Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents|
| Standard Number:||1910.1025|
May 22, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR: Linda R. Anku Regional Administrator THROUGH: Leo J. Carey, Director Office of Field Programs FROM: Patricia K. Clark, Acting Director Directorate of Compliance Programs SUBJECT: 29 CFR 1910.1025 - Respiratory ProtectionThis is in response to your letter of April 13, 1989 concerning the subject captioned above. Your interpretation of the respiratory protection requirements of the lead standard is correct.
The values for the airborne concentrations of lead in air presented in 29 CFR 1910.1025, Table II, represent the maximum concentrations at which the corresponding respirator can be used. These values are actual concentrations and not time weighted averages. The parenthetical values (e.g.; 10 x PEL) represent only the derivation of these concentrations.
If we may be of further assistance regarding this matter, contact Joseph
Hopkins of my staff at FTS 523-8036.
April 13, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR: THOMAS SHEPICH, Director Directorate of Compliance Programs THROUGH: LEO CAREY, Director Office of Field Programs FROM: LINDA R. ANKU Office of Field Programs SUBJECT: 29 CFR 1910.1025 - Respiratory Protection InterpretationTable II of 29 CFR 1910.1025 lists required respiratory protection for protection against lead. The table lists concentrations of exposure followed by the corresponding concentration in relationship to the permissible exposure limit, e.g. "not in excess of 0.5 mg/meter cubed (10X PEL)". Recently, the wording of the table caused some confusion as to whether the exposure to determine appropriate respiratory protection was to be a time-weighted-average (based on the definition of permissible exposure limit) or an upper limit of concentration based on the phrase "not in excess of 0.5 mg/meter cubed..."
It is our understanding that respiratory protection is to be based on the upper limit of concentration for lead since the values in parentheses, i.e. "10X PEL", are intended to demonstrate only the derivation of the lead concentration for determining the appropriate respiratory protection. This would also agree with the NIOSH protocol for approving respirators. Our understanding of this issue was confirmed with Joseph Hopkins of the Office of Health Compliance Assistance. Due to the potential for this issue arising again, we are requesting written confirmation of this interpretation.
Please contact Jim Johnston of my staff (FTS 596-1201) if there are any questions.
|Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents|