Applicator Exposure to Pesticides Applied to ... - ACS Publications

20 Downloaded by TEXAS STATE UNIV SAN MARCOS on December 26, 2017 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: February 25, 1985 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1985-0273.ch020

Applicator Exposure to Pesticides Applied to Turfgrass 1

1

2

R. P. FREEBORG, W. H. DANIEL, and V. J. KONOPINSKI Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906 Indiana State Board of Health, Indianapolis, IN 46202

1 2

Applicators for lawn care companies can encounter long term exposure periods while making required applications of pesticides to turf. Studies have shown that inhalation of a pesticide was minimal as were dermal exposures on the body and lower leg area. Wrist exposures were generally low in most cases. When higher wrist concentrations were measured they appeared to be related to whether the right or left hand was used by the applicator. Highest concentrations were recorded in the thigh-scrotal area and were also related to application techniques. Design of clothing to protect the scrotal area may be advisable. For example, a waterproof apron or properly designed non-absorbent pants could reduce exposure and add protection. Within recent years the commercial lawn care industry has developed into a major business employing thousands of applicators who treat millions of r e s i d e n t i a l and i n d u s t r i a l lawns with pesticides. The rapid development of the custom-type lawn care reflects the demand for such a service. In 1976 i t was estimated that Americans spent $9 b i l l i o n on home lawn and garden supplies. Although home lawn accounts comprise the largest number of customers for the lawn service companies, they also care for many of the grounds surrounding office buildings, hotels, motels, churches, schools, apartments, condominiums, cemeteries, i n d u s t r i a l plants, shopping centers and banks. The telephone d i r e c t o r i e s of many c i t i e s have more than 100 l i s t i n g s under 'lawn maintenance' in the yellow pages. In Chicago there are approximately 200. More than 4,790 professionally trained employees treat less than 5% of the 80 m i l l i o n lawns i n the USA. Of these lawn care companies, 84% are independently owned; only 7% are franchised operations. (\) Lawn owners who a v a i l themselves of the outdoor maintenance 0097-6156/85/0273-O287$06.00/0 © 1985 A m e r i c a n C h e m i c a l Society

Honeycutt et al.; Dermal Exposure Related to Pesticide Use ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1985.

288

DERMAL EXPOSURE RELATED TO PESTICIDE USE

Downloaded by TEXAS STATE UNIV SAN MARCOS on December 26, 2017 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: February 25, 1985 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1985-0273.ch020

services expect q u a l i f i e d people with professional equipment to apply the correct materials, including pesticides, at the proper time to obtain desirable r e s u l t s . The period of d a i l y exposure to one s p e c i f i c pesticide can be up to six to eight weeks with the applicator working eight to ten hours per day up to six days each week to meet acreage goals established by the company. Spray volume worked with in one day may amount to 1,000 gallons of water plus pesticide which, applied at the rate of 4 gallons per 1,000 sq. f t . , would require treat ment of approximately 5.7 acres, or 31 residential lawns. There are usually four eight-week treatment schedules offered to the home owners. Pesticides are generally included in the f i r s t and second, and sometimes in the third and fourth spray period. Use w i l l vary based on geography and pest control needs. There i s currently a trend to reduce use of pesticides as much as possible. Cost i s one factor that has influenced this trend. Also, because insecticides currently available have a short active l i f e when applied to the s o i l , applications must be made when insects are active to get f u l l benefit of the i n s e c t i c i d e s . Applications of insecticides to each customer's lawn are often made only when insect a c t i v i t y i s evident or past history in a community has shown continual insect infestations. These factors help to explain a decrease in the use of insecticides in recent years. Diazinon and t r i c h l o r f o n (Dylox 50% WP or Proxol 80 SP) are two insecticides frequently used by the commercial lawn industry because of their r e l a t i v e l y low level of acute t o x i c i t y . Recom mended rates for insect control may vary. Diazinon may be applied at 1 to 3 oz. active ingredient per 1,000 sq. f t . Trichlorfon i s also used for control of insects at 2 to 3 oz. active ingredient per 1,000 sq. f t . Lawn insects controlled include chinch bugs, sod webworms, cut worms, army worms, and grubs. In this report tests of operator exposure were conducted with the Nice Ν'Green Company and ChemLawn Corporation. Studies to evaluate potential applicator exposure to diazinon (0,0-diethyl 0-[methyl-2-(1-methyl ethyl)-4-primidinyl]phosphorothioate) insect icide were made on 3 August, 18 and 28 September, 1979; and for the i n s e c t i c i d e t r i c h l o r f o n (dimethyl 2,2,2, trichloro-1-hydroxyethyl) phosphonate) on 5 September, 1979. Trichlorfon was on the Rebuttal Presumption Against Registr ation (RPAR) l i s t , however diazinon was not at the time exposure studies were made. It was selected for measurement because of i t s widespread use in the industry.


