Health Hazard Evaluations (HHEs)

(2010) Isocyanate exposure during polyurethane foam application and silica exposure during rock dusting at an underground coal mine. (Click to open report)
NIOSH received a request for an HHE from the United Mine Workers of America, Local 1702 representing employees at the Consolidation Coal Company Blacksville #2 Mine in Blacksville, West Virginia. The HHE request concerned potential exposure to MDI during the application of polyurethane foam and exposure to silica and asbestos during rock dusting. In an initial evaluation on March 31, 2009, we sampled the surface of the foam applicator gun for MDI contamination and collected bulk samples of the r... (Click to show more) NIOSH received a request for an HHE from the United Mine Workers of America, Local 1702 representing employees at the Consolidation Coal Company Blacksville #2 Mine in Blacksville, West Virginia. The HHE request concerned potential exposure to MDI during the application of polyurethane foam and exposure to silica and asbestos during rock dusting. In an initial evaluation on March 31, 2009, we sampled the surface of the foam applicator gun for MDI contamination and collected bulk samples of the rock dust for silica and asbestos analysis. During a second evaluation on September 14-17, 2009, we collected PBZ air samples on day-shift rock dusters for respirable silica and dust. We did not detect MDI on the surface of the foam applicator gun. The bratticeman who applied the foam wore nitrile gloves that protected his skin from MDI. Inhalation exposure to MDI is unlikely because the foam was not aerosolized during application and does not readily evaporate due to its low vapor pressure. Low levels of silica were found in bulk samples of rock dust. Asbestos was not present in the rock dust. The PBZ air concentrations of respirable silica were below applicable OELs. However, according to a statistical analysis, there is a 73% probability that the rock dusters' PBZ concentrations may exceed the ACGIH TLV 5% of the time. Because of the potential for overexposure to respirable silica, we recommend continued use of N95 filtering facepiece respirators. Additionally, the company should implement a written respiratory protection program that incorporates medical evaluations and respirator fit testing. (Click to show less)
(Click to open report)

(2010) Potential exposures at an electrolytic manganese dioxide processing plant. (Click to open report)
NIOSH received an HHE request from a representative of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 369 at Erachem Comilog, Inc., in New Johnsonville, Tennessee. The requestors were concerned about exposure to cobalt and nickel in the filter mud, manganese dust in the production areas, and sulfuric acid mist in the cell rooms. The health effects reported were cancer, lung problems, skin and eye irritation, nausea, and exhaustion. We conducted site visits in October 2007, February 2008, a... (Click to show more) NIOSH received an HHE request from a representative of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 369 at Erachem Comilog, Inc., in New Johnsonville, Tennessee. The requestors were concerned about exposure to cobalt and nickel in the filter mud, manganese dust in the production areas, and sulfuric acid mist in the cell rooms. The health effects reported were cancer, lung problems, skin and eye irritation, nausea, and exhaustion. We conducted site visits in October 2007, February 2008, and August 2008. On October 24-25, 2007, we toured the facility to observe work processes, work practices, and PPE use. Confidential medical interviews were conducted with 11 employees, and 4 PBZ air samples were collected for sulfuric acid. We reviewed previous air sampling records, injury and illness records, and the respiratory protection and hearing conservation programs. During the February 20-22, 2008, site visit, we collected 16 full-shift PBZ air samples for sulfuric acid and 13 full-shift PBZ air samples for dust to evaluate employee exposure to metals such as manganese, cobalt, and nickel. We also conducted task-based air sampling by collecting four PBZ air samples for metals on employees performing job tasks associated with dropping and drumming the filter mud and spray washing the filters. During the August 25-28, 2008, site visit we collected 50 full-shift PBZ air samples, 2 full-shift GA air samples, and 3 task-based air samples for dust-containing metals over the morning and night shifts. We found that 2 PBZ air samples for manganese exceeded the NIOSH REL of 1 mg/m3, and 16 exceeded the ACGIH TLV of 0.2 mg/m3. The highest PBZ concentrations of manganese were among operators working in the product preparation area, ore trammers, and CCOs in the digest area of the plant. Of the 33 PBZ air samples collected from employees (CCOs and product preparation operators) working 12-hour shifts, seven exceeded the ACGIH TLV of 0.2 mg/m3. However, if the ACGIH TLV for manganese is adjusted to account for the 12-hour work shifts, 16 PBZ air samples would have exceeded the adjusted TLV of 0.1 mg/m3. In addition, a 30-minute task-based sample collected when an employee was bagging the final product exceeded the ACGIH excursion limit of 0.6 mg/m3. Employees' full-shift and task-based exposures to cobalt, nickel, and sulfuric acid were very low and below their applicable OELs. We also found that the respiratory protection and hearing conservation programs had deficiencies. The written respiratory protection program did not accurately reflect actual employee PPE use. Interviewed employees were concerned about cancer risk, upper airway irritation from exposure to sulfuric acid mist, and safety when working in cell rooms. Four out of 11 employees reported nosebleeds when exposed to the sulfuric acid mist. Review of the OSHA Form 300 Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses for the years 2002-2007 showed entries for chemical and thermal burns, falls, and musculoskeletal injuries such as sprains and strains. We found no cases of chronic manganese, cobalt, or nickel poisoning. We recommend installing local exhaust hoods for the bag filling operation and using existing local exhaust hoods when cutting and grinding parts. We recommend that employees with job titles exceeding the OELs for manganese wear a minimum of a NIOSH-approved half-mask air purifying respirator with N95 or higher filter efficiency until engineering controls reduce exposure below the OELs. We also recommend using nonreactive fiber-reinforced plastic covers to reduce the amount of acid mist and steam generation. Until the plastic covers are installed, management should place barricades along the full length of the cell tank to as a warning and to prevent employees from falling into the cell tanks. Employees could be also provided with crane-mounted fixed/extendable walkways to conduct their job safely in cell rooms. Additionally, we recommend revising the written respiratory protection program to address inconsistencies between the written program and the employees' current respirator use. (Click to show less)
(Click to open report)

(2010) Skin and respiratory symptoms in peanut inspectors with peanut dust and endotoxin exposure. (Click to open report)
On November 30, 2007, the GDPH submitted a request for technical assistance to NIOSH to address concerns about health symptoms in FSIS peanut inspectors who worked in the peanut grading room at Shann Peanut Company (Shann) in Ambrose, Georgia. FSIS employees began reporting irritation of the eyes, nose, respiratory tract, and skin; nausea; diarrhea; vomiting; headache; fever; and flu-like symptoms in middle to late October 2007. Prior to our evaluation, FDA and USDA analyzed peanut samples for f... (Click to show more) On November 30, 2007, the GDPH submitted a request for technical assistance to NIOSH to address concerns about health symptoms in FSIS peanut inspectors who worked in the peanut grading room at Shann Peanut Company (Shann) in Ambrose, Georgia. FSIS employees began reporting irritation of the eyes, nose, respiratory tract, and skin; nausea; diarrhea; vomiting; headache; fever; and flu-like symptoms in middle to late October 2007. Prior to our evaluation, FDA and USDA analyzed peanut samples for fungi, mycotoxins, and pesticides. GDPH officials conducted an epidemiologic assessment. On December 5, 2007, we met with FSIS inspectors, GDPH officials, a USDA official, and the facility owner and walked around the peanut grading facility. We assessed ventilation in the grading room, examined the PPE provided to employees, and collected a sample of dust from the air conditioner filter in the grading room. We spoke with FSIS employees about their health concerns and reviewed their medical records. We later analyzed peanuts sent to us for endotoxin and VOCs. On October 22, 2008, we returned to Shann and conducted PBZ air sampling for endotoxin in the grading room. In 2007, we found that the grading room machinery did not vent peanut dust outdoors. FSIS inspectors reported wearing dust masks that were not NIOSH approved; they also reported skin, gastrointestinal, respiratory, and flu-like symptoms. Employee medical records reported respiratory abnormalities in seven employees. Endotoxin were