U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services Centers For .

June 2013 Site VisitWe took air samples and surface/skin wipe samples for elements and measured noise levelsthroughout the facility. We took blood samples for lead and cadmium and urine samples forcadmium and mercury from shred room, teardown, battery sorting, maintenance, and forkliftemployees. These employees were selected because of potential for exposure to metals. Allpotential study participants read and signed a consent form in their native language (Englishor Hmong) before having their blood and urine samples collected. A Hmong interpreter wasonsite during all testing to assist with the consent procedure and answer questions. We followeduniversal (standard) precautions for working with blood and blood products [Siegel et al. 2007;29 CFR 1910.1030]. Blood and urine samples were analyzed by a contract laboratory. Mercuryand cadmium results were standardized to grams of creatinine to account for differences inurine concentration. We compared results of urine and blood testing to several occupationalexposure limits (OELs). The health effects and OELs for lead and cadmium are provided inAppendix B. We individually notified study participants in writing of their blood and urine testresults and explained what these results meant in their native language.We measured personal exposure to respirable particulate in the air during two shiftsfollowing National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Method 0600[NIOSH 2014]. We sampled work tasks in the shred room and tear down areas for respirabledust during two workshifts. We analyzed the respirable particulate for elements, includingindium and mercury, following NIOSH Method 7301. However, for this report we presentdetailed data only for the most toxicologically relevant metals such as lead, cadmium,chromium, and nickel. We were unable to schedule a follow up visit to evaluate employeeexposures to metals in total dust.We also measured personal exposure to mercury vapor and mercury particulate in the airduring one shift following NIOSH Method 6009 [NIOSH 2014a]. We sampled mercury sideby-side to the other metals on one employee in the shred room and another employee in theteardown area. A third employee in the shred room handling batteries and other electronicssuspected to contain mercury was sampled exclusively for mercury.We collected surface wipe samples for lead, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and mercury inproduction areas and nonproduction areas such as break rooms, locker rooms, and offices. Wetook wipe samples from the skin of employees (e.g., hands, neck, or forearm) immediatelyprior to leaving work noting if they washed up or not. We also took a wipe sample from theclothing of a shred room employee after that employee showered and changed into streetclothes at the end of the shift before going home.Wipe samples were taken using premoistened Ghost Wipe towelettes following wipinginstructions and analysis from NIOSH Method 9102 [NIOSH 2014a]. We analyzed forelements including indium; but present data only for the most toxicologically relevant metalssuch as lead, cadmium, chromium, and nickel. Wipe samples for mercury were taken usinga Whatman LabSales Inc. No. 41 filter and analyzed following the Occupational Safety andHealth Administration (OSHA) Method ID-145 [OSHA 2014]. For all wipe samples, weused clean nitrile gloves to avoid cross contamination and measured the area sampled withHealth Hazard Evaluation Report 2013-0067-3228Page 5

a 10-square centimeter, disposable cardboard template when possible. For uneven or irregularsurfaces, we estimated the sample area. For hand wipes, we asked employees to wipe bothhands (i.e., wrist down to fingers including palm and back of the palm) for at least 30 seconds.Hand wipes at the end of the shift after washing from shred room employees were compared tothose from teardown employees by a two-way t-test of the logarithm of the means.We used a Larson-Davis model 2800 sound level meter to measure sound levels inproduction areas during our April 2013 visit. During our June 2013 visit, we used a LarsonDavis model 824 octave band analyzer to measure noise levels in production areas. Wehad planned to analyze the June 2013 electronically recorded data to recommend potentialnoise controls and decide if additional employee hearing protection was needed in the glassshredding room. However, we were unable to retrieve the recorded data from the instrument.Results and DiscussionDocument ReviewThe company had written hazard communication, hearing conservation, and respiratoryprotection programs that were comprehensive and well-organized. We reviewed BLLs fromshred room and maintenance employees from 2008–2012; most BLLs were below10 micrograms per deciliter of blood (µg/dL). Seventeen of 107 employees for whomBLLs were reviewed had at least one BLL above 10 µg/dL; the highest BLL was 18 µg/dL.Although this is below the level allowed by OSHA, an expert panel recommends keepingBLLs below 10 µg/dL [Kosnett et al. 2007]. NIOSH defines an elevated BLL in adults as10 µg/dL or higher. Most of the employees that had elevated BLLs also had BLLs that werenot elevated, i.e., they did not remain elevated. For detailed information about the healtheffects of lead and recommended BLL levels see Appendix B.We reviewed six industrial hygiene reports from consultants the company hired to evaluatelead exposures. The evaluations occurred between June 2011 and October 2012. The reportsidentified that some employees’ lead exposure in the shred room had either exceeded theOSHA action level of 30 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) or permissible exposurelimit (PEL) of 50 µg/m3. Employees in other production rooms were not evaluated for leadexposure. The facility managers continued to improve engineering controls (i.e., ventilation),administrative controls (i.e., showers), and required PPE (i.e., respirators) based uponfindings from the consultants. The managers performed air monitoring after every ventilationintervention, as stipulated by OSHA, and was continuing their efforts during our evaluation.Employees were in a blood lead monitoring program as required by OSHA.We also reviewed industrial hygiene consultant reports dated November 2011 to May 2012that evaluated noise exposures. These reports identified that some exposures for employeesworking in the shred room, consumer teardown, and dumpster area were above the OSHAaction level and NIOSH recommended exposure limit (REL) of 85 decibels A-weighted(dBA). The facility began to require use of hearing protection in these areas and continued tomonitor employees’ exposure and do baseline and annual audiometric testing.Page 6Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2013-0067-3228

ObservationsWe saw good compliance with the use of required PPE throughout the facility. PPE waswidely available and signs showing the type of PPE needed were posted in each area.However, respirators used voluntarily by the teardown employees were sometimes usedimproperly (i.e., only one strap or over facial hair) which would reduce the protectionafforded by the respirator.The employees who processed large televisions had to bend over and lift heavy componentsmanually to disassemble and expose the CRT. The process of dismantling large televisionscould be changed to reduce ergonomic strain on employees performing this task.We saw two recycling tasks that could be changed to reduce airborne dust. The first taskoccurred at the end of the teardown line where employees pushed CRTs into cardboardboxes. The CRTs broke when they fell into the boxes, releasing dust. The other dustproducing task occurred when these cardboard boxes were emptied onto the loading platformat the glass shredding conveyor.We noticed several work practices that could result in unnecessary lead exposure andpotentially increase employees’ BLLs.1. Shred room employees removed their company provided uniforms immediatelyoutside the shred room when leaving the work area, but told us they put this sameuniform back on when they returned. This practice could contaminate their hands andpersonal clothes.2. Teardown employees were not required to wear uniforms and were not required toshower at the end of their workday. We also observed that employees without uniformsdid not always change into clean clothes before going home, and that work clotheswere laundered at home.3. Maintenance employees did not remove their uniform or gloves when they left theshred room.4. We observed employees dry sweeping, including in the shred room. We saw visibleplumes of dust when employees swept and shoveled debris in the shred room.5. We saw teardown employees using compressed air to clean work areas and theirclothing and skin at the end of the shift, although this practice was prohibited by thecompany. Using compressed air can increase employees’ exposure to metals and otherworkplace contaminants and may cause skin or eye injuries.6. The company required cut-resistant sleeves were widely available, and mostemployees wore them. However, there was no written policy on reuse or laundering ofsleeves. Reusing dirty sleeves can be a source of exposure.7. We saw employees using pedestal fans in the teardown lines for cooling. However,the fans faced employees who were breaking CRTs, potentially increasing exposuresamong employees working downwind.Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2013-0067-3228Page 7

