What are the safety risks when transporting radioactive materials?

Written by Stephen Pike, Argon Electronics

Radioactive materials have a wide variety of applications within the fields of medicine, power generation, manufacturing and the military – and just as with any other product, there are times when these materials may need to be moved from one location to another.

In the US, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that there are around three million shipments of radioactive materials to, from or within the US every year.  In the UK meanwhile, Public Health England (PHE) has reported that somewhere in the region of half a million packages containing radioactive materials are transported to, from or within the UK annually.

Regulation of transport of radioactive materials

Ensuring the safety and security of the transport of radioactive material – whether be it by road, rail, air or sea – is understandably a major priority and one that is highly regulated, depending upon the type, and the quantity, of radioactivity that is being transported.

Materials that are deemed to be low in radioactivity may be able to be shipped with no, or very few, controls.

Materials that are considered to be highly radioactive will be subject to controlled routes, segregation, additional security and specialist packaging and labelling measures.

The UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) has a primary role to play in advising on the safe and secure transportation of radioactive substances across a wide of sectors – from the movement of decommissioned nuclear reactors or the carriage of irradiated nuclear fuel to the shipping of medical radio-pharmaceuticals, or the transport of sealed radioactive sources used within the construction or oil industries.

What constitutes a radiation transport event?

The normal transport of radioactive materials can result in transport workers (and sometimes even members of the public) being exposed to small radiation doses.

The strict regulatory conditions of transport however are designed to minimise these exposures.

Accidents and incidents can occur for a variety of reasons – from seemingly minor administrative errors, to problems arising from insufficient packaging, mishaps that occur during loading or unloading of consignments or the theft or loss of a radioactive material being carried.

When such events do occur there is the risk of radiological consequences not just for those transport workers in the immediate vicinity but for emergency responders, HazMat personnel and the wider public.

According to the Radioactive Materials Transport Event Database (RAMTED) there were a total of 16 accidents or incidents involving the transport of radiological materials in the UK in 2012.

These included the receipt of a flask from a nuclear power station where one of the lid-chock locking bolts was found to be loose; the failure of lifting equipment when removing a type 30B uranium hexafluoride cylinder from its protective shipping packaging; and an incident involving the stealing of pipes and plates from a scrap meal facility that were found to have traces of orphan radioactive sources.

Public Health England differentiates radiation transport events into one of the five following categories:

  1. A transport accident (TA) – which is defined as any event that occurs during the carriage of a consignment of radioactive material and that prevents either the consignment, or the vehicle itself, from being able to complete its journey.
  2. A transport incident (TI) – comprising any form of event, other than an accident, that may have occurred prior to or during the carriage of the consignment and that may have resulted in the loss or damage of the consignment or the unforeseen exposure of transport workers or members of the public.
  3. A handling accident (HA) – encompassing any accident that occurs during the loading, shipping, storing or unloading of a consignment of radioactive material and that results in damage to the consignment.
  4. A handling incident (HI) – defined as any handling event, other than an accident, that may occur during the loading, shipping , storing or unloading of the radioactive consignment.
  5. Contamination (C) – defined an an event where radioactive contamination is found on the surface of a package or where the conveyance of a radioactive material is found to be in excess of the regulatory limit.

The role of radiation safety training

When formulating a radiation training strategy, it is vital that personnel are adequately trained to handle the hazards and the risks associated with incidents involving radioactive materials.

Radiation safety training and development programmes should ideally provide personnel with both the knowledge they need and the practical skills that they will rely on in order to carry out their duties safely and effectively.

While most radiation detection equipment is relatively easy to use, the key lies in ensuring that trainees understand the significance of the readings that they get, that they can recognise the implications of changes in units of measurement and that they have the opportunity to train in as life-like a setting as possible.


About the Author

Steven Pike is the Founder and Managing Director of Argon Electronics, a leader in the development and manufacture of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) and hazardous material (HazMat) detector simulators. He is interested in liaising with CBRN professionals and detector manufacturers to develop training simulators as well as CBRN trainers and exercise planners to enhance their capability and improve the quality of CBRN and Hazmat training.

Concern over potential slow response time at Burnaby crude oil storage facility

A recently disclosed fire protection audit report on the Burnaby, British Columbia crude oil storage terminal has raised concerns of local politicians and residents.  The facility is owned by TransMountain Pipeline.  The report estimates that the planned response time to a major event, such as a serious spill or fire, at six hours.

