Risk management measures for chemicals: the "COSHH essentials" approach

"COSHH essentials" was developed in Great Britain to help duty holders comply with the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations. It uses a similar approach to that described in the new European "REACH" Regulation (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals; EC No. 1907/2006 of the European Parliament), insofar as it identifies measures for managing the risk for specified exposure scenarios. It can therefore assist REACH duty holders with the identification and communication of appropriate risk-management measures. The technical basis for COSHH essentials is explained in the original papers published in the Annals of Occupational Hygiene. Its details will, therefore, not be described here; rather, its ability to provide a suitable means for communicating risk-management measures will be explored. COSHH essentials is a simple tool based on an empirical approach to risk assessment and risk management. The output is a "Control Guidance Sheet" that lists the "dos" and "don'ts" for control in a specific task scenario. The guidance in COSHH essentials recognises that exposure in the workplace will depend not just on mechanical controls, but also on a number of other factors, including administrative and behavioural controls, such as systems of work, supervision and training. In 2002, COSHH essentials was made freely available via the internet (http://www.coshh-essentials.org.uk/). This electronic delivery enabled links to be made between product series that share tasks, such as drum filling, and with ancillary guidance, such as setting up health surveillance for work with a respiratory sensitiser. COSHH essentials has proved to be a popular tool for communicating good control practice. It has attracted over 1 million visits to its site since its launch. It offers a common benchmark of good practice for chemical users, manufacturers, suppliers and importers, as well as regulators and health professionals.

Biomonitoring for Chromium and Arsenic in Timber Treatment Plant Workers Exposed to CCA Wood Preservatives

This study reports a survey of occupational exposure to copper chrome arsenic (CCA) based wood preservatives during vacuum pressure timber impregnation. The survey involved biological monitoring based on analysis of chromium and arsenic in urine samples collected from UK workers. The aim of the study was to determine the extent of occupational exposure to arsenic and chromium in the UK timber treatment industry. The objectives were to collect and analyse urine samples from as many workers as possible, where CCA wood preservatives might be used, at 6 monthly intervals for 2 years. In addition, to investigate day-to-day variations in urinary excretion of chrome and arsenic by collecting and analysing three samples a week for 3 weeks in subsets of workers and controls (people not occupationally exposed). All urine samples were analysed for chromium and inorganic arsenic. To investigate any residual interference every sample was accompanied by a short questionnaire about recent consumption of seafood and smoking. The analytical methods for arsenic used a hydride generation technique to reduce interference from dietary sources of arsenic and also a technique that would measure total arsenic concentration in urine. The main findings show that workers exposed to CCA wood preservatives have concentrations of inorganic arsenic and chromium in urine that are significantly higher than those from non-occupationally exposed people but below biological monitoring guidance values that would indicate inhalation exposure at UK occupational exposure limits for chromium and arsenic. The effects of consumption of seafood on urinary arsenic were not significant using the hydride generation method for inorganic arsenic but were significant if 'total' arsenic was measured. The 'total' arsenic method could not distinguish CCA workers from controls and is clearly unsuitable for assessment of occupational exposure to arsenic. There was a significant increase in the urinary concentration of chromium in workers over the four sample collection rounds indicating increasing exposure to chromium during the 2 years of the study. This unexpected finding may be worth further investigation. Overall, the study demonstrated the utility of biological monitoring for assessment of occupational exposure to chromium and arsenic.

Operator exposure when applying amenity herbicides by all-terrain vehicles and controlled droplet applicators

A total of 33 surveys of amenity herbicides took place during 1998-1999. These surveys concentrated on two application methods: all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and controlled droplet applicators (CDAs). The purpose of these surveys was to measure surface deposition and potential inhalation exposure of the operators to the spray fluid used. This paper recommends that the following indicative values should inform risk assessments for these types of application. ATV: The potential dermal exposure (PDE) to spray fluid (21 sample sets) ranged between 0.7 and 6.8 ml/h of spray fluid, median 2.0 ml/h based on patch samplers. Exposure to the hands, as collected on cotton gloves, ranged between 0.6 and 13.6 ml/h, median 3.0 ml/h. Potential exposure to spray fluid by inhalation was found in 85% of the samples, range 7-37 mg/m(3), median of non-zero values at 16 mg/m(3). CDA: The PDE to spray fluid (12 sample sets) ranged between 0.003 and 0.826 ml/h of fluid, median 0.133 ml/h, based on patch samplers. Exposure to the hands, as collected on cotton gloves inside protective gloves, ranged up to 0.06 ml/h, median 0.004 ml/h, and on socks ranged up to 0.05 ml/h, median 0.001 ml/h. Potential exposure by inhalation was low: detected in just 33% of the samples, range 0.02-0.61 mg/m(3), median 0.12 mg/m(3).

Developing COSHH Essentials: dermal exposure, personal protective equipment and first aid

The 'control banding' approach in COSHH Essentials combines the potential for harm with the potential for exposure by inhalation to band measures to control exposure at source, as generic strategies. These are simply adapted to specific tasks and circumstances to produce specific control advice. Where it is not possible or practical to use this control advice, the control bands can suggest adequate respiratory protective equipment using 'protection factors'. Proposals in the paper enable the user to identify the right level of respiratory protective equipment (RPE), and to begin selecting suitable RPE. Selection is made through a formatted questionnaire, enabling the user to give the right facts to the supplier. COSHH Essentials applies mainly to exposure by inhalation. However, skin exposure is very common and uptake via the skin can be an important contributor to body dose. This paper examines the factors concerning skin exposure, and the options for banding the potential for harm to the skin or via the skin. Proposals have then been made for dermal exposure control. Planning for emergencies is an important facet of risk control. Proposals are outlined to band chemical hazards for emergency planning according to a minimum of information, i.e. the danger symbol on a product label.