Document VeYRdMVvBmM4eJyoJ2wJ4Eyw

To From ( ( T&x&ZH {%***. PUT IT IN WRITING Date z-^ 1 February 1974 ^ J. D. KramerSubject USE OF CENTURY VAPOR ANALYZER IN J, P. Pearson____________________ ''. HAZARDOUS AREAS )TakeAction ( ) For Your Approval < JForYourlnfo ) For Your Comments ( ) As Requested ( ) File ( } Discuss With Me ( }Note&Return - | j Mr. Dave Blair of Ott Safety Equipment Company has been in u kxicontact with the Century Equipment Company regarding the ( k)C*^se vapor analyzer (Type OVA) in hazardous areas. ''"N The following information was obtained: 1. The Type OVA Analyzer has been submitted to Factory Mutual for approval. These approvals take considerable time to obtain and, as yet, they have received nothing. 2. The Analyzer was designed to be intrinsically safe in order to meet FM standards. Some of the standards specifically mentioned were: a) Brushless pump motors. b) Current limiters on battery pack. c) Approved flame arresters on inlet and outlet which dissipate heat very rapidly. 3. Century stated that many companies are now using their analyzers on a daily basis in areas classified as Class I Division I, Groups A, B, C D. B. F. Goodrich is one of these companies and they have tested the analyzer quite extensively. However, B. F. Goodrich requires the use of a Hot Work Permit before taking the analyzer into a hazardous, area. If you need any more information regarding these analysers, please let me know. JDP/bc ^ cc: R. W. Wolfe - Pensacola G. B. H. Speed M. H. Stermon R. W. McGinnis C. C. West D. PEARSON RECEIVED FEB 1 t974 J, D. KRAME? AP00035656 A y? ' ^ 'Tstodueti- a C^/?tcea& To Prom interoffice MEMORANDUM j -Subject '''TM-CT hxposure, Your ?ienn of 20 January b. V. Lowe J. T. Harr cc: T. L. Carey J. ICraricr " / A. \. Mc'!illany' G. Speed Calvert Citv__________________ ______ (i_oc*tion, Organisation, or 0parii>n*nt) Valley Forpc (Loeation.'Orgsriiaation. or Oepartment) )\. A. liny G. Primcau I offer the following consents on the items in the referenced nemo, using your numbering system. General: In the long run, just getting the vapors out of the room and up into the air will not be an acceptable solution. Both UPA and h'lOSii will probably object, and we should attempt to contain and/or recover as much ns possible, however, the steps you outline are. needed on an interim basis. You have signatory authority on the monomer recovery project, which can go a long way to clear up many problems. You should* take a new look at some of veur plans in view of tlie present problem, end some suggestions are given below: III. 1. Swcco Screens. Tetter stripping trill reduce the free rionohier hero. Pace has had, good success with an additional 15 minutes at lC^F higher temperature. Can these proposed fans be tied into the blend tank system? 2. b. Pace is sparging steam, in the bottom rather than air to reduce the explosive possibility. You are installing a second valve on the bottom drop line, and this should be done so that when \;e -put tlic solvent cleaning in the added expense will be minimised. Perhaps you could take advantage of this to got a steam, hose connec tion put on. c. *;)o you need both a central system and the good evacuation prcccluffe? Double evacuation, especially if the jacket is kept warm, and sLe:sS or air is admitted between puli-downs, should be much more efficient. d. If you do use a centra! svstom. he sura that the Horrible i i ..j. dre.'p.M in. U: type t'.nt '.'ll: /v *yo g.l.-ev; ... i ", ir AP00035657 -7. f it is at a vacuum whore it is desirable to disconnect it from the stripper for the long recovery period, but before it is free of vapors. This Wish would also ho useful for some other uses dis cussed below. 3, It would be useful to put a Racharach detector head in this vent to assist in finding leaks. 4, 14, IS, 21 Why not vent this monomer into the recovery system rather than into the air? Most pumps, filters, etc., have drain valves that could be connected via hoses to the Nash suctions. 5, 6 Studies done on the 300 Ml lb. plant showed that Nash seal water and acetate recovery tan!:, drainings could constitute a major pollution source. It was propose! there to put in a simple steam stripper to operate at a few pounds gauge positive pressure and vent the monomer to the recovery system. Lvery effort should be made to keep the Nasi) seal, system closed and purge as little water as possible. 7. I think you mean the Century instrument here. Remember that1 this should only be used with a hot work permit after the area is cliccked with the S-Tvtox first, until it gets an official UL approval. It is a very effective leak detector. C. V.'o can't do too much mixing nf t-->>nc:'.c rs , stripping of this stream will be especially valuable toward reducing pollution. 9, 20. Instructions were issued three years ago that ITL should nnt 'o used to purge water from vessels. This is a must, because of static explosion hncard, ns well ns all ether reasons. 11. The best solution is not to make bad batches. Wc should work on a high priority to automate and control by instrument and/or computer as many parts of,the process as possible to eliminate operator error, and anticipate conditions that could lead to a runaway or sot-up. This point will receive considerable attention in thggpcar future. -IS'. Individual La.il pipes are generally hotter than corr'on bonders, because oL* hector accessibility for inspection and main tenance. Hw 'i' w' ; _ ' : .- *_*> w,.!.,. >- r'v better choice, if v.oy i.o noc '.'ACi,''..L.<o co i ... .;p, on t.'.e pots. l-cio-i b-rc. AP00035658 -3All of tlie suggestions arc excellent. l'jnphnsis should be placed on preventing uncontrolled release in the first place, and not depend on blowing it away later, rood evacuation and stripping procedures, rare stringent raintcnance policies, and above all, realisation of and cooperation with the problem by the workers will yield the best results. JTB:rm AP00035659