Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
hds
Citation preview
SynergistTH
E
12/10 www.aiha.org
®
8 Building IH Capacity in the U.S.
22 Do “Zero-Risk” Exposures Exist?
27 ISO’s Social Responsibility Standard
29 The Business Case for OHS Databases
ImproveYour GraphicsDoes your data show
the forest or the trees?
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:53 PM Page 1
4 The Synergist � December 2010
TH
E
24
27
Synergist®
29
Features24 Extreme Makeovers
A longtime EHS pro shares simpletips for making your data come alive.By Ed Rutkowski
27 Contentious ConsensusInput from a diverse group ofstakeholders will add to the credibilityof ISO’s new standard on socialresponsibility.By Jeffrey Hogue
29 Streamlined ManagementHow to build a business case for OHSdatabases.By Monica Melkonian
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:54 PM Page 4
6 The Synergist � December 2010
8 President’s MessageBuilding Industrial HygieneCapacity in the United StatesBy Michael T. Brandt
10 LettersRevisiting the Haiti Earthquake
12 NewsWatchOEHS AND INDUSTRY NEWS
20 Insight: Exposure AssessmentTime for ModelingBy Steven D. Jahn
22 Insight: Risk AssessmentCrossing a ThresholdBy Frank Mirer
32 CommunityAIHA NEWS
35 OpportunitiesEDUCATIONAL EVENTS FOROEHS PROFESSIONALS
36 Product Features
37 Advertisers’ Index/Synergist Fax-Back Card
38 Introductions
The Synergist’s mission is to provide AIHA members with news and information about the occupational and environmental health andsafety fields and the industrial hygiene profession. The Synergist focuses on industry trends and news, government and regulatoryactivities, key issues facing the profession, appropriate technical information and news on association events and activities.
The Synergist’s objective is to present information that is newsworthy and of general interest in industrial hygiene. Opinions,claims, conclusions and positions expressed in this publication are the authors’ or persons’ quoted and do not necessarily reflect theopinions of the editors, AIHA or The Synergist.
Editor in ChiefConstance Paradise, CAE: [email protected]
Managing EditorEd Rutkowski: [email protected]
Assistant EditorBrooke Morris: [email protected]
Senior Manager, Periodicals and TechnologyJames Myers: [email protected]
Creative Services Associate/DesignerBilly Stryker: [email protected]
Advertising RepresentativeNetwork Media Partners
Ben Ledyard:[email protected]
Executive DirectorPeter J. O’Neil, CAE: [email protected]
The Synergist ® is a copyrighted publication of the AmericanIndustrial Hygiene Association, 2700 Prosperity Ave., Suite250, Fairfax, VA 22031; (703) 849-8888; e-mail [email protected]. No part of The Synergist may be reprinted withoutthe express written consent of AIHA. Submission of articlesor letters to the editor are welcome, but AIHA and The Syn-ergist will determine what to publish and reserve the rightto edit all submissions for content, style, length and clarity.
The Synergist (USPS #009-332) is published monthly ex-cept a combined June/July issue by the American IndustrialHygiene Association, 2700 Prosperity Ave., Suite 250, Fairfax,VA 22031 for $50 per year for members; nonmembers maysubscribe for $275/yr. International nonmembers may subscribefor $375/yr (U.S. funds). Periodicals postage paid at Fairfax,Virginia, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Sendaddress changes toThe Synergist, American Industrial HygieneAssociation, Attn: Customer Service, 2700 Prosperity Ave.,Suite 250, Fairfax, VA 22031. ISSN 10667660.Publications Mail Agreement No. 40039445. Return
undeliverable Canadian addresses to PO Box 503,RPOWest Beaver Creek, Richmond Hill ON L4B 4R6.
Editorial Advisory Board Members
Jeff Behar, California Institute of TechnologyWendell Britnell, LMI
Patricia Crawford, ConsultantM. Cathy Fehrenbacher, U.S. EPA
Don Garvey, 3M Co.Stephen Hemperly, Hitachi GSTJohn Mazur, MACTEC Inc.
Hank Muranko, Muranko & AssociatesDoris Reid, Saxe Colman Consulting GroupJohn Rekus, John F. Rekus & Associates Ltd.
Volume 21 � Number 11Columns & Departments
12COMING IN JANUARY � Wood-dust Exposures � Survey of OEHS Professionals � Smart Phones: Data Security and Privacy Concerns
TH
E Synergist®
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:55 PM Page 6
Circle Fax-back Card No. 4
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:55 PM Page 7
8 The Synergist � December 2010
COLUMN | PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
President’s Message
Building Industrial HygieneCapacity in the United StatesBY MICHAEL T. BRANDT, AIHA® PRESIDENT
We are well acquainted with the chal-lenge of replacing current industrial hy-gienists as they retire. In fact, otherscience, technology, engineering, andmedical (STEM) professions are experi-encing the same challenge and searchingfor ways to counter the following trendsin U.S. education:
• K-12 education lags behind that ofother developed nations, despite ahigher cost per student than any otherOECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) country.
• Junior and senior high school stu-dents are inadequately prepared inmath and science.
• 78 percent of high school graduatesdo not meet the readiness benchmarklevels for one or more entry-level col-lege courses in math, science, reading,and English.
• Fewer college students are receivingundergraduate degrees in science orengineering.
These statistics are found in the re-cently released National Academy ofScience (NAS) report “Rising Above theGathering Storm, Revisited.” (A free PDFof the report is available from www.nap.edu.) This update of the original 2005study assesses the principal ingredientsof innovation and competitiveness—knowledge capital and human capital.NAS research shows that funding ofR&D as a percentage of GDP has de-clined more than 60 percent in the past40 years, and only 4.5 percent of Ameri-can college students are earning degreesin engineering.
Impact on AIHAThe report’s findings are both alarmingand relevant to AIHA. Who will be IHsin the future? How will they be re-cruited? Where can we find qualifiedcandidates? Will there be enough quali-fied and competent IH practitioners?The report contends that if teachers
are better qualified to teach science andmath, then the number of students quali-fied to enter STEM fields will increase.As AIHA members, we need to ask our-selves, “What have we done to improveSTEM education in our communities?”Opportunities to make a difference areplentiful. Personally, I have volunteeredat three graduate schools to teach envi-ronmental and occupational health, in-dustrial hygiene, finance and othercourses. I have also visited middle andhigh schools in my community to intro-duce students to industrial hygiene andgenerate interest in math and science.AIHA National has invested member
equity over the past ten years to recruitand mentor early-career IHs. But ournew memberships are not keeping pacewith retirements. The report from NASis further confirmation that unless wereverse current trends, there won’t beenough qualified IHs to replace retiringIHs, let alone grow the profession.
Local OutreachI challenge each local section to reachout to middle- and high-school teachers.Offer to help them generate enduring in-terest in the application of scientificprinciples to solve real-world problems.Since the average K-12 student spendsfour hours each day watching TV, wecould help teachers incorporate IH into
their lesson plans to demonstrate howscience and math are used to solvecrimes, remediate disasters such as Katrina,protect and rescue workers such as theChilean miners, clean up oil spills, andprevent accidents.While K-12 education in America is a
national concern, our system of educationconsists of 14,000 local school systems.Each of us lives in a community whereour children attend school. Solving thisproblem begins in our communities. Solv-ing this problem begins with each of us!If we are to achieve our mission of
“Creating knowledge to protect workerhealth,” we need to ensure that ours is avibrant profession that attracts well quali-fied students and early-career profession-als. Sharing our experiences with youngminds that are searching for purpose is agood start. If each of our 10,000 membersstimulated just one student to study mathand science throughout high school andthen college, we would increase the talentpool for all STEM fields. I encourage eachof you to get involved with your localschools either individually or as a localsection with an action plan. Change beginswith the first step.
Michael T. Brandt, DrPH, CIH, PMP, is technical chiefof staff for Operations at Los Alamos National Labo-ratory in Los Alamos, N.M. He can be reached at(505) 667-1228 or [email protected].
Resources for Outreachto Students
Visit the AIHA website atwww.aiha.org/insideaiha/students/Pages/StudentOutreachMaterials.aspx for information related toconducting outreach to students.
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:55 PM Page 8
Circle Fax-back Card No. 5
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:56 PM Page 9
10 The Synergist � December 2010
COLUMN | LETTERS
Lettters
Revisiting the Haiti Earthquake
To the Editor:
This is in response to the article “The Next Day, Everything Was Flat” (Octoberissue) in which Managing Editor Ed Rutkowski interviews Jennifer Hornsby-Myersfrom NIOSH. Ms. Hornsby-Myers deployed to Haiti with the CDC as a public healthliaison to Joint Task Force-Haiti (JTF-H). While we laud her work, she doesn’t haveall her facts straight, specifically regarding the military’s capability to provide pub-lic health support. While she is correct in saying public health is not the military’sprimary mission, she completely misses the mark in saying the military doesn’thave many public health assets. The Air Force takes great pride in its robust publichealth, environmental health and industrial hygiene assets. JTF-Haiti was no dif-ferent with this support.
When Air Force Special Operations Command personnel landed in Port-au-Prince on Jan. 13, 2010, there was a public health officer and preventive-medicinephysician on the very first plane as part of the team of command and control,combat controllers, and para-rescue personnel to open up the airport and beginsearch and rescue operations. On Jan. 14, 2010, there was an Air Force industrialhygiene technician on the ground. The three made up what we call a SpecialOperations Forces Medical Augmentation team and immediately began vectorand rodent control, drinking water sampling, hazardous noise characterizations,heat stress monitoring, proper hazardous waste and used oil storage work.Within a week, and then a month, as more conventional forces arrived (calledGlobal Reach Laydown and Preventive Aerospace Medicine teams), more publichealth and industrial hygiene assets came with the rescue personnel and surgeons.With them came more air, water, noise, and vector sampling equipment, withwhich they were very busy evaluating and providing advice to JTF leadership onrisk control measures.
As a force within the Air Force, there are on average 10–20 Public Health Air-men, 10–20 environmental health/industrial hygiene Airmen (the Air Force callsthem Bioenvironmental Engineers), and 2–3 physicians trained in occupational/preventive medicine at each base around the world, and a smaller number at eachdeployed location in the Middle East and South Asia supporting our operations.While we can’t speak for the Army, Navy, or Marines (and we hope they commenton this article), we can say without a doubt that the Air Force has many robustpublic health, environmental health, industrial hygiene, and preventive medicineassets, both at our “home bases” and our deployed locations.
Lt. Col. Philip Goff, CIH, Command Bioenvironmental Engineer for Air ForceSpecial Operations Command, who provided command oversight for JTF-Haiti AirForce preventive medicine forces.
Major Rebecca Carter, PhD, deputy flight commander of the 96th Aerospace Medi-cine Squadron Bioenvironmental Engineering Flight, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida,who deployed to JTF-Haiti with a Preventive Aerospace Medicine Team.
Hornsby-Myers responds:
I appreciate the comments of LTC Goffand MAJ Carter of the U.S. Air Force,and I also appreciate the opportunity toclarify an off-the-cuff general com-ment in my Synergist interview thatprompted the letter concerning my de-ployment to Haiti. I certainly did notintend to imply that the Department ofDefense does not have public healthassets. My comment was intended todelineate between the overall missionof the DoD and the CDC, not the spe-cific assets of each group. From mypersonal experience during my deploy-ment, all of the services that make upthe DoD did an outstanding job of sav-ing lives and providing security post-earthquake—as did all of my colleaguesin the U.S. Public Health Service.
The intended message of this part ofthe article was to highlight the valu-able partnership that existed betweenthe CDC and the DoD through the JTF-H (Joint Task Force-Haiti). This was thefirst time, to my knowledge, that CDChad a liaison to a JTF during a foreigndisaster. It proved to be a very benefi-cial relationship not only for the CDCand the DoD but for the overall mis-sion of providing vital assistance to theHaitians who were (and are) sufferingso greatly. I sincerely hope that theHaitian relief effort will be a model forany future foreign disasters, includinga CDC Liaison to the JTF.
CDR Jennifer Hornsby-Myers, MS, CIHCDC Liaison to JTF-HUnited States Public Health ServiceCDC/NIOSH
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:56 PM Page 10
The Occupational Environment:
Be among the first to pre-order this book. Visit www.aiha.org/market or callCustomer Service at (703) 849-8888, Monday–Friday, 9 a.m.–5 p.m. ET.
®
AIHA Publications—Reliable Referencesfor OEHS Professionals Globally
Its Evaluation, Control,and Management,3rd Edition
Complete Set: BIHT10-566 ...............................Member Price: $229 ..............Nonmember Price: $309
Volume 1: BIHT10-765................................Member Price: $129 ..............Nonmember Price: $209
Volume 2: BIHT10-766................................Member Price: $129 ..............Nonmember Price: $209
An essential core reference for OEHS practitioners,
educators, and students, the newly revised 3rd edi-
tion includes information on hazard recognition and
evaluation, physical agents, program management,
and more. Most chapters have been rewritten and
updated to include the most current information
available in a single OEHS reference.
