Industrial Hygiene Monitoring How Much is Enough? When Can It Stop?? Presented by: Jonathan Haas, CSP, CIH Orange Park, Florida (904) STAR Consultants, Inc. 580 Bellerive Dr. Unit 5B Annapolis, MD (410) (410) FAX Sampling Presented at: AIHA Florida Annual Region IV Conference Tampa, FL Friday March 24, 2006 You may download this presentation by going to

2 What I Typically See Industrial hygiene at a company location is handled by a safety manager The safety manager typically has been on the job for less than two years Industrial hygiene monitoring is conducted by a consultant Reports from prior years have not been read by the current safety manager

3 What I Typically See Monitoring is conducted to a list of contaminants that was prepared some time ago – sometimes many years ago Monitoring is repeated this year because it was on the list last year and has always been monitored. The reason why is not known. Employees who are monitored are notified of the results Employees similarly exposed are not

4 What I Typically See Medical services, whether on site or contract occupational, have not been provided with summaries of data Exposure monitoring results, if provided to Medical services occasionally are filed in the employees “jacket” but usually are filed somewhere else Data summaries for similar exposure groups are not available anywhere on site

5 What I Typically See IH Consultants rarely are contracted to review all prior data and provide summaries and recommendations IH Consultants rarely are contracted to fully document all materials by similar exposure group, the toxicity, usage and controls – resulting in a fully documented QEA Safety staff rarely have a process to review new materials to make a determination if monitoring is needed before full production

6 Good HSMS Programs Help Employee complaints (coughing, irritation, etc.) are signs that one or more Health and Safety Management Systems are not working properly. IH Consultant observations for defective ventilation, unacceptable use of PPE, or improper handling of materials is another sign that HSMS programs are defective What one HSMS program misses, another is supposed to catch – see next page

7 WORKSITE HAZARD ANALYSIS WORKSITE HAZARD ANALYSIS HAZARD PREVENTION & CONTROL HAZARD PREVENTION & CONTROL SAFETY & HEALTH TRAINING SAFETY & HEALTH TRAINING Policy Goals, Objectives Planning Visible Top Management Leadership Responsibility and Authority Line Accountability Resources Contract Worker Coverage Written S&H Management System Annual Self-Evaluations Baseline Inventories Routine Hazard Analysis (JHA – Ergo) Change (Pre-use) Hazard Analysis IH Program Routine Self- Inspections (required, general, specific) Reporting System Investigations Trend Analysis Certified Professional Resources Hazard Elimination and Control Methods Engineering Admin PPE Work Rules/Practices/ Discipline Occupational Health Care Preventive Maintenance Tracking of Corrections Emergency Preparedness Managers Supervisors Workers Contractors Committees Emergencies PPE 30 Elements OSHA’s VPP Elements IH affects those noted Management Commitment Management Commitment Employee Involvement Employee Involvement Encouragement Participation (Committees) 1/26/89 & 3/25/03 MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP

8 Clients Need A process for determining monitoring needed based on a standardized qualitative exposure assessment process that results in a number A process for taking initial measurements or contracting for same that determines if additional monitoring is needed A process, when initial measurements indicate a continuing need for monitoring, for determining the number of samples needed to make the next decision

9 Hypothetical Case 1 Client has determined that a new material should be monitored Discussions with employees reveal that certain situations results in worse exposure, based on their knowledge of the job Monitoring of those worst case exposures using a validated method of collection with analysis in a AIHA accredited lab shows all samples “Below Detection Limit” Do you recommend additional tests?

10 Hypothetical Case 2 Client has determined that a new material should be monitored Discussions with employees reveal that certain situations results in worse exposure, based on their knowledge of the job Monitoring of those worst case exposures using a validated method of collection with analysis in a AIHA accredited lab shows all samples above the Exposure Limit Do you recommend additional tests?

11 Hypothetical Case 3 Client has determined that a new material should be monitored Discussions with employees reveal that certain situations results in worse exposure, based on their knowledge of the job Monitoring of those worst case exposures using a validated method of collection with analysis in a AIHA accredited lab shows 50% of the samples above the Exposure Limit Do you recommend additional tests?

12 Hypothetical Case 4 Client has determined that a new material should be monitored Discussions with employees reveal that certain situations results in worse exposure, based on their knowledge of the job Monitoring of those worst case exposures using a validated method of collection with analysis in a AIHA accredited lab shows none of the samples above the Exposure Limit Do you recommend additional tests?

