Document NeXkVVnoQ8pRYYBk26RXk9KbE

AIR MONITORING STUDY SHEET VINYL FLOORING REMOVAL OCTOBER 1988 QUALITY M. A. SAPIEN2A GROUP DIRECTOR TESTING, INSTALLATION & DEVELOPMENT CONCOLEUM CORPORATION TECHNICAL OPERATIONS CENTER 861 SLOAN AVENUE TRENTON, NJ 08619 MARCH 1989 AIR MONITORING SIUJY ) DURING SHEET VINYL FLOORING REMOVAL A. Background Work practices nave been rieveloped by the Resilient Floor Covering usCicuco r'Cl and :nanufacturers oi` resilient floor covering co provLcit ,,uic!ance ;.o '.he flooring rocnanic in tile removal of sheet vinyl flooring rvyiuc. V'Oci.fic .guidance is provided for removal procedures when as .isbes tor.-tacked flooring is being removed. RocorrcndaCioas, however, do seaCo chat floor removal should be a last resort. New floor covering ca: uo installed directly owr the old, and there are a variety of produces suen as liquid levelers, urderlavmcnts, and the like to assise in nroviria smooch subsurface for the installation of new flooring. Government regulations have imposed requirements upon workers and contractors for specific situations when asbestos is in use, removed or involved in demolition. Toe Occupational Safety and Health Administratii 'OSHA) tins set i Permissible Exposure Limit '?FI.) of *`.2 fibers/cubic centimeter over an eight-hour Time Waited Average 'TWA) and an action le' i.` 0.1 fibers/cubic centimeter. OSHA has established an excursion limit 1 fiber/cubic cenLimeter averaged over a 30-minute period. B. Objective To conduct a sheet vinyl flooring removal with asbestos-containing produc using recormnnded work practices to confirm compliance, wi th the OSHA asbestos standards. C. Protocol o Site Selection l. An isolated office 12 feet x 12 feet within the Congoleum facte site in Trencon, N.J., was selected. Tills particular office w unoccupied and had a concrete subfloor. The asbestos-containi: sheet vinyl flooring removed was Congoleum Corporation's Pavillion ^52020, installed in 1983. o 'Workers 1. Congoleun employees performed the removal, lhese employees wc: trained Installation Department personnel and were qualified t; handle asbestos-containing material. o Tools/Material Used for Removal of Flooring Sharp stiff blade floor scraper 2. Floor scraper with sharp, replaceable blade 3. Cor-ccn sprayer or hand sprayer liv.ereent solution (1 gallon warm water to lo ounces Ivory Lie; detergenc T. Vacuum wich a HEPA Filtration System and metal floor attachmen Fo-iw-duty, irrpermeable plastic trash bags wich minimum 6 mil wall thickness 7. Pressure sensitive labels 3" x 5" or larger. vJ l) Preparation Ail furniture was removed from Che work area. The HVAC ducts were sealed wich polyethyLene s.aeeting and duct cape. UL binding scrips and moldings were removed. The floor was vacuum cleaned with a vacuun equipped vi ch a HF.P.` Filtration System. :>. A detergent solution was mixed in the nurtabLe garden sDraver consisting of 5 ounces of a noniotuc surfactant per gallon.of water. o Procedure 1. A series of parallel cuts & to 8 inches apart were made in the flooring, parallel to one wall, 2. Fcarting at the end of the room farthest fr-xn the entrance dooi Che comer of the first strip was pried up by mechanics ^1, separating the backing Layer. As the scrip was being removed, constant mist of detergent solution was sprayed into the dclardnation nip point Co minimize airborne dust by mechanic *2 The scrip was observed to verify that the back of the strip as V"! as the residual felt left on the floor was thoroughly wet. The scrip was peeled by pulling upwards at an angle. j. The strin was rolled up tightly and nlaceri in a hoavy-duev irpermcaole crash bag tor disposal. A. The procedure for steps 2 and 3 was repeated on the next t,wo. strips. After removing three scrips of the wear-surface, the remaining residual felt was removed by mechanics -L and ~2 by wet scrapir The residual felt was thoroughly wetted jv an additional surav detergent solution. 7. After waiting 10 - 20 minutes, both niech.au.es kneeled down on c remaining floor covering still in- place and scraped tlie residua wet felt off the floor with stiff-bladed scrapers and replaceat blade floor scrapers. 8. The residual felt scrapings were placed In tne heavy-duty irmermeable trash bag for'disposal. The removal procedure steps 2 through 3 were then repeated unci the flooring was completely removed, one three-strip area at a time. 10. Ihe floor was then allowed to dry and the residual dirt was removed using a vacuum equipped with a HtPA filtration system. 