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
1060 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
(2024) Exposure to lead during bullet recycling. (Click to open report) Management of a lead bullet recycling company requested a health hazard evaluation to evaluate lead exposure among employees processing lead-containing bullets. We visited the facility on two occasions and completed the following activities: observed work processes, practices, and conditions; measured employees' lead exposure in air and throughout the facility; collected wipe samples for lead on surfaces outside of the warehouse; interviewed employees to learn about work history, health and safe... (Click to show more)Management of a lead bullet recycling company requested a health hazard evaluation to evaluate lead exposure among employees processing lead-containing bullets. We visited the facility on two occasions and completed the following activities: observed work processes, practices, and conditions; measured employees' lead exposure in air and throughout the facility; collected wipe samples for lead on surfaces outside of the warehouse; interviewed employees to learn about work history, health and safety concerns, PPE use, training, and possible work-related health effects; and reviewed documents and employee BLL data. We found that most employees were overexposed to lead in air. Surface sampling showed lead was being tracked outside of production areas. Lead was also found inside employees' respirator facepieces. Employee blood lead levels were elevated. Historical records of employee blood lead levels suggest that medical removal from work or to job duties with lower exposure has been the predominant intervention in successfully reducing employee blood lead levels thus far, further indicating a need for improved controls. Recommendations included (1) improving local exhaust ventilation over the melting pots/furnaces to better enclose the melting process, (2) reducing employees' exposure to lead through improved medical surveillance, cleaning, training, and work practices, and (3) reducing exposure to molten lead splashes by installing an automatic strainer.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2024) Exposures and health concerns in a dental clinic. (Click to open report) Request: We received a management request for a health hazard evaluation at a dental clinic. The request stated concerns about idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). IPF is a serious long term lung disease that can cause permanent scarring in the lungs. IPF was first identified in a cluster of dentists reported in 2018. In response to the request, we performed an air sampling survey in August 2022 to evaluate potential exposures to respirable dust, respirable crystalline silica, respirable metals,... (Click to show more)Request: We received a management request for a health hazard evaluation at a dental clinic. The request stated concerns about idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). IPF is a serious long term lung disease that can cause permanent scarring in the lungs. IPF was first identified in a cluster of dentists reported in 2018. In response to the request, we performed an air sampling survey in August 2022 to evaluate potential exposures to respirable dust, respirable crystalline silica, respirable metals, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). We also assessed the existing ventilation systems in the dental clinic. Workplace: The dental clinic provides dental care services to patients. General dentistry services and procedures are performed at the clinic and clinic laboratory. The dental clinic is housed on the second floor of a two-story medical clinic on an academic campus. At the time of our survey, eight staff were onsite, including two dentists, two dental hygienists, three dental assistants, and one administrative staff. Our Approach We conducted a site visit in August 2022 to assess possible exposures during routine dental care, assess the ventilation systems in use, and informally interview clinic staff. We conducted opening and closing meetings with employees and management to share background information about NIOSH and this health hazard evaluation. We also described the purpose of our survey, activities that would be performed while onsite, and actions that would be taken after we concluded our survey. During our onsite survey, we: a) Collected full-shift personal air samples on dental clinic employees for respirable dust and respirable crystalline silica. b) Collected full-shift area air samples in multiple locations in the dental clinic for respirable dust, respirable crystalline silica, respirable metals, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). c) Collected instantaneous air samples for VOCs during various tasks and procedures. d) Collected real-time measurements of respirable aerosols in and just outside of the laboratory. e) Assessed the heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems in use. f) Informally interviewed clinic staff to learn about any health concerns potentially related to exposures at work. Our Key Findings: All personal air samples were below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH®) threshold limit value (TLV®) for respirable dust. All personal air samples for respirable crystalline silica were below the NIOSH recommended exposure limit (REL) and OSHA PEL. All area air samples for respirable dust, respirable crystalline silica, and respirable metals were low; some metals were measured in all or most areas of the clinic. Some VOCs were higher in some locations or during specific tasks and procedures. Ethanol and isopropyl alcohol were the highest measurements collected during full-shift area sampling and during task or source sampling and were likely due to cleaning and disinfecting tasks. Treatment rooms (dental operatories) and staff offices did not receive adequate outdoor air from existing mechanical ventilation systems, and the clinic was unable to maintain temperatures in the clinic recommended by ASHRAE. LEV controls in the laboratory were not consistently used. When no LEV was used, higher levels of air contaminants were measured in the laboratory and adjacent hallway. Respirable aerosol generated in the laboratory migrated to adjacent areas. Employees reported no work-related symptoms. Our Recommendations: 1: Reduce risk of entrainment of air from the laboratory into adjacent spaces. 