Revised ANSI Training Standard for Health, Safety and Environmental

Purchase the ANSI Z490.1-2009 standard HEREansi-training-standard

The charter of the American National Standards Committee Z490 on Criteria for Accepted Practices in Safety, Health and Environmental Training was accredited by the American National Standards Institute on April 1, 1998. This Standard grew out of the recognized need for improvement in safety, health, and environmental training. Quality training is required to ensure that workers and safety, health, and environmental professionals have the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to protect themselves and others in the workplace.

Safety, health, and environmental training is an important element of an effective overall safety, health, and environmental program.

Historically, safety, health, and environmental training has been specifically addressed by only a few regulations with limited scope, such as asbestos, hazard communication, and storm water management. The regulations usually specify the technical topics to be covered in a training course, but do not stipulate how to adequately design, develop, deliver, and evaluate training.

This Standard covers all facets of training, including training development, delivery, evaluation, and management of training and training programs. Thus, the criteria were developed by combining accepted practices in the training industry with those in the safety, health, and environmental industries. The Standard is intended to apply to a broad range of training and training programs.

Industry employers may use this Standard to assess the services of external training providers or to audit or improve their own corporate training programs. Training providers may use the Standard to assess and improve their training services. This Standard may also be used as a basis for development and management of training and training programs, with the annexes and references providing additional information and detail.

A copy of the Table of Contents is provided below.


AIHA Addresses the Stimulus Program and Occupational Health and Safety

aihaSource: AIHA

“AIHA commends the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) on its recent decision to implement a multi-tiered enforcement program to ensure worker protection on projects related to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Early in the year, the Obama Administration proposed creating more than one million new construction and manufacturing jobs.

In response, the AIHA urged both President Obama and Labor Secretary Solis to ensure that the new jobs created by the stimulus package had adequate workplace protections for these workers. One specific issue AIHA stressed was the need for additional OSHA personnel to work solely on the new job creation projects.

Secretary Solis has announced that OSHA will strengthen enforcement by hiring an additional 36 inspectors to provide guidance training and outreach to employers and workers and by launching a new effort to collect information about injuries and illnesses in the construction industry.”

Read the

  FallProtectionPPT.ppt (3.1 MiB, 1,445 hits)

from AIHA pertaining to occupational health and safety and the stimulus.

Free Process Safety Management Training

gtriThe Georgia Tech Research Institute is offering FREE one day and one week course regarding the creation of an effective Process Safety Management (PSM) program in accordance with OSHA standard 29 CFR 1910.119. The training is being offered under the Susan Harwood Program grant from OSHA.

Course Highlights include:

  • Who is covered by the standard
  • Review of the standard
  • How to comply with the standard
  • Access to references and how to utilize them to ensure compliance

Course Topics include:

  • PSM history
  • Hazards of processes
  • Toxicity information
  • Technology and equipment of the process (block diagrams & P&ID’s)
  • Mechanical integrity
  • Training
  • Emergency Preparedness
  • Incident Investigation
  • and much more!

The courses are being held in Houston, Atlanta, Tampa, Raleigh, Savannah and Gulfport (MS).

Additional information can be found HERE or by downloading the

  ExcavationsPPT.ppt (3.4 MiB, 992 hits)


Combined Toxic Effects of Chemicals

cumulativeBelow is a summary of some of the very similar methods and rationale used by agencies to assess the combined toxic effects of chemicals.

Source: TLV’s and BEI’s Publication

  • Recommends an additive (combined) approach for two or more substances that affect the same target organ/system
  • The ratio of the exposure concentrations are summed together
  • {C_1}/{t_1} + {C_2}/{t_2} + cdots {C_n}/{t_n}

    where: C = observed concentration, t = TLV

  • If the sum exceeds one, the TLV for the mixture is considered to have been exceeded
  • Additive formula applies to simultaneous exposures for hazardous substances with TWA’s, STEL’s, Excursion Limits, and/or Ceiling Limits. Bases (TWA’s, STEL’s, etc.) should be kept consistent, as feasible
  • Exceptions are made when it is believed the major effects of the chemicals are not additive or possibly when the mixtures contain carcinogens
  • Synergistic effects should be carefully considered

