Document 15LkMy3LOBrVd93Krx9x5dxxo

t r i d i Interoffice Communication To From Jerald Uptain f Owen Tubb Date May 5> 1976 Subject i April Summary of Personnel Dosimetry # RECEIVED MW 12 JJ76 MEDICAL DIV. Listed below are the personnel dosimetry results for the month of April. A total of 103 samples were taken using the gas bag method for an eight (8) hours TWA. The results are as follows: .0-1.0 ppm vcm 1.0-5*0 ppm vcm 5.0-25.0 ppm vcm 25 + PPm vcm Total 97 5 1 __ 2. 103 94.18% 4.85% 0.97% Q% 100 % One employee was exposed to more than 5-0 ppm but less than 25*0 ppm. "Bud" Stone, Large Reactor operator, was exposed to 6.34 ppm vcm while changing out VCM filters. He was wearing respiratory protection. A total of five (5) employees were exposed more than 1.0 ppm vcm but less than 5.0 ppm vcm. They are as follows: il Rav. transporta ion warehouse worker was e transferring Mfresh" resin trom sta area to the was not wear in ory protection. d to 2.90 m whi 1 e w use. He _________ Hawki changing vcm Large Reacto rator. was e was not wearing respiratory protection. e. transportation warehouse worker w__a_s_____ osed II esin from stag!ng area to the He was not wearin rotection. t warehouse "Bud" Stone, Lar rinisinq out a reactor. He was no ry protection. the V-ll dryer building. He was not wearing respirator rotection 7 Owen Tubb, Industrial Hygienist OT/jl cc: RAD, GGD, Department Heads, DAK, Houston, 0DS, Ponca City t% * VAB.0001050350 a r- Owen Tubb - Abfdn % T% Oran D. Steffey - Fonea City, Oklahoma March 24, 1976 H -.P- ILLUMINATION AMD ITS MEASURlMftMT Wa ara enclosing far your uaa material which haa baan copied from two aeuraaa on the subject of "Illuhinetion." It la hoped that thia will serve to aid your offorta in evaluation of lifting oonditiana for your plant. Flaaaa give attention oapoeially to page XIII-7 from the U.S. Stool Corporation reprint which troata "Field Measurement. " Dotorulnatlone for average footcaadlee on a horirental plane from general lighting and for moaaurlng the light intonalty at a apoelflc seeing task are described. Again Z would be wary reluctant to allude to the fact that your measurements were incorrectly done, especially If you describe your purpose ee you did to ne by phone conversation Oran D. Steffey Industrial Hygienist rle Inc. 1973 U.S. Steel Corporation Chapter XIII - Illumination and Its Measurement Industrial Environment - Its Evaluation and Control - NIOSH Chapter 27 - Illumination, John E. Kaufman VAB.0001050351 4 f Interoffice Communication f To Jerald Uptain From Owen Tubb Date April 1, 1976 Subject MARCH SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY V tr - V* n Listed below are the personnel dosimetry results for the month of March. A total of 112 samples were taken using the gas bag method for an eight (8) hour TWA. The results are as follows: .0 - 1.0 ppm VCM 1.0 - 5.0 ppm VCM 5.0 - 25.0 ppm VCM 25+ ppm VCM TOTAL 108 3 0 1 112 96 M 2.7% 0.0% 0.9? 100.0% One employee was exposed to more than 25.0 ppm VCM. Ooe drain In blow down tank and VCM receivers. He was wearing respiratory protection. A total of three employees were exposed to more than 1.0 ppm but less than 5.0 ppm VCM. Their names, exposures, and work experiences are 1 isted as follows: 1) Sammy Stokes. Large Reactor Operator. 1.5 opm VCM. This employee was exposed while draining VCM receivers. He was wearing respiratory protection. was exposed while draining VCM receivers^ He^as wearing'resplratory protection. 3) John Ba 11 evwrM This employee was exposed while storing "fresh" resin in the East warehouse, and also while working around the shrink wrap unit. He was not wearing respiratory protection. ~ 4 * VAB.0001050352 Jerald Uptaln April l, 1976 Page 2 MARCH SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY 1 Several fifteen (15) minute monitoring tests were conducted during this month also. These tests were conducted using the gas bag method for a fifteen (15) minute TWA while employees were performing tasks that could potentially expose the workers in excess of the permissible limits for VCM. The monitoring results, by task, are as follows: Large Reactor Area: Draining VCM receivers - K9 0.1 0.2 ppm Draining blowdown tank - 0.2 21.7 ppm Recovering Reactors - 0*1 0.1 ppm Opening Reactor manheads - 0.1 0.5 ppm Dumping Reactors - 0.4 3-0 ppm Cleaning out Sweco - 0.2 ppm Yard Hooking up VCM cars Un-hooking VCM cars Compound Line III - 1.9 .1 6.6 ppm -- 11.5 5.5 0.4 ppm Charging blenders - 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 