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
(2002) Glass Masters Neon, Savannah, Georgia. (Click to open report) On November 11, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a request for a health hazard evaluation from the owner of Glass Masters Neon in Savannah, Georgia, a small business which manufactures and repairs neon tubes for commercial signs and artwork. The owner, who was also the sole worker, was concerned about the health risks of his exposures to mercury, lead, and cadmium. In response to this request, a NIOSH industrial hygienist conducted a site visit on ... (Click to show more)On November 11, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a request for a health hazard evaluation from the owner of Glass Masters Neon in Savannah, Georgia, a small business which manufactures and repairs neon tubes for commercial signs and artwork. The owner, who was also the sole worker, was concerned about the health risks of his exposures to mercury, lead, and cadmium. In response to this request, a NIOSH industrial hygienist conducted a site visit on January 23, 2001. Full-shift, personal-breathing zone (PBZ) air samples for mercury vapor, lead, and cadmium were collected. Real-time air monitoring for mercury vapor was conducted throughout the shop area. Surface wipe samples of the work-tables were collected using moist cloth wipes for analysis of lead and other elements. In addition to the site visit, the owner's medical records were reviewed by a NIOSH physician. The worker's full-shift time-weighted average (TWA) PBZ air sample was 0.03 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) for mercury, which is below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 8-hour TWA permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 0.1 mg/m3 and the NIOSH recommended exposure limit (REL) of 0.05 mg/m3 , but it is above the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' (ACGIH ) threshold limit value (TLV) 8-hour TWA of 0.025 mg/m3 . Lead and cadmium were not detected in the 8-hour PBZ air sample. Real-time monitoring indicated that mercury contamination was present in the neon glass room, especially in areas where mercury was added to glass tubes. Particularly high air concentrations of mercury were found above a floor mat. A difference existed between the amount of metals found on two work surfaces from which wipes samples were collected. The location designated as side A in this report was an area where cutting, heating, and other manipulations of the glass were performed; side B was an area where primarily glass cutting occurred. Side A had a much higher range of lead levels (120-170 micrograms per square foot (microg Pb/ft2 ) of surface wiped) than side B (16-21 microg Pb/ft2 of surface wiped). Cadmium levels were also elevated over background (side A = 1.1-2.9 microg Cd/ft2 of surface wiped; side B = 0.43-0.69 microg Cd/ft2 of surface wiped.). No occupational standards or recommendations exist for lead or cadmium or the other elements on surfaces. A medical record of the worker's urine, collected by his private physician, reported a mercury level of 22 micrograms per gram creatinine (microg/g creat.), which is below the ACGIH's biological exposure index (BEI ) of 35 microg/g creat. No lead was detected in the worker's urine. Urinary cadmium was 0.9 microg/g creat., which is consistent with levels found in the general population. Airborne mercury concentrations exceeded the ACGIH-TLV . Mercury in the air samples was largely the result of volatization of mercury from surface contamination rather than process aerosolization. Air concentrations of lead and cadmium were low, although there was lead and cadmium contamination of work surfaces. Recommendations were made to clean the shop and prevent further contamination by installing a hood with local exhaust ventilation, adding mercury trapping devices, and improving work practices.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2002) Lead Safe Services, Inc., Neenah, Wisconsin. (Click to open report) At the request of a state-licensed contractor, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted a study of residential lead hazard reduction work. Workers' task-specific and full-shift personal airborne lead (PbA) exposures were measured on three consecutive days during exterior work at two single-family homes in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. Tasks assessed were cleaning, demolition, dry scraping, component removal, set-up, and wet scraping. Additionally, we measured surface pai... (Click to show more)At the request of a state-licensed contractor, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted a study of residential lead hazard reduction work. Workers' task-specific and full-shift personal airborne lead (PbA) exposures were measured on three consecutive days during exterior work at two single-family homes in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. Tasks assessed were cleaning, demolition, dry scraping, component removal, set-up, and wet scraping. Additionally, we measured surface paint lead concentrations and, for dry scraping and a mix of other tasks, concomitant lead concentrations in settled dust (PbS) at 10, 15, and 25 feet (ft) (3.1, 4.6, and 7.6 meters [m]) from work surfaces. Mean exterior paint lead concentrations at the two houses were high: 22 percent (%) and 37% Pb by weight. The 79 task-specific worker PbA exposures measured