Environmental Health and Safety Blog | EHSWire

By Chuck Peruffo

It was a few days before Christmas and I was working outdoors as an Industrial Hygiene Technician on a construction project.  This is the first time in my life I have worked at such cold temperatures as I have been a Lab Rat most of my career.   Not being “climate adjusted”, I was bundled up like Ralphie’s little brother, Randy, from A Christmas Story.   As I kept one eye on my meters and the other eye trained on the excavator in front of me, the wind started to pick up.  The clouds of dust coming off the road shouted “dust control needed” even before I checked the numbers on the dust monitors.

Dust control is an important way to keep what’s in the ground out of the air and out of your lungs.  The standard method for controlling dust is to spray water on the ground. This practice works fine until your water truck freezes solid.  So, what do you do when Jack Frost is nipping at your nose and the dust is flying in the air?  Your solution for dust control is to make up a solution of water and a chemical such as magnesium chloride hexahydrate (“Mag flake”).  

Mag flake or Mag brine has long been used to control dust on rural roads.  Mag flake can be mixed directly into your water truck.  A bit of a disclaimer:  although Mag brine is less corrosive that sodium chloride, make sure the water truck tank vessel can handle the solution by noting the material of manufacture and then consulting a corrosion guide. And, it is good practice to flush the tank truck with clean water after use.

Some manufacturers sell Mag brine at up to a 33% solution for dust control. That translates into more than 2 ½ tons of Magnesium Chloride in a 2000 gallon water truck which is fine for dust control on rural roads that aren’t sprayed often but may be too concentrated for a construction site application. 

At Emilcott, we have found a solution to meet the challenge of frozen water.  Roughly, a 50 pound bag of magnesium chloride added to a 2000 gallon water truck lowers the freezing temperature by 0.3°F.  So, to have a liquid wetting agent for effective dust control when the temperature is around 25°F, we add 1500 pounds of magnesium chloride into a 2000 gallon water truck or about a 0.9% Mag brine solution.  And, now we have our “solution” to keep the dust out of the air!

Here’s the formula and factors Emilcott uses to determine how much magnesium chloride we need to add to the water truck to get the right, wet solution:

∆T = i * K_f * m

Read More

Topics: health and safety, dust control, General EHS, Construction H&S, Hazardous Waste Management, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Air Sampling, environmental air monitoring, magnesium chloride, mag brine, mag flake, magnesium chloride hexahydrate

Laurie de Laski

Having spent a large part of the last 25 years as an EHS professional developing and implementing Health and Safety Plans in a wide variety of industries, I was pleased to see that companies are requesting contractors and service providers to be prequalified for safety during the bidding process.  Conceptually, prequalification for safety should “raise the safety bar” and, companies with a well-developed safety plan should be rewarded for their proactive ethos with a competitive edge in the marketplace.  At Emilcott we have seen this really happen! Highly competitive project opportunities open up for clients that have genuinely adopted a top to bottom buy-in on the importance and value of safety. And, of course, they also experience measurable drops in both injury and insurance rates based on their safety performance.

Is the safety prequalification process good?

To have the “win-win”, the safety programs required for the project must be appropriate for the bidding contractor’s scope of work.  And, these safety programs need to be adopted, implemented and enforced. So, in order to make the prequalification process manageable for the companies writing the scope of work and the bidding contractors, an industry of on-line safety verification companies has evolved. While helping the contracting companies organize their bid processes, this on-line verification is very one-size fits all and focuses heavily on written programs, which may not be applicable to the scope of work.  This all or nothing approach leaves me wondering if on-line verification actually does raise the bar or just rubber-stamps paper safety programs.

Here’s the process “in theory”…

Contractors must have written safety programs that meet the requirements of the client.  The programs are submitted on-line and reviewed by the verification company.  Programs meeting the specifications are passed; those that don’t pass are requested to be updated.  This practice sounds likes a good idea, however,

• Many times contractors are required to write safety plans for equipment and operations outside the scope of their operations.


• The contractors spend a significant amount of time inputting the information to the website with no guarantee of being accepted. 


• Many of the bidding contractors are small businesses without the support or money to handle the overhead costs associated with maintaining their entries in the safety verification website.

