Environmental Health and Safety Blog | EHSWire

Ed Pearl

If you have a giant stack of the best personal protective equipment (PPE), but don’t use it, or just as important, don’t use it properly, are you trying to become an OSHA statistic? Knowing how to protect yourself from occupational hazards is a critical part of your job.

A Real Life PPE Correction

A few years ago, I was taking my annual HazWOPER 8-Hour Refresher class and a fellow student shared his story about PPE.

Part of his job was to open and close valves that allowed aviation fuels to flow to pumps used to fill airplane fuel tanks. As most of these valves were in confined space vaults without proper ventilation, he was often exposed to fuel vapors. After complaining about the headaches and dizziness that he was experiencing, his employer had him fit tested for a respirator. However, even with the proper-fitting respirator, he still had the same symptoms of overexposure.

Why didn’t the respirator control the exposure?  As a health and safety professional, the answer was obvious to me! I asked him, “What type of cartridge are you using?”

His reply, “I am using what was given to me.” Two days later he called me to tell me that he had been given HEPA filters – the WRONG cartridge for his petroleum vapors.

Instead he should have been using organic vapor cartridges. Without correction, this COULD have been become a very dangerous problem – just because of the wrong cartridge in the right respirator.

Proper Protection: Where Do You Start?

A perfect place to start understanding how to protect yourself is to know what you are dealing with on the job.

1. What are the potential hazards? Is there more than one? Not sure? Ask questions! Make sure that you understand the hazards and risk before you are satisfied?


2. Are there chemicals? Read material safety data sheets (MSDS) which have standardized information required by OSHA. MSDSs for all chemicals at your worksite must be made available by your employer for your review.  So that you, the worker, can read about the chemical hazards’ AND methods of protection. It’s the law!


3. Review your job duties and PPE with your job site safety officer or a health and safety professional.

Proper Protection:  A Quiz

Q: If a person is working with an acid and they are wearing cloth gloves, who are they protecting?

A: Nobody!  The proper glove is a “chemical resistant” polymer for protection from acids (usually a neoprene or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) glove). Depending on the risk of splash, this worker may also need goggles, a face shield, and chemical resistant garments (apron, or partial or full body protection).

Q: If a worker is welding and only wearing a face shield designed for grinding, are they properly protected?

A: Absolutely not! The proper protection for a welder includes a welding shield equipped with filter lenses that have a shade number appropriate for the welding operation

Q: What happens when you wear a respirator that is not properly fitted?

A: You are potentially letting in the very substance you are SUPPOSED to be protecting yourself from! OSHA mandates that all required use respirators be tested for proper fit using “fit test” procedures detailed in the OSHA Respirator standard (1910.134).

The point is, there is the right PPE for the job…know what it is, and use it correctly!

Proper Protection:  Personal Responsibility

Today, information is at our fingertips on ALL subjects including PPE. Take the time to hunt around and find the information you need to properly protect yourself. There are all types of online courses and local resources including those provided by unions and insurance companies that welcome your questions and interest. Whether it’s the Internet or real, live health and safety professionals, ask questions to ensure that your PPE is right for you and the hazards you encounter.  If you find out that don’t have the proper PPE, don’t do the job or you’ll eventually become an OSHA statistic – or worse!

Paula Kaufmann, CIH

If you are a foreign or domestic business in the US who is either a chemical importer (resells for use in blending, repackaging) or chemical manufacturer (make new chemicals out of chemicals purchased from others with the exception for pharmaceutical companies), this update is about mandatory compliance with the EPA’s Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), specifically filing the 2012 TSCA Form U “Chemical Data Report”.

Information about the new TSCA CDR Form U reporting tool is rolling in from the EPA.  On September 23 ^rd the Agency hosted an hour-long webinar in which the 2012 CDR reporting requirements were reviewed and the use of the electronic Form U reporting tool (“e-CDRweb”) was demonstrated. If you missed the webinar or need a rewind, both the presentation materials and recorded webinar have been posted by the EPA at IUR/CDR – About Submissions.

