Guest guest Posted November 8, 2006 Report Share Posted November 8, 2006 , You are down in New Orleans. You are seeing it first hand. Do you think it is wise to send children in their early/pre-teens down there to help clean up the debris/moulded materials of New Orleans? Sharon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 8, 2006 Report Share Posted November 8, 2006 Group, In regards to failure of a N95 mask you may want to look at these web sites. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Tony Havics Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 3:45 PM To: iequality Cc: ' Geyer' Subject: RE: The Katrina Disaster Good question. Our church sent a group down last spring and a Student Venture group we support high school) also went. I did a short training session of the use of N95 and N100 filtering facepieces. Talked about gloves, boots, eletrical and biological hazards. WI talked about work practices as well - not pushing air out of garbage bags to get them sealed, not using dry sweeping, etc. For specific folks (who might work around waste overflows) we checked for hep vacinations [Note: I found the CDC comments interesting since I worked on the floods in St. Louis in 1994 and they recommended vacin.] We did not allow those under 16 to work in areas that a mask was prudent to use. Along those lines I did a fit test (in front of the group) a 13 year old with an N95 (small) using a TSI Portacount with an N95 adapter. He failed miserably. So beware. I recommended that inside the houses for non-destruction work to use N95s as a minimum and for destructive work N100 filter facepieces or better. For those asthmatic or sensitive to mold I recommernded a grade up (N100 and Fullface with P100). I have monitored myself during my bnsthroom rip out (Stachy) and >100K S/m3 was evident [i used a PAPR]. I also monitored a contractor in sme work in GA using a button sampler (direct and cuturable on the gelatin filters) and that wasn't too bad for mold (<10K S/m3) but horrible for particulate loading [they were in PAPRs]. I've seen sme other data during rip-out and it can be well over 100K S/m3. My thoughts. ........................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC PO Box 34140 Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%℠This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. Re: The Katrina Disaster Dear , et.al.: I just learned today that a middle school I am working with to assess their IAQ is planning to have a school trip to Mississippi to help with the post-Katrina cleanup. Considering the potential exposures, can you, or anyone offer any suggestions for appropriate training and personal protection? Thank you, W. Bearg, PE, CIH Concord, MA -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Geyer <mgeyeratg1> > I don�t doubt that there will be long-term suffering from the > affects/effects of Katrina; not only to residents, but responders, > remediators, and the faith-based organizations that responded in kind. > Too few were adequately protected, and some now probably wish they > never went to help. From experience, I knew what to expect and > coached a few responders on what to bring/expect, and a few others I > talked-out of going because they were ill-prepared and lacked > experience. Those that went said it was worse than I mentioned, and > said that if it had not been for my comments, they would have been in > worse shape. I don�t say this to boast or to suggest I knew what to > do; I only speculated. I mention this because so many folks wanted to > help, had the capacity to help, and had resources to help, but were > inadequately prepared to help themselves. (The confined-space > scenario.) Fortunately, human-kind has a great capacity to help others in > need. However, in the Katrina-zone, there was a real lack of control, > coordination and communication � tis typical in disasters. This said, I > take exception to blaming the government, especially the Federal government, > and to suggest prior knowledge or suggest incompetence at that level is > wrong in my opinion. Moreover, the circumstances of 911 and Katrina are far > to different to say there are similarities. It just isn�t. The scale and > scope of Katrina was unprecedented in modern times. Katrina was HUGE and it > covered three states. The network news spent 90% of their air-time on New > Orleans because of an out-spoken, finger-pointing, grand-standing Mayor who > should have acted much more responsibly than he did; my opinion. Whereas, > most of the state of Mississippi was wiped out and it is still hurting, > badly too. The only Katrina similarity maybe, was hurricane Ivan (if I get > this one right) that swept through the Carolinas and emptied hundreds of > animal feed lots into the landscape � covering many square miles with toxic > gumbo. No....9/11 does not even compare to these two events. Ivan caused > the CAFO regulations to be promulgated, which the EPA is now enforcing to > mitigate much of the unrestrained biological load from a similar �toxic > gumbo� event. Katrina further demonstrated another form of destruction � on > urban infrastructure. Until the politicians and land-use planners fully > comprehend the consequences of coastal development in the face of very large > weather systems, it will not improve. There will be repeat Katrina-like > events. There are those in the know (e.g., engineers and geologists) but > these folks are not in elected positions. Because if they were, they would > restrict this type of unrestrained development in high-risk areas. > Historically, in the continental U.S., there are records of bigger > hurricanes, bigger floods, stronger winds, huge volcanic eruptions, and > shattering earthquakes. Even the Los Angeles (California) basin has a > record of at least two very large hurricanes striking the area and changing > the course of rivers. Imagine if it happens in modern times? Will it > happen again...Who knows? Probably. I hope I am prepared. Are you? > Moreover, building below sea-level, in flood zones, and/or downstream of > seemingly small water systems in normal years, is playing Russian Roulette > with Mother Nature. Katrina proves this. There are other areas of the U.S. > that are equally at risk to large-scale, purely natural events. > Furthermore, I do not believe that it is the Federal government�s > responsibility to dictate what can and cannot be built in high risk areas; > it is a local issue and it should stay a local issue. What Katrina showed > us was: the locals want the development and the tax base, the locals knew > the consequences and chose to postpone/ignore action, and the locals whined > and sniveled in the face of disaster and pointed the finger elsewhere > instead of taking responsibility and marshalling resources to limit > damage/injury. What has developed in the U.S. is a loss of personal > responsibility and an entitlement mentality, i.e., it must be someone else�s > fault. It is like a disease. If you want to point a finger, point to those > that allowed development to take shape in the risk-prone zones. To say; > �There is no excuse for this,� is to be a bit naive. There are a lot of > excuses, and the Mayor of New Orleans (and others) is full of excuses, and a > poster-child of a failure to comprehend the probable and the inevitable. > > For what it is worth.... > -- > Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP > President > KERNTEC Industries, Inc. > Bakersfield, California > www.kerntecindustries.com > > > > On 11/6/06 8:44 AM, " snk1955aol " <snk1955aol> wrote: > > > and , > > What has happened to some of the occupants of New Orleans in the > > wake of Katrina is so sad and so unnecessary. Worse than losing > > their possessions, I fear there are going to be long term health > > repercussions for many years to come, simply from lack of proper > > warning. There is no excuse for this. The gov't had 4 years of > > studying the health ramifications of the 911 clean up workers to > > understand the health implications of disaster clean up in New Orleans. > > New Orleans is even more tragic in that private citizens, including children, > > were not duly warned of the potential long term effects of the toxic gumbo > > they were inhaling, touching and ingesting. We are all going to be paying for > > this folly for a long time to come in that some, who were productive people, > > will now become burdens on the state. > > Below is an article from Newsweek. It is an interview with Hugh Kaufman, > > Ombudsman, EPA. > > �It�s Incompetence� > > An environmental expert fears