Reducing Exposures to Airborne Lead in Indoor Firing
Ranges -- United States
Between 1980 and 1982, the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) completed nine evaluations of exposures
to
lead in indoor firing ranges (1). Results show that exposure of
shooters to airborne lead is greatly reduced by replacing
traditional
lead bullets with nylon-clad, copper-jacketed, or zinc ammunition.
Investigators conducted studies in municipal, state, and
federal
government firing ranges in Alabama, Georgia, Missouri, Nebraska,
Ohio, Vermont, and Washington, D.C. Personal breathing-zone air
samples were obtained to measure lead exposure of 90 persons firing
weapons during qualifying tests with .38 caliber revolvers. The
samples were analyzed for lead by atomic absorption
spectrophotometry
(2).
When shooters were firing lead bullets, their mean lead
exposure
was 110 ug/m((3)), calculated as an 8-hour time-weighted average
(TWA). Forty-two (89%) of 47 exposures exceeded the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard (3) for
occupational
exposure to lead (50 ug/m((3)) as an 8-hour TWA) (Table 2). When
nylon-clad, zinc, and copper-jacketed bullets were being fired, the
mean exposures to airborne lead were 41, 22, and 10 ug/m((3)),
respectively, calculated as 8-hour TWAs. While these alternate
types
of ammunition were being fired, three (7%) of the 43 samples
studied
exceeded the OSHA standard for occupational exposure to lead.
Reported by Hazard Evaluations and Technical Assistance Br, Div of
Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studies, NIOSH, CDC.
Editorial Note
Editorial Note: There are an estimated 16,000-18,000 indoor firing
ranges in the United States (4) and an estimated 1,178,000 people
employed in law enforcement (5). Hence, alternatives that reduce
exposures to airborne lead in indoor firing ranges have important
implications for the health and safety of these workers. Several
previous studies have documented the occupational hazard of
exposure
to lead in indoor firing ranges, particularly among range masters
and
instructors (6,7). Major sources of such exposures are lead
bullets
(from which airborne particles are released during firing) and
primers
containing lead styphnate (a highly explosive compound used to
initiate the combustion of gunpowder in the cartridge).
These exposures may be reduced by limiting the time a shooter
or
other person spends in the range and/or by improving the range's
ventilation. In 1975, NIOSH developed criteria for the design and
ventilation of indoor firing ranges (8). However, they are
difficult
to implement, particularly as "retrofits" of existing ranges, and
high-efficiency ventilation is costly to install and operate.
Also,
while the criteria, when implemented, were sufficient to result in
lead exposures below the then-current OSHA standard of 200
ug/m((3)),
their ability to produce levels meeting the current standard is
less
certain.
These circumstances have prompted the search for more
utilitarian
control technologies. Substitution of a less toxic substance for a
hazardous one has been found to be an efficient and effective
primary
preventive measure in occupational safety and health. Results of
previous laboratory investigations showed that substituting
unleaded
materials for lead bullets and primers could reduce lead emissions
from those sources (9,10). The present study documents the
efficacy
of this substitution under conditions of actual use.
There are disadvantages to the use of alternate bullets that
must
be considered; they include the increased cost of clad or jacketed
bullets (although this cost in the long run may be less than that
of
operating a high-efficiency ventilation system) and possible safety
hazards caused by the propensity of zinc bullets to "bounce back"
from
the bullet traps in some ranges.
References
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Health
hazard evaluation and technical assistance report nos.: HETA
80-000-011; HETA 80-079-753; HETA 80-072-755; HETA 81-010-890;
HETA 81-019-846; HETA 81-470-1040; HETA 81-303-947; HETA
82-380-1219; and HETA 82-195-1200. Cincinnati, Ohio: National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1980-1982.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. NIOSH
manual of analytical methods. 2nd ed. P&CAM No. 173.
Cincinnati,
Ohio: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
1977. (DHEW publication no. (NIOSH) 77-157-A.)
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OSHA safety and
health standards. 29 CFR 1910.1000. Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, 1980.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
Unpublished data.
Statistical Abstracts. Government Printing Office.
Washington,
D.C., 1981:182.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Health
hazard evaluation and technical assistance report no. HETA
73-000-022. Cincinnati, Ohio: National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, 1973.
Landrigan PJ, McKinney AS, Hopkins LC, Rhodes WW, Price WA, Cox
DH. Chronic lead absorption: result of poor ventilation in an
indoor pistol range. JAMA 1975;234:394-7.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Lead
exposure and design considerations for indoor firing ranges.
Cincinnati, Ohio; National Institute for Occupational Safety
and
Health, 1975. (DHEW publication no. (NIOSH) 76-130.)
National Bureau of Standards. The reduction of airborne lead
in
indoor firing ranges by using modified ammunition. Washington,
D.C.: National Bureau of Standards, 1977. (National Bureau of
Standards special publication no. 480-26.)
Fischbein A, Nicholson WJ, Weisman I. Comparative lead
emissions
from conventional and jacketed ammunition. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J
1980;41:525-7.
Disclaimer
All MMWR HTML documents published before January 1993 are electronic conversions from ASCII text into HTML. This conversion may have resulted in character translation or format errors in the HTML version. Users should not rely on this HTML document, but are referred to the original MMWR paper copy for the official text, figures, and tables. An original paper copy of this issue can be obtained from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402-9371; telephone: (202) 512-1800. Contact GPO for current prices.
**Questions or messages regarding errors in formatting should be addressed to mmwrq@cdc.gov.
