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
(2014) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of metals, solvents, formaldehyde, ventilation, and ergonomic risks during the manufacture of electrical cable accessories. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from employees at a manufacturer of premolded cable accessories for underground power distribution systems. Employees were concerned about poor ventilation, ergonomic risks, and developing respiratory disease or cancer from exposures during rubber molding, plastic extrusion, soldering, and painting. The plant operated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with approximately 300 nonunion production employees working 8-hour shifts. Paint department e... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from employees at a manufacturer of premolded cable accessories for underground power distribution systems. Employees were concerned about poor ventilation, ergonomic risks, and developing respiratory disease or cancer from exposures during rubber molding, plastic extrusion, soldering, and painting. The plant operated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with approximately 300 nonunion production employees working 8-hour shifts. Paint department employees normally worked 12-hour shifts. During our evaluation, we (1) talked to employees about their health and work, (2) reviewed safety data sheets and injury and illness logs, (3) looked at work practices and plant processes, (4) inspected ventilation systems, (5) collected air samples for solvents and air and surface wipes for metals, and (6) evaluated workstations for ergonomic risk factors. We found deficiencies in the plant's ventilation system that included holes in the ductwork, disconnected ducts, and broken dampers. Air levels of chemicals were low except for one toluene air sample on a spray painter that exceeded the ACGIH TLV limit, which was adjusted for the 12-hour workshift. This overexposure may have resulted from inadequate exhaust ventilation or improper work practices. Some employees working with irritants and solvents reported eye and upper respiratory symptoms, headaches, and lightheadedness. The air levels of chemicals we measured were below those that have resulted in long-term respiratory problems in other scientific studies; however, these current levels may not reflect those that existed in the plant in years past. We noted that many employees had a combination of forceful exertion, repetitive movements, and twisting and bending during paint spraying, rubber molding, and deflashing operations; these factors put them at risk for musculoskeletal disorders. We recommended the company further reduce chemical exposures by (1) repairing the ventilation system, (2) moving parts further back into the spray booth for painting, (3) providing exhaust ventilation to the drying racks used for painted parts, and (4) ensuring employees keep the spray nozzle inside the spray booth. We also recommended the company improve communication with employees regarding how chemicals can affect their health and how to prevent exposures at work. To reduce the risk for musculoskeletal disorders, we recommended the company (1) move the paint booths so that the elbow of the spray painter is at a 90 angle to the part being sprayed, (2) install a conveyor to help load parts, and use a tool to move parts into the collection bin, and (3) rotate employees between job tasks that use different muscle groups.
(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: evaluation of dermatitis among sanders in a furniture manufacturing plant. (Click to open report) Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program investigators evaluated sanding department exposures and rashes among employees at a furniture manufacturing company in North Carolina. The employer became concerned after two sanders had severe skin reactions at work and were unable to continue work in the area. In November 2011, HHE investigators toured the facility, observed work processes and practices, and reviewed the company's material safety data sheets for the epoxies and other chemicals used in th... (Click to show more)Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program investigators evaluated sanding department exposures and rashes among employees at a furniture manufacturing company in North Carolina. The employer became concerned after two sanders had severe skin reactions at work and were unable to continue work in the area. In November 2011, HHE investigators toured the facility, observed work processes and practices, and reviewed the company's material safety data sheets for the epoxies and other chemicals used in the sanding department. They assessed ventilation in the work area using smoke tubes to observe air flow patterns, collected personal air samples for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), surface wipe samples for bisphenol A and diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (DGEBA) (epoxy components), and surface samples for metals and minerals. They interviewed 18 employees confidentially and reviewed employee medical records and OSHA 300 Logs. The sanders' downdraft tables were ineffective in controlling dust while employees sanded large frames. Compressed air was used to clean off the chairs, which increased the airborne dust levels in the sanding department. The wipe samples of work surfaces in the sanding department found low levels of DGEBA, indicating that employees had potential for skin contact with this epoxy resin component. They found low levels of metals and minerals in surface wipe samples and low concentrations of airborne VOCs. Eight of the 18 interviewed employees, all sanders or prior sanders, reported current or recent skin rash that began within 2 years of our site visit and that they associated with work. Five employees had visible skin rash. A few employees reported upper respiratory symptoms and one employee reported asthma symptoms. Employees reported using a much larger amount of epoxy than they did 2 years prior to our visit because they began plugging furniture screw holes with epoxy instead of wood plugs. Employees reported using their fingers to mix the epoxies because of their thick consistency. The company began requiring employees to wear gloves while working with epoxy about a month prior to the site visit. Medical record review of four employees revealed that one employee had been diagnosed with work-related allergic contact dermatitis after skin patch testing showed an allergic skin reaction to bisphenol A; the other three were diagnosed with contact dermatitis. Skin contact with epoxy resin may cause allergic contact dermatitis and occupational asthma. The increased use of epoxy 18 months before the site visit, insufficient dust control during sanding, and lack of skin protection likely played a role in the development of dermatitis among sanders. HHE investigators recommended the employer reduce epoxy resin exposures by using a dispensing gun to apply the epoxies, adding local exhaust ventilation to the hand-held sanders to control dust, and educating employees on the hazards of epoxy exposure and the need for work practices to prevent skin exposures to epoxy resins, including appropriate glove use. They encouraged employees to report work-related skin rashes and respiratory symptoms as early as possible and those with persistent symptoms were advised to be evaluated by an occupational medicine physician.
