- 03 April 2006 -
New Hex Chrome PEL: Can You Comply?
By Greg Valero, g.valero@elsevier.com
Surface finishers are finding the new hex chrome PEL ruling akin to taking the SAT exam: Lots of questions and uncertain answers.
"I'm cautiously optimistic that many people will find their initial exposure monitoring puts them in a situation where they are able to make some changes to comply," says Joelie Zak, AESF's vice president and an engineering consultant at Scientific Control Laboratories (Chicago). "But it's not going to be easy."
Indeed, the long-awaited announcement by OSHA to revise the hexavalent chromium permissible exposure limit (PEL) was the major topic of discussion at the recent SFIC Annual Industry Convention.
The new PEL of 5 micrograms of Cr(VI) per cubic meter of air (µg/m3) is not only more than 10 times less than the original PEL, but about 20 µg/m3 short of the compromise the industry was hoping to reach with OSHA. J. Kelly Mowry, president of Gull Industries (Houston)—who received NAMF’s Silvio C. Taormina Memorial Award at the convention—called upon his colleagues to raise the estimated $750,000 required to fund litigation costs to challenge the ruling. The litigation fund—which amounts to a contribution of roughly $2,500 per shop—is a drop in the bucket compared to NAMF's projected compliance costs.
According to OSHA, the new standard requires covered industries to achieve the PEL through engineering and work practice controls to the extent that is technologically feasible. Additional provisions cover exposure determinations, respiratory protection, protective work clothing and equipment, medical surveillance and communication of hazards.
The first step in the compliance process is to conduct exposure monitoring to determine whether employees are subjected to hex chrome levels above the PEL or action level. "It is important to note that compliance with the standard must be for the most exposed employee," says Jeff Hannapel, vice president of regulatory affairs at The Policy Group, the government relations arm for the surface finishing industry.
The exposure monitoring test requires comprehensive data to convince OSHA that a plant meets requirements set forth in the new standard. If the results indicate the facility is below the action level, the test is repeated within seven days for verification purposes, Zak says. However, even if similar results are obtained, she recommends periodic exposure monitoring of the facility, especially if there are changes to production, raw materials, and work practices that may alter test results.
While surface finishers have until May 31, 2010 to implement engineering controls, those facilities with employees exposed to a level above the PEL must meet the standard through the use of respirators. Says Hannapel: "This could pose a considerable compliance cost for facilities implementing and administering the respirator protection program."
For information on making a donation to support the hex chrome PEL legal challenge, contact Lauren Heard, SFIC, at 202-457-8404.
|
