Document 9o09e9YZVx42KyGDpGMkXYV6

mSrJ Ik Sfcnneth N. Morse, Director Hhvironmental Health fc* & i*t*rr|ntsstiM Me October 22, 1973 H. B. Delbert tojet Asbestos Survey Carrie Furnace* This memo covers an asbestos survey conducted by McGill University personnel at Vo* 3 and 4 Blast ruraaees so September 4 and 5 and October 3 and 4, 1973. The pur- ' pose of this survey vas to determine the asbestos exposure ccf the blast furnace workers while wearing asbestos protec tive clothing during easting. The MeGill University personnel were conducting this survey under contract with laybestos-Manhattan Corporation and with cooperation from Headquarters Environmental Health and Homestead Works management. The McGill University-personnel sampled using openface membrane filters and MSA Monitaire pumps at a sampling -rate of 2.0 1pm. The samplers were attached to the workers israediately before the cast and removed shortly thereafter. The workers were instructed to keep the filter outside their coat, but under their hood. On tf>e last day, S new sets of asbestos clothing, of the same type currently being used, were distributed and the sampling concentrated on the workers wearing this new clothing. During each east, one worker also wore s US5 sampler. Approximately 50 samples were collected by McGill University during the survey, and 9 concurrent samples were collected by USS. The results of the USS samples are given in detail in Table Wo. 1 included. Sample results are limited and may not be highly accurate es discussed below. However, they indicate the time-weighted asbestos exposure of the keeper, 1st helper, Sad helper and 3rd helper to be 0.9, 0.4, 1.5 and 0.2 fibers per cubic centimeter mspectively. The concentrations daring individual easts ranged from 0.4 fibers per cc at a 3rd helper to 4.0 fibers per cc at s 2nd helper. The writer was told that the results of McGill University's samples on September 5 ranged from 0.8 to 6.0 fibers per cc. Their results from the last two survey days are not yet known. From the above, it would appear that asbestos exposures due to wearing asbestos protective clothing are within both * ^SX0000773 JUN 25 *9i 10:3a F*un oi.; Lilu PAGE.003 2 the present end coning 1976 standard, on both the timeweighted average and ceiling basis. However, the Magnitude pf the exposures is aueh that periodic Monitoring May be required under the provisions ef the OSHA asbestoe stand ard. Needless to say, such a Monitoring prograa would be large in scope and would Involve Many areas in eur 'steclnaking operations. Several problems which affected or could affect the accuracy of the USS (and McGill) sample results should be noted. First of all, 5 out of 9 USS samples showed filter damage in the fora of smudges and/or fingerprints on the filter surface. Extraneous dust loadings on the filters were generally heavy, and in 5 of 9 instances, were felt to interfere with the asbestos fiber counting. One sample was so heavily loaded that fiber counting was impossible. Another potential source of error may occur when the worker puts on his asbestos hood. Should the asbestos cloth scrape against the filter holder, a localised "cloud" of asbestos dust could be deposited on the filter and thus lead to high results. The new suits of asbestos clothing, provided free of charge by Jtaybestos-Manhattan, were left with the workers who were told to wear them *in a normal manner. Ur. Magenhiemer, Aaybestos-Manhattan, stated that he would like to resurvey these workers after the suits had been worn for a few months. Be also expressed a desire to do another survey using suits made with a different type of asbestos doth. The McGill University people appeared to be eonfused over these plans. Zt can be assumed that we will be contacted if more sampling is desired. - To summarise, the results of limited sampling at workers wearing asbestos protective elothing indicate an asbestos exposure within both the current and 1976 OSHA standard. Bowever, the exposure levels are by no means insignificant and may lead to an extensive periodic monitoring program including all workers wearing such clothing. Several problems were noted whieh could have effected the accuracy of the above results, either on the high or low side. These results may indicate the need for Independent work on our part; however, before deciding on a course of action, the McGill University results should be obtained and evaluated. RHD/mdd Attachment t. B. Delbert USX0000774 % # . mi c* f0a o^9c 0P cf.aSfoa r^* i ae 5 &W 55 *9 9*4 O p9i~A* P9i *N J0fOCa ' A sbestos D ust Samples C a rrie furnaces - September 5 and O ctober 3 ( 4 , 1973 About 3 ca a to a re made p e r tu r n 4) Mc 1 fa O ft. fa 9 fa *9*o8Oa'e0O' -4 E H a. fc< H9 ZO 0 Pi 0 P> c-- ox xe x(faUs 0 0 9<U4I 0 9 09-3e* it to eo h x0J OO h\ Oa0 xcOe eJ0uQ A CO -V4I <U mtp 9> m mn re- Aae sas uo 525 o0 in iin0 sf-i.z0 eo %i m x* 0 a x0a?cfa aoD Ao u l s PC u Al f9t X* u 9ft. S0 fa Ai m9 to* fa 0 fa >m0 as JA0C A0k * 5I A? 9*4 St AO fa fa 00 AA s9s9 Ave A vc0 --O4 AV Aa Aa oo fa fa II n uw n mo fa a0ecs A . ca o 0 AO USX0000775 rC-P ' 5S>te! nm tn unuj : r. 1 ' e unr I li I I I I