that Gulf Coast residents and volunteers exposed > > to deadly toxins could suffer health effects similar to those of 9/11 workers. > > > > Carolyn Kaster / AP > > A woman in Arabi, La., just outside New Orleans, works alone to > > clear wet and moldy items from her home on Feb. 21 > > > > WEB EXCLUSIVE > > By > > Newsweek > > Updated: 6:33 a.m. PT Aug 24, 2006 > > Aug. 24, 2006 - You�ve seen the awful pictures: rotting houses > > knocked off their foundations, walls mottled with mold, floors > > coated in grimy mud, piles of God-knows-what towering over empty > > streets. For Hurricane Katrina survivors and volunteers sent to > > help, the cleanup isn�t just unpleasant�it�s potentially > > sickening. > > > > Like the 9/11 workers, many of those working in the Katrina rubble > > are being exposed to deadly toxins, says Hugh Kaufman, a senior > > policy analyst for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in > > Washington. With more than 35 years of experience in the field, he > > particularly worries about workers and citizens being exposed to > > harmful contaminants like asbestos > > <http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/health.pdf> and mold > > <http://www.epa.gov/mold/moldresources.html> .. > > > > A year ago, Kaufman cautioned residents > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9370519/site/newsweek/> about > > returning to the affected areas too quickly. Now he explains to > > NEWSWEEK�s how dangerous the situation remains. > > Excerpts: > > > > > > > > Online Newshour > > Kaufman: �The government has waived ... rules ... to save > > money� > > > > > > NEWSWEEK: What�s the present environmental situation in the Gulf > > Coast regions hit hardest by Katrina? Hugh Kaufman: We�re dealing > > with the major issue of cleanup, and continuing to assess the > > magnitude of the problem. You basically still have a large amount of > > toxic material ... [and] studies have shown high levels of heavy > > metals in the sediments that have coated the areas. You�ve got a > > tremendous amount of solid waste�over 20 million tons�[in the > > form of] automobiles, trash, etc., that has to be dealt with. And > > you have a problem that a number of us are raising red flags about, > > which is [the lack of] protective equipment for people who are > > involved in cleanup. > > > > CONTINUED > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > 1 | 2 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > | 3 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/3/> | > > 4 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/4/> | > > Next > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > > > Sharon Kramer > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 8, 2006 Report Share Posted November 8, 2006 : Thanks - for the group's sake. I am aware of those. I knew about the JOEH article before it came out. I took Roy McKays Course on Respiratory Protection a couple of years ago (highly, highly recommend it) and keep up with the info and his newsletter. As fpor the NIOSH cert revocation, It was not that brand. The JOEH article was not surprising given some of the restrictd data I have - but the use of an N95 is all about risk reduction vs comfort. If it isn't comfortable then it won't be worn or will be worn improperly. There was an article by Mark Nicas on Bacillus anthracis (anthrax agent) estimated risk for respirator use that was also a little scarry (also in JOEH). When I talked to him, Nicas said it was total modeling but still a cautionary tale. On a similar note, a colleague of mine is working on a thesis looking at bioaerosol re-release from filters in respirators. Should be available within a year; I'll pass it on when it does. This is not unexpected. I have data from a decade ago from Kaye (now deceased, great man) at filter collection processes and failure and it's an interesting and complex subject. Another interesting study was done by a piece was Dr. Leonas at Univ of Georgia looking at particle penetration through tyvek using confocal microscopy. (2000) Tony ........................................................................... "Tony" Havics, CHMM, CIH, PEpH2, LLCPO Box 34140Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%℠This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. Re: The Katrina DisasterDear , et.al.:I just learned today that a middle school I am working with to assess their IAQ is planning to have a school trip to Mississippi to help with the post-Katrina cleanup.Considering the potential exposures, can you, or anyone offer any suggestions for appropriate training and personal protection?Thank you, W. Bearg, PE, CIHConcord, MA-------------- Original message ----------------------From: Geyer <mgeyeratg1>> I don�t doubt that there will be long-term suffering from the > affects/effects of Katrina; not only to residents, but responders, > remediators, and the faith-based organizations that responded in kind. > Too few were adequately protected, and some now probably wish they > never went to help. From experience, I knew what to expect and > coached a few responders on what to bring/expect, and a few others I > talked-out of going because they were ill-prepared and lacked > experience. Those that went said it was worse than I mentioned, and > said that if it had not been for my comments, they would have been in > worse shape. I don�t say this to boast or to suggest I knew what to > do; I only speculated. I mention this because so many folks wanted to > help, had the capacity to help, and had resources to help, but were > inadequately prepared to help themselves. (The confined-space> scenario.) Fortunately, human-kind has a great capacity to help others in> need. However, in the Katrina-zone, there was a real lack of control,> coordination and communication � tis typical in disasters. This said, I> take exception to blaming the government, especially the Federal government,> and to suggest prior knowledge or suggest incompetence at that level is> wrong in my opinion. Moreover, the circumstances of 911 and Katrina are far> to different to say there are similarities. It just isn�t. The scale and> scope of Katrina was unprecedented in modern times. Katrina was HUGE and it> covered three states. The network news spent 90% of their air-time on New> Orleans because of an out-spoken, finger-pointing, grand-standing Mayor who> should have acted much more responsibly than he did; my opinion. Whereas,> most of the state of Mississippi was wiped out and it is still hurting,> badly too. The only Katrina similarity maybe, was hurricane Ivan (if I get> this one right) that swept through the Carolinas and emptied hundreds of> animal feed lots into the landscape � covering many square miles with toxic> gumbo. No....9/11 does not even compare to these two events. Ivan caused> the CAFO regulations to be promulgated, which the EPA is now enforcing to> mitigate much of the unrestrained biological load from a similar �toxic> gumbo� event. Katrina further demonstrated another form of destruction � on> urban infrastructure. Until the politicians and land-use planners fully> comprehend the consequences of coastal development in the face of very large> weather systems, it will not improve. There will be repeat Katrina-like> events. There are those in the know (e.g., engineers and geologists) but> these folks are not in elected positions. Because if they were, they would> restrict this type of unrestrained development in high-risk areas.> Historically, in the continental U.S., there are records of bigger> hurricanes, bigger floods, stronger winds, huge volcanic eruptions, and> shattering earthquakes. Even the Los Angeles (California) basin has a> record of at least two very large hurricanes striking the area and changing> the course of rivers. Imagine if it happens in modern times? Will it> happen again...Who knows? Probably. I hope I am prepared. Are you?> Moreover, building below sea-level, in flood zones, and/or downstream of> seemingly small water systems in normal years, is playing Russian Roulette> with Mother Nature. Katrina proves this. There are other areas of the U.S.> that are equally at risk to large-scale, purely natural events.