2: Encourage employees to utilize local exhaust ventilation (LEV) controls in the laboratory area during grinding, trimming, or soldering tasks. 3: Consider using LEV controls such as high-volume evacuation (HVE) and voluntarily using N95® filtering facepiece respirators (or other air-purifying particulate respirators) when performing dental procedures with nickel or silica (e.g., restorative procedures). 4: Improve ventilation so that all areas receive adequate outdoor air and maintain appropriate temperatures and comfortable humidity levels. 5: Make NIOSH-approved N95 filtering facepiece respirators (or other air-purifying particulate respirators) available for voluntary use and train employees on proper use of respiratory protection. 6: Ensure employees understand the hazards associated with working in a dental clinic and how to protect themselves. 7: Encourage employees to report any new, persistent, or worsening respiratory symptoms, particularly those with a work-related pattern, to their healthcare providers and, as instructed by their employer, to a designated individual at their workplace.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2024) Mercury and noise exposure at a lightbulb recycler. (Click to open report) Management at an electronics waste and lamp recycling facility requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employees' exposure to mercury, lead, and noise. During our two visits, we observed work processes, practices, and conditions, measured employees' exposure to mercury in air and the amount of mercury in employees' urine; interviewed employees to learn about work history and practices, health and safety concerns, personal protective equipment use, training, and possible work-related heal... (Click to show more)Management at an electronics waste and lamp recycling facility requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employees' exposure to mercury, lead, and noise. During our two visits, we observed work processes, practices, and conditions, measured employees' exposure to mercury in air and the amount of mercury in employees' urine; interviewed employees to learn about work history and practices, health and safety concerns, personal protective equipment use, training, and possible work-related health effects; and measured employees' exposure to noise. Some employees had (1) airborne mercury exposures exceeding NIOSH and ACGIH occupational exposure limits, (2) elevated urine mercury levels and reported symptoms consistent with mercury exposure, and (3) noise exposures over the NIOSH recommended exposure limit. In addition to employee exposures, we measured elevated concentrations of mercury in the air throughout the facility, including in nonproduction areas. Additionally, we observed mercury-containing dust piles throughout the facility and areas where engineering and administrative controls could be used to reduce the potential for exposures. Air sampling results indicate worker exposures to mercury and noise exceeded relevant occupational exposure limits. We noted high urine mercury levels in employees who had high occupational exposure to mercury in air and found high occupational exposure to mercury even in nonproduction areas. Some employees also reported symptoms consistent with mercury exposure, suggesting exposures to mercury may have led to health effects. Some of these exposures could be preventable with improved ventilation, housekeeping practices, and health and safety programs. In addition, some workers were exposed to noise over the NIOSH recommended exposure limit. Equipment enclosures and preventative maintenance of equipment may help reduce hazardous noise exposures in these areas. Our recommendations included (1) installing local exhaust ventilation and repairing existing systems, (2) improving housekeeping procedures, (3) standardizing the use of personal protective equipment among employees who are exposed to mercury-containing dusts, (4) improving the hearing loss prevention program, (5) periodically reevaluating workplace equipment and safety and health programs, and (6) encouraging employees to report any new, persistent, or worsening health symptoms, especially those with a work-related pattern, to their healthcare providers.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2024) Occupational exposures and indoor environmental quality in an underground cavern workplace. (Click to open report) An employer representative of a warehouse facility, located in a former underground limestone quarry, requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employees' exposures to carbon monoxide, wood dust and other airborne particles, noise, and radon. During our visits, we (1) observed work processes, practices, and workplace conditions, and spoke with employees; (2) measured carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, temperature, and relative humidity, and radon; (3) collected air samples for wood dust, oth... (Click to show more)An employer representative of a warehouse facility, located in a former underground limestone quarry, requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employees' exposures to carbon monoxide, wood dust and other airborne particles, noise, and radon. During our visits, we (1) observed work processes, practices, and workplace conditions, and spoke with employees; (2) measured carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, temperature, and relative humidity, and radon; (3) collected air samples for wood dust, other airborne particles, and noise; (4) used tracer gas to measure