Protective clothing worker exposure

Current OSHA standards specify the threshold limit value (TLV) 8-h exposure to ammonia as 50 ppm (35 mg/m ). However, the ACGIH recommends a TLV of 25 ppm (96). Respiratory protection should be provided for workers exposed to ammonia. Protective clothing such as mbber aprons, boots, gloves, and goggles should be worn when handling ammonia. 

Controls degree of work exposure Protective clothing Head, eye, hand, and foot protection Additional protection (e.g., hearing) and hazard Expedites quick entry and response Reduces worker efficiency Requires professional health and safety coverage Requires specialized training certifications Generates waste... 

Endosulfan and metabolites were observed in the urine of workers who had prepared and applied endosulfan for 2-5 hours either 1 day or 1 week prior to sampling, without using protective clothing or face mask (thus, exposure was probably both dermal and inhalation) (Vidal et al. 1998). Unchanged a-and P-endosulfan and endosulfan ether were the predominant chemicals excreted 1 day following exposure. One week after exposure, a-endosulfan was detected in urine of four of five workers, but P-endosulfan was detected in only one of five samples and endosulfan ether was not detected at all. Endosulfan sulfate was detected in only one of five samples at 1 week after exposure and in none of the four samples at 1 day postexposure. Endosulfan lactone was detected in one of four and one of five samples at 1 day and 1 week after exposure, respectively. 

Based on the patch method to assess worker or re-entry exposure, researchers have developed a database, which may be used to estimate exposure. Each patch from an individual in a study can be entered into the database separately, the residue data from patches from various body areas can be summed to yield a whole-body exposure number, and the data may be sorted as to worker tasks, equipment used, protective clothing worn, formulation types and other parameters. This is the basis for the currently used Pesticide Handlers Data Base (PHED), which was developed through a joint effort in the 1980s of CropLife America [formerly known as American Crop Protection Association (ACPA) and National Agricultural Chemicals Association (NACA)], the Environmental Protection Agency (ERA) and Health Canada. " The PHED is discussed in detail in another article in this book. 

Decision as to possible health hazards in mass production preliminary information on type of hazard which might exist in mass manufacture Safety of equipment necessity for ventilation, safe atmospheric concentration selection of suitable physical protective devices for workers (respirators, protective clothing, showers) procedure for medical treatment in emergency if this requires special equipment Decision as to health services needed at plant plan of preventive medicine (including selection of workers according to expected degree of exposure and methods of periodic check on health)... 

The design of a study by Davies et al. (1982) for mixers and applicators was similar to that of Nigg and Stamper (1983). "Between-days" variances of exposure were not given. Mean urinary metabolite concentrations were used to show reduction of internal exposure by protective clothing. The design of the study by van Rooij et al. (1993) was similar to our study (i.e., "within-worker" comparisons of internal exposure). Because no potential dermal exposure was assessed in this study, "within-worker" variances of potential exposure are not known. 

Fenske, R.A., Blacker, A.M., Hamburger, S.J., and Simon, G.S. (1990) Worker exposure and protective clothing performance during manual seed treatment with lindane, Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 19 190-196. 

Mild skin irritation has been reported by workers at a munitions factory who were exposed to low levels of hexachloroethane. The workers were wearing protective clothing that greatly reduced exposure. No other information is available concerning health effects in people exposed to hexachloroethane. However, results of animal studies can be used to show how it can affect your health. Based on the animal data, hexachloroethane in the air can irritate your nose and lungs and cause some buildup of mucus in your nose, much like an allergy. It can also irritate your eyes and make them... 

Hematological Effects. Routine blood parameters (hemoglobin, erythrocyte, leukocyte and thrombocyte levels) measured in 11 hexachloroethane workers that wore protective clothing did not differ from those of the controls (Selden et al. 1994). Mild skin and mucous membrane irritation were reported in the exposed group, suggesting that exposure may have been through either the inhalation or dermal routes of exposure. 

Hexachloroethane has been found in the plasma of workers wearing protective clothing and respiratory protection suggesting that hexachloroethane can be absorbed following inhalation and/or dermal exposure. Based on the minimal effects seen on target tissues (liver and kidney) in animal studies, absorption from the lungs seems to be limited. Dermal absorption was also estimated to be low based on calculated dermal penetration rates. 

Despite wearing protective equipment that included disposable overalls and compressed-air-fed visors or full-facepiece masks with filters for dusts and vapors, hexachloroethane was detected in the plasma of exposed workers (Selden et al. 1993). After 5 weeks of exposure, plasma levels of hexachloroethane in 12 workers were 7.3 + 6 pg/L. Mild dermal irritation was also noted. If the skin irritation was a response to hexachloroethane rather than trauma from the protective clothing, the irritation suggests that the principal exposure route may have been dermal. Absorption of a saturated hexachloroethane solution across human skin was estimated to be 0.0230 mg/cm2/hour based on the physical properties of hexachloroethane (Fiserova-Bergerova et al. 1990). 

Two fatal cases of occupational exposure to 1,2-dibromoethane were reported by Letz et al. (1984). A worker collapsed shortly after entering a pesticide storage tank containing residues of 1,2-dibromoethane he remained in the tank for 45 minutes. A supervisor attempting to rescue the worker also collapsed and was exposed for 20-30 minutes prior to rescue. Both men died 12 and 64 hours after collapse, respectively. The primary route of exposure was postulated to be dermal, with inhalation also playing a potentially important role. Neither worker had been wearing protective clothing or respirators. 

Nakamura,53 in a 1956 paper, reported working conditions in a Japanese mustard-gas factory operated secretly in Hiroshima from 1930 to 1945. Workers alternately worked 1 h in gas production and 2 h in a gas-free environment over a 10-h workday. They wore gasmasks and complete protective clothing, including rubber boots, and were often rotated. Nevertheless, many workers showed a darkening of skin some developed ulcers, diarrhea, and jaundice and later coughed blood and developed tuberculosis. The concentration of mustard gas may have reached 50-70 mg/m, as determined by bioassay. The bioassay involved exposure of unprotected birds in the work areas that resul-... 

Health and Safety. Both N-methylpyrrohdinone and dibasic esters have very low vapor pressure which limits worker exposure to vapors. Manufacturers recommend that the same safety precautions be taken as with other organic solvents. Hazardous location requirements must be considered if (lie formula is flammable. Ventilation that reduces vapors to manufacturer s recommended exposure levels should be used. Protective clothing must be worn during use. 

---