If you cannot find anything that addresses your concerns, please contact us to see how we can help.
All NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluation reports and other NIOSH publications are available at no cost.
You can either download a copy of the publication from the website or contact us for a copy.
For HHE reports, please send an email to HHERequestHelp@cdc.gov.
Information about all other NIOSH publications is available at https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/pubs/.
We carefully review our reports prior to publication, but we do make errors from time to time.
We regret any typographical or other minor errors that you might find. If you find a substantive factual or data-related error, let us know.
Please send an email to HHERequestHelp@cdc.gov with the report number (ex. HHE 2013-0500-7500),
the authors' names, the error you are reporting, and the page number of the error. We will look into your comments,
fix confirmed errors, and repost the report. Thank you for your interest in the HHE Program.
HHE Search Results
471 HHE reports were found based on your search terms. Reports are listed in order of year published with the most recently published reports listed first.
Year Published and Title
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of employee exposures during sea lamprey pesticide application. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a health and safety manager at a government agency concerned with potential exposures when employees manually applied pesticides into rivers to control sea lamprey larvae. Sea lampreys (Petromyzon marinus) are parasitic fish in the Great Lakes, the Finger Lakes, and Lake Champlain. In a typical treatment year, 30 to 40 U.S. tributaries receive applications of 3-trifluoro-methyl-4-nitro-phenol (TFM) and Bayluscide(TM). In 2012, an estim... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a health and safety manager at a government agency concerned with potential exposures when employees manually applied pesticides into rivers to control sea lamprey larvae. Sea lampreys (Petromyzon marinus) are parasitic fish in the Great Lakes, the Finger Lakes, and Lake Champlain. In a typical treatment year, 30 to 40 U.S. tributaries receive applications of 3-trifluoro-methyl-4-nitro-phenol (TFM) and Bayluscide(TM). In 2012, an estimated 56,000 kilograms of TFM and 1,000 kilograms of Bayluscide were applied. During our evaluation, we (1) observed employee work practices and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) when applying pesticides; (2) looked at health and safety records and documents; (3) asked employees about their work, use of PPE, and work-related health and safety concerns; (4) measured TFM and Bayluscide on work surfaces, work clothing, exposed skin, and glove liners worn under protective gloves; and (5) measured carbon monoxide in a portable laboratory and a portable workstation powered by a propane generator. We found pesticides on work surfaces, PPE, personal clothing, and skin of employees, and a high carbon monoxide reading in a portable workstation. We observed inconsistent and inappropriate reuse of PPE, inconsistent hand washing methods, and some worksites where clean water was not available. We saw employees transfer, handle, and mix pesticides in open containers, which could lead to spills and tracking pesticides out of the work area. During our interviews, employees indicated that they were generally aware of pesticide exposure routes and health risks from exposure, and they wore eye protection and chemical resistant gloves when mixing and applying pesticides. Fewer than five employees reported skin irritation from TFM, skin rash, and poison ivy. We recommended the employer (1) enclose pesticide transfer and mixing equipment; (2) install washing stations so that employees can clean their boots, PPE, and skin; (3) develop PPE cleaning and storage procedures; (4) provide employees with clean water; and (5) reroute generator exhaust. We recommended employees (1) use required PPE and clean it before storing or reusing, (2) wash hands and face with clean water and soap after handling pesticides, (3) change clothes when they become contaminated with pesticide and at the end of the work shift, and (4) report all health and safety concerns to your supervisor.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of employees' exposures to lead, noise, and heat at an automotive lead-acid battery recycling company. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from employees at a battery recycling plant in Puerto Rico. Employees were concerned about exposures to lead and noise. The company collected lead-acid automotive batteries and operated a secondary lead smelter 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The company had 106 employees. We visited the plant in April 2012 and September 2012. We observed work practices; sampled for lead in air and on surfaces; interviewed employees about their medical and... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from employees at a battery recycling plant in Puerto Rico. Employees were concerned about exposures to lead and noise. The company collected lead-acid automotive batteries and operated a secondary lead smelter 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The company had 106 employees. We visited the plant in April 2012 and September 2012. We observed work practices; sampled for lead in air and on surfaces; interviewed employees about their medical and work history; looked at the company's health and safety programs and employee blood lead test records; and measured employees' noise exposures. We found (1) airborne lead overexposures among foundry, battery breaker, and some warehouse and maintenance employees; (2) lead on most work surfaces and on employees' skin after they took a shower at the end of the work day; (3) 85% of interviewed employees reported at least one symptom that could be related to lead overexposure; (4) 78% of employees had an elevated average blood lead level (at or above 10 µg/dL) even though average blood lead levels have declined since 2009; and (5) inadequate local exhaust ventilation. We also found employees were overexposed to noise and had the potential to be exposed to heat stress conditions. The company did not have a hearing conservation or a heat stress management program. The respiratory protection program was deficient because some respirators did not have a protection factor sufficient for the employee's lead exposure, training was not conducted annually, and respirators were worn and stored incorrectly. Employees lacked knowledge about the health effects of lead and how they could help protect themselves. We recommended the company (1) install ventilated enclosures around the battery breaker and shredder, (2) provide more local exhaust ventilation, (3) make a path so employees can go from the clean locker room to the lunchroom without crossing lead-contaminated areas, (4) continue blood lead testing of employees, (5) provide more protective respirators for certain jobs, and (6) stop dry sweeping floors. We also recommended the employer start hearing conservation and heat stress management programs, improve the respiratory protection and hazard communication programs, start a health and safety committee, and encourage employees to report health concerns that may be related to their work. We recommended employees (1) wear all required PPE, (2) wash their hands using a lead removal cleaner before eating, drinking, and leaving work, (3) leave work clothes or boots at the plant, (4) drink plenty of water at work and take rest breaks, and (5) participate in the health and safety committee.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of exposure to metals at an electronic scrap recycling facility. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from managers at an electronic scrap recycling company. The request concerned possible employee exposure to lead and cadmium. The company's primary activities included recycling batteries, metals, cardboard, and ballast and capacitors for fluorescent lights. Other activities included sorting, dismantling, and shredding electronic equipment such as computers (excluding cathode ray tube monitors), printers, keyboards, central processing units... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from managers at an electronic scrap recycling company. The request concerned possible employee exposure to lead and cadmium. The company's primary activities included recycling batteries, metals, cardboard, and ballast and capacitors for fluorescent lights. Other activities included sorting, dismantling, and shredding electronic equipment such as computers (excluding cathode ray tube monitors), printers, keyboards, central processing units, fax machines, cameras, medical equipment, and photocopiers. Our evaluation included (1) observing work activities and processes; (2) testing air, work surfaces, and employees' hands for metals, including beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, and lead; (3) testing employees' blood for lead and cadmium; (4) measuring noise exposures; and (5) interviewing employees about their work history and health and safety concerns. Our metal sampling results indicated that the air levels were below their occupational exposure limits. Employees' blood did not show detectable amounts of lead, and cadmium levels were well below the limit that would trigger Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements. We detected metals on surfaces, including those in break areas. The metals that we found on employees' hands before they left the facility and the practice of taking work clothes home for laundering can lead to take-home exposures. Some employees were overexposed to noise. We observed a lack of machine guards on some equipment, employees eating near work areas, and some work activities that could lead to low back injuries. Our interviews with employees found that cultural differences related to national origin might create barriers to communication about workplace health and safety. To address exposure to metals, we recommended the employer provide employees with a designated eating area, provide laundering facilities on site or contract with a laundering service, and prohibit dry sweeping. We recommended the employer address noise exposures by implementing a hearing conservation program, requiring employees to turn down the radio volume, placing scrap parts on the conveyor instead of throwing them, and replacing old equipment with new equipment that generates less noise. The employer should also replace all missing machine guards, evaluate the risk for musculoskeletal disorders, and promote employee engagement in workplace health and safety.