Document 1nQpzp5aNK1ojkvQ6mDZv3bZ

FILE NAME: No Safe Threshold (NST) DATE: 1975 Oct 9 DOC#: NST002 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Federal Register - Proposed Rules for Occupational Exposure to Asbestos 47652 PROPOSED RULES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR should be lowered to 500,000 fibers per cubic meter (0.5 fiber per cubic centi Occupational Safety and Health meter) , and, if so, whether such an ex Adm inistration posure limit would provide an adequate [ 29 CFR Part 1910 ] margin of safety to protect employees [Docket No. H-033J against known and suspected workplace hazards of asbestos. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO 2. Whether, and by what date, the ASBESTOS permissible ceiling limit should be re Notice of Proposed Rulemaking duced to 5 million fibers per cubic meter Pursuant to sections 6(b) and 8(c) of (5 fibers per cubic centimeter), and, if the Occupational Safety and Health Act so, whether such an exposure limit would provide an adequate margin of safety to of 1970 (the Act) (84 Stat. 1593, 1599; 29 TT.S.C. 655, 657) and Title 29 Code protect employees against known and of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1911, suspected workplace hazards. 3. Whether the proposed change in it is proposed to revise 29 CFR 1910. 1001, the standard for occupational ex the definitions of "asbestos" and "as posure to asbestos. bestos fiber" would clarify the standard's intended scope, and properly relate to This standard, as revised, would con known or suspected workplace hazards. tinue to apply to all employments cov ered by the Act but would exclude the 4. W hether the proposed sampling pe construction industry. It is OSHA's in riod for the determination of ceiling con centrations would be appropriate and tention to develop and propose a sepa adequate. rate revision to the existing asbestos standard which would be applicable only . 5. Whether the proposed procedures to the construction industry. for initial and subsequent exposure mon , itoring would be appropriate and ade The accompanying document is a pro? quate. posal issued pursuant to sections 6(b) and 8(c) of the Act. The Occupational 6. Whether the proposed retention pe Safety and Health Administration riod for medical and monitoring records would be appropriate and adequate. (OSHA) requests the submission of writ ten comments, data, and arguments from 7. Whether the requirement for spe interested persons on the issues ad cific data on medical and monitoring records would be appropriate and ade dressed or implicit in the proposal. In quate. addition, the proposal states that an 8. Whether the procedure for trans- informal hearing may be requested to fering the medical and monitoring rec provide further opportunity for discus ords of former employers would be ap sion of the issues. After the hearing, if one is held, OSHA will issue a final propriate and adequate. standard based on the full record of the 9. Whether the information gather ing requirements of the proposal would evidence. . create any undue administrative and The proposed standard would, among economic burdens on employers, partic other things, lower the permissible'ex- ularly for those employing small num posure to 500,000 fibers per cubic meter bers of employees, or workforces which (0.5 asbestos fibers per cubic centime are highly transient in nature. ter) for an 8-hour time-weighted aver 10. Whether the revised schedule for age exposure, and likewise reduce the allowable respirator use would be appro permissible ceiling exposure to 5 million priate and adequate for protecting work asbestos fibers per cubic meter (5 as ers against exposure to asbestos. bestos fibers per cubic centimeter) for 11. Whether the provision for job re any period not exceeding 15 minutes; assignment on account of medical un extend the retention period for medical suitability is appropriate, and, if so, and monitoring records to forty years, whether it effectively furthers the pur or for the duration of employment plus poses of the Act twenty years, whichever is longer; pro 12. Whether the appendices are ap vide procedures for the transfer of medi propriate and otherwise in the best in cal and monitoring records of certain terests of worker health and safety. former employers; require specific mini mum data on medical and monitoring 13. To what extent, if any, should records; revise the procedures for initial the proposal be modified to reflect a con and subsequent monitoring; modify the cern for workplaces which are of a non definitions of "asbestos" and "asbestos fixed nature or otherwise engage a highly fiber;" add provisions for employee hy transient workforce. giene, information and training; revise 14. Whether compliance with the pro and update the requirements for res posal as a whole would be technologically pirators, and warning signs and labels; and economically feasible for all affected and establish a time parameter for sam industries, and particularly for employ pling ceiling concentrations. In addition, ers engaging small numbers of employ- the proposal will suggest work practices CCS. to be followed for certain operations and 15. Whether the standard should have processes involving asbestos. . a delayed effective date for any industry The major issues raised in this pro sector and, if so, the extent to which a posal include the following: phased schedule for compliance would be 1. Whether, and by what date, the appropriate. permissible limit for an 8-hour time- 16. What are the environmental and weighted average exposure to .asbestos inflationary impacts of the proposal. I. B ackground A. GENERAL Asbestos is a generic term used to de scribe a number of naturally occurring, fibrous, hydrated mineral silicates that differ in chemical composition These may be divided into two mineral groups: (1) Pyroxenes, which include chrysotile (3MgO-2SiO=-2H.O), the type most widely used in U.S. industry; and (2) am phiboles, including amosite (FeMg) SiO,), Crocidolite (NaFe (Si03): FeSiO- H O ), tremolite (CaJUgrBLOiOHM):.), anthophyllite (MgFe) 7Si.O-(OH) =an dactinolite (CaO-3MgFe)0-4SiO:). Asbestos fibers are generally characterized by high tensile strength, flexibility, heat and chemical resistance, and favorable fric tional properties. Certain grades of asbes tos can be carded, spun, and woven, while others can be laid and pressed to form paper, or used for structural reinforce ment of materials such as cement, plas tic, and asphalt. Chrysotile (white asbestos) is the fibrous form of the mineral serpentine. It is the most common variety of asbestos, widely distributed geographically, with the largest deposits being in Canada, Russia, and Rhodesia. It accounts for over 90 percent of world consumption. Chrysotile can be readily crushed or flberized into fine, white, silky fibers which may be processed into numerous products. The fibers have good heat re sistance, but are destroyed by acids. Crocidolite (blue asbestos) is another im portant, although more specialized, form of asbestos. It is the fibrous form of riebeckite, and has fine, resilient fibers of a characteristic blue color. I t is mined in South Africa and Australia, and to a lesser extent, in Bolivia. Crocidolite is a strong, fast filtering fiber used especially in the manufacture of asbestos cement sheets and pressure pipes. It is also char acterized by its high resistance to acids. Amosite is the fibrous variety of the mineral grunerite, a ferrous magnesium silicate mined only in South Africa. Amosite can be readily broken down into long, somewhat harsh fibers, with a brownish-yellow to almost white color, depending upon the quality. It is used largely in the production of asbestos ce ment and heat-insulating products. It is characterized by a good resistance to acids and other chemicals. Anthophyllite is a magnesium silicate of somewhat variable composition which has rather fragile, brownish or off-white fibers. It is rarer than other types de scribed, but significant quantities have been mined in Finland, Kenya,*and other countries. It is used primarily as an inex pensive filler, and for some specialized applications for which good heat or chemical resistance is required. . Tremolite, a calcium magnesium sili cate, is often a major component of in dustrial and commercial talc. I t is mined in various parts of the United States including New York, Vermont, and Mon tana. Actinolite, a calcium magnesium iron silicate, is rarely used in industry. It is NOTICE: Thfc fNfcxti* ma? b pra^-ri-j byoof^htta* (Tite 17 U.S. Cede) PROPOSED j ^ >.r ' - ' ' : v 47653 found in various parts of the world, but its low fiber strength makes it less de sirable for industrial use. Nearly one million tons of asbestos are consumed in the United States an nually. According to the Bureau of Mines Minerals Yearbook, 1973, approximately 77 percent of asbestos products consumed in 1972 were used in the construction industries (186,000 short tons). Approxipercent were used in non-construction industries (186,000 short tons). Approxi mately 92 percent of the asbestos used in construction is firmly bonded, i.e., the asbestos is "locked in" in such products as floor tiles, asbestos cements, and roofing felts and shingles; while the re maining 8 percent is friable or in powder form present in insulation materials, as bestos cement powders, and acoustical products. These latter products generate more airborne fibers than the firmly bonded products. The 186,000 short tons of asbestos used in the non-construction industries in 1972 were utilized in such products as textiles, friction materials including brake linings and clutch facings, paper, paints, plastics, roof coat ings, floor tiles, and miscellaneous other products. An estimated 50,000 workers are in volved in the manufacture of asbestoscontaining products. However, this figure does not include secondary manufacture of products which contain asbestos, such as electrical or thermal insulation, or products which include previously manufactured components containing asbestos. There are approximately 4Q.000 field insulation workers in the United States who are exposed to asbestos dust. The activities of these workers is estimated to cause secondary exposures to ap proximately three to five million other building construction and shipyard workers. However, since the dust ex posure to the individual worker is ex tremely variable, and the number of as bestos workers at any one location is small, the primary and secondary asbes tos dust exposures to all workers have never been satisfactorily estimated. In the United States, the mining and milling of asbestos is a relatively small industry employing fewer than a thous and workers. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration does not have jurisdiction over mining and milling operations, as such operations are covered by the Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration of the Depart ment of the Interior. B. REGULATION OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS A standard for occupational exposure to asbestos was included in the initial Promulgation of OSHA standards pub lished on 29 May 1971 (36 FR 10466) Pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 655(a). Derived from a 1969 fed eral standard issued under the Walsh- Healey Public Contracts Act (41 U.S.C. 35 et. seq.), the original OSHA standard established an exposure limit of 12 fibers 'greater than 5 microns in length) per milliliter or 2 million particles per cubic loot of air. Pursuant to Section 6(c) o f the Act,29 U.S.C. 655(c), a petition for an emer gency standard to control concentrations of asbestos dust was submitted to the Secretary by the Industrial Union De partment of the AFL-CIO on 4 Novem ber 1971. As a result of th at petition, an emergency temporary standard for oc cupational exposure to asbestos dust was published on 7 December 1971 (36 FR 23207). The emergency standard stated th at; "The 8-hour time-weighted aver age airborne concentration of asbestos dust to which employees are exposed shall not exceed 5 fibers per milliliter greater than 5 microns in length, as determined by the membrane filter method at 400-450 x magnification (4 millimeter objective) phase contrast il lumination. Concentrations above 5 fibers per milliliter, but not to exceed 10 fibers per millimeter may be permitted up to a total of 15 minutes in an hour for up to 5 hours in an 8-hour day." On 12 January 1972 a proposal for a new permanent asbestos standard was published (37 PR 466), pursuant to Sec tion 6(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 655(b). The proposal included the exposure lim itations of the emergency temporary standard plus additional engineering and administrative controls, work practices^ and procedures for medical surveillance and monitoring. The present standard was promulgated on 7 June 1972 (37 FR 11318). This standard which appears as 29 CFR 1910. 1001 [originally published as 29 CFR 1910.93a prior to recodification] estab lished an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) concentration exposure limit of five fibers longer than 5 micrometers per cubic centimeter of air, and a ceiling lim itation against any exposure in excess of ten such fibers per cubic centimeter. The present standard further provided that, effective 1 July 1976, the 8-hour TWA is to be reduced to two fibers. ~ Pursuant to Section 6(f) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 655(f), a petition for review of the Secretary's standard was filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The principal petitioners, the industrial Union Depart ment of the AFL-CIO, objecting to sev eral substantive provisions of the stand ard, as well as to the grounds upon which such provisions were premised, requested that the Secretary's final decision be re versed. However, the Court affirmed the standard and the Secretary's judgement with two exceptions. Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO v. Hodgson, 499 F. 2d 467 (CADC 1974). - The Court directed the Secretary to reconsider the effective date (1 July 1976) for the two-fiber standard and de termine whether such date might be ac celerated for all or some of the indus tries so affected. The Court also directed the Secretary to review the standard's recordkeeping provision requiring a three-year retention period for exposure monitoring records, and to reexamine whether such time period would be ade quate to assure employee protection and prevention of asbestos related diseases. Following the decision in Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO, supra, OSHA reviewed the record of the asbes tos rulemaking proceeding in 1972, par ticularly with_ respect to the issues remanded by the Court to the Secretary. I t is OSHA's belief th at the record of the 1972 asbestos standard proceeding is in adequate to properly resolve the two issues raised by the Court's remand and th at in the interest of achieving the best feasible occupational health protection a new tulemaking proceeding should be ini tiated so th a t fresh and more detailed evidence may be developed regarding changes in industrial usage, compliance capabilities, and employee health prac tices which have occurred since the standard's promulgation over three years ago. m addition, OSHA believes th at new research developments regarding the harmful effects of asbestos exposure, as well as advances in monitoring and pro tective technology, make re-examination of the previous standard's premises and general structure desirable. The proposal accordingly goes beyond the issues OSHA has been directed to consider by the Court, in the interest of effecting the Administration's continuing mndate to "set the standard which most adequately assures on the basis of the best available evidence, th at no employee will mate rial impairment of health or functional capacity" from occupational exposure to this substance. H . T oxicological Considerations of E xposure to Asbestos A. EFFECTS OF ASBESTOS EXPOSURE Asbestos, in its several commercial forms, has been shown in very recent time to be associated with the produc tion of a variety of disease entities. These include: I. Asbestosis: a diffuse, interstitial, nonmalignant, scarring-of the lungs; 2. Bronchogenic carcinoma: a malig nancy of the interior of the lung; 3. Mesothelioma: a diffuse malignancy of the lining of the chest cavity (pleural mesothelioma), or of the lining of the abdomen (peritoneal mesothelioma) ; and 4. Cancer of the stomach, colon, and rectum. Asbestos may be evident, in its ad vanced stages, by characteristic mani festations on x-ray films, by restrictive pulmonary function, or by clinical signs, of finger clubbing or rales (dry, crack ing sounds within the lung). Its most important symptom is dyspnea, or un due shortness of breath. The disease is progressive, even In the absence of further exposure, as those inhaled fibers which have been trapped within the lung continue their biological action. In its severe forms, death results from the in ability of the body to obtain requisite oxygen or from the heart's failure to pump blood through the scarred lungs. Mesotheliomas tumors are diffuse and spread rapidly throughout the cavity of origin. They have yet to be successfully cured by any types of treatment includ ing chemotherapy,, radiation, or surgery. Death usually results within a year of diagnosis. In the general population, mesothelioma is so rare that J t has yet FEDERAL REGISTER, V O L. 40 , NO. 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 47654 PROPOSED RULES to be separately coded in the interna tional classification of diseases. I t may account for one death in several thou sand in the absence of an environmental or occupational asbestos exposure. In some groups of asbestos workers, it may account for one death in ten. Once established, the other asbestos associated cancers differ little from those occurring in the general population, al though there may be variations in the location of the primary site. Appropriate treatm ent and prognosis follow for the particular tumor. There is very limited long term survival from lung cancer therapy; and only somewhat better from treated canea* of the colon or rectum. Asbestosis and asbestos cancer-- whether it be lung cancer, pleural meso thelioma, peritoneal mesothelioma, can cer of the stomach, colon, rectum--usu ally do not become clinically evident until more than 20 years have passed from onset of exposure. This time-frame is now widely recognized. While some such cancers may appear during the second decade following onset of occupational exposure, peak incidence is often not noted until the 30-years-from -onset point, or later. This is true both with regular, long-term asbestos work, and following short-term, brief or intermit tent exposures. While variations in the time of occurrence may depend upon in tensity and duration of exposure, with heavier exposure often being associated with shorter latency periods, variations among individual cases make it impos sible to predict the latency period for the risk of any particular worker. B. PRIOR HISTORY ' In 1971, in response to a petition of the Industrial Union Department, AFLCIO, OSHA considered development of a standard regulating occupational ex posure to asbestos. At th at time, it had been well established th at asbestosis was a major cause of disability and death among workers regularly exposed to as bestos dust in occupational circum stances in the United States, where the principal opportunity for such exposure occurred in the manufacture of asbestos products, and their use (Mancuso and Coulter, 1963;-Selikoff, Churg and Ham mond, 1964; Selikoff, 1965; Enterline and Kendrick, 1967; Selikoff, Hammond and Churg, 1968). The hazard of lung scar ring resulting from the inhalation of asbestos ("asbestosis") had been a con tinuing problem from the time of its first identification (Departmental Commit tee, 1907; Cooke, 1924; Merewether and Price, 1931 and Dreessen, et al, 1938). Data suggest th at the incidence of asbestosis would be markedly diminished by reduction of occupational exposure to identified levels, in factories and during end product use. The British Occupa tional Hygiene Society reported in 1968 (Subcommittee on Asbestos, British Oc cupational Hygiene Society, 1968) th at it had been given data by a single large asbestos textile mill which indicated th at there was comparatively little clinical and/or roentgenological evidence of as bestosis a t this factory in a survey com pleted in 1966. Recent measurements, using modem fiber-counting methods, were correlated with earlier dust assess ments using other techniques. This al lowed estimates of 4-15 fibers/ml to be made of worker's exposures since 1933 in the factory (Berry, 1973). These re ported data carried considerable weight because information on both exposures and their effects were available. More over, all of the 290 individuals examined and x-rayed by the company medical de partm ent had been employed for at least 10 years; 112 had been employed for 20 years or more. There had thus been some opportunity to observe the incidence of asbestosis associated with longer expo sure to asbestos, a factor of some im portance' since abnormal findings are often not seen until a significant period of time has elapsed from first exposure. The Committee of the British Occupa tional Hygiene Society, in evaluating the information given to it on the recorded exposures in this plant and the infre quency of disease among the workers ex posed to dust a t these levels, came to the conclusion that, by lowering the per mitted level still further, to 2 fibers/ml as a time-weighted average, employees could be permitted to work in such en vironments for a full working life-time (50 years) without substantial risk of developing asbestosis. It was calculated th at workers exposed to 100 fiberyears/ml, th a t is, to 2 fibers/ml for 50 years, 4 fibers/ml for 25 years, or 10 fibers/ml for 10 years) would have a 1% risk of developing early signs of as bestosis. The British Committee published in 1968 its report "Hygiene Standards for Chrysotile Asbestos" for the prevention of Asbestosis" in 1968. At the time, there were few data of comparable nature in the United States. While extensive clinical and epidemiological studies of the health effects of asbestos exposure on American workers had been made, com paratively few dust counts had been recorded during the years in which the exposure of these workers had occurred. Moreover, the dust counts that had been taken had utilized techniques other than the new membrane filter counting meth ods. For these reasons, NIOSH, in its evaluation of considerations relating to a standard for occupational exposure to asbestos (NIOSH, Criteria Document, 1971) stated th at the recommendation of the British Occupational Hygiene Soci ety was "given great weight in the devel opment of this standard." The asbestos standard set by OSHA in 1972 was thus' based on a number of well-characterized observations. Lufig scarring ("asbestosis") had been de scribed as an important complication of occupational exposure to asbestos during the original descriptions of the problem in G reat Britain. I t had been found equally important in U.S. studies in the 1930's, and more recent investigations in the 1960's had demonstrated th at it had continued as a serious problem. However, from the British Occupational Hygiene Society's evaluation of factory data re lating the incidence of disease it ap peared th at the recognized, continuing important health hazard of asbestosis could be controlled on the basis of cur rent observations. I t was known at the time th at asbes tosis was not the only disease th at could occur as the result of asbestos exposure. Reports were available th at workers so exposed were also at increased risk of developing several types of cancer, and these reports had demonstrated that such risks were present during the use of asbestos in the United States, in fac tory production of asbestos products, and in their subsequent use (Mancuso and Coulter, 1963; Selikoff, Churg and Ham mond, 1964; Enterline and Kendrick, 1965). However, these data had not yet been fully evaluated in terms of the extent of risk in large parts of the asbes tos industry in the United States and there were few date which would allow judgment concerning intensity and ex tent of exposure to asbestos in relation to the subsequent risk of asbestos-asso ciated cancer. The British Occupational Hygiene Society's Committee had recog nized this problem in Great Britain as well, but developed its standard based on information related to the risk of devel oping asbestosis, noting in its report (1968) th at it was "not possible, at this time, to specify an air concentration which is known will be free of (cancer) risk. In setting its standard, OSHA hoped that reduction of exposure levels de signed to prevent asbestosis would also serve to control the hazard of asbestosisassociated cancer. In this, it placed con siderable reliance on an additional facet of the British experience. Concurrently, a published report from the same fac tory by its medical director and recog nized statisticians (Knox, Holmes, Doll and Hill, 1968) had indicated th at no significant increase in cancer mortality had been found among workers first em ployed in this plant subsequent to 1933, when the improved conditions mandated by the 1931 Factory Regulations came into effect. Since the promulgation of the U.S. permanent asbestos standard, considera ble new information has been forthcom ing on the toxic effects of asbestos. This has been in two areas: in the widen ing spectrum of cancers associated with asbestos exposure, and in various mani festations of asbestos disease in indi viduals exposed to relatively low con centrations of dust This exten sion of the initial data within recent years now requires refocusing of OSHA's concerns from a primary function of pre vention of asbestosis with the expecta tion of concomitant reduction in the in cidence of asbestos-associated cancer, to a new orientation, that of primary con cern with the prevention of asbestoscancer. There is an additional logic in this reorientation. Reduction of as bestos exposure to levels sufficient to pre vent asbestosis is known, at least in some instances, to be insufficient to prevent asbestos-cancer. On the other hand, a reduction of asbestos exposure to an ex tent sufficient to prevent asbestos-asso ciated cancer will also prevent asbestosis. PROPOSED. JRULES i . ; .' " ,.47655 These new observations should not di In many groups of asbestos ^workers, ':.of workers in a British asbestos factory, minish OSHA's prior focus on the pre approximately 20% of all d eath s'are -tvhere calculations predicted th at be vention of asbestosis, since significant caused by lung neoplasms. This has been ~ tween 10 and 11 percent of deaths would pulmonary and/or pleural scarring have true both among asbestos product fac be due to mesothelioma (Newhouse and not been an important feature of low- tory workers (Selikoff, Hammond and Berry, 1975). level, short-term, interm ittent exposure. Churg, 1972; and Nicholson, 1975) and (C) Gastro-intestinal cancer Gastro Rather, it should emphasize the incom among users of these products (Selikoff, intestinal cancers (cancer of the stom plete perspectives of the current standard Hammond and Seidman, 1973). The ex ach, colon and rectum) are also in derived from considerations concerned act percentage varies with circumstances creased in incidence among asbestos with prevention of asbestos-related lung of exposure, age of the workers, duration workers, but the increase is less pro scarring rather than those needed for of the workers' exposure and, perhaps nounced than that of lung cancer or the prevention of asbestos-associated most of all, according to the duration mesothelioma. A number of studies now cancer, particularly mesothelioma. from the onset of their asbestos work indicate that the increase is on the order C. THE NEW EVIDENCE history. In addition, the last several years of two or three times the number of ex have seen the discovery of another crit pected tumors (Selikoff, Hammond and (1) Asbestosis. Subsequent to the hear ical variable affecting the incidence of Seidman, 1973; Elmes, 1968). Although ings on the current standard, uncertainty lung cancer among asbestos workers. In this increased risk is relatively limited, has arisen as to whether the existing 1968, Selikoff, Hammond and Churg re especially when compared with lung British asbestos standard and the man .ported th at lung cancer was not signifi cancer and mesothelioma, it is neverthe dated 2 fiber/ml U.S. standard provides cantly increased in incidence among as-: less of considerable importance since a effective protection even against asbesto bestos workers with no history of cig two- or three-fold increase in such com sis. The data from Great Britain ob arette smoking, although when such his mon tumors becomes an important cause tained in 1966 indicated th at little clini tory was present, the incidence of lung of death for the workers involved. cal disease, Including x-ray evidence of cancer increased markedly over what. I t has been suggested th at other tu asbestosis, had occurred among workers would be expected among other cigarette mors are also increased in incidence first employed in th at factory at some smokers, in the absence of asbestos ex among asbestos workers, particularly time after 1933, when important im posure. Thus, these scientists calculated cancers of the larynx (Stell and McGill, provements in work practices had been th at an asbestos worker who smoked cig 1972; Newhouse, 1973) and neoplasms of achieved. In 1972, results of evaluation of arettes had 92 times the risk of dying of the oropharynx (Selikoff, Hammond and new x-rays that had been taken in 1970, lung cancer, as compared with like in Churg, 1970), and of the esophagus (Se of the work force then employed in the dividuals without cigarette smoking or likoff, Hammond, and Seidman, 1973). same factory, were reported as showing asbestos work. This finding has been con However, data concerning these neo that many now had abnormal findings firmed by larger studies (Hammond and ' plasms are less extensive than for lung either in the lung or in the coverings of Selikoff, 1973) where, Again, it was found cancer, mesothelioma and gastro-intes the lung pleurae (Lewinsohn, 1972). th at non-smoking asbestos workers had tinal cancer and further experiences are There was thus a difference between the few lung cancers while those who smoked awaited. In any case, they are not very prevalence of abnormal x-ray findings had much more lung cancer than would common tumors in general and any in among workers x-rayed in 1966 as re have been expected had they not been crease does not weigh heavily on the ported to the British Occupational Hy asbestos workers. Calculations suggest overall cancer risk of asbestos workers. giene Society, and evaluation of other th at cigarette-smoking asbestos workers Considering all neoplasms, among x-rays of workers in the same factory have approximately eight times the risk some groups of asbestos workers, em four years later. of developing lung cancer compared to ployed either in asbestos factory work or Additionally, clinical data are becom other smokers. , in the use of asbestos products, as much ing available concerning asbestos lung (b) Pleural and peritoneal mesotheas 40 to 45 percent of all deaths have scarring in individuals exposed at levels lioma. In 1960, Wagner, Sleggs and M ar been due to one or another type of can much lower than those of occupational chand demonstrated an important asso cer, an approximately three-fold or four circumstances. Among 210 family con ciation between asbestos exposure and fold increase. tacts of former asbestos factory work pleural mesothelioma; This cancer, Of significant importance, new data ers, 38% have been reported to have x- which appears to be unrelated to smok have recently been made available con ray changes characteristic of asbestos ing, had previously been considered to cerning the cancer risk of workers at the exposure (Anderson, Selikoff, Lilis and Daum,. 