Eleven years (by publication) years after the development and application of the control banding (CB) Nanotool for the qualitative assessment and control of engineered nanoparticles (ENP), there remains no quantitative gold standard to serve as an alternative to the qualitative assessment. Many CB models have been developed during the years subsequent to the initial development of the CB Nanotool and the literature continues to blossom with comparisons and applications of these various tools; however, these developments have hitherto been made in the absence of validating and verifying their effectiveness using existing, albeit limited, quantitative methods. This paper reviews the existing literature on the CB Nanotool to evaluate its effectiveness in a variety of settings and presents a summary of qualitative and quantitative information from its application in a broad range of ENP handling activities performed in two different research institutions. A total of 28 ENP activities were assessed using the CB Nanotool (Version 2.0). Due to the lack of guidance on a single exposure assessment methodology, a combination of real-time monitoring, filter analysis, and microscopic analysis was used to assess various quantitative metrics, including mass concentration, particle number concentration, and particle speciation. All the results indicated that the control outcomes from the CB Nanotool qualitative assessment were sufficient to prevent workers from being exposed to ENP at levels beyond established exposure limits or background levels. These data represent an independent quantitative validation of CB Nanotool risk level outcomes and give further credence to the use of the CB Nanotool to effectively control worker exposures in the absence of quantitative air monitoring results.
Keywords: CB Nanotool; control banding; engineered nanoparticles; quantitative validation.
Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The British Occupational Hygiene Society 2019.