Document vyB7YBZK3V6y3k4GjnQOy5nw9

asct FfXMiBitr;. / ViiTERWAL CORRESPONDENCE 1 \%>flCkb. ... ifOON CARBIDE CHKMICAL9 COMPANY INSTITUTt PLANT P. 0. BOX Jl, CMMitSlOM, VJtST YIRCINU ^*r . ,,i:. R, J, Sexton, M.D. Medical Department . #r ' Dai# 3 December 1962 Orfpiooiin) o.pi. Industrial Hygiene - Plant 512 A Afwtriitf lilUr Jot* , Johns Manvllle "Thermobestos" On 21 March 1962, an Industrial Hygiene Report, i.e., 62-IH-1-6-1, Identified the existence of a hazard to health In the Construction Insulation . Shop during such times as when Insulation blocks manufactured by the Johns Manvllle Company are being fabricated with exhausted baud saws. It was recommended at that time that 18" x 36" x V "Thermobestos" insulation blocks* should not be fabricated with the existing equipment iwleos -- (a) The atmospheric duat problem could be reduced to below 20 oppef Of air through the use of ventilation, etc., or . (b) The producer of this product begins manufacturing an insulation block which will not release upon fabrication with a band eaw, dust concentrations in excess of 20 mppcf of air . m accordance with these recommendations, the Construction Insulation Shop discontinued almost immediately the purchase of ''Thermobestos" insulation blocks. ' On 20 July 1962, a second Industrial Hygiene Report, i.e., - 62-IH-2-G-1, was submitted subsequent to an evaluation of three new insulation materials supplied by the Johns Manvllle Company, This report concluded that . these materials were improved over the original. However, the dust concentrations produced upon fabrication of these insulation blocks were substantially in excess of the recommended safe concentrations of 20 mppcf of air. Therefore, the recommendations contained in this report remained exactly as those stated in the initial report of March, 1962. On 20 November 1962 the author was" contacted by Mr. D. R. Matheny, 3 General Foreman of the Insulation Shop, who stated that three Johns Mnnville g representatives, i.e., Messers. F. E. Saxer, N. Gordon, and H. E. Kaufman, were present and had requested a meeting with the Plant Industrial Hygienist. This meeting was held in the lobby of Building 2, at which time Mr. Saxer produced the accompanying copy of portions of a report submitted by the Johns Manville Industrial Hygiene Laboratory located at Manville, N.J. Mr. Soxer stated that, * in accordance with this report, they were not able to produce results which agreed with thoae contained in the reports submitted by this department. Therefore, they were concerned and interested in learning if their methods of reproducing *Tbe Johns Manville trade name for their insulation blocks -*'? UCC 010545 fi. J. Sexton, M.D. 3 December 19^2 Page 2 ' ' y * 1 our environmental conditions/ Bampling and evaluating the duet concentrations contained therein vere subject to question* At thiB point he stBted also that this conclusion vaa promoted on the basis of their analysis of the atmospheric dust conditiona produced by their competitors product, (i.e., Kaylo or Item # 5AT in the report) which in no vay agreed with the data submitted in the Industrial hygiene Report-TH-62-I-0-I. It was explained at this point, that this department's interest in this problem is always confined solely to the environmental conditiona na they effect the health of our workers, and that no part of the investigation should be construed aa an attempt to arbitrarily promote the use of one company's product over that of another. Upon completion of this statement, Mr. Saxcr proposed that Mr. D. R. Matheny and the Plant's Industrial Hygienist make a trip to Menville, Hew Jerocy, at Johns Manvllle's expense and at a time selected by Union Carbide. This visit would be for the specific purpose of observing, scrutinizing and comparing their method of atmospheric dust evaluation with'that an utiDJtlzed by the Institute Plant's Industrial Hugiene Department. It was Mr. Saxer's opinion that such a visit would permit a more positive approach to the problem and remove the possibility of misunderstandings, etc., that results from written ' correspondence. At this point, Mr. Saxer was assured that there would be no personal objection on my part to the performance of Buch a service. However, a proposal of this nature would have to be submitted to the Plant Manager, Mr. L. N. Dickinson, through appropriate channels before a final decision could bo mad. ' . In conclusion, it should be stated that a phone call was received from Mr, F. G* Comerford of Design and Construction on the morning of 21 November 1962, who requested that he be brought up to date on this specific problem. This request was immediately satlaified both by verbal explanation and by the promise that copies of both reporto, l.e., 62-IH~I-G-I and 62-IH-2-G-1, would be mailed to him immediately. Mr. Comerford further stated that we should not back down on our requirements, but that it probably might be wise to consider their proposal in light of the many ramifications of the problem as it affects the whole company structure, i.e., purchasing, sales, manufacturing, etc. Very truly yours/ ? Q. 0V % . REP:gh Enclosure Robert E. Peele Industrial Hygienist UCC 010546 INTERNAL. CORRESPONDENCE 'NION CARBIDE CHEMICALS COMPANY mi,institute plant p. o. box charleston, west Virginia >0 (Nom.J ampany ocalion op, to Mr. S. C. Giambruno Industrial Relations Da,. 4 December 1962 Originating D.pf. Medical Department .- Plant 512 Answering littar data Mr. L. N. Dickinson Mr. G. H. Daniels Mr. N. S. Eastman Mr. R. A. Huber Mr. B. F. King Mr. F. B. Snyder Dr. E. M. Bsd'fc; Jr. Mr. E. G. Heinz Sub'*c' Mr. P. E. Henry Mr. R. A. Neal Mr. D. R. Matheny Mr. N. H. Ketcham Dr. C. U. Dernehl Insulation Block Dust Survey Construction Insulation Shop Plant 511 i Two reports by Mr. R. E. Peele have been issued on thiB subject (21 March 1962 and 20 July 1962) and sent out under my signature. On 16 May 1962, a copy of a letter from Doctor Kale to the UCC Central Purchasing Department in New York pertaining to this subject was sent to some of the people on the above distribution list* Undoubtedly, Johns Manville is extremely interested in having our Construction Department use their "Thermobestos" blocks. However, I believe that possibly unnecessary pressure is being applied to us from several sources. The enclosed report by Mr. Peele includes information on an invitation for Mr. Peele to visit Manville, New Jersey, at Johns Manville's expense to evaluate their industrial hygiene studies. Mr. Peele points out in this report also that he has been contacted recently by the Design and Construction Department at the Technical Center who have implied that Mr. Peele should comply with Johns Manville's proposal. It is my opinion that we should continue to do surveys, with limitations, on samples of "thermobestos" blocks that are of a new formula and are submitted to our Construction Insulation Shop at the Institute Plant for evaluation. However, I am not in favor of Mr. Peele accepting Johns Manville's invitation and would appreciate approval or disapproval for this trip from my supervision so that Mr. Peele can be informed accordingly. Very truly yours, RJS:gh Enclosure f'V Plant