Industrial Hygiene in Construction

Background: A new client recently had an OSHA health inspection (industrial hygiene). He received citations stemming from overexposures(they found levels above the PELs) to airborne particulates.

The company wondered what to do next. Here were my suggestions:

• Fix the problem. You will need to comply and assure that your employees aren’t overexposed. Even if the inspection made you upset, use your energy to make the situation right. Focus your energy on removing the hazard, not complaining about how you were treated.
  • Engineer the problem out. Remove the hazard. If not,
  • Change your policies so no one is further overexposed. If you can’t fix it by the this, or the above method, then,
  • Provide personal protective equipment to affected employees.
• Request the full inspection package. – this will include the officer’s field notes, interview questions, observations and sampling methodology.
  • look through these documents carefully
  • keep them for your records
•  Informally appeal the citations.
  • at the appeal show them you have complied/changed
  • ask for a reduction in fines (it never hurts to ask)
  • ask to group the citations together – instead of citation 1 item 1a, 1b, item 2, etc. ask to narrow it down to just one
  • bring any additional information which supports your side and/or the changes you’ve made (including training docs, programs, policies, etc.)
• Resample the areas.
  • make significant changes to these areas. Then,
  • hire an industrial hygienist to perform additional sampling in these areas
  • ask them to document the changes you have made to reduce the exposures
  • review this with your safety committee & those affected

If you operate a ready-mix plant and have concrete trucks, you are aware of this process. Once a year (hopefully, only once) a person must climb into the drum of the ready-mix truck and chip off excess concrete. What happen during regular use, is that some concrete hardens, which usually sets-up over and around the blades. Access into the drum is by either the 3×4 hole in the side, or down the chute.

Yes, it is a confined space (def’n: 1. large enough to enter, 2. not designed for occupancy, and 3. limited entry/egress).

Here are a list of the possible hazards:

• silica dust (from chipping concrete)
• noise exposure
• hazardous atmosphere (curing concrete uses up oxygen, which we DO need BTW)
• slipping hazard (drum is round inside)
• heat stress (if you’re trying to do this activity in the summer)
• eye hazard (chipping)
• electrical hazard (if you’re using water & have an electric hammer)
• lock out / tag out (if the truck drives away, or if the barrel starts turning)

There are many resources available (see below). Some things to keep in mind; ventilation (fans, etc) to control the airborne silica dust are usually not effective (too much dust versus exhaust). Water controls are best, but you must limit the amount of water and the direction of the sprayer. I suggest looking at what others have done.

Keep in mind, if you perform this activity you will need (as a company):

• respiratory program (medical, fit test, written plan)
• confined space program (multi gas meter, written program, attendant?)
• lock out /tag out policy or procedures
• training (for each of the above, and for this specific activity)

At this point I know what my contractor-friends are thinking…I will subcontract this out!   ha. If you do, please make sure your sub is doing it right.

Resources:

Georgia Tech – good presentation & guidance

Georgia Tech/OSHA – Safe Work Practices (in Spanish too!)

Teamsters H&S hazards & controls

Illinois DCEO – Consultation on ready mix cleaning

Assume your general contractor reports that he has found a material (floor tile, popcorn ceiling, etc) with less than 1%. He wants you to remove it with the rest of the demolition because, as you know, “…if it’s less than 1%, it’s NOT considered asbestos containing!”.

Are you ok to remove it?

