Final Risk Evaluation for Asbestos Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos Systematic Review Supplemental File: Data Quality Evaluation for Consumer Exposure December 2020


LpA United States

Lh|	Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention

Final Risk Evaluation for

Asbestos
Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos

Systematic Review Supplemental File:

Data Quality Evaluation for Consumer Exposure

December 2020

-------
1

2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Table of Contents

Data Type

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Reference

Rohl, A. N.,Langer, A. M.,Wolff, M. S.,Weisman, I.. 1976. Asbestos exposure
during brake lining maintenance and repair. Environmental Research 12

Steinsvag, K.,Bratveit, M.,Moen, B. E.. 2007. Exposure to carcinogens for
defined job categories in Norway's offshore petroleum industry, 1970 to 2005.
Occupational and Environmental Medicine 64

Hosny, G.,Akel, M.. 2006. Assessment of asbestos in drinking water in Alexan-
dria, Egypt. Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association 81

Dodson, R. F.,0'Sullivan, M.,Corn, C. J.. 1996. Relationships between ferrug-
inous bodies and uncoated asbestos fibers in lung tissue. Archives of Environ-
mental Health 51

Khan, A. H.,Ansari, F. A.,Misra, D.,Bhargava, S. K.. 2006. Study of asbestos
fibre levels in and around a brake-lining industry. Journal of Scientific and
Industrial Research 65

Kakooei, H.,Hormozy, M.,Marioryad, H.. 2011. Evaluation of asbestos exposure
during brake repair and replacement. Industrial Health 49

Cely-Garcia, M. F.,Sanchez, M.,Breysse, P. N.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2012. Per-
sonal exposures to asbestos fibers during brake maintenance of passenger vehi-
cles. Annals of Occupational Hygiene 56

Madl, A. K.,Gaffney, S. H.,Balzer, J. L.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2009. Airborne
asbestos concentrations associated with heavy equipment brake removal. Annals
of Occupational Hygiene 53

Blake, C. L.,Johnson, G. T.,Harbison, R. D.. 2009. Airborne asbestos exposure
during light aircraft brake replacement. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacol-
ogy 54

Cely-Garcfa, M. F.,Torres-Duque, C. A.,Duran, M.,Parada, P.,Sarmiento, O.
L.,Breysse, P. N.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2015. Personal exposure to asbestos
and respiratory health of heavy vehicle brake mechanics. Journal of Exposure
Science and Environmental Epidemiology 25

Blake, C. L.,Van Orden, D. R.,Banasik, M.,Harbison, R. D.. 2003. Airborne as-
bestos concentration from brake changing does not exceed permissible exposure
limit. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 38

Page i of vii

-------
3080975
3083368
3084342
3099264

3099353

3099476

3099480
3100008
3278824
3520458
3520524

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Yeung, P.,Patience, K.,Apthorpe, L.,Willcocks, D.. 1999. An Australian study
to evaluate worker exposure to chrysotile in the automotive service industry.
Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene 14

Cheng, V. K.,0'Kelly, F. J.. 1986. Asbestos exposure in the motor vehicle repair
and servicing industry in Hong Kong. Journal of the Society of Occupational

Medicine 36

Langer, A. M.,Maggiore, C. M.,Nicholson, W. J.,Rohl, A. N.,Rubin, I.

B.,Selikoif,	I. J.. 1979. The contamination of Lake Superior with amphibole
gangue minerals. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 330

T. C. Cooper, J. W. Sheehy, D. M. O'Brien, J. D. Mcglothlin, W. F. Todd.
1988. In-depth survey report: Evaluation of brake drum service controls at
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Garages, Cincinnati, Evanston, and Monroe, Ohio
and Covington, Kentucky.

Cooper, T. C.,Sheehy, J. W.,O'Brien, D. M.,McGlothlin, J. D.,Todd, W. F..
1987. In-Depth Survey Report: Evaluation of Brake Drum Service Controls at
United States Postal Service Vehicle Maintenance Facility, Louisville, Kentucky,
Report No. CT-152-11B.

Godbey, F. W.,Cooper, T. C.,Sheehy, J. W.,O'Brien, D. M.,Van Wagenen, H.
D.,McGlothlin, J. D.,Todd, W. F.. 1987. In-Depth Survey Report: Evalua-
tion of Brake Drum Service Controls at United States Postal Service, Vehicle
Maintenance Facility, Nashville, Tennessee, Report No. CT-152-20B.

Sheehy, J. W.,Todd, W. F.,Cooper, T. C.,Van Wagenen, H. D.. 1987. In-Depth
Survey Report: Evaluation of Brake Drum Service Controls at Cincinnati Bell
Maintenance Facility, Fairfax, Ohio, Report No. CT-152-21B.

Kauppinen, T.,Korhonen, K.. 1987. Exposure to Asbestos During Brake Main-
tenance of Automotive Vehicles by Diiferent Methods. American Industrial
Hygiene Association Journal 48

Musthapa, M. S.,Ahmad, I.,Trivedi, A. K.,Rahman, Q.. 2003. Asbestos con-
tamination in biota and abiota in the vicinity of asbestos-cement factory. Bul-
letin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 70

C.	L. Blake, G. S. Dotson, R. D. Harbison. 2006. Assessment of airborne
asbestos exposure during the servicing and handling of automobile asbestos-
containing gaskets. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 45

Cely-Garcfa, M. F.,Curriero, F. C.,Sanchez-Silva, M.,Breysse, P. N.,Giraldo,
M.,Mendez, L.,Torres-Duque, C.,Duran, M.,Gonzalez-Garcfa, M.,Parada,
P.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2016. Estimation of personal exposure to asbestos
of brake repair workers. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epi-
demiology 27

14

16

17

18

20

21

22

23

25

26

30

Page ii of vii

-------
3531131

Monitoring

3531296

3531556

3580912
3610801
3615571

3645882
3646036

3648228

3649985
3655537
3970543
4152071
4152150

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring
Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

L. R. Liukonen, F. W. Weir. 2005. Asbestos exposure from gaskets during
disassembly of a medium duty diesel engine. Regulatory Toxicology and Phar-
macology 41

33

Paustenbach, D. J.,Madl, A. K.,Donovan, E.,Clark, K.,Fehling, K.,Lee, T. C..
2006. Chrysotile asbestos exposure associated with removal of automobile ex-
haust systems (ca. 1945-1975) by mechanics: results of a simulation study.
Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology 16

Weir, F. W.,Tolar, G.,Meraz, L. B.. 2001. Characterization of vehicular brake
service personnel exposure to airborne asbestos and particulate. Applied Occu-
pational and Environmental Hygiene 16

Pitt, R.. 1988. ASBESTOS AS AN URBAN AREA POLLUTANT. Journal of
Water Pollution Control Federation 60

Hickish, D. E.,Knight, K. L.. 1970. Exposure to asbestos during brake mainte-
nance. Annals of Occupational Hygiene 13

Rohl, A. N.,Langer, A. M.,Klimentidis, R.,Wolff, M. S.,Seilikoff, I. J.. 1977.
Asbestos content of dust encountered in brake maintenance and repair. Pro-
ceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 70

Niosh,. 1976. Preliminary industrial hygiene survey at Auto Brake Clinic,
Cincinnati, Ohio. 3

Lorimer, W. V.,Rohl, A. N.,Miller, A.,Nicholson, W. J.,Selikoff, I. J.. 1976. As-
bestos exposure of brake repair workers in United States. Mount Sinai Journal
of Medicine 43

Sheehy, J. W.,Godbey, F. W.,Cooper, T. C.,Lenihan, K. L.,Van Wagenen, H.
D.,McGlothlin, J. D.. 1987. In-Depth Survey Report: Control Technology
for Brake Drum Service Operations at Ohio Department of Transportation,
Maintenance Facility, Lebanon, Ohio, CT-152-18b.

Oliver, T.,Murr, L. E.. 1977. An electron microscope study of asbestiform fiber
concentrations in Rio Grande valley water supplies. 69

Sheehy, J. W.,Cooper, T. C.,O'Brien, D. M.,McGlothlin, J. D.,Froehlich, P. A..
1989. Control of asbestos exposure during brake drum service.

Crandall, M. S.,Fleeger, A. K.. 1989. Health hazard evaluation report no.
HETA 88-372-1953, Barbados Ministry of Health, Bridgetown, Barbados.

Equitable Environmental Health, Inc. 1977. Dust exposures during the cutting
and machining of asbestos/cement pipe, additional studies.

Roberts, D. R.. 1980. Industrial hygiene report: Asbestos at Allied Brake Shop,
Cincinnati, OH.

36

37

38

40

42

44

46

48

49

50

51

52

53

Page iii of vii

-------
4152152

Monitoring

Experimental

3093966	Experimental

3093967

Experimental

3531556

Experimental

3583030

Experimental

3585095

Experimental

Databases Not Unique to a Chemical

3970045
3970091

3970094

3970095

3970096

3970097

Completed Exposure Assessments

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

Databases Not Unique to a Chemi-
cal

Roberts, D. R.. 1980. Industrial hygiene survey report of the New York City
sanitation, traffic, and police brake servicing facilities, Queens, New York.

Sahmel, J.,Barlow, C. A.,Gaifney, S.,Avens, H. J.,Madl, A.,Henshaw, J.,Unice,
K. en,Galbraith, D.,Derose, G.,Lee, R. J.,Van Orden, D.,Sanchez, M.,Zock,
M.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2016. Airborne asbestos take-home exposures during
handling of chrysotile-contaminated clothing following simulated full shift work-
place exposures. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology
26

Sahmel, J.,Barlow, C. A.,Simmons, B.,Gaffney, S. H.,Avens, H. J.,Madl, A.
K.,Henshaw, J.,Lee, R. J.,Van Orden, D.,Sanchez, M.,Zock, M.,Paustenbach,
D. J.. 2014. Evaluation of Take-Home Exposure and Risk Associated with the
Handling of Clothing Contaminated with Chrysotile Asbestos. Risk Analysis

34

Weir, F. W.,Tolar, G.,Meraz, L. B.. 2001. Characterization of vehicular brake
service personnel exposure to airborne asbestos and particulate. Applied Occu-
pational and Environmental Hygiene 16

Inoko, M.,Ariiso, K.. 1982. DETERMINATION OF CHRYSOTILE FIBERS
IN RESIDUAL DUST ON ROAD VEHICLE BRAKE DRUMS. Environmental
Pollution Series B: Chemical and Physical 4

Rowson, D. M.. 1978. CHRYSOTILE CONTENT OF WEAR DEBRIS OF
BRAKE LININGS. Wear 47

U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. STORET: Asbestos.

U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Abestos.
U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Amosite.
U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Tremolite.
U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Anthophyllite.
U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Chrysotile.

54

56

56

58

60

62

64

65

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

Page iv of vii

-------
71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Mauskopf, J. A.. 1987. Projections of cancer risks attributable to future expo-
sure to asbestos. Risk Analysis 7

Esmen, N. A.,Erdal, S.. 1990. Human occupational and nonoccupational expo-
sure to fibers. Environmental Health Perspectives 88

Millette, J. R.,Craun, G. F.,Stober, J. A.,Kraemer, D. F.,Tousignant, H.
G.,Hildago, E.,Duboise, R. L.,Benedict, J.. 1983. Epidemiology study of the
use of asbestos-cement pipe for the distribution of drinking water in Escambia
County, Florida. Environmental Health Perspectives 53

Millette, J. R.,Clark, P. J.,Stober, J.,Rosenthal, M.. 1983. Asbestos in water
supplies of the United States. Environmental Health Perspectives 53

Millette, J. R.,Clark, P. J.,Pansing, M. F.,Twyman, J. D.. 1980. Concentration
and size of asbestos in water supplies. Environmental Health Perspectives 34

Suta, B. E.,Levine, R. J.. 1979. Non-occupational asbestos emissions and
exposures. 1

Finkelstein, M. M.. 2013. The analysis of asbestos count data with
"nondetects": the example of asbestos fiber concentrations in the
lungs of brake workers. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 56

Richter, R. 0.,Finley, B. L.,Paustenbach, D. J.,Williams, P. R. D.,Sheehan, P.
J.. 2009. An evaluation of short-term exposures of brake mechanics to asbestos
during automotive and truck brake cleaning and machining activities. Journal
of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology 19

Donovan, E. P.,Donovan, B. L.,Sahmel, J.,Scott, P. K.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2011.
Evaluation of bystander exposures to asbestos in occupational settings: a review
of the literature and application of a simple eddy diifusion model. Critical
Reviews in Toxicology 41

Finley, B. L.,Pierce, J. S.,Paustenbach, D. J.,Scott, L. L.,Lievense, L.,Scott, P.
K.,Galbraith, D. A.. 2012. Malignant pleural mesothelioma in US automotive
mechanics: reported vs expected number of cases from 1975 to 2007. Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology 64

Madl, A. K.,Clark, K.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2007. Exposure to airborne asbestos
during removal and installation of gaskets and packings: a review of published
and unpublished studies. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part
B: Critical Reviews 10

Paustenbach, D. J.,Finley, B. L.,Lu, E. T.,Brorby, G. P.,Sheehan, P. J.. 2004.
Environmental and occupational health hazards associated with the presence
of asbestos in brake linings and pads (1900 to present): a "state-of-the-
art" review. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B:
Critical Reviews 7

Page v of vii

-------
83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment
Completed Exposure Assessment

. 1977. IARC monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals
to man: asbestos. 14

Finley, B. L.,Richter, R. 0.,Mowat, F. S.,Mlynarek, S.,Paustenbach, D.
J.,Warmerdam, J. M.,Sheehan, P. J.. 2007. Cumulative asbestos exposure for
US automobile mechanics involved in brake repair (circa 1950s-2000). Journal
of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology 17

Naylor, L. M.. 1989. Asbestos in sludge - a significant risk. BioCycle 30

Ganor, E.,Fischbein, A.,Brenner, S.,Froom, P.. 1992. Extreme airborne
asbestos concentrations in a public building. British Journal of Industrial
Medicine 49

Atsdr,. 2001. Toxicological profile for asbestos (update).