Webinar Take Aways

• The Agency is emphasizing two new reporting requirements:
  
  
  
  • The standard of “known to or reasonably ascertainable by” for processing and use information (formerly “readily obtainable”)
  
  
  • The upfront Confidential Business Information (CBI) substantiation
  
  
  
  


• Both the company that contracts for the manufacture AND the toll manufacturer are now considered to be the co-manufacturers of that chemical substance


• The e-CDRweb tool is designed for joint reporting and has very specific requirements for supplier-EPA communication. Joint reporting is specifically for those instances where a supplier will not disclose the specific chemical name (or TSCA accession number) of a chemical substance or a reactant used to manufacture the TSCA chemical substance because the name is claimed confidential.


• Registration with the EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX) is required prior to accessing e-CDRweb.
  
  
  
  • CDX registration requires the completion of an electronic signature agreement (ESA) form that foreign suppliers must submit by mail.
  
  
  • CDX registration for e-CDRweb will be available on November 1, 2011.
  
  
  • CDX registration is a multi-part process.
  
  
  
  


• The EPA will be providing support for use of the new e-CDRweb tool.
  
  
  
  • A training webinar is tentatively scheduled for November 2011.
  
  
  • Comprehensive instructions for the 2012 TSCA Chemical Data Reporting are now online.
  
  
  
  

To summarize, the e-CDRweb tool looks like it is a much friendlier submittal tool than its predecessor, e-IURweb. The gotcha will be in the preparation of the materials so that the submittal process is easy. Like many other federal filings, understanding what to submit and why may be much more complicated than the actual filing process. The requirements that changed from the 2006 to 2012 range wildly from subtle and minor to extensive and complex.

Did you participate in the EPA’s e-CDRweb webinar? What did you think? Are there any particular “gotchas” that caught your eye?

If you need guidance with what data you should for the EPA TSCA 2012 CDR Submission, please contact Emilcott for help

• You can also subscribe to our free TSCA e-newsletter which delivers TSCA-related information right to your mailbox.


• Want more info? Enroll for our free Dec webinar by sending an email to pkaufmann@emilcott.com.

If you have any questions, feel free to post them in the comments section and we will respond quickly.

by Paula Kaufmann

When providing guidance on the selection and use of PPE, it is critical for occupational safety and health experts to understand not only the technical issues surrounding the use of PPE as an exposure control method, but also the regulatory compliance burden placed on the employer.  I recognize that “just” complying with OSHA standards is not equivalent to meeting industry best practices, but is important to understand the what might be considered the ‘back-bone’ of PPE programs in the US.

In February, OSHA announced the publication of an update of “ Enforcement Guidance for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in General Industry”.  This update establishes OSHA’s general enforcement and guidance policy for its Standards addressing PPE.  The PPE Standards had been revised by OSHA in 2007 and 2009.  These changes had not been reflected in the former enforcement Instruction.

The updated information provided to the OSHA Compliance Officers is helpful for all of us to review.  The revised OSHA Enforcement Guidance spotlights the following:

• Employer-provided (purchased) PPE requirements (Who, What, Which)


• Clarification of payment requirements for PPE worn off the jobsite, for PPE that must remain at the jobsite, and for employee-owned PPE.

Who: Employers must provide PPE to all affected employees with an established employer-employee relationship. These employees include short-term employees which may be referred to as temporary employees, piece workers, seasonal employees, hiring hall employees, labor pool employees, or transient employees.

What: Employers must pay for PPE that is required to comply with OSHA Standards, except in the limited cases specified in the Standards. Employers must provide, at no cost to employees,  the PPE that is necessary to protect against the hazards that the employer is aware of as a result of any hazard assessments required and specified in the OSHA standards.  An employer must provide, at no cost to employees, upgraded PPE that the employer chooses to use to meet OSHA PPE requirements.

Which: OSHA is updating the references in its regulations to recognize more recent editions of the applicable national consensus standards, and is deleting editions of the national consensus standards that PPE must meet if purchased before a specified date. In addition, OSHA is amending its provision that requires safety shoes to comply with a specific American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard.

So – what PPE must employers provide with no cost to their employees? And what PPE are employers not obligated by OSHA to purchase for use by the employees? It can be confusing!  The following is a list of examples and exceptions:

• those highlighted in GREEN are “must purchase” items


• those highlighted in red are “not required” to be purchased by the employer.

