health hazard evaluations: issues related to occupational ... · issues related to occupational...

WorkplaceSafety and Health

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES�Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Health Hazard Evaluations:Issues Related to OccupationalExposure to Lead1994 to 1999

ForewordContributorsAbbreviationsObtaining ReportsBackgroundLaw EnforcementManufacturing and RepairingLead Abatement and Lead-Based PaintAbrasive BlastingElectric ServicesOthersReferences

Hazard Evaluations and Technical Assistance Branch

Health Hazard Evaluations:Occupational Exposure to Lead

1994 to 1999

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESPublic Health Services

Centers for Disease Control and PreventionNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

March 2001


To receive documents or other information about occupational safety and health topics,contact the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) at

NIOSH—Publications Dissemination4676 Columbia Parkway

Cincinnati, OH 45226–1998

Telephone: 1–800–35–NIOSH (1–800–356–4674)Fax: 1–513–533–8573

E-mail: [email protected]

or visit the NIOSH Web site at www.cdc.gov/niosh.

This document is in the public domain and may be freely copied or reprinted.

Mention of any company or product does not constitute endorsement by NIOSH.

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2001–113

Ordering Information


Foreword

iii

The Health Hazard Evaluations and Technical Assistance (HETA) program responds to requests fromemployers, employees, employee representatives, other Federal agencies, and State and local agencies.Through a staff of industrial hygienists, engineers, occupational physicians, occupational health nurses,epidemiologists, other health professionals, and support personnel, the HETA Branch collaborates withappropriate personnel in other National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Divisions, torespond to approximately 400 requests for assistance each year. The typical HETA response to a requestfor assistance results in an evaluation of the workplace to determine if chemical, physical, biological, or otheragents are hazardous to workers. Control procedures, improved work practices, and medical programs maybe recommended to reduce any hazardous exposures found and to prevent adverse health effects. Theresults of individual evaluations may trigger wider studies of similar exposures in other settings, or maystimulate recommendations for implementation or modification of health standards. More than 10,000evaluations have been completed since the inception of the HETA program in 1972. Requests received bythe HETA program tend to reflect widespread occupational problems, such as lead hazards in the work-place.

The HETA program administers health hazard evaluations (HHEs) of occupational exposure to lead andother substances. Site visits are conducted if warranted, and interim and final reports are developed anddistributed to the employer, employees, and relevant State and Federal agencies. One-hundred, thirty-ninelead-related HHEs were conducted from 1990 to 1999. The HHE requests came from a variety ofworkplaces, including secondary lead smelters, battery manufacturers, structural steel painting sites, shipbuilding facilities, and firing ranges.

This document presents titles and summaries of the 31 HHEs related to lead that were completed between1995 and 1999. In most cases lead exposure was just one of several exposures that NIOSH researchersinvestigated at a work site. In many cases, corrective measures were made in response to the evaluationand recommendations made by NIOSH.

Lawrence J. Fine, M.D., Dr.P.H.Acting DirectorNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health


Prepared by:Beth Donovan Reh, M.H.S.

Edited by:Jane Weber, M.Ed.

Desktop Publishing by:Donna Pfirman

Project Officers for Individual Health Hazard EvaluationsDaniel Almaguer, M.S.Kevin Ashley, Ph.D.Terri J. Ballard, Dr. P.H.Michael E. BarsanSteve BerardinelliLeo M. Blade, C.I.H.Yvonne Boudreau, M.D.Faye T. Bresler, M.D.Charles J. Bryant, M.S., C.I.H.Teresa M. Buchta, M.S.Joseph E. Burkhart, C.I.H.Gregory A. Burr, B.S.Susan Burt, M.S., R.N.Nancy J. Clark, M.P.H., M.S.Catherine L. Connon, M.N.Calvin K. Cook, B.S.Keith G. Crouch, Ph.D.William Daniels, C.I.H., C.S.P.John Decker, M.S., C.I.H.Beth A. Donovan, M.H.S.Alan Echt, M.P.H., C.I.H.Marjorie A. Edmonds, B.S.Larry J. Elliott, M.S.P.H.Pete Estacio, M.D., Ph.D.Lynda M. Ewers, Ph.D.Eugene Freund, M.D., M.S.P.HSteve Galson, M.D.Janie Gittleman, Ph.D., M.P.H.Michael G. GresselHow-Ran Guo, M.D., M.P.H.Thomas Hales, M.D.Ronald M. HallJoshua Harney, M.S.Daniel Hewett

Philip JaJosky, M.D., M.P.H.Paul A. Jensen, P.E.Edward A. Kaiser, Ph.D., C.I.H.John E. Kelly, M.S.Max Kiefer, C.I.H.Gregory M. Kinnes, M.S., C.I.H.Matthew K. Klein, P.E.Steven Klincewicz, D.O.Steven A. Lee, C.I.H.Scott MadarRobert Malkin D.D.S., Dr. P.H.David A. Marlow, M.S.Dino MattoranoCharles S. McCammon, Ph.D., C.I.H.Jane B. McCammon, C.I.H.Robert McCleery, M.S.P.H.Kevin P. McManus, C.I.H.Leroy Mickelsen, M.S.Aubrey Miller, M.D., M.P.HClifford Mitchell, M.D., M.P.H.Michael Montopoll, M.D., M.P.H.J. Clint Morley, M.S.C. Eugene Moss, M.P.H., C.S.S.Robert F. Mouradian, Ph.D.Dennis M. O’Brien, Ph.D., C.I.H.Domyung Paek, M.D.Elena Page, M.D., M.P.H.Greg M. Piacitelli, M.S., C.I.H.Christopher M. Reh, M.S.Richard D. RinehartKevin Roegner, M.P.H.Carol Rubin, D.V.M., M.P.HStanley Salisbury, C.I.H.Paul J. Seligman, M.D., M.P.H.Teresa A. Seitz, M.P.H., C.I.H.Richard L. Stephenson, C.I.H.Aaron L. Sussell, M.P.HDavid C. Sylvain, M.S., C.I.H.Shiro Tanaka, M.D., M.S.Allison Tepper, Ph.D.Doug Trout, M.D.Randy Tubbs, Ph.D.Herbert L. Venable, M.S.David Wall, M.A.S.Marjorie WallaceAngela Weber, M.S.Elizabeth A. Whelan, Ph.D.Deanna Wild, M.S., M.B.A.

Contributors

iv


ACGIH American Conference of GovernmentalIndustrial Hygienists

AHU Air handling unitBEI Biological Exposure Index (ACGIH)BLL Blood lead levelCL Ceiling limit, an exposure that shall not be

exceeded during any part of the workday°C Degrees CelsiusCFR Code of Federal Regulationscm2 Square centimetersEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency°F Degrees FahrenheitGA General area (air sample)GM Geometric meanHETA Hazard Evaluation and Technical AssistanceHETAB Hazard Evaluation and Technical

Assistance BranchHEPA High-efficiency particulate air (filter)HHE Health hazard evaluationHUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

DevelopmentHVAC Heating, ventilating, and air-conditioningIAQ Indoor air qualityIEQ Indoor environmental qualityIH Industrial hygiene or industrial hygienistLBP Lead-based paintLEV Local exhaust ventilationLOD Limit of detection (analytical method)LOQ Limit of quantitation (analytical method)Lpm Liters per minuteMDC Minimum detectable concentration (the

smallest amount of a material that can bereliably detected). The MDC is calculated bydividing the analytical LOD by a representa-tive air volume.

mg Milligrams

mg/g Milligrams per grammg/m3 Milligrams per cubic meter of airmL Millilitermm MillimeterMQC Minimum quantifiable concentration (the

smallest amount of a material that can bereliably measured). The MQC is calculatedby dividing the analytical LOQ by arepresentative air volume.

MSDS Material safety data sheetNA Not applicable, not availableND Not detectedNIOSH National Institute for Occupational

Safety and Healthnm NanometerOSHA Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationPBZ Personal breathing–zone (air sample)PEL Permissible exposure limit (OSHA)ppb Parts (of a contaminant) per billion partsPPE Personal protective equipmentppm Parts (of a contaminant) per million partsREL Recommended exposure limit (NIOSH

exposure criteria)SIC Standard Industrial ClassificationSTEL Short–term exposure limitTA Technical assistanceTLV® Threshold limit value (ACGIH exposure

criteria)TWA Time–weighted averageXRF X-ray fluorescenceZPP Zinc Protoporphyrin�g Microgram�g/dl Micrograms per deciliter�g/g Micrograms per gram�g/ft2 Micrograms per square foot�g/m3 Micrograms of contaminant per cubic meter

of air (a unit of concentration)

Abbreviations

v


To purchase individual published reports listed in thisdocument or to order the CD-ROM collection ofselected published HETA reports from 1980 to 1996:

The National Technical Information Service (NTIS)5285 Port Royal Rd.Springfield, VA 221611–800–553–NTIS (6847)http://www.ntis.gov

To obtain single copies of interim reports, closeoutletters, and other non-published materials listed inthis document please send your request with a letter-sized, self-addressed, stamped envelope to:

Obtaining Reports

The Hazard Evaluations and Technical Assistance Branch (HETAB)4676 Columbia Parkway (M/S R-9)Cincinnati, OH 45226

Please include the report HETA reference numberwith your request.

General inquiries about any of the reports contained inthis document should be directed to Richard Hartle atthe HETAB address above. More information aboutthe HETA Program is available on the web athttp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe.html.

vi


Occupational exposure to lead occurs via inhalation oflead-containing dust and fume and ingestion fromcontact with lead-contaminated surfaces. Symptomsof lead poisoning include weakness, excessivetiredness, irritability, constipation, anorexia, abdominaldiscomfort (colic), fine tremors, and “wrist drop.”1,2,3

Overexposure to lead may also result in damage tothe kidneys, anemia, high blood pressure, impotence,and infertility and reduced sex drive in both sexes. Inmost cases, an individual’s BLL is a good indication ofrecent exposure to and current absorption of lead.

4

BLL will also reflect in the body, so it may not be anaccurate measure of recent exposure if there hasbeen long-term, high lead exposures. Elevated ZPPlevels have also been used as an indicator of chroniclead intoxication. Persons without occupational leadexposure usually have a ZPP level less than 40 �g/dl.5However, other factors, such as iron deficiency, cancause an elevated ZPP level, so the BLL is a morespecific test for evaluating occupational leadexposure. BLLs for the U.S. population as a wholehave declined significantly over the past threedecades. In the NHANES III survey, conductedfrom 1988 through 1991, the geometric mean BLL was2.8 �g/dl.6

In the OSHA lead standards for general industry andconstruction, the PEL for lead in air is 50 �g/m3

(8-hour TWA), which is intended to maintain workerBLLs below 40 �g/dl; medical removal is requiredwhen an employee’s BLL reaches 50 �g/dl.7,8

NIOSH has concluded that the 1978 NIOSH REL of100 �g/m3 as an 8-hour TWA does not sufficientlyprotect workers from the adverse affects of exposureto inorganic lead.9 NIOSH has conducted a literaturereview of the health effects data on inorganic leadexposure and finds evidence that some of the adverseeffects on the adult reproductive, cardiovascular, and

hematologic systems, and on the development ofchildren of exposed workers can occur at BLLs aslow as 10 �g/dl.10 At BLLs below 40 �g/dl, manyof the health effects would not necessarily be evidentby routine physical examinations but represent earlystages in the development of disease. In recognitionof this, voluntary standards and public health goalshave established lower exposure limits to protectworkers and their children. The ACGIH TLV forlead in air is 50 �g/m3 as an 8-hour TWA, withworker BLLs to be controlled to �30 �g/dl. A nationalhealth goal is to eliminate all occupational exposuresthat result in BLLs >25 �g/dl.11

Lead is commonly found in U.S. urban dust and soilresulting from the past use of lead in gasoline andpaints, and also industrial emissions. Lead-contami-nated surfaces in the workplace represent a potentialsource of exposure for workers. Lead exposure mayoccur either by direct hand-to-mouth contact, orindirectly through contamination of hands, cigarettes,cosmetics, or food. In the workplace, generally littleor no correlation occurs between surface lead levelsand employee exposures because ingestion exposuresare highly dependent on personal hygiene practicesand available facilities for maintaining personalhygiene. No Federal standard provides an exposurelimit for lead contamination of surfaces in theworkplace. HUD currently recommends the followingclearance levels for lead on surfaces after residentiallead abatement or interim control activities infederally owned or assisted housing: floors, 40 �g/ft2;interior window sills, 250 �g/ft2, and window wells,800 �g/ft2.12 Similarly, there are no Federal standardsfor soil lead contamination in the workplace. The EPAhas proposed standards for residential soil-lead levels,expressed as the average total lead by weight in drip-line and mid-yard composite soil samples: 400 ppm asa level of concern that should trigger appropriate riskreduction activities and � 2000 ppm as a trigger forpermanent abatement of soil lead hazards.13

Background

1


their living quarters with lead. A potential hazard fromshort-term overexposure to lead via inhalation existedat the outdoor firing ranges at the time of theinvestigation. In addition, a potential problem of “take-home” lead exposure to families of firearm instructorswas found. Recommended modifications for theindoor firing range ventilation system, proper hygienepractices, and safe use of all of the ranges werepresented at the end of the full report.

Copies are available from NTIS, individually or onCD-ROM.

HETA 95–0290February 1996

Toxicity determination: NegativeRequester: ManagementLead concentrations: PBZs of < 0.5 �g/m3, BLLsfrom <5 �g/dl to 10.6 �g/dlPurpose: To evaluate lead exposures at a State patroltraining academy that had recently begun to usecartridges containing copper-jacketed bullets and non-lead primersKeywords: SIC 9221 (police protection), lead, indoorfiring ranges, blood lead, copper

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to evaluatelead exposures at a State patrol training academy.An independent consultant had previously measuredlead exposures of 300 to 5,600 �g/m3 and an increasein average BLLs from 6.4 to 51 �g/dl after 4 weeksof firearms training. Subsequently, the academybegan using cartridges containing copper-jacketedbullets and non-lead primers as a means of reducinglead exposures. NIOSH conducted air and bloodsampling to determine the effectiveness of theintervention. All of the air samples were either non-detectable or contained only trace amounts of lead(detected, but below the limit of quantitation,approximately 0.5 �g/m3). The BLLs ranged from<5 �g/dl to 10.6 �g/dl, and ZPP levels rangedfrom 10 to 32 �g/dl. The data provided evidencethat the control measures were effective. NIOSHdid recommend that a proper ventilation system beused to control lead exposures so that the firing range

HETA 91–0346–2572April 1996

Toxicity determination: PositiveRequester: ManagementLead concentrations: PBZs from ND to 51.7�g/m3

for non-custodial employees and from ND to 220.0 �g/m3

for custodians while cleaning firing range; BLLsaveraged <16.2 �g/dl from 1989 to 1991Purpose: To evaluate lead exposures during firearmtraining and the potential for take-home leadKeywords: SIC 9221 (police protection), indoor firingranges, outdoor firing ranges, inorganic lead, ventilationsystem design, engineering controls, para-occupationalexposure, BLL, noise, hearing loss, take-home lead

Abstract: NIOSH investigators conducted an HHEat a firing-range training facility to evaluate leadexposures during firearm training and associatedactivities among range technicians, gunsmiths, andfiring range instructors. Additionally, the potentialfor “take-home” lead contamination of workers’vehicles and homes and exposure of their familieswas also evaluated. Sixty-one PBZ and 30 areasamples for airborne lead were collected. Personalsampling found firing range instructors’ exposureswere up to 51.7 �g/m3, range technicians’ to 2.7 �g/m3,and gunsmiths’ to 4.5 �g/m3. Private medicalinterviews were conducted with 13 randomlyselected workers associated with the firing range.None of the interviews were remarkable for anysymptoms or health problems associated with theworkplace lead exposures. Records of BLL for allcurrent instructors, range technicians, gunsmiths, andcustodians from 1989 to 1991 were reviewed. Themean BLL among instructors decreased from14.6 �g/dl in 1989 to 7.4 �g/dl in 1991. Incomparison, no appreciable reduction in mean BLLamong gunsmiths and range technicians occurredduring this time period. Custodians all had BLLs ofless than 4 �g/dl. Carpet dust samples were collectedin 14 student dormitory rooms and in 14 nonstudentdormitory rooms. Student dormitory rooms hadsignificantly higher lead concentrations than non-student dormitory rooms. This suggested that studentsusing the firing range might have been contaminating

Law Enforcement

2


However, continued use of lead-primer ammunitionby other police departments may expose thoseofficers to lead and result in further surfacecontamination.