1975). be a very rare tumor. Numerous reports textile mill reviewed for the British standard, including those workers first (2) Cancer. In December 1972, impor have confirmed the finding of Wagner and his colleagues th at mesothelioma employed after 1933 (Howard, Kinlen, tant new information on the spectrum of can be commonly associated with asbes Lewinsohn, Peto and Doll, 1975). I t was asbestos cancers was presented a t the tos exposure. A subsequent report by En- found th at there was excess mortality Conference on the Biological Effects of ticknap and Smither, 1964, concerning from lung cancer among those workers Asbestos, sponsored by the International workers in a British asbestos factory who entered scheduled areas after l Agency for Research on Cancer of the demonstrated th at the same tumor could January 1933. There was "clear evidence World Health Organization. At this con be commonly found in the abdomen of some excess of lung cancer and res ference, and subsequently, data on large (peritoneal mesothelioma), as well as in piratory deaths among those first ex groups of asbestos workers became avail the chest. posed between 1933 and 1950." Equally able (Selikoff, Hammond and Seidman, The exact risk of death of these in im portant was the finding th at "there 1973; Enterline, 1972). As expected, the variably fatal neoplasms has not been still appears to be an excess of deaths due high risk of bronchogenic carcinoma and as well defined as has lung cancer, al to lung cancer after 15 or more years' mesothelioma persisted among factory though recording of cases from hospitals ' exposure" even among those first ex employees and insulators. Moreover, near one large asbestos factory has indi posed in 1951 and subsequently. Indeed, these later studies confirmed- the excess cated th at it must be very common in it is known th at mesothelioma deaths gastrointestinal cancer that had been deed (Borow, Conston, Livornese and have occurred among the specific group suggested earlier, and extended the spec Schalet, 1973). Information available of 290 workers whose experience prior to trum of asbestos related cancers. from the experience of asbestos insula 1966 had led to the development of the (a) Lung cancer. The most importanttion workers suggests that approximately current standard, as detailed above cancer afflicting asbestos workers is can five to seven percent of deaths may be (Brody, J.E ., 1974). There are further data Indicating the cer of the lung, although mesothelioma due to this neoplasm (Hammond, Seli necessity for revaluation of the asbestos has attracted considerable attention be koff and Churg, 1965; Selikoff, Ham standard, albeit less directly derived cause of the high frequency among as mond and Seidman 1973). More recently, from asbestos worker exposure. This in bestos workers and infrequent occurrence it has been suggested th at this estimate formation is derived from occurrence of in the population as a whole. is too low, on the basis of the experience asbestos cancer among individuals ex- FEDERAL REGISTER, V O L 40 , N O . 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 47656 PROPOSED RULES posed to low levels of asbestos, as In en TTT Certain Considerations Concerning ' vironmental circumstances, or to brief or . Carcinogenicity interm ittent exposures to higher levels. In the case of asbestos, we are dealing Analysis of the history of asbestos with a substance that poses a range of exposure among individuals in a large health risks to the working population. series of cases of mesothelioma in Great These include the threat of cancer, as Britain and South Africa have provided well as asbestosis. In considering the evidence th a t brief or interm ittent ex controversial issue of carcinogenicity, posure to asbestos may, after the pas OSHA is relying upon not only the new sage of decades, result in mesothelioma data reviewed above, but the leading (Greenberg and Lloyd Davies, 1974; scientific principles and opinions be Webster, 1973). In such circumstances, lieved to reflect the research conclusions it appears th a t the lifetime exposure was of international cancer experts, which less than the 100 fiber-years/ml envis were developed since or not known to aged by the current standard. The same OSHA at the time th at the original discrepancy between present projected standard was promulgated. exposures and the risk of asbestos cancer exists when considering cases of meso ~ A. THE LATENCY OF CARCINOGENIC thelioma resulting from household con EFFECTS tact to asbestos among members of In humans, the latency period for families of asbestos workers (Lilling- chemical carcinogens may well extend ton, 1974) or among residents living in between 20 to 40 or more years. Analo the vicinity of asbestos plants. gous periods exist for test animals. This Of considerable industrial importance, means th at the diesase may undergo a has been the recent description of as long development before a tumor is ac bestos disease among shipbuilding and tually detected. At that point, it has ship repair workers, few of whom actu reached a stage where removal of the ally work with asbestos, but many of worker from the workplace may be of whom were, in the past, inadvertently no avail and where treatm ent may be exposed to the asbestos dust resulting extremely difficult, if not futile. Prudent from the use of asbestos products by a policy would therefore seem to indicate relatively few of their work mates. In th at every reasonable measure should 1968, Harries of the Royal Navy reported be taken to eliminate human exposure cases of mesothelioma among shipyard/ to chemical compounds as soon as their workers a t the Royal Navy dockyard in carcinogenic nature is identified. Devonport, in trades which did not di rectly involve worker exposure to as B. VARIABILITY IN INDIVIDUAL SUSCEPTI bestos, but in which there had been oc BILITY IN RELATION TO THE CONCEPT OF casioned opportunity for exposure merely ATHRESHOLD by virtue of working in the same areas. Cancer development may be influ This original finding has been widely enced by such factors as the differing confirmed and numerous cases of meso susceptibility of various body organs. In thelioma have since been reported in animal studies it has been found that former shipyard workers (Whitwell and individual variability in response to car Rawcliffe, 1970; McEwen et al, 1970; cinogens is great depending upon factors Stumphius, 1968; Greenberg and Lloyd such as age, sex, hormonal status, diet, Davies, 1974). Studies of populations of and genetic factors. Thus, in the work current shipyard workers have shown ing population, certain groups, such as much radiological evidence of asbestos those already biologically compromised, abnormalities among workers in trades may be more susceptible than other only Indirectly exposed to asbestos in the groups. yards (Sheers and Templeton, 1969; Fletcher, 1972). x C. A "THRESHOLD" LIMIT Gillam et al (1975), studying the mor Because of the variability of individ tality and reviewing the chest x-rays of ual response to carcinogens and other 439 underground metal miners exposed factors, the concept of a "no effect" or to an asbestiform mineral, found three "threshold level" may have little real times the risk of malignant respiratory significance on the basis of existing disease than expected. The fiber concen knowledge. While some level, below trations averaged 0.24 flbers/ml. . which exposure to a carcinogen does Further, evidence has indicated th at not cause cancer, may conceivably exist asbestos also acts as a lung carcinogen for any one individual, other individuals a t levels much below those which will ' in the working population may have produce asbestosis. Two surveys of ship- , cancer induced by dos.es so low as to yard workers who had x-ray evidence of be effectively zero. This is not to say pleural plaques, but generally not of pul th at researchers will never find a monary fibrosis, showed a 2.5-fold excess threshold level for a carcinogenic sub risk of death from lung cancer and high stance, but it does mean th at the thresh risk of mesothelioma. (Fletcher, 1972; old concept for carcinogens is, a t pres Edge, 1975). In a study of the mortality ent, more a matter of responsible regu experience of a large UB. asbestos prod latory policy than a precise, scientific ucts manufacturing facility, it was found determination. that workers in low-dust areas, with a These theoretical concepts have a minimum risk of death from asbestosis, bearing on the asbestos issue, particu had the same high risk of death from larly as to the question of the existence, various cancers as workers in dustier or nonexistence, of a threshold level of areas (Nicholson, 1975). .. ' - carcinogenic effect. A "no effect" level theoretically may exist, but it has not been demonstrated. In previous rulemaking proceedings, OSHA has considered these issues and determined th at in the absence of evi dence to establish a safe level on the basis of present knowledge, employee ex posure must be reduced as low as feasible. (See the preambles to the carcinogen standards 29 CFR 1910.1003-10016 (39 FR 3758) ; the vinyl chloride standard 29 CFR 1910.1018 (39 FR 35892); the coke oven emissions proposal (40 FR 32268), and the beryllium proposal.) OSHA welcomes all views and com ments on these subjects. IV. PERTINENT LEGAL AUTHORITY The primary purpose of the Act is to assure, so far as possible, safe and healthful working conditions for every working man and woman. One means prescribed by Congress to achieve this goal is the authority vested in the Secre tary of Labor to set mandatory safety and health standards pursuant to Sec tion 6(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 655(b). The standards setting process permits the participation of interested parties in the consideration of medical data, in dustrial processes and other factors rele vant to the identification of hazards and the selection of appropriate control measures. Occupational safety and health standards provide notice of the permitted exposure levels and provide a basis for ensuring the existence of safe and healthful workplaces. Section 6(b) (5) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 655(b) (5), pro vides that: The Secretary, In promulgating standards dealing with toxic materials or harmful physical agents under this subsection, shall set the standard which most adequately as sures, to the extent feasible, on the basis of the best available evidence, th a t no employee wUl suffer material impairment of health or functional capacity even if such employee has regular exposure to the hazard dealt with by such standard for the period of his work ing life. Development of standards under this subsection shall be based upon research, demonstrations, experiments and such other information as may be appropriate. In addi tion to the attainm ent of the highest degree of health and safety protection for the em ployee, other considerations shall be the latest available scientific data in the field, the feasibility of the standards, and expe rience gained under this and other health and safety laws. Sections 2(b) (5) and (6), 20, 21, 22, and 24 of the Act reflect Congress recog nition that conclusive medical or scienti fic evidence, including causative factors, epidemiological studies or dose-response data, may not exist for many toxic ma terials o harmful physical agents. Nevertheless, standards cannot be post poned because definitive medical or scientific evidence is not currently available. Indeed, while final standards are to be based on the best available evi dence, the legislative history makes it clear that "it is not intended th at the Secretary be paralyzed by debate sur rounding diverse medical opinion." H.Rpt. No. 91-1291, 91st Cong., 2d Ses sion, p. 18 (1970). This Congressional judgment has been supported by the .V courts which have reviewed standards promulgated under the Act. For instance, in sustaining the standard for occupa tional exposure to vinyl chloride (29 CFR 1910.1017), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stated that, "It re mains the duty of the Secretary to act to protect the working man, and to act even in circumstances where existing meth odology or research is deficient." The So ciety of the Plastics Industry, Inc. v. United States Department of Labor, 509 F. 2d 1301 (CA.. 2 1975), cert denied, sub nom Firestone Plastics Co. v United States Department of Labor,----- U.S. ----- , 43 U.S.L.W. 3525 (27 May 1975), A similar rationale was applied by the U.S. Comi; of Appeals for the District of Columbia in reviewing the standard for occupational exposure to asbestos (29 CFR 1910.1001, but appearing at the time of review as 29 CFR 1910.93a). The Court stated: Some of the questions involved in the promulgation of these standards are on the frontiers of scientific knowledge, and con sequently as to them Insufficient data is presently available to make a fully informed factual determination. Decision-making must .in th a t circumstance depend to a greater extent upon policy judgments and less upon purely factual judgments. Indus trial Union Department, AFL-CIO v Hodgson, supra, 499 F. 2d a t 474. In setting standards, the Secretary is expressly required to consider the feasi bility of the proposed standards. S. Rpt. No. 91-1282, 91st Cong., 2d Sess., p. 58 (1970). Nevertheless, considerations of technological feasibility are not limited to devices already developed and in use. Standards may require improvements in existing technologies or require the de velopment of new technology. The So ciety of the Plastics Industry, Inc. v United States, supra, 509 F. 2d a t 1309. Where appropriate, the standards are required to include provisions for labels or other forms of warning to apprise em ployees of hazards, suitable protective equipment, control procedures, monitor ing and measuring of employee expo sure, employee access to the results of monitoring, and appropriate medical examinations. Where a standard pre scribes medical examinations or other tests, they must be made available at no cost to the employee (Section 6(b) (7) of the Act). Standards may also prescribe recordkeeping requirements where nec essary or appropriate for enforcement of the Act