Occupational exposure, personal monitoring

Symposium on Toxicology, Carcinogenesis, and Human Health Effects of 1,3-Butadiene (265). Detailed comparisons of various personal monitoring devices are available (266), and control of occupational exposure to 1,3-butadiene has been reviewed (267). ... 

Hawthorne, A., et al. (1987) Models for estimating organic emissions from building materials formaldehyde example. Atmos. Environ. 21, No. 2. Lewis, R. G., et al. (1986) Monitoring for non-occupational exposure to pesticides in indoor and personal respiratory air. Presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association, Minneapolis, MN. 

While occupational hygiene measurements always measure only the concentrations of chemical compounds present in the occupational environment, i.e., the potential dose, the analysis of biological specimens predominantly reflects the body burden. Furthermore, biological monitoring is always limited to assessment of individual exposure. Personal occupational hygiene sampling takes into consideration only some of the individual factors, e.g., working... 

Davis, J.E. (1980) Minimizing occupational exposure to pesticides personal monitoring, Residue Rev., 75 33-50. 

If an individual performs both radiographic procedures (i.e., procedures without use of a protective apron) and fluoroscopic procedures i.e., procedures with the use of a protective apron) during a given monitoring period, there may be no practical way to determine precisely the relative contribution each type of procedure made to the total /fp(lO) value recorded by a personal monitor. However, occupational exposure during radiographic procedures should be very low, since the worker is at a relatively large distance from the x-ray source and most often i.e., except for use of mobile x-ray systems) in a protective cubicle. 

This Report is one of the series developed under the auspices of Scientific Committee 46, a scientific program area committee of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) concerned with operational radiation safety. The Report provides practical recommendations on the use of personal monitors to estimate effective dose equivalent (Hg) and effective dose (E) for occupationally-exposed individuals. The Report is limited to external exposures to low-LET radiation. Recent additions to the radiation protection literature have made the recommendations possible. In order to avoid delay in utilizing the recommendations in the United States, the quantity as well as E, has been included until such time as the federal radiation protection guidance and associated implementing regulations are revised to express dose limits in E as recommended by the NCRP. 

Non-occupational exposure to diazinon for residents of two U.S. cities (Jacksonville, Florida, and Springfield, Massachusetts) were studied over three seasons summer 1986, spring 1987, and winter 1988 (Whitmore et al. 1994). The study focused primarily on inhalation exposures with primary environmental monitoring consisting of 24-hour indoor air, personal air, and outdoor air. For the population of Jacksonville, Florida, the mean diazinon concentration ranges were 85.7 420.7 ng/m3 for indoor air,... 

Occupational pesticide exposure holds a peculiar status within the field of occupational health and safety, both from a scientific and regulatory perspective. Methods for personal monitoring of dermal exposure first arose in the context of pesticide applications in agriculture, pioneered by scientists in the USA Public Health Service (Batchelor and Walker, 1954 Durham and Wolfe, 1962). These methods gained worldwide recognition in the early 1960s, and remain a component of exposure assessment practice today. This work pre-dated most personal monitoring methods that were developed for industrial workplaces. 

In a survey of occupational exposure to glycol ethers in France that used both atmospheric and biological monitoring, the highest level of exposure to 2-butoxyethanol was among persons cleaning cars (Vincent et al. 1996). The average concentration of 2-butoxyethanol in air was 1.8 ppm, with pre- and post-shift... 

OSHA requires employers of workers who are occupationally exposed to 2-butoxyethanol to institute engineering controls and work practices to reduce employee exposure and maintain it at or below pennissible exposure limits (PEL). The PEL for 2-butoxyethanol is 50 ppm (OSHA 1974). Workers exposed to 2-butoxyethanol should wear personal protective equipment such as gloves, coveralls, and goggles to protect exposure to tire skin (OSHA 1974). NIOSH recommends that industrial hygiene surveys be completed at work places where airborne exposure to 2-butoxyethanol or 2-butoxyethanol acetate may occur (NIOSH 1990). If exposure levels are at or above one-half the recommended exposure limit (REL = 5 ppm), NIOSH recommends that a program of personal monitoring be instituted so that tlie exposure of each worker can be estimated. If exposure levels are at or greater than the REL, or if there is a potential for skin contact, NIOSH recommends that 2-butoxyacetic acid be measured in the urine of the workers. 

Personal monitoring Located on the employee and the test proceeds as he/she undertakes his/her duties the test measures the level of occupational exposure at the place of work... 

Fugitive emissions and fugitive dusts can be measured with a personal monitor or high-volume filter equipment when studying internal emission sources. Working methods and personal practices are, however, the most important factors that affect occupational lead exposure, and all personnel involved in lead operations must be trained adequately in lead abatement strategies and informed of the results of observations and monitoring, whether a cause for concern or not. 

---