HETA 96–0218–2623January 1997

Toxicity determination: Negative

Requester: Management

Lead concentrations: PBZs below MQC to140 �g/m3, surface concentrations from 2.5 to1,100 �g/100 cm2

Purpose: To investigate potential staff and recruitexposures to lead at this firearm training facility

Keywords: SIC 9221 (police protection), indoorfiring ranges, lead

Abstract: NIOSH investigators completed an HHEat a firearm training facility to determine if therewas a risk of lead exposure. Investigatorscollected 15 PBZ samples and two GA airsamples. In addition, 7 wipe samples werecollected from surfaces in and around the range, anda bulk sample was collected from dust on the floor.The highest airborne lead concentrations weremeasured during cleaning of the floor and target-retrieval rails (22 and 140 �g/m3, respectively).Although small amounts of lead were detected inall air samples (0.7 through 9.5 �g/m3), firearmstraining did not present a health hazard fromexposure to airborne lead. It appeared that someexposure to lead could have occurred from leadsurface contamination in and around the range;however, ingestion of lead could have been avoidedthrough good hygiene practices. It was recommendedto reduce lead exposure during routine cleaning byuse of a HEPA-filter equipped vacuum cleaner.


would be safe for a wider variety of firearms andtypes of ammunition. However, until effectiveventilation could be installed, NIOSH recommendedthe continued use of jacketed bullets and non-leadprimers.

Copies are available from HETAB.

HETA 96–0107–2613December 1996

Toxicity determination: NegativeRequester: ManagementLead concentrations: PBZs below MQC, surfacecontamination from 6.6 to 31.6 �g/100 cm2

Purpose: To evaluate the potential lead exposure in anindoor firing rangeKeywords: SIC 9221 (police protection), indoor firingranges, lead

Abstract: NIOSH investigators conducted an HHEat a police department indoor firing range andcollected air samples for lead during an in-servicefirearm training session. The results of air samplingindicated that airborne lead concentrations werebelow the MQC. The average MQC for personal leadsamples collected on officers was 43 �g/m3, basedupon an average sample volume of 27.6 liters (range30 to 84 �g/m3). The MQC for the sample collectedon the instructor during the training session was4.4 �g/m3. The MQC for an area sample was 4.1 �g/m3.Wipe samples from surfaces inside the trailerrevealed lead concentrations ranging from 6.6 to31.6 �g/100 cm2. Lead-containing ammunition wasthe likely source of the surface contamination.Ventilation was provided by two 14–inch axial fanslocated in the trailer’s sidewalls, approximately60 inches from the floor at either side of the targetarea. Makeup air entered through a doorway at theback of the room. The airflow was neither welldistributed nor adequate to ensure the removal ofairborne lead that was generated by the firing of lead-primer ammunition. The firing of copper-jacketedlead-free primer ammunition did not present a healthhazard to officers-in-training or the range instructor.

3


HETA 97–0255–2735January 1997

Toxicity determination: Positive


Lead concentrations: PBZs and GAs from ND to5910 �g/m3, surface concentrations below MQC to102,190 �g/ft2

Purpose: To evaluate lead exposures among policeofficers who used an indoor firing range

Keywords:* SIC 9221 (police protection), indoorfiring range, IFR, lead, ventilation, wipe sampling,blood lead levels, BLLs, inhalable sampler, IOM sampler

*At the conclusion of an HHE, the NIOSH investigatorsprovide keywords for inclusion in the HHE Database

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to evaluate leadexposures among police officers who used the indoorfiring range. Air samples and surface wipe sampleswere collected, and the ventilation system wasevaluated. Air sampling results indicated that even whilethe general ventilation system is operating, range userscould be overexposed to lead within a short time (about1 hour). GA and PBZ samples for lead ranged from NDto 960 �g/m3, 8–hour TWA. Wipe samples collectedinside the range and in the work areas outside the rangeshowed widespread lead contamination. Surface leadloading levels ranged from 130 �g/ft2 in the men’slocker room (outside the range) to 102,000 �g/ft2 on thecurved supply air diffuser inside the range. Both air andwipe samples indicated that lead was escaping from therange into surrounding work areas of the police station.Also, airborne lead was detected downstream of thefilter banks in the rooftop AHU in the July 1997 survey,indicating that in the past contaminated air had beenrecirculated into the range. At the time of the surveys,the general ventilation system performed inadequately tocontrol exposures to range users, range masters, andworkers in areas nearby the range. NIOSH recom-mended that the range be negatively pressurized andthat adequate airflow through the range move in auniform (non–turbulent) manner from the firing line tothe bullet trap and main exhaust plenum.


HETA 91–0272June 1999

Toxicity determination: PositiveRequester: UnionLead concentrations: cumulative blood lead indexmeasurements from 138 to 1,446 �g/dl-yr, TWA-BLLsfrom 12 to 50 �g/dlPurpose: To assess the relationship between long-termoccupational lead exposure and several health outcomesrelated to blood pressure at a battery manufacturingplantKeywords: SIC 3691 (storage batteries), lead, bloodpressure, hypertension

Abstract: NIOSH conducted a study to assess therelationship between long-term occupational leadexposure and several health outcomes related toblood pressure—diastolic pressure, systolicpressure, hypertension, and left ventricular mass.Evidence was found of a dose-response relation-ship between cumulative occupational leadexposure and diastolic pressure, with a statisti-cally significant difference between the highestand lowest tertiles of exposures. No associationwas found between lead exposure and hyperten-sion, but that may have been due to the lowerparticipation rate among retirees and the smallsize of the study. Finally, the study documented anon-statistically significant pattern of slightlyincreasing left ventricular mass with increasingoccupational lead exposure, supporting the ideathat the effects of lead on blood pressure may berelated to the development of cardiovasculardisease. The possibility of further analysis of theserelationships by using the blood pressure data inthe company’s medical records was explored, butthe available data was not sufficient for therequired analyses.


Manufacturing and Repairing

4


HETA 91–0292–2467November 1994

Toxicity determination: PositiveRequester: ManagementLead concentrations: PBZs and GAs from ND to36 �g/m3

Purpose: To evaluate the potential hazards fromexposure to paint at this electronics componentmanufacturing facility

Keywords: SIC 3679 (electronic components, notelsewhere classified), methylene chloride, 2-ethoxyethylacetate, lead

Abstract: NIOSH investigators conducted anHHE at an electronics component manufacturingfacility to evaluate potential hazards in the paintroom. Ventilation measurements were made, andPBZ and GA air sampling was conducted forsolvents and metals, including lead. In addition,bulk-material samples were analyzed, andobservations were made of the operations andwork practices. One PBZ air sample exceeded theOSHA action level for lead. Since exposures canvary from day-to-day, higher exposures to leadmay occur among paint room employees. Thefollowing recommendations were made to reduceworker exposure to lead at this facility: (1) conductadditional air monitoring to more fully characterizeworker exposures to lead, (2) provide additionalPPE for Paint Room workers, and (3) instituteventilation and administrative changes to furtherreduce exposures.

Copies are available from NTIS, individually oron CD-ROM.