In most cases, the determining factor for “who pays for the PPE” is whether the PPE is required to comply with a specific standard.  The outcome of site-specific PPE hazard assessments will determine what PPE is required. (Some of the exceptions seemed counter-intuitive to me ... what do you think?)

PPE that an Employer Must Purchase (when required to comply with a standard)

• Metatarsal foot protection


• Chemical resistant boots with steel toes


• Shoe covers – toe caps and metatarsal guards


• Non-prescription eye protection (safety glasses)


• Prescription eyewear inserts/lenses for full-facepiece respirators


• Prescription eyewear inserts/lenses for welding and diving helmets


• Goggles


• Face shields


• Laser safety goggles


• Firefighting PPE (helmet, gloves, boots, proximity suits, full gear)


• Hard hats


• Hearing protection


• Welding PPE


• Items used in medical/laboratory settings to protect from exposure to infectious agents (aprons, lab coats, goggles, disposable gloves, shoe covers)


• Non-specialty gloves for protection from dermatitis, severe cuts/abrasions.
  
  
  
  • Payment is not required if they are only for keeping clean or for cold weather (with no safety or health considerations)
  
  
  
  


• Chemical-resistant gloves/aprons/sleeves/clothing


• Encapsulating chemical protective suits


• Aluminized gloves


• Rubber insulating gloves


• Mesh cut-proof gloves, mesh or leather aprons


• Self Contained Breathing Apparatus, atmosphere-supplying respirators


• Air-purifying respirators


• Personal fall protection


• Ladder safety device belts


• Climbing ensembles used by linemen (for example, belts and climbing hooks)


• Window cleaners’ safety straps


• Personal Flotation Devices (life jackets)


• Reflective work vests or clothing


• Electric arc and flame-resistant garments

Some exceptions to the employer purchase requirement:

Non-specialty PPE - if the employer allows the employee to wear it off the job site

Footwear

By John Defillippo, CHMP

It makes sense, if you are injured in the head at work – you weren’t wearing a hard hat!

In 1980, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) conducted a survey that indicated that about 80% of the workers sustaining traumatic head injuries each year do not wear head protection. Most of those injured were performing their normal jobs at their regular worksites with 70% indicating that they had had no instruction concerning hard hats. With this information, OSHA started the process to revise the PPE (personal protective equipment) standards and in 1994, the current version of the OSHA PPE standards was published.

So let’s move through time to the present – 30 years after the BLS survey… in 2010 OSHA handed out over $ 1.2 million in proposed penalties for about 2,000 head protection violations ( 29 CFR 1926.100 and 29 CFR 1910.135 ).  Most of these violations were for workers failing to wear hard hats when required.

When are hard hats required to be worn?

The Simple Answer:  If you are working where ANYTHING MIGHT fall, drop, fly, splash, or land on your head OR your head could come into contact with ANYTHING that MIGHT injure you, like moving equipment, chemicals or electricity, you need to be correctly wearing a properly fitting, ANSI-approved hardhat.

All hard hats should have an ANSI certification label on the inside of the hard hat’s shell. This label will clearly identify what type and class standards it was designed to meet. If this label is missing or cannot be read it should be replaced. Hard hats are classified according to the specific impact and electrical performance requirements they meet.  The details are specified in ANSI Z89.1-2009, American National Standard for Personal Protection—Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers.

Wearing them correctly means in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. Not backwards (unless specifically so designed) and no hats underneath (except a proper hardhat liner).  A hard hat works by the shell deflecting the blow and absorbing shock and distributing the force of the impact over the suspension system. Wear it backwards or wearing hats (especially baseball caps) or carrying something inside is a really bad idea as it can adversely affect the way it works. Any stickers on the hat must be removable so the hard hat can be inspected and no paint is allowed.

If you are an employer you must determine if and when hard hats are required, provide the correct type and enforce their use.

All hard hats don’t protect our heads from all hazards!

How do you choose the right hard hat?  Do you need protection from just impact or do you also need protection from electrical hazards as well?

Impact Protection

Type I Hard Hats

Type I hard hats are intended to reduce the force of impact resulting for a blow to the top of the head only.

Daniel Senatus

A construction and renovation project within any facility creates a range of situations which can release debris, pollutants and contaminants that can impact the indoor air quality. These contaminants may be transported to other areas via HVAC systems, personnel coming and going through encapsulation barriers, and other factors that can subsequently affect people beyond the project area. Consideration of the effect upon indoor air quality is particularly important in healthcare settings when performing construction or renovation projects. Under these conditions, patients and other people with existing health problems that are in the hospital for treatment are at increased risk of contracting nosocomial infections.

Planning and Administrative Controls

All hospital construction projects must go through an Infection Control Risk Assessment (ICRA) to determine the impact of the project on patient care. The ICRA process is usually lead by the Infection Control staff with additional input from the construction company, engineering, and safety managers. See ICRA Sample here.

Advance planning by all project managers, combined with proactive communication efforts, can successfully allay concerns during and after construction activities. Healthcare facilities must consider other factors that may be a potential hazard as a result of the project and then determine the controls that must be put in place to mitigate them. Other critical factors include knowing what areas will be unusable for the extent of the project, and the time of day that will minimize disruption of services (which is variable depending upon whether it is an ambulatory or inpatient facility). It makes sense that most construction in hospitals should be done in a part of the hospital that is not operational or is vacant.

Hazards to Consider

PM (Particulate Matter)

Construction and demolition activities may introduce particulate matter such as dusts and fibers into an environment. Most concerning is respirable dust; these are dust particles that are small enough to bypass the body’s natural defense and clearance systems (mucous, cilia) and not trigger the coughing reflex which is the body’s way of removing mucous and foreign material from the lungs and upper airway passages. Once these particles get deep in the lungs, they are more likely to be retained and can lead to a whole host of health issues including altered lung function, lung cancer, and even heart problems later on.

Biological Hazards

Construction and demolition of materials may contribute to the release of and exposure to a variety of microorganisms: fungi (Aspergillus, Candida, etc.), bacteria, and medical waste. There is also a good chance that animal droppings, insect parts and standing water may be encountered when breaking into areas not normally accessed. Building materials that are constantly damp or wet may serve as breeding grounds for microorganisms. Workers can come into contact with bodily fluids and bloodborne pathogens originating from leaking medical equipment (suction lines, etc).

According to OSHA “ bloodborne pathogens are infectious organisms present in blood that can cause diseases in humans. These pathogens include, but are not limited to Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C and HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus), the virus that causes AIDS.”  Hepatitis B and C are of the most concern in the healthcare construction and renovation setting because they can survive outside of the body for up to a week in the right conditions. Construction activities can make these microorganisms airborne, affecting the indoor air quality and posing a threat to workers and immunocompromised patients.

Engineering Controls

Typically these are implemented as part of the Infection Control Risk Assessment (ICRA).

Containment

Create a containment barrier with fire-rated 6 MIL polyethylene sheeting around the source and isolate it from other areas of the building so that there is no recirculation of air from the work area into other spaces. HVAC intakes within the containment should be sealed to isolate the containment from general ventilation. Create a second barrier directly outside of the containment barrier (this is considered the “dirty” area) with a sticky mat on the floor, this is where used PPE (personal protective equipment) can be discarded. Create a third barrier (clean area) where clean PPE can be stored; this will actually be the space between the dirty area and the occupied spaces. High traffic zippers should be used on all openings and sticky mats should extend six feet from the clean containment entrance to the occupied areas. These mats should be replaced daily or whenever they look dirty, whichever comes first.

Air Cleaning and Negative Pressure

Use NAM (Negative Air Machines) with HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Air) filters inside the enclosure. Filters should be changed as needed. Create a negative pressure environment so that lower pressure inside the containment pulls outside air in and prevents the contaminated air from escaping. The NAM should be on prior to construction being started and stay on for the duration of the project whether construction is going on or not. A micro-manometer can be used to verify that negative pressure is established and maintained.

Dust Monitoring and Microbial Sampling

Continuous dust monitoring outside of the area can help determine the success of the control measures put in place. This can be accomplished using direct reading instrumentation that is equipped with alarms which notify personnel when dust is escaping from the enclosure so that corrective action can be implemented before patients and staff are impacted.

Collecting surface and air samples to evaluate microbiological impacts can also aid in establishing additional preventive measures to protect health and safety of patients and staff.

PPE (Personal Protective Equipment)

Prophylaxes and PPE

Construction in certain places in a hospital can increase a construction worker’s chance of being exposed to contaminated waste and bodily fluids. It is good practice to inoculate personnel with the Hepatitis B vaccine in addition to PPE if there is enough time before the project (4 to 5 months) or if the construction company does a lot of work in functioning hospitals. The vaccine is given in a three dose series to reach immunity:

• Dose #1 – Initial dose


• Dose #2 – 30 days after dose #1


• Dose #3 – 4 months after dose #2

All PPE selected for construction use at any healthcare facility must be “appropriate” for the task at hand. OSHA 1910.1030(d)(3)(i) states that personal protective equipment will be considered "appropriate" only if it does not permit blood or other potentially infectious materials to pass through to or reach the employee's work clothes, street clothes, undergarments, skin, eyes, mouth, or other mucous membranes under normal conditions of use and for the duration of time which the protective equipment will be used.

In damp areas or places with medical waste or other contaminated fluids, liquid-resistant Tyvek suits, gloves, shoe covers, respirators/N95 masks, and goggles should be worn. All PPE must be discarded before exiting the containment area.

Housekeeping

Post-construction cleanup in healthcare facilities is the final stage but is just as important as any other phase. A combination of damp wiping and HEPA vacuums should be used to clean all dusty surfaces. After all trash, dirt, and debris have been removed, wet rags should be used to wipe down all areas within the containment and other areas immediately surrounding it.

Removal of trash may require that the trash be wiped down and clean and/or placed in a covered cart for transport away from the construction site to the waste dumpster so as not to spread contamination in sensitive areas. The renovated or constructed area should be in a sanitary condition before it is turned over to hospital staff. A careful inspection and testing program can aid in documenting the level of cleanliness.

Planning and Partnership

Construction in any healthcare facility is a necessity – whether it is a long-awaited and carefully planned renovation or a response to an urgent problem within the building envelope. In either case, protecting the health and safety of patients and caregivers in the facility and the construction workers can be achieved through planning, communication, and a thorough knowledge of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) and industrial hygiene (IH) procedures and best practices. The success of the project is also dependent upon the partnership of the medical staff, management personnel and all the outside resources that will address the problem and ensure that the construction is completed without creating any additional health issues.

If you have any questions about construction or renovation at a healthcare facility or clinic, please comment below or c ontact us and an Emilcott IEQ specialist will respond.

References and Further Reading

http://www.ehow.com/list_7716877_statistics-exposure-hospital-construction-activity.html

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol4no3/weinstein.htm

http://www.mycology.adelaide.edu.au/downloads/Preventing-IFI-Buildings.pdf

by Paula Kaufmann

We just had our first cold weather snap in the northeast reminding me that 2012 is just around the corner.  A change in the seasons is our cue to ask Emilcott clients that manufacture or import chemicals:   Have you gathered the 2010 chemical volume data AND are you collecting the 2011 data needed for the 2012 TSCA Chemical Data Report?

In a previous blog we summarized the basic requirements of the inventory, production volume and use i nformation that needs to be collected for the EPA’s TSCA 2012 Chemical Data Report (CDR). You can find this “bare bones chart” by clicking here.  The EPA recently presented the following key requirements  in this document  “ Instructions for the 2012 TSCA Chemical Data Reporting.”

HIGHLIGHTS OF 2012 TSCA CHEMICAL DATA REPORTING (CDR)

• The determination of the need to report is based on production volume during calendar year 2011.


• Information on the reportable chemical substance must be reported during the 2012 CDR submission period, February 1, 2012 to June 30, 2012 (40 CFR 711.20).


• All reporting companies must report CDR data electronically, using e-CDRweb, the CDR web-based reporting tool, and EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX) system. Prior to submitting data, submitters must register with CDX.


• Reporting is required for all chemical substances listed on the TSCA Inventory, both organic and inorganic, other than polymers, microorganisms, naturally occurring chemical substances, certain forms of natural gas, and water (40 CFR 711.5 and 711.6) when manufacture (including import) of those chemical substances meets the other reporting requirements. Chemical substances that are the subject of any of certain listed TSCA actions may not be eligible for partial or full exemptions (40 CFR 711.6).


• Manufacturers (including importers) are required to report full manufacturing data, for calendar year 2011, and production volume only, for calendar year 2010, for all reportable chemical substances, when 2011 site-specific production volume equals or exceeds 25,000 lb (40 CFR 711.15(b)).


• Manufacturers (including importers) are required to report processing and use data, for calendar year 2011, for all reportable chemical substances, when 2011 site-specific production volume equals or exceeds 100,000 lb (40 CFR 711.15(b)). Inorganic chemical substances are no longer exempt from the reporting of processing and use information.


• Small manufacturers are exempt from CDR requirements unless they manufacture (including import) 25,000 lb or more of a chemical substance that is the subject of a rule proposed or promulgated under sections 4, 5(b)(4), or 6 of TSCA, or is the subject of an order in effect under section 5(e) of TSCA, or is the subject of relief that has been granted under a civil action under sections 5 or 7 of TSCA (40 CFR 711.9) and (TSCA §8(a)(3)(A)(ii)). See Appendix B for further information.


• Information submitted under CDR may be claimed as confidential; however, such claims must be made at the time of submission and substantiated in accordance with the CDR rule. Submitters must provide upfront substantiation of confidentiality claims for processing and use information as well as for confidentiality claims for site or chemical identity. A blank response or a response that is designated as “not known or reasonably ascertainable” may not be claimed as confidential (40 CFR 711.30).

The EPA is frequently adding information to their Inventory Update Reporting and Chemical Data Reporting Resource page.  And Emilcott will continue to update our TSCA Resource Center with helpful information -- check in often!

If you need guidance with the information that you should be gathering (starting now!) for the EPA TSCA 2012 CDR Submission, please contact Emilcott!.You can also subscribe to our TSCA newsletter to be kept up to date and enroll for our free webinar (date to be announced soon) by sending an email to pkaufmann@emilcott.com.  Feel free to post any questions below in the comments section and we will respond quickly.

Dale Wilson, CIH, LEED AP

With the departure of Hurricane Irene, many buildings throughout NJ and NY have sustained a wide range of water damage and require action to remediate or otherwise mitigate the impacts of water intrusion:  mold, fungus and structural damage. 

Timing is a key element in this response; immediate action is necessary to minimize the potential for mold growth within the building envelope. As in medicine, early detection leads to an early (and usually less expensive) cure. Time and water combined can grow to be an expensive and time-consuming enemy.  Failure to respond promptly will very likely result in mold growth requiring significantly more demolition than if the condition is handled in a timely manner.  What is the definition of “timely”? As soon as mold is discovered!

Experts Can Determine Proper Mold Remediation

Along with timing, selection of the proper remediation technique for the building’s water intrusion and moisture problem (removal, drying in place using fans and/or dehumidification equipment, cleaning, treatment with biocide, etc.) is essential for maintaining a safe building. Improperly implemented remediation procedures can result in cross-contamination and hidden mold growth areas which could adversely impact occupants as time passes while increasing overall remediation time and costs .

Water and flood remediation procedures vary and are dependent upon the convoluted mix of building materials, building design, furnishings, extent of exposure, and the source of the water. Water intrusion investigations and cleanup can be especially challenging in buildings such as multi-unit residences, hospitals or rehab centers, schools and older buildings. There are a wide range of environmental, health and safety (EHS) issues associated with commercial, industrial and institutional facilities; it is important to manage the project as well as the complex interaction between employees, contractors, and the public within a facility; the buildings themselves; and the physical surroundings where they are located.

Mold Remediation Services

An EHS mold expert will identify and eliminate sources of mold and other Indoor Environmental Quality problems. They will also provide a detailed project roadmap for cleanup and removal as well as project oversight for safe and effective remediation. Emilcott’s mold remediation strategy for safe and effective mold removal (with minimal damage to the building and reduced impacts to building occupants) includes the following steps:

Step 1: Initial Assessment

Locate the source of the moisture without deconstruction or disruption to the building and occupants.  Determine the urgency of the mold problem and its impact upon workers or residents.

Dale Wilson, CIH, LEED AP, Sr. Project Manager

"343" is a symbol of great sadness to members of the FDNY and their families as 343 is the number of FDNY firefighters who died on September 11, 2001. That staggering figure is remembered quite readily when recalling the events of that day and during the remembrances that have followed.  However, almost six years later, the lives of two additional NY firefighters were claimed during the demolition of the 9/11-damaged Deutsche Bank Building.

The 41-story Deutsche Bank Building stood adjacent to the World Trade Center and was severely damaged by falling debris and smoke when the Twin Towers collapsed. The damage to the skyscraper was so extensive that it had to be demolished. However, as the federal EPA requires, before it could be demolished, all asbestos-containing materials needed to be removed.

By August 18, 2007, demolition was well underway and the building now stood at only 26 stories tall.  Around 3:40 pm, a massive seven-alarm fire broke out as a result of a discarded cigarette in the asbestos decontamination unit on the 17 ^th floor.  The building had not been inspected by the Fire Department since March, when it should have been inspected every 15 days.  As a result, a crucial but inoperable fire standpipe forced firefighters to raise hoses up from the street to combat the flames.   Inside the building, three firefighters struggled to pull a hose through the deconstructed building. Only one of these men survived. The configuration of the asbestos abatement added to the difficulty of fighting a fire in an already structurally-compromised building.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), an institute within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), completed a description and evaluation of the incident as part of their fire fighter fatality investigation. Several items stand out from the asbestos abatement as contributors to the fire:

• White plastic sheeting was used to partition the floor area into separate zones.  All these partitions created maze-like conditions for the firefighters.


• Numerous zones were under negative pressure, as required for asbestos abatement, possibly drawing smoke and fire into localized areas.


• Stairwell doors were blocked by wooded hatch covers as part of the construction of the asbestos containments.


• Plastic sheeting, construction debris, and exposed lumber in partitions provided additional fuel.

These contributing conditions created by the asbestos abatement project have been recognized by several authorities, and in an effort to maximize safety, New York City enacted a number of new laws to ensure that asbestos abatement projects are conducted safely.  These laws impact the ways that asbestos projects are filed, approved and inspected, and involve new levels of cooperation among the agencies that oversee asbestos and construction safety:  the NYC Department of Environmental Protection (NYC DEP), the Department of Buildings (DOB) and the Fire Department (FDNY).  Most notably, the NYC DEP created the Asbestos -Technical Review Unit (A-TRU) to ensure that asbestos abatement is conducted safely and a new process for filing for asbestos permits called Asbestos Reporting and Tracking System (ARTS).

ARTS enables applicants to submit applications and/or receive approvals (or objections) electronically.  During the application process, applicants are asked questions to identify if

• the building’s fire protection systems (e.g., fire alarm or sprinkler system) will be turned off as a result of the abatement work,


• abatement work will result in blocked or compromised egress or whether any components of the fire protection system are going to be removed as part of the abatement


• abatement work entails removal of passive fire protection (e.g., fire resistance rated walls, sprayed on fireproofing, or smoke dampers)

If there is an impact to any of these fire protection items then a comprehensive Work Place Safety Plan must be developed for the project indicating abatement containment areas and systems, obstructed and temporary exits, tenant protection and a description of any measures that will be taken to mitigate compromised fire protection systems or means of egress. As a final item intended to promote life safety during abatement projects, the asbestos supervisor must inspect exits daily to ensure that there are no exterior blockages or impediments to exiting. If any blockages or impediments are identified, work must stop until the blockage has been removed.  Essentially, deconstruction and asbestos-abatement work cannot compromise the safety of workers and firefighters.

As Carrie Bettinger noted in a past EHSWire blog, “ In our society and legal system it seems that, yes, someone (or many) has to tragically die before change and regulation are considered.” In this case, the tragedy was 343+2. Hopefully the A-TRU process and increased oversight from NYC DEP, DOB, and FDNY will prevent another similar tragedy from occurring.

Postscript:  The last of the Deutsche Bank tower criminal trials were completed in July, 2011. More information can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/nyregion/final-defendant-is-acquitted-in-deutsche-bank-fire-trial.html.

Sarah Damaskos with Paula Kaufmann, CIH

When recalling our onsite environmental, health and safety work following 9/11, Emilcott’s health and safety staff often discuss that respirators were either not worn or improperly worn by many first responders and subsequent waves of workers and construction crew members at Ground Zero. Not surprisingly, ten years later the news media are churning out plenty of stories detailing the life-threatening health effects developing in many of these people -- possibly linked to their exposure to airborne dust and chemicals present at the World Trade Center site.

