Document bBBYxemyQGO9aOLr9DX955Ozo

j C53i'C^U^V^> | intra-company correspondence -- ---------------------- --^ JLiAi 22 1223 Mr. J. H. Boynton - New York June 20, 1963 0*1 William A. Lotz - Granville CO Mr. R, C. Amos - Berlin Mr. R. E. Davis - Newark METHODS FOR EVALUATING KAYLO DUST Mr, A. S. Kevlin - New York Mr. 0. W. Pfiefer - Toledo^ Mr. J. B. Rhoads - Berlin Mr. H. V. Smith - Toledo Mr. J. M. Westlake - Granville There are several associated problems involved in the category of Kaylo dust. These can be broken into three specific problems as follows: 1. The amount of dust which occurs on the surface of the material which becomes bothersome when handling the product. 2. The dust becomes airborne when the product is cut or fabricated. 3. The health hazard of the dust with respect to asbestosis. The current OCF Test Method No. M-Q7B is a measure of only the surface dust and does not give any indication of the other two problem areas. From what I have been able to ascertain, the primary dust problem with any insula tion material is the dust that becomes airborne when the product is being fabricated. This becomes a serious problem in any location where a fabrica tion shop is set up and a large quantity c dust is being generated in a confined area. This is the case in the Union Carbide Chemicals Company Institute, West Virginia, Insulation Fabrication Shop which I visited on May 16, 1963. I discussed the problem of dust and dust measurement with * Mr. Robert B. Peele, the industrial hygienist. They utilized a standard dust impinger for collecting samples. The procedure for measuring the amount of dust is involved and requires several pieces of small equipment which we do not have in our laboratory. Based on the threshold limit values of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, the maximum allowable asbestos dust in the air where people are working is $ millions of particles per cubic foot of air. Based on the asbestos content of Kaylo, this would be a limiting value of somewhere between 20 and 30 millions of particles per cubic foot of air of Kaylo dust above which a definite health hazard would exist. According to the measurements made by Union Carbide in their fabrication shop with the dust collection system in operation, there was approximately four to 18 MPPCF with an average of 10 MPPCF using Kaylo. However, when Thermobestos is used under the same circumstances, the dust count exceeds 100 MPPCF which means that Thermobestos is a definite health hazard. These values were given to us by Mr. Poele as Brand X rather than by their actual name, but we know from past experience that the material is Thermobestos. 01 007 0303 Mr. J. H. Boynton -2- June 20, 1963 The CCF Test Method shows Thermobestos to have less dust than Kaylo which might be expected as Thermobestos has molded surface areas whereas Kaylo blocks are cut and hence will have residual saw dust on the surface. I have in my files all of the details of the exact procedure that Union Carbide follows in collecting and analyzing dus$ samples. I am not too certain that their procedure is representative for the general case, but it is also obvious that the present OCF Test Method M-07B is not answering our basic dust problem. I recommend that as soon as man power permits our Test Method Development Group begin the assignment of more completely evaluating the dust problem and evolving a method which comes closer to evaluating all of the facets of the dust problem. This method should be made applicable to other products such as GPL-400, etc. . WAL:vv William A. Lots Product Testing 01 007 0304