Nt1310 Unit 4 Case Study

Unit IV Case Study
Corrinne DeMarco
Waldorf College
Industrial Hygiene
8/24/2017

Unit IV Case Study

Unit IV Case Study
What is the purpose of the exposure assessment?
According to Mr. Sam Sampler, the purpose of the survey was to evaluate personal exposures to select components of commonly used chemicals associated with the ACME printing process. Five samples were taken to assess ink components along with the one sample for ozone. This test is to insure employee heath and safety.
Why was the exposure assessment conducted?
In my opinion, this exposure assessment was conducted to evaluate exposures to employees working in the facility and also to the ambient atmosphere since VOC’s (Volatile Organic Compounds) are regulated in the amount

workers can be exposed to.
What type of sampling (personal or area) was conducted, and why?
At ACME Printing, the Plant Director was consulted to develop a working sampling strategy of how and where an area sample was to be collected for the ozone. Personal samplimg was conducted with 5 workers who all carried around individual monitors throughout the entirety of their work days. The air sampling pump was used with the proper filter media provided by a laboratory utilized for this sampling project. All of the samplingmust follw strict guidelines set by NIOSH and OSHA.
What are the chemicals that were sampled, and what are their hazards?
The chemicals that were sampled were chemicals commonly found to be in inks and and adhesives. Those chemicals are n-propyl alcohol and n-propyl acetate as shown after a review of the SDS for inks and adhesives. N-propyl alcohol is a health hazard and can cause irritation to the eyes, nose and throat (Centers for Disease Control, 2011). Potential exposure methods are the daily use of the chemical, inhalation, absorption through skin contact which can be minimized through the use of chemical resistant gloves. N-propyl acetate causes similar symptoms and is also mitigated by the used of chemical reisitant gloves in the facility.
What are the most likely routes of exposure given the nature of the business?
For this facility, they have safety precautions in place to prevent some exposures. However, I believe that the most common routes of entry are going to be through inhalation from all of the vapors in the process and inside of closed areas. The second most common entry would be absorbtion through contact with any of the chemicals listed about or inks that are part of the many processes they do at ACME.
Provide an overview of the results, including an explanation of the “additive formula,” and discuss them in relation to the applicable exposure limit.
The final results showed that the personal samples were all below their PELs and also with the exposures taken in the previous years showing a consistency in both exposure level and sampling. Even though the results for ACME Printing corporation Inc., were within acceptable levels in the past several years, their previous results at time were at 50%. Best practices are to keep sample limits at below 50% of the PEL (Sampler, S. (2012). Results from the first 5 personal samples range from 23 ppm with an additive percentage PEL of 14.8% to the highest sample of 91 ppm with an additive percentage of 59%. Results for the area sampling, taken directly at the laminator workstation showed an ozone concentration of less than .013 ppm. This is 2.5% of the PEL.
The additive formula is used to calculate the sample percent of PEL when there is more than one contaminate in the sample.

It is calculated as follows: (concentration of contaminant 1 / OSHA PEL for contaminant 1) + (concentration of contaminant 2 / OSHA PEL for contaminant 2). So, if we look at the personal sample taken from Josh’s workday, we would calculate the n-Propanol ppm of (47/200 = 0.235) + n-Propyl Acetate of (14/200 = .07). Our additive calculation % PEL would equal 23.5 + 7 = 30.5 % (Sampler, S. (2012).
Were there any off-normal or unplanned incidents relative to sample collection?
The area sample for the ozone was said to be insignificant because the day of the sampling, the lamination process was not in action. This process is one that may produce many vapors, so the readings were not exactly accurated for the “worst case day”.
Provide a summary of the recommendations made by Sam “IH” Sampler.
Sam Sampler recommended that ACME Printing continue with their air sampling program and also the sharing of all sampling information with the affected employees. A separate study for the area sampling of the laminations process should be done since the laminator was not in operation on the day of the air sampling project.
Comment on the thoroughness of the study. Did you feel that the exposure assessment was comprehensive? If not, what additional information would you

provide?
Sam “IH” Sampler, an Industrial Hygienist set up a project to take 5 personal samples and one area sample of airborne contaminants to obtain information and track the level of contaminate in the ambient air that the employees were being exposed to. Overall the report states all of the facts pertaining to the samples taken. The recommendations are good except I would have gone one step further to recommend specific PPE and the type of material the PPE is made of such as nitrile or Viton gloves and impermeable aprons. Not to say the employees need to wear these articles but the recommendation should be specific.
Comment on who the target audience would be for this report. If you were the plant director of ACME Printing, would you be comfortable with sharing this with an auditor from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)? Do you have any concerns related to sharing this with your employees?
This report is mainly for Management, EH&S and the affected employee/employees.

As Plant director I would have no problem sharing the report information with OSHA, especially when the sample levels are within limits and have been in the past. Although some samples were at 50%, the need for the exposure needs to be kept below that level at all times. When sharing this type of information with employees, especially if sample levels are above the PEL, it is most important to share this information with the employee but also in a manner where they will not become scared or alarmed at what they are being exposed to. I believe that the sharing of this information is part of the required OSHA regulation for

HAZCOM.

References:
Canadian Center for Occupational Health and Safety (n.d.). How Workplace Chemicals Enter the Body. Retrieved from https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/how_chem.html
Centers for Disease Control (2011) National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Pocket Guide. Retrieved April, 2014 at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/
Haight, J. M. (Ed.). (2012). Recognition, evaluation, and control of workplace health hazards. Des Plaines, IL: American Society of Safety Engineers.
Sam “IH” Sampler. (2012). 2012 Annual Air Sampling Survey. Gilbert, WS