Document vVknYomEv1569aoXN04RNVOjE

AlbMtM fyiUKAT**'' Utto LIMITS 7 The current workplace standard for asbestos should be revised to call for elimination of nonessential asbestos use. and reduction of worker exposure to the lowest possible level where the sututance must be used, an interagency working group urged. The recommendations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and National Institute fur Oceupational Safety and Health work group on asbestos cante in a report transmitted to OSHA Administrator Eula Bingham and NIOSH Director Anthony Robbins. According to the work group, which was appointed last fail by Bingham and Robbins, the current asbestos standard of two fibers per cubic centimeter of air is "grossly inade quate'' to protect workers against asbestos-related disease. "Compelling evidence" indicates that the limit should be set "far below" that level, the group asserted. The group said it could not present a "precise dose-response relationship" for asbestos diseases, because of a lack of epidemiological data. It added, however, that a significant consideration in establishing a permissible ex posure limit should be the lowest level of detectable asbestos exposure. That level currently is 0 1 fibers greater than five micrograms in length per cubic centimeter of air. as measured over an eight-hour period, the group noted. Whatever permissible exposure limit is established, a revised standard 'should require employers to institute the "best" engineering controls and work practices available, the group recommended. Protective clothing and hygiene facilities also should be provided. Respirators were not viewed by the group as a "suitable" substitute for these control measures. The committee cautioned, however, that even where ex posure is controlled to levels under 0.1 fibers per cubic cen timeter. "there is no scientific basis for concluding that all asbestos-related cancers would be prevented." Appropriate mediM^su^w^wMjwogri^aanf "crucial" for detecting and minimizing the progression of some asbestos related diseases, the committee stated. Con siderable emphasis should be placed on baseline medical ex aminations for espoaed or potentially exposed workers, the gmup maintained, including: A postero-anterior chest X-ray. Spirometry, including forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in one second. A physical examination of the chest, including ausculta tion for the presence or absence of rales, rhonchi, and wheel ing. An assessment of the presence or absence of finger club bing A history of respiratory symptoms and conditions, in cluding tobacco smoking. An occupational history should include a history of ex posure to asbestos and to other substances of "real or poten tial medical significance." the group stated. Sputum cytology should be evaluated in ihe development of an improved medical surveillance program, the com mittee asserted, adding that sputum cytology may prove to be a "valuable supplement" to X-ray evaluation. Provisions in OSHA's lead standard for medical removal protection and multiple physician review of workers are relevant to asbestos workers and should be considered as part of a revised asbestos standard, the group recommend ed. Effect* of SmoWnf Studies on cigarette smoking and asbestos exposure in dicate that "both asbestos and smoking are independently capable of increasing the risk of lung cancer mortality," the committee maintained. By itself, asbestos is a carcinogen capable of causing lung cancer and mesothelioma, the group stated. When exposure to both asbestos and cigarette smoke occurs, "the combined effect with respect to lung cancer appears to be mul tiplicative rather than additive," it said. Because of this effect, smoking should be an issue of "par ticular emphasis" in the development of educational programs for workers under a proposed standard, the group recommended. A revised asbestos standard should address the construc tion and maritime industries as well as general industry, the group maintained. Regulation of construction and maritime activities "should be structured around the. principle that where work must be done using asbestos, only those employees needed to do this work should be present, and only for the minimum period of time needed to complete this work." it suggested. Because of sampling difficulties associated with asbestos. ' manufacturers of asbestos-containing products should per-** form detailed monitoring to predict the types of exposures (/ which could result from all foreseeable uses of the products. _ including misuse, the group recommended. The monitoring _ should be done, it added, through electron microscopy to ^ identify fiber-type mix and the presence of fibers less than _ fivg'microgranu)in length. t- * Need for Nation O' In discussing its reasons for urging changes in the current CT standard, the working group said that the existing two fiber n, limit was developed in 1969 by the British Occupational Hygiene Society "for the limited purpose of minimizing asbestosis." However, disease data collected since that time "strongly suggest that this standard is insufficient to pre vent a large incidence of asbestosis," it added. All levels of exposure studied to date have demonstrated asbestos-related disease, indicating that there is no level of exposure below which clinical effecta do not occur, the group asserted. The report also cited "dramatic evidence" of asbestos-related disease in members of asbestos-worker households, and in persona living near asbestos-con taminated areas. These cases involved low level and inter mittent exposures, with "significant disease" found in con junction with "very short" exposure periods, the group stated. Members of the working group from OSHA included Robert Jennings, a special assistant to Bingham; Hn K. Kang, health sciential; and J. William Lloyd, senior epidemiologist. NIOSH members included J.dm M Dement, deputy director of the respiratory disease studies division. 