Paustenbach, D. J.,Richter, R. O.,Finley, B. L.,Sheehan, P. J.. 2003. An evalu-
ation of the historical exposures of mechanics to asbestos in brake dust. Applied
Occupational and Environmental Hygiene 18

Webber, J. S.,Covey, J. R.. 1991. Asbestos in water. Critical Reviews in
Environmental Control 21

del Piano, M.,Palagiano, C.,Rimatori, V.. 1989. Asbestos hazards in the city
of Rome, Italy. Social Science & Medicine 29

Anonymous,. 1975. Current Intelligence Bulletin 5 Asbestos. Asbestos Ex-
posure during Servicing of Motor Vehicle Brake and Clutch Assemblies (with
reference package). 5

U.S, E. P. A.. 1999. Methodology for conducting risk assessments at asbestos
superfund sites Part 2: Technical background document.

ToxNet Hazardous Substances Data, Bank. 2017. HSDB: Asbestos.

Iarc,. 2012. ARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to hu-
mans: Asbestos (Chrysotile, amosite, crocidolite, tremolite, actinolite, and an-
thophyllite).

Niosh,. 1976. Revised recommended asbestos standard.

Nicnas,. 1999. Chrysotile asbestos: priority exisiting chemical no. 9.

Oehha,. 2003. Public health goals for chemicals in drinking water asbestos.
Atsdr,. 2001. Toxicological profile for asbestos.

P. E. I. Associates. 1985. Asbestos dust control in brake maintenance. Draft.

Page vi of vii

-------
4152042

Completed Exposure Assessment

4152047
4152099
4152104
4152169

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

Completed Exposure Assessment

4152228	Completed Exposure Assessment

Survey

1005969	Survey

Modeling

3081596	Modeling

Niehs,. 1982. Control of toxic substances in the atmosphere: Asbestos (Prelim-
inary draft).

101

P. E. I. Associates. 1987. Cost of engineering controls for brake maintenance/	102

repair.

Bragg, G.. 1986. Exposure to asbestos: An analysis of the technical aspects of	103

the Environmental Protection Agency proposal to ban and phase out asbestos.

Osha,. 1986. Final regulatory impact and regulatory flexibility analysis of the	104

revised asbestos standard.

Cogley, D.,Krusell, N.,McInnes, R.,Anderson, P.,Bell, R.. 1982. Life cycle of	105

asbestos in commercial and industrial use including estimates of releases to air,
water, and land.

Wright, M. D.. 1984. Phase I report: Regulatory analysis of the proposed	106

OSHA standard on asbestos.

107

U.S, E. P. A.. 1987. Household solvent products: A national usage survey.	107

108

N. Plato, G. Tornling, C. Hogstedt, S. Krantz. 1995. An index of past asbestos	108

exposure as applied to car and bus mechanics. Annals of Occupational Hygiene

39

Page vii of vii

-------
Refer to Appendix E of ' Application of Systematic Review in TSCA Risk Evaluations' at https://www.epa.gov for more information of evaluation
procedures and parameters.

Page 1 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Rohl, A. N.,Langer, A. M.,Wolff, M. S.,Weisman, I.. 1976. Asbestos exposure during brake lining maintenance and repair.

Environmental Research.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	176

Domain	Metric	Ratingt Score	('< >111t r ic111 s

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:	Sampling Methodology	High	1

Metric 2:	Analytical Methodology	Medium	2

Metric 3:	Biomarker Selection	N/A	N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
Medium

1

3

3 <5 per scenario

2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Low

2

3

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes



I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Not many details provided, but used an OSHA method to col-
lect inhalation samples.

Method cited, but not osha or astm. No LOQ.

Page 2 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Steinsvag, K.,Bratveit, M.,Moen, B. E.. 2007. Exposure to carcinogens for defined job categories in Norway's offshore

petroleum industry, f 970 to 2005. Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 524541

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain f: Reliability

Metric f:

Sampling Methodology

Low

only stationary samples

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

Describes the use of electron microscope but did not provide

any other details of the methodology.

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Norway

Metric 5:

Currency

Medium

5-15 years old

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

small sample size (2 samples)

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Low

oil industry brake band exposure

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results Low 3 Multiple chemicals being summarized gives less analysis to as-

bestos

Metric 9: Quality Assurance Low 3 Not well described

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Needs more discussion specific to asbestos and only 2 samples

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.6

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 3 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Hosny, G.,Akel, M.. 2006. Assessment of asbestos in drinking water in Alexandria, Egypt. Journal of the Egyptian Public

Health Association.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 625815

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1

Sampling Methodology

Low

limited info

Metric 2

Analytical Methodology

Medium

limited info SEM

Metric 3

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4

Geographic Area

High

Alexandria, Egypt

Metric 5

Currency

Low

Metric 6

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

number actually sampled not reported, but do know it was

more than 1

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Low

drinking water, egypt

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Low

no concentration table

Metric 9

Quality Assurance

Low

no discussion

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

some discussion of various locations, different methods

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.6

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 4 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Dodson, R. F.,0'Sullivan, M.,Corn, C. J.. 1996. Relationships between ferruginous bodies and uncoated asbestos fibers in

lung tissue. Archives of Environmental Health.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 758913

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

Small sample size; grouped by lung cone, not previous work

history

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

Generally accepted method

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

America

Metric 5:

Currency

Unacceptable

No discussion of timing of sample collection

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Medium

Sample size noted but small group per exposure set

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Unacceptable

relevant: pipeworker and brake repair. The relevant data is

lung tissue data over time for workers. This does not relate to

exposure from consumers

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

Relatively complete analysis

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

lab blanks and background recorded

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Needs more discussion of variability and uncertainty regarding

linking outcomes and exposures, i.e. recorded work history

Overall Quality Determination

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score**: 2.4.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, two of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency,
t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 5 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Khan, A. H.,Ansari, F. A.,Misra, D.,Bhargava, S. K.. 2006. Study of asbestos fibre levels in and around a brake-lining

industry. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 786483

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^-

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Indian standards used; good description of equipment used
acetone and PCM technique

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Low

India

Sampling took place in 2002
description of various sampling areas

More occupational than consumer, but potentially relevant ex-
posure via ambient sampling

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Low
N/A

N/A

Two tables of raw data but very little discussion
No discussion of QAQC methods: no blanks, etc.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Unacceptable

No discussion of the topic

Overall Quality Determination

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score**: 2.5.

Extracted

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency,
t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 6 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Kakooei, H.,Hormozy, M.,Marioryad, H.. 2011. Evaluation of asbestos exposure during brake repair and replacement. Indus-
trial Health.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	1082293

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology	Medium 2 Collection of all airborne asbestos samples consistent with

NIOSH method 7400. Not calibrated

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology	Medium 2 Collection of all airborne asbestos samples consistent with

NIOSH method 7400 (PCM). Method sensitivity reported.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection	N/A	N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1

Study conducted in 30 brake & replacement auto shops (cars
& trucks) in Iran

Metric 5:

Currency

Medium

2

>5-15 yrs old; samples collected between July 2008 & Decem-
ber 2008

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High

1

large sample size (60 personal air samples collected in the auto
shops from 32 cars and 28 trucks)

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Low

3

Minimal description of the process carried out during brake
repair in the auto shops.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results	Medium 2 Geometric means and ranges of airborne asbestos fiber con-

centrations provided in Table 1 and concentrations by season
(Summer and Autumn) listed in Table 2. No supplemental or
raw data are available.

Metric 9: Quality Assurance	Low	3 Controls, recoveries not reported

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty	Medium 2

Overall Quality Determination

Medium 2.0

Extracted

Yes



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 7 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Cely-Garcia, M. F.,Sanchez, M.,Breysse, P. N.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2012. Personal exposures to asbestos fibers during brake

maintenance of passenger vehicles. Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	2560364

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High

N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
High

1

2	>5-15 years old

1
1

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

High
Medium

1

2

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.2

Extracted



Yes



I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 8 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Madl, A. K.,Gaffney, S. H.,Balzer, J. L.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2009. Airborne asbestos concentrations associated with heavy

equipment brake removal. Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 2591959

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology High 1

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology High 1

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A

>5 - 15 years ago

somewhat relevant exposure scenario for construction equip-
ment

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:
Metric 7:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Medium 2

Spatial and Temporal Variability High 1

Exposure Scenario Medium 2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

High
Medium

Limited previous studies on construction equipment for com-
parison

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

some discussion based on limited previous studies

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 9 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Blake, C. L.,Johnson, G. T.,Harbison, R. D.. 2009. Airborne asbestos exposure during light aircraft brake replacement.

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	2594497

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High

N/A

1
1

N/A

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Low

1

3

2

3	surrogate - airplane brakes

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Low

2

3

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.9

Extracted



No



I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 10 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Cely-Garcia, M. F.,Torres-Duque, C. A.,Duran, M.,Parada, P.,Sarmiento, O. L.,Breysse, P. N.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2015.

Personal exposure to asbestos and respiratory health of heavy vehicle brake mechanics. Journal of Exposure Science and
Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3078032

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High
High

N/A

1
1

N/A

Good description of methods, equipment used, etc
Listed well known methods

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6

Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Medium

High

Colombia

Data collection in early 2012

More than 10 workers total for personal monitoring would be
better

Very relevant exposure scenario

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

High
Medium

Extensive discussion

QC and background for personal samples were taken, but no
control group for voluntary respiratory health study

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

High

Extensive discussion

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.2

Extracted

Yes

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 11 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Blake, C. L.,Van Orden, D. R.,Banasik, M.,Harbison, R. D.. 2003. Airborne asbestos concentration from brake changing does

not exceed permissible exposure limit. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3080338

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Biomarker Selection

High 1 Protocol defined sampling methods to be used in tests.

High 1 Air samples analyzed by two methods NIOSH Methods 7400

(PCM) and 7402 (TEM). Reporting detection limits for air-
borne dust

N/A N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area High 1

Currency Medium 2

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium 2

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

Low

Former auto repair facility in New Kensington, PA
>5-15 yrs old; pub date 2003

Indoor air samples collected at seven locations within building
as well as personal air samples collected within the mechanic's
breathing zone

Table 2 outlines procedures and microenvironment (date, tem-
perature, humidity)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

Personal air fiber test data provided in Table 4. Results are
reported as average airbone fiber concentration during the du-
ration of each test and as an 8-h TWA.

Test 1 was a baseline test involving removal and replacement
of brake shoes with no additional manipulation of the brake
shoes.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

No standard deviations reported some manipulations of brake
repair not captured. Supplemental data not available.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

Continued on next

page

Page 12 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type
Hero ID

Blake, C. L.,Van Orden, D. R.,Banasik, M.,Harbison, R. D.. 2003. Airborne asbestos concentration from brake changing does

not exceed permissible exposure limit. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Monitoring

3080338

Domain

Metric Rating^ Score Comments*



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 13 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Yeung, P.,Patience, K.,Apthorpe, L.,Willcocks, D.. 1999. An Australian study to evaluate worker exposure to chrysotile in

the automotive service industry. Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3080975

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Medium 2 Sampling methodology discussed briefly. Nine typical estab-

lishments in the Sydney metropolitan area, including five ser-
vice garages (four for passenger and light commercial vehicles,
one for buses and coaches), three brake bonding workshops,
and one gasket processing workshop participated in this study.
The three brake bonding workshops and one gasket process-
ing workshop were the only workshops in the industry that
still processed asbestos-containing products and were located
in the Sydney metropolitan area. The study methodology in-
volved air monitoring to estimate exposure to chrysotile at
work when chrysotile-containing friction materials were worked
on, in relation to the type of control measures used, and sizing
of airborne fibers by transmission electron microscopy (TEM).
Task-specific personal and area air samples were collected at a
fiowrate of 2 liters per minute on 25-mm-diameter 0.8 um pore
size Millipore mixed cellulose ester membrane filters housed in
anti-static cowls, in accordance with the Australian standard
membrane filter method. Area samples were taken at fixed lo-
cations in the vicinity of the work tasks, and between one and
two meters above floor level. Single sample durations were se-
lected not to exceed two hours, such that only a maximum of
240 liters of air would be collected.

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 Analytical methodology discussed. This approach has resulted

in a practical detection limit of around 0.05 f/mL (or 10 fibers/
100 graticule areas) by Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCM). In
addition to PCM analysis, 16 samples in half filters were se-
lected for TEM analysis on a Phillips CM12 at 8800 X magni-
fication. These 16 samples included all personal samples and
some area samples with relatively high PCM fiber readings.
TEM analysis was performed to identify asbestos fibers too
small to be detected by PCM. Fibrous minerals were identi-
fied by selected area electron diffraction (SAED) and energy-
dispersive X-ray analysis (EDAX), and sized by length and di-
ameter. The grid openings used in TEM were sized by optical
microscopy so that the TEM results could be reported in fibers
per equivalent Walton Beckett graticule area and directly com-
pared to the PCM results. Due to the higher resolution power
of TEM, respirable fibers of all dimensions were recorded (res-
olution limit was about 0.02 1 m in diameter).

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A Biomarker is not used.

Continued on next page

Page 14 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yeung, P.,Patience, K.,Apthorpe, L.,Willcocks, D.. 1999. An Australian study to evaluate worker exposure to chrysotile in

the automotive service industry. Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3080975

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^



Domain 2: Representativeness









Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1

Australia, Sydney

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

3

>15 years (1996)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Medium

2

Small to moderate sample size (1-6) No replicates.

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Brake and clutch service operations, brake bonding operations,
and gasket processing discussed.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity







Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

2

No supplemental or raw data. Table II reports fiber concentra-
tions (f/mL) GM and range for PCM for personal air samples
for each establishment. Table III reports GM-fiber concentra-
tions (f/mL) for PCM and TEM (chrysotile).

