Exposure Magazine - Issue 6 2019

EXPOSURE PROMOTING A HEALTHY WORKING ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL

#6

DECEMBER 2019

2019IN REVIEW ALSO INSIDE THIS ISSUE ❚❚ Dustbusters Campaign ❚❚ LEV2019 ❚❚ The Early Years ❚❚ LEV2020 The official magazine of

Monitoring VOCs in the Workplace Potentially hazardous VOCs in the workplace include solvents in paints, adhesives, cleaning products and plastics.

Diesel, petrol, gasoline, heating oil and aviation fuel are all VOCs too and these, along with benzene, toluene, ethylene, xylene and formaldehyde, all require careful monitoring. VOCs can be detected using specific detectors which utilise photoionisation detection (PID) technology.

Shawcity exclusively offers the complete Ion Science family of ATEX-rated PID detectors for VOCs in the UK and Ireland which includes personal monitoring, handheld surveying or fixed detection systems.

At just 66mm tall, the lightweight Tiger Cub personal monitor offers a detection range down to a market-leading 1 ppb and measures 480 selectable compounds, including benzene.

Next generation fixed PIDs for continuous area detection

The Tiger is a handheld monitor which measures down to 1 ppb, the widest measurement of any VOC detector on the market and it is ready to use straight out of the box.

The Tiger LT variant is the lowest-cost handheld VOC detector, still performing to 0.1 ppm and offering the fastest response and cleardown time available.

TVOC 2 offers diffusive monitoring and has Fence Electrode technology with increased resistance to humidity and contamination. Ideal for use in manufacturing and process industries.

FALCO has Typhoon technology to protect it from condensing moisture and has pumped or diffusive models. The FALCO TAC option specialises in monitoring total aromatic compounds.

Titan is designed for benzene-specific area monitoring and is deal for continuous real-time measurement in refinery applications.

shawcity.co.uk info@shawcity.co.uk 01367 899419

INSIDE

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE 3 Welcome 4 President’s Column 5 CEO’s Column 6 LEV 2019 8 UK Hearing Conservation Association

Welcome Welcome to Issue 6 of Exposure for 2019!

From everyone at BOHS Head Office, we would like to wish all of you a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. We would like to take this opportunity to thank you for supporting BOHS and our vision of a healthier working environment for everyone.

As we close the doors to another successful year, we remind ourselves of where the British Occupational Hygiene Society started with a fantastic personal account written in 1993 by one of our founders and Past President, Peter Isaac. To read this account, please turn to page 10.

On page 16, you can find our interview with Chartered Fellow, Catherine Ansell, who reflects on her career and discusses her experience and reasons for applying for Chartered Fellowship.

10 Early Years- A Personal Account 15 Essential Guidance for Occupational Hygiene 16 Meet the fellow Member - Catherine Ansell 17 The Royal Charter 18 Occupational Exposure to Nickel Compounds in France 20 The importance and benefits of Biological Monitoring and when to use it

We are always impressed with the level of detail and effort put into the studies we receive for our conference poster competitions. As a result, we feel that it is important to share the findings with our members and have included, on page 18, the winning poster from our annual conference, OH2019.

We close off 2019 with a significant loss for BOHS, as our CEO, Simon Festing, has confirmed he will be moving on from his post in February. We want to thank Simon, for his contribution to BOHS and wish him well in his new position.

22 Farewell Simon Festing

THE EXPOSURE TEAM

23 BOHS supports HSE’s #Dustbuster Campaign

AMY HARVEY

EVI KARMOU

SHANI JACKSON

JOE MOTT

LATEST BOHS NEWS & INFO @BOHS BOHS Head Office 5/6 Melbourne Business Court, Millennium Way, Pride Park, Derby, DE24 8LZ, UK T: + 44 (0) 1332 298101 | F: + 44 (0) 1332 298099 | membership@bohs.org | www.bohs.org The views expressed in this issue are not necessarily those of BOHS Board

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

@BOHSworld @BOHS Video @BOHSworld

3

PRESIDENT’S COLUMN and 18th September at the Pillo Hotel in Dublin. This was an exceptionally good conference and I definitely learned a lot – so much so that I am planning to devote the President’s session at OH2020 to dermal exposure risk management.

Interestingly the next OEESC conference is planned to be run by the Scientific Liaison Council (SLC) which is part of the American Society of Toxicology.

BOHS has been invited to join and this will be one of the subjects covered at the November Board Meeting.

JOHN DOBBIE BOHS PRESIDENT

Hello everyone - Well we are well into the first throes of Winter now, and the tremendous amount of rain and damaging floods are probably just a precursor to a potentially harsh Winter – that said I am writing this from a summery Perth in Australia, where I am attending the annual AIOH Conference.

Lisa Williams (our Head of Qualifications) and her partner are also part of the BOHS contingent and Lisa has assured me that we will have a stand-out entry for the 3M Fancy Dress Dinner, on the subject of recycle, reuse or repurpose. I had hoped to repurpose some Australian Rugby Shirts, if England had won the Rugby World Cup in Japan, but sadly it was not to be!

I have been involved in many discussions and teleconferences around the Awards Committee activities and it is good to see how well this group is developing under the expert guidance from head office staff.

I was also honoured to attend the Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM) 50th Birthday celebration held in the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh. It was a great event and showcased their many achievements over the past half century. Our profession would be very different without many of their important developments. It was also a great chance to catch-up with many BOHS members also helping them celebrate – perhaps not surprising that an event offering free drinks should attract plenty of occupational hygienists!

On Friday 18th October I finally attended the only regional BOHS meeting that I missed during my year as PresidentElect. This was the East Anglia Region organised by Jeanine Draser and it also had my fellow Board members, Kelvin Williams and Parmjit Gahir speaking.

It was well-attended, and I was very pleased to meet several old friends, and distinguished members including Trevor Ogden.

I also attended the Health Leadership Group Northern Ireland Conference on 20th Nov 2019 in Belfast to talk about occupational hygiene. I was helped tremendously by Adele McClelland and Marian Molloy. Adele additionally manned a BOHS stand which attracted quite a bit of attention.

The picture below shows Adele manning the BOHS stand and shows the useful “in case of Emergency Break Glass” unit behind the stand which contains a bottle of champagne. Adele said she would have preferred vodka – I just wished there had actually been an emergency!

Until the next edition – I will sign off and wish you all a very Happy Christmas and a peaceful New Year.

I attended a BOHS Senior Management Team meeting on Thursday 5th September as part of an agreement that I would attend a number of these this year and last. I was also privileged to attend the Technical Advisory Group meeting, at which I was impressed by the depth & scope of the topics addressed, – I will admit that I had always assumed BOHS must have such a group, but was happy to see the depth of expertise and experience of all the participants.

I attended the Occupational and Environmental Exposure of Skin to Chemicals (OEESC) event between 16th

4

Adele McClelland at the BOHS stand

BOHS.ORG

CEO’S COLUMN

2019 SIMON FESTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

We now have a Senior Management Team with the commitment and experience to drive forward the activities of the organisation. We have the operational systems to improve the efficiency and effectiveness by which we deliver those activities. And our finances remain in good health.

The volume of work which we are doing under our Policy and Technical Committee has grown steadily throughout 2019. A number of members of the Society have worked hard to respond to policy initiatives and to raise the profile of occupational hygiene. In particular, the Committee submitted its official response to Work and Health Unit’s consultation on ‘Health is everyone’s business: Proposals to reduce ill-health related job loss’. We pointed out that, as the Chartered Society for the Protection of Workers’ Health, we “support every initiative aiming to achieve healthy workplaces and reduce the burden of preventable diseases caused by exposure to workplace hazards”. However, as usual we find ourselves frustrated with the lack of appreciation of how important prevention is. Our consultation response pointed out our concerns that “OH delivery is too narrowly defined into clinical practice, ‘fitness for work’, health surveillance and generic wellness programmes”. As you would imagine, our lengthy and well-considered submission gave numerous positive suggestions to improve the state of occupational health in the UK.

HAS BEEN A YEAR OF CONSOLIDATION WITHIN HEAD OFFICE FOR THE SOCIETY. Our final paragraph in our response to the above consultation pointed out that: “the adage ‘prevention is better than cure’ should be given equal weight to managing a health condition or disability. Although ‘prevention’ is mentioned in the consultation, we believe it is not sufficiently transparent that this is the case. In our response, we have provided comments to help redress the balance. Moreover, the level of effort required to help employers manage chronic health conditions within a diverse population spanning different age ranges and health needs presents long term challenges for employers as well as employees. Only by fully engaging with employers of both large and small entities and establishing sustained programmes of support in tandem with clear expectations for outcomes will overall standards be improved.