Source: 29 CFR 1910.1000

  • Recommends an additive (combined) approach for two or more substances that affect the same target organ/system
  • The ratio of the exposure concentrations are summed together
  • {C_1}/{t_1} + {C_2}/{t_2} + cdots {C_n}/{t_n}

    where: C = observed concentration, t = TLV

  • If the sum exceeds one, the TLV for the mixture is considered to have been exceeded
  • Approaches to chemicals with similar effects are not restricted

Source: NIOSH Methylene Chloride Intelligence Bulletin

  • Recommends an additive (combined) approach for two or more substances that affect the same target organ/system
  • The ratio of the exposure concentrations are summed together
  • {C_1}/{t_1} + {C_2}/{t_2} + cdots {C_n}/{t_n}

    where: C = observed concentration, t = TLV

  • If the sum exceeds one, the TLV for the mixture is considered to have been exceeded
  • Specifically addressed methylene chloride in the presence of carbon monoxide due to the formation of carboxyhemoglobin

Other Agencies


  • Typically a semi-quantitative screening process using flow-chart methodology
  • Useful:
    1. when exposures to the components are not clearly hazardous when considered singly, but potentially
      hazardous due to additivity or interactions when considered together
    2. when the community-specific health outcome data indicated that the site might have an adverse
      impact on human health, but the exposure-based assessment of each separate component did not
    3. when the health outcome data were ambiguous or did not indicate an adverse impact on human
      health, but the exposure-based assessment identified a potential hazard from one or more of the

  • Consistent with the ASTDR approach

Adjusting Occupational Exposure Limits for Extended Work Shifts


OSHA currently has two standards in which the PEL is adjusted based on the length of the work shift, both of which are lead standards:

All other PELs are based upon 8-hour time weighted average (TWA), a short term exposure limit (STEL), or a ceiling limit (C).

The lead PEL of 50 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) is adjusted in accordance with the following formula:

New PEL = 400/hours worked during shift

e.g. If an employee works a 10 hour shift, the PEL is reduced from 50 ug/m3 to 40 ug/m3

Additionally, as discussed in‘s post PEL Adjustments for Extended Work Shifts – Noise, the Action Level for noise must be reduced for extended work shifts based on the following formula:

New AL (dBA) = 90 + 16.61 x log (50 / (12.5 x number of hours worked))

e.g. If an employee works a 10 hour shift, the PEL is reduced to 83 dBA

From a recommended practice standpoint, the Brief and Scala model provides a easy method of reducing exposure limits and is noted ACGIH’s TLVs and BEIs documentation. The Brief and Scala model provides a reduction factor via the following formula:

Reduction Factor = (8 x hours worked in shift) x ((24 – hours worked in shift) / 16)

It should be noted that the Brief and Scala model should not be used to justify very high exposures for short durations.

e.g. If an employee works a 10 hour shift, the reduction factor is 0.7. Multiply 0.7 times to the Exposure Limit to determine the recommended limit using the Brief and Scala model.

Additionally, it should be noted that OSHA does have PEL adjustments for cotton dust, but only when employees are required to wear respirators to reduce their respective exposures.

Risk Assessment Proposal Removed From the Table

dept-of-laborThe Department of Labor is withdrawing the risk assessment proposal in June according to representatives of OSHA. Issued by the Bush Administration in July 2008, critics stated the proposed rule would have added additional time to the rulemaking process which would have “dramatically weakened future workplace health and safety regulations and slow their enactment.”

Furthermore, critics had three main concerns pertaining to the proposal:

  • Definition of a working life from 45 years to an average number of years.
  • Calls for an uncertainty analysis but provides no clear guidance on how to conduct one.
  • Limits pertaining to regulatory action to hazards associated with “clinically apparent adverse health outcomes.”

A letter issued to former secretary Chao by public health professionals from around the country stated:

“By oversimplifying the risk assessment process, demanding an unachievable quantification of uncertainty, and defining adverse effects in a narrow manner that overlooks medical reality, the Department has created a proposed regulation that will hamper the OSHA and MSHA in their Congressionally-mandated duties to protect workers’ health from toxic agents.”

