Document 4v6zr1yrd8Vz92xOD9x0R1peN

Wpo'tcTJ #> SPECIALTY CHEMICALS DIVISION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL WORK ORDER 930-?Oc7 JOB NUMBER NP-8009 PACE 1 OF 8 TITLE: ASBESTOS INSULATION UPGRADE - PHASE I SOUTH CHARLESTON PLANT r See opr.opt.sys. 326100 profit center Attached REQUEST OR JOB NO.i 514- 0586 SPONSOR Specialty Chemicals Div dept : Maintenance PROJECT: JFDodd BUDGET NUMBER v\\W6-y-j 87WMSH3 ENDORSEMENT / APPROVAL ROUTING! PROJECT PRIORITY LOCATION 514 BLDG.NO. ADMINISTERED BYl ( )PLANT(AD.CODE 2) (<) 484 (AO.CODE 1) ( )DISTRI8UTI0N(AD.C0DE 3) TITLE (24 SPACES) Asbes Insul Upgrd PHI ACCOUNT ORDER NO. DATE imnazAnO' 9I3I010I0I0 |2 I 0l,57 3T5TW $900,1)00 The justification of this project is Occupational Health. The asbestos insulation throughout the Plant must be upgraded to comply with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (05HA) Standards. The long-term plan is to remove asbestos `From idle equipmentj replace damaged asbestos insulation with an approved type, and seal all remaining asbestos insulation. This project is Phase 1 of the program for work to be completed in 1987 on that asbestos insulation with the highest exposure potential to employees. principle type of project Occupation Health NPV M# NA AUDIT REO. YESE3 NO}DATE 4Q88 I CAPITAL COSTiRANGE* TO X CR ISSUE NA LOCAL ENDORSEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL OCC. HEALTH SAFETY ENERGY ENERGY CONSERVA, JLW MJS MJS TGS TGS mmm INCLUDESi AIR POLLUTION CONTROL XES. ML HATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESIDUE(SOLIDS)DISPOSAL OCC. HEALTH $900.000 SAFETY NOISE CONTROL TOTAL H,S- A EA $900,000 NA RETIREMENT OF PROPERTY (1) 838000 -L2J4-I 21-3. $900,000 270,000 EXPENSE (REARRANGEMENTS. REVISIONS* ETC.) CAPITAL EXCLUSION TO PROFIT CENTER EST.CONSTR.COMP.DATE 4Q87 DISTRIBUTION OF APPROVED WORK ORDER W. D. BRADBURY, JR. 0. R. DEMENT A. B. WILLIAMSON G. R. HATTIANGADI B. N. GLIATTA/ J. F. DODD A. WALKER J. E. McKEON D. G. M0SHIER, R- G- H0LL J G. F. HAYES M. G. DWYER J- L- W0RSTELL M. J. SHOGER R. G. LINK M. D. FAIRALL G. M. ROSENGARTEN,OR(2) A. LYNCH (2) 838000 Jill DATE TOTAL ESTIMATE $1,170,000 APPROVALS T/Wr/ sYzc/f-i_ WS -7 V WS 1 sjn/%7 sfot-kl y&S-Ju. r\ d'fa/c / '1 COST SUMMARY TOi JF Dodd 82-712 (514) (2) '*( l-V *7 UCC 006567 \ V CA0421 10/11/85 >M 3 3 -J a Cl O 3 3 3 3 l P- Pi 03 rn i\2 CO 3; CtoO -D *>o 3o >3 3 1-3 33 <o 3 3 CD 3 3 (D P O cr m 3P 33 < CD CD pp; p* 3 (Q *3 3 P3 33 oo 3 o tJ 3 *3 P- 3< 3 (D 3 3 < & C CwD 3 p P 3 P> o. 3 o O iQ 3< 3 o 3 p Ps CPD P* 3a p> CD p>**bpP> 3 3 W < 3 *3 P1 M (_< 3*j* P* 3 p* O 3O* * t3Q 33 OP 3w 3t--1 CD PO! 3 3 7? 3 O *3 P 3 O p P CD n 3 O <P >H 3 3 pi a P> P O po *Q a 3< VP1 33< Cw a3 *bI--* IB PpM 3 <H- O3 a OP pi c 3 o p PI--1 OPi 3 3 CD P CD . 3 3O ft O OP o p: ft 3 3P31 COp 3 Krr 3P Oi < P- H O so o Cl M n w ctCsl PI o O >i-3 i-3 i-3 PI UCC 006568 CO fcj CD Papi oP' ao 3 P> rt n> PS Sd BJ O pi 3" O CD M "3P` n O 3 oso pJ Wo w > i-3 pi O a !! o 3 3w cr to c p **< & n SO H p* CQD o et co CcDr cp -IJ o < soo O3 P1 jQi I T> X -X. 33 ma ID < m a SPECIALTY CHEMICALS DIVISION SOUTH CHARLESTON PLANT ENGINEERING May 28, 1987 received TO: 1) W. D. Bradbury, Jr. 2000-?4335 R. G. HULL 2) M. G. Dwyer L3489 CC J. R. Dement G. R. Hattiangadi G. F. Hayes HulI^Jr.-* R. G. Link/B. N. Gliatta A. Lynch SUBJECT: 930-WORK ORDER REQUEST 514-0586 ASBESTOS INSULATION UPGRADE - PHASE I SPECIALTY CHEMICALS DIVISION SOUTH CHARLESTON PLANT The attached Work Order Request has been approved by local management. Please obtain additional approval signatures and process through regular channels. wdm Attachment 3405G UCC 006569 SPECIALTY CHEMICALS DIVISION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAPITAL WORK ORDER 930- JOB NUHBER NP-8009 PACE 1 OF 8 TITLE: ASBESTOS INSULATION UPGRADE - PHASE I SOUTH CHARLESTON PLANT See opr .dpt.sys. 326100 PR0F1T center Attached LOCATION 514.' BLDG.NO. REGUEST OR JOB NO.