were highly variable; range 1.4-2240 micrograms per cubic meter (microg/m3), geometric mean (GM) = 71 microg/m3, geometric standard deviation (GSD) = 4.6. Within-task variability of PbA exposures was high (GSDs = 1.9-5.4). PbA exposures were significantly associated with task, worker, and house variables (p <0.0001). High-exposure tasks were cleaning (GM = 108 microg/m3), dry demolition (77 mcirog/m3), dry scraping (136 micorg/m3), and wet scraping (90 microg/m3); the means did not differ significantly in paired comparisons. The low-exposure task was set-up (GM = 12 microg/m3); the GM for removal also appeared to be low (30 microg/m3 ) but is uncertain due to small sample size (n = 3). Nearly all (14/15) of the full-shift PbA exposures collected for workers performing scraping and a mix of other tasks were above the permissible exposure limit (PEL) (GM = 100 microg/m3, range: 39-526 microg/m3). Results for five full-shift area PbA samples collected to measure potential bystander exposures on work days were relatively low, ranging from 0.83 to 6.1 microg/m3. Seventeen PbS samples collected at 10 ft (3.05 m), sixteen samples at 15 ft (4.57 m), and twelve samples at 25 ft (7.62 m) had respective GMs of 1716, 458 and 65 milligrams per square meter (mg/m 2). PbS levels were significantly associated with distance from the work surface, p <0.0005. PbS levels were not significantly associated with the two task categories (dry scraping and a mix of other tasks). Almost all of the full-shift PbA exposures for workers performing exterior scraping and a mix of other tasks were greater than the PEL. Task-specific PbA exposures were highly variable both within and between tasks. High-exposure tasks were cleaning, demolition, dry scraping, and wet scraping, with mean exposures exceeding the PEL. Mean exposures for set-up and component removal were below the PEL. The respirators used were adequate to protect workers from the exposures measured. Recommendations are provided in this report to assist the contractor in controlling worker exposures to hazardous levels of lead-based paint.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2002) Marion County Board of Education, Fairmont, West Virginia. (Click to open report) The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) was requested to evaluate noise levels in the interior of school buses operated by the Marion County Board of Education in West Virginia. Drivers were particularly concerned about the transit-style buses that have a flat front where the diesel engine is behind the windshield next to the driver's seat, covered by a cowling. A NIOSH investigator performed a one-day survey of the noise levels in six buses with the transit-style confi... (Click to show more)The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) was requested to evaluate noise levels in the interior of school buses operated by the Marion County Board of Education in West Virginia. Drivers were particularly concerned about the transit-style buses that have a flat front where the diesel engine is behind the windshield next to the driver's seat, covered by a cowling. A NIOSH investigator performed a one-day survey of the noise levels in six buses with the transit-style configuration as well as two conventional-style buses with the diesel engine in front of the windshield, under a hood. The NIOSH investigator rode one of the buses for the entire day as the driver picked up and dropped off students at school and home making a log of activities to match with the noise data for that bus. The noise levels were measured with noise dosimeters placed in the bus with the microphone taped to the right side of the driver's seat at approximately the level of the driver's ear. The overall daily average noise was compared to three different evaluation criteria for increased risk of occupational hearing loss from workplace noise exposures. The measured noise levels for all eight buses were less than the limits set forth in the criteria, with none of the levels greater than 82 decibels on an A-weighted scale expressed as a time-weighted average. The conventional-style buses were generally found to be quieter than the transit-style buses. The time-weighted average noise levels measured in this evaluation were less than all the of the evaluation criteria referenced in this report. The school bus operators are not at increased risk for occupational noise-induced hearing loss from exposure to bus engine noise. Some general recommendations to maintain low noise levels in the buses and to possibly lead to additional noise reductions are offered at the end of the report.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2002) Mueller Company, Chattanooga, Tennessee. (Click to open report) In May 1998, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a confidential request for a health hazard evaluation (HHE) at the Mueller Company facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The HHE requesters expressed concern over exposures to formaldehyde, phenol, xylene, isocyanates, toluene, naphthalene, carbon monoxide, trimethyl benzene, cumene, lead, and silica in the Pepset, No- Bake, shell core, green sand, and iron pouring areas; silica and iron dust in the cleaning r... (Click to show more)In May 1998, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a confidential request for a health hazard evaluation (HHE) at the Mueller Company facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The