20.

Exposure

FREEBORG ET AL.

to Pesticides

Applied

to

Turfgrass

289


M a t e r i a l s and Methods I t was t h e i n t e n t o f t h i s s t u d y t o determine both i n h a l a t i o n as w e l l as dermal exposure. Concentrations o f p e s t i c i d e s encountered through i n h a l a t i o n were measured u s i n g a Bendix model BDX44 p e r s o n a l a i r s a m p l i n g pump. A i r f l o w r a t e s were e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y and f r e q u e n t checks o f t h e r o t o m e t e r f l o w r a t e and a d j u s t ments i n r a t e s were made as needed t o m a i n t a i n a c o n s t a n t a i r f l o w volume throughout t h e f i e l d s t u d y . The f i e l d m o n i t o r used t o c o l l e c t i n h a l a t i o n samples was a t h r e e - p i e c e Gelman No. 4336 c a s s e t t e w i t h c e l l u l o s e support pad and NG4, 37 mm (0.8 pore s i z e ) Gelman membrane f i l t e r . DHEW (NIOSH) Pub. No. 77-159 #21.01. Dermal exposures were determined by a d h e r i n g absorbent pads t o the body under c l o t h i n g a t up t o t e n l c o a t i o n s on t h e body. W r i s t , a n k l e and t h i g h pads were 11.7 χ 22.8 (289 cm ) Johnson & Johnson s t e r i l e 'Surgipads* (HR1 8137-002145). A l l o t h e r body pads were Johnson & Johnson c o t t o n gauze sponges (HR1 8137-007-623). Gauze pads were f o l d e d , 10.2 χ 10.2 cm (104 cm ) 12 p l y . T o t a l gauze a r e a was 1238.8 cm . These were made from type V I I (20 χ 12) gauze. I n h a l a t i o n measurements i n c l u d e d exposure d u r i n g i n s e c t i c i d e a d d i t i o n t o the tank, t r a v e l time throughout the day, time i n v o l v e d i n s p r a y a p p l i c a t i o n , and t r u c k and equipment c l e a n u p time a t t h e end o f t h e day f o r T e s t s 1 and 2. T e s t 3 was a g r a n u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n which r e q u i r e d i n d i v i d u a l s e p a r a t e h a n d l i n g p r o c e d u r e s a t each s i t e . T e s t 4 r e q u i r e d a d d i t i o n o f a w e t t a b l e powder t o the tank. Because o f g r e a t e r p o t e n t i a l exposure from t h e powder as t h e i n s e c t i c i d e was added t o the tank a s e p a r a t e i n h a l a t i o n measurement was made d u r i n g tank m i x t u r e p r e p a r a t i o n ( T a b l e I ) . F i e l d m o n i t o r c a s s e t t e s and absorbent pads were c o l l e c t e d immediately a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e work s c h e d u l e and p l a c e d i n s t e r i l e Z w i r l P a k p l a s t i c bags and s e a l e d . Samples were then p l a c e d i n 10° F. temperature p r i o r t o a n a l y s i s . 2

