Draft Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to 1-Bromopropane (1-BP)

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced the public review and discussion of a draft document entitled “Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to 1-Bromopropane (1-BP)” published in the Federal Register on February 10, 2016. A public meeting was held on March 16, 2016 to provide a forum for discussion about the draft document, to request feedback and comments, and to allow stakeholders to make presentations to NIOSH. The public meeting was held at the NIOSH/CDC Robert A. Taft Laboratories, Auditorium, 1150 Tusculum Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226.

Background Information

Federal Register Notice: Federal Register Notice 2/10/16

Background Information: March 2016 – CORRECTED Draft Criteria Document for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to 1-Bromopropane (1-BP)

January 2016: Draft Criteria Document for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to 1-Bromopropane (1-BP)

Errata to the January 2016 External Review draft document

Peer review

Title: Draft NIOSH Criteria for a Recommended Standard: 1-Bromopropane

Subject: A comprehensive summary of the health risks from exposure to 1-bromopropane.

Purpose: To describe the extent and characteristics of workplace exposures and to provide strategies for preventing exposure at the work site (engineering controls, personal protective equipment, and a recommended exposure limit).

Timing of Review: February – April 2016

Primary Disciplines or Expertise Needed for Review: Risk assessment, toxicology, epidemiology, industrial hygiene

Type of Review: Individual

Number of Reviewers: 6

Reviewers Selected by: NIOSH

Public Nominations Requested for Reviewers: No

Opportunities for the Public to Comment: Yes

Peer Reviewers Provided with Public Comments Before Their Review: Yes

Peer Reviewers:

James V. Bruckner, PhD
Professor of Pharmacology & Toxicology
Department of Pharmaceutical & Biomedical Sciences
College of Pharmacy, University of Georgia
Areas of expertise: toxicology, pharmacology

Stephanie Chalupka, EdD, RN, PHCNS-BC, FAAOHN, FNAP
Associate Dean for Nursing
Dr. Lillian R. Goodman Department of Nursing
School of Education, Health and Natural Sciences, Worcester State University
Area of expertise: occupational medicine

Gaku Ichihara, MD, PhD
Department of Occupational and Environmental Health
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tokyo University of Science
Area of expertise: toxicology

Lawrence H. Lash, PhD
Professor, Department of Pharmacology
Wayne State University School of Medicine
Areas of expertise: toxicology, pharmacology

Jennifer J. Majersik, MD
Chief, Division of Vascular Neurology
Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah Neurology
Area of expertise: neurology

Xiaozhong Yu, MD, MPH, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Environmental Health Science
College of Public Health, University of Georgia
Areas of expertise: developmental and reproductive toxicology, toxicogenomics

Charge to Peer Reviewers:

1. Does the draft criteria document accurately identify and characterize the health hazards of occupational exposures to 1–bromopropane (1–BP) based on the current understanding of the scientific literature? Please identify any additional relevant literature that NIOSH should consider when developing its recommendations. Is the risk estimation for 1–BP presented in the draft criteria document a reasonable reflection of the current understanding of the scientific literature? Please describe any changes in the risk estimation that NIOSH should consider and provide supporting scientific literature.
2. Are there other risk assessment methods or health endpoints that NIOSH should consider for estimating risks of 1–BP? Please provide supporting scientific literature or other evidence to support your recommendations.
3. In this draft criteria document, NIOSH proposes a recommended exposure limit (REL) to prevent a risk of one excess cancer in 1000 workers exposed to 1–BP for a 45-year working lifetime. During development of the draft criteria document, NIOSH also considered setting the REL at a level to prevent 1 excess cancer in 10,000 workers for a 45-year working lifetime. Please comment on the excess cancer
   risk level and resulting REL for 1–BP.
4. Is the relationship between exposure to 1–BP and biological activity (toxicity) accurately presented in the draft criteria document?
5. Are the recommended strategies for controlling or preventing exposure to 1–BP (e.g., engineering controls, work practices, personal protective equipment) reasonable and technically feasible?
6. Are there other techniques or technologies capable of controlling workplace exposures to 1–BP that should be discussed in the draft criteria document?
7. Are the exposure measurement methods and the associated challenges in measuring workplace exposures to 1– BP adequately addressed in the draft criteria document?
8. Are there medical screening and surveillance measures, such as specific diagnostic tests, guidelines, and metrics, that should be implemented for workers expected of being exposed to 1–BP that are not discussed in the draft criteria document?
9. Are there biological indices or metrics that should be used to aid in the interpretation of biomonitoring data for 1–BP? What is the most appropriate biomarker that can confirm and quantify occupational exposures to 1–BP?
10. Should acute exposure recommendations, such as a short term exposure limit (STEL), be derived for 1– BP? If so, what data support the development of the STEL?
11. NIOSH provided Globally Harmonized System (GHS) of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals designations for health endpoints evaluated in the criteria document. Please comment on the utility of these classifications for hazard communication. Are these classifications helpful for employers?