HETA 88-262-2209 NIOSH INVESTIGATORS:

APRIL 1992 Christopher M. Reh, M.S.

EGG HARBOR YACHT, INC. Edward L. Petsonk, M.D.

EGG HARBOR CITY, NEW JERSEY

I. SUMMARY

In April 1988, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

(NIOSH) was requested by a group of employees to evaluate respiratory

complaints in a fiberglass-reinforced plastic boat manufacturing

facility.

In November 1988, an initial site visit and worker health interviews

were conducted at the Egg Harbor Yacht, Inc., Egg Harbor City, New

Jersey. It appeared at that time that an excessive number of

respiratory complaints was present in the workers, and in March 1989, a

combined medical and environmental survey was conducted at the facility.

Results of personal breathing zone samples from workers in the

fiberglass molding area showed an average styrene concentration of 46.8

ppm. Over 78% of the measurements from this area were above the NIOSH

action level of 25 ppm, and 35% of samples were above the NIOSH REL,

OSHA PEL, and ACGIH TLV of 50 ppm. In addition, of four breathing zone

samples for total wood dust from workers in woodworking areas, three

were above the ACGIH TLV of 1 mg/m3

. Styrene exposure measurements from

the production line, in contrast, were all below the NIOSH action level.

Acetone concentrations from personal breathing zone samples were also

below the NIOSH REL of 250 mg/m3

.

Questionnaire responses from the workers showed a high prevalence of

respiratory symptoms. No clear relationship between symptoms or lung

functional changes and measured exposures was observed, however.

Considering all of the data from the medical and environmental

survey, the NIOSH investigators conclude that a health hazard does

exist from exposure to styrene in the molding areas, and exposure to

wood dust in the woodworking areas at Egg Harbor Yacht, Inc.

Recommendations are offered regarding exposure monitoring,

engineering and administrative controls, personal protection, and

medical monitoring of workers.

Keywords: SIC 3732 (Boat building and repairing), styrene, fiberglass,

wood dust, boat manufacturing

This Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) report and any recommendations made herein are for the specific facility evaluated and may not be universally

applicable. Any recommendations made are not to be considered as final statements of NIOSH policy or of any agency or individual involved.

Additional HHE reports are available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports

This Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) report and any recommendations made herein are for the specific facility evaluated and may not be universally

applicable. Any recommendations made are not to be considered as final statements of NIOSH policy or of any agency or individual involved.

Additional HHE reports are available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports

This Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) report and any recommendations made herein are for the specific facility evaluated and may not be universally

applicable. Any recommendations made are not to be considered as final statements of NIOSH policy or of any agency or individual involved.

applicable. Any recommendations made are not to be considered as final statements of NIOSH policy or of any agency or individual involved.

Additional HHE reports are available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports
Page 2 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

II. INTRODUCTION

On April 12, 1988, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and

Health (NIOSH) received a valid, confidential request for a health

hazard evaluation at Egg Harbor Yacht, Inc., Egg Harbor City, New

Jersey. NIOSH was requested by a group of employees at Egg Harbor

Yacht, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Egg Harbor Yacht) to evaluate

respiratory complaints from exposures in the mold room areas, the

production lines, and the woodworking shops.

On November 9, 1988, investigators from NIOSH and the State of New

Jersey Department of Health (NJDOH) conducted an initial site visit at

Egg Harbor Yacht. During the site visit, the industrial hygienists

reviewed company records and inspected the workplace, while the medical

officers interviewed workers from the different areas of the plant.

During the course of the site visit, Egg Harbor Yacht management

rescinded their cooperation with the investigation, forcing the NIOSH

and NJDOH investigators to leave the premises prior to completion of the

worker interviews. In reviewing the data obtained from the 65

interviews completed prior to interruption of the investigation, it

appeared that an excessive number of respiratory complaints were present

in the workers. Consequently, a warrant was obtained on March 28, 1989,

and served to officials at Egg Harbor Yacht. On March 29-30, 1989, the

NIOSH and NJDOH investigators conducted industrial hygiene and medical

surveys. After completion of these surveys, a response letter was

written to Egg Harbor Yacht on May 19, 1989, which included

recommendations for the use of dedicated personal protective equipment,

establishment of respiratory protection and hearing conservation

programs, the repair and upgrade of local exhaust ventilation systems,

and the purchase of powered hand tools with anti-vibration grips.

III. BACKGROUND

Egg Harbor Yacht is a manufacturer of fiberglass-reinforced plastic

(FRP) boats, specializing in fishing and sporting yachts. At the time

of the survey, Egg Harbor Yacht employed approximately 200 hourly

workers, operating for one 10-hour shift per day, four days per week.

The NIOSH investigators estimate that approximately 60-70% of the work

force is of Hispanic origin, and for many Spanish is their primary

language.

The hull, deck, and some smaller boat parts are fabricated from

polyester-base resin, gel coat (pigmented resin), and split strand glass

fiber (roving) using either hand or spray lay-up techniques. An initial

layer of gel coat is applied to the FRP mold. The pigments in the gel

coat give color to the FRP, as this layer is the outside surface of the

molded part. Next, layers of woven roving are manually laid-up on the

gel coated mold, and the polyester resin is applied using a brush and/or

spray system. This process is repeated, building-up the FRP to a

desired level of thickness. For some FRP parts, it is not possible to

use layers of
Page 3 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

woven roving to build-up the mold. In these instances, a chopper gun is

attached to the resin sprayer. With this configuration, the worker can

deliver chopped strands of roving with the polyester resin, building-up

the FRP part layer by layer in a mat-like style. After the roving and

resin are applied to the mold, workers roll-out the structure,

compacting the resin and the roving to conform to the contour of the

mold. The polyester resin systems used in these operations typically

contain styrene and acetone.