HETA 92–0102–2537October 1995

Toxicity determination: UndeterminedRequester: Union

Lead concentrations: ND (<1 �g/m3)

Purpose: To evaluate the health hazards at an Armydepot, including an area that repaired military electro-optic devices with the use of lead solder

Keywords: SIC 7629 (electrical and electronic repairshops), acetone, ethanol, isopropyl alcohol, lead, silica,diisoncyanate, IAQ, IEQ

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE at an Armydepot. One of the areas evaluated was a buildingdesigned for the repair of military electro-opticdevices (night vision systems such as thermal andimage enhancers) and laser range finders. Repairactivities included the use of various solvents(predominantly ethanol, acetone, and isopropanol)and the use of soldering devices (with lead solder).Along with other industrial hygiene and medicalevaluations, air samples were collected and analyzedfor lead, but none had detectable amounts (minimumdetectable concentration: 1 �g/m3 for a 1,000 litersample). However, solder particulate was observedon workstation surfaces, which could have repre-sented a potential hazard from exposure to leadthrough ingestion. NIOSH recommended that eatingand drinking not be allowed in workstation areas,that hand-washing by employees be emphasized,especially prior to eating or smoking, and that thepossibility of bringing lead contaminated objects(i.e., clothing) into the home be stressed toemployees.


5


evaluation and video exposure assessment monitoringwere compiled in two separate appendices to thereport. Although the engineering controls wereappropriate for battery manufacturing, leadexposures exceeded the OSHA PEL. Operationsand maintenance of engineering controls,housekeeping issues, and certain work practiceswere identified as some of the reasons foroverexposures. Recommendations were made toensure that local exhaust ventilation systemsfunction as designed, improve the company’srespiratory protection program, decontaminate andcontrol lead on lunchroom surfaces (cafeteria tablesand hand contact surfaces), improve handdecontamination to reduce the potential foringestion of lead, and modify employee workpractices to discourage activities that may result inthe suspension of lead dust into the workplaceatmosphere.



Toxicity determination: Negative for lead, positivefor other exposures


Lead concentrations: PBZs of 15.1 and 28.3 �g/m3,GAs of 0.06 and 0.07 �g/m3

Purpose: To document worker exposures to a widevariety of contaminants, including lead during thecleaning of dross from a wave solder machine

Keywords: SIC 3519 (internal combustion engines),noise, isocyanates, metal working fluids, TDI, MDI,total reactive isocyanate groups, toluene, xylene,formaldehyde, inorganic acids, ammonia, lead

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to documentworker exposures to a wide variety of contaminantsin production jobs that included printed circuitboards, electrical product assembly, silk screening,spray painting, shipping, and mechanical production.Samples for lead were collected during the cleaningof dross from the wave solder machine. The two




Lead concentrations: PBZs from 15 to 495 �g/m3

Purpose: To determine if on-going improvements to abattery manufacturing plant’s engineering controlswould reduce employee lead exposures

Keywords: SIC 3691 (storage batteries), lead, Pb,battery manufacturing, BLLs, wipe sampling,respiratory protection, saliva, anodic strippingvoltametry, ASV

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE at a batterymanufacturing plant to determine if on–goingimprovements to the plant’s engineering controlswould reduce employee lead exposures. Site visitswere made during the periods July 13–16, 1994, andMarch 27–31, 1995. PBZ samples collected invarious locations of the plant exceeded the OSHAPEL of 50 �g/m3. The highest PBZ exposures weremeasured in plate pasting operations (range: 68 to495 �g/m3). Exposures in first assembly andpouching ranged from 15 to 418 �g/m3 and 31 to77 �g/m3, respectively. Surface wipe samplesshowed a consistent presence of lead oncafeteria table tops. Significantly increasedamounts of lead were present on hand wipesamples obtained from employees finishing lunchcompared to hand wipes collected from the sameemployees before they entered the lunchroom. Aunique biological monitoring and sample analysismethod (analysis of saliva lead by anodic strippingvoltametry) was used to evaluate for the presence ofrecently absorbed lead in employee saliva samples.Triplicate saliva samples obtained during 4 consecu-tive workdays documented a consistent daily increasein saliva lead. Video exposure monitoring identifiedwork practices and housekeeping issues, such asdumping dross into unventilated scrap barrels andfloor sweeping with corn brooms, that could increaseairborne lead concentrations. Modifications to someengineering controls were suggested to optimizecapture efficiencies and enhance performance of theventilation system. The engineering controls

6


tions were made to reduce worker exposure to leadat this facility: (1) Always pour molds within the fumehood, (2) the metal waste slag from the top of themelting pot also should be ladled into a collectioncontainer within the hood, and (3) reestablish themedical surveillance program for oncology labpersonnel, especially biological exposure to lead.


HETA 97–0292–2678March 1998


Requester: Union

Lead concentrations: bulk samples from 160 to9,900 �g/g, GAs from 1.6 to 51 �g/m3, PBZ of 4 �g/m3

Purpose: To evaluate mercury (and also lead andcadmium) exposures during fluorescent lampmanufacturing and maintenance activities

Keywords: SIC 3229 (pressed and blown glass andglassware), mercury, urine mercury, central nervoussystem, renal system, kidneys, cullet, glass recycling,lead, cadmium

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to evaluatemercury exposures during fluorescent lamp manufac-turing and maintenance activities. Bulk samples ofdust and cullet (the cut-off tips of the glass tubes)were analyzed for lead and cadmium, as well asmercury. The lead concentrations ranged from 160 to9,900 �g/g. The lead GA air samples ranged from 1.6to 51 �g/m3, and the one PBZ was 14 �g/m3, below theOSHA PEL. Many recommendations were provided toalleviate the mercury health hazard, which would alsohelp to control the potential for lead exposures.


PBZ samples were 15.1 and 28.3 �g/m3 for the 15-minute operation. Although at and near the OSHAaction limit for lead, the exposures were short andboth workers wore respirators and gloves during thejob. The two GA air samples collected above thewave solder machine over the entire work shiftwere 0.06 and 0.07 �g/m3. Recommendationswere made to not allow eating or drinking in thework areas where lead solder was conducted; toeducate employees involved with soldering to washtheir hands prior to eating, drinking, or smoking; andto use sodium phosphate (or something similar) toclean lead from contaminated surfaces.


HETA 97–0103July 1997



Lead concentrations: PBZs and GAs from ND to0.91 �g/m3

Purpose: To evaluate exposure to lead while makingradiation-shielding molds in this oncology/radiationlaboratory

Keywords: SIC 8069 (cancer hospitals), lead, metalmolding, oncology, radiation, laboratories

Abstract: NIOSH investigators conducted an HHEat a hospital radiation laboratory to evaluate workerexposures to lead and other metals while makingradiation-shielding molds. Investigators conductedair sampling, including PBZ samples from the labtechnicians, and full-shift GA air samples withinthe lab. Results for lead analysis ranged from NDto 0.91 �g/m3 of air as a TWA for eight samplescollected. All were well below established occupa-tional exposure criteria. The following recommenda-

7


HETA 93–0818–2646July 1997

Toxicity determination: PositiveRequester: Joint Employee and Management

Lead concentrations: PBZs from 0.1 to 120 �g/m3;BLLs up to 17.5 �g/dl; average surface leadmeasured on floors in homes undergoing renovationwas 2,045 �g/ft2, in vehicles of full-time workers was310 �g/ft2, and in vehicles of volunteers was 140 �g/ft2

Purpose: To evaluate worker lead exposures duringrenovation of homes with LBP

Keywords: SIC 1521 (general contractors), singlefamily houses, remodeling, lead exposure, LBP, homerenovation, construction, chemical test kits, take-hometoxin

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE for anonprofit organization that provides home repair andweatherization services to low-income homeowners,primarily in pre-1960 homes, to evaluate worker leadexposures during renovation of homes containingLBP. Lead exposures of full-time professional homerenovators and of part-time volunteers who worked afew days per year in an annual Paint-a-Thon eventwere assessed in 18 homes. Potentially hazardouslead exposures were measured during exterior dryscraping and wet scraping of LBP, with maximumexposures of 120 and 63 �g/m3, respectively. Thesetasks were performed only by volunteers duringhome painting. Exposures during all the other tasks,including general repair, weatherization, scraping/painting (mostly applying new paint), windowreplacement, demolition, and plumbing were low(range: 0.1 to 16 �g/m3), as were 13 full-shiftpersonal exposures that included break periods,initial set-up, and clean-up (GM = 3.6 �g/m3,range: 0.2 to 12 �g/m3). BLLs for full-time workersranged up to 17.5 �g/dl, with a GM of 5.2 �g/dl; the

