This document on best practices was developed using the recommendations set forth in the
OSHA Metalworking Fluids Standards Advisory Committee Final Report (1999); the NIOSH Criteria Document on
Occupational Exposure to Metalworking Fluids (1998); and the Organization Resources Counselors, "Management of
the Metal Removal Fluid Environment: A Guide to the Safe and Efficient Use of Metal Removal Fluids" (1999).
This Best Practices Manual is not a standard or
regulation, and it creates no new legal obligations. The manual is advisory in nature, informational in content,
and is intended to assist employers in providing a safe and healthful workplace for workers exposed to
metalworking fluids (MWFs) through effective prevention programs adapted to the needs and resources of each place
of employment.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act requires employers to comply with hazard-specific safety and health
standards as issued and enforced by either the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), or an
OSHA-approved State Plan. In addition, employers must provide their employees with a workplace free from
recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious physical harm under Section 5(a)(1), the General Duty Clause
of the Act. Employers can be cited for violating the General Duty Clause if there is a recognized hazard and they
do not take steps to prevent or abate the hazard. However, failure to implement these guidelines is not, in
itself, a violation of the General Duty Clause. Citations can only be based on standards, regulations, and the
General Duty Clause. |
METALWORKING FLUIDS STANDARD ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MWFSAC)
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) |
PUBLIC REPRESENTATIVES
Maura Sheehan, Sc. D.
MWFSAC CHAIRPERSON
Professor, Environmental Health
West Chester University
Department of Health
West Chester, PA 19383
610-436-2623 work
610-436-2860 fax
Lee Newman, M.D.
Director
Div. of Env. & Occup. Hlth. Sci.
Nat'l. Jewish Medical & Research Ctr.
1400 Jackson Street
Denver, CO 80206
303-398-1725 work
303-398-1452 fax
Dennis O'Brien, Ph.D.
Director, Division of Physical Sciences and Engineering
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
4676 Columbia Parkway
Cincinnati, OH 45226
Daniel Teitelbaum, M.D.
Medical Tox. & Occup. Med. Corp.
155 North Madison
Denver, CO 80206
303-355-2625 work
303-355-3361 fax
WORKER REPRESENTATIVES
Dave Day
Int'l. Assoc. of Machinists & Aerospace Workers
9000 Machinists Place
Upper Marlboro, MD 20722
301-967-4704 work
301-967-3431 fax
James Frederick
Industrial Hygienist
United Steel Workers of America
Five Gateway Center
Pittsburg, PA 15222
412-562-2586 work
412-562-2584 fax
Arthur McGee
President, UAW Local Union 599
812 Leith Street
Flint, MI 48505
810-238-1616 x 414 work
810-238-3378 fax
Frank Mirer, Ph. D.
Director, Health & Safety Dept.
International Union, UAW
8000 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, MI 48214
313-926-5563 work
313-824-4473 fax
David Wegman, M.D.
Univ. of Massachusetts Lowell
Department of Work Environment
Lowell, MA 01854
978-934-3265 work
978-452-5711 fax
EMPLOYER REPRESENTATIVES
David Burch
Director of Human Resources & Government Affairs
Precision Machined Products Assoc.
6700 West Snowville Road
Brecksvile, OH 44141- 3292
440-526-0300 work
440-526-5803 fax
John Cox
Manager, Bovernment Affairs
National Tooling & Machining Assoc.
9300 Livingston Road
Ft. Washington, MD 20744
301-248-6200 work
301-248-7104 fax
John Howell, Ph. D.
Director, Safety, Health, & Environmental Affairs
Castrol Industrial North America
1001 West 31st Street
Downers Grove, IL 60515
630-241-4000 x 5235 work
630-963-9027 fax
Henry Lick, Ph. D., CIH, CSP, ROH
Manager, Industrial Hygiene
Ford Motor Company
104 Central Laboratory
15000 Century Drive
Dearborn, MI 48120
313-594-6961 work
313-390-4237 fax
Frank White
Vice President
Organization Resources Counselors, Inc.
1910 Sunderland Place, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
202-293-2980 work
202-293-2915 fax
STATE REPRESENTATIVES
Henry Anderson, M.D.
Bureau of Public Health
State of Wisconsin,
1400 E. Washington Ave., Rm. 96
Madison, WI 53703
608-266-1253 work
608-267-4853 fax
ALTERNATES
Kenneth Kushner, CIH, SCP
Principal - Occ. Safety & Industrial Hygiene
The Timkin Company
Mail Drop gne-13
1835 Dueber Avenue, SW
Canton, OH 44706
330-471-3292 work
330-471-4600 fax
William Shortell
ConnectiCOSH & IAMAW Local 700
care of: 1510 Saybrook Road
Middletown, CT 06157
860-549-1877 work
860-251-6049 fax
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- Introduction
What Does This Manual Address?
Additional Health and Safety Hazards
-
The Basics of Metalworking Fluids
What Are The Different Types of Metalworking Fluids?
Straight Oil
Soluble Oil
Semisynthetic
Synthetic
What Are the Signs That a Fluid May No Longer Be Safe To Use?
- Principles of Fluid Selection
How Can You Obtain Safety and Health Information About a Fluid?
What Are the Health and Safety Concerns That Should Be Considered When Selecting a Fluid?
-
Required and Recommended Exposure Limits
- Health Effects
General
Skin Disorders
Respiratory Diseases
Cancer
-
Engineering and Work Practice Controls
How Can Occupational Exposures Be Controlled?
What Design Considerations and Operational Procedures Can Be Used to Control Misting?
How Can Isolation Be Used to Control Exposures?
Should an Exhaust Ventilation System Be Installed to Control Mist?
What Are the Types of Exhaust Hoods?
Why Are Machine Tool Enclosures Necessary?
What If Existing Equipment Lacks an Enclosure?
Is It Necessary to Provide Make-up Air?
What Factors Need to Be Considered When Exhaust Air is Recirculated?
What Is The Function of a Mist Collector and How Should It Be Maintained?
Where Can the Exhaust Air of the Mist Collector Be Discharged?
What Work Practices Can Be Implemented to Reduce Employee Exposures?
Personal Hygiene
Barrier and Moisturizing Creams
Housekeeping
Periodic Inspection and Maintenance
Use of Proper Procedures
Supervision
- Personal Protective Equipment
When Should Employers Use Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)?
What OSHA Standards Govern the Use of Personal Protective Equipment?
What Are Some of the Specific Requirements of the Personal Protective Equipment Standard (29 CFR 1910.132)?
How Can The Employer Tell If MWF Hazards Warrant Employees Wearing Personal Protective Equipment?
What Type of Personal Protective Equipment Should Be Worn?
When Should Respirators Be Worn?
Respirator Selection
-
Establishing a Metalworking Fluid Management Program
Why Is Establishing a Metalworking Fluid Management Program Important?
What Elements Should a Fluid Management Program Include?
What Are Some of the Ways to Minimize and Control Bacterial and/or Fungi Growth?
- Clean System Before Introducing Fresh Metalworking Fluid
- Operate System at Correct Concentration
- Ensure Makeup Water Is of Adequate Quality
- Incorporate Biocides
- Miscellaneous Factors
What Should Be Done After MWFs Reach the End of Their Service Life?
How Does a Facility Determine If It Has Good MWF Management?
-
Instituting An Exposure Monitoring Program
Why Should Exposure Monitoring (Air Sampling) Be Conducted?
How Is Employees' Exposure to MWFs and Fluid Contaminants Assessed?
What Is Objective Data and How Can it Be Used in Qualitative Assessments?
How Is Air Sampling to Be Conducted?
What Are the Sampling and Analytical Methods That Can Be Used?
How Often Should Monitoring Be Done?
How Can a Small Company Get Industrial Hygiene Assistance in Obtaining Monitoring Services?
-
Medical Monitoring Of Exposed Employees
What Is Medical Monitoring?
Why Is Medical Monitoring Important?
What Is the Medical Monitoring Process?
Who Should Be Included in the Medical Monitoring Program?
What Does Medical Monitoring Consist Of?
What Symptoms or Conditions Are Considered Most Important in the Medical Monitoring of MWF Employees?
What Follow-Up Examinations Should Be Conducted?
What If the Questionnaire, the Skin Examination, Pulmonary Function (Spirometric) Testing, or Other Medical Tests
Reveal Problems That Might Arise from Working with MWF?
What Is Medical Management?
What About Employee Self-reporting of Symptoms or Medical Problems?
Confidentiality
- Training
What Training Is Necessary?
What Are Some of the Requirements Under OSHA's Hazard Communications Standard?
When Should Training Be Conducted?
What Should Be Included in the Training Program and How Should it Be Conducted?
- References
- Bibliography
- Appendices
Appendix 1 - Glossary
Appendix 2 - Typical Additives Included in MWFs
Appendix 3 - References for the Proper Design and Operation of Ventilation Systems
Appendix 4 - General Considerations for Enclosure/Exhaust Hood Design
Appendix 5 - NIOSH Recommended Respiratory Protection For Workers Exposed to Metalworking Fluid Aerosols
Appendix 6 - Procedures for Draining, Cleaning, and Recharging Metalworking Fluid Delivery Systems
Appendix 7 - Self-Assessment Procedure
Appendix 8 - OSHA Air Sampling Methods
Appendix 9 - NIOSH Analytical Method 0500
Appendix 10 - OSHA Consultation Directory
Appendix 11- Best Practices for Training
A. INTRODUCTION
Millions of workers engaged in manufacturing parts for products such as automobiles, farm equipment, aircraft, heavy
machinery, and other hardware are exposed to metalworking fluids (MWFs). Metalworking fluids are in widespread, high
volume use for their coolant, lubricant, and corrosion resistant properties during machining operations. These fluids
are complex mixtures of oils, detergents, surfactants, biocides, lubricants, anti-corrosive agents, and other
potentially toxic ingredients.
This document focuses on that group of metalworking fluids known as metal removal fluids.
Metalworking fluids/metal removal fluids are also called machining fluids, cutting fluids, and cutting oils. These
fluids are those used in grinding, cutting, boring, drilling, and turning metal. Although metal removal fluids is a
more specific term, these fluids are most often referred to by the generic term metalworking fluids. It is believed
that employers and employees are more likely to associate this document with their work environment if the term they
commonly use is in the title and text. Consequently, OSHA will use the more common term, metalworking fluids,
throughout the document. While the scope of this document is limited to metal removal operations and their fluids,
the exclusion of other metalworking fluids or related processes or environments does not imply the lack of a
potential problem in these related fluids, processes or environments. A glossary of metalworking fluid terms is
included in Appendix 1.