Yes, and no. There is more to consider. The “1% rule” (as it’s called) as it is called states that they only regulate asbestos containing materials if they contain more than 1% of asbestos. Here are a few other considerations:

1. OSHA definition. Don’t get stuck on the definition. If you have employees, you must still follow parts of the OSHA rules. At a minimum, you must train your employees, work practices, clean-up and disposal requirments. More details on training here.
2. How were the samples taken? If one bulk sample shows less than 1% asbestos, you still might have a problem. According to the EPA/AHERA sampling rules, some types of materials must have up to 7 samples taken. This rule is in place because, back in the day, asbestos was added to joint compound (or anything similar) and it could really vary in amount according to where you take the sample. In addition, OSHA does not allow for composite sampling (combining the layers).
3. Do you know that 0.99% asbestos is still bad for you? Asbestos is a carcinogen. The greater the exposure, the greater the risk of disease. Any exposure could be the one to cause the disease. If the material is friable and you are disturbing it, I would NOT recommend performing that activity. Hire an abatement contractor.
4. Finally.Let’s assume it’s non-friable, you are not going to disturb it (when removing it) and it’s less than 1%. What will you do if your neighbor next door decides to call OSHA/EPA? Do you have a written plan and procedure? Have your employees been trained on the hazard? How to remove it? How to dispose of it? …Sometimes bad publicity will get you in worse trouble than any monetary fine.

 

After performing an industrial hygiene survey (air monitoring), have you considered when you should resample? Here are some considerations that might help you in determining when.

• Are there specific rules that state when you must resample? For example, the construction lead standard (1926.62) states that you must resample yearly (or actually, that you can only use relevant results for one year).
• Has the process changedsince the last time you sampled? This one is hard to determine. Lot of things can change air monitoring results, here’s a “starter list” of things that can change a process.
  • Different employee?
  • Time of year? Summer versus winter? (closed up/open and humidity)
  • Is a new tool in place?
  • Has the ventilation changed?
  • Have new controls been put in place? (administrative, systems operations)
• Has the product changed? Check the safety data sheet (aka MSDS).
• Are more (or less) employees exposed to this hazard? This might change some assumptions you have made about your risk.?

If you have air sampling performed, make sure you have a written report of your findings. Laboratory results without an explanation of how they sampled, where, # of employees, process description, PPE used, safety data sheets, etc….is worthless. You may remember is well enough, but OSHA will have a hard time believing that it is a similar exposure the next time you do the “exact same thing”.

Having this report and sharing it with the employees will fulfill (part of) the hazard communication standard requirement to employees.

As common as it sounds, falls in construction are still the #1 killer.

Go to www.osha.gov/stopfalls

This site has good information, reminders, training, and resources.

I love the show, “Dirty Jobs” with Mike Rowe. I find it fascinating what people are willing to do for work. Many of the jobs on the show have a true element of danger. Either a pinch point, an animal bite/kick, struck-by, heat/cold extreme, confined space, etc.

Did you ever consider what makes something hazardous?

My “deep thought for today” (thanks Jack Handy) is that education and training can make a job less hazardous. If you know how to do it right, and you know the risk, it doesn’t seem as dangerous anymore. The risk is there, but you know how to handle it, so the “hazard” seems to fade. This week I’ve given two separate asbestos classes to two different employers. At the beginning the employees were genuinely concerned about the hazards. By the end, they looked a lot more comfortable about upcoming project.

Is it any surprise that the HazCom standard is the most OSHA cited rule year over year?

So, keep up the training! Educate the employees on the dangers.

As I have said in an earlier post, some OSHA, EPA, and MSHA rules are a good fit. They blend well with health research, scientific technology, good practices, and a low-cost-of-compliance for employers. Other rules are just bad. They are  totally out of date, not protective enough, or just not feasible/practical. Here’s my plug for a good safety manager/industrial hygienist – A good one will know which rules/guidelines to follow.

The New York Times (July 19, 2012, Cara Buckley) recently wrote an article on the US noise standards which are not protective enough for employees. In construction we also have three additional problems.

1. hearing loss is expected (or at least assumed in certain fields – carpenters, sheetmetal, ironworkers, etc.) and,
2. work shifts are usually over 8-hours. Noise exposure is usually calculated on an 8-hour time weighted average. During the busy months, an 8-hour work day is rare. It’s at least 10, maybe 12-14 hours. This doesn’t allow your ears to “rest” between shifts. For more information on extended work shifts go here.
3. extracurricular activities contribute to overall hearing loss – my point is that most construction workers don’t sit at home at the end of their shift. Almost everyone I know in construction is involved in one of these activities: hunting, shooting, motorcycles, water sports, yard work, cars, wood working/cutting, concerts, music, etc. Each of these activities contribute to their overall hearing loss, and again, doesn’t allow your ears to “rest”.