* 514- 0586 SPONSOR Specialty Chemicals Div dept* Maintenance PROJECT* jFDodd BUDGET NUMBER ENDORSEMENT / APPROVAL ROUTING* PROJECT PRIORITY ADMINISTERED BY* C )PLANT(AD.CODE 2) #) 464 CAD .CODE 1) C )DISTRIBUTIONlAD.CODE 3) TITLE t24 SPACES) Asbes Insul Upgrd PHI ACCOUNT ORDER NO. DATE IfTKHlZHI 1J> 813 1 0 1 0 101 0 Mil 0,5, 1, 8, 7 $900,000 The justification of this project is Occupational Health. The asbestos insulation throughout the Plant must be upgraded to comply with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards. The long-term plan is to remove asbestos from idle ecpjipment, replace damaged asbestos insulation with an approved type, and seal all remaining asbestos insulation. This project is Phase 1 of the program for work to be completed in 1987 on that asbestos insulation with the highest exposure potential to employees. principle type of project Occupation Health NPV K> NA AUDIT REQ. YESES NOD DATE 4088 I CAPITAL COSTiRANGE* 10 X CR ISSUE NA LOCAL ENDORSEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL OCC. HEALTH SAFETY ENERGY ENERGY CONSERVA. JLW MJS MJS TGS TGS XES. m. INCLUDES* AIR POLLUTION CONTROL NATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESIDUEfSOLIDS)DISPOSAL OCC. HEALTH SAFETY NOISE CONTROL TOTAL HS 4 EA $900.000 $900,000 RETIREMENT OF PROPERTY (1) 838000 J__ I__I--L NA X $900,00(5 270,000 EXPENSE t REARRANGEMENTS * REVISIONS. ETC.) (2) 838000 J__ I__ 1__ L CAPITAL EXCLUSION TO PROFIT CENTER EST. CONSTR.COMP.DATE 4Q87 DISTRIBUTION OF APPROVED WORK ORDER* W. D. BRADBURY, JR. A. B. WILLIAMSON J. R. DEMENT G. R. HATTIANGADI B. N. GLIATTA J. F. DODD A. WALKER G. F. HAYES M. G. DWYER J. E. McKEON D. G. MOSHIER R- G- HlJLL J- L. WORSTELL M. J. SHOGER R. G. LINK . M. D. FAIRALL G. M. ROSENGARTEN,JR(2) A. LYNCH TOTAL ESTIMATE $1,170,000 DATE -t - APPROVALS SfiX'foq s'hc/s'7 f/i c/s-7 skil%7 sf^fzi 7 v&AF\ J COST summary TOr JF Dodd 82-712 (514)(2) CAD421 10/11/8S UCC 006570 Page 2 of 8 OBJECTIVE The objective of this project is to minimize hazards of airborne asbestos in the South Charleston Plant. The potential highest exposure areas throughout the Plant will be brought into compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards. .. JUSTIFICATION The justification of this project is Occupational Health. The asbestos insulation throughout the South Charleston Plant must be upgraded to comply with the OSHA Standards. The long-term plan is to remove asbestos from idle equipment, replace damaged asbestos insulation with an approved type, and seal all remaining asbestos insulation. Based on the recently enacted OSHA Standards, the overall plant program will cost about $8,000,000 to $10,000,000 over the next several years. This project is Phase 1 of the program for work to be completed in 1987 on that asbestos insulation with the highest exposure potential to employees; the cost of the Phase 1 project is $900,000 capital and $270,000 expense. The remaining work on the overall Plant program is planned for execution over the next four years at about a $2,000,000 a year expenditure. The recently enacted OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1926.58 has.significantly increased the cost of removing and repairing asbestos insulation due to increased job preparation, execution, and cleanup requirements. Negative pressure enclosures are required "where feasible" for large scale removal, demolition and renovation operations. FACILITIES REVISIONS Asbestos removal/upgrading will take place throughout the Plant. The project will focus on correcting the worst case potential exposure in each unit of the Plant and the preliminary dollar-value of work in each area is shown in Table 1 on page 7. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION/OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS This project will correct an Occupational Health concern by replacing or sealing exposed asbestos insulation that has the highest exposure potential throughout the Plant. When the insulation is being replaced or removed, Safety and Health Guidelines will be followed which includes: installing barricades and clearing the area of plant personnel, posting of warning signs, proper bagging and disposal of insulation, and monitoring of surrounding work areas. In addition, assuring that personnel adhere to guidelines such as: wet clean-up, wearing of appropriate respirators, wearing and disposal of proper protective clothing, construction of negative pressure enclosures, etc. UCC 006571 Page 3 of 8 Project execution will be in compliance with all applicable OSHA and EPA Regulations. The EPA will be notified that the removal of asbestos insulation could occur at the South Charleston Plant. A designated, trained "competent person" will oversee the removal/repair activities. The required Health, Safety, and Environmental review of the overall plantwide replacement or sealing of asbestos insulation was completed on October 30, 1986, for a proposed Outline of Project (0/P) by the Engineering, Manufacturing, and Technology Services Department (EM&TS). The initial phase of the work will now be executed on a working budget project and the review was updated on May 19, 1987 by EM&TS. This project is endorsed contingent upon the following: 1. Maintenance Procedure XVIII Provisions for Asbestos Material Removal and Disposal Safety will be revised to be in compliance with the latest OSHA Standard 29 CFR Parts 1910.1001 and 1926.58. 2. Procedure XVIII will be revised in accordance with the environmental concerns listed in the review. This procedure has been issued for final review. The complete 0/P review and the subsequent review along with endorsement letters from Messrs. R. R. Rankin and D. B. Marsh are attached. This project has been endorsed by the Plant Environmental Protection Department Head, J. L. Worstell, and the Plant Safety Department Head, M. J. Shoger. EFFECT ON SUPPORTING FACILITIES The project will have no effect on support requirements. However, Energy Conservation will be improved with this insulation upgrade. PROJECT PLAN The project will be supervised by the Maintenance Department. Insulation specification consultation will be supplied by Engineering. Field construction will be provided by an outside contractor. Project Management, including cost control and reporting, will be provided by Plant Engineering. The work associated with this project will be performed by outside contractors. Powerhouse Equipment Company, an outside insulation contractor, will perform the work. Work priorities and schedules will be developed based on the criteria contained in the following "Asbestos Project Criteria". UCC 006572 Page 4 of 8 1. Analytical tests are used to identify the composition of insulation materials. - 2. Work priorities and schedules are developed based upon: o verification of the insulation as asbestos o degree of deterioration of the insulation o interior locations with greater exposure potential are given priority over exterior locations with low exposure potential o scheduled or pending shutdowns are considered o potential for interference with other work activities, i.e. paint program o efficient utilization of the contractor resources (minimize skipping around) 3. All insulation material identified or applied under this program is clearly labeled for future reference. 4. Records are maintained documenting removal and repair activities, quantities of asbestos insulation removed, and associated costs. \ 5. All applicable Federal and State regulations are followed. 