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

2



Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty







Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

PCM is the international regulatory method for the determi-
nation of airborne asbestos fiber concentrations. However, as
shown in this study, PCM is not able to detect the very many
small fibers (< 0.2 1 m in diameter) generated by high en-
ergy shearing processes (e.g., cutting, grinding, and sanding)
of asbestos-containing materials. For this type of processes,
PCM may underestimate exposure and thus the health risk;

and TEM should be used as an adjunct to PCM in any regular
air monitoring program.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium 2.0

Extracted

Yes



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 15 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Cheng, V. K.,0'Kelly, F. J.. 1986. Asbestos exposure in the motor vehicle repair and servicing industry in Hong Kong.

Journal of the Society of Occupational Medicine.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3083368

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

High

12 garages chosen at random from Factory Inspectorate; de-

scription includes placement of individual and task. Occupa-

tional used as surrogate for Consumer.

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

PCM as recommended by Asbestos Research Council. NIOSH

is the standard now. PCM is a NIOSH test, so analytical

methodology is appropriate.

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Hong Kong

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

> 15 years old

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

High

personal samples and static samples within 5 m of activity;

good sample size per approach

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

High

very relevant: vehicle repair

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

High

No raw data but has range and mean : High; absence raw data

is not a concern.

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

Minimal discussion :: No discussion of controls, e.g., flow rate

calibration

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

good comparison to other study outcomes :: min/max/mean

provided. SD/quantiles not provided

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 16 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Langer, A. M.,Maggiore, C. M.,Nicholson, W. J.,Rohl, A. N.,Rubin, I. B.,Selikoff, I. J.. 1979. The contamination of Lake

Superior with amphibole gangue minerals. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3084342

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low

Medium

N/A

3
2

N/A

Sampling methodology published elsewhere
Described but older method

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
Medium

3
3

Lake Superior
>15 yrs old

Small sample size for samples drawn from Lake Superior

Somewhat relevant: drinking water drawn from contaminated
surface water

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Medium

2
2

Lack of statistical analysis
Minimal discussion

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Minimal discussion

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.2

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 17 of 111

-------
Study Citation: T. C. Cooper, J. W. Sheehy, D. M. O'Brien, J. D. Mcglothlin, W. F. Todd. 1988. In-depth survey report: Evaluation of
brake drum service controls at Cincinnati Gas and Electric Garages, Cincinnati, Evanston, and Monroe, Ohio and Covington,
Kentucky.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3099264

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Medium

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

N/A

Personal air samples for asbestos were collected in duplicate on
25 mm, 0.8 um pore size cellulose ester membrane filters at 2.5
to 3.0 1pm using a DuPont P-4000 pump for the duration of one
brake job, or 2 hours, whichever was longer. (Brake Jobs 1 and
2 were collected on one set of filters.) The minimum volume
collected (300 liters) allowed a limit of detection of approxi-
mately 0.005 fibers/cc by Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCH)
analysis. Area air samples for asbestos were also collected on 25
mm, 0.8 um pore size cellulose ester filters. Two area samples
were collected at the fender and the axle (source samples) at
approximately 7.0 1pm using rotary vane high volume pumps
for the duration of one brake job or 2 hours, whichever was
longer. The source samples were used to measure fibers escap-
ing into the working environment during the brake service and
repair activity.

All filter air samples were analyzed by PCM according to
NIOSH Method 7400. In addition to PCM analysis, approxi-
mately 82 percent of these samples were analyzed by light-field
Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM). To facilitate analy-
sis by PCM and TEM on the same samples, the direct transfer
method of sample preparation described by Burdett and Rood
was used.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area

Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High 1 Cincinnati, Evanston, and Monroe, Ohio and Covington, Ken-

tucky

Low 3 >15 years old

Medium 2 Adequate discussion and sample size

Medium 2 Exposure during brake work using different dust control tech-
niques

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Medium

Acceptable discussion of the results

Continued on next page

Page 18 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: T. C. Cooper, J. W. Sheehy, D. M. O'Brien, J. D. Mcglothlin, W. F. Todd. 1988. In-depth survey report: Evaluation of
brake drum service controls at Cincinnati Gas and Electric Garages, Cincinnati, Evanston, and Monroe, Ohio and Covington,
Kentucky.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3099264

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Field blanks were prepared for each sampling date and submit-
ted for PCM and TEM analysis. The minimum volume col-
lected (840 liters) allowed a limit of detection of 0.002 fibers/
cc by PCM. Two additional area samples were collected in the
general garage area (background) at approximately 7.0 1pm for
up to 4 hours encompassing pre- and post-brake job activities.
These samples were used as "background" samples to deter-
mine effects of general shop cleanliness and overall containment
effectiveness of the controls. The minimum volume collected
(1,000 liters) allowed a limit of detection of 0.002 fibers/cc.
Two other area samples were collected out-of-doors at 2.5 to
3.0 1pm using battery powered pumps for 3 to 8 hours. These
outdoor (ambient) samples were collected at 7.0 1pm using a
high volume pump. Ambient samples were used to determine
environmental levels of asbestos. The minimum volume col-
lected (400 liters) allowed a limit of detection of 0.004 fibers/
cc. (One pair of area samples, one pair of background samples,
and one pair of ambient samples were collected for Brake Jobs
1 and 2. All other brake jobs have one set of filters for each
brake job.)

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

TEM Personal sample results (Tables 5 and B-l) showed a ma-
jor difference between vehicles having brake drums greater than
12" in diameter and those having smaller brake drums. One
possible explanation is that the brake surface area is greater
resulting in a greater amount of brake dust that needs to be
controlled. Also, the wheel well area is larger making the area
to be sprayed less accessible.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0

Extracted

Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 19 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Cooper, T. C.,Sheehy, J. W.,O'Brien, D. M.,McGlothIin, J. D.,Todd, W. F.. 1987. In-Depth Survey Report: Evaluation of
Brake Drum Service Controls at United States Postal Service Vehicle Maintenance Facility, Louisville, Kentucky, Report No.
CT-152-11B.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3099353

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High	1	personal & area air samples collected; Hand-Held Aerosol Mon-

itor (HAM) used to measure & record dust levels
High	1 PCM (NIOSH Method 7400) & TEM LODs reported for PCM

N/A	N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area	High	1

Currency	Low	3

Spatial and Temporal Variability High	1

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Louisville, KY

>15 yrs (1987)

large sample size (12-22 personal, 7-11 fender, 8-11 axle, 5 each
background, 4-8 ambient) Duplicate samples collected

microenvironment (ventilation, temperature, humidity, and
wind conditions)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results	High	1 Raw data included in Appendix A, Table A-l Summaries pro-

vided in Tables 1 and 2 for PCM and TEM, resp.

Metric 9: Quality Assurance	High	1 Field blanks were prepared for each sampling date and submit-

ted for PCM & TEM analysis

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty	Medium 2

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 20 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Godbey, F. W.,Cooper, T. C.,Sheehy, J. W.,O'Brien, D. M.,Van Wagenen, H. D.,McGlothlin, J. D.,Todd, W. F.. 1987.

In-Depth Survey Report: Evaluation of Brake Drum Service Controls at United States Postal Service, Vehicle Maintenance
Facility, Nashville, Tennessee, Report No. CT-152-20B.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3099476

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High	1	personal & area air samples collected; Hand-Held Aerosol Mon-

itor (HAM) used to measure & record dust levels
High	1 PCM (NIOSH Method 7400) & TEM LODs reported for PCM

N/A	N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area	High	1

Currency	Low	3

Spatial and Temporal Variability High	1

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Nashville, TN

>15 yrs (1986)

large sample size (10-20 personal, 10 each fender and axle, 8-16
background, 4-8 ambient) Duplicate samples collected

microenvironment (ventilation, temperature, humidity, and
wind conditions)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results	High	1 Raw data included in Appendix A, Table A-l Summaries pro-

vided in Tables 1 and 2 for PCM and TEM, resp.

Metric 9: Quality Assurance	Low	3 Field blanks were prepared for each sampling date and submit-

ted for PCM & TEM analysis

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty	Medium 2

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 21 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Sheehy, J. W.,Todd, W. F.,Cooper, T. C.,Van Wagenen, H. D.. 1987. In-Depth Survey Report: Evaluation of Brake Drum

Service Controls at Cincinnati Bell Maintenance Facility, Fairfax, Ohio, Report No. CT-152-21B.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3099480

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High	1	personal & area air samples collected; Hand-Held Aerosol Mon-

itor (HAM) used to measure & record dust levels; calibrated

High	1 PCM & TEM LODs reported for TEM

N/A	N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area	High	1

Currency	Low	3

Spatial and Temporal Variability High	1

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Fairfax, OH

>15 yrs (1986-1987)

large sample size (13 each personal, 5 each fender and axle,
7-12 background, 7-12 ambient) Duplicate samples collected

microenvironment (ventilation, temperature, humidity)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results	High	1 Raw data included in Appendix A, Table 1 Summaries provided

in Tables 2 & 3 for PCM and TEM, resp.

Metric 9: Quality Assurance	Medium 2 Field blanks were prepared for each sampling date and submit-

ted for PCM & TEM analysis.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty	Medium 2

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 22 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Kauppinen, T.,Korhonen, K.. 1987. Exposure to Asbestos During Brake Maintenance of Automotive Vehicles by Different

Methods. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3100008

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Medium

Low

N/A N/A

Sampling method discussed briefly. Measurements carried out
by authors in 7 out of the 24 work-places. Other results col-
lected from the measurement reports that include a description
of sampling and anaytical methods used, data on sampling sites
and time, and results with pertinent comments.
Phase-contrast-optical microscope standardized Method
(Finnish Standard SFS 3868). Method has been tested in
international quality control analyses.

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6

Geographic Area
Currency

High
Low

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium 2

24 work places in Finland
>15 yrs (1977-1983)

Number of samples varies from 1-30 based on operation in
brake maintenance of trucks & buses or passenger cars. No
replicates. Various number of work-places (1-13) and range of
sampling time.

Source of exposure presented by operation and type of vehicle.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium 2 Supplemental or raw data are not reported. Concentrations by
operation in brake maintenance (range, median, mean, number
of samples, range of sampling time) reported in Table 1 trucks
& buses and Table 2 for passenger cars.

Medium 2 The method has been tested in international quality control
analyses. The calculated concentrations do not include the
background concentration of asbestos, b/c only very few data
were available.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

Page 23 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Kauppinen, T.,Korhonen, K.. 1987. Exposure to Asbestos During Brake Maintenance of Automotive Vehicles by Different

Methods. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3100008

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Variations in respirable dust concentrations measured by Leitz
tyndallometer during different cleaning procedures are shown
in Figure 2. The unestimated background concentration of as-
bestos in the brake maintenance work places, however, gives
rise to the possibility of underestimation of the TWA concen-
trations.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1



Extracted

Yes







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 24 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Musthapa, M. S.,Ahmad, I.,Trivedi, A. K.,Rahman, Q.. 2003. Asbestos contamination in biota and abiota in the vicinity of

asbestos-cement factory. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3278824

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Low
Low
N/A

3
3

N/A

Minimal description of sampling methodology
PCM by Indian Standard (1986)

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Medium
Low

India

> 15 yrs old

different locations within pond sampled for pond water
surface water contamination from asbestos cement factory

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

Tables of values, minimal discussion
Minimal discussion

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Minimal discussion of variability and uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.7

Extracted

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 25 of 111

-------
Study Citation: C. L. Blake, G. S. Dotson, R. D. Harbison. 2006. Assessment of airborne asbestos exposure during the servicing and handling

of automobile asbestos-containing gaskets. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3520458

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology	Medium 2 Sampling methodology was discussed. Personal air samples

were collected to estimate airborne fiber exposure levels that
mechanic and hypothetical bystanders would encounter during
the servicing and handling of asbestos-containing gaskets. The
equipment utilized for collecting personal samples consisted of
battery powered portable air pumps, Ametek Model alpha 1,
that drew air at metered flowrates, nominally 2.0"2.4 liters
per minute (1pm), through 25-mm diameter cassettes mounted
mixed cellulose ester (MCE) membrane filters. The cassettes
were placed within the mechanic"s breathing zone. The mem-
brane filters placed atop the mechanics right shoulder were of
0.8 micron (um) pore size, while those placed atop his left
shoulder were of 0.45 um pore size.

Continued on next page

Page 26 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: C. L. Blake, G. S. Dotson, R. D. Harbison. 2006. Assessment of airborne asbestos exposure during the servicing and handling

of automobile asbestos-containing gaskets. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3520458

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 Samples were analyzed using phase contrast microscopy (PCM)

and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). PCM analysis
followed the National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH) Method 7400. This analytical method is un-
able to distinguish between fibers of asbestos and non-asbestos
origins, and provides an index of airborne fibers commonly
used to estimate asbestos concentrations (NIOSH, 1994a). The
optical limitations of the phase contract microscope restrict its
resolution capabilities to fibers wider than 0.25 micrometer (m)
and longer than 5m in length. Additionally, fibers not exhibit-
ing a three to one length to width ratio are excluded from the
counting process. Use of this method satisfies requirements of
the OSHA standards for asbestos specific air sampling.
PCM analysis of air samples counts all resolvable fibrous struc-
tures including non-asbestos fibers that meet the dimensional
criteria. There exists the potential for such analysis to yield
airborne fiber concentration data which exceed the actual air-
borne asbestos concentrations. In settings such as automobile
repair shops, cellulose fibers, long thin metal fragments from
power brushing activities and synthetic, and other fibers often
appear in air samples taken during work of the type subject
of this research. For this reason, additional analysis of air
samples was done using TEM, following NIOSH Method 7402.
This analytical method measures fibers longer than 5 um and
wider than 0.25 um, and allows development of an asbestos-to-
total fiber ratio. This ratio is then multiplied by the airborne
fiber concentration generated using the PCM analysis, yield-
ing an asbestos fiber count known as phase contrast microscopy
equivalent (PCME). This asbestos fiber count may be used for

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

comparison against occupational exposure limits (OEL) such
as the OSHA PEL or NIOSH recommended exposure limits
(REL). Detection limits are not reported.