> Furthermore, I do not believe that it is the Federal government�s> responsibility to dictate what can and cannot be built in high risk areas;> it is a local issue and it should stay a local issue. What Katrina showed> us was: the locals want the development and the tax base, the locals knew> the consequences and chose to postpone/ignore action, and the locals whined> and sniveled in the face of disaster and pointed the finger elsewhere> instead of taking responsibility and marshalling resources to limit> damage/injury. What has developed in the U.S. is a loss of personal> responsibility and an entitlement mentality, i.e., it must be someone else�s> fault. It is like a disease. If you want to point a finger, point to those> that allowed development to take shape in the risk-prone zones. To say;> �There is no excuse for this,� is to be a bit naive. There are a lot of> excuses, and the Mayor of New Orleans (and others) is full of excuses, and a> poster-child of a failure to comprehend the probable and the inevitable.> > For what it is worth....> --> Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP> President> KERNTEC Industries, Inc.> Bakersfield, California> www.kerntecindustries.com> > > > On 11/6/06 8:44 AM, "snk1955aol" <snk1955aol> wrote:> > > and ,> > What has happened to some of the occupants of New Orleans in the > > wake of Katrina is so sad and so unnecessary. Worse than losing > > their possessions, I fear there are going to be long term health > > repercussions for many years to come, simply from lack of proper > > warning. There is no excuse for this. The gov't had 4 years of > > studying the health ramifications of the 911 clean up workers to > > understand the health implications of disaster clean up in New Orleans.> > New Orleans is even more tragic in that private citizens, including children,> > were not duly warned of the potential long term effects of the toxic gumbo> > they were inhaling, touching and ingesting. We are all going to be paying for> > this folly for a long time to come in that some, who were productive people,> > will now become burdens on the state.> > Below is an article from Newsweek. It is an interview with Hugh Kaufman,> > Ombudsman, EPA. > > �It�s Incompetence�> > An environmental expert fears that Gulf Coast residents and volunteers exposed> > to deadly toxins could suffer health effects similar to those of 9/11 workers.> > > > Carolyn Kaster / AP> > A woman in Arabi, La., just outside New Orleans, works alone to > > clear wet and moldy items from her home on Feb. 21> > > > WEB EXCLUSIVE> > By > > Newsweek> > Updated: 6:33 a.m. PT Aug 24, 2006> > Aug. 24, 2006 - You�ve seen the awful pictures: rotting houses > > knocked off their foundations, walls mottled with mold, floors > > coated in grimy mud, piles of God-knows-what towering over empty > > streets. For Hurricane Katrina survivors and volunteers sent to > > help, the cleanup isn�t just unpleasant�it�s potentially > > sickening.> > > > Like the 9/11 workers, many of those working in the Katrina rubble > > are being exposed to deadly toxins, says Hugh Kaufman, a senior > > policy analyst for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in > > Washington. With more than 35 years of experience in the field, he > > particularly worries about workers and citizens being exposed to > > harmful contaminants like asbestos > > <http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/health.pdf> and mold > > <http://www.epa.gov/mold/moldresources.html> .> > > > A year ago, Kaufman cautioned residents > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9370519/site/newsweek/> about > > returning to the affected areas too quickly. Now he explains to > > NEWSWEEK�s how dangerous the situation remains. > > Excerpts:> > > > > > > > Online Newshour> > Kaufman: �The government has waived ... rules ... to save > > money�> > > > > > NEWSWEEK: What�s the present environmental situation in the Gulf > > Coast regions hit hardest by Katrina? Hugh Kaufman: We�re dealing > > with the major issue of cleanup, and continuing to assess the > > magnitude of the problem. You basically still have a large amount of > > toxic material ... [and] studies have shown high levels of heavy > > metals in the sediments that have coated the areas. You�ve got a > > tremendous amount of solid waste�over 20 million tons�[in the > > form of] automobiles, trash, etc., that has to be dealt with. And > > you have a problem that a number of us are raising red flags about, > > which is [the lack of] protective equipment for people who are > > involved in cleanup.> > > > CONTINUED > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/>> > > > 1 | 2 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > | 3 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/3/> | > > 4 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/4/> | > > Next > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/>> > > > > > Sharon Kramer> > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE:This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2006 Report Share Posted November 9, 2006 Sharon, Let me answer as it there were my children. The answer would be no. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of snk1955@... Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 8:30 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: N-95 Failure to Perform , You are down in New Orleans. You are seeing it first hand. Do you think it is wise to send children in their early/pre-teens down there to help clean up the debris/moulded materials of New Orleans? Sharon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 3, 2007 Report Share Posted August 3, 2007 , In regards to failure of a N95 mask you may want to look at these web sites from my earlier posting. Moffett recommend a N-100 or greater level of respiratory protection. that's good. do you give credence to the disposables types of N-100's known as filtering facepieces (as i mentioned i like) ; which may be exempt from some of the requirements like fit-test, admin, etc.? or do you recommend only the real cartridge-type with fit testing and all other std requirements for " respirators " Armour, M.S. Armour Applied Science, LLC Green Building Healthy Building Cleveland, OH From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Tony Havics Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 3:45 PM To: iequality Cc: ' Geyer' Subject: RE: The Katrina Disaster Good question. Our church sent a group down last spring and a Student Venture group we support high school) also went. I did a short training session of the use of N95 and N100 filtering facepieces. Talked about gloves, boots, eletrical and biological hazards. WI talked about work practices as well - not pushing air out of garbage bags to get them sealed, not using dry sweeping, etc. For specific folks (who might work around waste overflows) we checked for hep vacinations [Note: I found the CDC comments interesting since I worked on the floods in St. Louis in 1994 and they recommended vacin.] We did not allow those under 16 to work in areas that a mask was prudent to use. Along those lines I did a fit test (in front of the group) a 13 year old with an N95 (small) using a TSI Portacount with an N95 adapter. He failed miserably. So beware. I recommended that inside the houses for non-destruction work to use N95s as a minimum and for destructive work N100 filter facepieces or better. For those asthmatic or sensitive to mold I recommernded a grade up (N100 and Fullface with P100). I have monitored myself during my bnsthroom rip out (Stachy) and >100K S/m3 was evident [i used a PAPR]. I also monitored a contractor in sme work in GA using a button sampler (direct and cuturable on the gelatin filters) and that wasn't too bad for mold (<10K S/m3) but horrible for particulate loading [they were in PAPRs]. I've seen sme other data during rip-out and it can be well over 100K S/m3. My thoughts. ........................