Tue 9 Apr 2013

Hexavalent Chromium – an update

Posted by admin under Admin Controls, Air Monitoring, Carcinogen, Dermal, Engineering Controls, Federal OSHA, Hexavalent chromium, NIOSH, PEL (Perm Exp Limit), Safety Policies, Uncategorized, Welding
Comments Off on Hexavalent Chromium – an update

Chromium in it’s elevated valence state, called Chromium 6, or hexavalent chromium is a known carcinogen and sensitizer. From a toxicological point of view, it has a really interesting exposure to disease path.

I’ve mentioned it before, but recently NIOSH reduced their suggested limit from 1.0 µg/m³ to 0.2 µg/m³ (80% reduction for you math wiz’es).  They base this on eye & skin irritation, respiratory damage & lung cancer. Yikes.

OSHA has listed their exposure limits, along with other’s recommended limits here.

The take-away from this reduction is the serious nature of Chromium 6. hex chrome cleaningIf you are dealing with this hazard, you should take more than just a little precaution. Even if your prior air monitoring data is below the Action & Exposure Limit, continue  to document and verify your employees are well below the regulatory & recommended limits. As you know, hexavalent chromium is a skin hazard and can be absorbed easily into your body. I would also suggest performing wipe samples (area & skin) & decontamination in areas where there is work activity with hexavalent chromium.

For most construction companies, investigate these areas:

  • welding (any stainless steel?) See this earllier post, also here.
    • And, OSHA has a new Fact sheet on welding & hexavalent chromium here.
    • Washington’s OSHA (L&I) has a great page on the hazards during welding here, including training videos. (so cool!)
  • hardfacing on equipment. See earlier post.
  • Bridge painting – (or painting with chromates) OSHA’s new safety bulletin is here.
  • Electroplating – OSHA’s safety bulletin is here.
  • Anytime you heat, or work with chromate painted surfaces.
  • Portland cement when working with it wet and on your skin. NIOSH has some information here. hint: Try adding ferrous sulfate to lower the Cr6.

And, if you don’t work in construction, but live in Garfield, NJ, you might have to pull your toenails out to prove you aren’t exposed to hexavalent chromium.

Tags:

 

Wed 3 Apr 2013

Silica- Are you competent?

Posted by admin under Air Monitoring, Engineering Controls, GHS, Hazard Communication, industrial hygienist, Management, Respirators, Safety Policies, Safety Programs, Silica, Training, Uncategorized
Comments Off on Silica- Are you competent?

AIHA has released (2013) a white paper for guidelines on skills & competencies in silica specific to construction. It is a great outline for training your employees.

Some interesting points:

  • Respiratory protection, and their respective assigned protection factor is mentioned. (Are you wearing the right respirator?)
  • There is no mention of air sampling. Thank you. You do not need air sampling every-time, we already know it’s hazardous.
  • They emphasize control measures for silica.

Another recent publication from IRSST in Canada explains the effectiveness of controls with regard to specific tools and where exposures are found in the industry. It has a lot of information, but if you are looking for the best method to control dust with a certain tool, it would be worthwhile to read the 108 page document.

silica- IIRST graph

 

The best resource for silica is silica-safe.org. You can create a plan for controlling it here. They have a database of tools & controls. Very handy. Someday soon we may see 3D printers able to make these dust controls and adapters for us at a moments notice. Until then, pre plan your task.

Tags:

 

Mon 1 Apr 2013

What’s the point? Be effective.

Posted by admin under Behavior Based, GHS, Hazard Communication, Management, MSDS, Presentation, Proposition 65, SDS, Training, Uncategorized
Comments Off on What’s the point? Be effective.

So, while standing in the California jet-way waiting to board my plane, I noticed this sign. It was most likely a Proposition 65 labeling warning. However, what in the world do you do with that information? How did posting that sign change any behavior? Could I have done anything different to avoid the jet fumes?

prop65 jet

It reads, “Warning. Chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects and other reproductive harm are present in the jet engine exhaust fumes from jet fuel, and exhaust from equipment used to service airplanes. Sometimes these chemicals enter this jet bridge.”

In much the same way, sometimes our warning to employees is pointless. What can they do different? What is the point of telling them something if there is nothing we can do different?