the air exchange rate in the workspace; (5) took sound level measurements when powered woodworking equipment and tools were used; and (6) measured illumination levels at various locations throughout the space. We found employees' noise exposures in the woodshop exceeded the NIOSH recommended exposure limit due to noise generated during the use of powered woodworking equipment. Wood dust exposures in the woodshop could exceed occupational exposure limits depending on how much time woodworking equipment was used. Carbon monoxide and radon levels were well below occupational exposure limits. The air exchange was very low as the warehouse as there was not a mechanical ventilation system to bring outdoor air into workspace. Temperature and relative humidity levels were within ASHRAE guidelines. Our measurements indicated that illumination could be improved in some areas of the workspace. We recommended including woodshop employees in a hearing loss prevention program, which includes audiometric testing, proper hearing protection use, and employee training; improving wood dust capture at the saws; increasing lighting in various areas of the workspace; and adding a portable toilet, handwashing station, emergency eyewash, and drinking water within the work area.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2024) Respirable dust and respirable crystalline silica exposures during asphalt mix production and road paving operations. (Click to open report) Management from an asphalt mix production and paving company requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employee exposure to respirable dust and respirable crystalline silica during asphalt mix production and road paving activities. During our site visits, we observed work processes and practices, equipment type and usage, and workplace conditions; spoke with employees about the workplace, their job duties, and other tasks associated with their work; observed work practices within the produ... (Click to show more)Management from an asphalt mix production and paving company requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employee exposure to respirable dust and respirable crystalline silica during asphalt mix production and road paving activities. During our site visits, we observed work processes and practices, equipment type and usage, and workplace conditions; spoke with employees about the workplace, their job duties, and other tasks associated with their work; observed work practices within the production yard and a field crew milling (grinding) and re-paving a section of highway; and conducted air monitoring of employees for exposure to respirable dust and respirable crystalline silica. Our air sampling showed that operating and cleaning the rock shaker inside the quality control laboratory led to concentrations of respirable crystalline silica that were above several occupational limits. The use of compressed air to clean the unit most likely played a role in the amount of respirable crystalline silica produced. Respirable crystalline silica exposures during chipping of hardened material buildup off the vanes inside the mixing drum using a pneumatic chisel also had the potential to exceed exposure limits and indicate the need for exposure control and continued use of respiratory protection. The tractor with an enclosed cab with air filtration provided the operator with some protection from respirable dust and respirable crystalline silica. However, using a water-based dust suppression attachment mounted to a rotary sweeping broom provided a reduction in potential exposures and should continue to be used in cleanup operations in the yard and during road paving work. We recommended implementing the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration silica standard and conducting noise monitoring to help identify high noise tasks.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2024) Silica exposures during drywall sanding. (Click to open report) Management from a drywall finishing company requested a health hazard evaluation (HHE) concerning employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS) during drywall-sanding activities. For this HHE, we visited a hospital construction site. Sanding occurred approximately once every 4 days. The crew was made up of three drywall finishers. During our visit, we observed work processes and work practices, collected air samples for RCS and respirable dust, collected bulk samples of sanding dust a... (Click to show more)Management from a drywall finishing company requested a health hazard evaluation (HHE) concerning employee exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS) during drywall-sanding activities. For this HHE, we visited a hospital construction site. Sanding occurred approximately once every 4 days. The crew was made up of three drywall finishers. During our visit, we observed work processes and work practices, collected air samples for RCS and respirable dust, collected bulk samples of sanding dust and wet joint compound to determine their silica content, and conducted semi-structured interviews with employees to discuss personal protective equipment use during current work processes and whether they have health or safety concerns. Our air sampling found that one employee was above the OSHA PEL to RCS, and all three employees were exposed to RCS at levels above the OSHA action level. Work practices may have added to more exposures. For instance, employees sanded the tops of walls and ceilings while other employees were sanding directly below, the vacuum was used without a disposable bag, which put more dust into the air when the vacuum was emptied, and employees shook dust off their clothes at the end of their shift into the air around them and others. Employees who voluntarily wore respirators were not wearing them correctly. Employees did not report any symptoms they associated with their work activities. Employees' exposures to RCS may be reduced by improving vacuum care and maintenance and modifying work practices so that employees do not sand above each other. We recommended continued exposure monitoring at regular times and reassessing exposures whenever a change in the production process, control equipment, personnel, or work practices may reasonably be expected to result in new or additional exposures and/or to see if any implemented controls are effective in reducing exposures. Because employees are required to wear respirators until additional sampling shows their exposures are below the OSHA PEL, we recommended strengthening the existing respiratory protection program and bringing it into compliance with the OSHA standard. We also recommended reviewing the OSHA Small Entity Compliance Guide for the Respirable Crystalline Silica Standard for Construction and the Small Entity Compliance Guide for the Respiratory Protection Standard.