In 1993, the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW)
petitioned OSHA for an emergency temporary standard. OSHA subsequently issued a Priority Planning report, which
identified metalworking fluids as an issue worthy of Agency action. The Assistant Secretary then asked the National
Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH) for recommendations on how to proceed. NACOSH
recommended that OSHA form a Standards Advisory Committee (SAC) to address the issues of occupational exposure to
metal removal fluids. The Secretary of Labor signed the charter establishing the Metalworking Fluids SAC on August
28, 1997. The Standards Advisory Committee comprised of 15 representatives from unions, academia, affected industries
that included large and small employers, and NIOSH and State public health professionals, issued a report in 1999. A
summary of that report is available on
OSHA's website.
What Does This Manual Address?
This document provides general information about the metalworking fluid environment and the health hazards of
occupational exposure to MWFs. This Manual recommends occupational health guidelines to mitigate the adverse health
effects associated with occupational exposure to MWFs. It covers major topics such as a systems management approach,
exposure assessment, medical surveillance, and training. Systems management includes a comprehensive programmatic
approach including such things as machine enclosure, ventilation, fluid management, and other actions to control
exposure and minimize contact with the fluid. The material in this Manual will help safety and health professionals
apply their resources to the industrial hygiene problems associated with the metalworking environment. Engineering,
work practice, and administrative controls that help reduce workplace exposures are identified and appropriate
methods are described that limit exposures.
Additional Health and Safety Hazards
Other potential safety and health hazards associated with the metalworking fluid environment but not addressed in
this Manual include:
- Noise
- Vibration
- Ergonomic stresses
- Machine guarding and interlocks
- Electrical hazards
- Flying objects
- Wet and slippery work surfaces
- Sources of high temperature
B. THE BASICS OF METALWORKING FLUIDS
Industrial operations requiring the grinding, cutting, or boring of metal parts also require the use of metalworking
fluids to meet productivity and quality requirements. Metalworking fluids (MWFs) have two primary functions: to cool
and to lubricate.
All metal removal processes generate a tremendous amount of heat. This heat must be reduced in order to achieve
productivity and part quality. The cooling effect provided by a metalworking fluid gives the cutting tool or grinding
wheel a longer life and helps to prevent burning and smoking. At the point where the tool is in contact with the
part, lubrication is necessary to reduce friction between the tool and the part, resulting in improved tool life and
better finishes on the metal cut.
Metalworking fluids also provide corrosion protection for the newly machined part and machine tool. Water-miscible
metalworking fluid formulations (those fluids that are meant to be diluted with water) include components that slow
or prevent such corrosion. MWFs also help remove chips or swarf (an accumulation of fine metal and abrasive
particles) from the cutting zone.
What Are the Different Types of Metalworking Fluids?
There are four major classes of metal-working fluids widely available: straight oil, soluable oil, semisynthetic, and
synthetic. Many metalworking fluids, except the straight oils, are mixed with water for use. Each has additives such
as surfactants, biocides, extreme pressure agents, anti-oxidants, and corrosion inhibitors to improve performance and
increase fluid life (refer to Appendix 2 for a listing of typical additives).
Straight Oil: This type of metalworking fluid is made up mostly of mineral (petroleum) or
vegetable oils. Petroleum oils used for these fluids today tend to be "severely solvent refined" or
"severely hydrotreated" (refining processes which reduce cancer-causing substances called polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs] present in crude oil). Other oils of animal, marine or synthetic origin can also be used
singly or in combination with straight oils to increase the wetting action and lubricity.
Straight oils can be recognized by an oily appearance and viscous feel. These materials may contain chlorinated and
sulfur additives. This product is not diluted with water before use.
Straight-oil metalworking fluids are generally used for processes that require lubrication rather than cooling. They
perform best when used at slow cut speeds, high metal-to-metal contact or with older machines made specifically for
use with straight oils. Straight-oil MWF systems may require fire protection.
Soluble Oil: Soluble oil is also called emulsifiable oil. It is made up of from 30 to 85
percent of severely refined lubricant base oil and emulsifiers to help disperse the oil in water. The fluid
concentrate usually includes other additives to improve performance and lengthen the life of the fluid. Soluble oil
products are supplied as concentrates that are diluted with water to obtain the working fluid. They may have
colorants added.
Soluble oils in general provide good lubrication and are better at cooling than straight oils. Drawbacks in using
soluble oils, however, are that they sometimes have poor corrosion control, are sometimes "dirty" (i.e.,
machine tool surfaces and nearby areas become covered with oil or difficult-to-remove product residues), may smoke
(they may not cool as well as semisynthetics and synthetics), and may have poor mix stability or short sump life.
Semisynthetic: This type of metalworking fluid contains a lower amount of severely refined
base oil, for example, 5-30 percent in the concentrate. Semisynthetics offer good lubrication, good heat reduction,
good rust control, and have longer sump life and are cleaner than soluble oils. They are comprised of many of the
same ingredients as soluble oils and contain a more complex emulsifier package.
Synthetic: These metalworking fluid formulations do not contain any petroleum oil. They
contain detergent-like components to help "wet" the part and other additives to improve performance. Like
the other classes of water-miscible fluids, synthetics are designed to be diluted with water.
Among the four types of fluids, synthetic metalworking fluids generally are the cleanest, offer the best heat
reduction, have excellent rust control, and offer longer sump life. In addition, this type of metalworking fluid is
transparent (allowing the operator to see the work) and are largely unaffected by hard water.
What Are the Signs That a Fluid May No Longer Be Safe to Use?
There are many signs that a fluid has undergone changes and is no longer safe to use because of emerging health
hazards. If one or more of the following changes occur, the fluid should be evaluated to see if it is safe for
continued use or if it should be replaced.
- Low sump level. Check the sump level at the start of the shift. A low sump level
(30% below the full mark) shows metalworking fluid loss or water evaporation (increasing the concentration of
chemicals present in the MWF). Check the concentration! If too strong, add water to reach the proper concentration.
If the concentration is correct then fluid was lost due to dragout. You should add fluid at an appropriate
dilution, or if prediluted fluid is not available, water and concentrate can be added. All systems should be
monitored carefully and metalworking fluid additions should be made on a regular basis to maintain a constant
working concentration. The correct concentration should be verified when finished.
- Abnormal fluid appearance. Determine if the fluid color looks normal. When in good
condition many synthetic fluids are clear, semi-synthetics are often transparent to milky, and soluble oil usually
looks milky white with no free oil layer. If the fluid turns gray or black, then bacteria are often present. If the
fluid picks up a yellow or brown tint then tramp oil may be present. Dye fading may indicate that a fluid is aging.
- Foul smell (rancidity). When fluids smell bad, it usually means that there is
uncontrolled microbial growth. Although it may be possible to cover up the odor, it's best to address the cause
because microorganisms present in the fluid can be aerosolized into the air as part of the mist. Exposure to
microorganisms in the air may cause adverse health effects to exposed employees. If the fluid has a strong and
"locker room" odor, it likely has biological growth and should be treated with biocide and evaluated. If
need be, the fluid should then be discarded, the sump properly cleaned, and the fluid replaced.
- Floating matter on the fluid. If the fluid has floating chips, swarf, or mold
growth, this is not normal. Try to remove as much as possible with a skimmer or have it pumped off. The level of
dirt (total suspended solids) in the fluid is a measure of the efficiency of the filtering system. Periodic checks
and maintenance of the filtration system and oil skimmer are necessary to assure that they are functioning as
designed.
- Tramp oil floating on the surface. With water-diluted fluids, if the sump is
completely covered with oil and the machinist cannot swish the oil out of the way for more than 5 to 8 seconds
before the sump is covered again, there is too much tramp oil present. Skim or pump the surface oil to remove it.
Tramp oil is one of the main causes of dermatitis. These oils are not developed with repeated skin contact in mind,
and some components of these machine lubricants are highly irritating to the skin. Unemulsified (tramp) oils can be
a significant carrier of metallic fines, which can be deposited on the skin and cause mechanical irritation. These
fines, suspended by tramp oil, are a major cause of dermatitis.
- Excessive foam. A lot of foam may be caused by soft water with some products. The
fluid may also be too highly concentrated, or it may be contaminated by cleaners, or there may be an imbalance in
the fluid surfactants. Another possibility is that you could have an undersized system, excessive flow rates, or
the fluid may not be at rest long enough to allow air to escape. In addition, the level of cutting fluid in the
reservoir may be low, causing air to be drawn into the pump.
- Dirty machines or trenches. This could mean that the emulsion is becoming unstable,
the cleaners in the fluid have been depleted, the contaminants are being deposited from the fluid, there is filter
failure, or there is poor housekeeping.
- Employees have skin irritation. If employees have skin irritation, it could mean
that the fluid has one or more of the following properties: too high a concentration, high alkalinity, metal
contamination, an unstable emulsion, or contamination from workpiece coatings. Of course, skin irritation can also
be due to causes not directly related to metalworking fluids, such as changes in the weather, poor personal
hygiene, poor work habits, the use of harsh hand soaps, wearing contaminated clothing, or prolonged exposure to the
fluid.
- Employees have respiratory irritation. Exposure to MWF aerosols can lead to
complaints of irritation and tightness in the chest. Factors that can contribute to irritation could be the
improper delivery of fluid to the cutting zone; improper use of additives; a high coolant concentration; a heavy
concentration of machines in a small area; inadequate or poorly designed enclosures and mist collectors; loss of
microbial control; poor general ventilation of the shop; insufficient fresh air make-up rates; and high mist
concentrations (even in the absence of machining operations) may be present in areas where coolant flumes make
sharp turns.
Other problems that might be fluid-related and that should be investigated to see if the fluid
is failing and may no longer be safe to use include:
- rust or corrosion of the machine tool or of the part produced;
- staining of the metal machined or ma chine tool;
- tool failure due to the loss of performance additives;
- growth of fungi that block fluid flow;
- change of fluid viscosity (thinner or thicker);
- accumulation of water at the bottom of the oil sump drain, in straight oils;
- dirt and grit suspended in the fluid; and
- failure at the workpiece-tool interface (for example, burning of a ground part due to excessive heat build-up).
C. PRINCIPLES OF FLUID SELECTION
How Can You Obtain Safety and Health Information About a Fluid?
The fluid supplier will normally be your best source of information about a fluid. The supplier should be familiar
with the health effects associated with the fluid to be used and can provide you with up to date material safety data
sheets.
Some suppliers go a step further and provide additional assistance such as providing a chemical or fluid management
program, a customer support program, and a product stewardship program which includes health, safety, and
environmental support. These programs can be especially helpful since they usually include current and comprehensive
health and safety information required by OSHA's hazard communication standard, recommendations for effective fluid
management, and information on the proper use and disposal of their products.