After molding, the boat parts are moved to the production line area for

assembly of the yacht. Some FRP work is performed on the three

production lines. Many of the parts or sections of the yacht are made

of wood. These parts are built and assembled in the woodworking area.

This area contains workers using tools and equipment typically

associated with carpentry (e.g., lathes, drills, saws, etc.). Egg

Harbor Yacht uses teak and mahogany woods in the woodworking areas.

Other work performed on the production lines includes the installation

of the electrical and plumbing systems, the engine and drive trains, the

custom interiors with galleys and showers, the fuel and fresh water

tanks, and the installation of other boating and/or sporting

accoutrements.

IV. EVALUATION DESIGN AND METHODS

A. Industrial Hygiene

The industrial hygiene survey consisted of personal breathing zone

air sampling for styrene and acetone in the mold room and

production line areas, and for respirable wood dust in the

woodworking areas. Temperature and relative humidity also were

measured, and photographs were taken of work practices and

procedures.

Styrene and Acetone

Styrene and acetone were measured using NIOSH Methods 1501 and

1300, respectively.1 The samples were collected by drawing air

through a sorbent tube containing 150 milligrams (mg) of activated

charcoal at a nominal flow rate of 0.05 liters per minute (lpm),

using calibrated, battery-powered sampling pumps. The samples

were desorbed with 1 milliliter (ml) of carbon disulfide

containing 1 microliter per ml of benzene as an internal standard.

Each sample was analyzed by gas chromatography with a flame

ionization detector (GC-FID). The limit of detection (LOD) for

these methods is 0.02 mg per sample for both styrene and acetone;

the limits of quantitation (LOQ) for these methods were 0.06 mg

per sample for acetone, and 0.05 mg per sample for styrene.
Page 4 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Wood Dust

Personal breathing zone air samples for wood dust were obtained by

drawing air through a tared polyvinyl chloride filter (37 mm

diameter, 5 micron pore size) at a nominal flow rate of 1.7 lpm

using a calibrated, battery-powered sampling pump. Both total and

respirable dust were measured using this method. After sampling,

the filters were stored in an environmentally controlled room to

allow for stabilization. A determination of the weight of dust

deposited on each sample was made by weighing the samples on an

electrobalance and subtracting the previously determined tare

weights. The instrumental precision of this method was 0.01 mg

per weighing.

B. Medical

The medical portion of this study consisted of a questionnaire to

document symptoms, personal habits, and work histories; and

spirometry to measure changes in the lung function of the study

participants. In the initial site visit, all mold room workers

and a random selection of workers in other areas of the plant were

requested to appear for an interview. During the subsequent

survey, all workers who had been selected to participate in the

initial interviews were asked to undergo the medical evaluation.

Questionnaire responses were compared when workers were grouped

with respect to exposures and job category. Relationships were

sought between spirometric measures and estimates of exposure,

taking into account tobacco use, since changes in lung function

can be attributed to factors other than workplace exposures.

These comparisons were evaluated to determine if increased

symptoms and/or reductions in lung function were associated with

job categories or workplace exposure(s).

Questionnaires

Questionnaires were adapted from those used by NIOSH in previous

studies of cotton dust-exposed workers. Occupational history and

tobacco use were documented by the questionnaire. All questions

were translated into Spanish, and, where appropriate, a Spanish

speaking individual was available to administer the questionnaire

and to handle any language-related difficulties during the survey.

Cigarette smoking was quantified as pack-years (total years smoked

multiplied by average number of packs smoked each day).

Symptoms were defined based upon the subject's responses to

sequences of questions. "Bronchitis" was defined as productive

cough on most days for at least three months each year. "Cough"

was similarly defined, with or without expectoration. "Dyspnea"

was considered present if shortness of breath occurred walking at

an ordinary pace on level ground. "Wheeze" was present if the

symptom occurred as often as once each week. "Asthma" was defined

as
Page 5 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

attacks of shortness of breath with wheezing, with normal

breathing between attacks. A "chest illness" was recorded if the

worker had been off work for a respiratory problem for as long as

one week at any time in the past three years. A positive response

to "Do you usually have a stuffy, itchy, or runny nose?" was

labeled "rhinitis". All subjects were asked "During the past

month have you had a chest cold or flu?" Finally, to determine

the timing of certain symptoms, participants were asked "Is your

chest tight or your breathing difficult on any particular day of

the week?", and "Do you cough on any particular day of the week?"

Spirometry/Pulmonary Function Tests (PFTs)

Spirometry was performed using a dry rolling-seal spirometer

interfaced to a computer terminal with tape and disk storing

capabilities. At least five maximal expiratory maneuvers were

recorded for each person. All values were corrected to BTPS (body

temperature, pressure, saturated with water vapor). The largest

forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume in one

second (FEV1) were selected for analysis regardless of the curves

on which they occurred. The ratio of the FEV1 divided by the FVC

(FEV%) was calculated. The spirometer and methods met the quality

control recommendations of the American Thoracic Society (ATS). 26

Spirometry was performed before and at least six hours after the

beginning of the workshift.

