Employment and epidemiology: place and work unit, length of work, elements of protection, hygiene methods in the workplace, the workload on weekdays, presence of protection protocols, reasons for committing violations and the person responsible answer for referral, date of appearance of symptoms, positive and negative tests, pre-test contacts, isolation and characteristics, and return to work.

The questionnaire was distributed directly to the workshop workers by direct contact, conduct several interview questions with management Data collection that include the concentration of heavy metals in the air, questionnaires, and interviews.

This research was a quantitative study that used the method of environmental health risk analysis (EHRA). The tools and materials were: stationery; Air Sampler Impinger; Questionnaire sheets; EHRA Guidelines; Monitoring results document; Field documentations and activities. Meanwhile, to determine the heavy metal content, it was carried out by a third party, namely PT. Secondary.

To analyze the value of lead and chromium heavy metal intake from the intake of inhalation agents referred to the Ministry of Health, the implementation steps were:

In analyzed the exposure to the value of Chromium, it was done by calculating the intake or intake of the risk agent. In this study, the intake calculation was carried out in the inhalation (inhalation) exposure pathway with the formula as follows:4,5

Risk characterization was the final stage of this research method. Risk characterization aimed to determine the risk of the agent to be analyzed. In the ARKL guidelines, risk characterization was divided into 2, namely carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic. Based on the EPA, lead and chromium (VI) are carcinogenic metals, so to determine the level of carcinogenic risk, the calculation is used as follows:

Steps taken to calculate the risk characterization for non-cancerous effects, it could be seen by dividing the Intake value by the RfD or RfC value as follows5:

The population in this study was known to be 15 people, consisting of 4 welder members, 2 helpers, 2 pipefitters, 1 mechanical engineering assistant, 1 civil leader, 1 field supervisor, 1 HSE officer, 1 admin RAM, and 2 drivers. The sample was all employees who work in the workshop. The sampling method was the total population.

The formal working days were 5 working days, Monday to Friday, then 2 days off, but they make a shift schedule for Saturday, Sunday and overnight for a week for 1 team each. The sources of exposure to Lead and Chromium in the Workshop were from welding, cutting, soldering/brazing, and grinding. The workshop did not have a special room to carry out these activities, so the warehouse and rest area for workers became one in the workshop. So workers can be easily exposed to these heavy metals.

See Table 1.

See Table 2.

For carcinogenic or cancer-causing exposures, the calculations were almost the same, but there was a slight difference, namely the average period of exposure to cancer, which was 70 years (Tables 3 and 4).

The workshop was carried out in 2 stages, by finding the value of the Risk Quotient (RQ) and Excess Cancer Risk (ECR). In the RQ, an RfC (Reference Concentration) value was required for each heavy metal, lead 0.0014mg/kg/day and chromium 0.00286mg/kg/day. The ECR requires a CSF (Cancer Slope Factor) value for each heavy metal CSF: lead 0.0085mg/kg/day and chromium 0.5mg/kg/day. Apart from RQ and ECR, the calculation of risk characteristics also required a non-carcinogenic intake for RQ and a carcinogenic intake for ECR.

After obtaining the RQ value, the following assumptions were used:

• •

  If RQ≤1, then the hazard concentration is not at risk of causing non-carcinogenic health effects.

• •

  If RQ>1, then hazard concentrations are at risk of causing non-carcinogenic health effects.

While the characteristics for the cancer effect could be determined by multiplying the Intake value with the CSF value.

After obtaining the ECR value, the following assumptions were used:

• •

  If the ECR≤10−4, then the hazard concentration is not yet at risk of causing carcinogenic health effects.

• •

  If the ECR>10−4, then the hazard concentration is at risk of causing carcinogenic health effects.

In conclusion, at realtime exposure, all employees exposed to chromium were at risk of cancer effects, and none of the employees exposed to lead were at risk of cancer effects. Also, a lifetime exposure, all employees exposed to chromium had a risk of cancer effects, and 1 employee exposed to lead had a risk of cancer effects (Table 5).

Tables 6–9.