Federal Law 426-FZ obliges employers to evaluate the safety and hygiene conditions at the workplace. This law allows to reduce the hazard class when workers are provided with effective personal protective equipment, including respirators. This article describes the problems that arise during the assessment of the effectiveness of respirators in the workplaces and in the laboratories. Current level of world science is insufficient to accurately measure the concentration of harmful substances in the air inhaled through respirator mask. A random and unpredictable nature of leakage of unfiltered air under the mask prevents the application of the results of the measurements to assess the effectiveness in other cases. Therefore, accurate assessment of the effectiveness of respirators is not possible. This article shows that the requirements for assessing the effectiveness do not correspond to the current level of world science, and they do not prevent the provision of respirators, that are wittingly not effective enough. It is necessary to stop lowering the hazard class levels and develop requirements to provide employees with adequate respirators only.
RPD, respirator, protection factor, occupational diseases, biomonitoring.
1. Введение
Несовершенство технологических процессов и оборудования, их износ приводят к загрязнению воздуха рабочей зоны вредными веществами. Для защиты от них широко используются средства индивидуальной защиты органов дыхания (СИЗОД) — респираторы. Для обеспечения рабочих СИЗОД разработаны «Типовые нормы бесплатной выдачи специальной одежды, специальной обуви и других средств индивидуальной защиты работникам…». Принятый федеральный закон 426-ФЗ предусматривает проведение специальной оценки условий труда и допускает возможность снижения класса вредности при обеспечении рабочих средствами индивидуальной защиты, соответствующими условиям труда. Для определения этого соответствия в Минтруда России была разработана специальная методика [1]. В многочисленных публикациях (например, в [2]) работодателю рекомендуется использовать эффективные СИЗОД для обеспечения «гарантированной защиты» рабочих от воздушных загрязнений. Для стимулирования работодателя улучшать условия труда расходы на закупку СИЗОД могут компенсироваться за счет отчислений в Фонд социального страхования.
Ниже сравниваются рекомендации методики [1] с современным состоянием науки и техники в этой области, а также оценено, насколько эффективно использование данной методики позволит снизить риск развития профзаболеваний у работающих в загрязненной атмосфере, т.е. обеспечить достижение целей, указанных в законе 426-ФЗ (статья 1) и Трудовом кодексе РФ (статья 219).
1. Metodika snizhenija klassa (podklassa) uslovij truda pri primenenii rabotnikami, zanjatymi na rabochih mestah s vrednymi uslovijami truda, jeffektivnyh sredstv individual’noj zashhity, proshedshih objazatel’nuju sertifikaciju. Prilozhenie k prikazu Ministerstva truda Rossijskoj Federacii ot 05.12.2014 № 976n [Methods of reducing class (subclass) of working conditions, used then the workers, employed in jobs with hazardous working conditions, apply approved and effective personal protective equipment. Annex to the Order of the Ministry of Labour of the Russian Federation 05.12.2014 № 976н]. Available at: www.kamchatka.gov.ru/oiv_doc/5514/37889.docx (Accessed 19 November 2015) (in Russian).
2. Vasil’ev E.V., Gizatullin Sh.F., Spel’nikova M.I. The problems in the selection and organization of the use of gas - and particulate - filtering facepieces. Spravochnik specialista po ohrane truda [Handbook for occupational safety and health specialist] 2014, I. 12, pp. 51-55. (in Russian).
3. Kirillov V.F., Filin A.S., Chirkin A.V. The Overview of Industrial Testing Outcome of Respiratory Organs Personal Protection Equipment. Toksikologicheskij vestnik [Toxicological Review] 2014, I. 6, pp. 44-49. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17686/sced_rusnauka_2014-1034 (in Russian and in English).
4. R. Howie. Fit testing fails to indicate adequacy of fit for individual wearers. Presentation at 17 ISRP Conference, Prague, 21-25 September 2014. Available at: www.isrp.com
5. P. Hewett et al. A Model for Correcting Workplace Protection Factors for Lung Deposition and Other Effects. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1993. Vol. 54(4) pp. 142-149. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15298669391354487.
6. W.R. Myers, J. Allender et al. Parameters that Bias the Measurement of Airborne Concentration Within a Respirator. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1986. Vol. 47(2) pp. 106-114. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15298668691389423.
7. W.R. Myers and J. Allender. Causes of in-Facepiece Sampling Bias - II. Full - Facepiece Respirators. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene. 1988. Vol. 32(3) pp. 361-372. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/32.3.361.
