2002International Journal of Environmental Health ResearchRequires access

Impact of asbestos concentrations in floor tiles on exposure during removal

John H. Lange

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

This study investigated personal airborne exposure to asbestos during its abatement in two projects that had floor tile with different concentrations of asbestos. Abatement of floor tile with the higher percent asbestos exhibited the highest personal exposure level. Airborne exposure concentrations of asbestos between these abatement projects were found to be statistically significant. However, since neither had levels above occupational exposure standards this difference was not considered important, a type two error (false positive). It is suggested that when establishing negative exposure assessments, priority be given to process/work practices, with percent of contaminant in the building component being of less importance. Time period of applicability of data from negative exposure assessments to future projects should be considered indefinite. Neither within- or between-worker variation was predominant, in this study. Likelihood of exceeding occupational exposure standards during abatement of asbestos-containing floor tile, even for materials containing up to 15% asbestos, is low. Regulation of floor tile as a special category or group of asbestos-containing material appears to be warranted. Current schemes in the United States that regulate floor tile in the same group as other asbestos-containing materials would appear to be a legislating of science.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study investigated personal airborne exposure to asbestos during its abatement in two projects that had floor tile with different concentrations of asbestos. Abatement of floor tile with the higher percent asbestos exhibited the highest personal exposure level. Airborne exposure concentrations of asbestos between these abatement projects were found to be statistically significant. However, since neither had levels above occupational exposure standards this difference was not considered important, a type two error (false positive). It is suggested that when establishing negative exposure assessments, priority be given to process/work practices, with percent of contaminant in the building component being of less importance. Time period of applicability of data from negative exposure assessments to future projects should be considered indefinite. Neither within- or between-worker variation was predominant, in this study. Likelihood of exceeding occupational exposure standards during abatement of asbestos-containing floor tile, even for materials containing up to 15% asbestos, is low. Regulation of floor tile as a special category or group of asbestos-containing material appears to be warranted. Current schemes in the United States that regulate floor tile in the same group as other asbestos-containing materials would appear to be a legislating of science.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This study investigated personal airborne exposure to asbestos during its abatement in two projects that had floor tile with different concentrations of asbestos. Abatement of floor tile with the higher percent asbestos exhibited the highest personal exposure level. Airborne exposure concentrations of asbestos between these abatement projects were found to be statistically significant. However, since neither had levels above occupational exposure standards this difference was not considered important, a type two error (false positive). It is suggested that when establishing negative exposure assessments, priority be given to process/work practices, with percent of contaminant in the building component being of less importance. Time period of applicability of data from negative exposure assessments to future projects should be considered indefinite. Neither within- or between-worker variation was predominant, in this study. Likelihood of exceeding occupational exposure standards during abatement of asbestos-containing floor tile, even for materials containing up to 15% asbestos, is low. Regulation of floor tile as a special category or group of asbestos-containing material appears to be warranted. Current schemes in the United States that regulate floor tile in the same group as other asbestos-containing materials would appear to be a legislating of science.

Key concepts: Asbestos, Tile, Environmental science, Occupational exposure, Significant difference, Exposure assessment, Environmental health, Toxicology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Impact of asbestos concentrations in floor tiles on exposure during removal — Research Paper | ScholarLens