or for developing information regarding occupational accidents and illnesses (Section 8(c) of the Act). V. T h e P r o po sa l The development of this proposal is premised upon: (1) recent medical and scientific evidence as to increased health hazards associated with occupational exposure to asbestos and (2) the experi ence gained by OSHA through three years of enforcement and administra tion of the current asbestos standard. The following is a summary and analysis of the significant issues con tained in the text of the proposed stand ard for occupational exposure to asbestos. PIlpPOSEDjlUUS > - ' - . " ' ' ' - 47657 % ' \ ",! ' ' - A. SCOPEAlTOAmiCATION. , be considered in the setting of occupa The standard, as revised, would con tional safety and health standards. ' In addition, the Act explicitly takes tinue to apply to all workplaces Where occupational exposure to asbestos Is cognizance of its impact upon affected present, but would exclude the construc small business, specifically with respect to any recordkeeping requirements which tion industry. -,n Vr I t is OSHA's intention to develop and are imposed. Pursuant to section 8(d) of propose a separate revision to the exist the Act, OSHA is exploring methods of reducing; to the maximum extent pos ing asbestos standard for the construc tion Industry. Appproxlmately three- sible, the administrative and economic fourths of all asbestos products In 1972 burdens of the proposal's various infor were used in the construction industry. mation gathering requirements. - In addition, the uniqueness of the con ' . While the proposal does not address struction industry itself (viz., the mul Itself to specific alternatives, OSHA in tiplicity of non-flxed workplaces, and vites comments concerning options the utilization of highly transient work which would both provide full protec forces) strongly suggests separate tion to affected employees and a t the treatment. These structural differences same time would minimize the admin were reflected in the 17-18 September istrative and economic burden on af 1975 deliberations of the OSHA Advisory fected employers--especially those with Committee on Construction Safety and small numbers of employees, non-flxed Health. ' - >. workplaces; or highly transient work Although OSHA believes th a t health forces. . . hazards faced by employees hi the con B. DISCUSSION OF MAJOR PROVISIONS struction industry with regard to occupa tional exposure to asbestos are similar OSHA recognizes that, since the to those faced by their counterparts in promulgation of the current standard, . several distinguished Individuals and other covered employments, OSHA rec many agencies, both public and private, ognizes th at alternative administrative have made valuable contributions to the and engineering controls may be more appropriate and feasible for the con field of toxic substances generally, and struction industry. Therefore, OSHA in asbestos specifically. I' Exposure Levels. Recently, the Na tends to consult with the Construction tional Institute for Occupational Safety Advisory Committee in order to further and Health (NIOSH) has informed explore such alternatives. Upon publica tion of the proposal to revise the existing OSHA th at it is currently reviewing data asbestos standard for the construction which may provide significant informa tion with respect to the margin of safely industry, OSHA will consider the possi afforded by the existing asbestos expo bility of consolidated hearings on th at proposal and the proposal contained sure limits. In a memorandum dated 29 herein for all other covered employments. September 1975 to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, the Direc OSHA is aware th at certain provisions of this proposal, such as medical surveil tor of NIOSH stated: lance and the extended retention period Multiple and consistent epidemiological for medical and monitoring records, may studies leave virtually no doubt that as pose special problems to some employers, bestos is carcinogenic to man. especially those who have small numbers ' OSHA also believes sufficient medical of employees, operate with non-flxed and scientific evidence has now been ac places of employment, or use workforces cumulated to w arrant the designation of which are highly transient in nature. asbestos as a hum an carcinogen. There This awareness has been expressed by the fore, it is incumbent upon OSHA to pro Department of Labor in a statement pose the establishment of safeguards to submitted to the House Subcommittee on protect the lives of affected workers. Environmental Problems Affecting Small OSHA deems it appropriate to propose Business on 26 June 1975, as follows: ' th at the 8-hour exposure limit (TWA) I t has become increasingly evident th a t the combined body a t Federal regulations imposes a substantial, and to some extent, unnecessary burden upon employers, particu larly those who ru n small businesses. While most of these requirements serve a neces sary and useful purpose, a definite potential exists for duplication, conflicting standards, and inappropriate recordkeeping require ments. In an effort to eliminate problems where any exist In the Department of Labor, I have requested my agency heads to assess the small business Impact of the laws they administer and determine what can be done to ease the burden on th e small employer, while still assuring compliance with the law. ' Although it clear that OSHA's first and prime responsibility is to assure employ ees safe and healthful places of employ ment, the Act and its legislative history recognize th at economic and technolog ical feasibility are legitimate factors to be lowered to 500,000 fibers per cubic meter (0.5 asbestos fibers per cubic cen timeter) , and th at the ceiling exposure limit be 5,000,000 asbestos fibers per cubic meter (5 asbestos fibers per cubic centimeter) for any period up to 15 minutes. OSHA recognizes th at there is no assurance of a safe exposure for a substance with known carcinogenic property, in this case asbestos, and thus there should be no detectable concentra tions. However, the Act requires th at the Secretary establish standards to the extent feasible, and therefore the Secre tary must take into consideration tech nological and economic factors. OSHA believes th at it may be appro priate to postpone the effective date of the proposed exposure level because of the existence of problems of feasibility of a technological and economic nature. OSHA expressly Invites comments on this issue, including comment on the ap FEDERAl REGISTER, V O L. 40 , N O . 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 47658 PROPOSED RULES propriateness of a phased schedule for compliance with any new exposure level, based on such feasibility factors. In this respect, OSHA particularly invites com ments oh the structure of the asbestos industry generally including factors dis tinguishing particular sub-industries in terms of methods of asbestos use and ca pabilities of compliance. Definitions. OSHA believes the present standard's definitions of "asbestos1' and "asbestos fiber" should be revised by adding to the existing definition of "asbestos" and phrase "and every prod uct containing any of these minerals", and by substituting the phrase "particu late form of asbestos", for the words "asbestos fibers" in the definition of "asbestos fiber." This reflects OSHA's concern for the morphology and toxic ity of .the regulated substance rather than its geologic or mineralogie origin. The proposed definition of "asbestos fiber" would also add to the current specification (minimum length 5 microm eters) , a minimum aspect ratio of 3 to 1 and a maximum diameter of 5 microm eters. Such a definition is consistent with the one appearing in the "Recom mended Procedures for Sampling and Counting Asbestos Fibers (Joint AIHA VoL 36, No. 2, February 1975, pp. 83-90). In addition, air samples are presently evaluated by OSHA in terms of the con centration of asbestos fibers greater than 5 micrometers in length, and with a length to width aspect ratio of at least 3-to-l. Thus, the definition as revised will set specific parameters for'asbestos fibers which are known to be respirable, and which can be counted using phase contrast microscopy. - ' OSHA is aware of scientific explora tion into the area of pathological re sponse to fiber morphology, and is cur rently working on several projects with other agencies, including NIOSH, to pro vide additional knowledge of this area. Recordkeeping. OSHA proposes to ex tend the period for employer retention of monitoring records from three years to forty years, or for the duration of em ployment plus twenty years, whichever is longer. As the Court in Industriai Union Department, AFL-CIO, supra, 499 F. 2d a t 487 pointed out, although the existing three-year period is ade quate for OSHA's enforcement purposes, it may not be sufficient for the develop ment of essential data regarding the causes of asbestos related diseases, some of which appear to have latency periods of up to forty years. The extend! period for retention, with resultant data accumulation, will be vital to epidemio logical and diagnostic investigations to determine such things as dose-response relationships in diseases caused by ex posure to asbestos. OSHA believes th at it is essential to such scientific investigations th at both medical and monitoring records be re tained for a similar period of time. Therefore, OSHA has proposed th at the retention period for employee medical records be extended from the present twenty years to a period commensurate with that for monitoring records. i.e,, forty years, or for th duration monitor ing records, Le., forty years, or for the duration of employment plus twenty years, whichever is longer. The proposal also outlines specific Items of data which would be recorded with regard to employee exposure monitoring and medical examinations. OSHA views these requirements as the minimum necessary to develop the caus al relationships between exposures and pathology. OSHA believes these modifi cations to be consistent with the Court's direction, as well as with the record keeping requirements of section 8(c) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. 657(c). The proposal would also add a re quirement concerning the transfer of monitoring and medical records (1) when one employer succeeds another, or (2) when an employer ceases to do busi ness, without a successor. An employer succeeding another would be required to receive and maintain those records which the predecessor would have been re quired to keep. Employers terminating their businesses without successors would be required to send their records to NIOSH. Monitoring Procedure. The proposal also revises monitoring requirements for initial occupational exposure to asbestos, and increases the frequency for subse quent monitoring in order to provide a more adequate basis for relating em ployees's health records to their exposure levels. The adoption of this proposal would revoke the current specific re quirements for both personal and envi ronmental monitorings as well as the specific provisions for the collection of samples. Such revocation, and the per mission to discontinue monitoring after two consecutive measurements below the permissible exposure levels would allow the exercise of some judgment as to when and how monitoring would have to be performed. An employer would be ex pected to exercise this judgment with an adequate appreciation of the purpose of monitoring, and the possible grave con sequences of over-exposure. Diagnostic Testing. The proposal also adds sputum cytology as a diagnostic test. The use of sputum cytology is pro posed only for those workers who are 45 years of age or older or who have been employed in occupations involving ex posure to asbestos 10 years or more. Al lhough there has been some concern as to the value of sputum cytology, OSHA believes its usage for special high risk groups can be beneficial. Regulated areas. The proposal requires th at regulated areas be established, that access be limited to authorized persons, and that a roster of persons authorized to enter be made daily and maintained for a t least 40 years, or for the duration of employment plus 20 years, whichever is longer. One purpose of establishing regulated areas is to limit the exposure to as few people as possible. OSHA recog nizes th a t in certain non-fixed work places this requirement would pose special problems. Therefore, comments relating to alternative procedures appli cable to affected employers would be welcomed. Sampling of Ceiling Concentrations. The proposal provides for a sampling period up to 15 minutes for the deter mination of ceiling concentrations. The present standard contains no time pa rameters for measurement of the ceil ing limit. A period of up to fifteen min utes is proposed because it has been found to be practical and is currently used by OSHA in determining compli ance. Respirators. The proposal revises the requirements for respirators, referencing NIOSH as the current approving au thority and listing those respirators al lowed for various air concentrations based on known protection factors. This is consistent with the selection of respi rators recently developed for use in the Joint OSHA-NIOSH Standards Comple tion Project. The proposed revision will not render any existing respirators ob solete, but rather will enable a greater variety of respirators to be used under different conditions of exposure. Refusal of Medical Exams. The pro posed revision also contains a procedure to be followed by the employer in the event that an employee refuses to under go any medical examination which must be offered. The procedure involves in forming the employee of the potential risks that are incurred by his refusal to be examined and obtaining a signed state ment from the employee attesting to the fact th at the employee has been informed of the potential risks, but still does not wish to be examined. I t is not OSHA's intent to encourage employees to avoid medical examinations. On the contrary, OSHA believes th at positive action taken by the employer to inform employees of the risks involved will encourage em ployees to undergo such examinations. Job Reassignment. The proposal also retains a provision from the existing standard (29 CFR 1910.1001(d) (2) (iv) (c)) which requires job rotation or transfer without loss of pay (where such positions are available) for employees found unable to function normally as a result of having to wear one of the prescribed respirators. OSHA is aware that the concept has been the subject of considerable controversy. However, actual labor management experience as to the operation of this provision has yet to be reviewed by OSHA. Therefore, OSHA would welcome comments from interested parties concerning not only the effectiveness of the provision, but as to the relative merits of the concept it self. Based on the receipt of such infor mation, OSHA will reconsider the pro vision's applicability and scope. If war ranted, OSHA may consider job reassign ment based on medical unsuitability, per se, as the subject for a separate rule making procedure. Employee Information and Training. Information and training are essential for the protection of employees, because employees can do much to protect them selves if they are informed of the nature of the hazards in the workplace. To be effective, however, an employer educa tion system must apprise employees of the specific hazards associated with the work environment. For this reason, the ;"'r- /. 