Tools for risk assessement of nanomaterials at the workplace

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Nanomaterials and occupational safety and health in the EU
Advertisements

Exposure assessment Session 1: Risk Assessment – Scientific Challenges EP STOA Panel – European Commission Brussels, 21 Nov 2011 Kai Savolainen, Finnish.
Workplace exposure to nanoparticles. Workplace exposure to nanoparticles Aims  To provide the Risk Observatory target audience with a comprehensive picture.
REACH and SDS Requirements Presented by Paula Laux Senior Regulatory Specialist Wercs Professional Services.
Nanotechnology Work Health & Safety Food & Grocery Nanotechnology Forum 26 February 2013 Howard Morris (Safe Work Australia) 1.
Title slide PIPELINE QRA SEMINAR. PIPELINE RISK ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION TO HAZID 2.
1 REACh Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals and Restriction! Ohio Valley SOT Wednesday, August 26, 2009 REACh: The New Toxicology Frontier.
Guidelines for the reporting of evidence identification in decision models: observations and suggested way forward Louise Longworth National Institute.
The EU Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL) Presentation by Professor Len Levy, Cranfield University (Vice-Chair of SCOEL)
Energy Facility Contractors Group Safety Working Group Industrial Hygiene / Industrial Safety Technical Team Dina Siegel, Los Alamos National Laboratory.
ICONN DEEWR Nanotechnology OHS Research and Development Program & Nanotechnology OHS Regulation Dr Howard Morris Nanotechnology OHS R&D Program.
Accident Prevention Manual for Business & Industry: Engineering & Technology 13th edition National Safety Council Compiled by Dr. S.D. Allen Iske, Associate.
Occupational Legislation Overview - Rest of the World
Nanotechnology Summary. Potential Worker Exposures.
Nanomaterials Issue Paper Standard 61 Joint Committee Meeting December, 2013.
Presentation 5: Steps to prevent worker exposure to nanomaterials in the workplace.
Presentation 4: How can I know if nanomaterials are used in my workplace?
World Congress on Safety and Health at Work Korea Promoting Safe Use of Nanotechnologies in Australian Workplaces: Nanotechnology OHS Research and.
New or increasing occupational exposure to chemical and biological agents Gérard Lasfargues Deputy Director General, Anses.
1 Risk Governance of Manufactured Nanoparticles, Joint Workshop EP STOA Panel – European Commission, Brussels, 21 November 2011 Interfaces between Science.
SCP / Sps / REACH Objective : Safe use of chemicals.
Programme Performance Criteria. Regulatory Authority Objectives To identify criteria against which the status of each element of the regulatory programme.
1 Hazmat 2011 Nanotechnology Work Health & Safety Dr Howard Morris Nanotechnology Work Health & Safety Manager Safe Work Australia 11 May 2011.
Recommendation 2001/331/EC: Review and relation to sectoral inspection requirements Miroslav Angelov European Commission DG Environment, Unit A 1 Enforcement,
Malaysia Update on “draft” proposal for the Environmentally Hazardous Substance (“EHS”) Notification and Registration Scheme.
1 Team Based Program Design Management and Research Operations Involvement in Nanoscale Materials ES&H.
8 th EU/US Joint Conference on Health and Safety at Work Fort Worth, Texas, 17 – 19 September 2015 Nanomaterials: Grouping approach and OSH reference values.
Provisional Nano-Reference Limit Values
Summary of the discussion session 1C: action plans and campaigns 1.
