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
1057 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
(2015) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of occupational exposures at a drycleaning shop using SolvonK4. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from the managers of a drycleaning shop. The request concerned potential occupational exposures to the drycleaning solvent SolvonK4. We evaluated the drycleaning shop in May 2014. The shop was staffed by 10 full-time employees (pressers, tailors, and a cashier) and two owners. The pressers worked from 6 a.m. until they completed pressing for the day. The tailors worked from 12 p.m. to approximately 6 p.m. The shop drycleaned 20-40 loads per... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from the managers of a drycleaning shop. The request concerned potential occupational exposures to the drycleaning solvent SolvonK4. We evaluated the drycleaning shop in May 2014. The shop was staffed by 10 full-time employees (pressers, tailors, and a cashier) and two owners. The pressers worked from 6 a.m. until they completed pressing for the day. The tailors worked from 12 p.m. to approximately 6 p.m. The shop drycleaned 20-40 loads per week, including five loads each day during our visit. We took air samples for butylal, the main ingredient in SolvonK4. We also took air samples for formaldehyde and butanol. These chemicals can be produced by SolvonK4. We measured temperature and relative humidity to learn about the risk for illnesses from the heat. We found butylal, but not formaldehyde or butanol, in the personal air samples from employees. We saw employees spraying and brushing pretreatment solutions onto fabrics. The employees did not wear gloves or eye protection. Although the shop had heating and air-conditioning, the front and back doors were opened to provide general dilution ventilation, as needed. The temperatures inside the shop ranged from 78 degrees F to 104 degrees F and the relative humidity range ranged from 21%-57%. Comparing our calculated heat indices to the OSHA guidelines for heat illness prevention, we noted that the risk of heat-related illness varied throughout the work day from low in the morning to high in the early and late afternoon. It was warmest in the pressing areas of the shop. Cool drinking water was available from a dispenser in the break area, and we saw employees drinking water during breaks and at lunch. We saw dust and lint in the shop, which can be a source of fuel if there is a fire. We recommended the employer (1) train employees to pour and brush pretreatments onto fabrics instead of spraying, (2) inspect and maintain the drycleaning machine according to the manufacturer's recommendations, (3) follow OSHA guidance on protecting employees from the effects of heat, (4) clean the shop regularly with a high efficiency particulate air vacuum cleaner or a wet mop, and (5) provide eye protection and chemical resistant gloves. We recommended the employees wear eye protection and chemical resistant gloves while pretreating fabrics and wash hands or exposed skin with soap and water after contact with chemicals, and wash their hands after removing gloves.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2015) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of skin and respiratory symptoms among employees with exposure to metals, metalworking fluids, and noise at an orthopedic implant manufacturer. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from employees who were concerned about exposures to metalworking fluid mists, and metals at an orthopedic implant manufacturer. Our 2013 evaluation was in one building where 26 employees manufactured cobalt chromium femoral implants, titanium femoral stem implants, and plastic patellar implants. All employees were required to wear safety glasses and steel-toe boots; use of company-issued coveralls, earplugs, protective gloves, and respirat... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from employees who were concerned about exposures to metalworking fluid mists, and metals at an orthopedic implant manufacturer. Our 2013 evaluation was in one building where 26 employees manufactured cobalt chromium femoral implants, titanium femoral stem implants, and plastic patellar implants. All employees were required to wear safety glasses and steel-toe boots; use of company-issued coveralls, earplugs, protective gloves, and respirators was optional and varied by department. We observed work practices, measured noise levels, tested for metals and metalworking fluid mist, reviewed sampling records and written policies and procedures, collected urine from employees to check their cobalt and chromium levels, and surveyed employees about their health and work-related symptoms. We measured an overexposure to cobalt before the local exhaust ventilation system was improved. The improvements helped lower airborne cobalt levels. One air sample for hexavalent chromium was more than half the NIOSH REL. Cobalt and chromium levels in employee urine samples were low. Some surfaces in the break room were contaminated with cobalt, chromium, and aluminum. Noise exposures were above the OSHA and NIOSH limits. Air sample concentrations for metalworking fluids were low. We recommended the company improve engineering controls for protection from metals and noise exposures, start a hearing conservation program, improve employee training, and conduct medical evaluations for employees with persistent work-related symptoms. We also recommended the company stop employees from using compressed air to clean work clothing, stop using latex gloves, require nitrile glove use when skin contact with metalworking fluids or metal dust is possible, and encourage employees to report potential work-related health conditions to their supervisor.