6. A schedule is developed projecting 3Q-day work activity and is updated every two weeks. The Goff Mountain landfill will be used for disposal of the asbestos insulation. The cost of disposal is included in the project cost. The Project Team organization follows: Maintenance Department Head Maintenance Coordinator/Supervisor Project Manager (Cost Control) R. G. Hull H. Price J. R. Maier SCHEDULE All work will be completed in 1987. UCC 006573 Page 5 of 8 COST ESTIMATE The estimate for the project is based on doing $1,170,000 of work in 1987 throughout the Plant (see Table 1 on page 7): Capital 838 Expense o Labor o Materials o Engineering/Maintenance* Total $ 570,000 270,000 60,000 $ 900,000 $ 220,000 30.000 20.000 $ 270,000 * Insulation specification consultation, project management and field coordinator of contractor. COST ALLOCATIONS TO DIVISIONS The project costs are allocated to the tenant divisions as follows: Division Percent Costs Capital Expense Specialty Chemicals Solvents & Coatings Industrial Chemicals 74.4 22.1 3.5 $669,600 198,900 31,500 $200,900 59,700 9,400 Total 100.0 $900,000 $270,000 A Division Profit Center Breakdown is shown in Table 2 on page 8. OFD 05/22/87 3346G UCC 006574 Page 6 of 8 BASIS FOR AUDIT REVIEW I. PROJECT TITLE Asbestos Insulation Removal/Upgrade South Charleston Plant II. AUDIT CRITERIA TO BE USED IN REVIEW Date of Mechanical Completion Capital Costs Non-capital Costs Estimated 4Q87 $900,000 $270,000 Actual Specific Performance Asbestos insulation exposure will be corrected in the highest exposure potential areas throughout the Plant. UCC 006575 001 004 007260 007270 007280 019 049100 064 077 082 083 106 113 115 121 169 222 224 226 227 228 300 326 342 355 391 Page 7 of 8 TABLE I ASBESTOS REMOVAL/UPGRADE PROJECT PRELIMINARY WORK BREAKDOWN AREA M$ Capital Expense Water Treating Bldg. 102 Powerhouse 600# Steam Distribution Headers 200# Steam Distribution Headers 30# Steam Distribution Headers Raw Material Pipeline Chemical Mix Mpper Island Mainland Chemicals PVA Solvent Vinyl Resins Polyols Specialty Catalyst Specialty Chemicals Middle Island Oxide Adducts Drumming @ 303 Automated Warehouse Tank Truck Load/Unload Tank Car Loading/Unload/Cleaning NC Bulk Terminal Buildings Maintenance Facilities Stores Facilities Plant Laboratory Fire Station 5.0 40.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 57.5 57.5 57.5 57.0 57.5 57.5 57.0 57.0 57.0 57.5 57.0 10.0 35.0 22.5 22.5 20.0 30.0 3.0 22.0 10.0 3.0 20.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 3.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 2.0 8.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 TOTALS 900.0 270.0 RGHull 5/8/87 3352G UCC 006576 Rage 8 of 8 TABLE 2 ASBESTOS REMOVAL/UPGRADE PROJECT DIVISION/PROFIT CENTER ALLOCATION BREAKDOWN DIVISION Industrial Chemicals PROFIT CENTER 156 170 174 Sub-Total ALLOCATION % 0.3 1.8 1.4 3.5 Solvents & Coatings Materials 163 181 188 270 271 307 311 313 314 315 316 324 326 331 332 333 381 485 Sub-Total 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 2.0 0.7 0.2 1.4 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.5 9.7 2.1 22.1 Specialty Chemicals G. F. Hayes 3346G 139 143 147 162 165 175 184 351 353 384 Sub-Total TOTAL 11.6 2.5 5.6 15.3 2.6 4.3 4.5 7.8 12.8 7.4 74.4 100.0 UCC 006577 *** UNION CARBIDE ** * INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE chemicals and plastics group HEALTH, SAFETY & ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS P-2 39 Old Ridgebury Road Danbury, CT 06817-0001 TO: D. Liebeskind B. D. Marsh COPY: W. D. Bradbury, Jr. M. G. Dwyer R. G. Link S. Rossi/B. N. Gliatta A. Walker DATE: SUBJECT: January 19, 1987 Insulation Upgrade Project South Charleston We have