Dave Tomsey

On the second day of 2011, the James Zadroga Act was authorized to broaden and renew funding and extend benefits to Ground Zero workers whose death was a result of exposure.  These exposures were directly and indirectly caused by toxins present in the billowing clouds of dusts and smoke following the worst tragedy to happen on American soil in my lifetime.  The tragic sickness of countless rescue workers continues to add heartbreak where there is little room for more.

What Do We Know?

In the 9/11 crisis, workers were really battling two threats:   terrorism and vaporized building materials. The high levels of toxins at the World Trade Center site were identified and measured.  This process was carried out using sampling pumps, associated media and lab results in order to classify possible carcinogens and determine their percentage in a given volume of air.  The process is the same today. Although concentrations may differ from one area to another, the goal is to establish the worst-possible contaminant scenario to protect site workers and the public.  Once the type and levels of hazards are known, engineering controls, PPE and other methods of worker health protection are put in place.

Protecting Emergency Response Workers: What Has Changed?

In the time that has passed since the WTC tragedy, technology has progressed to offer improved worker protection. Just as smart phones have become prevalent in our lives, the same technology has been integrated into measurement devices producing smaller instrumentation with better, faster communication capabilities.  Put together, these smart systems, unthinkable ten years ago, enable real time environmental hazard monitoring.  In a nutshell, as hazards are detected at the site, real time systems send up an immediate flare.  What used to take a day (at best) to reveal is now known instantly at your fingertips.

How Would Real-time Monitoring be Used for Emergency Response Today?

As lab samples are being collected and rescue workers or cleanup crews are in service with respirators, monitoring field stations can be set up and started.  Once samples identify the risk, , the field stations can continuously measure dust and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in real time as a surrogate for contaminants found in laboratory samples.  Field stations located around and within the work area form multiple monitoring zones to (1) protect workers in close proximity to contaminants, (2) determine an exclusion zone for support personnel, and (3) protect residents and other businesses at an even greater distance from the site. End result? The constant stream of field data, with corresponding weather information such as wind, precipitation and temperature, would either confirm or indicate modified worker protection needs as the project continues.

How Do You Know When Workers Need Some Type of Additional Safety Precautions Beyond Respirators?

A real time environmental monitoring system is designed for continuous monitoring of all aspects of emergency response recovery and cleanup efforts so that risk can be evaluated as the scenarios change. Today’s technology has impacted and improved virtually every aspect of environmental monitoring:

• Authorized personnel can receive constant updates and alarms via multiple means:  text, email or 2-way radios.


• Incoming and historical data can be viewed by multiple stakeholders at varying locations and allow managers in the field to instantly assess trends with laptops, tablets and smart phones.


• Measurements collected in real time are averaged and processed to show trends in and around the work zone.  These trends are displayed as either a table, graphic plots or shown with contours to establish if a work practice or area is safe for personnel


• Plotting data points with corresponding wind speed and direction allows for managers to determine if offsite sources are impacting the job site or if the vapors and dusts shown on-screen are generated onsite.  Meteorological data showing site conditions (such as high winds) indicates when additional safety precautions should be considered.


• New monitoring equipment now measures multiple levels of dust and vapors into the parts per billion range.  Vapors measured in the parts per billion ranges allow for managers to see if potential toxic vapors are steadily climbing from the lowest detectable levels.  Multiple particle sizing differentiates inhalable dusts from heavier ones that can contain heavy metals.  This allows managers to classify dust readings, watching diesel emissions across site for workers and heavier particulates for neighboring residents and the public.

With such new and remarkable technologies there is no reason to not employ them.

The connected lifestyle and technology of today’s standards help us accomplish many tasks and stay informed.  We are all used to checking our phone or bringing up a website to learn more.  This same connection through real time monitoring to hazardous work sites would be second nature to most and allow for the protection of many.  My hope is that there will never be a need for real time monitoring in response to an incident like 9/11 but, as an American and a CIH working at hazardous sites; it is reassuring to know that there are developed technologies in place to better protect workers if the worst does indeed occur.