4 17 dO Cooy''OOi ' I9S0 by rh# Suntu of Nation*' Affair*. Inc Od* Jur *0 MO so DOW 07064 1' OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER David H. Grot*, chief of the pathology section, division of biological and behavioral sciences; Richard A. Lenten, assistant chief of the industry-wide studies branch: and Joseph K. Wagoner, senior epidemiologist. Lemen was chairman of the group. legislation OSHA. CHAMBER OP COMMERCE. PANEL OEEATE NEEO POR AMENDMENTS TO OSH ACT The April IS opening session of Senate hearings on a bill to amend the law which established the Occupational Safety and Health Administration found the bill's sponsor and top OSHA officials in debate over the need to legislate changes to OSHA's inspection policies. Senator Richard S. Schweiker (R-Pal. sponsor of the "Oc cupational Safety and Health Improvements Act of 1980" IS 1193) charged that a General Accounting Office investiga tion of OSHA inspections found that "two out of three inspec tions misfired" by finding no serious hoards. But OSHA Administrator Eula Bingham, accompanied by Deputy Assistant Basil Whiting and OSHA Solicitor Ben jamin Mints, aid that the statistic also could be interpreted as meaning that one-third of ali complaints, coming mostly from workers not sophisticated about afety and health hazards, found serious health hoards. She aid that of com plaints received from unions which are training employees in the recognition of health and safety hazards, as many as 80 percent are found to be serious. Bingham aid the Schweiker bill's proposed changes in OSHA s procedures for responding to employee complaints would "deprive workers of one of their fundamental rights." She aid that except for "extreme circumstances." the bill would preclude OSHA from inspecting even serious afety complaints unless the employer failed to give atisfactory assurance to OSHA that the hazard was abated (Current Report. December 37. 1978. p. 898). In rebuttal. Schweiker said his bill would permit OSHA to conduct health inspections and inspections of serious hazards if the employer did not abate them. He added that the measure is based on OSHA's new system for responding to informal complaints. Bingham responded that the agency is using the new system only on an experimental basts, and only for informal, or unwritten, unsigned, complaints. She said it is too early to judge the results of the agency's new system. "We sre arguing against putting such a procedure in con crete." Bingham testified. In response to a question from Senator Orrin Hatch iRUtah >. Bingham said she saw no need to legislate changes in the agency. But Hatch replied that on the basis of a wide , "polarization'' between tabor and industry, and industry and < OSHA. "there will be an OSHA bill, if not this year, then the _ ee Woreere* Compenastion Data Inadequate Bingham testified that the bill's proposed method to deter mine what firms will be exempt from routine OSHA inspec tions is flawed because of the difficulties in securing ac curate. similar workers' compensation data from all states. The bill would automatically exempt from routine OSHA safety inspections any firm which reported no lost workday injuria in a particular year in workers' compensation reports submitted to State authorities. Firms which reported a low number of lost workday injuria, based on the firm's site and the national average lost workday rate, would be ex empt from the inspections by filing an affidavit with OSHA. "The bill envisions minimising recordkeeping and paper work by having the Secretary of Labor enter into agreements with Stata to furnish data from workers' com pensation reports." Bingham said. But die added there sre many obstada to using-such data, "even should the Stata choose to cooperate." Bingham provided the committee with three cherts depict ing the types of information which would be available from each state, and depicting the differenca in data collected by each state. The charts art reprinted in the Full Test section of this Current Report. Bingham said that even if state systems were uniform in data collection, and even if state participation m the OSHA exemption program were required, not all lost workday in juria would be reported. "For example, self-insured employers and canton are not required to report certain uncontested workers' compensa tion claims in some stata." Bingham said. She added that many lost workday injuria that are not compensable may not be reported, and that some disabled worken do not apply for workers' compensation because of, among other reasons, preference for sick leave at full pay. "The consensui among Department of Labor experts and othen familiar with the intricacia and vagaria of the various state workers' compensation systems is that very few stata - possibly none -- would be both able and willing, to furnish adequate data to comply with the provUiow of the" exemption proposed in S 3133," Bingham said. C/ Support wtth Reeervetione. _ In testimony given by its treasurer, Robert T. Ttaompeotw the Chamber of Commerce of the U S. reiterated "strong, support" for the concepts and underlying principla of thirl bill." but noted that the Chamber baa reservations about thr feasibility and equity of certain provisions in tha bill. The Chamber also criticized the use of state workers' conP" pensation data to identify workplaca with "good" safetfuu records. "We strongly quation the wisdom and feasibility of using this data, especially where leu burdensome methods lor identifying good ufety records already exist." Thompson testified. "Such requirements would add substantial costa and increase reporting requirements, both of which are un necessary to implement the components of S 3193." The Chamber said a better alternative would be to use the' OSHA log and summary of occupational injuria and ill nesses. The part of the form which employers are required to post in the workplace each February could be forwarded to OSHA "with minimal expense and' inconvenience." Thompson said. Firms with fewer than 18 employees are not required to maintain the log and summary. Thompson noted, but he add ed that an exemption system could be enacted on the oasis of the Schweiker amendment to the Department of Labor ap propriations bill (Current Report. August 3, 1979, p. 311). "Attempts to legialata on appropriations bills demonstrate the frustrations of members of Congress, their constituents, and the busineu community with the failure of the normal legislative proceu to face head-on the iuue of OSHA reform," Thompson uid. Calling the Schweiker proposal "moderata" and "a responsible attempt to improve workplace ufety and health." Thompjon criticized what he called organized labor's "steadfast" opposition and OSHA'a "smug" de nouncing of the bill as "legislative interference." "Only the busineu sector has offered constructive concern for a bill which, though not without significant problems, is a reasonable and proper step toward lessening the conflict and 4-1790 COM 333? 90*00*0 DOW 07065