As part of its response to this consultation, the Society for Occupational Medicine (SOM) published a report on the OH workforce at https://www.som.org.uk/futureoccupationalhealth-workforce.

This report highlighted broad concerns about the future of the occupational health workforce.

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

Whilst it has always been seen as a niche speciality, further declines in the workforce in recent years will inevitably make it even more challenging to deliver the services that the government would like. This work culminated in a debate with a high-level panel of experts, at which our President Elect, Kelvin Williams, was represented (see: https:// www.personneltoday.com/hr/crisis-oropportunity).

The Society aims to increase its level of collaboration with SOM in the year ahead, and is also looking at increasing joint working with other professional bodies. It was a small surprise to me when I came into this job that there was no umbrella organisation for the different professional bodies and societies operating broadly in the occupational health arena. This may be due to the disparity in size between the small ones, like BOHS, SOM and CIEHF (for ergonomists), and the large ones like IOSH and British Safety Council.

The more direct collaboration we can enter into, therefore, the better!

5

LEV 2019 Thank you to all of our speakers, exhibitors and attendees for participating with us at LEV 2019.

Some of you travelled very far and took the time out of your working week to attend our conference. This event was organised by various members of the organising committee including Mary Cameron and Adrian Sims along with Marie Townshend and Rachel Sipson of BOHS. LEV 2019 was the 4th annual joint conference between BOHS and ILEVE. We were fortunate to have such a wide range of expert speakers this year.

This year our conference focussed on training and competency, commissioning, filtration efficiency, LEV examination reporting guidance, a control measure case study, fan selection, containment testing, personal exposure monitoring reports, and an HSE update. These were very exciting topics, which sparked a lot of interest.

It was great to see everyone come together for the workshops, especially the workshop focusing on the pass or fail

6

decisions from real-world oddball systems and with the room full of LEV experts, the Q&A sessions which gave attendees the opportunity to text in their LEV related questions and have the room discuss and answer got underway.

This conference was such a great opportunity for those in the LEV industry to build stronger relationships. We are all working to prevent occupational ill health by installing, testing and maintaining LEV systems and this event turned out to be a great networking and learning opportunity for all of us.

LEV 2019 was a great event, we had more delegates attend, more exhibitors, more presenters, more trade associations and more debate! The BOHS ILEVE LEV conference is becoming a feature on the LEV calendar.

Delegate feedback was good, many liking the return to the one day event from the previous two day events. This year we intend to keep trying new things so we are looking to host an informal drinks reception for anyone to attend. It’s always great to catch-up with friends and new

LEV professionals all who want to learn and develop their LEV skill sets.

LEV2020 has been in the planning for six months now. We have a great organising team who have pulled together an exciting programme for this year’s event focusing on noise. What is nice is that this year we have had a number of potential speakers approach us and ask to present which is fantastic and shows the reach the event is having.” – Adrian Sims, Vent-Tech Ltd

BOHS.ORG

The Chartered Society for Worker Health Protection

2020

Extracting the Best Practices Tuesday 25th February 2020 | Hilton East Midlands Airport BOHS & ILEVE are holding their fifth joint ‘LEV – Extracting the Best Practices’ event.

Now in its 5th year, this one-day event is for anyone who has an active involvement in the local exhaust ventilation (LEV) industry. If you are involved in LEV system design, installation, commissioning, thorough examination and testing, servicing, maintenance work or if you own LEV installations then this conference is for you! We are reaching out to those working specifically in LEV, those working within the broad field of occupational hygiene or even just those interested in these subjects and wanting to learn more.

We will be presenting topics and workshops delivering insight and generating debate into the topics affecting LEV control and its role in the reduction of industrial disease.

For LEV control to become more effective at preventing ill health at work we need to install, test and maintain effective LEV systems. We need to build stronger relationships between all interested parties. If you agree, please join us and let’s reduce work-related ill health.

Conference Rates BOHS / ILEVE* Member Rate

£150.00 +VAT

Non Member Rate

£210.00 +VAT

*ILEVE Members contact conferences@bohs.org for the discounted rate.

Exhibitor Package Exhibitor Stand Package

£550 +VAT

• 3m x 2m exhibition space for one day with one delegate place • Listing in email campaigns, in social media posts & logo on slides at the event

Full details For more information, to view the programme or book your place EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

7

The UKHCA mission is, “Preventing damage to our nation’s hearing health and other noise related health conditions; through practical, evidenced and costeffective communications and solutions”.

As a collective group the UKHCA is “Passionate about preserving and promoting the protection of our nation’s hearing health.”

Hearing health damage from exposure to excessive noise is an invisible, irreversible, largely untreatable yet wholly preventable condition. Over 1 million workers in the UK are exposed to noise above the legal action value and therefore at risk of hearing damage.

Hearing loss has a significant effect on communication and can mean exclusion and disadvantages in education, employment, social care and public life.

Noisy workplaces also cause a safety risk as workers can’t hear what is going on around them including audible warning alerts.

In addition to work exposures, many young people are now entering the workplace with pre-existing hearing loss from a youth spent using headphones (the iPod generation). At the other end of the generational gap an increasingly ageing working population means that more people will be at work with accrued lifetime hearing impairment.

And it’s not just about hearing loss – exposure to noise at work and existing hearing loss are closely linked to tinnitus, depression, risk of dementia, higher risk of increased blood pressure and other stress related responses.

8

The UK Hearing Conservation Association (UKHCA) was officially set up in early 2019 by its founding members. BOHS is one of those founding members and is a proud supporter of the association.

The UKHCA is made up of many different members who have one thing in common, protecting hearing health from preventable causes, particularly excessive noise. Our members range from audiologists, acoustic engineers, music professionals, hearing protection manufacturers and suppliers, occupational hygienists, health and safety professionals and other professional bodies and charitable associations. We currently stand at 30+ founding members and this number is growing all the time as we plan to extend our membership to reach all interested parties. The UKHCA were proud to see 3 of our members recognised for innovation and education with EAVE, HearAngel and LOCHER project announced among the winners and highly commended at the recent John Connell awards held at the Houses of Parliament October 2019.

The UKHCA have created 4 main special interest groups in order to channel the expertise of our members and identify, create and share best practice for these key areas where the need for hearing conservation is required. These 4 main focus groups, which support our pillars of interest and key areas of influence to affect hearing conservation are: • Education for Young People Will focus on providing education and influence to the younger generation who are critical for the future of hearing conservation - helping them to have a healthier relationship with sound.

Highlighting the risks of prolonged listening to music on personal devices, and generally placing more value on their hearing as a precious commodity • At Work Where there is still a significant risk of exposure to high noise at many workplaces, providing a much needed improved focus on reduction of noise at source and not solely through the use of hearing protection, which has been shown to fail and leaves a million plus workers vulnerable to hearing health damage.

• Lifestyle The modern world can be very noisy and adds to our total noise dose over our lives. How to live a quieter life with a greater awareness of those risky hobbies and lifestyle choices can protect future hearing health, wellbeing and prevent other hearing related health problems.

BOHS.ORG

• Music and Entertainment An intriguing area which is difficult to solve with the “usual” reduction at source and control techniques as sound is created for intention not as a by-product!

Yet hearing health harm is a significant problem for those involved in this sector and can lead to a life of misery with early retirement from a lifelong passion becoming a harsh reality for many.

The UKHCA are keen to work with other industry associations, companies or groups to help raise awareness, educate and help put best practice into place in all aspects of hearing conservation, noise reduction and use innovative technology and techniques to do this. Recently the UKHCA produced some FAQs and guidance for construction project s via the “At Work” working group. This is a simple example of what can be done.

To help us communicate and raise awareness we are working with a management company to improve our communications and increase reach and

scope for our messaging and influence. You can sign up to our newsletter on our website http://hearingconservation.org.uk/ to receive updates and the latest information on our progress.

As part of our work to influence the music and entertainment sector the UKHCA are collaborating with the Institute of Acoustics and the UK Acoustics Network and with key music industry bodies to deliver; Hear for Tomorrow – an event for music lovers on the 8th April 2020 at the Royal College of Music. This event aims to raise awareness of the effect of music on hearing health through sharing the latest research and solutions. The meeting aims to cover the scale of the problem, what we now know, and what can be done. World leading specialists will deliver the cutting edge knowledge to help inform decision makers and influencers on wellbeing and health issues for amateur players, professional musicians, casual listeners and festival goers! UKHCA also plan to develop some evidence position papers

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

on key topics of contention in the world of hearing conservation, for example on health surveillance, hearing protection quality and audibility.