Medical Director / 5~-/*/-?? . . UCC 010547.. , ....... . . .... C I49-? INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE NION CARBIDE CHEMICALS COMPANY INSTITUTE PLANT P. 0. BOX 2631, CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA s 'o (Ham*) *0mpany ocoliM R. J. Sexton, M.D. Medical Department Dai* 3 December 1962 Originating oapt Industrial Hygiene - Plant 512 *opy to Aaiw*ring Itlltr dal* Subj.cf Johns Manville "Therm"obe' s~ tos~" On 21 March 1962, an Industrial Hygiene Report, i.e*, 62-IH-1-6-1, identified the existence of a hazard to health in the Construction Insulation Shop during such times as when insulation blocks manufactured by the Johns Manville Company are being fabricated with exhausted band saws. It was recommended at that time that l8" x 36" x 4" "Thermobestos" insulation blocks* should not be fabricated with the existing equipment unless - (a) The atmospheric dust problem could be reduced to below 20 mppcf of air through the use of ventilation, etc., or (b) The producer of this product begins manufacturing an Insulation block which will not release upon fabrication with a band saw, dust concentrations in excess of 20 mppcf of air. In accordance with these recommendations, the Construction , Insulation Shop discontinued almost immediately the purchase of "Thermobestos" Insulation blocks. On 20 July 1962, a second Industrial Hygiene Report, i.e., , 62-3B-2-G-1, was submitted subsequent to an evaluation of three new insulation materials supplied by the Johns Manville Company. This report concluded that these materials were improved over the original. However, the dust concentrations produced upon fabrication of these insulation blocks were substantially in excess of the recommended safe concentrations of 20 mppcf of air. Therefore, the reconmendations contained in this report remained exactly as those stated in the initial report of March, 1962. On 20 November 1962 the author was contacted by Mr. D. R. Matheny, General Foreman of the Insulation Shop, who stated that three Johns Manville representatives, i.e., Messers. F. E. Saxer, N. Gordon, and H. E. Kaufman, were present and had requested a meeting with the Plant Industrial Hygienist. This meeting was held in the lobby of Building 2, at which time Mr. Saxer produced the accompanying copy of portions of a report submitted by the Johns Manville Industrial Hygiene Laboratory located at Manville, N.J. Mr. Saxer stated that, in accordance with this report, they were not able to produce results which agreed with those contained in the reports submitted by this department. Therefore, they were concerned and interested in learning if their methods of reproducing *The Johns Manville trade name for their Insulation blocks .ywjyr-. m '' T'rY*f-T-'rf* UCC 010548 R. J. Sexton, M.D. 3 December 1962 Page 2 ' our environmental conditions, sampling and evaluating the dust concentrations contained therein were subject to question* At this point he stated also that this conclusion was promoted on the basis of their analysis of the atmospheric dust conditions produced by their competitors'product, (i.e., Kaylo or Item # 5AT in the report) which in no way agreed with the data submitted in the Industrial Hygiene Report " IH-62-I-G-I. It wsb explained at this point, that this department's interest in this problem Is always confined solely to the environmental conditions as they effect the health of our workers, and that no part of the Investigation should be construed as an attempt to arbitrarily promote the use of one company's product over that of another. Upon completion of this statement, Mr. Saxer proposed that Mr. D. R. Matheny and the Plant's Industrial Hygienist make a trip to Manville, New Jersey, at Johns Manville's expense and at a time selected by Union Carbide. This visit would be for the specific purpose of observing, scrutinizing and comparing their method of atmospheric dust evaluation with that as utllltized by the Institute Plant's Industrial Huglene Department. It was Mr. Saxer's opinion that such a visit would permit a more positive approach to the problem and remove the possibility of misunderstandings, etc., that results from written correspondence. At this point, Mr. Saxer was assured that there would be no personal objection on my part to the performance of such a service. However, a proposal of this nature would have to be submitted to the Plant Manager, Mr. L. N. Dickinson, through appropriate channels before a final decision could be made. In conclusion, it should, be stated that a phone call was received from Mr. F. G* Comerford of Design and Construction on the morning of 21 November 1962, who requested that he be brought up to date on this specific problem. This request was immediately satisifled both by verbal explanation and by the promise that copies of both reports, i.e., 62-IH-I-G-I and 62-IH-2-G-1, would be mailed to him immediately. Mr. Comerford further stated that we should not back down on our requirements, but that it probably might be wise to consider their proposal in light of the many ramifications of the problem as It affects the whole company structure, i.e., purchasing, sales, manufacturing, etc. Very truly yours, REP:gh Enclosure Robert E. Peele Industrial Hygienist UCC 010549 DISCUSSIOM Atmospheric t conoentration tosto wnro r.edo on October jO, 19&?, daring tho fabrication of insulation blocks on -he D(KVLL Kodol L-H-V band cz.u in iho Easearch Csr/.cr iiatoriola Tooting Lr.'coratory a&r.plo preparation room. Iho Eation&l Confcrcnco of Govo*-nnsntal Industrial Hygioniats Toot Method vaa * follovod using tho Greonburgh-Snith iuplngor. Tocto ucro conducted by ;Ir. T. F. Bednarchuk of the J-M Industrial Hygiene Laboratory at KanVillo. To obtain comparative data, tho room ventilation vna adjusted o give* more than tho usual amount of ataoaphoric dust. Tho toot cot up is shown in tho photo graph bolov. UCC 010550 T ' la rdiiiic.: to tiro rcca veatilailiv; nvstea, air vcS ivrovcd fro:i directly thoro ' iho lie.-:.: all c. rats of 57 ou ft par r..'-n on J. i'a-;." ihj a;;til ho a?, ins curr&uadij.-.;- cc^r a'l a r~*t % of Is it p5r rain< ol-.o c-* 3 ijnjijarvl baa teeth per in- ard r. lineal ccocd of 2;0C ft pox* rin- jl"0 Jjlookn u-oro lfl r II ;; 4 or Cr la < ard vara out no that the blade entered iho 11-in. cd"c. five irp-. a of irsulailoa vearo % "'/'ocir:^lr.'3a fhcecobcctos, and tkxv.o tcp-crlrn.atrJL pan cant blocks. foiv-alas'nra "ivon lie Apserile; I. r-ior to testin'?, blocks of ccch irero condition'd byj a) drying a rdalana of .corea clay.'; at 25071 b) dryir.: at 2>01' cv:1 cos-ilUonir;; for 10 days at 70 par ooni El, 707j c) drying at 2507 card cccditioairy for 1G dips at 95-1C0 par coat EH, 95* *ic tost data arc jjivoa ia J^rruia II. ril.o dupt oo&ecatration tosts usro ainlyuri rail lriisaioi that th ouporiority reported by Chics Cnriddo of over eVaaVerd Shottssbsatoa czH the urn osst bles.ha saledited to thcei io subject to qttcotioa# Ski results alro laiinr-tsel ih.it tho slato dust cceipocition, 2-A'f, caused laso atmospheric chest tirea the) o'tibra-* hjyjs of blcsha. . . *ho offcot that Gcr.iiticair,^ of ''.hi kv; Jmvd on tho dust osvocatratica la rir u-*.:; rot apparent. This is GthritwicA to ih liriiisd amount of rr.tori-JL tooted czl *!to jsoocitility that aa cquillfcritvs oswiiiian of dust ocsccatrailou in tho ea--fULci area sesy ::ot havo teen rccsiad in rer.o oosca. In order to definitely oatsbllch iks effect misiuro contest of tho blush:: has on atras'yhrris dust a r.cro oaisaslvo series of tests could'to required. Cash teats mould also corro to rare dofinitoly establish the relative duoiiasco cf tho fcn.