Document 065K9mJjEJXgga1oa96nKRNRV

Federal Register / Vol- 51, No. 119 / Friday, |une 20, 1986 / Rules and Regulations 22693 practice controls over.respirators (see together [Ex. 238A, 240A) and because leave only a nominal possibility that NIOSH', Tr. 6/21; American Industrial they are the only methods that eliminate respirators will be properly worn at all Hygiene'Section, Ex. 2-126. Docket H- or reduce the. hazard at its source, they times |Ex. 328. pp. 111-14-15: see also 160; American Conference of have been given equal status in the NIOSH, Ex. 117A, pp. 24-25; Held, Ex. Government Industrial Hygienists. Ex. compliance priorities of OSHA health 171, p. 7; Com, Ex. 178A. p. 5; Dukes- 2-32, Docket H-160). standards. For asbestos in particular, Bobos and Smith. Ex. 315). Because of Reliance on the use of respirators there exist time-tested inexpensive work the problems and limitations listed when engineering and work practice practices which are widely regarded as above, experts testify that workers controls can feasibly achieve the PEL necessary and effective in many cases. rarely keep on a respirator for an entire was also opposed by many unions, such These include the wetting down with eight-hour shift {Rosenthal, Tr. 7/11, p. as the United Auto Workers |Ex. 172A], surfactants of friable asbestos before 6U|. However, even short periods where International Brotherhood of Teamsters handling, prohibiting blowing of respirators are not properly used |Ex. 223), International Brotherhood of asbestos dust with air hoses, prohibiting dramatically affect the degree of Electrical Workers [Ex. 313). the dry sweeping of asbestos dust, banning protection to a worker relying on International Union of Electronic. certain high speed abrasive cutting tools respiratory devices. Electrical. Technical, Salaried and and others. Therefore, for asbestos, OSHA recognizes that there are Machine Workers [Ex. 90-135] and the proper work practices are essential in certain activities, often involving certain Amalgamated Clothing and Textile the control of asbestos dust and are maintenance and repair operations, as Workers (Ex. 260A). properly given priority as a control well as in emergency situations, in These general statements of policy technique. which the reliance on engineering and preference were augmented by evidence In addition, this rulemaking record work practice controls to control and testimony concerning the reasons again documents OSHA's past findings exposures to the permissible exposure for preferring engineering and work that respirators are the least reliable limit may not always be feasible. Where practice controls. It is generally means of control because of difficulties the employer can show that engineering acknowledged that protection of the inherent in their design and use (see e.g. and work practice controls for such employee is most effectively attained by preamble to OSHA's Carcinogen Policy. operations are not feasible, respirators elimination or minimization of the 45 FR 5003 at 5224 et seq.. the preamble may be used as a primary means of hazard at its source, which work to the inorganic arsonic standard. 43 FR control. For small scale, short practices and engineering controls are 19584 at 19617 cl seq.. and the preamble duration maintenance and repair both designed to do. Industrial hygiene to the acrylonitrile standard. 43 FR activities, the infeasibility of most types doctrine also teaches that control 45800, etc.). Because of these inherent of engineering controls will generally be ' methods which depend upon the difficulties, the effectiveness of assumed. This is so, in particular, when vagaries of human behavior are respiratory protection varies from the maintenance operations involve inherently less reliable than.well-.. worker to worker and is'subject to having personnel located at.places not maintained mechanical methods. The human error of many forms [AFL-CIO, normally occupied'by workers or when validity of these generalizations has Ex. 335, p. 12; Held,, Tr. 7/2, pp. 10-11; personnel must perform duties to fix been borne out by agency experience Corn, Tr. 7/3, pp. 7-8; ORC, Tr. 6/22. p. broken machineiy. In these situations, obtained throughout OSHA's existence 61). OSHA does not require that the and has been reiterated by a number of One difficulty facing respirator users employer design and install special professional industrial hygienists for the is getting an adequate fit: For negative ventilation systems. However,'where asbestos rulemaking record (Exs. 171, pressure respirators facepiece to face asbestos insulation is being removed 176A, 253). seal is the most critical barrier against from components of machinery, OSHA Engineering controls in conjunction contamination. Simply, the effectiveness would expect work practices.to be used. with appropriate work prabtices are of any filter is nullified by a bad fit. In such situations, however, the usually the best method for effective . Even if an employer offers sophisticated employer must institute whatever and reliable control of employee quantitative Fit testing, that test . engineering and work practice controls exposures, to.asbestos. [Exs. 123A, 171, indicates the fit of a respirator under can feasibly be used. 176A). Engineering controls act on the laboratory, not working conditions. For Commenters who endorsed OSHA's source of the emission and eliminate or example, changes in strap tension proposal to permit employers to reduce reduce employee exposure without . significantly may affect fit. Tightness exposure below 2f/cc to the new PEL reliance on the employee to take self- may well be endurable in a testing using any feasible combination of protective action. These controls . . situation, but unacceptable to the engineering controls, work practices or encompass product substitution, process employec at work who may then loosen respiratory protection [Exs. 90-166,90- .or equipment redesign, process or the straps. Poor maintenance,.defects, or 168, 90-170, 90-182,90-233. 263) equipment enclosure,, exhaust or dilution normal deterioration will similarly affect emphasized that flexibility will result in ventilation, and employee isolation. fit. Fit problems are intrinsic for many better protection. For example, Texaco Once implemented, engineering controls workers, even under laboratory stated: protect the employee permanently, subject only, in some cases, to periodic ' preventive maintenance. Work practices condilions'because of unusual facial structures, glasses, wrinkles, scars, bumps, facial hair and dentures (Held, it has b.ehn our experience that control methods which are more cost-effective, but equally safeguarding, will be provided when also uct on the source of the emission, Tr. 7/2, pp. _14r-15, Ex. 171). . the employer has the flexibility to select the but rely upon employer, and employee . Even if Fit is not-a problem, . . means of controlling exposure.Therefore, we behavior, which in turn rely upon supervision, motivation, and education to make them effective:. For this reason, work practices may.nbt be as desirable conscientious wearing of a respirator is hindered by many factors. As pointed out by AIA/NA, worker discomfort, skin irritation or heat stress, body. strongly support any feasible combination of engineering controls, work practices, and . protective equipment to reduce exposure ... j Ex. 90-.17Q|. as engineering controls, but because the movements, difficulties in Similarly the Chemical Manufacturers two methods often must be employed communicating and vision limitations. Association commented: GLEASON-000941