If you are interested to hear more about what we do and be linked into our developing association with news and guidance you can follow us on our Website; http:// hearingconservation.org.uk/ Twitter; @uk_hearing Or contact us here; enquiries@ hearingconservation.org If you have an interesting point of view, challenge or success story around hearing conservation we’d love to hear from you and share your experience with our members to help raise the profile of hearing health protection and drive this topic forward.

9

EARLY YEARS, A PERSONAL ACCOUNT

By Peter Isaac

The formation of the British Occupational Hygiene Society “In the years after the Second World War, the rich and powerful Rockefeller Foundation, of New York, gave great support to the promotion of public health in its widest sense, all over the world.

It did this in several ways. It employed professional experts directly in the field, for example in the attempt to eradicate malaria by mosquito control. But I believe that it envisaged catalytic action as being, in the long run, more efficient - or, as we should say in the current jargonridden language, more cost-effective - and, perhaps, more permanent; for this reason it promoted the establishment of university courses in public health engineering, occupational hygiene etc., both by direct grants to teaching departments and by paying for young lecturers to attend postgraduate courses in the United States.

In this way David Hickish, then a young electrical engineer lecturing in the occupational hygiene course at the London School of Hygiene, and I, then a railway engineer turned public-health engineering lecturer at King’s College, Newcastle upon Tyne, found ourselves at Harvard University in the autumn of 1951.1 Both of us were formally studying for the MSc (Master of Science) in the Graduate School of Engineering - the first year in which students of industrial hygiene were required to register at Cambridge rather than at the School of Public Health in Boston. David spent part of his time in the Harvard School of Public Health, under Philip Drinker and Leslie Silverman, and part at Cambridge in the Department of Sanitary Engineering, while I should have spent all my time at Cambridge, in that Department, under Gordon Fair, ShihLu Chang, Harold Thomas and Edward Moore. I found, however, that several of the courses of lectures that I should have been attending were rather ‘old-hat’, since I was already lecturing on the topics at Newcastle. Looking back I see how very fortunate I was that Professor Fair and his colleagues were so amenable, and suggested that I should spend time taking courses on physiology, industrial hygiene etc., in the School of Public Health.

It is out of this ‘accident’ that I came to be interested in industrial hygiene - and came to meet David with his career-long devotion to the teaching and practice of occupational hygiene - and this led, as we shall see, to the foundation of our Society.

The Rockefeller studentship not only paid the costs of our tuition, but also provided

10

living expenses for our wives (and, in David’s case, for a baby daughter) and – most important – enough to enable us to attend appropriate conferences and to travel to places of concern to our studies. (Boulder Dam was of obvious relevance to me as a water engineer – and allowed my wife and me to get to nearby Las Vegas!) Glancing again at the diary that my wife kept of our eventful years in the States, I am amazed at the number of valuable visits that we were able to pay. In particular, the Easter vacation was especially rich in visits to industrial plants to see occupational hygiene at work.

Later, a visit to Pittsburgh, at that time very polluted by the steel industry, enabled me to meet Ted Hatch, then the doyen of US Industrial Hygienists.

David and I were impressed not only by the attention paid to the environmental control in much of US industry, but also by what we saw of the fruitful cooperation of many professions in the American Industrial Hygiene Association, which we both joined, and whose impressive Annual Conference we both attended in Cincinnati in the Easter break. It was not long before we thought that a similar organisation for the UK would be timely and useful. We were encouraged in this idea by both Philip Drinker and Ted Hatch. Knowing that a few leading practitioners in this field in Britain were members of the AIHA, we first thought of trying to set up a British ‘chapter’ of the American association. Both Professors Hatch and Drinker, however, urged us to go it alone, and to set up a society for the UK, which would receive fraternal assistance, if necessary, from the AIHA. And that is how it was.

Gestation and birth Soon after our return to Britain in September 1952 David Hickish and I put this proposal to Dr Thomas Bedford, a central figure in British industrial hygiene at that time.

He gave it his warmest support, and immediately wrote to all those whom he knew to be working in the field – chemists, physicists, medical practitioners, engineers etc. He received favourable answers very quickly, and, as a result, I was able to write on 28 November to all those who had expressed interest, calling an exploratory meeting at the London School of Hygiene on the 21 January 1953 (my thirty-second birthday!). The detailed agenda paper was sent out on 5 January, and the meeting was attended by almost forty people.

As Jerry Sherwood reminded me through Derek Turner, the ground was prepared for such a proposal.2

Recognition of the real need for occupational hygiene came from Martin Herford…; as Deputy Director of Slough Industrial Health Service he persuaded the then Director, Austin Eagger, that a Health Engineer was a necessity.

Austin had real influence at the School [the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine] and persuaded them to put up some funds and, just as important, to provide space, so the Occupational Health Sub-unit was formed under the nominal direction of Guy Crowden and Jimmie Mackintosh.

The work of this unit received very significant, but unofficial, support from Thomas Bedford and Norman Davies.

Other support came from Peter Nash at Slough, and later from Thomas Bedford’s daughter, Joan. While this Society history is not the place for a full account of the development of occupational hygiene in the United Kingdom, it would be churlish – and, indeed, incomplete – not to indicate that the ‘transatlantic’ seed was strewn onto a good bed. Accordingly, the proposal came at the right moment, and some sixty of those approached expressed interest. It was felt at the meeting on the 21 January that ‘the details of the formation of such an association were too important and too farreaching to be settled at this initial meeting and an ad-hoc Constituent Committee was formed, consisting of Dr Thomas Bedford (Chairman), Dr C N Davies, Dr D G Harvey, Mr H R Payne, Dr P Pringle, Dr J Rogan, Mr R J Sherwood and myself. This met twice in the early months of 1953 – on 11 February and 18 March.

Many important decisions were taken at our first meeting on 11 February. The new society was to be called The British Occupational Hygiene Society (note the ‘The’; Henry Walton reminds me that with my usual pedantry I demanded the definite article in the title). There was some discussion whether to use ‘Industrial’ or ‘Occupational’, which may seem strange now in a community with so little concern for language that it can miscall a strike by air-traffic controllers ‘industrial action’ – for inaction by a professional group. At the time it was felt that Industrial might be construed as excluding agriculture; the founders wished to give the Society the widest terms of reference. There was even more discussion about ‘Hygiene’, a word who’s meaning even forty years ago had unfortunate connotations. ‘Health’ was rejected as being ‘too narrowly medical’.

It seems to me, as one now very much on the sidelines, that there has been almost no

BOHS.ORG

time in the Society’s forty years when the question of grades and qualifications has not been a topic of discussion and occasionally, sad to say, of bitter disagreement. At this very first meeting the founders, having talked over this matter, decided that the Society should be a learned society, not a qualifying body – and this is enshrined in the earliest constitution. (Nevertheless, as will be seen later, there was an implicit assumption that members would be graduates or of equivalent educational standing.) The composition of the Executive Committee and the procedure for electing members – they were to be proposed and seconded by members, and elected by the Executive Committee – were settled.

One of the most active of the founders (and President in 1957-8) was Dr Peter Pringle, Chief Medical Officer of the British Electrical Authority, who was also a barrister. He was given the task of drafting the Society’s Constitution, a simple two-page document that was approved at the second meeting of the Constituent Committee on 18 March, and was formally adopted at the Society’s Inaugural Meeting on 27 April 1953. (It may be noted parenthetically that Peter Pringle, having, like myself, enjoyed a classical education at my own old school, also supplied the Society’s motto from Virgil’s Georgics.) The committee fixed a ‘relatively high’ subscription (mirabile dictu) of two guineas. Even at this very early stage the founders were sufficiently sanguine to agree that a journal should be established as soon as practicable.

An invitation was sent, to all those who had expressed interest, to attend a meeting, at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, to inaugurate the Society on the 27 April 1953. Dr Bedford, who had convened the meeting, took the chair, and eighteen others were able to attend, with apologies for absence from several more.

The Constitution, which called for at least one Conference (a term used to distinguish a meeting for the presentation of technical papers from a business meeting) per year, was adopted with one minor alteration.

The annual subscription, due in advance on 1 May, was agreed at two guineas.

Tom Bedford was elected President with acclamation and Professor Early J King, a distinguished Canadian working in Britain, was unanimously elected President-Elect; David Hickish was elected Hon Treasurer, and the Executive Committee was selected.