HHE requesters expressed concern over exposures to formaldehyde, phenol, xylene, isocyanates, toluene, naphthalene, carbon monoxide, trimethyl benzene, cumene, lead, and silica in the Pepset, No- Bake, shell core, green sand, and iron pouring areas; silica and iron dust in the cleaning room, shell core, green sand, and machining areas; oil mist from hydraulic tanks; and asbestos from the concrete plant floors. The HHE request listed respiratory symptoms and possibly increased cancer rates as health concerns. On March 31-April 1, 1999, NIOSH investigators conducted a walk-through survey, reviewed material safety data sheets and environmental sampling data, and interviewed 22 employees about the work environment and possible work-related health effects. Employer records were examined to determine the number of cancer cases among employees. On August 8-9, 2000, environmental monitoring was conducted for phenol, volatile organic compounds, Stoddard solvent, formaldehyde, toluene, cumene, ammonia, trimethyl benzene isomers, 4,4'-diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI), and hexamethylenetetramine (HMTA). Formaldehyde was detected at low levels in some air samples. MDI and HMTA were detected at low concentrations. Phenol, Stoddard solvent, toluene, cumene, ammonia, and trimethyl benzene isomers were detected at levels below current occupational exposure limits. Smoke released from the shell core ovens was found to move through the employees' breathing zones before being exhausted through the canopy hood. Twenty-one (4.4% of the 475 production workers) were interviewed. Among those interviewed, most employees who had prolonged exposure to emissions from the Pepset and No-Bake coremaking/molding operations reported transient respiratory irritation. The workers who worked in these areas on a regular basis generally did not report persistent respiratory illnesses that they associated with their workplace exposures. Review of the medical records of six employees who reported work-related respiratory illnesses found that some workers had worsening of pre-existing chronic respiratory conditions, although the cause of this was not determined. Information concerning cancer diagnosed among Mueller Co. employees did not reveal an unusual number or pattern of cancers; however, it is not possible to determine the cause of the cancers that developed among the employees. All of the substances sampled in the employees' personal breathing zones had concentrations below the occupational exposure limits. The 16 identified cancer cases were of 10 different types, and there was not enough information available to determine if the cancers resulted from workplace exposures. Among the small number of employees interviewed, most who had long term exposures to emissions in the Pepset and No-Bake coremaking/molding areas reported temporary respiratory irritation. Recommendations are provided for additional monitoring for MDI, formaldehyde, and phenol, use of gloves, reporting of health symptoms to medical personnel, and local exhaust ventilation in the shell core area.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2002) STN Cushion Company, Thomasville, North Carolina. (Click to open report) On August 28, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a confidential request for a health hazard evaluation (HHE) at STN Cushion Company (STN) in Thomasville, North Carolina. The request was submitted by employees concerned about health effects potentially associated with 1-bromopropane (1-BP, also called n-propyl bromide) and 2-bromopropane (2-BP, also called isopropyl bromide) exposures during the spray application of an adhesive. The employees' conce... (Click to show more)On August 28, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a confidential request for a health hazard evaluation (HHE) at STN Cushion Company (STN) in Thomasville, North Carolina. The request was submitted by employees concerned about health effects potentially associated with 1-bromopropane (1-BP, also called n-propyl bromide) and 2-bromopropane (2-BP, also called isopropyl bromide) exposures during the spray application of an adhesive. The employees' concerns centered around neuropathy (abnormal nerve function), weakness and numbness in the lower extremities, dizziness, and headaches. Site visits were conducted in November 2000 (exposure monitoring and informal [confidential] employee interviews), April 2001 (ventilation assessment), and July-August 2001 (medical evaluation and repeat exposure and ventilation evaluations). After April 2001, STN improved the local ventilation in the area of concern based on recommendations made by the NIOSH ventilation engineer. During both exposure assessments, employees were monitored for full-shift 1-BP and 2-BP inhalation exposure. Short-term (15-minute) and ceiling (5-minute) 1-BP and 2-BP inhalation exposure measurements were also collected from the adhesive sprayers (Sprayers). Area air sampling for 1-BP and 2-BP was conducted also. The ventilation assessments included an evaluation of local exhaust ventilation at the workstations (consisting of spray tables and spray booths). The medical survey, consisting of a questionnaire, a complete blood count, start-of-week and end-of -week urine analysis for bromine, and a battery of neurobehavioral tests, was performed on all employees within the facility who were willing to participate. Additionally, a