Understanding the Breathing-Air System in Abrasive Blasting

Compilation of this list is the initial step in OSHA's screening process for suspected carcinogens. To compile this list, substances for which there was some evidence of carcinogenicity and potential occupational hazard were drawn from such lists the NIOSH Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances (RTECS); U.S. Public Health Service, Publication No. 149; EPA's Inventory of Chemical Substances; the

To study the occupational safety and health systems used for emergency response workers in the USA, we performed interviews with related federal agencies and conducted research on related studies. We visited the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in the USA and performed interviews with their managers on the agencies' roles in the national emergency response system. We also obtained information prepared for our visit from the USA's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). In addition, we conducted research on related studies and information on the website of the agencies. We found that the USA had an established emergency response system based on their National Incident Management System (NIMS). This enabled several organizations to respond to emergencies cooperatively using a National Response Framework (NRF) that clarifies the roles and cooperative functions of each federal agency. The core system in NIMS was the Incident Command System (ICS), within which a Safety Officer was positioned as one of the command staff supporting the commander. All ICS staff were required to complete a training program specific to their position; in addition, the Safety Officer was required to have experience. The All-Hazards model was commonly used in the emergency response system. We found that FEMA coordinated support functions, and OSHA and NIOSH, which had specific functions to protect workers, worked cooperatively under NRF. These agencies employed certified industrial hygienists that play a professional role in safety and health. NIOSH recently executed support activities during disasters and other emergencies. The USA's emergency response system is characterized by functions that protect the lives and health of emergency response workers. Trained and experienced human resources support system effectiveness. The findings provided valuable information that could be used to improve the occupational safety and health function in the Japanese system.

A Little Occupational Audiology for the Clinical Audiologist

This chapter covers (1) esters of carbonic and orthocarbonic acid, (2) esters of organic phosphorous compounds, (3) esters of monocarboxylic halogenated acids, alkanols, or haloalcohols, and (4) organic silicon esters. Other classes of esters are summarized in Chapters 79 and 80. Refer to the Introduction in Chapter 79 for a more detailed overview of general properties of esters.Unfortunately, as shown in the two prior chapters, mainly fragmented toxicological evaluations are available for esters. Most of these esters are characterized by low toxicity. Indeed, as expressed in Chapter 79, lethal dose (e.g., LD50) values are frequently difficult or impractical to measure. Localized dermal irritation is one common effect characteristic of exposures to most organic solvents. Few esters are readily absorbed, but there are exceptions, such as tri‐o‐cresyl phosphate (TOCP). Several of the halogenated derivatives, such as ethylchloro‐ and ethylbromo‐, are potent lacrimators. Ethyl fluoroacetate and fluoroacetic acid exhibit about the same mode of action, which may indicate that the acetate is rapidly hydrolyzed and metabolized in the mammalian system. The unsaturated carbonates are also associated with high lacrimatory activity.TOCP is an example of an ester that can cause neuropathy in a variety of animal species. The initial weakness and paralysis are normally reversible in early stages, but repeated or massive assaults result in demyelination of the nerve fibers. The mechanism of action is not yet certain, but it appears to involve phosphorylation of proteins. Only selected phosphates exhibit neuropathic effects, including diisopropyl fluorophosphorate andN,N′‐diisopropyl phosphorodiamidic fluoride.As was expressed in Chapter 79, industrial hygiene evaluation of esters involves collecting and analyzing air samples to determine their airborne concentrations. Published industrial hygiene air sampling and analytical methods, however, are unavailable for most esters. In relation, there are few occupational exposure and biological limits. A list of ester compounds covered in this chapter that have industrial hygiene sampling and analytical methods are presented here along with their respective occupational exposure limits, established by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). As stated in Chapter 79, since sampling and analytical methods and occupational exposure limits are subject to periodic revision, the reader is encouraged to refer to current publications of ACGIH, OSHA, and NIOSH.

Researchers have reported public school band directors as experiencing noise-induced hearing loss. Little research has focused on collegiate band directors and university student musicians. The present study measures the sound pressure levels generated within a university concert band and compares sound levels with the criteria set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Additionally, the immediate effects of sound exposure are described by temporary threshold shifts (TTS), collected from pre- and postrehearsal hearing screenings. Time-weighted averages were computed from the sound pressure levels and compared to the permissible noise limits established by OSHA and NIOSH. None of the time-weighted averages exceeded the permissible noise limits; however, there were 139 temporary TTSs (greater than 10 dBA) measured from pre- to postrehearsal. Presumably, university concert band musicians are exposed to sound levels that, over time, may lead to noise-induced hearing loss.

