Personal protective equipment evaluation

The chemical and physical compatibility of decontamination solutions or other decontamination materials must be determined before use. Any decontamination method that permeates, degrades, damages, or otherwise impairs the functioning of the personal protective equipment (PPE) is incompatible with such PPE and should not be used. If a decontamination method does pose a direct health hazard, measures must be taken to protect both decontamination personnel and the workers being decontaminated. Figure 16.22 presents a decision aid for the evaluation of health and safety aspects of decontamination methods. 

Evaluation of plans for building evacuations, including the provision and maintenance of appropriate personal protective equipment. 

Cold Zone This area is adjacent (and uphill and upwind) to the warm zone and is where decontaminated victims enter. As the victims enter this area, a more thorough triage is performed (including evaluation for secondary injuries), and victims are directed to treatment areas based on the severity and nature of illness or injury. Personal protective equipment is maintained in this area in case the wind changes or victims arrive who have been improperly decontaminated. 

It would be irresponsible to focus solely on research and development, while ignoring potentially simpler, faster, or less expensive mechanisms, such as organization, staff, training, and procurement. All health establishments must be surveyed and evaluated for the tasks of being prepared and responding adequately to potential terrorist violence. Not only should a special attention be paid to supplies of antidotes, drugs, ventilators, personal protective equipment and decontamination capacity, but the spotlight must also be fixed on an insufficient familiarity of medical stuff with the acute effects and treatment of chemical weapons. 

Because these drug candidates have potential biological activity, precautions should be taken to limit worker exposure during scale-up operations. Personal protective equipment requirements and adequate containment and ventilation provisions should also be defined as part of the safety review process. Often this assessment can be difficult because the material produced from the pilot plant will be used for toxicology evaluation purposes. In these cases, structure-activity relationship evaluations with regard to the relative toxicity of the compound may be appropriate to estimate the extent of risk. 

The demonstration plot of the experimental site should be constructed to evaluate the effectiveness of phytoremediation. The field activities consist of site mobilization, plot layout an construction, and soil sampling combined with other agricultural practices designed secifically for phytoremediation and adapted for the conditions present at the site. The activities has to be conducted in accodance with the personal protective equipment, level of protection, action levels and other health and safety practices, i.e. hazard analysis general safety reccomendations evaluation of the mechanical, electrical, fire hazards, gas and power lines, heat stress, noise, chemical hazards. 

Based on these assumptions and identified hazardous properties of the raw material (such as those that appear in Section V of the MSDS), the supplier will assign the "maximum protective equipment" required. This maximum protective equipment recommendation will match the recommendation on the MSDS contained under the personal protective equipment section. The task then falls to the paint manufacturer to evaluate his suppliers recommendation in light of other protective measures within his plant. This includes such things as engineering controls and administrative control procedures. Then the paint manufacturer must assign the proper protective equipment for his workers. 

Furthermore it is apparent that as long as the employer seeks cheaper solutions such as providing personal protective equipment because other solutioi are perceived as costly (and apparently they don t even do this very often), the role of OELs cannot be clarified because it is not sufficiently tested. Overall this means that the whole system and culture of prevention in Greece does not yet enable the use of OELs to be evaluated beyond an impressionistic level and even this is problematic. There is not a caitical mass of data and experience sufficient enough cautiously to conclude more than tiie following ... 

Preliminary evaluation. A preliminary evaluation of a site s characteristics shall be performed prior to site entry by a qualified person in order to aid in the selection of appropriate employee protection methods prior to site entry. Immediately after initial site entry, a more detailed evaluation of the site s specific characteristics shall be performed by a qualified person in order to further identify existing site hazards and to further aid in the selection of the appropriate engineering controls and personal protective equipment for the tasks to be performed. 

Based upon the results of the preliminary site evaluation, an ensemble of personal protective equipment (PPE) shall be selected and used during initial site entry, which will provide protection to a level of exposure below permissible exposure limits and published exposure levels for known or suspected hazardous substances and health hazards, and which will provide protection against other known and suspected hazards identified during the preliminary site evaluation. If there is no permissible exposure limit or published exposure level, the employer may use other published studies and information as a guide to appropriate personal protective equipment. 

Additional examinations that are independent of medical surveillance will be required. These include fitness evaluations for personal protective equipment and evaluation of a potential worker s ability to meet the functional requirements of the job. 

A review of symptoms will enable the medical officer to evaluate the ability of an individual to work in protective ensemble. Questions concerning shortness of breath or labored breathing on exertion, asthma, other respiratory symptoms, chest pain, high blood pressure, and heat intolerance will provide helpful information. Questions about allergic reactions to rubber products and cold-induced bronchospasm should be asked and a brief psychiatric history directed toward the individual s ability to be encapsulated in personal protective equipment should be taken. Questions about panic attacks, syncopal episodes, or hyperventilation will also offer valuable information. 

General laboratory rules and procedures Personal protection equipment requirements Spill and accident procedures Chemical storage rules and procedures Safety equipment requirements and inspection procedures Employee safety training requirements Exposure and medical evaluation processes Emergency evacuation plan... 

The cross-reference to 721.63(a)(3) adds that it would be a significant new use to manufacture, import, or process a substance without demonstrating that the personal protective equipment used provides an impervious barrier to prevent dermal exposure under normal and expected working conditions. It adds that the only acceptable demonstrations that the personal protective equipment is impervious to the SNUR substance, in combination with other chemicals in the work area, are specific types of testing, or an evaluation of the manufacturer s specifications or a sample of the materials used in the personal protective equipment. Therefore, anyone who intends to manufacture, import, or process octanoic acid, hydrazide must be able to demonstrate either through testing or evaluation of specifications or a sample, that the personal protective equipment to be used is impervious to the SNUR substance. If the prospective manufacturer, importer, or processor cannot make that demonstration, it must submit a SNUN at least ninety days prior to engaging in that activity. 

Evaluation of the impact of occupational regulations governing use of personal protective equipment. 

Kanchi Govarthanam K, Anand SC, Rajendran S. Development of advanced personal protective equipment fabrics for protection against slashes and pathogenic bacteria. Part 1 development and evaluation of slash-resistant garments. J Ind Textil 2010 40(2) 139-55. 

The myriad technical advances in our understanding of hazards and risk evaluation, improvements in chemical analysis, improvements in miniaturization and automation of laboratory operations, and the availability of vastly improved safety equipment, atmosphere-monitoring devices, and personal protective equipment and... 

---