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of occupational exposures at an electronic scrap recycling facility. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a health and safety manager at an electronic scrap recycling facility. The employer was concerned about workplace exposures, including lead and cadmium. Computers, monitors, hard drives, televisions, printers, light bulbs, and other e-scrap were recycled and processed at this facility. The recycling operations included cathode ray tube (CRT) processing (demanufacturing and glass breaking operations, and electronic sorting, demanufactur... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a health and safety manager at an electronic scrap recycling facility. The employer was concerned about workplace exposures, including lead and cadmium. Computers, monitors, hard drives, televisions, printers, light bulbs, and other e-scrap were recycled and processed at this facility. The recycling operations included cathode ray tube (CRT) processing (demanufacturing and glass breaking operations, and electronic sorting, demanufacturing, shredding, and bailing operations for all other electronics. We made multiple visits between 2012 and 2013 to evaluate employee exposures to workplace contaminants. We collected air samples for metals, dust, and crystalline silica; surface wipe samples for metals; and blood and urine samples for metals. We also did employee medical interviews; reviewed the facility's health and safety monitoring plans; and evaluated noise, engineering controls, and ergonomics in the work areas. We measured an overexposure to lead during shredder sorting and overexposures to cadmium on two employees during CRT buffing and grinding. We measured overexposures to noise on employees during CRT buffing and grinding, shredder sorting, forklift driving, and baling. We found metal contamination on surfaces throughout the facility; potentially contaminated air was recirculated back into the production area. We found lead on the clothing and skin of employees and on work surfaces. Blood lead levels ranged up to 13.7 micrograms per deciliter of blood. Two employees were above 10; a level of 10 or above is considered elevated. We noted the potential for taking lead and other contaminants outside of the workplace. Employees were exposed to ergonomic risk factors including extreme working postures, forceful exertions, and repetitive motions. Our recommendations to the employer included (1) following the OSHA lead and cadmium standards, (2) starting a medical monitoring program for all employees exposed to lead, (3) starting a hearing conservation program, (4) requiring respirator use in CRT buffing and grinding and shredder operations, (5) using wet methods or a vacuum with a high efficiency air filter instead of sweeping, and (6) designing work tasks and workstations to reduce bending, lifting, and other postures that do not allow employees to work efficiently and comfortably. We recommended the employees (1) provide and discuss this report with their doctor and discuss blood lead tests for their children and other family members, (2) wear required personal protective equipment, and (3) take a shower at the end of the shift and avoid wearing work clothing or shoes home.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: exposures of helicopter pilots and gunners to firearm noise and lead during gunnery target training exercises. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program received a technical assistance request from managers in the flight safety office of a federal agency. Managers were concerned about helicopter crews' exposures to gunshot noise, vibration, and lead during airborne offshore and ground range gunnery training exercises. The helicopter crews (50 pilots and 25 gunners) assisted in the interception and disabling of drug- and contraband-running watercraft. They flew MH-65C "Dolphin" helicopters. In response t... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program received a technical assistance request from managers in the flight safety office of a federal agency. Managers were concerned about helicopter crews' exposures to gunshot noise, vibration, and lead during airborne offshore and ground range gunnery training exercises. The helicopter crews (50 pilots and 25 gunners) assisted in the interception and disabling of drug- and contraband-running watercraft. They flew MH-65C "Dolphin" helicopters. In response to this request, NIOSH investigators measured pilots' and gunners' exposures to noise from shooting weapons and from helicopter flights during gunnery target training. We measured exposures to lead from shooting lead-containing ammunition and took surface wipe samples for lead inside helicopter cabins. We also spoke with pilots and gunners about the health symptoms they had while training and during actual missions. We found that helicopter pilots and gunners were exposed to high noise levels during gunnery target training; peak noise levels (exceeding 150 decibels) during weapons shooting were high enough to damage hearing. In our review of audiometric test results, we found that some pilots and gunners had evidence of threshold shifts using NIOSH criteria, but did not have standard threshold shifts using OSHA criteria. Helicopter pilots reported