ABSTRACTInhalation of respirable crystalline silica (RCS) is a significant risk to worker health during well completions operations (which include hydraulic fracturing) at conventional and unconventional oil and gas extraction sites. RCS is generated by pneumatic transfer of quartz-containing sand during hydraulic fracturing operations. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) researchers identified concentrations of RCS at hydraulic fracturing sites that exceed 10 times the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) and up to 50 times the NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit (REL). NIOSH research identified at least seven point sources of dust release at contemporary oil and gas extraction sites where RCS aerosols were generated. NIOSH researchers recommend the use of engineering controls wherever they can be implemented to limit the RCS released. A control developed to address one of the largest sources of RCS aerosol generation is the NIOSH mini-baghouse assembly, mounted on the thief hatches on top of the sand mover. This article details the results of a trial of the NIOSH mini-baghouse at a sand mine in Arkansas from November 18–21, 2013. During the trial, area air samples were collected at 12 locations on and around a sand mover with and without the mini-baghouse control installed. Analytical results for respirable dust and RCS indicate the use of the mini-baghouse effectively reduced both respirable dust and RCS downwind of the thief hatches. Reduction of airborne respirable dust ranged from 85–98%; reductions in airborne RCS ranged from 79–99%. A bulk sample of dust collected by the baghouse assembly showed the likely presence of freshly fractured quartz, a particularly hazardous form of RCS. Planned future design enhancements will increase the performance and durability of the mini-baghouse, including an improved bag clamp mechanism and upgraded filter fabric with a modified air-to-cloth ratio. Future trials are planned to determine additional respirable dust and RCS concentration reductions achieved through these design changes.

Campylobacter and Salmonella are leading causes of bacterial gastroenteritis in the United States and are estimated to cause >1 million episodes of domestically acquired illness annually (1). Campylobacter and Salmonella are primarily transmitted through contaminated food, but animal-to-human and human-to-human transmission can also occur (2,3). Although occupationally acquired infections have been reported, occupational risk factors have rarely been studied. In 2015, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identified 63 suspected or confirmed cases of Campylobacter infection over 3.5 years at a poultry-processing plant (Kathleen Fagan, OSHA, personal communication, December 2015); most involved new workers handling chickens in the "live hang" area where bacterial contamination is likely to be the highest. These findings were similar to those of a previous study of Campylobacter infections among workers at another poultry-processing plant (4). The investigation led to discussions among OSHA, state health departments, and CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); and a surveillance study was initiated to further explore the disease incidence in poultry-processing plant workers and identify any additional occupations at increased risk for common enteric infections. Deidentified reports of campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis among Maryland, Ohio, and Virginia residents aged ≥16 years were obtained and reviewed. Each employed patient was classified into one of 23 major occupational groups using the 2010 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system.* Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for associations between each occupational group and each disease were calculated to identify occupations potentially at increased risk, contrasting each group with all other occupations. In 2014, a total of 2,977 campylobacteriosis and 2,259 salmonellosis cases were reported. Among the 1,772 (60%) campylobacteriosis and 1,516 (67%) salmonellosis cases in patients for whom occupational information was available, 1,064 (60%) and 847 (56%), respectively, were employed. Persons in farming, fishing, and forestry as well as health care and technical occupations were at significantly increased risk for both campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis compared with all other occupations. Targeting education and prevention strategies could help reduce disease, and improving the systematic collection of occupational information in disease surveillance systems could provide a better understanding of the extent of occupationally acquired diseases.