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC PO Box 34140 Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%℠This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. Re: The Katrina Disaster Dear , et.al.: I just learned today that a middle school I am working with to assess their IAQ is planning to have a school trip to Mississippi to help with the post-Katrina cleanup. Considering the potential exposures, can you, or anyone offer any suggestions for appropriate training and personal protection? Thank you, W. Bearg, PE, CIH Concord, MA -------------- Original message ---------------------- > I don�t doubt that there will be long-term suffering from the > affects/effects of Katrina; not only to residents, but responders, > remediators, and the faith-based organizations that responded in kind. > Too few were adequately protected, and some now probably wish they > never went to help. From experience, I knew what to expect and > coached a few responders on what to bring/expect, and a few others I > talked-out of going because they were ill-prepared and lacked > experience. Those that went said it was worse than I mentioned, and > said that if it had not been for my comments, they would have been in > worse shape. I don�t say this to boast or to suggest I knew what to > do; I only speculated. I mention this because so many folks wanted to > help, had the capacity to help, and had resources to help, but were > inadequately prepared to help themselves. (The confined-space > scenario.) Fortunately, human-kind has a great capacity to help others in > need. However, in the Katrina-zone, there was a real lack of control, > coordination and communication � tis typical in disasters. This said, I > take exception to blaming the government, especially the Federal government, > and to suggest prior knowledge or suggest incompetence at that level is > wrong in my opinion. Moreover, the circumstances of 911 and Katrina are far > to different to say there are similarities. It just isn�t. The scale and > scope of Katrina was unprecedented in modern times. Katrina was HUGE and it > covered three states. The network news spent 90% of their air-time on New > Orleans because of an out-spoken, finger-pointing, grand-standing Mayor who > should have acted much more responsibly than he did; my opinion. Whereas, > most of the state of Mississippi was wiped out and it is still hurting, > badly too. The only Katrina similarity maybe, was hurricane Ivan (if I get > this one right) that swept through the Carolinas and emptied hundreds of > animal feed lots into the landscape � covering many square miles with toxic > gumbo. No....9/11 does not even compare to these two events. Ivan caused > the CAFO regulations to be promulgated, which the EPA is now enforcing to > mitigate much of the unrestrained biological load from a similar �toxic > gumbo� event. Katrina further demonstrated another form of destruction � on > urban infrastructure. Until the politicians and land-use planners fully > comprehend the consequences of coastal development in the face of very large > weather systems, it will not improve. There will be repeat Katrina-like > events. There are those in the know (e.g., engineers and geologists) but > these folks are not in elected positions. Because if they were, they would > restrict this type of unrestrained development in high-risk areas. > Historically, in the continental U.S., there are records of bigger > hurricanes, bigger floods, stronger winds, huge volcanic eruptions, and > shattering earthquakes. Even the Los Angeles (California) basin has a > record of at least two very large hurricanes striking the area and changing > the course of rivers. Imagine if it happens in modern times? Will it > happen again...Who knows? Probably. I hope I am prepared. Are you? > Moreover, building below sea-level, in flood zones, and/or downstream of > seemingly small water systems in normal years, is playing Russian Roulette > with Mother Nature. Katrina proves this. There are other areas of the U.S. > that are equally at risk to large-scale, purely natural events. > Furthermore, I do not believe that it is the Federal government�s > responsibility to dictate what can and cannot be built in high risk areas; > it is a local issue and it should stay a local issue. What Katrina showed > us was: the locals want the development and the tax base, the locals knew > the consequences and chose to postpone/ignore action, and the locals whined > and sniveled in the face of disaster and pointed the finger elsewhere > instead of taking responsibility and marshalling resources to limit > damage/injury. What has developed in the U.S. is a loss of personal > responsibility and an entitlement mentality, i.e., it must be someone else�s > fault. It is like a disease. If you want to point a finger, point to those > that allowed development to take shape in the risk-prone zones. To say; > �There is no excuse for this,� is to be a bit naive. There are a lot of > excuses, and the Mayor of New Orleans (and others) is full of excuses, and a > poster-child of a failure to comprehend the probable and the inevitable. > > For what it is worth.... > -- > Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP > President > KERNTEC Industries, Inc. > Bakersfield, California > www.kerntecindustries.com > > > > On 11/6/06 8:44 AM, " snk1955@... " wrote: > > > and , > > What has happened to some of the occupants of New Orleans in the > > wake of Katrina is so sad and so unnecessary. Worse than losing > > their possessions, I fear there are going to be long term health > > repercussions for many years to come, simply from lack of proper > > warning. There is no excuse for this. The gov't had 4 years of > > studying the health ramifications of the 911 clean up workers to > > understand the health implications of disaster clean up in New Orleans. > > New Orleans is even more tragic in that private citizens, including children, > > were not duly warned of the potential long term effects of the toxic gumbo > > they were inhaling, touching and ingesting. We are all going to be paying for > > this folly for a long time to come in that some, who were productive people, > > will now become burdens on the state. > > Below is an article from Newsweek. It is an interview with Hugh Kaufman, > > Ombudsman, EPA. > > �It�s Incompetence� > > An environmental expert fears that Gulf Coast residents and volunteers exposed > > to deadly toxins could suffer health effects similar to those of 9/11 workers. > > > > Carolyn Kaster / AP > > A woman in Arabi, La., just outside New Orleans, works alone to > > clear wet and moldy items from her home on Feb. 21 > > > > WEB EXCLUSIVE > > By > > Newsweek > > Updated: 6:33 a.m. PT Aug 24, 2006 > > Aug. 24, 2006 - You�ve seen the awful pictures: rotting houses > > knocked off their foundations, walls mottled with mold, floors > > coated in grimy mud, piles of God-knows-what towering over empty > > streets. For Hurricane Katrina survivors and volunteers sent to > > help, the cleanup isn�t just unpleasant�it�s potentially > > sickening. > > > > Like the 9/11 workers, many of those working in the Katrina rubble > > are being exposed to deadly toxins, says Hugh Kaufman, a senior > > policy analyst for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in > > Washington. With more than 35 years of experience in the field, he > > particularly worries about workers and citizens being exposed to > > harmful contaminants like asbestos > > <http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/health.pdf> and mold > > <http://www.epa.gov/mold/moldresources.html> .. > > > > A year ago, Kaufman cautioned residents > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9370519/site/newsweek/> about > > returning to the affected areas too quickly. Now he explains to > > NEWSWEEK�s how dangerous the situation remains. > > Excerpts: > > > > > > > > Online Newshour > > Kaufman: �The government has waived ... rules ... to save > > money� > > > > > > NEWSWEEK: What�s the present environmental situation in the Gulf > > Coast regions hit hardest by Katrina? Hugh Kaufman: We�re dealing > > with the major issue of cleanup, and continuing to assess the > > magnitude of the problem. You basically still have a large amount of > > toxic material ... [and] studies have shown high levels of heavy > > metals in the sediments that have coated the areas. You�ve got a > > tremendous amount of solid waste�over 20 million tons�[in the > > form of] automobiles, trash, etc., that has to be dealt with. And > > you have a problem that a number of us are raising red flags about, > > which is [the lack of] protective equipment for people who are > > involved in cleanup. > > > > CONTINUED > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > 1 | 2 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > | 3 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/3/> | > > 4 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/4/> | > > Next > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > > > Sharon Kramer > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 3, 2007 Report Share Posted August 3, 2007 , In regards to failure of a N95 mask you may want to look at these web sites from my earlier posting. Moffett recommend a N-100 or greater level of respiratory protection. that's good. do you give credence to the disposables types of N-100's known as filtering facepieces (as i mentioned i like) ; which may be exempt from some of the requirements like fit-test, admin, etc.? or do you recommend only the real cartridge-type with