reproductive study was performed which included all eligible female employees who were willing to participate. The purpose of the medical survey was: 1) to assess whether hematological (blood), neurobehavioral (postural stability and psychomotor ability), and reproductive effects might be associated with 1-BP exposure; 2) to assess whether health effects reported on the questionnaire were associated with 1-BP exposure; and 3) to evaluate urinary bromine levels at the start and end of the week and compare these results to airborne 1-BP levels (to see if urinary bromine concentration can be used as a biomarker of exposure). The "exposed" population consisted primarily of those employees who worked in the Fabrication area performing spraying activities. The comparison ("less exposed") population consisted of all other employees who worked in the facility. At the first site visit the mean (average) airborne 1-BP exposure for the Sprayers was 65.9 parts per million (ppm) (range 41.3 to 143.0 ppm). The mean full-shift airborne 2-BP exposure for Sprayers was 0.66 ppm (range 0.33 to 1.35 ppm). At the second site visit, the mean concentration of 1-BP for the Sprayers increased from the first (16.6 ppm) to the third (23.3 ppm) day of sampling, but was lower than the concentration found during the first site visit. Two individual spray booths (Stations #6 and #11) did, however, yield a 3-day average exposure above a recommended level of 25 ppm. The initial ventilation assessment revealed that all of the workstations had exhaust flow rates which were lower than recommended values. Enclosure of spray tables led to improved ventilation at each of the workstations; however, factors were identified which would lead to further improvement in ventilation effectiveness. Of the 84 individuals employed at STN at the time of the survey, 32 (38%) volunteered to participate in the medical survey. The symptoms most often reported from all participants included: headache (reported by 48%), trouble falling asleep or staying asleep (reported by 28%), dizziness or feeling "off balance" (reported by 25%), and blurred vision (reported by 24%). Two of the symptoms in the questionnaire, blurred vision and dizziness or feeling "off-balance," were significantly more common among the exposed versus the comparison groups. Of the exposed employees, five of six reporting blurry vision and four of six reporting dizziness noted symptom improvement during time away from the work environment. All of the results for blood indices were within the normal value ranges provided by the testing laboratory; however, because of the small number of blood specimens available for analysis, a statistical determination regarding the blood tests and their relationship to 1-BP exposure could not be made. The start-of-week and end-of-week urine bromine concentrations for the exposed group were both significantly higher than the corresponding values for the comparison group. We found no significant elevation in urine bromine level in the end-of-week urine samples compared to the start-of-week urine samples - in other words, we did not detect an increase in urine bromine from the first urine sample (start-of-week) to the second urine sample (end-of-week). Urinary bromine concentrations were highly correlated to the airborne concentration of 1-BP, and it was concluded that urinary bromine may be a good indicator of 1-BP exposure. A total of 30 participants participated in the neurobehavioral testing. We found no differences in the Postural Stability test results between employees in the exposed and comparison groups. Of the 16 Psychomotor Ability parameters tested, 3 demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the exposed and comparison groups. Specifically, we found indications of increased tremor in the right hand of participants in the exposed group. Although we cannot determine the cause of the tremor observed by our testing, we believe that this unilateral tremor is likely due to muscle fatigue (a known cause of the type of tremor observed), as 1-BP exposure, if sufficient to cause tremor, would likely cause bilateral tremor (tremor on both sides) due to a potential mechanism involving the central nervous system. And lastly, we collected insufficient data among exposed workers in the reproductive evaluation part of the survey to be able to make any comparisons between exposed and comparison workers in that portion of the HHE. Although we found the Sprayers at STN to have greater exposure to 1-BP than other employees, we are unable to determine if these exposures constitute a health hazard. By enclosing the spray booths in the Fabrication area, STN has dramatically reduced Sprayers' exposures to 1-BP and 2-BP. Because of symptoms consistent with excessive solvent exposure reported among the exposed workers, concerns raised in other studies, and the lack of definitive information, efforts should continue to minimize 1-BP and 2-BP exposures. Recommendations are provided in this report to assist in this, and include improving the ventilation of spray booths #6 and #11 as well as improving personal protective equipment use.