-ulns inv.cii v'sc2,, UCC 010551 pPi C; & S APP-LSII IX ES? DATA AE:asp2caic dust colcsijilatigi-j data IAq>ori:r.;.r'*l XL Pan Cost J V'-.'! -i. m^'-^ Acd.. 4--Li. .1 Sea. 4--iii. Ccraentrniloa la nppaf of Air Dried at 2507 Condi`s 5.one ci *1i 7 lili, 707 Conditioned at 95-1005 E3, 957 110.0 59.3 ! ? ._99.fr Avc. of tlrroo condition-; 63.2 Moletura Absorbed During Conditionin'; - >3 Dry to 70j> LI, 70? Dry to 95-1005 13, 957 2.7 13.6 19.9 .V...C in,, 6 J 15.1 1 * 2.0 12.3 16.4 47.1 .'i,./'. 31.6 2.5 17.2 ' ! f j 1 .. 34.2 52.0 15.8 36.4 ,TO/,. 0 97.fr 51.3 62.0 O. O 15.6 3.9 12.8 C-TJiin forcalation vc3 uncd for cornice cv&eiittcd "to Union Carbide for ^v.-i'oatlo.n. Refer to fornalo 12o, 53, sanploa 21, c-rel- Eoport I'd. XV--VVVX, p 1 t i I 1 I i UCC 010552 INTBRNAL OORRI1PONOINOI UNION CARMDK CHKMICALS COMPANY INtTttim PLANT P. 0. BOX 2*31, CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA rtithMi Mr. S. C. Giambruno Oat* 23 October 1963 Industrial Relations o^eWffi.* d**i Medical Department - Plant 512 AMfwartag fatfar Waf* Can Mr. L. N. Dickinson Mr, N. S. Eastman Mr. R. A. Huber Mr. B. F. King Dr. E. M. Best Dr. C. U, Demehl Mr. J. W. Perry Insulation Block Dust Survey Mr. P, E. Henry Construction Insulation Shop Mr. R. A. Neal Plant 511 Mr. D. R. Mathen Mr. N. H. Ketcham Mr. L. B. Weddell - Safety Dept. Enclosed is a very excellent and very complete Industrial Hygiene report on the potential hazardousness of "Thermobestos", "Kaylo" and "Carey-Temp" insulation blocks Which have been processed in the Construction Department's Insulation Shop. The report points out definitely that "Thernobestos" and "Carey-Temp" insulation blocks cannot be fabricated safely with existing equipment, but that "Kaylo" insulation blocks can be fabricated safely, ft?. Peele's recommendations are quite definite and I am sure that you will wish to comply with them. I believe this particular project should be considered completed. If there are any comments, suggestions or criticism, please direct these to me. Very truly yours, RJS:hl Enclosures i, M.D. Medical Director F- >f UCC 010553 INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE SURVEY Construction Insulation Shop - Building 511-2018 Report 63-IH-3-G-1 SUMMARY: The Construction Insulation Shop (Building 2018), Plant 512 location, routinely fabricates large quantities of insulation block with ventilated band saws. This more efficient procedure of fabrication has replaced an older, time honored, practice of using simple handsaws to do the job. However, it has, at the same time, created a health hazard resulting from exposure to excessive concentrations of atmospheric dust. The hazard to health has been evaluated and reported previously* with the result that one material, "Thermobestos" was clearly identified with the hazard (exceeded TLV) and another material, "Kaylo", was safe to fabricate (within TLV). The present report (the third on this subject) was initiated in an attempt to supply answers to three basic questions: (1) was there any error in the original evaluation of "Kaylo", (2) can supplementary exhaust ventilation reduce the "Thermobestos" hazard to within safe acceptable limits, and (3) is a hazard to health produced in the fabrication of a third material, i.e., "CareyTemp". The information uncovered in the present evaluation reveals the following facts: ^ 1. "Kaylo" insulation blocks can be safely fabricated with the existing equipment. 2. "Thermobestos" insulation blocks cannot be safely fabricated at the present time with existing equipment, but could be safely fabricated if the exhaust ventilation is improved. 3. The TLV (Threshold Limit Value) for "Carey-Temp" is identical > with that established for both "Kaylo"' and "Thermobestos", ' i.e., 20 mppcf (million particles per cubic foot) of air. 4. "Carey-Temp" also cannot be safely fabricated with the existing equipment, but could be if improvements are made in the ventilation system. 5. The original "downdraft" exhaust ventilation rates, on either band saw, do not meet the reconroended capture velocity rate of 4,000 fpm (feet per minute). 6. The supplementary "overhead" exhaust ventilation on both band saws, is an improvement and the rates do meet the recommended capture velocity rate of 4,000 fpm. 4 I.H. Reports 62-IH-l-G-liaM 62-IH-2-G-1 UCC 010554 2. INTRODUCTION: A report, submitted in March 1962, stated that an inhalation hazard to health was produced in the Construction Insulation Shop whenever "Thermobestos" insulation blocks were fabricated. In July 1962, a second survey was conducted in order to evaluate three new "Thermobestos" materials which had been supplied by the nanufacturer for evaluation. This survey revealed that, although the inhalation hazard to health had been substantially reduced from that encountered during the first survey, the atmospheric dust concentrations being emitted during fabrication of these new products, were still in excess of the Threshold Limit Values as designated in the first report. Therefore, all recommendations should remain exactly as stated in the initial report of March 1962. The manufacturer and Union Carbide's Purchasing Department expressed a great deal of concern about the findings revealed in this initial report when ' it was uncovered that the manufacturer's Research Department also had evaluated these materials and was not able to produce results comparable with those contained in the report of March 1962. That is to say, the atmospheric dust concentrations reported by the manufacturer, when processing "Thermobestos" insulation blocks, were substantially higher than those revealed in Report 62-IH-l-G-l. This revelation disclosed the need for a more extensive evaluation of this problem so as to resolve all differences of opinion relative to the atmospheric dust exposures in this environment. This decision in favor of further evaluation, promoted the production of a much more extensive study than was originally planned, a study which eventually encompassed three separate intervals of dust sampling, analysis, and evalution before all of the unanswered health problems could be resolved. DISCUSSION: These three investigations were actually initiated for the general purposes of both clarification and identification - purposely for clarification of the actual hazard to health (if any) connected with the fabrication of three different insulation materials and identification of acceptable measures for use in reducing all exposures to within safe acceptable limits. However, each investigation occurred for clearly identifiable reasons as explained below: The investigation of 24 Jan 63 was conducted because: 1. The Johns Manville Company submitted a report, compiled by their Research Department, which contained data that conflicted with that submitted by this department in Report 62-IH-l-G-l. 2. This department desired to clarify the reasons for the discrepancy between the two reports and to identify positively, the actual conditions as they exist in the working environment. The investigation of 25 and 26 Feb 63 was conducted because: 1. In the preceding investigation, the two insulation materials in question, i.e., "Thermobestos" and "Kaylo" were evaluated inadvertently during the same afternoon, a procedure which was not in keeping with an attempt to stimulate the conditions of the original report. In the original report, each material was evaluated on separate occasions so as to preclude the possibility that any one sample might contain dust produced by both operations. UCC 010555 3 2, The "Kaylo" insulation material had to be re-evaluated. 