Immediately afterwards the Executive Committee met briefly to appoint Dr C N Davies as Hon Editor (for a simple newsletter at first), and I was appointed Hon Secretary. The first three members were elected. It was also agreed to extend to 30 June 1953 the date for those who had originally expressed interest in the establishment of the Society to take up ‘founder-membership’, and just under fifty joined as founders; their names will be found

in the Appendix.

It is worth recalling with gratitude that not only was this first meeting held at the London School of Hygiene, but that the School provided the Society with a venue for its meetings for many years, and a base for its administration until it became too large to be serviced by purely honorary officers.

The practice of welcoming visitors from the American Industrial Hygiene Association, and other overseas societies, at our meetings started at our first Conference, held in London on the 2 November 1953.

This was opened by the Minister of Labour, the late Sir Walter Monckton. The President of the AIHA, Dr Henry F Smyth, came and, after giving the congratulations and good wishes of the American Association, he presented the Society with a silver mounted gavel from the AIHA, which has been used by our Presidents at Annual General Meetings ever since. (The Inaugural Luncheon, at the Bonnington Hotel, close to the School of Hygiene where the Conference was held, cost 15s – 75 pence for the very young!)

In the autumn, the Executive Committee had discussed the possibility of accepting industrial nurses into membership, and it was decided that applications for membership from them and from safety officers should be considered individually on their merits. The Committee, as may be expected in the Society’s early days, met frequently – some five times per year – and had a variety of matters to consider, both routine and of greater importance to the continued healthy growth of the Society.

Childhood In November 1954, the Minister of Labour reconstituted the Industrial Health Advisory Committee, which met under his chairmanship. Of the sixteen members of this Committee appointed by the Minister three represented employers and three employees; and one had to have LocalAuthority experience. The remaining nine were professional men and women nominated by various professional bodies.

The IHAS performed two functions: it advised the Minister and the Ministry on such aspects of industrial health as the Minister referred to it, and its members channelled back to their own organisations information on legislative, administrative and technical matters currently under discussion.

The Society, although metaphorically still just learning to walk, was invited to nominate a representative.

Following Professor E J King I served on the IHAC for a number of years. In my early years on the Committee I was optimistic of the formation of a national occupational hygiene laboratory service, as recommended by the Society (see our memorandum submitted in 1959 (but by the middle of 1966 when I resigned from the

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

IHAC, it had become clear that nothing of the kind would occur.3 There were a few members of the Society, which had not yet reached one hundred strong, who complained about the Society’s performance – or rather, lack of it- and threatened to resign. The foremost of these was Dr A J Amor, Chief Medical Officer of ICI, who, instead of taking merely negative action, agreed to arrange a meeting at an ICI plant in the Liverpool area in the spring of 1956, which would include the Annual General Meeting (in the University of Liverpool), a dinner and a works visit.

So began the Society’s out-of-London meetings. The complaint of inaction must have borne fruit because the records show that the Society organised more than twenty conferences and technical meetings in its first decade – not a bad performance for a body whose membership had only just topped the 200-mark by the end of those years. Derek Turner and Henry Walton, in their contribution show how fully Amor’s criticisms have been taken to heart by the Society.

After the relatively rapid growth of the first two years, the Executive Committee became concerned at a lessening of the numbers of applications for membership. Various steps were taken to stimulate new interest in the Society: criteria for the election of industrial nurses, proposed by Dr E F Edson, were accepted; a little later, it was agreed that occupational hygiene technicians should be eligible for membership but only if they were engaged in work of a character normally carried out by a graduate.

Also in 1955 the first steps were taken to launch a journal. Dr C N Davies, the Society’s first Editor of Transactions, had discussions with F J Parsons, publisher of several medical periodicals, and with Malcolm Page, who issued ‘free’ technical publications, supported by advertising; both withdrew, in the event. (It was the first International Conference, held in Oxford in March 1960, on inhaled particles and vapours, planning for which started in 1957, that first brought the Society into touch with Robert Maxwell, who agreed to publish the Proceedings – but that is a story for Henry Walton.) A Handbook was published for the Society (and at the Society’s expense) by Pergamon Press, and this was, in a sense, a pilot publication for the Annals.

Concern about the Society’s role in the broad field of industrial health, and about the scope of membership, continued and a paper on future policy was presented to the Executive Committee by Dr R B Buzzard in mid-1957, at a meeting attended by Past Presidents. This was accepted and it was agreed to widen the criteria for membership.

Those who had responded to Dr Bedford’s earliest approaches had strongly hoped that the range of professions represented in the Society would be very wide, and that medical

11

practitioners, scientists and engineers would all find a congenial ‘home’ in the BOHS. As a result of these discussions it was agreed that all engaged in occupational hygiene practice for a considerable part of their time should be eligible; at the same time graduate status was relaxed for those with appropriate experience.

Some form of membership for industrial and other bodies was discussed on several occasions, and was accepted in principle by the Executive Committee at its meeting on the 24 October 1963. A membership grade of Industrial Associates was accepted by the Committee at the beginning of 1964, and finally agreed at the AGM in April 1965.

In the late 1950s, the Society was very active in promoting the concept of a national occupational hygiene laboratory service. This was widely supported outside Government, the British Medical Association, for example, seeking the Society’s advice for its discussions on this matter with the Trades Union Congress. The proposal was stillborn, and in my Presidential Address in 1962, I said4 “For twelve months there was considerable activity in sub-committee [of the IHAC] and, later, in panel, but since the announcement of the generous grant by the Nuffield Foundation the Ministry seems to have taken little further interest. It is clear that the furthering of a nationwide application of occupational hygiene in industry rests in the hands of the three [then] functioning services: Slough, Newcastle and Manchester.”

funds had become large enough to call for the appointment of professional auditors; this has been the case ever since.

The graduate course in public-health engineering that I had started at Newcastle in a very small way in the late 1940s had, after my return from Harvard, received a generous grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, and was burgeoning. The Foundation intended special attention to be given to conditions in the Third World, and in the early months of 1955, I paid my first trip to the tropics – the beginning of the overseas travel which eventually built up to some 100 000 miles per year. I found it necessary, therefore, to give up the Hon Secretaryship at the ACM in 1961. The sadness of the occasion was much mitigated by my being nominated as President-Elect.

Dr Derek Turner (President 1973-4), who had been Scientific Secretary since 1955, was elected as Hon Secretary; Derek has been serving the Society for longer than almost anyone

Another Harvard graduate (before David and me), who entered the councils of the Society in those early years, was Jerry Sherwood (President 1966-7), who came onto the Executive Committee in 1959. At the time of writing, he is repaying that first essential American contribution to our work by ‘trying to hold the industrial-hygiene program [at Harvard] together until a new tenured professor can be appointed’. It was during his Presidency that the Executive Committee first formed sub-committees that have contributed so much to the Society’s progress, especially in its technical activities.

Following the launch of The Annals of Occupational Hygiene in 1958 and its first and very successful International Conference in Oxford in 1960 the Society’s expenses were increasing. It was decided at the Annual General Meeting in 1962 to put up the annual subscription to three guineas a nostalgic coin and an even more nostalgic amount! The 1962 meeting was also the high spot in my membership of the Society,

What has happened in the last thirty-five years suggests that we are still awaiting a nationwide service, which is, perhaps, no longer called for in these days of the apotheosis of private enterprise.

It was a natural corollary of the Society’s constitutional aim of promoting the professional development of occupational hygiene that it should soon be concerned with training in this field, and it set up a Working Group to look into the matter. The Society has never ceased to be interested in training, and, as is well-known, more formal bodies have grown out of this early concern.

In the first ten years, the work of the BOHS had called for a number of new honorary officers: a Scientific Secretary, responsible for the conferences, a Publicity Officer, and two Assistant Editors. The titles of the officers have changed over the years, but the functions are still carried out by honorary officers - and this is one of the strengths of the Society. In the first years the Hon Secretary was among the officers appointed by the Executive Committee, and, therefore, had no vote (and no voice) in the deliberations of that Committee.

This was changed at the Annual General Meeting in 1958, when several alterations were made to the original Constitution. Up to the AGM in 1959 the Auditors, too, had been honorary, but by then the Society’s

12

Thomas Bedford’s Letter

BOHS.ORG

when I was installed as the tenth President and that of a Society that had come of age, as the Annals and the Oxford Conference demonstrated.

Sad to say it was at this time that Thomas Bedford, the Father of the Society, and one or two other founders died. Since he saw that memories would soon fade Henry Walton, who had been President in 195960, prepared a specially bound volume with photographs of Past-Presidents, which, since he could not attend the 1962 AGM, I, acting on his behalf, handed to the outgoing President, DR L G Norman, Chief Medical Officer of London Transport. Mr Walton ‘had expressed the hope that future Presidents would add their photographs to the volume’.

