Document KowR991wDnK8gDqLVZEyB2qo
(conoco)
Interoffice Communication
T Tom Grumbles From p, [_. Fetzer
Daie subject
March 24, 1982
Comparative Testing of Organic Vapor Monitors 3M-#3500 & #3520
CONFIDENTIAL
In each of the last three summers, extensive VCM exposure studies have been conducted in the Conoco VCM Plant Laboratory. These studies have examined charcoal tube/pump and passive dosimeter monitoring of vinyl chloride and ethylene dichloride exposures. Both standard gas and comparative field studies were completed the first year.
The later laboratory studies utilizing a wide concentration range of vinyl chloride standards were conducted primarily with the 3M Brand Organic Vapor Monitor *3500. The data obtained from these studies indicated that the capa city of the monitor towards vinyl chloride was dependent upon the standard concentration and the duration of the testing. The data also indicated that vinyl chloride readily desorbed from the monitor during the course of the testing.
During this time frame, 3M developed the dual wafer monitor, =3520, to im prove the retention of the volatile organics. The literature describing the #3520 monitor and its sampling criterias stated the validity of the test can now be established by calculating the weight ratio of components found in the primary and secondary sections of the monitor. This ratio (Ws/Wp) must be 0.5 or less for the sample to be valid. 3M provided the VCM Plant with several monitors to conduct a field and laboratory study. The purpose of the study was to compare the results from the #3520 monitor to those from the #3500 moni tor in actual field use and in a control laboratory studv. Manpower limitations delayed the completion of this study for several months.
The field study portion included personnel testing during the initial shutdown phase of a plant maintenance, turnaround, vinyl chloride tank car loading opera tions and miscellaneous work functions during normal plant operations. These data are summarized in Table I.
During the field study seven valid samples, according to Ws/Wp ratio, were ob tained on the twenty-five testings conducted. In examining the field study data, it is interesting to note that in the presence of ethylene dichloride (EDC), more vinyl is found on the secondary wafer than on the primary. Little or no EDC was ever found on the secondary wafer as indicated by the Ws/Wp ratio.
The vinyl chloride concentration shown for the two monitors agreed within 0.1 ppm on 14 of 25 samples. Only 4 of the 12 turnaround maintenance samples were in this group. The data appears to indicate that EDC displaced the vinyl chlor ide component from the primary badge back to the atmosphere in the #3500 moni tor and onto the secondary section in the #3520 monitor.
SAL 0000480!-
Comparative Testing March 24, 1982 Page 2
The data for the standards study conducted in the laboratory are shown in Table II and graphically represented in Figure I for vinyl chloride and in Figure II for EDC. These data substiate the observation made from the field data concerning EDC in that it remains on the primary absorbent wafer. Our standards data for vinyl chloride supports the study conducted by 3M and shows how rapidly the vinyl chloride is transferred to the secondary absorbent or eliminated to the atmosphere.
This study indicates that for a combined gas, 8.20 ppm mole vinyl chloride and 9.8 ppm mole EDC, the #3520 provides a valid sample for at least 6 hours. Figure I. It appears that the single badge, #3500, began losing the vinyl chloride almost irnediately when compared to the corrected value for the #3520 dual wafer badge. ;
Additional work will be required v/i th lower concentration standards to deter mine where it becomes practical to use the #3520 monitor in place of the #3500 monitor.
P. L. Fetzer
kf CC: SRA-JAD-RB-JWW-J. Hal 1
FT FI D STUDY COMPARISON
'3-M 3500 AND 3520 BADGES VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
Sample No.
Samole Tine-Min.
a 500
b 475
c 465
d 465
e 480
f 490
g 450 h 450 i 4^0
j 440
k 430
1 480
m 445
n 450
0 420
P . 470 q 410 r 495
S 450
t 470
u 450
V 450
w 430
X 490
y 450 .D. - Not Detected
PPM VCM
#3500
#3520
0.33
0.89
0.06 0.07 0.23 0.04 0.26
0.39 0.13 0.27 0.13 0.59
0.14 0.06
0.45 0.19
0.17 0.06
0.62 0.25
0.05 0.03 N.D.