The supplier may also be able to assure you that its products comply with applicable governmental safety and
environmental regulatory considerations; provide analysis of in-use fluids, including characterization of microbial
content; and provide air sampling to measure employee exposure.
What Are the Health, Safety, and Environmental Concerns That Should Be Considered When Selecting a
Fluid?
When selecting a fluid, consider the following:
- Toxicity of the fluid components
The MWFs selected should be as non-irritating and non-sensitizing as possible. Avoid
potentially carcinogenic components such as oils containing PAH's, chlorinated paraffins, alkanolamines, nitrites,
and formaldehyde release biocides. The base oil used in petroleum-containing MWFs should be evaluated for potential
carcinogenicity using ASTM Standard E 1687-98, Determining Carcinogenic Potential of Virgin Base
Oils in Metalworking Fluids. Acute toxicity characteristics of metalworking fluids can be evaluated using
information contained in ASTM Standard E 1302-00, Standard Guide for Acute Animal Toxicity
Testing of Water-Miscible Metalworking Fluids. To minimize the potential for nitrosamine formation,
nitrite-containing materials should not be added to MWFs containing ethanolamines (NIOSH 1998b).
If soluble oils or synthetic fluids are used, ASTM Standard E 1497-00, Standard Practice for
Safe Use of Water-Miscible Metalworking Fluids should be consulted for safe-use guidelines, including product
selection, storage, dispensing, and maintenance.
Most water-miscible metalworking fluids contain a chemical biocide that kills
various microscopic organisms and protects the fluids from microbial
degradation. To protect workers, make sure that the biocides used in your
fluids and as sump-side additives are registered by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for use as additives to metalworking fluids and are used in accordance with the conditions of registration. Biocide concentration should
not exceed that needed to meet fluid specifications, since an excessive amount may cause employees to experience skin
or respiratory irritation or sensitization.
- Flammability of the fluid.
This is an important consideration for straight oils. You should consult OSHA standards, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations, local codes, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), MSDS's,
and specific handbooks for detailed information about flammability hazards.
In order to protect your employees, as well as the public, from the potential safety and health
problems that can occur during disposal operations, you should follow the manufacturer's instructions for disposal as
well as relevant government regulations. Government regulations dictate where and how to dispose of metalworking
fluids. Disposal requirements vary by the type of fluid. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for instance,
regulates emissions and disposal of substances under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act. In addition, some states may have disposal requirements that are stricter than the
federal government requirements. Local publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) are likely to have their own discharge
regulations which significantly affect what can be disposed of through a POTW.
The National Center for Manufacturing Sciences' Metalworking Fluids Optimization Guide (NCMS
Guide) describes the important factors to consider when selecting metal removal fluids. The NCMS Guide also
includes an example of a MWF selection process to assist you in making an appropriate selection.
D. REQUIRED AND RECOMMENDED EXPOSURE LIMITS
Currently two OSHA air contaminant permissible exposure limits apply to MWFs. They are 5 mg/m3 for an
8-hour time weighted average (TWA) for mineral oil mist, and 15 mg/m3 (8-hour TWA) for Particulates Not
Otherwise Classified (PNOC) [applicable to all other metalworking fluids], 29 CFR 1910.1000. No other requirements
exist.
In addition, there are other recommended exposure limits. In 1998, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH) published a criteria document which recommended an exposure limit (REL) for MWF aerosols of 0.4 mg/m3
for thoracic particulate mass as a time-weighted average (TWA) concentration for up to 10 hours per day during a
40-hour work week. Because of the limited availability of thoracic samplers, measurement of total particulate mass is
an acceptable substitute. The 0.4 mg/m3 concentration of thoracic particulate mass approximately
corresponds to 0.5 mg/m3 for total particulate mass. The NIOSH REL is intended to prevent or greatly
reduce respiratory disorders causally associated with MWF exposure. It is NIOSH's belief, that in most metal removal
operations, it is technologically feasible to limit MWF aerosol exposures to 0.4 mg/m3 or less (NIOSH
1998b).
The American Conference of Governmental Hygienists (ACGIH) threshold limit value (TLV) for mineral oils is 5 mg/m3
for an 8-hour TWA, and 10 mg/m3 for a 15-minute short-term exposure limit (STEL).
In 1999, the OSHA Metalworking Fluids Standards Advisory Committee also recommended a new 8-hour time-weighted
average permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 0.4 mg/m3 thoracic particulate (0.5 mg/m3 total
particulate). The committee based the recommended PEL on studies of asthma and diminished lung function.
E. HEALTH EFFECTS
General
Metalworking fluids (MWFs) can cause adverse health effects through skin contact with contaminated materials, spray,
or mist and through inhalation from breathing MWF mist or aerosol.
Skin and airborne exposures to MWFs have been implicated in health problems including irritation of the skin, lungs,
eyes, nose and throat. Conditions such as dermatitis, acne, asthma, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, irritation of the
upper respiratory tract, and a variety of cancers have been associated with exposure to MWFs (NIOSH 1998a). The
severity of health problems is dependent on a variety of factors such as the kind of fluid, the degree and type of
contamination, and the level and duration of the exposure.
Skin Disorders
Skin contact occurs when the worker dips his/her hands into the fluid or handles parts, tools, and equipment covered
with fluid without the use of personal protective equipment, such as gloves and aprons. Skin contact may also result
from fluid splashing onto the employee from the machine if guarding is absent or inadequate.
Two types of skin disease associated with MWF exposure are contact dermatitis and acne.
Contact dermatitis is the most commonly reported skin disease associated with MWFs. People with contact dermatitis
have itchy skin and a rash, often with cracks, redness, blisters, or raised bumps. The two kinds of contact
dermatitis are irritant contact dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis. In irritant contact dermatitis the rash
is confined to the area in contact with the irritating substance. In allergic contact dermatitis the rash can spread
beyond the area directly in contact with the irritant. Fourteen to 67 percent of workers exposed to MWFs are at risk
for developing dermatitis (NIOSH 1998a). This high rate of dermatitis indicates susceptibility of many employees to
the irritating or sensitizing nature of MWFs and their contaminants or additives. Once the skin is compromised, very
small exposures, which previously did not have any effect, can cause an episode of dermatitis. It is important to try
to prevent skin disease from developing and to treat it early because untreated dermatitis can lead to more serious
complications (NIOSH 1998a).
In metalworking operations contact dermatitis may be caused by any of the following factors: clothing contaminated
with MWF; poor personal hygiene (e.g., allowing MWF to remain in contact with skin by not washing after exposure);
poor housekeeping practices; higher than recommended metalworking fluid concentrations; high alkalinity of in-use
fluid which can remove natural skin oils; metal processing aids such as degreasers, cleaners, or rust inhibitors;
metal shavings contained in the fluid which may abrade the skin; prolonged contact with the MWF; tramp oils (e.g.,
hydraulic fluids, gear or spindle oils, way lubes, grease); hand washing with abrasive soaps or with water that is
excessively hot or cold; seasonal conditions (e.g., winter dryness); other contaminants (e.g., water in an oil based
system).
People working with water based, synthetic, and semi synthetic MWFs are most at risk for developing contact
dermatitis.
Straight oils are often associated with acne-like disorders characterized by pimples in areas of contact with the
MWFs. Red bumps with yellow pustules may develop on the face, forearms, thighs, legs, and other body parts contacting
oil-soaked clothing.
Respiratory Diseases
Inhalation of MWF mist or aerosol may cause irritation of the lungs, throat, and nose. In general, respiratory
irritation involves some type of chemical interaction between the MWF and the human respiratory system. Irritation
may affect one or more the following areas: nose, throat (pharynx, larynx), the various conducting airways or tubes
of the lungs (trachea, bronchi, bronchioles), and the lung air sacks (alveoli) where the air passes from the lungs
into the body. Exposure to MWF mist or aerosol may also aggravate the effects of existing lung disease.
Some of the symptoms reported include sore throat, red, watery, itchy eyes, runny nose, nosebleeds, cough, wheezing,
increased phlegm production, shortness of breath, and other cold like symptoms. These symptoms may indicate a variety
of respiratory conditions, including acute airway irritation, asthma (reversible airway obstruction), chronic
bronchitis, chronically impaired lung function, and hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP). When symptoms of respiratory
irritation occur, in many cases it is unclear whether the disease was caused by specific fluid components,
contamination of the in-use fluid, products of microbial growth or degradation, or a combination of factors.
Exposure to MWFs has been associated with asthma. In asthma, airways of the lung become inflamed, causing a reduction
of the flow of air into and out of the lungs. During an asthmatic attack, the airways become swollen, go into spasms
and fill with mucous, reducing airflow and producing shortness of breath and a wheezing sound. A variety of
components, additives, and contaminants of MWFs can induce new-onset asthma, aggravate pre-existing asthma, and
irritate the airways of non-asthmatic employees.
Chronic bronchitis is a condition involving inflammation of the main airways of the lungs that occurs over a long
period of time. Chronic bronchitis is characterized by a chronic cough and by coughing up phlegm. The phlegm can
interfere with air passage into and out of the lungs. This condition may also cause accelerated decline in lung
function, which can ultimately result in heart and lung function damage.
Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is a serious lung disease. Recent outbreaks of HP have been associated with
exposure to aerosols of synthetic, semi synthetic, and soluble oil MWFs. In particular, contaminants and additives in
MWFs have been associated with outbreaks of HP (NIOSH 1998a). In the short term, HP is characterized by coughing,
shortness of breath, and flu-like symptoms (fevers, chills, muscle aches, and fatigue). The chronic phase (following
repeated exposures) is characterized by lung scarring associated with permanent lung disease.
Other factors, such as smoking, increase the possibility of respiratory diseases. Cigarette smoke may worsen the
respiratory effects of MWF aerosols for all employees.
Cancer
A number of studies have found an association between working with MWF and a variety of
cancers, including cancer of the rectum, pancreas, larynx, skin, scrotum, and bladder (NIOSH 1998a). Studies of MWF
and cancer have relied on the health experiences of workers exposed decades earlier. This is because the effects of
cancers associated with MWF may not become evident until many years after the exposure. Airborne concentrations of
MWF were known to be much higher in the 1970s - 80s than those today. The composition of MWFs has also changed
dramatically over the years. The fluids in use prior to 1985 may have contained nitrite, mildly refined petroleum
oils, and other chemicals that were removed after 1985 for health concerns. Based on the substantial changes that
have been made in the metalworking industry over the last decades, the cancer risks have likely been reduced, but
there is not enough data to prove this.
F. ENGINEERING AND WORK PRACTICE CONTROLS
How Can Occupational Exposures Be Controlled?