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2015) Health hazard evaluation report: metal exposures in an electronic scrap recycling facility. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a manager at an electronic scrap (e-scrap) recycling company. The request concerned potential exposure to metals, including lead and cadmium. The company employed about 80 individuals who processed and recycled computers, monitors, hard drives, televisions, printers, light bulbs, and other e-scrap. We evaluated the facility in April and June 2013. We (1) interviewed employees about their work practices, symptoms, and health concerns re... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a manager at an electronic scrap (e-scrap) recycling company. The request concerned potential exposure to metals, including lead and cadmium. The company employed about 80 individuals who processed and recycled computers, monitors, hard drives, televisions, printers, light bulbs, and other e-scrap. We evaluated the facility in April and June 2013. We (1) interviewed employees about their work practices, symptoms, and health concerns related to work; (2) tested work surfaces, skin, and clothing for metals such as lead, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and mercury; and (3) tested employees' urine for cadmium and mercury and their blood for lead and cadmium. No employees reported work-related health problems. Exposure to lead was well controlled in the shred room as indicated by employee blood lead levels. However, two employees in the teardown area had elevated blood lead levels (at or above 10 µg/dL). Blood and urine cadmium levels were not elevated, and no mercury was detected in employees' urine. We found lead and other metals on the skin of employees at lunch and before going home. We also found metals on nonproduction work surfaces. Lockers stored personal items and food along with work clothing and personal protective equipment. Showers and laundered uniforms were only offered to the glass shredding employees. Workers unjammed scrap from equipment that was powered on and running. To address employee exposures to metals, we recommended the employer (1) include all employees exposed to lead in a lead prevention program, (2) install a clean locker room area for employees to store personal items and food, (3) provide scrubs, uniforms, shoe covers, and a contract laundering service for all employees exposed to lead, (4) require all employees exposed to lead to shower and change clothing before leaving work, and (5) increase the number of sinks for hand washing. We also recommended the employer follow lockout/tagout procedures to de-energize machinery before conducting troubleshooting, repairs, or maintenance. We recommended employees take a shower at the end of the shift, wash their hands before eating or smoking, and not wear or take work clothing or shoes home.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: a pilot assessment of occupational health hazards in the U.S. electronic scrap recycling industry. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program established an interagency agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to learn more about work-related health hazards and their control in the electronic-scrap (e-scrap, also called e-waste) recycling industry. This industry contributed approximately $20.6 billion to the U.S. economy in 2012, compared to less than $1 billion in 2002. Additionally, this industry sector employed more than 45,000 full-time employees, up from 6,000 employees in 2002.... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program established an interagency agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to learn more about work-related health hazards and their control in the electronic-scrap (e-scrap, also called e-waste) recycling industry. This industry contributed approximately $20.6 billion to the U.S. economy in 2012, compared to less than $1 billion in 2002. Additionally, this industry sector employed more than 45,000 full-time employees, up from 6,000 employees in 2002. Currently, 25 states have laws mandating e-scrap recycling. As part of this interagency agreement, we surveyed a randomly selected sample of e-scrap recycling facilities nationwide to characterize work processes, exposures, controls, and health and safety programs. We contacted 278 e-scrap recycling facilities between September 2012 and April 2013. Forty-seven facilities completed the survey; a response rate of 17%. Because of the low response rate, this survey may not represent the U.S. e-scrap recycling industry. Surveyed facilities averaged 58 employees and most facilities had an industry certification. Surveyed facilities reported recycling a wide variety of electronics. The most common recycling processes were manual dismantling and sorting. Other processes included shredding, crushing, and automated separation. Most facilities reported having local exhaust or general ventilation, having a health and safety committee, and providing personal protective equipment for employees. Some facilities reported having environmental/ industrial hygiene monitoring and biomonitoring, using compressed air for cleaning, and allowing food and drinks in the production areas. E-scrap recycling has the potential for a wide variety of occupational exposures (e.g., metals, noise) particularly because of the use of manual processes. On-site evaluations of e-scrap recyclers are needed to determine if reported work processes, practices, and controls are effective and meet current standards and guidelines. Educating the e-scrap recycling industry about good health and safety practices, specifically related to safe handling of metal dust, would help protect employee health.