Document JNN14nj9mnJbKp2VNVgmbndzv

FILE NAME: DuPont (DUP) DATE: 1963 July 11 DOC#: DUP159 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Unpublished Report - Results from Airborne Dust Sample Made at Construction Division Site Locations iTwiiiir! E. I. ou Pont oe Nemours 5 C ompany Wilm ington, Delaw are ase CNOINCEMNO DEPARTMENT July 11 1963 CC: G. J* Stopps,MD, Emp.Rel**Naskoli Lab. J.L. Parsons, Engineering, ESD ' J. R. Allen, Engineering, ESD ADRIAN LINCH MEDICAL SECTION CHAMBERS WORKS DUST CONTROL PROGRAM . r a copy of the results from the airborne dust sample it Con-trSetion Division site locations during the month of * I,, included are the procedures used for the evaluation Hirborn; d S l saSpcs por" TM,d by Ilr. Felix Dtoin end Dr. Morton Corn of the University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Publxc Hcalt-i. . In evaluating the site local;ion= "hose qutitative^ ?abricat?onSprocess.b^n'Cisoated^instances^handCsausncontributed a percentage of the airborne particles. The Old Hickory Construction Mono Spray sample dated 6/13/63 substantiates a?er!iisf0rT r a o H S e empiei opening Mono insulation material bags and changing spray machine. Ve anticipate this information will be of interest t 7u and if we cln be of any further service, please contact the writer. CONSTRUCTION DIVISION / / . . / 4 u~ jr* z-- K. E. Keuper Division Safety Supt. XEK/dla Enclosures k e c e iv e d JU L 15 1SS3 HASKELL LAB. C T T C N TH IH O * FO R C T T t LIVING . . .m W O V O M CHCMIETNT t 3 I0 l mple J^r l9 I .,, I tocatlon. DD aa t e- *J--_---_---_-------"------s-4-68 | Waynesboro 6 L3 6-11*88| Kingston 3 6-5-68 j T ' r s T i ' " ' " "'' DU PONT C0MP^ SUMMAM OF M W X C b F0R ju n e , F1BEp COUNT es Y V lu ^ T ^ - *.-1 I Rewar^* 18.9 18.41 + ;0 0 nn /u i -i-- -- -- --03,J--0.0r5T4T j tT ,io . o 3 0 t- I - \ ( __ < n^0l3 _ 00 0.U'\" 035 . l,uo ..( i 0.010 t a -,4 4.0 2 1 1 0 . w-,U - 1 -- i ^ - L - t t * 213-- H ^ T V o6 o.63to.u, v 0#01r _ L o ^ ! -- r r ^ s + __-- ------- ---- + o . u - Mono $P**V lJttatotTsh^P 'p^r"t1ose "irr-S B I Chasco ' ' ** ' s--)-68 i'"circovllle I *1 -r n v -M V S r S V 8 . W DU PONT V.JMPAHK SUMMARY OF PARTICLE AND FIBER COUNT FOR June, 1968 SAMPLES PROCEDURES USED FOR THE EVALUATION OF AIR30RIE DUST SAMPLES The millipore filter was first visually examined to detect any jose dust or uneven dust deposition. In the few cases where the - filter deposit did not pass this examination it was necessary to resuspend the collected dust in. distilled water and refilter this suspension on VF-Millipore filter to assure an even dust distribution over the whole filter area. A pie shaped segment of the millipore filter was then placed on a microscope slide and rendered completely transparent with Cargille certified index of refraction liquids. In our tests we found Cargille liquid of an index of refraction of n^ * 1.500 to be best suited for this purpose. The counting of the dust particles and the counting and sizing of the asbestos fibers was performed with a Zeiss Photomicroscope using Phase Contrast Illumination, The objective was a Zeiss Neofluar Ph 63x phase contrast objective with a numerical aperture of 0.90. The eyepiece contained a Porton graticule#has a magnification of 20x and the intermediate magnification of the Zeiss Photomicroscope {called optovar) increased the magnification by an additional factor of 1.6x. hus, the total working magnification was 2016x and the resolution was approximately 0.35ju, making the detection of particles and fibers possible down to a size of 0.30u diameter. In the evaluation procedure all particles and fibers inside of the field of the Porton graticule were counted and the fibers were grouped by fiber length into 3 categories (less than 5m . 5-10r and larger than lOju). This procedure was repeated for a number of 1 randomly selected fields on the face of the filter.- Because only a i portion of the total filter area was evaluated by this method/ it was necessary to correct the cou ntby the ratio of the total filter area to the evaluated area. The resultant particle or fiber number was divided by the volume of the air sample and concentration was expressed as MPPCF (Millions of Particles Per Cubic Foot). The statistical reliability of the evaluation was expressed as the standard deviation* of the concentration and is tabulated as the * * Standard Deviation is taken as /S"where M is the particle or fioc- co