reviewed the subject project based on the October 30, 1986 Wegert-Whipple Health, Safety and Environmental Review Transmittal. We $ endorse the project contingent on satisfactory resolution of the items listed in the Wegert-Whipple transmittal. Also our endorsement is contingent on compliance with Regulation 29CFR 1926.58 which became effective January 16, 1987. RRRjmmt R. R. Rankin UCC 006578 Union Carbide Corporation Community & Employee Health. Safety & Environmental Protection 39 Old Ridgebury Road Danbury. CT 06817-0001 January 21, 1987 TO: D. Liebeskind cc: W. D. Bradbury^'-Jr. J. F. Dodd M. G. Dwyer R. G. Link R. R. Rankin S. Rossi/B. N. Gliatta A. Walker SUBJECT: South Charleston - Insulation Upgrade Project The Corporate HS&EP Department has reviewed and endorses the subject project contingent upon the recommendations listed in R. R. Rankin's letter of January 19, 1987. BDM:r1 `A/ B. D. Marsh UCC 006579 BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY SERVICES DEPARTMENT HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY SOUTH CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA t: MEMORANDUM Hay 19, 1987 TO: Mr. J. R. Dement DottdZ?* Mr. D. A. Gosselln Hr. R. L. Foster Hr. E. D. Southard COPY: Mr. W. D. Bradbury Hr. T. E. Hanning Dr. P. R. Kavasmaneck Dr. D. Liebesklnd Mr. R. R. Rankin Hr. 'S; Rossi 6,vV. Mr. A. D. Williamson FROM: L. S. Magelssen H. W. Wegert SUBJECT: Health, Safety, and Environmental Review Asbestos Insulation Removal Upgrade - Phase I South Charleston The Insulation Upgrade Project at South Charleston was reviewed by CED's Health, Safety and Environmental Technology Section and recommended for endorsement on October 30, 1986 (see attached). Since that review OSHA Regulation 29 CFR 1926.58 has been promulgated (January 16, 1987), significantly Increasing the cost of removing and repairing asbestos Insulation due to Increased job preparation, execution, and cleanup requirements. Negative pressure enclosures are required "where feasible" for large scale removal, demolition, and renovation operations. The long-term plan Is to remove asbestos Insulation from Idle equipment, replace damaged asbestos Insulation with an approved type, and seal all remaining asbestos Insulation. This Phase I project Is a working budget project to be completed In 1987 for work on the asbestos Insulation that presents the highest exposure potential to employees. Subsequent projects over the next few years are planned to complete this upgrade program. Project executions will be In compliance with all applicable OSHA and EPA Regulations Including the recently enacted OSHA 29 CFR 1926.58. The EPA will be notified that the removal of asbestos Insulation could occur at the South Charleston Plant. Removed asbestos Insulation will be disposed of at the Goff Hountaln Landfill. UCC 006580 2- - BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL Endorsement of this project Is recommended contingent upon the following: 1. Maintenance Procedures XV11I Provisions for Asbestos Material Removal and Disposal Safety be revised to be In compliance with the latest OSHA Standards 29 CFR Parts 1910.1001 and 1926.58. 2. Procedure XVIII be revised In accordance with the environmental concerns listed In the attached October 30, 1986 review. l. S. Hagelssen 1 H. W. Wegrfrt LSM:HWW:mw 7601D UCC 006581 UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL ENGINEERING. MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY SERVICES DEPARTMENT HEALTH. SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY SOUTH CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA MEMORANDUM October 30, 1986 TO: COPY: Hr. J. R. Dement Hr. J. F. Dodd Hr. D. A. 6osse11n Hr. R. L. Foster Hr. E. D. Southard Hr. W. D. Bradbury Dr. P. R. Kavasmaneck Dr. D. Llebesklnd