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of coccidioides exposures and coccidioidomycosis infections among prison employees. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program received a request on behalf of a state correctional and rehabilitation agency and a state correctional health care services agency concerning potential employee exposure to the fungus Coccidioides at two state prisons in California. Coccidioidomycosis, also known as valley fever, is a disease caused by inhalation of spores of a fungus of the Coccidioides species, which grows in the soil in semiarid areas. The prisons are located in counties where the d... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program received a request on behalf of a state correctional and rehabilitation agency and a state correctional health care services agency concerning potential employee exposure to the fungus Coccidioides at two state prisons in California. Coccidioidomycosis, also known as valley fever, is a disease caused by inhalation of spores of a fungus of the Coccidioides species, which grows in the soil in semiarid areas. The prisons are located in counties where the disease is considered hyperendemic. At the time of our evaluation in 2013, staff numbered over 1,300 in prison A and 1,500 in prison B. NIOSH investigators reviewed work and occupational health policies and practices, reviewed medical and work information for the coccidioidomycosis cases among prison employees, interviewed a convenience sample of 172 prison employees about their work practices and exposures, and looked at the ventilation systems in buildings where more employees worked such as clinics and offices and some inmate housing units. We identified 103 confirmed cases of coccidioidomycosis among prison employees over a 4½-year period (January 2009-June 2013). The crude average annual incidence was 1,039 cases per 100,000 employees for prison A and 511 cases per 100,000 employees for prison B over this time. However, we do not know if each confirmed case of coccidioidomycosis among prison employees was due to an exposure at work or outside of work. Interviews with employees revealed that they may be potentially exposed to Coccidioides in the outdoor work environment through soil disruption activities, being present during dust storms, and other outdoor activities. Employees may also be potentially exposed to Coccidioides during outdoor activities outside of work. Neither the written respiratory protection plans nor the aerosol transmissible diseases exposure control plans specifically discuss exposure to Coccidioides. Most of the offices and clinics were air-conditioned, temperature and relative humidity measurements were within established guidelines, and an adequate amount of outdoor air was being provided. However, some prison areas had airflow patterns that could result in entrainment of unconditioned outdoor air. Environmental control measures such as wetting soil before it is disturbed, maintaining grass on exercise yards, stabilizing soil, paving roads, improving building ventilation, and changing work practices (such as reducing time spent outdoors) would be expected to reduce dust exposures to varying degrees. However, none of these measures will eliminate exposure to Coccidioides, and their relative effectiveness in reducing occupational coccidioidomycosis is unknown. To address the potential for exposure to dust, NIOSH investigators recommended the employers (1) install door sweeps and seal gaps around doors and windows and ensure doors and windows are kept closed as much as possible; (2) ensure employees wet soil before disturbing it, and continuously wet it while digging; (3) consider closing the prison yards and advising inmates and employees to stay indoors during dust storms and unusually windy or dusty days; and (4) replace air filters in the ventilation systems as needed. NIOSH investigators also recommended the employers (1) provide education and training during work hours to all prison employees on coccidioidomycosis and ways to minimize exposure, (2) consider offering the coccidioidal spherulin skin test to employees when it becomes commercially available, (3) review injury and illness records for reports of coccidioidomycosis infections among prison employees to look for trends over time, and (4) encourage prison employees to report suspected symptoms of possible coccidioidomycosis to a supervisor.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of employee exposures to Libby amphibole asbestos during forest management activities in the Kootenai National Forest. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from managers serving the Kootenai National Forest in Montana. The request concerned employees' potential exposure to Libby amphibole during forest management and fire suppression activities in an area surrounding a former vermiculite mine. The site has approximately 40 full-time employees, and up to 100 additional employees in the summer. Work shifts are typically 8-10 hours per day. Most of the work involves land management activities, in... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from managers serving the Kootenai National Forest in Montana. The request concerned employees' potential exposure to Libby amphibole during forest management and fire suppression activities in an area surrounding a former vermiculite mine. The site has approximately 40 full-time employees, and up to 100 additional employees in the summer. Work shifts are typically 8-10 hours per day. Most of the work involves land management activities, including civil engineering, trail and road maintenance, forest biology, fuels and timber management, hydrology, and wildland fire suppression. Our evaluation included (1) observing work activities and use of PPE, and (2) collecting and analyzing the samples for asbestos and Libby amphibole. We collected full shift and activity-based personal air samples on employees conducting various forest management activities; bulk samples of bark, duff, and soil; and wipe and vacuum samples from surfaces in the hydrology lab. Six of 109 personal air samples analyzed by PCM exceeded the occupational exposure limit of 0.1 f/cc; however, we found non-asbestos material that met the definition of a fiber on these samples. Of the 27 personal air samples evaluated by TEM, which included the six air samples exceeding 0.1 f/cc, six contained mineral fibers. Five of six contained richterite (one of the fibers that compose Libby amphibole), and one contained chrysotile (a serpentine form of asbestos). Of the five samples containing richterite, four were collected during fireline construction and one was collected during tree thinning. On the basis of these results, we found that employee exposures to Libby amphibole did not exceed occupational exposure limits during activities in the mine area. We detected no Libby amphibole in the bulk or surface samples. Employees wore respirators during trail maintenance and fuel reduction activities and completed a 3-stage decontamination; removed and discarded equipment and clothing, showered, and changed into street clothing. We recommended the employer (1) create a respirator program for employees working in the mine area, (2) periodically monitor employees' exposure to Libby amphibole, (3) analyze samples for Libby amphibole by electron microscopy in addition to current methods, (4) schedule dust generating work when the potential for dust generation is low, and (5) train employees on good work practices to minimize dust.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of erionite and silica exposure during dirt road maintenance. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a management representative at a federal government agency concerned about potential employee exposures to erionite mineral fibers when maintaining dirt roads in areas where erionite was confirmed or was suspected to be present. We visited two field offices to assess potential employee exposures to erionite and respirable crystalline silica (quartz) during road maintenance activities in October 2012 and August 2013. Erionite is a natur... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from a management representative at a federal government agency concerned about potential employee exposures to erionite mineral fibers when maintaining dirt roads in areas where erionite was confirmed or was suspected to be present. We visited two field offices to assess potential employee exposures to erionite and respirable crystalline silica (quartz) during road maintenance activities in October 2012 and August 2013. Erionite is a naturally occurring mineral found in fine-grained sediments such as volcanic ash deposits that have been altered by weathering and ground water. Erionite deposits have been identified in all of the western states except Washington. We observed employees blading and grading dirt roads, replacing culverts and cattle guards, replacing aggregate on parking lots, and pulverizing and analyzing rock samples. We took air samples for mineral fibers and crystalline silica and bulk rock and soil samples to analyze for erionite. We found that employees doing road maintenance activities could be exposed to quartz above the recommended limits. Area air samples indicated a high percentage of quartz, up to 100%. Zeolite mineral fibers, a class of fibers that includes erionite, were not found in the personal air samples. None of the bulk rock samples collected in the areas surrounding where employees worked contained erionite. Because of the variable environmental and geological conditions encountered by the employees and the variability in job tasks, including tasks that aerosolize dust particles, the potential for exposure to erionite and silica dust exists. Therefore, minimizing dust exposure during dust-generating activities is prudent. To address the potential for exposure to dust that may contain erionite or crystalline silica, we recommended the employer (1) not use aggregate that contains erionite to repair roads, (2) maintain air filters in the equipment regularly, (3) wet the soil before doing road maintenance, (4) schedule dust-generating tasks on days when the soil is moist, and (5) provide employees with clothes that are solely designated for work activities. We also recommended monitoring employees' exposure to respirable crystalline silica, and training employees in proper work practices for working in areas that contain crystalline silica or erionite. We recommended employees keep the windows and doors on equipment closed, and not bring work clothing home.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of exposure to chemicals at a polymer additive manufacturing facility. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from the union at a polymer additive manufacturing facility. Employees were concerned about developing chronic health problems including lung disease, kidney disease, and cancer, from exposure to workplace chemicals. Chemicals of concern included several used to make the polymer additive (including aniline and N-oxydiethylenethiocarbamyl-N'-oxydiethylenesulfenamide [OTOS]) and manufacturing byproducts (including hydrogen sulfide and a benzo... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from the union at a polymer additive manufacturing facility. Employees were concerned about developing chronic health problems including lung disease, kidney disease, and cancer, from exposure to workplace chemicals. Chemicals of concern included several used to make the polymer additive (including aniline and N-oxydiethylenethiocarbamyl-N'-oxydiethylenesulfenamide [OTOS]) and manufacturing byproducts (including hydrogen sulfide and a benzothiazole tar). We visited the facility in October 2012 and July 2013. We interviewed 10 current employees about health and workplace concerns, observed work practices, sampled the air for chemicals and OTOS dust, wiped surfaces to look for aniline, and reviewed safety data sheets, injury and illness logs, employee medical records, workers' compensation claims, prior sampling results, and facility policies and procedures. We found employees were overexposed to OTOS when compared to the manufacturer's occupational exposure limit of 0.1 mg/m3, but not overexposed to aniline or hydrogen sulfide. Aniline was not found on the wipe samples. OTOS overexposures occurred during product bagging and when troubleshooting a clog in the bagging operation. These overexposures and our observations indicate deficiencies in the local exhaust ventilation system. Although the employees used respiratory protection while bagging OTOS, they did not wear respirators while troubleshooting the clog. In our review of the respiratory protection program, we found critical elements missing and inconsistencies between the written program and actual practice. Some employees had eye, nose, throat, and skin irritation consistent with exposure to workplace chemical irritants. We determined that two former employees with chronic kidney disease had conditions that were unlikely to be related to work exposures. We recommended the employer (1) improve local exhaust ventilation for bagging OTOS and the primary polymer additive product, (2) follow the OSHA respiratory protection standard, (3) encourage employees to report possible work-related symptoms to their supervisors and to seek medical follow-up, and (4) improve communication with employees, particularly with regard to concern about working with cancer causing chemicals. We recommended employees follow all health and safety guidelines, report health and safety concerns, and wash their hands before eating, drinking, and smoking, and before and after using the bathroom.
(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 health concerns at a pet food manufacturing facility - Missouri. (Click to open report) In September 2012, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health received a confidential health hazard evaluation request from employees of a pet food manufacturing plant in Missouri. The requesters expressed concerns about vomiting, seizures, and breathing problems potentially associated with substances used in the manufacture of pet food and dog biscuits and/or possible phosphine exposure, which is a fumigant applied to bulk materials prior to arriving at the facility. They were al... (Click to show more)In September 2012, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health received a confidential health hazard evaluation request from employees of a pet food manufacturing plant in Missouri. The requesters expressed concerns about vomiting, seizures, and breathing problems potentially associated with substances used in the manufacture of pet food and dog biscuits and/or possible phosphine exposure, which is a fumigant applied to bulk materials prior to arriving at the facility. They were also concerned about other issues with their livers, lungs, and kidneys. This health hazard evaluation was conducted after a phosphine investigation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and in the context of litigation against the company filed by some current and former employees concerning health impacts of employment. In December 2012, we conducted a walk-through site visit at the facility, interviewed employees, and reviewed company records. In February 2013, two interim letters were sent describing the visit, the sampling results of the walk-through survey, and the preliminary recommendations, all of which are included in this final report. The purpose of the survey sampling was to assess potential exposure agents and characterize the process in terms of these agents; it was not designed to assess personal exposures for comparison against regulatory limits. Results from the three tape-lift mold samples indicated no surface mold in the mill room basements. Grain dust was not sampled or tested for mold during the site visit, but it should be examined in any future exposure assessments of this industry. Headspace chemical analysis of bulk materials showed the presence of diacetyl and 2,3-pentanedione in one ingredient used in the production process. Fugitive dust emissions were observed during some process events. We cannot conclude from our preliminary walk-through investigation whether health effects reported by workers were work-related or not. We planned a return medical survey since we were concerned with health symptoms experienced by requesters and interviewed employees; the medical survey was cancelled due to plant closure. Further medical testing of employees who work in this industry and industrial hygiene sampling of exposure agents at similar processing facilities are warranted to resolve health concerns raised about phosphine, flavorings, and/or dust exposures that may occur during the production of pet food and treats.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