HETA 98–0352March 1999


Requester: GovernmentLead concentrations: ND

Purpose: To provide technical assistance to a publichealth department by performing an exposurecharacterization at the home workshop of an electroniccomponents repairman

Keywords: SIC 7629 (electrical and electronic repairshops), lead poisoning prevention program, leadexposure, BLLs, lead ingestion, lead inhalation, leadsolder, chewing

Abstract: NIOSH was asked to provide technicalassistance to a public health department by perform-ing an exposure characterization at the homeworkshop of an electronic components repairman.The repairman and his family had elevated BLLs thatremained high over a period of 11 months of repeatedtesting, despite chelation therapy administered twiceto the children and improved work practices of thefather. NIOSH investigators collected PBZ and GAair samples for lead during the repairman’s workprocess and in the repairman’s house while floorswere vacuumed with a commercial sweeper (noHEPA filter); none of the samples had detectable leadconcentrations. Also, surface contamination was notfound in either the work or home areas. However,during discussions with a member of the extendedfamily, it was discovered that the family had a long-standing history of chewing pieces of solder from thesupply coil. The family discontinued this practice6 months prior to the HHE, once they had learned thehazards of lead exposure, but their previous leadingestion was probably enough to cause thecontinued high BLLs. Recommendations were madefor lead-free solder and improved work and hygienepractices to ensure no further lead exposures.


Lead Abatement andLead-Based Paint

8


study, janitorial tasks, such as sweeping, vacuuming,and emptying trash receptacles, did not result in aTWA airborne lead exposure in excess of the OSHAPEL. Some custodial activities (power sanding onlead-containing paint or the uncontrolled heating oflead with a propane torch during a plumbing repairtask) resulted in higher (although still below theOSHA PEL), short-term lead exposures. The riskfrom these activities, fortunately, can be identifiedand quantified by evaluating work practices and, asneeded, collecting air and bulk samples for lead. Theblood lead results indicate that these workers werenot overexposed to lead at work.


HETA 95–0054February 1995

Toxicity determination: PositiveRequester: Management

Lead concentrations: paint chip concentrationsfrom 2 to 39 mg/g

Purpose: To evaluate potential hazards to volunteerswho were going to be moving objects from andcleaning storage areas prior to renovation activities in alocal theater

Keywords: SIC 7832 (motion picture theaters), lead,asbestos, renovation, volunteers

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE at a theaterwhere volunteers were going to be moving objectsfrom and cleaning storage areas prior to renovationactivities. Samples of peeling paint were collectedand analyzed for lead content, which ranged from2 to 39 mg/g. Therefore, NIOSH recommended thatthe volunteers avoid dry sweeping areas as aprecaution against potentially excessive short-termlead exposures. If sweeping was necessary, NIOSHrecommended half-face respirators with HEPA filtersor using vacuums equipped with a HEPA filter. Also,proper hygiene and work practices were recommended.


GM for volunteers was 3.2 �g/dl. All 49 painted worksurfaces sampled in 15 homes had detectableamounts of lead (GM = 1.05, range: 0.0022 to 58%lead). Sixty-five percent (32) of the work surfaceshad an average lead concentration >0.5%, theFederal definition of LBP. Sampling results indicatedthat chemical spot test kits, when used by industrialhygienists, are highly sensitive (100% positive) inscreening for high levels (>9%) of lead in paintedwork surfaces, and somewhat less so (88% positive)for lower lead levels (>0.5%). Mean paint leadconcentrations were correlated with mean workerexposures during renovation, both by house(r = 0.875) and by work surface (r = 0.898). Averagesurface lead loadings measured on floors in homesundergoing renovation (2,045 �g/ft2) and in vehiclesof full-time workers (310 �g/ft2) and volunteers(140 �g/ft2) were relatively high. Further study isneeded to assess the prevalence and degree ofchildhood lead exposure caused by renovation andremodeling work in homes with LBP.


HETA 94–0374–2534October 1995

Toxicity determination: NegativeRequester: Management

Lead concentrations: PBZs from ND to 36 �g/m3,BLLs from 2.8 to 10 �g/dl

Purpose: To investigate potential lead exposureduring custodial operations at a university

Keywords: SIC 8221 (colleges, universities, andprofessional schools), lead, BLL, custodial, janitorial

Abstract: A large State university was selected byNIOSH for the evaluation of potential lead exposureduring custodial operations, including painting,carpentry, housekeeping, plumbing, and generalmaintenance. PBZ air samples for lead werecollected on 16 university custodial workers. Inaddition, all participants completed an occupationalhealth questionnaire, and 13 of the 16 workers had aone-time BLL test. Based on the results from this

9


tal lead dust loadings on various surfaces exceededthe HUD guidelines, all BLL were low. There wereno relationships between BLL and abatement statusof assigned work area, BLL and hand lead, or surfacelead and hand lead.


HETA 96–0209–2598September 1996


Requester: Government

Lead concentrations: NA

Purpose: To investigate potential exposure to LBP ata hospital

Keywords: SIC 8062 (general medical and surgicalhospitals), lead, lead-based paint, x-ray fluorescence

Abstract: NIOSH investigators conducted an HHEat a hospital to inspect for LBP. NIOSH assessed thelead content on various interior componentsdesignated for removal or remodeling in anupcoming building renovation and asbestosabatement project. Additionally, NIOSH maderecommendations concerning safe work practices thatcontractors should follow when removing lead-containing components and the appropriate wastedisposal category for lead-containing waste.During a site visit to the hospital, 87 measure-ments were conducted with a direct reading XRFdetector, and 32 paint chip samples were collectedfrom various interior surfaces. Lead was detected bythe XRF detector on 28 of the 87 surfaces sampled,13 of which exceeded the HUD definition of LBP.None of the components (walls, window sills, doors)with measurable lead had deteriorating paint. Leadwas detected in 23 of the 32 paint chip samples. Fiveof the samples exceeded the HUD criteria for LBP, asdetermined by the paint chip method. For twosamples, the paint chip analysis resulted in reclassify-ing the component from negative (as determined byXRF) to positive, based on HUD criteria. Interiorpaint was in good condition; no deteriorating LBP was

HETA 96–0140–2606October 1996


Requester: Union

Lead concentrations: BLLs from 0.6 to 5.6 �g/dl,surface concentrations from ND to 128,000 �g /ft2

Purpose: To evaluate the presence of LBP in a schoolbuilding

Keywords: SIC 8221 (colleges, universities, andprofessional schools), lead, BLL, custodial, janitorial

Abstract: NIOSH investigators conducted an HHEto investigate a possible LBP hazard at a schoolbuilding. Deteriorating LBP and lead-containing dustwere found throughout the building. Because of thesefindings, the school district initiated a lead abatementproject. At the time of the NIOSH evaluation,approximately one-third of the school had beenabated, and some employees were working in abatedareas. Both environmental sampling and medicalmonitoring for lead exposure were conducted. Theenvironmental measurements consisted of surfacewipe samples from floors, desks, and windowsills.The medical component of the investigationconsisted of a questionnaire and a blood lead testoffered to all employees in the building. Twenty-three window sills in non-abated areas and 16window sills in abated areas were sampled. Dustlead loadings (the amount of lead dust per unitsurface area) exceeded HUD guidelines (500 �g /ft2)on 10 of the 39 (26%) window sills sampled. Onlyone window sill sample from an abated area failedthe HUD criterium. Twenty-six floors in non-abatedareas and 14 floors in abated areas were sampled.The HUD guideline for lead on floors (100 �g /ft2)was exceeded in 17 (65%) of the non-abated areasand 3 (21%) of the abated areas. Dust lead loadingon desktops (39 sampled) ranged up to 230 �g/ft2

(no criteria exist for lead on desktops). Wipesamples from employees’ hands contained from2 to 160 �g lead (GM = 9 �g). Correlationsbetween surface and hand contamination were notfound. All BLLs were low, ranging from 0.6 to 5.6 �g/dl.The BM was 2.2 �g/dl, similar to that of the generalU.S. population. Although in some cases, environmen-

10


removed with Paint Shaver®, the exposure wasextremely low, <2 �g/m3. NIOSH concluded that allof the demonstrated methods for removal of LBPwere potentially hazardous. Further evaluation of theinnovative power tool methods were recommended,especially when it would be possible to comparethem to conventional methods.