13 Professional Judgment If you are called to testify in a court case involving your monitoring, your exposure assessment determination process will be attacked If you used a validated sampling method and accredited lab, that is an expected question What will you say when a statistical analysis of the samples you took, which were all below the exposure limit, shows that 5% overexposures are predicted?? Did you advise the client?

14 Document The Process Your client needs to understand how you make recommendations for added sampling, fewer samples, or the termination of sampling Pulling the cloak over your head and saying “Trust me – I know what I’m doing” makes you either Obi Wan or the Evil Sith depending on who is asked Showing your client a strategy based on statistics and probability, with graphs of examples, gains you credibility You will not be stammering when attacked as a witness

15 Industrial Hygiene Data Before we can debate how much is needed and when can we stop, we need to debate how much predicted overexposure is acceptable The debate is NOT about how much actual overexposure is acceptable, but is about how much predicted overexposure is acceptable

16 How Much Exceedance is OK? Does the acceptable percentage predicted to exceed the limit depend on what the material’s toxicity – the reason for the limit? Does the acceptable percentage predicted to exceed the limit depend on who is asked? Employees Management The industrial hygienist Yes

17 What Predicted Exceedance % is OK? Reproductive toxin Adequate controls Good PM for controls Knowledgeable people Good concern handling Great supervision Good mgmt of change Your daughter works it Reproductive Toxin Iffy controls Poor PM for controls MSDS available Poor concern handling Weak supervision No mgmt of change Your daughter works it Situation ASituation B Do controls change the answer?

18 The Wall Street Journal Test How would management react to having a Wall Street Journal article describe how they were knowingly permitting employees to be potentially overexposed to a reproductive toxin, based on available data? And describing how one out of five children have observable birth defects and that data predicts that your plant averages one day a year over the exposure limit? (0.4% of 250 days) With anger, right?

19 What Predicted Exceedance % is OK? Carcinogen Adequate controls Good PM for controls Knowledgeable people Good concern handling Great supervision Good mgmt of change Your daughter works it Carcinogen Iffy controls Poor PM for controls MSDS available Poor concern handling Weak supervision No mgmt of change Your daughter works it Situation ASituation B Do controls change the answer?

20 What Predicted Exceedance % is OK? Lung damage Adequate controls Good PM for controls Knowledgeable people Good concern handling Great supervision Good mgmt of change Your daughter works it Lung damage Iffy controls Poor PM for controls MSDS available Poor concern handling Weak supervision No mgmt of change Your daughter works it Situation ASituation B Do controls matter, really?

21 What Predicted Exceedance % is OK? Irritant only Adequate controls Good PM for controls Knowledgeable people Good concern handling Great supervision Good mgmt of change Your daughter works it Irritant only Iffy controls Poor PM for controls MSDS available Poor concern handling Weak supervision No mgmt of change Your daughter works it Situation ASituation B Do controls matter, really?

22 Available Software Really easy to use: Ihstat.xls Determines whether samples are normally distributed or log normally distributed Determines % predicted to exceed limit Really terrific to use: Minitab Same as above, plus terrific graphs Used by many for Six Sigma projects Obsolete: Logan Unusable: NIOSH Decision Logic graphs

23

24 Here is a Minitab graph of the same data

Monitoring Decisions Starting from no data at all

26 IH Monitoring Decisions Based on Statistical Data Results Take three “Worst Case”* samples Any sample > full or short term limit All three < 10% of limit All < limit; both means <50% of limit All 50% of limit Reduce exposure No more samples needed Start PM *Worst case sampling can be personal samples or area samples and can last for only as long as the agent is handled that day. If sampling is just for 15 to 30 minutes, the result is compared to a Short Term Limit ( or calculated STEL ). The result is also to be converted to an 8-hour time weighted average and compared against that full shift exposure limit. Investigate Reduce Repeat Calculated STELFull shift limit 0 to 1 PPM; STEL = 3 times full shift limit; is based on full shiftFull shift limit 2 to 10 PPM; STEL = 2 times “ “ “ exposure limit whenFull shift limit 11 to 100 PPM; STEL = 1.5 times “ “ none is publishedFull shift limit >100 PPM; STEL = 1.25 times “ “ “ No Yes No Yes (See next page)