0.10 0.07 N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
0.21
2.34
N.D. 0.14
0.11 0.21
<0.01 0.09 0.04
0.16 0.15 0.04
0.01 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04
0.01 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.07
1.08 1.47 0.34 0.33 1.48 0.78 1.12 1.61 1.59 2.47 1.18 1.80
3.95 0 0.65 0 0.16 0.33 0 0.67 1.09 0.46 0.53
#3500 3.11 3.00
22.56 7.81
17.17 31.71 11.57
9.70 46.38 100.40 13.20
5.03 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.10 0.36 0.17 N.D. 0.40 0.13 1.57 1.93 0.31
PPM EDC -3520 3.74 3.79 24.25 8.72 16.79 31.79 11.96 9.54 23.30 20.58 13.39 4.78 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.00 0.44 0.23 N.D. 0.37 0.49 1.37 6.17 0.91
Ws
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0
0 0 0
0 0.81 0 0 0
p, | () 0 0 0 4 8 0 9
TABLE ri
LABORATORY STUDY COMPARISON VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE STANDARDS
3M #3500 AND #3520 BADGES
Time Samples
360
_____________________ VCM AREA________________________
#3500
#3520
Single
Front
Back
Correct Total
Ms/ Wd
666,271
527,397
159,306 379,470
.30
#3500
Single 75,307
___________EDC AREA
#3520
Corrected Ms
Front Back Total
W
72,623 0 72,628
0
240 530,436 442,349 71,324 599,262 .16 55,654 51.749 0 51,749 C
125 27,990
120 257,706 241,421 23,974 294,163 .10 26,302 24,638
24,638
0
60 134,303
13,540
^00048092
/OO
(conoco)
Interoffice Communication
Ta From Cate Subiect
Tom Grumbles
P. L. Fetzer
March 24, 1932
Comparative Testing or Oraanic Vaoor Monitors 3M- =3500 i =3520
CONFIDENTIAL
In each of the last three summers, extensive VCM exposure studies have been conducted in the Conoco VCM Plant Laboratory, 'hese studies nave examined charcoal tube/pump and passive dosimeter monitoring c* vinyl chloride anG ethylene dichloride exposures. Both standard gas ana comparative field studies were completed the first year.
The later laboratory studies utilizing a wide concentration range of vinyl chloride standards were donducted primarily with the 3M Brand Organic Vapor Monitor -3500. The data obtained from tnese studies indicated that the capa city of the monitor towards vinyl chloride was dependent upon the standard concentration and the duration of the testing. The data also indicated that vinyl cnloride readily desoroed from the monitor during the course of the testing.
During this time frame, 3M developed tne dual wafer monitor, =3520, to im prove the retention of the volatile organics. The literature describing the = 3520 monitor ana its samoling criterias stated the validity of the tes-t can now be established by calculating the weight ratio of comconents found in the primary and seconaary sections of the monitor, "his ratio yis/Wp) must be 0.5 or less for tne sample to oe valid. 2M provided tne VCM Plant with sever31 monitors to conduct a field and laboratory study, 'he purpose of the study was to ccmoare the results f^om the =3523 "ioniser to tnese from tne =3500 ronitor in actual field use ana i~ a control laDoraso--;/ stuav. `-'anoewe^ limitations delayed tne comcietion of th's study ":r several mcrt"S.
The field study portion included personnel testing during the initial shutdown onase of a olant maintenance turnaround, vinyl cnloride tank car loading operat"ors ad1"* mi sc3' 1 anecus vcv'k f^nctio^" o u" n o ^ z '''"= a.art z Zz ^ zz' zz. ~S32
:ata a-e summarizes ;~acle 1.
3ur' nc ~"e ~= 1 c s* utv ' tainso on tne "'isniv-fi vs te data it is in teres titc to " EBC:, more vinyl is found c or no EEC was ever founc on
tne secondary wafer than on t.-.e orimary. Little ie seconcarv *afer as -'rdi cased by tne >is/Vio ravo.
vinyl cnloride concentration snewn for tne two monitc"s aoreed within cn l-d of 25 samoles. Only - o~ tne 12 turnaround "c i - tenance samples ns ircuo. 'he oata aocears to incica e that EEC disci aces tne vinyl i d e component from tne orimary badge back to the atmGStnere in the ?35QQ noni,,3 ano onto the seconcarv section in tne =3523 monitor.
Comparative Testing Marcn 24, 1982 Page 2
The dat3 for the standards study conducted in the laboratory are shown in Table II ana graphically represented in Figure I for vinyl chloride and in Figure II far EDC. These data substiate the observation made from the field data concerning EDC in that it remains on one primary absorbent wafer. Our standards data for vinyl chloride supports the study conducted by 1M and shows how rapidly the vinyl chloride is transferred to the secondary absorbent or eliminated to the atmosphere.
This study indicates that for a combinea aas, 8.20 ocn mole vinyl chloride and 9.3 opm mole EDC, the *3520 provides a valid same's *`cr at least 5 hours , Figure I. It aooears that the single badge, *3500, began losing the vinyl chloride almost immediately when comoarec to the corrscteo value for the *3520 dual wafer badge.
Additional work will be required with lower concentration standards to deter mine where it becomes practical to use the *3520 monitor in olace of the t350C monitor.