The Burnaby storage terminal is the end point of the Trans Mountain Pipeline System. It is a distribution point for crude oil and refined products to local terminals – the Parkland refinery and the Westridge Marine Terminal. The Burnaby terminal currently has 13 tanks with a combined storage capacity of 1.6-m bbl with secondary and tertiary containment.

The fire protection audit was commissioned by the National Energy Board (now the Canadian Energy Regulator [CER]) in 2016.  The audit was conducted by PLC Fire Safety Solutions, a company provide quality fire safety engineering services.

In May, the National Energy Board (now the CER) issued a report on Trans Mountain’s fire preparedness at three oil terminals in Burnaby, B.C., and Edmonton, Alberta. The CER report notes that TransMountain’s response time goal for assembling staff and contractors to initiate the fire fighting activities as six hours.  In its report, it states the TransMountain reduce the response time to four hours.

The PLC Safety Solutions report on the Burnaby terminal concluded in the emergency response plans were generally in compliance, but it raised questions about the time and manner in which the company’s own firefighting team could respond.

“Since there is currently no mutual aid agreement with the Burnaby Fire Department, initial response will be limited and response time could be six hours,” concludes the report.

The fire protection audit report was recently made public after the local Member of Parliament filed a Freedom of Information request.  In response to the report being made public and the  Since the report was prepared, the Canadian Energy Regulator has stated that the response time has been reduced to four hours.

TransMountain Pipeline issued a news release in response to the report’s finding being made public, stating, “At our terminals, we are ready to respond immediately with people and equipment. Trans Mountain has mutual aid agreements in place with other industrial operators in the areas where we operate, and contracts with response companies to provide fire responders to the terminals.”

The Burnaby crude oil storage terminal has been in operation for more than 65 years.  There has never been a storage tank fire.

 

Training for CBRNe & HazMat incidents at mass public events

Written by Steven Pike, Argon Electronics

Preparing civilian first responders and military teams for the threat of possible chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or explosive (CBRNe) attacks is a top priority for countries around the world.

The very nature of CBRNe threat detection, however, all too frequently relies on the ability to monitor and manage the ‘invisible’ – which can present unique challenges for both trainees and their trainers.

And the landscape in which CBRNe events can take place is ever expanding, as perpetrators exploit soft civilian targets at mass public gatherings – evidenced by the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka in 2019, the terrorist attack at the UK’s Manchester Arena in 2017 or the Boston Marathon bombing in April 2013.

When training for these types of mass public CBRNe incidents, the challenge for instructors is to be able to authentically replicate the environment and conditions that are typical of large-scale public areas – be it a music stadium, sports arena or religious venue.

The value of CBRNe training exercises

Realistic, hands-on exercises can provide a useful opportunity for trainees to practice carrying out their roles, and to gain familiarity and confidence with their CBRN detector equipment.

The more life-like the exercise, the greater the likelihood that the participants will become fully engaged in ‘alert’ mode rather than simply remaining in an ‘exercise’ mindset.

But while authenticity is valuable, it is also crucial to ensure that in creating these realistic scenarios there is no risk of harm to the participants, the trainers, the environment or the public at large.

Selecting the optimum training method

As we have explored in previous blog posts, traditional methods of CBRNe and HazMat training (such as those that incorporating Live Agents or simulants) can have their limitations.

The use of live simulants, for example, can often only be detected at very close range, which means the training scenarios can lack realism.

In addition, many simulated substances are not well suited to being used in repeated training exercises, due to the practical issue of managing residual contamination.

Electronic simulator detectors, however, offer a safe and practical alternative – by replicating the appearance, feel and functionality of actual detectors and by responding to safe electronic sources.

CBRNe training in action

With the use of electronic simulation equipment, it is possible to conduct realistic and easily repeatable training exercises that present no risk of harm to the personnel or the environment in which they are operating.

In one recent case study, the use of an inventory of electronic simulators was seen to vastly enhance the realism of a large-scale CBRNe training exercise that was conducted by the Bristol Police at the Bristol City Football Ground.


About the Author

Steven Pike is the Founder and Managing Director of Argon Electronics, a leader in the development and manufacture of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) and hazardous material (HazMat) detector simulators. He is interested in liaising with CBRN professionals and detector manufacturers to develop training simulators as well as CBRN trainers and exercise planners to enhance their capability and improve the quality of CBRN and Hazmat training.

