Results of Inspections in Health Hazard Industries in a Region of the State of Washington

Abstract

Results from state of Washington Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) health inspections were reviewed to characterize the level of control that existed at the work sites, identify common problems, and assess the success of targeting programs in finding and correcting uncontrolled health hazards. Data were obtained from 170 inspections conducted by industrial hygienists in a four-county area in 12 industries, including 10 that were targeted. Inspection data were accessed through the use of electronic databases and inspection reports then summarized by the following industries: bathtub refinishing, carbide tool and saw sharpening, fibercement siding installation, furniture refinishing, health care clinics, janitorial floor waxing service, landscaping, lawn maintenance, tree service, road construction, stone countertop fabrication, truck bed lining, warehouse and cold storage, and wood floor finishing. Targeted health hazards included worker exposure to airborne contaminants, noise, and bloodborne pathogens typical of the industry. Method and effectiveness of control of health hazards were evaluated by counting work sites with violations associated with engineering control, personal protective equipment, hearing conservation, or training. Results are presented by industry for the number and percentage of work sites that failed to provide required protection. Poor control of health hazards was generally found across all inspected industries. Follow-up inspections and self-reports of abatement found that more than 85% were able to successfully control the hazards and abate the violations. The results are further discussed as they relate to methods of control and risk and identifying existing and emerging high health hazard industries. Based on employment data and the poor hazard control that was found, most if not all the industries can be described as high health hazard, small-employer industries. The results can be used for the planning of interventions in other regions and industries.

Keywords:

• health intervention
• high hazard industries
• industrial hygiene
• occupational health hazards
• OSHA
• targeting

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author thanks Nicole Irby and David Bonauto for their review and comments. The author would also like to acknowledge the following agency industrial hygienists whose work contributed to data presented in this article: Rick Cole, Larry Gore, Nicole Irby, David Johnson, David Klavens, Terry Walley, and Jin Zhang. The contents are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the reviewers or the state of Washington.

The contents are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the reviewers or the state of Washington.

Notes

^A Exposure level in multiple of agency limits except noise in units of dBA. TWA₈ = 8-hr time-weighted average. STEL = short-term exposure limit. C = ceiling.

^B Multiple of limit for mixture of chemicals with additive health effects.

^C Multiple of manufacturer's limit, see Material Safety Data Sheet Homopolymer of Hexamethylene Diisocyanate. Bayer Material Science LLC, Pittsburg, Pa., June 2005.

^D See Table III.

^E Work sites with workers overexposed but engineering control considered not feasible.

^F Sum of the number of work sites with lack of control for one or more assessed health hazards.

^G Sum of the numbers for each industry using the greater value.

^A Data excluded for three national corporations.