Occupational Exposure to Carbon Nanotubes and Nanofibers

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SiC nanoparticles and multi-walled carbon nanotubesexposure in several mammalian cell types: anin vitro study. J Nanopart Res 12(1):61–73.Baron PA, Deye GJ, Chen BT, Schwegler-Berry D,Shvedova AA, Castranova V. [2008]. Aerosolizationof single-walled carbon nanotubes for an inhalationstudy. Inhal Toxicol 20(8):751–760.Bello D, Hart JA, Ahn K, Hallock M, YamamotoN, Garcia EJ, Ellenbecker MJ, Wardle BL [2008].Particle exposure levels during CVD growth andsubsequent handling of vertically-aligned carbonnanotube films. Carbon 46(6):974–981.Bello D, Wardle BL, Yamamoto N, de Villora RG,Garcia EJ, Hart AJ, Ahn K, Ellenbecker MJ, HallockM [2009]. Exposure to nanoscale particles andfibers during machining of hybrid advanced compositescontaining carbon nanotubes. J NanopartRes 11(1):231–249.Bello D, Wardle BL, Zhang J, Yamamoto N, SanteufemioC, Hallock M, Virji MA [2010]. Characterizationof exposures to nanoscale particles andfibers during solid core drilling of hybrid carbonnanotubes advanced composites. Int J Occup EnvironHealth 16(6):434–450.Bellmann B, Muhle H, Creutzenberg O, MermelsteinR [1990]. Recovery behavior after dust overloadingof lungs in rats. J Aerosol Sci 21(3):377–380.Bellmann B, Muhle H, Creutzenberg O, DasenbrookC, Kilpper R, MacKenzie JC, Morrow P,Mermelstein R [1991]. Lung clearance and retentionof toner, utilizing a tracer technique, duringchronic inhalation exposure in rats. Fundan ApplToxicol 17:300–313.Birch ME, Cary RA [1996]. Elemental carbonbasedmethod for monitoring occupational exposureto particulate diesel exhaust. Aeros Sci andTechnol 25(3):221–241.Birch ME [1998]. Analysis of carbonaceous aerosols:interlaboratory comparison. Analyst 123(5):851–857.Birch ME, Dahmann D, Fricke H-H [1999]. Comparisonof two carbon analysis methods for monitoringdiesel particulate levels in mines. J EnvironMonit 1(6):541.Birch ME [2002]. Occupational monitoring of particulatediesel exhaust by NIOSH Method 5040.Appl Occup Environ Hyg 17(6):400–405.Birch ME [2003]. Standard test method for monitoringdiesel particulate exhaust in the workplace.ASTM standard test method D 6877-03. West Conshohocken,PA: ASTM International.Birch ME [2004a]. Monitoring of diesel particulateexhaust in the workplace. Chapter Q. In: SchlechtPC, O’Connor PF, eds. NIOSH manual of analyticalmethods (NMAM). 4th ed. Cincinnati, OH:U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NationalInstitute for Occupational Safety and Health,DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2003–154.Birch ME [2004b]. NIOSH Method 5040 update.In: Schlecht PC, O’Connor PF, eds. NIOSH manualof analytical methods (NMAM). 3rd supplement,4th Edition. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department ofHealth and Human Services, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, National Institute for OccupationalSafety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH)Publication No. 2003–154.Birch ME [2011a]. Exposure and emissions monitoringduring carbon nanofiber production−partII: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Ann OccupHyg 55(9):1035–10470.Birch ME, Ku B-K, Evans DE, Ruda-Eberenz T[2011b]. Exposure and emissions monitoring duringcarbon nanofiber production−part I: elementalcarbon and iron-soot aerosols. Ann Occup Hyg55(9):1016–1036.Bohning DE, Lippmann M [1992]. Particle depositionand pulmonary defense mechanisms. Chapter14, Organ Systems: Lung. In: Rom WN, ed. Environmentaland Occupational Medicine, 2nd ed.,pp. 171–182. Boston, Little, Brown, and Company.74 NIOSH CIB 65 • Carbon Nanotubes and Nanofibers
