Document dY19VyyYqBkqE3EZa4edXY6vB

' * s Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 119 / Friday, June 20, 1986 / Rules and Regulations . 22679 Isv?" witnesses, OSHA has concluded that These studiesnxamined the effect of exposure to all forms of tremolite, chemically modified asbestos should be intrapleural injectionsof 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 intent clear, the phrase "and any of these minerals that has been chemically nonasbestiform tremolite. In these studies, sample's of asbestiform tremolite and a sample Of The Agency recognizes that the minerals tremolite, actinolite and anthophyllite exist in different forms. treated and/or altered" has been added to the definition of asbestos. OSHA currently regulates all forms of tremolite. actinolite, and anthophyllite as asbestos. Some commenters, most notably representatives of the R.T. Vanderbilt Company, have strongly encouraged QSHA to revise its definition of asbestos to make it mineralogically correct. They have encouraged the Agency to amend the definition to make it clear that only the nonasbestiform tremolite induced tumor formation in hamsters while other samples of nonasbestiform tremolite did riot (Ex. 84-194). In addition to the experimental animal studies, much of the support to eliminate some forms of tremolite, actinolite, and anthophyllite from the definition of asbestos has focused on epidemiological studies of exposed workers. Particular attention has been paid to two prospective mortality studies al a New Further, the Agency has concluded that all forms of these minerals should continue to be regulated for the reasons stated above. Therefore, OSHA is amending the definition of asbestos in recognition that different mineral forms exist and adding a definition for tremolite, anthophyllite and actinolite to make it clear that all of the mineral forms come under the scope of the standard. "asbestiform" varieties of tremolite, ' York state talc mine and mill. The Action Level anthophyllite, and actinolite are November proposal discussed both In the final standard the action level considered to be asbestos (Ex. 337). The Btudies in great detail. has been set at.0.1 f/cc which triggers Agency raised this issue in the April Briefly, the NIOSH investigators the monitoring, medical, and employee proposal. (Brown, Dement and Wagoner Ex. 84- information and training requirements. A number of commenters supported the addition of the term "asbestiform" 25) concluded that there were significant excesses of lung cancer mortality and of This level is consistent with the trigger currently applied to the medical ta ' :i (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; 90-161; 90-167) or to adopt a mineralogical definition (Ex. 90- 37; 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 Bince 1972. The elimination of these minerals from the scope of the standard could only be justified by evidence that exposure to these 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 riot statistically significant and was "consistent with a smoking effect" (Ex. 84-196). 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). 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 1910.1047). 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. 88-4,90-49,90-1.63, adverse health effects. ' Kleinfeld et al (Ex. 84-181). Kiviluoto et 90-174,90-180,158D, 328). Some Both Dr, Mearl Stanton and Dr. al. (Ex. 84-181). Gamble et al. (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 trigger implementation ' carcinogenicity pf 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, 90-163.90- experiments (Ex. 84-195) demonstrated and/or morbidity associated with 174, 90-160,158D, 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 therelationship 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. 88-4, 90-49, 292), monitoring certified by Dr. Ann Wylie (Ex. 337 Att 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 86-4, 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 level 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 fEx. 84-194; 306). Therefore, OSHA concludes that 90-138, 90-166, 9tFT68). GLEASON-000927