A copy of this letter can be found here. (

  ElectricaPPTConstruction.ppt (5.5 MiB, 793 hits)


Average Salaries of Industrial Hygienists, Occupational Health and Safety Specialists, and EHS Managers

(Be sure to check out’s Occupational Health & Safety Professional Salary Survey here for detailed salary information provided by professionals like you!)

Salaries in the Occupational Health and Safety field are in the upper-mid range for professional individuals, with managerial positions being at the top.

Consultant salaries typically start around:

  • $30,000.00 for an entry level position
  • $50,000.00 for 5-8 years of experience
  • $70,000.00 for 8-15 years of experience
  • $90,000.00 for 20+ years of experience

The average Industrial Hygienist salary is approximately $71,650.00.

A quick search of open Industrial Hygiene positions reveals 1300 jobs related to IH with a salary greater than $40,000.00.

  • 100% were $40,000.00 or more
  • 47% were $60,000.00 or more
  • 6% were $100,000.00 or more
  • 2% were $120,000.00 or more

Much like the rest of the economy, salary trends for Certified Industrial Hygienists have seen a sharp drop in 2009, however, there has been an increase since April 2007.

The average Health and Safety Manager (i.e. Safety Professional Manager) salary is approximately $114,490.00.

A quick search of open Safety Professional positions reveals 400+ jobs for safety professionals with a salary greater than $40,000.00.

  • 100% were $40,000.00 or more
  • 69% were $60,000.00 or more
  • 13% were $100,000.00 or more
  • 6% were $120,000.00 or more

Much like the rest of the economy, salary trends for Certified Safety Professionals have seen a sharp drop in 2009.

The average Environmental, Health and Safety Manager salar is approximately $125,800.00.

A quick search of open Environmental, Health and Safety positions reveals 600+ jobs for safety professionals with a salary greater than $30,000.00.

  • 100% were $30,000.00 or more
  • 69% were $50,000.00 or more
  • 17% were $90,000.00 or more
  • 8% were $110,000.00 or more

Much like the rest of the economy, salary trends for Environmental, Health & Safety Managers have seen a sharp drop in 2009.

The National Safety Council’s 2008 Salary Survey contained the following information and can be found HERE

  ElectricalPPTGI.ppt (3.8 MiB, 983 hits)


NIOSH Publication for Surveillance and Screening of Workers Exposed to Nanoparticles

nanotech11Full copy of the publication can be found HERE

“Concerns have been raised about whether workers exposed to engineered nanoparticles are at increased risk of adverse health effects. The current body of evidence about the possible health risks of occupational exposure to engineered nanoparticles is quite small. While there is increasing evidence to indicate that exposure to some engineered nanoparticles can cause adverse health effects in laboratory animals, no health studies of workers exposed to the few engineered nanoparticles tested in animals have been published. The purpose of this document from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is to provide interim guidance about whether specific medical screening, including performing medical tests on asymptomatic workers, is appropriate for these workers.

Medical screening is only one part of what should be considered a complete safety and health management program. An ideal safety and health management program follows a hierarchy of controls and involves various occupational health surveillance measures. Since specific medical screening of asymptomatic workers exposed to engineered nanoparticles has not been extensively discussed in the scientific literature, this document makes recommendations based upon what is known until more rigorous research can be performed.

Currently there is insufficient scientific and medical evidence to recommend the specific medical screening of workers potentially exposed to engineered nanoparticles. Nonetheless, this lack of evidence does not preclude specific medical screening by employers interested in taking precautions beyond existing industrial hygiene measures. If nanoparticles are composed of a chemical or bulk material for which medical screening recommendations exist, these same screening recommendations would be applicable for workers exposed to engineered nanoparticles as well.

As research into the hazards of engineered nanoparticles continues, vigilant reassessment of available data is critical to determine whether specific medical screening is warranted for workers. In the interim, the following recommendations are provided for workplaces where workers may be exposed to engineered nanoparticles in the course of their work:

* Take prudent measures to control exposures to engineered nanoparticles.
* Conduct hazard surveillance as the basis for implementing controls.
* Continue use of established medical surveillance approaches.

