Document KR47Vom0o08EDGyJJvvrL0Xj2

3D^. 1 Jl I '' carcinogenic fiber are elimi nated. The report contains recommen dations for medical testing pro cedures including chest X-rays, pulmonary function tests, ob servation of respiratory and other clinical symptoms. The Group also recommends that sputum cytology be evaluatedas a surveillance technique. Results of medical examinations should be reported directly to the employee, and aggregate medi cal information -- without indi vidual identifiers -- should be reported to an employer's entire workforce. Asbestos workers showing respiratory problems should be'c' forded the opportunity to trans fer to jobs where there is no asbestos exposure. They should suffer no cut in oavor benefits to ~3tTso. The Group suooests that this program should be similar to the one now enforced by OSHA for lead workers. -Regulations should protect all workers' exposed to asbestos, including those in the construc tion, shipbuilding, and maritime industries, where high expo sures have historicallyoccurred. Asbestos product manufac turers should perform air sam pling in all possible processes involving their productstodeter mine probable airborne asbes tos levels. This information should be passed on to Ihe products' potential users. Dr. Bingham added the following remarks: For quite some time, a number of us in the public health community, both in and out of govern ment. have expressed concern about the health effects of exposure to asbestos, fn recent years, the sub stance has become the focus of public attention as well: asbestos js now perhaps the foremost "symbol of this country's concern about toxic sub stances in the environment and in the workplace. Considerations of asbestos health effects and regulatory protec tion have always been complex and controversial. In this light, the current data and solid recommendations to come out of this NlOSH/OSHA project are especially welcome and important. The report released today is certainly a cause lor concern -- concern for Ihe numbers of workers still exposed to dangerous levels of asbestos. But this report, and OSHA's response to it, should also be a cause for hope among American workers everywhere. It should be a cause for hope because it confirms that occupational health research is not a static science. On the contrary, under Dr. Robbins' direction. NIOSH has demonstrated an ongoing commitment to the re-evalua tion of all available data with only one thought in mind: the protection ol the worker. The current workplace stan dard governing asbestos exposure was OSHA's first comprehensive health standard. It is based on data that was assembled and analysed during the mid-sixties, if not the '".fancy certainly the childhood of occupational health. Much has been learned in the laboratory and in the workplace since then, as this report indicates. In view of what we know now. OSHA's current standard needs major improvements. The report is cause for hope be cause. contrary to some of OSHA's critics, the agency's regulations are not carved in stone. They are instead a reflection of the best science available. As science continues to improve, so will OSHA's health standards, and worker protection. The report we are issuing today demands corrective ac tion. We will begin immediately. We have designated a team within OSHA to begin working on a proposed revision to the present OSHA asbestos standard. We will be developing that proposal pursuant to the OSHA cancer policy announced last January. I can't tell you yet what permissible level will be proposed or whether we will issue ' an emergency temporary slandard or pursue the proposed permanent stan dard route. But .the_seyetity_jaLthe .ihreai pnsgri and rhi. very hiqt^ num bers of workers exposed to the asbestos hazard dictate that we moys_yyiih all deliberate speed in amending the present 5tandard-ifl'2~rnillion fibers per tubic.meier. average over a workday. I am confident that the procedures set down by the cancer policy and the synthesizing effect of the rulemaking procedure will result in a much more protective standard so that we can finally move toward an end to fatal asbestos-related diseases such as lung cancer, asbestosis, and meso thelioma. < Aw. t. air^p/cfalfdresslng'!. ewpmrltf^extrsSi&rtrf' tra'prcta'ctldr^Ye^tK'B sVncferorffthanhrdnfd.i _ ton aljglijtldrstrlp3tAstaf6! rn Vc* oooo Occupational Health Nursing, July 1980 49 ft- v'.rJtii. " mwrfrrTf*--y , ' ^