DEPARTMENTS​
BY THE NUMBERS​​
​Occupational Exposure to 1-Bromopropane
A new draft document from NIOSH proposes a recommended exposure limit (REL) for the solvent 1-bromopropane (1-BP) of 0.3 ppm (1.5 mg/m3 of air) as an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) concentration during a 40-hour workweek. The agency’s proposed REL is intended to reduce workers’ risk of lung cancer associated with a 45-year working lifetime of occupational exposure, and corresponds with an excess working lifetime risk of lung cancer of 1 per 1,000 workers. NIOSH anticipates that the proposed REL will reduce the risk of other adverse health outcomes, including other cancers and non-cancer endpoints such as neurological, reproductive, and developmental toxicity. Federal OSHA does not currently have a specific exposure standard for 1-BP.
The draft document, which also includes an assessment of toxicological data for 1-BP and recommendations for the safe handling of materials containing 1-BP, is available for public comment through April 29, 2016. To learn how to submit comments, see the
Federal Register
notice
The following information was selected from the draft document and related EPA data.
From the draft document “Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to 1-Bromopropane (1-BP)”
: “1-Bromopropane (1-BP; CAS #106-94-5) is an organic solvent used in commercial and industrial applications, such as vapor degreasing operations and dry cleaning facilities.... The number of workers exposed to 1-BP is unknown, but 1-BP has been identified as a high production volume (HPV) substance; at least 1 million pounds is used annually in the United States.”
thesynergist​ | TOC | NEWSWATCH | DEPARTMENTS | COMMUNITY
Editor's Note: Fumes vs. Vapors
 
The original wording from the Center for Public Integrity's report "Common Solvent Keeps Killing Workers, Consumers" mistakenly refers to "fumes" in a context where "vapors" is the correct term. The Synergist has corrected this error in the digital edition.
 
Unfortunately, the error found its way into the print version of the November issue. The Synergist regrets the error and will publish a correction in the December issue.
 
Ed Rutkowski, editor