Monitoring asbestos

Asbestos fibers have been proven to produce lung cancer and therefore, a strict monitoring requirement has been set forth by OSHA. Monitoring asbestos may tend to be difficult at first, depending on the interference of other particulate in the atmosphere and the volume of air sampled. 

The purpose of this chapter is to describe the analytical methods that are available for detecting, measuring, and/or monitoring asbestos, its metabolites, and other biomarkers of exposure and effect to asbestos. The intent is not to provide an exhaustive list of analytical methods. Rather, the intention is to identify well-established methods that are used as the standard methods of analysis. Many of the analytical methods used for environmental samples are the methods approved by federal agencies and organizations such as ERA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Other methods presented in this chapter are those that are approved by groups such as the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) and the American Public Health Association (APHA). Additionally, analytical methods are included that modify previously used methods to obtain lower detection limits and/or to improve accuracy and precision. 

Asbestos testing (bulk and air sampling) in existing facilities, equipment Monitor asbestos removal projects... 

Monitor the exposure of employees to asbestos where appropriate. 

Also keep in mind that most asbestos abatement is closely monitored by state and local governments. Although OSHA has jurisdiction, the states and local regulators typically keep a watchful eye over ACM activities. 

Respiratory protective equipment for use against asbestos Monitoring strategies for toxic substances Carbon monoxide... 

The principal objective of an O M program is to minimize exposure of aU building occupants to asbestos fibers. To accomplish this objective, an O M program includes work practices to (a) maintain ACM in good condition, (b) ensure proper cleanup of asbestos fibers previously released, (c) prevent further release of asbestos fibers, and (d) monitor the condition of ACM. 

Insulation. It is common for workers replacing insulation at older plants to encounter asbestos (see Insulation, electric Insulation, thermal). The composition of both old and new insulation should be known to be certain that proper procedures are followed. The removal of asbestos-containing insulation is a complex and difficult process requiring personal protective equipment, monitoring, containment, special disposal procedures, stringent work practices, and record keeping (3). Many companies elect to have asbestos removal done by specialized contractors. 

In order to properly characterize the brownfield site, before choosing the specific remediation approach, an Expert Committee was nominated by the Government to coordinate and check the remediation activities. This Committee planned the following activities two monitoring phases, which included waste and soil sampling, groundwater sampling, chemical analyses, map compilation for the pollutant elements, data elaboration and interpretation, asbestos characterization and remediation, and a preliminary operative remediation plan. 

The CIPE plan called for a remediation of asbestos-containing materials in the Etemit and in the ILVA steelwork factories. Ninety percent of the buildings, squares, and sites were cleared of asbestos by March 4,2000. During the remediation activities, and in coordination with the local Health Unities (ASL)), a series of control samples were collected. 915 samples were analyzed to evaluate the presence of aerially dispersed asbestos fibers in nearby locations. No values exceeding WHO limits were detected. 1044 samples and analyses from the Etemit site and 56 from the ILVA site were also collected to monitor fiber dispersion inside the area of the operations. 

Light Microscopic Method. Phase contrast microscopy (PCM) accurately assesses fiber exposure levels for fibers 5 pm in length and >0.25 pm in diameter. Furthermore, PCM cannot differentiate between asbestos and nonasbestos fibers. Currently, the standard method for the determination of airborne asbestos particles in the workplace is NIOSH Method 7400, Asbestos by Phase Contrast Microscopy (NIOSH 1994a). OSHA considers that sampling and analytical procedures contained in OSHA Method ID-160 and NIOSH Method 7400 are essential for obtaining adequate employee exposure monitoring. Therefore, all employers who are required to conduct monitoring are required to use these or equivalent methods to collect and analyze samples (OSHA 1994). In NIOSH Method 7400, asbestos is collected on a 25 mm cellulose ester filter (cassette-equipped with a 50 mm electrically-conductive cowl). The filter is treated to make it... 

EPA. 1984c. Evaluation of turbidometric methods for monitoring of asbestos fibers in water. Athens, GA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. EPA-600/4-84-071. NTIS PB84-2325I1. 

Conventional diaphragm cells have potential environmental losses from operating materials. Fiber dispersion into the cell products occurs from the asbestos diaphragm, and steps have been taken to monitor the degree of hazard [21]. Cell streams are all generally either in closed circuits, or are fed as components to the following processes so that the risk of outside asbestos... 

Prior to any works on site, a risk assessment should be carried out and possible control or preventative measures put in place to minimise any release of asbestos fibres and subsequent exposure of the operatives working on the site, or members of the public who may live, work or have right of way near the site boundary. If there is a strong possibility of ACMs being disturbed then it may be considered prudent to carry out reassurance air monitoring during the works to determine the airborne fibre levels and hopefully prove that no increase in the background fibre levels has occurred. 

The risk assessment process was incomplete because there was a lack of test results for many pollutants, and many test results were not completed for a number of days after sampling. There was also an absence of shortterm health benchmarks for asbestos and other pollutants, and problems with asbestos monitoring. EPA did not have monitoring data to support reassurances made in their early press releases, because they lacked monitoring data for several contaminants, such as PCBs, particulates, dioxin, and polyaromatic hydrocarbons. 

---