We found several ways that dust containing lead and other metals could be tracked from theshred room to nonproduction areas and to employees’ homes.1. Employees stored their personal clothes and items with their PPE in lockers.2. Employees from all areas could enter the shred room and track lead back to their work areas.3. Shred room employees wore their work boots to the locker room for storage when notin use.4. Forklifts travelled from the shred room to other areas of the facility, potentiallycarrying dust with lead and other metals.5. Most employees washed their hands before lunch, but many did not remove all PPE.Many employees did not wash their hands or change clothes before going home. Thispractice could result in employees transporting workplace contaminants to their cars andhomes, placing their families at risk of exposure to dust containing lead and other metals.We observed the conveyor belt immediately beyond the shredder frequently jamming withCRT fragments. When this occurred, the shredder rebooted. When the shredder failedto unjam, we saw employees climbing on the scrap metal in the dumpster and manuallydislodging the fragments in the shredder while the conveyor was operating. In addition topossible falls, these employees were at risk of severe injury or death by not implementinglockout/tagout of the shredder.Employee InterviewsWe interviewed 24 English speaking employees with a variety of job titles including teardown(6), shred room (5), sorting, weighing, and data entry (4), diagnostic technician (2), janitor (1),battery sorter (1), maintenance (2), finished goods (1), bailer (1), logistics (1). Employees hadno health complaints related to exposures on the job. Employees were knowledgeable aboutpotential hazards in the plant and about required PPE. Most employees who had BLL testingdid not know what their BLL was, but they knew how to get the information.Blood and Urine TestingOf 40 employees, 24 in the targeted areas participated in the blood and urine testing: 13 fromteardown, seven from the shred room, two fork truck drivers, one from battery and bulbprocessing (which took place in the consumer room), and one who reported working in boththe shred room and teardown. Results are presented in Table 1. Two employees had elevatedBLLs (i.e., 10 µg/dL or higher); neither worked in the shred room. All employees had urinemercury levels below the limit of detection of 5 micrograms per liter (µg/L). Urine and bloodcadmium levels were below OSHA limits.The OSHA standard, established in 1976, requires immediate removal of employees fromlead exposure at work if they have a BLL of 60 µg/dL, or if the average level of the last threetests is 50 µg/dL or higher. Most experts now believe that BLLs in workers should be keptat much lower levels than OSHA requires. These experts believe that BLLs should be keptbelow 10 µg/dL (Appendix B). For cadmium levels, OSHA requires blood cadmium levelsPage 8Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2013-0067-3228

to be below 5 µg/L and urine cadmium levels to be below 3 micrograms per gram creatinine(µg/g/Cr). OSHA does not have a legal requirement for a level of mercury in the urine, butthe American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) recommends thatthe level of urine mercury be kept below 20 µg/g/Cr.Table 1. Lead and cadmium biomonitoring results, June 2013Location/activitiesNumber ofemployeesBlood lead g/Cr)Shred 13.4ND†–0.9ND‡–1.1§Forklift drivers andbattery and bulbemployees36.6–9.4ND†–1.5ND‡–0.9ND not detected*Not detected, blood lead below the limit of detection of 3.0 µg/dL.†Not detected, blood cadmium below the limit of detection of 0.5 µg/dL.‡Not detected, urine cadmium below the limit of detection of 0.1 µg/g/Cr.§Two employees did not have their urine cadmium levels checked because they had not worked atthis facility long enough for cadmium to build up in their kidneys.Air SamplingResults of personal air sampling for metals (not including mercury) are shown in Table 2.We compared our air sampling results for respirable cadmium to the ACGIH threshold limitvalue (TLV) of 2 µg/m3. There are no OELs for respirable lead, nickel, and chromium. Wefound the highest respirable cadmium concentrations on samples collected on glass operatorswho handled broken CRTs at the shred room platform. Respirable lead concentrations werehigher in the shred room than in the teardown area, as would be expected on the basis of thework performed in these areas.Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2013-0067-3228Page 9