Occupational exposures can be controlled by the application of a number of well-known principles including
engineering and work practice controls, administrative controls, and use of personal protective equipment. These
principles may be applied at or near the hazard source, to the general workplace environment, or at the point of
occupational exposure to individuals. Engineering and work practice controls, applied at the source of the hazard,
are generally the preferred and most effective means of control. In machine shops where workers are at risk of
exposure to metalworking fluids, exposure may be controlled by some or all of the following: (1) proper design and
operation of the MWF delivery system; (2) isolation; (3) effective local exhaust ventilation (see Appendices 3 and
4); (4) effective general or dilution ventilation; (5) good work practices on the part of the machinists, including
the proper use of controls; and (6) proper maintenance of equipment;
What Design Considerations and Operational Procedures Can Be Used to Control Misting?
Many factors influence the generation of MWF mists, which can be minimized through the proper design and operation of
the MWF delivery system (Figure 1). ANSI Technical Report B11 TR 2-1997 (Mist Control
Considerations for the Design, Installation and Use of Machine Tools Using Metalworking Fluids) [ANSI 1997]
provides guidelines for minimizing mist and vapor generation. Another useful document is ASTM E 1972-98, Standard
Practice for Minimizing Effects of Aerosols in the Wet Metal Removal Environment.
Fine mists are produced when MWF streams break up during use. This occurs when the fluid is applied and interacts
with the spinning tools or parts, and when fluid is moved at high velocity in open conduits. Small mist droplets are
easily suspended in air and can escape containment or collection.
The MWF delivery system should be designed to generate a minimum amount of fluid mist. Factors that can reduce
misting include low-pressure delivery of MWF, matching the fluid to the application, using MWF formulations with low
oil concentrations, using mist suppressants, avoiding contamination with tramp oils, minimizing the MWF flow rate,
covering fluid reservoirs and return systems where possible, maintaining control of MWF chemistry, and proper machine
maintenance.
An adequate, low-pressure flow of MWF delivered directly to the cutting zone, where it floods and cools the workpiece
and cutting tool, is usually most effective in reducing misting. A high-pressure delivery of MWF, on the other hand,
may create mists, may not supply adequate cooling or lubrication, and may not have sufficient flow to properly remove
swarf or chips from the cutting area.
The use of mist suppressants should also be considered. Mist suppressants work at the source, enlarging the size of
the mist droplets so that they don't stay suspended in air as long. The use of mist suppressants may also reduce
fluid loss and vapor generation.
 |
| Figure 1. Metalworking Fluid Delivery System Schematic.
(Reproduced by permission of American National Standards Institute, New York, New York.) |
Another basic step that can be taken to reduce employee exposure to mist is to interrupt or
reduce the flow of MWF when practical. As an example, the flow of MWF should be interrupted when machining is not
occurring. This not only reduces mechanically generated mist, it also reduces degradation of the MWF and oxidation of
the biocides. Quiet time also allows tramp oil to float and solids to settle so that they can be removed more easily.
An intermittent flow (or change in pressure) of the MWF (e.g., 30 seconds on, then 2 minutes off) may often be more
effective at moving chips than a continuous flow. Extended periods of fluid inactivity (more than 8-10 hours) should
be avoided as this promotes the growth of anaerobic bacteria in those fluids that are heavily contaminated and/or do
not contain the correct concentration of the right biocide.
Proper equipment maintenance is also important. Leaking seal packing, leaking mechanical seals, and leaking ports in
delivery pumps allow air into the metalworking fluid, increasing the amount of mist produced. Filtration and delivery
systems that are properly maintained also reduce misting and minimize splashing.
Metalworking fluids should not be allowed to flow over the unprotected hands of employees loading or unloading parts.
Use of compressed air blow-offs to dry parts of excess fluid should be avoided, unless adequate ventilation controls
are provided to capture the airborne mist created by the compressed air.
How Can Isolation Be Used to Control Exposures?
Isolation of the employee through mechanical parts handling equipment and machine enclosures can minimize skin and
inhalation exposure. Simple splash guarding may suffice for low production machines, while high production machines
generally require complete enclosure with ventilation. In addition, transfer machines should be located away from
other operations and workers should be protected with isolation booths or air curtain-exhaust ventilation (NIOSH
1998b).
Should an Exhaust Ventilation System Be Installed to Control Mist?
One way to reduce employee exposure to MWF aerosols is to install an exhaust ventilation system to prevent the
accumulation or recirculation of airborne contaminants in the workplace. A local exhaust ventilation system is the
primary means for controlling employee exposure to air contaminants. This exhaust system is termed "local"
because the source of exhaust or suction is located adjacent to the source of contamination. If properly designed,
such an arrangement removes a contaminant directly from its source before it has an opportunity to escape into the
workplace environment where it could be inhaled by an employee. Capturing and removing a contaminant at its source is
the principle objective of local exhaust ventilation.
You are much more likely to successfully ventilate operations that produce MWF aerosols if the machine tool and
machining operations are enclosed as much as possible. Where an exhaust hood (i.e., enclosing hood) is used that
completely or partially encloses the process or contaminant generation point, it essentially surrounds the
contaminant source, thereby isolating the process from the employee and the workplace. Thus, when the MWF aerosol is
emitted from the machining operation, it is already either totally or at least partially inside the hood. The aerosol
is contained inside the enclosure by an inward flow of air through the hood opening(s) and is prevented from escaping
into the workplace air.
Also effective is locating an exhaust hood (i.e., an exterior hood) in close proximity to an emission source without
enclosing it. Then, the movement of air flowing into the hood captures contaminants at their source and induces the
contaminants to flow into the hood along with the moving air. Since this hood does not completely or partially
enclose the process, the MWF aerosol is released outside rather than inside the physical confines of the hood. The
capture velocity for this type of hood should be designed to overcome the velocity with which the generated aerosol
is released from the process, and the motion of the air (in front of the hood) into which the aerosol is released.
Local exhaust ventilation of machining operations is not the only strategy for reducing employee exposures to
aerosols, vapors, mists, and dust. General or dilution ventilation systems rely on the supply and exhaust of air with
respect to an area, room, or building rather than on a localized exhaust source to control airborne contaminant
concentrations.
Dilution ventilation is different from local exhaust ventilation because, instead of capturing emissions at their
source and removing them from the air, dilution ventilation allows the contaminant to be emitted into the general
workplace air and then dilutes the concentration of the contaminant by circulating large quantities of air into and
out of the work area(s). Generally speaking, local exhaust ventilation is more effective than dilution ventilation in
achieving contaminant control and employee protection.
What Are the Types of Exhaust Hoods?
Many types of exhaust hoods are available. Some designs are more effective than others. ANSI Technical Report B11 TR
2-1997 contains guidelines for exhaust ventilation of machining and grinding operations and recommends only enclosure
type exhaust hoods for MWF mist control. Enclosures are classified by ANSI according to the extent of enclosure:
close capture (partial enclosure at the point of operation), total enclosure (enclosure of the entire machine), or
tunnel enclosure (continuous enclosure over several machines).
Types of exhaust hoods:
- Close capture enclosure;
- Total enclosure;
- Tunnel enclosure;
- Push-pull ventilation;
- Side-draft hood;
- Canopy hood; and
- Down-draft hood.
A brief description of the kinds of exhaust hoods and their pros and cons follow:
A close capture enclosure (Figure 2) is a
contaminant-capturing hood that is mounted very close to the point of mist generation. By nature, it has a high
entrainment velocity and lower air volume requirements. The problem with this device, though, is there may be
significant loss of the MWF into the exhaust system, requiring excessive make-up fluid to be added.
Total or complete enclosure (Figures 3 and 4) is defined as a box or housing around the
machine or process. The housing is not intended to be airtight. The openings are normally limited to the minimum
required to allow for part entry/egress, maintenance, or utility access. The enclosure is provided with exhaust
ventilation with the replacement air entering through the openings designed into the enclosure. Total enclosures will
have low air volume requirements.
A tunnel enclosure encompasses two or more connected workstations or machining processes.
Push-pull ventilation consists of a jet of air blown across the process emission source
(i.e., work piece/cutting tool) toward an exhaust hood. The push-pull hood is generally used on open surface tanks
and is not recommended for effective capture of contaminants generated by machine tools. Generally, it is not used
unless close capture or total enclosure is not possible.
The side-draft hood (capture exhaust hood) is located behind or to the side of the worker
and tends to pull the contaminants away from the breathing zone of the operator. Large volumes of air are usually
required for this type of hood design.
The canopy hood (receiving hood) is located above the machine operator's breathing zone.
Large volumes of air are required for this type of hood design. In addition, if the hood is not properly designed,
contaminated air can pass through the employee's breathing zone.
The downdraft hood is a device located in the floor or at the base of the machine. It
pulls contaminants vertically down below the breathing zone of the operator. It requires large volumes of exhaust
air.
Why Are Machine Tool Enclosures Necessary?
Studies show that aerosol mists may have an adverse effect on exposed workers. That's why mist generating operations
should be enclosed and ventilated. Enclosures and appropriate exhaust ventilation minimize the release of MWF
aerosols into the workplace. When you put in place well-designed enclosures and splashguards you prevent metalworking
fluids from spilling on the ground and improve the general cleanliness of the operation. Consequently, existing
enclosures and splashguards should be maintained. Missing equipment and enclosures should be restored. If guarding
has been removed or the enclosure not maintained, MWF may escape through openings in the enclosure.
 |
| Figure 2. Close capture enclosure of a surface grinder.
("From American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists: Industrial Ventilation
(ACGIH): A Manual of Recommended Practice, 23 rd Ed. Copyright 1998.
Cincinati, OH. Reprinted with permission.") |
 |
| Figure 3. Total enclosure (at point of operation) of a
lathe. ("From American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists: Industrial
Ventilation (ACGIH): A Manual of Recommended Practice, 23rd Ed.
Copyright 1998. Cincinnati, OH. Reprinted with permission.") |
 |
| Figure 4. Total enclosure of a milling machine.
("From American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists: Industrial Ventilation
(ACGIH): A Manual of Recommended Practice, 23rd Ed. Copyright 1998.
Cincinnati, OH. Reprinted with permission.") |
What If Existing Equipment Lacks an Enclosure?
Retrofitting existing equipment should be considered if other control measures (previously mentioned) have been tried
and were unsuccessful in reducing airborne mist concentrations to acceptable levels. ANSI Technical Report B11 TR
2-1997 should be used as a guide. However, unless exhaust hood retrofits are properly designed and constructed,
retrofits may not effectively capture metalworking fluid aerosols. With some equipment, retrofitting may not be
possible or even economically feasible (ORC 1999), in which case modifying MWF handling to reduce or eliminate mist
generation is crucial. When ever possible, ventilated enclosures should be phased in with new machinery or machinery
rebuilds.