2

2

f

Analytical

r

Procedures

The A s s o c i a t i o n o f A g r i c u l t u r a l Chemists (2) a n a l y t i c a l method 6.431-6.435 was used f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g changes: 1. F o r d i a z i n o n an a d d i t i o n a l s t e p was added t o 6.432. A f t e r s h a k i n g , t h e samples were p l a c e d i n a s o n i c bath f o r 15 m i n u t e s . Samples were then e x t r a c t e d and s t a n d a r d s were p r e p a r e d i n methylene c h l o r i d e instead o f acetone. 2. I n t h e a n a l y t i c a l p r o c e d u r e f o r t r i c h l o r f o n , dermal pad samples were e x t r a c t e d w i t h a c e t o n e , c o n c e n t r a t e d and d i l u t e d t o 10 ml i n acteone f o r t r i c h l o r f o n a n a l y s i s f o r gas chromatography. The f i l t e r s used t o determine i n h a l a t i o n exposure c o u l d n o t be desorbed w i t h acetone because t h e Gelman f i l t e r s used i n the c a s s e t t e t o determine i n h a l a t i o n exposure would not d i s s o l v e , so t h e y were t r e a t e d w i t h methanol as above. One ml o f t h i s s o l u t i o n was c o n c e n t r a t e d t o d r y n e s s and t h e r e s i d u e was d i s s o l v e d i n 1 ml acetone. The f o l l o w i n g d a t a were c o l l e c t e d from each o f f o u r exposure studies. Three were f o r d i a z i n o n and one f o r t r i c h l o r f o n exposure. A l l s t u d i e s were made under a c t u a l c o n d i t i o n s normal f o r t h e ap p l i c a t i o n procedure.


Honeycutt et al.; Dermal Exposure Related to Pesticide Use ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1985. .023 .013 .021 .002

.061 .048 .204 .007 . 109

Mixing time i s that required to prepare the tank mix for application.

9.6 9.6 13.3 2.

3.

158 201 65 306 (46)

3

Concentration Total App. pg/m

Application time i s that which was devoted to spray application only.

3

1 13 106 34 161 24)

Filter Analy. yg

2.

300 400 326 456 (mixing/

Air Volume App. liters

Total time i s based on time from i n i t i a l morning operation procedures u n t i l spray truck i s returned to garage.

1.4 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0

Exposure ~ Total/ App./ minute!5

1979

1.

II

trichlorfon

II

II

trichlorfon

Flow rate 1 /min.

to I n s e c t i c i d e s ,

AU SE SE SE SE

Pesticide

Custom Lawn A p p l i c a t o r Exposure

3 18 28 5 5

App.Date

Table I.


*v

c m

5

m on H n

-υ

α

m

m 73 m r

73

a

ΙΑ

Ο

> r m Χ

73

m

α

Κ)

20.

FREEBORG ET AL.

Exposure

to Pesticides

Applied

to

Turfgrass

291


Diazinon Exposure Test 1 Location: Downers Grove, I l l i n o i s Applicator: Mike Oatis Date of application: 3 August 1979 Insecticide: Diazinon AG500, l i q u i d Application equipment: 1,000 gallon tank and Meyer c e n t r i fugal pump and spray equipment was mounted on a truck bed. The tank contained 800 gals, t o t a l volume water plus insecticide and f e r t i l i z e r . A ChemLawn spray gun with 40 psi at the nozzle applied 4 gallons of insecticide and water per minute per 1,000 sq.ft. Weather: 11:00 am to 4:00 pm - 77-84°, R. H. 77-63%, wind speed, 13-8 mph Total work time: 300 minutes Total application time: 113 minutes Sample i d e n t i f i c a t i o n Surgipad front upper back upper right wrist l e f t wrist right ankle l e f t ankle

Concentration of Diazinon Ug/100 cm 6.9 6.9 3.9 19.9 6.9 6.9 2

Test 2 Location: Indianapolis, Indiana Date of application: 18 September 1979 Insecticide: Diazinon AG500, l i q u i d Application equipment: 1,200 gallon tank with John Bean piston pump with ChemLawn spray gun. Application rate 4 gpm insecticide and water per 1,000 sq. f t . Weather: 6:55 am to 1:35 pm - 61-77° F, R. H. 93-62% wind speed, SW 6 NW 9 mph Total work time: 400 minutes Total application time: 106 minutes Sample i d e n t i f i c a t i o n Cotton gauze pads front upper back upper front lower back lower Surgipads right wrist l e f t wrist right ankle l e f t ankle right thigh l e f t thigh