Table 2. Personal air sampling results for respirable elements over two work shifts, June 2013Respirableelements*Job titleNumber ed room2515ND† to 1.81.9 to 6.8NoneNoneCadmiumTeardownShred room2515ND† to 0.18ND† to 0.242 (ACGIH)2 (ACGIH)ChromiumTeardownShred room2515ND** to (0.58)‡(0.35) to (0.82)‡NoneNoneNickelTeardownShred room2515ND†ND†NoneNone*Elements that were not detected (minimum detectable concentration [MDC] of 1.1 µg/m3 or less):cobalt, indium, lanthanum, lithium, nickel, phosphorus, selenium, tellurium, thallium, and vanadium.Elements that were detected but below the minimum quantifiable concentration (MQC) of 1.0µg/m3: copper, molybdenum, potassium, and silver. Elements that were above the MQC: aluminum(up to 2.7 µg/m3), zinc (up to 3.5 µg/m3), barium (up to 2.1 µg/m3), beryllium (up to 0.02 µg/m3),calcium (up to 30 µg/m3), iron (up to 22 µg/m3), magnesium (up to 2.4 µg/m3), manganese (up to0.32 µg/m3), strontium (up to 1.5 µg/m3), tin (up to 0.49 µg/m3), titanium (up to 0.14 µg/m3), yttrium(up to 0.81 µg/m3), and zirconium (up to 0.05 µg/m3).†For these samples the MDC was 0.16 µg/m3 for respirable lead, 0.11 µg/m3 for respirable nickel,and 0.027 µg/m3 for respirable cadmium.‡The chromium concentrations in parenthesis are between the MDC of 0.32 µg/m3 to the MQC of1.0 µg/m3. This means there is more uncertainty associated with these values.We did not detect mercury particulate or mercury vapor in the three personal air samplesmeasured. This means that the measured exposures were well below the ACGIH TLV of25 µg/m3, NIOSH REL of 50 µg/m3, and OSHA PEL of 100 µg/m3. The minimum detectableconcentration was 0.0099 µg/m3 for mercury particulate and 0.0023 µg/m3 for mercury vapor.Wipe SamplingPersonal wipe sample results for selected elements are shown in Table 3. Overall, leadwas found more frequently than the other metals, although all metals were found on someemployees in both rooms.We found lead on the skin of all 12 shred room employees tested, nickel on the skin of threeemployees, chromium on the skin of eight employees, and cadmium on the skin of eightemployees. We did not find mercury on the skin of the four shred room employees we tested(not in table). We found mercury on the street clothes of the one shred room employee tested(not in table).Lead was found on the skin of all 19 teardown employees we tested. We found nickel on thehands of ten employees, chromium on the hands of 15 employees, and cadmium on the handsof 17 employees. We took skin wipe samples for mercury from five teardown employees, andfound mercury on one (not in table).Page 10Health Hazard Evaluation Report 2013-0067-3228

Table 3. Wipe sample results for selected elements taken at the end of the shift, unlessotherwise specifiedSurfaceWas rearm*NoRightforearm orneck*†Loading geometric mean [range], shown in .59]Forearm .840.020.0540.050.170.51.6HandsLODLOQLOD Limit of detectionLOQ Limit of quantitation*Approximated 100 cm2 surface area.†These samples were taken during the lunch break.‡Result is below the LOD.§Washing “yes” meant that the employee said he washed his hands. At the end of the shift all shredroom employees were required to shower and change clothes while teardown employees may havewashed hands and/or change clothes only on a volunteer basis.We found that after washing their hands, teardown employees had more metal contaminationremaining on their hands than shred room employees. For example, teardown employeeshad 3 times more lead (P 0.01), 33 times more cadmium (P 0.03), 12 times mo

Large cardboard boxes containing CRTs from the consumer room were delivered to the shred room by forklift, then placed onto one of two tilting stations on the loading platform. Two employees on the loading platform used a pulley