Volume 1 focuses on chemical aspects, air monitoring, and exposure and riskassessment strategies. Volume 2 includes content related to the physical hazards,control methods, and management aspects. Several new chapters have been addedto cover nanotechnology, ethics, IH issues in construction, the AIHA Value Strategybusiness model, and more.
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:56 PM Page 11
Preparing for JanuaryBy Aaron Trippler, Director, AIHA® Government Affairs
SynergistTH
E
10/11 www.aiha.org
®
SPECIAL TO THE DIGITAL EDITION
The Synergist | December 2010 DE 1
The voters have spoken, and Washington is prepar-ing for another session of a Congress that will lookmuch different from the one about to conclude.The ramifications of the midterm elections will affectlegislative action in Congress and occupational healthand safety activity at the agency level. At the veryleast, changes in legislative leadership will affect theOHS agenda.
Leadership
Leadership in the Senate will likely remain as is: ExpectSenator Tom Harkin to remain chairman of the Health,Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee andSenator Patty Murray to remain chairwoman of the sub-committee that oversees OSHA. Senator Mike Enzi is alsolikely to continue as the Republican leader on the HELPCommittee.
The House leadership will experience considerablechange. Rep. George Miller is out as chairman of theHouse Education and Labor Committee, with Rep. JohnKline the likely successor. Who might chair the subcom-mittee with OSHA oversight has yet to be determined,but Rep. Lynn Woolsey is out.
OSHA Reform
Under a Republican-controlled House, OSHA is unlikelyto receive additional authority to impose regulations onemployers. Republicans have hinted they are unwilling toconsider substantial changes to the way OSHA operatesand have already announced there will be more oversightof regulatory agencies. Of course, industry hopes theHouse will go even further than simple oversight and stopseveral activities within OSHA.
The following issues may come up for discussion duringthe new Congress:
Mine Safety and Health. Republicans may sit down withDemocrats and work out a bill that would provide addi-tional health and safety measures in the mining industry.Whether this bill will go as far as the bill introduced in2010 is unclear.
Injury and Illness Prevention Program Rule. Industrymay work with House leadership to stop OSHA’s effortsto enact an injury and illness prevention program rule.The most obvious way to stop agency efforts is throughthe appropriations process.
MSD 300 Log Addition. Industry will also work to enlistthe support of Republicans to stop OSHA from movingforward on this proposal, which industry views as a “back
Washington Insider
DigitalXtra DEC 2010:Layout 1 12/6/2010 2:35 PM Page 1
SPECIAL TO THE DIGITAL EDITION
The Synergist | December 2010 DE 2
door” approach to ergonomics. However, adding an MSDcolumn on the OSHA 300 log has numerous supporterswho will argue that OSHA should be allowed to continueits efforts.
Voluntary Protection Program (VPP). Republicans maywork to enact legislation that would codify and perma-nently fund the Voluntary Protection Program. This ap-proach enjoyed bipartisan support in the previous sessionof Congress. OSHA had hoped to convince Congress thatthe VPP should be user funded. Expect any OSHA appro-priations measure to include continued funding for VPP.
NIOSH. What the new Republican leadership might dowith NIOSH is unclear. While some Republicans believethese types of agencies need to be shut down, just asmany recognize their value. AIHA® has been meetingwith other stakeholders to discuss possible efforts to en-sure that NIOSH is funded and protected. One possibilityis to have the Government Accountability Office studythe pros and cons of keeping NIOSH within the organiza-tional structure of the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention (CDC). AIHA believes there is support for sucha study within the GOP and within NIOSH. In a recent dis-cussion, AIHA learned that CDC has appropriated nearly$300 million of the NIOSH budget for CDC expenses overthe past 18 years.
Appropriations. Republicans in the House will certainlyattempt to control spending. Some possibilities includecutting federal employment by 10 percent, federal dis-cretionary spending by $100 billion per year, and agencyspending by 22 percent. Another possibility is to capspending at 2008 levels. All of these actions will be con-sidered, but the Senate is unlikely to allow such drasticchanges.
However, Republicans may place language in many of theappropriations bills that limits where the dollars may bespent. For example, they could adopt an OSHA budgetthat prohibits spending money on advancing an injury andillness prevention program rule. Any threats to agency ac-tivity are likely to come from actions such as this.
The bottom line: many stakeholders say the new Congresswill be devastating for occupational health and safety,while many others predict that Congressional limitations
on OSHA and its efforts to regulate employers. Bothgroups are probably wrong. In the last two years, no leg-islation to address workplace health and safety was en-acted, so it’s not like the Republicans have anything torepeal. And the Republicans will likely be unsuccessful inmany attempts to limit agency oversight.
What about OSHA?
OSHA will continue to pursue its agenda, but this won’tbe quite as easy as before the election. Industry is muchmore empowered to oppose OSHA efforts and will at-tempt to stop, or at least slow, agency activity. Most no-tably, OSHA will have even more difficulty addressinganything remotely related to ergonomics. The Injury andIllness Prevention Program (I2P2) rule may also faceproblems from industry, which has already approachedmembers of the House about stopping this program,most likely through appropriations.
Agency activity on other issues will continue but likely ata slower pace. OSHA will have to consider whether an ac-tivity has a reasonable chance of success before it movesforward. Issues such as VPP, changing the on-site consul-tation program, and updating the PELs will all be moredifficult to achieve.
What about the States?
A considerable number of states saw a switch in partycontrol of the governor’s office, and many of the statelegislatures also saw a switch to the Republican party. It’shard to tell how this might impact occupational healthand safety in 2011. I expect states to continue to be moreinclined than the federal government to address specificOHS issues. Look for the same involvement in the stateson issues such as mold abatement, methamphetaminelaboratories, Chinese drywall, and other issues that di-rectly impact workers and consumers.
Aaron Trippler directs government affairs for more than 70local sections and serves as AIHA’s chief liason with Congressand federal agencies. He can be reached at (703) 846-0730 [email protected].
DigitalXtra DEC 2010:Layout 1 12/6/2010 2:35 PM Page 2
12 The Synergist � December 2010
STANDARDS
ISO Releases Guidance Standard on Social ResponsibilityOn Nov. 1, the highly anticipated ISO 26000:2010 standard,Guidance on Social Responsibility, was unveiled in Geneva,Switzerland. The standard provides guidance to business andpublic sector organizations on socialresponsibility concepts and imple-mentation elements.Development of ISO 26000:2010
lasted more than eight years. AIHA®participated as a D-Liaison organiza-tion, which enabled the association totake part in the formal standard pro-ceedings and contribute to the draftingprocess.Unlike other management interna-
tional standards, ISO 26000:2010 contains voluntary guidance,not requirements, and is not intended for certification pur-poses.“The key purpose of the standard is to encourage organiza-
tions to integrate social responsibility throughout their deci-sions and activities,” states Jeffrey Hogue, who represents AIHAas D-liaison expert to the ISO Working Group on Social Re-sponsibility (WG/SR) and on the U.S. Technical Advisory Group(TAG) to ISO Technical Committee 26000 on Social Responsibil-ity. “Best practices include making social responsibility integralto an organization’s policies, culture, strategies and operations.”For more information, see Hogue’s article on page 27.The standard can be purchased from the ISO website,
www.iso.org.
NOISE
OSHA Proposes New Interpretation for Noise StandardsOSHA is proposing to issue a reinterpretation of the phrase“feasible administrative or engineeringcontrols” in occupational noise exposurestandards and to revise its current policyto reflect this interpretation. In theOSHA proposal, “feasible” will retain itscommon meaning of “capable of beingdone” in order to enforce compliancewith current noise standards.The existing noise standards stipulate that feasible adminis-
trative or engineering controls must be used to abate noise, andPPE, such as earplugs or earmuffs, are to be worn when admin-istrative or engineering controls are insufficient. Currently, cita-tions for failure to use engineering and administrative controls
are issued only when they cost less than a hearing conservationprogram and PPE is ineffective. In the proposed amendment toits noise enforcement policy, the agency intends to sanction theissuance of citations requiring the use of administrative and en-gineering controls when feasible as noted in the interpretation.“Since 1983, when the current interpretation was in place,
there has been a somewhat unrealistic reliance on hearing pro-tection,” says AIHA® Noise Committee Chair Joe Cissna, CIH,MHS. “So we support OSHA for bringing engineering controlsmore to the forefront. It follows the hierarchy of controls prin-ciple that underpins the industrial hygiene approach.”OSHA is accepting comments through Dec. 20, 2010. Com-
ments can be submitted at www.regulations.gov, by mail, or byfax to (202) 693-1648. Individuals who mail or deliver com-ments must submit three copies to the OSHA Docket Office.Faxed submissions may not exceed 10 pages.The OSHA proposal is available at
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-26135.htm. To readOSHA’s press release, visit http://bit.ly/aVEKXo.
RESEARCH
Workplace Noise Increases Risk of Heart Disease,Study FindsA new study conducted by the University of British Columbia’sSchool of Environmental Health in Vancouver suggests that anoisy work environment can lead to heart disease. The studywas published on the website of the journal Occupational andEnvironmental Medicine.EmpoweredNews.net reports that, according to
the study, workers exposed to a noisy environ-ment are two to three times more likely to de-velop heart disease than those who work inquieter environments. Authors of the studyclassified persistent loud noise as unwanted,intrusive sound resonating from manu-facturing processes.Researchers analyzed data from 6,300
subjects who were at least 20 years old.The subjects were given physicals and bloodtests and answered questions regarding their health andlifestyle. Researchers found that loud noises elicit stress and therelease of chemicals that constrict coronary arteries and cancause additional heart-related illnesses.An abstract of the study is available at http://oem.bmj.com/
content/early/2010/09/06/oem.2010.055269. To read the Empow-eredNews.net article, visit http://empowerednews.net/?p=2530.
NewsWatchOEHS NEWS � GOVERNMENT NEWS � INDUSTRY NEWS
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:56 PM Page 12
[Continued: 14]
Circle Fax-back Card No. 6
November 2010 � The Synergist 13
MINING SAFETY
Following Mine Rescue, Chilean Government Vows toBetter Protect WorkersThe rescue of 33 miners from a collapsed mine in Copiapo,Chile, in mid-October has caused the Chilean government toreevaluate its worker health and safety protections, accordingto an article posted Oct. 15 onCNN.com. After meeting with the miners,Chilean President Sebastian Pinerapledged to strengthen labor laws andimprove work environments. He alsovowed to see that Compania MineraSan Esteban Primera, the companythat operated the mine, would cover aportion of the millions spent on rescueefforts.
CNN.com quotes Pinera as saying, “Never again in our coun-try are we going to permit work in such an unsafe and inhu-mane environment as the San Jose mine. We are going tocreate a culture of respect for life, health and dignity of ourworkers.”
In addition to forcing Compania Minera San Esteban Primerato pay for part of the rescue expenses, the Chilean governmentintends to take administrative action and launch a congressional
investigation, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.The 33 miners were trapped more than 2,000 feet under-
ground for 69 days.To read the Wall Street Journal article “Chile, in Mine Res-
cue’s Glow, Vows Labor Reform,” visit http://bit.ly/ad6ARZ. TheCNN.com article “After a Final Day Together, Miners Begin toDisband” is available at http://bit.ly/dyIXWy.
MINING SAFETY
Proposed Rule Would Reduce Exposure to Coal DustIn October, MSHA released a proposed rule that would lowermine workers’ exposure to respirable coal dust in all under-ground and surface coal mines. Part of MSHA’s “End BlackLung–Act Now” campaign, the pro-posed rule would blend previous reg-ulatory actions and implementrecommendations in the 1995 NIOSHreport “Criteria for a RecommendedStandard: Occupational Exposure toRespirable Coal Mine Dust” and the1996 “Report of the Secretary ofLabor’s Advisory Committee on the Elimination of Pneumoco-niosis Among Coal Mine Workers.”
NEWSWATCH | DEPARTMENT
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:56 PM Page 13
14 The Synergist � December 2010
DEPARTMENT | NEWSWATCH
Think all HSE Consultants & Laboratories are the same?Put us to the test.
888.357.7020www.us.bureauveritas.com
1. Years of experience2. U.S. locations3. # of global locations4. Accredited labs?5. # of countries served6. # of professionals
8. Dedicated client service team?9. Professional Licenses
The proposed rule would reduce the existing concentrationlimits for respirable coal mine dust from 2 mg/m3 to 1 mg/m3
over a 24-month phase-in period, require the use of continuousdust monitors, enforce the utilization of a single, full-shift sam-ple to verify compliance, and expand medical surveillance sominers could better manage their health. The proposed rule alsoaddresses extended work shifts and production shifts.
According to data from NIOSH, cases of black lung are onthe rise. Young miners are even developing advanced and de-bilitating lung disease due to exposure to excessive amounts ofdust, and more than 10,000 miners have died from black lungwithin the past decade.
To read the complete proposed rule as published in the Fed-eral Register, visit http://bit.ly/axmHr3. Comments are due Feb.28, 2011, and may be submitted via the federal e-rulemakingportal at www.regulations.gov, via mail to MSHA, 1100 WilsonBlvd., Arlington, Va. 22209-3939, or by fax to (202) 693-9441.
To read the MSHA press release, visitwww.msha.gov/MEDIA/PRESS/2010/NR101014.pdf. Videos fromMSHA’s “End Black Lung–Act Now” Campaign are available atwww.dol.gov/dol/media/webcast/20101013-coal/.
NIOSH data on black lung disease can be found atwww.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/pneumoconioses/.
TRAINING
OSHA Revises Policy on TrainingOSHA has modified the guidelines of its Outreach Training Pro-grams to reduce the number of hours students spend each dayin 10- and 30-hour training classes. Thenew policy limits classes to a maximum of7.5 hours per day; prior to this change,classes could last up to 13 hours a day.OSHA instituted this policy change to pre-vent students from being overloaded withinformation in a single day of training.
In accordance with the new trainingpolicy, 10-hour courses must be conductedover a minimum two-day period and 30-hour courses must be given over at leastfour days. OSHA will not accept classesthat do not meet all program requirements or exceed 7.5 hoursper day. The agency has also set up an outreach fraud hotline at(847) 725-7810 where the public can report program fraud orabuse.
For more information, read the OSHA press release atwww.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=18606.
[From: 13]
Circle Fax-back Card No. 7
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:57 PM Page 14
NACOSH
Labor Department Renews NationalSafety and Health Advisory Commit-tee CharterIn October, Secretary of Labor Hilda L.Solis renewed thecharter of the OSHANational AdvisoryCommittee on Occu-pational Safety andHealth (NACOSH).NACOSH advises,consults with, andmakes recommenda-tions to secretaries oflabor and the Department of Health andHuman Services (HHS) on issues concern-ing the OSH Act and improvements toworkplace health and safety protections.
“Since OSHA’s inception, NACOSH hasplayed an important role in advising thesecretaries of labor and HHS on workersafety issues such as hazard communica-tion, the whistleblower program andproviding ideas and input on ways to re-duce worker deaths, injuries and ill-nesses,” said Assistant Secretary of LaborDavid Michaels in an OSHA press re-lease. “The members’ advice and recom-mendations are extremely valuablebecause they have a wealth of knowl-edge and real-world experience on awide range of worker health and safetymatters.”
The NACOSH charter expires in 2012.The OSHA press release is available atwww.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=18609.
ENFORCEMENT
OSHA Cites U.S. Army Garrison forPotential Chlorine ExposureOSHA issued notices of unsafe and un-healthy working conditions to the U.S.Army garrison at FortRiley, Kan., on Oct. 15after an inspectionfound that workers atthe garrison’s watertreatment plant wereconsistently exposedto hazards that in-volved a potentiallydangerous release of
chlorine, said Charles E. Adkins, OSHARegional Administrator, Kansas City, Mo.,in an agency press release.
OSHA claims the garrison willfully vio-lated procedures by supplying workerswho were changing chlorine cylinderswith five-minute emergency escapebreathing devices. OSHA procedures forworking with hazardous chemicals requireself-contained breathing apparatus orsupplied-air respirators.
The garrison can comply with the no-tice, request an informal meeting with theOSHA director in Wichita, Kan., or ask fora hearing with the regional administratorin Kansas City.
The OSHA press release is available athttp://bit.ly/cVut3W.
RECORD KEEPING
Nonfatal Workplace Injuries andIllnesses in Private Sector Down in2009, BLS ReportsAccording to the Bureau of Labor Statis-tics (BLS) 2009 Survey of OccupationalInjuries and Illnesses, nonfatal workplaceinjuries and illnesses among workers inprivate industry decreased to 3.6 cases per100 equivalent full-time employees in2009—a decline from 3.9 cases in 2008.Nonfatal occupational injuries and ill-nesses dropped from 3.7 million cases in2008 to 3.3 million cases in 2009. In ad-dition, the number of private industry in-jury and illness cases reported nationwidein 2009 that resulted in the need for timeoff from work, job transfer, or restrictionfell from 2.0 cases per 100 workers in2008 to 1.8 cases in 2009.
The manufacturing industry reported a23 percent drop in cases from 2008 to2009—the largest year-to-year decrease ininjuries and illnesses since the NorthAmerican Industry Classification System(NAICS) was first published in 2003. Theconstruction industry also saw a signifi-cant decline in 2009 with its incidencerate dropping to 22 percent. The com-bined decrease in cases reported in thesesectors make up 56 percent of the totalprivate industry decline in 2009 injuryand illnesses.
For more information, visitwww.bls.gov/news.release/archives/osh_10212010.pdf.
ENFORCEMENT
OSHA Launches Inspection Plan forHigh-Hazard WorkplacesIn August, OSHA began its annual in-spection of high-hazard work sites underthe Site Specific Targeting 2010 (SST-10)program. The plan is intended to helpOSHA channel its enforcement resourcesinto workplaces with the highest rates ofinjuries and illness.
“Our goal is to prevent worker injuriesand illnesses and save lives,” said Assis-tant Secretary of Labor David Michaels inan OSHA press release. “The Site SpecificTargeting program helps OSHA focus itsenforcement resources to high-risk em-ployers who are endangering their work-ers’ health and safety.”
The OSHA SST program inspects non-construction workplaces with 40 or moreemployees. Based on work-related injuryand illness data compiled from a 2009OSHA survey, SST-10 randomly selectsestablishments from a list of 4,100 manu-facturing, nonmanufacturing, and nursing
December 2010 � The Synergist 15
Circle Fax-back Card No. 8
NEWSWATCH | DEPARTMENT
[Continued: 16]
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:57 PM Page 15
and personal care facilities. The plan ex-amines various factors such as the num-ber of injury and illness cases, thenumber of days a worker must stay awayfrom work, and the number of employ-ees who received job transfers or workrestrictions because of injury or illness.More information about SST-10 is
available at www.osha.gov/OshDoc/Directive_pdf/CPL_02_10-06.pdf.
CROWD CONTROL
OSHA Urges Major Retailers to TakeWorker Safety PrecautionsIn early November, Assistant Secretaryof Labor David Michaels sent a letter tothe CEOs of 14 major retail companies—including Kohl’s, Sears, Target andMacy’s—urging them to take precautionsto prevent worker injuries during BlackFriday and other holiday sales events.Enclosed with the letter was the OSHAfact sheet, “Crowd Management SafetyTips for Retailers.” The fact sheet, avail-able at https://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/
data_General_Facts/Crowd_Control.html,provides employers with recommendedelements for crowd management plans.“Crowd-related injuries during special
retail sales and promotional events haveincreased during recent years,” Michaelstold the CEOs. “Many of these incidentscan be prevented by adopting a crowdmanagement plan, and this fact sheetprovides retail employers with guidelinesfor avoiding injuries during the holidayshopping season.”In 2008, a worker was trampled to
death while a mob of shoppers rushedthrough the doors of a large store to takeadvantage of a Black Friday sales event.For a copy of the letter sent to the CEOs
and a list of the retailers they represent,visit www.osha.gov/ooc/blackfridayletter.pdf.
LEAD
NIOSH Releases Online LeadDatabaseA new online resource released byNIOSH in November will help users iden-tify, monitor, and address harmful over-exposures to lead, the agency stated in apress release. The web page providesdata on cases of elevated levels of leadin the blood of adults, and trends inthose cases over time.Intended primarily for use by occupa-
tional and environmental health profes-sionals and researchers, the web pageallows users to customize reports byyear, U.S. state, age group, type of expo-sure, industry sector, and gender. Thedata are drawn from the NIOSH-fundedAdult Blood Lead Epidemiology and Sur-veillance (ABLES) program. Exposure in-formation from 2002 through 2008 isavailable for 40 states.The new web page can be found at
wwwn.cdc.gov/niosh-survapps/ables/default.aspx.“With this new web page, we are
pleased to make data from the ABLESprogram more accessible, more under-
standable, and more useful to our part-ners as a tool for protecting workers’health,” said NIOSH Director JohnHoward. “Although the U.S. has madegreat progress in controlling work-relatedlead exposures since the enactment ofthe Occupational Safety and Health Act,we must remain vigilant in recognizingand addressing this occupational hazard.”Initiated in 1987, the ABLES program
is intended to build states’ capacity to ini-tiate, expand, or improve adult blood leadsurveillance programs. More informationon ABLES is available at www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/ABLES/ables.html.
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
FEMA Encourages EmergencyManagers to Plan for EntireCommunityIn an address to emergency managers inSan Antonio, Texas, Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA) Adminis-trator Craig Fugate encouraged attendeesto consider the capabilities and needs ofthe entire community, including peoplewith disabilities and children, whenplanning for disasters.
“Considering the needs of all membersof our community and planning forworst case scenarios is exactly why weneed a strong emergency managementteam—a team that FEMA is only onemember of,” Fugate told his audience atthe 58th Annual International Associa-tion of Emergency Managers Conference.“We know government can’t do italone—many of the most innovativeideas for how we can protect all mem-bers of our community from the impactsof disasters will come from you.”Fugate then announced a FEMA-
sponsored competition intended to gen-erate ideas for ways that communitiescan become better prepared for disas-ters. The winning idea will be featuredon the agency website. For more infor-mation about the competition, visithttp://challenge.gov/fema.
16 The Synergist � December 2010
DEPARTMENT | NEWSWATCH
[From: 15]
Save an automatic 5% when you rent at www.RAECO.com!
Need help with your rentals? Call 866-RENT-EHS (866-736-8347)
New instrumentation catalog! Get yours at www.RAECO.com
www.RAECO.com
Daily, weekly, and monthly rentals.
Your one-stop rental source for...Respirator �t testing systems
Air monitoring and sampling pumpsCombustion e�ciency analyzersGas detection and monitoring
HVAC and ventilation test instrumentsIndoor air quality monitoring
Particulate monitoringSound and noise level monitoring
See our website for the full list
Circle Fax-back Card No. 9
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:57 PM Page 16
NEWSWATCH | DEPARTMENT
Circle Fax-back Card No. 10
December 2010 � The Synergist 17
From Yahoo! to the Wall Street Journal, media outlets have been giv-ing industrial hygiene and related professions a lot of attention lately:
• For its video series “Career Paths,” the Wall Street Journal onlinefeatured an interview with AIHA® member and EHS Director atEmilcott, Paula Kaufmann, CIH. The video, available athttp://bit.ly/a5rNfW, shows Kaufmann performing a health andsafety audit and discussing what motivates her in her career.
• CNNMoney.com, in collaboration with PayScale.com, ranked envi-ronmental health specialist as the 22nd best job in America with a28 percent 10-year job growth and a median salary of $71,000.Jobs on the list, which appeared in the November 2010 issue ofMoney magazine, are ranked by pay, job growth and quality of life.To view the list, go to http://bit.ly/9pjvhY.
• Investopedia, powered by Yahoo! Finance, listed IH as one of sevenjobs employers are desperate to fill. Investopedia reports that IHjobs are expected to increase by 14 percent within the next eightyears. Visit http://yhoo.it/b6FvDQ to read the article.
Have you seen industrial hygiene in the news? If so, let TheSynergist know by e-mailing [email protected].
IH Careers a Hot Topic in the NewsENFORCEMENT
MSHA Asks Court to Temporarily CloseKentucky MineOn Nov. 3, MSHA filed a motion with the U.S. DistrictCourt for the Eastern District of Kentucky for a prelim-inary injunction against Freedom Energy Mining Co.’sMine No. 1 in Pike County, Ky. This is the first timeMSHA has used its authority to take legal action ofthis nature. Freedom’s Mine No. 1 is owned by MasseyEnergy Co., which also owns the Upper Big Branchmine in Montcoal, WVa., where 29 miners were killedin an April 5 explosion.In its brief, MSHA claims Freedom Energy has con-
sistently failed to investigate and manage crucial ele-ments of its mining operations, andcites four specific safety areaswhere the mine hasn’t properlyprotected its workers. According toMSHA, Freedom Energy neglectedto clear the mine of excessive accu-mulations of coal dust, failed tomaintain an adequate roof controlplan, failed to test and maintainthe safety of electrical equipment to guard against
[Continued: 18]
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:57 PM Page 17
18 The Synergist � December 2010
DEPARTMENT | NEWSWATCH
fires or explosions, and neglected toproperly ventilate the mine of hazardousand explosive gases. Freedom EnergyMine No. 1 is located in a coal seam thatemits excessive amounts of methane andis prone to roof collapses—there havebeen six major roof falls in the minesince Aug. 11, 2010.MSHA issued 1,952 citations and 81
orders during eight standard inspectionsbetween July 2008 and July 2010. If thecourt grants MSHA’s motion, FreedomEnergy will be forced to temporarily closeits mine until it fixes all dangerous condi-tions and institutes an MSHA-approvedhealth and safety management program.To read the MSHA press release, visit
www.msha.gov/MEDIA/PRESS/2010/NR101103.pdf.