ppm Dry Blend * i- Making' up master batch - 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 ppm Hooking up transfer lines * 0.3 p ppm Sampling blenders - 0.5 0.1 0.3 ppm Owen Tubb Industrial Hygienist smp c: RAD, GGD, All Department Heads ODS - Ponca City DAK - Houston VAB.0001050353 X conoco Interoffice Communication To From Date Subject Gerald Uptain Owen Tubb March 3, 1976 EBRUARY SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY o 2} S A RECEIVED MAR 0 8 1976 MEDICAL DIV. / i Listed below are the personnel dosimetry results for the month of February. A total of 204 samples were taken using the gas bag method for an eight (8) hour TWA. Area sampling on non-regulated areas are also included in the results. The results are as follows: .0 - 1.0 ppm VCM 1.0 - 5.0 ppm VCM 5.0 -25.0 ppm VCM 25+ ppm VCM 196 5 3 0 Total"204 96.0% 2.5% 1.5% 0% 100.0% A total of three employees were exposed to more than 5.0 ppm but less than 25.0 ppm. Their names, exposures and work experiences are as follows: involved with supervising the cleaning of a VCM receiver and also drained the blowdown tank several times. He was wearing respiratory protection. changed the filters in the VCM filtering unit. He was wearing respiratory protection. 3) involved with training respiratory protection. ^6025. This employee was and blow down tank. He was wearing Five employees were exposed to more than 1.0 ppm but less than 5,0 ppm. Their names, exposures and work areas are as follows: 1. Don Johnson 2. "Bud" Stone 3. Walter West Large Reactor Supervisor Large Reactor Operator Dryer Utility (bagger) 1.2 ppm 4,0 ppm 1.3 ppm 4 h VAB.0001050354 I Gerald Uptain t 1976 - -...... - ----- ---------- FEBRUARY SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY Page 2 4. Mike Gilmore Dryer Utility (bagger) 5. Dennis Lindsey Lead Warehouseman (Transportation) 1.8 ppm 1.2 ppm is Owen Tubb Industrial Hygienist smp c: RAD, GGD Department Heads ODS - Ponca City DAK - Houston 4 VAB.0001050355 I? r*conoco 4 Interoffice Communication To : Jerald Uptain From : Owen Tubb Date : February 9, 1976 Subject ; JANUARY SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY RECEIVED FEB l g 1976 MEDICAL m Listed below are the personnel dosimetry results for the month of January. A total of 242 samples were taken using the gas bag method for an eight (8) hour TWA. Area sampling of non-regulated areas are also included in the results. The results are as follows: .0-1.0 ppm VCM 1.0 - 5.0 ppm VCM 5.0 - 25.0 ppm VCM 25+ ppm VCM TOTAL - 228 10 4 0 242 94.2% 4.1% 1.7% 0.0% 100.0% Four employees were exposed to more than 5.0 ppm but less than 25.0 ppm. Their names, exposures, and work areas are as follows: F 1. Harrison. Lar Reactor supervisor He was not using respirato c t ion VCM I This employee was involved^ith draining a^C^receive^and was wearing a continuous flow mask. Larry This employee was involved with draining a VCM receiver and was wearing a continuous flow mask. 4. He w rotection. m VCM A total of ten (10) employees were exposed to more than 1.0 ppm but less than 5.0 ppm. Their names, exposures, and work areas are as follows: 1. Jesse Moore 2. Bobby Hawkins 3. Doug Spann 4. Rodger Collins 5. Sammie Stokes 6. D. W. Clark 7. Cleveland Brown 8. Milton Threadgill 9. Leo Ezell 1.2 ppm 3.3 ppm 1.1 ppm 1.9 ppm 1.3 ppm 1.5 ppm 1.4 ppm 1.7 ppm 2.4 ppm i Large Reactor Area Large Reactor Area Large Reactor Area Large Reactor Area Large Reactor Area Vinyl Bagging Area Vinyl Bagging Area Yard Area Prairie Warehouse f VAB.0001050356 JANUARY SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY February 9, 1976 Page 2 10. John McWhirter 1.3 ppm 4 Large Reactor Area Owen Tubb Industrial Hygienist tp c RAD GGD Department Heads DAK, Houston Ponca City 4 I4 * Immmm m ! It ' I 1i 1l VAB.0001050357 wmmmm Interoffice Communication To : Gary Draper received FEB ^ From : Canty Jemigan pate : January 29, 1976 MEDICAL DIV, : PARA TOLUENE SULFONIC ACID Introduction: * i 9 h * Dr. Oran Steffey. Industrial Hygenist in Ponca City Medical Department, has identified a potential para toluene sulfonic acid (TSA) employee exposure problem in the plant plasticizer operation. TSA, an acidic initiator used in production of plasticizer, is presently heated in a 55 gallon drum with a low pressure steam strap and transferred to the plasticizer reactor with an open bucket. Dr. Steffey has urged repeatedly that this method be discontinued and that a method be engineered to eliminate employee exposure to TSA. ("Medical Visitation to the Aberdeen Plant", September 4, 1975 by Dr. Robert L. Lemke.) _4 This report deals with two alternatives which will satisfy Dr. Steffey's recommendations. The alternatives are as follows: 1. Engineer and install a mechanical charge system. 