V. EVALUATION CRITERIA

As a guide to the evaluation of the hazards posed by workplace

exposures, NIOSH field staff employ environmental evaluation criteria

for assessment of a number of chemical and physical agents. These

criteria are intended to suggest levels of exposure which most workers

may be exposed up to 10 hours per day, 40 hours per week, for a working

lifetime, without experiencing adverse health effects. It is, however,

important to note that not all workers will be protected from adverse

health effects if their exposures are maintained below these levels. A

small percentage may experience adverse health effects because of

individual susceptibility, a pre-existing medical condition, and/or a

hypersensitivity (allergy).

In addition, some hazardous substances may act in combination with other

workplace exposures, the general environment, or with medications or

personal habits of the worker to produce health effects, even if the

occupational exposures are controlled at the level set by the evaluation

criterion. These combined effects are often not considered in the

evaluation criteria. Also, some substances are absorbed by direct

contact with the skin and mucous membranes, and thus, potentially

increase the overall exposure. Finally, evaluation criteria may change

over the years as new information on the toxic effects of an agent

become available.
Page 6 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

The primary sources of environmental evaluation criteria for the

workplace are: 1) NIOSH criteria documents and recommendations,

including recommended exposure limits (RELs), 2) the American Conference

of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Values

(TLVs), and 3) the U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA permissible exposure

limits (PELs). The OSHA standards also may be required to take into

account the feasibility of controlling exposures in various industries

where the agents are used; the NIOSH-recommended standards, by contrast,

are based primarily on concerns relating to the prevention of

occupational disease. In evaluating the exposure levels and the

recommendations for reducing these levels found in this report, it

should be noted that industry is legally required by the Occupational

Safety and Health Act of 1970 to meet those levels specified by an OSHA

standard.

A time-weighted average (TWA) exposure refers to the average airborne

concentration of a substance during a normal 8- to 10-hour workday.

Some substances have recommended short-term exposure limits or ceiling

values which are intended to supplement the TWA, where there are

recognized toxic effects from high short-term exposures.

A. Styrene

The major routes of worker exposure for styrene are inhalation and

dermal absorption. Styrene vapor is an eye and respiratory tract

irritant, and liquid styrene is a dermal irritant. The major

target organ for workers exposed to styrene is the central nervous

system (CNS), with exposure producing health effects such as

headache, fatigue, drowsiness, nausea, malaise, difficulty in

concentrating, and a feeling of intoxication. Decrements in

balance, coordination, manual dexterity, and reaction time have

also been associated with styrene exposure.2,3 Workers exposed to

concentrations averaging 50 parts per million (ppm) have

demonstrated acute effects on neuropsychological tests of verbal

learning skills and other abilities.4 Styrene can be absorbed

through the skin, and repeated or prolonged skin exposure can lead

to dermatitis.5 Human studies on the reproductive effects among

workers exposed to styrene are limited and have revealed

conflicting results, without consistent evidence of adverse

effects.2,6-9 Presently, styrene is not considered to be a

potential occupational carcinogen.10-12

The OSHA PEL, ACGIH TLV, and NIOSH REL agree that exposure to

styrene should not exceed an 8-hour time weighted average

concentration of 50 ppm.10-12 In addition to this, NIOSH has

established an action level of 25 ppm.2 Due to interday

variability of exposures, a worker's single TWA exposure that is

below the NIOSH REL of 50 ppm does not necessarily indicate that

exposures on other days would also be below the REL. If a

worker's TWA exposure is at or above the 25 ppm action level,

NIOSH believes that sufficient
Page 7 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

probability exists that on other days exposures could exceed the

NIOSH REL of 50 ppm. The action level helps ensure adequate

protection of workers from the variability in workplace styrene

exposures.

B. Acetone

Acetone is considered to be of low risk to health except at very

high levels, as it has been used for years without many reported

adverse health effects.13 Acetone is irritating to the eyes,

skin, and upper respiratory tract.3,13 At airborne levels above

1000 ppm, acetone tends to cause dizziness, lightheadedness, and

headache.14 Exposure to high levels (over 10,000 ppm) has also

been associated with CNS depression, narcosis, loss of

consciousness, a feeling of intoxication, and weakness in the

legs.3

The NIOSH REL for acetone of 250 ppm (for up to a 10-hour TWA)

will be used in evaluating the air sampling data presented in this

report.12 For comparison purposes, the OSHA PEL and ACGIH TLV for

acetone are 8-hour TWA exposures of 750 ppm.10,11

C. Wood Dust

Exposure of workers to wood dust, including hard woods such as

teak and mahogany, has been reported to result in numerous health

effects including allergic reactions,15 chronic non-allergenic

respiratory disease,16 and both nasal and sinus cancer.17

Obstructive respiratory effects16, development of lung fibrosis,18

and impairment of the mucociliary clearance mechanism 19 also have

been reported.

The OSHA PEL for soft and hard wood dust is an 8-hour TWA of 5

milligrams of wood dust per cubic meter of air (mg/m3

).10 The

ACGIH TLV for hard wood dust is 1 mg/m3

, and 5 mg/m3 for soft wood

dust, as 8-hour TWAs.11 The PELs and TLVs are based on total dust

levels. Presently, NIOSH has yet to establish an REL for wood

dust.12 The ACGIH TLV for hard wood dust of 1 mg/m3 will be used

to evaluate the air sampling results presented in this report.

VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Industrial Hygiene

The results from the personal breathing zone air sampling for wood

dust are presented in Table 1 of this report. The sampling

protocol was designed to measure and compare workers' exposures to

both respirable and total wood dust. As stated previously, Egg

Harbor Yacht uses primarily teak and mahogany hard woods. All of

the respirable dust concentrations were equal to or below 0.5

mg/m3

; conversely, 3 of the 4 (75%) total wood dust levels were

equal to or above the ACGIH TLV of 1 mg/m3

. The average total

dust levels
Page 8 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

measured during this study were 1.2 mg/m3

; the average respirable

dust levels were 0.26 mg/m3

. These data indicate that

approximately 22% of the dust is respirable; i.e. has an

aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometers and is capable of

reaching the alveolar regions of the lungs upon inhalation.

Hence, a large portion of the dust exposure would be deposited in

the nose, throat, and upper respiratory tract regions of the human

body.

Tables 2 (March 29) and 3 (March 30) present the results from the

personal breathing zone air sampling for styrene and acetone in

the molding and production line areas. Workers in the molding

areas were exposed to an average styrene concentration of 46.8

mg/m3

, with 8 of 23 (35%) of these exposure measurements being

above the NIOSH REL, OSHA PEL, and ACGIH TLV of 50 ppm. In

addition to this, 18 of 23 (78%) of these measurements were above

the NIOSH action level of 25 ppm. Workers' exposure to styrene in

the molding areas ranged from 11.2-120.4 ppm. In contrast,

workers in the adjacent production line areas were exposed to an

average styrene concentration of 2.7 ppm, and these exposures

ranged from 2.3-3.6 ppm. It should be noted that most of the

styrene and acetone exposure in workers in the production line

areas is secondary in nature, with the vapor concentrations

originating from the resin applications being performed in the

molding areas. All of the measured acetone exposure

concentrations for the above molding and production line workers

were below the NIOSH REL of 250 ppm. A sample taken on a welder

measured styrene and acetone exposure levels of 1.0 and 8.5 ppm,

respectively. An area air sample taken in the cafeteria measured

a styrene concentration of 4.6 ppm and an acetone concentration of

1.8 ppm.

B. Medical

Questionnaires

Questionnaires were collected from 52 workers during the medical

survey. Eight subjects did not satisfactorily complete the

symptom questions and/or the smoking habit questions. Therefore,

demographics and symptom information are available on 44 workers.

All the participants were male. Ages ranged from 18 to 61 years,

with a mean age of 35 years and a standard deviation of 11 years.

The racial distribution of the subjects can be found in Table 4.

The tenure of these workers in the boat manufacturing industry

ranged from 0.5 years to 21 years, with a mean tenure of 5 years

and a standard deviation of 5 years. It was not possible to

restrict the tenure calculation to the number of years spent

solely at Egg Harbor Yacht, as many workers did not give specific

company names in their occupational histories. Job locations of

the participants on the day of the survey were distributed as

indicated in Table 5. Cigarette use is indicated in Table 6.
Page 9 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Of these 44 participants, industrial hygiene samples for personal

exposure to styrene and acetone were collected on 22. Only one of

these individuals did not work in either the mold room or on the

production line. This person's IH results were excluded from the

analysis. Personal air samples for seven individuals were

available from both survey days; for these workers the mean of the

two exposures was used in the analysis.

Results were tabulated based upon each worker's responses to the

queries defining a symptom. Symptom prevalence was tabulated and

compared when workers were categorized by job classification into

two groups: (1) assembly-workers who worked on the three

production lines, or (2) moldroom-workers who worked primarily in

the molding areas. Six other individuals who worked primarily in

various other locations, such as woodworking were not included in

these analyses. (Tables 7 and 8)

In the entire group (N=44), of the 14 subjects that reported

cough, three (21%) reported that they coughed on a particular day

of the week, including two on Mondays and one on Saturdays.

Twenty-four participants (55%) answered "YES" to the question

"Does your chest ever feel tight or your breathing become

difficult?". Of these subjects, four (17%) reported that this

occurred on a particular day of the week (2-Mondays; 1-Tuesdays;

1-Fridays).

Workers were grouped by the results of personal breathing zone air

measurements, when available. Three exposure groupings were

determined for styrene, as follows: Low exposure group: less than

25 ppm (NIOSH action level), Intermediate exposure group: 25 to 49

ppm, and High exposure 50 ppm and above (over the PEL). Symptom

prevalences and tobacco use were compared in workers exposed at

each level. (Tables 9 and 10)

Overall, participating workers showed a high prevalence of

symptoms, as defined in the methods section, of cough, phlegm,

wheeze, rhinitis, recent flu-like illnesses, and chest

tightness/breathing difficulty. Fewer workers had dyspnea,

asthma, or respiratory symptoms which occurred on a specific day

of the week. When symptoms were compared by styrene exposure

groups, no clear pattern emerged.

Spirometry

Due to technical problems, post-shift spirometry data was not

available for the entire study group. Therefore, only pre-shift

(baseline) spirometry measures have been utilized. Of the 44

subjects, baseline spirometry was available for 39 (89%).

Knudson's (1983) prediction equations with a 0.85 correction for

black workers, were used to calculate the percent of predicted FVC

and FEV1 for each participant.27 No correction was applied for
Page 10 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Hispanic workers. Restrictive and obstructive lung disease

patterns were detected by comparing the observed FVC and

FEV1/FVC%, respectively, to the lower limit of normal for FVC and

FEV1/FVC% defined by using Knudson's (1983) prediction equations

along with the 95th percentiles for his age groups.

