Document M6qq10KxQV67xvnOgo49rRd7

SU---JJi 1 IS L--. oC <C.J if1 Fwn: BID Center - 401-3X9B win: 236-1382 Oat*: Notember 6, 1087 Subject: 1088 NEGOTIATIONS POSITION PAPES Tee J. B. Jacoby - Gateway cc: E. P. Uassaro - Gateway (without att.) Attached is a draft copy of the 1988 Negotiations Position Paper, 'Toxic or Hazardous Substances in Vestinghouse1 which I hare updated. Some of the attachments are dated but are still current. I did not include our asbestos guidelines with this letter but will make it available if you need it. > *ger Corporate Industrial Hygiene Environmental Affairs /ehw HWBB-B037<*2l> HWBB-0037425 i '=? b--J DRAFT SSL PEQPRIETASY 1088 NEGOTIATIONS POSITION PAPER **** Tone QE HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN EESTINGEOUSE* #*** u- Prepared by : C. T. Bickerstaff Hamper i Industrial Hygiene Enrironaental Affairs EAD Csntar I HU6B-B037426 5=2 L-----Li TOXIC OH HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN lESTINGHOUSB A. Historical Background Westinghouse [(}] m a pioneer is the field of Industrial Hygiene with the history of the department going back to the early 1030's. The initial effort ns evaluating and controlling eaploye exposure to silica particulate in the foundry operations. Efforts were then directed toward developing a system of evaluating the chenicals and aaterials used in the (W) aanufacturing processes to deternine the potential employe health hazards and deteraining shat controls, precautions and protective clothing was necessary to minimise the hazards. This system was then integrated into the Vestinghouse Corporate Standards Purchasing Department Specification/Haterial (PDS/M) Card System as a means of communicating this information to the (V) plants. Once the hazardous aaterials were identified, then Safe Practice Data Sheets (SPDS) were developed, prepared and issued to the plants. SPDS included the physical properties, the common (T) aaterials which contained this hazardous material, the toxicity, fire information, first aid information, sad how to safely handle and control the material. Until 1970 there was limited personnel monitoring of eaploye exposure to hazardous aaterials at industrial plants including (V), with the exceptions being the monitoring of eaploye radiation and noise exposure. If the Headquarters Industrial Hygiene Department was involved in any monitoring that was performed, these records were well maintained. However, maintenance of such historical records at the (W) plants varies from excellent to poor. Medical surveillance, e.g. audioaetric exams, periodic physicals, bioassay samples, was such more prevalent including the maintenance of such records. In 1984 Mr. Stu Saltmaa of the Law Department issued guidelines on records retention and by including a review of plant record retention during our plant audits, maintenance of these records has improved. Vhen the Occupational Safety and Health Act came into being in 1971, sore emphasis was placed on eaploye exposure to toxic materials. Industrial Hygiene training courses were developed for the plant industrial hygiene and -2- MMBB-0037h27 I safety representatives. Additional monitoring equipment, sampling puaps, noiseaeters, etc., were purchased and sampling procedures were prepared for the Qf) plants to ^.-rfora assessment of occupational exposure. Therefore, documentation of employe exposures to toxic materials or physical agents increased such that personnel monitoring of employe exposure in the last 11 years is sore than twice the amount there was in the previous 40 years. The format of the (J) SPDS was revised to reflect the changes in the OSEA Occupational Health Standards, e.g. personnel monitoring requirements, permissible exposure limits, employe training requirements concerning the potential health hasard of toxic materials, disposal of waste and recordkeeping. Plant audits were established to review the (T) plant Industrial Hygiene and Safety Programs with a written report then issued to the General/Plant Manager discussing the findings recommendations and requesting a response. Becaue (V) was a pioneer in developing industrial hygiene and safety programs, the OSEA regulations have had a minimum impact compared to other major corporations, e.g. chemical manufacturers, and in general OSEA has a high regard for (J) as a responsive employer. B, Present Conditions About 00-70 percent of the (V) plants use, in part or total, the (T) PDS/M card system to purchase materials and chemicals and thus these chemicals and materials are evaluated by our department as previously described. The other plants, e.g. acquisitions or new divisions, have their <C: - own method of material evaluation including material safety data sheets from their supplier. Bach plant has copies of the Qf) Safe Practice Data Sheets (SPDS) which they can use for reference and training the employes. Specific hasardous awareness training has always been given to CD radiation workers. Sessions covering hasardous or toxic materials mad the (T) SPDS have recently been added to the safety observer training and are also included in the () Hasard Comaunications/Bight-to-Know Program. In August, 1080 OSHA issued a standard *Employe Eight of Access to Medical and Exposure Hecords. This standard permits employes, or their designated representative, to have access to their medical records and their records of exposure to hasardous materials. 3- --'< If A letter me issued by (J) Headquarters advising the pleats of the details of the standard, and shat steps to follow if aay request was Bade for aedical and/or exposure results (Attachaent 1). ' Very few plants have received employe requests for information exposure to hasardous materials and these requests were honored. Headquarters Industrial Hygiene has always recommended that results of employe personnel aouitorisg be given and explained to the eaployes. This is especially iaportant with the increased eaphasis on aonitoring employe exposure to hasardous aaterial and all of the new OSHA occupational health standards now requiring it, e.g. asbestos, lead, arsenic and hearing conservation. If, however, during our plant audits we find that sobs (T) plants do not have a mechanism for inforaing eaployes of their aonitoring results this is then corrected. 