found on the air conditioner filter and in peanut samples. During the 2008 site visit, endotoxin were found in the grading room air and outdoor air. The acute respiratory and flu-like symptoms reported by FSIS employees were consistent with endotoxin exposure. The acute gastrointestinal and skin symptoms reported were consistent with exposure to chemical toxins, possibly mycotoxins. The persistence of symptoms in some workers after being removed from exposure was unusual. Persistent respiratory symptoms could be a result of additional lung insult from cigarette smoking or co-existing disease, such as COPD or asthma. In addition, persistence of symptoms might be explained by employees inadvertently taking home organic dust on their clothing and shoes and in their cars, thus continuing their exposure. We recommend reducing dust in the peanut grading room by installing ductwork on machines to discharge dust outdoors. We recommend providing employee training on the hazards of organic dust and ways to prevent exposure, providing appropriate respiratory and skin protection to reduce exposure to irritants and allergens, and encouraging employees to report potential work-related symptoms. FSIS management also should review injury and illness logs and conduct additional endotoxin sampling in FSIS peanut grading rooms throughout the state to monitor trends in work-related illness and exposures. (Click to show less)
(Click to open report)

(2009) Employees' exposures to welding fumes and powder paint dust during metal furniture manufacturing. (Click to open report)
On April 6, 2007, NIOSH received a confidential employee request for an HHE at Dehler Manufacturing, Inc., (Dehler) in Chicago, Illinois. Employees were concerned about exposure to welding fumes and dust from powder painting and grinding operations. During our initial site visit on June 28-29, 2007, we met with management and employee representatives; toured the facility; observed work processes, use of PPE, and existing engineering controls; and interviewed 10 employees. We collected bulk sampl... (Click to show more) On April 6, 2007, NIOSH received a confidential employee request for an HHE at Dehler Manufacturing, Inc., (Dehler) in Chicago, Illinois. Employees were concerned about exposure to welding fumes and dust from powder painting and grinding operations. During our initial site visit on June 28-29, 2007, we met with management and employee representatives; toured the facility; observed work processes, use of PPE, and existing engineering controls; and interviewed 10 employees. We collected bulk samples of powder paint for particle sizing and to check for silica and asbestos content. Two of the 10 employees we interviewed reported symptoms we determined were not related to exposures in the workplace. They described episodic transient shortness of breath that lasted a few minutes and also affected members of their families who were not Dehler employees. Their condition did not improve when they were away from work. Two other employees reported eye and throat irritation. The remaining six employees reported no symptoms. Although the bulk powder paint samples did not contain silica or asbestos, we decided a return survey was needed to evaluate exposures to welding fumes, powder paint, noise, and heat stress. During the follow-up evaluation on September 18-20, 2007, we collected PBZ air samples for carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide on welders, and for elements (metals) on welders and grinders. We also collected PBZ samples for carbon monoxide on two grinders. For the painters, we collected PBZ air samples for TGIC, respirable dust, and total dust. We measured the face velocity on door openings to the paint booth, the capture velocity on a welding fume extractor, and noise levels throughout the facility. We also evaluated heat stress in the paint room. We interviewed the nine painters who were available and provided them with self-recording PEF meters. We were interested in knowing if the painters' breathing was affected by TGIC in powder paint. These meters provide an indication of airway obstruction. Of the 38 PBZ samples for elements collected on MIG welders, seven exceeded the ACGIH TLV of 200 microg/m3 for manganese, and an additional eight samples were at least at half of the TLV. Concentrations of the remaining elements in the welding fumes were below applicable OELs. Of the 16 PBZ air samples for carbon monoxide collected on welders, four exceeded the NIOSH ceiling limit of 200 ppm. Despite painting for only 80 to 300 minutes, four of eight painters were exposed to TGIC above the ACGIH 8-hour