Document 2JRw7ngGZ1NJzn6kQww0BeQRr

Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 119 / Friday, June 20, 1986 / Rules and Regulations 22679 witnesses. OSHA has concluded that These studiesexamined the effect of exposure to all forms of tremolite, chemically modified asbestos should be intrapleural injections of a number of anthophyllite and actinolite should be regulated In the same manner as minerals including asbestiform and regulated under, this standard. unmodified asbestos. To make this nonasbestiform tremolite. In these The Agency recognizes that the intent clear, the phrase "and any of studies, sample's of asbestiform minerals tremolite! actinolite and these minerals that has been chemically tremolite and a sample of anthophyllite exist in different forms. treated and/or altered" has been added nonasbestiform tremolite induced tumor Further, the Agency has concluded that to the definition of asbestos. formation in hamsters while other all forms of these minerals should OSHA currently regulates all forms of samples of nonasbestiform tremolite did continue to be regulated for the reasons tremolite, actinolife, and anthophyllite riot (Ex. 84-194). stated above. Therefore. OSHA is as asbestos. Some commenters, most In addition to the experimental animal amending the definition of asbestos in notably representatives of the R.T. studies, much of the support to eliminate recognition that different mineral forms x. Vanderbilt Company, have strongly some forms of tremolite, actinolite, and exist and adding a definition for encouraged QSHA to revise its anthophyllite from the definition of tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite to definition of asbestos to make it asbestos has focused on epidemiological make it clear that all of the mineral mineralogically correct. They have studies of exposed workers. Particular forms come under the scope of the encouraged the Agency to amend the attention has been paid to two standard. definition to make it clear that only the prospective mortality studies at a New "asbestiform" varieties of tremolite, ' York state talc mine and mill. The Action Level & anthophyllite, and actinolite are considered to be asbestos (Ex. 337). The Agency raised this issue in the April proposal. A number of commenters supported the addition of the term "asbestiform" (Ex. 90-3; 90-143; 90-180) or the term "fibrous" (Ex. 90-37; 117A) to the definition. Some urged OSHA to adopt the definition of another governmental Agency (Ex. 90-143; 90-181; 90-107) or to adopt a mineralogical definition (Ex. 9037; 90-162; 90-179; 230 p. 13). The modification of the definition to read tremolite asbestos, anthophyllite asbestos, and actinolite asbestos would eliminate other forms of tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite from the definition of asbestos. OSHA has regulated all of these minerals as asbestos.since 1972. The elimination of these minerals from the scope of the standard could only be justified by evidence that exposure to these November proposal discussed both studies in great detail. Briefly, the NIOSH investigators (Brown, Dement and Wagoner Ex. 8425) concluded that there were significant excesses of lung cancer mortality and of mortality due to nonmalignant respiratory disease. In the opinion of the investigators, this increase could not be accounted for by smoking history alone. They also reported that asbestos was present in the mine and mill. Stille and Tabershaw, studying a larger cohort employed at the same facility, concluded that the lung cancer excess observed was not statistically significant and was "consistent with a smoking effect" (Ex. 84-198). A number of reports, analyses, and letters to the editor that discussed the strengths and shortcomings of the two studies were placed in the record and were discussed in the November proposal (Exs. 84-217; 84-218; 84-231; 84-257; 84-375.306, 337). In the final standard the action level has been set at.0.1 f/cc which triggers the monitoring, medical, and employee information and training requirements. This level is consistent with the trigger currently applied to the medical surveillance provision of the asbestos standard, so it represents no real change to the standard with regard to this provision, but merely clarifies OSHA's policy. This provision is also consistent with other OSHA health standards which trigger monitoring, medical, and training requirements at the action level (e.g., arsenic, 1910.1018; lead, 1910.1025; acrylonitrile. 1910.1045; and ethylene oxide 1910.i047). Regulated areas, hygiene facilities, and protective clothing are triggered at the PEL, consistent with past OSHA rulemaking. [See, for example, inorganic arsenic, 1910.1018). Representatives of industry, labor and minerals would not present a health (For a detailed discussion see 48 FR government endorsed the action level hazard to exposed workers. Therefore, 51117-51120.) concept. Many participants suggested in its deliberations, OSHA examined the Several other authors have that a 0.1 f/cc action level should be data in the record to determine whether investigated the mortality and morbidity maintained as an appropriate level for or not there is evidence that workers associated with anthophyllite and . the implementation of medical exposed to these minerals are at risk for tremolite exposures. Studies by surveillance [Exs. 86-4, 80-49,90-163, adverse health effects. ' Kleinfeld et al (Ex. 84-181). Kiviliioto et 90-174,90-180,158D. 328]. Some Both Dr. Me8rl Stanton and Dr. at. (Ex. 84-181). Gambje elal. (Ex. 84- commenters were of the opinion that the William Smith have investigated the 181) and others were discussed in the O.i level should triggerimplemenlation ' carcinogenicity of termolite in ' November proposal. In general, these of other provisions'as well, such as. experimental.animals.Dr. Stanton's studies have found ah excess mortality training [Exs. 88-4, 90-49,90-183, 90- experiments (Ex. 84-195) demonstrated and/or morbidity associated with 174,90-180.158D. 328]. Some that tremolite asbestos is highly exposures to these minerals. commenters were of the opinion that the carcinogenic when implanted in the OSHA has examined the data in the 0.1 level should trigger implementation pleurae of rats. He also tested two record that addresses the relationship of other provisions as well, such as samples Of talc that did not induce between the health of workers and training [Exs. 88-4, 292, 328), regulated tumors! These two samples were exposure to tremolite, actinolite and areas [Exs. 66-4, 90-49, 292], monitoring certified by Dr. Ann Wylie (Ex. 337 Alt anthophyllite. There is epidemiological (86-4, 292, 328], hygiene facilities and 2) to be tremolitic talcs which "usually evidence in the record that shows that protective clothing requirements [Exs. contain approximately 30-50% tremolite exposed workers are at risk 88-4, 292]. Other industry spokespersons nonasbestiform tremolite by weight, and for both death and disease. The results*- believed that the action level was overly small quantities of nonasbestiform in experimental animals indicate that burdensome, stating their opinion that if anthophyllite and fibrous talc" (Ex. 337 under test conditions that some samples the permissible exposure Ievel were a Att 2). Dr. William Smith also conducted of nonasbestiform tremolite induce level that adequately protects workers, a series of experimental carcinogenicity tumor formation while others do not. no action level should be required [Exs. studies in hamsters iEx. 84-194; 306). Therefore, OSHA concludes that 90-138, 90-166. 90^168]. GLEASON-000927