(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 indoor environmental quality at an accounting office, Florida. (Click to open report) On April 15, 2011, NIOSH received an employee request regarding headaches, fatigue, weakness, fever, chills, flu-like symptoms, shortness of breath, coughing, chronic sinusitis, sore throat, burning eyes, and difficulty concentrating in a water-damaged building. In June 2011, NIOSH investigators conducted a site visit. The majority of employees reported building-related symptoms. We found evidence of water damage inside the building and mold inside supply air ducts of two air handlers. Vacuumed ... (Click to show more)On April 15, 2011, NIOSH received an employee request regarding headaches, fatigue, weakness, fever, chills, flu-like symptoms, shortness of breath, coughing, chronic sinusitis, sore throat, burning eyes, and difficulty concentrating in a water-damaged building. In June 2011, NIOSH investigators conducted a site visit. The majority of employees reported building-related symptoms. We found evidence of water damage inside the building and mold inside supply air ducts of two air handlers. Vacuumed carpet dust samples collected during the site visit showed a high burden of culturable fungi and bacteria. We provided a number of recommendations for remediation including addressing causes of water damage and replacing contaminated carpet and ductwork. Building management replaced two rooftop air handling units and some ductwork. The carpet was steam cleaned. Some building occupants continued to have symptoms, and the accounting company relocated to another building.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2013) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of instructor and range officer exposure to emissions from copper-based frangible ammunition at a military firing range. (Click to open report) The HHE Program evaluated instructors' and range officers' exposure to weapon emissions during qualification sessions inside a partially-enclosed firing range. The range uses copper-based frangible ammunition that breaks into pieces on impact. During medical interviews range personnel reported headaches, sore throat, respiratory symptoms, and metallic taste that they thought were associated with the firing of frangible ammunition. These symptoms were similar to those reported in previous surveys... (Click to show more)The HHE Program evaluated instructors' and range officers' exposure to weapon emissions during qualification sessions inside a partially-enclosed firing range. The range uses copper-based frangible ammunition that breaks into pieces on impact. During medical interviews range personnel reported headaches, sore throat, respiratory symptoms, and metallic taste that they thought were associated with the firing of frangible ammunition. These symptoms were similar to those reported in previous surveys at the facility and were consistent with the types of exposures measured at the facility. The airflow inside the firing range was measured and investigators determined that the ventilation system was not designed to remove air contaminants. Air contaminant concentrations did not exceed occupational exposure limits, but levels of very small particles increased inside the range during firing events. Investigators did find that firing weapons when the propane-fired heater was on produced higher carbon monoxide levels than the heater produced by itself. Investigators also noted that some instructors did not wear eye protection or were wearing eyewear without side shields. Some shooters did not wear hearing protection correctly. HHE Program investigators recommended that the employer modify the ventilation system so that air contaminants are exhausted out of the range and adjust the propane-fired heater to reduce the amount of carbon monoxide produced. The employer should rotate range duties to minimize time spent inside the range during firing events. Investigators also recommended reminding employees about the types and proper use of hearing protection and requiring eyewear with side shields inside the range.