with the primary responsibility of protecting the majority of workers while at the same opti- mizing limited resources (Waters et al., 2015). Walk-through audits, coupled with pre- vious work experience and training, are practical tools that benefit safety profession- als, workers, and communities. These tools are vital to provide information suitable to prioritize the hazards. A toolbox for these approaches must also consider a checklist, brainstorming, and recordables as they relate to specific hazards (Lyon & Hollcroft, 2016). Chemicals without regulatory or voluntary OELs make it dicult to realistically assess their hazards and risks without this relative ref- erence. In these situations, the use of databases of injury and illness can be appropriate (e.g., probability [chance] of occurrence × impacts [severity] = HRV [hazard risk and vulnerabil- ity]. HRV is a good resource for the hazard pri- oritization scheme where the level of risk can determine the procedure or action needed to reduce the risk. This approach can provide a tool to evaluate a variety of hazards that can lead to a comprehensive exposure strategy. We note that for hazards with OELs, expo- sure and risks are derived from the dose rate, total cumulative dose, and frequency of the exposures to hazards (AIHA, 2020). For mul- tiple hazards we can rely on scientific meth- ods of calculations, and relative to OELs, we can establish compliance or noncompliance and hence characterize the risks. Because risk characterization for human health is depen- dent on OEL guidelines, the limitations of these OELs with regard to sex, gender, age, and frequency of exposure make them incomplete for a comprehensive risk charac- terization. A checklist from basic identifica- tion and recognition, suggested as a “Rule of 10,” utilizes the vapor hazard ratio and par- ticulate hazard ratio (Arnold et al., 2016). A checklist suggested by Arnold et al. (2016) is appropriate and e ective for preliminary hazard identification, documentation, and communication in the form of qualitative and semiquantitative exposure assessments. We can establish that illnesses in the available data- bases of injury and illness are a good source for assessing exposure scenarios. Limitations exist, however, for the assessment of chronic illness and injury, which can be inadequate and might not appear in the record of the employer databases. Therefore, these approaches must be complemented with additional tools.
TABLE 5
Noise Exposure Control Categories Based on Noise Dose or Percent Dose at a Time-Weighted Average (TWA) of 90 dBA
Exposure Level
SEG Exposure Control Category
Recommended Control
TWA: <56.8 dBA Noise dose: <1%
0 (<1% of OEL)
Hearing loss prevention awareness training (optional) Hearing loss prevention awareness training (optional) Hearing loss prevention awareness training, periodic exposure monitoring Hearing conservation program inclusion, exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, requirements for personal protective equipment (PPE), consideration of hierarchy of controls
TWA: 56.8–73.4 dBA Noise dose: 1–10% TWA: 73.4–85.0 dBA Noise dose: 10–50% TWA: 85.0–90.0 dBA Noise dose: 50–100%
1 (<10% of OEL)
2 (10–50% of OEL)
3 (50–100% of OEL)
TWA: 90.0–101.6 dBA Noise dose: 100–500% TWA: >101.6 dBA Noise dose: >500%
4 (>100% of OEL)
Implement hierarchy of controls and engineering controls
5 (Multiples of OEL)
Implement hierarchy of controls, validation of hearing protection sufficiency, dual hearing protection devices, priority engineering controls
Note. 100% noise dose = 8-hr TWA of 90 dBA. OEL = occupational exposure limit; SEG = similar exposure group. Source: Hager & Johnson, 2015.
FIGURE 2
Estimated Costs of One Injury/Illness (Extremely Chronic) per Year Versus Company Profitability
1 2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
6 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
4 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
0
C ancer
Sil icosis
Direct C osts
I nd irect C osts
T otal C osts ( Direct + I nd irect)
Sal es to C ov er I nd irect C osts Sal es to C ov er T otal C osts
show that multiple approaches and tools are required to prioritize multiple hazards and the risks of exposure that a ect workers and com-
munities. A combination of such methods can easily provide the basic information to charac- terize risks and improve exposure judgments,
15
December 2023 • Journal of Environmental Health
Powered by FlippingBook