3. The Construction Insulation Shop requested that a new insulation material, i. e., "Carey-Temp", be evaluated. The investigation of 6 Mar 1963 was conducted because 1. The Construction Insulation Shop recently had installed supplementary exhaust ventilation on both band saws and desired to know if this additional control method would reduce the "Therroobestos" dust concentrations to within safe acceptable limits. A comparison of the reasons listed above discloses that each was different in content and concerned actually with different investigations but all were interrelated in part, i.e,, each was concerned with the same environment, the same location and the same specific methods of fabrication. Consequently, the sampling procedures, utilized in each instance, basically were identical and in accordance with the following condensed explanation: First: Two methods of fabrication, ,,i.e., cutting and edging, and cutting a radius, were Evaluated at each band saw since this is standard practice followed in the fabrication of any insulation material. Second: The environmental conditio/is of both preceding reports, i.e., 62-IH-l-G-l and 62-IH-2-G-1, were duplicated in that all outsidedoors to the building were closed. Third: Each dust sample was collected in the operator's breathing . zone as he.worked in the fabrication process. Fourth: The complete fabrication of "Carey-Temp" insulation blocks was evaluated in two ways: First, with all available ventilation in operation and second,with only the-original downdraft ventilation in operation. Specialized sampling procedures were utilized also during portions of the latter twc investigations, in an endeavor to evaluate the supplementary exhaust ventilation system which had been installed as recommended. These were as follows: First: The complete fabrication of "Thermobestos" insulation blocks was evaluated in two ways: First, with all available ventilation in operation and second ,with only the original downdraft ventilation in operation. Second: The complete fabrication of "Carey-Temp" insulation blocks was evaluated while utilizing all available exhaust ventilation. UCC 010556 4. It is necessary to explain that "Kaylo" insulation blocks were not included as a part of this evaluation since the initial investigation, (performed without supplementary exhaust ventilation) disclosed only one exposure exceeding the TLV of 20 mppcf of air and, therefore, it could be assumed that any ventilation that might be added should be more than adequate in controlling the hazard. EVALUATIONS: A. Atmospheric dust exposures: 1. The concentrations of inhalable dust, present in the breathing zone when fabricating any one of the three types of insulation materials, were determined in accordance with the following procedure: a. Three locations and nine different conditions of exposure, as described on Page 9, were selected for evaluation. b. Atmospheric dust samples were collected through the use of the impingement* principle of air sampling. The midget impinger apparatus (described on Page 5 ) served as the instrument of use. c. The concentration of dust collected in each sample was established through the use of standard' light field microscopic counting techniques as described on Page 5, 2. 'The size of the particles of inhaled dust was determined, for both "Kaylo" and "Thermobestos", in the initial survey of 1962 in accordance with the procedure described on Page 5 . Consequently, no effort was expended to repeat the determination for any of the insulation materials since the sawing techniques as well as equipment, i.e., saw blades with three teeth to the inch operating at 2200 linear feet per minute, were identical on both occasions and, therefore, the size of the particles should not be expected to deviate to any great degree from the prior recorded values. - 3, The composition of the dust, i.e., percentage crystalline free silica or percentage asbestos was determined for both "Kaylo" and "Thermobestos" in the initial survey of 1962. Consequently, no effort was expended to repeat this determination since the materials used on both occasions, were reported as being identical in composition. However, since the composition of "Carey-Temp" was not established at any earlier date it was deemed imperative that it be determined and reported at this time. This was accomplished as described on Page 5, B. Local exhaust ventilation controls: 1. The velocity of the air being exhausted through the ventilation hood openings on both band saws (#1 and #2) was measured through the use of a Model 60 Anemotherm air meter. 2, Four variable conditions of interest were evaluated: a* The velocity of air through the downdraft hood on both saws with all other hoods on the system closed off. * This means to strike against, as (in this application) the striking or dashing of atmospheric dust particles against the bottom of a snail impinger flask containing a specific volume of dust-free water as a collecting medium. UCC 010557 5 b. The velocity of air through the downdraft hood on both saws with all other hoods on the system open. c. The velocity of air through the supplementary overhead hood on both saws with all other hoods on the system closed off* d. The velocity of air through the supplementary overhead hood on both saws with all other hoods on the system open, PROCEDURES: Both sampling and analytical methods were as follows: SAMPLING: 1. All samples used in determining the actual concentrations in air were collected with a midget impinger apparatus, sampling 0.1 cubic feet of air per minute through impinger flasks containing 15 milliliters of double distilled dust-free water. 2. All samples used in obtaining particle size distribution data were collected on millipore filters connected to a small battery-operated pump. ANALYTICAL: v 1. Each dust sample was evaluated through the use of a counting procedure referred to as the light field microscopic counting technique.* 2. The particle sizing techniques were derived from two separate sources. First, the sample was prepared for sizing in accordance with a permanent mounting method.+ Second, the actual sizing was accomplished in accordance with the recomnended technique depicting the use of a filar micrometer and a standard microscope while using both the 43X (high and dry) and the 97X (oil immersion) objectives.