Hr. R. R. Rankin Hr. S. Rossi Hr. A. D. Williamson FROH: H. W. Wegert 6. H. Whipple SUBJECT: Health, Safety, and Environmental Review Insulation Upgrade Project. South Charleston This Health, Safety, and Environmental review was based on the draft Outline of Project and the South Charleston Plant Halntenance Procedure XVIII Provisions for Asbestos Haterlal Removal and Disposal Safety. Attached are the applicable Summary Checklists; the Project Safety Summary Checklist was not Included as no product Is produced as a result of this project. The review was conducted by qualified engineers from CEO's Health, Safety and Environmental Technology Section. Endorsement of the project Is recommended contingent upon the Items listed at the end of this memo. Written response to the contingency Items by project personnel Is requested prior to start of work In the field. This project will upgrade asbestos Insulation In the South Charleston Plant over the next three years. Huch of the asbestos Insulation In the plant Is In poor condition and presents a potential exposure problem for plant personnel. The plan Is to remove asbestos Insulation from Idle equipment, replace damaged asbestos Insulation with an approved type, and seal all remaining asbestos Insulation. This project will be executed In accordance with all applicable OSHA and EPA Regulations and the South Charleston Plant procedure for handling asbestos material. The EPA will be notified that the removal of asbestos Insulation could occur at the South Charleston Plant. UCC 006582 -2- BlISINESS CONFIDENTIAL The plant procedures for asbestos material removal and disposal safety was reviewed by CEO Health Technologist Terry Hanning, The procedure should be revised In accordance with Terry's comments (see attached memo) for conformance with OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1001. are: Additional comments on this procedure from an environmental viewpoint o The procedure does not refer to review of State Air Pollution Regulation No, 15 which deals with notification of the West Virginia Air Pollution Commission. o The procedure does not refer to state requirement to notify the West Virginia Department of National Resources before land filling. o The procedure does not refer to NESHAPS 40 CFR 61.152 (Disposal Container labels) or 40 CFR 61.156 (Warning Signs at Landfill). However, the procedure does refer to OSHA warning label requirements and these are probably equivalent to the NESHAPS requirements. The procedure should clarify this Issue, particularly the signs required at the landfill. Based on review of the draft Outline of Project and Maintenance Procedure XVIII, endorsement of the project Is recommended contingent upon the following: 1. Maintenance Procedure XVIII Provisions for Asbestos Material Removal and Disposal Safety be revised to be In compliance with the latest OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.1001 per Terry Hanning's memo. 2. Procedure XVIII be revised In accordance with the environmental concerns listed above. irt T HWW:GMW:mw 6536D UCC 006583 -3- BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL HS&E REVIEW SUMMARY Reviewers EP - L. K. (Linda) Scholl, Senior Chemist In CED's Land Disposal Technology Group HS - H. W. (Harvey) Wegert, Group Leader of CED's Safety & Fire Protection Technology Group Protect Data a. Material Balance - Not applicable b. Environmental Releases - Asbestos removal wastes will be landfilled. c. Governmental Requirements - HS&E regulations that apply to this project Include OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1001, W. Va. State Air Pollution Regulation No. 15, and NESHAPS 40 CFR 61.152 & 156. d. Corporate HS&E Policy Requirements - No variances are required. e. Project Reviews o Process Safety/Health Review - Not applicable o Safety/Health Review Board - Not applicable o Pre-startup Safety/Health Review - Not applicable Concerns There are no HS&E concerns that had not been adequately discussed In the checklists or the endorsement review memo. HWW:GMW:mw 6001D UCC 006584 UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING AND TECHNOLOGY SERVICES DEPARTMENT HEALTH. SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY SOUTH CHARLESTON. WEST VIRGINIA MEMORANDUM October 28. 