Concentation of ug/100 cm 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8

2

5.9 5.9 23.7 5.9 29.6 189.4




292

Test 3 Location: Indianapolis, Indiana Date o f a p p l i c a t i o n : 29 September 1979 Insecticide: D i a z i n o n ( g r a n u l a r ) 5% GR Application rate: 5.5 l b s . a i / a c r e A p p l i c a t i o n equipment: C y c l o n e model B l r o t a r y s p r e a d e r Weather: 6:51 am t o 12:17 pm - 63-66° F., R. H. 87-84% wind W 7 mph T o t a l work t i m e : 326 minutes T o t a l a p p l i c a t i n t i m e : 34 minutes Sample i d e n t i f i c a t i o n C o t t o n gauze pads f r o n t upper f r o n t lower back upper back lower Surgipads right wrist l e f t wrist r i g h t ankle l e f t ankle r i g h t thigh l e f t thigh

Concentration of ug/100 cm

2

12.8 38.3 9.2 12.8 43.4 130.2 17.8 5.9 592. 237.

Test 4 Location: I n d i a n a p o l i s , Indiana Date o f a p p l i c a t i o n : 5 September 1979 Insecticide: D y l o x ( t r i c h l o r f o n ) w e t t a b l e powder Application rate: 8 l b s . ai/acre Weather: 7:30 am t o 3:06 pm - 68-86° F., R. H. 93-48% wind, NE 8 NE 10 mph T o t a l work t i m e : 456 minutes T o t a l a p p l i c a t i o n time: 161 m i n u t e s , a p p l i c a t i o n 24 m i n u t e s , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n - m i s i n g Sample i d e n t i f i c a t i o n C o t t o n gauze pads f r o n t upper f r o n t lower back upper back lower Surgipads right wrist l e f t wrist r i g h t ankle l e f t ankle right thigh l e f t thigh

Concentration of t r i c h l o r f o n ug/100 cm n.d.* n.d. n.d. n.d. 2

n.d. 0.35 3.5 2. 1 1.0 1.4

* not d e t e c t a b l e


20.

FREEBORG ET AL.

Exposure

to Pesticides

Applied

to

293

Turfgrass

Results Inhalation exposure, diazinon The amount of diazinon to which operators were exposed v i a inhalation during the three tests was 0.023, 0.013, and 0.021 Ug/m for the t o t a l work day of 67, 300, 400 and 625 minutes. The amounts applicators were exposed to i f the measurements were based e n t i r e l y on application time were 0.061, 0.048, and 0.025 pg/m . The amount of time committed to actual spray applications was 6, 113, 106 and 34 minutes. Table I. When inhalation concentrations were determined based on a TWA (Time Weighted Average) work day, the t o t a l exposure concentrations were less than 0.1 pg/m TWA established (DHEW, NIOSH 77-159,#11.01). When determined based on actual application time, exposure on 29 September of 0.205 Ug/m was the largest recorded. The Threshold Limit Value-Short Term Exposure Limit (TLV-STEL) (3) for diazinon i s reported as 0.3 Ug/m . Thus, based on the STEL, the exposure levels were below the 0.3 Ug/m . According to the ACGIH publication (4) the STEL should be considered a maximal allowable concentration, or c e i l i n g , not to be exceeded at any time during a 15-minute excursion period. The average time spent treating any one r e s i d e n t i a l s i t e was approximately s i x minutes. 3


3

3

3

3

3

Inhalation exposure, Trichlorfon There appears to be no available TWA or TLV-STEL for t r i c h l o r f o n . However, based on the organophosphate level as established for diazinon, the concentrations of 0.002 for the total work day and 0.007 \xg/m for the application time were low. A concentration of 0.109 pg/m was measured during tank preparation. The TWA l i m i t i s 0.1 ug/m . 3

3

3

Dermal exposure, Diazinon Dermal concentrations were determined by adhering absorbent pads without backing to the body and then extracting the insecticide adhering to the pads. Front and back body pads as well as ankle pads generally showed only traces or low levels of diazinon. Body pads with the greatest amount of exposure contamination were those on the wrist and on the inner thigh just below the scrotal area. Table II includes a l i s t of wrist dermal exposure. Table I I . Wrist Dermal Exposure Wrist Right Left Ug/cu 3.9 19.9 5.9 5.9 43.4 130.2

