An official website of the United States government
Request for the Technical Review of 4 Draft Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) Value Profiles
May 2017
NIOSH Docket Number 156-C, CDC-2017-0048
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced the availability of four (4) draft Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) Value Profile documents for public comment on May 5, 2017. These draft documents were developed to provide the scientific rationale behind derivation of IDLH values. Both the draft IDLH Value Profile documents and finalized versions (published on September 29, 2017) are provided below:
| Document # | Draft Document | Final Document | CAS |
|---|---|---|---|
| B-01 | Acetonitrile [PDF – 285 KB] | Acetonitrile | # 75-05-8 |
| B-02 | Chloroacetonitrile [PDF – 352 KB] | Chloroacetonitrile | # 107-14-2 |
| B-03 | Methacrylonitrile [PDF – 287 KB] | Methacrylonitrile | # 126-98-7 |
| B-04 | Nitrogen dioxide [PDF – 331 KB] | Nitrogen Dioxide | # 10102-44-0 |
Each IDLH Value Profile provides a detailed summary of the health hazards of acute exposures to high airborne concentrations and the rationale for the proposed IDLH value with the chemical(s) of interest.
To view the notice and related materials, visit https:www.regulations.gov and enter CDC-2017-0048 in the search field and click “Search”.
To view related dockets see Docket 156, Docket 156-A, and Docket 156-B.
- Federal Register Notice: Federal Register Notice
- Federal Register Notice: Federal Register Notice [PDF – 183 KB] – Issuance of Final Guidance Publications
-
Background Information: In 2013, NIOSH published Current Intelligence Bulletin (CIB) 66 – Derivation of Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) Values [NIOSH 2013]. Since the establishment of the IDLH values in the 1970s, NIOSH has continued to review available scientific data to improve the protocol used to derive acute exposure guidelines, in addition to the chemical-specific IDLH values. The information presented in this CIB represents the most recent update of the scientific rationale and the methodology (hereby referred to as the IDLH methodology) used to derive IDLH values. The primary objectives of this document are to:
- Provide a brief history of the development of IDLH values
- Update the scientific bases and risk assessment methodology used to derive IDLH values from quality data
- Provide transparency behind the rationale and derivation process for IDLH values
- Demonstrate how scientifically credible IDLH values can be derived from available data resources.
The IDLH methodology is based on a weight-of-evidence approach that applies scientific judgment for critical evaluation of the quality and consistency of scientific data and in extrapolation from the available data to the IDLH value. The weight-of-evidence approach refers to critical examination of all available data from diverse lines of evidence and the derivation of a scientific interpretation on the basis of the collective body of data, including its relevance, quality, and reported results. Conceptually, the derivation process for IDLH values is similar to that used in other risk-assessment applications, including these steps:
- Hazard characterization
- Identification of critical adverse effects
- Identification of a POD
- Application of appropriate UFs, based on the study and POD
- Determination of the final risk value
Peer Review
Subject: NIOSH Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health value for Acetonitrile, Chloroacetonitrile, Methacrylonitrile, and Nitrogen Dioxide.
Purpose: The purpose of these technical reports is to document the scientific basis of the NIOSH immediately dangerous to life or health (IDLH) value for acetonitrile, chloroacetonitrile, methacrylonitrile, and nitrogen dioxide. The toxicologic data and risk assessment approach used to derive the IDLH values are summarized to ensure transparency and scientific credibility. The IDLH values are intended to protect workers from short-term high-risk exposure conditions. They are based on a 30-minute exposure duration and have traditionally served as a key component of the decision logic for the selection of respiratory protection devices.
Timing of Review: Public review May 5, 2017 – July 5, 2017.
Primary Disciplines or Expertise Needed for Review: Toxicology, risk assessment, industrial hygiene, occupational medicine
Type of Review: Individual
Number of Reviewers: 4
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: No
Charge to Peer Reviewers:
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is conducting a peer and public review of the draft Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) values and support technical documents, entitled IDLH Values Profiles. The draft documents are based on the process outlined in the NIOSH Current Intelligence Bulletin 66 – Derivation of Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) Value.
Each IDLH Value Profile document provides a detailed summary of the health hazards of acute exposures to high airborne concentrations and the rationale for the proposed IDLH value with the chemical(s) of interest.
To facilitate the review of these documents, NIOSH requests that the following questions be taken into consideration:
- Does this document clearly outline the health hazards associated with acute (or short-term) exposures to the chemical? If not, what specific information is missing from the document?
- Is the rationale and logic behind the derivation of an IDLH value for a specific chemical clearly explained? If not, what specific information is needed to clarify the basis of the IDLH value?
- Are the conclusions supported by the data?
- Are the tables clear and appropriate?
- Is the document organized appropriately? If not, what improvements are needed?
- Are you aware of any scientific data reported in governmental publications, databases, peer-reviewed journals, or other sources that should be included within this document?