Tobacco Documents Online

01i05 93 10:52 %12U'2 219 8064 U.S. Departiltenf of~ Labor DOL 06H.A. 0.- S z016- 023 EXi=IJl'r 1 1lNStC't::Jiy 1D;, - ^'C':y .. ., !;.C. Ms. Kathleen E. Scheg LcgicZativc Counocl Action on Smoking and Health 2013 H'Street, N.W. Washingtdn, D.C. 20006 Dear Ms. Scheg: Thank you for your petition of July 31 to the Occupational Safety a2Yd He4l>r2i AdminiSLLaliaii (OSHA) requesi.ing! the regulatior. or enviroiamental tobacco srnoke (ETS) as a potential occupational carcinogen as outlined in the usHA c.anC,~Pc Policy. You also requested that ETS be separated from 3,radoor air quality and consicered as an independent project. un tne first point, the cancer policy (2r Ck'2t Part 1990) was intended to set OSHA policy for "the identification, classirication, and regulation ot potential occupational carcinogens" (§1990.10L). The OSFIA Cancer Policy basically "requires that criteria should be specified for the identification of substances which should be regulated as posing potential cancer risks to workers" (§1990.111 (a)). The OSHA Cancer Policy does not obligate oSAA to propose regulation, but specifies the procedures to be followed if oSHA decides to regulate (§19'90.142). As you no doubt know, even if the health effects are established, there are other elements to consider before rulemaking can be successfully undertaken. These include assessment of significant risk and feasibility. OSHA is in the process of examining all the data submitted to the indoor air quality docket. Specifically, all relevant ETS- associated health endpoints, including cancer, heart disease, and low-bzrthweight, are being examined by OSHA staff tn assuro that all significant health effects are included in OSHA's determi'r,atinn of Girlnifinant risk. It is important not to limit the scope of the project to just cancer effects since it is pst.imatcid that the number of chronically ETS-oxposad nonemokerc who are materially impaired due to heart and respiratory diseases wc->>,ld be much largar than those that die due to lung: canoor. On the second point, OSHA has already begun the proccc^ of collecting relevant information cn tobacco smoke, through the Reque.st for Information that was publishcd laot scptcmber 20. 0SI-rA zeceived over 1, 200 comments, and ae are in the process off revioaing tiZcac coiruncnto in or3cr to procrcd. :;t'atutorilT, OGIIA

DOL OSH.y 21:,S 01-05•93 10:52 $202 219 6064 evidenCe on thE record t!:at a sig,niii.c-ant: ,-;sk to workers exi~. _s, anJ we are prcc,eed_ng, Z01'". 023 we believe that, at th1s pcint im the project, nothing is to be gained either in the effectiveness cr the expediticn of the lulemaking, by separating out the issue of tobacco sMoke from indoor air quality issues. The information that you submitred a1on5 w.itri your petition has been included in the docket. Sincerely, uoroth_v L. Strunk Acting Assistant Secxetary 2