+ 3. The.evaluation and free silica determination of "Carey-Temp" material was accomplished through the use of two methods. First, through information supplied by Mr. E. D. Ermenc, Director of Research of the Philip Carey Manufacturing Company and second, through contracted analysis performed by Mr. Thomas M. EUrkan, Chief Chemist for the Trudeau Foundation, Inc., Saranak Lake, N. Y. . RESULTS: See Pages 8, 9, 10 and 11. Drinker and Hatch: "Industrial Dust", 2nd Edition, pp. 152-153, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. New York, 1954. Pautus, Hi J., Talvitie, N. A., Fraser, D. A,, and Keenan, R. G.: "Use of Membrane Filters in Air Sampling", A.I.H.A. Quarterly, Vol. 18, p. 269, September, 1957. Drinker and Hatch: "Industrial Dust", 2nd Edition, pp. 166-179, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1954. UCC 010558 6. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to dust exposures from Graph. #1 & Tables on Pages 8 6 9: 1. "Thermobestos" insulation blocks should not be fabricated when using only the original downdraft exhaust ventilation. 2. "Kaylo" insulation blocks could be fabricated safely when using only the original downdraft exhaust ventilation if existing leaks, observed on the #1 band saw, are corrected. 3. "Kaylo" insulation blocks definitely may be safely fabricated when using the entire exhaust ventilation facilities now available, i.e., hoods , above the blocks as well as below. From Graph #26 Tables on Pages 869: 1. Methods of handling "Thermobestos" blocks (preparatory to sawing) and scraps (after sawing) contribute greatly to specific individual exposures as demonstrated by the following facts: a. The fabrication process, which always begins at the #2 band saw with the simple cutting of each 18" x 36" x 4" block into three smaller blocks about 18" x 12" x 4", is normally the least dusty of all the fabrication operations as revealed by the samples taken on 24 Jan 1963. b. However, on 6 Mar 1963, this operation was revealed as being one of the dustiest, regardless of the ventilation being used. c. There was only one major variable between the samples taken on the two dates, i.e., the method of handling the blocks preparatory to sawing. Consideration of the procedure used on these dates reveals: (1) that on 24 Jan 1963, the blocks were rolled up to the saw after having been removed from their shipping cartons and stacked on a "dolly" for easy individual removal and (2) on 6 Mar 1963, the blocks were not removed from their shipping cartons until needed by the worker. A large amount of dust is produced when blocks are removed individually from the cartons as a result of the natural abrasion produced when one block is pulled over the surface of the other. Consequently, the dust concentrations on this date at this location were greater than normal. 2. The supplementary overhead ventilation (added since the time of the preceding two reports) does successfully reduce the dust exposures. However, it does not reduce "Thermobestos" dust exposures to within safe acceptable limits wfien cutting radii. From Graph #3 6 Table on Page 9: 1. "Carey-Temp" dust concentrations for each exposure was substantially greater than the comparable "Thermobestos" dust concentrations and in excess of even the most lenient TLV established for human exposures, i.e,, 50 mppcf of air. UCC 010559 7. 2. The existing exhaust ventilation system as installed on both band saws is incapable of reducing the dust hazard, associated with the fabrication of "Carey-Temp", to within safe acceptable limits, i.e, 20 mppcf of air. Relative to the exhaust ventilation system: 1. The duct velocity in the downdraft ventilation system on both band saws is far below the recommended value of 4000 fpm. I 2. The duct velocity in the overhead ventilation system on both band saws is equal to or more than the recommended value of 4000 fpm. 3. The velocity in the downdraft ventilation systems for both band saws could be increased by patching all holes, leaks, etc., now in existence. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Do not fabricate 18" x 36" x 4" "Carey-Temp" or "Thermobestos" insulation materials unless: a. The atmospheric dust problem can be reduced to below 20 mppcf of air through the use of improved ventilation techniques or repairs to the existing system, or b. The manufacturers of the two makes of insulation materials are able to produce a product which will not release, upon fabrication with a band saw, dust concentrations in excess of 20 mppcf of air. REP:hi 23 October 1963 UCC 010560 INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE SURVEY Evaluation of Atmospheric Dust Conditions at the Construction Insulation Shop Table #1 Atmospheric Dust Concentration Data Collected When Using Only Partial Ventilation, i.e., Only Below the Blocks Date 25 Feb 63 24 Jan 63 6 Mar 63 25 Feb 63 24 Jan 63 6 Mar 63 Cutting 6 Edging Insulation Blocks Type of Material Kaylo Thermobestos VI Kaylo Thermobestos 11 Description of Location #1, i.e., South Side of the #2 Band Saw H H II 11 II 11 11 It ' t n #2, i.e., South Side of the #1 Band Saw #2 1f ii ii ii ii *i 'i " " " " ' ' Concentration in mppcf 9.32 10.00 51.50 17,92 26.36 42.70 Date - * Mar 62 25 Feb 63 Mar 62 24 Jan 63 6 Mar 63 Mar 62 25 Feb 63 Mar 62 24 Jan 63 6 Mar 63 Cutting a Radius on Insulation Blocks Type of Material Description of Location Kaylo 11 Thermobestos IV It Kaylo ft Thermobestos n 11 . #3, i.e., South Side of the #2 Band Saw #3, It It 11 It It It It #3, 11 It 11 It If 11 tl If #3, fl II It fl II It tv VI #3, II If 11 II VI 11 It VI #4, 16* } South Side of the #1 Band Saw #4, #4, ft IT If If fl If If tl fl It It If 11 It 11 #4, #4, It ft If ?! 11 11 II tv II ft If- II ft 11 It It Concentration in mppcf 17.10 3.39 101.40 69.59 36.82 3.06 29.35 83.30 66.69 70.00 UCC 010561 Date i 6 Mar 63 26 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 26 Feb 63 Table 82 Atmospheric Dust Concentration Data Collected When Using All Available Ventilation, i.e., Both Above 6 Below the Blocks Cutting 6 Edging Insulation Blocks 9 Type of Material Thermobestos Carey-Temp Thermobestos Carey-Temp Description of Location r #la, i.e., South Side of the #2 Band Saw ii , 1 n ii , ii it ti ii it #2a, i.e., South Side of the 81 Band Saw #2a.t " " ` n n < m Concentration in mppcf 30.20, 51.70 17.59 68.20 Cutting a Radius on Insulation Blocks Date ' Type of Material 6 Mar 63 - 6 Mar 63 26 Feb 63 26 Feb 69 , Thermobestos Thermobestos Carey-Temp Carey-Temp Description of Location #3a, i.e., South Side of the 82 Band Saw #4a, i.e., South Side of the #1 Band Saw ffUa* " ii ii H y n ii ti #5a, i.e., North Side of the #1 Band Saw Concentration in mppcf 22.42 51.70 85.40 100.90 Index for Graphs #1, #2 8 #3 #1 = South Side 82 Band Saw - Cutting Blocks - Ventilation Only Below 82 = " II 81 ti 11 -- Edging 11 - II If If 83 - it II 82 n " - Cutting a Radius It II ft #4 = n It 81 n it _ it ii ii If IV ft 8la s n If 82 it " - Cutting Blocks - ft Both Above 8 Below 82a 83a = " II 81 It 82 n it " - Edging " " - Catting a Radius II II It If ff If It tf It II #4a B " It 81 it II _ H II If II If II II ft #5a = North Side #1 