Is it Necessary to Provide Make-Up Air?
Exhaust ventilation systems (whether they are local or dilution) require the replacement of exhausted air to ensure
that they operate properly. Replacement air, also called make-up air, can be supplied naturally by atmospheric
pressure through open doors, windows, wall louvers, and adjacent spaces as well as through cracks in walls and
windows, and beneath doors; or by mechanical means such as a dedicated replacement air system.
Ideally, the make-up air should be provided, controlled, and conditioned by a mechanical system rather than relying
on random infiltration. Mechanical air handling systems, which can range from simple to complex, all distribute air
in a manner designed to meet the ventilation, temperature, humidity, and air quality requirements established by the
user. Individual units may be installed in the space they serve, or central units can be installed to serve multiple
areas.
A good make-up air system would have the following characteristics:
- Adequate size to replace the amount of air exhausted from the building.
- Supply registers positioned to avoid disruption of emission and exposure controls and to aid dilution efforts.
The air supply and exhaust outlet should be so located that all the air employed in the ventilation passes through
the zone of contamination.
- Make-up air should be heated in cold weather and should be designed to provide some cooling in the summer in hot
process areas.
- Make-up air should be introduced into the "living zone" of the plant, generally 8-10 feet (2.4 to 3.0
meters) from the floor. This gives the workers the benefit of breathing fresh air and, if the air is tempered
(heated or cooled), maximizes the comfort provided by the make-up air.
- Make-up air inlets outside the building located so that no contaminated air from nearby exhaust stacks,
chimneys, or parking lots is drawn into the make-up air system.
What Factors Need to Be Considered When Exhaust Air is Recirculated?
Air exhausted from machine tool enclosures and hoods is often cleaned and recirculated in the workplace (NIOSH
1998a). In a recirculation system, exhaust air that is removed from the process is cleaned and recycled back to the
facility (the objective of recirculation of exhaust air is to return cleaned air to the facility in order to reduce
the amount of energy required to heat or cool make-up air). Criteria to ensure the safe recirculation of exhaust air
are discussed in, The Recirculation of Industrial Exhaust Air
(NIOSH 1978), and general guidelines for recirculating exhaust air are presented in Industrial
Ventilation: A Manual of Recommended Practice (ACGIH 1998).
Though the benefits obtained by recirculating exhaust air can be great, the method is not a simple one, and it is not
without problems. The air quality of the recirculated air should be such that the employee is not exposed to a
potential health hazard. Before returning this air to the workplace, all contaminants should be removed. The
ventilation system should be maintained and cleaned so that it does not itself become a source of air contamination.
The efficiency of any air cleaner in a recirculation system should be such that respirable particles or harmful gases
and vapors are removed before the air re-enters the workroom. Commercially available mist collectors are typically
multi-stage and should use a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter as a final stage. Air cleaners without a
HEPA filter typically spew small particles out into the workplace.
In addition, air monitoring equipment should be installed and air sampling should occur on a real-time basis to
ensure that the recirculated air is clean, since to determine that a harmful exposure has occurred after the fact
does not provide adequate protection to the employee. Other adequate safety precautions should also be considered.
These may include multiple air cleaning systems installed in series or automatic sensing devices to warn of air
cleaner failure along with a means of diverting the recirculated air outdoors if the air cleaner fails. If unfiltered
exhaust air is vented outside the work environment, local air pollution authorities should be contacted regarding the
relevant regulations.
What Is the Function of a Mist Collector and How Should It Be Maintained?
A mist collector is an air cleaning device used for removing MWF aerosol from an exhaust
airstream before discharge into the ambient air. Guidance for design and maintenance is contained in ANSI Technical
Report B11 TR 2-1997. Factors which should be considered in the design and selection of a mist collector are
collector efficiency, filter life, collector maintenance, and pressure drop.
Many commercial mist collection systems are available. In general, commercial collectors have multiple stages
utilized in series. The purpose of the first stage(s) in a multi-stage collector is to remove swarf and to reduce the
mist loading to the final stage, which is typically a 95% DOP filter or HEPA (high efficiency particulate air)
filter. Often a three-stage collector, which includes a 95% DOP or HEPA filter is used for MWF operations:
- The first-stage is a prefilter, typically a metal-mesh. It removes swarf and reduces the mist loading on the
second-stage and third (final) stage filters.
- The second-stage is more efficient than the first, and may use pocket or cartridge filters.
- The final-stage, using either a 95% DOP or HEPA filter, provides excellent efficiency when new, but are
expensive to replace and have lifetimes determined by their cumulative mist load. Thus, selection of effective
first and second stages, upstream of the final stage, is crucial (AAMA 1996).
Keep in mind that most filters work best when they are new, but they may lose their
effectiveness quickly when they become loaded with liquid. For proper performance, it is crucial to inspect air
cleaner filters and to clean them regularly or replace them, as appropriate. A poorly maintained mist collector can
increase the mist loading in the discharged air. The aerosol captured by the mist collector can become rancid if left
in the collector. Ideally, the collected aerosol should be removed continuously or at the end of each workday or
shift. Collected aerosol should not be allowed to drain back into the fluid system. Microbial contamination will
seriously degrade fluid life and can pose a serious health problem.
Where Can the Exhaust Air of the Mist Collector Be Discharged?
The discharged exhaust air of the mist collector can be directed back into the shop or it can be directed outdoors
through the roof or wall of the building (ORC 1999). A disadvantage of discharging the cleaned air back into the shop
is that if the mist collector is operating improperly, mist will go back into the workplace. In addition, vapors or
bioaerosols that may contribute to respiratory problems and to odor problems are not removed by the filters.
Discharging the mist collector exhaust from the building eliminates the possibility of increasing the indoor mist
level and gets rid of the moisture and vapors in the building. However, it can increase the need for building supply
air. You may also need to get a permit from EPA, State or local authorities for venting the process air from the
building.
In cases where exhaust air is discharged into the shop:
- Make sure you adequately filter the contaminants, both chemical and microbial, before you recirculate the air;
- Use air pollution equipment that is capable of meeting rigorous collection standards and maintaining efficiency
over time; and
- Make sure you monitor the recirculated air as often as necessary to ensure that the contaminant levels do not
exceed established limits.
What Work Practice Controls Can Be Implemented to Reduce Employee Exposures?
Work practices, as distinct from engineering controls, involve the way in which a task is performed. OSHA has found
that appropriate work practices lower employee exposures to hazardous substances and reduce safety hazards. Some
fundamental and easily implemented work practices are: (1) use of appropriate personal hygiene practices, (2) use of
barrier and moisturizing creams, (3) good housekeeping, (4) periodic inspection and maintenance of process and
control equipment, (5) use of proper procedures to perform a task, and (6) provision of supervision to ensure that
proper procedures are followed.
Personal Hygiene
Good personal hygiene is an important control measure in preventing occupational skin disorders. Employees should be
encouraged to maintain good personal hygiene by cleaning MWF-contaminated skin periodically (especially before breaks
and meals) with gentle soaps, clean water, and clean towels; and to minimize personal contact with MWF, metal debris,
and other potentially harmful chemicals in the workplace. Employees should not place their unprotected hands and arms
repeatedly into MWFs. Unwashed skin covered with unwashed and unchanged clothes prolongs contact with MWFs and other
chemicals. In addition, rapid evaporation of water from the fabric leaves behind MWF at much higher than intended
concentrations, which is a major cause of dermatitis.
Employees should change work clothing that becomes soaked with metalworking fluids and contaminants during the work
shift, and should change from contaminated work clothes into street clothes before leaving work. Employees should
wear clean work clothing at each shift.
Easy access to hand washing facilities must be provided if employees are to minimize contact with harmful chemical
agents. Inconveniently located washing facilities invite undesirable practices such as washing at workstations with
solvents, mineral oils, or industrial detergents, none of which is appropriate or intended for skin cleansing.
Excessive skin cleansing with harsh agents can produce an irritant contact dermatitis or aggravate preexisting
dermatitis.
In addition, employees should keep personal items such as food, drink, cosmetics, and tobacco separate from the work
environment to prevent any unnecessary additional exposure to MWFs.
Barrier and Moisturizing Creams
Barrier creams may be useful for some employees (NIOSH 1998a). They may be applied to exposed skin areas to prevent
contact with harmful agents. There are two main types of barrier creams: water-repellant and solvent-repellant. The
primary application of water-repellant creams is in machine shop operations, where gloves cannot always be worn
safely, and where water-based cutting fluids are used (SACMA 1990).
The use of good quality barrier creams on exposed skin areas can offer protection against the development of
dermatitis if used consistently and re-applied as necessary throughout the shift. The use of moisturizing creams may
also be protective. Although barrier creams and moisturizing creams protect the skin, they must be viewed as
supplements only. They do not replace good personal hygiene or the use of chemical-protective gloves.
Moisturizing creams replenish the moisture in the hands; barrier creams prevent moisture in the hands from escaping
and keep mild irritants from penetrating to the skin. Creams should be selected based on the characteristics of the
fluids being used. Creams must also be used with care, as some operations may be contaminated by them. Barrier creams
should be applied only to healthy skin and should not be used if the employee has dermatitis.
Housekeeping
Good housekeeping is an important control measure to prevent operator contact with MWFs and other potential hazards,
and to prevent contamination of the MWFs by dirt and debris. Cleaning of floors, equipment, and the general work
environment should be done by properly trained and equipped personnel working on a planned schedule. People assigned
to cleaning should be supplied with proper equipment, materials, and protective clothing, and be trained in safe
procedures.
On a day-to-day basis, spills should be cleaned up immediately. Wastes (including floor wash water) should not be
dumped or swept into MWF sumps or coolant return trenches. Solvent-soaked rags should be deposited in airtight metal
receptacles. All machines should be cleaned and have the MWF changed periodically.
Periodic Inspection and Maintenance
Periodic inspection and maintenance of process equipment (e.g., fluid filtration and delivery systems) and control
equipment, such as ventilation systems, is another important work practice control. Equipment that is in disrepair
will not perform as intended. The failure of the ventilation system, for example, can result in elevated exposures of
MWF to machine workers. Maintenance of the fluid chemistry as well as properly maintained filtration and delivery
systems provide cleaner MWFs, reduce mist, and minimize splashing and emissions.
Regular inspections can detect abnormal conditions so that timely maintenance can be performed. If process and
control equipment is routinely inspected, maintained, and repaired, or is replaced before failure occurs, there is
less chance that hazardous employee exposures will occur.
Use of Proper Procedures
One important element of this program is training employees to follow the proper work practices and operational
procedures for their jobs. Employees must know the proper way to perform job tasks to minimize their exposure to MWF
and other hazardous chemicals. For example, machine operators should thoroughly understand the proper addition and
dilution of fluids and components. How to recognize if a ventilation system is not working properly is important.