'vjsi'vv'-vV* . * 'c*.. - - ' \F6pE*A.REGIST0,..VOL 4, NO. 197--THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 ' PROPOSED 'RULES . , . ; _ . -7 ' : ' " ' ' 47659 ! employer would be required to Inform each employee assigned to a regulated area about the nature of asbestos-related health problems, the necessity for ex posure control, the work practices and engineering controls associated with the employee's job assignment, and the medi cal surveillance programs. Signs and labels. Due to the hazardous nature of asbestos, OSHA believes that emphasis should be placed on warning employees and other persons about the dangers of exposure. For this reason, the proposed standard includes a section on signs for regulated areas and labels for products containing asbestos or their containers. The signs to be posted at regulated areas inform employees of the carcino genic hazard of asbestos and alert them to the fact th at only persons authorized by the employer should enter the area. Hygiene facilities and practices. The proposal provides th at all employees working in regulated areas must be re quired to wash hands, face, and fore arms before eating, drinking, or smoking. Finally, smoking, nonfood chewing prod ucts, drinking, and eating are prohibited in regulated areas. In addition employees working in regulated areas are required to shower before leaving a t the end of the work shift. This section of the proposed standard also requires th at the employer provide for the hygiene facilities such as change rooms and showers in accordance With 29 CFR 1910.141. Appendices. In addition, the proposal introduces appendices to be published with the standards as information and guidance. Appendix A (Substance Safety Data Sheet) provides information on the gen eral nature of asbestos, exposure limits and general precautions regarding its usage. Appendix B (substance Technical Guidelines) provides technical informa tion on asbestos minerals, recommenda tions for monitoring, and general workpractices for clean-up operations. Two guides for workpractices for certain op erations are included as enclosures. The first deals with loading, unloading, and storing asbestos cargo. The second pro vides guidance to employers who intro duce asbestos into manufacturing opera tions. Appendix C (Medical Surveillance Guidelines) provides information con sidered to be useful and appropriate to the examining physician. VI. E nvironmental I mpact Assessment The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), (42, U.S.C. 4321 4343), requires, among other things, that Federal agencies assess their proposed major actions, including rulemaking, to determine whether a significant impact on the quality of the human environment may result. Furthermore, 29 CFR 1999.3 (d) requires that where OSHA deter mines that an environmental impact statement should be prepared, the deter mination to do so must be published in the F ederal Register. Accordingly, it is hereby noticed th at OSHA Intends to prepare an environmental impact state ment on the proposed revision to the standard for occupational exposure to "vidence proposed to be adduced a t the requested hearing. Once the draft environmental impact - In addition to the comments invited statement has been prepared, a copy of above concerning the proposal and its it will be made available by OSHA to any environmental impact, OSHA hereby member of the public who requests an solicits comments from interested parties opportunity to comment on it. Any per regarding the potential inflationary im son or agency submitting comments on pact of the proposed revision. Comments it to OSHA must a t the same time for must be submitted in accordance with ward five copies of the comments to the the above requirements for comments on Council on Environmental Quality the proposal and may be directed toward (CEQ), 772 Jackson Place, N.W., Wash any or all of the following subjects: ington, D.C. A 45-day period will be al - 1. Cost impact on consumers, busi lowed for the submission of comments nesses, markets, or Federal, State, or after the publication of the notice of local government; _ ^ ` availability of the draft environmental 2. Effect on the productivity of wage impact statement. The draft statement earners, businesses, or government; will be available where practicable, at 3. Effect on competition; least 15 days prior to a public hearing 4. Effect on supplies of important on the proposed standard. The environ materials, producers, or services; _ mental impact of the proposal would be 5. Effect on employment; and an appropriate issue a t such hearing. . .6. Effect on energy supply or demand. In addition, comments th at may be . It is OSHA's intention to prepare an helpful in preparing the draft environ inflationary impact statement and anal mental impact statem ent on the proposed ysis, if appropriate, or a certification revision are solicited. Any person having th at the revision has no substantial in relevant information or data is invited flationary impact, and to make such to submit it to David R. Bell, Office of statement or certification available a t Standards Development, Occupational least 30 days prior to any public hearings Safety and Health Administration, UB. on the proposed revision. The potential Department of Labor, 200 Constitution inflationary impact of the proposed revi Avenue, N.W., Room N-3669, Washing sion would be an appropriate issue a t ton, D.C. 20210, by November 10, 1975. such hearing. Comments submitted in regard to the This procedure has been concurred proposed standard need not be resub with by the Council on Wage and Price mitted. All material received on environ Stability in accordance with the Office mental impact will be available for pub of Management and Budget Circular lic inspection and copying at the above A-107 (28 January 1975), issued pur address. suant to Executive Order 11821. VII. P ublic P articipation Accordingly, pursuant to sections 6(b) and 8(c) of the Occupational Safety and Interested persons are invited to com Health Act (84 Stat. 1593,1599, 29 UB.C. ment on the proposed standard on or 655, 657) and 29 CFR P art 1911, it is before December 8, 1975. Written data, hereby proposed to amend P art 1910 of views and arguments concerning the Title 29 of the CFR as set forth below. proposal must be submitted in quadrupli cate to the Docket Officer, Docket H-033, Signed m Washington, D.C., this 30th U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3620, day of September 1975. 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Wash J ohn T. D unlop, ington, D.C. 20210 Telephone 202/ Secretary of Labor. 523-8076. Written submissions must 1. Mancuso, T. F. and E. J. Coulter: Meth clearly identify the provisions of the odology In Industrial Health Studies. Arch proposal addressed and the position Environ Health 6:310-226, (1663). taken with respect to each such provi 2. Sellkoff, I. J., Churg, J. and E. C. Ham sion. The data, views, and arguments mond: Asbestos Exposure and Neoplasia. will be available for public inspection JA M A. 188:22-26, (1964). and copying a t the above address. All 3. Sellkoff, I. J., Churg, J. and E. C. Ham written submissions received will be mond: The Occurrence of AsbestosIs Among Insulation Workers In The United States. made part of the record. N.T. Acad Scl 132:139-155, (1965). Pursuant to 20 CFR 1911.11 (b) and 4. Enterline, P. and M. Kendrick: Asbestos- (c), interested persons may, in addition Dust Exposure at Various Levels and Mor to filing written comments as provided tality. Arch Environ Health 15:181-186, above, file objections to the proposal and (1967). ' request an informal hearing with respect . 5. Sellkoff, I. J,, Churg, J. and E. C. Ham thereto, in accordance with the follow mond: Asbestos Exposure, Smoking and Neo plasia. JA M A . 204:106-112, (1968). ing conditions: 6. Murray, H. M.: Report of the Depart 1. The objections must include the mental Committee on Compensation For In name and address of the objector; dustrial Disease. HM. Stationery Office, 2. The objections must be postmarked London, (1907). on or before December 8, 1975; 7. Cooke, W. E.: Fibrosis of the Lungs Due 3. The objections must specify with to the Inhalation of Asbestos Dust. Brit. J. particularity the provision of the pro Med. II p. 147, (1924). posed rule to which objection is taken, 8. Nureweather, E. R. A., and C. W. Price: Report on the Effects of Asbestos Dust on the and must state the grounds therefor; Lungs and Dust Suppression in The Asbestos 4. Each objection must be separately Industry. H.M. Stationery Office, London, stated and numbered; and (1930). 5. The objections must be accom 9. Dressen, W. C., Dallavalle, J. M. Edwards, panied by a detailed summary of the T. I. et al: A Study of Asbestosis In the As- FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 40, NO . 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 47660 PROPOSED RULES bestos Textile Industry: Public Health Bul letin No. 241. p. 126, (1938). 10. British Occupational Hygiene Boclety- Sub-Committee on Asbestos Hygiene Stand ards For Chrysotlle Asbestos Dust. Ann. Oocup. Hyg. 11:47-69, (1968). 11. Berry, J.: Hygiene Standards--Theory and Application in Biological Effects of As bestos. pp. 145-149, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, (1973). 12. Criteria for a Recommended Standard . . . Occupational Exposure to Asbestos, Na tional Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, (1972). 13. Knox, J. F,, Holmes, S,, Dozz, R. and I. D. Hill: Mortality From Lung Cancer and Other Causes Among Workers in an Asbestos Textile Factory. Brit. J. Industr. Med. 25:293-303, (1968). 14. Lewinsohn, H. C.: The Medical Surveil lance of Asbestos Workers. Roy. Soc. Health J . 92: (2) 69-77, (1972). 15. Anderson, H. A., Selikoff, I. J., Lilis, H,, and S. Daum: Conjugal Asbestos Neoplastic Risk. Ann. N.T. Acad. Sci. (In Press). 16. Selikoff, L J., Hammond, E. C,, and H. Seidman: Cancer Risk of Insulation Work ers in th e United States Biological Effects of Asbestos, pp. 209-216, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, (1973). 17. Enterline, P., de Coufle, P. and V Hen derson: Mortality in Relation to Occupa tional Exposure in The Asbestos Industry. J. Occup. Med. 14:897-903, (1972). 18. Selikoff, I. J., Hammond, E. C. and J. Churg: Carcinogenicity of Amoslte As bestos. Arch. Environ. Health 25: 183-186, (1972). ' ' 19. Nicholson, W. J.: Research Approaches to the Control of Carcinogenic Exposures: Asbestos--the "TLV" Approach, Mount Sinai School of Medicine of the City University of New York, New York, 10029. 20. Hammond E. C., and I. J. Selikoff: Rela tions of Cigarette Smoking to Risk of Death of Asbestos-Associated Disease Among In sulation Workers in the United States in Biological Effects of Asbestos, pp. 312-817, International Agency for Research on Can cer, Lyon, (1973). . . 21. Wagner, J. C. Sleggs, C. A. and P. Mare- hand: Diffuse Pleural Mesotheloma and Asbestos Exposure in the North Western Cape Province, Brit. J. Industr. Med., 17:260 271, (1960). 22. Entickwap, J. B. and W. J. Smither: Peritoneal Tumors in Asbestosis. Brit. J. In dustr. Med., 21:20-31, (1964). 23. Borrow, M., Conston, A., Livoraese. L. L, and N. Scbalet: Mesothelioma and its As sociations with Asbestos: J.A.MA. 201:587591,(1967). 24. Hammond, 3. C., Selikoff, L J. and J. Churg: Neoplasia Among Insulation Work ers in the United States with Special Ref erence to Intra-Abdominanl Neoplasia. Ann, N.Y. Acad. Sci. 132:519-525, (1965). - 25. Newhouse, M. L. and G. Berry: The Risk of Developing Mesothelioma Tumors Among Workers In an Asbestos Textile Fac tory, XVIII International Congress on Oc cupational Health, Bristol, England, (1975). 26. Elmes, P. C. and M. J. C. Simpson: In sulation Workers in Belfast. 3. Mortality 1940-66. Brit. J. Industr. Med., 28:226-236, (1971). 27. Still, PM. and T. McGill: Asbestos and Larynges Cancer. Lancet 2:416-417 (1973). 28. Newhouse, M. L. and G. Berry: Letter to the editor: Asbestos and Laryneal Cancer. L an 'et 2:615, (1973). 29. Selikoff, I. J., Hammond, E. C,, and J . . Churg: Mortality Experiences of Asbestos Workers. Pneumoconiosis, Proc. ly t. Conf. Johannesburg. 1969, pp. 180-186, Oxford University Press, (1976). 30. Howard, 8., Klnleln, L. J - Lewlnshohn, B . C- Peto, J , and R. Dole: A Mortality Study Among Workers In an English Asbes tos Factory. XVIII International Congress on Occupational Health, Brighton, England. (1975). 31. Brody, J. E.: New York Times, Sept. 30, 1974. 32. Wester, I.: Asbestos and Malignancy: S.A. Med. J. 47:165-171, (1973). 33. Greenberg, M. and L. Davies: Mesothe lioma Register 1967-68. Brit. J. Industr. Med. 31:91-104,(1974). 35. Harries, P. G.: Asbestos Hazards in Naval Dock Yards. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 11:135- 145,(1968). 36. Whitwell, F. and Rawcllffe M.: Diffuse Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma and Asbes tos Exposure. Thorax 26:6, (1971). 37. McEwen J., Flnlayson, A., Mair A. and A. A. M. Gibson: Mesothelioma In Scotland. Brit. Med. J. 4:575-578, (1970). 38. Stumphlus J.: Epidemiology of Meso thelioma on Wallheren Island. Brit. J. IndustrL Med., 28:59-66, 1971). 39. Sherrs, G. and A. R. Templeton: Effects of Asbestos In Dockyard Workers. Brit. Med. J . 7:574-579. (1968). " 40. Fletcher, D. E.: A Mortality Study of Shipyard Workers with Plural Plagues. Brit. J. Industr. Med. 29:142-145, (1972). 41. Gilliam, 3. D,, Lemen, R. A., Archer, V. E., Wagner, J. K,, and J. Dement: Mor bidity and Mortality Among Hard Rock Miners Exposed to an Abestiform Mineral. Am. N. Y. Acad. Sci. (In press). 