For a quick safety program, click here!

Don't have the time to develop a safety plan? Don’t know what you’re missing? Under the gun to qualify for a lucrative project?  Don’t worry!

A large number of on-line “safety” specialists are available to help contractors meet the prequalification safety requirements! They advertise the development of company-specific safety programs that will meet the verification requirements at a very low cost, and some will include on-line input on behalf of the contractor and guarantee that they will pass.  One organization guaranteed approval in 72 hours!

Wait a minute…what problem does this solve? These companies offer to “customize” the safety plan by including the contractor’s company name and logo.  These cookie-cutter programs may meet verification requirements, but don’t appear to be customized for the contractor operations or the protection of the workers.  My sense is that there is no effort to actually develop a program that would be implemented by the contractor.  In conclusion, this “click here” approach does not raise the safety bar – it merely creates the illusion of a safety culture.

So, does safety prequalification work?

While health and safety program verification using this broad, sweeping approach may reduce the client’s liability, it doesn’t automatically improve safety performance.  In addition, the contractor may not be aware that they are creating a huge liability if they don’t implement their own safety program. In fact, OSHA will fine heavily for injuries that occur due to the lack of compliance with their stated safety plan.  Criminal penalties are also a possibility since the contractor could be considered negligent in not implementing or enforcing the procedures.

Where should we go from here?

The Requirements - Companies should require contractors to maintain only the safety programs that apply to the scope of work.  Requiring extensive safety programs for hazards the contractor is not likely to encounter devalues the safety culture for both the site and the contractor.

The Contractor Safety Programs - Contractors need to honestly implement programs that apply to their scope of work; understand the intent of the specific safety programs by learning the requirements of the regulations, provide employee training, and foster a culture of safety awareness with their employees.

The Verification Process – Be clear about the REAL goal of the process. If the objectives are truly to reduce accidents, improve safety, and make sure that everyone goes home at night, then old fashioned site health and safety inspections are what should be required.  Seeing how people work is the best way to make improvements in safety!

Do you think that the on-line safety verification process actually make a difference or is worth the time and expense?  Have you worked on a project where the on-line verification process develop and promoted a safe work environment, or like me, do you doubt they make a positive impact at all?

Read More

Topics: Personal Protective Equipment, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Occupational Training, safety plan, health and safety plan, safety prequalification, on-line verification

Bruce Groves

Why do we care about particles floating around in our air? Small, inhalable particles are themselves pollutants that have shown to cause illness and chronic diseases such as asthma and certain types of lung cancer . Particles are also excellent indicators (or surrogates) for measuring other pollutants such as vapors and gases. By measuring the aerodynamic size of particles in our air, it is possible to identify and sometimes “fingerprint” them so that we can reduce or stop local sources of pollution immediately. The goal AND end result are to develop as clean a living and working area as possible.

What are we doing today?

Today, air monitoring is a piecemeal approach that is government-mandated but generally project related. When the project is over, the problem is essentially considered to be gone. Of course, in areas of high population density or industrial activity, continuous, real-time air monitoring of general conditions does not exist. Other than pollen counts, very little information about these pockets of high pollution and high particulates is available to the public or government agencies. And, the data that is available is generally much later and does not present an accurate picture of today’s problem.

What is the future in environmental air monitoring?

As technology has improved, so have particle detectors and the ease of data transmission and analysis. By 2013, small particle size detectors, such as those found in the Greenlight Environmental Monitoring System, will be consistently deployed in high population areas in such cities such as NYC, Tokyo, London and Los Angeles. These particle size detectors will be coupled with wind-speed and direction detectors and web cameras to pinpoint the exact sources of particle emissions (e.g., construction or industrial equipment, idling vehicles or high traffic transportation corridors) that are creating a measurable increase in local air pollution.

This web of detector stations will form an active or “live” map of a city that continuously measures and reports the concentration of various particle sizes. The “map” will be automatically programmed to provide warning levels and alarms to reveal when and where total particle concentrations exceed warning and safe threshold levels. By locating (in real time) the place, the direction of the pollution source and supporting video evidence, private companies and government agencies can take measures to stop or reduce the indicated pollution sources. Constant real-time monitoring, assessment and action will provide continuous improvement in local air quality that will reduce the onset of disease associated with inhaling dirty air. Warning systems set up through websites will enable agencies and individuals to check on their local air pollution conditions using their computer or smart phone.

