Document e5K8a001kZnGYBYqdnw3xX1X4
(conoco)
Interoffice Communication
T Tom Grumbles From p. l . Fetzer
Date Subject
March 24, 1982
Comparative Testing of Organic Vapor Monitors 3M-#3500 & #3520
CONFIDENTIAL
In each of the last three summers, extensive VCM exposure studies have been conducted in the Conoco VCM Plant Laboratory. These studies have examined charcoal tube/pump and passive dosimeter monitoring of vinyl chloride and ethylene dichloride exposures. Both standard gas and comparative field studies were completed the first year.
The later laboratory studies utilizing a wide concentration range of vinyl chloride standards were conducted primarily with the 3M Brand Organic Vapor Monitor #3500. The data obtained from these studies indicated that the capa city of the monitor towards vinyl chloride was dependent upon the standard concentration and the duration of the testing. The data also indicated that vinyl chloride readily desorbed from the monitor during the course of the testing.
During this time frame, 3M developed the dual wafer monitor, #3520, to im prove the retention of the volatile organics. The literature describing the #3520 monitor and its sampling criterias stated the validity of the test can now be established by calculating the weight ratio of components found in the primary and secondary sections of the monitor. This ratio (Ws/Wp) must be 0.5 or less for the sample to be valid. 3M provided the VCM Plant with several monitors to conduct a field and laboratory study. The purpose of the study was to compare the results from the #3520 monitor to those from the #3500 moni tor in actual field use and in a control laboratory studv. Manpower limitations delayed the completion of this study for several months.
The field study portion included personnel testing during the initial shutdown phase of a plant maintenance turnaround, vinyl chloride tank car loading opera tions and miscellaneous work functions during normal plant operations. These data are sumnarized in Table I.
During the field study seven valid samples, according to Ws/Wp ratio, were ob tained on the twenty-five testings conducted. In examining the field study data, it is interesting to note that in the presence of ethylene dichloride (EDC), more vinyl is found on the secondary wafer than on the primary. Little or no EDC was ever found on the secondary wafer as indicated by the Ws/Wp ratio.
The vinyl chloride concentration shown for the two monitors agreed within 0.1 ppm on 14 of 25 samples. Only 4 of the 12 turnaround maintenance samples were in this group. The data appears to indicate that EDC displaced the vinyl chlor ide component from the primary badge back to the atmosphere in the #3500 moni tor and onto the secondary section in the #3529 monitor.
SAL 000048039
Comparative Testinq March 24, 1982 Page 2
The data for the standards study conducted in the laboratory are shown in Table II and graphically represented in Figure I for vinyl chloride and in Figure II for EDC. These data substiate the observation made from the field data concerning EDC in that it remains on the primary absorbent wafer. Our standards data for vinyl chloride supports the study conducted by 3M and shows how rapidly the vinyl chloride is transferred to the secondary absorbent or eliminated to the atmosphere. This study indicates that for a combined gas, 8.20 ppm mole vinyl chloride and 9.8 ppm mole EDC, the #3520 provides a valid sample for at least 6 hours. Figure I. It appears that the single badge, #3500, began losing the vinyl chloride almost immediately when compared to the corrected value for the #3520 dual wafer badge. Additional work will be required with lower concentration standards to deter mine where it becomes practical to use the #3520 monitor in place of the #3500 monitor.
P. L. Fetzer kf CC: SRA-JAD-RB-JWW-J. Hall
000048090
FTFLP STUDY COMPARISON '3-M #3500 AND #3520 BADGES VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
Sample No.
a
Samole Time-Min.
500
b 475
c 465
d 465
e 480
f 490
g 450 h 450
i 440
j 440
k 430
1 480
m 445
n 450
0 420
P , 470 q 410 r 495
s 450
t 470
u 450
V 450
w 430
X 490
y 450 N.D. - Not Detected
PPM VCM
#3500 0.33
#3520 0.89
0.06
0.39
0.07
0.13
0.23
0.27
0.04 0.26
0.13 0.59
0.14
0.45
0.06
0.19
0.17
0.62
0.06
0.25
0.05 0.03
0.10 0.07
N.D.
N.D.
N.D. 0.21 N.D.
N.D. 2.34 0.11
0.14
0.21
-tO.01
0.16
0.09
0.15
0.04
0.04
0.01
0.01
0.02 0.02
0.06 0.04
0.04 0.04
0.05 0.07
%
1.03 1.47 0.S4 0.33 1.48 0.78 1.12 1.61 1.59 2.47 1.13 1.80
3.95 0 0.65 0 0.16 0.33 0 0.67 1.09 0.46 0.53
#3500 3.11 3.00
22.66 7.81 17.17
31.71 11.57
9.70 46.38 100.40 13.20
5.08 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.10 0.36 0.17 N.D. 0.40 0.13 1.57 1.93 0.81
PPM EDC #3520 3.74 3.79 24.25 8.72 16.79 31.79 11.96 9.54 23.80 20.58 13.39 4.78 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 1.00 0.44 0.23 N.D. 0.37 0.49 1.37 6.17 0.91
Ws
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0
0 0 0
0 0.81 0 0 0
SAL 0000480?
TA8LE II
LABORATORY STUDY COMPARISON VINYL CHLORIDE AND ETHYLENE DICHLQRIDE STANDARDS
3M tt3500 AND #3520 BADGES
Time Samples
360
_____________________ VCM AREA_______________________
#3500
#3520
Sinqle
Front
Back
Correct Total
Ws/ Wp
666,271
527,097
159,306 879,470
.30
#3500
Sinqle 75,307
__________ EDC AREA #3520
Corrected Ws,
Front Back Total
Wi
72,628 0 72,628
0
240 530,436 442,349 71,324 599,262 .16 55,654 51.749 0 51,749 0
125 27,990
120
257,706 241,421
23,974
294,163
.10 26,302
24,638
24,638
0
60 134,303
13,540
00004^09;;;
/OO
HH'II ,'1.1,1