2. Continue to improve work practice and safety procedures. Purchase new commercial chemical measuring buckets with lids and a new drum cradle. Relocate the TSA drum to a new location and install an adequate drain to the sewer. The 1976 Capital Commitment Budget has Capital funds allotted for this item under "Plasticizer Safety Improvements". By copy of this report a meeting on this subject is requested. A proposed date for this meeting is Tuesday, February 10, 1976. Recommendations: It is recommended that alternative two be adopted. The considerations of cost of construction, infrequency of charge (the average number of charges made per day is 4), small amount of material charged (maximum of 6 gallons), the uncertainty of continued plasticizer operation and the implementation time make this alternative the most attractive. Alternate two will require that an employee understand the hazards involved with handling TSA and that he follow the correct handling procedures for TSA. Alternate two will not require the expenditures of Capital funds for installation. Dr. Steffey and Jerald Uptain, Safety Supervisor Aberdeen Plant, are in agreement with alternative two as the optimum method of dealing with this safety problem. VAB.0001050358 r Para' Toluene Sulfonic Acid Page 2 January 29, 1976 -f Discussion: TSA is an acidic initiator used in the plasticizer operation. It is shipped to the plant in 55 gallon drums and remains in crystalline solid form at temperatures below 80F. The recommended handling temperature of TSA is 150F. Since TSA is classified as a strong acid, contact of TSA with skin results in destruction of tissue. * Dr. Steffey, in a recent telephone discussion, expressed concern with employee exposure due to spillage of the acid on the floor. He was par ticularly concerned with potential spillage of TSA from the open bucket onto an employee during charging and the OSHA related problems this would incur. The following two alternatives deal with solutions to the problems stipulated by Dr. Steffey. Since a steam strap heater is the only effective method of heating TSA to a flowable temperature in the 55 gallon drums, the use of a strap heater would be required in either of the alternatives. Alternative 1 m This alternative requires the engineering and construction of a mechanical charge system. A typical mechanical charge system would consist of a storage vessel (in this case, the 55 gallon drum of TSA would be the storage vessel), a charge pump, a charge meter, and piping. .+ To resist the corrosive and solvating qualities of TSA, 304 S.S. material and special plastic or rubber material would have to be used in all construction. In maintaining the bulk handling temperature of TSA all transfer equipment and piping would have to be steam or electrically traced and insulated. * A reactor operator would charge the TSA into a reactor by lining up the piping to the reactor being charged and by manually controlling the charge pump. The amount of TSA being charged would be registered on the charge meter. After charge the piping would have to be purged to the reactor with inert gas to prevent freeze up or material degradation in the charge line. Alternative 2 p Alternative two would not change the manual method of charging TSA with a bucket, hut would require that improvements be made in existing work practices. These improvements include: 1. Educating employees as to the dangers involved with handling TSA and the proper clean-up procedures in the event of spills. 1 Electrical strap heaters have been proven ineffective in plant VAB.0001050359 I Para)Toluene Sulfonic Acid Page 3 January 29, 1976 Alternative 2 - Continued 2. Requiring employees to wear chemical resistant suits in addition to the face shield and rubber gloves already being worn during the handling of TSA. 3. Purchasing commercial chemical measuring buckets with lids and a new drum cradle. (The buckets have been ordered.) * 4. Relocating the TSA drum to a more open and accessable area. 5. Installing a chemical sewer with catch basin and drain to sewer beneath the drain spout on the TSA drum. 4 Process Engineer Approved: E. L. Kieschnick Senior Process Engineer ct c: RAD, RWS, KWC, DEM, DML, RGG, JVU, COT Dr. Oran Steffev - Ponca City VAB.0001050360 1