Bolton RE, Vincent HJ, Jones AD, Addison J, BeckettST [1983]. An overload hypothesis for pulmonaryclearance of UICC amosite fibers inhaled byrats. Br J In Med 40:264–272.Brouwer D, van Duuren-Stuurman B, Berges M,Jankowska E, Bard D, Mark D [2009]. From workplaceair measurement results toward estimates ofexposure? Development of a strategy to assess exposureto manufactured nano-objects. J NanopartRes 11(8):1867–1881.BSI [2007]. Nanotechnologies—Part 2: Guide tosafe handling and disposal of manufactured nanomaterials.PD 6699-2:2008. London: BSI Group.Bullock W, Ignacio JS, eds. [2006]. A strategy forassessing and managing occupational exposures.3rd ed. Fairfax, VA: AIHA Press.Carrero-Sanchez JC, Elias AL, Mancilla R, ArrellinG, Terrones H, Laclette JP, and Terrones M [2006].Biocompatibility and toxicological studies of carbonnanotubes doped with nitrogen. Nano Lett6(8):1609–1616.CEN [1993]. Workplace atmospheres—size fractiondefinitions for measurement of airborne particles,EN 481. Brussels, Belgium: European Committeefor Standardization.Cena LG, Peters TM [2011]. Characterization andcontrol of airborne particles emitted during productionof epoxy/carbon nanotube nanocomposites.J Occup Environ Hyg 2(8):86–92.Chai M, Birch ME, Deye G [2012]. Organic andelemental carbon filter sets: preparation methodand interlaboratory results. Ann Occup Hygdoi:10.1093/annhyg/mes029.Chang Ly, Huang Y, Stockstill BL, Graham JA, GroseEC, Menache MG, Miller FJ, Costa DL, Crapo JD[1992]. Epithelial injury and interstitial fibrosis inthe proximal alveolar regions of rats chronicallyexposed to a simulated pattern of urban ambientozone. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 115(2):241–252.CIIT and RIVM [2006]. Multiple-path particle dosimetry(MPPD, version 2.0): a model for humanand rat airway particle dosimetry. Research TrianglePark, NC: Centers for Health Research (CIIT)and the Netherlands: National Institute for PublicHealth and the Environment (RIVM).Coppeta L, Legramante J, Galante A, BergamashiAJ, Bergamashi E, Margrini A, Pietroiusti A [2007].Interaction between carbon nanotubes and cardiovascularautonomic nervous system regulation:proposal of an animal model and preliminary findings.G Ital Med Lav Ergon 5(29):465–467.Corn M and Esmen N [1979].Workplace exposurezones for classification of employee exposure tophysical and chemical agents. Am Ind Hyg Assoc1(40):47–57.Costa DL, Tepper JS, Stevens MA, Watkinson WP,Doerfier DL, Gelzleichter TR, Last JA [1995]. Restrictivelung disease in rats exposed chronically toan urban profile of ozone. Am J Respir Crit CareMed 151(5):1512–1518.Crump KS [1984]. A new method for determiningallowable daily intakes. Fund Appl Toxicol4(5):854–871.Crump KS [1995]. Calculation of benchmark dosesfrom continuous data. Risk Anal 15(1):79–89.Crump KS [2002]. Critical issues in benchmarkcalculations from continuous data. Crit Rev Toxicol32(3):133–153.Dahm MM, Evans DE, Schubauer-Berigan MK,Birch ME, Fernback JE [2011]. Occupational exposureassessment in carbon nanotube and nanofiberprimary and secondary manufactures. Ann OccupHyg doi:10.1093/annhyg/mer110lDeLorme MP, Muro Y, Arai T, Banas DA, FrameSR, Reed KL, Warheit DB [2012]. Ninety-day inhalationtoxicity study with a vapor grown carbonnanofiber in rats. Tox Sci 128(2):449–460.Deng X, Jia G, Wang H, Sun H, Wang X, Yang S,Wang T, Liu Y [2007]. Translocation and fate ofNIOSH CIB 65 • Carbon Nanotubes and Nanofibers75
Page 1 and 2:
CURRENT INTELLIGENCE BULLETIN 65Occ
Page 3 and 4:
Current Intelligence Bulletin 65Occ
Page 5 and 6:
ForewordThe Occupational Safety and
Page 7 and 8:
Executive SummaryOverviewCarbon nan
Page 9 and 10:
2009; Pauluhn 2010a; Porter et al.
Page 11 and 12:
neurogenic sig nals from sensory ir
Page 13 and 14:
possible. Until the results from an
Page 15 and 16:
••Follow exposure and hazard as
Page 17 and 18:
Periodic Evaluations••Evaluatio
Page 19 and 20:
ContentsForeword ..................