The global harmonization system (GHS) is being implemented in the US by the end of 2013. By 2014 you must train your employees on the new changes to the (Material) Safety Data Sheets (SDS, now). (BTW, there are also some other things you must do).

The message I am trying to make (double irony, I know) is when you are training your employees, how do you measure the effectiveness  If they “sign in and say they were in your training”, were you effective? Here are some suggestions, which might help to measure the right thing:

  • Questions. This ___ number of the audience asked ___ questions.
  • Feedback. I received ____ # of suggestions for the next training.
  • Changes. They are going to implement ____ changes to their workplace.
  • Secondary labeling. (GHS specific, of course) While walking around the site, I noticed ____ secondary labels with the new labeling pictographs.

I admit these aren’t the-best-suggestions-ever. But, warning someone without an alternative, method to change, or way to adopt a change, is really pointless.

Tags: , , , ,

 

Fri 22 Mar 2013

Vermiculite with asbestos

Posted by admin under Air Monitoring, Asbestos, Building Survey, Carcinogen, Dust, Exposure, Safety Policies, Training
Comments Off on Vermiculite with asbestos

It’s always fun to hear about new/different situations especially when the contractor handles it properly.

Vermiculite

During the start of a demolition on a 1989 structure, the first swing of the hammer produced a pile of vermiculite sand.

 

 

 

After some discussion on “what in the world is this doing inside a wall cavity“. The contractor stopped work, had an asbestos test performed and quarantined the area. The bulk sampling for asbestos came back with the report of “asbestos containing, but less than 1%“. Well, as you know (and as I have mentioned earlier) it may not be safe to treat this product like every other demolition project. In this case, the asbestos was very friable and by opening the wall cavity, it had definitely been disturbed.  The contractor quickly set up some procedures. Here they are:

  • Stop work in area. Quarantine area and place warning on doors.
  • Train employees & subcontractors onsite to hazard (asbestos).
  • Abatement contractor will remove wall & vermiculite
  • Abatement contractor will treat the material as if it is asbestos containing
  • Once the area is abated. An aggressive clearance test will be performed to assure no airborne levels of asbestos are present.

But why in the world was it in there in the first place? The best guess is it was added as a sound proofing / noise dampening for a air conditioning unit (actually a liebert unit) located on the adjacent wall. No other wall cavities contained the material.

Tags: , , , ,

 

Wed 20 Mar 2013

Radiation exposure from Radio/ Tv/ Cell Towers

Posted by admin under ACGIH, Federal OSHA, Hazard Communication, Management, Radiation, Safety Programs, Training
Comments Off on Radiation exposure from Radio/ Tv/ Cell Towers

This type of potential exposure usually doesn’t cross my mind. Luckily, the specifications in the construction project (and the obvious towers nearby), alerted us to the hazard.

If employees are working near areas of potential high electromagnetic (EM) activity, you should do something (see below). High EM potential areas are power lines, cellular towers, TV/Radio broadcast sites, etc. We have all heard the dangers of living under high voltage power lines, and this is essentially the same concern: Non-ionizing radiation.

The FCC has a guidance document OET-65 (radio frequency) which has some recommended limits, called maximum permissible exposures (MPE). These limits vary depending on the frequency range and how close/what type of work you are doing nearby. OSHA (1910.97) has some guidance (based upon an old ANSI standard) and the ACGIH also has recommended limits. New research is ongoing due to the increased use, and the future demand, of cell phones. The clearest guidance is from IEEE (C95 radio frequency). They provide recommendations and a sample plan. But, to summarize:

  • look for the source (s) of the radiation (sometimes it’s not obvious)
  • take measurements (might be difficult, unless you have access to a field intensity meter) Ask the FCC?
  • determine risk potential
  • make a plan
    • develop controls – time & distance are easiest radio tower
    • consider off-hours/ shut down of towers (in extreme cases)
  • train
  • consider:
    • cranes, large pieces of equipment that may resonate with a certain frequency
    • heat from stored energy
    • nondescript symptoms, which is usually the first sign of a problem

This is a somewhat new field (no pun). But, remember when power lines, cell towers, and tv/radio stations were installed. – The goal wasn’t to keep these away from people, it was to bring them closer. How close should we get? I’d love to hear if anyone has been dealing with this a lot in construction.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Tue 12 Mar 2013