fit testing and all other std requirements for " respirators " Armour, M.S. Armour Applied Science, LLC Green Building Healthy Building Cleveland, OH From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Tony Havics Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 3:45 PM To: iequality Cc: ' Geyer' Subject: RE: The Katrina Disaster Good question. Our church sent a group down last spring and a Student Venture group we support high school) also went. I did a short training session of the use of N95 and N100 filtering facepieces. Talked about gloves, boots, eletrical and biological hazards. WI talked about work practices as well - not pushing air out of garbage bags to get them sealed, not using dry sweeping, etc. For specific folks (who might work around waste overflows) we checked for hep vacinations [Note: I found the CDC comments interesting since I worked on the floods in St. Louis in 1994 and they recommended vacin.] We did not allow those under 16 to work in areas that a mask was prudent to use. Along those lines I did a fit test (in front of the group) a 13 year old with an N95 (small) using a TSI Portacount with an N95 adapter. He failed miserably. So beware. I recommended that inside the houses for non-destruction work to use N95s as a minimum and for destructive work N100 filter facepieces or better. For those asthmatic or sensitive to mold I recommernded a grade up (N100 and Fullface with P100). I have monitored myself during my bnsthroom rip out (Stachy) and >100K S/m3 was evident [i used a PAPR]. I also monitored a contractor in sme work in GA using a button sampler (direct and cuturable on the gelatin filters) and that wasn't too bad for mold (<10K S/m3) but horrible for particulate loading [they were in PAPRs]. I've seen sme other data during rip-out and it can be well over 100K S/m3. My thoughts. ........................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC PO Box 34140 Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%℠This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. Re: The Katrina Disaster Dear , et.al.: I just learned today that a middle school I am working with to assess their IAQ is planning to have a school trip to Mississippi to help with the post-Katrina cleanup. Considering the potential exposures, can you, or anyone offer any suggestions for appropriate training and personal protection? Thank you, W. Bearg, PE, CIH Concord, MA -------------- Original message ---------------------- > I don�t doubt that there will be long-term suffering from the > affects/effects of Katrina; not only to residents, but responders, > remediators, and the faith-based organizations that responded in kind. > Too few were adequately protected, and some now probably wish they > never went to help. From experience, I knew what to expect and > coached a few responders on what to bring/expect, and a few others I > talked-out of going because they were ill-prepared and lacked > experience. Those that went said it was worse than I mentioned, and > said that if it had not been for my comments, they would have been in > worse shape. I don�t say this to boast or to suggest I knew what to > do; I only speculated. I mention this because so many folks wanted to > help, had the capacity to help, and had resources to help, but were > inadequately prepared to help themselves. (The confined-space > scenario.) Fortunately, human-kind has a great capacity to help others in > need. However, in the Katrina-zone, there was a real lack of control, > coordination and communication � tis typical in disasters. This said, I > take exception to blaming the government, especially the Federal government, > and to suggest prior knowledge or suggest incompetence at that level is > wrong in my opinion. Moreover, the circumstances of 911 and Katrina are far > to different to say there are similarities. It just isn�t. The scale and > scope of Katrina was unprecedented in modern times. Katrina was HUGE and it > covered three states. The network news spent 90% of their air-time on New > Orleans because of an out-spoken, finger-pointing, grand-standing Mayor who > should have acted much more responsibly than he did; my opinion. Whereas, > most of the state of Mississippi was wiped out and it is still hurting, > badly too. The only Katrina similarity maybe, was hurricane Ivan (if I get > this one right) that swept through the Carolinas and emptied hundreds of > animal feed lots into the landscape � covering many square miles with toxic > gumbo. No....9/11 does not even compare to these two events. Ivan caused > the CAFO regulations to be promulgated, which the EPA is now enforcing to > mitigate much of the unrestrained biological load from a similar �toxic > gumbo� event. Katrina further demonstrated another form of destruction � on > urban infrastructure. Until the politicians and land-use planners fully > comprehend the consequences of coastal development in the face of very large > weather systems, it will not improve. There will be repeat Katrina-like > events. There are those in the know (e.g., engineers and geologists) but > these folks are not in elected positions. Because if they were, they would > restrict this type of unrestrained development in high-risk areas. > Historically, in the continental U.S., there are records of bigger > hurricanes, bigger floods, stronger winds, huge volcanic eruptions, and > shattering earthquakes. Even the Los Angeles (California) basin has a > record of at least two very large hurricanes striking the area and changing > the course of rivers. Imagine if it happens in modern times? Will it > happen again...Who knows? Probably. I hope I am prepared. Are you? > Moreover, building below sea-level, in flood zones, and/or downstream of > seemingly small water systems in normal years, is playing Russian Roulette > with Mother Nature. Katrina proves this. There are other areas of the U.S. > that are equally at risk to large-scale, purely natural events. > Furthermore, I do not believe that it is the Federal government�s > responsibility to dictate what can and cannot be built in high risk areas; > it is a local issue and it should stay a local issue. What Katrina showed > us was: the locals want the development and the tax base, the locals knew > the consequences and chose to postpone/ignore action, and the locals whined > and sniveled in the face of disaster and pointed the finger elsewhere > instead of taking responsibility and marshalling resources to limit > damage/injury. What has developed in the U.S. is a loss of personal > responsibility and an entitlement mentality, i.e., it must be someone else�s > fault. It is like a disease. If you want to point a finger, point to those > that allowed development to take shape in the risk-prone zones. To say; > �There is no excuse for this,� is to be a bit naive. There are a lot of > excuses, and the Mayor of New Orleans (and others) is full of excuses, and a > poster-child of a failure to comprehend the probable and the inevitable. > > For what it is worth.... > -- > Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP > President > KERNTEC Industries, Inc. > Bakersfield, California > www.kerntecindustries.com > > > > On 11/6/06 8:44 AM, " snk1955@... " wrote: > > > and , > > What has happened to some of the occupants of New Orleans in the > > wake of Katrina is so sad and so unnecessary. Worse than losing > > their possessions, I fear there are going to be long term health > > repercussions for many years to come, simply from lack of proper > > warning. There is no excuse for this. The gov't had 4 years of > > studying the health ramifications of the 911 clean up workers to > > understand the health implications of disaster clean up in New Orleans. > > New Orleans is even more tragic in that private citizens, including children, > > were not duly warned of the potential long term effects of the toxic gumbo > > they were inhaling, touching and ingesting. We are all going to be paying for > > this folly for a long time to come in that some, who were productive people, > > will now become burdens on the state. > > Below is an article from Newsweek. It is an interview with Hugh Kaufman, > > Ombudsman, EPA. > > �It�s Incompetence� > > An environmental expert fears that Gulf Coast residents and volunteers exposed > > to deadly toxins could suffer health effects similar to those of 9/11 workers. > > > > Carolyn Kaster / AP > > A woman in Arabi, La., just outside New Orleans, works alone to > > clear wet and moldy items from her home on Feb. 21 > > > > WEB EXCLUSIVE > > By > > Newsweek > > Updated: 