Procedures for getting something fixed should be known by machine operators. Employees can be informed of proper
operating procedures through fact sheets, discussions at safety meetings, and other educational means.
Supervision
Good supervision is another important work practice. It provides needed support for ensuring that proper work
practices are followed by employees. By stressing proper work procedures and ensuring that employees wear the
necessary protective clothing and equipment, a supervisor can do much to minimize unnecessary employee exposure to
safety hazards and airborne contaminants.
G. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT
When Should Employees Use Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)?
Engineering controls, work practice controls, and a MWF management program are the preferred methods for reducing
employee exposure to metalworking fluid. However, in some situations, personal protective clothing and/or respirators
should be used to prevent dermal contact with the MWFs or unhealthy airborne exposures.
What OSHA Standards Govern the Use of Personal Protective Equipment?
OSHA's Personal Protective Equipment Standard (29 CFR 1910.132) requires employers to evaluate the need for personal
protective equipment in their workplaces, to provide the proper equipment, and ensure it is properly used and
maintained (even when it is employee owned). The standard has an employee training provision that requires that each
affected employee demonstrate an understanding of the training before being allowed to use PPE.
Other standards, 29 CFR 1910.133 through 1910.138, clarify and expand the requirements for specific areas such as
hand protection, eye and face protection, and protective footwear. These standards are intended to make sure that the
employee is protected and that PPE doesn't create any new hazards of itself.
What Are Some of the Specific Requirements of the Personal Protective Equipment Standard (29 CFR
1910.132)?
The standard requires that the employer conduct a workplace review for hazards that require PPE to be used. This can
be done by surveying each work task, looking for potential injury and illness sources, and then organizing and
analyzing the resulting data. An assessment may then be made of the potential for injuries and illnesses, the type
and level of risk, and the seriousness of the hazard. Material safety data sheets, operating manuals for machines,
and any warnings of the companies that made the machines, tools, and chemicals used in the shop should all be
considered in the final assessment. From this survey, PPE can be selected.
Training is necessary for each employee who is required to use PPE. Each employee must be trained to know when PPE is
necessary; what PPE is necessary; how to properly put on, take off, adjust, and wear it; the limitations of the PPE;
and the proper care, maintenance, useful life, and disposal of the PPE. For example, for chemical splash goggles the
employer should point out to the employees what the goggles protect against, how to wear them, how to adjust them,
what they won't protect against (UV radiation, welding arcs, intense light, etc.), how to clean and store them
safely, and finally how to know when its time to get a new pair. This can be done easily and effectively with short
commercially produced training videos. Some makers of equipment have inexpensive (or even free) videos that are
adequate.
In addition, each affected employee must demonstrate an understanding of the training, and be able to use PPE
properly, before being allowed to do work requiring the use of PPE. If the employer has reason to believe that an
employee does not have the understanding and skill required to safely use the assigned PPE, then the employer must
retrain that employee. It may also be necessary for the employer to re-evaluate the training program.
How Can the Employer Tell If MWF Hazards Warrant Employees Wearing Personal
Protective Equipment?
The employer should conduct a survey to identify all potential safety and health hazards from machining operations
using MWF. They may include:
- Chemical exposure - splash or spray from MWFs, cleaning compounds such as parts cleaning liquids, etc.;
- Projectiles - flying metal chips;
- Punctures - sharp edged parts;
- High temperatures - hot parts that could result in burns;
- Falling objects - heavy parts that pose a risk to feet if dropped; and
- Machine noise.
What Type of Personal Protective Equipment Should Be Worn?
Protective equipment for employees exposed to metalworking fluids should protect wearers from chemicals as well as
punctures, cuts and abrasions. Employees should wear gloves, protective sleeves, aprons, trousers, and caps as needed
and appropriate to protect their skin from contact with MWFs. Eye protection such as goggles and face shields should
be worn to guard against chemical splash when handling the neat chemicals, and safety glasses with side shields can
be worn for most other machining operations to prevent eye contact with MWFs.
Since excellent manual dexterity is often required of machine operators, some personal protective equipment, such as
gloves, may not be appropriate for some operations and may even be a serious safety hazard from possible entanglement
in moving tools or workpiece parts. Consequently, if gloves are required, special attention should be given to
guarding the equipment. In any event, the employer should specify the operations for which gloves are permitted.
Gloves and other protective equipment, where used to prevent dermatitis, must be chemical-resistant or impervious to
the chemicals contacted.
Eye and face protection must also be worn to protect employees from hazards of flying particles. Such protection may
be required for employees working at or near operating metalworking processes or transferring as-received MWFs and
other materials, such as additives, to the machine tool or fluid sump or reservoir. Foot protection is needed against
hazards such as falling objects, and objects that may penetrate the feet. When floors of the work area are oily,
safety shoes with slip-resistant soles should be provided.
When Should Respirators Be Worn?
Before requiring the use of respiratory protection, the employer must institute effective engineering controls (such
as machine enclosures and/or local exhaust ventilation), work practice controls, and/or administrative controls, as
necessary, to reduce employee exposure to at or below the OSHA PELs of 5 mg/m3 for mineral oil mist and 15
mg/m3 for Particulates Not Otherwise Classified (PNOC) (applicable to all other metalworking fluids),
expressed as 8-hour time-weighted averages. If these controls fail to reduce and maintain employee exposures, to or
below the applicable PEL, then the employer must provide respiratory protection.
When respirators are required, a comprehensive respiratory protection program as outlined in the OSHA respiratory
protection standard (29 CFR 1910.134) must be established. Important elements of the OSHA respiratory protection
standard include:
- Procedures for selecting respirators;
- Medical evaluation of employees required to use respirators;
- Fit testing procedures for tight-fitting respirators; and
- Procedures and schedules for cleaning, disinfecting, storing, inspecting, repairing and otherwise maintaining
respirators;
- Training employees in the respiratory hazards to which they are potentially exposed;
- Training employees in the proper use of respirators, including putting on and removing them, any limitations on
their use, and maintenance procedures; and
- Procedures for regularly evaluating the effectiveness of the program.
When employees voluntarily use (not required, but provided by the employer or the employee and
worn voluntarily by the employee) only "filtering facepieces" (formerly referred to as "dust
masks" or "single use respirators"), the employer is not required to
implement a respiratory protection program. Instead, employees must be provided annually basic information on
respirators, contained in Appendix D of the standard. Furthermore, the employer needs to ensure that these
respirators are not dirty or contaminated, and that their use does not interfere with the employee's ability to work
safely.
When respirators other than filtering facepieces are being voluntarily worn by employees, the employer must:
- Ensure that respiratory use will not in itself create a hazard;
- Establish a limited written program:
- Medically evaluate employees;
- Ensure proper cleaning, maintenance, and storage of respirators.
Once the program is in place, make sure you evaluate it regularly. If you don't have a
well-thought out, complete respiratory protection program, your employees may not be properly protected.
Respirator Selection
Respirators must be selected by correctly matching the respirator with the hazard, the degree of the hazard (airborne
concentrations in the employee's breathing zone), and the user. Respirators should be selected by the person who is
in charge of the program and knowledgeable about the workplace and the limitations associated with each type of
respirator.
Particulate respirator filters are classified into three filter series, depending on the resistance of the filters to
oil:
- N (Not resistant to oil)
- R (Resistant to oil)
- P (oil Proof)
These categories apply only to non-powered, air purifying, particulate-filter respirators. R-
or P-series filters should be selected if there are oil (e.g., metalworking fluids, lubricants) or non-oil aerosols
in the workplace. N-series filters should be used only for non-oil (i.e., solid and water-based) aerosols. According
to NIOSH, the R-series should be used only for a single shift (or 8 hours of continuous or intermittent use) when oil
is present. P-series filters can be worn for longer than eight hours. As with all filters, they should be replaced
whenever they are damaged, soiled or causing noticeably increased breathing resistance (e.g., causing discomfort to
the wearer).
The NIOSH recommended respiratory protection for employees exposed to metalworking fluid aerosol appears in Appendix
5 (NIOSH 1998a). The NIOSH REL is directed at reducing exposure to MWF aerosols - not to vapors
from MWFs and its aerosols. Guidance on the selection of appropriate respirator filters is presented in the NIOSH
Guide to the Selection and Use of Particulate Respirators Certified Under 42 CFR 84 (NIOSH 1996).
H. ESTABLISHING A METALWORKING FLUID MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Why Is Establishing a Metalworking Fluid Management Program Important?
There are many factors that affect the generation of MWF mist, all interacting with each other, so an approach that
takes the entire system into account will be the most effective. Addressing only one or a few of the issues will
probably be ineffective, while dealing with all the issues in a systematic way will be beneficial.
MWF systems are complex, biologically active, and constantly changing in response to conditions of use. However, MWF
systems can be maintained in a stable condition over relatively long periods of time. For that to happen, there
should be a well thought-out and consistently enforced fluid management plan. The plan should identify key elements
of the program and the individual(s) responsible for their implementation.
What Elements Should a Fluid Management Program Include?
The main elements of the fluid management program include the following:
Designation of overall responsibility for performance of the system The designated
person(s) coordinating the fluid management program should receive input from all available sources along with
information on finished part quality, production quantity, and production cost data. Whoever is selected to track the
system's performance should understand the chemistry involved in the metalworking processes.
Designation of responsibility for adding materials All system additions should be
controlled and recorded by a designated person(s). Chemicals to be added may include fresh biocides, MWF fluid
additives or concentrates, and waters or oils used to make up for fluid loss in the metalworking process.
A written standard operating procedure (SOP) for testing the fluid A procedure should be
in place to test the fluids periodically to keep their performance in optimal shape. Such an SOP should include:
- Where and when to collect the samples to be tested;
- How they should be treated after collection;
- Which tests should be performed;
- A specific protocol for each test performed; and
- The name of the person responsible for performing and recording the test results.
A data collection and tracking system To properly manage
metalworking fluids, you also need to collect and track data about the operation. The data should include physical
observations of the condition of the MWF and its supporting systems, laboratory analyses, and data on additions made
to the system. The data should be tabulated so that relationships and trends in the data can be spotted which can be
used to improve fluid management techniques. Production and quality data may also give you useful information on how
the system is performing. The data collection and tracking system should be set up so that feedback on system
condition allows corrective action to be taken before the system develops problems.