Solvent Spill from Transport Truck results in $100,000 fine

Penner International Inc., headquartered in Manitoba, was recently convicted on one charge on the Ontario Environmental Protection Act as a result of a spill of solvent from one its transport trucks in 2017. The company was fined $100,000 plus a victim surcharge of $25,000.

The driver of the vehicle involved in the solvent spill was also personally charged and convicted. He was fined $35,000 plus a victim surcharge of $8,750. He was given 12 months to pay the fine.

In spill occurred on July 20, 2017 in the Town of Gwillimbury, approximately a 1-hour drive of Toronto. A Penner tractor-trailer driven a by independent contractor was heading north on Highway 400 when it rear-ended a pick-up truck that swerved in front of it, ultimately leading to a spill of solvent VORTEX WPM onto the highway.

The VORTEX PM had been picked up by the driver earlier in the day from a Mississauga, Ontario distribution company and loaded onto the trailer. The load consisted of twelve stainless steel 1500-kilogram. The distribution company did not secure them to the trailer.  The driver did not inquire as to whether the totes were secured or not before he closed the doors to the trailer and drove off.

During transport and at the time of the rear-ending incident, as the totes were not properly secured, they shifted and the valves on two of the totes were knocked open. Solvent spilled from the trailer onto the highway and some also ran down gradient onto the soil of an adjacent construction site.

A one-kilometre evacuation zone was also established around the spill site. The closure remained in force for 10.5 hours, and the construction site’s operations were affected for a few days.

Hundreds of motorists were trapped on Highway 400, where the spill occurred, for up to five hours before they could be re-routed to ancillary roads.

VORTEX WPM is an organic solvent that is flammable. To clean up a large spill of VORTEC WPM, the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for VORTEX WPM states: “Eliminate all ignition sources. Persons not wearing protective equipment should be excluded from area of spill until clean up has been completed. Stop spill at source. Prevent from entering drains, sewers, streams, etc. If runoff occurs, notify authorities as required. Pump or vacuum transfer spilled product to clean containers for recovery. Transfer contaminated absorbent, soil and other materials to containers for disposal.”

Penner International Ltd. was founded in 1923 and specialized in truckload dry van, international, and Canadian transport.

What are the pros and cons of simulators for radiation safety training?

Written by Steven Pike, Argon Electronics

Electronic radiation simulators provide trainees with realistic first-hand experience of handling detector equipment that is identical to that which they will use in the field.

But while the use of simulator detectors can offer significant advantages for both student and instructor, as with any form of training method there may be some compromises.

In this blog post we explore some of the pros and the cons of radiation safety training using simulator detectors.

The Pros

Practicality

Ionizing radiation is a powerful, invisible force – which can make creating realistic scenarios a challenge.

By incorporating the use of simulator detectors into training exercises students have the opportunity to both understand and ‘trust’ the values displayed on their instruments.

In doing so they can also develop an understanding of the relationship between the measurements on their survey meter and their own personal dose readings as well as the effects of time, distance and shielding.

Safety

Safe and environmentally friendly radiation training systems can be used in a variety of scenarios – whether indoors, outdoors in confined areas or in public spaces.

With simulators incurring zero safety risk there are no Health & Safety restrictions – and the administrative burden for instructors is vastly reduced.

Immersion

Simulator detectors offer the opportunity for a truly authentic and immersive training experience.

Scenarios can be planned to replicate all the crucial elements of real-life incidents, which in turn exposes trainees to the psychological challenges they may well encounter in high-stress incidents.

Repeatability

With the use of simulators, radiation training exercises can be quickly and easily set up – and repeated as many times as required.

Outcomes

Powerful after action review (AAR) ensures that trainees have followed clearly set out procedures and that they understand when mistakes have been made.

Efficiency

Using simulators can provide some significant time-saving advantages for training exercises.

The costly and time-consuming administrative effort normally associated with the transport, deployment and safe handling of radionuclides is completely removed – and the need to secure specialist facilities where ionizing radiation sources is no longer an issue.

The cons

With any form of training, some compromises will inevitably have to be accepted. The key, however, is to find the happy medium between the optimum training outcome and what is practical and achievable.

Dynamic ranges

The dynamic ranges associated with radiation readings are extremely large, which can contribute to challenges in implementing simulations.

Instructor intensiveness

Simulation training can also be very instructor-intensive – with the trainer finding that too much of their attention is focused on creating the “effect” for their student and not enough on observing the student’s actions.

