By Alison B. Kaelin, CQA ABKaelin, LLC Managing Chemical Hazards & Permissible Exposure Limits n October 2014, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it is seeking Coatings Industry Considerations public comment on strategies for managing chemical hazards in to protect workers from adverse health 1968 Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) of the the workplace and approaches to effects related to hazardous chemical American Conference of Governmental Iupdating chemical permissible expo- exposure. Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). sure limits (PELs). In this request, OSHA Most of OSHA’s PELs were issued short- This means that approximately 95 per- admits that “Many OSHA PELs are ly after adoption of the Occupational cent of OSHA’s current PELs have not out-of-date and they’re not adequate for Safety and Health (OSH) Act in 1970. been updated since they were adopted ensuring protection of worker health.” OSHA has occupational exposure limits nearly 45 years ago. Further, the The initiative is requesting public for only about 470 substances. Section American Chemistry Council estimates comment by April 8, 2015 on how 6(a) of the OSH Act allowed OSHA to that approximately 8,300 chemicals are to streamline and improve OSHA’s adopt existing federal standards or nation- being used in significant amounts in the process for updating PELs and possible al consensus standards as enforceable workplace, and that OSHA is regulating approaches to reducing and controlling OSHA standards. Most of these are listed approximately only 5 percent of these chemical exposures in the workplace. as simple limits in the three Z-Tables of 29 chemicals. This article discusses material provid- CFR 1910.1000; Subpart Z, Toxic and Industrial experience, safety, health ed in the request for information and Hazardous Substances: Table Z-1, Limits and industrial hygiene professionals the OSHA website section; for Air Contaminants, Table Z-2, and Table and organizations, new developments in “Transitioning to Safer Chemicals” and Z-3, Mineral Dusts. technology, and current scientific data evaluates them based on their potential Approximately 30 chemicals and car- (such as what we now have about lead, relevance or impact on the coatings cinogens are regulated through Compre- silica and isocyanates to name just a industry. hensive Health Standards (including lead, few) clearly demonstrate that, in many cadmium, hexavalent chromium and instances, the outdated PELs are not Permissible Exposure Limits arsenic). Most PELs were adopted from sufficiently protecting worker health. PELs establish the acceptable amount the Walsh-Healy Public Contracts Act as Even the more recent PELs, such as the or concentration of a substance in the existing federal standards for general OSHA PEL for “Lead in Construction” of air in the workplace. They are intended industry. These were adopted from the 50 µg/m3 as an eight-hour time-weight- 36 JPCL December 2014 / paintsquare.com ©iStockphoto/iznashih ed average established in 1993, is now make updating current PELs or issuance approaches, OSHA relies heavily on the considered to be outdated based on of new PELs for other chemicals cum- Hazard Communication Standard current health effects data. bersome and nearly impossible to (HCS). It suggests that priorities for new In 1989 OSHA tried to update and achieve. and revised PELs may be based on the establish new PELs for more than 350 As part of the request for information updated hazard classifications estab- chemicals in a single rulemaking. (RFI), OSHA has indicated that new lished in the HCS. It states that data However, the entire rulemaking was ulti- strategies are also needed to update used for “banding” (grouping based on mately vacated by the court. and supplement the PELs. OSHA similarities) could be based on informa- Industrial hygiene professional associ- Director Dr. David Michaels stated that tion in the safety data sheets. One ations and safety advocacy organizations OSHA is exploring a number of “more method suggests that the hazard classi- such as the American Industrial Hygiene flexible, scientifically accepted fication and dustiness of the material Association (AIHA) and the ACGIH have approaches that may streamline the might have to be considered. advocated updating OSHA’s outdated risk-assessment process and increase The RFI also suggests that OSHA is PELs for years. the capacity to address a greater num- interested in using task-based control ber of chemicals.” OSHA indicates it is approaches in the construction industry PEL Updates considering the following concepts: such as the method used in the recently Currently, Section 6(b) of the OSHA Act • A tiered approach to exposure- proposed rule for crystalline silica. This mandates that