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2002) United States Senate and House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. (Click to open report) On February 8, 2002, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a joint request from the Sergeant at Arms Office at the United States Senate and the Chief Administrative Officer at the United States House of Representatives regarding health concerns related to handling and opening irradiated mail at the United States Senate and House office buildings in Washington, D.C. In response to the request, NIOSH representatives conducted environmental and epidemiologic eva... (Click to show more)On February 8, 2002, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a joint request from the Sergeant at Arms Office at the United States Senate and the Chief Administrative Officer at the United States House of Representatives regarding health concerns related to handling and opening irradiated mail at the United States Senate and House office buildings in Washington, D.C. In response to the request, NIOSH representatives conducted environmental and epidemiologic evaluations at the Russell, Dirksen, Hart, Cannon, Longworth, Rayburn, and Ford Buildings, the Senate Post-Office Screening Facility, the House Mail Processing Facility, the Capitol building, and Postal Square on February 13-15, 2002. The environmental evaluation included air sample collection for carbon dioxide, temperature, and relative humidity as well as for contaminants potentially derived from heated mail as a result of irradiation, including small and total particulate, volatile organic compounds, formaldehyde, ozone, carbon monoxide, toluene diisocyanate, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. In addition, bulk samples of irradiated mail and mail that had not gone through the irradiation process were analyzed for anions, metals, and pH. The epidemiologic evaluation consisted of interviews with individual employees who handled or had concerns about the mail, meetings with the Senior Medical Officer from the Office of the Attending Physician (OAP), and review of data collected by the OAP. Air samples indicated non-detectable or low concentrations of sampled contaminants. The types and levels of airborne substances we measured in areas where irradiated mail was handled were not distinguishable in a meaningful way from those measured in areas where irradiated mail was not handled. This comparison was hindered in a few cases where employee interviews revealed that mail volumes and/or mail opening activities were lower on the day that samples were collected. We do not suspect that daily variability of the mail load will have an effect on the results of our environmental evaluation based on the number of buildings and offices evaluated, the number of samples collected, and the low concentrations of any detectable compounds. Many of the volatile organic compounds that were detected are common in indoor air, and the results of the sampling for these compounds generally are similar to results seen by NIOSH in other indoor environments. The bulk sample analysis did not provide information that could link irradiated mail to the reported health effects. . Among the 389 Congressional staff employees interviewed, the most common symptoms were headache, skin irritation, eye irritation, skin rash, dry hands, nausea, and nose or throat irritation. We believe that it is likely that multiple factors are responsible for the reported symptoms. The added dryness of the mail from the irradiation process can lead to dryness and skin irritation from repeated handling of the mail. This is due to the absorptive effect of the damaged cellulose fibers from the irradiated paper drawing moisture off the skin. This drying effect can cause the outer layer of the skin to dry out and fissure, causing chapped and irritated skin. Individuals with a history of atopy (allergies) may have been particularly vulnerable. The we observed in our environmental survey can also exacerbate the symptoms of eye and skin irritation that were seen. In general, established guidelines for occupational exposures are based on the goal of preventing and minimizing measurable adverse effects in healthy populations. They are not based on avoidance of odors, and many chemical odors can be detected by smell at levels below exposure guidelines. Some odors can be detected by humans at levels below those detectable using industrial hygiene techniques. There is evidence that irritation can be produced from volatile organic compounds at very low levels -- levels which would trigger the activation and amplification of the neurosensory mechanisms for an odor threshold (activating the sense of smell), but potentially below levels that we could measure for some compounds. Thus, odors could potentially trigger irritant symptoms experienced by the employees, including some of the mucous membrane irritation and headaches. Adding to the unfamiliar and unpleasant odors causing headaches and irritation, skin irritation, and mucous membrane irritation, was the fact that these occurrences happened in a climate of heightened awareness and unusual anxiety in these Government Buildings due to recent terrorist acts. It is possible that this heightened awareness and resultant employee stress, while not a root cause of the problem, may have contributed to problems caused by the handling of the very dry irradiated mail. Environmental samples collected across several Capitol Hill building locations over a three day period did not reveal any exposures exceeding any existing occupational guidelines. In addition, exposures in irradiated mail locations were not demonstrably higher than exposures in control locations where no mail was opened. These findings are similar to what has been found in other recent investigations of irradiated mail. Medical interviews did result in finding a fairly high number of individuals reporting symptoms of irritation. As noted above, the absorptive effect of the irradiated paper drawing moisture off the skin could account for some of the symptoms, other irritant symptoms may be due to odors associated with the mail, still others due to the and heightened awareness. Therefore, it is likely that a number of causes were responsible for the reported symptoms. Recommendations are provided in the report.