(I wonder if this still goes on, as we reach our fortieth anniversary.)

end of my close contact with the inner workings of the Society. I was coming off the Executive Committee, no longer being Immediate Past-President, and a few days later I was due to sail to Thailand to inaugurate a new postgraduate course in

public health engineering at the South-East Asia Treaty Organization Graduate School of Engineering, which was financed by the SEATO Governments, principally the USA, Britain and Thailand at that time; I was being sent out by the then Ministry of Overseas

Years of discretion Although not yet into its teens the Society had, as I suggest above, entered years of discretion, as a learned society, with a serious publication, and capable of mounting important conferences. It regularly cooperated with other societies in the field, and, in 1962, the first meeting of the Presidents of our Society with those of the then Association of Industrial Medical Officers (later to become the Society for Occupational Medicine) and the Ergonomics Research Society was held. The Society’s view was sought by the Ministry of Labour and by HM Factories Inspectorate, but soon disillusion with the IHAC (and ministerial consultation) would occur - but that, too, is a topic for another contributor.

At the Annual General Meeting in 1963 Dr Fortuin, of Philips in Eindhoven, was elected to the Executive Committee, the first overseas member to be so elected. He had been a regular attender at the Society’s meetings and conferences, and gave sterling support for many years. At the same meeting Dr Hickish who had been Honorary Treasurer for the ten formative years of the Society, resigned this office and was elected to the Executive Committee. His close concern with the work of the Society continued through his Presidency in 1967-8, and until very recently.

It is he who is dealing authoritatively with those Professional Developments, which he did so much to promote. Another long-serving loyalist, Dr J Graham Jones (President 19745) was elected Hon Treasurer in place of David Hickish.

The Fourteenth Conference in 1962 was held in Newcastle upon Tyne, the first provincial conference to be held on the current President’s home ground, but by no means the first to take place outside London Professor Ronald Lane, remembered forhis pioneer work in the lead-accumulator industry, succeeded me as President, and the AGM and Conference in April 1964 took place in the Clinical Sciences Building of the University of Manchester. I recall the occasion clearly, because it was the

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

Founding Members’ Signatures

13

Development for six months. (A week earlier, on All-Fools’ Day 1964, I had been appointed to Britain’s first chair of public health engineering in the newly constituted University of Newcastle upon Tyne, and Ronald Lane used the occasion to wish me good fortune in this new activity.) But there was a black side to the meeting – the outgoing President deplored the demise of the Occupational Hygiene Service based at Slough, and suggested that the Society needed to give serious and unemotional consideration to the reasons for this failure.

(Again, to one on the sidelines it seems that, in 1992, greater care for the health of the worker has allowed the development of several thriving consulting services in the

Notes: 1.

2.

3.

4.

David was following in the footsteps of Jerry Sherwood, who had spent the academic year 1949-50 studying at Harvard, supported by a grant from the Nuffield Foundation (source in note 2 below).

William Wordsworth did not know what his solitary Highland lass was singing about, as we may see if we seek the context of the quotation above. Virgil, on the other hand, envied the natural scientist who understood the causes of things. We are among those to be envied, and I hope that my very personal reminiscences may give the newer members an inkling of the ‘causes’ of the Society in its earliest years.

13. Mr P C G Isaac, King’s College, Newcastle upon Tyne

Members on 27 April 1953 1.

Dr J C Amor, Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd

2.

Dr T C Angus, London School of Hygiene

3.

Dr T Bedford, Environmental Hygiene Research Unit

4.

Mr W G Busbridge, Atomic Energy Research Establishment

5.

Dr A L Cochrane, Pneumoconiosis Research Unit

6.

DR A N Currie, Ministry of Labour & National Service, Medical Branch

7.

Dr C N Davies, East Mersea

8.

Dr J Dobson, Warkworth

9.

Dr J C Gilson, Pneumoconiosis Research Unit

10. Mr R Hamilton, National Coal Board, Central Research Establishment 11. Dr D G Harvey, Department for Research in Industrial Medicine 12. Mr D E Hickish, London School of Hygiene

33. Dr C G Warner, Penarth

14. Mr C Jones, National Coal Board, Central Research Establishment

34. Mr S H Wilkes, Ministry of Labour & National Service, Factory Department

15. Prof E J King, Postgraduate Medical School, Hammersmith

35. Dr B M Wright, Pneumoconiosis Research Unit

16. Dr J A A Mekelburg, Peek Frean & Letter from Prof R J Sherwood dated Co Ltd 12 March 1992 from the Harvard 17. Dr ER A Merewether, Ministry of School of Public Health, to Dr Derek Labour & National Service, Medical Turner.

Department See the transcript of my Presidential 18. Dr W Miall, Pneumoconiosis Address (Ann. Occup. Hyg., vol 6 Research Unit (1963), pp 49-54).

19.Dr T G Morris, Pneumoconiosis Ann. Occup. Hyg., vol 6 (1963), p51.

Research Unit

Founder Members

14

field, and we may look back on the struggles of the 1960s as ‘old, happy, far-off things and battles long ago’.)

20. Dr G Nagelschmidt, Safety in Mines Research Establishment 21. Mr P D Oldham, Pneumoconiosis Research Unit 22. Mr H R Payne, Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd 23. Mr J Davidson Pratt, Association of British Chemical Manufacturers 24. Dr P Pringle, British Electricity Authority 25. Dr Drivers, Pneumoconiosis Research Unit 26. Mr S A Roach, Penarth 27. Dr J Rogan, National Coal Board 28. Mr R J Sherwood, London School of Hygiene

Members on 30 June 1953 36. Sir George Barnett, Ministry Of Labour & National Service, Factory Department 37. Dr R T G Craig, Newcastle upon Tyne 38. Dr M W Goldblatt, IC I Research Laboratories 39. Mr A J Holden, Association of British Chemical Manufacturers.

40. Dr W G Marley, Atomic Energy Research Establishment 41. Mr D Matheson, HM Inspector of Factories 42. Dr A Meiklejohn, University of Glasgow 43. Dr L G Norman, London Transport Executive 44. Mr J H F Smith, HM Inspector of Factories 45. Mr S Smith, Ministry of Labour & National Service, Factory Department 46. Dr A Topping, London School of Hygiene

29. Dr D G Skinner, National Coal Board, Members elected by the Executive Scientific Department Committee 22 May 1953 30. Dr F V Tideswell, Safety in Mines 47. Dr E Edson, Pest Control Ltd Research Establishment 48. Mr R C Frederick, Royal Naval 31. Dr V Timbrell, Pneumoconiosis Medical School Research Unit 32. Mr W H Walton, National Coal Board, 49. Dr R S F Schilling, University of Manchester Central Research Establishment

BOHS.ORG

ESSENTIAL GUIDANCE FOR OCCUPATIONAL HYGIENE CONSULTANTS AND BUYERS NOW UPDATED AND AVAILABLE FREE

BOHS, the Chartered Society for Worker Health Protection, has recently updated and published its best practice guidance for occupational hygiene consultants as well as its guide for companies wanting to obtain occupational hygiene services. Both guides are available free of charge, and aim to serve as the industry standard for competency in occupational hygiene consultancy services.

Written by the Society’s Faculty of Occupational Hygiene, the guides present essential information for anyone interested in either of the two transactional sides to occupational hygiene – namely, offering occupational hygiene consultancy services to organisations and obtaining such services as a buyer.

hygiene specialist services. Businesses are faced with key legal responsibilities in appointing competent persons to assist with compliance of health and safety laws.

The guide is designed to address this requirement, helping buyers of occupational hygiene services find the right competent advice for their needs.

The Good Practice Guide for Consultants outlines the legal and ethical responsibilities of occupational hygiene consultants. It also sets out some of the pitfalls which may result in occupational hygiene consultancy services received by the buyer failing to reach the standards expected of a competent occupational hygienist. These pitfalls may include scenarios where:

The Buyer’s Guide for Obtaining Occupational Hygiene Services explains that whilst appropriate professional qualifications alone do not guarantee a good consultancy service, they make it more likely.

• Work has been estimated and specified by someone without the right level of knowledge in the fundamentals and principles of occupational hygiene • Site work has been conducted by a technician or trainee with a low level of training or inadequate supervision by a competent hygienist • Reports are not checked or reviewed thoroughly enough and contain significant technical flaws.

The guidance aims to help occupational hygiene consultants to translate their individual competence into high quality occupational hygiene consultancy services, raising standards in the process.