headache and fatigue from gun blast, especially after flights for gunnery target training. Airborne lead exposures were below occupational exposure limits, but surface lead was found inside helicopter cabins. To address the potential for noise exposure among helicopter crews, NIOSH investigators recommended the employer (1) install a partial noise barrier in the helicopters between the pilots and gunner, (2) install a window in the helicopter cabin that can be opened to reduce blast pressure when high caliber weapons are shot, (3) continue to require double hearing protection for everyone in the helicopter cabin when they shoot weapons and during gunnery target training flights, and (4) test employee hearing and report results using NIOSH and OSHA criteria. To address the potential for lead exposure among helicopter crews, we recommended the employer (1) consider using non-lead bullets and non-lead primers as they become economically feasible, (2) clean the inside of the helicopter cabins to help remove surface lead accumulation, and (3) advise helicopter crews to maintain good hand hygiene and thoroughly wash their hands after handling guns or bullets that contain lead and after gunnery target training exercises.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: lead exposure at a firing range and gun store. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request for an evaluation from employees of a firing range and gun store. Employees were concerned about lead exposure and reported being diagnosed with lead poisoning and being medically removed from the workplace by an occupational physician. We visited the facility in December 2013 to interview employees, assess lead exposures, and evaluate ventilation system performance. In February 2014, we provided a summary of the environmental sampling resu... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request for an evaluation from employees of a firing range and gun store. Employees were concerned about lead exposure and reported being diagnosed with lead poisoning and being medically removed from the workplace by an occupational physician. We visited the facility in December 2013 to interview employees, assess lead exposures, and evaluate ventilation system performance. In February 2014, we provided a summary of the environmental sampling results to the employer and employee representatives and personal sampling results were sent to each employee who participated in the evaluation. Employees generally spent most of their work day at the sales counter in the showroom or in the office. They occasionally entered the ranges to assist shooters who were experiencing difficulty or to supervise league shooting. On Saturdays, employees performed a deep cleaning of the firing ranges. Each range had a separate single-pass ventilation system that supplied outside air to the range and exhausted the air directly outdoors without recirculation. The areas of the facility other than the range were served by two recirculation ventilation systems. All employees had elevated blood lead levels, defined as greater than or equal to 10 µg/dL, when tested by the employer in November 2013. Employee BLLs ranged from 19.9-40.7 µg/dL. No employees had undergone the medical surveillance required by Cal/OSHA. Air sampling results for lead were below the Cal/OSHA permissible exposure limit of 50 µg/m3. We found lead on all tested surfaces in the range and in the showroom. Employees also had lead on their hands and shoes as they left work to go home. The ventilation system had numerous deficiencies, and lead contaminated air circulated throughout the building. Multiple openings between the ranges and the wall separating them from the showroom allowed lead dust to migrate to the air handling units that serve the showroom and office/classroom area. We recommended the employer (1) switch to lead-free ammunition, (2) remove all employees with blood lead levels of 20 µg/dL or higher from exposure to lead until their two blood lead levels taken a month apart drop below 15 µg/dL, (3) hire a ventilation engineer to modify or redesign the ventilation systems, (4) remove lead contamination from the showroom, and (5) follow the Cal/OSHA medical surveillance requirements. We recommended employees (1) talk to their doctor about their exposure to lead at work, (2) not eat, drink, or smoke inside the facility, (3) wash their hands with a lead-removing soap before leaving the facility, and (4) change their clothes and shoes before leaving work to decrease the amount of lead transferred to their car or home.