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2001) Echo Bay Marina, Lake Mead, Nevada. (Click to open report) On December 8, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a request from management officials of Seven Crown Resorts to evaluate carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations associated with the operation of houseboats on Lake Mead. On January 24 - 25, 2001, NIOSH investigators conducted a site visit at Lake Mead to investigate CO concentrations on houseboats located at Echo Bay Marina, Nevada. This letter describes our evaluation methods, findings, and conclusions. T... (Click to show more)On December 8, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a request from management officials of Seven Crown Resorts to evaluate carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations associated with the operation of houseboats on Lake Mead. On January 24 - 25, 2001, NIOSH investigators conducted a site visit at Lake Mead to investigate CO concentrations on houseboats located at Echo Bay Marina, Nevada. This letter describes our evaluation methods, findings, and conclusions. The Seven Crown Resorts houseboats evaluated at Echo Bay Marina were designed as pontoon boats with the generator exhaust discharging out to the side. The back of the houseboats did not have slides, and the stairs leading down to the water were located on the opposite side of the boat away from the generator exhaust. Warning CO labels were located on the back of the boat and directly above the generator exhaust discharge. These design features help deter individuals from spending time directly near the generator exhaust discharge area. During our evaluation at Echo Bay Marina the prevailing wind was moving the exhaust gases away from the back of the houseboats and not toward the back decks. Therefore, no extremely high CO concentrations (CO concentrations above the NIOSH IDLH value of 1,200 ppm) were measured on the back of the houseboats. IDLH environments were measured with detector tubes and the emissions analyzer directly near the generator exhaust discharge. Therefore, the possibility of high CO concentrations may exist under environmental conditions that would carry the exhaust gases toward the back of the houseboat. A previous study has documented that the area around the back deck of houseboats can be hazardous under certain environmental conditions (i.e., lack of air movement) when the generator or motors are in operation. Individuals swimming or working in the area directly near the generator exhaust (with the gasoline generator in operation) could be exposed to extremely high CO concentrations resulting in CO poisoning or death within a short period of time. This evaluation was performed in January which is not in the prime operating season for houseboats. Activities at the dock were slow, due to the low number of houseboat rentals. Therefore, personal sampling was not conducted. However, general recommendations are provided to help control potential worker CO exposures. In addition, recommendations are provided to reduce the potential for CO exposure around the generator exhaust and back deck on houseboats.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2001) Foeste Masonry, Cape Girardeau, Missouri. (Click to open report) Foeste masonry recently received an OSHA citation for overexposure of workers to crystalline silica during the dry cutting of brick. Foeste subsequently purchased several brick/block cutoff saws equipped with water dust suppression. Until Foeste could show that exposures were adequately controlled, Foeste was required by OSHA to enroll the operators in a respiratory protection program (fit testing and use of half mask, cartridge respirators). On April 3, 2000, Foeste Masonry requested a Health H... (Click to show more)Foeste masonry recently received an OSHA citation for overexposure of workers to crystalline silica during the dry cutting of brick. Foeste subsequently purchased several brick/block cutoff saws equipped with water dust suppression. Until Foeste could show that exposures were adequately controlled, Foeste was required by OSHA to enroll the operators in a respiratory protection program (fit testing and use of half mask, cartridge respirators). On April 3, 2000, Foeste Masonry requested a Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) to assess the effectiveness of wet dust suppression during the cutting of brick and block. On May 8, 2000, NIOSH investigators met with Foeste representatives to discuss sampling procedures for collecting airborne dust samples. Environmental measurements of airborne particulate were obtained on May 9 -10,2000. NIOSH investigators determined that dry cutting can lead to intense exposures to silica dust. Such exposures are likely to be very hazardous to workers operating the saws and working in their vicinity. NIOSH recommends that wet cutting be used when ever possible. The sampling undertaken in this study indicates that wet cutting, undertaken using the manufacturer's guidelines, generally leads to exposures to silica dust below the OSHA PEL. It is recommended that saw operators continue to wear at least a NIOSH-approved, disposable respirator, especially when wet cutting for two hours or more. If dry cutting brick or block is necessitated by the building design a Powered Air Purifying Respirator (PAPR) should be worn and the cutting time should be limited. Routine evaluation of dust exposures is desirable to ensure that the workers are adequately protected, especially for brick or block of high silica content.