1986 TO: r. > COPY: Hr. S. W. Clark Hr. J. F. Dodd Hr. 0. A. Gosselln Dr. P. R. Kavasmaneck Hr. J. E. Neff FROH: T. E. Hanning SUBJECT: Review of South Charleston Plant Procedures Removal and Disposal of Asbestos Haterlals The following updates/changes apply to the 514 Halntenance Department's procedure for handling and disposal of asbestos Insulation: Definitions 1. The OSHA allowable limit for personnel exposure to asbestos was revised In July 1986. 2. The 8-hour time-weighted average for asbestos shall not exceed 0.2 fibers, longer than five micrometers, per cubic centimeter of air. 3. There Is no celling concentration In the revised standard. 4. The revised standard calls for an action level of 0.1 fibers, no longer than five micrometers, per cubic centimeter of air. This level triggers monitoring, medical, and employee Information and training requirements. UCC 006585 2- - Overvlew of Procedure 1. The warning signs mentioned In Item 4 should state: DANGER - ASBESTOS: CANCER AND LUNG DISEASE HAZARD-AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL ONLY: RESPIRATORS AND PROTECTIVE CLOTHING ARE REQUIRED IN THIS AREA . ............................ 2. Item 7 should be expanded to read: Remove asbestos to special containers for handllng/dlsposal. These containers should be properly labeled as follows: DANGER - CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBERS: AVOID CREATING DUST; CANCER AND LUNG DISEASE HAZARD. Disposal containers should be leak-tight and discarded In an approved landfill. 3. Item 6 should be expanded to state: Where feasible, the employer shall establish negative-pressure enclosures before commencing removal, demolition, and renovation operations. Respirators Disposable (throw away) respirators are not permitted under the July 1986 asbestos revision. Respirators are to be selected by the following scheme. Airborne Concentration Reaulred Respirator 1. Not In excess of 2.0 f/cc (10 X PEL) 1. Half-mask air-purifying respirator equipped with hlgh-efflclency filters. 2. Not In excess of 10.0 f/cc (50 X PEL) 1. Full-facepiece air purifying respirator equipped with hlghefflclency filters. 3. Not In excess of 20 f/cc (100 X PEL) 1. Any powered air-purifying respirator equipped with high efficiency filters. 2. Any supplled-alr respirator operated In continuous flow mode. 4. Not In excess of 200 f/cc (1000 X PEL) 1. Full facepiece supplled-alr respirator operated In pressure demand mode. UCC 006586 -3- Greater than 200 f/cc (greater than 1000 X PEL or unknown concentration) 1. Full facepiece supplled-alr respirator operated In pressure demand mode equipped with auxiliary positive pressure self-contained breathing apparatus. 0SHA has also required that employers provide powered air-purifying respirators for employees who request them for concentrations of asbestos-fibers less than 100 times the PEL. This recognizes that the proper use of respirators may depend on the worker's comfort and preference for various types of respirators. Work Area Precautions > Warning signs should contain the same message as stated In Number 1 under Overview of Procedure In this letter. Wet Cleanup ; Any asbestos Insulation left In place will contain a visible label, where feasible. The label will contain the same Information as stated In Number 2 