1'. . lunch break of 102 minutes was caken during che removal orocess. 0. Sanyle Collection and Analysis o Objective 1, .Snnpling was done to characterize che conditions chat can bo `KiK.'Cted during che removal of resilionc sheet vinyl flooring with asbestos hacking. o Strategy 1. Base line air monitoring was conciliated in the work area prior and after the actual removal. 2. Personal air samples were collected from che breaching zone or cho cwo mechanics. Each mechanic wore a personal air sampling i*.cm with cassette attachment. Samples were collected for che oneire removal period and results extrapolated to determine th oi gilt-hour time weighted average (TWA) exposure level. An are sample was also collected during the removal. Samples were collected and analyzed using the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) method 7400 for Phase Contrast Microscopy (PCM). h Sarnies for the PCM asbestos analysis were collected on 25 "iUimecer mixed cellulose ester filter -nembranes with 0.8 to I' pore size, with conductive cwl on che cassettes. For sampling Che cassettes were attached wi th clie face plate oi to Cilian Low voUme sampling pimps, which were calibrated by , urinary calibration source. The flow rate for the pumps was s< prior to sampling at 2 liters/minuce. Ihe flow rate was ."ointained at 2 L/min. during the sailing period. c Analysis Samples were sent to Astech Inc. for analysis of asbescos via phase contrast, microscopy NIOSH method 7400. F.. Results The attached test retort lists the results for the seven samples submitt. The samples represent che following: =1 - An area sample takenin the rerroval location prior ro the work. -- - An nrca sample taken during che removal operation. :3 - Personal sample frombreaching zone of mec.nanic -1 during removal prior to lunch break 4 - I'ersom: sample from breathing zone of mechanic "2 during removal prior to lunch break ) -u - -3 - Blank cassette to verify background fiber levels in the cassettes h - An nrea sanple taken in the removal .iron curing r.,i<? lunch break while no work was beinf; performed - An ire.-i sample taken after the work har. ended in che removal area S Persona 1 sample from breadline zone of mechanic "1 during removal after lunch break hi - Personal sample from broaching zone of mecnanic -2 during removal after lunch break Hie 8-hnu- rire weighted average (TWA) exposure levels for mechanics =1 an were calculated with the assistance of Dr. S. ftcown of Environ Inc. asine the formula below. Nec fiber concentrations of the samples wore use i.n order to measure che amount of fiber exposures attributed to die sheec vinyl flooring removal. Net concentrations were determined by subtracting t*V` 'ro- -orx-vaL background fiber concentration and che unexposed filter concentrations from the measured concentrations of che samples in questior 1VA mech. -/Exposure timeV A'et cone. "\ - /Exposure time! /Net cone. ^ \or Sample ij Vpf Sanrle y \for Sample 8J Vof Sample 3 430 min. TWA mech. - (78 min)(0.0236 f/cc) - U19 min.)(O.OL36 f/cc) 480 min. TWA mech =1 - 0.0072 f/cc J JTWa mech. 42 -*/xposure CimeN /Net cone. * Exposure timeN/N'et cone. \|or Sample 4 \of Sample 4/ \or Sample 9 \of SamLe 480 min. 1VA mech. ~2 - (75 min)(0.0256 f/cc) * (118 mini)10.0166 .f/cc) 480 nin. TWA mech. 42 - 0.0081 f/cc No short-ter^ (30 min.) measurements were made: however a maximum 30minute concentration can be estimated by multiplying the net concentration bv the sampling duration in minutes and dividing by 30. The net concentrations were derived from the original measured values adjusted fo blanks and background. Meeh. Hstirrace 1 7M min.)f 0.0236 f/cc) --------------30----------------- 0.061 f/cc Vfan. -i .sti.T.ace 1 (119 min.)(0.0136 f/cc) --------------30------------------- 0.054 f/cc Mech. *2 Estinace 1 -(-7--5---m---i-n--.-)3(00-.0--2--5--6----f-/-c--c--)- 0.064 f/cc >!ech. #2 Estimate 2 (113 min.)(0.0166 f/cc) 30 0.065 f/cc F. Conclusions The study of this asbestos-containing sheet vinyl flooring removal using recornnended work practices showed that the flooring mechanics' asbestos exposures via PCM analysis were 0.0072 /cc arid 0.0081 f/cc for an 8-houi TU'A. These results are substantially below the action limit of 0.1 f/cc and che PEI. of 0.2 f/cc under the OSHA. asbestos standard. In addition, -axinucr i'.'-^u.nute exposures Cor the flooring mechanics were 0.061 f/cc at u.ubi t/cc IxDth of which are well below the OSHA excursion limit of 1 f A averaged over 30 minutes. M. A. bapienza J j Croup Director C^ialitv, Testing, Install. & Develop. March 28, 1989 I