Document YvEd7NYda6d9rzLbBwBLNE6V

THE PHILIP G***t MFG. COMPANY i PLAINTIFF'S { EXHIBIT I "ovomber ?0, 1962 :!x* John ~Antlon, ``resident John " -antIon .* Associates, Ino !;0 /. ""bird Avenue Col'jabua 1, Chlo occupational health i;X KAH near John: `"hln sr rov<*8 your pecuest or :icvcmcer '1 that ?r. Loe 'osdlclc of hlofii.o e orou>;.ht to Locicland :'or a throe- day survey of tho ^lant 'cercber 17-19 at a coat of '5^0. Tt la understood that ~he -"roose of the iunfey Is revtow our situation aa "T* ^ancuso ha a already anal7sd it, Pin point things that are needed and to eliminate duplication and engineer studies and voric *hat are not neceasary. -.lncerely. -C '-U-- L. 4. ''echsfein Assistant Secretary cot T. d. 'iarrett T JU e J. nlupa '* Sr leg r> -* J. Treaton I Preliminary Industrial Hygiene Surrey at the PHILIP CARET MA3U7AC1URUK5 COMPANY A preliminary Industrial hygiene engineering survey vaa conducted at the Philip Carey Manufacturing Company, Cincinnati, Ohio on December 17, 13, 19, 1962. Observations vere r*mAm of the dust-producing operations, namely those involving asbestos and free silica* In addition, various other potentially hazardous environmental conditions vere noted* The purpose of this preliminary evaluation vas to establish: 1. a priority schedule - determine vfalch dust producing operations appear to involve the greatest potential hazard. (First efforts would be directed at these operations for proper evaluation and control.) 2* a plan for environmental evaluation - indicate generally vfaare and vhat types of air saag>1cs, ventilation measurements, etc., should be taken to properly define potentially hazardous areas. 3. preliminary tine estimates - estimate the approximate time necessary to carry out the steps Indicated in (2) above. Earironnental Evaluation -- Priority Schedule Table I suamarixes the areas recosnended for environmental evaluation on a priority basis. As Indicated, facilities in several of the areas vere not observed in operation. Priority ratings for those arees have been baaed on the types of operations involved, the materials used, the existence or absence of exhaust control and zoom ventilation, and on the general appearance of the 's dust spillage, rafter dust accumulation, etc Pag 2 u 1 Page 4 a a V a 9 a a P* $ a l a. 4 .n 4 3 Cl CM jf I ao 5 4 3 gI 4 3 M Ci _=T Cl I Cl 1 M M H CO I ^3 I CrnKI 33 ** P* t f ) / (co n t'd ) PHILIP CAKET MFO. CO ? 7 Bepre*entative Air ftaple* 2he tnct number and location or breathing stone and general rooa air aacples has not been specified for each operation. This aan only 'be determined when detailed area evaluation* an undertaken. At that time the ncaaureaent* necessary to accurately describe each area vlll be determined by such factors as t 1* the quantities and types of materials used 2. hoe the material* are handled; variations in process 3* whether the operation is continuous or intermittent h. bov assy persons are involved; their locations 5* whether personnel are exposed to dust from several different operations 6. changes in rooa air flow patterns; seasonal variations, etc. 7* effect of local exhaust systems The problem of obtaining representative sasples is a complicated one. 2be tine required to obtain dust samples usually is of the order of minutes or hours; while a period of some months 19 to many years is generally required for the developaent of diseases froa dusts. Biese diseases result froa the integrated effect of dust breathed over a long period. On the other hand, a single inplant dust determination represents only the aaount of dust in the atmosphere at a definite tlae and place. It cannot give an Indication of the average exposure of a man over a period of years -- particularly if he has not worked continuously at the one Job. Thus a proper measure of dust exposures requires a picture of the variations in dustiness -- the dust floods' -- as well as a measure of the average concentration, five locations of the ssnpl Ing points, the volme of sample to be collected, and PHILIP gi-Bry mTO- CO Page 8 the frequency of sampling mat therefore be chosen carefully through a detailed study of the particular operation. Generally every effort la aade to evaluate a dusty area vlth as fsv samples as possible -- dust counts and particle sice measurements are tedious and time consuming operations. The casual observer night veil ask vhy any air saaqples or atmospheric measurements are necessary -- acme of the plant areas are quite obviously very dusty. However, It is only by actual atmospheric dust measurements that the quantity of respirable contajfirination can be established. Beyond this, of course, Is the major objective of sampling vfalch Is to Identify the principal source* of dust In order to apply appropriate control measure*. rollov-up atmospheric a angles then can Indicate the effectiveness