Oberon Class Submarine Occupational Hygiene Project Final Report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ased limit, is derived by dividing the occupational value by 10, with the full detailspromulgated in BR1326. For example, benzene has an occupational value of 5 ppmwhich is divided by 10 to arrive at an MPC90 of 0.5 ppm. This methodology iscontrary to what has been stated by Raffaelli (1989).It is of interest to note that the UK Health & SafetyExecutive (HSE) (2005) in itspublication on exposure limits for workplaces, in paragraph 94, which deals withsubmarines and saturation diving, states that ‘continuous limits should be derived bydividing the 8-hour TWA exposure limit by a factor of 5’.Comment. It is difficult to make a comment on the approach taken without seeing thedocumentation for MPCs. The latest approach by HSE appears to be rather cavalier aseven the occupational values only at best ‘protect’ against a specific health effect in anormal setting. It has been the practice of ACGIH and the Worksafe Australia(Exposure Standards) to recommend that the documentation be read first beforeapplying the numbers.3. Östberg & Perrson (2004) collected air quality data on the Gotland Classsubmarine for the development of future submarine standards but in this exercisecompared their results with the Swedish OELs (Occupational Exposure Levels – 8hour time weighted averages) that are used for assessing normal work environments.The authors did express concern that the CO 2 concentrations exceeded the OEL of0.5%.Comment. It would appear that the Swedes have not set any values specifically forsubmariners as mooted in the Maron (1997) comments paper as they were stillcollecting data in 2004. It should be noted that the Swedes publish the scientificevidence for setting an occupational exposure limit but do not publish how the valuehas been arrived after a tripartite review. The user does not necessarily know whathealth effect the value protects the user from.4. For the Oberon Class submarine the only air quality listing that could be foundwas in the Standard Orders (Royal Australian Navy, 1997) the table ‘EmergencyAtmosphere Monitoring’ (p4-117) which lists seven substances: carbon monoxide,hydrochloric acid, phosgene, hydrocyanic acid, chlorine, carbon dioxide, and oxygen.Carbon dioxide has incorrect unit of measurement recorded (should be percent (%)and not vpm ), whereas, phosgene has what is probably a misprint for MPC Normal(0-0.05 vpm instead of 0-0.5 vpm). The document also stated the scale and number ofpumps needed to get the reading. There is also an action value for Otto Fuel (seeprevious comment under Otto Fuel). No documentation for the basis of the valuescould be obtained.Comment. RAN documentation which supports the values and the associated healtheffects should exist and would be worthwhile reviewing. The submariners are entitledunder the Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth Employment) Act 1991and Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth Employment) (NationalStandards) Regulations 1994 to view this information.5. Since 1995 the US Navy has used the Committee on Toxicology of theNational Research Council, which formed the Subcommittee on Emergency and34
Continuous Exposure Guidance levels for Selected Submarine Contaminants, toreview and update the submarine guidance levels. Their recommendations for 10substances (acrolein, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, hydrazine,methanol, monoethanolamine, nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, and oxygen) have beenpublished (NRC (2004)). The publication provides a very extensive review of thetoxicology and basis for the recommended values. The National Research Council(NRC (2002)) has also published another series on acute exposure guidelines forsubstances which are sensitizers (e.g., Otto fuel) or irritants (e.g., phosgene) or acutelylethal (e.g., hydrogen cyanide).Comment. Exposure guidelines (or equivalent) play a critical role in occupationalhealth and hygiene in providing a healthy and safe workplace. They need to be basedon good toxicological evidence, if possible, based on human experience. Whencombined with monitoring data they provide an index to health and safety. The USvalues are published and available for scrutiny. Similar documentation was notavailable for other nations, including Australia.Composition of the AtmosphereThis section will review and comment on several papers which relate to oxygen (O 2 )and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and their health effects.1. Consolazio et al (1947) carried out an extensive set of experiments