NIOSH will continue to collect and evaluate new research findings and update its recommendations about medical screening programs for workers exposed to nanoparticles. NIOSH will also continue to consider the strengths and weaknesses of establishing exposure registries for workers potentially exposed to engineered nanoparticles for future health surveillance and epidemiological studies.”

Study Links Formaldehyde Exposure With Increased Cancer Risk

nih-newsThe National Cancer Institute, a division of the National Institutes of Health, has released a report detailing the increased risk of blood and lymphatic cancers in workers employed at plants using or producing formaldehyde.

With an average follow-up of 40 years, the report stated a “statistically significant association between death from all blood an lymphatic cancers combined and peak formaldehyde exposure.” The report indicated a mortality risk increase of 37% for workers with the highest peak exposures.

“The overall patterns of risk seen in this extended follow-up of industrial workers, while not definitive, are consistent with a causal association between formaldehyde exposure and cancers of the blood and lymphatic system and warrant continued concern. Further studies are needed to evaluate risks of these cancers in other formaldehyde-exposed populations and to assess possible biological mechanisms,” said lead author of the report, Laura E. Beane Freeman, Ph.D., NCI Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics.

formaldehydeFound throughout industry as a disinfectant, preservative, and by-product, the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified formaldehyde as a carcinogen. OSHA has estimated that approximately 2.1 million workers in the United States are exposed to the chemical.

Read the full report, HERE

OSHA Funding Sees 10 Percent Increase in 2010

Within the Department of Labor, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will receive an additional $50 million dollars ($577 million total) for the 2010 budget, a 10 percent increase over last years funding of $522 million.

Department of Labor Secretary Hilda Solis stated the need for even more money to erase years of static funding. 

Over the past several years, MSHA has received large budget increases, which have allowed the agency to step up its enforcement significantly. OSHA’s budget has remained flat over the last few years.

Upcoming rulings are as follows:

Combustible Dust Podcast & Imperial Sugar Explosion Presentation

Brian Edwards, Director of Engineering at Conversion Technology Inc. discusses specific industries and the dust hazards at each. In addition to how knowledgeable the safety managers and people in industry tend to be and the types of OSHA citations some of these industrial facilities are receiving for failing to address combustible dust hazards.

Combustible Dust & Industry


For an insiders view of a recent combustible dust explosion, take a look at a presentation recently delivered by the President and CEO of Imperial Sugar who suffered tragedy in February 2008.


  EgressFirePPT.ppt (2.7 MiB, 972 hits)


Imperial Sugar Presentation

Silica Exposures Guidance Document

sandblastingThe Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has published the document Controlling Silica Exposures in Construction for use in controlling hazards associated with work activities that may contribute to silica exposures that may be harmful to the health of individuals.

Work activities detailed include:

  • Handheld and Stationary Masonry Saws
  • Hand Operated Grinders
  • Jackhammers
  • Mortar Removal
  • Rock Drilling Rigs
  • Drywall Finishing

The document includes information dust control methods, work practices, personal protective equipment, engineering controls, and housekeeping that will limit an employee’s exposure to silica, which is known to cause silicosis.

For example:

Using a stationary saw without engineering controls can cause exposure to respirable silica to reach 2.0 mg/m3 or higher. Therefore, it is important to utilize effective controls to reduce employee exposures. Wet methods present the best choice for suppressing dust while cutting with stationary saws. Studies indicate that effective wet methods can reduce exposures below 0.05 mg/m3, as an 8-hour TWA. Stationary saws can be purchased with water-fed equipment, or existing saws can be retrofitted with water-fed attachments. Respiratory protection should not be necessary when using effective wet methods.

Additionally, the document references the need for conversion from the obsolete unit concentration of millions of particles per cubic foot (mppcf) (the units used in the Construction Industry standard – 29 CFR 1926.55(a)) to the current unit concentration of milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) (the units used in the General Industry standard – 29 CFR 1910.1000(c)) via the following conversion factor:

1 mppcf = 0.1 mg/m3 respirable dust