In these cases, alternative techniques which involve the temporary placement of a means to simulate the presence of radioactivity may be more practical – selection of the ideal simulation equipment is essential.

Shielding

It is the simulation of the effects of shielding where there is the potential for the greatest compromise.

The reality is that safe alternatives won’t be subjected to the same degree of attenuation (or reduction in force) as actual ionizing radiation.

But new technology now means that shielding can be represented to a realistic enough level to enable students to appreciate its importance for protection.

Instructors will of course need to clarify the differences, where appropriate, for the lesson being delivered – and these are likely to vary depending upon the operational responsibilities of the trainees.

While training with simulator detectors has both advantages and limitations, there is no doubt that it is an effective method of ensuring successful training outcomes while at the same time maintaining the safety of student and instructor.


About the Author

Steven Pike is the Founder and Managing Director of Argon Electronics, a leader in the development and manufacture of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) and hazardous material (HazMat) detector simulators. He is interested in liaising with CBRN professionals and detector manufacturers to develop training simulators as well as CBRN trainers and exercise planners to enhance their capability and improve the quality of CBRN and Hazmat training.

How does After Action Review benefit HazMat training?

Written by Steven Pike, Argon Electronics

Emergency response teams are constantly looking for ways to improve their operations.

Simulated exercises, training classes and seminars can all provide valuable insight into tactics and technologies that can be applied in real life HazMat incidents.

However unless feedback on incident response and command is recorded (and can be easily shared with personnel), a valuable learning opportunity can risk being lost.

An effective way to enhance learning outcomes is through the use of a post-incident critique or After Action Review (AAR).

An AAR is a structured means of analyzing what took place during a particular training exercise or event to identify strengths, weaknesses and areas for improvement.

As well as providing a method to scrutinize the actions that occurred, an AAR is also an opportunity to consider what could have been done differently – both by those who took part in the exercise and by those who were in charge.

The evolution of AAR

The origins of After Action Review can be found in the US military where formal AARs evolved out of the combat action debriefs that were carried out during World War Two and the Vietnam war.

The use of AAR in a military context has also been documented in the memoirs of Chinese military leader Gong Chu’s during the 1934-1938 three-year war in South China; and by Emperor Napolean’s Marshall’s and Generals in the early 19th century.

Military AARs fall into two types – formal AARs (which require detailed planning, preparation and resources) and informal AARs (which take the form of on-the-spot reviews of individual or group training performance).

Over the years, a wide variety of public health and emergency management agencies have recognized the value of AARs – using them within training programs to aid better understanding of the perspectives and expectations of all involved and to capture crucial learning that can be widely shared.

One potential challenge with any form of realistic HazMat training exercise is that much can be going on in a relatively short time-frame. When the exercise ends, participants can sometimes find that many of the events, and the associated learning opportunities, have become a “blur” in their minds.

A 2018 article in the online magazine FireEngineering.com discussed how taking a “stop-and-start” approach to full-scale HazMat training exercises can help to cement learning. By breaking up the scenario into several smaller sections with regular breaks for review, there is the opportunity to discuss what’s just happened, to explore alternative tactics, to quickly correct any misunderstandings and to enhance exercise efficiency.

In addition there is also the advantage of being able to ensure that departmental procedures and guidelines are being followed, and that they are modified when necessary.

The application of AAR in simulator detector technology

The integration of AAR capability into simulator detector technology has been shown to reveal important lessons that improve professional practice, minimize risk and enhance communication.

When we think about AAR in the context of a simulator detector, it is the technology within the device itself (rather than a human) that maintains a record of all the activity.

The simulator version of the LCD3.2 Chemical Hazard Detector (the LCD3.2e) is just one example of a device that keeps a record of all real-time trainee movement – from the initial set-up of the equipment through to the completion of the exercise.

Once the scenario has concluded, the instructor is able to easily switch the device to display a detailed (and indisputable) performance report.

AAR is a powerful and constructive way to obtain valuable knowledge that can improve processes and enhance training efficiency – be it in the form of constructive group discussion, via fact-finding exercises or by harnessing the intelligent technological capability of simulator detectors.

The process of regularly critiquing can serve as a powerful tool for understanding the impact of one’s actions and effecting change.

And by regularly comparing the “expected outcome” with what “actually happened”, adjustments and improvements can continually be made, to improve safety at both an individual and an organizational level.

