The Goldilocks Approach: Finding the Right Project and the Right Team at the Right Size
Is any one approach the right one?
Transcript of Is any one approach the right one?
![Page 1: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Is any one approach the right one?
![Page 3: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
o Traditional Air
(Reactive)
Sampling
o Qualitative
Exposure
Assessment
o Control
Banding
![Page 4: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
![Page 5: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Unlimited IH sampling budget?
A platoon of industrial hygienists waiting for their next command?
An in-house AIHA accredited laboratory?
Didn’t think so!
![Page 6: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Reactive or comprehensive sampling • Respond to complaints
• Respond to OSHA
• May over sample some materials
• May miss some exposures entirely
• Expensive
![Page 7: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
![Page 8: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Review chemicals used at each site Assess their hazards Frequency of use Volume of use Number employees exposed
Determine what is really important first!
Then design a sampling strategy that fits the budget
and protects your employees
![Page 9: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Simplified risk assessment system for chemical handling tasks
Results of reasonable quality without expert involvement
Places chemicals in broad groupings (bands) that have similar characteristics
Often used in pharmaceutical industry where no OELs exist for many compounds
Band # Hazard Group Control
1 Skin and/or eye irritant Use good industrial
hygiene practice and
general ventilation.
2 Harmful on single exposure Use local exhaust
ventilation
3 Severely irritating and/or corrosive Enclose the process
4 Very toxic on single exposure;
reproductive hazard; sensitizer
Seek expert advice
![Page 10: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
QEA CONTROL BANDING
Designed for Chemicals
with Established
Occupational Exposure
Limits
Comprehensive
Focused on Assessment &
Measurement
Chemical Specific
Exposure Judgment
Developed by AIHA
Designed for Chemicals Without: Established OELs; Little to No Toxicology Basis, or Epidemiology Data
Generic
Mostly Applicable to Small/Medium Sized Companies Without Safety & Health Resources
Tends to be Ultraconservative
Focused on Controls
Not Fully Validated
![Page 11: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Based on the AIHA book: • A Strategy for Assessing and Managing
Occupational Exposures, 3rd Edition
William H. Bullock, MSPH, CIH, CSP
Joselito S. Ignacio, CIH, CSP, MPH, REHS
![Page 12: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Industrial hygienists inspect the site • Review processes
• Observe employees
• Note chemicals used
• Document existing controls
• Interview employees
• Interview management
• Review past IH reports
• Review MSDS – Now SDS!
• Use the Workplace Safety QEA tool………
![Page 13: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Where are these products used?
How often? By whom? Any PPE
used? Engineering controls?
Is this engineering control used
properly? Has it been validated
through air flow testing or
employee exposure monitoring?
![Page 14: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
How often is this sander used?
What materials are sanded? Hard
woods? Soft woods? Metals?
How is this chemical handled?
What PPE is used? What happens
in the event of a spill?
![Page 15: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Uses an algorithm to:
• Assigns an overall risk ranking to the
chemical exposure, for the similar
exposure group (SEG)
• Suggests a sampling frequency based
on the degree of hazard
![Page 16: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
QEA Database
![Page 17: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Considers for each similar exposure group
(SEG): • Number employees exposed to chemical hazard
e.g. 11-20 employees – ranking of “3”
• Duration of exposure
e.g. 5-15 hours/week – ranking of “2”
• Hazard ranking for inhalation (OEL range)
e.g. OEL range of 3.1 – 10 mg/m3 or >1,000 ppm –
ranking of “1”
![Page 18: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Considers for each similar exposure group (SEG): • Degree of airborne risk e.g. medium vapor pressure – ranking of “3”
• Past air monitoring data e.g. past avg. results between 50-75% of OEL –
ranking of “16”
• Degree of Engineering Control e.g. Full engineering control in place but not yet
validated by IH monitoring within last 12 months – ranking of “2”
![Page 19: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Considers for each similar exposure group
(SEG): • Degree of dermal risk
e.g. probable skin irritants, may cause dermatitis –
ranking of “4”
• Duration of dermal exposure
e.g. short term skin exposure is possible – ranking of
“4”
• Is the an ingestion risk?
e.g. Yes or No – Yes is ranking of “2”
![Page 20: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
TOTAL RISK:
Calculated by adding together the skin
absorption risk and whichever is higher
of the two inhalation risks (air monitoring
data vs. control); this sum is then
multiplied by the ingestion risk
![Page 21: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Total Risk Score relates to a recommended
IH sampling frequency:
Total Risk
Score
Acceptability Final Risk
Value
IH Sampling
Frequency
<50 Acceptable 1 No Sampling Needed
50-199 Potentially
acceptable
2 Every 3 Years
200-400 Further evaluation
needed
3 Every 2 Years
>400 Potentially
unacceptable
without new controls
4 Every Year
![Page 22: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
For example when a final risk value = 3:
SAMPLE EVERY TWO YEARS
• chemical with moderate toxicity
• used by multiple employees
• used on a moderately frequent basis
• moderate potential of becoming airborne
• reasonably good engineering controls
![Page 23: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Local Electric Utility
• In 2012, sought assistance in upgrading their IH program
• A comprehensive QEA was performed with the corporate industrial hygienist (Stan Blinta, CIH) using a database tool – from this, air monitoring strategies were developed
• Findings: some products were discovered and accounted for in the QEA that previously had not been considered. Other products were evaluated and determined to require no further analysis
![Page 24: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Given sufficient resources or if specifically required by a special OSHA standard e.g. lead or cadmium, reactive or comprehensive IH sampling may be appropriate
If the company’s primary focus is on controls and are willing to over-engineer some solutions to avoid sampling and analysis (which may not be feasible), control banding may be the way to go
For most companies including utilities, a systematic approach to evaluating employee exposures, while keeping costs in line is the qualitative exposure assessment
![Page 25: Is any one approach the right one?](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020703/61fb3ef12e268c58cd5be43a/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)