TLV-TWA of 0.05 mg/m3. One painter's exposure to TGIC exceeded the protection factor of the filtering facepiece respirator he was wearing. Had employees applied paint containing TGIC for 8 hours or longer at the same application rate (as is commonly done for a larger work order), at least six of the eight painters would have been overexposed to TGIC. Two of 15 PBZ air samples for respirable dust collected on painters exceeded the OSHA 8-hour PEL-TWA of 5 mg/m3, and 7 of 13 PBZ air samples for total dust exceeded the OSHA 8-hour PEL-TWA of 15 mg/m3. Talc was not detected in the respirable dust air samples collected on painters. The WBGT in the paint room did not exceed NIOSH recommended heat stress exposure limits, but at times the dry bulb temperature in the paint room exceeded 100 degrees F. On the day of our evaluation, the outdoor temperature was 77 degrees F, so it is possible that on warmer days the NIOSH RELs may be exceeded because the production area is not air-conditioned. Noise levels exceeded 85 dBA during grinding, welding, and painting, and at most presses occasionally exceeded 90 dBA. Hearing protection was required in the press area, but some employees were observed not wearing it, or wearing ear plugs that were not properly inserted. Two of the nine painters interviewed had PEF readings with a variability of 20% or more, which may suggest asthma. One of the two painters reported having symptoms of shortness of breath, which predated employment at Dehler, and had reportedly not worsened since employment. Because these employees only had Sundays off during the period of the PEF recordings, we are unable to determine if the PEF rates would have improved while away from work. A single day away from work is not sufficient to observe such changes if present. We are therefore unable to make a determination on work-relatedness of this finding. Our evaluation did not identify any painter who had definitive work-related respiratory disease or symptoms. However, we recommended to the two painters with increased variability of their daily peak flow readings that they consult their physician for further evaluation to determine if their bronchial hyperresponsiveness was related to workplace exposures. We also recommend that management take steps to prevent employee sensitization to TGIC. We recommend using powder paints that do not contain TGIC and welding wire that does not contain manganese. The paint booth should be further enclosed to better contain the powder paint, and the painters should be provided with a higher level of respiratory protection until exposures can be reduced through engineering or administrative controls. Painters should avoid skin contact with powder paint that contains TGIC because it is also a skin sensitizer and can cause allergic contact dermatitis and asthma. Management should inform employees about the risks of working with TGIC. We recommend installing spot cooling fans and exhaust fans in the paint booth room to control heat stress, and exhaust fans in the welding area to remove welding fumes. We recommend that management conduct noise monitoring to determine employees' full-shift TWA noise exposures, and ensure employees wear hearing protection properly while in designated hazardous noise areas. We also recommend that an ergonomics consultant be hired to assess work tasks and provide recommendations for reducing the number of ergonomic injuries. (Click to show less)
(Click to open report)

(2009) Exposure to flour dust and sensitization among bakery employees. (Click to open report)
In May 2005, NIOSH received a confidential employee request for an HHE at the Sara Lee Bakery in Sacramento, California. The request concerned rashes, respiratory symptoms, and problems with ventilation and indoor environmental quality. In an August 2005 work site visit we met with management and union representatives, toured the plant, and held confidential medical interviews with employees. We observed potential exposure to flour dust and BAA and received reports of employees with work-related... (Click to show more) In May 2005, NIOSH received a confidential employee request for an HHE at the Sara Lee Bakery in Sacramento, California. The request concerned rashes, respiratory symptoms, and problems with ventilation and indoor environmental quality. In an August 2005 work site visit we met with management and union representatives, toured the plant, and held confidential medical interviews with employees. We observed potential exposure to flour dust and BAA and received reports of employees with work-related hand dermatitis, cough, eye irritation, and aggravation