Construction Safety Best Practices

Posted by admin under Behavior Based, Engineering Controls, Hazard Communication, Health & Wellness, Management, Risk, Safety Policies, Safety Programs, Tool Box Talk, Training
Comments Off on Construction Safety Best Practices

I had the opportunity to attend a construction safety award presentation and listen to various commercial construction companies (GC, and Specialty Contractors) explain why their company deserved an award. Owners, CEOs, Safety Directors, and Employees spoke about their company. Their stories were amazing. Below I have listed some of the ideas that inspired me. They may not, at first glace, appear to be amazing. However, consider when the CEO tells a story that makes him cry, or when a superintendent explains how he is part of a family,…. it makes the words ring different.

Here are my takeaways:

  • Safety really starts at the top. It’s not a priority, it’s a core value. Check out the Injury Free Forum (IIF).
    • This is basically a club/meeting for CEOs to gather and talk about how to prevent injuries. It’s ‘almost’ an invite-only type of event. But, if you’re a CEO/President you should think about it. (helps if you live in the NE part of the US)
    • Here are some companies participating, Gilbane, Gilbane video (yep, it’s good), JMJ Associates, Baker Concrete video
  • During initial employee orientation;
    • one company has each employee write a letter to their family saying (apologizing) why they are gone/dead. This really emphasizes to each individual why they need to work safe.
    • the CEO gives each new employee his business card and tell them to call him directly if they are asked to do something unsafe.
    • each new employee is assigned a mentor (the time period varies from 2 weeks to 1 month) to watch them work safely.
  • Each employee has the right to stop work due to safety. If they do it: the CEO/President writes them a personal thank you note.
  • Make each near miss a incident, but do NOT have a lot of paperwork, just simple documentation for future learning.
  • Have a innovative idea challenge at your company for good safety ideas.
    • Put a bar code on infrequently used tools. Link to a short video which explains how to use it.
    • Zip tie PPE onto the tools upon checkout.
  • Send your “Safety Incident” or “Safety Summary” to their home. Ask them to put it on their fridge. Then, run a contest. Randomly find a name & call that employee to see if they can tell you what the safety topic is. Give a prize. Repeat.
  • Look at the design. A large GC mandated that every hole in their project have safety netting installed during the concrete pour. …and they did it!
  • An electrical firm uses no knives. None. Think that helps cut down on injuries? (pun intended)

The goal is zero injuries. So, what happens after zero injuries? How about sending your spouse to work…and they come home healthier! It’s not far away for some companies, Health & Wellness programs are already being implemented. For whom are you working? Here’s one of my reasons:

live work

Tags: , , , , ,

 

Fri 1 Mar 2013

Silica during chipping hammer

Posted by admin under Carcinogen, Exposure, Silica
Comments Off on Silica during chipping hammer

chippingYes, there can be airborne silica in the concrete when you are chipping up motar & tiles from a concrete base. This week a friend told me about his neighbor. He is a self-employed tile setter. He has worked in the industry for 20+ years. They just discovered he has cancer and will have the upper portion of his lungs removed.

Go here for more information. NPR article on silica rule delay.

 

silica4

Tags: , , , , ,

 

Wed 27 Feb 2013

Formaldehyde in construction

Posted by admin under ACGIH, Air Monitoring, Carcinogen, Chemical Exposure, Exposure, Federal OSHA, Formaldehyde, insulation, odor thresholds, Olfactory, PEL (Perm Exp Limit), Proposition 65
Comments Off on Formaldehyde in construction

From what I have seen, there are not a large amount of formaldehyde exposures in construction. However, there is A LOT of formaldehyde used in construction materials. Formaldehyde can be dangerous at levels undetectable by your nose. And, the symptoms of exposure are nondescript (irritant & tingling of eyes, nose, respiratory tract).