What is the first step?

At Emilcott, we have been working with particulate monitoring on job sites for over 25 years. As an extension of our field experience, we’re working on a solution that meets the needs of our clients (private companies and government agencies) -- the Greenlight Environmental Monitoring System. With multiple project implementations under its belt, the Greenlight System’s particle size measurement, assessment and reporting capabilities are demonstrating how real-time monitoring is helping projects get cleaner each day – reducing the liabilities of our clients while giving them the information to keep the public and workers safe.

As the Greenlight System’s next phase of engineering development is outlined, our goal is to have a universal system that will provide comprehensive sampling in potentially high pollution areas so that neighborhood air quality can be improved and the incidence of lung disease is reduced. It will be a future watchdog for providing cleaner air locally where no such means of protecting local air quality exists today.

What do you think the future of environmental air monitoring holds? What are the benefits or challenges that you associate with monitoring and mapping pollutants in a broad geographic area?

Read More

Topics: Emilcott, indoor air quality, health and safety, Construction H&S, EPA, Emergency Response, Homeland Security, Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, worker safety, Occupational Health, Air Sampling, Greenlight System, Exposure, environmental air monitoring, Respiratory, Public Safety, perimeter air monitoring

Megan Grennille

Your next visit to a truck stop may be more pleasant in a few years.  New standards were announced on October 25th from the DOT (Department of Transportation) and EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in heavy-duty trucks and buses.  The standards, which are set to be phased in on new vehicles in 2014, will include requirements to improve fuel efficiency which benefits businesses, the shipping industry, and cities and towns.

The large vehicles being targeted by the proposed standards are divided into three categories: combination tractors, heavy duty pickups and vans, and vocational vehicles.  Combination tractors will have a 20% decrease in CO ₂ output as well as fuel consumption.  Heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans will have separate gas and diesel standards; by 2018 CO ₂ emissions and fuel consumption will decrease by 10% in gas vehicles and 15% for diesel.  Vocational vehicles, such as buses and utility trucks, could see a 10% reduction in fuel consumption and CO ₂ emissions by 2018.  

The new regulations bring environmental and economic benefits.  People who live near bus depots, cities, and highways should be happy.  And, on those hot smoggy days near the end of this decade, the air will be a little cleaner.

What do you think of the regulations? Will they impact your business?

Read More

Topics: DOT, indoor air quality, General EHS, EPA, Hazardous Materials, worker safety, Occupational Health, Air Sampling, Exposure, chemicals, environmental air monitoring, Working Green, greenhouse gas emissions

by: Capt. John DeFillippo, CHMP, EMT-B

When some of us head to the “office” the decisions we make about what to wear go way beyond fashion…our very lives could depend on our wardrobe choices. For many workers, Personal Protective Equipment, or PPE, protects them from slight and serious workplace injuries or illnesses resulting from contact with chemical, radiological, physical, electrical, mechanical, or other hazards. Here’s a rough guide to occupational “Dress for Success” (and survival!).

Let’s start with the head.

A properly fitting, ANSI-rated hard hat will do more than protect you from falling stuff. They’re rated to provide protection against electric and chemical hazards as well. By the way, you have to wear your hard hat correctly if you want it to protect your noggin:  Do not wear it backwards. Do not wear another hat underneath (except a proper hardhat liner).  Any stickers have to be removable so that the hard hat can be inspected for integrity.

Next, Move Down to the Eyes

According to OSHA, Not all eye protection is the same. Start by looking at the ANSI-89 rating on the specs. Does the rating match your job function?  And, don’t let style issues affect your decision whether or not to wear them. Safety glasses used to be big, unattractive, and were often uncomfortable. Not anymore! There are styles and sizes for everybody and most “well-dressed” workers have at least two pair:  sunglasses and clear. Keep in mind that eye injuries, including permanent blindness, occur on the job every day. According to OSHA, “ eye injuries alone cost more than $300 million per year in lost production time, medical expenses, and worker compensation”. Don’t let it happen to you.