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2013) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of pharmaceutical dust exposures at an outpatient pharmacy. (Click to open report) The HHE Program evaluated concerns about employees' exposures to pharmaceutical dust at an outpatient pharmacy. Investigators sampled the air for dust and measured particle levels. Samples were analyzed for lactose (a common inactive filler) and active pharmaceutical ingredients; both were found. The use of compressed air to clean automatic dispensing machine canisters released dust into the air. Investigators found that after this activity more than an hour passed before the small particles wer... (Click to show more)The HHE Program evaluated concerns about employees' exposures to pharmaceutical dust at an outpatient pharmacy. Investigators sampled the air for dust and measured particle levels. Samples were analyzed for lactose (a common inactive filler) and active pharmaceutical ingredients; both were found. The use of compressed air to clean automatic dispensing machine canisters released dust into the air. Investigators found that after this activity more than an hour passed before the small particles were no longer in the air. Most of these canisters contained uncoated pharmaceutical tables. On two days, one employee was exposed to lisinopril at levels near or above the manufacturer's exposure limit. HHE Program investigators recommended that the employer develop a list of dusty pharmaceuticals and gather exposure guidelines and toxicity data to determine how to handle these substances. A partially-enclosed local exhaust hood should be installed for cleaning and filling canisters with tablets, as well as other tasks that could release pharmaceutical dust into the air. Investigators recommended that the use of compressed air to clean canisters be discontinued and replaced with the use of a vacuum with a long narrow nozzle. Lactose was found on surfaces throughout the pharmacy. The highest contamination level was on a surface used in refilling canisters before it was cleaned. Higher amounts of lactose were found on work surfaces than on undisturbed areas such as elevated shelving. Investigators recommended that all work surfaces be cleaned with alcohol wipes before breaks and at the end of each workday. Investigators noted that employees did not wear protective clothing or safety glasses in the pharmacy, but some employees did wear nitrile gloves when handling pharmaceuticals. HHE Program investigators encouraged employees to (1) wear nitrile gloves when handling pharmaceuticals, (2) wash their hands before eating, drinking, or using tobacco products, and (3) follow procedures for using and maintaining the local exhaust hood.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2013) Health hazard evaluation report: evaluation of potential employee exposures at a medical examiner's office. (Click to open report) The HHE Program evaluated exposures to volatile organic compounds, mold, airborne particles, and formaldehyde in the autopsy suite, histology laboratory, and toxicology laboratory at a medical examiner's office. Some employees reported respiratory problems that may be related to occupational exposures, but other problems reported by employees such as acne, kidney stones, and hives were not related to work in the building. Chronic water damage was found throughout the building and mold growth and... (Click to show more)The HHE Program evaluated exposures to volatile organic compounds, mold, airborne particles, and formaldehyde in the autopsy suite, histology laboratory, and toxicology laboratory at a medical examiner's office. Some employees reported respiratory problems that may be related to occupational exposures, but other problems reported by employees such as acne, kidney stones, and hives were not related to work in the building. Chronic water damage was found throughout the building and mold growth and deteriorating ductwork lining were found. Disintegrated fiberglass was found in surface samples, but few intact fibers were present. Airborne formaldehyde exposures measured during five autopsies were below occupational exposure limits. Air flowed into the autopsy suite from the adjacent room as recommended and the number of air changes in the autopsy suite exceeded national guidelines. Airborne exposures to formaldehyde and volatile organic compounds in the toxicology laboratory were very low. HHE Program investigators recommended that the employer purchase local exhaust ventilation units for use during cranial autopsies. The potential for entrainment of morgue exhaust into the rooftop air intakes should be evaluated further. The employer should identify and repair all leaks in the building and remove mold from the ductwork to prevent mold spores from spreading through the ventilation system. When available, employees should use local exhaust ventilation for cranial autopsy saws. The use of powdered latex gloves was noted during the evaluation and should be stopped; nitrile gloves should be worn instead. Employees were encouraged to keep containers of formaldehyde closed except when needed during autopsies. Investigators also recommended that employees report health and safety concerns to their supervisor and their healthcare provider.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