under Overview of Procedure In this letter. Clothing Storage Two separate lockers or containers shall be provided each employee, so separated or Isolated as to prevent contamination of the employee's street clothes from his work clothes. Employees exposed to asbestos during their work shift must shower before leaving the plant and must not leave wearing contaminated work clothing. Employees working In asbestos areas must have ready access to filtered air lunchrooms and must wash their face and hands prior to eating or smoking. Protective clothing must not be worn In the lunchroom unless cleaned beforehand. We question the use of vacuums to clean asbestos - contaminated clothing unless hlgh-effIclency filters are attached to the vacuum exhaust. This action could also prevent an employee from properly disposing his clothing after a designated work period. Laundering Caution labels will contain the same Information as stated In Number 2 under Overview of Procedure In this letter. Disposal by Trucking Under RCRA truck drivers do not need a properly fllled-out manifest for asbestos disposal. UCC 006587 -4- References The 1972 standard Is redesignated as 29 CFR 1910.1101 to distinguish It from the revised standard for general Industry which Is designated as 29 CFR 1910.1001. Asbestos Information for construction activities Is under 29 CFR 1926.58. Terry El Hanning L TEH:mw 6284D ?! UCC 006588 3 % - -3 *a *) -J o I, cy . \ .$ i T -5fc a .A 0 4a. '50 4i 3 q. 'A <i ml 1 a ai a 3 I 113 3 a 'S ^; M N ji h i* 4 - li %i ro ri 335 iij ii \h ll! 3 'a 3 ^3 N 3N I 3 33 UCC 006589 tloa la aot iH ltM tli a. 3% 1 3^ 3 4g -3: 3 ^*> --v-. j *3 5 Si *TS Ja i IS <r S US -ft a Ji oa| a o bo C5 *C 93 3H a 3 3^ ^ ii J O t 3-1 3d3 1S=> 5 ,'o, i. , C5 /***' Io 3^3 f* 5 i < I u4 <7;S f'O cq ) Kj a if ii S~ if fi If II SI 518 i3 'a 3 3 3 I. a N I "3 ^ I, | ; 1 * 5.,3 :3 U . a I*?* 3s s. . * :!-: if!; ? II#! Il 8!s * I1f 3 J li I ip) II fill I pi! 1 !{ VillI li 53? 3 mu il!!? s 3 UCC 006590 4 1^33 3 3 t 1 3 3 3 3o a I IN 3 N I I 3 3 N 3a * a 3^3 N 3 3 3 N N 3 N UCC 006591 N h: 1 I? *5 nj 3 d ? I "3 0 3 1 `d 3 *no c -s_ 1 Si. 3 O) O' * S\ vi I 33 M "H a 33 I kf v I] 1 ji li 9f AH $% 3 3 ^ ^3 3 3 11 N ^3 3 I* . * 11 fa. ii fl {: \\\ I! si li u 33 3N N3 I1 i*I* S-i I ii, 3S3 Jl| 41* ill I M 5 3 UCC 006592 4 o ,V -Q 1" &a i * 3- 3 13 3 j's's n bo N N i iN > -J? i'H 3 3 3 3 3 3 * i 4*4 Jil* VU 3* tZ iVJr! iil h\\\ fi It *| fj iii I ill illli U a if if UCC 006593 fJ Xc < iw N * t 4 ~-o il 41 i>& * *i Is i/ ^* 4 i . I <0 N I 3 3 3 3 3 3 \i j 81 I N 'H 3 3 N 3H SI ^3 3 3 NN 3 >9 I 3 Ij UNION CNSI1C CORPORATION CAPITAL PROJECT PROPOSAL li i ]l * 3* !.-a^ m ft I 1= ft it I: io 8 I4 li i\0 2 affi 1 li 3 ?l iJ 3?= <*I ll li mli!* J31!1 P &8 35 O Ij fc i j<!i fitll| !r?t iHll| Zs Iit! I!|lli 1I i !ff?tt ftl g li II ill U in al * if-= fl ii IJi UCC 006594 ,f "e* *ry)- Any m H t r In brackets ro q u lr** a x p lm tlo n kaydw to t t * quoatton" -* 1 * 333 3 333 B H'H 3 3 3 3^1 i | a jo Ui*-- rf\ t^' W K tK 'SI ">1 S) "I 3I ww SM 11 * S3 II 4o - M ?i i Ri [Kill Psi. m& K lip 11 I IlSIf ill ii ?e1lf* ^fi * e, *JJj iisll 2_ If?1J? P ill 3 ill ill 3 ill i! 0 3 (^ n& U cO T t ? UCC 006595 ? Any aniMBr In brnckat* raqulras axplanatlofl kayad to th * q u a *tIo r" lw > tertiurssi^sssTs: irs"s^its^isr***p* ,f 3 1? a^ -J- 4- 4* a^ I rA lA >^ 4- >. O' 90 21 ^ S 3 3 "9 "9 "9 1 3 3SI 3 II |N3 3 3 3 3 -h- 1 i"/i\ *f ; 1^ 1Jii* S *S ? M J 1li ;! IhI i* I rist m? ll=* S i illt -r.a 3 4-t m E I* i; fi 8*-8s,5 Hill |I|-H Sc us i g *i ]i iSU= it i |! ]i 2* in fc1 I !! h iilll ii il li f! m UCC 006596 I" *TM TM UCC 006597 07MC/07MC i iS' *ei a X C* I B 5 * *** M a3 I 3 3 ST| V| w w' V* V1 w* w' SI- V| V| \~| * ?: $ rJ 11-10 ^ " ~ tAny answer tn brackets requires explanation keyed to the question U r c *r*K