Exposure to airborne asbestos during abatement of ceiling material, window caulking, floor tile and roofing material

Our plain-English summary of Exposure to airborne asbestos during abatement of ceiling material, window caulking, floor tile and roofing material, by J.H. Lange, S.L. Sites, G. Mastrangelo, et al (Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 2008).

The study

• Authors: J.H. Lange, S.L. Sites, G. Mastrangelo, K.W. Thomulka
• Journal: Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
• Published: 2008;80(1):10-3
• Cited by: 8 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Summary of the article

The authors measured airborne asbestos during abatement of several types of asbestos-containing material because they considered published exposure data for this industry limited. The removal work took place in schools in the eastern United States in 2000. Project A and Project B involved floor tile and mastic. Project C involved roofing, window caulking and ceiling or wall plaster. The materials contained more than 1% asbestos by polarized light microscopy. Personal, 30-minute excursion, perimeter and background air samples were collected on mixed cellulose ester filters and analysed by phase contrast microscopy. Final clearance samples were analysed by transmission electron microscopy. Results were compared with the OSHA permissible exposure limit (0.1 f/cc time-weighted average) and excursion limit (1.0 f/cc over 30 minutes). All exposures, including the highest single measurement, were below both limits, and most samples were below detection limits. Plaster removal gave the highest levels: personal samples had an arithmetic mean of 0.02 f/cc (range <0.01–0.05), and excursion samples had a mean of 0.09 f/cc (range <0.08–0.24). The estimated probability of overexposure was below 5% for all projects, except for personal exposure during plaster work, where it was about 20%. All work areas passed final clearance. The authors concluded that these activities posed no 'significant' risk of asbestos disease. They argued that caulking, roofing and floor tile/mastic should not be regulated as asbestos-containing material, that abatement is over-regulated, and that resources would be better spent on smoking prevention.

PubMed has no abstract for this study, and the article doesn't print one. We wrote this summary from the full article with the help of AI. It is not the authors' wording.

In plain English

This study reported air measurements taken during removal of asbestos-containing materials from schools in the eastern United States in 2000. The materials were floor tile and mastic (two projects), roofing, window caulking and plaster, each containing more than 1% asbestos. The asbestos fiber type in the abated materials was not reported. Samples were taken in workers' breathing zones, including 30-minute short-term samples, and in and around work areas. Fibers were counted by phase contrast microscopy. The authors reported that all exposures were below the OSHA permissible exposure limit (0.1 f/cc time-weighted average) and the 30-minute excursion limit (1.0 f/cc), with most samples below detection limits. Plaster removal gave the highest levels: personal samples averaged 0.02 f/cc and 30-minute samples averaged 0.09 f/cc. The estimated probability of overexposure was below 5% except for plaster personal samples, at about 20%. All work areas passed final clearance testing. The authors concluded that this work does not pose a "significant" risk of asbestos disease, and argued that asbestos abatement is over-regulated.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Workplace air-sampling (exposure measurement) study during asbestos abatement projects
• Who was studied: Asbestos abatement work in various schools in the eastern United States in 2000. There were three projects: A and B were floor tile/mastic, and C included roofing, window caulking and plaster. The table lists 51 personal, 52 excursion, 11 background and 248 perimeter samples. The number of workers is not given.
• Exposure: Removal of floor tile/mastic, window caulking, roofing and plaster, each identified by polarized light microscopy as containing more than 1% asbestos. The fiber type in the abated materials is not stated. Floor tile/mastic and plaster were removed inside full enclosures with negative air filtration. Caulking had a barrier enclosure without negative air filtration. Roofing had no containment. Wet methods were used for plaster only. Workers wore respirators.
• Main results:
  • All exposures, including the highest individual measurement, were below the OSHA permissible exposure limit (0.1 f/cc time-weighted average) and the excursion limit (1.0 f/cc over 30 minutes). Most samples were below detection limits.
  • Plaster abatement had the highest levels. Plaster personal samples (13) had an arithmetic mean of 0.02 f/cc.
  • Plaster 30-minute excursion samples (14) had an arithmetic mean of 0.09 f/cc and a geometric mean of 0.08 f/cc.
  • The estimated probability of overexposure was less than 5% for personal and excursion samples on projects A and B, roofing and window caulking, and for plaster excursion samples. For plaster personal samples it was about 20%.
  • All work areas passed the final clearance criterion of less than 70 structures/mm2, measured by transmission electron microscopy.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded there is little likelihood that workers doing these operations will have elevated airborne asbestos exposure, and that this work does not pose a 'significant' risk of asbestos occupational disease. They also argued that asbestos abatement is over-regulated and that caulking, roofing and floor tile/mastic should not be regulated as ACM.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Abatement, Asbestos-Containing Material (ACM), Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM), Mixed Cellulose Ester Filter, phase contrast microscopy (PCM), Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL), Time-Weighted Average (TWA).

Related studies

• Exposure to airborne asbestos during abatement of ceiling material, window caulking, floor tile, and roofing material — J.H. Lange, S.L. Sites, et al. (2006)
• Airborne exposure concentrations during asbestos abatement of ceiling and wall plaster — J.H. Lange, K.W. Thomulka (2002)
• Airborne exposure during asbestos abatement of floor tile, wall plaster, and pipe insulation — J.H. Lange (2005)
• Area and personal airborne exposure during abatement of asbestos-containing roofing material — J.H. Lange, K.W. Thomulka (2000)
• Asbestos abatement of pipe and floor tile/mastic and comparison of critical plastic barrier controls — J.H. Lange (2004)
• Personal airborne asbestos exposure levels associated with various types of abatement — J.H. Lange, K.W. Thomulka, et al. (2006)

Browse more research in Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, or return to medical research.