in groupsof 4 to 77 volunteers in sealed steel chambers under a variable set of conditions of O 2 ,CO 2 , time, temperature and humidity. A range of tests were conducted to evaluatetheir biochemical, physiological and psychological state. Conclusions based on theirdata were that O 2 concentrations greater than 12% and CO 2 concentrations less than5% did not appear to have any serious impairment to the test group’s physicalcondition or efficiency. There were some minor symptoms such as headache, nasalcongestion and dryness of throat, which disappeared when outside air was breathed.Adequate O 2 pressure in lungs, blood and tissue was maintained as a result ofhyperventilation and increased pulse rate. Concentrations of CO 2 above 5% were notwell tolerated.Comment. The above study represents a one-off exposure of up to 34-72 hours duringwhich the CO 2 concentration of 5% was reached after about an average of 34 hours(29-37) in the chamber. No sequential repeat exposures simulating a normalsubmarine environment were done to determine if the observed decrements changed.2. In a conference paper, Davies (1975) reviewed the problems confrontingsubmariners during possible long habitation periods in nuclear submarines. Over 400hydrocarbons have been identified with at least 88 found regularly. The difficulty is indefining an acceptable level. Workplace standards cannot be directly applied withoutcomplete review of the toxicity of the substance. He cites some experimental workdone by Thomas (1968) in the USA where continuous exposure of animals to someselected chemicals at the civilian exposure levels resulted in death of a significantnumber of the animals before the 90 days were up. Oxygen deficiency may affectnight-vision. Above 22% O 2 becomes a fire risk to hydrocarbon laden carbon filters.There are doubts about the long term safety of CO 2 concentrations greater than 1% forcontinuous exposure. Davies questions some of the MPC90 limits and the level of35
Page 1 and 2: Oberon Class SubmarineOccupational
Page 3 and 4: ContentsExecutive Summary..........
Page 7 and 8: There is strong anecdotal evidence
Page 10: decommissioned) in 1992. The five r
Page 13 and 14: Ventilation Arrangements(from Kane
Page 15 and 16: Approach Adopted in this StudyIn or
Page 17 and 18: Departmental DocumentsDefence Scien
Page 19 and 20: of diesel-electric propulsion and a
Page 21 and 22: 4. Gan & Mazurek (~ 2005), “Expos
Page 23 and 24: to avoid short and long term effect
Page 25 and 26: from the air vents, in excess of 65
Page 27 and 28: Overseas Studies Relating to Oberon
Page 29 and 30: For the compounds identified with *
Page 31 and 32: pollution by 33%. There is a length
Page 33: Air Quality Standards1. In his brie
Page 37 and 38: ClothingStandard orders refer to th
Page 39 and 40: occupational health exposure studie
Page 41 and 42: Issues of body absorption of diesel
Page 43 and 44: eading time is 10 minutes. The 0.2
Page 45 and 46: Comment. This study is cited as the
Page 47 and 48: • secrecy associated with submari
Page 49 and 50: 3-methyl hexanedimethylcyclohexane1
Page 51 and 52: - performance of tasks in cramped c
Page 53: smoke candles ·torpedo 'hot runnin
Page 56 and 57: The control room onONYX, looking af
Page 58: Committee and the University of Que
Page 61 and 62: Many references were made to a sens
Page 63 and 64: safety was compromised for speed an
Page 65 and 66: Health HazardsThe health hazards id
Page 67 and 68: Psychological• Stress caused by n
Page 69 and 70: Tar epoxiesJason pistols?berylliumE
Page 71: Some of the psychological effects i
Page 75 and 76: Table 3: Rank and job description b
Page 77 and 78: Junior SailorsEngineeringTradespers
Page 79 and 80: Seaman- maintainerelectricalLeading
Page 81 and 82: Table 4: Exposure Profile and Quali
Page 83 and 84: DiscussionThis project appears to b
Page 85 and 86:
in surface vessel engine rooms. The
Page 87 and 88:
exceeded the guideline of 50 microg
Page 89 and 90:
ConclusionIn conclusion, the occupa
Page 91 and 92:
AnnexesAnnex A: The Project TeamAnn
Page 93 and 94:
Annex B toOberon Class SubmarineOcc
Page 95 and 96:
locked cabinets at CMVH and accesse
Page 97 and 98:
THIS PAGE WILL BE DETACHED FROM YOU
Page 99 and 100:
• What were the specific tasks co
Page 101 and 102:
List of Documents not AvailableAnne
Page 103 and 104:
ReferencesLiterature ReviewAdelson
Page 105 and 106:
Gorman R., Liss G.M., (1985), “Oc
Page 107 and 108:
McKinnery, W. N., Jr. and Moore, R.
Page 109 and 110:
Aeronautical and Maritime Research
Page 111:
111
show all

Oberon Class Submarine Occupational Hygiene Project Final Report

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?