HETA 98–0331December 1998


Requester: Employee

Lead concentrations: paint chip concentrationsfrom 56 to 480,000 �g/g

Purpose: To evaluate the potential for asbestos andlead exposure in a school during renovation

Keywords: SIC 8211 (elementary and secondaryschools), LBP, asbestos, renovation, school

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to evaluatethe potential for asbestos and lead exposure in aschool where renovation was occurring. Nine paintchip samples were collected from areas whererenovation work had not yet been completed andwere analyzed for lead content. The results rangedfrom 56 to 480,000 �g/g. Every sample except the56 �g/g sample from the auditorium would beconsidered LBP, based on the definition from Title Xof the Housing and Community Development Actof 1992 (Public Law 102–550). For that reason,NIOSH recommended that the school follow theHUD guidelines for removal of LBP.


identified. Although the presence of lead on paintedcomponents in this facility was not considered ahazard to occupants, remodeling and renovationactivities at this facility needed to take into accountthose components identified as containing LBP. Thefollowing recommendations were made to furtherreduce risk of exposure to lead at this facility: (1)LBP precautions should be taken during remodelingactivities involving lead-containing materials and (2)trained and certified lead-abatement contractors andworkers should be used for those tasks. Thecontractors and workers should follow OSHA, HUD,and State guidelines.


HETA 98–0283April 1999

Toxicity determination: PositiveRequester: Government

Lead concentrations: PBZ from <1 to 27,000 �g/m3

Purpose: To evaluate worker lead exposures during apilot project at a historic home

Keywords: SIC 1521 (general contractors—singlefamily houses), lead, lead abatement, renovation, homepainting

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to evaluateworker lead exposures during a pilot project at ahistoric home. NIOSH investigators collected task-based PBZs while several methods for residentialsurface preparation were demonstrated on paintedsurfaces. The lead exposures ranged from <1 to27,000 �g/m3 for the various tasks. The leadexposures for the Paint Shaver® and Paint Blitzer®tools (1,400 and 1,600 �g/m3, respectively) weresignificantly lower than those for the conventionalorbital sander (27,000 �g/m3). When the conventionalpower sander was used after the paint had been

11


HETA 93–0502–2503April 1995

Toxicity determination: PositiveRequester: UnionLead concentrations: PBZs from 0.09 to 1,800 �g/m3,BLLs from 2.2 to 16.5 �g/dl, face and hand surfaceconcentrations from 1 to 5,600 �g/wipe, clothing surfaceconcentrations from 1 to 7,700 �g/gauze padPurpose: To evaluate the workers’ potential to carryhome lead-containing dust produced during removal ofLBPKeywords: SIC 1622 (bridge, tunnel, and elevatedhighway construction), lead, take-home exposures,construction, bridge workers, lead-paint abatement,surface lead contamination

Abstract: NIOSH investigators conducted an HHEto evaluate occupational health hazards during bridgerenovation, particularly the workers’ potential to carryhome lead-containing dust produced during removal ofLBP. Workers performed abrasive blasting and paintinginside a total enclosure containment structure and alsoabatement-related activities outside the containmentstructure. The State Department of Transportationincluded performance specifications in the contractrequiring medical monitoring, personal air sampling,PPE, hygiene facilities, and worker training. The HHE,conducted several months after work began, includedmonitoring of BLLs, and measurement of PBZ airbornelead exposures, as well as assessment of surface leadlevels on skin and clothing and in automobiles. At thetime of the study, employees’ BLLs ranged from 2.2 to16.5 �g/dl. The mean BLL was 7.2 �g/dl. Thirty-sixpercent of the workers had BLLs over 10 �g/dl.The 13 employees who worked in or near thecontainment structure had significantly higher BLLsthan the 9 other workers in less exposed jobs (8.9versus 4.7 �g/dl, respectively; p = 0.04). NIOSHresearchers were not able to collect blood from workersin one potentially highly exposed job category, therecycling machine operators. The arithmetic means ofPBZ air lead concentrations for workers in the blaster/painter, apprentice, and recycling equipment operator jobcategories were higher than the OSHA 10-hour

TWA PEL of 40 �g/m3 (250 �g/m3, 6.25 timesPEL; 110 �g/m3, 2.8 times PEL; and 140 �g/m3,3.5 times PEL, respectively). PBZ exposures forblaster/painters and apprentices were highly variable;for example, among the 24 samples taken from blaster/painters, 16 had air lead concentrations below the PEL,but 3 exceeded 1,000 �g/m3. Categories of workershaving high levels of lead on their hands included theapprentices, blasters, and recycling equipment operators(430, 1,000, and 1,700 �g/sampling wipe, respectively,at the end-of-shift and before washing). Workers inthese same categories had high levels of lead on theirclothing (460, 360, and 3,100 �g/sampling pad,respectively). Inspectors, security personnel, andindustrial hygienists/safety personnel had lower levelsof lead on both their hands (64, 10, and 34 �g/wipe,respectively) and their clothing (10, 1.6, and 14 �g/pad,respectively). While skin absorption of lead in paint isnot thought to be significant, the presence of‘ lead onskin and clothing may result in accidental ingestion ofthe lead by the worker and may be an importantpathway for carrying the lead dust into the home. Leadwas present in each of the 27 automobiles sampled. Thehighest lead loadings were found on the driver’s floor(GM = 1,900 �g/m2), which suggests that lead is beingcarried into cars on work shoes. Lead-contaminatedskin or clothing is also a source of car contamination, asevidenced by the presence of lead on armrests(GM = 1,100 �g/m2 ) and steering wheels(GM = 240 �g/m2) . The mean dust loading on thefloor and seat area was highest in cars of the workers inlow exposure categories, such as industrial hygiene/safety and security personnel (1,000 �g/m2). Abrasiveblasters, who typically had the highest exposures toairborne lead, had the lowest mean dust loading in theircars (370 �g/m2) . These findings may be explained bythe observation that blasters regularly changed out ofwork clothing and showered before entering their cars,whereas other personnel, thought to be only minimallyexposed to lead, did not regularly follow thesepractices. To prevent lead from being carried into carsand homes, personal hygiene practices such as leavingwork clothes and shoes at the job site, showering, andchanging into clean clothes before leaving the work sitewere recommended for ALL personnel involved in orworking near lead abatement activities.


Abrasive Blasting

12


samples collected during this HHE indicated thatconventional air sampling methods overestimatedconcentrations of lead and other inhalable airbornecontaminants present in abrasive blasting environ-ments. Use of the metal guard and locating samplingcassettes behind the head (or body) were not reliablemethods for preventing grit from entering cassettes.Grit did not penetrate most of the cyclones in the testtank; however, cyclones would not be useful underactual blasting conditions because they would beinverted as the blasters climbed through confinedspaces. Neither grit guards nor placement of severalsamples appeared to effectively control entrance ofabrasive blasting grit.