GREENHOUSE GASES
EPA Issues Pollution PermittingGuidanceNew tools made available by EPA inNovember are intended to help state and
local air permitting authorities identifycost-effective pollution reduction op-tions for greenhouse gases (GHGs) underthe Clean Air Act, the agency stated in apress release.EPA recommends that permitting au-
thorities use the best available controltechnology (BACT) process to look at allavailable emission reduction options forGHGs. After taking into account technicalfeasibility, cost and other economic, envi-ronmental and energy considerations,permitting authorities should narrow theoptions and select the best one. EPA an-ticipates that, in most cases, this processwill show that the most cost effective wayfor industry to reduce GHG emissions willbe through energy efficiency.
The guidance does not define or re-quire a specific control option for a par-ticular type of source because BACT isdetermined on a case-by-case basis. In-stead, the guidance and resources pro-vide the basic information that permitwriters and applicants need to addressGHGs. The guidance also provides exam-ples of how permitting requirementscould apply.In January 2011, industries that are
large emitters of GHGs, and are planningto build new facilities or make majormodifications to existing ones, will workwith permitting authorities to identifyand implement BACT to minimize theirGHGs. This includes the nation’s largestGHG emitters, such as power plants, re-fineries and cement production facilities.Emissions from small sources, such asfarms and restaurants, are not coveredby these GHG permitting requirements.Information about EPA’s guidance is
available from www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgpermitting.html.
Circle Fax-back Card No. 11
[From: 17]
John Funk, a former Nevada Test Site worker who helped lead the fight for com-pensation for work-related illnesses, died Oct. 13 of complications from chronicobstructive pulmonary disease, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported. (“Funk, ad-vocate for ex-test site workers, dies at 69,” Oct. 29.)Indiana OSHA was investigating the death of a 20-year-old student at the Univer-sity of Notre Dame who died while filming a practice of the Notre Dame footballteam when the scissor lift he was in tipped over from high winds. (“Declan Sullivan,Notre Dame videographer dies in accident, OSHA launches probe,” Washington Post.)The makers of Brazilian Blowout, a chemical hair-straightening treatment, statedin November that they would initiate legal action against Oregon OSHA followingan agency alert that said the treatment contains dangerous amounts of formalde-hyde. (“Brazilian Blowout Formally Initiates Legal Proceedings Against OregonOSHA,” www.sys-con.com.)Illinois Senator Dick Durbin called for an EPA probe of toxic diesel pollution inChicago’s two major rail stations and inside the cars that carry commuters. In No-vember, the Chicago Tribune reported that riders on the city’s Metra transit systemwere exposed to levels of diesel soot up to 72 times higher than on the streets out-side the system. (“Metra riders subjected to high amounts of diesel soot,”www.chicagotribune.com.)Britain’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) reports 152 worker deaths in 2009-2010, a rate of 0.5 fatalities per 100,000 workers. (“The Health and Safety ExecutiveStatistics 2009/10,” www.hse.gov.uk.)Employees of Ames Laboratory from 1955 through 1960 who developed cancerwere granted compensation by the U.S. Advisory Board on Radiation and WorkerHealth. Ames Lab, a Department of Energy facility, was the site of secret researchwith radioactive materials, including uranium. (“Ames Lab uranium cause of cancerin workers; compensation claims approved,” Iowa State Daily.)
In Brief
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:57 PM Page 18
Members who renew online prior to 12/31/2010
will be entered in a drawing for a $250 gift card!
Renew Your 2011 Membership Online!
Continue to receive uninterruptedmember benefits
Connect with other professionals
Receive current OEHS information
Go Green!
®
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:57 PM Page 19
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
Time for ModelingToward a Culture Change for Industrial Hygienists
BY STEVEN D. JAHN
On a recent trip to my parent’s home in Connecticut, I received abook from my Dad to read on my way back to South Carolina.The book contained an appropriate reference for gauging ourprogress in the use of modeling tools in exposure assessment.
Many of us learned our craft from graduate schools and cor-porate organizations that expected a professional technical de-fense of judgments made to protect worker health. We wereexpected to ferret out hazards that mattered and defend the ex-penditure of dollars toward controls (whether engineering or ad-ministrative). Demonstrating the “adequacy” of that posture wasleft to the ethics of the individual—and of the corporate auditorswho looked at the work (and possibly wrote the procedures andtrained us as well).
If this description reflects your experience, then your attitudemay have been as mine was: I declared myself to be a profes-sional, short on time to document hazards that didn’t exist, andlong on ethics.
If you have read The Synergist or the Journal of Occupationaland Environmental Health for any length of time, you recognizethat Tom Armstrong and Mike Jayjock have lobbied for yearsfor a transparent defense of our professional judgments throughmodeling. Yet even today, exposure modeling is rarely used. Thisresistance to modeling is cultural; changing a culture is slowwork, and can be measured through what I call the three A’s: at-titude, atmosphere, and acceptance.
AtmosphereIn 1980, OSHA was ten years in existence and I was an indus-trial hygienist in training. Our professional emphasis was onmonitoring data, not models. (By the way, we still don’t have anexposure assessment standard to drive the right monitoring pri-ority.) However, most of our judgments are rendered with nosampling data.1 It is the rare occasion when statistically validdata populations drive exposure assessment decisions.
AcceptanceThere are two reasons why our profession has not yet acceptedexposure modeling. The first is fear of learning that supposedly
“safe” exposures from our considered “professional judgment”are grossly in error. The second is laziness. We should be chas-ing an effective occupational health program with our best ef-fort, but we cannot muster the energy. The majority of modelingis done by a handful of practitioners, and often for litigation orregulatory reasons.
AttitudeSo how can we spark a return to our foundation of decisionmaking, exposure assessment? By making a professional com-mitment to learning and using models. The second edition ofMathematical Models for Estimating Occupational Exposure toChemicals is ready to guide your schooling. Join us in movingthis critical tool to the forefront of exposure assessment.
And that book my Dad gave me? It was titled, Do the RightThing.
Steven D. Jahn, CIH, is a senior IH technical advisor in Aiken, S.C. He can bereached at [email protected] or (803) 557-3828.
InsightEXPOSURE ASSESSMENT � RISK ASSESSMENT
20 The Synergist � December 2010
Resource1. Logan, P.W., G. Ramachandran, J.R. Mulhausen, and
P. Hewett: “Occupational exposure decisions: Can limiteddata interpretation training help improve accuracy?”Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 53(4):311–324 (2009).
Guidance for Exposure ModelingThe second edition of AIHA’s Mathematical Models for Esti-mating Occupational Exposure to Chemicals, edited byCharles B. Keil, Catherine E. Simmons, and T. Renee Anthony,was released in 2009. Members can purchase this resource ata discount of nearly 25 percent from the nonmember price.Go to www.aiha.org/marketplace.
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:58 PM Page 20
INSPIRE
INTEGRATE
INNOVATE
AIHce20I IThe Premier Conference and Exposition for OEHS Professionals
PORTLAND, ORMAY 14–19, 2011
aihce2011.org
co-sponsored byAIHA®
& ACGIH®
2nd International Symposium onWood DustMay 17–18
Registrationincludes
Registration and HotelReservations Open This Month
Be a part of more than 80% of AIHce attendees who enjoy thebenefits of registering early: first choice of hotels and PDCs andmaximum registration savings.
Check your e-mail soon for registration information.
www.aihce2011.org
AIHA Members: Be sure to renew your membership for 2011to enjoy low member rates on AIHce registration.
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:58 PM Page 21
22 The Synergist � December 2010
DEPARTMENT | INSIGHT
RISK ASSESSMENT
Crossing a ThresholdDo “Zero-Risk” Exposures Exist?
BY FRANK MIRER
Do observations of chemical hazards at high exposure levelspredict risk at much lower levels? Or are there reliably “safe”(that is, zero-risk) doses or exposure levels for most chemicalsother than carcinogens? To lay down the gauntlet, this columnargues that the concept of a “threshold” in a population violatesthe principle of the exposure-response relationship. I agreethere are population doses with minimal risk, perhaps practicalthresholds for concern. But assuming a threshold assumesthere is an exposure region where increasing exposure doesn’tincrease risk.
Our jobs as practitioners include communicating the riskof a chemical exposure at levels well below those where ahazard has been identified. Paracelsians fondly say that“everything” is a poison at some dose, as a way soft-soapingpeople exposed to a chemical already shown to a be a poison.(I think Paracelsus used that argument to defend using mercuryas a medicine, based on an alchemical theory; probably hesaid or wrote it in Latin.) Opining about causation where oneperson among a larger group of similarly exposed individualsbecomes ill is another side of that coin. In some situations,the illness is clearly associated with exposure to the chemicalin some setting; in others, past evidence of association maybe shaky.
As practitioners, we rely mostly on authorities like govern-ment or scientific organizations to tell us the level of exposurewhere there’s a concern or probability of adverse effect. SinceOSHA and NIOSH have done little in the past decade (or more)to bring exposure rules or recommendations in line withemerging science, the main sources of such data are the EPAIntegrated Risk Information System (IRIS) reference doses andconcentrations (www.epa.gov/iris/) and the Agency for ToxicSubstances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) minimal risk levels(MRLs) for hazardous substances (www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/index.html).
I tell my students to go to IRIS and ATSDR whenever theyhave an identified chemical exposure level to evaluate. IRIScalculates a unit cancer risk for carcinogens, based on linearlow-dose extrapolation, and generates reference doses and con-centrations for non-cancer endpoints by applying uncertaintyfactors to a no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) as a pointof departure. Some of these values are aggressive (5 mg/m3 fortoluene), and some are very aggressive (0.1 mg/m3 for xylenes).This column provides arguments for applying these aggressivelimits in the occupational setting.
Defining “Zero-Risk”We are taught that all chemicals exhibit an exposure-responserelationship: the lower the dose, the lower the risk. Is there athreshold—that is, the upper bound of zero-risk doses? Athreshold dose implies a dose region in which there is no expo-sure-response relationship—within this region, increasing thedose carries no increased risk because the risk is zero. This re-gion is a biological black hole: dose goes in, but no responsecomes out.
What evidence is there for a threshold? Proving the thresh-old (in a population exposure-response relationship) is as diffi-cult as proving any negative. I teach the concept of “Limit ofDirect Observation” (LODO)—the power of various methods tosee the toxic potential of an exposure, if it were there. TheLODO for laboratory studies is a risk of about 1 in 10 against azero background, the risk at the NOAEL or the benchmark dose.A background risk in control animals—for example, liver cancerin mice—moves the LODO upward. Some special designs (dis-cussed below) might do a little better. (Remember that theSupreme Court-derived border of “significant risk” is 1 in 1,000,or 0.1 percent.)
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:58 PM Page 22
December 2010 � The Synergist 23
INSIGHT | DEPARTMENT
For studies in people, the LODO is the population rate of thetarget condition. The population rate of lung cancer in Ameri-can men is about 5 percent, so the LODO is whatever excess isconvincingly exposure-related. Maybe a 6 percent risk wouldbe statistically significant, but it would be difficult to get thisaccepted for hazard determination in a single study. Epidemiol-ogy can be more sensitive to elevated risks than laboratorystudies, but has many other barriers and obstacles.Plenty of known human carcinogens—like sulfuric acid mist—
are unregulated even after direct observation. But, at 10 percentexcess, we are extending knowledge below the LODO—that is,laboratory studies cannot confirm that a risk is less than 1 in 10.It’s like the dark side of the moon before the Apollo missions—we knew it was there, but hadn’t seen it.Sometimes we get a window to test high-to-low-dose conti-
nuity of risk. Environmental tobacco smoke is classified as“known to be carcinogenic to humans.” I voted for this classifi-cation in the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Report on Car-cinogens sometime around the year 2000. This determination isbased on multiple epidemiologic studies in people, mostly com-paring lung cancer rates among non-smoking spouses of smok-ers with those of non-smoking spouses of non-smokers. Thelower rate of lung cancer among non-smokers extended theLODO downward. Cigarette smoke is a very low-potency car-cinogen (µg per µg), and the exposure gradient between directand environmental exposures depends on which component ofsmoke is considered and which environmental exposure levelsare assumed for the studies. But it could be 1,000-fold.The gradient between occupational and take-home asbestos
levels also must be very large, so family mesotheliomas alsoprovide evidence for high-to-low-dose continuity, and thereforelack of a threshold. The consensus is that the risk of cancerfrom ionizing radiation is also present at low doses, althoughthere are still deniers and advocates of the view that low dosesare good for you (radiation hormesis).
Mega-Mouse and Mega-RatIn the mid-1970s, the “mega-mouse” study was planned to con-firm or deny a threshold. Part of the Pine Bluff Arsenal, a bio-logical and chemical warfare facility in Arkansas, wasreconfigured as the National Center for Toxicological Research,which housed the study. The agent chosen was acetylaminoflu-orene, an amine to which few humans might be exposed. Hereis the abstract of an early mega-mouse report:
Although bladder neoplasms exhibited a minimum effect level(or a nonlinear response) for specific conditions, the total re-sults were consistent with a “no threshold concept.” The late-appearing liver neoplasms displayed a nearly linear-typeresponse that extrapolated directly to zero dose.1
A similar mega-rat study in England produced similar re-sults. Subsequent reinterpretations—by industry-associated sci-entists—have claimed evidence for a threshold. Overall, theparadigm-testing experiment was like the tree that burned inthe forest with no one to smell it. Did it give off smoke?The next stage of the debate was to concede the plausibility
of linear low-dose extrapolation for “genotoxic” carcinogensbut to argue a threshold for agents that did not cause mutationsin short-term bioassays but did cause cancer in whole animals.