6:33 a.m. PT Aug 24, 2006 > > Aug. 24, 2006 - You�ve seen the awful pictures: rotting houses > > knocked off their foundations, walls mottled with mold, floors > > coated in grimy mud, piles of God-knows-what towering over empty > > streets. For Hurricane Katrina survivors and volunteers sent to > > help, the cleanup isn�t just unpleasant�it�s potentially > > sickening. > > > > Like the 9/11 workers, many of those working in the Katrina rubble > > are being exposed to deadly toxins, says Hugh Kaufman, a senior > > policy analyst for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in > > Washington. With more than 35 years of experience in the field, he > > particularly worries about workers and citizens being exposed to > > harmful contaminants like asbestos > > <http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/health.pdf> and mold > > <http://www.epa.gov/mold/moldresources.html> .. > > > > A year ago, Kaufman cautioned residents > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9370519/site/newsweek/> about > > returning to the affected areas too quickly. Now he explains to > > NEWSWEEK�s how dangerous the situation remains. > > Excerpts: > > > > > > > > Online Newshour > > Kaufman: �The government has waived ... rules ... to save > > money� > > > > > > NEWSWEEK: What�s the present environmental situation in the Gulf > > Coast regions hit hardest by Katrina? Hugh Kaufman: We�re dealing > > with the major issue of cleanup, and continuing to assess the > > magnitude of the problem. You basically still have a large amount of > > toxic material ... [and] studies have shown high levels of heavy > > metals in the sediments that have coated the areas. You�ve got a > > tremendous amount of solid waste�over 20 million tons�[in the > > form of] automobiles, trash, etc., that has to be dealt with. And > > you have a problem that a number of us are raising red flags about, > > which is [the lack of] protective equipment for people who are > > involved in cleanup. > > > > CONTINUED > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > 1 | 2 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > | 3 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/3/> | > > 4 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/4/> | > > Next > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > > > Sharon Kramer > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 4, 2007 Report Share Posted August 4, 2007 , I was tired last night and I didn’t see the rest of your e-mail. In reply to your question, when I am around only dusty situations I use a N-100 paper mask with an exhalation valve. Generally one made by 3M. When I am inspecting or working around environments where there is the potential for water-based airborne particles that are suspected of having Legionellae and sewage; or dusty environments suspected of Hanta Virus, Psittacosis, TB and other viruses and harmful airborne bacteria, I adopt donning a MSA PAPR with HEPA Organic filter cartridges. Anytime I do a research lab cleanup I follow the lab’s risk assessment requirements which may include Level-B or A PPE. Moffett    From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Pat Moffett Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 10:12 PM To: iequality Subject: FW: N-95 Failure to Perform , In regards to failure of a N95 mask you may want to look at these web sites from my earlier posting. Moffett In a message dated 8/3/2007 2:07:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, PatMoffett@... writes: recommend a N-100 or greater level of respiratory protection. that's good. do you give credence to the disposables types of N-100's known as filtering facepieces (as i mentioned i like) ; which may be exempt from some of the requirements like fit-test, admin, etc.? or do you recommend only the real cartridge-type with fit testing and all other std requirements for " respirators " Armour, M.S. Armour Applied Science, LLC Green Building Healthy Building Cleveland, OH From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Tony Havics Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 3:45 PM To: iequality Cc: ' Geyer' Subject: RE: The Katrina Disaster Good question. Our church sent a group down last spring and a Student Venture group we support high school) also went. I did a short training session of the use of N95 and N100 filtering facepieces. Talked about gloves, boots, eletrical and biological hazards. WI talked about work practices as well - not pushing air out of garbage bags to get them sealed, not using dry sweeping, etc. For specific folks (who might work around waste overflows) we checked for hep vacinations [Note: I found the CDC comments interesting since I worked on the floods in St. Louis in 1994 and they recommended vacin.] We did not allow those under 16 to work in areas that a mask was prudent to use. Along those lines I did a fit test (in front of the group) a 13 year old with an N95 (small) using a TSI Portacount with an N95 adapter. He failed miserably. So beware. I recommended that inside the houses for non-destruction work to use N95s as a minimum and for destructive work N100 filter facepieces or better. For those asthmatic or sensitive to mold I recommernded a grade up (N100 and Fullface with P100). I have monitored myself during my bnsthroom rip out (Stachy) and >100K S/m3 was evident [i used a PAPR]. I also monitored a contractor in sme work in GA using a button sampler (direct and cuturable on the gelatin filters) and that wasn't too bad for mold (<10K S/m3) but horrible for particulate loading [they were in PAPRs]. I've seen sme other data during rip-out and it can be well over 100K S/m3. My thoughts. ........................................................................... " Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE pH2, LLC PO Box 34140 Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell 90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%℠This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement. Re: The Katrina Disaster Dear , et.al.: I just learned today that a middle school I am working with to assess their IAQ is planning to have a school trip to Mississippi to help with the post-Katrina cleanup. Considering the potential exposures, can you, or anyone offer any suggestions for appropriate training and personal protection? Thank you, W. Bearg, PE, CIH Concord, MA -------------- Original message ---------------------- > I don�t doubt that there will be long-term suffering from the > affects/effects of Katrina; not only to residents, but responders, > remediators, and the faith-based organizations that responded in kind. > Too few were adequately protected, and some now probably wish they > never went to help. From experience, I knew what to expect and > coached a few responders on what to bring/expect, and a few others I > talked-out of going because they were ill-prepared and lacked > experience. Those that went said it was worse than I mentioned, and > said that if it had not been for my comments, they would have been in > worse shape. I don�t say this to boast or to suggest I knew what to > do; I only speculated. I mention this because so many folks wanted to > help, had the capacity to help, and had resources to help, but were > inadequately prepared to help themselves. (The confined-space > scenario.) Fortunately, human-kind has a great capacity to help others in > need. However, in the Katrina-zone, there was a real lack of control, > coordination and communication � tis typical in disasters. This said, I > take exception to blaming the government, especially the Federal government, > and to suggest prior knowledge or suggest incompetence at that level is > wrong in my opinion. Moreover, the circumstances of 911 and Katrina are far > to different to say there are similarities. It just isn�t. The scale and > scope of Katrina was unprecedented in modern times. Katrina was HUGE and it > covered three states. The network news spent 90% of their air-time on New > Orleans because of an out-spoken, finger-pointing, grand-standing Mayor who > should have acted much more responsibly than he did; my opinion. Whereas, > most of the state of Mississippi was wiped out and it is still hurting, > badly too. The only Katrina similarity maybe, was hurricane Ivan (if I get > this one right) that swept through the Carolinas and emptied hundreds of > animal feed lots into the landscape � covering many square miles with toxic > gumbo. No....9/11 does not even compare to these two events. Ivan caused > the CAFO regulations to be promulgated, which the EPA