P. L. Fetter
kf CC: SRA-JAD-RB-JWU-J. Hall
Comparative Testing March 24, 1982 Page 2
The data for the standards study conducted in the laboratory are shown in Table II and graphically represented in Figure I for vinyl chloride and in Figure II for EDO. These data substiate the observation made from the field data concerning EDC in that it remains on the primary absorbent wafer. Our standards data for vinyl chloride supports the study conducted by 3M and shows how rapidly the vinyl chloride is transferred to the secondary absorbent or eliminated to the atmosphere.
This study indicates that for a combined gas, 8.20 oom mole vinyl chloride and 9.8 ppm mole EOC, the #3520 provides a valid sample for at least 6 hours. Figure I. It appears that the single badge, #3500, began losing the vinyl chloride almost immediately when compared to the corrected value for the #3520 dual wafer badge.
Additional work will be required with lower concentration standards to deter mine where it becomes practical to use the #3520 monitor in place of the #3500 monitor.
P. L. Fetzer
kf CC: SRA-JAD-RB-JWIJ-J. Hal 1
Comparative Testing March 24, 1982 Page 2
The data for the standards study conducted in the laboratory are shown in Table II and graphically represented in Figure I for vinyl chloride and in Figure II for EDC. These data substiate the observation made from the field data concerning EDC in that it remains on the primary absorbent wafer. Our standards data for vinyl chloride supports the study conducted by 3M and shows how rapidly the vinyl chloride is transferred to the secondary absorbent or eliminated to the atmosphere.
This study indicates that for a combined gas, 8.20 ppm mole vinyl chloride and 9.8 ppm mole EDC, the #3520 provides a valid sample for at least 6 hours, Figure I. It appears that the single badge, #3500, began losing the vinyl chloride almost immediately when compared to the corrected value for the #3520 dual wafer badge.
Additional work will be required with lower concentration standards to deter mine where it becomes practical to use the #3520 monitor in place of the #3500 monitor.
P. L. Fetzer
kf CC: SHA-JAD-RB-JWW-J. Hall
FTFLD STUDY COMPARISON '3-M #3500 AND *3520 BADGES VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
Sample No.
Samole Time-Min.
a 500
b 475
c 465
d 465
e 480
f 490
g 450 h 450
i 440
j 440 k 430
1 480
m 445
n 450
0 420
P . 470 q 410
r 495
5 450
t 470
u 450
V 450
w 430
X 490
y 450 .D. - Not Detected
PPM VCM
#3500 0.33 0.06 0.07 0.23 0.04 0.26 0.14 0.06
#3520 0.39 0.39 0.13 0.27 0.13 0.59 0.45 0.19
0.17 0.06 0.05 0.03 N.D.
0.62 0.25 0.10 0.07 N.D.
N.D. 0.21 N.D. 0.14 <0.01 0.09 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04
N.D. 2.34 0.11 0.21 0.16 0.15 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.07
%
1.08 1.47 Q.S4 0.33 1.4S 0.78 1.12 1.61 1.59 2.47 1.18 1.80
3.95 0 0.65 0 0.16 0.33 0 0.67 1.09 0.46 0.53
#3500 3.11 3.00
22.56 7.81
17.17 31.71 11.57
9.70 46.38 100.40 13.20
5.08 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.10 0.36 0.17 N.D. 0.40 0.13 1.57 1.93 0.81
PPM EDC #3520 3.74 3.79 24.25 8.72 16.79 31.79 11.96 9.54 23.80 20.58 13.89 4.78 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.00 0.44 0.23 N.D. 0.37 0.49 1.37 6.17 o.ai
Ws
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0
0 0 0
0 0.81 0 0 0
SAL 00 < ) 0 4 3 0(
FIELD STUDY COMPARISON '3-M #3500 ANO #3520 BADGES VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
Samp!e No.
Sample Tine-Min.
a 5 00
b 475
c 465
d 465
e 480
f 490
9 450 h 450
i 440
j 440
k 430
1 480
m 445
n 450
0 420
P . 470 q 410 r 495
s 450
t 470
u 450
V 450
w 480
X 490
y 450 .D. - Not Detected
PPM VCM
#3500
#3520
0.33 0.06 0.07
0.89 0.39 0.13
0.23
0.27
0.04 0.26
0.13 0.59
0.14 0.06 0.17 0.06 0.05 0.03 N.D.
0.45 0.19 0.62 0.25 9.10 0.07 N.D.