BOHS Buyer’s Guide for Obtaining Occupational Hygiene Services is vital reading for those seeking occupational

In this regard, crucially, both guides emphasise that BOHS recognises the difference in the likely breadth and depth of knowledge that a Chartered Member or Fellow may have, compared to a Licentiate, and between a Licentiate and a technician or trainee.

Finally, both guides highlight the online BOHS Directory of Occupational Hygiene Services – the definitive list of companies able to provide qualified and experienced occupational hygienists and specialist occupational hygiene support services.

Commenting on the guides, John Dobbie, President of BOHS, said, “BOHS is delighted to present these two muchneeded guides as industry standards for addressing the competence of the services provided by occupational hygiene consultants on the one hand, and for assisting businesses to select the best competent occupational hygiene consultancy services on the other.

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

In launching these updated guides, the Society aims to improve the overall standards of occupational hygiene deliverables by setting minimum competency requirements for consultancies and offering assistance to companies to identify what good practice looks like. These are critical questions which need urgent focus now – to ensure high standards, legal compliance and a healthy working environment for all.

Mike Calcutt, Head of the Occupational Hygiene Unit at the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), said, “Good advice from suppliers and consultants can make a very important contribution to reducing workplace ill health. This guidance from the British Occupational Hygiene Society should help businesses secure the information needed to make good decisions about controlling exposure to substances that can cause significant harm to workers.”

15

MEET THE FELLOW MEMBER

CATHERINEANSELL 1 WHAT FIRST DEGREE DID YOU TAKE?

BA Hons in Environmental Studies from Newcastle Upon Tyne Polytechnic

2 WHAT WAS THE FIRST

JOB YOU GOT WHEN YOU FINISHED YOUR FULLTIME EDUCATION? I spent a year working in a hotel on reception before landing the job as an Asbestos Technician with Thomson Laboratories in Milton Keynes in 1984. .

3

DESCRIBE A TYPICAL DAY IN YOUR WORK. Well that’s a bit tricky now having retired (yay), but for the last three years it involved dealing with issues around the new strike fighter and its integration onto the Queen Elizabeth class carrier. With US Marine Corps personnel as well as RN personnel involved all maintenance activities had to comply with COSHH etc. So a lot of negotiation with the project teams in the US and UK bases.

5

HOW DID YOU GET YOUR CURRENT JOB? Funnily enough it was advertised whilst I was completing my Master in Occ Hygiene. So bad timing there with a return to service agreement with Thomson Labs. But it came up again a few months later and since it was based in Plymouth, my husband had a hankering to return to the South West, I applied and to my shame

16

wasn’t even first choice (or second!). But they all fell by the wayside and I got the job.

6

WHAT PROMPTED YOU TO APPLY FOR FELLOWSHIP? WHY NOW AND NOT SOONER? At the BOHS conference in Harrogate I was approached

by Neil Pickering who asked whether I had and/or would consider applying for Fellow.

He was on a mission. Why not sooner? To be honest I never really thought that I had evidence of sufficient quality to present to the Board and it took a couple of years to actually submit due to work pressures (we were down to two professional Occupational Hygienists in the MOD by then).

7

HOW WAS THE APPLICATION PROCESS? Surprisingly easy in so far that I was able to call on experienced colleagues to vet my submission, which was in the form of a letter containing my CV and the supporting evidence. Once submitted I waited to hear and I am sure that the process is normally quite quick but I didn’t hear for a few months due to an ‘outbox’ mishap, but that’s technology for you. It all came right in the end.

8

WHAT DO YOU SEE AS THE ADVANTAGES OF BEING A FELLOW? It might seem strange to apply so late in one’s career and I did think about it for a long while before applying, but I think for me personally it’s the acknowledgment of your

peers for what you have done in the world of Occupational Hygiene. If you are still in business then the additional status should show any clients that you are at the top of your field and getting the very best of what BOHS members have to offer.

9

ANY TIPS TO OTHER MEMBERS CONSIDERING APPLYING TO BECOME A FELLOW? Don’t ever think that you haven’t enough ‘time in the saddle’ as I am sure that each of us can bring something new and different to the pot, after all that’s the beauty of this profession and I often described it to bemused managers as ‘Jack of all Trades and Master of All’, perhaps a little big headed but I think it has the ring of truth!

10 WHAT DO YOU

ENJOY DOING WHEN YOU ARE NOT WORKING? Soooo much, not necessarily in any order, singing acapella, knitting, tapestry, anything crafty, trying to lose weight and keeping fit, lunches out (trying to lose weight and keeping fit etc. etc).

11 WHERE DID YOU

LAST GO ON HOLIDAY?

Well we stayed in the UK much of this last year, but the latest trip was a long weekend

in Belfast city, touring the Falls Road and Shankhill areas, and the Titanic Museum. It’s a very welcoming city and well worth a visit.

12 DO YOU HAVE A FAVOURITE PET?

Sadly no pets at present but my preference is dogs, but seem to have had cats most of the time in the last 20 years.

13 DO YOU HAVE

A FAVOURITE FILM OR SERIES?

Well I suppose it would have to be the NCIS series (all variations) on TV as I can relate to the defence environment having worked for the MOD Navy for 27 years. Haven’t been to the cinema for ages.

14 IF YOU COULD

ONLY LISTEN TO ONE SONG FOR EVERMORE, WHAT WOULD IT BE AND

BY WHOM?

For a singer that is a tough one. It’s always the one I’ve just heard, or singing now. But if pushed I would have to say Time to Say Goodbye sung by Katherine Jenkins. Both my daughter and I love singing this together (But I have to leave the very high bits to her now).

WANT TO BE OUR NEXT EXPOSURE STAR? Contact us at exposure@bohs.org to find out how!

BOHS.ORG

THEROYALCHARTER In December 2012, Our Royal Charter was sealed in recognition of our dedication to occupational hygiene and our commitment to providing a service that is within the public’s interest.

A Royal Charter is granted by The Queen after considering an organizations’ independent legal personality. All Royal Charter companies will have their own set of bylaws which govern their activities, based on the requirement needs of the organization.

We are proud to have upheld our chartered status for the past seven years and continue to do so.

As part of our Royal Charter, we have the ability to award the individual Chartered designation; Chartered Occupational Hygienist (CMFOH/CFFOH) which can be found on the Privy Council website: http:// tiny.cc/y9emhz. There are less than 150 individual Chartered designations at present as not all Royal Charter companies are allowed to award these designations and they are a mark of excellence across the world.

The Chartered Status ‘Chartered Occupational Hygienist’ is a coveted and protected title which is recognised as a mark of excellence across the world. Those who have achieved this position are entitled to use post-nominal letters to show their prestigious status in the profession.

By receiving the title of Chartered Occupational Hygienist, you are gaining recognition for your strong knowledge and expertise within the field of occupational hygiene and your commitment to continued professional competency and development.

To become a Chartered Occupational Hygienist, you must have completed the BOHS Diploma in Professional Competence.

This is the highest professional occupational hygiene qualification awarded in the UK. By holding this Diploma, you are demonstrating your thorough understanding of occupational hygiene and hold the highest of standards within your field.

After five years as a Chartered Occupational Hygienist, you can become a Chartered Fellow. The status of the Chartered Fellow is the highest accolade an occupational hygienist can receive. It is the formal acknowledgment and reward of your services to BOHS and the occupation of occupational hygiene. Chartered Fellows have been involved in committees, have become Trustees of the Board and even BOHS Presidents.

We encourage all of our occupational hygienists out there, to apply for Chartered status if you’ve completed your Diploma or to get in touch with us to discuss your career progression route, if you’re not sure what your next steps are, to becoming a Chartered Fellow.

We have over one hundred Chartered Members and over fifty Chartered Fellows.

BOHS Past Presidents receiving the Royal Charter Seal in 2013

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

17

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO NICKEL COMPOUNDS IN FRANCE

INHALABLE DUST EXPOSURE DATA FROM THE COLCHIC DATABASE The French database COLCHIC contains occupational exposure data for more than 700 chemicals, collected since 1987 by the eight interregional chemistry laboratories of the French occupational health insurance system and the National Research Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (INRS).

The French 8-hour Occupational Exposure Limit Value (OEL8h) for nickel compounds (except for nickel sulphate and Time period

n

AM

SD

GM

1987-2017

6 534

0.09

0.58

0.008

GSD

min

nickel tetracarbonyl) is 1 mg m-3. In March 2018, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) proposed an 8-h OEL of 0.03 mg m-3 for inhalable nickel dust. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe inhalable nickel dust exposure data in France for the period 1987-2017 and to compare it both with the French OEL and that proposed by ECHA.