NANOTECHNOLOGY – MATERIALS IN THE WORKPLACE Kai Savolainen 8th EU-US Joint Conference on Health and Safety at Work, Fort Worth, Texas September 2015.
BAuA Nanosafety Research
EU: Project SCAFFOLD proposals for OEL’s and worker protection Kai Savolainen 8th EU-US Joint Conference on Health and Safety at Work, Fort Worth, Texas.
Methods Available at the Workplace and the Preventive Approach Anthony Casaru – FORUM-MUT.
Nano to go Raising awareness in material science and startup enterprises Dr. Rolf Packroff, Dr. Aart Rouw, Dr. Aline Reichow Federal Institute for Occupational.
8 th EU/US Joint Conference on Health and Safety at Work Fort Worth, Texas, 17 – 19 September 2015 OSH testing and information requirements for biopersistent.
ECHA activities relating to Nanomaterials
#aihce Can Control Banding be Useful to Ensure Adequate Controls for Safe Handling of Nanomaterials? A Systematic Review June 3, 2015 The findings and.
Guide to Options Comparison Revision of the SAFEGROUNDS Guidance James Penfold, Quintessa SAFESPUR, 4 October 2007.
Systematic Review of Control Banding for Nanomaterials Performed for WHO.
By: Dhananjai Borwankar Senior Safety Officer University of Waterloo Safety Office UW N ANO T OOL I NSTRUCTIONAL.
Berkeley Lab Exposure Assessment: thoughts after an ISM Audit Tim Roberts, Industrial Hygiene Jim Floyd, ALS LBNL.
The Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation
Presentation 6: Sharing your knowledge and experience.
Nanorama Laboratory – a 360° virtual environment of a laboratory M.Sc. Christian Schumacher Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German.
Nanosafety ISO TC 229 Nanotechnologies Standardization in the field of nanotechnologies that includes either or both of the following:  1. Understanding.
Volker J. Soballa Evonik Degussa GmbH Essen, Germany
Organization and Implementation of a National Regulatory Program for the Control of Radiation Sources Program Performance Criteria.
Update on Revision of DOE Order 456.1, The Safe Handling of Unbound Engineered Nanoparticles DOE and DOE Contractors Industrial Hygiene Meeting in Conjunction.
REACH Downstream Users Istanbul 21 st June 2010 Mike Potts UK REACH Competent Authority.
Nanotechnology Work Health & Safety
Communication: Safety Summary
DUCC Mixtures TF October 2016
Making EU legislation on health and safety at work future-proof
EU-OSHA Workshop: Workplace Risks to Reproductive Function
Abdulla Al Yammahi Specialist, Radiation Safety Inspection
Reprotoxic substances in the context of the revision of the 2004/37/EC (CMD) - Viewpoint from WPC and France - Matthieu Lassus Ministry of Labour, Employment,
Forum for Air quality Modelling FAIRMODE ew. eea
پیشگیری و کنترل خطرات بهداشتی و ایمنی نانومواد
Content of presentation
CCMI 9 September 2015 Public Hearing: Nanotechnology for a competitive chemical industry Social aspects: education, health and safety.
Christof Mainz European Commission
Social protection network asisp:
Evaluation of the marketing standards framework for fishery and aquaculture products Presentation to the Market Advisory Council 23 May 2018 Brussels.
USNRC IRRS TRAINING Lecture18
Proof of concept 29 September 2010
A Practical Introduction to the Clinical Evaluation Report
Study on non-compliance of ozone target values and potential air quality improvements in relation to ozone.
European Commission, DG Environment Air & Industrial Emissions Unit
Radiopharmaceutical Production
Risk Assessment in Nanosafety - Tools for Now and the Future
Presentation transcript:

Tools for risk assessement of nanomaterials at the workplace Maaike Visser | EOHnano 2019

Background on Workplace risk assessment in NL Content: Background on Workplace risk assessment in NL Dutch Nano Reference Values (NRV) Evaluation of risk assessment tools for the workplace Maaike Visser | EOHnano 2019

The Dutch dual system of Occupational Exposure Limits Employer: Government: Responsible for safe working conditions: Risk Inventarisation and Evaluation (RI&E) Inspection and enforcement Setting public OELs (EU BOELs, CMR substances, substances without ‘owner’) No public OEL available: derive own OEL Legally binding, public OELs (+/- 190 substances) Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

No public OEL available: what are my options? In general: Use recommended health-based limit from e.g. SCOEL, Dutch Health Council, NIOSH, … Use OEL from other country Use DNEL (REACH) Derive own OEL Safe working practices (Arbocatalogus) Tools for qualitative risk assessment (e.g. control banding tools) For nanos: Safe working practices (Guidance document) Use recommended health-based exposure limits (e.g. NIOSH) NRV Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Nano Reference Values (NRV) NRV Class Description Examples NRV (2012) (8-hr TWA) 1 Rigid, biopersistent nanofibres for which effects similar to those of asbestos are not excluded SWCNT or MWCNT or metal oxide fibres for which asbestos-like effects are not excluded by manufacturer. 0.01 fibres/cm3 (= 10,000 fibres/m³) 2A Biopersistent granular nanomaterial in the range of 1 and 100 nm and a densitiy of > 6000 kg/m³ Ag, Au, CeO2, CoO, Fe, FexOy, La, Pb, Sb2O5, SnO2 20,000 particles/cm³ 2B Biopersistent granular and fibre form nanomaterials in the range of 1 and 100 nm and a densitiy of <6000 kg/m³ Al2O3, SiO2, TiN, TiO2, ZnO, nanoclay, Carbon Black, C60, dendrimers, polystyrene, Nanofibres for which asbestos-like effects are excluded 40,000 particles/cm³ 3 Non-biopersistent granular nanomaterials in the range of 1 and 100 nm e.g. fats, common salt (NaCl) Applicable OEL for the non-nano form Based on OEL for asbestos Pragmatic values, based on urban background concentrations and particle size vs density (IFA, Germany) NOT health-based! Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Evaluation of Nano Reference Values Dutch NRVs were established in 2012 Since then, knowlegde on toxicity of NM has increased Several proposals for nano-specific OELs (overview: Mihalache et al 2016) Increasing knowledge on grouping of NM Increasing knowledge on occupational exposure to process-generated nanoparticles (PGNPs) en nano-fraction in conventional materials (FCNPs) Dutch public (=binding) OEL for asbestos decreased from 10,000 to 2,000 fibers/m3 >>> Should we update the NRV? Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Evaluation of NRV: conclusions NRV Class Description Examples NRV (2012) (8-hr TWA) 1 Rigid, biopersistent nanofibres for which effects similar to those of asbestos are not excluded SWCNT or MWCNT or metal oxide fibres for which asbestos-like effects are not excluded by manufacturer. 0.01 fibres/cm3 (= 10,000 fibres/m³) 2A Biopersistent granular nanomaterial in the range of 1 and 100 nm and a densitiy of > 6000 kg/m³ Ag, Au, CeO2, CoO, Fe, FexOy, La, Pb, Sb2O5, SnO2 20,000 particles/cm³ 2B Biopersistent granular and fibre form nanomaterials in the range of 1 and 100 nm and a densitiy of <6000 kg/m³ Al2O3, SiO2, TiN, TiO2, ZnO, nanoclay, Carbon Black, C60, dendrimers, polystyrene, Nanofibres for which asbestos-like effects are excluded 40,000 particles/cm³ 3 Non-biopersistent granular nanomaterials in the range of 1 and 100 nm e.g. fats, common salt (NaCl) Applicable OEL for the non-nano form Will be decreased to 2000 fibers/m3 Will be replaced by health-based limit values for groups of NM in the (near) future and expanded to include PGNPs/FCNPs No update required Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Some Tools for risk assessment of NM Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Evaluation of nano-risk assessment tools for the shop floor Which tools can be found? What kind of tools are they? (e.g. control banding, risk management, sampling strategy) Evaluation of: Accessibility Field of application (e.g. worker, environment) Knowledge needed to use the tool (layman, expert level?) Ease of use (time spent, difficulty to obtain data) Quality Inventarisation Identification Evaluation - Concise - In-depth Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Evaluation of nano-risk assessment tools for the shop floor 40 tools were identified 16 tools were thoroughly evaluated Transparancy: no overall score Score per theme: accessibility, ease of use, user knowledge level, area of application, quality of the tool. Each theme is built of sub-scores, for which criteria are described in detail Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Example: scoring of Quality Quality score consists of: Input parameters (what kind? How many? Which Pchem/ hazard / exposure parameters?) Type of assessment (qualitative? (semi)quantitative?) Type of output (what kind? Recommendations for risk management measures?) Is the tool validated and calibrated? Hierarchy of risk measures followed? Insuffcient Good Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Example: scoring of Quality Score Criteria Insufficient quality Validation Clear and thorough description of the method and/or relation to relevant literature Developed by international authority Hiearchy of RMMs followed Moderately sufficient quality +/- Clear and thorough description of the method and/or relation to relevant literature Sufficient quality +/- Validation +/- Clear and thorough description of the method and/or relation to relevant literature Good quality Hierarchy of RMMs followed Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Some examples of evaluated tools: Anses CB Nanotool CB Nanotool Nanomaterials in the laboratory (DGUV) Nanosafer 1.1beta Precautionary matrix SCAFFOLD Stoffenmanager nano Good Nano Guide Guidance on the protection of health … (EC) Guidenano Licara Nanoscan Nano to Go Nanoreg2 NanoRiskApp Safe handling and use of carbon nano tubes Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

How to get these results to the shop floor? Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Web-application “NanoToolSelector” Evaluation of nano-tools for the shop floor| EOHnano2019

Web-application “NanoToolSelector”

Web-application “NanoToolSelector”

Thank you for your attention Maaike Visser | EOHnano 2019