Document rp2wmD2JrKK7w0Z6m24Rvw4Oe

22716 Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 119 / Friday, June 20, 1986 / Roles and Regulations As AIA/NA indicated in its opening a very infrequent practice, mainly Paragraph (h)--Respiratory Protection comments, the OSHA . . . PEL should be reduced to the lowest level feasible through engineering and work practice controls. Like many other participants in this rulemaking. AIA/NA does not believe OSHA should rely on respirator use when engineering and work practice controls con feasibly achieve the PEL. (Tr. 7/6, p. 5| In addition, OSHA reviewed the testimony of a number of other commenters who supported OSHA's traditional approach to methods of compliance (see Section X, Summary and Explanation for a Revised Standard for General Industry). In response to the overwhelming body of evidence contained in the record and testimony supporting the retention of the traditional hierarchy of controls in this because of the penalties involved in major market areas such as California for the use of abrasive disk saws . . ." (Tr. 710. p. 124). The hazard associated with the use of unver.tiiaied'abrasive saws is also evident from data obtained by CONSAD, Inc. (Ex. 92), which reported that the operator's 8-hour TWA exposure ievel can exceed 5 f/cc. The BCTD took 8 .broader position and recommended that OSHA prohibit the use of any hand or power tool not equipped with local ventilation (Ex. 872. p. 13). Although the use of local ventilation is one of the engineering controls permitted under paragraph (g)(1) of the revised standard, OSHA did not find that the record evidence The existing asbestos standard. 29 CFR 1910.1001 (effective July 7.197?). required respiratory protection to be worn to reduce exposures below the 2.0 f/cc PEI, under the following circumstances: (1) during the time necessary to install engineering controls and institute work practices; (2) in work situations in which engineering controls anil work practices are not feasible for reducing exposures to or below the PEL: or (3) in emergencies. The existing . standard also permitted single-use or reusable air-purifying respirators only be used in work situations in which the concentration of airborne asbestos fibers was less than 10 times the PEL or rulemaking, the revised rule for asbestos supported a prohibition against the use ceiling limit. In situtations in which the requires that engineering and work of all band or power tools operated concentration of asbestos fibers was practice controls be implemented to without local ventilation. Therefore. less than 100 times the PEL or ceiling reduce employee exposures to the PEL, OSHA has restricted the prohibition to limit, the existing standard allowed the and that personal protective equipment the use of abrasive disk saws operated use of full facepiece air-purifying be used only to supplement engineering without local ventilation. respirators. Type "C" supplied-air and work practice controls and in emergencies. As explained in the April proposal. OSHA is considering revising its policy on the hierarchy of controls and is soliciting comment on this policy in general (49 FR 14124). Because of the serious nature of the threat posed to construction workers exposed to asbestos; however, OSHA believes it would be imprudent to await the final outcome of the general rulemaking on hierarchy of controls before promulgating a revised rule for asbestos. Therefore, OSHA is proceeding with the revised asbestos rule for construction and is retaining its traditional- requirements for appropriate methods of compliance. In the revised standard, OSHA has also prohibited the use of compressed air to remove asbestos-containing materials, unless the compressed air is used in conjunction with an enclosed ventilation system to capture the resulting dust cloud. Using compressed air to clean asbestos dust from surfaces results in the formation of large dust clouds that lead to excessive exposures ofthe operator and bystanders unless local ventilation is used. Prohibitions against the use of compressed air were recommended by both the A1A (Ex. 328. p. 1V-15) and the BCTD (Ex. 87-2. p. 13). The final prohibition contained in the revised standard for construction is respirators operated in the continuousflow or pressure-demand mode were required in work situations in which the concentration of asbestos fibers exceeded 100 times the PEL or ceiling limit. The existing standard also required employees to establish a respirator program in accordance with ANSI Z38.2-1969. In addition, the existing standard required that no employee be assigned to work where respiratory protection is necessary if an examining physician determined that the employee was unable to function normally while wearing a respirator. Paragraph (c). Methods of Paragraph (g)(2) of the revised against the spray application of Compliance, of the existing standard standard for construction prohibits the asbestos materials. 11118 represents a required that type "C" aupplied-air use of high-speed abrasive disk saws that are not equipped with local change from the existing standard, which permitted the spraying of respirators operated in a continuousflow or pressure-demand mode be used ventilation, the use of compressed air to remove asbestos-containing materials, and the application of asbestos by spray methods. OSHA has specifically prohibited these activities in response to concerns by rulemaking participants that worker exposure to asbestos during these operations would be consistently excessive. OSHA's prohibition of the use of abrasive disk- saws isconsistent with the recommendation of the A1A (Ex. 328, p. IV-15). Banning the use of these saws without local ventilation was also - supported by the Association of . Asbestos Cement Pipe Producers asbestos-containing materials if proper respiratory protection is used. Although workers performing the application may be adequately protected by the use of respirators and protective clothing, OSHA now believes that emissions resulting from the operation are high and can result in excessive bystander exposure to a carcinogen. It is for this reason that both EPA (40 CFR 61.140) and the State of California have banned the spraying of asbestos-containing materials in buildings and structures during construction, alteration, or repair operations. The prohibition contained in OSHA's revised standard against the in any work situation that involves the spraying of asbestos or during the removal or demolition of asbestos from pipes, structures, or equipment insulated with asbestos. In the April notice, OSHA requested public comment on the selection of appropriate respirators for various work situations. Information was specifically requested regarding the necessity for requiring type "C" supplied-air respirators during the spraying of asbestos and during asbestos demolition, removal, and renovation operations. (AACPP)-(Tr. 710. p. 140) and the application of asbestos materials by Paragraph (h), Respiratory Protection, American Water Works Association (Tr. spray reflects the concern of these' of the revised standard for the 710, pp. 124-125). Joseph Jackson of the government agencies that the use of construction industry requires that AACPP testified at the hearing that the spray applications of asbestos poses a employers provide respirators at no cost use of abrasive disk saws today is ", . . serious carcinogenic hazard. to employees; i i 5 ( \ J GLEASON-000964