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2001) Human Performance International, Inc., Charlotte, North Carolina. (Click to open report) The Hazard Evaluation and Technical Assistance Branch (HETAB) of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) collaborated with the Division of Applied Research and Technology (DART) within NIOSH to conduct a pilot research study evaluating occupational exposure to noise and potential ototoxic agents, such as solvents, metals, and asphyxiants, among a stock car racing team. The purpose of the study was to evaluate exposures to noise and ototoxic agents for their potential co... (Click to show more)The Hazard Evaluation and Technical Assistance Branch (HETAB) of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) collaborated with the Division of Applied Research and Technology (DART) within NIOSH to conduct a pilot research study evaluating occupational exposure to noise and potential ototoxic agents, such as solvents, metals, and asphyxiants, among a stock car racing team. The purpose of the study was to evaluate exposures to noise and ototoxic agents for their potential combined effect on occupational hearing loss. The exposure assessment included two site visits to the racing team's race shop and two site visits to a racetrack, which represented the worst case exposure scenario due to its small size, steep banking, and high grandstand configuration. An initial site visit was conducted at the professional stock car race team's shop on January 19 and 20, 2000. Air samples were collected to qualitatively and quantitatively identify ototoxic chemicals and other organic compounds. Full-shift and half-shift carbon monoxide (CO) measurements were also collected. Sound pressure levels were measured for the tasks that generated the greatest amount of noise. Noise dosimetry was then conducted to give full-shift personal noise exposures for at least one employee from each job description related to assembling the race car. A follow-up site visit was conducted at the racing team's race shop on February 9, 2000. Full-shift air samples were collected for organic solvents in the paint and body shop areas. A short-term air sample was also collected for lead and 26 other metals and minerals next to a tungsten inert gas (TIG) arc welding station. Noise dosimetry was performed on three workers. Concentrations of toluene, acetone, perchloroethylene, xylenes, styrene, C7-C8 alkanes, and methylene chloride at the race shop were either not detectable or extremely low, and well below any relevant occupational exposure criteria. Mean CO concentrations were well below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 50 parts per million (ppm), the NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limits (REL) of 35 ppm, and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV) of 25 ppm. The peak concentrations, although elevated, did not exceed the 200 ppm NIOSH ceiling REL. The short-term air sample collected for metals near a welding station revealed no detectable concentrations, with the exception of manganese (which was less than 20% of it's most stringent exposure criteria of 1 milligram per cubic meter of air (mg/m3) as an 8-hour-timeweighted average [TWA]). Sound pressure levels for individual job tasks ranged from 58 to 103 decibels, A-weighted [dB(A)]. While the OSHA PEL of 90 dB(A) for an 8-hour TWA was never exceeded, in two instances the values exceeded the OSHA action level (AL) of 85 dB(A) for hearing conservation implementation. The NIOSH REL of 85 dB(A) for an 8-hour TWA was exceeded for five of the nine measured jobs. Only three of the workers (21%) were observed wearing ear plugs during their work shift. An initial site visit was conducted at Bristol Motor Speedway in Bristol, Tennessee, on March 24 and 25, 2000. Air samples were collected for organic compounds, CO, and lead during the race. Although isopentane, C8 alkanes (isooctane, dimethylhexanes, trimethylpentanes), and toluene were the major compounds detected, the amounts of even these compounds were insufficient to quantify. Mean CO concentrations were well below all evaluation criteria. Air samples collected for lead revealed either non-detectable, or extremely low concentrations, well below the occupational exposure criteria. Noise measurements were performed on both practice and race days (March 24 and 25, 2000, respectively) which included sound level meter measurements and noise dosimetry conducted in and around the pit area, as well as inside the race car. Both the OSHA PEL and NIOSH REL were exceeded in every instance with average noise levels above 100 dB. A follow-up site visit was conducted at Bristol Motor Speedway in