The results of pre-shift spirometry are shown for the two work

areas. (Table 11) In the entire group for whom spirometry

results are available (N=39), four subjects (10%) showed evidence

of an obstructive lung pattern and 2 subjects (5%) showed evidence

of a restrictive lung volume.

Workers were also grouped as above by exposures to styrene. (Table

12) Mean FEV1, FVC, and FEV1/FVC% were calculated for workers

grouped by exposure. The workers in the highest styrene exposure

group had the lowest mean values for these spirometry

measurements. However, when recognized predictors of spirometry,

such as age and height, were taken into account, no relationship

between lung function and exposure was seen.

VII. CONCLUSIONS

During the initial site visit, workers were randomly selected for

interview. The results of these interviews confirmed a high prevalence

of respiratory tract symptoms. The prevalence of symptoms found in the

follow-up survey may have been affected by reduced participation.

However, this appears unlikely to have been an important bias, since the

symptoms detected in the medical survey were similar in proportion and

type to those documented during the initial site visit. Respiratory

tract symptoms have previously been reported in workers exposed to

styrene. 21,22,23,24 No clear relationship of symptoms or spirometry

findings to the measured airborne levels of styrene was observed in the

current survey. Small numbers and variable participation may have

affected the survey results. Also, no adjustment of the predicted

values was made for Hispanic workers.

In considering all of the data from the medical and industrial hygiene

studies performed during this study, the NIOSH investigators conclude

that a health hazard does exist from exposure to styrene in the molding

areas, and exposure to wood dust in the woodworking areas at Egg Harbor

Yacht.

VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Engineering controls, such as fixed local exhaust ventilation,

should be used whenever possible to reduce exposure to styrene.

In some situations, fixed local exhaust is not feasible and a

movable hood with a flexible duct may be used. General

ventilation may be
Page 11 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

necessary where local exhaust ventilation cannot be used, and may

be used to supplement local exhaust ventilation. All exhaust

ventilation should be designed and operated to prevent the

accumulation and recirculation of airborne styrene in the

workplace and to effectively maintain safe levels of styrene

vapor. Recommended examples of good ventilation system design for

molding areas in the FRP boat-making industry have been

published.28 Since Egg Harbor Yacht uses fixed hull molds, these

may be fitted with a push-pull ventilation system, sweeping air

from bow to stern while workers laminate counter current to

airflow. Whenever exhaust ventilation systems are used to control

styrene exposures, the following requirements should apply:

a. Exhaust hoods and ductwork should be constructed of

fire-resistant materials.

b. Ventilation systems should be equipped with alarms,

flowmeters, or other devices to indicate malfunction or

blockage of the system. These systems should be inspected

at the beginning of each workshift.

c. The hood design, capture velocity, and flow rate should be

chosen to capture styrene vapors effectively.

d. Clean make-up air should be provided according to the OSHA

General Industry Standards, 29 CFR 1910.252.

e. The efficacy of new engineering controls should be tested by

performing industrial hygiene monitoring on the workers

using that work station. This monitoring should document a

reduction of styrene vapors in the breathing zone of the

worker(s) to a level below the NIOSH action level of 25 ppm.

2. Exhaust ventilation systems in the woodworking areas should be

repaired and upgraded to reduce the workers's exposure to wood

dust. Engineering controls should be designed, and installed on

all woodworking operations which presently have no such controls

to reduce exposure. These controls should conform to the

recommended guidelines given in the above 1a through 1e.

3. Respiratory protection should be provided to all workers in the

molding and woodworking areas, and/or those potentially exposed to

hazardous concentrations of styrene and wood dust, when the

following situations occur: 1) when engineering controls are not a

technically feasible means to reduce exposure, 2) in the interim

before the installation and testing of new engineering controls,

and 3) when engineering controls have not successfully lowered

styrene exposures below the NIOSH action level of 25 ppm or wood

dust exposure levels below the ACGIH TLV of 1 mg/m3

. When

respirators
Page 12 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

are used, a complete respiratory protection program should be

provided, with minimum standards for such a program set forth in

the OSHA General Industry Standards, 29 CFR 1910.134. For

styrene, we recommend that workers be provided with a

NIOSH-approved air-purifying respirator with a sorbent cartridge

capable of removing styrene vapors. Workers potentially exposed

to wood dust should be provided with a NIOSH-approved respirator

capable of removing particulate matter. If industrial hygiene

monitoring documents a change in exposure levels, or exposure to

contaminants not measured during the NIOSH surveys at Egg Harbor

Yacht, the NIOSH Respirator Decision Logic20 should be used to

select the proper respirator.

4. Egg Harbor Yacht should institute a medical monitoring program for

all workers potentially exposed to styrene and wood dust. This

monitoring program should consist of both preplacement and

periodic medical examinations, which are defined below:

a. The preplacement medical examination should consist of

comprehensive work and medical histories, a smoking history,

a comprehensive medical examination with emphasis on the

respiratory, nervous, and hepatic systems, and a baseline

pulmonary function test which measures both forced vital

capacity and forced expiratory volume in one second.

b. Until exposures are documented to be consistently below the

NIOSH action level of 25 ppm, workers should be given a

periodic medical examination on an annual basis. This

should include updates of the work, medical, and smoking

histories, a medical examination with emphasis on the

respiratory, nervous, and hepatic systems, including a

pulmonary function test which measures both forced vital

capacity and forced expiratory volume in one second.

c. Workers or potential workers having medical conditions, such

as disorders of the nervous, respiratory, and/or hepatic

systems, should be counseled on the possibility of increased

risk of impairment to their health from exposure to styrene

and wood dust.

d. All medical records must be maintained by the employer for

the duration of employment plus 30 years for all workers

subject to exposure to styrene in the workplace.

