Health hazard evaluation report: HETA-2010-0144-3164, metalworking fluid exposure at an aircraft engine manufacturing facility - Ohio.
Chen-L; Meza-F; Hudson-N
Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, HETA 2008-0099-3152, 2012 Aug; :1-39
In July 2010, NIOSH received a request for an HHE from a representative of the United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America to evaluate exposure to MWFs in an aircraft engine manufacturing facility in Ohio. The evaluation focused on workers exposed to a new formulation of a semisynthetic MWF introduced in January 2010. We administered questionnaires to employees who worked with MWFs and to employees who did not use MWFs. The questionnaire asked about demographics, workplace practices and location, cigarette smoking, and skin and respiratory symptoms. We performed area and PBZ air sampling for MWF aerosols (thoracic particulate mass and extracted MWF) in the areas fed by the three central MWF supply systems. We also performed area air sampling for endotoxin. Bulk samples from the central MWF supply systems were collected for microbial analysis. We looked at the results of MWF tests done regularly at the facility. We also reviewed the company's MWF management program, PPE program, training materials, and material safety data sheets. We found that MWF-exposed participants reported significantly higher rates of work-related asthma symptoms and of work-related dermatitis symptoms in the last 12 months than participants not exposed to MWFs. All airborne MWF concentrations were below applicable occupational exposure limits. Airborne endotoxin concentrations were below recommended guidelines. Low bacteria counts in bulk samples from the central MWF supply systems indicated good microbial control. We recommended training employees on how to properly use engineering controls, such as mist collectors, machine partitions, enclosures, and splash guards. Management should ensure that the mist collector preventive maintenance scheduled is followed. The MWF management program should include better documentation of processes and procedures. This program should include information on employee training, environmental monitoring, and medical screening. A medical surveillance program should be started. It should include pre-employment and periodic questionnaires about respiratory and dermal symptoms. Employees with symptoms should be evaluated by a medical professional who is trained in occupational health. A healthy skin program should be started, which should include teaching employees about proper cleansing and use of protective sleeves.
Region-5; Questionnaires; Demographic-characteristics; Statistical-analysis; Metalworking-fluids; Bacteria; Fungi; Endotoxins; Air-sampling; Exposure-assessment; Respiratory-system-disorders; Respiratory-irritants; Engineering-controls; Skin-exposure; Skin-irritants; Skin-protection; Training; Personal-protective-equipment;
Author Keywords: Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing; metalworking fluid; MWF; thoracic particulates; asthma; dermatitis; endotoxin; mycobacteria; microbial contamination; fungi; aircraft engine manufacturing
Field Studies; Hazard Evaluation and Technical Assistance
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health