Bristol, Tennessee, on August 25, 2000, to measure CO and perform more noise dosimetry. Full-shift mean CO concentrations in some locations exceeded the PEL, REL, and TLV of 39 ppm, 19 ppm, and 27 ppm, respectively, after they were adjusted for a 10-hour day. Peak CO concentrations exceeded the NIOSH recommended ceiling limit of 200 ppm in three of the five sampling locations during the practice period. Peak concentrations in two of the three locations where measurements were collected over the full day also exceeded 200 ppm. Noise dosimetry and sound level meter measurements were also conducted. Both the OSHA PEL and NIOSH REL were exceeded in every instance. Based on the environmental data collected during this pilot study, exposures to potentially ototoxic agents are not high enough to produce an adverse effect greater than that produced by the high sound pressure levels alone. Carbon monoxide levels, however, occasionally exceeded all evaluation criteria at the race track evaluated. In addition, noise exposures occasionally exceeded the OSHA PEL at the team's race shop and exceed all evaluation criteria at the race track evaluated. Recommendations are included to reduce exposures to potentially ototoxic agents that have the likelihood of producing high short-term exposures and to control noise exposures through the use of appropriate strategies (such as wearing hearing protection with a high enough noise reduction rating [NRR] to provide adequate attenuation).
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2001) Lehigh Portland Cement Company, Union Bridges, Maryland. (Click to open report) On May 30, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a health hazard evaluation (HHE) request from the Paper, Allied Industrial, Chemical, and Energy Workers Union Local 2-0031 regarding fly ash exposures during the cement manufacturing process at the Lehigh Portland Cement Company in Union Bridge, Maryland. The union was concerned about possible exposures to crystalline silica as a constituent of the fly ash (approximately 1-6%) used in the cement manufac... (Click to show more)On May 30, 2000, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) received a health hazard evaluation (HHE) request from the Paper, Allied Industrial, Chemical, and Energy Workers Union Local 2-0031 regarding fly ash exposures during the cement manufacturing process at the Lehigh Portland Cement Company in Union Bridge, Maryland. The union was concerned about possible exposures to crystalline silica as a constituent of the fly ash (approximately 1-6%) used in the cement manufacturing process. On July 24-25, 2000, NIOSH investigators conducted a site visit at the Lehigh Portland Cement Company. Area and personal breathing zone (PBZ) air samples were collected for total dust, respirable dust, and crystalline silica. Bulk samples of the fly ash and raw feed were also collected and analyzed for crystalline silica content and elements (e.g., chromium, copper, nickel, lead, magnesium, manganese, titanium, zinc, etc.). A return site visit was conducted on December 13, 2000, to collect PBZ air samples for elements. PBZ air samples collected for respirable dust, quartz (crystalline silica), cristobalite, and elements did not indicate any exposures exceeding applicable exposure criteria. Three area samples collected at different times in the raw mill separator area indicated total dust concentrations of 149 milligrams of dust per cubic meter of air (mg/m3), 14 mg/m3, and 20 mg/m3. (The settled dust [on equipment, stairs, floors, etc.] in the raw mill area, and leaks in the process equipment may affect dust sample concentrations collected at different times during the day). Three out of seven workers sampled during the initial site visit had total dust time-weighted average (TWA) exposures above the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV) and Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 10 mg/m3. Two of these workers were performing work tasks in the mill room and had TWA exposures that also exceeded the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for total dust (15 mg/m3). PBZ air samples collected on a worker repairing a leak in the process equipment (located within the raw mill building) indicated an extremely high total dust TWA concentration (3800 mg/m3). This sample was not representative of the worker's breathing zone exposure (dust was blowing directly on the sampling cassette at a high velocity while he was repairing the leak). However, because of the high concentration in this sample, it is possible that the worker's true exposure to total dust concentrations was well over applicable exposure criteria. All area and PBZ air samples for quartz (crystalline silica) were below applicable exposure criteria. However, PBZ air samples indicated that total dust TWA exposures were in excess of applicable exposure criteria. Recommendations to control total dust exposures include shutting off process equipment when performing maintenance activities to repair leaks; fixing leaks in process equipment to reduce dust generating sources; using engineering and administrative controls when feasible; using respirators when other controls are not feasible; using vacuums (with P95 filters) instead of pressurized air to clean off work clothing; and re-sampling after any process changes to evaluate worker exposures under new conditions.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
