Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 06 June 2007 13:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert S Woods Has anyone had any experience in dealing with bitumen fume? One of our company’s has started using it indoors as part of a coating/ gluing process. LEV is in place but employees are complaining that they can still smell it and they are worried that it could cause ill health. I cannot find WEL in EH40 for it. Any help or comments are most welcome.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 06 June 2007 13:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By LynneR it depends upon your process and what form of bitumen in use eg. hot, cold, emulsion, paving grades, road levels? etc contact your supplier and ask for their MSDS that should contain the info you need and if not get on to their technical department and ask them. They provide it so they will know the manufacturer to provide any info.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 06 June 2007 13:16:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert S Woods The bitumen comes in blocks and is heated to melting point. This is used for binding reeds for looms. This process should be a good test for the REACH directive. I bet the importers don't have this down as one of the uses of their product.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 06 June 2007 13:21:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis Robert A google on ther term Bitumwen fume produces a number of papers such as this one http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih....s=10689757&dopt=Abstract Bob
Admin  
#5 Posted : 06 June 2007 13:27:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Leadbetter Bob You could also try this one: http://asac.csir.co.za/capsa/Documents/118.pdf Because of the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, bitumen is thought to present a risk of cancer but proving it has been difficult as many papers available on the internet will attest. Paul
Admin  
#6 Posted : 06 June 2007 13:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By LynneR Robert They may not have that process but they will have data for the properties of the bitumen when heated. Differing levels of chemicals are released at different temperatures. go to the supplier and check!
Admin  
#7 Posted : 06 June 2007 15:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mike Robert This HSE paper (WATCH/2006/3 annex 1) has information on health effects for asphalt workers. http://www.hse.gov.uk/ab.../010206/paper3annex1.pdf EH40 has an 8-hour WEL for asphalt, petroleum fumes of 5 mg/m3. However, polyaromatic hydrocarbons in the particulate fume might be of concern. There is no approved WEL for airborne PAHs. There is only a biological monitoring guidance value for a PAH metabolite.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 08 June 2007 22:38:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Granville Jenkins Hi Robert Not a simple situation. I have done a search on the Internet and come up with the following information, which should be of interest: The vapour, mists, fumes or gases that are given off will contain a cocktail of chemicals, including polycyclical aromatic hydrocarbons and hydrogen sulphide. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are a group of powerful cancer causing chemicals that can damage DNA and cause tumours. Hydrogen Sulphide smells of rotten eggs is highly toxic and is an irritant to the respiratory tract, it is quickly absorbed by the lungs and exposure may lead to coma or death. With hydrogen sulphide there is a rapid loss of sense of smell on exposure to hydrogen sulphide that means the extent of the exposure may be under estimated. If operations are are such that there is an excessive generation of vapour, mist, or fumes to which operatives would be exposed then suitable approved respiratory protective equipment should be worn. Recommended: TWA 5ppm/7mg/m3 SEL 10ppm/14mg/m3 Regards Granville
Admin  
#9 Posted : 11 June 2007 09:45:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Andy Brazier A google of 'msds bitumen' gives access to many hazard data sheets. These show trace amounts of polycyclical aromatic hydrocarbons and hydrogen sulphide may be present. Yes, both these compounds are hazardous and when bitumen is stored in bulk quantities (i.e. large heated tanks) concentrations may build up. In normal use I doubt people in the vicinity would be exposed to any significant concentration, although the users may. Granville makes the following statement "If operations are are such that there is an excessive generation of vapour, mist, or fumes to which operatives would be exposed then suitable approved respiratory protective equipment should be worn." I am afraid this is poor advice. It is not acceptable to simply specify use of Respiratory Protective Equipment (RPE) to control a risk. Rather all action should be taken to minimise exposure first, before considering if RPE should be worn to provide extra protection. In the case in question, being able to smell the bitumen does not necessarily mean there is any risk from exposure. You could sample for concentrations of the hazardous compounds in bitumen. However, I have read in the past that smell alone can make people unwell, even if there is no hazardous material present.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 11 June 2007 13:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Anthony Elsmore Robert, A starting point would be to test that the LEV is functioning correctly. If there is residual smell then it would seem to indicate the LEV is either not working correctly or is simply inadequate for this process. Realistically if this process is to continue you will need to control the smell within the working area even if the levels of fume are found to be below it's WEL. If you are going to continuously discharge fume via an LEV exhaust make sure you do not create a Statutory Nuisance to your neighbours from the smell. Cheers Ant
Admin  
#11 Posted : 11 June 2007 15:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mike Robert In a previous message forgot to mention this reference http://www.inchem.org/do...icads/cicads/cicad59.htm
Admin  
#12 Posted : 11 June 2007 21:57:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Middleton I have been away from the chemical industry for a while, but in the late 90s, I was working on a site that was sampled by the HSL for research into tar based cancers. The group of PAHs that cause the problem (cancer of the kidneys I think) was known as coal tar pitch volatile (CTPV). There used to be an exposure limit reference in EH40, but it has been removed. Work was done across a range of industries, e.g. coking plants, tar distillation, aluminium smelting, asphalt production etc. It was decided that an MEL should be set, but it should be based on a level of one typical constituent 1,3 butadiene rather than CTPV as a whole. The MEL was not set at this time and CTPV continued to be observed by the HSE. A 2003 paper by Richard Pederson, ACTS/26/2003 entitled Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons: A Control Approach debated the merits of setting an MEL for CPTV at 0.5, 1 or 2 µg/m3. The problem was that different industries would experience difficulties whatever the MEL was set at and as few employees were affected control costs were disproportionate. The recommendations were that HSE would · prepare sector-specific guidance; · establish a benchmark biological monitoring guidance value of 4 µmol/creatinine for 1-hydroxypyrene in urine · include PAHs within HSE’s overall Carcinogens programme · abandon the MEL proposal I do not know if anything has happened in the last few years but I think that your work would be covered by these proposals
Admin  
#13 Posted : 12 June 2007 10:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mike John Mostly correct, but a couple of points: The proposed MEL in the range 0.5-2 ug/m3 was for benzo(a)pyrene, not total CTPV. BaP is only about 1% of CTPV. There is little or no coal tar in European bitumen. The Health Council of the Netherlands have recently published an evaluation of bitumen fume (DECOS report 2007/01OSH)http://www.gr.nl/pdf.php?ID=1500&p=1 but there is not enough evidence to set a limit value.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.