About the Author

Steven Pike is the Founder and Managing Director of Argon Electronics, a leader in the development and manufacture of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) and hazardous material (HazMat) detector simulators. He is interested in liaising with CBRN professionals and detector manufacturers to develop training simulators as well as CBRN trainers and exercise planners to enhance their capability and improve the quality of CBRN and Hazmat training.

VelocityEHS acquires Industrial Hygiene Software company Spiramid

VelocityEHS, a Chicago-based environment, health, safety (EHS) software company, recently announced it has acquired Spiramid, developer of the a system for managing industrial hygiene (IH). The acquisition adds Spiramid’s occupational safety & health software to the VelocityEHS’s EHS platform. The software, now called VelocityEHS Industrial Hygiene, gives organizations the capabilities to efficiently run an industrial hygiene program.

VelocityEHS is launching its new Industrial Hygiene solution at a time when IH is at an important crossroads. The need for workplace programs that anticipate and prevent workplace hazards is growing, while the number of certified industrial hygienists and investments in traditional programs has been on the decline.

“We’re
excited to launch our powerful new Industrial Hygiene product. It’s a perfect
fit for people working on the frontlines and has great synergy with our
market-leading Chemical Management capabilities. Its simple design cuts through
the complexity of IH tasks,” said Glenn Trout, president and CEO of
VelocityEHS. “While there’s no substitute for a well-trained, well-resourced
team of industrial hygienists, the reality today is that a growing number of
EHS generalists are being called upon to do sampling and run IH programs that
fall outside the scope of their training and traditional responsibilities.
Whether you’re a veteran hygienist or new to the role, we believe our new IH
solution will provide significant value.”

The software gives companies with sophisticated programs the ability to see, in one place and in real time, what’s happening across their enterprise. It gives staff hygienists new reporting tools — like dynamic risk matrices — to help them determine where and why to deploy resources, as well as to demonstrate the value of IH when talking with leadership stakeholders. For companies without a Certified Industrial Hygienist, it provides a framework for managing exposure risks and meeting a wide range of IH tasks.

“The goal of any industrial hygiene program is to help as many people in the workplace as you can. I am proud to see our IH software, which we have spent years perfecting, added to the VelocityEHS platform, which serves the industry’s largest EHS software community,” said Dave Risi, co-founder of Spiramid.

Managing
IH can require the collaboration of many stakeholders, including people
sampling in the field, IH consultants, outside laboratories, and program
managers. VelocityEHS’ Industrial Hygiene software is a central management hub,
facilitating the workflow and hand-off of responsibilities from party to party.
For instance, users can more easily plan and control all aspects of IH, from
selection of chemicals and analytical methods, to selection of laboratories and
access of sampling results, with options to share information with the right
stakeholders. The solution lets users send chain of custody forms directly to
labs and receive the analytical data electronically, inside the product,
eliminating the need for manual input and helping to avoid errors by making the
information readily accessible.

Other features include an in-product database of CAS Registry Numbers, OELs and laboratories, plus easy tools for tracking and managing of similar exposure groups (SEGs), qualitative assessments, sampling plans, medical surveillance, surveys, samples and equipment. It is the smartest and most efficient way to track a high-volume of complicated sample data and to manage risk assessments and mitigation programs.

The new IH software, together with VelocityEHS’ Chemical Management and Industrial Ergonomics solutions, provides industrial hygienists with the comprehensive resources they need to promote healthier workplaces.

Demystifying Occupational Hygiene

Written by Abimbola Badejo, Staff Writer

At the recent Partners in Prevention 2019 Health and Safety Conference, Ontario, Canada; organized by Workplace Safety and Prevention Services (WSPS) Ontario, Canada, Dave Gardner of Pinchin Ltd. delivered a presentation on Demystifying Occupational Hygiene. Mr. Gardner is Senior Occupational Hygiene and Safety Consultant with Pinchin Ltd. Below is a summary of his presentation.

WHAT IS OCCUPATIONAL HYGIENE?

Occupational hygiene has been
defined by the United States Department of Labour Occupational Safety and
Health Administration as “that science
and art devoted to the anticipation, recognition, evaluation, and control of
those environmental factors or stresses arising in or from the workplace, which
may cause sickness, impaired health and well-being, or significant discomfort
among workers or among the citizens of the community.
1.   Simply
put, the goal of Occupational hygiene is to ensure the safety and protection of
a worker at his or her workplace, provided the worker follows a set of
guidelines  that have been put in place
to safeguard his/her health and safety. Occupational hygiene concerns fall under the remit of human resources departments, who can use HR Software to ensure that appropriate monitoring, reporting, and training opportunities are put into place. 