Face Protection

OSHA considers face protection separate from eye protection - one is never a substitute for the other. This OSHA powerpoint is a great overview of eye and face protection requirements. Find out if your job (grinding and pressure washing for example) requires a face shield.

Don’t Forget Your Ears!

Your hearing is a delicate tool that, once damaged, cannot be repaired. Did you know that most cases of hearing loss in the US are the result of occupational exposure? Hearing protection, like respiratory protection, can get a little complicated so if you’re confused, ask an expert. EHS experts like Emilcott can perform quantitative noise analysis and provide best recommendations to protect hearing for your worksite. To start, a good rule of thumb is that if you need to raise your voice in normal conversation, you probably should be wearing hearing protection.

Body Protection

Protection for the body varies greatly depending on the hazard(s) encountered. At a minimum,   make sure you can be seen! High visibility garments are required by OSHA and DOT when working around traffic and are a good idea all the time.

Last (But Not Least), Your Feet

Safety footwear is required by OSHA if your feet are subject to injury. They also must be ANSI- approved -- look for the markings on the shoe or boot to be sure. 

The Final Word

Keep these points in mind the next time you get dressed for work:

• While individual PPE items may not go “out of style”, they do go out of date. Check your gear to make sure it’s still within the expiration date.

• Once your PPE has protected you from an injury, replace it.  It did its job and you don’t know how it will hold up a second time.

•  And, finally, get the good stuff. Those cheap boots may seem like a bargain until your feet start hurting.

By the way, the Dress for Survival list above, with the exception of respirators (a blog in itself!), is considered “minimum PPE” on most sites. You need proper protection for each body part just to get in.  Don’t know what to use?  For every job, there are specific OSHA requirements that are designed to keep you safe – your health and safety office or EHS group should be a resource for information as well as monitoring the worksite for safety needs. 

Does your company keep employees protected by dressing them in the appropriate safety PPE?  Have you ever done a self-evaluation, head to toe, of what you are wearing and if it adequately protects you from the job hazards that you may encounter?  Has your safety clothing ever protected you and how?

Read More

Topics: OSHA, indoor air quality, Personal Protective Equipment, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, Emergency Response, H&S Training, Hazardous Waste Management, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Fire Safety

Capt. John DeFillippo, CHMP, EMT-B

The health effects from airborne hazards are a frequent topic in many health and safety courses, especially in hazardous substance and hazardous waste training.  This is because so many of these exposures may not show up as health problems for decades! Consider asbestos. While it’s not harmful to the touch, inhalation can be fatal, but it can take 25-30 years before asbestosis or mesothelioma can develop. Both are chronic and often deadly diseases of the lungs.

The lungs are amazing. It surprises most people to learn that the lungs have the largest surface area of any body organ -- about 80 times more area than the skin, or about the size of a tennis court!  As we breathe, our lungs are in constant contact with the outside world and that is a lot of contact area. They need to be protected.

Over three million American workers are required to wear respirators to protect themselves from hazardous airborne contaminants.  Not surprisingly, OSHA has some pretty strict rules when it comes to protecting our lungs . Despite this , it is estimated that more than half of the respirators worn are not worn in accordance with OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.134

Did you know that…

• If workers are wearing respirators, a written program is required?


• A medical evaluation is required for anyone who wears a respirator?


• A fit test of each respirator worn must be conducted initially AND annually?


• The workplace must be evaluated to determine the hazard so that the proper respirator (there are many) can be selected?


• These rules, and others, apply to what many people refer to as “dust masks”?

Proper respirator usage training is also required. Why? Because wearing the wrong type, wrong size, or an improperly fitted respirator can be more dangerous than not wearing one at all. For example:

1. Wearing a filtering respirator in an O₂-deficient atmosphere, or the wrong cartridge, can mislead you to believe that you are protected…when you are not!


2. A mask with even the slightest poor fit allows contaminates in and may actually increase exposure levels.


3. Not everyone can wear a respirator. Because a respirator restricts your breathing, people with certain medical conditions can be seriously harmed by wearing them. This is why being medically cleared prior to use is so important, and required.