Important laboratory (and possibly human) carcinogens such asperchloroethylene (see “Percs at the National Academy” in theMay 2010 Synergist) have not been shown to cause mutationsin short-term bioassays.Maybe the most prominent and troubling “non-genotoxic”
carcinogen is dioxin. The consensus is that dioxin acts by bindingto the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR). This interaction leads toeffects on a host of organ systems—immune, reproductive—and atvery low levels of exposure. AhR was not known when I was areal toxicologist back in the 1970s. EPA’s interminable update ofthe risk assessment for dioxin—the last draft went from EPA to theNational Academy of Sciences in 2004—was sent back with com-ments in 2006; EPA’s most recent response was released in May2010. EPA found low-dose risk for non-cancer endpoints as wellas cancer (see http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/CFM/nceaQFind.cfm?keyword=Dioxin). Honestly, the hundreds of pages, dozens ofcalculations, and, I assume, hundreds of references were toomuch for me to digest.Every two years the Institute of Medicine, by law, updates
the list of conditions suffered by veterans exposed to Agent Or-ange and presumably caused by dioxin. Vietnam veterans whosuffer these diseases get compensation. Many organ systems areimplicated beyond cancers, including diabetes and nervous sys-tem disorders (see http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12662). The important point is that low-dose effects fornon-cancer endpoints are prominent in the risk assessmentbased heavily on laboratory results and are also found in theassessment of people with dioxin exposure.
Acceptable RiskThere’s no doubt that a “significant” risk (in occupationalterms) persists at the NOAEL, whether cancer risk or other. Therisk assessment task includes extrapolating known effects intothe dose region where direct observation is not feasible. Therisk management tasks include deciding an acceptable risk. Itmight be useful to convert the extrapolation factors now usedby EPA to calculate the reference concentrations in IRIS to riskrates—I think the EPA benchmark dose software will actually dothis. The distance of extrapolation from the point of departuredose to occupational levels is usually many factors of 10 lessthan those in the general environment. The task is feasible, andit needs to be accomplished. Practitioners waiting for authorita-tive results can look up the IRIS RfC, multiply by 3 to accountfor 24/7/365 exposures compared with occupational, and theywould be in the ballpark.
Franklin Mirer, PhD, CIH, is a professor in the Environmental and OccupationalHealth Sciences Urban Public Health Program at Hunter College School of HealthSciences in New York. He can be reached at (212) 481-7651 [email protected].
CONNECT for CREDITwww.aiha.org/syntestseries
Resource1. Farmer, J.H., D.W. Gaylor, and W.G. Sheldon: “Effects ofDose and Time in a Long-term, Low-dose CarcinogenicStudy.” J Environ Pathol Toxicol 3(3 Spec No):17–34 (1980).
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 23
B
24 The Synergist � December 2010
FEATURE | Extreme Makeovers
Bob Emery talks about data theway a novelist might discuss verbs.Currently vice president for Safety,Health, Environment and RiskManagement at the University ofTexas (UT) Health Science Center atHouston, Emery has worked inOEHS for 25 years, and he’s certainthat the main reason why his OEHScolleagues struggle to win the ap-proval of management is a seem-ingly innate difficulty makingdata—the dry essence of exposuremonitoring—come alive.“We function largely in the field of
prevention, so on a good day, nothinghappens,” Emery says. “The problem isthat we’ve got to get better at explainingto various stakeholders all of the workthat went on behind the scenes to makenothing happen. And part and parcel ofthat is showing data.”The event that crystallized the impor-
tance of data presentation for Emery wasTropical Storm Allison, which dumped35 inches of rain on Houston in June2001 and caused $5 billion worth ofdamage across Texas. On UT’s Houston
campus, one of the university’s majorbuildings flooded, rendering the bottomfloor unusable. In the days following re-occupation of the upper floors, Emery’steam at the Health Science Center cre-ated graphs of indoor air quality dataand posted them by the elevators, whereUniversity employees were sure to noticethem. Instead of simply listing the data,the graphs clearly showed that air qual-ity measurements were within ASHRAEguidelines for IAQ.“When they were waiting to go to
their floor, they could actually see whatthe relative humidity levels were, whatthe temperature was—and they could seethis within the context of these red linesthat showed the ASHRAE recommenda-tions,” Emery recalls. “We had hardly anyindoor air quality complaints, I believelargely because people could see the datawithin the context of the reference lines.”For Emery, data is more than raw
numbers; it’s part of a narrative. Whenhis employees show him a problematicgraph, he’ll say, “You’ve got a good storyto tell, but this sure ain’t telling it.” Hehas ample opportunity to share this judg-ment with UT students, too: 20 percent ofhis appointment is dedicated to teachinga class on communicating public health
information. His lectures incorporate theideas of American statisticians EdwardTufte and John Tukey, who have madeimportant contributions to the field of in-formation design, and he often presentson the topic at conferences.Emery’s dual role allows him to chal-
lenge his students with examples straightfrom his inbox. His assignments requirestudents to create new presentations ofexisting data, and some of theirmakeovers are startlingly good. (A stu-dent’s re-creation of BP exposure moni-toring data from the Gulf oil spill appearsin Figure 1.)
The Synergist recently spoke withEmery about data presentation. Excerptsfrom this discussion appear on the fol-lowing pages.
The Synergist: If you were to make abroad generalization, how would youcharacterize most OEHS professionals’skills in data presentation?
Bob Emery: I'm struggling to find a po-lite term for “atrocious.” I don’t meanthat in a bad way; it’s just sometimeswe’re so focused on the trees that wemiss the forest. And that’s really whatdrove my interest in graphics, because inmy field, I see confusing graphics time
EXTREMEMAKEOVERSTips for Improving EHS Graphics
BY ED RUTKOWSKI
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 24
December 2010 � The Synergist 25
Extreme Makeovers | FEATURE
and time again. If I’m in the businessand I don’t know what you’re talkingabout, how do you expect others outsidethe profession to understand?
You know, we’re always criticized fornot communicating appropriately withmanagement. I think a lot of it has to dowith the way we present data.
TS: How often do you present data touniversity management?
BE: I meet with my boss once a month,and I make it a point to bring some sortof one-page data display. Managementloves measures and metrics, because theperception is if it’s being measured, it’sbeing managed. So I always show upwith a graph on something.
I think the entire profession wouldbenefit if we could communicate better.And I think this is one of the areas ofcommunication that we can improve.
TS: What are some common problemswith the visual presentation of EHS data?
BE: One of the big problems we have isthat we tend to rely on the automaticformatting afforded by PowerPoint orExcel or whatever software we’re using.We’ll get the data and we’ll put it inthese cells, and hopefully we’ll get thestuff in the right row, and at that pointwe just stop. We shouldn’t rely on theautomatic formatting from these pro-grams. We need to take a step back andthink about the story we’re trying to tellwith our data.
One of Tufte’s main precepts is tomaximize the “data-to-ink ratio.” Whathe means is that most of the ink on apiece of paper should talk about thedata, not all the stuff around it. Excel isa good example of how not to do it:when you make a graph in Excel, it au-tomatically turns the background gray,
which tends to obscure the data. In mostof my graphics, the background is white.The intent is to make the x-y axes andthe data the most notable features on thepiece of paper.
The other common problem is the lackof a reference point. When we create agraph, we should ask, What are we try-ing to compare this data to? A good ex-ample is BP’s exposure monitoring datafor benzene [see Figure 1]. To theircredit, they were publishing the air sam-pling data for benzene and posting it ona website. But the way the data was dis-played, the media and the public had noidea what it meant. Now compare thatprintout to the graph one of our studentscreated from the same data. I think itshows a very different story.
TS: In your presentation “Communicatingwith Data,” you recommend using hori-zontal graphics. Why?
BE: The reason you want to turn graphssideways is that the human eye uses thehorizon as a timeline. It’s our natural in-clination, so when we look at a graph,
Digital Edition Special: Extreme Makeovers
The digital edition of this month’s Synergist features step-by-step examples of ways to improvegraphic displays. Look for the digital edition to reach your inbox by mid-December.
Figure 1. BP’s exposure monitoring data for benzene (right)appeared on OSHA’s website in June 2010. One of Emery’sstudents at the University of Texas-Houston arranged BP’sdata on a simple scatterplot and added lines to indicate theOSHA action level and PEL.
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 25
26 The Synergist � December 2010
FEATURE | Extreme Makeovers
we expect time to be on the x-axis. And most of the data thatEHS people show is time-series data. So the point is to seize onthat presumption whenever possible by turning the page side-ways, making it nice and big, and having time on the x-axis.
TS: There are several different kinds of graphs. How do youknow which is the best one to use?
BE: That’s always a challenge, but my advice is, if you don’tknow what to do and the data is over time, the best place tostart is with a bar chart. People often ask about pie charts, andpie charts are okay for some things. If we have a graph show-ing “injuries by type in year 2009,” a pie chart showing thatbreakdown is fine.
But let’s say we now want to compare 2009 with 2010. Oftenwe’ll show two pie charts next to each other, but this doesn’tconnote the overall number of injuries. For example, if we hada hundred injuries in 2009 and 200 injuries in 2010, then onepie chart should be twice the area of the other. But when youmake a circle twice the area of another circle, it doesn’t looklike it’s twice. If it’s in a bar chart, though, it does look like it’stwice.
A pie chart to show a snapshot in time is okay, but youshouldn’t use it to connote orders of magnitude.
TS: How long does it take to make an effective graph?
BE: Most of them probably take me an hour or two. I sit downwith a piece of paper and sketch out what I want to do first.After I kind of get the vision, it doesn’t take that long.
But that’s certainly one of the criticisms—“I don’t have timeto do all this.” My response is that you don’t need to do this forall of your graphics. You just need to do it for the one or twothat you really want to tell your story.
Ed Rutkowski is managing editor of The Synergist. He can be reached at (703)846-0734 or [email protected].
Don’t Be a DRIP: Quick Tips for Communicatingwith DataAre your graphics DRIP (data-rich, information-poor)? Thefollowing suggestions will help improve your ability to com-municate with data:
1. When you’re unsure which kind of graph to use, start witha bar chart.
2. Don’t rely on the automatic formatting provided byspreadsheet and presentation software.
3. Make graphs horizontal—50 percent wider than tall is agood rule of thumb.
4. Make the data and the x-y axes the most prominent fea-tures of your graph.
5. Encourage viewers to compare different data.6. Representations of numbers should be directly propor-tional to their numerical quantities.
7. Use clear, detailed and thorough labeling.8. Sketch your ideas on paper before you begin creating agraph.
Resources on Information DisplayBy John Tukey:• Exploratory Data Analysis. Addison-Wesley: Reading,Mass. (1977).
• “Summarization: smoothing; supplemented views” in In-terpreting Multivariate Data (Vic Barnett, ed.) Chichester,U.K.: Wiley (1982).
By Edward Tufte:• The Visual Display of Quantitative Information (2nd ed.)Cheshire, Conn.: Graphics Press (2001).
• Envisioning Information. Cheshire, Conn.: Graphics Press(1990).
• Visual Explanations: Images and Quantities, Evidence andNarrative. Cheshire, Conn.: Graphics Press (1997).
By Robin Williams:• The Non-Designers Design Book: Design and TypographicPrinciples for the Visual Novice. Berkley, Calif.: PeachpitPress (1994).
Figure 2. A slideshow in the digital edition of the DecemberSynergist will explain step-by-step how Emery transformed agraph charting the incidence of nuisance fire alarms at UT-Houston (top) into a much more coherent display (bottom).
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 26
NNovember 1 marked the launch ofISO 26000:2010, the long-awaitedguidance standard on social re-sponsibility (SR). AIHA® activelyparticipated in the development ofthe standard, which provides guid-ance to business and the publicsector on the concepts and imple-mentation of social responsibility.
As a voluntary standard, ISO 26000—unlike other management system inter-national standards such as ISO 9001:2008 and ISO 14001:2004—is not a typi-cal management system standard and isnot intended for certification. ISO 26000defines social responsibility by bringingtogether the multitude of approaches andprinciples already defined in separate in-ternational norms, standards and instru-ments. It also solves the challenge ofputting SR principles into practice whenmaterial SR issues exist in differing or-ganizational contexts. But the standard’smain achievement is its global relevance:organizations around the world can lookto the standard for guidance on whatthey must do to operate in a socially re-sponsible way.