Typical occupational hygiene
principles include written standards, procedures and practices; workers
training as part of a knowledge management program; logical thinking on the
part of the creator; a combination of actions with words learned from the
written standards; and total compliance with associated regulations.

WHY IS OCCUPATIONAL HYGIENE PROGRAM
IMPORTANT?

An Occupational Hygiene
program is of great importance as its negligence leads to occupational injuries
and diseases. Occupational diseases are considered more significant due to
factors associated with it; which include

  • Diseases
    caused by exposure to either chemical, physical or biological agents at the
    workplace
  • Sources
    such as exposure to airborne asbestos particles, confined spaces, noise,
    construction projects, etc.
  • Categories
    namely Long Latency Illness, Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL), Chronic
    Exposure and effects and Acute Exposure and effects
  • Observable
    effects which are not seen until after a long duration of exposure
  •  75% of fatalities in diseases, attributed to
    occupational origins

The Ontario Workplace Safety
and Insurance Board (WSIB) reported that approximately 130 thousand claims were
filed, and about $940 million benefit costs were released, between 2008 and
2017. Occupational diseases with long latency are mostly serious and these
account for only three percent of the occupational diseases with benefits.

Based on these factors (and
those not mentioned), reviews have been made by the Human Resources and Skills
Development Canada (HRSDC) and Labour Canada. These reviews include updates
made to the Occupational Exposure Limits (OEL) of chemicals, training workers
on the safe usage of materials and the equipment at the workplace, thorough
knowledge of the materials and substances used at the workplace, compulsory and
proper use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), alertness of workers to the
state of their own health and compulsory medical check-ups in relation to
workplace risk assessment.

CASE FOCUS: SUMMARY OF RISKS AND SURVEYS REPORTED FOR
WORKERS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

A survey made by the Center
for Construction Research and Training regarding occupational diseases in the
construction industry reported that the workers in this industry are:

  • twice
    as likely to have chronic obstructive lung diseases, five times more likely to
    have lung cancer, thirty-three times more likely to have asbestosis
  • inclined
    to suffer a 50% increase in Lung Cancer related deaths
  • predisposed
    to noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) (50% of workers)
  • susceptible
    to elevated levels of lead in their blood (17% of workers)
  • exposed
    to the allowable 8-hour exposure limit for Manganese during welding processes.
    This was observed with workers involved in boiler making (75%), iron-working
    (15%) and pipe-fitting (7%)).

In addition, a nationwide report has disclosed that 40% of WSIB
costs are for construction occupational diseases, more construction workers die
from a combination of occupational diseases and traumatic injuries and that 2
to 6 construction workers are more likely to develop occupational lung disease
and NIHL.

As observed, most of the occupationally related diseases can
be prevented by simple tasks such as hand-washing, proper use of PPE and
correct compliance to defined regulations.

LEGISLATIONS
GOVERNING OCCUPATIONAL HYGIENE

To ensure the protection of workers in various Canadian
industries, regulations and guidelines have been put in place; some of which
require compliance by either the employee or the employer. The legislations and
related codes/standards guiding occupational hygiene in workplaces include:

Some of the provided
regulations and guidelines are specific while others are general in application.
The key to correct interpretation is to apply the correct regulation to the
right workplace situation.

An example of a proper
legislation application: Silica is
an inert substance and an irreplaceable material in most products and buildings
in the world today.  As the second most
abundant mineral on the planet, silica is used in numerous ways. Getting the
substance to the usable state requires processing, which exposes the worker to
the respirable crystalline form. The regulation (O. Reg 490/09), listing silica
as a designated substance, does not apply to the silica infused products but to
the respirable fractions which the processing worker is exposed to. The
regulation specifies an occupational exposure limit (OEL) for respirable
crystalline silica as 0.05 mg/m3 of air (cristobalite silica) and
0.1 mg/m3 of air (quartz and tripoli silica) for an 8-hour/day or
40-hour weekly exposure. This regulation, however, does not apply to the
employer or some other workers on a construction  project; but the employer’s responsibility
will be to protect the worker’s health in compliance to section 25 (2)(h) of
the OHSA, requiring employers to take every reasonable precaution in the
circumstances to protect a worker.

FUNDAMENTALS OF OCCUPATIONAL HYGIENE

Before initiating an
occupational hygiene program, a clearer understanding of basic terms is ideal.