Not complying with the rules designed for occupational safety can be costly… and not just in fines and penalties. Too many workers have destroyed their health by failing to protect their delicate, vital lungs. And, it’s not just at work. Working around the home and yard can also present respiratory dangers, too. If you are not sure that you need more than a “dust mask” ask someone who can help.

Have you been properly trained to use your respirator and fit-tested to make sure it is actually stopping hazards from reaching your lungs?Are you confident that you are using your respirator properly and that the respirator that you have selected is the best for the contaminants you are exposed to?  How about the person next to you - are they in compliance?  Hopefully you and your workmates can answerYES! to these questions. If you have any questions about respiratory protection, please ask me!

Read More

Topics: OSHA, indoor air quality, Personal Protective Equipment, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, Emergency Response, Homeland Security, H&S Training, Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Lab Safety & Electrical, emergency response training, Fire Safety, environmental air monitoring, Respiratory, Occupational Training

Bruce Groves - CIH

In July, David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, published a memo to his staff at OSHA highlighting several new approaches that OSHA is using (or planning to use) in its effort to protect workers.  Dr. Michaels is building on the progress of his predecessors and reinforcing some of the weak links in the system created both by Congress and former administrations. In his recent letter, Dr. Michaels reviews some legacy issues that limit OSHA-influence in creating safer workplaces such as

• OSHA has only 2,000 inspectors responsible for the health and safety of 130 million workers at 7 million worksites


• OSHA fines are too small to have an adequate deterrent effect


• OSHA standards provide limited protection to whistleblowers from retaliation


• OSHA occupational exposure standards have been established for only a small percentage of chemicals used in US workplaces (most of those are based on out-of-date science) with a slow and resource-intensive standard-setting process

Dr. Michaels states that OSHA needs to transform how it addresses workplace hazards, and in its relationship to employers and workers. As such he outlines a new strategy that is a clear shift from recent years indicating that there is a “new sheriff in town” and business (ALL businesses) should take heed.  Here are some of my extrapolations and thoughts regarding 6 of these transformational items -- consider how they will affect your business or workplace.

1.       Stronger Enforcement:  Some Employers Need Incentives to Do the Right Thing

OSHA will have more and bigger sticks.  OSHA is redirecting resources to conduct inspections of high risk industries and tasks including ergonomics.

Read More

Topics: Emilcott, OSHA, indoor air quality, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Lab Safety & Electrical, emergency response training, Occupational Training, Safety Training in Spanish, water safety, small business

Capt. John DeFillippo, CHMP, EMT-B

Every organization develops a “safety culture”, be it good or bad. It is immediately observable to anyone who cares to look, and more people are – particularly prospective clients and business partners.  When evaluating vendors and business partners, companies with strong safety cultures will steer clear of doing business with companies with poor safety records; the risks and exposures are too great.  In addition to the obvious reasons of possible injury or death to workers or the public, there is the potential for serious damage to a company’s image and reputation should their vendor or subcontractor have an incident or accident.  We’ve all heard some of the stories recently in the news; reporters will highlight a major construction accident and all the players are named, regardless of their culpability.

Government agencies also use strong criteria to evaluate potential vendors. The State of New York has severely tightened up its safety and health requirements following the series of construction accidents that have plagued NYC in recent years.

A company can develop a comprehensive health and safety programs. It can post attention-getting signs and posters warning workers of hazards. It can also provide all manner of safety and personal protective equipment and conduct training for employees. These measures are good, but as soon as a supervisor or company owner walks onto a site ignoring the PPE requirements, all this good goes out the window. “Do as I say, not as I do” is not the way lead. The rules must to apply to all, without exception. Even more importantly, owners and managers should set a proper example. Professional experience has shown me that when management creates and “lives” a proactive safety culture, it will get the best results. It’s the front-line managers and supervisors that make the difference.

And it’s a never ending task. Maybe your company has a few workers who constantly violate the safety rules without any real consequences or discipline. The message being sent is pretty clear: the company doesn’t take safety seriously. Most people realize that the rules are there for a reason; their protection and it’s the law.  However, there will always be a small percentage of people that just don’t get it. Without enforcement of the policies, there is not only the risk of worker injury, but an erosion of the “safety culture” of the organization and a negative impact on morale. Plus, it is the employer and management who will be responsible for any fines or penalties handed out as well as increased insurance premiums, particularly workman’s compensation. Often, they are found personally responsible. Why would anyone risk this?

