Effective emergency management and response require appropriate utilization of various resources as an incident evolves. This manuscript describes the information resources used in chemical emergency management and operations and how their utility evolves from the initial response phase to recovery to event close out. The authors address chemical hazard guidance in the context of four different phases of emergency response: preparedness, emergency response (both initial and ongoing), recovery, and mitigation. Immediately following a chemical incident, during the initial response, responders often use readily available, broad-spectrum guidance to make rapid decisions in the face of uncertainties regarding potential exposure to physical and health hazards. Physical hazards are described as the hazards caused by chemicals that can cause harm with or without direct contact. Examples of physical hazards include explosives, flammables, and gases under pressure. This first line of resources may not be chemical-specific in nature, but it can provide guidance related to isolation distances, protective actions, and the most important physical and health threats. During the ongoing response phase, an array of resources can provide detailed information on physical and health hazards related to specific chemicals of concern. Consequently, risk management and mitigation actions evolve as well. When the incident stabilizes to a recovery phase, the types of information resources that facilitate safe and effective incident management evolve. Health and physical concerns transition from acute toxicity and immediate hazards to both immediate and latent health effects. Finally, the information inputs utilized during the preparedness phase include response evaluations of past events, emergency preparedness planning, and chemical-specific guidance about chemicals present. This manuscript details a framework for identifying the effective use of information resources at each phase and provides case study examples from chemical hazard emergencies.

Citizen science is defined as a voluntary collaboration among scientists and non-specialists to achieve scientific and societal goals. This emerging form of scientific inquiry has grown in popularity recently, particularly in the environmental sciences where crowdsourcing can be leveraged to overcome resource constraints associated with the collection of empirical data. Citizen science is a powerful tool that not only leverages human resources for scientific discovery but also presents an opportunity for outreach, education, and engagement of the public. Citizen science is new to the field of occupational health; however, there are natural alignments between these two disciplines that warrant investigation. This commentary explores the use of citizen science as a potentially innovative and economical approach to protect and promote a healthy workplace. We discuss the various types of citizen science, followed by a series of hypothetical applications that demonstrate opportunities for the practice of occupational health protection. We also discuss potential pitfalls and challenges that may limit the proliferation of citizen science in our field.

The rate at which chemicals are introduced into commerce continues to outpace the development of authoritative occupational exposure limits. Occupational exposure banding is a tool that empowers and enables occupational hygienists to address unregulated chemicals. An occupational exposure band is not meant to replace an OEL; rather, it serves as a starting point to inform risk management decisions. Given the utility of an OEB, more occupational hygiene professionals are embracing the proposed NIOSH occupational exposure banding tool and using the occupational exposure banding process to guide their risk management decisions for chemicals without OELs. Occupational exposure banding, also known as hazard banding, is a process intended to quickly and accurately assign chemicals to specific categories (bands) that correspond to a range of exposure concentrations. These bands are assigned on the basis of a chemical’s toxicological potency and the adverse health effects associated with exposure to the chemical. The output of this process is an OEB. The pharmaceutical sector and some major chemical companies have used occupational exposure banding over the past several decades to establish exposure control limits or ranges for new or existing chemicals that lack formal OELs.

Translation research in occupational safety and health is the application of scientific investigative approaches to study how the outputs of basic and applied research can be effectively translated into practice and have an impact. This includes the study of the ways in which useful knowledge and interventions are disseminated, adopted, implemented, and institutionalized. In this paper, a 4-stage framework (Development, Testing, Institutionalization, and Evaluation) is presented. Translation research can be used to enhance the use and impact of occupational safety and health knowledge and interventions to protect workers. This type of research has not received much attention in the occupational safety and health field. However, in contemporary society, it is critical to know how to make an impact with the findings and outputs of basic and applied research. This paper provides a novel framework for consideration of how to advance and prioritize translation research for occupational safety and health.

Occupational exposure limits (OELs) are a critical component of the risk assessment and risk management process and their use remains a staple of occupational hygiene practice. There are dozens of organizations and agencies that derive OELs worldwide. Yet, while most of these groups describe their administrative procedures as well as the rationale for the derivation of OELs for individual substances, few provide equally complete documentation of the underlying scientific methodology for conducting the quantitative risk assessment employed in OEL development. The paucity of written descriptions of OEL development methodology has resulted in a lack of transparency related to implementation of important scientific principles for OEL development and inconsistent practices for OEL development within and among organizations. The absence of such transparency limits the opportunities for international harmonization of existing values and OEL setting practices among organizations. | Given these and other challenges, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) began an effort to identify and characterize leading issues pertaining to OELs and their development through research which culminated in a collection of articles focused on each key issue. Those articles and the key issues they explore comprise this supplement of the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene. Utilizing subject matter expertise from researchers and thought leaders in the occupational hygiene profession and affiliated fields of environmental public health, the goal of this effort is to describe the issues related to education and communication of science principles and to understand how they can be incorporated into (and thereby impact) the practices of OEL development and interpretation. Focusing specifically on the state-of-the-science in the fields of exposure science, occupational hygiene, risk assessment, and toxicology this effort sought to provide a clear description of how advances in these research areas can contribute to the practice of OEL setting—by reviewing the methods used for most OELs that are currently available as well as new methods that are actively being incorporated in the OEL process. An essential topic included within the set of complementary and interrelated articles dedicated to this pursuit is the consideration and interpretation of OELs in the context of evolving risk management practices. The articles are intended to serve as a current critical review of occupational risk assessment methods that will enable occupational hygiene professionals to have a clear understanding of the science methods incorporated in the OELs they develop or use. A brief introduction to each article in this collection is provided in the following paragraphs.