P5

P25

P50

P75

7.55 <0.001 <0.001 0.002 0.006 0.027

P95

Max

%>OEL

%>ECHA

0.31

17.3

1.8

24

n=number of observations; AM=Arithmetic Mean; SD=Standard Deviation; GM=Geometric Mean; GSD=Geometric Standard Deviation; min=minimum value; P5-P95=percentiles; Max=maximum value; %>OEL=percentage of measures higher than the French OEL-8h; %>ECHA=percentage of measures higher than the OEL proposed by ECHA.

CENTILE

FIGURE 1

1.00

98% OF MEASURES ARE LOWER THAN THE FRENCH OEL

0.75

76% OF MEASURES ARE LOWER THAN THE ECHA OEL

0.50

ECHA OEL

FRENCH OEL

0.25

0.00 0.1

1

5

10

NICKEL CONCENTRATION (mg m-3)

Methods

Results and Discussion

Data were extracted and exploited using the R programming language. A cumulative frequency graph comparing the distribution of nickel exposure with the French and ECHA-proposed OEL was obtained (Figure 1). An Exposure Index (EI=C/OEL) comparing nickel concentration with the French and ECHA-proposed OELs was calculated and categorised. Calculation of EI was restricted to quantitative air sampling measures in the workers’ breathing zone. Results were merged by activity sector and custom bar-charts were produced to obtain visual summaries (Figures 2 and 3).

Nickel was collected in several activity sectors, and especially in the “Manufacture of medical and dental instruments and supplies” (NACE 32.50; n=546), the “Treatment and coating of metals” (NACE 25.61; n=474), the “Manufacture of metal structures and parts of structures” (NACE 25.11; n=385), the “Installation of industrial machinery and equipment” (NACE 33.20;

18

n=344), and the “Casting of steel” (NACE 24.52; n=302). Welding is the most represented task in COLCHIC (n=1609, range [<0.001– 7.32] mg m-3, median=0.005 mg m-3, P95=0.14 mg m-3, 0.6% of measures > OEL-8h) but the highest exposures are found for tasks in the foundry and plating industries.

Since 1987, a decrease in exposure levels is observed: the AM was

BOHS.ORG

COLCHIC : 2013-2017 Distribution by activity sector of EI in comparison with the French OELV

Other service activities n =

32

Financial and insurance activities n =

120

Professional, scientific and technical activities n =

148

Manufacturing n = 5 250

Education n =

40

Construction n =

274

Water supply; sewerage, waste management n =

285

Real estate activities n =

31

Arts, entertainment and recreation n =

7

Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles/cycles n =

114

Administrative and support services activities n =

38

Human health and social work activities n =

57

Public administration n =

55

Accommodation and food service activities n =

3

Agriculture, forestry and fishing n =

7

Transportation and storage n =

37

Mining and quarrying n =

8

Energy supply n =

21

Information and communication n =

7

Proportion

ND

IE<0.1

0.1<=<1

IE>=1

COLCHIC : 2013-2017 Distribution by activity sector of EI in comparison with the ECHA OEL

Real estate activities n =

31

Financial and insurance activities n =

120

Arts, entertainment and recreation n =

7

Manufacturing n = 5 250

Professional, scientific and technical activities n =

148

Other service activities n =

32

Transportation and storage n =

37

Construction n =

274

Energy supply n =

21

Administrative and support services activities n =

38

Education n =

40

Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles/cycles n =

114

Water supply; sewerage, waste management n =

285

Human health and social work activities n =

57

Public administration n =

55

Accommodation and food service activities n =

3

Agriculture, forestry and fishing n =

7

Mining and quarrying n =

8

Information and communication n =

7

Proportion

ND

0.035 mg m-3 in 1987 and 0.013 mg m-3 in 2017. Around 2% of these values are greater than the current French OEL-8h and 24% of them are greater than the OEL proposed by ECHA. “Manufacture of hollow glass” (NACE 23.13) is the sector presenting the highest percentage of measures exceeding the OEL8h (11%). Compared to the ECHA proposal, the median of exposure levels to nickel would be higher than the OEL in 7 sectors, particularly in the “Manufacture of machinery” (NACE 28), the “Casting of steel” (NACE 24.52), and the “Manufacture of batteries and accumulators” (NACE 27.20).

IE<0.1

0.1<=<1

IE>=1

Conclusions Inhalable nickel data from the COLCHIC database show that exposure levels for the period 1987-2017 are overall well below the French OEL: 98% of measures are compliant and exceeding measures are mostly found in the manufacturing industry. However, shall the OEL proposed by ECHA be implemented, a considerable impact would then be observed, with 24% of

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

existing measures exceeding 0.03 mg m-3 and approximately one quarter of exposures in manufacturing exceeding this limit value. These data should help inform future preventive actions in those sectors presenting a risk of noncompliance with future OELs.

19

THE IMPORTANCE AND BENEFITS OF BIOLOGICAL MONITORING

AND WHEN TO USE IT KATE JONES, HSE

I gave this presentation as part of a oneday BOHS regional workshop, “Enhance Your Practical Skills”, arranged by Helen Pearson (one of the Scotland regional organisers) and held at Perth Racecourse in March of this year. I shared the platform with Mike Clayton (3M) talking about RPE, with Shawcity demonstrating the Quantifit system, Helen Taylor (Enviroderm) on skin health surveillance and Linda Bell (Business Medical Limited) on occupational health. John Dobbie (then President-Elect) finished up with a view on occupational hygiene competency.

As you may know, biological monitoring (BM) is the assessment of overall systemic exposure to chemicals by measurement of the chemicals themselves or their breakdown products in a biological sample (usually blood or urine) supplied by the worker. BM has particular relevance when the chemical in question can be significantly absorbed via the skin or when control of exposure relies on personal protective equipment (PPE). BM should be considered as a measurement of exposure, not an indication of likely ill-health, and therefore falls under COSHH Regulation 10 (Monitoring exposure). Most BM is not mandated by law, except for the Control of Lead at Work1 regulations, but HSE has published 17 guidance values (BMGVs2 ) and many more are available from organisations such as ACGIH3 in the USA and DFG4 in Germany.

These are useful in interpreting the results.

20

There is also guidance available on how to undertake BM in the workplace5 with advice on sampling and ethical considerations; your specialist laboratory should also be able to advise on these issues. One of the most important aspects to consider on the sampling side is biological half-life; this is the time taken for half of the absorbed dose to be excreted (as the analyte you are measuring in the appropriate sample medium). For those chemicals with a short half-life (less than, say, 10 hours) such as isocyanates and many solvents, the sample collected only reflects exposure on the day of sampling.

For slightly longer half-lives there is likely to be an accumulation over the working week so sampling towards the end of the week is recommended whereas for much longer half-lives (>100 hours, e.g. cadmium), a steady state is reached and sampling time becomes less crucial but demonstrating the effectiveness of an intervention for example requires more consideration due to the response time involved. The route of likely exposure is also important as chemicals absorbed through the skin take longer to reach the blood supply due to the time taken to penetrate the skin layers; this can result in pre-shift next day levels being greater than the post-shift levels and is often a good indication of significant dermal uptake.

One of the most common questions I am asked is “how often should sampling be done?”

The answer, of course, depends on the level of exposure. As a general rule, where potential exposure is well characterised and previous

results indicate that control is satisfactory (i.e. well within current guidance values) then annual monitoring should be sufficient.

Like other monitoring (air sampling, health surveillance), it may be appropriate to conduct more sampling initially to get an adequate dataset to which to compare future sample results and to ensure that those new to the job have been adequately trained. Sample results should always be actively reviewed as to whether further action is required. As for airborne exposure limits, many BMGVs come with an understanding that exposures should be as low as reasonably practicable (particularly carcinogens, mutagens and sensitisers) and therefore if it is possible to cost-effectively reduce the observed exposure then efforts should be made to do so. Where interventions are undertaken, BM can often be a quick and effective means of assessing the efficacy of the changes6 7 and the adherence of workers to any new procedures.

In conclusion, BM is a simple, cost-effective tool for assessing and controlling exposure to potentially harmful substances. BM sits alongside other environmental monitoring methods, but it is a direct measure of an individual’s exposure and incorporates all exposure routes, assesses the appropriateness of any PPE and its use, and evaluates worker behaviour.

