Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "26413532",
    "label": "Tobacco Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS)",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413532"
}

{
    "id": "26413532",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413532",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Tobacco Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS)",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413532",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
        "Bruce Reed's Tobacco Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/32/4135/26413532/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-Tobacco/2011-0299-S-Tobacco-JPG/Box_265/42-t-7367462-20110299S-265-011-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_265_011_2015_Page_001.JPG",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/32/4135/26413532/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-Tobacco/2011-0299-S-Tobacco-JPG/Box_265/42-t-7367462-20110299S-265-011-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_265_011_2015_Page_001.JPG",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/32/4135/26413532/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-Tobacco/2011-0299-S-Tobacco-JPG/Box_265/42-t-7367462-20110299S-265-011-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_265_011_2015_Page_001.JPG",
    "imageCount": 20,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26413532",
    "naId": 26413532,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "otherTitles": [
        "42-t-7367462-20110299S-265-011-2015"
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 2,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/32/4135/26413532/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2011-0299-S-Tobacco/2011-0299-S-Tobacco-JPG/Box_265/42-t-7367462-20110299S-265-011-2015/42_t_7367462_20110299S_265_011_2015_Page_002.JPG",
    "mediaId": "406bc0c2331e4ad8",
    "ocrText": "MAY 11:24 FR CDC/OSH-OD\n97704885767 TO 912022058313\nP.03/08\nMAY-04-88 10:10 From:CHAMBLEE IC\n7704887422\nT-704 P.03/08 Job-200\nJOEM Volume 40, Number 3, March 1998\n271\nfor ETS exposure.⁷⁻⁹ One potential\nBiologic monitoring of exposure\narea has an area of 8679 ft.² Gaming\ndrawback of vapor-phase nicotine is\nto ETS is most commonly conducted\nactivities are in operation 24 hours\nthat the physical properties of vapor-\nby measuring cotinine in the serum\nper day, seven days a week. The\nphase nicotine on indoor surfaces\nand/or urine of potentially-exposed\nmaximum occupancy of the casino is\ncan alter (increase or decrease) its\npersons. 3.8.14-16 Cotinine. which is\n9560 persons. The casino employs\nconcentration relative to other ETS\nthe major metabolite of nicotine, has\napproximately 800 persons who\ncomponents. Respirable particulate\na half-life of approximately 16-20\nwork on the casino floor, approxi-\nhas also been used as a marker of\nhours, reflecting exposure to nicotine\nmately 330 are full-time dealers and\nETS, but it may be difficult to sepa-\nfrom the previous one to two days.³\napproximately 180 are full-time\nrate the ETS-associated particulate\nThere are no NIOSH, ACGIH, or\ndealer supervisors. Specific game or\nfrom that of other indoor sources. 7-0\nOSHA criteria for cotinine in blood\narea assignments for dealers and su-\nThe concentrations of these markers\nor urine. Although studies reporting\npervisors were made at the start of\nin ETS are consistently lower than\ncounine levels in non-smokers ex-\neach shift and changed daily (and\ntheir respective occupational air-\nposed to ETS have been summa-\nsometimes within a given work\nborne exposure criteria. which were\nrized,¹² differences in laboratory\nshift). Other casino floor employees\nbased primarily on acute effects. The\nmethods sometimes make it difficult\ninclude waitresses. cashiers. and se-\nNIOSH Recommended Exposure\nto compare cotinine levels deter-\ncurity personnel.\nLimit (REL) and the American Con-\nmined in different laboratories. A\nThe heating. ventilating, and air-\nference of Governmental Industrial\nstudy of more than 600 non-smokers\nconditioning system was controlled\nHygienists' (ACGIH) threshold limit\nattending a medical clinic found a\nby a Honeywell building manage-\nvalue (TLV) for nicotine, used pri-\nmean urine cotinine level of 8.8\nment system (Honeywell Inc., Min-\nmarily for exposure assessments in\nng/mL (range, 0-85). with increased\nneapolis. MN). There were 17 air\nagriculture, are 500 micrograms per\nlevels correlating with reported ex-\nhandling units, each rated to supply\ncubic meter of air (µg/m³). and are\nposures.¹⁴ Another study found a\n47,000 cubic feel per minute of con-\nnot applicable in evaluations of ETS\nmean urine cotinine level of 9.2\nditioned air. Assuming a maximum\nexposure. 10.11 A model used to de-\nng/mL among non-smokers exposed\ncasino capacity (9560 persons) and a\nrive a health-based standard for ETS\nto ETS at home or work. 18 A recent\nreported minimum 30% outdoor air\nhas shown that an eight-hour, time\nUS population survey measuring se-\nintake, an outside air rate of 25 cubic\nweighted average exposure to 2.3\nrum cotinine in over 2600 working\nfeet per minute per person (cfm/\nµg/m³ of nicotine would correspond\nadults reported the following geo-\nperson) can be calculated. Although\nto 3 lung cancer deaths among\nmetric means by category: (1) no\nthe ventilation system was not in-\n10,000 exposed over a working life-\nreported ETS exposure: 0.132 ng/\nspected, carbon dioxide (CO₂) mea-\ntime.¹² The US Department of La-\nmL; (2) reported ETS exposure at\nsurements (which ranged from 425\nbor. Occupational Safety and Health\nwork: 0.318 ng/mL; (3) reported\nto 850 parts per million) were con-\nAdministration (OSHA) general in-\nETS exposure at home: 0.651 ng/\nsistent with the calculated outdoor\ndustry permissible exposure 11mit\nmL: and (4) reported ETS exposure\nair supply rates.\n(PEL) for respirable particulate not\nat home and work: 0.926 ng/mL.\nTobacco smoking by customers is\ncomposed of a substance that has its\nAlthough some foods. including\npermitted throughout the casino\nown PEL is 5000 µg/m³ (the ACGIH\ntea, tomatoes, poratoes, and cauli-\nfloor; employees do not smoke while\nTLV is 3000 µg/m:³ there is no\nflower. may contain nicotine in mea-\non duty. Although some gaming ta-\nREL). 11.13 In contrast, the mean area\nsurable quantities and therefore have\nbles are designated as non-smoking,\nair nicotine concentrations reported\nbeen suggested as a source of cotin-\nthe non-smoking tables are generally\nin ETS studies of public buildings\nine in the body.¹⁹ the amount of\nlocated adjacent to tables where\nhave ranged from 0.7-37 µg/m³,\ncotinine in serum as a result of food\nsmoking is permitted. The employee\nconcentrations in restaurants and\nintake has been shown to be ex-\ncafeteria has smoking and non-\nbars have ranged from 2.3-65.5 Hg/\ntremely low relative to that resulting\nsmoking areas, bur these areas are\nm³, and concentrations in gaming\nfrom ETS exposure.\nnot physically partitioned. and to-\nparlors and betting shops have\nbacco smoke is evident in the non-\nranged from 11-19 µg/m.¹.⁷.¹² One\nWorkplace Description\nsmoking area. Employee lounges are\nstudy found that the median air nic-\nThe casino that was evaluated was\ndesignated non-smoking areas.\notine concentration was 8.6 µg/m³ in\nconstructed in 1979 and offers a\noffices at worksites that allowed\nvariety of gaming activities, includ-\nMethods\nsmoking.⁶ Respirable particulate\ning slot machines. roulette, black-\nThe field study was performed in\nmeasurements have ranged up to 115\njack. baccarat. craps. and poker. The\nMarch 1996 and consisted of envi-\nµg/m³ in office buildings and up to\ngaming floor has an area of 71.380\nronmental and medical evaluations.\n843 µg/m³ in restaurants.⁷\nsquare feet (ft²): a separate poker\nEmployee representatives and man-"
}