Document O3V3781wqr91reZqdjdnvBwpK

KtUi.u I INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MAR 2 i 1975 R. N. WHffi ^ JR CHEMICALS AND PLASTICS P. O. BOX 8361, SOUTH CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA 25303 To (Name) Division location Copy to Mr. R. N. Wheeler Location 514 Date March 24, 1975 Originating Dept. R/D H. V. Hooper - 514 Subject T. R. Smith - 511 M. 0. Robinson - Jennat,Tucker R. J. Hanna - 511 J. C, Flanders - NYO-33 J. B. Saunby - 511 Exemption of UCAR Latex 1000, UCAR Latex 508 and Milt 32 From 0SHA VCM Standard We believe we have valid grounds for seeking the subject partial or complete exemption in the same manner as you are doing for vinyl solution and dispersion resins (re your letter of 2/3/75). We have successfully revised our processes to reduce residual VCM in the prod uct to 5 ppm. Following the outline of your study, we would propose to gather the following information: 1. Establish typical values (average) and standard deviations for each product/manufacturing loca tion combination by analysis of 8 to 15 samples per case. 2. Establish typical values for each storage tank and shipping container (truck and drum) for each latex by analysis of 8 to 15 samples per case. 3. Monitor personnel exposure (carbon tube) on latex loading and unloading operations for each latex in each shipping mode utilized. 4. Monitor personnel exposure (carbon tube) in paint manufacturing operations in at least two custo mer plants. 5. Monitor personnel exposure (carbon tube) on paint application by a) rolling and brushing and b) spraying. We need your comments on whether or not you judge that all this information is necessary and suf fi-? cient for a quality proposal, whether or not all essential ijCO 032848 Mr. R. N. Wheeler Location 514 -2- Mar. 24, 1975 steps are covered. Mickey Hooper has sent you a copy of the letter re ceived by Air Products on an exemption for their BBT-8 Airflex 728 product. In your judgment, should a legal ruling on an exemption using their case as precedent be requested. Would such an approach require a less extensive monitoring and analy sis program than outlined above. Mickey will also continue to work with you on finding a mutually satisfactory meeting date so we can discuss this proposal. Thanks for your continued help. Very truly yonTM WPM:j t W. P. Miller ucc 032349 CHEMICALS GROUP Fim Exaculiw* Mill, S*d*fofd Ro*d, W*yn, P. 19097 polymer chemicals division February 25, 1975 \Mr. Ralph Armstrong Mr. Victor M. Willis Shervin-Wlllioraa Company * 115^1 South Champlain Chicago, Illinois 60628 itoar Sirs: # ' * As you are avare, our Airflex*1 BBT-8 is an ethylene-vinyl acetate-vinyl chloride terpolymcr. It has been our opinion right along that the Federal Regulation concerning polyvinyl chloride resins does not cover the sale and ' use of this emulsion. Attached is a reply from the Occupational Safety and - Health Administration agreeing to our petition that Alrflex 728 is excluded , from the provisions of the vinyl chloride standard. For purposes of the . regulation the physical composition of Airflex BBT-8 is the same as Airflex 728 and is also classified, as a "faorlcat,ed~pfoduct." ' ~~ In order to support our petition with OSHA ve did carry out monitoring at representative paint manufacturing plants during the past few months. The low residual amounts of vinyl chloride in our product resulted in vinyl chloride exposures veil belov the "action level" of the OSHA standard. Con sequently, work practices and conditions necessary for handling Airflex 728 are no more nor less stringent than those necessary for other emulsion pro ducts. Neither our product nor compounded products made from it require any * apodal handling or label!npTundcr the regulation.' Copies of the regulation itself, along vith the reply from OSHA mentioned above are attached for your perusal. The caveat concerning "mass melting" - appearing in the last paragraph vhile germane to the use of polyvinyl chlor ide resins, Is irrelevant to most applications of Airflex BBT-8. This exemption Is Indeed good news for both of our companies and vlll enable us to continue current areas of business and the development of pro mising nev emulsions in the Airflex BBT-8 family. Very truly yours. Enclosures HLJ/acb cc:'J. Lensottl, Sherwin-Williaras J* Tillman, Shervin-Villiams General Manager Polymer Chemicals Division uce 032351 CHEMICALS GROUP POLYMER CHEMICALS DIVISION AIRFLE)728 RECEIVES "FABRICATED PRODUCT1* STATUS FROM OSIIA ~ AND~"l~S~ THEREBY E~XCLUDED FROM ANY ' PROVISIONS OF TltE VINYL CHLORIDE STANDARD UHDER TIIE REGULATION FUpTfrfHKD I~W THE IToCTOBER 1<?7h FEDERAL REOIOTER Dear Mr.-Customer: Although our Airfle^ 728 is an ethylene, vinyl acetate, vinyl chloride terpolymer, which contains very low residual vinyl chloride levels in the final product, it has been our opinion right along that the Federal Regulation concerning polyvinyl chloride resins does not cover the sale and use of our Airflej 728 emulsion. To support our position, monitoring was carried out at representative customer plants during the past few months, resulting in vinyl chloride exposures well below the "action level" of the OSIIA standard. Consequently, work practices and conditions necessary for handling Airfle** 728 are no more ' nor less stringent than those necessary for other paint and emulsion products, and neither our product nor paints made from it require any special handling or labeling under the regulation. Copies of the regulation itself, along with the reply of the Occupational ' Safety .and Health Administration to our petition are attached for your perusal. The caveat concerning "mass melting", appearing in the last paragraph, while germane to the use of polyvinyl chloride resins, is probably irrelevant t Airfle: 720 since it is difficult to conceive of any practical combination of manufacturing conditions that would subject the binder or the paint to mass melting. This is indeed good news for all concerned, and will enable us to contlnu our research and development programs leading to promising new emulsions in the Airflex 728 family. If you have additional questions or comments not covered here, please feel free to call on us at any tme. Very truly yours, , HLJ/acb Attachments /v * If. Jaffe General Manager Polymer Chemicals Division ucc JAN 1 7 .375 u.s. dlpartmlxt of labor 0>:cupacioiul Safety and i-.ulth AJminucrjuati WASHINGTON. '.:C. Mild AA PCl CMEM. GROUP tfc; J LAW DEPT. ''' 0 Mr. Joseph T. Sebastianelll Attorney, Air Products and Chemicals Incorporated Five Executive Mall Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087 Dear Mr. Sebastianel1 i: This Is in response to your letter of December 18, 1974, regarding the applicability of the vinyl chloride standard to Airflex 723 emulsion. As you describe the composition of Ajrflex 728 emulsion. It would be considered polyvinyl chloride, since it is a co-polymer of vinyl chloride. It would also be considered a fabricated product, since its further processing does ` rfirtTJTVoive a mass-mel ting step. Consequently, the material once so fabricated, is not subject to any pro visions of the vinyl chloride standard, 29 CFR 1910.93q, dated uctober 4, i9M. As noted In your letter, any mass-melting by a subsequent processor would subject the material and operations to the regulations of the standard. Sincerely, Barry J. White Associate Assistant Secretary for Regional Programs ucc 032853