Chris,

Don't worry. I think your precautionary remark is very important. There is
a strand of OH that took this very attitude, i.e. that it was a damage
limitation exercise, part of the checking procedure of the human machinery
(allowing removal of 'worn parts' at an early stage?). In this sense,
health surveillance could be argued to be a constantly reactive process.


Yes, health surveillance is very important but it must fit in with other
preventative approaches.

This is neatly illustrated in this correspondence: discussions have been
about changing the solder type, provision of LEV, etc.. Together they form
a sound basis for a good OH strategy.

Regards

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Packham [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 02 July 2001 7:35 am
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Rosin flux solder


In response to Geoff's comments, my message was not intended to suggest that
health surveillance should not be carried out, merely to point out that we
cannot detect with any reasonable certainty who is likely to become
sensitized prior to the event. As a result health surveillance has only a
limited benefit as a preemptive tool when dealing with sensitizers. If you
refer to my technical bulletion on our website (www.enviroderm.co.uk) you
will see that I am a great believer in health surveillance, but we do need
to be objective as to what exactly it will achieve.

Regards
Chris Packham

----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Helliwell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: Rosin flux solder


> Alan,
> Yes Colophony free cored flux solder is available, as is Colophony free
> flux. The solder process will still contain some lead component in the
> fume, but with proper solder selection (the right one for the temperature
of
> your soldering irons), then the risk of airborne lead will be minimal.
Lead
> free electronic manufacture has implications for all of the component
> procurement, to ensure they are not degraded by the higher temperatures in
> use (and that any plastic coatings do not vaporise and become respiratory
> hazards).
> I have seen several cases of Occupational Asthma related to bench
soldering.
> The most effective LEV is the extract ventilation of 3-4mm diameter tubes
> going down to the solder iron tip. From experience of measuring these
> systems, it is important that they are regularly cleaned with small wire
> brushes and that the extract is between the soldering iron tip and the
> breathing zone of the operator (i.e. above the tip). Measurement of
> Colophony fume is technically difficult, but you can follow it simply by
> using aldehyde pyroloysis products as a marker.
> Another point to watch is that large LEVs on soldering processes
(especially
> flow solder machines) will fall within the prescribed processes that need
to
> be notified and licensed by Local Authorities as "Part B" processes under
> the Environmental Protection Act (They elute Lead into the environment).
> One potential supplier of rosin-free (and lead free) flux(solder) is
> http://www.alphametals.com
>
> Turning next to Health Surveillance; Chris Packham's argument that it has
no
> value as only detects cases after they have developed flies in the face of
> all established protocols such as ILO, and of HSE legislation & guidance.
> Health Surveillance is a legal requirement in the UK wherever risk or
COSHH
> assessments identify significant risk of a disease being developed in the
> circumstances assessed - in this case you should look at HSE Guidance Note
> MS25 "Medical Aspects of Occupational Asthma" , Booklet L55 "Preventing
> Asthma at Work, Controlling Respiratory Sensitisers" and leaflet IND(G)95
> for your responsibilities (all are available at
http://www.hsebooks.co.uk ).
> Unless you eliminate Colophony, you do have a legal duty to carry out
Health
> Surveillance.
>
> Turning next to soft wood dust; since 1997 it has had a Maximum Exposure
> Limit of 5mg/m3 - see HSE publication EH40/2001. You therefore have a
duty
> to demonstrate that you are "as low as reasonably practicable" below this
> level (have you got dust measurements - preferably personal sampler
results
> ?) - AND carry out Health Surveillance for Occupational Asthma.
>
> As an Occupational Health provider we regularly carry out health
> surveillance for all of the above risks for customers, many are unaware of
> the legal requirements. We also do investigations of workforces after
index
> cases of Occupational Asthma, it is not unusual to find second or third
> cases which have been hidden because of lack of previous surveillance.
> Given quantums of up to 18 times earnings for severe cases of asthma who
> cannot work again, Health Surveillance to identify them at the earliest
> stage sounds a very cost effective insurance, and not "Shutting the
> stable-door after the horse has bolted".
>
> Dr. Geoff Helliwell MB ChB CIH FFOM MIOSH
> Medical Director
> WellWork Ltd. UK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Occ-health is a list open to everyone with an interest in
> teaching, learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Swann,
> Alan B
> Sent: 29 June 2001 14:00
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Rosin flux solder
>
>
> We've a technician who works for c1-2 hours per week soldering with Rosin
> flux solder using benchtop LEV to reduce exposure to fumes. I'm enquiring
> about alternative solders to avoid the risk of sensitisation.
> If alternatives are not practical, should we be keeping him under
HealthSurv
> for sensitisation?
> What do others do?
> And whilst we are on the subject, does anyone do routing HealthSurv for
> technicians who's work includes machining wood? For softwoods, or only if
> working with hardwoods
> Regards
>