OSHA meets the follow- response assessment that will enable approach allows employers to choose ing requirements before proposing rules the agency to establish acceptable PELs to measure their workers’ exposure to for a comprehensive health standard: for larger numbers of workplace chemi- silica and independently decide which • The standard must substantially cals; controls work best in their workplaces. reduce a significant risk of material • Chemical grouping approaches to Alternately, the employers can simply harm. expedite the risk assessment process; use a pre-established control method • Compliance with the standard must be • Toxicity testing and other emerging that outlines work practice, engineering technically feasible. This means that the test data to calculate risk; controls and respiratory protection protective measures required by the • Alternative approaches to judging based on the task (such as use of hand standard currently exist, can be brought economic and technical feasibility that grinders). into existence with available technology, might involve less time and fewer or can be created with technology that resources; Alternative Approaches to Chemical Management can reasonably be developed. • Opportunities to incorporate non-reg- OSHA indicated that workers suffer • Compliance with the standard must be ulatory “informed substitution” — the more than 190,000 illnesses and 50,000 economically feasible. This is reviewed considered transition from a potentially deaths annually due to chemical expo- by the Office of Management and hazardous chemical, material, product sures. Workplace chemical exposures Budget. or process to a safer chemical or non- are linked to various cancers, lung, kid- • It must reduce risk of adverse health to chemical alternatives — as part of work- ney, skin, heart, stomach, brain, nerve, workers to the extent feasible. place chemical management; and and reproductive diseases. • The standard must be supported by • Banding chemicals together either As a precursor to the RFI, in substantial evidence in the record, con- through similar toxicity, occupational October 2013 OSHA introduced the sistent with prior agency practice or is exposure danger, task-based exposure “Transitioning to Safer Chemicals: A supported by some justification for or through control measures such as Toolkit for Employers and Workers” departing from that practice. dilution ventilation, engineering controls website and annotated an occupational • These requirements and the sheer or containment. exposure limits table to assist employ- number of chemical compounds in use, In the RFI discussion of the potential ers to voluntarily reduce chemical paintsquare.com / JPCL December 2014 37 Chemical Hazards & Exposure Limits exposures and adopt newer, more pro- such as air emissions and TRIR ard. NIOSH communicates its recommen- tective workplace exposure limits. reporting. dations to OSHA in order to produce • Assess costs. legally enforceable standards. NIOSH also Transitioning to Safer Chemicals Process • Assess potential changes in worker publishes a pocket guide to chemical haz- The “Transitioning to Safer Chemicals” experience, training and transition. ards, alerts, special hazard reviews and (www.osha.gov/dsg/safer_ technical guidelines. chemicals/index.html) and "Toolkit" Step 5: Select online resources support OSHA’s hierar- ACGIH Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) chy of controls where hazard elimination Step 6: Pilot Test the Alternative ACGIH is a private, scientific organization or substitution make the most effective • Implement a pilot or small scale test. that produces recommendations and solution for reducing chemical hazards. • Identify resources needed if alternative guidelines to help manage occupational The OSHA step-by-step toolkit pro- is implemented. health hazards. TLVs are airborne concen- vides employers and workers with infor- • Evaluate. trations of chemical substances which are mation, methods, tools and guidance on believed to cause no adverse effects after using informed substitution in the work- Step 7: Implement repeated exposure over a working life- place. It can be utilized by all types of and Evaluate the Alternative time. businesses that use products containing • Evaluate worker benefit (reduction in Because the TLVs are based solely on chemicals in their everyday operations. exposures). health issues, there is no attention given • Determine if alternative meets needs. to economic or technical practicality. They The Toolkit Steps are recognized as credible and their inclu- Step 1: Engage Annotated Z-Tables sion is required on safety data sheets by • Form a team to develop a plan. OSHA’s mandatory PELs in the Z-Tables the HCS. • Develop goals for chemical remain in effect. However, OSHA