Industrial
Hygiene
: this
is an exercise devoted to the anticipation, recognition, evaluation, and
control of those environmental stresses arising from the workplace, which may
cause the impairment of a worker’s health.

Toxicology: the study of how chemical,
physical and biological agents adversely affect biological systems. The adverse
effects include irritation, sensitization, organ failure, diseases or cancer.

Disease,
dose and exposure
:
Disease / response is caused by an agent dosage. Dosage is measured in relation
to the exposure of the worker to an agent. Mathematically, exposure is
calculated as the agent concentration multiplied by duration of exposure
(concentration x time). Therefore, sampling surveys are simply estimating the
exposure of the worker to a specific concentration of the agent. Exposure routes
may be through inhalation, ingestion, contact or skin absorption.

Threshold
Limit Values (TLV)
:
TLVs are general concentration limit values for specific chemicals, to which a
healthy adult worker can be exposed. 
However, TLVs does not adequately protect all workers as their
susceptibility levels to various chemicals are unique to them. TLVs are used by
regulators as guidelines or recommendations to assist in the control of
potential workplace hazards.

Time-Weighted
Average (TLV-TWA)
:
TWA concentration for a conventional 8-hour/day or 40-hour/week , to which a
worker may be repeatedly exposed.

Short-Term
Exposure Limit (TLV-STEL)
:
This is a 15-minute TWA exposure that should not be exceeded.

Ceiling
(TLV-C)
: This
is a concentration that must not be exceeded during any part of working
exposure

Air
Monitoring
:
This is a process of sampling the air in the workplace, on a regular basis. The
monitoring  may be qualitative (risk
assessments, hygiene walkthroughs and training) or quantitative (air, noise and
wipe sampling) in perspective.

RISK ASSESSMENT

The first focus of an
occupational hygiene program is to conduct a risk assessment of the workplace
processes.  A risk assessment shows that
20% of the activities or tasks  carried
out, leads to 80% of  risks. Carrying out
a risk assessment, focuses on the adverse effects of  a hazardous agent and the associated level of
risk if a worker is exposed to it. Approaches to risk assessment include
Critical Tasks Analysis (where stepwise task and risk inventories are made with
the focus on worker’s safety), Process Safety (where the focus is on the
process, controlling the risk to keep the worker safe) or a combination of both
approaches. Risk assessment, therefore, is done 
as thus:

  1. Making a list of the agents
    the worker is exposed to,
  2. Identifying the routes of
    entry,
  3. Identifying a relative risk
    level (low, medium or high),
  4. Documenting the control in
    place and its effectiveness.

Table 1. Requirements of a
Hazard Reviewer. Scores are used to dictate the skill level required to assess
and develop control strategies.

Risk
Score
Risk
Level
Minimum Requirements
<10 Low to Medium low Any trained employee
>10 to <20 Medium Health and Safety Department
or a contracted Health and Safety Consultant
20 & above High Certified Health and Safety Professional or Industrial Hygienist (CRSP, CSP, CIH, ROH)

DEVELOPING AIR SAMPLING
STRATEGIES

A preliminary survey is
initially conducted using simple and common tools such as human senses (sight,
taste, hear, smell, taste and gut-feelings), video camera, photo camera, tape
measure and a notebook. Optional tools include velometer and smoke tubes.

Next, all knowledge and
processes related to the hazardous agents are sought out using the central
dogma of risk assessment (Recognition, Evaluation and Control).

The sampling itself should be
done using standardized and validated methods (NIOSH, EPA, ASTM, etc.).

The extent of sampling should
be determined, whether personal (breathing zone) samples or area samples.

Next, the duration of sampling
should be determined, which could be  a
whole day, full-shift, partial shift, single samples, sequential samples, grab
or composite samples.

The worker to be sampled
should be with the worker with the 
highest exposure potential or a group of workers with similar exposure
due to the similarity of their tasks at the workplace.

The amount of samples taken
should also be determined.

The time of sampling should be
determined (day or night shift, winter or summer season, etc.)

Documentation should be made
at every sampling point; and this should include start and stop times,
environmental conditions, chronological log of work tasks, quantified
conditions during production, duration of shifts and break periods, use of PPE,
engineering controls, housekeeping habits and the state of workplace
ventilation.

