OSHA Whistleblower Urges Agency to Release Beryllium Exposure Details
WASHINGTON, DC — July 22, 2005 — The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has failed to release detailed information about a group of its inspectors who tested positive for health problems related to beryllium, a former OSHA official has charged. The inspectors took a blood test that indicates when a person has developed an allergic reaction or been “sensitized” to the metal beryllium. The results of this “beryllium lymphocyte proliferation test” (BeLPT) showed that the inspectors may be at risk for developing chronic beryllium disease.
Also known as berylliosis, chronic beryllium disease is a painful scarring of the lungs that causes shortness of breath and chest pain. It may severely limit activities and stress the heart. In some cases, berylliosis can be fatal.
Dr. Adam Finkel, who was then the OSHA administrator for the Rocky Mountain region, originally revealed that OSHA employees may have been exposed to illegal beryllium levels when they inspected industries that use the metal. He went public with this information in October 2003, charging that OSHA was not performing medical monitoring for its beryllium–exposed employees (Disclosure, Adam Finkel, October 9, 2003). The agency did not begin a formal monitoring program using BeLPT testing until April 2004, eighteen months after Dr. Finkel made his comments (Memo to OSHA Employees, March 25, 2005). So far, 271 out of about 1,200 current inspectors have been tested.
About 3.7% of OSHA Inspectors Who Were Tested Showed Beryllium Sensitization
OSHA has reported that 10 of the 271 safety inspectors were sensitized to beryllium. We know that the risk of high beryllium exposure is great for nuclear weapons workers, machinists, and those who produce beryllium–containing ceramics and alloys. Beryllium sensitization ranges from 2% to 19% in this group. The rate of sensitization for the inspectors, 3.7%, falls within this range.
Dr. Finkel is urging OSHA to reveal the levels of beryllium to which each agency employee was exposed, the facilities that were involved, and the duration of each employee’s exposure. He believes that this information could provide further help in understanding the hazards of beryllium, as well as alert employees and the public to any dangers. OSHA says that this data is not available, a claim that Dr. Finkel and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) do not believe (Letter from Jonathan Snare, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA, to Rep. George Miller, March 24, 2005; PEER News Release, January 17, 2005).
PEER, a non–profit organization of scientists and professionals, also notes that the present OSHA program does not cover retired agency inspectors who may have been exposed to beryllium. There is no outreach project to inform them about their health risks, and the retired employees must pay for their own BeLPT tests. The tests are given in only a few locations, and range in price from $500–$600 (BNA Reporter, Occupational Health and Safety, Vol. 35, No. 13, March 31, 2005).
Dr. Finkel points out that it is standard practice for industrial hygienists to assume that typical beryllium exposures may be lower in the present day than they were several decades ago. He concludes that “testing retired inspectors should be a high priority, and … refusing to even inform them of their exposure is callous in the extreme” (Letter from Dr. Finkel to Congressmen Miller and Owens, May 13, 2005).
Is There a Safe Level of Beryllium Exposure?
Federal agencies regulate the level of beryllium that may become airborne at a job site. OSHA sets this limit at 2.0 micrograms per cubic meter during an 8–hour shift for private workers. The Department of Energy sets this level at 0.2 micrograms per cubic meter per 8–hour shift for government workers, an amount that is 10 times stricter than the OSHA standard. OSHA has admitted that its own standard may be too lax to fully protect workers from berylliosis, but has failed to modify its rules (OSHA Hazard Information Bulletin, September 2, 1999).
The Department of Energy standard for beryllium may not even be strict enough, as there is no known safe level of beryllium exposure. Even minimal exposure to beryllium may cause chronic beryllium disease and other health problems in susceptible individuals, according to some reports (J Occup Environ Med. 1999 Apr; 41 (4): 304–8).
Many have criticized OSHA for taking too much time to modify its beryllium standards. In 1999 and 2001, Public Citizen Health Research and the Paper Allied–Industrial, Chemical, and Energy Workers Union petitioned OSHA to issue an emergency, temporary beryllium standard. The petition was denied. OSHA did begin an information–gathering process in 2002. The agency is still in a “pre–rule” stage for the beryllium exposure standard, but expects to issue a report in the fall of this year.
At Brayton Purcell, we are concerned about workplace and environmental exposure to beryllium. We have successfully handled cases involving beryllium and other toxic substances for over 20 years, and have earned an excellent national reputation in this legal field. If you have been exposed to beryllium and developed chronic beryllium disease, please feel free to contact us to learn about your legal options.