42. Eolge, J. R.: Asbestos Related Disease in Barrow-in-Fumances. Env. Resh. (In Press). Section 1910.1001 is proposed to te re vised to read as follows: $ 1910.1001 Asbestos. <a) Scope and application. This section applies to every place of employment where asbestos or a product containing asbestos is m anufactured, processed, packaged, stored, applied, used or other wise handled. However, this section does not apply to construction work within ' the scope of S1910.12 of this part nor to working conditions of employees with re spect to which other Federal agencies exercise statutory authority to prescribe or enforce standards or regulations af fecting occupational safety or health. (b) Definitions. For the purpose of this section-- (1) "Asbestos" includes chrysotile, amoslte, crocidolite, tremolite, antho- phyllite, and actinolite, and every prod uct containing any of these minerals. (2) "Asbestos fiber" means a particu late form of asbestos, longer than 5 mi crometers, w ith a length-to-diam eter ratio of a t least 3 to 1, and with a maxi mum diam eter of 5 micrometers. (3) "Emergency" means an unforesee able and unexpected occurrence likely to release airborne concentrations of asbes tos fibers in excess of 5 fibers per cubic centim eter of air, such as, but not limited to, failure of equipment or control de vices, and rupture of containers. (4) "Authorized person" means a per son required by his duties to enter a regulated area and authorized to do so by his employer, this section, or the Oc cupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. The phrase Includes a representa tive of employees who Is designated to observe monitoring procedures. (5) "Assistant Secretary" means the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occu pational Safety and Health, U.S. Depart ment of Labor, or any of his designees. (6) "Director" means the Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, or any of its designees. ic' Permissible exposure to airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers--(1) 8hour time-weighted average concentra tion. No employee may be exposed to an 8-hour time-weighted average airborne concentration of asbestos fibers in excess of 0.5 fiber per cubic centimeter (or 500,000 fibers per cubic meter) of air, as determined on the basis of a 40-hour work week and by the method prescribed in paragraph (e) (3) of this section. (2 >Ceiling concentration. No employee may be exposed to airborne concentra tions of asbestos fibers in excess of 5 fibers per cubic centimeter (or 5 million fibers per cubic meter) of air, as deter mined over a period up to 15 minutes, by the method prescribed in paragraph (e> (3) of this section. (d> Regulated areas. Any work area where a person may be exposed to air borne concentrations of asbestos fibers in excess of either of the limits imposed by paragraph (c) of this section shall be designated a regulated area. Only au thorized persons may be allowed to enter such an area. A daily roster of all persons entering a regulated area shall be made and maintained. (e> Monitoring. The purpose of all monitoring required by this paragraph is to measure accurately the airborne con centrations of asbestos fibers in a work place to which employees would be ex posed if they worked in the area without the use of personal protective equipment, such as respirators. Monitoring shall be performed in a manner reasonably cal culated to satisfy this purpose. It may not be necessary to monitor every em ployee exposed to airborne concentra tions of asbestos fibers in order to satisfy the purposes of this paragraph. For in stance, the employee, or his working lo cations, likely to be exposed to the high est airborne concentration of asbestos fibers in a work area may be deemed a representative of all the employees in the area. An employee in one shift may be deemed a representative of all em ployees in other shifts who, because they perform the same operation or are sta tionery in the same area, or for other relevant reasons, may reasonably be considered to have the same level of exposure as the representative employee. However, the results of a monitoring of a representative employee shall be deemed to apply, and to indicate the exposure level of, all employees represented. PROPOSED..RULES ^ V; * ' . . 47661 (1 ) Initial. Every employer shall cause exposure to or below the jpennisslble" ex- . strate the effectiveness of th system to every place of employment where asbes posure limits, except to the extent thaf.cbntrol the exposure, such as capture tos fibers may be released to be monitored such controls are not feasfble. 'Where ''veIocity, duct velocity, or static pressure. in such a manner as to determine wheth engineering controls which can be in shall be made a t least every 3 months. er employees are exposed to concentra stituted immediately are not sufficient Measurements of the system's effective tions of asbestos fibers In excess of either to reduce exposure to or below the per ness to control exposure shall also be of the two limits prescribed in paragraph missible exposure limits, they shall none made within 5 days of any change in (c) of this section. If either limit is ex theless be used to reduce exposure to the production, process, or control which ceeded, the employer shall immediately lowest practicable level, and shall be sup /m ight result in any change in employee undertake a compliance program in ac plemented by the use of work practice exposure. cordance with paragraph (f) of this controls. (7) Compliance program, (i) Every section. (2) Personal protection controls. employer shall establish and implement (2) Frequency, (i) If monitoring shows Where engineering and work practice a written program to reduce exposures that an employee's exposure is above controls are not sufficient to reduce em to or below the permissible exposure lim either limit prescribed in paragraph (c) ployee exposure to or below the permis its solely by means of engineering and of this section, the monitoring shall be sible exposure limits, they shall nonethe work practice controls. repeated every month, except as other less be used to reduce exposure to the (ii) The written program shall in wise provided in paragraph (e) (2) (ii) lowest possible level, and shall be sup clude: of this section. . plemented by the use of respirators, in (A) A description of each exposed op (ii) If monitoring shows th at an em accordance with paragraph (g) of this eration, e.g,, crew size, operating pro ployee's exposure is below both limits section. cedures, and maintenance practices; prescribed in paragraph (c) of this sec (3) Particular tools. All hand-oper (B) Engineering plans and studies tion, the monitoring shall be repeated ated and power-operated tools which used to determine the controls for the every three months, except as otherwise may produce or release asbestos fibers operation; . provided in paragraph (e) (2) (i) or (e) in excess of the exposure limits pre (C) A report of the technology con (2) (iii), or (e) (2) (iv) of this section. scribed in paragraph (c) of this section, sidered in meeting the permissible ex (iii) If two consecutive monitorings such as, but not limited to, saws, scorers, posure limits; made at least 5 days, but not more abrasive wheels, and drills, shall be pro (D) Monitoring data; than 3 months apart, show th at an em vided with local exhaust ventilation sys (E) A detailed schedule for imple ployee's exposure is, below both limits tems. * mentation of the engineering controls prescribed in paragraph (c) of this sec (4) Work practices, (i) Wet methods. and work practices th at cannot be im tion, monitoring need not be repeated, Insofar as practicable, asbestos shall be plemented immediately, as well as for the except as otherwise provided in para handled, mixed, applied, removed, cut, development and implementation of any graph (e) (2) (iv) of this section. scored, or otherwise worked in a wet additional engineering and work prac (iv) Whenever an employer has reason state sufficient to prevent the emission tices necessary to meet the permissible to believe th at an employee's level of of airborne fibers in excess of the ex exposure limits; exposure has changed because of a posure limits prescribed in paragraph (c) (F) Other relevant information. change in production, process, controls, of this section, unless' the usefulness'of (iii) Written plans for compliance pro or other relevant factors, the employee the product would be diminished thereby. grams shall be submitted, upon request shall be monitored as soon as practicable, (ii) Particular products and opera to the Assistant Secretary and Director, and thereafter paragraphs (e) (2) (i), (e) tions. (A) No asbestos cement, mortar, and shall be available a t the worksite for (2) (ii), or (e) (2) (iii) shall apply. coating, grout, plaster, or similar mate examination and copyingby the Assist (3) Method of measurement. All de rial containing asbestos shall be removed an t Secretary and the Director. Such terminations of airborne concentrations from bags, cartons, or other containers written plans shall be revised and up of asbestos fibers shall be made by the in which they are shipped, without being dated a t least every six months to reflect membrane filter method at 400-450 x either wetted, or enclosed, or ventilated the current status of the program. (magnification) (4 millimeter objective) so as to prevent effectively the release of (g) Respiratory protection. (1) Use. with phase contrast illumination. airborne asbestos fibers in excess of the Respirators shall be used where required (4) Employee notification, (i) Within limits prescribed in paragraph (c) of this under this section. Compliance with the five (5) working days after the receipt section. (B) Employees engaged in the permissible exposure limits may not be of the measurement results, the employer spraying of asbestos, and in the removal achieved by the use of respirators, shall notify each employee in writing of of asbestos insulation or coverings shall except: the results concerning the employee's be provided with respiratory equipment (1) During the time period necessary exposure. and protective clothing in accordance to install engineering or work practice (ii) Where the results reveal an emwith paragraph (g) of this section. controls; or . ployee's exposure to be above either of (5) Local exhaust ventilation. Local (ii) In work situations in Which en the permissible exposure limits, such exhaust ventilation and dust collection gineering controls and supplemental notification shall also include a state systems shall be designed, constructed, work practice controls are insufficient to ment of the corrective action being taken installed, and maintained in accordance reduce exposure to or below the permis to reduce exposure to or below the per with the American National Standard sible exposure limits; or ' missible exposure limits. Fundamentals Governing the Design and (iii) In emergencies. (f) Methods of compliance. EmployeeOperation of Local Exhaust Systems, (2) Selection. Where respirators are exposure to asbestos fibers shall be con ANSI Z9.2-1971, which is incorporated permitted by this section, the employer trolled to or below the permissible ex by reference herein. (See 51910.6 of this shall select them from among those ap posure limits by engineering controls, part concerning the availability of ANSI proved by the National Institute for Oc work practices, and personal protection Z9.2-1971, and the maintenance of a his cupational Safety and Health, U.S. De controls. toric file in connection therewith.) (1) Engineering and work practice (6) Mechanical ventilation. When partm ent of Health, Education, and Wel controls. Engineering controls shall be in mechanical ventilation is used to control fare, pursuant to 30 CFR P art 11, and in stituted immediately to reduce employee exposure, measurements which demon- accordance with Table 1 set out below. FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 40, NO. 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 47662 PROPOSED RULES Tabu: 1 RESPIRATORY PROTECTION AGAINST ASBEST06 FIBERS (5) Arrangement of lavatory facilities. Lavatory and toilet facilities which are located in regulated areas shall be a r Concentration of asbestos Over 2,000 times the applicable exposure lim it prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section. Up to 2,000 times the applicable exposure limit prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section. Required respirator (A) Self-contained breathing apparatus with a full facepiece in pressure-demand (positive pressure) mode. (A) A type C supplied air respirator with a full facepiece operated In pressuredemand or other positive pressure-mode, or with a full facepiece, hood, or helmet ranged so that no access is available from them to uncontaminated area. (6) Prohibition of activities in regu lated areas. The presence or consump tion of food or beverages, the presence or use of smoking or nonfood chewing prohibit shall be prohibited in regulated areas. Up to 1,000 times the applicable exposure limit prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section. Up to 60 times the applicable exposure limit prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section. Up to 10 times the applicable exposure limit prescribed In paragraph (c) of this section. operated in continuous flow mode. (A) A type C supplied air repirators oper ated in pressure-demand or other posi tive pressure or continuous flow mode; or (B) A powered air purifying respirator with a high efficiency particulate filter;1 (C) self contained breathing apparatus in pressure demand (positive pressure) mode. (A) A high efficiency particulate filter respirator with a full facepiece; or (B) Any supplied air respirator with a full facepiece; or (C) Any self-contained breathing apparatus with a full face piece. - (A) Any air purifying respirator with replaceable particulate filter; or (B) Any single use respirator with or with out valve; or (C) Any supplied air respirator; or (D) Any self-contained breathing apparatus. 1High efficiency filter--99.97 percent efficient against 0.3 micron size dioctylphthalate (DOP). (j) Medical surveillance. (1) General. Every employer shall provide or make available a t his cost medical examina tions relative to exposure to asbestos, as required by this paragraph. If an em ployee refuses a medical examination provided in accordance with this para graph, the employer shall inform the employee of the possible health conse quences of such refusal, and shall obtain a signed statement from the employee stating that such employee has been in formed of the consequences and refuses to be examined. (2) Preplacement. The employer shall provide or make available to each of his employees, within 30 calendar days fol lowing his first employment in an area exposed to airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers, a comprehensive medicai examination. Such examinations shall include, as a minimum, a chest roent (3) Respirator program, (i) Respira (4) The employer shall assure th at all genogram (posterior-anterior 14 x 17 inches), a history to elicit symptoms of tors shall be used and maintained in ac protective clothing and equipment is re respiratory disease, pulmonary function cordance with 1910.134 (e) and (f) of moved only in change rooms required by tests to include forced vital capacity this part. paragraph (i) (l)-of this section. (FVC) and forced expiratory volume at (ii) The employer shall institute a (5) The employer shall assure th at no 1 second (FEV,.,), and for employees respiratory protection program in ac employee removes contaminated protec with 10 or more years of exposure to cordance with 1910.134(b) of this part. tive clothing and equipment from the airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers - Oil) Employees who wear respirators change room, except for the purpose of or who are 45 years of age or older, a shall be allowed to leave work areas to cleaning, laundering, maintenance, or sputum cytology examination. wash their face and respirator facepiece disposal. (3) Annual. Every employer shall pro to prevent skin irritation due to respira (6) Contaminated protective clothing vide or make available comprehensive tor use, and equipment shall be placed in tm- medical examinations to each of his (iv) No employee shall be assigned topermeable closed containers. tasks requiring the use of a respirator if, (7) The employer shall inform any employees exposed to airborne concen based upon his most recent examination, person who launders or cleans protec trations of asbestos fibers at least an nually. Such examination shall include, an examining physician has determined th at the employee would be unable to tive clothing and equipment contami nated with asbestos of the potentially as a minimum, a chest roentgenogram function normally while wearing a res harmful effects of exposure to asbestos (posterior-anterior 14 x 17 inches), a history to elicit symptoms of respiratory pirator, or that the safety or health of fibers. the employee or other employee would be ' (i) Hygiene facilities and practices. disease, pulmonary function tests to in impaired by his use of a respirator. TO (1) Change rooms. Where employees clude forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume a t 1 second the maximum extent possible, such em ployee shall be rotated to another job, or wear protective clothing and equipment, dean change rooms equipped with stor (FEVi.o) and, for employees with 10 or given the opportunity to transfer to a age facilities for street clothes and sepa more years of exposure1to airborne con centrations of asbestos fibers or who are different position, whose duties he is'able to perform, with the same employer, rate storage facilities for protective clothing and equipment shall be pro 45 years of age or older, a sputum cytol in the same geographical area and with vided. ogy examination. the same seniority, status, and rate of (2) Showers. Employees working in (4) Termination of employment. The pay he had just prior to such transfer. regulated areas shall be required to employer shall provide or make available, (h) Personal protective clothing. (1)shower before leaving a t the end of the within 30 calendar days before or after The employer shall provide, and require work sh ift The employer shall provide termination of employment of any em the use of, personal protective clothing, shower facilities in accordance with ployee exposed to airborne concentra such as coveralls or similar whole body S 1910.141(d) (3) of this part. tions of asbestos fibers, a comprehensive clothing, head coverings, gloves, and foot coverings, for any employee exposed to . (3) Lavatories. Employees working in medical examination. Such examination shall include, as a minimum, a chest airborne concentrations of asbestos regulated areas shall be required to wash hands, face, and forearms prior to drink roentgenogram (posterior-anterior 14 x fibers which exceed either of the limits prescribed in paragraph (c) of this ing, eating, or smoking. The employer 17 inches), a history to elicit symptoms of respiratory disease, pulmonary func section. shall provide an adequate number of lavatories for this purpose which shall tion tests to include forced vital capac (2) Clean and dry protective cloth ing and equipment shall be provided to meet the requirements of 1 1910.141 ity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume each affected employee a t least daily. (d) (1) and (2) of this part. . - at 1 second <FEV,.0) and, for employees (3) The employer shall clean, launder, (4) Arrangement of shower facilities.with 10 or more years of exposure to air maintain, or dispose of-protective cloth Clothes lockers and shower facilities shall borne concentrations of asbestos fibers ing and equipment required by this be arranged so as to separate regulated or who are 45 years of age or older, a section. areas and uncontaminated areas. sputum cytology examination. FEDEKA1 REGISTER, V Q L 40, NO. 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 . , PROPOSED kULS i i - (5) Recent examinations. No medical (1) Danger signs and labels. (1) Dan (n) Recordkeeping. (1) Exposure rec examination is required of any employee, ger signs, (i) Posting. Signs shall be pro ords. Every employer shall make an ac if adequate records show th at the em vided and displayed a t each regulated curate record of every monitoring of em ployee has been examined in accordance area. Signs shall be posted a t such a dis ployee exposure as required in para with this paragraph within the past 1 - tance from such an area th at an em graph (e) of this section. year period. ployee may read the signs and take nec (1) The record shall include: (6) Physician's written opinion, (i) essary protective steps before entering (A) Date of monitoring; With respect to each examination re the area marked by the signs. (B) Operation involving exposure to (ii) Sign specifications. The signs shall asbestos fibers; quired by this paragraph, the employer shall obtain a written opinion from the display the following legend, with letter (C) Sampling and analytical methods examining physician, containing the sizes and styles of a visibility a t least used; following: equal to the following: 4 (D) Number, duration, and results of (A) The physician's opinion as to Legend Dotation samples taken; whether the examined employee has any Asbestos ____________ 1 inch sans ser (E) Type of protective devices worn, medical conditions which would place if, gothic, or if any; and the employee at increased risk of mate block. (P) Names, social security numbers, rial impairment of his or her health from Cancer hazard. % inch sans ser job titles, and exposure levels of all em exposure to asbestos fibers, or which if, gothic, or ployees monitored. Mock. (ii) Each record of an employee's ex would, directly or indirectly, be aggra Avoid breathing dust-- V4 inch gothic. vated by such exposure; Wear assigned protective posure shall be maintained for at least (B) Any recommended limitations equipm ent_________ Do. 40 years, or for the duration of the em ployee's employment plus 20 years, upon the employee's exposure to asbestos Do not remain In area Do. fibers, or upon the use of protective unless your work re whichever period is longer. (2) Medical records. The employer clothing and equipment, such as respira quires it. . shall keep an accurate medical record tors; and Spacing between lines shall be a t least for each employee subject to medical sur (C) A statement that the employee has equal to the height of the upper of any veillance required by paragraph (j) of been informed by the physician of any two lines. this section. medical conditions which require fur (2) Danger labels, (i) Labeling. Labels (i) A record shall include: ther examination or treatment. shall be affixed to all raw materials, mix (A) Physician's written opinion; (ii) The written opinion shall not re tures, scrap, waste, debris, and other (B) Any employee medical complaints veal specific findings or diagnoses un products containing asbestos fibers, or to related to exposure to asbestos; related to occupational exposure to as their containers, except th a t no label (C) A signed statement of any refusal bestos fibers. is required where asbestos fibers have to be examined, in accordance with (iii) A copy of the written opinion been modified by a bonding agent, coat paragraph (j) (i) this section. shall be provided to the affected em ing, binder, or other material so that (ii) Each record shall be maintained ployee. during any reasonably forseeable use, for at least 40 years, or for the duration (7) Withdrawal from exposure. No handling, storage, disposal, processing, of the employee's employment plus 20 employee shall be exposed to asbestos or transportation, no airborne concen years, whichever period is longer. fibers in such a way as would put the trations of asbestos fibers in excess of (3) Mechanical ventilation measure employee at increased risk of material the exposure limits prescribed in para ments. When mechanical ventilation is impairment of his or her health from graph (c) of this section will be released. used as an engineering control, the em such exposure. This determination may (ii) Specifications. Labels shall be ployer shall m aintain a record of the be based on the physician's written opin printed in letters of sufficient size and measurements demonstrating the effec ion. contrast as to be readily visible and legi tiveness of such ventilation, as required (k) Employee information and trainble. The label shall state: by paragraph (f) (6) of this section. ing. (1) Training program, (i) Every em Dances (i) The record shall include: ployer shall provide a training program for employees assigned to regulated Cancer Hazard (A) Date and location of measure ments; areas. Contains Asbestos Fibers (B) Type of measurements taken; (ii) The training program shall be Avoid Creating Dust and provided at the time of initial assign (C) Result of measurements; ment and at least annually thereafter, .(3) Prohibition of contrary statement. (ii) Each record shall be maintained and shall include informing each em No statement may appear on or near any for at least 3 years. ployee of: sign or label required by this paragraph (4) Employee training. The employer (A) The specific nature of the opera which would contradict or detract from shall keep an accurate record of all em tions which could result in exposure to the sign or label. ployee training required by paragraph asbestos fibers as well as any necessary (m) Housekeeping. (1) Cleaning. All (k) of this section. protective steps; (B) The engineering controls and exposed surfaces in any place of employ ment shall be maintained free of accu (i) H ie record shall include: (A) Date of training; work practices associated with the em mulations of asbestos fibers if their dis (B) Name, social security number and ployee's job assignment; persion would create an airborne con job title of employee trained; (C) The purpose, proper use, and lim centration in excess of the exposure (C) Content or scope of training pro itations of respiratory protection equip limits prescribed in paragraph (c) of vided; and ment as specified in 1910.134 (b), (e), this section. (D) Identification of materials dis and (f ) of this part; _ (2) Waste disposal. Asbestos waste, tributed to the employee. (D) The purpose for, and a descrip scrap, debris, bags, containers, equip (ii) Each record shall be maintained tion of, the medical surveillance program ment, and asbestos-contaminated cloth for at least 3 years. required by paragraph (x) of this sec ing, consigned for disposal, which may (5) Rosters. Each roster required by tion: and produce in any reasonably forseeable paragraph (d) of this section shall be (E) A review of this standard. use, handling, storage, processing, dis maintained for at least 40 years or for (2) Access to training materials, (i) posal, or transportation airborne con the duration of the personnel's employ A copy of this standard and its appen centrations of asbestos fibers in excess ment plus 20 years, whichever period is dixes shall be made readily available to of the exposure limits prescribed in para longer. all employees working in regulated areas. (ii) All materials relating to the em graph (c) of this section shall be col (6) Availability, (i) All records re quired to be maintained by this section ployee information and training pro lected and disposed of in sealed imper shall be made available, upon request, to gram shall be provided upon request to meable bags, or other closed, imperme the Assistant Secretary and the Director the Assistant Sfecretary and the Director. able containers. for examination and copying. FEDERAI REGISTER, V O l. 40, NO. 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 -- --- --, A n| ; -J 47664 PROPOSED RULES (ii) Employee exposure m easurements^ f L j J B . a Z U . T H HAZARD DATA records required by this paragraph shall ? be made available for exam ination and'- Asbestos poses a hazard as an air contami copying to employees, farm er employees,*? nant. Tissue pathology may be seen at the and their designated representatives. - site of retained fine asbestos fibers which (ill) Employee medical records : re^' haye been Inhaled. quired by this paragraph shall be m ade ^Asbestosis available upon request fo r exam ination ^ and copying to a physician designated *,',A lung disorder characterized by a diffuse by the employee or former employee; 3-j interstitial .fibrosis a t times including pleu ral changs ait fibrosis and calcification. Ac (7) Transfer of records*. Cl) In thec"ompanying'"clinical changes may Include event the employer ceases ip do business, :; fine ralee, and dyspnea, finger clubbing, and the successor shall receive an d retain a lf; cyanosis.,Many of the people exposed to as records required to be m aintained by;th is .' bestos fibers develop asbestosis if the fibers paragraph. - - - ,concentration is high or the duration of (ii) In the event the employer ceases, their exposure Is long. In general, there is to do business and there is no successor., J f considerable time lapse between inhala to receive and retain his records fo r th e : tcihona/n,goefs'aths detfeibrmerisneadndbytxh-eraya.ppearance of prescribed period, these records shall be^. transm itted by mail to th e Director; and each employee and form er employee d iall Neoplasms, sueh as mesothelioma, may be individually notified in vftiting of this ' occur w ithout radiological evidence of asbes transfer. .j '5 V tosis a t exposure levels lower than those re quired for prevention of radiologically evi- (o) Observation of monitoring** <1>l*dentasbestosis. Employee observation. The - employer i shall give employees of th e ir representa : ~itr. RESPIRATORS AND PROTECTIVE CLOTH IN G tives an opportunity to observe 'any ` A. Respirators, ` " m easuring or m onitoring of th eir ex p o rt -.You, must wear respirator whenever you sure to asbestos fibers conducted pursu are in on atmosphere where asbestos fiber a n t to this section. ;^ ^ i* 3 V concentrations exceed the permissible limits. (2) Observation ProcedvreslObWherT However: respirators can only be required observation of the m easuring or m onitor- ; fo f routlne use if your employer is in the ing of employee exposure td sbstos' process of installing controls, or in situations bers requires entry into an area.w hert where these controls cannot feasibly reduce exposure levels to within permissible limits. the use of personal protective im pinent XI rfeipJraVirs Are worn, they must be selected is required, th observer h B b e pro in accordanclf wlth Table I of the asbestos vided with and required to use such standard and have a National Institute for equipm ent and shall comply ^with hU " OocUpatlori&i Safety and Health (NIOSH) other -applicable safety aiuTbealtii p n n seal of approval. If you experience difficulty cedures. - .. >?* 'r:: breithing While wearing a respirator, tell (ii> ' W ithout interfering:' w ith th your employer. .. . _ . . measurement, observers shall "be entitled Bt Clothing ' _ ` to receive" an explanation S the nSonf-. -" The purpose of wearing protective cloth toring^ o r measurem ent: ; procedures,". observe all steps related to fc m ftsuret m ents and record the results, obtained;'-:-. (p) Appendices. The J n f o i^ to n coiR.: talned In the appendices Jib this section is not intended, by itself, to create any: additional obligations riot ojBieiwise .im -' posed, or to detract from a n / existing obligation. .3 " A p p e n d ix -- S u b st a n c e S A rrJA T * S h e e t Asbestos I. SUBSTANCE IDEN TIFICATIOlf ` - A. Substance: Asbestos For purposes of the asbestos standard a s bestos is identified as including, the follo#ing hydrated silicates: chrysote, "amoslte, crocidollte, tremollte, anthophyllita nd as- tinolite. . : ing is to prevent additional exposure which could" resist frond asbestos dust from per sonal clothing and/or the body, becoming airborne. I t is essential.that contaminated clothlng. be removed and handled in such a .Wty th a t the duet will not become airborne and inhaled. . : IV. PRECAUTIONS FOB SAFE U SE AND H a n d lin g =^Perform all operations in a manner which will keep the amount of dust which becomes airborne and potentially Inhaled to an ab solute minimum. Follow the requirements of the asbestos standard regarding engineer ing controls, regulated areas, work practices, respiratory protection and protective cloth ing. Special work practices may be developed for your particular operations. Find out what 'thsy'Are an d follow them. If you notice operatlons_which may be exposing you or others to asbestos dust, tell your supervisor. . , B. Permissible airborne e x p o s u r e s 3 ' - A p p e n d ix S -- S u b sta n c e T e c h n ic a l . 