Biomarker is not used.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

United States, Detroit, MI

Metric 5:

Currency

Medium

> 5 to 15 years (2006 publication date)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

Small sample size (3 personal air samples), no replicates

Continued on next page

Page 27 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: C. L. Blake, G. S. Dotson, R. D. Harbison. 2006. Assessment of airborne asbestos exposure during the servicing and handling

of automobile asbestos-containing gaskets. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3520458

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario Medium

2 Asbestos exposure during the removal of asbestos-containing

gaskets on vehicles. Engine disassembly; gaskets removed -
1974 Chevrolet Malibu and Ford cubic inch V-8 390 Engine.
During the gasket removal test sessions, the mechanic first re-
moved engine heads and manifolds components that covered
or otherwise held the target gaskets. Many of these gaskets
came off intact leaving gasket residue on the metal mating sur-
face. Bulk samples of the removed gaskets were obtained for
subsequent analysis. The mechanic next scraped away gasket
residue using a wide blade putty knife, sometimes assisted with
a rubber hammer. Loose parts, such as engine heads and mani-
folds, were next immersed into a water bath cleaner, a product
of Safety Kleen, and washed using an Arm and Hammer brand
Aqua Works Cold Cleaning Solution, before being burnished
using a rotary 1-in. knot type wire end brush, NAPA service
tools Part Number (P/N) 2312. The end brush was powered
by a hand held drill motor, Ingersoll Rand model 7803R, oper-
ated from 90 PSI line pressure. To aid in the gasket and other
residue removal process, the mechanic sprayed the parts with a
non-chlorine containing solvent dispersed from an aerosol spray
can, Aerosol Systems, Inc., P/N TM 3506. This solvent con-
tained; xylenes, aliphatic petroleum distillates, and acetone,
with a compressed carbon dioxide propellant. When cleaning
the surfaces of fixed, non-transportable parts such as engine
blocks, the mechanic utilized scraping, powered wire brushing,
and solvent spray, however no aqueous wash occurred with the
fixed parts. This process continued until all gasket remnants
were removed from the loose parts and engine blocks, and sub-
ject parts were sufficiently clean to allow reassembly.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

Low

Personal air samples results containing asbestos fibers were re-
ported in Table 7 as PCM 8-HR TWA (f/cc) and PCME 8-HR
TWA (f/cc) . No supplemental or raw data were provided.
Note: The minimum PCME 8-hr TWA value (0.0018 f/cc) re-
ported in Table 6 does not match the minimum personal PCME
8-hr TWA value (0.0008 f/cc) reported in Table 7.

QA/QC procedures not directly discussed, but can be implied

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

Page 28 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: C. L. Blake, G. S. Dotson, R. D. Harbison. 2006. Assessment of airborne asbestos exposure during the servicing and handling

of automobile asbestos-containing gaskets. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3520458

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty	Medium 2 Limitations associated with NIOSH Methods 7400 and 7402 are

discussed. Criticism of the use of phase contrast microscopy
and transmission electron microscopy focuses on the exclusion
of short (<5 um long) and long, but thin (<0.25 um wide)
asbestos fibers (Atkinson et al., 2004; Lemen, 2004). Those
who oppose the use of NIOSH Methods 7400 and 7402 state
that the elimination of short and thin structures from the data
set underestimates the risk that exposed workers encounter.
Recent committee findings released by the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) report limited or
no human cancer risk from fibers fitting the previous descrip-
tions (ATSDR, 2003). Research has demonstrated that the
pathogenesis of asbestos-related diseases is directly influenced
by the physical dimensions of asbestos fibers (Stanton et al.,
1981). The length and width of fibers determine their abil-
ity to be deposited within the lungs, and subsequently affect
the onset of malignant and non-malignant diseases (Lippmann,
1990; ATSDR, 2003). Fibers longer than 10 um are not eas-
ily phagocytized, and tend to remain in the lower respiratory
tract or penetrate the pleural membrane (Hume and Rimstidt,
1992). Shorter fibers, including the fiber populations (<5 um
in length and <0.25 um in width) excluded from consideration
by NIOSH Methods 7400 and 7402, are arguably of less signifi-
cance in terms of the development of asbestos-related cancers.
In addition, the debate regarding dimension based fiber exclu-
sion distracts attention from the real benefit these methods of-
fer. NIOSH Methods 7400/7402 data can be directly compared
against established health risk databases. No such databases
exist for the asbestos structure data for short (<5 um long) and
long but thin (<0.25 um wide) asbestos fibers. Despite the lim-
itations associated with these NIOSH Methods 7400 and 7402,
the advantages of their use exceed their disadvantages.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium 2.1

Extracted

Yes



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 29 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Cely-Garcia, M. F.,Curriero, F. C.,Sanchez-Silva, M.,Breysse, P. N.,Giraldo, M.,Mendez, L.,Torres-Duque, C.,Duran,
M.,Gonzalez-Garcia, M.,Parada, P.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2016. Estimation of personal exposure to asbestos of brake re-
pair workers. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3520524

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

High

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

High

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

N/A

Personal and quality control samples were collected according
to NIOSH methods 7400 and 7402 using MCE filters, with 0.45
" m pore size, on conducting extension cowls cassettes of 50 mm
connected to AIRCheck XR5000 pumps. Thirty-minute short-
term personal samples were collected during manipulation ac-
tivities, and longer or shorter personal samples were collected
during non-manipulation activities.

Samples were analyzed on a Philips CM12 transmission elec-
tron microscopy (FEI Corp, Hillsboro OR, USA). A magnifi-
cation of " 2500 was used for the general analysis, scanning for
fibers longer than 5 "m. A magnification of " 19,000 was used
for more precise measurements, to confirm the dimensions of
fibers close to the method limits. Only fibers >5 "m long and
>0.25 "m diameter were counted. Energy Dispersive X-ray
(EDXA) NORAN System 7 (NS7) (Thermo Electron Scientific
Instruments, Madison, WI, USA) was used for elemental com-
position analysis, and the accelerating voltage was 100 keV.
All samples were coded, and the laboratory was blinded about
the activities performed during the collection of each sample,
and about the working conditions of the shops.

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area High 1 Bogota, Colombia

Metric 5; Currency Medium 2 Samples taken since 2010, 10 years old (>5 to 15 years)

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium 2 Analysis of the bulk asbestos content of 18 duplicate samples

of brake products from 12 of the most common brands com-
mercialized in Bogot" was performed by Forensic Analytical

Laboratories (Hayward, CA, USA), following EPA 600/R-93-
116 PLM method.

Continued on next page

Page 30 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Cely-Garcia, M. F.,Curriero, F. C.,Sanchez-Silva, M.,Breysse, P. N.,Giraldo, M.,Mendez, L.,Torres-Duque, C.,Duran,
M.,Gonzalez-Garcia, M.,Parada, P.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2016. Estimation of personal exposure to asbestos of brake re-
pair workers. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3520524

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments^

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Relevant exposure scenarios; Activity diaries were filled with
information regarding all the activities performed by workers
during sampling campaigns, the number and type of products
manipulated daily (i.e., brake pads, brake linings, and brake
blocks), and if the brake product manipulated contained as-
bestos (i.e., based on the labels of the products and/or the
knowledge of workers).

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Medium

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

High

Based on the results of the sampling campaigns, 103 8-h
TWA PCM-Eq personal asbestos concentrations were calcu-
lated. Forty three were for 13 riveters that worked in 9 pas-
senger vehicles BRS, and had a mean of 0.151 f/cm3, a median
of 0.048 f/cm3, a SD of 0.191 f/cm3 and a range from 0.00 to
0.61 f/cm3. Sixty were for 15 riveters that worked in 9 heavy
duty vehicles BRS, and had a mean of 0.042 f/cm3, a median
of 0.021 f/cm3 and SD of 0.057 f/cm3, and a range from 0.00
to 0.31 f/cm3.

Blank samples were collected each sampling day, and back-
ground samples were collected during one night in each shop
sampled. Asbestos analyses were performed by two American
Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) accredited laboratories
(Forensic Analytical Laboratories, Inc, Hayward, CA, USA,
and RJ Lee Group, Monroeville, PA, USA).

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

40 out of the 318 30-min short-term personal samples collected
during manipulation activities were not classified in any task-
related EF. In addition, 25 out of the 280 personal samples
collected during non-manipulation activities were not classified
because a worker had inadvertently performed a brake prod-
uct manipulation, and these samples were longer than 30 min
(i.e., and because of the duration, they were not included in
the 318 30-min short-term personal samples). Furthermore,
another 32 of the 280 personal samples collected during non-
manipulation activities were not classified because they were
collected in a shop with a workload that vastly exceeded the
average workload of the shops sampled, which could limit the
generalizability of the results.

Continued on next page

Page 31 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Cely-Garcia, M. F.,Curriero, F. C.,Sanchez-Silva, M.,Breysse, P. N.,Giraldo, M.,Mendez, L.,Torres-Duque, C.,Duran,
M.,Gonzalez-Garcia, M.,Parada, P.,Ramos-Bonilla, J. P.. 2016. Estimation of personal exposure to asbestos of brake re-
pair workers. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3520524

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Overall Quality Determination	High	1.4

Extracted	Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 32 of 111

-------
Study Citation: L. R. Liukonen, F. W. Weir. 2005. Asbestos exposure from gaskets during disassembly of a medium duty diesel engine.

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3531131

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology Medium 2 Sampling methodology discussed. All samples were collected

using SKC PCXR3 or PCXR7 sampling pumps and open-faced
25mm mixed cellulose ester filters. The pumps were calibrated
to a nominal 2L/min (1pm) before and after each day of test-
ing with a primary standard (Mini-Buck). Sampling proce-
dures were in accordance with National Institute of Occupa-
tional Safety and Health (NIOSH) Sampling and Analytical
Method 7400, Asbestos and Other Fibers by PCM (NIOSH,
1994). Throughout the disassembly process, portions of all en-
gine gaskets were placed in sealed polyethylene sample bags,
labeled, and stored for subsequent analysis. Personal and area
air samples were collected to evaluate the quantity of asbestos
fibers in the breathing zone of the mechanic as well as the
area near the disassembly procedure. The personal sampler
was located on the lapel of the mechanic"s shirt. For several
of the gasket-surface cleaning tasks, a third sample was col-
lected where one of the observers wore a second monitor and
stood as near as was practical to the mechanic throughout the
task"approximately 2"5 ft. To the extent possible, the observer
with the monitor stood facing the mechanic and directly across
from the work being performed to sample the air for any ma-
terials generated by the process.

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology Medium 2 Analyses were conducted using PCM as required by NIOSH

7400 and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) Reference Method. Analysis was by RJ Lee Group, a
laboratory accredited by the American Industrial Hygiene As-
sociation (AIHA) and National Voluntary Laboratory Accred-
itation program (NVLAP). As PCM does not distinguish be-
tween asbestos and non-asbestos fibers, samples that recorded
detectable concentrations of airborne fibers were further ana-
lyzed by TEM using NIOSH 7402, Asbestos by TEM (NIOSH,
1994) to determine a ratio of asbestos to nonasbestos fibers.
This ratio was then used to reduce, if appropriate, the fiber
count.

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection N/A N/A No biomarker used.

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area High 1 United States; authors from TX. The engine rebuilding was

conducted at a privately operated, independent repair facility.

Continued on next page

Page 33 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: L. R. Liukonen, F. W. Weir. 2005. Asbestos exposure from gaskets during disassembly of a medium duty diesel engine.

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3531131

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Metric 5:

Metric 6:

Metric 7:

cnanic was instructed to proceed as ne would ror any similar
procedure, but to identify and describe each task as he ini-
tiated work. No attempt was made by any party to suggest
procedures or to otherwise influence the customary processes
of the mechanic. The mechanic removed the gaskets with a
scraper. Any remaining residue was cleaned from the surface
using either a rotary wire brush or a 3M brand Scotch Brite
pad on a hand held air-operated grinder. Gasket scraps were
allowed to fall to the floor until normal work area cleanup was
done by the mechanic, usually at the end of each work interval,
such as at the end of the day. Each task was timed. Table 1
presents information relating to the disassembly tasks. For the
most part, personal samples were changed at the beginning of
each task, except as noted.

Currency Medium

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium

Exposure Scenario Medium

2 >5 to 15 years (2005 publication date). Early part of August.
2 Large sample size (14 personal air samples collected over 3 days

during 10 engine disassembly task). No replicates.

2 Disassembly of the engine was divided into tasks. The me-

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium

No supplementary or raw data provided. PCM personal air
sample results reported in Table 3 for 10 disassembly tasks.
These results are presented as fibers greater than 5 um in
length per cubic centimeter of air (f/cm3) as determined by
phase contrast microscopy.

QA/QC techniques and results not directly discussed but can
be implied through the study's use of standard field and labo-
ratory protocols.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

Page 34 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: L. R. Liukonen, F. W. Weir. 2005. Asbestos exposure from gaskets during disassembly of a medium duty diesel engine.