5. Egg Harbor Yacht should implement an exposure monitoring program

for all workers potentially exposed to styrene and wood dust, as

well as any other hazardous substances that may be used in the

workplace.
Page 13 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

This program should consist of sampling of air from the worker's

breathing zone to measure the worker's exposure concentration to a

specific chemical or substance. The purpose of this exposure

monitoring is to determine whether exposures to any chemical or

physical agent may exceed the applicable exposure limits.

Exposure monitoring surveys should be performed on a annual basis,

or whenever changes in work processes or conditions are likely to

lead to a change in exposures. Though not all workers have to be

monitored, sufficient samples should be collected to characterize

the workers' exposures. Variations in work habits and production

schedules, worker locations, and job functions should be

considered when developing exposure monitoring protocols. All

workers participating in the monitoring should be informed of the

results, and the employer must maintain these records for a period

of 30 years.

6. All efforts should be made to prevent styrene from coming in

contact with workers' skin. Workers should be prohibited from

handling resin-soaked roving without the use of a glove which is

impermeable to styrene.

7. Eating, drinking, and smoking should be prohibited in all work

areas. Until smoking can be eliminated from the workplace, it

should be allowed only outside or in designated areas with

independent exhaust ventilation such that smoke is not

recirculated within the building. Workers who smoke should be

counseled on how smoking may exacerbate the adverse effects of

other respiratory hazards.

8. All labels and warning signs should be printed in both English and

in the predominant language of non-English reading workers.

9. The use of powered hand tools has been associated with a condition

known as vibration white finger (Raynaud's Phenomenon) in some

workers. Only powered hand tools that minimize vibration should

be used at Egg Harbor Yacht. Gloves also aid in reducing the

effects of vibrating hand tools on the worker.
Page 14 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

IX. AUTHORSHIP AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Statistical analysis by: Kathleen B. Kinsley

Medical Site Survey Assistance: Alicia Stevens

Occupational Health Services

New Jersey Department of Health

Carmen Lugo

Atlantic County New Jersey Health

Department

Tracy McCardle

Atlantic County New Jersey Health

Department

Originating Office: Respiratory Disease Hazard

Evaluations and Technical

Assistance Program

Division of Respiratory Disease

Studies, NIOSH

Morgantown, West Virginia

X. DISTRIBUTION AND AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

Copies of this report may be freely reproduced and are not copyrighted.

Single copies of this report will be available for a period of 90 days from

the date of this report from the NIOSH Publications Office, 4676 Columbia

Parkway, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226. To expedite your request, include a selfaddressed mailing label along with your written request. After this time,

copies may be purchased from the National Technical Information Service, 5285

Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161. Information regarding the NTIS stock

number may be obtained from the NIOSH Publications Office at the Cincinnati

Address.

Copies of this report have been sent to:

1. Egg Harbor Yacht, Inc.

2. New Jersey Health Department

3. NIOSH Regional Office

4. OSHA

For the purpose of informing affected employees, copies of this report should

be posted by the employer in a prominent place accessible to the employees for

a period of 30 calendar days.
Page 15 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

REFERENCES

1. NIOSH: Manual of Analytical Methods, Third Edition, Volumes 1 & 2. DHHS

Publication No. 84-100. Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Dept of Health and Human

Services, NIOSH. 1984.

2. NIOSH: Criteria for a recommended standard...occupational exposure to

styrene. DHHS Publication No. 83-119. Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Dept. of

Health and Human Services, NIOSH. 1983

3. Proctor NH, Hughes JP, Fischman ML: Chemical Hazards of the Workplace.

Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company. 1988.

4. Mutti A, et. al.: Exposure-effect and exposure-response relationships

between occupational exposure to styrene and neuropsych functions.

American Journal of Industrial Medicine 5:275-286. 1984.

5. Dutkiewicz T, Tyras H: Skin absorption of toluene, styrene and xylene in

man. British Journal of Industrial Medicine 25:243. 1968.

6. Lemasters GK, Hagen A, Samuels SJ: Reproductive outcomes in women

exposed to solvents in 36 reinforced plastic companies. Journal of

Occupational Medicine 27, 7:490-494. 1985

7. Lemasters, GK, Samuels SJ, Morrison JA, Brooks SM: Reproductive outcomes

of pregnant workers employed at 36 reinforced plastics companies, II.

lowered birth weight. Journal of Occupational Medicine 31, 2:115-120.

1989.

8. Harkonen H, Holmberg PC: Obstetric histories of women occupationally

exposed to styrene. Scandinavian Journal of Work and Environmental

Health 8:74-77. 1982.

9. Hemminki K, Franssila E, Vainio H: Spontaneous abortions among female

chemical workers in Finland. International Archives of Occupational and

Environmental Health 45:123-126. 1980.

10. OSHA: Air Contaminants-Permissible Exposure Limits. Title 29 Code of

Federal Regulations Part 1910.1000. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of

Labor. 1989.

11. ACGIH: Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical

Agents and Biological Exposure Indices. Cincinnati, Ohio: ACGIH. 1990.