The point is that paying lip service to safety won’t fly anymore -- proactive is best. There are all kinds of resources to help your company succeed. OSHA even offers free services:    http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/smallbusiness/consult.html and http://www.osha.gov/dte/outreach/construction_generalindustry/index.html.  You may also get help from a trade or professional association that you belong to. Health and safety consulting services from companies like Emilcott who are experienced in honing in on risk and compliance can be a great investment to shift your company onto the right track.

Have you ever worked for a company that has an ineffective or sham health and safety policy? How did it make you or fellow employees feel? Was there a tipping point event that made them switch to being proactive and how did they implement a new, comprehensive program (that worked)?

Image Credit:  www.lumaxart.com

Read More

Topics: Personal Protective Equipment, health and safety, General Industry H&S, General EHS, Construction H&S, Emergency Response, H&S Training, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Lab Safety & Electrical, emergency response training, Fire Safety, Occupational Training, Safety Culture, Leadership

Dian Cucchisi, PhD, CHMM

Environmental Health and Safety Professionals are often faced with questions that do not seem to have black and white answers, but, in reality, regulatory requirements are not that gray.  A common question: When do the requirements for 29 CFR 1910.120 and 29 CFR 1926.65 (OSHA’s Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response regulations) apply?  The challenge for EHS professionals is to communicate to workers the distinction between what are considered environmental health risks and the risks to human health, and to clarify the difference of the word “hazardous” as used by various environmental protection agencies and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the state environmental protection agencies have standards for soil and groundwater “cleanliness” for residential and non-residential properties.  Soil or groundwater in exceedence of those standards needs to be remediated (usually by removal), but to add to the confusion, sometimes when soil and/or groundwater is removed from the site and transported to a disposal facility it may not fall into the EPA’s definition for hazardous waste.  So here lies the misunderstanding; if it is not classified as “hazardous waste” by the EPA, people often make the determination that it is not considered hazardous to workers and, therefore, it is not necessary to take measures to protect the workers’ health and safety.

When it comes to worker safety and the risks to human health, we must look at the requirements provided by OSHA.   OSHA is focused on exposure potential and the resulting hazard assessment evaluation to workers from the chemicals that may be encountered when working in areas with potentially contaminated soil and/or groundwater.  If the chemicals present are regulated by OSHA with a Permissible Exposure Limit (exposure based on an 8-hour average), the employer is required to conduct exposure assessments and air monitoring to determine potential risks to the workers onsite.  It also requires that workers are protected from these potential exposures through either engineering controls or personal protective equipments (such as tyvek, gloves and respirators).

 There is also a need to protect the workers and meet all the other applicable OSHA standards that mitigate health and safety risks to workers on this site.   Such required protection would include: 

• developing a site-specific health and safety plan,


• training workers in chemical hazards and controls,


• conducting environmental monitoring to determine exposure,


• instituting controls (PPE and Engineering) to protect from exposure potential,


• clean up (decontamination).and a number of other procedures.  

It is surprising and frustrating that this issue is still debated, but if it is, doesn’t it make sense to use the guidelines in these standards to clarify? We are talking about human health and the regulations are clear about the requirements for worker training and personal protection when dealing with chemical contamination.  You can use the environmental classifications to determine how to treat the situation, but you must look to OSHA to protect the workers as they are doing it.

Have you ever had workplace confusion regarding environmental risk and hazardous to human health? If so, I'd like to hear about your situation and how you resolved it.

Read More

Topics: OSHA, DOT, health and safety, General Industry H&S, Construction H&S, EPA, Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety

Tom Carlson, PE, Sr. Project Manager

Read More

Topics: OSHA, indoor air quality, Personal Protective Equipment, health and safety, Construction H&S, EPA, Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Materials, Compliance, worker safety, Occupational Health, Occupational Safety, Air Sampling, environmental air monitoring, Respiratory, Public Safety