Document 4QB0a2d2Z0YwNO50GnwBxz8Q

(% s INSULATIONS, INC. COM'tcto'i and Distributor* /,/) U^>'* ST0 180251 5 Mr. Carroll Gabel * Pro Chemical Corporation Job No: 1035 Dear Carroll: Attached are several copies of our Job Safety File trtiich was compiled for the light Hydrocarbon No. II Project. Please distribute copies of this to ap propriate Dow individuals who may have need of the Information. Attachments include: 1. toco's Asbestos Removal & Respirator Procedures. 2. Docunentaticn of Safety Meetings Held. 3. Copy of Safety Survey completed during stripping operations. % 4. Copies of Asbestos-Medical Examination Pbxms. \ i 5. Information Letter to Employees. 6. Sanpling Data Collection Sheet. fi 7. Asbestos fiber Count Analyses by Independent Laboratory. f Carroll, all of these are self-explanatoryj however, we felt that an explana tion of the Asbestos Fiber Count Analyses would be appropriate. Federal Regulation 1910.1001 specifies that the eight-hour time-weighted average airborne concentra \ i i tions of asbestos fibers to \*dch any employee may be exposed shall not exceed two fibers longer than five micrometers per cubic centimeter of air. Because there were only four employees Involved In this job and further because the job was contained to a relatively small area, we cnly took one smaple whidi data was collected on May 12, 1983. Ihe results of tills sampling indicates fibers as described above of 0.10 per able centimeter of air. While the vnudmm limit is 2.0 percent we were operating at a level of 1/10 of 1 percent which is certainly within the n**iT*m it premisable exposure. Because our employees were working directly with the Insulation, they would i have received a greater dosage, had they not been protected with approved respira 1 tors. Obviously this indicates dust concentrations in the perimeter areas of even less than that monitored. It is understandable that tie employees personal ygfnrt was sacrificed for his overall safety. The cooperation of the employees, as well as Dow, particularly In the choice of location were the stripping was to be performed should be ccraoended. Overall If we were to single out one specific thing which we J could say was done to achieve these low results, it would have to be the fact that <i l ! DOU 06582 \ FAGS 1 of 2 P rt AOV CAtOft * tooc uunnnrtAi c *rwn cnA * DC A tn AM 1API ' 4. ' ' June 1, 1983 > Page 2 of 2 Mr. Carroll Gabel # the Insulation was thoroughly wet before being removed. This single requirement is more important than any other because it prevents the fibers from floating in the atnosphere and thus being inhaled. Dow's cooperation and assistance alleged us to perform the job safely in accordance with Anco's and OSHA's safety requiremerits. Thank you. Very truly yours, KJK/dkm Attachments cc: Ronnie L. Nolan T. L. Virgets File (1) HERBERT J. KNOBLAUCH, JR. Risk Manager STOJ 80252 OOW 06583