NIOSH Health Study After BP Macondo Spill

8/3/2019 NIOSH Health Study After BP Macondo Spill

1/56

Margaret M. Kitt, MD, MPH

Worker Safety and Health:

NIOSH Perspectives from the Deepwater HorizonResponse


2/56

Occupational Safety andHealth Act of 1970

To assure safe and

healthful working

conditions for workingmen and women


3/56

Mine Safetyand Health

Administration(MSHA)

Department ofHealth and Human Services

(HHS)

Department of Labor(DOL)

Regulation/Enforcement

Occupational Safety and Health

Occupational

Safety and HealthAdministration(OSHA)

Research/Recommendations

Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention

(CDC)

National Institute forOccupational Safetyand Health (NIOSH)


4/56

Deepwater Horizon Disaster April 20, 2010 drilling rig exploded, caught fire,

sank

Explosion killed 11 platform workers

Well capped on July 15 after releasing about 4.9

million barrels of oil

DWHOilRig ExplosionandFire Sinking


5/56


6/56

PopulationsofConcern


7/56

NIOSH Activities Rostering

Technical Guidance and Communication

Health Surveillance

Toxicity Testing

Health Hazard Evaluations

(HHEs)

This was a resource intensive effort for NIOSH with 106 staff

deployed to the field and close to 250 staff involved in total


8/56

Rostering

Lesson Learned from the WTC: need

to have to have a prospective roster

of response workers

For DWH, NIOSH rostered over 55,000

workers

Staging areas and training sites

Paper-based and web-based

BP employees, contractors, federal and state

employees, volunteers

RosteringWorkers

inLA


9/56

Florida-major-road-map.gif

Paper & Electronic RecordsPaper & Electronic RecordsAs of 10As of 10--11--1010

Total Collected: 55,512

PercentagePercentage

Male 81%

Female 19%

Asian 2%Hispanic 9%

Black 38%

All Others 52%

Deepwater Horizon Response Worker Rostering

Targeted Workers

BP Staff

BP Contractors

Volunteers

Federal

State & Local


10/56

NIOSH and OSHA Collaboration


11/56

Source of Occupational DataSource of Occupational Data

BP/Unified Command incident safety data

A collaborative effort between NIOSH, UnifiedCommand, and the BP safety team

NIOSH and HHS involved in development of SafetyIncident report forms used in the field by Safety

officials Data abstracted into electronic format by BP

Used to produce: Internal daily reports to the UC

Periodic reports to stakeholders, including the public (CDCwebsite)


12/56

InjuryReporting

(NIOSHanalysis

of

BP

data)


13/56

IllnessReporting

(NIOSHanalysis

of

BP

data)


14/56

Locationof

IllnessLocation

of

Illness


15/56

Toxicity TestingToxicity Testing

Corexitdrum

delivered

from

Nalco

Dispersant generation system, animal

exposure chamber and computer

controls


16/56

Toxicity Testing Acute animal testing (mice) conducted on:

Dispersant (Nalco Corexit 9500A)Crude Oil from the source (sample from well head

obtained May 23rd)

Dispersant/crude oil mixture

Inhalation studiesMeasured pulmonary, cardiovascular, and CNSendpoints

Dermal studies

Assessed hypersensitivity and immune-mediatedresponses


17/56

BP Requested Health Hazard

Evaluations:Six Work Categories

On Shore Evaluations:

Beach clean-Up Wildlife rehabilitation Equipment decontamination and waste

stream management

Off Shore Evaluations:

Source Control

In-situ burns Booming, skimming, dispersant operations

HHEstaffat

sourcecontrol


18/56

A NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluation

Worksite epidemiologic / industrial

hygieneinvestigation in response to a request

from either 3 employees, an employer, or

union

Determine whether harmful exposures,processes, or conditions exist OR cause

injuries or illnesses

Process involves employees at every step

No cost to the employer, employees, etc. Addresses all workplace hazards


19/56

DWH HHEs Included

Industrial hygiene monitoring

Observational assessments of workactivities

Health symptom surveys

Recommendations for each site

examined


20/56

Evaluated Dispersant Use:

The Dispersant Vessel

The Dispersant Vessel:

The International Peace

There was concern that the dispersant wascausing many of the health symptoms that

people were reporting


21/56

Large containersof dispersant connected to

hoses

Special Dispersant Vessel: on this boat, scientists evaluated theefficacy of the dispersant breaking up the oil


22/56

Hoses connected to a hollow boom through

which dispersant is sprayed into the water

Nozzles


23/56

50 gallons of

Corexit

9500ADispersantapplied

tosurfaceoil


24/56

Dispersant Breakingup the Oil on the

Surface of the Gulf


25/56

Note the PPE* useOf the Dispersant

Applicator:Impermeable suit with hood,gloves, cartridge

respirator, goggles,steel-toed boots, life vest

PPE=personalprotective

equipment


26/56

Measurement Results on the

Dispersant Vessels

All samples* were at non-detectable or

low concentrations well below

occupational exposure limits (OELs)

*Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 2-butoxyethanol, benzene,ethanol, ethyl benzene, naphthalene, toluene, CO, H2S,dipropylene glycols, mercury, total hydrocarbons


27/56

InIn--Situ BurnsSitu Burns


28/56

A pair of shrimping trawlers towed 300

feet of boom trailing and capturing

floating oil, until it was about 3 mm thick


29/56

The oil would be lit

by an igniter


30/56

InSitu

Surface

Oil

Burns


31/56

Measurement Results

at the In-Situ Burn

Samples* were either non-detectable or well

below Occupational Exposure Levels Carbon monoxide peak exposure was above

NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit ceiling

limit; occurred when the gasoline poweredengines idling

*VOCs, 2-butoxyethanol, benzene, ethanol, ethyl benzene,naphthalene, toluene, H2S, dipropylene glycols, mercury, totalhydrocarbons


32/56

InSitu

Surface

Oil

Burns

Recommendations and observations:

Use of portable direct-reading CO monitors

Decrease engine running time

Minimal opportunity for dermal exposures except during

maintenance of boom, use of gloves necessary

Safety protocols during ignitions were not fully complied with, use

of flame-retardant coveralls and leather gloves necessary

Continuous wearing of respirators not warranted, escaperespirators may be an option

Reduce or quit smoking!!


33/56

HHE Evaluationat the Source


34/56

The Source above the leaking well on theocean floor, at the time of the NIOSH HHE

DDII:Thereliefwell

DiscovererEnterprise:

Vesselcapturing

leakingoil


35/56

Source Workers on VesselsRisk of exposure to contaminants from

oil:

Proximity to the source of the oilEnclosed spaces

Flares created possible exposures

to combustion by products

However, these were full time oil rig workers, andtheir exposure to oil was not novel


36/56

Measurement Results at the Source

Low concentrations of VOCs were detected on

both vessels

Samples* were all well below OELs

*VOCs, propylene glycol ethers, sulfides, PAHs, CO, H2S, toluene,naphthalene, limonene, ethyl benzene, 2 -butoxyethanol


37/56

NIOSH Recommendations

at the Source

No need for routine respirator use, but

make respirators immediately available for

uncontrolled situations

Attend to Heat Stress Management Plan

Consider a special emphasis follow-up with

regard to Employee Assistance Program

service, due to stress reported on DDII


38/56

Evaluated Oil Skimming OperationsThe skimmer was put in the water

by crane, skimmed the surface

and transported oil to the barrel

tanks on the vessel.


39/56

Measurement Results on the Skimmer

No symptoms were

reported by workers

Chemical constituent concentrations were

all well below OELs

Potential for skin contact with oil while

placing and removing skimmer from water &

during cleaning activities on deck, but

adequate PPE used


40/56

Evaluated Barge Vacuuming of Oil

Lack of fall protection: workers bending at 8 ft ledge

Musculoskeletal risk: from continuous bending

Noise risk: from vacuum - lack of hearing protection

Sh W k


41/56

Shore Workers


42/56

Recommendations for Wildlife Cleaners

Follow heat stress management

plans

Minimize skin and mucusmembrane exposures

Follow ergonomic

recommendations (adjustable

tables, stools, kneeling pads)

Provide adequate staffing for

work tasks using work rotation

schedules


43/56

Industrial Hygiene Measurement Results

for On-Shore Sites

None of the individuals chemical exposures

exceeded any OEL and majority were non-detects

Workers around pressure washers likely tohave exposures above NIOSH noise REL

43


44/56

On-Shore WorkerRecommendations

Minimize contact with oil through work practices and

PPE

Follow heat stress management plan, including the

role PPE may add to heat stress risk

Improve design of tools for beach cleaning Address hearing protection and conservation

Maintain routine reporting of illnesses and injuries

Pre-placement medical evaluations of workers

A i J b St I


45/56

Assessing Job Stress Issues

among DWH Response Workers

Conducted focus groups (August 2010)

Objective:

Understand factors that contribute to job

stress during emergency response

Make recommendations to improveworking conditions


46/56

DWH Focus Group Participants

Safety Professionals operating out of

Venice, LA

Hired as contractors by BP to overseecrews on Vessels of Opportunity

Familiar with day-to-day operations


47/56

DWH Focus Group Participants Worked closely with crews on health and safety issues

Eyes and ears of the off-shore cleanup crews

During focus groups, participants were asked to reporttheir own thoughts and experiences, as well as what theywere observing among crews

46 of 48 Safety Professionals participated (96%)

Median age 46 years (18-62)

89% male Median of 60 days at the spill (6-120)


48/56

Summary of Job Stressors Heat (intensified by PPE)

Availability of food and living arrangements

Fatigue

Job insecurity Communication

issues

Under utilizedknowledge and skills


49/56

Impact on Family Life Being away from family for long periods

Inability to address emergencies or otherproblems at home

Unreliable cell phone and internet service

Work schedules made it difficult to contactfamilies during the day

Evacuation concerns


50/56

Coping with Job Stress

Limited options for entertainment orrecreation

Distraction

Social camaraderie

Alcohol & drug use


51/56

Recommendations In addition to providing and encouraging use

of EAP* for mental health and stress issues,

organize work to help reduce stress at thegroup level

Consult with experts in emergency

response on work organization issues

Examine food availability commensurate withlength and timing of work shifts and physical

workloads*Employee Assistance Programs

Recommendations


52/56

Recommendations

Expand communication network to ensure allworkers have access to daily information

Schedules, weather conditions, and changes in

roles or expectations

More needs to be understood about how toproperly communicate with workers about the

transient nature of emergency response

Provide response workers with messages about whatis being done to provide a healthy and safe

temporary living environment, and have hot-lines etc.

for workers to report concerns


53/56

Recommendations Establish communication centers where

workers have access to landlines and high-

speed internet connections

Evaluate scheduling requirements and allow

for sufficient rest between shifts

Conduct pre-placement screening of all

response workers, including backgroundchecks, and medical evaluations to determinefitness for duty

Recommendations


54/56

Recommendations

Ensure response workers receive adequate jobtraining before reporting for duty

During training, emphasize the importance ofself-care, including nutrition, hydration, andsleep

Provide off-hours entertainment andsocialization activities, as well as a site formeditation or religious services

Establish a safe mechanism for workers toinform management about needed changes inwork organization


55/56

General Response Observations Collaborative effort with OSHA, Unified Area Command,

USCG, State and Local Health Depts, etc. worked very well

All potential workplace exposures important -- heat, noise, ergonomics, stress, diesel/gasoline

engine exhaust , CO

Not just the obvious ones: --oil, dispersant, cleaning chemicals

While quantitative sampling results are important,qualitative observations made by experienced OSH experts

vital for a comprehensive assessment for this kind of

disaster

Transparency and fast turnaround of results was key

Whatcanthisresponseteachusabouthow


56/56

p

Companies,Federal

Agencies,

State

and

Locals,andNGOsworktogetherinadisaster?

The findings and conclusions in this presentation are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or theU.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Contact information:

Margaret M. Kitt

[email protected]

Documents

NIOSH Health Study After BP Macondo Spill