Page 21 and 22:
A.3.2 Comparison of Short-term and
Page 23 and 24:
ESPFeFMPSFPSSgGMGSDHCLHECHEPAhrISOI
Page 25 and 26:
AcknowledgementsThis Current Intell
Page 27 and 28:
1 IntroductionMany nanomaterial-bas
Page 29:
2 Potential for ExposureThe novel a
Page 32 and 33:
CNMs, with MWCNT agglomerates obser
Page 34 and 35:
composite materials with local exha
Page 36 and 37:
information on air contaminants. Sa
Page 39 and 40:
3 Evidence for Potential Adverse He
Page 41 and 42:
decreasing agglomerate size increas
Page 43 and 44:
examined up to 60 days post-exposur
Page 45 and 46:
3.3 SWCNT and MWCNTIntraperitoneal
Page 47 and 48:
The same potency sequence was obser
Page 49 and 50: Table 3-3. Findings from published
Page 55 and 56: Table 3-7 (Continued). Findings fro
Page 57: Table 3-8. Findings from published
Page 60 and 61: length, respectively) [Muller et al
Page 63 and 64: 5 CNT Risk Assessment and Recommend
Page 65 and 66: A-6). Risk estimates derived from o
Page 67 and 68: Table 5-4. Factors, assumptions, an
Page 69 and 70: and analytical methods. NIOSH is re
Page 71 and 72: Table 5-5. Recommended occupational
Page 73 and 74: deficits in animals or clinically s
Page 75: (3) Rat lung dose estimationIn the
Page 78 and 79: tasks where worker exposures exceed
Page 80 and 81: As part of the evaluation of worker
Page 82 and 83: Table 6-1. EC LODs and LOQs for 25-
Page 84 and 85: 6.2 Engineering ControlsOne of the
Page 86 and 87: Table 6-6 (Continued). Examples of
Page 88 and 89: Table 6-7 (Continued). Engineering
Page 90 and 91: exposure estimates for SWCNT on ind
Page 92 and 93: Table 6-8. Respiratory protection f
Page 94 and 95: ••Workers in areas or in jobs w
Page 97 and 98: 7 Research NeedsAdditional data and
Page 99: ReferencesACGIH [1984]. Particle si
Page 103 and 104: eport issued on July 22, 2011. NEDO
Page 105 and 106: Kobayashi N, Naya M, Mizuno K, Yama
Page 107 and 108: Methner M, Hodson L, Geraci C [2010
Page 109 and 110: Human Services, Centers for Disease
Page 111 and 112: Piegorsch WW, Bailer AF [2005]. Qua
Page 113 and 114: AD, Baron PA [2003]. Exposure to ca
Page 115: Varga C, Szendi K [2010]. Carbon na
Page 119 and 120: ContentsA.1 Introduction ..........
Page 121 and 122: A.1 IntroductionThe increasing prod
Page 123 and 124: provide an informal check on the es
Page 125 and 126: these same dose groups; this effect
Page 127 and 128: Table A-1. Rodent study information
Page 129 and 130: the deposited (no clearance) and th
Page 131 and 132: The other BMDS models failed to con
Page 133 and 134: Figure A-2. Benchmark dose model (m
Page 135 and 136: Figure A-3 (continued). Benchmark d
Page 137 and 138: Table A-3. Benchmark dose estimates
Page 139 and 140: Table A-5. Benchmark dose estimates
Page 141 and 142: histopathology grade 2 or higher lu
Page 143 and 144: Table A-8. Working lifetime percent
Page 145 and 146: developing early-stage adverse lung
Page 147 and 148: Figure A-4. Dose-response relations
Page 149 and 150: cell surface area). However, the wo
Page 151 and 152:
purified or unpurified (with differ
Page 153 and 154:
Table A-9. Comparison of rat or hum
Page 155 and 156:
A.6.1.3 Pulmonary Ventilation RateT
Page 157 and 158:
used as the effect levels in evalua
Page 159 and 160:
the DF estimate, although a larger
Page 161 and 162:
or overloading, of particle clearan
Page 163 and 164:
Table A-13. Human-equivalent retain
Page 165 and 166:
A.7.1 Particle CharacteristicsBoth
Page 167 and 168:
and density. The following MMAD and
Page 169:
Table A-15. CNT lung dose normalize
Page 172 and 173:
B.1 Key Terms Related toMedical Sur
Page 175 and 176:
APPENDIX CNIOSH Method 5040
Page 177 and 178:
filter. In the method evaluation, d
Page 179 and 180:
Most of the studies on sampling art
Page 181 and 182:
e analyzed to determine the onset o
Page 184:
Delivering on the Nation’s promis
show all

Occupational Exposure to Carbon Nanotubes and Nanofibers

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?