Long Time ComingDevelopment of ISO 26000 lasted morethan eight years. AIHA’s participationbegan in 2005 in the U.S. TechnicalAdvisory Group (US/TAG), or mirror
committee, to the ISO Working Group onSocial Responsibility (WG/SR). Participa-tion in the US/TAG allowed only limitedimpact on the U.S. consensus positions,which were presented to the WG/SR inplenary sessions around the standardsdevelopment process. Because of our in-ternational membership, AIHA sought amore prominent role, and in 2007, ISOapproved AIHA as a D-Liaison organiza-tion to the WG/SR. This designation al-lowed us to participate in formalstandard proceedings and impact thetext directly through involvement indrafting groups at the internationallevel. The last meeting, in July 2010, washeld in Copenhagen and included up to450 participating experts and 210 ob-servers from 99 ISO member countriesand 42 liaison organizations.
Originally expected to be completed in2008, work on the standard was fraughtwith disagreements on tone and scope;definitions of terms like “sphere of influ-ence,” “international norms of behavior,”“complicity” and “value chain”; issues ofgender and sexual orientation; and thepotential impact of international agree-ments—such as the WTO Agreement onTechnical Barriers to Trade—on interpre-tation of the standard. Compounding thedifficulties in attaining consensus wasthe decision to develop the standard withequal stakeholder representation from in-dustry, government, labor, consumers,nongovernmental organizations, andother groups.
Although the standard was delayedseveral years, the process enhanced dis-cussions around key SR principles. Thehard-won consensus of diverse partici-pants will add to the standard’s credibil-ity and broaden its acceptance globally.
The standard aims to provide guid-ance to organizations, regardless of theirsize, activity or location, on the follow-ing topics:
• Concepts, terms and definitions re-lated to social responsibility
• Background, trends and characteris-tics of social responsibility
• Principles and practices relating tosocial responsibility
• Core subjects and issues related tosocial responsibility
• Integrating, implementing and pro-moting socially responsible behaviorthroughout an organization and,through its policies and practices,within its “sphere of influence”
• Identifying and engaging stakeholders• Communicating commitments, per-formance and other information re-lated to social responsibility
The standard provides a road mapfor social responsibility by defining itsrelationship with sustainable develop-ment (Clause 3). With this basis, anyorganization can review the principlesof social responsibility described inClause 4 to determine their relevancefor that organization. Clause 6 identifies
December 2010 � The Synergist 27
Contentious Consensus | FEATURE
Contentious
ISO Releases Standard on Social Responsibility
BY JEFFREY HOGUE
CONSENSUS
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 27
T
28 The Synergist � December 2010
FEATURE | Contentious Consensus
actions that corporations can undertaketo support the seven core SR subjects:organizational governance, humanrights, labor practices, the environment,fair operating practices, consumer issuesand community involvement and devel-opment. Before organizations can pursueSR, of course, they must define the SRissues in their sphere of influence and inthe context of their stakeholders’ needsand concerns.The key purpose of the standard is to
encourage organizations to integrate so-cial responsibility into their decisionsand activities. Clause 7 contains a com-pendium of best practices and imple-mentation practices defined by the ISOWG/SR membership. These best practicesinclude making social responsibility in-tegral to an organization’s policies, cul-ture, strategies and operations; buildinginternal competency for social responsi-bility; undertaking internal and externalcommunication on social responsibility;and regularly reviewing practices relatedto social responsibility.A list of authoritative sources of infor-
mation from voluntary initiatives can befound in Annex A. Inclusion of the Annexwas one of the most highly contested is-sues surrounding ISO 26000; some WG/SRmembers argued that the included initia-tives would be perceived as endorsementsby ISO. Consensus was achieved throughthe addition of clear disclaimers. The list isnot intended to be an exhaustive source ofreferences, but it provides a good startingpoint for any user to gain a deeper knowl-edge of each subject area.
The Price of SRAt more than 100 pages, the standardcan be unwieldy for SR novices. Smalland medium-sized enterprises, in particu-lar, may find the standard difficult to di-gest if they lack internal expertise on SRprinciples and implementation schemes.Similar to the launch of other interna-tional standards, expect consultancies tobecome “experts” overnight and provideguidance on the integration of SR princi-ples into business models.Although ISO 26000 is not intended
for certification purposes, several coun-tries, including Brazil, Mexico, Portugal,Spain and the Netherlands, have devel-oped their own certifiable national stan-dards based on the ISO 26000 text. Someindustry stakeholders argue that country-
specific approaches that support newstandards and certification mechanismsmay marginalize some complex SR issuesin favor of a “check-box” mentality to-ward addressing mainstream SR issuesand linkages between the core principles.This observation has some merit, but ISO26000 is very clear on the fundamentalprinciples of SR and the related expecta-tions of organizations. Those that use thestandard thoughtfully are unlikely to missa material aspect of their value chains.An additional controversial issue con-
cerns whether ISO 26000 should be of-fered free of charge. Many WG/SR expertsand observers argued that ISO 26000should be an open-source document be-cause charging for it is fundamentallycounter to the principles of SR. How canthe world progress in this area when thecost of 192 Swiss francs (195 USD) maybe prohibitive for students and for smallorganizations in the developing world?Another argument in favor of a free stan-dard is that ISO cannot copyright the pub-licly available sources, such as UN andILO conventions and other internationalnorms, used to develop the standard.Despite strong stakeholder support for
an open-source, free version of ISO26000, the ISO Technical ManagementBoard reaffirmed current ISO policy re-lated to sales. The standard can be pur-chased at the ISO website, www.iso.org.
Holistic ApproachSo how does this development impactthe OEHS profession? Aside from areas
where the core subjects intersect ourresponsibilities—for example, labor prac-tices and environmental protection (theterm “industrial hygienist” appears twicein the text)—the standard provides noth-ing new for successful OEHS profession-als, who already employ a holisticapproach to add value to their organiza-tions. We are familiar with the conceptsof stakeholder engagement, materialityassessment and sphere of influence, andour organizations see us as primemovers in these areas. We are skilled inthe process of embedding OEHS ap-proaches in our business models, and thecross-functional nature of our rolescombined with the catalytic dimensionof our work allows us to drive perform-ance for our organizations.However, ISO 26000 could allow some
OEHS professionals to further integratetheir functions into their organizations.Using SR initiatives to influence businesspractices across an organization’s valuechain could help expand our roles intoniche sustainability and SR functionsthat are becoming more mainstream andpotentially lucrative.
Jeffrey Hogue is AIHA’s D Liaison Expert to the ISOWorking Group on Social Responsibility (WG/SR),and our representative to the U.S. Technical AdvisoryGroup (TAG) to ISO Technical Committee 26000on Social Responsibility. He can be reached [email protected].
CONNECT for CREDITwww.aiha.org/syntestseries
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 28
T
December 2010 � The Synergist 29
Streamlined Management | FEATURE
The data industrial hygienists man-age continues to grow in volumeand complexity. We rely on thisdata when making sound judgmentsregarding the health and safety ofworkers and the general public.
But instead of employing a stream-lined, centralized approach to managingoccupational health and safety (OHS)data, many organizations use disparatedatabases, Excel spreadsheets and paper-based systems. These systems can in-crease the potential for inconsistent,fragmented data that hinders industrialhygienists’ ability to track, manage andreport OHS data. If not corrected, dis-parate systems can drain resources, neg-atively impact productivity, and possiblyresult in less informed decision making.
Utilizing a comprehensive, automatedOHS system that integrates occupationaldata in one place can significantly en-hance data quality and efficiency withinyour organization. With quality datareadily at hand, the industrial hygienistcan make more proactive and effectivedecisions.
When proposing implementation of anew integrated system, whether pur-chased from a software provider or builtin-house, industrial hygienists will oftenbe asked to justify the investment with abusiness case. In today’s difficult eco-nomic climate, the ability to build an ef-
fective business case has become evenmore important. The business case willneed to prove that the proposed invest-ment will not only enhance health andsafety but positively impact the organi-zation’s bottom line.
When building your business case,keep in mind that the benefits of imple-menting integrated OHS software are bothqualitative and quantitative. Managementtypically responds best to numbers, butyou should stress that qualitative benefitscan easily result in significant corporatesavings.
Qualitative BenefitsWhile difficult to measure, the qualita-tive benefits of integrated OHS softwaremake good business sense. Discussingqualitative benefits first in your businesscase will help management understandwhy the software system is needed.These benefits include the ability to:
• collect and manage data more effi-ciently and consistently
• harmonize and streamline OHSprocesses
• provide a platform for sharing bestpractices
• manage risk proactively• facilitate or improve effective commu-nication of OHS data
• identify how to prioritize and allocateresources
Integrating and streamlining work-flows, business processes, and communi-cations can improve OHS practices andresult in a healthier, more productivework force. These benefits alone amountto a strong case for implementing an in-tegrated OHS software system. And youcan further justify the business decisionwith measurable results.
Quantitative BenefitsA business case for an integrated OHSsoftware system must measure its re-turn on investment (ROI). Here, ROI isevaluated in terms of administrative ef-ficiency, regulatory compliance, IT costsavings, preparedness for litigation andfile storage.
BY MONICA MELKONIAN
Streamlined Management
ROI Tools for the IH
The AIHA® IH Value Strategy WorkingGroup has published text and tools toassist industrial hygienists in provingIH value to their organization. Formore information, visit www.IHValue.org. In addition, the newly releasedAIHA Value Strategy Manual offersmanagement-level guidance on howto convince employers to implementhealth and safety interventions. Orderthe Value Strategy Manual from theAIHA Marketplace at www.aiha.org/marketplace/Pages/default.aspx.
How to Build a Business Case for OHS Databases
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 29
30 The Synergist � December 2010
FEATURE | Streamlined Management
These are the criteria the research firm Watson Wyatt (nowTowers Watson) used to evaluate ROI for a 2007 study of com-panies utilizing integrated OHS software systems. At the requestof my employer, Medgate, which manufactures OHS software,Watson Wyatt sent a survey to companies that had been run-ning an OHS software application for a minimum of two years.Companies participating in the survey represented a cross-sec-tion of medium-sized to large organizations in various industrysectors in the U.S. and Canada. The survey asked companies toquantify the progress made since implementation of the soft-ware. Results varied depending on the extent to which the soft-ware had been implemented at each company, but overall, thestudy revealed that OHS software yielded significant return oninvestment in each area.
Administrative efficiency. From an industrial hygiene perspec-tive, organizations that use disparate systems can have diffi-culty tracking historical exposures, managing similar exposuregroups and ensuring a consistent means to proactively and ef-fectively manage risk. In addition, administrative costs associ-ated with aggregating disparate data can be significant becauseorganizations that lack integrated OHS software typically usephone, fax or e-mail to communicate OHS data. Routine datacollection, data entry and communication can take days.
With an integrated OHS software system, the aggregation,communication and analysis of OHS data could take minutesinstead of days. Software also eliminates redundancies andminimizes duplicate data entry. The Watson Wyatt study calcu-lated the hours of labor saved and found an administrative effi-ciency of 20 percent when an integrated OHS software systemis utilized.
Regulatory compliance. Regulatory audits take time. Organiza-tions that store data in disparate locations require significantlabor to aggregate data and present it to regulatory authorities.The Watson Wyatt study calculated that organizations utilizing acentralized system realize an average time savings of 12 percent.
IT cost savings. Supporting multiple legacy homegrown sys-tems can be time-consuming and inefficient for IT departments.By implementing an integrated OHS software system and re-ducing IT support requirements, the organizations participatingin the Watson Wyatt study recognized an average of 11 percentsavings in OHS IT support costs.
Preparedness for litigation. Allegations of adverse health effectsfrom workplace exposures can lead to costly lawsuits and harma company’s reputation. In response to the Watson Wyatt sur-vey, an oil and gas company noted that the greatest ROI fromintegrated OHS software were savings from reduced litigation.Even small savings in claim amounts were significant for thecorporation. The organizations surveyed for the study realized,on average, a 9 percent decrease in OHS litigation exposure.
File storage. Storage of paper files costs money. A centralizedsystem grants access to data solely through employees’ comput-ers, an efficient solution that potentially replaces all or most fil-ing rooms. The Watson Wyatt study found that surveyrespondents estimated file storage savings of 12 to 16 percentby freeing up valuable on-site real estate or eliminating theneed for off-site storage.