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3531131

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

A limiting factor in determining exposure to asbestos fibers
during investigations such as the diesel engine overhaul is the
accumulation of particulate on the filters. This limitation be-
comes more pronounced as sample times and volumes increase.
The industrial hygienist must balance the need to collect suffi-
cient volume of the workplace air to permit sufficient sensitiv-
ity but not so much as to overload the filter so that the fibers
cannot be reliably counted. Thus, because of the presence of
other, [non-fibrous], particulate in the atmosphere of the work-
shop, the detection limits in such a study are somewhat less
than optimal, less than optimal.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0



Extracted

Yes







I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 35 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Paustenbach, D. J.,Madl, A. K.,Donovan, E.,Clark, K.,Fehling, K.,Lee, T. C.. 2006. Chrysotile asbestos exposure associated
with removal of automobile exhaust systems (ca. 1945-1975) by mechanics: results of a simulation study. Journal of Exposure
Science and Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3531296

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
High

N/A

Limitation of only 2 mechanics being sampled

N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4: Geographic Area
Metric 5: Currency

Metric 6: Spatial and Temporal Variability
Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High
Medium
High
High

2
1
1

Study was conducted inn Santa Rosa, CA.
>5 - 15 years old

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Low

No raw data

very little discussion of QA/QC measures

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

needs better discussion of uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.7

Extracted

Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 36 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Weir, F. W.,Tolar, G.,Meraz, L. B.. 2001. Characterization of vehicular brake service personnel exposure to airborne asbestos

and particulate. Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3531556

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

High

Phase 1 monitoring protocol for a "closed" drum brake system.

Instrument calibrated

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

High

Phase 1 air samples analyzed using PCM (NIOSH Method

239).

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Public service organization auto/truck repair facility (Texas?

All three authors from Texas)

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

>15 yrs (2001 pub date)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Medium

Phase 1: Three vehicles monitored. A total of 36 samples

collected during this series; five stationary samples and one

personal sample collected for each rear wheel of every vehicle.

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

Description of facility, gas heaters in operation so limited air

circulation in work area

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Low

Phase 1 results reported as average ranges. No supplemental

or raw data provided.

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Low

No controls, baseline, recoveries reported

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Average concentrations reported. No maximum values so vari-

ability is unknown.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.1

Extracted

Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 37 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Pitt, R.. 1988. ASBESTOS AS AN URBAN AREA POLLUTANT

Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation.

Data Type Monitoring









Hero ID 3580912









Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability









Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

2

Sampling procedures & equipment described, calibration not









mentioned.

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

High

1

Two phased approach: screening qualitative procedure and









quantitative transmission electron microscopic and selected-









area electron diffraction (TEM/SAED). Procedures based on









published EPA methodology.

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

N/A

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness









Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1

Castro Valley, CA

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

3

>15 yrs (1979 and 1980)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Medium

2

Moderate sample size, 22 samples collected showed quantita-









tive results for asbestos, 5 of which were creek water samples

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Some asbestos pipe may be involved, the primary source of









asbestos in San Francisco drinking water is the erosion of ser-









pentine rock formations.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity







Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

2

Supplemental or raw data are not reported. Table 1 reports









results of TEM/SAED quantitative asbestos analyses on Creek









water samples

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

2

Two phase approach to analysis, optical qualitative screening









and quantitative TEM/SAED. No recoveries or controls

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty







Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Individual creek asbestos concentrations (Table 5) vary widely.









Only a few medium sized runoff events contributed most of









the asbestos. These concentration estimates can therefore be









expected to vary appreciably for other periods and locations of









monitoring.

Overall Quality Determination



Medium

1.9



Extracted



No









Continued on next

page



Page 38 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Pitt, R.. 1988. ASBESTOS AS AN URBAN AREA POLLUTANT. Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3580912

Domain	Metric	Ratingt Score	('< >111t r ic111 s

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 39 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Hickish, D. E.,Knight, K. L.. 1970. Exposure to asbestos during brake maintenance. Annals of Occupational Hygiene.
Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3610801

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability









Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

2

Limit information on sampling methodology discussed; how-









ever, article stated air sampling was carried out using mem-









brane filters and sampling and subsequent assessment was in









accordance with the technique described in the "Hygiene Stan-









dard for Chrysotile Asbestos Dust" (1968); not calibrated

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

2

Limit information on analytical methodology discussed; how-









ever, article stated air sampling and subsequent assessment









was in accordance with the technique described in the "Hy-









giene Standard for Chrysotile Asbestos Dust" (1968)

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

N/A

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness









Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1

Study conducted at Service Bay of a Ford Main Dealer in









Greater London area in England

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

3

>15 yrs old; 1970 pub date

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

3

small sample size (6 personal during car brake service, 4 per-









sonal druing truck brake service, and 3 general area air samples









collected during truck brake service in morning and afternoon)

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Low

3

Minimal description of the process carried out during brake









servicing on cars and trucks in the auto shop. Brake servicing









carried out on 11 vehicles.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity







Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Low

3

Concentration (fibers/cm3) results were presented in Tables 2









(6 personal air samples during car brake service), 3 (general









atmosphere samples during truck brake service in morning and









afternoon, 4 (personal air samples during truck brake & clutch









service during various operations; No supplemental or raw data









are available.

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Low

3

Controls, recoveries not reported

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty







Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Does not compare to other studies. No standard deviation or









ranges reported.





Continued on next

page



Page 40 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation:
Data Type
Hero ID

Hickish, D. E.,Knight, K. L.. 1970. Exposure to asbestos during brake maintenance. Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

Monitoring

3610801

Domain

Metric Ratingt Score ('< >111t r ic111 s

Overall Quality Determination Low 2.6

Extracted

Yes



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 41 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Rohl, A. N.,Langer, A. M.,Klimentidis, R.,Wolff, M. S.,Seilikoff, I.

J.. 1977. Asbestos content of dust encountered in brake

maintenance and repair. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine.

Data Type Monitoring









Hero ID 3615571









Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability









Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

High

1

Air sampling for the determination of fiber concentrations in









accordance with OSHA techniques

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

2

Analytical methods for the determination of fiber concentra-









tions in accordance with OSHA techniques Reporting limits,









detection limits (LOQ/LOD) not reported

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

N/A

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness









Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1

NYC

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

3

>15 yrs (1977 study pub date)

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Medium

2

large sample size (13 for automotive brake repair & 23 for truck









brake repair) no replicates?

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

Source of exposure: blowing dust from brake drums; renewing









used linings by grinding Various distances from source

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity







Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

2

No supplemental or raw data

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

2

Samples of brake dust first examined by optical microscopy,









X-ray diffraction, transmission electron microscopy and en-









ergy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy to determine presence of









chrysotile.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty







Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

For dust samples, article indicates that samples were obtained









from areas representing variable circumstances (e.g., driving









conditions, friction material composition, type of automobile









and climate For personal air samples, samples collected from









various distances from source.

Overall Quality Determination



Medium

1.8



Extracted



Yes









Continued on next

page



Page 42 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type
Hero ID

Rohl, A. N.,Langer, A. M.,Klimentidis, R.,Wolff, M. S.,Seilikoff, I. J.. 1977. Asbestos content of dust encountered in brake

maintenance and repair. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine.

Monitoring

3615571

Domain

Metric Rating^ Score Comments^



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 43 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Niosh,. 1976. Preliminary industrial hygiene survey at Auto Brake Clinic, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3645882

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Low

Limit information on sampling methodology. Seven general

area and five personal air samples collected on millipore fil-

ters. Three bulk brake drum dust samples collected; sampling

methodology not specified. Not calibrated

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Low

Limited analytical methodology information provided. Both

general area and personal samples analyzed by phase contrast

counting methods. Bulk brake drum dust were presently being

analyzed by electron microscopy.

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness

Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

Study conducted at Auto Brake Clinic in Cincinnati, OH

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

>15 yrs old; samples collected August 1976

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

small sample size (4 personal and 7 general area air samples

collected; during the survey the brakes of four vehicles were

serviced)

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

Low

Minimal description of the process carried out during brake

servicing in the auto shop.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

Fiber concentration (fibers >5 "m/cc of air) results were pre-

sented in Table I for four personal and 7 general area. No

supplemental or raw data are available.

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Low

Controls, recoveries not reported

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Range of sample concentrations not reported.

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.7

Extracted

Yes

Continued on next

page

Page 44 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Niosh,. 1976. Preliminary industrial hygiene survey at Auto Brake Clinic, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3645882

Domain	Metric	Ratingt Score	('< >111t r ic111 s

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 45 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Lorimer, W. V.,Rohl, A. N.,Miller, A.,Nicholson, W. J.,Selikoff, I.

J.. 1976. Asbestos exposure of brake repair workers in

United States. Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine.







Data Type Monitoring









Hero ID 3646036









Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability









Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Low

3

"Standard OSHA" but no description of type of personal air









monitor used

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

2

"standard optical technique" and OSHA standard for fiber









counting but sounds outdated

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

N/A



Domain 2: Representativeness









Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1



Metric 5:

Currency

Low

3

personal air monitoring for 2-10 min; actual dates of sampling









not discussed; 1976 print date

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Low

3

Only one shop tested in NYC; background samples taken at









various distances and times but not specified; moderate sample









size per exposure scenario

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

Very relevant exposure scenario

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity







Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Low

3

duration of sampling for personal samples not reported indi-









vidually, only background has specific duration of sampling;

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Low

3

Little discussion of QA/QC; dust samples were examined by









two techniques for comparison

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty







Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

little discussion; conclusions indicate that results can't be gen-









eralized to all brake workers; states both TWA and peak levels









showed significant asbestos exposure but TWA was not calcu-









lated for this study

Overall Quality Determination



Low

2.4



Extracted



Yes







Continued on next page

Page 46 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Lorimer, W. V.,Rohl, A. N.,Miller, A.,Nicholson, W. J.,Selikoff, I. J.. 1976. Asbestos exposure of brake repair workers in

United States. Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3646036

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 47 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Sheehy, J. W.,Godbey, F. W.,Cooper, T. C.,Lenihan, K. L.,Van Wagenen, H. D.,McGlothlin, J. D.. 1987. In-Depth Survey
Report: Control Technology for Brake Drum Service Operations at Ohio Department of Transportation, Maintenance Facility,
Lebanon, Ohio, CT-152-18b.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3648228

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High	1	personal & area air samples collected; Hand-Held Aerosol Mon-

itor (HAM) used to measure & record dust levels; calibrated
High	1 PCM (NIOSH Method 7400) & TEM LODs reported for PCM

N/A	N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area	High	1

Currency	Low	3

Spatial and Temporal Variability High	1

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Lebanon, OH
>15 yrs (1986)

large sample size (18 each personal, 9 each fender and axle,
10-11 background, 10-12 ambient) Duplicate samples collected

microenvironment (ventilation, temperature, humidity, and
wind conditions)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

High
Medium

1

2

Raw data included in Appendix A, Table 1 Summaries provided
in Tables 1 and 2a for PCM and TEM, resp. Table 2b TEM
concentrations excluding one large salt truck

Field blanks were prepared for each sampling date and submit-
ted for PCM & TEM analysis.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Detection was only slightly above background. No statistical
difference between ambient and background conc.

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.4



Extracted

Yes







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 48 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Oliver, T.,Murr, L. E.. 1977. An electron microscope study of asbestiform fiber concentrations in Rio Grande valley water

supplies.

Data Type Monitoring

Hero ID 3649985

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium
Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Some info on sample collection, but not detailed.

Domain 2: Representativen
Metric 4
Metric 5
Metric 6
Metric 7

ess

Geographic Area
Currency

Spatial and Temporal Variability
Exposure Scenario

High
Low
Low
Low

3
3
3

1977, >15 years

Background and asbestos pipe. Surface water and groundwa-
ter. Source water samples, but difficult to determine if surface
water or well.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Low
Low

3
3

Older study, not as clear as to number of samples, no raw data,
limited info.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

limited discussion, possible one sample per water body.

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.6

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 49 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Sheehy, J. W.,Cooper, T. C.,O'Brien, D. M.,McGlothlin, J. D.,Froehlich, P. A.. 1989. Control of asbestos exposure during

brake drum service.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3655537

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

High	1	personal & area air samples collected; Hand-Held Aerosol Mon-

itor (HAM) used to measure & record dust levels; calibrated

High	1 PCM & TEM LODs reported for PCM

N/A	N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area	High	1

Currency	Low	3

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium 2

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

U.S., sites not specified, taken from in-depth surveys
>15 yrs (1989 study pub date)

small to large sample size, based on Control Method Note:
Water hose and solvent control method is considered a "do-it-
yourself' mechanic (2 samples each for PCM and TEM)
microenvironment (ventilation, temperature, humidity)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8; Reporting of Results	Medium 2 No raw/supplemental data Summaries provided in Tables 5-1

and 5-2 for PCM and Tables 5-3 and 5-4 for TEM

Metric 9: Quality Assurance	Medium 2 Samples analyzed by PCM & TCM. "Uncontrolled" samples

(i.e., no dust controls were used; brake drums were banged on
the floor to remove dust) were also analyzed.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty	Medium 2

Overall Quality Determination	Medium 1.7

Extracted	Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 50 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Crandall, M. S.,Fleeger, A. K.. 1989. Health hazard evaluation report no. HETA 88-372-1953, Barbados Ministry of Health,

Bridgetown, Barbados.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	3970543

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology	Low	3 Bulk samples, surface sweep, and air samples were collected.

No asbestos containing materials found at vehicle repair shop.
Brief descriptions of surface sweep and air sampling provided.

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology	High	1 Air samples analyzed by two methods NIOSH Methods 7400

(PCM) and 7402 (TEM). Reporting detection limits

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection	N/A	N/A Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area	High	1

Currency	Low	3

Spatial and Temporal Variability Low	3

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

Medium

Barbados, vehicle repair shop

>15 yrs (1988)

Small sample size, 3 air samples collected, one was an outdoor
air sample

Source of exposure: description of vehicle repair shop; little
activity on day of survey

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results

Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium
Low

2

3

Supplemental or raw data are not reported. Air samples all 3
samples were  1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 51 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Equitable Environmental Health, Inc. 1977. Dust exposures during the cutting and machining of asbestos/cement pipe,

additional studies.

Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	4152071

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology	Medium 2 short term and longer term personal and helper sampling for

several well-described ac pipe activities

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology	Medium 2 Asbestos fiber counts were done by an experienced and accred-

ited technician, following OSHA and NIOSH methods; PCM

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection	N/A	N/A

Domain 2: Representativeness
Metric 4:
Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Geographic Area	High	1

Currency	Low	3

Spatial and Temporal Variability Medium 2

Metric 7: Exposure Scenario

High

Torrance, CA

October 1977; > 15 yrs old

Personal and helper air sampling; multiple activity scenarios
covered; smaller sample sizes
asbestos cement pipe exposure

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 8: Reporting of Results
Metric 9: Quality Assurance

Medium 2 Multiple tables

Medium 2 three replicate short term exposures for personal and helper
exposure; background samples collected at end of each day;
samplers changed at regular intervals;

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 10: Variability and Uncertainty	Medium 2 acceptable description of variability among activity exposures

and some discussion of uncertainty regarding concentrations

Overall Quality Determination

Medium 1.9

Extracted

No



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 52 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Roberts, D. R.. 1980. Industrial hygiene report: Asbestos at Allied Brake Shop, Cincinnati, OH.
Data Type	Monitoring

Hero ID	4152150

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability









Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Medium

2

Brake shop exposure: personal exposures for two mechanics;









general area samples; 15 minute samples

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

2

transmission electron microscope (TEM) utilizing selected area









electron diffraction (SAED) and an energy dispersive X-ray









analyzer;

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

N/A



Domain 2: Representativeness









Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1

Cincinnati Ohio

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

3

1979; > 15 yrs old

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Medium

2

personal as well as area samples taken for spatial variability;









lacks temporal based only on one day's sampling.

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

very relevant exposure during brake repair

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity







Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

2

Minimal discussion

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Low

3

minimal discussion

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty







Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Minimal discussion

Overall Quality Determination



Medium

2.0



Extracted



Yes







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 53 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Roberts, D.

R.. 1980. Industrial hygiene survey report of the New York City sanitation, traffic, and police brake servicing

facilities, Queens, New York.







Data Type Monitoring









Hero ID 4152152









Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability









Metric 1:

Sampling Methodology

Low

3

Personal breathing zone, general area, high-volume general









area, and bulk brake dust samples were collected. Minimal









description of sampling methodology.

Metric 2:

Analytical Methodology

Medium

2

Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the









NIOSH P&CAM #239. PCM and TEM

Metric 3:

Biomarker Selection

N/A

N/A



Domain 2: Representativeness









Metric 4:

Geographic Area

High

1

Queens, NY

Metric 5:

Currency

Low

3

> 15 yrs old

Metric 6:

Spatial and Temporal Variability

Medium

2

Sampling across three different repair stations: sanitation, traf-









fic, and police vehicle repair stations; small sample sizes per









scenario

Metric 7:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

very relevant brake maintenance exposure

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity







Metric 8:

Reporting of Results

Medium

2

Acceptable discussion of results; lacking calculations to com-









pare across different time/volume sampling

Metric 9:

Quality Assurance

Medium

2

The filters were changed periodically during the work shift to









prevent overloading of the sampling media; varying total times









for sampling

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty







Metric 10:

Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Peak .samples were collected using identical media and flow









rate as when workers were cleaning dust from brake assemblies;









small sample sizes for each scenario; discusses actual activities









during sampling

Overall Quality Determination

*

Medium

2.1



Extracted



Yes









Continued on next

page



Page 54 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Data Type
Hero ID

Roberts, D. R.. 1980. Industrial hygiene survey report of the New York City sanitation, traffic, and police brake servicing

facilities, Queens, New York.

Monitoring

4152152

Domain

Metric Rating^ Score Comments*



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 55 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Sahmel, J.,Barlow, C. A.,Gaffney, S.,Avens, H. J.,Madl, A.,Henshaw, J.,Unice, K. en,Galbraith, D.,Derose, G.,Lee, R. J.,Van
Orden, D.,Sanchez, M.,Zock, M.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2016. Airborne asbestos take-home exposures during handling of
chrysotile-contaminated clothing following simulated full shift workplace exposures. Journal of Exposure Science and Envi-
ronmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 3093966

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions Medium 2

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology
Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

High 1

N/A N/A

Study design approved by institutional review board, negative
pressure chamber, sampling conditions provided (temp & hu-
midity), no calibration

NIOSH 7400 (PCM) & NIOSH 7402 (TEM)

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

High

Medium 2

Metric 6: Temporality

High

Figure 2 Chamber design for clothes-handling and shake-out
(SO) events (simulated household environment); minimum of
two field blanks collected during each study event; HEPA ven-
tilation AFD operated at rate of 3.5 ACH which is consistent
with EPA reported rate. Three types of clothing used.

Sample size moderate. See Figure 6, air samples collected
during various sampling periods for active clothing shake out
(SO) and post SO (N=6) for each time interval and Bystander
(N=24). Medium grade assigned since it has between 5-10
samples.

<5 yrs old; pub date 2016

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium 2 Figure 6 provides a bar graph of mean airborne concentration
(f/cc) data for PCM and PCME for various sampling peri-
ods for SO and Post SO and bystanders. Article indicates
that supplementary information accompanies the paper on the
Journal of Exposure Science and Epidemiology website (http:/
/www. nature.com/jes)

N/A N/A Minimum of two field blanks collected during each study event.

Between study events a separate AFD was run to decontam-
inate the chamber & decrease time to background concentra-
tions.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

Page 56 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Sahmel, J.,Barlow, C. A.,Gaffney, S.,Avens, H. J.,Madl, A.,Henshaw, J.,Unice, K. en,Galbraith, D.,Derose, G.,Lee, R. J.,Van
Orden, D.,Sanchez, M.,Zock, M.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2016. Airborne asbestos take-home exposures during handling of
chrysotile-contaminated clothing following simulated full shift workplace exposures. Journal of Exposure Science and Envi-
ronmental Epidemiology.

Data Type	Experimental

Hero ID	3093966

Domain	Metric	Ratingt Score	('< nimioiil s:

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Lengthy discussion section; lists several factor that should be
considered when evaluating the results (i.e., use of stationery
mannequins as a surrogate for active workers, study did not
consider effects of commuting or blowing/brushing off work
clothes before entering the home)

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.6



Extracted

No







I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 57 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Sahmel, J.,Barlow, C. A.,Simmons, B.,Gaffney, S. H.,Avens, H. J.,Madl, A. K.,Henshaw, J.,Lee, R. J.,Van Orden, D.,Sanchez,
M.,Zock, M.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2014. Evaluation of Take-Home Exposure and Risk Associated with the Handling of Clothing
Contaminated with Chrysotile Asbestos. Risk Analysis.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 3093967

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions High

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology
Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

High

N/A

Study design approved by institutional review board, sealed
chamber, sampling conditions provided (temp & humidity),
sampling pumps were calibrated with a frictionless piston pri-
mary flow meter before & after each sample collected.

NIOSH 7400 (PCM) & NIOSH 7402 (TEM). LOD reported for
NIOSH 7400. Sensitivity limits for NIOSH 7402 estimated.

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

High 1 Figure 1 is a depiction of chamber & test arrangements. Six 30-

minute clothes-handling and shake out events performed dur-
ing study and described for simulated home environment. Sup-
plemental Materials further describe Study Methods.

Medium 2 A total of 12 air-monitoring events were conducted (six loading
events and six shake-out events) over a 5-day period. Sample
size is moderate to low. Six personal airborne fiber samples
were collected on the clothes handler during each SO event.
Four area samples intended to reflect exposure to bystander
collected. Sample size for most is 5-10 samples.

High 1 <5 yrs old; pub date 2014

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Medium

N/A

Airborne concentration (f/cc) reported in Figures 2-4 provides
a bar graphs. Article indicates that additional supporting in-
formation may be found on the online version of this article at
the publisher's website. Supplemental info obtained and sup-
plemental tables provided mean concentrations for each loading
event.

Airborne fiber concentrations outside the chamber were ND by
PCME. All clearance samples taken inside the chamber prior to
handling and SO events were also ND. Safety/Quality Control
Procedures discussed in supplemental materials

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Continued on next page

Page 58 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Sahmel, J.,Barlow, C. A.,Simmons, B.,Gaffney, S. H.,Avens, H. J.,Madl, A. K.,Henshaw, J.,Lee, R. J.,Van Orden, D.,Sanchez,
M.,Zock, M.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2014. Evaluation of Take-Home Exposure and Risk Associated with the Handling of Clothing
Contaminated with Chrysotile Asbestos. Risk Analysis.

Data Type	Experimental

Hero ID	3093967

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^



Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Under the Discussion section, it is noted that some of the vari-
ations in the magnitude of handling and SO air concentrations
in the study could have been caused by differences in how the
clothes were treated between loading and SO events.

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.4



Extracted



No







I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 59 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Weir, F. W.,Tolar, G.,Meraz, L. B.. 2001. Characterization of vehicular brake service personnel exposure to airborne asbestos

and particulate. Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene.

Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 3531556

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions High 1

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

High

N/A N/A

Phase 2, during Run 1 utilize sampling pumps to estimate air-
borne concentrations in the breathing zone at various positions,
Runs 2, 3, & 4 conducted within an exposure chamber with
sampling pumps. All sampling pumps were calibrated.

Phase 2 samples submitted to accredited lab for analysis.
NIOSH Method #7400 (PCM) to evaluate all area and personal
total and respirable airborne fiber samples. Bulk samples from
the brake pad analyzed by Polarized Light Microscopy (PCM).
Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Medium 2

Low

Metric 6: Temporality

Low

Four sequences of tests run. Run 1 conducted outside of cham-
ber; Runs 2, 3, and 4 conducted in a dynamic flow expo-
sure chamber; environmental conditions include no detectable
net air flow. Chamber temperature maintained at 26C during
study.

Sample size not really reported, but I don't want to make
it unacceptable. Air samples both personal and area) were
collected. Discussion on placement and position of sampling
pumps. For asbestos content verification, a bulk sample was
collected from each of the 6 pairs of shoes used in this study.

>15 yrs (2001 pub date)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Low 3 Phase 2 results reported in the text only, no tables. No sup-

plemental or raw data provided.

N/A N/A For asbestos content verification, a bulk sample was collected

from each of the 6 pairs of shoes used in this study.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

The sample data was not summarized in a table to provided
statistics on variance. Since it was an emission study it was
not clear why more studies were not collected.

Continued on next page

Page 60 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Weir, F. W.,Tolar, G.,Meraz, L. B.. 2001. Characterization of vehicular brake service personnel exposure to airborne asbestos

and particulate. Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene.

Data Type	Experimental

Hero ID	3531556

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments^

Overall Quality Determination



Low 2.3



Extracted



Yes





I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 61 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Inoko, M.,Ariiso, K.. 1982. DETERMINATION OF CHRYSOTILE FIBERS IN RESIDUAL DUST ON ROAD VEHICLE

BRAKE DRUMS. Environmental Pollution Series B: Chemical and Physical.

Data Type	Experimental

Hero ID	3583030

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Sampling Methodology and Conditions Low

Metric 2: Analytical Methodology

Metric 3: Biomarker Selection

Low

N/A

N/A

Three kinds of dust samples found in brake drums when worn
brake linings are exchanged for new ones were provided by a
bus company; no other info provided.

Ordinary membrane filter method is not suitable for measuring
concentrations of asbestos in the residual dust on brake drums
produced during car brake action. Other analytical methods
were assessed: xray diffraction analysis, xray diffraction analy-
sis after chemical pre-treatment; xray diffraction analysis after
burning treatment

Biomarker is not used

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 4: Testing Scenario

Metric 5: Sample Size and Variability

Metric 6: Temporality

Low
Low

Low

3	Activities have a lesser similarity but are still potentially ap-

plicable to the activity within scope (brake repair)

3	<5 samples: 3 kinds of dust samples; authors state sample

number insufficient to explain the differences in chrysotile con-
centration

3 >15 yrs (1982)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Low	3 Concentration of chrysotile in three car brake dust samples

shown in Table 1; listed as wt percent

N/A	N/A Calibration curves for determination of chrysotile in dust sam-

ples were linear (Fig. 4)

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Differences in the chrysotile concentration between dust sam-
ples taken from the front and rear brake drums; the reasons for
this could not be explained for the following reasons: 1) sam-
ple number (3) was insufficient; and 2) concentration difference
might be due to the pattern of use.

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.9





Continued on next page

Page 62 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Inoko, M.,Ariiso, K.. 1982. DETERMINATION OF CHRYSOTILE FIBERS IN RESIDUAL DUST ON ROAD VEHICLE

BRAKE DRUMS. Environmental Pollution Series B: Chemical and Physical.

Data Type	Experimental

Hero ID	3583030

Domain

Metric

Rating^ Score

Comments^

Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 63 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Rowson, D. M.. 1978. CHRYSOTILE CONTENT OF WEAR DEBRIS OF BRAKE LININGS. Wear.
Data Type Experimental

Hero ID 3585095

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:
Metric 3:

Sampling Methodology and Conditions

Analytical Methodology
Biomarker Selection

Medium

Medium
N/A

2
2

N/A

Debris collection technique was described and seemed reason-
able. The method may have been used in H. D. Bush, D. M.
Rowson and S. E. Warren, Wear, 20 (2) (1972) 211. , but is
unclear

Limited details on sampling methodology.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Testing Scenario

Sample Size and Variability
Temporality

Medium

Low
Low

3
3

Dust from brakes. Dust was from a simulation, not actual
brake repair. Brake dust was collected from two temperature
conditions.

number of samples not specifically reported. Brake dust was
collected from two temperature conditions.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 7: Reporting of Results

Metric 8: Quality Assurance

Low
N/A

N/A

Results not clearly described. Uncertain on the number of
replicated performed, no CV.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 9: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

looked at various temperatures.