Band Saw - Catting a Radius - Ventilation Both Above 8 Below UCC 010562 Trial 1 2 3 Trial * 1 2 3- Table #3 Determination of Percentage Crystalline Free Silica Present in "Thermobestos" * "Kaylo" "Carey-Temp" as Quartz by the "Talvitie" Method 10. "Thermobestos" (As Contained in Report 62-IH-l-G-l) Wi in Grams W2 in Grams W3 in Grams % Free S1O2 0.5002 0.5000 0.5002 0.0390 0.0347 0.0396 0.0069 0.0068 0.0082 Average Percentage Crystalline Free S1.O2 = 6.4 6.42 5.58 6.28 "Kaylo" (As Contained in Report 62-IH-l-G-l) in Grams W2 in Grams W3 in Grams % Free Sj^2 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.0807 0.0730 0.0563 0.0433 0.0364 0.0190 7.48 7.32 7.46 Average Percentage Crystalline Free S]_02 = 7.4 "Carey-Temp" (As Reported by Mr. Thomas M. Durkan) 4 October 1963 UCC 010563 Table #4 Ventilation Pates on Two Band Saws 11. Date 25 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 25 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 25 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 25 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 25 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 Band Saw n #2 #2 #2 n #2 n n n n Hood Being Checked Downdraft If It If II tl Overhead II II It Description of Condition Only Downdraft System in Operation m it nn ii Downdraft 6 Overhead System in Operation II II ft II II Every Hood in the System Open H 11 II 11 11 II Downdraft 6 Overhead System in Operation II II II If It It Every Hood in the System Open II It If II II II Ventilation Rate in fpm 1500 1450 1200 1200 950 900 6500 4800 4000 25 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 "*5 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 25 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 26 Feb 63 6 Mar 63 25 Feb 636 Mar 63 #i #i #i #i #i #i #i #i #i #i Downdraft II II It II II Overhead II II II Only Downdraft System in Operation ti it it n it Downdraft S Overhead System in Operation it it n n it ii Every Hood in the System Open ti ti it n it it Downdraft 6 Overhead System in Operation If II It II II II Every Hood in the* System Open II II II tl If If 2100 1500 1600 1150 1100 , 5500 4500 4200 UCC 010564 z o # 1 Band Saw #2 Band Saw #1 Band Saw #S l u d Saw o* o O O ON OH O jtv jo jodcJui ur nuot^pj^uaDuq^ UCC 010565 0 Z 8 5 i5 u i?Z O Ui Cl u. Ul 3 OO 3 zX CL in Z in ui flL <oc o0 m O * % at 69 4M 9 1 W- (1 19 *f 91 | 69 JfH 9 K* \ ------------------------------ 1--------------------------1" 1 ViI *1 ft 1 - AH | 69 Wf 96 #6 B m d Sot 69 H 9 | * 1 i ft i 1 69 9 | eg <^h 1--------------------------- 69 Wf 96 1 H H* [ It "H9 1 1 69 W V| I I MI *3 ft 84 8 8 3 8 3 8 JTV J joddui trr uorjpaiuaouoo B*a4f l S o UCC 010566 UCC 010567 uc w> ION UNION CARBIDE CHEMICAL* COMPANY iNtTmm plant r o. box 2*31, chmuston. west virgi h|Nw R. J. Sexton, M.D. C* Medical Department - Plant 512 29 November 1963 Of%imN*oK Industrial Hygiene - Plant 512 Ainnib| hllif Mi cwt* Mr. L. N. Dickinson Mr. N. S. Eastman It*. S. C. Giambruno Mr. R. A. Huber Mr. B. F. King Dr. E. M. Best Dr. C. U. Demehl Mr. J. W. Perry Construction Insulation Shop Mn P. E. Henry Building 511-2018 Mr. R. A. Neal Mr. D. R. Mathen Mr. N. H. Ketcham hfc\ L. B. Weddell - Safety Dept. Mr. F. G. Comerford In accordance with Mr. P. E. Henry's request of Thursday, 7 Nov 63, I have investigated the fabrication of "Carey-Temp" pipe covering. This operation is carried out with band saws and, on the basis of visual observation alone, it has been decided that there should be no health hazard associated with this particular type of operation. This investigation took place during the morning of Thursday, 14 Nov 63, in the company of Mr. K. B. Lanham, Foreman of the Fabrication Insulation Shop, and consisted merely of observing the process of the cutting of half sections of eight inch diameter "Carey-Temp" pipe covering with a hand saw. No effort was made, at that time, to determine the actual concentration of atmospheric dust being produced during this operation. It should not be necessary to perform this specific test so long as working conditions are not altered appreciably from those observed on this date. However, a more thorough evaluation of these conditions will be performed if (1) it is `specifically requested, (2) employees begin complaining about reactions such as nose bleed, etc,, (3) a thicker material, i.e.^more than two inches in diameter is substituted for fabrication, or (4) the fabrication shop begins cutting each curved half-section from large blocks of "Carey-Temp". Very truly yours, REP:hi R. E. Feele Industrial Hygienist 7 /-// 9 UCC 010568 Mr* D. C Willard Building 8-96-2 E* Q* Hull, M.D* April 28, 1967 particulate Matter in Air AsbeBtos Dust Project Ho. IB-PAR-76-6T Dear Dont As per our telephone conversation today, I am attaching a resume* of our determinations of dust breathed by the employees while cutting and installing "kale" insulation. We feel that further air sampling is needed to give you more meaningful conclusiohs as to the best protection for the employees handling this material. ' At your convenience, we will be glad to discuss these findings with you. In the meantime, if you would keep us informed of jobs pertain ing to cutting, installing and removing "kaylo" insulation, it would be helpful in scheduling the air sampling work* Thanks, Bert Murray UCC 010569 DISTRIBUTION: Mr. Peter Barna Hr. J. N. Dermit C. U. Dernehl, M.D, E. Q. Hull, M.D. Hr. N. H. Ketcham Hr, R. J. Murphy Kr. R. A. Neal Mr, R. E. Peele Mr, V. C. Seguin R. J. Sexton, M.D. Mr. F. J. Sheets Mr. Fred Williams General Foremen's Office UCC 010570 L P PARTICULATE MATTER IN AIR Dust Breathed by the Employees While Cutting end Installing "Kayla" Insulation _ Plant-wide Survey - Plant 514 Authors: H. H. Warwick B. L. Murray ' Dote: September 21, 19G5 Project No.: Ill-10-65 Doctor Hull, Plant Medical Director, requested a plant-wide industrial hygiene study to determine the potential exposure of insulators to asbestos fiber dust concentrations. Table I gives the results of seven separate tests, including 24 breathing zone level air samples end shows an average dust concentration of 5.2 million particles per cubic foot of air. A "threshold limit value" of 20 rappef of air has been suggested.1 When three employees, or less, hand-cut and apply "Koylo" insulation, the concentration of dust is considerqd safe from the health standpoint; however, with 6 men the dust count exceeds the TLV, It is at thi3 phose of the operation that exhaust ventilation should be used. Excessive dust concentrdtions can bo expected when the insulation is removed from piping and tanks. Again, exhaust venti lation should be used to move the dust away from the employees, if possible; otherwise, respirators are advised. "Kaylo" insulation contains 12 to 13% asbestos and 5.6 to 7.4% crystalline-free silica,^ This material is received in block and pipe form and the insulator measures and marks the material into appropriate sizes and cuts it with a hand saw. The insulation material is wired into position around the tank or pipe. The tasks of cutting and apply ing the "Kaylo" Insulation are shown in Figures 1 and 2. The air samples were collected with a midget impinger and a Unl-jet -sampler, drawing D.l cubic foot of air per minute through impinger flask3 containing 10 milliliters of distilled water. Dust counts, made by the Light Field Microscopic Counting Techniqqe, appear in Table I. This study has revealed that further research work is needed to: 1. Attain an established figure for the "threshold limit value". 2. Utilise exhaust ventilation to remove the dust from the work area, 3; Determine tJ\e particle size of the asbestos fiber where the dust count exceeds 5 mppcf, 4. Obtain Range Finding Tests on animals exposed to different percents of asbestos fiber. 5. Continue our plant-wide study in support of these conclusions. 1. Cook, Warren A., and Poole, Robert E,, Lottor doted February 12, 19G2 Tha University of Michigan School of Public Health. 2. redo, R, E., Industrial Hygiene Survey - Construction Insulation Shop, Uuilding 511-2018. Report 62-IH-l-G-l (March 21, 1962). UCC 010571 TABLE I(l) PARTICULATE MATTER IN AIR Dust Breathed by Employees While Cutting and Installing "Kaylo" Insulation Date 11-16-64 1-19-65 2-16-55 3-1-65 3-22-65 5-26-65 6-14-65 Sample Humber '' Sampling Conditions at Breathing Level Number of Employees 1 2 3 4, 5-min. cutting, 5-min. application inside building Same Same 7-min. cutting, 3-min. application 2 2 2 2 Dust Count HPFCF (1) 2.1 2.6 1.7 3.0 5 Cutting and application during 6 entire sampling period - inside building 6 . Same 6 7 Same 6 22.5 17.0 22.5 8 Some 9 5 erne 10 Application of insulation - no hand saw cutting 11 Same 2 2. 2> 1 3.6 1.6 U. 3 0.1 12 Cutting and application during 2 sampling period - outside building 13 . Same 2 14 Same 2 7. B 2.4 4.0 15 Application of insulating - no 3 cutting - inside building 16 Same '3 17 7-min. cutting* 3-min. application 1 1.9 13.0 7.3 18 Clean up of insulation from floor 2 sweeping and shoveling - inside b'lt 19 Same 2 20 Same 2 U.O 0.1 2.5 21 Cutting and application during 2 sampling period - inside building 22 Same 2 23 Same 2 24 Same 2 1.0 5.0 2.5 1.1 (l) Hilllon porticlc3 per cubic foot of air. 10-14-65 UCC 010572 . r* PARTICULATE MATTER BJ AIR Dust Breathed by the Employees while Cutting and Installing "Kaylo11 Insulation Plant-wide Surrey - Plant 614 Figure 1. Sowing block sections. Breathing zone level air sample being collected in the background. BLtf. Figure 2, Applying insulation block. Breathing zone level air sample being collected in the foreground. UCC 010573 v-'t-- --i.w^p ^ INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE EVALUATION AND SURVEY PROJECT m. / // Date '/' / / < "'> Time /' ' ,,, Project Sj- 't'J> A*^ <> I'eoartmen t / / C tr t Location f r * ' v / / Bldg. No. {j/2'/ Requested by General Conditions * ' ^ r J . f - 4 t ~/a < * . -..s . Reason S' / l/-- ^ ' ''* r> / / , / y. m/ */ -/ Sampling Method and Equipment /A -7' ^ / tS * i ;v ' . A* Shift: Day Eve. [Sample Sampling iHuziber Zone Time-Min. rr /'! . Mid . No. Employees Sampled by //*S' <5~i C / ,4*- Plow CONCENTRATION Rate r i WF 9 y A > <0.1 s-cjs Special Conditions *~/ -'y/' Y' s;r*<z/~ < ;~sr'<>{'[ S* "e'/'' ' / / T1^ __ /(r.. .. ?.y o.L> /' r A-V ^ ,r /- . r' . - ' / /* 47 '0 alculation: ^7 o4 2.0 y -- - /" //> ,, *-?''& Y*//r <2 o.z 0.5 ' \ > 1 -VW- jr--.',-A.* / ' ?V.y.- -.(*y-/ S' *** ., /, /., /, . .'/r/v,. ^ / r-*t~*`* ci . /" / S' O f / '- ,. f./t .r* "/ ;v / /, ^ V' " 7 ! v) y.y y r> <o.( <c>^ 3 cmorks: /./y-/ ---------- - /v' / > y yite ^ f y `t'Cfr "rt,yJ v/^ : <etch - See Reverse Side. Reference No. 7Jft& 4$ Analyzed by "'--' ' "" j 1 "' ."J 1,1 Date ^6 ..... UCC 010574 , >* '1 INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE EVALUATION AND SURVEY PROJECT NO,2/J- te -- /j*^ Time /Q. <Q T - 9act rJ~)( t( / / <1 department /'/&;>*' /'/-'<%///) Jfr'fj Bldg. No. /S& Requested by SfJ't V e General Conditions:__ - 4c/q- (2 Z' <7 Ca rffeouesf) Sampling Method and 1 c/t'-iK Kr7^*^ l Shift: Day ___ Eve* : t ,.sj' * y <v r ** ; r-,4 / jV^w* /^ ^ ^^ / ..' No. Employees 1 "; Sampled by /ft/K</- C(o(T Calculation: /yV/ Remarks: * t,5C> X H> ,, m Sketch - See Reverse Side. Reference No. ,J/^p /fl Analyzed by Q'fjgjus UCC 010575 Date 4-/S- / ,j rn-7MO AVOID ORAL INSTRUCTIONS DATE, lh.L .I973L L. C--r-i-*i-r-v->,v- s iSt 3|3^' 'T^^sss 914-IP* O ?7,, I J9/3 + DO IT THE SAFE WAY + SIGNED R. H* STEINBERG ['': ? -vvI;*--.--.v.- r fK'#I .V -* f '> jf, 'V.'-v I g ? w*'' UCC 010576 INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE EMICAL5 AND PLASTICS (Nam*) txllr. Fred Williams Iritha 3cofien epy It Mr. R. 0. Midkiff Mr. R. E. Peele 1 INSTITUTE PLANT P. 0. BOX ?33J. CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA 25330 Call January 24, 1973 Originating Dept. Answering letter dole Employee Relations Hygiene/Safety Subject Asbestos Sampling Values 511 Insulation Fabrication Shop 4**%$A-M* (O /**/*l&fo* l Asbestos fiber counts for samples we have collected at the Plant 511 Insulation Fabrication Shop are submitted for your information. They may serve as guidance for any sampling program you may initiate and they should be valid as part of a records program. Sample No. Date Sampling Time, min Fiber Count/ml Sample-Job Description ^512-HHF-Ol 3-8-72 /512-HHF**02 3-8-72 ^512-HHF-03 3-8-72 >"512-HHF-04 11-21-72 `'51.2-HHF-Q5 11-21-72 ^512-HHF-06 11-21-72 K 512-HHF-07 11-21-72 S512-HHF-08 12-4-72 512-HHF-09 12-4-72 512-HHF-10 12-4-72 512-HHF-ll 12-4-72 512-HHF-12 12-4-72 _ 512-HHF-13 12-4-72 - 512-HHF-14 12-4-72 512-HHF-15 12-4-72 15 Too heavy to S. E. Painter - Dust count * collection removal for disposal. 5 61.5 ^ S. E. Painter - Dust -to collector wearing A*w TuU ' respirator. *r*' 15 24.5 min.^ S. E. Painter - End of dust removal job. 6 4.1 L. I. Mitchell - Butt sawing. 6 23.4 r" L. I. Mitchell - Placing pairs of sawed blocks in cartons. 9 4.1 H. Stanley - Janitor -broom sweeping. 15 3.9 H. E. Samples - Cementing pre-formed blocks. 15 0.05 L. I. Mitchell - Off bearing south saw 1st cut. 15 5.3 H. E. Witt - Separate sawed block - apply glue. 9 - Bad filter - not counted. - 15 11.8 mini1' H- E. Samples - Removing glued blocks from stack-edging. 4 27.8 ' H. E. Samples - Sawing block. 13 6.5 L. I. Mitchell - Off bearing second cut - placing in carton. lh 9.8 L. I. Mitchell - Unpacking a single carton - sawed 22 pcs. 1{s 48.3' L. I. Mitchell - Filling carton with sawed blocks. Mr. Fred Williams Page 2 January 24, 1973 All samples were collected on the person of the employee and each of them represents a peak exposure for the various work tasks. All work was involved with asbestos containing KAYLO block materials. The problem area most deserving corrective measures is obviously the dumping procedure of the shop dust collecting facility. Excessive exposures are encountered in the handling, especially packing, of sawed block material. Exposure values have not been reported to the employees nor to shop supervision. Very truly yours, HHF:llh H. H. Frazier % UCC 010578 INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE CHEMICALS DIVISION insiituu punt p. o box 283i. charuston, wist Virginia 25330 Mr. K. B. Lanhara Insulation fabrication Shop Bldg. 511 - Roan 2018 *' 24 August 1965 o.. Industrial Hygiene - Plant 512 Mr. F. G. Comerford n Mr, J. M. Fallon Mr. P. F. Henry