N.O. 0.21
N.D. 2.34
N.D. 0.14 <0.01
0.11 0.21 0.16
0.09 0.04
0.15 0.04
0.01
0.01
0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04
0.06 0.04 0.05 0.07
1.08 1.47 0.34 0.33 1.48 0.78 1.12 1.61 1.59 2.47 1.13 1.80
3.95 0 0.65 0 0.16 0.33 0 0.67 1.09 0.46 0.53
#3500 3.11 3.00
22.56 7.81
17.17 31.71 11.57
9.70 46.33 100.40 13.20
5.03 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.10 0.36 0.17 N.D. 0.40 0.13 1.57 1.93 0.81
PPM EDC -3520 3.74 3.79 24.25 8.72 16.79 31.79 11.96 9.54 23.80 20.58 13.89 4.78 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.00 0.44 0.23 N.D. 0.37 0.49 1.37 6.17 0.91
Ws Hn 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0.01 0 0
a 0 0
0 0.81 0 0 0
hj 00004809
pi C| n c TODY COMPARISON '3-M -3500 AND =*3523 RADGES VINYL CHLORIDE AND ethyle: !E OICHLORrO c
Sample No. a b c d
o
f g h
Sample T i m e -' M o
500 -75 465 465 450 490 450 45G 44Q
j 44Q k 430 1 430 m 445 n 450
Q
0 470
q 410
- 4 05
3 "-- ^^
3
-*
"
!
J
u 4-
7 Z-H
v 400 .< 1C r* 7 1-
N.D. - Nat Detected
PPM 7cm
-3500 0.33
= 3520 q pq
0.06 0.07 0.23
0.39 0.13 0.27
0.04 0.26 0.14 0.06 0.17 0.06
0.13 0.59 0.45 0.19 - .0^ 0.25
0.05 0.03 N.D.
0.10 0.07 N.D.
N.D.
0.2'
N.D. 2.34
N. D. 0.14
0.11 0.21
<:.:;
0.09
- -2.1c
7 04 0.31
'"i ^ c
3.34 3 0' 0.06
'22
2.34
e . -w*' ^*
0.05 0.0'
i;i:s0. 1.03 1.47 0.34 0.33 1.43 0.73 1.12 1.61 1.59 2.47 1.13 1.30
5.95
0
0.65
- :-
0.3 3
~i /
> , Ct :
i :w 0. 16 0.53
= 3500
3.11 1w> n-ry 22.55 7. si 17.17 31.71 11.57
9.70
46.33
00.40
13.20
5.03
N.D.
m, t
n
u
\W .
N.D. 1.10 0.35
- 17
N.D.
0.40
0.13
1 57
1.93 0.31
PPM EDO
= 3520 3.74
3.79
24.25
3.72
15.79
31.79
11.96
9.54
23.30
20.53
13.39
4.78
N.D.
*1 *S
,
^
u
N.D.
n.d. 1i jr- r 1.44
J . 4_ J
0.37 0.49
1.37
6.17
0.91
Ws 0 nj 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.01 0 0
rU*1 3
0
0 0.31
O
n.j
0
TABLE I!
LABORATORY STUDY COMPARISON VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE STANDARDS
3M *3500 AN0""#3520" BADGES
Time Samples
#3500
Sinqle 360 666,271
VCM AREA
#3520
#3500
Front
Back
Correct
Ws/
Total
Wd Sinaie
527,397
159,306
379,470
.30 75,307
EDC AREA
#3520
Front 72,623
Corrected Ws
Back Total
W
0 72,628
c
240
530,436
442,349
71,324
599,262
.16 55,654
51.749
0
51,749
125 27,990
120
257,706
241,421
23 ,974
294,163
.10 25,302
24,633 - 24,633
-
60 134,303
13,540
i #04 8'
TABLE II
LABORATORY STUDY COMPARISON VINYL CHLORIDE ANOTHYLENE ~DrCHLORIDE_STANDARD$
3M #3500 AND #3520 BADGES
Time
Samples
VCM AREA
EDC AREA
#3500
#3520
#3500
#3520
Sinale
Front
Back
Correct Ws/
Total
Wp Sinale
Corrected Ws
Front Back Total
Wf
360 666,271 527,397 159,806 879,470 .30 75,307 72,628 0 72,628 0
240 530,436 442,349 71,324 599,262 .16 55,654 51.749 0 51,749 0
125 27,990
120 257,706 241,421 23,974 294,163 .10 26,302 24,638
24,638
0
60 134,303
13,540
`-'00043092
TABLE II
LABORATORY STUDY COMPARISON VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE STANDARDS
3M #3500 AND #3520 BADGES
Time Samples
VCM AREA
EDC AREA
#3500
#3520
#3500
#3520
Sinqle
Front
Back
Correct Ws/
Total
Wp Sinqle
Front
Corrected Ws,
Back Total
Wr
360 666,271 527,097 159,306 879,470 .30 75,307 72,628 0 72,628 0
240
530,436 442,349
71,324
599,262
.16 55,654 51.749 0 51,749
0
125 27,990
120
257,706
241,421
23,974 294,163 .10 26,302 24,638
24,638
0
60 134,303
13,540
SAL 0000^8092
mi rji
/OO
n: tin m
(
H rtrji