Industrial Hygiene in Construction

If you’ve ever won an award before, sometimes getting the award rarely equates to anything lasting (other than your increased ego). However, in construction nowadays, safety awards are HUGE! This is especially true if you are competitive bidding (or plan to in the future). I know companies who have received jobs & project  based upon one (or several) safety awards they have won. Of course they had other things going for them, but the safety award was the tipping point.

I am talking about company safety awards, not safety awards for being safe (see my earlier post, about safety incentives).

I really don’t think it matters where you get the award.

• Could be a OSHA SHARP, OSHA VPP, a regional/local conference (here’s an example, and here),
• an association award for safety (AGC, CURT, ABC),
• an insurance award (workers comp, your general liability carrier),
• safety program award,
• trade association (HVAC, Landscape, Union) or go for
• Safety non-profit (National Safety Council), ASSE, local section, or
• LEED and sustainability award (I know, not exactly safety-related).

Heck, create your own award! If you’re a GC, or a specialty contractor, why not give awards to your subcontractors or general contractors if they do an amazing safety work, or provide innovation? Print off your own certificates. Or, at the end of your project, ask your owner/GC if they will recommend and/or give you an award for the safe work you’ve performed.

Here’s an example of a construction website’s awards: Russell, James (no connections). Here’s a similar article from EHS Today.

On one hand it makes perfect sense. If you work safely, over time, this is something that should be rewarded. Many, many companies provide a safety-incentive for no/low work place injuries.  However, there is a downside, which some people have discovered:  If you reward people for being safe, there is a possibility they won’t tell you if something isn’t safe. It’s called a reporting bias, or selective reporting.

Unfortunately this bias is exactly the opposite of what the best companies do. The best companies report every little thing (every incident). People who scrutinize the numbers can tell you for every accident that occurs, there are usually 100 little incidents which occurred prior to the accident. The reporting of incidents is the best indicator for future accidents. (aka, catch phrase: leading indicators)

A really cool example of this is Google Dengue Trends. Dengue is a mosquito-spread virus. Google looks at search words and, over time & many data points, can actually see people where the fever is spreading. An article in Science & Tech (June, 2001 Graham Smith) “Google launches Dengue Trends tool to help doctors track spread of deadly fever”

So how do you motivate people to report an unsafe act?

Here are some ideas:

• Pre task planning & post task wrap-up (downside: can be a lot of paperwork)
• Check the first-aid safety box for what’s being used
• Encouraging open communication
• Spies (not my favorite)
• Follow up on any report of near miss (by management within a certain time frame)
• Reward the reporting of incidents
• Make it easy, safe, convenient, rewarding, honorable, and validating

Or, maybe you should ask the opposite question: What would motivate someone NOT to tell you? In construction, it is common practice to provide a bonus at the end of a project based upon various factors. This most definitely includes profitability, but it can also include safety. If you didn’t hurt anyone on the project, you SHOULD be rewarded. (or, at least be given a pat on the back). Here’s a case of someone who really got it backwards: A former safety manager at the Shaw Group (formerly Stone & Webster Construction) falsified records.

Chromium in it’s elevated valence state, called Chromium 6, or hexavalent chromium is a known carcinogen and sensitizer. From a toxicological point of view, it has a really interesting exposure to disease path.

I’ve mentioned it before, but recently NIOSH reduced their suggested limit from 1.0 µg/m³ to 0.2 µg/m³ (80% reduction for you math wiz’es).  They base this on eye & skin irritation, respiratory damage & lung cancer. Yikes.

OSHA has listed their exposure limits, along with other’s recommended limits here.

The take-away from this reduction is the serious nature of Chromium 6. If you are dealing with this hazard, you should take more than just a little precaution. Even if your prior air monitoring data is below the Action & Exposure Limit, continue  to document and verify your employees are well below the regulatory & recommended limits. As you know, hexavalent chromium is a skin hazard and can be absorbed easily into your body. I would also suggest performing wipe samples (area & skin) & decontamination in areas where there is work activity with hexavalent chromium.

For most construction companies, investigate these areas:

• welding (any stainless steel?) See this earllier post, also here.
  • And, OSHA has a new Fact sheet on welding & hexavalent chromium here.
  • Washington’s OSHA (L&I) has a great page on the hazards during welding here, including training videos. (so cool!)
• hardfacing on equipment. See earlier post.
• Bridge painting – (or painting with chromates) OSHA’s new safety bulletin is here.
• Electroplating – OSHA’s safety bulletin is here.
• Anytime you heat, or work with chromate painted surfaces.
• Portland cement when working with it wet and on your skin. NIOSH has some information here. hint: Try adding ferrous sulfate to lower the Cr6.

And, if you don’t work in construction, but live in Garfield, NJ, you might have to pull your toenails out to prove you aren’t exposed to hexavalent chromium.

AIHA has released (2013) a white paper for guidelines on skills & competencies in silica specific to construction. It is a great outline for training your employees.

Some interesting points:

• Respiratory protection, and their respective assigned protection factor is mentioned. (Are you wearing the right respirator?)
• There is no mention of air sampling. Thank you. You do not need air sampling every-time, we already know it’s hazardous.
• They emphasize control measures for silica.

Another recent publication from IRSST in Canada explains the effectiveness of controls with regard to specific tools and where exposures are found in the industry. It has a lot of information, but if you are looking for the best method to control dust with a certain tool, it would be worthwhile to read the 108 page document.

The best resource for silica is silica-safe.org. You can create a plan for controlling it here. They have a database of tools & controls. Very handy. Someday soon we may see 3D printers able to make these dust controls and adapters for us at a moments notice. Until then, pre plan your task.

So, while standing in the California jet-way waiting to board my plane, I noticed this sign. It was most likely a Proposition 65 labeling warning. However, what in the world do you do with that information? How did posting that sign change any behavior? Could I have done anything different to avoid the jet fumes?

It reads, “Warning. Chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects and other reproductive harm are present in the jet engine exhaust fumes from jet fuel, and exhaust from equipment used to service airplanes. Sometimes these chemicals enter this jet bridge.”

In much the same way, sometimes our warning to employees is pointless. What can they do different? What is the point of telling them something if there is nothing we can do different?

The global harmonization system (GHS) is being implemented in the US by the end of 2013. By 2014 you must train your employees on the new changes to the (Material) Safety Data Sheets (SDS, now). (BTW, there are also some other things you must do).

The message I am trying to make (double irony, I know) is when you are training your employees, how do you measure the effectiveness  If they “sign in and say they were in your training”, were you effective? Here are some suggestions, which might help to measure the right thing:

• Questions. This ___ number of the audience asked ___ questions.
• Feedback. I received ____ # of suggestions for the next training.
• Changes. They are going to implement ____ changes to their workplace.
• Secondary labeling. (GHS specific, of course) While walking around the site, I noticed ____ secondary labels with the new labeling pictographs.

I admit these aren’t the-best-suggestions-ever. But, warning someone without an alternative, method to change, or way to adopt a change, is really pointless.