The metalworking fluid manager should decide which factors need to be recorded and tracked. These factors should be
prioritized and customized for specific facility situations. For instance, in a facility using water-miscible MWFs
with good microbiological control in a soft-water area, a manager's list of priorities may look like this:
- concentration
- pH
- foaming tendency
- water quality contamination
- system stability
- biological contamination
- tramp oil and invert emulsions "cream"
- biocide levels
- corrosion resistance
- emulsified oils
On the other hand, in a facility using water-miscible MWFs in older equipment with heavy
leakage of tramp oil and poor microbiological control, a manager's list of priorities may look like this:
- concentration levels
- emulsified oils
- tramp oil and invert emulsions "cream" contamination
- corrosion resistance
- biological contamination
- biocide
- pH
- system stability
- water quality
- foaming tendency
Employee participation - Employees from the manufacturing,
maintenance and technical support groups, and metalworking fluid lubricant and machine tool suppliers each have their
own area of expertise, and together they can create the best fluid management program. Machine operators can be
trained to look at the fluids and report anything unusual to those responsible for maintaining it. Employee
observations should be documented and compared with the laboratory data and any chemical additions.
Training programs - Managers and employees should have training to understand the basic
functioning of the fluid management system, including what can affect the proper functioning of a particular
metalworking fluid system and prolong or shorten its useful life, and the warning signs of impending problems.
Employees who work in the metalworking fluid environment should also receive training about the safety and health
hazards of the chemicals to which they are exposed.
What Are Some of the Ways to Minimize and Control Bacterial and/or Fungi Growth?
Clean System Before Introducing Fresh Metalworking Fluid - It
is important to clean the machine tool's MWF delivery system; otherwise, you are exposing the new fluid to the same
conditions that forced you to change the fluid in the first place. This is particularly true in the case of bacteria
and/or fungi contamination. By draining the sump only, you are disposing of the majority of the bacteria/fungi, but
as long as there is some residual MWF in the system, there will be some residual bacteria/fungi. These bacteria/fungi
consume the organic components (oil and other additives) present in the metalworking fluid. By allowing them to come
into contact with fresh fluid, you are providing them a free food supply. Due to the abundance of food, they will
rapidly multiply and within a short period of time, you will find yourself pumping out the machine tool sump again.
Existing bacteria and fungi should be killed by the proper addition of biocide, and then the coolant pumped out and
discarded. Any accessible colonies should be physically removed, a suitable cleaner circulated through the system,
the cleaner removed, and the system well rinsed before refilling with fresh MWF.
Operate System at Correct Concentration All water based metalworking fluids are designed
to be operated at a given concentration dissolved or emulsified with water. The correct concentration is important to
provide the cutting operation with optimal lubricity and cooling, corrosion protection, and resistance to bacteria
and fungus. Operating a system at a low concentration may result in decreased tool life, bacteria and/or fungus
problems, possible corrosion and eventual downtime. Operating a system at too high a concentration may result in
dermatitis, foaming, and heavy residues.
Proper mixing procedures are critical to the attainment of long metal removal fluid life and economical use of
metalworking fluid concentrate, as well as to the elimination of metalworking fluid concentration related problems.
Premixing the MWF concentrate with pure water at the MWF manufacturer's recommended concentration is important for
initial charge. Actual concentration in machines must be checked frequently and adjusted as needed with pure water,
concentrate, or premixed fluid as appropriate to maintain the recommended range.
Ensure Makeup Water Is of Adequate Quality The quality of makeup water is very important.
Water used for making MWF mixtures should be as pure as possible for the most economical and trouble-free use.
Minerals in metal working fluid water can corrode machine tools and machined parts, can aggravate deposition of
residues on machine tools, and can increase the rate at which bacteria and fungi grow in the metalworking fluid. It
is also essential that the proper water miscible MWF be selected.
Water that contains certain dissolved ions such as calcium and magnesium is termed "hard" because they will
form scale upon evaporation and will form insoluble soap scum when mixed with many MWFs. Other minerals such as
sulfates are detrimental because they promote the growth of sulfate-reducing bacteria that produce a "rotten
egg" odor. Some, including sulfates and chlorides, are corrosive to metal and contribute to rust. Minerals are
thus very detrimental to the performance of MWF mixtures. The more concentrated these minerals are, the faster they
build-up and cause adverse effects to appear. Therefore, the purer the water for making MWF mixtures is initially,
the longer the fluid can be used before problems occur. One method of removing minerals is to run it through a
zeolite softener followed by a reverse osmosis filter. Purified water can also be produced by deionization, which
removes most of the dissolved minerals thus producing a high quality process water.
Incorporate Biocides The incorporation of effective biocides is also helpful in
preventing or retarding degradation caused by bacterial action. These compounds may be incorporated as components in
formulated MWFs or may be added to MWFs before and during use. Biocidal activity should be broad enough to suppress
the growth of a highly diverse contaminant population. Over time, chemical and biological demands may consume the
biocides and cause the concentrations to fall below those needed to inhibit microbial growth. Biocides should be
added judiciously to prevent microbial growth or to arrest modest growth. Some biocides that function very well in
clean products can actually serve as food for the various types of bacteria found in water miscible fluids that are
so easily contaminated. Grossly contaminated fluids should be treated if necessary with biocide just prior to pumpout
as part of the overall cleaning procedure, but this should be done after operators have ceased working with the fluid
(i.e., offshift). Conscientious monitoring and prevention of microbial growth is the best approach for preventing the
buildup of endotoxins and other hazardous biological substances and for preserving fluid quality and function.
Miscellaneous Factors To avoid problems related to bacteria and/or fungi growth a good
filtration system should be in place. A metalworking fluid is subjected to the metal chips and fines of the process,
airborne contamination from cascading fluid over a part and the machine, machine leakages, residues left on the part
from previous operations, water, operators, and other factors. Whenever possible, these contaminants need to be
removed (IAMS 1996).
The build-up of chips and metal fines in the metalworking delivery system provide an excellent "nesting"
area for bacteria. In large systems, these chip beds many extend for many yards in sluices and pipes. The associated
biomass will be too large for simple treatment with biocides to be effective. The periodic removal of this debris
minimizes the potential for bacteria growth and extends MWF life.
Tramp oil is non-emulsified oil that is mechanically entrained in a MWF in large droplets. Tramp oil often results
from machine tool hydraulic or way lube systems leaking oil into metalworking fluids. Tramp oil damages MWFs by
extracting key components, by providing food for microbes, and by providing an area of reduced oxygen which promotes
the growth of anaerobic bacteria. Consequently, all possible steps should be taken to reduce oil leakage.
In some cases it is not possible to avoid tramp oil. Oil is applied to the ways of machine tools to insure proper
movement of the workpiece during the machining operation. As the MWF comes into contact with the ways or the oil
drips off the way, tramp oil is introduced into the MWF. This should be minimized by applying the required amount of
way lube and no more, and by making sure that way lubricators run only when the machine tool runs.
The amount of tramp oil in the system should be minimized through hand skimming or by the use of skimmers,
separators, or other devices. Since tramp oil separates and floats when agitation ceases these devices are
particularly effective when the system pumps are not running, as on weekends and off-shift. Using system quiet time
to facilitate skimming will help prevent problems. In addition, finding a MWF and way oil that are compatible will
also help.
It is important to maintain good housekeeping by teaching your company's employees not to use machine tool sumps as
trash receptacles. Paper cups, uneaten food, cigarette butts, and other trash should not be seen floating in the MWF.
These not only introduce bacteria into the sump but provide nutrients for bacteria. Trash should go in trash
containers even if it means the employee has to walk away from the machine tool.
What Should Be Done After MWFs Reach the End of Their Service Life?
All fluids, even those used with well-managed systems, eventually reach the end of their useful life. When testing
shows that the fluid in a system has reached the point where making additions to the fluid is no longer effective, or
when the level of bacteria or mold has become unmanageable, the system must be properly drained, cleaned and
recharged (see Appendix 6). Periodic checks of the system on a regular basis are strongly recommended. The size of
the system will indicate the frequency and type of testing.
How Does a Facility Determine If It Has Good MWF Management?
A self-assessment should be done to determine good MWF management. The procedure outlined
in Appendix 7 (developed by the Organization Resources Counselors) is recommended. It involves the use of a checklist
and covers the features of the management plan that are common to all shop MWF systems. It also covers individual
processes, locations, or MWF systems within the shop. The purpose of the self-assessment metric is not to grade a
shop's performance, but rather to provide information for improvements in the MWF management program. Regardless of
the outcome, the assessment information should be used to improve the MWF management program. Other checklists may
also be effective in evaluating the fluid management program.
I. INSTITUTING AN EXPOSURE MONITORING PROGRAM
Why Should Exposure Monitoring (Air Sampling) Be Conducted?
Good management of the MWF environment includes assessing the level of employees' exposure to MWF. Exposure
monitoring provides a means of determining the effectiveness of engineering controls and work practices, the overall
performance of the metalworking system management program, and assists in the proper selection of personal protective
equipment. Air sampling helps identify the high exposure jobs or tasks so that the employer can determine ways to
reduce these exposures, for example, by improved ventilation to control MWF mist, and may also indicate the level of
exposure associated with the presence or absence of health complaints.
How Is Employees' Exposure to MWFs and Fluid Contaminants Assessed?
There are two kinds of exposure assessment: qualitative and quantitative.
A qualitative assessment identifies the shop areas where exposure to MWFs is possible and estimates the level of
airborne exposure and the extent of mist or dermal exposure hazards. Qualitative assessments are often performed to
rule out the need for quantitative assessments. Such estimates may be based on expert industrial hygiene opinion, the
presence of MWF-related adverse health effects, any past exposure measurements, and possibly the results of a
direct-reading aerosol instrument. Objective data, discussed below, is also a good qualitative assessment tool. An
employer should first conduct a qualitative assessment to characterize generally what the upper limits of exposure
may be for each operation in the MWF environment. For example, in some MWF operations, such as automated transfer
lines where machining takes place, operators do not routinely come into contact with MWF. In contrast, maintenance
employees on such transfer lines may be required to change or adjust tools and be exposed to MWF for extended
periods. Area and source sampling, discussed below, is considered a qualitative tool for estimating the airborne
exposure of workers.
Quantitative assessment measures the amount of exposure to MWFs. Exposure monitoring is generally performed in
response to employee concerns, complaints, symptoms or irritation or health effects, or where experience indicates
that exposure to MWF aerosol may be relatively high. Exposure monitoring is generally not needed if the employer can
show that a process, operation, or activity has low exposures If the qualitative assessment indicates that the
exposure levels of MWF may exceed either of the current OSHA PELs you should conduct quantitative air monitoring
(breathing zone air samples) for those employees whose exposure is at issue.
What Is Objective Data and How Can It Be Used in Qualitative Assessments?
Objective data is used in qualitative assessments to show that a process, operation, or activity is highly unlikely
to result in significant exposures under all foreseeable conditions. For example, many small, low volume, or
ventilated machining operations just do not create exposures above an appropriate exposure limit. The kind of
objective data that employers would use to demonstrate this may include information from industry studies, laboratory
product test results, insurance companies, or trade associations. You should make sure that the data are obtained
under workplace conditions closely resembling the processes, types of materials, control methods, work practices and
environmental conditions in your current operations or under conditions that would results in even higher exposures
that the conditions in your workplace.
How Is Air Sampling to Be Conducted?
If a qualitative assessment shows that air sampling should be done, a strategy for sampling should be developed.
Personal samples give the best estimate of an employee's exposure level since they represent the actual airborne
contaminant concentration in the employee's breathing zone during the sampling period, and is the preferred method
for determining a employee's time-weighted average (TWA) exposure. Where several employees perform the same job, on
the same shift, and in the same work area, and the length, duration, and the level of MWF aerosol are similar, an
employer may sample a representative fraction of the employees instead of all employees. Personal sampling can also
be used to assess work practice controls.
Source and area samples are useful supplements to personal monitoring. However they cannot substitute for taking
personal breathing zone samples. Area sampling is useful for evaluating overall air contaminant levels in a work area
and for investigating cross-contamination with other areas in the facility. Area sampling may help to determine the
source of MWF aerosol exposures. Source sampling can be used to assess the effectiveness of engineering controls. It
is also useful to take a sample when the target equipment is not running. Exposure at a work station when the target
equipment is not running will tell how much of the exposure is due to adjacent sources, and how much comes from the
target machine.
What Are the Sampling and Analytical Methods That Can Be Used?
The OSHA Chemical Sampling Information file contains current sampling technology for mineral oil mist and other
metalworking fluids (Particulates Not Otherwise Classified). The OSHA sampling procedure for mineral oil mist is
listed under IMIS: 5010; and for other metalworking fluids, under IMIS: 9135 (Appendix 8).
The current OSHA recommended media sampling for mineral oil mist requires a pre-weighed, 5-micron low-ash polyvinyl
chloride (LAPVC) filter. The sample can be taken at a flow rate of 2.0 L/min. Total sample volumes not exceeding 960
liters are recommended. The current recommended media sampling for all other metalworking fluids also requires a
pre-weighed, 5-micron low-ash polyvinyl chloride filter. The recommended sampling flow rate and total sample volume
is also the same as for mineral oil mist. The filter media captures total aerosol, and the gross weight measured does
not require laboratory analysis. A cyclone should not be used with this method.
NIOSH recommends thoracic sampling and gravimetric measurement of MWF aerosol using NIOSH Method 0500 (see Appendix
9) with a sampling device that collects the thoracic fraction. If a thoracic sampling device is not available, a
total dust sampler can be used and the result can be divided by 1.25 to estimate the thoracic fraction. NIOSH Method
0500 can be used to measure the total material collected.
When there are simultaneous exposures to nontoxic particulate materials, ASTM
PS 42-97 Provisional Standard Test Method for Metal Removal Fluid Aerosol in
Workplace Atmospheres (American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)),
may be useful to estimate the soluble component of the workplace aerosol. This method improves the specificity
(ability to measure only MWF) of the analytical method by removing non-MWF materials from the analysis. In ASTM PS
42-97, a sample of MWF mist is collected on a PTFE membrane filter and then a combination of standardized gravimetric
and solvent extraction techniques are used. The extraction solvent removes the fluid components and leaves the
insoluble particulate on the filter, regardless of MWF formulation. The resulting extract can be subjected to various
analytical techniques to determine the total or specific components of the extracted MWF. In this method, both total
particulate matter and extractible mass MWF aerosol concentrations in a range of 0.05 to 5 mg/m3 in
workplace atmospheres can be quantified.
A direct reading instrument (real-time aerosol monitor) can be used in some cases as an alternative to conventional
sampling and analysis that uses pumps and filters with subsequent gravimetric analysis. Aerosol monitors
(photometers) can be used for screening operations for further evaluation or determining locally high concentrations
of aerosol. Aerosol monitors are also useful in identifying mist or particulate sources and can be useful in
determining time-dependent fluctuations in mist or particulate levels. They sample the workplace air and
instantaneously measure the concentration of airborne dusts and mists by measuring the amount of light scattered by
these materials.
Because these monitors cannot differentiate between MWF mist and dust, care must be used when evaluating areas near
dry machining operations or other sources of particulate. Although the results of these measurements are typically
displayed with the units mg/m3, these numbers should be considered as estimates of the true concentration,
since the amount of light scattered depends on the characteristics of the aerosol in addition to its concentration.
Consequently, these instruments should be calibrated by comparing them with gravimetric techniques for each
combination of aerosol size and fluid type.
How Often Should Monitoring Be Done?
NIOSH recommends that surveys be repeated at least annually. For employees exposed to concentrations at or above
one-half the NIOSH REL, NIOSH recommends that monitoring be undertaken at least every six months. If results show
that aerosol levels are below the REL, you can just keep tabs on your system by completing the self-assessment
metalworking fluid management checklist to ensure that the MWF is properly managed and aerosol mists controlled
through the use of equipment.
In addition, employee exposures should be reevaluated whenever a significant change in production, equipment,
process, product formulation, personnel, or control measures takes place, that might cause new or additional exposure
to MWFs. If you get reports from employees complaining of conditions related to exposure to MWFs, (see discussion on
medical monitoring in this guide), you should monitor workplace exposures of those employees as soon as possible.
Employers should notify the affected employee(s) of the results of the monitoring of metalworking fluid exposure.
Notification should be in writing, either by distributing copies of the results to the employees or by posting the
results.
How Can a Small Company Get Industrial Hygiene Assistance in Obtaining Monitoring Services?
Some of the ways to reduce sampling costs for small business can be achieved through the use of insurance carriers,
fluid supplier product stewardship, the OSHA Consultation Program (Appendix 10), NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluations, and
through union and association efforts.
Data may be available to you from previous exposure measurements. For example, studies may have been conducted in
your industry. Your trade association may have data, or manufacturers of the MWF fluids used in your workplace may
have conducted laboratory tests that provide employee exposure data. To generalize from data obtained from these
sources or an industry-wide survey, however, you must show that the conditions that existed in the survey, such as
the operations, MWF fluids, control methods, work practices, and environmental conditions, are similar to those in
your own workplace.
J. MEDICAL MONITORING OF EXPOSED EMPLOYEES
What Is Medical Monitoring?
Medical monitoring is a process of periodic medical screenings aimed at early diagnosis and treatment of disease in
employees exposed to a hazardous substance.
Why Is Medical Monitoring Important?
Whatever the exposure in a shop, control of MWF exposures by engineering and work practice controls and
implementation of a MWF management program may not eliminate all possibility of illness or injury due to exposure to
MWFs. Medical monitoring of employees will help identify those experiencing early evidence of respiratory impairment
or skin disease due to failure of control systems or inadequate hygiene and respirator programs.
Taking corrective action will reduce the incidence and severity of lung and skin disease in people working with MWFs.
What Is the Medical Monitoring Process?
Medical monitoring should be directed and supervised by a qualified and licensed physician or health care
professional who periodically reviews an employee's health status by collecting health information from the employee
and/or conducting a physical examination and appropriate medical tests. An adequate program includes:
- Review of an employee-completed health questionnaire;
- Limited examination of the areas of the body at risk (lungs and skin); and
- Measurement of lung function (pulmonary function test).
Health problems as a result of exposure to MWFs should be followed by referral to a qualified
and licensed physician or health care professional.
Who Should Be Included in the Medical Monitoring Program?
All exposed employees will benefit from participating in a medical monitoring program. Newly hired or transferred
employees should undergo a pre-placement evaluation to determine a baseline status. All employees should have
periodic exams following job placement. People working in high exposure areas or working in areas where one or more
co-workers have developed lung disease (asthma, bronchitis, HP, etc.) or skin disease should be evaluated more
frequently.
What Does Medical Monitoring Consist Of?
At a minimum, medical examinations should consist of an examination of the lungs and a standardized respiratory
symptom questionnaire that addresses all of the potential respiratory conditions that have been associated with MWF
exposure. OSHA has a
respiratory symptom questionnaire associated with the Respiratory Protection
Standard, Appendix C to 29 CFR 1910.134. The
respiratory protection questionnaire contains appropriate questions about respiratory conditions. However, questions
about other conditions relating to MWF exposure should be added when questionnaires are used for medical monitoring
for MWFs.
NIOSH recommends that if an employer's resources permit, routine periodic examinations should include baseline
spirometric (lung function) testing for comparison with future tests. NIOSH recommends that anyone who administers a
spirometric test as part of an occupational medical monitoring program should have completed a NIOSH-approved
training course in spirometry. Spirometry equipment and procedures
should comply with
American Thoracic Society guidelines.
The initial medical examination should also consist of a skin examination and history of skin problems.
What Symptoms or Conditions Are Considered Most Important in the Medical Monitoring of MWF
Employees?
Symptoms or conditions important in the medical monitoring process can be identified by the use of OSHA's Respirator
Medical Evaluation Questionnaire, or a comparable questionnaire, and a skin history. A few examples include:
- Treatment by a physician for a respiratory illness;
- Onset of chest tightness, shortness of breath, or wheezing, especially if it occurs at work and improves when
away from work;
- Onset of cough that produces phlegm;
- Tightness in the chest;
- Chills, fever, and unusual weight loss;
- Unusual fatigue;
- Skin rash, sores, or pimples; and
- Eyes burning or nasal congestion while at work.
What Follow-Up Examinations Should Be Conducted?
All employees included in the medical monitoring program should be provided with periodic health exams. Medical
monitoring and follow-up medical evaluations should be provided at a reasonable time and place and without cost to
the participating employees.
Periodic health evaluations should include a medical exam of the lungs and the skin, spirometric testing, as well as
a brief questionnaire to determine if the person is experiencing any respiratory symptoms (such as shortness of
breath, wheezing, chest tightness, or cough) and/or skin disorders. The questionnaire should also include a question
on whether the person is taking any medications for these conditions.
The frequency of periodic exams depends on the frequency or severity of health effects in the employee population for
a given worksite. If there is no evidence of any person contracting a disease associated with metal working fluids or
MWF aerosols at a particular facility, then testing once a year would be reasonable. Employees in facilities where
there has been an increase in the frequency and severity of MWF health related illnesses or symptoms should be tested
more frequently, such as twice a year.
What If the Questionnaire, the Skin Examination, Pulmonary Function (Spirometric) Testing or Other
Medical Tests Reveal Problems That Might Arise from Working with MWF?
Employees who develop new abnormal respiratory or skin symptoms or signs and workers with worsening pre-existing
disease should be re |