12. U.S. Centers for Disease Control: NIOSH recommendations for occupational

safety and health standards 1988. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report

37, S-7. 1988.
Page 16 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

13. NIOSH: Criteria for a recommended standard...occupational exposure to

ketones. DHEW Publication No. 78-173. Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Dept. of

Health, Education, and Welfare, NIOSH. 1978.

14. Raleigh RL, McGee WA: Effects of short, high concentration exposures to

acetone as determined by observation in the work area. Journal of

Occupational Medicine 14:607-610. 1972.

15. Chan-Yeung M, Barton GM, MacLean L, Grzybowski S: Occupational asthma

and rhinitis due to western red cedar. American Review of Respiratory

Disease 108:1094-1102. 1973.

16. Whitehead LW, Ashikaga T, Vacek P: Pulmonary function status of workers

exposed to hard wood or pine dust. American Industrial Hygiene

Association Journal 42:178-186. 1981.

17. Hills JH: Nasal carcinoma in woodworkers: a review. Journal of

Occupational Medicine 24:526-529. 1982.

18. Michaels L: Lung changes in woodworkers. Canadian Medical Association

Journal 96:1150-1155. 1967.

19. Black A, Evans JC, Hadfield HE, MacBeth RG, Morgan A, Walsh M:

Impairment of nasal mucociliary clearance in woodworkers in the

furniture industry. British Journal of Industrial Medicine 31:10-17.

1974.

20. NIOSH: NIOSH Respirator Decision Logic. DHHS Publication No. 87-108.

Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, NIOSH. 1987.

21. Moscato G, Biscaldi GP, Cottica D, et al: Occupational Asthma Due to

Styrene: Two Case Reports. J Occup Med 1987;29:957-960.

22. Chmielewski J, Renke W: Clinical and Experimental Studies on the

Pathogenesis of Toxic Effects of Styrene. II. The Effect of Styrene on

the Respiratory System. Bull Inst Mar Trop Med Gdynia 1975;26:299-302.

23. Lorimer WV, Lilis R, Nicholson WJ, et al: Clinical Studies of Styrene

Workers: Initial Findings. Environ Health Perspect 1976;17:171-181.

24. Jedrychowski W: Styrene and Methylmethacrylate in the Industrial

Environment as a Risk Factor of Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. Int

Arch Occup Environ Health 1982;51:151-157.

25. Schikler KN, Lane EE, Seitz K, Collins WM: Solvent Abuse Associated

Pulmonary Abnormalities. Adv Alcohol Subst Abuse 1984 Spring;3(3):75-

81.

26. American Thoracic Society. Standardization of Spirometry - 1987 Update.

Am Rev Respir Dis 1987;136:1285-1298.
Page 17 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

27. Knudson RJ, Lebowitz MD, Holborg CJ, et al: Changes in the normal

maximal expiratory flow-volume curve with growth and aging. Am Rev

Respir Dis 127:725-34, 1983.

28. Todd WF: Styrene Vapor Control Systems in FRP Yacht Plants. American

Journal of Industrial Medicine 1985;8:219-232.
Page 18 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 1

Results from Air Sampling for Total and Respirable Wood Dust

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 29-30, 1989

Job Sample Sample Concentration 2

Location Time Volume1 Total Respirable

March 29, 1989

Woodworking 0742-1623 886 -- 0.1

Woodworking 0745-1656 937 -- 0.5

March 30, 1989

Production Line 0657-1710 989 -- 0.1

Production Line 0705-1547 887 -- 0.3

Woodworking 0700-1610 935 -- 0.3

Woodworking 0732-1547 842 1.7 --

Woodworking 0743-1550 763 1.0 --

Woodworking 0745-1550 760 1.5 --

Woodworking 0737-1158 444 0.6 --

OSHA PEL 5.0

ACGIH TLV 1.0

1 Sample volumes are expressed in liters of air.

2 Concentrations are in milligrams of wood dust per cubic meter of air.
Page 19 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 2

Results from Air Sampling for Styrene and Acetone

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 29, 1989

Worker Elapsed Sample Concentration 2

Location Sample Time Volume1 Styrene Acetone

(minutes)

Molding Areas 344 17.2 21.7 7.4

Molding Areas 437 21.9 17.8 5.0

Molding Areas 527 26.3 29.5 59.6

Molding Areas 482 24.1 42.9 20.3

Molding Areas 244 12.2 29.0 22.9

Molding Areas 471 23.5 73.0 20.3

Molding Areas 454 22.7 40.4 2.0

Molding Areas 485 24.3 59.0 21.3

Molding Areas 405 20.3 11.9 8.3

Molding Areas 442 22.1 35.1 7.2

Molding Areas 448 22.4 11.2 6.6

Molding Areas 484 24.2 28.2 12.0

Molding Areas 421 21.0 53.7 12.6

Welder 528 26.4 1.0 8.5

Area Air Sample

in Cafeteria 527 25.4 4.6 1.8

NIOSH REL 50.0 250.0

ACGIH TLV 50.0 750.0

OSHA PEL 50.0 750.0

1 Sample volumes are expressed in liters of air.

2 Concentrations are in parts per million of styrene or acetone.
Page 20 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 3

Results from Air Sampling for Styrene and Acetone

Egg Harbor Yachts, Inc.