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2023) Exposures to dust and noise at a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility. (Click to open report) Management at a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility requested a health hazard evaluation of employees' exposures to pharmaceutical dust and noise during pharmaceutical manufacturing. During our visit to the facility, we observed work processes, work practices, and conditions; measured particulates in air during pharmaceutical manufacturing and packaging; took personal noise exposure measurements from workers involved in manufacturing and packaging pharmaceuticals; and measured sound levels thr... (Click to show more)Management at a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility requested a health hazard evaluation of employees' exposures to pharmaceutical dust and noise during pharmaceutical manufacturing. During our visit to the facility, we observed work processes, work practices, and conditions; measured particulates in air during pharmaceutical manufacturing and packaging; took personal noise exposure measurements from workers involved in manufacturing and packaging pharmaceuticals; and measured sound levels throughout the manufacturing and packaging areas of the facility. We found that none of the average particle mass concentrations from the activities measured exceeded the OSHA PEL for total or respirable dust or ACGIH guidelines for respirable dust. However, particle concentrations reached these levels for short periods of time during tablet pressing when scooping powder by hand into the hopper. We recommend reducing airborne dust exposure as much as practicable by reducing or eliminating hand scooping of powder, reducing powder transport distance from containers to hoppers, eliminating use of compressed air to blow dust and powder off clothing, and minimizing use of compressed air to clean equipment. We also found that employees in the bottling room had the highest full-shift noise exposures. However, noise exposures did not exceed noise exposure limits. Noise in the bottling room and other areas where compressed air is used could potentially be reduced by using compressed air nozzles designed to produce less noise. We recommend continuing to use hearing protection during activities that generate sound levels above 85 dBA.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2023) Occupational exposures and indoor environmental quality in an underground cavern workplace (superseded). (Click for full summary) This document has been superseded and the new version can be found <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2018-0181-3389.pdf"target="_blank">here</a>. An employer representative of a warehouse facility, located in a former underground limestone quarry, requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employees' exposures to carbon monoxide, wood dust and other airborne particles, noise, and radon. During our visits, we (1) observed work processes, practices, and workplace conditions,... (Click to show more)This document has been superseded and the new version can be found <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2018-0181-3389.pdf"target="_blank">here</a>. An employer representative of a warehouse facility, located in a former underground limestone quarry, requested a health hazard evaluation concerning employees' exposures to carbon monoxide, wood dust and other airborne particles, noise, and radon. During our visits, we (1) observed work processes, practices, and workplace conditions, and spoke with employees; (2) measured carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, temperature, and relative humidity, and radon; (3) collected air samples for wood dust, other airborne particles, and noise; (4) used tracer gas to measure the air exchange rate in the workspace; (5) took sound level measurements when powered woodworking equipment and tools were used; and (6) measured illumination levels at various locations throughout the space. We found employees' noise exposures in the woodshop exceeded the NIOSH recommended exposure limit due to noise generated during the use of powered woodworking equipment. Wood dust exposures in the woodshop could exceed occupational exposure limits depending on how much time woodworking equipment was used. Carbon monoxide and radon levels were well below occupational exposure limits. The air exchange was very low as the warehouse as there was not a mechanical ventilation system to bring outdoor air into workspace. Temperature and relative humidity levels were within ASHRAE guidelines. Our measurements indicated that illumination could be improved in some areas of the workspace. We recommended including woodshop employees in a hearing loss prevention program, which includes audiometric testing, proper hearing protection use, and employee training; improving wood dust capture at the saws; increasing lighting in various areas of the workspace; and adding a portable toilet, handwashing station, emergency eyewash, and drinking water within the work area.
(Click to show less)
Contact us to obtain a copy of report HHE-2018-0181-3389.
(2021) Coccidioides exposure and coccidioidomycosis infections among warehouse and distribution employees. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from management of a warehouse and distribution facility concerned about the potential for work-related coccidioidomycosis, also known as Valley fever or "cocci." Several employees developed coccidioidomycosis in recent years. The warehouse and distribution facility consisted of multiple buildings on several hundred acres mostly surrounded by farmland. We interviewed employees about work characteristics, time spent outdoors at and outside o... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation Program received a request from management of a warehouse and distribution facility concerned about the potential for work-related coccidioidomycosis, also known as Valley fever or "cocci." Several employees developed coccidioidomycosis in recent years. The warehouse and distribution facility consisted of multiple buildings on several hundred acres mostly surrounded by farmland. We interviewed employees about work characteristics, time spent outdoors at and outside of work, residence in areas where Coccidioides has been found, and personal health; observed work practices and conditions; assessed the ventilation systems; reviewed policies and procedures; and identified cases of coccidioidomycosis among employees. We found that employees could possibly breathe in dust during indoor and outdoor work. We identified at least 10 cases of coccidioidomycosis among facilities during January 2014-April 2019. However, it was not possible to determine whether this represented an excess risk of coccidioidomycosis at this workplace or whether exposure to Coccidioides occurred at work or outside of work. Most employees reported performing job activities outdoors or handling materials that were dusty from being outdoors. Housekeeping practices varied in the buildings we visited. Some areas used dry sweeping, which can generate dust. While the facility's respiratory protection plan outlined that an exposure assessment was to be performed to determine required or voluntary respirator use, an exposure assessment for airborne dust was not documented in the respiratory protection plan we reviewed. Although management reported that respirator use for dust was voluntary, communications to employees were unclear on whether respirator use was voluntary or required during excessive wind conditions. We recommended reducing airborne dust exposure by keeping warehouse bays, doors, and windows closed; using a wet sweeping method or a filtered vacuum to capture dust; choosing machinery with closed cabs and increased filtration when replacing equipment; and cleaning and maintaining window air-conditioning units in warehouse breakrooms. We also recommended conducting exposure assessment(s) to determine whether respirator use to prevent dust exposure should be required or voluntary, instructing employees voluntarily wearing N95 filtering facepiece respirators on how to wear them properly, and improving communication with employees about Coccidioides exposure and coccidioidomycosis.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
(2021) Exposure to lead during residential water line replacement activities. (Click to open report) The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program received a request from the employer of a city water department concerning lead exposure among crews replacing lead water lines servicing residential homes. This occurred after two employees received blood tests indicating elevated lead levels. In response to these findings, the employer implemented some measures to minimize lead exposures among employees and submitted an HHE request. In response to this request, we conducted confidential medical interv... (Click to show more)The Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program received a request from the employer of a city water department concerning lead exposure among crews replacing lead water lines servicing residential homes. This occurred after two employees received blood tests indicating elevated lead levels. In response to these findings, the employer implemented some measures to minimize lead exposures among employees and submitted an HHE request. In response to this request, we conducted confidential medical interviews; collected personal air samples for lead; conducted colorimetric wipe sampling for lead on the hands of employees; collected wipe samples inside the surfaces of work gloves, work trucks, and areas at the main pump station; and determined whether lead particulate was expelled from the old lead pipe during a removal process. All air samples were below the occupational exposure limit for lead; however, we found lead on various surfaces and on the hands of some employees. Specific job titles such as crew leader and maintenance worker appear to have a higher potential for exposure via all routes than other job titles. We detected lead on the hands of employees who handled the lead pipe during removal activities, and lead on the inside of some work gloves after the job was completed. The task of using compressed air to blow a string through the lead piping produced a large amount of lead aerosol being ejected from the pipe. We observed incorrect respirator usage and some cases where nitrile gloves were not worn underneath work gloves when handling lead pipe. The company had a written lead monitoring and control program, a hazard communication program, and a job-hazard analysis for tasks associated with lead line replacement. While the employer had implemented multiple measures to minimize lead exposures to employees, there appears to be opportunities for potential lead exposure among employees during residential water line replacement activities. We recommended improving (1) lead surveillance, training, and work practices; (2) personal protective equipment use and training; (3) procedures for employees to keep their hands clean and free of lead during different tasks; and (4) cleaning procedures to reduce lead exposure.
(Click to show less) (Click to open report)