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2013) Health hazard evaluation report: chemotherapy drug evaluation at a veterinary teaching hospital - Michigan. (Click to open report) In February 2010, NIOSH received a confidential employee HHE request concerning exposure to chemotherapy drugs at a university veterinary teaching hospital (veterinary hospital) in Michigan. Employees were concerned that exposure to chemotherapy drugs may cause adverse health effects such as reproductive problems and hair loss. We visited the veterinary hospital in September 2010 and observed work practices and workplace conditions. We talked with employees about their health and workplace conce... (Click to show more)In February 2010, NIOSH received a confidential employee HHE request concerning exposure to chemotherapy drugs at a university veterinary teaching hospital (veterinary hospital) in Michigan. Employees were concerned that exposure to chemotherapy drugs may cause adverse health effects such as reproductive problems and hair loss. We visited the veterinary hospital in September 2010 and observed work practices and workplace conditions. We talked with employees about their health and workplace concerns related to chemotherapy drugs. We collected surface wipe and air samples for the chemotherapy drugs cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, and doxorubicin. We gave a presentation on the occupational risks associated with chemotherapy and other hazardous drugs to the employer, employees, and students. We also met with university officials responsible for the veterinary hospital's occupational health and safety program. Cyclophosphamide was detected in 4 of 44 surface wipe samples, ranging from ND (< 5 ng/100 cm2) to 240 ng/100 cm2. All detectable levels of cyclophosphamide were found in the chemotherapy drug preparation room and administration area. Ifosfamide was detected in 2 of 44 surface wipe samples, ranging from ND (< 2 ng/100 cm2) to 37 ng/100 cm2. We detected neither cyclophosphamide nor ifosfamide in the air samples. Doxorubicin was not detected (LOD = 7 ng/sample) in any of the surface wipe or air samples, but we believe the recovery of doxorubicin from these samples may have been poor because of the length of time the samples were stored frozen before analysis. Most employees we talked with were not satisfied with the health and safety program, particularly in the areas of training, supervisor communication, and required re-use of disposable PPE. A few employees reported that they did not always wear appropriate PPE when administering chemotherapy drugs. Three employees reported health effects (headache, nausea, and abnormal menstruation) that have been associated with chemotherapy exposure in prior studies, but that also have a variety of other etiologies. No employees reported hair loss at the time of our evaluation. We were unable to determine if the health effects reported by employees were work related. However, similar effects have been reported with occupational exposure to chemotherapy drugs in other studies. We have provided recommendations that may reduce chemotherapy drug exposure, address employee concerns about their workplace health and safety program, and lead to more consistent work practices and personal protective equipment use.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2013) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of employee exposure to lead and other chemicals at a police department. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program evaluated employees' exposure to lead when working in the parking garage adjacent to the firing range of a police department. Lead was found on surfaces inside the parking garage; the firing range was identified as the main source of this contamination. Investigators determined that the firing range did not meet all of the ventilation design elements recommended by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. When investigators interviewed... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program evaluated employees' exposure to lead when working in the parking garage adjacent to the firing range of a police department. Lead was found on surfaces inside the parking garage; the firing range was identified as the main source of this contamination. Investigators determined that the firing range did not meet all of the ventilation design elements recommended by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. When investigators interviewed employees they found that most employees reported health symptoms that they felt were related to or made worse by the workplace. One employee who reported headache, tiredness, and leg weakness and pain had a higher than normal blood lead level. A lack of ventilation in the property room where illicit drugs were stored was also of concern. Illicit drugs were found on some surfaces in the property room. Employees were also concerned about water intrusion and mold growth on the ceiling tiles in offices, but investigators did not find visual of water intrusion or mold growth. HHE Program investigators recommended that the firing range be redesigned to meet all recommended design elements or that another firing range be used. Officers should be provided with non-lead bullets and lead-free primer. If bullets or primer containing lead are used then investigators recommended collecting air samples. The results of this sampling will help determine which elements of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration lead standard need to be followed. Investigators also recommended that surfaces contaminated with lead or illicit drugs be properly cleaned. Change-out schedules for the air filters in the local exhaust ventilation systems and vacuum cleaners should be established and followed. HHE Program investigators recommended that employees wear nitrile gloves when cleaning guns, handling spent cartridge cases, and when working in the firing range or parking garage. Even when gloves are worn, hands should be cleaned with soap and water or with lead-decontamination wipes after firing weapons or doing other work that could result in exposure to lead. Investigators also recommended the use of nitrile gloves when employees handle illicit drug evidence or perform criminology procedures.