Control of Lead at Work, third edition, http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ books/l132.htm 2 EH40/2005 Workplace exposure limits, http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ books/eh40.htm 3 2019 TLVs and BEIs, https:// www.acgih.org/forms/store/ ProductFormPublic/2019-tlvs-andbeis 4 List of MAK and BAT Values, https:// onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ pdf/10.1002/9783527695539.oth1 5 Biological monitoring in the workplace, http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ books/hsg167.htm 6 Case Study: Benzene exposure to workers during tunnelling, https:// www.hsl.gov.uk/resources/casestudies/benzene-exposure-toworkers-during-tunnelling7 Case Study: Skin absorption of isocyanates: Use of MDI adhesive, https://www.hsl.gov.uk/resources/ case-studies/skin-absorption-ofisocyanates-use-of-mdi-adhesive 1

BOHS.ORG

BRISTOL UK The 10th International Symposium on Modern Principles of Air Monitoring and Biomonitoring Bristol Marriott City Centre Hotel 6 – 10 September 2020

Abstracts & Bookings Open Abstract Deadline 6 March 2020 This symposium is the leading international forum at which recent progress in workplace, residential and environmental exposure assessment strategies and associated analytical air sampling and biomonitoring methodologies can be discussed. The symposium is supported by a consortium of European and International Institutes of Occupational and Environmental Health and Safety, from whom, members of the scientific committees are drawn.

An exciting programme is planned which combines thought-provoking keynote presentations with accompanying oral presentation sessions. Practical workshops and presentations for hygienists will be included.

Full details and abstract submissions tiny.cc/airmon2020

To enquire about exhibition and sponsorship packages contact conferences@bohs.org

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

Conference Rates Delegate Type

Full Conference

Early Bird*

Day Rate

Full Conference Non Member

£675

£625

£225

Full Conference BOHS Member

£575

£525

£225

Full Conference Speaker Rate

£450

-

-

Student/ Developing Country

£300

-

-

All rates are subject to UK VAT currently 20%. *Early Bird rates available until 29 May 2020.

Student & Developing Country Rates If you would like to enquire about the Student or Developing Country rates, contact conferences@bohs.org Cancellations received after 29 May 2020 are NOT entitled to a refund but delegate name changes are allowed up until the conference date.

The Chartered Society for Worker Health Protection

www.bohs.org

21

FAREWELL SIMON FESTING 2019 draws to a close with the announcement of a significant loss for BOHS, as CEO Simon Festing has confirmed he will move on from his post in February.

This loss does, however, present an opportunity to reflect on Simon’s multiple achievements during his time with the Society, and recognise his valuable contributions.

Prior to joining BOHS, Simon’s career included senior positions for several Societies and Bodies, including Chief Executive at: The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management; The Microbiology Society; and Understanding Animal Research. Other positions included directing policy and public affairs for a number of organisations.

Upon joining BOHS, Simon shared how pleased he was to join the Society, and how he relished the unique opportunity of being able to continue to improve the impact of the occupational hygiene profession.

He also shared his vision that he saw his role as BOHS’ CEO as being responsible for ensuring a clear strategic direction; a strong external profile; and a well-run, efficient organisation that provides the highest service levels for its members – all of which inevitably would mean a process of improvement and modernisation being undertaken at head office. His view on how a professional body should be run, is that the staff run the machinery of the society, whilst the members are responsible for the ‘content’ i.e. the expertise in occupational hygiene and related disciplines – that feeds into the collective work.

This vision has delivered many improvements to internal processes, which in turn has greatly enhanced the levels of service the Society offers, via initiatives and projects such as: • A new CRM system and membership portal, that has greatly enhanced the user experience for BOHS’ members by making it easier to manage their accounts, and book services such as membership and events/conferences • Working with the Board to improve efficiencies in the Board meetings and decision-making processes

22

• Working with the Senior Management Team to improve the internal running of the organisation and achieve efficiencies in team collaboration and project management The Presidential trio paid individual tributes to Simon’s accomplishments during his tenure as CEO. BOHS’ President John Dobbie commented by saying that Simon joined BOHS at a time when the Society had ambitious plans to raise the profile of occupational hygiene, and had been working for a few years on the Breathe Freely campaigns. Though these campaigns had been very successful in raising the Society’s external profile, and both Head Office staff and the Board (the then Council) had increased their efforts and workloads to meet the technical challenges presented by these campaigns, this had perhaps resulted in governance and internal processes drifting a little off-course. John underlined how Simon rapidly managed to address both these areas with significant success, and he said:

He leaves BOHS in a much better place than it was when he started. I wish Simon every success in his future ventures and thank him for all his efforts over the past two years.

Neil Grace, Immediate Past President, recalled that Simon’s arrival at BOHS in late 2017 kick-started a full review of how the organisation was managed, commenting that “his focus and evaluation on the business processes within the Society was second to none” and that during Simon’s tenure significant improvements have clearly taken place. Neil referenced a particularly valuable change, which concerned the format of Board meetings: the new format is for three

smaller committees to meet in the morning to look at Finance, Policy and Technical, and Strategy issues; whilst in the afternoon the full Board meets to agree the actions needed to move forward. Neil explained that this new system enables the teams to more easily review and focus in detail the particular issues that have been presented, commenting that this results in “increasing the time we have in the day to get more done… good work Simon!”.

Kelvin Williams, President Elect for 2020 said:

Within a short period of time on the Board it became clear to me that Simon is a most thoughtful and insightful person, bringing astute consideration and clarity to the development of BOHS and our strategy for the coming years. BOHS has been the beneficiary of Simon’s extensive third sector experience and he will be sorely missed. I join with others in thanking Simon for his hard work on behalf of BOHS and wishing him future success.

Everyone at BOHS sincerely thanks Simon for all his hard work and indispensable contributions, and wishes him all the very best in his future endeavours.

BOHS.ORG

BOHS SUPPORTS HSE’S #DUSTBUSTER CAMPAIGN BOHS and Breathe Freely have been actively supporting the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) #Dustbuster inspection campaign through its social media channels and by informing and engaging its members.

The #Dustbuster campaign aims at protecting Britain’s workers from lifechanging and fatal lung diseases.

themselves with the HSE’s advice and guidance on occupational respiratory health, ahead of a visit from an inspector.

Following on from the January 2019 campaign’s launch, HSE has announced more construction site inspections between 7th October and 1st November 2019. The focus of the inspections is to check that employers are implementing control measures to protect workers from occupational lung disease and cancer caused by asbestos and silica dust, wood dust and other types of construction dust.

BOHS and the Breathe Freely campaign are calling for better awareness in particular of the following key facts:

As the momentum of the inspection campaign gathers, employers, managers and workers are being urged to familiarise

• Every year work-related lung diseases cause nearly 12,000 deaths. This is about 90% of the total annual death toll of 13,000 deaths caused by occupational ill health in general.

• Some of these diseases, like lung cancers caused by asbestos or cancers of the nose caused by wood or leather dusts, take a relatively long time to

EXPOSURE MAGAZINE #6 - the official magazine of BOHS

develop, so in the past neither workers nor their employers may have been aware of the link to the workplace.

• Others illnesses, for example occupational asthma caused by flour dust or acute silicosis due to breathing in microscopic pieces of sand and rock, can occur more quickly.

• The negative effects of these diseases on the quality of life of workers – and their families – can be extreme. In some cases, these illnesses are fatal.

23

Bristol

BOOKINGS OPEN Bristol Marriott City Centre Hotel April 20-23 2020 Book now and take advantage of our discounted Early Bird rates available until 28 February 2020.

The three day conference will bring together researchers, practitioners, regulators and other experts from around the world to discuss the very latest in issues that affect health at work. Following on from the success of OH2019 which attracted a global audience of over 320 delegates, BOHS will once again be delivering an exciting programme which combines inspiring and thought-leading plenary sessions with scientific and technical sessions as well as a range of interactive workshops and case studies.

Full details OH2020 Conference Rates Delegate Type

Full Conference

Early Bird*

Day Rate

Member

£640

£530

£305

Non-Member

£780

£730

£385

Speaker

£550

£465

£275

BOHS Student/ Dev. Country

£245

Professional Development Course

£200

Dinner

£45

£125

All rates are subject to UK VAT currently 20%.

Early Bird* Early Bird rates available until 28 February 2020.

Retired & Developing Country Rates If you would like to enquire about the Retired or Developing Country rates, contact conferences@bohs.org Cancellations received after 28 February 2020 are NOT entitled to a refund but delegate name changes are allowed up until the conference date.

To enquire about any aspect of OH2020 including exhibitor and sponsorship packages please contact: conferences@bohs.org

The Premier Conference for Occupational Hygiene in the UK

The Chartered Society for Worker Health Protection