Mr. N. H. Ketchara Mr. D. R. Matheny Dr. R. J. Sextcn Mr. Frank Shaffer Mr. L. B. Weddell Hr. Fred Williams * DUST SAMPLine OF "CAREY-TEMP" INSU1ATIQN We have received results from the dust sampling series conducted in your shop while the head grinder machine was being used to cut "Carey-Temp" insulation block. These results indicate that the hazard to health from dust exposure during this operation is very slight and should not present any serious respiratory problems to the machine operator if conducted in a similar manner to the test runs. During our conversation, you mentioned that you anticipate moving the machine to another location in the shop and also making certain modifications to the machine and dust exhaust system. It is our reccrrmendation that these changes be carried out to their completion in the near future so as to further add to the adequacy of the system. In order to canpletely finalize this investigation, we would like to do another series of sampling when more "Carey-Temp" insulation is available and after the above changes and modifications have been made. If, in the interim period, you have any questions relative to these tests, please notify this department. JITfjhl UCC 010579 INTERNAL CORRU3PONDSNC3 HEMICALS AND PLASTICS VmW Mr. D. R. Albright Chemicals and Plastics Bound Brook, New Jersey , i. Hr. R. W. Cope - SC Mr. R. A. DeCoudres - BB Mr. J. L. Goodson - BB Mr. N. L. Ketcham - SC Dr. C. S. McKinley - BB Mr. R. A. Riraicci - BB Mr. F. A. Schillinger - BB ` Mr. J. M. Swalra - BB Mr. J. P. Zuccarelli - BB RIVER ROAD. nom.'D BROOK. NEW JIRSEr 0880b Du* November 8, 1972 Originating D.pt. Environmental Protection I.Nif Jala SvNJacf Asbestos Dust Measurements The September and October samplings of the Unit B and C work areas have afforded the opportunity of measuring the maximum concentrations of airborne asbestos expected when these units are running products of 29 to 33% asbestos content. The following are my conclusions and recommendations as the result of ay samplings and observations to date. 1. Airborne asbestos concentrations to which molding materials mixer operators on the third floor are exposed while charging asbestos do not exceed 6 flbers/cc compared with the OSHA celling limit of 10 flbers/cc when sampled for 15-minute periods. The eight-hour time-weighted averaged concentrations measure under 3 fibers/cc compared with the present OSHA limit of 5 flbers/cc. When proper precautions are followed in the dumping and put-away of empty bags, it appears -that airborne concentrations can be maintained below the 2 fiber/cc eight-hour TWA limit to be effective July 1, 1976. . . 2. Although the third floor operation appears "clean" by our measurements, there are conspicuous situations which could provoke citations under the "general duty" clause if observed by the compliance officer. It is recommended that departmental programs aimed at these items be intensified, not nn1y trt impt-nyo our margin oi safety, but also to improve the morale of operators, some of whom see sources oi asbestos contamination as a threat to their health despite the measurements taken. These situations are as follows: ' A. /Handling of Empty Bags; / remains a visable dusting problem. Although operators can exercise due / core in gathering empty bags and placing them in the gaylord liner bln, there is great variability between operators. Unless firmer supervision can be given to this area, it would appear that the installation of hoods over the two disposal bin locations will-be required to minimize this source. UCC 010580  <Chem'Jscfls and Plastics Bound Brook, Hew Jersey . Asbestos Dust Measurements - B. Condition of Incoming Asbestos Bans; The palletized packages of asbestos bags are prone to being, torn open from loading, shipping, nnd subsequent handllng_ln our plant. The condition appears to have improved during recent sampling, evidently the result of attention to this problem.' Close monitoring must be maintained to avoid spillage of asbestos, not only in the third"floor ~Srea but In the warehouses and areas traversed by persons not aware of or protected from exposure to asbestos. C. Work Habits of Personnel; Operators have been observed using the air hose that hangs by the wall between Units B and C to blow dust from their clothing and gloves. Obviously, this fills the area with a cloud of dust. Use of vacuuming and/or disposable coveralls Is recommended. Also, one operator was observed to dump asbestos without wearing a respirator, claiming inability to breathe through the "Dustfoe" respirator. All other operators wore their respirators while discharging asbestos. D. General Housekeeping ` Although the third floor appears to be swept frequently, there are accunula- tlons of dust on equipment, ledges, and in corners which detract from the general appearance of the area. Additional vacuum connections with brushes and hoses should facilitate clean-ups. 3. Airborne asbestos concentrations in the areas of the first floor charge rolls present no problem, as indicated by the maximum measurement of 1.4 fibers/cc from the September samples. However, operators should be encouraged to wear respirators during malfunctions when they arc shovelling quantities of raw mix for highly-loaded products. 4. Another (probably non-asbestos) dust source which could subject us to the "general duty" clause is the Tote Bin filling station station at Unit C where heavy dusting has been observed during the filling operation. Whether or not dust from BMN G935 Bk 25 product contnlps free asbestos fibers remains to be investigated; however, the nuisance factor to operators in the vicinity is high and could draw undue attention during a compliance inspection. An improved dust hood or better vacuum source should alleviate much of this dust. Future plans call for additional sampling during production of high asbestos products to further measure sources. Meanwhile, we have arranged for a visit on November 13 by an industry consultant, Mr. W. Bradley, whose wide experience in asbestos testing will afford the opportunity of "shoulder-to-shoulder" comparisons with our test methods to further establish our measuring accuracy. WDNjgb W. D. Neal UCC 010581 'i.Z v. -1.1 .*'. J li lLX * ASBESTOS DUST MEASUREMENTS - OCTOBER 1972 Date 10-18-72 10-19-72 10-20-72 10-18-72 10-19-72 10-20-72 Unit B B B C C C Product EMMA 5303 BMMA 5303 BMMA 5303 BMK 6935 BMN 6935 BMN 6935 Asbestos Loading % No. Bags 28.6 12 28.6 12 28.6 12 30.0 25 30.0 25 30.0 25 Area Sample Fibers/cc 0.7 0.3 0.2 1.1 - 0.8 Mixer Man Sample 15 Minute 8 Hour TWA Fibers/cc Fibers/cc 4.5 2.1 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.2 6.0 2.4 5.4 3.8 * 2.3 1.9 NOTES; All samples taken over 15 minute intervals. Eight hour TWA based on 8 mixes/8 hours for total of 2 hours at 15 minute concentration, 5 hours at 1.5 fibers/cc, maximum area concentration measured in September, and 1 hour at 0 concentration for tine off station. -Example; For Unit C, 10-18-72 sample: 2 hours 5 hours 1 hour 8 hours @ @ @ 6.0 fibers/cc 1.5 fibers/cc 0 fibers/cc , = 12.0 fibors-hour/cc 7.5 fibers-hour/cc a 0 fibers-hour/cc 19.5 -f 8 hours = 2.4 fibers/cc WON:GB 11/8/72 UCC 010582