Dang, not to be snarky but bear with me. OSHA… Look, there is a big difference between “allowable” “permissible” and good for you. Keep in mind those limits were set on what was economically feasible and in the employers best interest in the 70’s… you know the era of bad color choices, shag carpets, cheap gas, muscle cars, macho, and cigarettes were still good for you. Heck, the filters may still have been asbestos. And these don’t change without legislation, and note all the ancillary agencies new targets are most always lower than the 70’s regulations… except steel toed boots. Yup, Steel toes not shown to protect you from dropping several tons on your feet, and discontinued in some states.
Any space not meeting the minimums in ventilation for the lab standard is probably not somewhere you want to do any work with any fumes… whether or not there is enough space for the molten droplets to precipitate. Cumulative exposure issues and delayed response to dose are real bears, as is the whole microscopic particle bit. And in small lots, it is the lab standard that applies, not general industry. Lab standard relies on ventilation of process and air exchanges in room rather than prove outs of exposures for multiple processes, imo of course. Don’t forget the catch all general duty clause… which means if you know it is dangerous, then fix it. 29 CFR 1903.1 Which means if the welding fumes and smoke escape the welding room to the general area… and so on. Pretty good test is fiberglass work. Somebody doing fiberglass work in the booth, and you feel loopy, then the vent ain’t workin. My guess, somebody brings out the resin, there are gonna be complaints.
And speaking of OSHA technicalities… it does not cover the hive… as the members are not employees. Until the Hive pays somebody to be there, OSHA is a moot point besides being the bare minimum you must do to avoid a fine or jail as an employer.
And specifically which section and sub section was reviewed last time?
Not to unreasonably doubt ya, but “Osha says” is a pretty broad brush, and subject to a lot of interpretation… which may vary. In fact, even the experts have to cut and paste and decompress the jargon to readable sentences to figure out “all instances except V VII IV and part 4 iii, where 120.1 and 140 apply except instances x, y, z the following shall be performed unless p, d, q and sometimes y if y has conditions X. L, or V” I am having a hard time believing that the size of the room in industry is not assuming much more in air exchanges/hr than currently available. It looks to me that the confined space regulations may be confused with other regulations, because nothing I am reading seems to me to fit the solution offered.
Construction industry: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/1926.353
https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=10699
https://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_iii/otm_iii_3.html
https://www.labdesignnews.com/article/2013/12/review-recent-changes-current-lab-ach-rate-standards-guidelines
and finally, one that lists the air exchange rates in mostly english http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-change-rate-room-d_867.html
Just please, from personal experience do not make the mistake of thinking that OSHA = perfectly safe or OSHA = easily understandable.