is now enforcing to > mitigate much of the unrestrained biological load from a similar �toxic > gumbo� event. Katrina further demonstrated another form of destruction � on > urban infrastructure. Until the politicians and land-use planners fully > comprehend the consequences of coastal development in the face of very large > weather systems, it will not improve. There will be repeat Katrina-like > events. There are those in the know (e.g., engineers and geologists) but > these folks are not in elected positions. Because if they were, they would > restrict this type of unrestrained development in high-risk areas. > Historically, in the continental U.S., there are records of bigger > hurricanes, bigger floods, stronger winds, huge volcanic eruptions, and > shattering earthquakes. Even the Los Angeles (California) basin has a > record of at least two very large hurricanes striking the area and changing > the course of rivers. Imagine if it happens in modern times? Will it > happen again...Who knows? Probably. I hope I am prepared. Are you? > Moreover, building below sea-level, in flood zones, and/or downstream of > seemingly small water systems in normal years, is playing Russian Roulette > with Mother Nature. Katrina proves this. There are other areas of the U.S. > that are equally at risk to large-scale, purely natural events. > Furthermore, I do not believe that it is the Federal government�s > responsibility to dictate what can and cannot be built in high risk areas; > it is a local issue and it should stay a local issue. What Katrina showed > us was: the locals want the development and the tax base, the locals knew > the consequences and chose to postpone/ignore action, and the locals whined > and sniveled in the face of disaster and pointed the finger elsewhere > instead of taking responsibility and marshalling resources to limit > damage/injury. What has developed in the U.S. is a loss of personal > responsibility and an entitlement mentality, i.e., it must be someone else�s > fault. It is like a disease. If you want to point a finger, point to those > that allowed development to take shape in the risk-prone zones. To say; > �There is no excuse for this,� is to be a bit naive. There are a lot of > excuses, and the Mayor of New Orleans (and others) is full of excuses, and a > poster-child of a failure to comprehend the probable and the inevitable. > > For what it is worth.... > -- > Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP > President > KERNTEC Industries, Inc. > Bakersfield, California > www.kerntecindustries.com > > > > On 11/6/06 8:44 AM, " snk1955@... " wrote: > > > and , > > What has happened to some of the occupants of New Orleans in the > > wake of Katrina is so sad and so unnecessary. Worse than losing > > their possessions, I fear there are going to be long term health > > repercussions for many years to come, simply from lack of proper > > warning. There is no excuse for this. The gov't had 4 years of > > studying the health ramifications of the 911 clean up workers to > > understand the health implications of disaster clean up in New Orleans. > > New Orleans is even more tragic in that private citizens, including children, > > were not duly warned of the potential long term effects of the toxic gumbo > > they were inhaling, touching and ingesting. We are all going to be paying for > > this folly for a long time to come in that some, who were productive people, > > will now become burdens on the state. > > Below is an article from Newsweek. It is an interview with Hugh Kaufman, > > Ombudsman, EPA. > > �It�s Incompetence� > > An environmental expert fears that Gulf Coast residents and volunteers exposed > > to deadly toxins could suffer health effects similar to those of 9/11 workers. > > > > Carolyn Kaster / AP > > A woman in Arabi, La., just outside New Orleans, works alone to > > clear wet and moldy items from her home on Feb. 21 > > > > WEB EXCLUSIVE > > By > > Newsweek > > Updated: 6:33 a.m. PT Aug 24, 2006 > > Aug. 24, 2006 - You�ve seen the awful pictures: rotting houses > > knocked off their foundations, walls mottled with mold, floors > > coated in grimy mud, piles of God-knows-what towering over empty > > streets. For Hurricane Katrina survivors and volunteers sent to > > help, the cleanup isn�t just unpleasant�it�s potentially > > sickening. > > > > Like the 9/11 workers, many of those working in the Katrina rubble > > are being exposed to deadly toxins, says Hugh Kaufman, a senior > > policy analyst for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in > > Washington. With more than 35 years of experience in the field, he > > particularly worries about workers and citizens being exposed to > > harmful contaminants like asbestos > > <http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/health.pdf> and mold > > <http://www.epa.gov/mold/moldresources.html> .. > > > > A year ago, Kaufman cautioned residents > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9370519/site/newsweek/> about > > returning to the affected areas too quickly. Now he explains to > > NEWSWEEK�s how dangerous the situation remains. > > Excerpts: > > > > > > > > Online Newshour > > Kaufman: �The government has waived ... rules ... to save > > money� > > > > > > NEWSWEEK: What�s the present environmental situation in the Gulf > > Coast regions hit hardest by Katrina? Hugh Kaufman: We�re dealing > > with the major issue of cleanup, and continuing to assess the > > magnitude of the problem. You basically still have a large amount of > > toxic material ... [and] studies have shown high levels of heavy > > metals in the sediments that have coated the areas. You�ve got a > > tremendous amount of solid waste�over 20 million tons�[in the > > form of] automobiles, trash, etc., that has to be dealt with. And > > you have a problem that a number of us are raising red flags about, > > which is [the lack of] protective equipment for people who are > > involved in cleanup. > > > > CONTINUED > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > 1 | 2 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > | 3 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/3/> | > > 4 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/4/> | > > Next > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > > > > > Sharon Kramer > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2007 Report Share Posted August 6, 2007 I only recommend the "elastomeric" half face repirators (the ones with a rubber facepiece and cartridges). The "filtering facepiece" respirators (the ones where the whole facepiece is a filter) can not be checked to make sure they seal tightly each time you put them on. This is called a seal check and should be done each time you wear them. Its easy to do with the elastomeics but often very difficulat to perform with the filtring facepiece respirators. Re: The Katrina DisasterDear , et.al.:I just learned today that a middle school I am working with to assess their IAQ is planning to have a school trip to Mississippi to help with the post-Katrina cleanup.Considering the potential exposures, can you, or anyone offer any suggestions for appropriate training and personal protection?Thank you, W. Bearg, PE, CIHConcord, MA-------------- Original message ----------------------From: Geyer <mgeyeratg1>> I don�t doubt that there will be long-term suffering from the > affects/effects of Katrina; not only to residents, but responders, > remediators, and the faith-based organizations that responded in kind. > Too few were adequately protected, and some now probably wish they > never went to help. From experience, I knew what to expect and > coached a few responders on what to bring/expect, and a few others I > talked-out of going because they were ill-prepared and lacked > experience. Those that went said it was worse than I mentioned, and > said that if it had not been for my comments, they would have been in > worse shape. I don�t say this to boast or to suggest I knew what to > do; I only speculated. I mention this because so many folks wanted to > help, had the capacity to help, and had resources to help, but were > inadequately prepared to help themselves. (The confined-space> scenario.) Fortunately, human-kind has a great capacity to help others in> need. However, in the Katrina-zone, there was a real lack of control,> coordination and communication � tis typical in disasters. This said, I> take exception to blaming the government, especially the Federal government,> and to suggest prior knowledge or suggest incompetence at that level is> wrong in my opinion. Moreover, the