Here are some products that may contain trace (or more) amounts of formaldehyde:

  • resins in plywood, MDF, CDX, particle board/fiber board
  • garage doors
  • drywall
  • roofing
  • glues / mastics
  • paint/coatings
  • carpets
  • insulation (spray in and batting)

I believe the reason we do not see high exposures is due to the limited duration of exposure, and the open-aired nature during the construction. Some exceptions are warehouses with large storage areas of particle board/MDF. (I have found exposures in these areas)

The OSHA exposure limit for formaldehyde is 0.75 ppm (action limit of 0.5 ppm, and short term limit of 2 ppm). However, this may not be low enough, based upon other standards (ACGIH says 0.3 ppm, NIOSH 0.1 ppm)

Another major issue with this hazard in construction is once the space is occupied.

  • Once construction is done, the space may be sealed up, heated, and additional curing can occur.
  • This may release more formaldehyde, and also NOT allow as much to escape (by dilution ventilation).
  • Compounding this issue are the type of occupants in the building. Are there children, non-working adults, immunocompromised individuals, sick, or elderly occupying this space? The OSHA standards are NOT protective for these types of people.

I do not forsee this type of sign being posted immediately after new construction.

formaldehydeOn the plus side, someone has discovered that plants may help reduce formaldehyde & VOC levels in homes. Horticulture Science Kwang Jim Kim, et.al

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

 

Fri 22 Feb 2013

Focus on the biggest things first

Posted by admin under Admin Controls, Behavior Based, Fall Protection, Hazard Communication, Ladder, Ladders, Management, OSHA, Risk, Safety Policies, Safety Programs, Training
Comments Off on Focus on the biggest things first

focusfourMuch research has been done in construction safety. If you are working in construction, you have probably heard the facts over and over. The majority of construction injuries are from four main hazards, hence the “focus four hazards“. Although this site is for health issues & industrial hygiene in construction, it would be ridiculous to NOT mention these other hazards.

  • Falls,
  • Caught-in or Caught-between,
  • Struck-by &
  • Electrocution.

When talking with superintendents and safety coordinators, you can usually tell very quickly  if they have these under control. Either their subcontractors already do it right, or if/when they see an error, they immediately stop and address the inefficiency.

I saw this ladder in front of my children’s school. There was no one around and, by the look of it, there might have been someone on the roof. I should have waited, or fixed the ladder and spoken to the individual. But, I didn’t. Instead, I took a picture, put it on the internet, and now I’m telling everyone why it’s wrong.

ladder

Tags: , , , ,

 

Mon 18 Feb 2013

How to review a MSDS (SDS)

Posted by admin under Air Monitoring, GHS, Hazard Communication, industrial hygienist, Management, MSDS, Personal Protective Equip (PPE), Proposition 65, Risk, SDS
Comments Off on How to review a MSDS (SDS)

Reviewing a material safety data sheet (MSDS), or soon to be called a SDS (safety data sheet), can be a useful skill. Most times the product is straightforward and gives you what you need. However, there are somethings to watch for and areas to focus to make your reviewing skills better.

To start,  make sure you have the right SDS. Match the product with the form. If is is not exactly right, find the right one. It must list the model/product name & manufacturer.

Below are some suggestions:SDS

  • What is the date of the SDS?
    • is it the most recent?
    • when was it last updated?
  • Look at section 2/3 (Hazardous components) VERY carefully.
    • google the CAS# and find the name (they sometimes hide the true-name)
    • look at the % of each component
    • what is the listed exposure limit? Is it correct? What about other recommended limits?
    • remember the hazard is only listed in this area if it is greater than 1% of the total
  • Look through each section mindful of how you will be using the product.
    • for example: if you are going to be burning the product, usually the SDS will not address these types of concerns/exposures
    • what are the required PPE during “regular use”
    • what happens if you use this product in a confined area?
    • does the manufacturer recommend air monitoring? when?
  • Familiarize yourself with the emergency procedures
    • what if it spills?
    • disposal?
    • what can cause exposure? inhalation? skin?
  • Look at the other sections with a inquisitive eye
    • do they list other chemicals, which are NOT included in the product section? why?
    • do they mention Proposition 65?
  • Finally,
    • post/make available a copy wherever it’s needed
    • make sure you know the product

It is a mixed-bag when it comes to the quality of SDS from a manufacturer. Some of them will work with you, others are a total-pain. Remember it is YOUR RIGHT to know about the products you use. If you don’t feel comfortable with the information they’ve given you, call them. OR, go find another product.

Tags: , , , ,

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »