April 6, 2023
- Adoption of Agenda
The agenda was adopted. - Presentation: Radon - What You Need to Know - National Radon Program Update
Kelley Bush, Manager, Radon Outreach and Stakeholder Engagement, Health Canada (HC), provided an introduction to radon, its health impacts, and how to test for and reduce exposure. She also gave an overview of the National Radon Program’s (NRP) priorities and progress and reviewed the radon updates in Part I of the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations (COHSR).
K. Bush introduced radon and its related risks. It is a radioactive gas that comes from the breakdown of uranium that occurs naturally and can be found everywhere throughout the earth’s crust. When it seeps into homes and buildings, she explained that radon can accumulate to high levels, which can create a risk to the occupant’s health. It is also the leading cause of lung cancer in non-smokers, however it is easy to mitigate the risks associated with radon as it becomes harmless when diluted outside of buildings. She noted that the updated Canadian guideline for radon in indoor air is an annual average level of 200 becquerels per cubic metre (Bq/m3) and remarked that every building in contact with the ground has some level of radon in it, without exception.
K. Bush remarked that it is estimated that radon represents 50% of a person’s lifetime radiation exposure. She advised that HC created a radon risk map of Canada from surveys over the past ten (10) years that indicates that 7% of Canadian homes have high levels of radon but noted that this number varies so wildly that neighbouring buildings can have different levels of radon. Therefore, she clarified that the only way to know is to specifically test each building.
K. Bush indicated that the health risk of radon is long term and depends on three (3) things: the radon level, the length of exposure and whether one is a smoker. To assist in increasing awareness of the risks of radon, HC compares it to better known risks that cause death: radon-induced lung cancer causes 3,200 deaths per year compared to 1,898 deaths from car accidents, 300 from carbon monoxide exposure and 109 from house fires. She equated changing your smoke detector batteries, wearing a life vest when on the water, or a seat belt in a vehicle, to testing your house for radon levels.
K. Bush reviewed the options for testing, being purchasing a certified test kit or hiring a certified professional and conducting a long-term test, defined as at least three (3) months preferably during the fall or winter. She indicated that the three (3) month minimum accounts for the vast fluctuations in levels to avoid false positives or negatives to ensure a realistic assessment against the national standard to determine next steps. K. Bush indicated that information on both of these testing methods can be found at www.TakeActiononRadon.ca/test. K. Bush noted that if high levels of radon are found, they can be reduced through a Canadian – National Radon Proficiency Program (C-NRPP) certified professional, usually within a day, at a cost of approximately $2,000 - $3,000.
K. Bush went on to discuss the NRP and its five (5) main components: database and mapping, radon research, radon policy promotion, outreach & stakeholder engagement, and technical & industry guidance. Established in 2008, she indicated that the program has completed two (2) large-scale residential surveys as well as testing over 21,000 federal buildings, which resulted in the 7% average for homes and 3 – 4% average for federal buildings. Noting that radon is a multijurisdictional issue, K. Bush indicated that HC developed two (2) guides, one (1) for provinces and territories, and the other for municipalities, to enable radon reduction behaviour change, and encourages other federal departments to do also include radon reduction in their programs and action plans. HC has also created supporting documents outlining the rationale for radon action and linkages to existing initiatives, among other items, emphasizing the importance of government taking the lead to meet Canadians’ expectation that government will help keep them safe.
K. Bush advised that there are several documents that have been updated relevant to radon testing in government buildings. This includes the Guide for Radon Measurements in Public Buildings, to provide clarity and ensure consistency with current best practices. She also noted the creation of a new fact sheet, targeting those using Do-It-Yourself (DIY) test kits which can be shared by departments with their employees as the workplace building is being tested.
K. Bush indicated the NRP completed a survey in Halifax in 2021 to compare how radon levels in homes have changed since the 2010 National Building Code included new radon provisions. She advised that the results of the survey show that newer homes have higher radon levels, and verified that the full report is available. Radon gas survey in homes built after 2000: Halifax region
K. Bush noted that the previous guideline of 800 Bq/m3 is still in Part X of the Canada Labour Code (Code), but that the change to 200 Bq/m3 is expected to be gazetted early in the new year. She noted that many departments that participated in the testing are not waiting for the change to the Code but are taking action to reduce and respect the current guideline of 200 Bq/m3.
The Committee appreciated the presentation and requested information on a type of registry for radon that is similar to the asbestos registry. The request included ensuring that the departmental OHS policy committee receive the resultant data from the survey. K. Bush indicated that there would need to be conversations around how this would work, and how it would benefit research to have open access to this type of data. She noted that there are data sharing agreements in place with other jurisdictional authorities that can be used as a starting point for discussions. Additionally, she remarked that the information is shared when departments ask for their testing data results, as HC has retained those records. M. Gosselin asked who the department can contact to get the testing results or ask for testing. K. Bush noted that the information belongs to the requesting authority at the time of the request but acknowledged that the people in those positions at that time may no longer be in those positions and that HC does not know what was done with the information after it was provided to the authority. Therefore, she indicated that the NRP (radon@hc-sc.gc.ca) would be the best resource for obtaining that information, assuming that HC was involved in the testing.
A. Peart questioned whether there is a threshold at which it would be required to close a workplace. K. Bush indicated there is no threshold, as radon is a long-term risk, clarifying that the risk is low provided that the high level of radon is remediated within a reasonable timeframe, usually about one (1) year. She further clarified that, in federal buildings, it is not likely to be the entire building that has a high radon level, so discussions on how to mitigate high radon levels should be held, noting that a short-term mitigation method may be a change in ventilation. She noted that ventilation generally results in a 25 - 50% reduction in radon, so the ventilation upgrades in response to COVID-19 may prompt HC to provide guidance for buildings that have not had the radon levels mitigated, or even suggest re-testing prior to deciding to mitigate based upon test results from 2019 or earlier. - Update from the Sub-Committees:
- OHS Training/Learning Sub-Committee
The Committee Advisor noted that the Sub-Committee met earlier in the week but lacked quorum. Therefore, the Sub-Committee will begin to meet quarterly so that the meetings can be accounted for in people’s calendars well ahead of time. M. Dyck noted that there were discussions of the training being covered, as well as the Joint Learning Program’s (JLP) training was proceeding. M. Gosselin indicated that he tasked one of his team members to gather data on the distribution of OHS training, both initial and refresher training. While noting that the JLP has a large role in providing this training, he indicated that this is a shared responsibility. He also shared that from the JLP training feedback, 93% of the 500 attendees recommended the training for their colleagues, and that many of the attendees indicated that this course was the first OHS training they received. Additionally, the JLP will be preparing a report by January on the training and will be invited to SWOHS to present the results. - Harassment and Violence Prevention Tools Working Group
A. Peart and Rhianna Clark, sub-committee co-chair, advised that the working group continues to update the FAQ document, clarifying existing questions and adding questions to it, and will be bringing the revised document to SWOHS for their review in the near future. She noted that if Committee members have any feedback or comments of additional material to add, to please review the document to improve the quality of the document.
- OHS Training/Learning Sub-Committee
- Standing Items
- Asbestos
Nil. - Mental Health
Christine Gagnon, Manager, Engagement, Outreach and Promotion, and John Florence, Senior OHS Advisor, Policy and Data, from the Centre of Expertise on Mental Health in the Workplace (CoEMHW), at the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) provided updates on the work being done. C. Gagnon indicated that her role includes bringing together advisor or sub-committee groups. One such group is the Office of Primary Interest (OPI) on psychological health and safety from each department that meets to receive updates from the CoEMHW, OHS updates, and a spotlight series for members to share promising practices. At their last meeting, they reviewed the identification and location of key documents that support departments in developing mental health strategies, which she would be happy to share with SWOHS.
C. Gagnon indicated that there is also an advisory board made up of senior leaders on the employer side as well as bargaining agent representatives, which meets to bring forward promising practices and share efforts across the board. She noted these meetings occur quarterly. M. Dyck noted that there was a fair amount of knowledge among the JLP training participants regarding mental health and a push to increase the profile and prioritization of mental health which C. Gagnon was pleased to hear. - Harassment
M. Gosselin provided an update on a Designated Recipient (DR) guide that his team member is leading, which is also being reviewed by the HVP Tools Working Group. He noted DRs have requested guidance over the years, which they have inventoried and combined into a guide, with the understanding that each department has flexibility under the Work Place Harassment and Violence Prevention Regulations (Regulations) to vary how the complaints are managed. The purpose of the guide is to highlight best practices and prevent common mistakes or outdated practices. He noted that Centre for Labour Employment Law (CLEL) was heavily consulted for their expertise.
M. Gosselin noted that the process for the new National Master Standing Offer (NMSO) for investigative services is proceeding and expects that the new NMSO will replace its predecessor at the end of the year. He indicated that one of the lessons learned is that, while there is interest in the industry to respond to the offer, it is an issue to have investigators that meet the requirements under the Regulations. Once the list is finalized, he indicated that more information can be shared. M. Gosselin also highlighted that they include messaging to the departments that while there has been a lot of effort going into the NMSO for investigations, it is still a last resort, and that they encourage the department to continue and increase investment in prevention, training and skills development with a goal to eliminate harassment.
M. Gosselin advised that the Human Resources Systems Review Board began working together last week to automate and accelerate the data collection for the annual report provided to the Labour Program. He indicated the hope that eventually the public service will be able to provide input to the Labour Program or add categories of information to be reported internally. He emphasized that this would create a central point of information that will be able to monitor the efficiency of the investment being put into harassment and violence and the trends beyond what is reported in the Public Service Employee Survey.
A. Peart questioned whether human rights data will be tracked, noting that there appears to be a relationship between racism and harassment. She further noted that if human rights data isn’t tracked, harassment prevention becomes difficult, if not impossible. - Legionella
A. Peart noted that the SWOHS created a standard Legionella communiqué to be shared with OHS Policy Committee co-chairs prior to starting up air conditioning units.
- Asbestos
- 2023 Meeting Dates
The Committee Advisor requested confirmation from the Committee members whether there are any issues regarding the proposed 2023 meeting dates. She indicated that the follow-up can be done by email. She also solicited interest in a holiday luncheon.
- Round table
Nil.
Next Meeting
The next meeting is scheduled for January 19, 2023.