AAP Occupational Safety Report
Unit VII Scholarly Activity
Instructions
For this assignment, you will take the data you calculated in Units II through VI and prepare a final report. Your report will be addressed to Mr. John Smith, the plant manager for Acme Automotive Parts (AAP). Your report must include the following sections:
Introduction – This section should summarize the operations at the plant and why the industrial hygiene sampling is being performed.
Hazard Assessment – This section should identify the health hazards that you identified for each area at the facility.
Sampling Plan – This section will summarize the sampling that you performed. Include the types of samples you collected and the NIOSH or OSHA sampling/analytical methods you used.
Sample Results – This section will include the results from the sampling that you calculated. You can present the results in a tabular form or an equivalent method as long as the results are clearly displayed. Your results should include samples’ locations, names of employees who were sampled (make the names up), sample times (start, finish, and total times), volumes, and results in the proper units.
Evaluation of Sample Results – In this section, you should compare the sample results to existing occupational exposure limits (OELs). You can use OSHA permissible exposure limits (PELs) or other guidelines—just make sure to explain why you chose the OELs you used. You should also state whether the resulting risks are acceptable or unacceptable and the requirements for control methods.
Recommendations – Here you will summarize the control methods you recommend that the plant implement. Include all engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment (PPE) you believe are necessary. Do not forget to include recommendations for PPE during the time it will take to implement the other controls. For respiratory protection, you must specify the level of protection (type respirator) and the types of any cartridges that would be required. Do not forget to list any written programs that you believe the plant will need.
Future Needs – Complete your report by including any recommendations for additional IH sampling you believe are necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the controls that you recommended.
Unit VII Scholarly Activity: Acme Automotive Parts (AAP) Occupational Safety Sample Report
Introduction
At Acme Automotive Parts (AAP), various operations present potential hazards. The leading hazards are welding, painting and metal working operations. The welding operations contributes to manganese fume, copper fume, lead fume and noise hazards. Paint operations lead to 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene, toluene and xylene hazards. Metal working operations contributes to fluid and noise hazards. These hazards present health and safety risks to employees. Appropriate sampling should be done to identify the severity of the hazards and suitable controls. OSHA and NIOSH recommend chemical sampling and analysis to evaluate the level of worker exposure and workplace contaminants.Health Hazard Assessment
The report presents hazards for each of the three areas: welding, paint and metal working fluids. In the welding area, the report identified copper fume hazard, while paint and metal working fluids were identified in the paint and metal working areas respectively.
Sampling Plan
Both personal and area samples were collected. The collection of area samples applied for the occupational exposure limits (OEL), which had a shift of over 8 hours. It is recommended that only personal samples can be collected within a work shift of 8 hours. Any extended shift beyond 8 hours, the area samples should be collected. For example, for metal working fluid, both personal and area samples were collected. In sampling each of the three hazards, various sampling methods were used in line with OSHA and NIOSH standards. In sampling copper fume hazard, filter-Mixed Cellulose Ester (MCE) was used. NIOSH and OSHA recommend this sampling media for copper and other metal fluids. Toluene was sampled using CSC, Anasorb 747, SKC 575-002, or 3M 3520, which are recommend sampling methods by OSHA (1998). Metal working fluids were sampled using Filter + Cyclone, which is recommended by NIOSH (2014) as suitable media for metal working fluids.
Sampling Results
The minimum sampling time, exposure concentration in mg/m3 and exposure in parts per million (ppm) for each identified hazard was calculated as presented below. Also, in the table are the calculations of the other hazards, which were not selected.
