NIOSH Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Exposure to Hexavalent Chromium
NIOSH Scientific Information Quality - Peer Review Agenda
Document
Related Materials
- NIOSH Response to Peer Review Comments; 12/18/12 [PDF - 1,120 KB]
- NIOSH Response to Public and Stakeholder Comments
- NIOSH Docket 144 (includes peer, public, and stakeholder review comments)
Required Elements for Initial Public Posting
Title: Criteria Document Update: Occupational Exposure to Hexavalent Chromium
Subject: Review of the relevant scientific literature on occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium compounds along with recommendations for preventing and limiting occupational exposure.
Purpose: To provide recommendations to reduce worker exposure to hexavalent chromium compounds, and to reduce lung cancer deaths due to occupational hexavalent chromium exposure.
Timing of Review: Fall 2008-Winter 2009
Primary Disciplines or Expertise Needed for Review: Industrial hygiene, chemistry, risk assessment, epidemiology, toxicology
Type of Review: Individual
Number of Reviewers: 6
Reviewers Selected by: NIOSH
Public Nominations Requested for Reviewers: No
Opportunities for the Public to Comment: Yes
Peer Reviewers Provided with Public Comments Before Their Review: Yes
Peer Reviewers:
Edwin van Wijngaarden
Academic and Professional Credentials: PhD
Organizational Affiliation: Assistant Professor, Epidemiology, Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY
Areas of Expertise, Discipline, or Relevant Experience: Epidemiology
Recommended by: NIOSH
Harvey Clewell, III
Academic and Professional Credentials: MA, DABT
Organizational Affiliation: Director, Center for Human Health Assessment, CIIT Centers for Health Research, Research Triangle Park, NC
Areas of Expertise, Discipline, or Relevant Experience: Risk assessment
Recommended by: NIOSH
Herman Gibb
Academic and Professional Credentials: PhD, MPH
Organizational Affiliation: Sciences International, Inc., Alexandria, VA
Areas of Expertise, Discipline, or Relevant Experience: Risk assessment, epidemiology
Recommended by: NIOSH
John Wise
Academic and Professional Credentials: MD, MPH
Organizational Affiliation: Center for Integrated and Applied Environmental Toxicology
Research Institute University of Southern Maine
Areas of Expertise, Discipline, or Relevant Experience: Toxicology
Recommended by: NIOSH
Richard Danchik
Academic and Professional Credentials: Dr
Organizational Affiliation: PittCon, Pittsburgh, PA
Areas of Expertise, Discipline, or Relevant Experience: Chemistry
Recommended by: NIOSH
Charge to Peer Reviewers:
The goals of this document are to describe the:
- critical animal, human, and in vitro studies on occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium;
- relevant quantitative risk assessments about occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium;
- appropriate methods for sampling and analysis of hexavalent chromium compounds in the workplace;
- basis for the NIOSH revised Recommended Exposure Limit for hexavalent chromium compounds;
- other NIOSH recommendations for protecting workers from occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium.
The charge to the Peer Reviewers is to objectively review the document to determine whether:
- the hazard identification is a reasonable reflection of the available scientific studies,
- the NIOSH recommendations for protecting workers from occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium are appropriate, and
- NIOSH has a transparent and sound basis for its revised Recommended Exposure Limit for hexavalent chromium compounds.
To facilitate review of this Criteria Document, the questions below should be considered:
- Are the critical studies presented clearly and adequately?
- Do all of the presented studies use scientifically valid methods and techniques?
- Are there additional critical studies relevant to occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium compounds that should be included?
- Does NIOSH have a transparent and sound basis for its revised Recommended Exposure Limit for hexavalent chromium compounds?
- Is the new NIOSH policy of providing general exposure assessment recommendations instead of a specific Action Level scientifically justified?
- Are the NIOSH recommendations for worker protection clear and justified?
- Are there additional recommendations for worker protection that should be included?
- Page last reviewed: May 2, 2013
- Page last updated: May 3, 2013
- Content source:
- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Office of the Director