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2013) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of potential employee exposures during crime and death investigations at a county coroner's office. (Click to open report) The HHE Program evaluated employees' exposures during crime and death investigations at a coroner's office. Investigators observed work practices and procedures and interviewed employees about their work and health. Investigators sampled the air for formaldehyde, volatile organic compounds, airborne particles, and ethyl 2-cyanoacrylate. Samples were taken during autopsy procedures, tissue prepping and processing, and fingerprint fuming operations. Investigators also sampled for lead in the air a... (Click to show more)The HHE Program evaluated employees' exposures during crime and death investigations at a coroner's office. Investigators observed work practices and procedures and interviewed employees about their work and health. Investigators sampled the air for formaldehyde, volatile organic compounds, airborne particles, and ethyl 2-cyanoacrylate. Samples were taken during autopsy procedures, tissue prepping and processing, and fingerprint fuming operations. Investigators also sampled for lead in the air and on surfaces in the firearms section and sampled for residual drug particles in the air and on surfaces in the drug evidence laboratory. The ventilation system was also assessed. Investigators found that some exposures to formaldehyde in the autopsy suite were above the recommended ceiling limits and that the number of air changes per hour was below the recommended level. Airborne drug particles were found in samples taken during drug analyses and on the surfaces in the drug evidence laboratory. In the firearms section, air did not flow from the shooter towards the target as recommended and lead contamination was found on surfaces in the firing room. Investigators determined that airborne concentrations of lead may be a health hazard to firearm investigators involved in multiple weapons testing sessions in one shift. For the autopsy suite, HHE Program investigators recommended increasing room exhaust, installing downdraft tables, removing items blocking exhaust fans, using local exhaust ventilation attachments when doing cranial autopsies, and opening containers of formaldehyde only when needed. For the drug evidence laboratory, they recommended using a high-efficiency particulate air filtered hood for procedures that produce airborne drug particles and improving housekeeping. To reduce lead exposures, they recommended modifying the supply and exhaust ventilation in the firing room to provide a laminar flow of air from the shooter towards the bullet trap and using a high-efficiency particulate air filtered vacuum or wet mopping methods to clean the firing range. Throughout the facility, they identified the need for employees to wash their hands with warm water and soap after completing work activities.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2013) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of vibration exposure for interment technicians. (Click to open report) The HHE Program evaluated concerns about injuries to an interment crew at a cemetery. Investigators spoke with employees about their health and safety concerns and measured the distance employees had to reach to operate equipment controls. Most operators' feet did not touch the foot controls when their back was against the backrest of the dumper, causing a larger portion of the forces from vehicle vibration to be absorbed through the seat and into the buttocks, pelvis, and torso. Whole body vibr... (Click to show more)The HHE Program evaluated concerns about injuries to an interment crew at a cemetery. Investigators spoke with employees about their health and safety concerns and measured the distance employees had to reach to operate equipment controls. Most operators' feet did not touch the foot controls when their back was against the backrest of the dumper, causing a larger portion of the forces from vehicle vibration to be absorbed through the seat and into the buttocks, pelvis, and torso. Whole body vibration measurements were taken during operation of a 10-ton power tip dumper and backhoe. Investigators also compared whole body vibration exposures during different driving speeds and loading conditions and found that higher speeds on the dumper produced more whole body vibration. Interment employees were exposed to whole body vibration due to the configuration of the dumper and the condition of the roadways and soil shed area. Investigators concluded that operating the dumper caused more whole body vibration than operating the backhoe. HHE Program investigators recommended that the employer restrict driving speeds of the dumper and backhoe by either installing a governor device on the equipment or by establishing a speed policy for employees. Roadways should be improved and maintained regularly and the unpaved soil shed area and access roadways leading to the area should be graded more often. Investigators also recommended rotating employees through tasks on the dumper and backhoe more frequently.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
