skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Managing asbestos: Ten costly sins

Abstract

This article describes how to build an ongoing, continuous, and improved asbestos management program. Asbestos management is one of the toughest jobs facing a plant or environmental engineer today; even seasoned engineers can make mistakes. Much confusion exists about how best to manage this issue, especially in plant settings. Whether the company is small, medium, or large, asbestos has the power to steal from profits if not managed properly. To help POWER readers examine their current asbestos management programs, here are 10 common errors that could be stopped or avoided by practicing preventive techniques. The 10 costly sins presented are not mutually exclusive, and they certainly are not all-inclusive. They are offered as a way to stimulate ideas on how to build an ongoing, continuous, and improved asbestos management program. These include Sin 1: No written policy. Sin 2: Lack of corporate guidance. Sin 3: Not complying with regulations. Sin 4: Not worrying about other respirable fibers. Sin 5: Lawsuits--not culpable. Sin 6: No visible emissions, no problems. Sin 7: Managing asbestos manually.

Authors:
;
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
5944734
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Power; (United States); Journal Volume: 137:1
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION; ASBESTOS; POLLUTION CONTROL; ELECTRIC UTILITIES; PLANNING; AIR QUALITY; INDOOR AIR POLLUTION; MAINTENANCE; AIR POLLUTION; CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; POLLUTION; PUBLIC UTILITIES 320107* -- Energy Conservation, Consumption, & Utilization-- Building Systems-- (1987-)

Citation Formats

Denson, F.A., and Onderick, W.A.. Managing asbestos: Ten costly sins. United States: N. p., 1993. Web.
Denson, F.A., & Onderick, W.A.. Managing asbestos: Ten costly sins. United States.
Denson, F.A., and Onderick, W.A.. 1993. "Managing asbestos: Ten costly sins". United States. doi:.
@article{osti_5944734,
title = {Managing asbestos: Ten costly sins},
author = {Denson, F.A. and Onderick, W.A.},
abstractNote = {This article describes how to build an ongoing, continuous, and improved asbestos management program. Asbestos management is one of the toughest jobs facing a plant or environmental engineer today; even seasoned engineers can make mistakes. Much confusion exists about how best to manage this issue, especially in plant settings. Whether the company is small, medium, or large, asbestos has the power to steal from profits if not managed properly. To help POWER readers examine their current asbestos management programs, here are 10 common errors that could be stopped or avoided by practicing preventive techniques. The 10 costly sins presented are not mutually exclusive, and they certainly are not all-inclusive. They are offered as a way to stimulate ideas on how to build an ongoing, continuous, and improved asbestos management program. These include Sin 1: No written policy. Sin 2: Lack of corporate guidance. Sin 3: Not complying with regulations. Sin 4: Not worrying about other respirable fibers. Sin 5: Lawsuits--not culpable. Sin 6: No visible emissions, no problems. Sin 7: Managing asbestos manually.},
doi = {},
journal = {Power; (United States)},
number = ,
volume = 137:1,
place = {United States},
year = 1993,
month = 1
}
  • Air pollution from the burning of wood fuels has become a concern to the wood stove industry and to the EPA. Wood smoke contains a mixture of carbon monoxide, volatile organic gases, and polycyclic organic matter which reduces the air quality and exposes increasing numbers of residential neighborhoods to heavy levels of these hazardous pollutants. Two states and numerous municipalities have developed emission standards for new stoves or have banned wood-burning during certain weather conditions. The EPA plans to propose national emission standards during January 1987 and promulgate final rules by January 1988. Catalytic converters for wood stoves have beenmore » tested with good results: reduction of particulate emissions by as much as 86%; increase in thermal efficiency of 20 to 30%; and elimination of 85 to 90% of the creosote accumulation in the flue.« less
  • With over 12 million wood heaters in use in 1986 and 800,000 more being sold each year, there is a tremendous amount of carbon monoxide and other pollutants being released into the atmosphere. This has resulted in the need for emission standards for wood stoves. Environmentalists see a national standard as the way to abide by 1977 amendments to the Clean Air Act. Last March, EPA established a committee of representatives from the wood-heating industry, state governments, and environmental and consumer groups to negotiate provisions of the standard. The committee came up with a proposed standard at the end ofmore » January, 1987. The committee expects to come up with a final decision on the standard by January 31, 1988.« less
  • This study deals with current modes in SNS and SINS junctions. The temperature characteristic of the Josephson current is determined by the phase-coherent spectrum of discrete states of quasiparticles in the normal layer. Transient characteristics of an SINS junction in an alternating electromagnetic field are also established here, and it is shown that the impedance is a nonmonotonic function of the frequency. The oscillation period is found from the relation dirac constant..omega../2..pi.. = 2..delta..E/sub n/, with ..delta..E/sub n/ denoting the difference between energy levels is the discrete spectrum.
  • Current states in SINS junctions are investigated for non-zero voltages across the junction. The features of the volt-current characteristics of the junction are examined, which are determined by the presence of discrete energy levels of quasi-particles within the normal interlayer.
  • This editorial considers the errors that can occur in the routine practice of radiation protection in the workplace. This work provides a tool and an incentive for radiation protection professionals to mentally examine their radiation protection responsibilities to identify actions they may take to improve their part of the practice of radiation protection for the benefit of humankind. We introduce a rating tool that is patterned after the IAEA International Nuclear Event Scale.?Sins? discussed include ignorance of the radiological situation, failure to integrate safety management, disabling safety interlocks, warning devices, access controls, omission of''reasonable'' from the policy of''as low asmore » reasonably achievable'' (ALARA), extrapolation of risk beyond reason, using radiation exposure as an excuse for terminating an unwanted pregnancy, escalation of safety requirements beyond reason, failure to average a concentration standard, not responding to concerns (of workers, public, patient s, etc.), over-training, and substitution of prescriptive procedures for judgment. Readers are encouraged to look at their radiation protection activities and judge which ones do not make sense from the viewpoint of protecting people against radiation. It is likely that readers will find more than one radiation protection activity that bears scrutiny.« less