HETA 95–0225–2596September 1996

Toxicity determination: Negative for lead



Purpose: To provide technical assistance to a Statehealth department by conducting medical screening ofworkers involved in or around abrasive blastingactivities

Keywords: SIC 1721 (painting and paper hanging),SIC 1791 (structural steel erection), silica, crystallinesilica, pneumoconiosis, silicosis, respirable quartz,sandblasting, construction, lead, abrasive blasting,respirator, steel-plate fabrication, painting contractor

Abstract: NIOSH provided technical assistance to aState health department by conducting medicalscreening of workers involved in or around abrasiveblasting activities. This request was a follow-up to aninvestigation of a worksite where an employee whoworked as an abrasive blaster had died withaccelerated silicosis. Given the fact that abrasiveblasting may also result in exposure to lead, the healthdepartment requested that NIOSH expand the scopeof the technical assistance to include blood-leadscreening. NIOSH investigators conducted medical

HETA 94–0122–2578May 1996

Toxicity determination: Undetermined


Lead concentrations: PBZs from ND to 7.1 mg/m3

(Note: potential overestimation — see abstract)

Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of personal airmonitoring conducted during abrasive blasting inconfined spaces at a shipyard

Keywords: SIC 3731 (ship building and repairing),abrasive blasting, air sampling, elemental metals, lead

Abstract: NIOSH performed an HHE to evaluatethe accuracy of personal air monitoring conductedduring abrasive blasting in confined spaces at ashipyard. The shipyard industrial hygiene staffprovided information indicating that abrasive gritparticles enter environmental air sampling cassettes,resulting in an overestimation of worker exposure toinhalable airborne metals. Therefore, NIOSHcollected 15 PBZ air samples during manual abrasiveblasting in confined spaces, and a second sample,concurrently with each PBZ, from behind eachblaster’s head to determine if sample placement hadan effect on reducing the amount of grit entering thecassette. In addition to analysis for lead and selectedmetals, a visual assessment of the grit in the cassetteswas made. Then, on a second site visit, ten sets ofside-by-side PBZ air samples were collected duringabrasive blasting inside a steel tank. Each setconsisted of a sample using a standard closed-facecassette; a closed-face cassette fitted with a metalguard to shield the inlet from high-velocity grit (“gritguard”); and a sample using a 10 mm nylon cycloneat a flow rate of 300 cc/minute. Prior to sampleanalysis, the steel grit was separated from the filtersand dust in the closed-face cassettes; the fractionswere analyzed separately. Although only low levelsof lead and other contaminants were present in thebase-metal, surface coating, and steel grit, therelatively large mass of grit that entered the airsampling cassettes resulted in an overestimation ofthe airborne lead concentration. Evaluation of air

13


screening, which consisted of a work history andmedical questionnaire, chest x-ray, and blood leadtest. A total of 170 participants from two differentsites were screened, including workers whoseprimary occupations were abrasive blasters, painters,tapers (drywall finishers), general laborers, andforemen. Ninety-six of the participants (56%)participated in the blood-lead screening, and noneof them had BLLs that exceeded the limits oraction levels specified by OSHA. The median BLLwas 5 (�g/dl) with a range of 2 to 30 �g/dl.


HETA 97–0260–2716November 1998

Toxicity determination: Undetermined

Requester: Union

Lead concentrations: Abrasive blasting PBZsoutside the hood from 1 to 10 �g/m3 for the smallparticle component and from 8 to 260 �g/m3 for the largeparticle component, abrasive blasting PBZs inside thehood of <0.8 �g/m3, welding PBZs from 3 to 10 �g/m3

Purpose: To evaluate exposures at a shipyard thatmight be related to the reported symptoms of breathingproblems and nose bleeds

Keywords: SIC 3731 (ship building and repairing),abrasive blasting, air sampling, lead, arsenic, weldingfume, ventilation

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE at a shipyardto evaluate exposures that might be related to thereported symptoms of breathing problems and nosebleeds. Among other samples, lead was sampled inthe shot house during abrasive blasting. Elevenabrasive blasters wore three samplers each—oneinside the abrasive blasting hood, one outside thehood, and one “passive” sampler to determine theextent of rebound, or inertia-driven, shot that enteredthe sampling cassette. The lead concentrationsoutside the hood ranged from 1 to 10 �g/m3 for thesmall particle component and 8 to 260 �g/m3 for thelarge particle component. The concentrations inside

the hood were all <0.8 �g/m3. During weldingoperations, lead concentrations ranged from 3 to 10 �g/m3.The “passive” samples contained highly variable butsignificant amounts of inertia-driven grit, rangingfrom 1.58 to 366.5 mg. Data indicated that the PPEused during abrasive blasting was sufficientlyprotecting the workers but that a higher degree ofrespiratory protection was necessary to reduce allwelding fume exposures. The source of lead detectedin the shot house appeared to be the small amountspresent in the steel grit. It was hypothesized thatduring blasting, the finer lead dust particles werecontinuously generated from the fracturing of gritand then recirculated through the system. Recom-mendations were made to reduce welding exposuresand improve the safety and health program.


HETA 94–0093June 1996

Toxicity determination: NegativeRequester: UnionLead concentrations: BLLs from 1.9 to 12.6 �g/dlPurpose: To determine the prevalence of chewingplastic electrical wire insulation and of overt orsubclinical lead poisoning among electriciansKeywords: SIC 1731 (electrical contractors), lead,blood lead, electrician

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to determinethe prevalence of chewing plastic electrical wireinsultation and of overt or subclinical lead poisoningamong electricians. A total of 75 electricianscompleted a consent form and questionnaire andprovided a blood sample. None of them had elevatedBLL or ZPP levels, but a union newsletter 3 monthsprior to the HHE had warned about the hazards ofchewing the wire insulation. The mean BLL was4.8+2.6 �g/dl, with a range of 1.9 to 12.6 �g/dl. Someof the reported symptoms were consistent with lead

Electric Services

14


Recommendations were made to improvehousekeeping procedures to reduce the amount of flyash on working surfaces and to improve workpractices.


HETA 95–0393–2633April 1997

Toxicity Determination: Negative for lead, positivefor other exposures

Requester: Union

Lead concentrations: PBZs from <0.07 to3.3 �g/m³

Purpose: To evaluate exposures to arsenic, otherheavy metals, and silica during rebuilding of coal-firedboilers

Keywords: SIC 4911 (electric services), electricitygeneration, coal-fired power plant, coal-fired powerstation, fly ash, arsenic, heavy metals, crystalline silica,lead, beryllium, nickel, boilermakers, welding, air arcgouging

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE at a powerplant because of concerns about worker exposures toarsenic, other heavy metals, and silica duringrebuilding of coal-fired boilers. Full-shift PBZ airsamples were collected from 29 workers (25 boiler-makers and 4 laborers)—48 PBZ air samples forheavy metals, 9 PBZ air samples for respirable dustand silica, 8 hand wipe samples, and 12 bulk fly ashsamples. During the sampling period, boilermakersremoved secondary inlet and secondary outlet boilerelements and removed and replaced portions of thesteel boiler casing, exposing them to fly ash andfumes from air arc gouging, welding, and torchcutting. Laborers maintained walkways and preparedwork areas by dry sweeping and vacuuming, primarilyexposing them to fly ash. Employees worked six,10-hour workdays (equal to a 60-hour workweek).Because of this increase in hours worked per week,the PBZ air sample results are compared to adjustedoccupational exposure limits calculated by the Brief

exposure but could also be caused by other exposuresor conditions. The reported symptoms of joint pain,muscle ache, muscle weakness, and nervousnesswere all related to the reported history of chewingwire clippings or connecting nuts with statisticalsignificance, but a cause-effect relationship was notpossible to determine. NIOSH recommended that theunion join them in petitioning electrical wire manufac-turers to print a warning on their products.


HETA 94–0273–2556January 1996

Toxicity Determination: Positive

Requester: Union

Lead concentrations: PBZs from ND to 182 �g/m3

Purpose: To evaluate potential exposures to arsenicand other heavy metals encountered during therebuilding of coal-fired boilers

Keywords: SIC 4911 (electric services), electricitygeneration, coal-fired power plant, coal-fired powerstation, fly ash, arsenic, heavy metals, crystalline silica,lead, beryllium

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to evaluatepotential exposures to arsenic and other heavy metalsencountered by workers during the rebuilding ofcoal-fired boilers. The HHE focused on 33 plumbersand steamfitters. Forty-five PBZ samples for metals,12 PBZ samples for respirable dust and silica, 8 bulkfly ash samples, and 11 hand wipe samples werecollected during the survey. Employees removedretractable soot blowers and boiler drains located onthe exterior of the boiler during the air monitoring.Employees worked six 10-hour workdays, whichequated to a 60-hour workweek, so the evaluationcriteria was adjusted. Lead was detected on 12 of the43 samples; concentrations ranged from 1.7 to182 �g/m3, with one sample above the adjusted OSHAPEL of 28 �g/m3. Hand wipe samples collected toevaluate the potential for contaminant hand-to-mouthcontact showed that employees could be exposed toarsenic and other metals through ingestion.