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.6

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 64 of 111

-------
Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. STORET: Asbestos.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970045

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

High
High

1
1



Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Low

1
1

3



Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
High

1
1



Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

N/A



Overall Quality Determination

High

1.3



Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 65 of 111

-------
Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Abestos.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970091

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Medium
N/A

2

N/A

Could not find documentation of how MSDS were selected, for
inclusion

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Low

1
1

3



Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
High

1
1



Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

N/A



Overall Quality Determination

High

1.5



Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 66 of 111

-------
Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Amosite.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970094

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Medium
N/A

2

N/A

Could not find documentation of how MSDS were selected, for
inclusion

no analytical method for msds.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
High

1
1
1



Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

Medium
High

2
1

Documentation available, but limited.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

N/A



Overall Quality Determination

High

1.3



Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 67 of 111

-------
Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Tremolite.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970095

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

High

N/A

1

N/A

Could not find documentation of how MSDS were selected, for
inclusion

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Low

1
1

3

No brakes listed.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
High

1
1



Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

N/A



Overall Quality Determination

High

1.3



Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 68 of 111

-------
Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Anthophyllite.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970096

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Medium
N/A

2

N/A

Could not find documentation of how MSDS were selected, for
inclusion

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
Low

1
1

3



Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

Medium
High

2
1

Documented on web, but limited.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

N/A



Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.7



Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 69 of 111

-------
Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 2017. Chemical and product categories: Chrysotile.
Data Type Databases Not Unique to a Chemical
Hero ID 3970097

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Metric 2:

Sampling Methodology
Analytical Methodology

Medium
N/A

2

N/A

Could not find documentation of how MSDS were selected, for
inclusion

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:
Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area
Temporal
Exposure Scenario

High
High
High

1
1
1



Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Availability of DB and Supporting Documents
Metric 7: Reporting Results

High
High

1
1



Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

N/A



Overall Quality Determination

High

1.2



Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 70 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Mauskopf, J. A.. 1987. Projections of cancer risks attributable to future exposure to asbestos. Risk Analysis.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 338

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

2

Gave the sources for which 1983 data was used; needs more
explanation on how the search was conducted

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

1

Very relevant exposure scenario: exposure to friction products

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

Gave the whole list of references, included in table of data used

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Good discussion of model data variability and assumption un-
certainty

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.2



Extracted

No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 71 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Esmen, N. A.,Erdal, S.. 1990. Human occupational and nonoccupational exposure to fibers. Environmental Health Perspec-
tives.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	522

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Low

3

Selected paper for demonstrations of variances in sample col-
lection

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

very relevant: brake repair

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

2

Some selected without documentation; otherwise, documented

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Good discussion of variability in data collection and data gap
uncertainty

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 72 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Millette, J. R.,Craun, G. F.,Stober, J. A.,Kraemer, D. F.,Tousignant, H. G.,Hildago, E.,Duboise, R. L.,Benedict, J.. 1983.

Epidemiology study of the use of asbestos-cement pipe for the distribution of drinking water in Escambia County, Florida.
Environmental Health Perspectives.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	60451

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

2

No discussion of ample analysis type

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Low

3

Asbestos cement pipe, tap water

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1



Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1



Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 73 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Millette, J. R.,Clark, P. J.,Stober, J.,Rosenthal, M.. 1983. Asbestos in water supplies of the United States. Environmental

Health Perspectives.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	60452

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

2

Review of previous summary articles with only some additional
data

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

relevant: asbestos cement pipes and contaminated surface wa-
ters

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

2

Older references

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Needs a more robust discussion

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 74 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Millette, J. R.,Clark, P. J.,Pansing, M. F.,Twyman, J. D.. 1980. Concentration and size of asbestos in water supplies.

Environmental Health Perspectives.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	60455

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	High	1 Collection of asbestos analyses from all other the US

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

1

Relevant: reservoirs, surface waters exposed to asbestos

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

Well documented

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Discusses variability in concentration and size data

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.2



Extracted

No







I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 75 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Suta, B. E.,Levine, R. J.. 1979. Non-occupational asbestos emissions and exposures.
Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	786508

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

2

Chapter 5 Non-occupational asbestos emissions and exposures
is based on material included in Asbestos: An Informational
Resource, Ed. by Richard J. Levine, U.S. Dept. Health, Ed-
ucation, and Welfare DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 78-1681,
May 1978, and supported under contract number NOl-CN-
55176.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Discussion on automotive friction materials under Section
4(iii).l

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

References listed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2



Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 76 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Finkelstein, M. M.. 2013. The analysis of asbestos count data with "nondetects": the example of asbestos fiber

concentrations in the lungs of brake workers. American Journal of Industrial Medicine.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	2546734

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	Medium 2 Specific data sets from previous publications detailed

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Very relevant: brake workers - asbestos dose

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

2

Few studies but detailed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Some discussion of the uncertainty of methodology for account-
ing for fiber counts vs density

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0



Extracted

No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 77 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Richter, R. 0.,Finley, B. L.,Paustenbach, D. J.,Williams, P. R. D.,Sheehan, R J.. 2009. An evaluation of short-term exposures
of brake mechanics to asbestos during automotive and truck brake cleaning and machining activities. Journal of Exposure
Science and Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 2548725

Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

Studies accepted from a large date range; good description of
acceptance criteria

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

Very relevant exposure scenario: mechanic's exposure; gives
numerous raw data values and SD/range information

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

Gives a complete list of the included studies and the large
database used to search for them; could use more discussion
of search terms

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Discussion of variability among mechanical procedures for cre-
ating dust and discussed uncertainty regarding simulating pre-
1970 conditions

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8

Extracted

Yes

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 78 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Donovan, E. P.,Donovan, B. L.,Sahmel, J.,Scott, P. K.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2011. Evaluation of bystander exposures to
asbestos in occupational settings: a review of the literature and application of a simple eddy diffusion model. Critical Reviews
in Toxicology.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	2581697

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	High	1 Detailed criteria for choosing studies and the methodology to

search for them; includes 1970s studies and more recent simu-
lation studies

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario	High	1 very relevant: friction products exposure

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1 Thorough documentation of sources used

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1 Great discussion of model differences and uncertainties

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.0

Extracted

No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 79 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Finley, B. L.,Pierce, J. S.,Paustenbach, D. J.,Scott, L. L.,Lievense, L.,Scott, P. K.,Galbraith, D. A.. 2012. Malignant pleural
mesothelioma in US automotive mechanics: reported vs expected number of cases from 1975 to 2007. Regulatory Toxicology
and Pharmacology.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3078581

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	High	1 Good description of criteria for chosen studies and search strat-

egy

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario	High	1 very relevant: auto mechanics exposure; percent by weight fric-

tion products

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

well documented and available

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

discussion of factors that could overestimate or underestimate
the observed number of cases

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.0



Extracted

No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 80 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Madl, A. K.,Clark, K.,Paustenbach, D. J.. 2007. Exposure to airborne asbestos during removal and installation of gaskets and
packings: a review of published and unpublished studies. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B: Critical
Reviews.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3079606

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

High

1

described exposure of interest; indicated include/exclude cri-
teria

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

relevant: exposure to gaskets and packing material used in
pipes and autos

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

2

published and unpublished but well documented

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Good discussion of variability regarding the studies used, needs
better discussion of uncertainty of outcome

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.5



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 81 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Paustenbach, D. J.,Finley, B. L.,Lu, E. T.,Brorby, G. P.,Sheehan, P. J.. 2004. Environmental and occupational health hazards
associated with the presence of asbestos in brake linings and pads (1900 to present): a "state-of-the-art" review.
Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B: Critical Reviews.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3080278

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

1

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.0

Extracted

No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 82 of 111

-------
Study Citation: . 1977. IARC monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to man: asbestos.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3084507

Domain Metric Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium

2

Summary paper: late 1970s

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium

2

Some relevant friction values, percent by weight

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References High

1

Complete

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low

3

Separate section of discussion on results that includes some
discussion

Overall Quality Determination Medium

2.0



Extracted No



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 83 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Finley, B. L.,Richter, R. 0.,Mowat, F. S.,Mlynarek, S.,Paustenbach, D. J.,Warmerdam, J. M.,Sheehan, P. J.. 2007. Cumulative
asbestos exposure for US automobile mechanics involved in brake repair (circa 1950s-2000). Journal of Exposure Science and
Environmental Epidemiology.

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3085741

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

greater extrapolation necessary for 8-h TWA for monte carlo
analysis vs raw data

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

High

Very relevant exposure scenario: lifetime exposure for career

mechanics in the US

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

Extensive discussion of references and criteria for study accep-
tance

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Discussed variability among selected studies and uncertainty
of representativeness and previous studies' shortcomings

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.5

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 84 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Naylor, L. M.. 1989. Asbestos in sludge -
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3095297

a significant risk. BioCycle.



Domain Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^



Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Low

3

No information on methodology for surface water;
source

secondary

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

3

No info on exposure scenario for surface water;
source

secondary

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

References cited for Surface Water; secondary source

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

No info on variability/uncertainty for surface water;
source

secondary

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.5





Extracted

No









t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 85 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Ganor, E.,Fischbein, A.,Brenner, S.,Froom, P.. 1992. Extreme airborne asbestos concentrations in a public building. British

Journal of Industrial Medicine.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3096697

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Low

3

Sampling and analysis were carried out according to Method
No. 2 (RTM-2) which was issued by the Asbestos International
Association; secondary source

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Unacceptable

4

No information provided on garage where brake linings con-
taining asbestos are repaired.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

3

Reference provided for Method (RTM-2)

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score**: 3.2.

Extracted



No







** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable
(score = 4), EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered
unacceptable and the score is presented solely to increase transparency,
t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 86 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Atsdr,. 2001. Toxicological profile for asbestos (update).
Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3098571

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^-

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

2

Gov't report (ATSDR Tox Profile) but did not provide info on
literature search methods.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Low

3

Cannot determine if air concentrations are indoor or ambient.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

References listed: *WHO. 1998. Chrysotile asbestos: Environ-
mental health criteria. Geneva: Switzerland: World Health
Organization.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.2



Extracted



No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 87 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Paustenbach, D. J.,Richter, R. 0.,Finley, B. L.,Sheehan, P. J.. 2003. An evaluation of the historical exposures of mechanics

to asbestos in brake dust. Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3531297

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

High

1

Historical analysis of over 200 samples; convert 8-h TWA for
comparison; US and abroad; at least 1 hr of sampling to be
included

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

High

1

Very relevant exposure scenario

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

30 years of data; 10 studies chosen-listed in a table

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Automobile vs truck exposure differences; thorough discussion
of characterizing variability

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.0



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 88 of 111

-------
Study Citation:

Webber, J. S.,Covey, J. R.. 1991.

Asbestos in water.

Critical Reviews in Environmental Control.

Data Type

Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID

3583091

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium 2 For methodology there is no discussion of literature search

methods. Under Section IV Aquatic Ecosystems, secondary
sources: some of the studies state that samples were analyzed
by TEM. Article also contains a Section V Detection and Anal-
ysis that discusses a variety of analytical methods have been
assessed for their ability to detect asbestos in water and states
TEM is the method of choice for detection and identification
for waterborne asbestos.

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

No info on exposure scenario for surface water; however, vari-
ous aquatic species are discussed; secondary source

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

References listed for Aquatic Ecosystems

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 89 of 111

-------
Study Citation: del Piano, M.,Palagiano, C.,Rimatori, V..
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 3615595

1989. Asbestos hazards in the city of Rome, Italy. Social Science & Medicine.

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

2

Samples collected using membran filters (AIA and NIOSH

Methods). Fibers counted by PCOM

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Some discussion but limited on exposure scenario for brake
repair/servicing; secondary sources

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

References listed for brake repair/servicing

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 90 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Anonymous,. 1975. Current Intelligence Bulletin 5 Asbestos. Asbestos Exposure during Servicing of Motor Vehicle Brake

and Clutch Assemblies (with reference package).

Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID 3648286

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Low

Primary data were presented at a July 21, 1975 NIOSH meet-
ing by investigators from the Mount Siani School of Medicine in
New York City indicating that workers engaged in the mainte-
nance and repair of automobile and truck brake linings are ex-
posed to potentially hazardous levels of airborne asbestos dust.
Specific brake servicing operations studied included blow-out
of automobile drum brake assemblies, grinding of used truck
brake linings, and bevelling of new truck brake linings. Aver-
age peak asbestos air concentrations for these three activities
based on personal samples taken within ten feet of the operator
were reported; however, there is no discussion on how samples
were collected or analyzed.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

Workers engaged in the maintenance and repair of automobile
and truck brake linings are exposed to potentially hazardous
levels of airborne asbestos dust. Specific brake servicing op-
erations studied included blow-out of automobile drum brake
assemblies, grinding of used truck brake linings, and bevelling
of new truck brake linings.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

Citation for primary data from the investigators at the Mount
Sinai School of Medicine is implied based on this being pre-
sented at the July 21, 1975 NIOSH meeting. Other references
are provided.

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.8

Extracted

Continued on next

page

Page 91 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: Anonymous,. 1975. Current Intelligence Bulletin 5 Asbestos. Asbestos Exposure during Servicing of Motor Vehicle Brake

and Clutch Assemblies (with reference package).

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3648286

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 92 of 111

-------
Study Citation: U.S, E. P. A.. 1999. Methodology for conducting risk assessments at asbestos superfund sites Part 2: Technical background
document.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3970153

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	High 1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

3 No brakes

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.5

Extracted

No





I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 93 of 111

-------
Study Citation:
Data Type
Hero ID

ToxNet Hazardous Substances Data, Bank. 2017. HSDB: Asbestos.