Drawing on the study results, Watson Wyatt designed an ROIcalculator that helps organizations determine potential ROI be-fore implementing an automated off-the-shelf OHS softwaresystem. (A public version of this calculator is planned for re-lease at AIHce 2011 in Portland, Ore.) Tables 1 and 2 are takendirectly from the ROI calculator and provide an example of thesavings an organization could potentially realize when usingan integrated OHS software system. The results are based onaverages from the ROI study and hypothetical inputs, so specific
Industry General manufacturing
Previous system in use Excel/Access orsimilar system
Average annual earnings per employee $50,000
Number of employees (total) 10,000
Number of OHS employees 18
Annual software license fee (hosted) $50,000
Concurrent user count 8
Expected implementation time (months) 6
Discount rate (cost of capital) 15%
Table 1. Return on Investment Calculator: Example Inputs for aFictional Manufacturing Company
Table 2. Return on Investment Calculator: Example Outputs fora Fictional Manufacturing Company
Estimated Savings
First year of operation $114,000
First 2 years of operation $384,000
First 5 years of operation $1,378,000
Estimated Costs
First year of operation $166,000
First 2 years of operation $218,000
First 5 years of operation $378,000
Financial Analysis
Present value of ROI after 1st year -40%
Present value of ROI after 2nd year 52%
Present value of ROI after 5th year 203%
Breakeven occurs in… 1.4 years
[Continued: 37]
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 2:59 PM Page 30
Circle Fax-back Card No. 12
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:00 PM Page 31
32 The Synergist � December 2010
Register Early for AIHce 2011To be eligible for discounted member registrationfees for AIHce 2011, be sure to renew your AIHA®membership by Dec. 31, 2010. Beginning Jan. 1,2011, members who have not renewed will becharged nonmember rates for AIHce.
Registration for AIHce 2011, to be held May 14–19in Portland, Ore., is now open at www.aihce2011.org.The following tips will make your registration easy:
Start your approval process now. As early as pos-sible, begin the process within your organization toenable you to attend AIHce. A sample document forgaining approval to attend AIHce is posted onwww.AIHce2011.org
Register early and online. Registering early will in-crease your chances of getting the hotel (price andlocation) and PDCs (price and topic) you want—andwill also lock in early registration fees. Since hoteland PDC enrollment is first-come, first-served, wait-ing for the Advance Program, which mails in earlyFebruary, can put you at a disadvantage.
Make a case for the value of AIHce—to you andyour organization. AIHce 2011 has an exceptionalconference program featuring diverse topics, specialtracks and presentation formats. Plus, few conferencesprovide the opportunity to earn so many CM pointsin one trip.
Compared with other national OEHS conferences,AIHce has the lowest registration fees and offersmore education. Get more for less money than atany other OEHS conference. Register by Mar. 15and save over $350 on your registration.
Attendees consistently point to the high qualityof the conference program and repeatedly praisethe quality of the networking and the opportunitiesfor renewing acquaintances with colleagues, meet-ing new friends and developing valuable businesscontacts. Attendees also consistently applaud thequality of the exposition, with its multitude ofproducts, services, and interesting OEHS displays.
Have questions? Ask staff. If at any time youhave questions, don’t hesitateto ask staff. Staff e-mailaddresses are listed atwww.AIHce2011.org.
CommunityAIHA NEWS � FOUNDATION NEWS
ACADEMY NEWS � LOCAL SECTIONS NEWS
2010 Rachel Carson AwardThe Environmental Issues Committee (EIC) presented the 2010 RachelCarson Award to Garrett Brown and the Maquiladora Health andSafety Support Network (MHSSN) at AIHce 2010 in Denver, Colo.As a founding member of MHSSN, Brown coordinates activities forthe organization.
MHSSN is a volunteer network of nearly 400 OHS professionalswho provide information, technical assistance and on-site instruc-tion regarding workplace hazards in the 3,000 “maquiladora” (for-eign-owned) assembly plants along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Established in 1987, the Rachel Carson Award is presented to anindividual or group for attaining outstanding success and distinctionin the OEHS field. The EIC is accepting nominations for the 2011award, which will be presented at AIHce 2011 in Portland, Ore., May14–19. If you or someone you know is a qualified recipient, contactPatty Beach at [email protected]. For more information and todownload the nomination form, visit www.aiha.org/insideaiha/volunteergroups/Pages/EnvironmentalIssues.aspx.
AIHA® and ACGIH® End Alliance DiscussionsOn Oct. 25, AIHA and ACGIH announced they will end talks regard-ing the strategic alliance originally proposed in May 2009. The al-liance discussions were temporarily suspended in 2010 when itbecame clear that ACGIH needed to make significant changes to itsorganizational structure. ACGIH and AIHA may resume alliance dis-cussions following the approval of a new ACGIH business model byits board and membership.
The AIHA/ACGIH alliance discussions reflected the AIHA/ACGIHcollaboration in developing occupational exposure guidelines andACGIH’s efforts to fund the enhancement and maintenance of TLVs®.Over the past year, a joint AIHA/ACGIH task force worked to estab-lish specific operating agreements that would delineate the terms ofan effective, resourceful strategic alliance between the two organiza-tions. However, a modification to the ACGIH governance approachcould affect the result of any dialogue with AIHA; therefore, the as-sociations have agreed to terminate the current alliance discussions.
“We respect the ACGIH leadership team’s effort to develop a neworganizational structure that will create an enduring and sustainableprocess for TLV development,” stated AIHA President MichaelBrandt, DrPH, CIH, PMP, in the AIHA/ACGIH joint press release. “Oc-cupational Exposure Guidelines are important tools for our profes-sion, and our members need the capacity to develop and maintainmore of them. The parallel efforts of AIHA and ACGIH will ensurewe retain this capacity into the future.”
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:00 PM Page 32
COMMUNITY | DEPARTMENT
Online
Dates andDeadlinesDec. 31, 2010: Deadline for nominations for 2011AIHA® Fellow awards.
March 5, 2011: Deadline for American IndustrialHygiene Foundation scholarship applications.
May 14–19, 2011: AIHce 2011 in Portland, Ore.
Have You Given to AIHF This Year?Time is running out to give to the American Industrial Hygiene Foun-dation and receive a tax deduction in 2010. Donating to AIHF will helpensure that deserving students preparing for careers in industrial hy-giene will receive scholarships. There are three easy ways to give: do-nate to the capital fund, donate to an endowed named scholarship, orpledge to one or both.Detailed information about making a donation or a pledge can be
found at www.aiha.org/foundations/AIHFoundation/Pages/default.aspx.
Reminder: Renew Your MembershipLast month, AIHA® e-mailed membership renewal notifications. The mem-bership renewal notification process is online only—dues invoices willnot be sent through the mail. Membership dues payments may be madequickly and securely at www.aiha.org/aboutaiha/AIHAMembership/Pages/JoinRenew AIHAMe.aspx. Members may also pay by check ormoney order—send payments to AIHA at P.O. Box 1519, Merrifield, Va.,22116-9990.If you have not received a membership renewal e-mail, contact
AIHA membership services at (703) 849-8888. For more information onthe benefits of AIHA membership, visit www.aiha.org/aboutaiha/AIHAMembership/Pages/MemberBenefits.aspx.
Committee Spotlight: Nanotechnology Working GroupThe Nanotechnology Working Group (NTWG) provides AIHA with cur-rent nanotechnology health and safety information. NTWG holdsmonthly teleconferences, organizes and sponsors AIHA educationalcourses, compiles and shares research, and partners with other groupsoutside AIHA to advance nanotechnology EHS.NTWG offers a variety of opportunities to increase knowledge about
nanotechnology, including self-paced courses, PDCs and conference ses-sions. For further nanotechnology EHS information, visitwww.aiha.org/insideaiha/volunteergroups/Pages/NTWG.aspx.If you have any questions regarding AIHA Volunteer Groups, includ-
ing how to get involved, contact the specific group’s chair. If you are in-terested in being on the NTWG’s distribution list or being a member,contact Angela Oler at [email protected] this article in its entirety at http://bit.ly/CS_NWTG.
Synergist
AIHA® Hosts First Course in IndiaAIHA, in collaboration with the Indian Associationof Occupational Health (IAOH), successfullylaunched the highly rated Fundamentals of Indus-trial Hygiene (FIH) course, Oct. 11–14, 2010, inNew Mumbai, India. Participants in this interna-tionally recognized course received four days ofhands-on workshops and problem-solving exer-cises taught by Frank Renshaw, PhD, CIH, CSP;Toral Metha, CIH; Ed Stuber, CIH; and Dileep And-hare, MD, AFIH, DHA.
Unrestricted educational grants and equipmentsponsors of the course included Sri RamachandraUniversity, Swan Environmental, TSI, SKC, BIOS,and Galson. If your organization is interested insponsorship of international educational events,contact Stacey Talbot, AIHA education manager,at [email protected] this article in its entirety at http://bit.ly/
bLxnce.
2011 Buyer’s Guide AvailableThe print version of the 2011 AIHA® Buyer’s Guide—your source for IH- and OEHS-related services andproducts—was mailed in October. If you have notreceived your copy, please contact AIHA customerservice at (703) 849-8888. To view the onlineversion, visit www.aiha.org/news-pubs/bg/Pages/default.aspx.
December JOEHDecember JOEH clears the air with articles
on organophosphate pesticide exposure inhomes and vehicles and the effectiveness ofexisting dust control methodsduring concrete grinding.To read abstracts of this andother articles, visit http://oeh.informaworld.com. Memberscan access the full-text ofJOEH articles viawww.aiha.org.
Visit www.aiha.org/SynergistCommunity to read moreabout these and other AIHA news items.
33December 2010 � The Synergist
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:00 PM Page 33
Brand New!
The AIHA® Value StrategyManual
Visit www.aiha.org/market or call Customer Serviceat (703) 849-8888, Monday–Friday, 9 a.m.–5 p.m. ET.
AIHA’s Value StrategyManual outlines the processes and procedures needed to
evaluate EHS programs and initiatives to determine their impact on worker
health and a company’s operation.
In its simplest form, the AIHA Value Strategy represents
a framework to logically develop and support a business
case that can be applied and scaled:
• From complex multimillion dollar projects and programsto narrowly scoped projects and programs costingthousands
• To multinational companies and small companies
• For government and not-for-profit organizations
• By senior- and junior-level industrial hygienists
The manual’s 14 chapters take you through the seven steps of the AIHA Value Strategy
and provide approaches, examples and tools to help you conduct a value assessment of
your own. Sample checklists, spreadsheets and other tools also aid practitioners in
conducting value assessments.
AIHA Publications—Reliable Referencesfor OEHS Professionals Globally
®
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:00 PM Page 34
December 2010 � The Synergist 35
Continuous EnrollmentAIHA’s Distance Learning
Program offers a variety of topicsin convenient and cost-effectiveformats such as TeleWeb virtualseminars, self-study workbooks,webcourses, DVDs and videos.Visit: www.aiha.org/education/ce/Pages/default.aspx.
AIHce 2010 Technical,General and Keynote
Sessions are available as DVDsand downloads. Contact: (703)849-8888; [email protected];www.conferencemedia.net/store/stores/aihce.
December 6Chapel Hill, North CarolinaAHERA Supervising AsbestosAbatement Projects Refreshercourse. CMs: 1.34. Contact: (888)235-3320; [email protected];http://osherc.sph.unc.edu/ce/courses/ahera_super_ref.htm.
December 6Berlin, GermanyInternational Workshop on Howto Use REACH Information forHealth and Safety at Work. Con-tact: www.bmas.de/portal/47266/property=pdf/2010__08__04__workshop__reach.pdf.
December 6–7Birmingham, AlabamaSpirometry Workshop. Contact:(205) 934-7178; [email protected];www.uab.edu/dsc.
December 7Chapel Hill, North CarolinaAHERA Building Inspection forAsbestos Refresher course. CMs:0.67. Contact: (888) 235-3320;[email protected];http://osherc.sph.unc.edu/ce/courses/ahera_bldginsp_ref.htm.
December 7Natick, MassachusettsRadiation Safety course. Contact:[email protected];www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
December 8Chapel Hill, North CarolinaAHERA Designing AsbestosAbatement Refresher course.CMs: 1.34. Contact: (888) 235-3320; [email protected]; http://osherc.sph.unc.edu/ce/courses/ahera_des_ref.htm.
December 8Natick, MassachusettsSafety in the Laboratory course.Contact: [email protected]; www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
December 8–10Birmingham, AlabamaAudiometric Testing and HearingConservation. Contact: (205) 934-7178; [email protected];www.uab.edu/dsc.
December 9Natick, MassachusettsHow to Be a More EffectiveChemical Hygiene Officer course.Contact: Register@LabSafety
Institute.org; www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
December 9–10Atlanta, Georgia2010 Modeling for Public HealthAction: From Epidemiology to Op-erations. Contact: www.phmodeling2010conference.com/index.html.
December 13Applications of Non-IonizingEquations webinar. CM: 0.33; COC:0.20. Contact: www.bowenehs.com.
December 14Natick, MassachusettsSafety in the Secondary SchoolScience Lab course. Contact:[email protected];www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
December 15Natick, MassachusettsLab Waste Management course.Contact: [email protected]; www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
December 15–16Birmingham, AlabamaAir Sampling for Toxic Sub-stances. Contact: Contact: (205)934-7178; [email protected];www.uab.edu/dsc.
December 16Natick, MassachusettsBiosafety in the Laboratorycourse. Contact: [email protected]; www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
January 10–13, 2011San Jose, CaliforniaCIH Review Workshop. Contact:www.bowenehs.com.
January 11, 2011Natick, MassachusettsSafety in the Laboratory course.Contact: [email protected]; www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
January 12, 2011Natick, MassachusettsLab Waste Management course.Contact: [email protected]; www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
January 13, 2011Natick, MassachusettsBiosafety in the Laboratorycourse. Contact: [email protected]; www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
January 17–20, 2011Oakland, CaliforniaASP CSP Exam Workshop.Contact: www.bowenehs.com.