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT

Occupational hygiene programs
are made with several guidelines governing it. According to the province of
Ontario, all control programs must provide engineering controls, work practices
and hygiene facilities  to control a
workers exposure to a designated substance; methods and procedure should be put
in place to monitor airborne concentrations of designated substances and
measure workers exposure to the same; training programs should be organized for
supervisors and workers on the health effects of the designated substance and
the respective controls required. A typical Occupational Hygiene program,
therefore, should  include the following:

  • Version
    history
  • Purpose
    / objectives
  • Scope
    and application
  • Distribution
  • Definitions
    and abbreviations
  • Roles,
    responsibilities and accountabilities
  • Program
    management (Resources, commitment and program coordinator)
  • Risk
    assessments
  • Exposure
    monitoring plans
  • Occupational
    hygiene surveys (sampling strategy development, analytical services,
    documentation and reporting )
  • Occupational
    hygiene controls
  • Training
  • Related
    document / appendices
  • Quality
    assurance
  • Maintenance
    of standard operating practices (SOPs)
  • Annual
    summary report.

CONCLUSION

An occupational hygiene program is an important component of
workplace management. This ensures the protection of workers’ health, which
leads to better and greater productivity at the workplace.  The foundation of occupational hygiene
programs is to understand the principles that govern the program and knowing
how to apply the principles to various situations at the workplace. Proper
application and effective controls will assist in achieving the goal of
establishing a safe environment for workers to operate.

REFERENCES

  1. https://www.osha.gov/dte/library/industrial_hygiene/industrial_hygiene.pdf

Meat Packing Plant facing major fines for exposing workers to hazardous chemicals

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (U.S. OSHA) has cited 7 S Packing LLC – operating as Texas Packing Company in San Angelo, Texas – for exposing workers to releases of hazardous chemicals. The company faces $615,640 in penalties.

The U.S. OSHA determined that the meat-packing facility failed to implement a required Process Safety Management (PSM) program for operating an ammonia refrigeration unit containing over 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia. The employer also failed to provide fall protection, guard machines and equipment, control hazardous energy, and implement a respiratory protection program.

The PSM Covered Chemical Facilities National Emphasis Program focuses on reducing or eliminating workplace hazards at chemical facilities to protect workers from catastrophic releases of highly hazardous chemicals. PSM standards emphasize the management of hazards associated with highly hazardous chemicals, and establishes a comprehensive management program that integrates technologies, procedures, and management practices to prevent an unexpected release.

The company has 15 business days from receipt of the citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA’s role is to help ensure these conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance.

Global Crisis, Emergency and Incident Management Platforms Market 2019

Persistence Market Research recent market report on Global Crisis, Emergency and Incident Management Platforms estimates that it will be worth $102 billion (USD) by the end of 2024.

A 2017 market analysis by Persistence Market Research on the market in North America predicted the year-over-year growth the Global Crisis, Emergency and Incident Management Platforms to increase at a CAGR of 7.2%. through to 2023. The 2017 report estimated that the North America market accounted for a relatively high market share and be valued at more than US$ 20 Billion in 2017. The report estimated that the North American regional market would continue to remain dominant in terms of value during the forecast period (2017 – 2024).

The latest market report from Persistence Market Research predicts that the global market or crisis, emergency & incident management platforms will be fragmented across various systems and platforms. Among which, the demand for web-based emergency management software, geospatial technology, emergency notification system, hazmat technology, seismic warning systems, and remote weather monitoring systems is expected to gain traction throughout the forecast period. These systems are also predicted to be demanding greater incorporation of communication technologies. Through 2024, satellite phone, vehicle-ready gateways, and emergency response radars will be the most dominant type of communication technologies used in working of any crisis, emergency & incident management platform.

Likewise, the report also expects that during the stipulated forecast period, professional services such as consulting and emergency operation center (EOC) design & integration will be in great demand. By the end of 2024, crisis, emergency & incident management platforms will be actively adopted across industry verticals such as BFSI, energy & utility, government & defense, and telecommunication and IT.

A regional analysis of the global crisis, emergency & incident management platform market indicates that North America will dominate by accounting for over US$ 36 Billion revenues by 2024-end. Adoption for such platforms will also be high in Asia-Pacific, and the region is expected to showcase a 6% value CAGR.

Leading providers of crisis, emergency & incident management platforms in the world include Honeywell International, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corporation, Motorola Solution, Inc., Rockwell Collins, Inc., Siemens AG, Iridium Communication Inc., Guardly, Environmental System Research Institute, Inc., and Intergraph Corporation.