Completed Exposure Assessment

3970271

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

High

1

For methodology there is no discussion of literature search
methods; however, it is a ToxNet Hazardous Substances Data,
Bank from NLM, NIH so should be accepted by the scientific
community

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Exposure scenario for brake repair and domestic exposure as-
sociated with DIY construction briefly discussed; secondary
source

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

References listed for brake repair and domestic exposure asso-
ciated with DIY construction

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 94 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Iarc,. 2012. ARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans: Asbestos (Chrysotile, amosite, crocidolite,

tremolite, actinolite, and anthophyllite).

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3970851

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

2

For methodology there is some discussion of using systematic
review of epidemiological literature, but not much discussion
on literature search methods for other areas. It is an Interna-
tional Agency for Research and Cancer (IARC) monograph so
should be accepted by the scientific community

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Exposure scenario for clutches, brake repair, and cement cut-
ting briefly discussed; secondary source; Table 1.3 fiber con-
centrations in air in different workplaces in Germany and text
narratives list under Section on Studies of Occupational Expo-
sure

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

3

References listed for clutches, brake repair, cement cutting

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.5



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 95 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Niosh,. 1976. Revised recommended asbestos standard.
Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3974877

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Medium

2

For methodology there is not much discussion on literature
search methods; however, it is a NIOSH Revised Recommended
Asbestos Standard; should be accepted by the scientific com-
munity

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

Low

3

Epidemiological study (Lorimer et al. 1976) for brake re-
pair maintenance and xray abnormalities, no concentrations
reported; secondary source

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

References listed for epidemiological study (Lorimer et al.
1976) for brake repair maintenance and xray abnormalities,

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.2



Extracted



No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 96 of 111

-------
Study Citation:

Nicnas,. 1999. Chrysotile asbestos: priority exisiting chemical no. 9.



Data Type

Completed Exposure Assessment



Hero ID

3978350



Domain

Metric Rating^ Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1; Methodology	Medium 2 See App. 2, personal monitoring conducted at all workshops

membrane filter samplin (MFM) and PCM specified in As-
bestos Code of Practice. Some samples analyzed by ATEM
using the NIOSH/TEM/MFM1 and MFM2. Sampling was less
than the specified 4 hours as work was task oriented (therefore
results were not expressed as TWA).

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Workplace surveyed in Sydney, NSW: 5 service garages (4 cars
& 1 bus), 3 brake bonding workshops, and one gasket process-
ing workshop. Table 10 provides results of NICNAS Automo-
tive Aftermarket Survey: Control measures used in workshops
(exposure duration & frequency, comments on ventilation)

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

2

Reference list provided

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2



Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0



Extracted

No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 97 of 111

-------
Study Citation:

Oehha,. 2003. Public health goals for chemicals in drinking water asbestos.



Data Type

Completed Exposure Assessment



Hero ID

3982252



Domain

Metric Rating^ Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	Medium 2 For methodology there is not any discussion on literature

search methods; however, it is an OEHHA CA EPA document
on Public Health Goals for Asbestos in Drinking Water; should
be accepted by the scientific community

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario	Low	3 Asbestos in drinking water is Off PECO; however, document

also contains some discussion on surface water (river, lakes,
streams), rainwater into a cistern and surface water from cis-
tern with considerable asbestos contamination to raise con-
cern about use of water for room humidification , corrosion of
asbestos-cement pipes; secondary sources

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1 References listed

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3 Variability & uncertainty are not discussed

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.2

Extracted

No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 98 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Atsdr,. 2001. Toxicological profile for asbestos.
Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	3982335

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^-

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

High

1

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Low

3 No concentration data for brakes

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

High

1

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

High

1

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.5

Extracted

No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 99 of 111

-------
Study Citation:
Data Type
Hero ID

P. E. I. Associates. 1985. Asbestos dust control in brake maintenance. Draft.

Completed Exposure Assessment

4151966

Domain

Metric

Rating^

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:

Methodology

Low

Because this monitoring was done under a variety of sampling
times and conditions, with variable amounts of brake drum
dust, and variable asbestos concentrations in the dust, and by
different test methods, the results should be viewed only as
rough estimates of worker exposure.

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 2:

Exposure Scenario

High

very relevant: dust control for brake maintenance workers

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

A mix of old agency reports and publications, industry papers,
and also some personal communications and workshops; but
well documented

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

Variability described and uncertainty addressed; ultimately a
comparison of dust control methods relative to each other.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.2

Extracted

Yes

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 100 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Niehs,. 1982. Control of toxic substances in the atmosphere: Asbestos (Preliminary draft).
Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	4152042

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^-

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

2

multiple methodologies from various studies

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

1

various activity exposure concentrations

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

2

Older agency reports and publications but well documented

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2



Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8



Extracted

No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 101 of 111

-------
Study Citation: P. E. I. Associates. 1987. Cost of engineering controls for brake maintenance/repair.
Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	4152047

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^-

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

2

number of do-it-yourself brake jobs; number of brake shops

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

1

brake maintenance exposure

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Medium

2

The primary sources of information for this study were direct
contact with vendors of control equipment, the National In-
stitute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the Oc-
cupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), litera-
ture supplied by the vendors, and the open literature. Other
sources included trade associations such as the Motor Vehicle
Manufacturers Association and trade publications

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

minimal discussion

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.0



Extracted

No





t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 102 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Bragg, G.. 1986. Exposure to asbestos: An analysis of the technical aspects of the Environmental Protection Agency proposal

to ban and phase out asbestos.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	4152099

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	Medium 2

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

2



Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

3

Lots of older agency documents, fewer published scientific lit-
erature

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

2

Some discussion

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.2



Extracted

No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 103 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Osha,. 1986. Final regulatory impact and regulatory flexibility analysis of the revised asbestos standard.
Data Type Completed Exposure Assessment
Hero ID 4152104

Domain Metric Rating^

Score Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology Medium

2

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario Medium

2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References Medium

2 Older references

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty Low

3 some discussion

Overall Quality Determination Medium

2.2

Extracted No



t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 104 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Cogley, D.,Krusell, N.,McInnes, R.,Anderson, P.,Bell, R.. 1982. Life cycle of asbestos in commercial and industrial use

including estimates of releases to air, water, and land.

Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	4152169

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology	Medium 2

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

Medium

2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

3 Includes older documentation and personal communications

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3 Some discussion

Overall Quality Determination

Low

2.5

Extracted

No





I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 105 of 111

-------
Study Citation: Wright, M. D.. 1984. Phase I report: Regulatory analysis of the proposed OSHA standard on asbestos.
Data Type	Completed Exposure Assessment

Hero ID	4152228

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^-

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Methodology

Medium

2

Multiple exposure activities

Domain 2: Representative

Metric 2: Exposure Scenario

High

1

Some very relevant exposure scenarios

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 3: Documentation of References

Low

3

Older documentation

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Low

3

Minimal discussion

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

2.2



Extracted

No







t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

* The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 106 of 111

-------
Study Citation:	U.S, E. P. A.. 1987. Household solvent products: A national usage survey.

Data Type	Survey

Hero ID	1005969

Domain	Metric	Rating^ Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Data Collection Methodology
Data Analysis Methodology

High
High

1
1

Domain 2: Representative
Metric 3:

Metric 4:
Metric 5:

Geographic Area

Sampling / Sampling Size
Response Rate

High

High
Medium

1 Nationwide (U.S.A.) survey with outreach via random dialing
and willingness to provide address and respond to survey.

1

2

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 6: Reporting of Results
Metric 7: Quality Assurance

High
Medium

1

2

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 8: Variability and Uncertainty

N/A

N/A

Overall Quality Determination

High

1.3

Extracted



No



I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

If any individual metrics are deemed Unacceptable, then the overall rating is also unacceptable. Otherwise, the overall rating is based on the following scale:
High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: => 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: => 2.3 to < 3.

Page 107 of 111

-------
Study Citation: N. Plato, G. Tornling, C. Hogstedt, S. Krantz. 1995. An index of past asbestos exposure as applied to car and bus mechanics.

Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 3081596

Domain Metric Ratingt Score ('< >111t r ic111 s

Domain 1: Reliability

Metric 1: Mathematicl Equations Medium 2 The model was designed to calculate asbestos exposure from

work with friction materials such as dust from clutches and
break shoes. It has been described in detail in Swedish (Plato
et al., 1991), and is more briefly summarized in the Appendix.
By reviewing the international literature, a set of parameters
that influence the asbestos exposure of car and bus mechanics
was selected. The magnitude of the multipliers associated with
those variables was estimated and chosen from a large series
of past measurements covering representative values for differ-
ent work activities, technical equipment, ventilation, technical
standard and workshop sizes. The derivation is discussed in
more detail in Table Al of the Appendix. The coefficients were
used in an equation that takes task activity as well as back-
ground exposure (general shop exposure) into consideration.
The model was created as a combination of an additive and a
multiplicative model (Table A2 in the Appendix) and makes
calculation of cumulative exposure possible. The equation in
the model expresses the quantative exposure in an asbestos
index. Asbestos index (Al) = general shop exposure + task
activity exposure, for each mechanic, for each year, summed
for all years of employment as a vehicle mechanic.

Continued on next page

Page 108 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: N. Plato, G. Tornling, C. Hogstedt, S. Krantz. 1995. An index of past asbestos exposure as applied to car and bus mechanics.

Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 3081596

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Metric 2: Model Evaluation Medium 2 The model was validated using representative Swedish mea-

surements in car and bus repair shops for the period 1976-
1988. The fiber measurement criteria using phase-contrast op-
tical microscopy were: length > 5 um, diameter less than or
equal 3 um and aspect ratio 2 3: 1. Ten reports, including 23
8-h measurements (personal sampling) at different car repair
shops, were selected from the data bank of industrial measure-
ments at the Swedish National Board of Occupational Health
to validate the efficiency of the model. These investigation re-
ports were selected because they contained sufficient informa-
tion on work activity, production rate and other information
needed to choose coefficients in the model. Many reports in
the databank did not contain adequate information and could
not be used. The coefficients and equations in the Appendix
were applied for those 23 measurements. Asbestos indices (AI)
were calculated and plotted against the measured fiber level in
the transformed curve (Fig. 1). The calculated asbestos index
was related to asbestos fiber level by the statistically signif-
icant regression line y = 0.029 + 0.011 x, shown in Fig. 3.
The correlation coefficient was r=0.69 for all observations (N=
23). This demonstrates that a quantitative relationship exists
between f/ml and the AI. It also shows that the exposure was
generally low.

Domain 2: Representative

Continued on next page

Page 109 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: N. Plato, G. Tornling, C. Hogstedt, S. Krantz. 1995. An index of past asbestos exposure as applied to car and bus mechanics.

Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 3081596

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Metric 3: Exposure Scenario Medium 2 The model was used to characterize the exposures of 103 car

and bus mechanics. Each subject answered a questionnaire
which asked about the repair shops where they had worked, job
activities and employment time. The self-administered ques-
tionnaire was expanded with a standardized personal inter-
view. Two industrial hygienists asked 38 additional questions
for each workplace in a subject"s work history. The questions
included the following topics: room conditions (11 questions);
treatment/handling of brake shoes (eight questions); work ac-
tivities involved with repair (13 questions); and activities of the
bystanders (six questions). The people interviewed also had to
estimate the duration of work to replace brake shoe linings,
number of changes from year to year, grinding of brake lining,
time and end year for use of compressed air, and use of res-
piratory protection. For each decade they also estimated the
general condition of the work area and dustiness from different
work operations using a five-level ranking scale with the exist-
ing condition as the reference point. The aim of the personal
interview was to collect information that could have influenced
early exposure, such as work activities that generate high ex-
posure peaks and also the possibility of dispersing the fiber in
dusts found in brake drums and clutch housings,

A model was constructed to calculate cumulative asbestos ex-
posure from friction materials including duration, intensity and
exposure. The model is a combination of an additive and a
multiplicative model, where an asbestos index was constructed
that takes both near field and far field exposure into consider-
ation. The model was based upon data from the international
literature and quantitative asbestos measurements performed
1976-1988 in Swedish car repair workshops.

Domain 3: Accessibility/Clarity

Metric 4: Model and Model Documentation Availability High 1

Metric 5: Model Inputs and Defaults

Medium 2

The model and documentation are provided in Appendix A.
The cumulative index for asbestos exposure was calculated us-
ing a three-step model, combining additive and multiplicative
components. Coefficients for eight variables representing job
activity, technology level, workshop conditions and time (Ta-
ble Al), were put into an exposure matrix. The model has been
described earlier in detail in Swedish (Plato et al., 1991).

The mechanics' fiber exposure at 398 repair workshops during
a period of 48 years were calculated using the model. The mean
cumulative exposure was estimated to be 2.6 f/ml * year.

Continued on next page

Page 110 of 111

-------
— continued from previous page

Study Citation: N. Plato, G. Tornling, C. Hogstedt, S. Krantz. 1995. An index of past asbestos exposure as applied to car and bus mechanics.

Annals of Occupational Hygiene.

Data Type Modeling

Hero ID 3081596

Domain Metric Rating^ Score Comments^

Domain 4: Variability and Uncertainty

Metric 6: Variability and Uncertainty

Medium

A model was developed to estimate past exposure from as-
bestos friction materials for Swedish vehicle mechanics. The
model was based on estimations of multipliers for different
exposure variables derived from the worker" s task activities
and background activities in the workshop. The constructed
model was applied on interview data from 103 mechanics. The
mean cumulative asbestos exposure for this population was 2.6
f ml * year. Despite the perception that car and bus mechan-
ics constitute a homogeneous group, the variation in exposure
was wide, 0.1-11.6 f ml * year. Annual asbestos exposure es-
timates showed a three times higher mean exposure in 1964
compared to 1984. A statistically significant 13 percent de-
crease in mean TL,, was observed for the exposed group com-
pared to the non-asbestos exposed control group. However, no
exposure-response relationship was observed between either cu-
mulative asbestos exposure or employment time and any of the
lung function variables TL co, TLC, FEV1, CV percent or VC.

Overall Quality Determination

Medium

1.8

Extracted

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Page 111 of 111

-------