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Worker Elapsed Sample Concentration 2

Location Sample Time Volume1 Styrene Acetone

Molding Areas 531 26.5 67.4 31.5

Molding Areas 544 27.2 38.1 28.8

Molding Areas 552 27.3 34.0 11.1

Molding Areas 522 26.1 80.5 25.5

Molding Areas 579 28.9 38.4 15.2

Molding Areas 548 27.4 62.6 15.5

Molding Areas 458 22.9 23.0 7.5

Molding Areas 350 17.5 45.7 21.4

Molding Areas 321 16.1 112.4 33.8

Molding Areas 327 16.4 120.4 46.2

Production Line 563 28.1 3.6 31.6

Production Line 578 28.9 2.3 16.0

Production Line 565 28.3 2.3 5.8

Production Line 579 28.9 2.4 16.0

Production Line 559 28.0 2.8 60.2

Production Line 553 26.2 2.6 67.6

Production Line 533 26.7 2.6 7.1

NIOSH REL 50.0 250.0

ACGIH TLV 50.0 750.0

OSHA PEL 50.0 750.0

1 Sample volumes are expressed in liters of air.

2 Concentrations are in parts per million of styrene or acetone.
Page 21 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 4

Racial Distribution in Participating Workers

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Race N %

White

Hispanic

Non-Hispanic

Not Classified

24

5

2

55

11

5

Black

Hispanic

Non-Hispanic

1

3

2

7

Other

Hispanic 9 21
Page 22 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 5

Job Location of Participating Workers

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Location N %

Mold Room 15 34

Production 22 50

Wood Shop 3 7

Warehouse 1 2

Maintenance 2 5

Welding 1 2
Page 23 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 6

Cigarette Smoking in Participating Workers

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Cigarette Smoking

Habit N %

Pack Years

Mean SD

Never 14 32 - -

Former 12 27 6.8 9.9

Current 18 41 16.3 14.5
Page 24 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 7

Demographics, Tenure, and Smoking in Mold Room and Production Workers

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Mold Room

N=15

Production

N=22

Mean SD Mean SD

Age 33 11 36 11

Height (cm) 170 8 169 8

Boat Manufacturing

Tenure (years) 4 5 7 6

Cigarette

Pack Years 7.5 11.5 6.4 8.5

N%N%

Cigarette Smoking Habit

Never

Former

Current

6 40

3 20

6 40

6 27

7 32

9 41
Page 25 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 8

Symptom Prevalence by Job Location

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Symptom

Mold Room

N=15

Production

N=22

Cough 4/15 27% 9/22 41%

Bronchitis 7/14 50% 13/22 59%

Dyspnea 2/15 13% 3/21 14%

Wheeze 6/15 40% 6/22 27%

Asthma 0/15 0% 2/22 9%

Chest Illness 1/15 7% 3/22 14%

Rhinitis 8/15 53% 14/22 64%

Chest Tightness/

Breathing Difficult 5/15 33% 17/22 77%

Chest Cold/Flu

in the Past Month 8/15 53% 11/22 50%
Page 26 - Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 88-262

Table 9

Demographics by Styrene Exposure Categories

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

STYRENE

(ppm)

Exposure level:

Number of Workers:

0 to < 25

N=9

25 to < 50

N=7

50 and higher

N=5

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

Age 37 9 29 12 35 12

Boat Manufacturing

Tenure (years) 9 7 4 7 5 5

Cigarette

Pack Years 5.9 7.6 8.9 14.3 7.8 10.8

N% N% N %

Cigarette

Smoking Habit

Never

Former

Current

3 33

3 33

3 33

2 29

2 29

3 43

2 40

1 20

2 40

Worker Location

Mold Room

Production

2 22

7 78

7 100

- -

5 100

- -
Table 10

Symptoms by Styrene Exposure Categories

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Styrene

(ppm)

Exposure level:

Number:

0 to < 25

N=9

25 to < 50

N=7

50 and higher

N=5

N% N% N%

Cough 3/9 33 3/7 43 1/5 20

Phlegm 4/9 44 4/6 67 3/5 60

Dyspnea 2/9 22 2/7 29 0/5 0

Wheeze 2/9 22 3/7 43 3/5 60

Asthma 1/9 11 0/7 0 0/5 0

Chest Illness 1/9 11 0/7 0 1/5 20

Rhinitis 5/9 56 5/7 71 2/5 40

Chest Cold/Flu

in Past Month 5/9 56 7/7 100 1/5 20

Chest Tight/

Breathing

Difficult 7/9 78 3/7 43 2/5 40
Table 11

Pulmonary Function Test Results by Job Location

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Mold Room

N=12

Mean SD

Production

N=21

Mean SD

FVC (l) 4.51 0.63 4.43 0.69

FEV1 (l) 3.70 0.65 3.56 0.63

FEV1/FVC (%) 81.8 4.6 80.3 8.1

% Predicted FVC 108.0 12.0 104.5 15.3

% Predicted FEV1 105.3 11.3 100.8 17.9
Table 12

Pulmonary Function Measures by Styrene Exposure Categories

Egg Harbor Yacht

HETA 88-262

March 30, 1989

Styrene

(ppm)

Exposure Level:

Number:

0 to < 25

N=9

25 to < 50

N=7

50 and higher

N=5

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

FVC (l) 4.45 0.77 4.79 0.51 4.13 0.65

FEV1 (l) 3.64 0.89 4.00 0.51 3.23 0.62

FEV1/FVC (%) 80.7 9.3 83.3 2.1 78.1 6.1

% Predicted FVC 102.6 18.4 108.7 9.8 114.0 16.3

% Predicted FEV1 99.6 19.7 107.3 11.0 106.4 16.3