We read with great interest the recent publication, Evaluation of electronic cigarette liquids and aerosol for the presence of selected inhalation toxins.1 We are particularly grateful to the authors for recognizing the high rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and of bronchiolitis, specifically, in smokers and for measuring the concentrations of diacetyl (DA) and acetyl propionyl (AP, also known as 2,3-pentanedione) in electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) liquids and aerosols. However, we would like to clarify two issues: | The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) draft document, Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Diacetyl and 2,3-Pentanedione, proposes recommended exposure limits (RELs) to reduce the risk of respiratory impairment (decreased lung function) and the severe irreversible lung disease, constrictive bronchiolitis obliterans, associated with occupational exposure to these chemicals. As noted by Farsalinos and co-workers in their limitations section, it is not intended to establish “safe” exposure concentrations for consumers or the general public.1 | The exposure comparisons between e-cigarette users and traditional cigarette smokers and workers use values that are not widely accepted.

Flavorings are substances that alter or enhance the taste of food. Workers in the food-manufacturing industry, where flavorings are added to many products, may be exposed to any number of flavoring compounds. Although thousands of flavoring substances are in use, little is known about most of these in terms of worker health effects, and few have occupational exposure guidelines. Exposure assessment surveys were conducted at nine food production facilities and one flavor manufacturer where a total of 105 area and 74 personal samples were collected for 13 flavoring compounds including five ketones, five aldehydes, and three acids. The majority of the samples were below the limit of detection (LOD) for most compounds. Diacetyl had eight area and four personal samples above the LOD, whereas 2,3-pentanedione had three area samples above the LOD. The detectable values ranged from 25-3124 ppb and 15-172 ppb for diacetyl and 2,3-pentanedione respectively. These values exceed the proposed National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure limit for these compounds. The aldehydes had the most detectable samples, with each of them having >50% of the samples above the LOD. Acetaldehyde had all but two samples above the LOD, however, these samples were below the OSHA PEL. It appears that in the food-manufacturing facilities surveyed here, exposure to the ketones occurs infrequently, however levels above the proposed NIOSH REL were found. Conversely, aldehyde exposure appears to be ubiquitous.

With increasing numbers and quantities of chemicals in commerce and use, scientific attention continues to focus on the environmental and public health consequences of chemical production processes and exposures. Concerns about environmental stewardship have been gaining broader traction through emphases on sustainability and "green chemistry" principles. Occupational safety and health has not been fully promoted as a component of environmental sustainability. However, there is a natural convergence of green chemistry/sustainability and occupational safety and health efforts. Addressing both together can have a synergistic effect. Failure to promote this convergence could lead to increasing worker hazards and lack of support for sustainability efforts. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has made a concerted effort involving multiple stakeholders to anticipate and identify potential hazards associated with sustainable practices and green jobs for workers. Examples of potential hazards are presented in case studies with suggested solutions such as implementing the hierarchy of controls and prevention through design principles in green chemistry and green building practices. Practical considerations and strategies for green chemistry, and environmental stewardship could benefit from the incorporation of occupational safety and health concepts which in turn protect affected workers.

BACKGROUND: Significant numbers of people are exposed to tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene, PCE) every year, including workers in the dry cleaning industry. Adverse health effects have been associated with PCE exposure. However, investigations of possible cumulative cytogenetic damage resulting from PCE exposure are lacking. METHODS: Eighteen dry cleaning workers and 18 laundry workers (unexposed controls) provided a peripheral blood sample for cytogenetic analysis by whole chromosome painting. Pre-shift exhaled air on these same participants was collected and analyzed for PCE levels. The laundry workers were matched to the dry cleaners on race, age, and smoking status. The relationships between levels of cytological damage and exposures (including PCE levels in the shop and in workers' blood, packyears, cumulative alcohol consumption, and age) were compared with correlation coefficients and t-tests. Multiple linear regressions considered blood PCE, packyears, alcohol, and age. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the PCE-exposed dry cleaners and the laundry workers for chromosome translocation frequencies, but PCE levels were significantly correlated with percentage of cells with acentric fragments (R2 = 0.488, p < 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: There does not appear to be a strong effect in these dry cleaning workers of PCE exposure on persistent chromosome damage as measured by translocations. However, the correlation between frequencies of acentric fragments and PCE exposure level suggests that recent exposures to PCE may induce transient genetic damage. More heavily exposed participants and a larger sample size will be needed to determine whether PCE exposure induces significant levels of persistent chromosome damage.