Date

2

3 August 18 September 28 September

Concentrations above the lower detectable l i m i t were found on 3 August, l e f t wrist 19.9 Ug/100 cm pad, and on 28 September, right wrist 43.4 and l e i t w r i s t 130.2 yg/289 cm . It should be noted that 2

2



294

on 18 and 28 September the applicator used his l e f t hand to hold and guide the spray application. This may p a r t i a l l y account for the greater exposure concentration on the l e f t wrist. The highest exposure levels were found on the 289 cm pads taken from the upper thigh, scrotal area (Table I I I ) . 2


Table I I I . Thigh-Scrotal Dermal Exposure

Date

Thigh Right Left pg/200 cm 39 189 592 347 2

18 September 28 September

1979 1979

Samples to determine exposure in the thigh-scrotal area were collected on 18 and 28 September. The application on 18 September was a l i q u i d spray, that on 28 September was a dry granule applied with a rotary type spreader. In practice, when applying the l i q u i d spray, the applicator normally walks at a brisk pace and the hand held nozzle releasing the spray i s swinging from side to side i n a rhythmical motion. It appears that exposure levels are highest on the l e f t or right thigh, depending on whether the applicator i s l e f t or right handed. Exposure during the granular application on 28 September was greater than that experienced from the l i q u i d spray application. Dermal exposure, Trichlorfon Dermal exposure levels for t r i c h l o r f o n were not detectable on the front or back of the upper body. Also a l l wrist and ankle pad exposures were low. The thigh exposure levels did not r e f l e c t those high concentrations for diazinon. Conclusion In conclusion, i t would appear that inhalation exposure levels based on t o t a l work day time are below the TWA for organophosphates d i a z i non and t r i c h l o r f o n . However, i n some instances, the STEL may be approached or exceeded. For these situations,care should be taken with the application spray pattern and existing wind speed and d i rection to minimize exposure. Dermal exposure levels were generally low, the exception being that for the wrist and thigh-scrotal area. Frequent washing of hands and wrists would tend to reduce the potential for a build-up in the wrist area. Thigh-scrotal area concentrations, which were high on two occasions,may need additional confirmation. To reduce the exposure a non-absorbent apron could shield the applicator using hand held spray nozz and protect this part of the body from p o t e n t i a l l y hazardous exposure l e v e l s . Nontechnical Summary Estimates are that 5,000 employees of lawn care companies treated 5% of the 80 m i l l i o n lawns i n the USA i n 1980. Pesticides most used include preemergent grass weed, broadleaf weed and insect control pesticides. Applicators applying these pesticides are exposed for periods of s i x to eight weeks. Measurements made to determine exposure showed long term exposure resulted in very low levels of pesticide inhalation. Also, pesticide concentrations reaching the Honeycutt et al.; Dermal Exposure Related to Pesticide Use ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1985.

20.

FREEBORG E T AL.

Exposure

to Pesticides

Applied

to

Turfgrass

295

skin under the clothing were very low to non-detectable. Only wrist and thighs had measurable concentrations. Occasional cleansing of the hands and wrist should protect this exposure s i t e . Clothing that would protect the crotch area such as a waterproof apron or properly designed non-absorbent pants could reduce exposure and add protection.


Acknowledgments This study was made possible through funding provided by the North Central Region Impact Assessment Program.

Literature Cited 1. Daniel, W. H. and R. P. Freeborg. Turf Managers' Handbook. West Lafayette, Indiana, 1979, p. 376-77. 2. Triazines And Other Pesticides, Association of Agricultural Chemists, 1980, 13th ed. 3. National Institute For Occupational Safety And Health, 77-159, No. 11.01. U. S. Department of Health,Education and Welfare. 1977. 4. Threshold Limit Values For Chemical And Physical Agents In Workroom Environments. 1978. RECEIVED

September 11, 1984


Applicator Exposure to Pesticides Applied to ... - ACS Publications

Recommend Documents