January 18, 2011Natick, MassachusettsSafety is Elementary. Contact:[email protected];www.LabSafetyInstitute.org.
January 18, 2011Machine Safeguarding RiskAssessment: Achieving Accept-able Risk web course. CMs: 0.25;COCs: 0.15. Contact: www.zoubek-consulting.com.
Circle Fax-back Card No. 13
Send information about OEHS events to [email protected]. For a complete list of events, visit www.aiha.org/education/Pages/CalendarofEvents.aspx.
Circle Fax-back Card No. 14
OpportunitiesMEETINGS � CONFERENCES � COURSES
DISTANCE LEARNING � CALLS FOR PAPERS
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:00 PM Page 35
36 The Synergist � December 2010
Publication of this material does not constitute endorsement by AIHA.
To obtain further information on the listed products and companies, please circle the numbers on the fax-back card (p. 37) that correspond to the new products.
ADVERTISEMENT � SOFTWARE
Actio CorporationEHS/Compliance Software On-demand
Actio’s automated SaaS technology system helps customersmanage risk, master product stewardship, and avoid compliancepenalties and fines associated withchemical data and MSDS data storageand distribution, which result inhigher profitability. For more infor-mation, visit www.actio.net.
DataChem Software, Inc.New CIHprep V9.0
DataChem Software just released CIHprepV9.0, a computer-based training programthat helps professionals prepare for theCIH exam. The questions were reviewedand realigned with the current exam out-line. This resulted in updating hundredsof questions, deleting inapplicable questions, and adding newquestions. Visit www.CertiStep.com for more information.
Don’t Buy Gas DetectorsThere’s a better way to do gas detection ... iNet
iNet is a software-based service thatincreases safety, providing visibility intoalarms, exposure and usage. It also keepsgas detectors working without costly andtime-consuming maintenance, and iNetsubscribers do not have to buy the gasdetectors. Instead, they receive gasdetection as a service. For moreinformation, visit www.dontbuygasdetectors.com.
Open Range Software LLCIndustrial Hygiene Software
Open Range Software LLC offerssampling (air, noise, bulk, wipe, direct-reading, water, light and specialtyareas), employee notification, labinterface, statistics, chain of custody,action tracking, health risk assessment,exposure groups, medical interface,equipment calibration, job hazard analysis, confined space, localexhaust, laser inventory, and much more.
Safetec Compliance Systems, Inc.Chemical and MSDS ManagementSoftware-as-a-Service (SaaS)
For EHS professionals and right-to-knowusers alike, Safetec’s configurable, easy-to-use chemical and MSDS managementsolutions allow you to demonstrate com-pliance, optimize your procurement, useand management of chemical inventories, and automate regula-tory reporting. For your free chemical compliance analysis, visitwww.safetec.net.
SiteHawkMSDS Management and Authoring
SiteHawk offers a complete approach to MSDS and chemical datamanagement via web-based, user-friendlysoftware and managed services. We con-tinue to lead the EHS industry in cus-tomer satisfaction in organizations invirtually every industry. Utilize SiteHawkchemical management solutions forMSDS management, MSDS authoring, and chemical inventorymanagement. For more information, visit www.sitehawk.com.
SpiramidOccupational Health and Safety Software
Nanotechnology features, AIHA® EAStrategy, COSHH Assessments, statisticalanalysis and equipment management arejust a few of the unique components inSpiramid’s world-leading IH module.Our clients in over 60 countries havestreamlined their processes through anintegrated approach to manage their medical, safety and IHrecords in one database.
TSIData Analysis Software
TRAKPRO software is the ideal tool for indoor air qualitystudies, exposure studies or environmental monitoring.It allows you to view, organize, analyzeand save data quickly and efficiently.For more information, visit www.tsi.com.
Circle Fax-back Card No. 15 Circle Fax-back Card No. 16
Circle Fax-back Card No. 19
Circle Fax-back Card No. 21 Circle Fax-back Card No. 22
Circle Fax-back Card No. 18
Product Features
Circle Fax-back Card No. 17
Circle Fax-back Card No. 20
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:01 PM Page 36
December 2010 � The Synergist 37
Fax-Back CardThe Reader Service Card is now a FAX-BACK card. Use this card to obtain more information about the products and services advertised in this issue. You could win a $200 AMEX Gift Card.
FILL OUT AND FAX THIS PAGE TO 410-584-8351.
Please send me free information on items circled.
SynergistDecember 2010
Fax completed card by Dec 31, 2010, to enter to wina $200 AMEX gift card. No purchase is necessary.
FB# Advertiser Page
2 . . . . 3M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
14 . . . . Bowen EHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
7 . . . . Bureau Veritas . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
13 . . . . Colden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
1 . . . . EMSL Analytical . . . . . . . . .Cover 2
3 . . . . Environmental MonitoringSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
4 . . . . NEXTTEQ LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
8 . . . . On-Site Instruments . . . . . . . . . .15
12 . . . . Open Range Software, LLC . . . .31
9 . . . . Raeco Rents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
5 . . . . RJ Lee Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
10 . . . . Safetec ComplianceSystems, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
6 . . . . SKC Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
FB# Advertiser Page
23 . . . . TSI Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cover 3
11 . . . . University of Medicineand Dentistry of New Jersey . . . .18
24 . . . . Zefon International . . . . . . .Cover 4
Product Features
15 . . . . Actio Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . .36
16 . . . . DataChem Software, Inc. . . . . . .36
17 . . . . Industrial Scientific Corporation .36
18 . . . . Open Range Software, LLC . . . .36
19 . . . . Safetec ComplianceSystems, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
20 . . . . SiteHawk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
21 . . . . Spiramid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
22 . . . . TSI Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
1—Type of firm:1 � Manufacturer2 � Consultant3 � School/College4 � Hospital5 � Government
2—Professional function:A � Administration/Mgmt.B � Marketing/SalesC � Industrial HygienistD � PhysicianE � NurseF � Environ. SpecialistG � Safety SpecialistH � Health SpecialistI � Res./DevelopmentJ � Purchasing Agent
3—Purchasing authority:1 � Recommend2 � Specify3 � Approve
4—Number of employees:A � Under 100B � 100 to 500C � 500 to 1,000D � Over 1,000
5—This inquiry is for:A � Immediate PurchaseB � Future Project
6—This issue is addressed to:A � MyselfB � Someone else
7—Please have a salespersoncontact me
A � Yes B � No
8—Select the primary type ofproducts you recommend,specify, and/or buy in yourjob (check all that apply):A � All of the followingB � Air Sampling EquipmentC � Direct Read. EquipmentD � Respiratory ProtectionE � Protective ClothingF � Medical/Occ. HealthG � Environ./Waste ControlH � Training/EducationI � Safety EquipmentJ � Asbestos AbatementK � Computer Software
Please type, print or affix self-addressed label from front mailing label.
Name:
Title:
Company:
Address
City: State: Zip:
Phone:( )
results will vary.Table 1 identifies some of the data entered into the calcula-
tor tool, and Table 2 provides the results. Though not shown,the inputs include information about short- and long-term dis-ability claims as well as litigation expenditures (the calculatorapplies Watson Wyatt industry norms if no data is available forthe company in question). Note that the break-even estimate inTable 2 includes a six-month implementation period.
ImplementationWhen evaluating how an integrated OHS software system canhelp your organization, you must consider the post-purchaseimplementation, which is just as important as the software it-self. If the software is not properly implemented, you will notderive the maximum ROI from your purchase. Managementbuy-in for implementation consulting services can sometimesbe difficult to achieve, but the investment is well worth the cost.(Note that the sample results in Tables 1 and 2 are calculationsbased on the cost of a standard six-month implementation.)
Make sure that adequate staff resources are in place duringimplementation. Staff will be involved in making importantdecisions regarding how the software will be configured. Staffresources typically include internal OHS staff, who understandyour organization best, and consulting staff from the softwarevendor, who know the software best. Be sure to consult yourvendor to get a detailed quote of the costs up front. Servicescan include detailed business process reviews and configura-tion support to help ensure the software works in harmonywith your organization. Some vendors employ consultants whospecialize in functional areas and types of implementation (i.e.,enterprisewide vs. local, or in specific countries or areas), so in-quire about who will be working on your project. You can askto meet the people who will work on your project team, whichwill allow you to evaluate whether the provider you’re consid-ering is right for you and your organization. Ultimately, if thevendor is a good fit, you’ll benefit from the greatest ROI.
ValueWhether purchased off the shelf or built in-house, a compre-hensive OHS database that integrates OHS data in one placecan significantly enhance data quality and efficiency withinyour organization.
Moving to an integrated system requires an investment intime and money, but it could result in significant savings. Sys-tem solutions may vary from one organization to the next, butthe fundamental concepts regarding return on investment arethe same for all.
Monica Melkonian, CIH, is a senior application consultant and member of theproduct design team at Medgate, Inc. She also is an active member of AIHA’s IHValue Strategy Working Group and Computer Applications Committee. She canbe reached at (503) 385-7040 or [email protected].
[From: 30]
Streamlined ManagementHow to Build a Business Case for OHS Databases
CONNECT for CREDITwww.aiha.org/syntestseries
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:01 PM Page 37
38 The Synergist � December 2010
Introductions
You’ve participated in operations related to the World Trade Center collapse,Hurricane Katrina, and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. What key lessons canpublic health professionals take away from these events? Preparedness, includ-ing cooperating with partners and effective communication, is critical. I have learned agreat deal about preparedness and response since joining ATSDR in 1998. Public healthagencies have learned and grown from these events, too. For example, CDC establishedan Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in 2003. The EOC staff work incredibly well withCDC and ATSDR subject matter experts on emerging public health threats such as H1N1.
What were your responsibilities as Chief Health Officer at CDC/ATSDR’s Emer-gency Response Operations Center for the Deepwater Horizon spill? I served asChief Health Officer for a three-week period in June 2010. My role was to provide adviceand support to the CDC Incident Commander—RADM Scott Deitchman—on public healthissues. Much of our focus was on obtaining health surveillance information about GulfCoast residents, reviewing and evaluating air, water, and waste sampling results col-lected by EPA, and developing accurate health messages for health professionals and thepublic.
Describe the hazards you found at the shelters for Hurricane Katrina evacuees.I was deployed with a CDC-led public health team to Dallas. We worked closely with theDallas County Public Health Authority. Our role was to identify public health and safetyconcerns in shelters for evacuees. One small community outside of Dallas turned a va-cant box store into a shelter with tall wooden racks to store donated blankets and otherarticles. I called the structural engineer after the volunteers stored cases of bottled wateron the racks. Overall, the most pressing health need for many evacuees was obtainingmedications for their chronic disease conditions.
You’re responsible for public health consultations. Is it challenging to get com-panies to share health and safety information with residents? In my experiencemost companies are willing to share pertinent information once they recognize the com-munity concerns result from a general lack of environmental health information. Some-times communities aren’t aware of the extent to which companies are complying withEPA and OSHA regulations. For example, one metal refining facility had a network of airmonitors operating continuously to measure a hazardous air pollutant in compliancewith EPA regulations. The local community was unaware of this monitoring effort andthe monitoring results. Once the company started sharing this information, many of thecommunity’s concerns were allayed.
How do communities react when your team investigates a site? Communityreactions vary depending on the site and the circumstances. ATSDR has a mandate toconduct public health assessments for all Superfund sites. ATSDR does not perform siteclean-up, but we act as an advisor and work closely with the environmental agenciesthat perform this role. This is important because the public sometimes does not distin-guish between environmental and public health agencies. Health education and effectiverisk communication are critical for easing fears and addressing public concerns.
Introductions presents profiles ofindustrial hygienists working to pro-tect worker health worldwide. Thismonth we feature Peter Kowalski,MPH, CIH, CSP, REHS, Environmen-tal Health Scientist V at the Agencyfor Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry (ATSDR) in Atlanta, Ga.Working in the division of healthassessment, Kowalski is charged withconducting public health consulta-tions and providing IH technicalsupport to ATSDR. He also served asChief Health Officer during a rota-tion at the CDC/ATSDR EmergencyResponse Operations Center for hur-ricane response activities and theDeepwater Horizon oil spill. In 2007,the U.S. Public Health Serviceawarded him an Outstanding ServiceMedal for outstanding community,technical and scientific contributionsof national importance related toberyllium exposure.Kowalski received a BA in Envi-
ronmental Science from St. Michael’sCollege and an MPH in Environmen-tal Health from Yale UniversitySchool of Public Health. He is a pastpresident of the AIHA Georgia LocalSection and member of the Commis-sioned Officers Association. Kowalskican be reached at (770) 488-0627 [email protected].
Peter Kowalski
COLUMN | INTRODUCTIONS
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:02 PM Page 38
Circle Fax-back Card No. 23
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:02 PM Page 39
Circle Fax-back Card No. 24
DECEMBER 2010 12/1/2010 3:02 PM Page 40