of such control measure*. Time Estimate -- Engineering Evaluation Table II contains time estimates (in man-days) to conduct in-plant and laboratory measurements, to Interpret and compute the results, and to form;late recommenda tions . These estimates are the best approximations which can be given at this time, (The actual time will depend largely upon the number of sasgles necessary, which in turn will vary from operation to operation as explained In the previous section, page 7*) r- TAEL! ZZ TSOI E3TIHAIS3 ~ EBQSCgHIIP SURTET $1 PKEOKCTr (14 Are**) Urns to Cocgleta (in aan-dayB) In-Plant Measurements air sables (estimate between 25 and 45 sauries) bulk sables (eat. between 10 and 15 bangles) ventilation; local exhaust, general air aoveaent occupational analysis 14 Laboratory Measurements dust counts (estimate between 25 add 45) particle size measurements (est. between 12 and 18) chemical analyses (est* between 5 and 8) 16 interpretation cosputations, data analysis conclusions, recoa* inflations, report 10 Total 40 #2 PHIOBOT (19 Areas) m-Flaat Hpasurasmnts air sables (estimate between 26 and 48 samples) balk sssyles (est. between 12 and IT sasplee) ventilation mmeuremsntsj local exhaust, general air 15 fact taunts (estimate bstwssa 26 and 48 counts) partial* alts msastxrsmnts (sat* between 10 and 20) ohesrtital analyses (sat* ttsm 5 and 8) V- Brterpretatiac. ' <" s * ecoputatloa, data analytic eonclnsioos, moossHodations, report Total 16 10 41 TABLE H (cost'd) #3 PRioRirr (15 Are**) In-Plant Measurements air gmaples (estimate 'between 22 and 40 samples) bulk 8angles (eat* between 5 and 8 sangles) ventilation measurements j all areas occupational analysis Laboratory Measurements dust counts (estimate between 22 and 40 counts) particle size measurements (est. between 6 and 10) chemical analyses (est. between 2 and 4) interpretation computations, data analysis conclusions, reconnendatioos, report Total V^#4 PHIOHXTT ( 6 Areas) In-Plant Measurements air sagplus (estimate between 10 and 18) bulk samples (est. between 4 and 8) ventilation measurements . occupational analysis Laboratory Measurements dust counts (est. between 10 and 18) particle site measurements (est. between 4 and 8) ehesdeal analyses (sst. between 2 and 4) lotsture latlon s, data analysis , reccmaaendatlons, report Total 8 33 7 7 5 19 Lee B. Posdick Induetrial Hygiene Engineer a `5 K> (Appendix) 1 / Page 11 THRESHOLD LIMIT VA1PB Za any dusty environment there Is the question of "bow much" duet is safe. To help ansver this question, Hireshold Limit Values for various toxic materials have been established by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists* These values of allowable air concentrations represent conditions under vhleh most workers may be repeatedly exposed, day after day, without adverse effeete. They are guides for the control of health hazards -- not fine lines between safe and dangerous concentrations* The Unite are based on the beet available Information from Industrial experience, from experimental studies, and, when possible, from a conblnatloa of the two* They are subject to modification as more complete data become available* In the ease of dusts containing at least free silica, 5 million particles of dust per cubic foot of air (appcf) has been established as the Threshold Limit Vfclna* Tor dusty atmospheres containing asbestos, the level similarly has been set at 5 nppef. However, because of the fibrous nature of asbestos, ths threshold limit cannot be considered to be as firmly established is are limits for some of the other dusts. Techniques used for evaluating most other dusts* (considered as spher ical particles) may not be entirely valid for asbestos* The etiology of asbeetoels still is under study and research efforts are vitally concerned with the effect of the length end diameter of the fibers in producing lung dmnege. * Based on the standard procedure for lergillng end counting dusts adopted by the fifth Annual Meting of ACOIH (19*2). rvr.-.fr^ l * , :;s ;'*.> '- '.';:^-V. 'yfcdsf *i 'VA`i Cm Isfga isemfacturer of products using asbestos evaluates sir .. takas-tt] the plant for both dust ssd fibers. Tbs respirable dust consists of ths *we gff ^isss spherics! particle* 10 sicrons sad less in disaster, vfails the fiber is considered to be those elongated particles greater than 10 sieroos in length. A threshold 11 sit of 5 adllion particles per cubic foot of air fapef) is applied for the dust and 1 agpef is applied to the fiber. (The 1 sgipcf fiber threshold limit is based on experimental vorfc conducted at the Saranac Laboratories, Saranac, Hev York and reported in "Experimental Studies of Asbestos is".) These *9- ' Y guide lines are said to have vorked out veil baaed on this particular industry1* ollnlcal experience. 1 sisron is approximately 1 of an inch ^333 .,,V y~: *..*%*