27 Worst Case Both means > 50% Limit Investigate, Reduce, Repeat

28 IH Monitoring Decisions Based on Statistical Data Results Take three “Worst Case”* samples Any sample > full or short term limit All three < 10% of limit All < limit; both means <50% of limit All 50% of limit Reduce exposure No more samples needed Start PM *Worst case sampling can be personal samples or area samples and can last for only as long as the agent is handled that day. If sampling is just for 15 to 30 minutes, the result is compared to a Short Term Limit ( or calculated STEL ). The result is also to be converted to an 8-hour time weighted average and compared against that full shift exposure limit. Investigate Reduce Repeat Calculated STELFull shift limit 0 to 1 PPM; STEL = 3 times full shift limit; is based on full shiftFull shift limit 2 to 10 PPM; STEL = 2 times “ “ “ exposure limit whenFull shift limit 11 to 100 PPM; STEL = 1.5 times “ “ none is publishedFull shift limit >100 PPM; STEL = 1.25 times “ “ “ No Yes No Yes (See next page)

29 Worst Case Both means < 50% Limit Start Periodic Monitoring

30 IH Monitoring Decisions Based on Statistical Data Results Take three “Worst Case”* samples Any sample > full or short term limit All three < 10% of limit All < limit; both means <50% of limit All 50% of limit Reduce exposure No more samples needed Start PM *Worst case sampling can be personal samples or area samples and can last for only as long as the agent is handled that day. If sampling is just for 15 to 30 minutes, the result is compared to a Short Term Limit ( or calculated STEL ). The result is also to be converted to an 8-hour time weighted average and compared against that full shift exposure limit. Investigate Reduce Repeat Calculated STELFull shift limit 0 to 1 PPM; STEL = 3 times full shift limit; is based on full shiftFull shift limit 2 to 10 PPM; STEL = 2 times “ “ “ exposure limit whenFull shift limit 11 to 100 PPM; STEL = 1.5 times “ “ none is publishedFull shift limit >100 PPM; STEL = 1.25 times “ “ “ No Yes No Yes (See next page)

31 Worst Case Both means < 10% Limit No Predicted Exceedance Stop Monitoring

Monitoring Decisions Based on Results of Periodic Monitoring

33 Periodic Monitoring Decisions based on Statistics Take 8 full-shift samples, random Any sample > Limit Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” Yes No % Predicted >Limit < 0.1% Yes Take 4 random samples / year No %Predicted >Limit = % Yes Take 8 random samples /year No %Predicted >Limit = 0 Yes Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” % Predicted >Limit > 5% Yes Stop monitoring for this. No

34 Exceedance Predicted 1.4% Continue at 8 samples / year

35 Periodic Monitoring Decisions based on Statistics Take 8 full-shift samples, random Any sample > Limit Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” Yes No % Predicted >Limit < 0.1% Yes Take 4 random samples / year No %Predicted >Limit = % Yes Take 8 random samples /year No %Predicted >Limit = 0 Yes Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” % Predicted >Limit > 5% Yes Stop monitoring for this. No

36 Exceedance Predicted 0.3% Continue at 8 samples / year

37 Definitely looks lognormal when plotted

38 Periodic Monitoring Decisions based on Statistics Take 8 full-shift samples, random Any sample > Limit Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” Yes No % Predicted >Limit < 0.1% Yes Take 4 random samples / year No %Predicted >Limit = % Yes Take 8 random samples /year No %Predicted >Limit = 0 Yes Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” % Predicted >Limit > 5% Yes Stop monitoring for this. No

39 Exceedance Predicted <0.1% Reduce to 4 samples / year

40 Periodic Monitoring Decisions based on Statistics Take 8 full-shift samples, random Any sample > Limit Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” Yes No % Predicted >Limit < 0.1% Yes Take 4 random samples / year No %Predicted >Limit = % Yes Take 8 random samples /year No %Predicted >Limit = 0 Yes Conduct exposure assessment “Worst Case” % Predicted >Limit > 5% Yes Stop monitoring for this. No

41 Exceedance Predicted = 0.000% Communicate & Stop Sampling

42 Precautions Some regulations mandate monitoring Changes in the workplace will change QEA Production rate Changed ventilation Different chemical composition Changed methods for handling Even though nothing has changed, management may expect additional sampling just because it is time to confirm all’s well

43 Summary Statistics and probability can be used to modify sampling frequency Use of graphs to communicate data to similar exposure groups will enhance HAZCOM Use of graphs will enhance Medical program understanding of workplace stressors Use of graphs for tracking and trending is an expectation of VPP under OSHA