|
|
Respirators
BNA reports
OSHA Withdraws Proposed Rule for New Respirator Quantitative Fit-Test Protocols
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration Jan. 27 withdrew a proposed rule on the use of two proposed quantitative fit-testing protocols for its respiratory protection standard, citing deficiencies in the study supporting the protocols, a low sensitivity value, and insufficient evidence that the protocols would accurately determine fits for filtering-facepiece respirators.
The proposed rule would have revised Appendix A of the standard (29 C.F.R. 1910), which applies to general industry, shipyard construction, and the construction industry, to include two new protocols that would cut fit-testing time approximately in half, a Jan. 21 notice in the Federal Register said (39 OSHR 238, 3/26/09).
In its submission to the agency, TSI Inc., which developed the method, included a copy of a peer-reviewed industrial hygiene article, “Evaluation of Three New Fit Test Protocols for Use with the TSI PortaCount®,” published in 2005 in the Journal of the International Society for Respiratory Protection. The article evaluated the new fit test protocols and compared them against an acceptance criteria established by the American National Standards Institute.
OSHA said it could not evaluate the results, however, because the study's analysis grouped half-mask respirators with full-facepiece respirators, making individual comparisons impossible. The study also did not demonstrate it could accurately determine fit for filtering-facepiece respirators, OSHA said.
Furthermore, the first protocol failed to achieve the sensitivity value required by ANSI, indicating it would result in false-positive fits, OSHA said in the notice.
“This failure to meet the sensitivity value specified by ANSI Z88.10-2001 raises a question of whether revised PortaCount® quantitative fit testing protocol 1 is as protective as the standard PortaCount® quantitative fit testing protocol,” OSHA said.
In addition, the study did not provide enough detail regarding individual fit-test results, the types of respirators selected, and the distribution of respirator fits in the test population, OSHA said.
Jeff Weed, who developed the protocols for TSI Inc., did not return a Jan. 26 phone call from BNA requesting comment.
AFL-CIO Applauds Withdrawal Bill Kojola, an industrial hygienist for the AFL-CIO, told BNA Jan. 26 he supported OSHA's decision to withdraw the proposal.
In comments submitted to the agency, the AFL-CIO urged OSHA to reject the proposal for its failure to test filtering facepiece respirators and its failure to meet sensitivity values for half-mask respirators.
“We're quite pleased that the agency is withdrawing the proposal,” he said. “I think if the agency had gone forward with this, it would have weakened worker protections,” Kojola said.
OSHA said it would reevaluate its decision if further testing, data, or other revisions to the protocols are provided.
By Greg Hellman
OSHA's withdrawal of its proposed rule to add quantitative fit-testing protocols to its respiratory protection standard is available at http://www.federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2010-01656_PI.pdf
OSHA releases workplace injury and illness data
Every year since 1996 the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has collected work-related injury and illness data from more than 80,000 employers. For the first time, the agency has made the data from 1996 to 2007 available in a searchable online database, allowing the public to look at establishment or industry-specific injury and illness data. The workplace injury and illness data is available at http://www.osha.gov/pls/odi/establishment_search.html as well as Data.gov
OSHA uses the data to calculate injury and illness incidence rates to guide its strategic management plan and to focus its Site Specific Targeting (SST) Program, which the agency uses to target its inspections.
“Making injury and illness information available to the public is part of OSHA’s response to the administration’s commitment to make government more transparent to the American people,” said David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA. “This effort will improve the public's accessibility to workplace safety and health data and ensure the Agency can function more effectively for American workers.”
Information available at the Data.gov and www.osha.gov Web sites includes an establishment’s name, address, industry, associated Total Case Rate (TCR), Days Away, Restricted, Transfer (DART) case rate, and the Days Away From Work (DAFWII) case rate. The data is specific to the establishments that provided OSHA with valid data through the 2008 data collection (collection of CY 2007 data). This database does not contain rates calculated by OSHA for establishments that submitted suspect or unreliable data.
Data.gov provides expanded public access to valuable workforce-related data generated by the Executive Branch of the federal government. Although the initial launch of Data.gov provides a limited portion of the rich variety of Federal datasets presently available, the public is invited to participatein shaping the future of Data.gov by suggesting additional datasets and site enhancements to provide seamless public access and use of federal data.
More information about the Department of Labor’s Open Government Web site is available at http://www.dol.gov/open/ where there are links to the latest data sets, ways to connect with Department staff, and information about providing public input that will make the Department’s site and its work more useful and engaging.