Use of nonionic surfactant to reduce sulfuric acid mist in the copper electrowinning process

The health effects of lead exposure are well documented. Lead can be inhaled into the lungs, absorbed through the skin, or ingested from contaminated hands, food, or cigarettes. Because air samples are not a surrogate for biological monitoring, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations mandate that employees’ bloodlead levels be tested regularly.1 Given the high potential for surface contamination, venous samples are considered the primary method for blood-lead testing in occupationally exposed individuals. Currently, OSHA regulations do not mandate a speciŽ c analytical method for blood-lead analysis. Instead, successful participation in an ongoing proŽ ciencytesting program is necessary to remain CLIA(Clinical Laboratory Improvements Amendment2) certiŽ ed and OSHA-approved in blood-lead analytical techniques. CLIA mandates that a blood-lead analysis laboratory must report proŽ ciency testing results within §4 1g/dL (§0.19 1mol/L) or within 10 percent, whichever is greater, of the target (true) value.2 In recent years, different technologies have been investigated for their utility as portable blood-lead analysis instruments. Portable instruments are potentially useful because they provide immediate results and the opportunity for immediate intervention, if necessary. Instruments involving both Potentiometric Stripping Analysis (PSA) and Anodic StrippingVoltammetry (ASV) have been explored.3 An instrument utilizing PSA is in commercial development by Intelab Corporation (Mission Viejo, CA). Although some preliminary Ž eld evaluations have been conducted with the PSA instrument, this device has not been submitted for FDA (Food and Drug Administration) market clearance.4 Hence, this article discusses only anASV instrument that has received market clearance. ESA, Inc. (Chelmsford, MA) and AndCare, Inc. (Durham, NC) developed a small, rapid, handheld portable instrument utilizing ASV. This device, named the LeadCare°R instrument, has received 510(k) market clearance from the FDA and has been classiŽ ed under CLIA as a moderately complex medical diagnostic device.5 It has been used with success during pediatric screening programs.6 However, blood-lead levels in children are generally signiŽ cantly lower than the blood-lead levels normally present in occupationally exposed adults. Thus, it was of interest to evaluate the portable blood-lead monitor in worker populations where lead exposures are encountered.

The respirator is historically one of the oldest types of equipment used for personal protection in the occupational setting. It is uncertain when the use of primitive forms of respiratory protection began. However, Pliny the Elder recorded the first known use of such a device early in the 1stcenturyad. Although respirators have been used for almost 2000 years, the genesis of their technical development is actually the mid‐19th century. During that century. Despite major advances in knowledge and technology, respirator development continued slowly. Chemical warfare agents, introduced in World War I, focused attention on the need for adequate respirators. In the United States, the Bureau of Mines successfully carried out this work for the army. The forerunners of present‐day respirators began to appear after World War I. In those early years, misuse of surplus army gas masks by civilians and employers, who had sole discretion about deciding when and how respirators were used, highlighted the need for respiratory protection standards.The Bureau of Mines in 1919 initiated the first respirator certification program in the United States and certified their first respirator, a self‐contained breathing apparatus in 1920. Responsibility for the respirator certification program was transferred from the Bureau of Mines to NIOSH in 1972. In 1995, NIOSH promulgated new certification regulations, Title 42Code of Federal RegulationsPart 84 (Part 84). Knowing the minimum performance standards and recognizing the limitations of the NIOSH certification tests are important when selecting and using a “NIOSH‐certified” repirator. Achieving proper respiratory protection with NIOSH‐certified RPE requires that (1) the RPE be properly selected for the environment in which it will be used; (2) its face fitting characteristics be adequately evaluated and considered in the selection process; and (3) workers receive periodic training that adequately prepares them to conscientiously and properly wear and use the RPE.Three recognized standard‐producing groups have produced guidance or standards on establishing and maintaining the elements of a good respiratory protection program. They are:The American National Standards Institute (ANSI),The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), andThe Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).The primary objective of industrial hygiene is to prevent contaminants from escaping into the atmosphere. Hazard control should start at the outset of process, equipment, and plant design stages so those potential exposure sources can be engineered out. But very often exposure control becomes an issue after the process(es) are operational and therefore control becomes a more difficult and costly proposition. However, even then consideration should be given to the use of effective engineering controls to eliminate and/or reduce exposure to respiratory hazards. The preferred priority of controls steps are (1) substitution of a less toxic substance, (2) encapsulation or isolation of the process, (3) use of local exhaust ventilation or general ventilation in conjunction with filters and scrubbers to control the effluents, (4) use of personal protective equipment (PPE).Respiratory protective equipment should be used only when all higher priority control steps are not technically or financially feasible. Real world circumstances however demonstrate that engineering controls often do not reduce exposures sufficiently to eliminate a respiratory hazard. As a result respiratory protective equipment (RPE) becomes the only technically and economically feasible adjunct to engineering controls to minimize and control respiratory exposures. According to recent estimates reported by the OSHA Office of Regulatory Analysis, roughly 5 million workers, 19–20% of the mining/manufacturing/ construction workforce, in 1.3 million establishments use or have access to some type of respiratory protective equipment. Thus, RPE continues to be an important component in many respiratory exposure control plans. As a result, selection, use and evaluation of RPE have become more important as well.

The use of medical screening and biological monitoring has seen substantial changes in the past two decades specifically in the provision of occupational medical services. For example, national surveys of workplaces conducted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) showed that the provision of off-site medical care to workers increased from 19.6% in 1972-1974 to 57.8% in 1981-1983, although the percent of workers receiving on-site services remained stable during the same period. After a recent survey in 1990-1991, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) estimated that 6.3% of US industries have a medical surveillance program at their individual establishment. We reviewed NIOSH documents, OSHA's Code of Federal Regulations, and texts on biological monitoring and medical screening for recommendations on medical surveillance of workers. This report summarizes the medical tests (including biologic monitoring) recommended or used by independent investigators and by the government for OSHA-regulated substances to provide guidance to physicians and occupational health professionals in accessing the pertinent literature; the utility of the recommendations is not evaluated.

Research has documented occupational health disparities, including higher rates of work-related injuries, among temporary workers compared with workers in standard employment arrangements. According to guidance from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), both staffing companies and host employers are responsible for protecting the occupational safety and health (OSH) of temporary workers. To date, there has been little qualitative research on temporary worker OSH in the United States and a lack of evidence-based OSH programs designed to meet the needs of temporary workers. The aim of this study was to better understand the barriers to and facilitators of temporary worker OSH from the perspective of US staffing companies. In-depth interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of representatives from 15 US staffing companies. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed through a three-step process. Commonly mentioned barriers to temporary worker OSH include differential treatment of temporary workers by host employers; lack of understanding among host employers and staffing companies of joint OSH responsibilities; and workers' fear of job loss or other negative repercussions if they report an injury or illness or voice OSH concerns. Commonly mentioned facilitators of temporary worker OSH include conducting client assessments and site visits and fostering strong communication and relationships with both host employers and temporary workers. These findings can help inform the tailoring of OSH programs to promote health equity in temporary workers.

To the Editor.— I hope that the letter by David Jacknow, MD (241:2701, 1979), regarding his concern for the preservation of confidentiality of medical records will stimulate other physicians to speak publicly on this issue. He is concerned that if the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) finalizes their proposed regulations permitting access to the complete medical record of workers, a physician in private practice who accepts referrals from industry will have the impossible task of attempting to separate occupational information about patients from nonoccupational information. If the physician were not permitted to do this, Dr Jacknow points out, the patient would be exposed to wide-open scrutiny by OSHA, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), or an authorized representative. Physicians in the full-time practice of occupational medicine are equally concerned about this issue. Dr Jacknow states he believes this problem has been overlooked, because an article in

Fatal falls and PFAS use in the construction industry: Findings from the NIOSH FACE reports

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that 1 in 3 adults suffer from hearing loss. The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) further provides that 24% of U.S. workers hearing loss is caused by occupational exposure. To prevent hearing loss, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recommends that workers not be exposed to sounds at or greater than 85 decibels (dBA) for 8 hours. Abrasive blast nozzles, however, can produce noise levels upward of 115dBA, for which OSHA sets a max safe exposure time of just 15 minutes per day. Leveraging cutting edge advancements in jet engine technology, new Blast Ninja abrasive nozzle designs can now reduce noise by up to 17dB, an approximate 50× reduction in sound power, when compared with conventional venturi nozzles of the same bore size. Blast Ninja nozzles accomplish this by reducing the nozzle air exit velocity and sound pressure level, while preserving particle velocity to maintain equal abrasive power. The difference in noise exposure enables operators to be safer and more productive, diminishes operator fatigue, and minimizes employer liability. Furthermore, whereas NIOSH estimates a $100 per dBA of savings when purchasing quieter products, such improvements in acoustical performance can also translate to employer cost savings. The efficacy of Blast Ninja nozzles was evaluated by Oceanit and 3rd party industry partners interested in use or distribution of the nozzles for the industry. This paper explores the efficacy of such nozzles, and details their performance in different conditions, with different blasting setups, with different abrasives, and on different surfaces.