circumstances of 911 and Katrina are far> to different to say there are similarities. It just isn�t. The scale and> scope of Katrina was unprecedented in modern times. Katrina was HUGE and it> covered three states. The network news spent 90% of their air-time on New> Orleans because of an out-spoken, finger-pointing, grand-standing Mayor who> should have acted much more responsibly than he did; my opinion. Whereas,> most of the state of Mississippi was wiped out and it is still hurting,> badly too. The only Katrina similarity maybe, was hurricane Ivan (if I get> this one right) that swept through the Carolinas and emptied hundreds of> animal feed lots into the landscape � covering many square miles with toxic> gumbo. No....9/11 does not even compare to these two events. Ivan caused> the CAFO regulations to be promulgated, which the EPA is now enforcing to> mitigate much of the unrestrained biological load from a similar �toxic> gumbo� event. Katrina further demonstrated another form of destruction � on> urban infrastructure. Until the politicians and land-use planners fully> comprehend the consequences of coastal development in the face of very large> weather systems, it will not improve. There will be repeat Katrina-like> events. There are those in the know (e.g., engineers and geologists) but> these folks are not in elected positions. Because if they were, they would> restrict this type of unrestrained development in high-risk areas.> Historically, in the continental U.S., there are records of bigger> hurricanes, bigger floods, stronger winds, huge volcanic eruptions, and> shattering earthquakes. Even the Los Angeles (California) basin has a> record of at least two very large hurricanes striking the area and changing> the course of rivers. Imagine if it happens in modern times? Will it> happen again...Who knows? Probably. I hope I am prepared. Are you?> Moreover, building below sea-level, in flood zones, and/or downstream of> seemingly small water systems in normal years, is playing Russian Roulette> with Mother Nature. Katrina proves this. There are other areas of the U.S.> that are equally at risk to large-scale, purely natural events.> Furthermore, I do not believe that it is the Federal government�s> responsibility to dictate what can and cannot be built in high risk areas;> it is a local issue and it should stay a local issue. What Katrina showed> us was: the locals want the development and the tax base, the locals knew> the consequences and chose to postpone/ignore action, and the locals whined> and sniveled in the face of disaster and pointed the finger elsewhere> instead of taking responsibility and marshalling resources to limit> damage/injury. What has developed in the U.S. is a loss of personal> responsibility and an entitlement mentality, i.e., it must be someone else�s> fault. It is like a disease. If you want to point a finger, point to those> that allowed development to take shape in the risk-prone zones. To say;> �There is no excuse for this,� is to be a bit naive. There are a lot of> excuses, and the Mayor of New Orleans (and others) is full of excuses, and a> poster-child of a failure to comprehend the probable and the inevitable.> > For what it is worth....> --> Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP> President> KERNTEC Industries, Inc.> Bakersfield, California> www.kerntecindustries.com> > > > On 11/6/06 8:44 AM, "snk1955aol" <snk1955aol> wrote:> > > and ,> > What has happened to some of the occupants of New Orleans in the > > wake of Katrina is so sad and so unnecessary. Worse than losing > > their possessions, I fear there are going to be long term health > > repercussions for many years to come, simply from lack of proper > > warning. There is no excuse for this. The gov't had 4 years of > > studying the health ramifications of the 911 clean up workers to > > understand the health implications of disaster clean up in New Orleans.> > New Orleans is even more tragic in that private citizens, including children,> > were not duly warned of the potential long term effects of the toxic gumbo> > they were inhaling, touching and ingesting. We are all going to be paying for> > this folly for a long time to come in that some, who were productive people,> > will now become burdens on the state.> > Below is an article from Newsweek. It is an interview with Hugh Kaufman,> > Ombudsman, EPA. > > �It�s Incompetence�> > An environmental expert fears that Gulf Coast residents and volunteers exposed> > to deadly toxins could suffer health effects similar to those of 9/11 workers.> > > > Carolyn Kaster / AP> > A woman in Arabi, La., just outside New Orleans, works alone to > > clear wet and moldy items from her home on Feb. 21> > > > WEB EXCLUSIVE> > By > > Newsweek> > Updated: 6:33 a.m. PT Aug 24, 2006> > Aug. 24, 2006 - You�ve seen the awful pictures: rotting houses > > knocked off their foundations, walls mottled with mold, floors > > coated in grimy mud, piles of God-knows-what towering over empty > > streets. For Hurricane Katrina survivors and volunteers sent to > > help, the cleanup isn�t just unpleasant�it�s potentially > > sickening.> > > > Like the 9/11 workers, many of those working in the Katrina rubble > > are being exposed to deadly toxins, says Hugh Kaufman, a senior > > policy analyst for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in > > Washington. With more than 35 years of experience in the field, he > > particularly worries about workers and citizens being exposed to > > harmful contaminants like asbestos > > <http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/health.pdf> and mold > > <http://www.epa.gov/mold/moldresources.html> .> > > > A year ago, Kaufman cautioned residents > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9370519/site/newsweek/> about > > returning to the affected areas too quickly. Now he explains to > > NEWSWEEK�s how dangerous the situation remains. > > Excerpts:> > > > > > > > Online Newshour> > Kaufman: �The government has waived ... rules ... to save > > money�> > > > > > NEWSWEEK: What�s the present environmental situation in the Gulf > > Coast regions hit hardest by Katrina? Hugh Kaufman: We�re dealing > > with the major issue of cleanup, and continuing to assess the > > magnitude of the problem. You basically still have a large amount of > > toxic material ... [and] studies have shown high levels of heavy > > metals in the sediments that have coated the areas. You�ve got a > > tremendous amount of solid waste�over 20 million tons�[in the > > form of] automobiles, trash, etc., that has to be dealt with. And > > you have a problem that a number of us are raising red flags about, > > which is [the lack of] protective equipment for people who are > > involved in cleanup.> > > > CONTINUED > > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/>> > > > 1 | 2 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/> > > | 3 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/3/> | > > 4 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/4/> | > > Next > <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14497763/site/newsweek/page/2/>> > > > > > Sharon Kramer> > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE:This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2007 Report Share Posted August 7, 2007 Alice, yes the filtering facepiece disposables (e.g., N-100 with exhale valve) don't allow for seal checks. however, they are designed for a purpose. I guess my real question should have been "what is that purpose?" Is there any literature out there that supports their use and under what real world conditions. I use one for investigations, even for going into a mold remediation site for a few minutes. they seem useful for nuisance dust. When the seal is incorrect you get the characteristic black line to the nostril, indicating the path of least resistance for the dirt to enter! I also tell people they are quite different than the old style paper dust mask, which I recommend only for sweeping out one's own garage! Armour, M.S.Armour Applied Science, LLCGreen Building Healthy BuildingCleveland, OH "The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them." A.Einstein"If having endured much, we at last asserted our 'right to know' and if,knowing, we have concluded that we are being asked to take senseless andfrightening risks, then we should no longer accept the counsel of thosewho tell us that we must fill our world with poisonous chemicals, weshould look around and see what other course is open to us." CarsonGet a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.