| Hazard | Minimum Sampling Time (minutes) | Exposure concentration in mg/m3 | Exposure in parts per million (ppm) | Minimum sample volume |
| Copper fume | 240 | 0.1458 | 0.0561 | 480L |
| Toluene | 96 | 2.6042 | 0.6913 | 4800mL |
| Metal working fluid | 480 | 0.6944 | — | 960L |
| Manganese fume | – | 0.167 | 0.0744 | – |
| Lead fume | – | 0.0417 | 0.0049 | – |
| 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene | – | 0.1042 | 0.0212 | – |
| Xylene | – | 0.4167 | 0.096 | – |
The calculations of the hazards associated with noise have been presented in the table below:
| Location | dBA (%) |
| Shipping/Receiving | 19.75% |
| Hydraulic Press | 227.3575% |
| Metal Working Line | 65.2913% |
| Robotic Welding | 40.1915% |
| Hand Welding | 44.9055% |
| Paint Booth | 34.9887% |
| QA/QC Laboratory | 6.25% |
| Final Inspection | 10.15315% |
For the three hazards selected, the total sampling times for copper fluid and toluene were 8 hours while the that of metal working fluid were 10 hours. All the samplings started at 8 AM and ended at 4 PM, except metal working fluid sampling which ended at 6 PM. The sampling locations were hand welding, metal working line and paint booth. The employees involved in the sampling comprised males:
| Name | Area |
| William | Copper fume |
| Michael | Copper fume |
| Thomas | Copper fume |
| Charles | Copper fume |
| Albert | Toluene |
| Bruce | Toluene |
| Dylan | Toluene |
| Jordan | Toluene |
| Alan | Metal working fluid |
| Bobby | Metal working fluid |
| Roy | Metal working fluid |
| Randy | Metal working fluid |
Evaluation of Sample Results
When calculated mg/m3 exposures are compared with the existing occupational exposure limits, the majority of existing OELs had higher exposures than the calculated ones. However, the calculated exposure for manganese fluid was higher than the existing one. Existing occupational exposure for manganese fluid was 0.1mg/m3, while the calculated exposure of the same chemical was 1.67mg/m3. There was a difference of 0.67mg/m3 between the two exposures, with the calculated exposure being higher than the existing exposure. The report considered manganese because its calculated exposure is higher than the existing one despite both having a work shift of 8 hours. The other existing exposures from hand welding and paint booth locations are below the calculated exposures.OSHA’s permissible exposure limit (PEL) is recommended at 90 dBA for an 8-hour day for all workers, and when this rule is met, the exposure should be at 100% (OSHA, 2016). Based on this recommendation, only the hydraulic press exceeds the OSHA PEL. The recommended standard exchange rate by OSHA is 5dBA, meaning when the noise level increases by 5dBA, the time of exposure should reduce by half (Fuller, 2014). The result that has exceeded OSHA PEL does not conform with this exchange rate standard since it is limited within 12-hour exposure and 93 dBA, which is 227.36% as per unit four results. Although other results such as metal working line, robotic welding, hand welding, and paint booth exceed the recommended time of eight hours, the percentage calculations from unit four are below 100%, meaning they are yet to reach the maximum limit. For example, the Metal working line is 65.29%, Robotic welding is 40.19%, hand welding is 44.91%, and the paint booth is 34.99%.
According to OSHA, the noise exposure is subject to action level if it exceeds 85dBA or 90 dBA as well as when it goes beyond 8 hours. OSHA (2013) has provided a table showing exposure hours with corresponding action levels. Eight hours of action level is 85 dBA, 9 hours have an action level of 84.2dBA, 10 hours have an action level of 83.4dBA, 12 hours action level is 82.1dBA, and 16 hours action level is 80 dBA. Based on the OSHA table, the results which have exceeded the OSHA action level are hydraulic press and metal working line.
As per the OSHA guidelines, the hydraulic press and metal working line present non-acceptable risks, while the rest presents acceptable risks. Although some of the results like robotic welding, hand welding, and paint booth exceeds 8 hours recommended by OSHA, the percentage calculations are below 100%, hence presenting the acceptable risk. Other results that were showing acceptable risks are shipping or receiving, QA/QC laboratory, and final inspection.
Recommendations
Based on the nature of the operations in the plant, engineering controls, administrative controls and personal protective equipment (PPE) are all needed to protect employees from the hazards. The engineering controls will be implemented by fitting machines, devices and building with automatic sensor to halt the operations of the machine and alert employees in terms of alarms when the running of machines run above the acceptable levels or in case of a fire emergency. Administrative controls will involve the plant manager establishing the safety guidelines that should be observed by all the workers. The failure to observe these guidelines should be met with the punishment. The engineering controls should also consider adjusting work schedules to reduce the level of exposure on one employee and rotation of job assignments. Personal protective equipment controls should involve the use of respirators. The recommended respirators should have cartridges to purify the air by removing contaminants. Other recommended respirators are the ones that supply clean air from a different source. Apart from respirators, the workers will need other PPEs such as wearing eye protection, use of gloves and chemical protective wearing.
Future Needs
The recommended controls might need to be reviewed in future. The physical alteration recommended for the engineering controls might not be effective ways. The plant manager should consider automating all the engineering controls to make them more effective.
References
Fuller, T. P. (2014). Basics of Occupational Safety and Health. Illinois: National Safety Council.
OSHA. (1998, April 2). Toluene. Retrieved from United States Department of Labor: https://www.osha.gov/dts/sltc/methods/organic/org111/org111.pdf
OSHA. (2013, August 15). OSHA Technical Manual: Section III: Chapter 5. Retrieved from United States Department of Labor: https://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/new_noise/#footnote2
OSHA. (2017). Chemical Hazards and Toxic Substances. Retrieved from Occupational Safety and Health Administration: https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/hazardoustoxicsubstances/control.html
NIOSH. (2014, December 29). Metalworking Fluids (MWF) All Categories. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2014-151/pdfs/methods/5524.pdf