0. Hew Standards and Regulations of Concern In 1085 the OSHA Federal Hasard Communication standard became effective for the manufacturing and chemical industries. Since then about one-half of the states have legislated employe and/or community Right-To-Know laws. A recommended prograa of compliance was developed and issued to all (V) plants (manufacturing and aon-aaaufmaturing) advising them how and when to. achieve specific requireaents for the standard (Attachaent 2). As of August 1087, only three (T) plants have received citations froa OSHA on their Hasard Communication Program and these were minor infractions. OSHA extended the hasard communication standard to include all industries effective August 1087. Fortunately most () facilities implemented our recoamended prograa and this will have a minimum impact on the corporation. With the increasing use of video display terainals (VDTs) e.g. eoaputers, word processors, electronic sail, in the workplace, aost (V) employes will have none exposure to VDTs on a routine basis. As the use of VDTs has proliferated, so has allseed health concerns associated with their use, e.g. eye strain, back strain, cataracts, skin rash and even clusters of birth defects. The only substantiated concern is design of the workstation, i.e. ergonomics. To alleviate these concerns, Guidelines for VDTs and aedical vision screen examination were developed and issued to all (J) plants (Attachments 3 and 4). HM8B-B037*28 7=3 U--u '*0* (0/y 6' L' <:= Iff1 .si Corporate Industrial Hygiene has developed a data system to Maintain and retrieve Industrial Hygiene aonitoring records for the plants, e.g. air samples, noise Measurement. This system is able to track employe exposure by chemical, plant, worker occupation, dates, etc. The next module to be developed will be for occupational aedical surveillance records, e.g. blood lead, audiograms. As this system is developed and used, it will aid in complying with these new regulations and will increase the access to record retention and access to employe exposure and health records in case of worker coapensation claims or litigation (Attachment 6). OSHA issued their new asbestos standards for both industry and construction in June 1086. Guidelines for developing a control prograa were issued to all plants in October 1086. The industry standard will have a minimum impact because asbestos in (J) products has been reduced to only a few plants, whereas the asbestos construction standard will effect aost (T) facilities because it addresses asbestos insulation in buildings: fireproofing, pipe covering, sound damping, exterior siding, floor tils, etc. Future Occupational Health Legislation of concern is the 'High Risk Occupational Disease Notification and Prevention act of 1087.1 Representative Gaydos (D - PA) H.B. 162 and Senator Hetsenbaum (D - OH) S. 70 are the authors. The House bill was recently passed and the Senate bill will probably be passed in early 1088. This legislation would require the government and participating employes to identify, notify and counsel past and present employes whoa the government determines are at risk of occupational disease from exposure to hasardous chemicals or agents. Some of the major points of these bills in current fora are: o Establishment of a lisk Assessment Board which will identify those populations at risk of disease associated with occupational health hasards. o The board will then notify employes and employer of that risk. , . o The notification will identify the associated disease(s), latency periods (time of exposure to time of disease), appropriate medical monitoring, the nearest certified health center and the employer's health monitoring responsibilities. -5- MUBB-0037ti29 HWBB-0037*.30 <5=2 ir--u L---- C'.C' D. Trends in the Unions Recently there has been an increase in the nusber of new OSEA occupational health standards. However, there bar been a decline In the nuaber of OSHA inspections under the Reagan administration, which has been also true at (V) plants, therefore the unions are starting to becoae more aggressive in this area. They now have the ability to access eheaical toxicity data. Soae are even attempting to conduct mortality studies of previous aeabers. The United Auto Workers have developed and issued to its aeabers a brochure on epidemiology, what to look for in the workplace, types of illness and deaths that could be work related and to report this information back to the union headquarters. All unions are aware of these state Right-To-Know regulations and the Federal Haxard Communication standard because most have occupational health specialists on their staffs and they have been very successful in lobbying for passage of these regulations. Both represented and son-represented plants have experienced numerous requests for information on materials in the workplace from employes. Unions in general favor having joint Uanagesent-Union Occupational Safety and Health Committees. (W) continues to promote the use of our safety observer program and we contend this program, if properly presented, will meet this need to involve the workers in the plant occupational safety and health program. In fact, Headquarters Safety revised this program in 1081 and promoted its use through 'Train the drainer* seminars. Within the last year we have had to respond to union requests for information on employe exposure to hasardous material at former (W) plants i.e. Lester, Bloomfield, Sharon. 11/6/87 -8-