Workers and respirators: What factors influence medical clearance? Experience in the petrochemical industry 2004--2008

This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from more than 2200 OSHA-mandated respirator medical evaluations performed between 2004 and 2008, with information initially obtained using an online questionnaire, to determine what factors influence medical clearance and the ability to safely wear respiratory protection in a large petrochemical company.^ The employees were mostly white males with a high school education, ranging in age from 25 to 60 years of age, who had been employed with the company an average of eight years. Their work was typically performed outdoors in a rural or offshore setting. Respirators were typically required for emergency response – escape or rescue only – and/or limited to less than four hours per month.^ Approximately 90% of the population achieved medical clearance by utilizing the online questionnaire. Of the remaining 10%, 66% were cleared after additional "hands-on" medical examination exam; 28% of the individuals' jobs were modified by their supervisor in order to not use a respirator, and 6% of the individuals (n=13) were excluded from wearing a respirator on the basis of the medical examination. The primary causes for exclusion from respirator use were cardiovascular (37.5%) and respiratory (31.3%) issues, followed by psychological (18.8%) and musculoskeletal (12.5%) concerns. Ultimately, over 99% of workers evaluated under this system were found capable of using respiratory protection safely. This questionnaire has proven to be an excellent health screening tool capable of initiating early detection and further investigation of potentially serious medical conditions within a large and diverse population in multiple locations. ^

The role of municipalities in air toxics regulation: The Houston experience

The federal regulatory regime for addressing airborne toxic pollutants functions fairly well in most of the country. However, it has proved deficient in addressing local risk issues, especially in urban areas with densely concentrated sources. The problem is especially pronounced in Houston, which is home to one of the world's biggest petrochemical complexes and a major port, both located near a large metropolitan center. Despite the fact that local government's role in regulating air toxics is typically quite limited, from 2004-2009, the City of Houston implemented a novel municipality-based air toxics reduction strategy. The initiatives ranged from voluntary agreements to litigation and legislation. This case study considers why the city chose the policy tools it did, how the tools performed relative to the designers' intentions, and how the debate among actors with conflicting values and goals shaped the policy landscape. The city's unconventional approach to controlling hazardous air pollution has not yet been examined rigorously. The case study was developed through reviews of publicly available documents and quasi-public documents obtained through public record requests, as well as interviews with key informants. The informants represented a range of experience and perspectives. They included current and former public officials at the city (including Mayor White), former Texas Commission on Environmental Quality staff, faculty at local universities, industry representatives, and environmental public health advocates. Some of the city's tools were successful in meeting their designers' intent, some were less successful. Ultimately, even those tools that did not achieve their stated purpose were nonetheless successful in bringing attention and resources to the air quality issue. Through a series of pleas and prods, the city managed to draw attention to the problem locally and get reluctant policymakers at higher levels of government to respond. This work demonstrates the potential for local government to overcome limitations in the federal regulatory regime for air toxics control, shifting the balance of local, state, and federal initiative. It also highlights the importance of flexible, cooperative strategies in local environmental protection.^