…which reminds me that I need to keep a set of ear plugs in my motorcycle jacket.

On occasion, owners say they just want to do the minimum to be in compliance with OSHA. Most times this is due to lack of understanding.

For some rules OSHA’s standard is right on the money. Take, for instance, lead (leaded paint) exposure. They have specific rules and guidelines that, if followed, keep virtually everyone protected*. The trouble is that some of OSHA’s rules have not been updated since 1973. New research and industry practices have found these levels to be unsafe even at current standards and exposure limits (PELs).

So, how do you know if the OSHA standards are current?

The quick answer is, you don’t.

Good safety professionals and industrial hygienists study the standards, recommended guidelines, and occupational limits worldwide.  In the US, the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) provides the most current best practices. However, there are other methods and standards for specific hazards. ANSI, AIHA (although getting more dated due to lack of funding), European OELs (occupational exposure limits), and others.

It is rare that an employer knowingly exposes employees to a hazard. On the other hand, ignorance isn’t acceptable either….which might be the best reason for OSHA to be in existence. I wish they would spend more money on resources, information and training.  Consult your safety professional!

*recently there is some discussion about low level lead exposure to children

Who has jurisdiction over lead based paint? Are the EPA’s lead rules all I need to follow? Or, do I follow OSHA?

Well, the short answer (for those in construction) is YES. Usually OSHA, but maybe both EPA and OSHA (*and others, HUD, etc).

OSHA’s focus (as I’m sure you know) is to protect employees. If you are removing leaded on your own home, OSHA has no jurisdiction. However, if you have employees and are working with lead based paint, you must follow OSHA.

The EPA is focused on the environment (of course). They have implemented (April 22, 2008) a rule called the Renovation, Repair & Painting Rule. This rule applies when you are working on any facility which effects kids under the age of 6. If you are contractor looking to work on a project (s) with this demographic, you need to be certified by the EPA. Here is a good starting spot.

It is interesting (maybe just to me) but the EPA has very little enforcement, compared to OSHA. Yet, most people are very aware of the EPA rule. In contrast, I find contractors working with leaded paint who don’t know that they are under OSHA’s rules. I suppose the EPA has done a great job of marketing.

Another interesting comparison is that the EPA and OSHA rules are actually very similar. There are differences, but in general, if you are following the OSHA rules correctly, you are most likely very close to complying with the EPA. (one difference: the EPA requires certification)

You know those lead testing kits from the hardware store?  They seem extremely handy, however, they are a bit misleading.

LEAD CHECK ™ and LEAD ALERT ™ use a chemical (rodizonate-based) to instantly tell you if you have lead in your paint. If you use this kit, and the color changes, you have lead present.

They are quick and easy, but have a few HUGE downsides.

• OSHA has stated in a letter of interpretation (7/2003) that these should not be used for determining if lead isn’t present. In other words, you can’t rely on a test that says, “no lead!”
• These kits only check the “top layer” of paint – not the coat of paint below the one you are testing. You must test each layer.
• These kits will not tell you how much lead you have (what percentage). You knew these kits didn’t do this already, but this is useful information!
• Some chemicals may interfere with these type of kits. If you have chromium in your paint, the kit may say there is no lead present, but in fact, the chromium has interfered with the true results.

The biggest issue is that you need to have objective air monitoring to prove that your airborne levels of lead are not overexposing your employees.  A true bulk test (of paint) gives you great information. It tells you the percentage of lead in the paint. This, and your air sampling data, can be used again for future projects. It will also tell you which colors of paint have the highest lead.  Be safe out there!