8. W.R. Myers, J.R. Allende, W. Iskander and C. Stanley. Causes of in-Facepiece Sampling Bias - I. Half-Facepiece Respirators. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene. 1988. Vol. 32(3) pp. 345-359. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/32.3.345.
9. B.Y.U. Liu, K. Sega, K.L. Rubow et al. In-Mask Aerosol Sampling For Powered Air Purifying Respirators. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1984. Vol. 45(4) pp. 278-283. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15298668491399785.
10. Critical Issues Conference. On In-Facepiece Sampling. Part 3. Journal of the International Society for Respiratory Protection.1988. Vol. 6(1) pp. 24-39. Available at: www.isrp.com.
11. M.S. Bergman, D.J. Viscusi et al. Evaluation of Sampling Probes for Fit Testing N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene. 2013. Vol. 57(4) pp. 507-518. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mes091.
12. U. Krishnan, K. Willeke, A. Juozaitis et al. Variation in Quantitative Respirator Fit Factors Due to Fluctuations in Leak Size During Fit Testing. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1994. Vol. 55(4) pp. 309-314. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15428119491018943.
13. British Standard BS 4275-1997. Guide to implementing an effective respiratory protective device programme. 1997. British Standards Institution (BSI) - 64 p.
14. US OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.134 “Respiratory Protection”. Available at: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&;p_id=12716 (accessed 19 November 2014)
15. Assigned Protection Factors. Federal Register. 2003. Vol. 68, pp. 34036-34119. Available at: ttps://www.osha.gov/FedReg_osha_pdf/FED20030606.pdf (accessed 09 November 2015).
16. Bollinger N.J., Schutz R.H. NIOSH Guide to Industrial Respiratory Protection. 1987. 305 p. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/87-116/ (accessed 09 November 2015).
17. Bollinger N.J. NIOSH Respirator Selection Logic. 2004. 39 p. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2005-100/ (accessed 08 November 2015).
18. Respirator Usage in Private Sector Firms. U.S. Department of Labor, 2003. 278 p. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/respsurv/ (accessed 08 November 2015).
19. US OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.1025 Lead, 1910.1025(j) - Medical surveillance. Available at: https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&;p_id=10030 (accessed 09 November 2014).
20. US OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.1027 Cadmium, 1910.1027(l) - Medical surveillance. Available at: https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&;p_id=10035 (accessed 09 November 2014).
21. L.G. Grauvogel. Effectiveness of a Positive Pressure Respirator for Controlling Lead Exposure in Acid Storage Battery Manufacturing. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1986. Vol. 47(2) pp. 144-146. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15298668691389478.
22. Fu-Kuei Chang, Mei-Lien Chen, Shu-Fang Cheng et al. Evaluation of dermal absorption and protective effectiveness of respirators for xylene in spray painters. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health. 2007. Vol. 81(2) pp. 145-150. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-007-0197-9.
23. A. Löf , C. Brohede, E. Gullstrand et al. The effectiveness of respirators measured during styrene exposure in a plastic boat factory. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health. 1993. Vol. 65(1) pp. 29-34. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00586055.
24. Kirillov V.F., Buchnev A.A., Chirkin A.V. On Individual protective means for workers’ respiratory organs (review of literature). Medicina truda i promyshlennaja jekologija [Occupational medicine and industrial ecology] 2013, no. 4, pp. 25-31. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17686/sced_rusnauka_2013-1033 (in Russian and in English).
25. Kaptsov V.A., Chirkin A.V. Proper use of gas masks as prevention of occupational diseases. Gigiena i Sanitarija [Hygiene and sanitation] 2013, I. 3, pp. 42-45. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17686/sced_rusnauka_2013-1109 (in Russian and in English).
26. Methodical Instruction МУ 2.2.5.2810-10. Organizacija laboratornogo kontrolja soderzhanija vrednyh veshhestv v vozduhe rabochej zony predprijatij osnovnyh otraslej jekonomiki [Organization of monitoring the concentration of harmful substances in the air at the workplaces in enterprises of most sectors of the economy] 2010. Available at: http://www.niiot.ru/doc/bank01/doc206/doc.htm (accessed 09 November 2015) (in Russian).
27. N.A. Leidel, K.A. Busch and J. Lynch. NIOSH Occupational Exposure Sampling Strategy Manual. DHHS (NIOSH) Pub. № 77-173. 1977. pp. 75-77. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/77-173/ (accessed 09 November 2015).