of pre-existing asthma. We also learned of at least one employee who was diagnosed with baker's asthma. We returned to the bakery in March 2006. All bakery employees were asked to participate in an evaluation designed to compare sensitization and symptom prevalences between groups categorized as having higher and lower potential exposure to BAA and to more accurately characterize exposure in the different bakery departments. PBZ and GA air monitoring was performed to measure inhalable flour dust and total dust. The inhalable flour dust samples were further analyzed for alpha-amylase and wheat. The study included a questionnaire, and blood tests for total IgE; IgE specific to flour dust, wheat, and alpha-amylase; and for a variety of common aeroallergens. Of 186 bakery employees present during our site visit, 161 (87%) completed the questionnaire. Of these, 96 allowed their blood to be drawn. We observed the process in the bakery and also used information in the scientific literature to assign "lower-exposure" and "higher-exposure" categories to participants. Participants were assigned to either a lower-exposure group or a higher-exposure group based upon their job title at the time of the survey. We collected 83 PBZ and 19 GA air measurements for inhalable flour dust in the bread and bun production, distribution, engineering, and sanitation departments; and the office and plant management areas. The inhalable flour dust concentrations for PBZ and GA samples for certain job titles in the lower-exposure group had a GM of 0.235 mg/m3, a median of 0.245 mg/m3, with a range between ND (less than 0.12 mg/m3, based on an average sample volume) and 1.4 mg/m3. Of the 23 PBZ measurements for employees in this group, 8 reached or exceeded the CalOSHA PEL and ACGIH TLV of 0.5 mg/m3 TWA for inhalable flour dust. The inhalable flour dust concentrations for PBZ and GA samples in the higher-exposure group had a GM of 3.01 mg/m3, a median of 2.75 mg/m3, with a range between trace (between 0.12 and 0.42 mg/m3, based on an average sample volume) and 65 mg/m3. Of the 60 PBZ measurements for employees in this group, 56 reached or exceeded the CalOSHA PEL and ACGIH TLV for inhalable flour dust. Employees in the higher-exposure group had a significantly higher prevalence of work-related wheezing than those in the lower-exposure group (14.8% vs. 1.1%). They also had significantly higher prevalences of work-related runny nose, stuffy nose, and frequent sneezing. The higher-exposure group had a significantly higher prevalence of rash on their face, neck, hands, or arms in the month prior to the study. The prevalences of IgE specific to wheat, inhalable flour dust, and alpha-amylase were higher in the higher-exposure group at both the >/= 0.10 kU/L and the >/= 0.35 kU/L cutoffs, but the differences were not statistically significant. The prevalence of IgE specific to wheat was significantly higher among employees who reported either a current or past job in the higher-exposure group or in production at another bakery at both the >/= 0.10 kU/L and the >/= 0.35 kU/L cutoffs, and to flour dust and alpha-amylase at the >/= 0.10 kU/L cutoff, compared to the lower-exposure group. The prevalences of work-related wheezing were 3.5 times higher in employees sensitized to wheat than those who were not sensitized. This difference was statistically significant at the >/= 0.10 kU/L cutoff for IgE but was not significant at the >/= 0.35 kU/L cutoff. The prevalences of work-related runny nose was significantly higher among those sensitized to wheat at the >/= 0.35 kU/L cutoff, but not at the >/= 0.10 kU/L cutoff. We found no statistically significant differences in work-related symptom prevalences between those above and below the cutoffs for sensitization to alpha-amylase. Work-related runny nose was significantly more prevalent among those sensitized to flour than those who were not sensitized at the >/= 0.35 kU/L cutoff, but was not significant at the >/= 0.10 kU/L cutoff. Atopics (defined by a positive AlaTOP) were significantly more likely to be sensitized to wheat and flour dust at both the >/= 0.10 kU/L cutoff and >/= 0.35 kU/L cutoff, and to alpha-amylase at the >/= 0.10 kU/L cutoff. In conclusion, a health hazard exists at the Sara Lee Bakery in Sacramento, California, from exposure to flour dust and other BAA. Recommendations include implementing a variety of engineering and work practice controls, as well as the use of respiratory protection until these controls are implemented. Management should provide a medical surveillance program for employees exposed to BAA. (Click to show less)
(Click to open report)