0.5 fibers (longer th l micrometers, " ..-* G U ID E L IN E S . with a length-to-diameter ratio .of a t least & to 1 and with a,m axim um ,diam eter -of 5- - :J - , Asbestos . mlcrometrs) per cubic cenUmeterjjf'air as L. P H V S IC A L AND C H EM IC A L DATA an 8-hour time-weighted average., i?- """ , 2. Bfibers (longer than 5 micrometers with jL Identification' ", ' / . a lengtii-to-diameter ratio" sit Nfest 5 to Asbestos Includes Several different hydrated 1,' and with a maximum diameter of 5 m i crometers)' per cubic centimeter o f ai?' es silicates, all fibrous m inerals.. determined using a sample opHected ovr a B. Minerals Atarned in the asbestos standard period up to 15 minutes.*" . ...z..C..h..r.ysotUeJ'p;am'os"ite, c' roc"idollte, tremollte, C. Description * ' ", ; .. anthophylliteahdactlnollte. . .. ' Mineral fibers of high tensile strength; and -flexibility. Color may be white; off white, blue ' C~. Pliysteal characteristics - . or brown. Fibers vary from harsh coarse' ASbesto fiber generally have high tensile : varieties to fine silky ones. j .V' strength, flexibility, heat and chemical re- sistance and good frictional properties. Characteristics vary with the mineral: (1) Chrysotile, the fibrous form of serpen tine, is the most common variety of asbestos. It can be crushed into fine, white, silky fibers. It has high heat resistance but is de stroyed by acids. (2) Crocidollte, the fibrous form of riebeckite, has fine resilient blue fibers. The fibers are strong and resist acids. (3) Amosite, the fibrous variety of grunerite, can be broken down into long somewhat" harsh fibers, brownish-yellow to white in color. I t is characterized by good resistance to acids and other chemicals. (4) Anthophyllite has rather fragile, brownish or off-white fibers with good heat and chemical resistance. (5) Tremollte (a calcium magnesium sili cate) fibers have low tensile strength, making them undesirable for many industrial appli cations. It is often a major component of in dustrial and commercial talc. (6) Actinollte (a calcium magnesium iron silicate) fibers, like tremollte fibers, have low tensile strength so th a t industrial use is limited. n . CLEAN -U P OF SPILLS AND CONTAMINATED AREAS A. Clean-up of asbestos and asbestos-con taining materials must be done in a manner which will not result in employee exposure to asbestos dust. Do not dry sweep, blow or otherwise move the material so th a t it will become airborne. Wet the material before handling when possible. If loose" material must be cleaned up dry, use vacuum clean ing or other methods which will keep dust under control. * B. Employees involved in clean up opera tions should be restricted from the area until clean up has been completed. C. Employees Involved in clean up opera tions should wear respiratory equipment specified in Table 1 of the asbestos standard when air concentrations are unknown. When air concentrations are known select appro priate respirators from Table 1 of the asbestos standard. D. Enclose waste asbestos materials in con tainers which are impermeable to asbestos fibers and dispose of in a manner which will hot result in subsequent exposures. IV. M ONITORING AND MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES A. General Measurements taken for the purpose of de termining employee exposure are best taken in a fashion such th a t the average 8-hour exposure may be determined from a single sample or two (2) 4-hour samples. Short time interval samples (up to 30 minutes) may also be used to determine the average exposure level if a minimum of five (5) measurements are taken in random manner over the 8-hour work shift. Random sam pling means th a t any portion of the work shift has the same chance of being sampled as any other. The arithmetic average of all such random samples taken on one (1) workshift is an estimate of an employee's average level of exposure for. th a t workshift. Air samples should be taken in the employee's breathing zone (air th a t would most nearly represent th a t inhaled by the employee). The concentration of dust in the air to which a worker is exposed will vary, depend ing upon the nature of the operation and upon the type of work performed by the operator and the position of the operator relative, to the source of the dust. The amount of dust inhaled by a worker can vary daily, seasonally, and with the weather. In order to obtain representative samples of workers' exposures, it is necessary to col lect samples under varying conditions of FEDERAL. KO ISISC.V O t^ ; 40, NO. 1$7-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 weather, on different days, and at different times during a shirt. T h e percentage of working time spent on different tasks will affect the concentration 0f dust the worker Inhales since the dif ferent tasks usually result In exposure to different concentrations. The percentage can be determined from work schedules and by observation of work routines. The concentration of any air contaminant resulting from an Industrial operation also varies with time. Therefore, a longer sam pling time will better approximate the actual average. With the following recommended sampling procedure, It Is possible to collect samples at the workers' breathing zones for periods from 4 to 8 hours, thus permitting the evalu ation of average exposures for a half or full 8-hour shift--a desirable and recommended procedure. Furthermore, dust exposures of a more normal work pattern result from the use of personal samplers. B. Recommended method The recommended sampling and evalua tion method Is described In a paper "USPHS/ NIOSH Membrane Filter Method for Evalu ating Airborne Asbestos Fibers" by Nelson A. Leidel, Stephen G. Bayer and Ralph D. Zum- mualde, TJ.S. Department of Health, Educa tion, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control, National Insti tute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 (In press). A brief summary Is given below. Samples are collected by drawing air through a cellulose ester membrane filter by means of a battery powered personal sam pling pump. H ie filter, after collection of the sample, is transformed from an opaque solid to a transparent, optically homogenous gel. The fibers are sized and counted by phase- contrast microscopy at 400-450X magnifica tion. V. W O R K PRACTICES FO R CER TA IN O PERA TIO N S Work practices for certain work Involving asbestos follow as enclosures to this ap pendix. They are advisory In nature and are not intended to create any additional obliga tions not otherwise imposed by the standard, or to detract from any existing obligation. E nclosure I LOADING, U N LO A D IN G AND STORAGE ASBESTOS CARGO (a) Prior to unloading bags or other con tainer of asbestos fiber from a railcar, truck, ship, or other carrier, make a visual inspec tion of the cargo and cargo space to deter mine If leakage or spillage of asbestos cargo has occurred and the extent of loose asbestos and dust present, If any. (b) If the cargo has not been damaged, and there is no visible loose asbestos fiber or dust on the cargo or in the cargo space, unload ing and transport to storage or another car rier may proceed normally. Handle and store asbestos fiber which Is In sealed bags or other closed containers impermeable to asbestos fiber In a manner th a t will minimize any damage th a t could create an exposure prob lem. PROPOSED RULES j v ; . ..... V ' 3 " V (c) If visual Inspection of cargo and cargo space reveals bag or other container damage or loose asbestos fiber or dust at any time, do not proceed with unloading of cargo until precautions have been taken to minimize employee exposure. ' (d) Collect any loose asbestos fiber and dust found in the process of unloading, or In the storage area, by vacuum cleaning or other suitable methods th at do not In them selves produce air concentrations exceeding those prescribed in paragraph (b) of the as bestos standard, and dispose of It In sealed bags or other closed containers Impermeable' to asbestos fiber. Do not clean up asbestos by blowing or dry sweeping. Repair damaged bags or other containers by taping or by in serting Into bags or other containers Im permeable to asbestos fibers. Make these rem edies before transporting the bag or the container to storage or use point. (e) If it is known th a t railcars, trucks, ships or other carriers have contained as bestos as their last cargo, Inspect the carrier and clean up any visible asbestos fiber and dust, prior to loading the next asbestos car go, to ensure th a t no residue of asbestos fiber and dust will contaminate the asbestos car go(f) If the airborne concentrations of asbes tos fibers to which employees are exposed during asbestos cargo loading, unloading and storage are unknown select any respirator from Table 1 of the asbestos for employee use. During clean-up operations In carrier or storage areas where airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers are unknown have employ ees wear respirators selected from Table 1 of the Asbestos standard which protect for up to 50 times or more of the limits In paragraph (b) of the asbestos standard. Where the concentrations are known have employees wear appropriate respirators as specified In Table 1 of the asbestos standard. (g) Special clothing is to be worn by all employees engaged in loading, unloading, and storage of asbestos cargo when th e wear ing of such clothing is required by paragraph (d) (3) of the asbestos standard. E n closure n INTRODUCTION OF ASBESTOS FIBER INTO MANUFACTURING PROCESSES (a) Conduct production operations Involv ing introduction of asbestos fiber Into a proc ess under dust controlled conditions such th a t employees are not exposed to concen trations of asbestos fiber above the exposure limits prescribed in paragraph (b) of the asbestos standard. (b) In those operations where bagged as bestos fiber is being used, ensure th a t the fiber bags arrive at the work station in dean condition, free of loose fiber on the bag sur face. If the bags are stacked on pallets, the pallets m ust be clean and free of loose fiber. (c) Place empty bags or other containers which have contained asbestos fibers In closed or sealed containers impermeable to asbestos fibers until disposed of by methods that do not create airborne concentrations in excess of the exposure limits prescribed in paragraph (b) of the asbestos standard. . A p p e n d i x C-- M e d i c a l S u r v e i l l a n c e .. G u id e l in e s ' X. R O U TE O F E N TR Y Inhalation. n . TOXICOLOGY A. Exposure to asbestos dust may result In asbestosls If the dust concentration Is high or th e duration of exposure is long. In gen eral, there Is a considerable time lapse be tween Inhalation of the dust and the ap pearance of changes as determined by X-ray Asbestosls Is characterized by: 1. A pattern of roentgenographlc changes consistent with diffuse interstital fibrosis of variable degree and, at times, pleural changes of fibrosis and calcification. , 2. Clinical changes Including fine rales and finger clubbing. These may be present or absent In any individual case. 3. Physiological changes consistent with a lung disorder. ' B. Neoplasms Neoplasms, such as mesothelioma, may oc cur without radiological evidence of ashes- tosls a t exposure levels lower then those re quired for prevention of radiologlcally evi dent asbestosls. . H I. SPECIAL TESTS A. Chest roentgenographs. B. Lung function tests. 1. Forced vital capacity. 2. Forced.respiratory volume at 1 second. 3. Sputum cytology. V I. SURVEILLANCE AND PREVENTIVE C O N S ID E R A T IO N S A. Preplacement A routine medical examination and a com plete medical and work history are required to be made available. The examination in cludes a chest roentgenogram (posterior anterior 14 x 17 inches), a history to elicit symptomatology of respiratory disease, and pulmonary function tests to Include forced vital capacity (FVC) forced expiratory vol ume a t 1 second (FEV10) , and, for employees with 10 or more years of exposure to airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers or who are 45 years of age or older, a sputum cytology examination. Those employees with respira tory disorders generally should not be placed where there is increased risk to Inhalation of asbestos fibers. C. Annual and termination examination Annual and termination examinations are required to be made available. They are to include, as a minimum, a chest roentgeno gram (posterior-anterior 14 x 17 inches), a history to elicit symptomatology of respira tory disease, pulmonary function tests to in clude farced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume at 1 second (FEV1(1) and, for employees with 10 or more years of ex posure to airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers or who are 45 years of age or older, a sputum cytology examination. (Secs. 4, 6, 8, 84 Stat. 1592, 1593, 1599 (29 UB.C. 653, 655, 657) and 29 CFR Part 1911) [FR Doc.75-26561 Filed 9-30-75:4:54 pm] FEDERAL REGISTER, V O L 40, NO. 197-- THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1975 PART II: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS N otice of Proposed Rulemaking Vol.40-- No.197 10-9-75 PAGES 47469-47749 i % A - ~vr " v.:., ' 9- i\r. 70 n o n ii PART I: VICE PRESIDENTIAL COAT OF ARMS, SEAL, AND FLAG , Executive order............__ ,,__ ................... .... ,.......... ...... M M M M M M M H M M n c O N T IN U tD PART II: ^ . OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TQ ASBESTOS Labor/OSHA proposes revised safety and health stand- ards; comments by 12-8-75.....1........... ......................... 47469 INSIDE 47651 PART III: AIR QUALITY CONTROL EPA proposes amendments and test procedure for Stage II gasoline vapor recovery; commente by 1.1--24--75...... 47667 PART IV: ;; . FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION FEC proposes subpena power regulations; comments by 11-10-75 ................... ............... ...I......... .......... ............. FEC proposes regulations for Presidential Primary Elec tion Matching Funds; comments by 11-10-75.............. FEC issues interim gu idelin efor Presidential Primary Election Matching Funds.... ................. ............................. FEC publishes advisory opinions on reporting require ments for inter-political committee contributions and investment or savings deposits of contribtuions or other receipts......................... ........ .......: ................... ............... 47688 47688 47691 47691 PART V: EMERGENCY HOME OWNERS' RELIEF PROGRAM HUD proposes establishm ents............................ .......... HUD issues description of standard to determine when to activate standby authority............................ .............. 47694 47706 PART VI: NEW SOURCE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DIS V i i CHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMITS EPA issues proposed regulations on preparation of en vironment impact statements; comments by 11-24-75.. 47713 PART VII: INDIAN MANPOWER PROGRAMS Labor issues regulations for implementation.................. Labor proposes limitations on the expenditure of Federal funds by prime sponsors.......--..................... - ................. 47722 47744 PART VIII: PRIVACY ACT . The-following; agencies issue rules, proposals and/or notices: - 1 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE National Security Council (2 documents)... ........ 47746, 47748