Respiratory protection from isocyanate exposure in the autobody repair and refinishing industry.

This study, part of the Survey of Painters and Repairers of Auto bodies by Yale (SPRAY), evaluated the effectiveness of respiratory protection against exposure to aliphatic polyisocyanates. A total of 36 shops were assessed for respiratory protection program completeness; 142 workers were measured for respirator fit factor (FF) using PortaCount Plus respirator fit tester. Twenty-two painters from 21 shops were sampled using NIOSH method 5525 to determine the workplace protection factor (WPF) of negative pressure, air-purifying half-facepiece respirators equipped with organic vapor cartridges and paint prefilters during spray-painting and priming activities. Only 11 shops (30%) had written respiratory protection programs. Eighty percent of all fit tested workers passed the test on the first try with FF >or= 100, and 92% passed the second test after respirator use training. Overall geometric mean (GM) FF was 1012 for all fit tested workers. Significant differences on pass rate (92% vs. 72%) and on FF (1990 vs. 736) were found between previously fit tested workers vs. nontested workers. Twenty-nine WPF samples were collected. The outside facepiece GM concentration of total isocyanate group (NCO) was 378.4 micro g NCO/m(3) with 96% concentrations exceeding the U.K. short-term exposure limit, 70 micro g NCO/m(3), but no in-facepiece concentrations exceeded the limit. The GM WPF of total NCO was 319 (GSD 4) and the 5th percentile was 54. WPF of total NCO was positively correlated with the duration of painting task. FF positively correlated with WPF when FF was 450. We conclude that negative pressure, air-purifying half-facepiece respirators equipped with organic vapor cartridges and paint prefilters provide effective protection against isocyanate exposure in spray and priming operations if workers are properly trained and fitted.

Isocyanate exposures in autobody shop work: the SPRAY study.

Isocyanates, known to cause respiratory sensitization and asthma, are widely used in automotive refinishing where exposures to aliphatic polyisocyanates occur by both inhalation and skin contact. The work reported here, the characterization of isocyanate exposure in the autobody industry, was part of an epidemiologic study of workers in 37 autobody shops in Connecticut. This article describes workplaces, tasks, and controls, and outlines the frequency, duration, and intensity of isocyanate exposures. Personal air samples taken outside of respirators had median concentrations of 66.5 microg NCO/m3 for primer, 134.4 microg (NCO)/m3 for sealer, and 358.5 microg NCO/m3 for clearcoat. Forty-eight percent of primer, 66% of sealer, and 92% of clearcoat samples exceeded the United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive guideline for isocyanate, though none exceeded the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure limit for monomer. Nonisocyanate-containing primers and sealers are used in more than half the shops, but nonisocyanate clearcoats are rare. Eighty-two percent of personal samples taken within a spray booth exceeded the U.K. guideline: 81% of those in downdraft spray booths, 74% in semidowndraft booths, and 92% in crossdraft booths. Only 8% of shops reported that spraying is done exclusively in spray booths. All painters wore some type of respirator. In 30% of shops, painters used supplied air respirators; the rest relied on half face organic vapor cartridge respirators with N95 overspray pads. All shops provided some type of gloves, usually latex, not recommended for isocyanate protection. Despite improvements in autobody shop materials, practices, and controls, there are still opportunities for substantial exposures to isocyanates.

Polyisocyanates in occupational environments: a critical review of exposure limits and metrics.

BACKGROUND: Determination of polyisocyanates is important because they are a major contributor of exposure to the isocyanate functional group in many workplace environments and are capable of inducing sensitization and asthma. However, with multiple different measurement metrics in use, comparison of isocyanate exposure data between studies and development of occupational exposure limits (OELs) for polyisocyanates is difficult. METHODS: An analysis of existing problems in the measurement and regulation of isocyanates is presented based on the published analytical, toxicological, and regulatory literature, and the authors' own analytical data and experience with isocyanates. RESULTS: This analysis supports a need for standardization of isocyanate measurement metrics and provides a framework for the development of an OEL for polyisocyanates. CONCLUSIONS: The total isocyanate group (microg NCO/m(3)) is recommended as the most feasible and practical metric (unit) by which to express polyisocyanate exposures for research, control, and regulatory purposes. The establishment of a comprehensive isocyanate OEL that simplifies the current agent-by-agent approach and expands coverage to polyisocyanates is also recommended.