Rock Products is the aggregates industry's leading source for market analysis and technology solutions, delivering critical content focusing on aggregates-processing equipment; operational efficiencies; management best practices; comprehensive market
Issue link: https://rock.epubxp.com/i/77035
Diesel Exhaust Study Clouds The Air By Mark Savit and Scott E. Stewart Diesel engines are indispensible to our economy. Diesel power is durable, effi‐ cient and very versatile. Diesel engines power a diverse fleet of vehicles and equipment, including cars and light‐ duty trucks, transit and school buses, long‐haul trucks, heavy off‐road equip‐ ment, locomotives, ships and emer‐ gency power generation equipment. Diesel power touches virtually every sector of our economy and nonroad diesel engines are essential to the indus‐ tries that are the backbone of our nation – including construction, mining, farm‐ ing, industrial, railroad transportation, port and marine transportation, and air‐ port services industries. Since the mid‐ 1990s, diesel engine and emission control technology has improved signifi‐ cantly as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has imposed ever‐tight‐ ening emission control and fuel stan‐ dards pursuant to its Clean Air Act authority. In its most recent nonroad diesel rule‐ making, EPA estimated that standards imposed for nonroad land‐based diesel engines typically used in construction, agricultural, industrial and mining op‐ erations will achieve particulate matter (PM) reductions in excess of 95 per‐ cent. As a result of a variety of pro‐ grams, including access to funding under the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act, EPA's National Clean Diesel Cam‐ paign is effectively addressing older diesel engine emissions without resort to job killing new regulation. Ironically, against this backdrop, the Na‐ tional Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), released the Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study (DEMS) in 2012, a deeply flawed and expensive 42 ROCKproducts • AUGUST 2012 endeavor to examine the potential health effect of diesel exhaust exposure on miners working in nonmetal mines dating back over a half century. Increased Risk NIOSH and NCI concluded that there is an increased risk of lung cancer death as levels of exposure to diesel exhaust increase. Even after acknowledging that the data from the study are not sufficient to estimate the risk of low level diesel exhaust exposure on the general population, the NCI press re‐ lease asserts that the DEMS findings "suggest that the risks may extend to other workers exposed to diesel ex‐ haust in the U.S. and abroad, and to people living in urban areas where diesel exhaust levels are elevated." Although NIOSH and NCI attempted to eliminate certain confounding factors by focusing on nonmetal mines, the DEMS does not adequately address other confounding factors including how cigarette smoke and non‐diesel airborne pollutants impact workers' cancer risks, the use of carbon monox‐ ide and horsepower as surrogates for diesel exhaust, and modeling 1998‐ 2001 air survey data to the 1947‐1997 study period where no actual diesel air monitoring data existed. A particularly glaring issue is that the DEMS concludes that the risk of lung cancer tapered off for heavy smokers in the highest exhaust exposure group. The science has been called into ques‐ tion and the process undertaken by the DEMS researchers has been opaque. Even in the face of congressional de‐ mands, NIOSH and NCI have failed on numerous occasions to disclose data and analysis relied upon for the DEMS conclusions. A Deeply Flawed Study Continues To Be Relied Upon By Policymakers And Advocates. Ripple Effect The ripple effect from this deeply flawed study, whose methods and analysis were developed behind closed doors and away from public scrutiny, is already being felt both nationally and internationally. On June 12, 2012, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the United Nation's World Health Organization upgraded its diesel exhaust classification to "car‐ cinogenic to humans," citing DEMS. Al‐ though IARC claims that its evaluations do not directly recommend legislation or regulation, it recognizes that the evaluations are designed to be used by national and international health and environmental regulatory authorities in "making their risk assessments and taking preventative action." In fact, in the United States, IARC find‐ ings are much more powerful. Al‐ though not subject to notice and comment rulemaking or other stan‐ dard public scrutiny, nor related to cur‐ rent diesel engine clean technology, IARC findings directly affect compa‐ nies' Hazard Communication Reporting responsibilities. Manufacturers, im‐ porters and employers are required to treat IARC findings as a source "estab‐ lishing that a chemical is a carcinogen . . . for hazard communication pur‐ poses." 29 C.F.R. §1910.1200(d)(4). In addition to current and potential regulatory burdens associated with re‐ vising MSDSs, IARC's reliance on the DEMS creates "evidence" that may be used by plaintiffs' lawyers. The first such lawsuit relying on the IARC find‐ ing, and the DEMS study that informed it, was filed in a California court against three of the world's largest integrated www.rockproducts.com