15


HETA 94–0109–2494March 1995



Lead concentrations: PBZs from 7.4 to 280 �g/m3

BLLs from 13 to 54 �g/dl

Purpose: To assess occupational exposures to heavymetals and sulfur dioxide at a large tin smelter locatednear Oruro, Bolivia

Keywords: SIC 3339 (primary smelting and refiningof nonferrous metals, except copper and aluminum),arsenic, lead, tin, antimony, cadmium, smelting, sulfurdioxide, international health, take-home toxins

Abstract: At the request of the Pan AmericanHealth Organization, and in collaboration with theNational Center for Environmental Health, NIOSHconducted an assessment of occupational exposuresto heavy metals and sulfur dioxide at a large tinsmelter located near Oruro, Bolivia. Workers werepre-selected for inclusion in the study based onseveral criteria, including presumed high exposureto lead, arsenic, and other metals. During thesurvey, 15 workers, representing 12 job titles, weresampled to assess their occupational exposures toantimony, arsenic, bismuth, cadmium, lead, iron, tin,zinc, and sulfur dioxide. Additionally, BLL and urinearsenic were measured in 15 workers—not necessarilythe same workers who participated in air sampling.All of the workers had been provided half-mask air-purifying respirators, but they were not usedconsistently. The GM for lead exposures was 42 �g/m3

(range: 7.4 to 280 �g/m3). Dust sampling resultsindicated that surfaces throughout the facility,including worker locker rooms, were highlycontaminated with heavy metals. Fifteen workers,with a median of 17 years of employment,participated in biological monitoring. The medianBLL was 19 �g/dl (range: 13 to 54 �g/dl). Five ofthe 15 workers had BLLs greater than the ACGIH

and Scala model. Lead concentrations ranged fromless than 0.07 to 3.3 �g/m³. The highest concentrationwas found while workers torch cut on the boilercasing. Samples were below the adjusted OSHA PELand ACGIH TLV of 28 �g/m3. Recommendationswere made to reduce worker exposures to contami-nants through the use of engineering controls andimprovements in housekeeping procedures.


HETA 98–0124–2743July 1999



Lead concentrations: PBZ of 2300 �g/m3, GAof ND

Purpose: To evaluate exposures from fly ashcontaminants from burning used motor oil in twodifferent boilers at a school

Keywords: SIC 8211 (boarding schools), boilers,maintenance, lead, arsenic, used motor oil, confinedspace

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE to evaluateexposures from fly ash contaminants from burningused motor oil in two different boilers at a school.Wipe sampling revealed no evidence of leadcontamination in the plumbing or machine shopareas. Air sampling results indicated overexpo-sures to lead and arsenic when cleaning the insideof the boilers but that engineering controlseffectively limited exposures when cleaning theboiler tubes. The boilers fit the criteria of a ClassB confined space, which warranted that certainprecautions be taken. These requirements weredescribed along with other recommendations forreducing exposures.


Others

16


warehouse was to be permanently vacated,NIOSH provided recommendations for safe workpractices during the moving and cleaning so as toavoid potentially excessive short-term lead exposures.


HETA 97–0291–2681April 1998



Lead concentrations: PBZs and GAs below MQC,soil concentrations from 15 to 640 �g/g

Purpose: To evaluate exposures to vehicle exhaustand noise at a Port of Entry

Keywords: SIC 9721 (international affairs), bordercrossing station, San Ysidro, immigration andnaturalization service, carbon monoxide, lead,noise, VOCs

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE at a Port ofEntry between Mexico and the United States toevaluate exposures to vehicle exhaust and noise.PBZ samples were collected on four inspectorsand analyzed for lead, but only trace amounts weredetected (less than the MQC of 0.06 �g/m3).Three composite soil samples were also collected,and the results ranged from 15 to 640 �g/g, wellbelow the EPA concern level of 2,000 �g/g for soilwhere there is not high potential for use by children.Recommendations were provided to address the otherexposure problems.


BEI of 20 �g/dl; 4 exceeded the U.S. Public HealthService goal of 25 �g/dl; 2 exceeded a World HealthOrganization study group recommended limit of 40�g/dl; and 1 exceeded the OSHA medical removallevel of 50 �g/dl. The results of this study indicatedthat a significant health hazard existed for someemployees. Recommendations for better control ofthe health hazards, including further study ofexposures, implementation of engineering controls,improved hygiene facilities, implementation of amedical surveillance program, and improvements for therespiratory protection program, were provided.


HETA 95–0355October 1995


Requester: Employee


Purpose: To evaluate exposures to flaking lead paintin a weatherization supply warehouse

Keywords: SIC 4225 (warehousing—general), indoorair quality, IAQ, IEQ, lead

Abstract: NIOSH conducted an HHE at aweatherization supply warehouse where there wasconcern about flaking lead paint, rat and pigeonwaste, and safety hazards. NIOSH investigatorsinspected the warehouse and reviewed an indepen-dent consultant’s report, which documented airbornelead exposures below the relevant evaluation criteriaand BLLs within normal ranges. Since the

17


1. Saryan LA, Zenz C [1994]. Lead and itscompounds. In: Occupational medicine. 3rd ed.Chicago, IL: Mosby-Year Book, Inc.

2. Landrigan PJ, Froines JR, Mahaffeyet KR[1985]. Body lead burden: summary ofepidemiological data on its relation toenvironmental sources and toxic effects.In: Dietary and environmental lead: humanhealth effects. Amsterdam: Elsevier SciencePublishers.

3. Proctor NH, Hughes JP, Fischman ML [1991].Lead. In: Chemical hazards of the workplace.3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. LippincottCompany, Philadelphia, pp 353–357.

4. NIOSH [1978]. Occupational exposure toinorganic lead. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Departmentof Health, Education, and Welfare, PublicHealth Service Center for Disease Control andPrevention, National Institute for OccupationalSafety and Health, DHEW (NIOSH)Publication No. 78-158.

5. Lauwerys RR, Hoet P [1993]. Industrialchemical exposure: guidelines for biologicalmonitoring. 2nd ed. Ann Arbor, MI: LewisPublishers, p. 62.

6. Brody DL, Pirkly JL, Kramer RA, Flegal KM,Matte TD, Gunter, FW, Paschal DC [1994].Blood lead levels in the U.S. Population: Phase 1of the Third National Health and NutritionEvaluation Survey (NHANES III, 1988 to 1991).JAMA 272(4):277–283.

7. CFR. Code of Federal Regulations. OSHA leadstandard for general industry. 29 CFR,Part 1910.1025. Washington, DC: U.S.Government Printing Office, Office of theFederal Register.

8. CFR. Code of Federal Regulations. OSHAconstruction industry lead standard. 29 CFR,Part 29 CFR 1926.62. Washington, DC: U.S.Government Printing Office, Office of theFederal Register.

9. 62 Fed. Reg. 206 [1997]. National Institute forOccupational Safety and Health; occupationalexposure to inorganic lead: request for commentsand information.

10. Sussell A [1998]. Protecting workers exposed tolead-based paint hazards: a report to congress.Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, Centers for Disease Controland Prevention, National Institute for Occupa-tional Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH)Publication No. 98–112. January 1998–revisedwith minor technical changes.

11. HHS [2000]. Healthy people 2010—conferenceedition; National health promotion and diseaseobjectives. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofHealth and Human Services. Available on theinternet at: www.health.gov/healthypeople/Document/default.htm

12. 64 Fed. Reg. 178 [1999]. Department ofHousing and Urban Development: requirementsfor notification, evaluation, and reduction oflead-based paint hazards in federally ownedresidential property and housing receivingfederal assistance. Washington, DC: U.S.Government Printing Office, Office of theFederal Register. September 15, 1999. (To becodified at 24 CFR, Part 35, et al.)

13. 63 Federal Register 106 [1998]. EnvironmentalProtection Agency: lead; identification ofdangerous levels of lead. Washington, DC: U.S.Government Printing Office, Office of theFederal Register. Proposed rule, June 3, 1998.(To be codified at 40 CFR, Part 745.)

References

18

health hazard evaluations: issues related to occupational ... · issues related to occupational...

Documents