Document wrMdEra1rzo24nqkNp7L3vqvD

FILE NAME: TILO (TIL) DATE: 1968 Feb 7 DOC#: TIL017 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Inspection Report - Air Sampling Id Largcnt - B O Dr. J. N. NaeNlllan - B O N. II. Baker - Tilo Company fab. 7 1968 Obaarvatlona vara mads at Tilo Company, Ino.( Stratford, Connactlout, on January 11 1968. Air was aaaplad for particulate loading at the raw materials feeding station on the aeoond floor directly above tha aebeetoe slurry tank. No other aeasureaenta ixocpt visual obaarvatlona ware made. RBULTB The dust found In samples In iaplnger flask liquid used to sample during the operator's cycle of about 80 minutes west No. 1 No. 2 l.% million particles per oubla foot. 5.9 million particles per cubic foot. In the areas where stone granules and alca are applied to opposite sides of asphalt sheeting, there was gross evidence of dustiness. However, the equip ment was not In operation due to repair, so no sir ssspllng could be dons. Sound pressures were axtrasoly interesting in certain arses, particularly near a large v u m a pimqp. Thor# nay be no hasard to hearing here, but there could be near the leg shredder at tha start of the prooess in the felt mill. jiitta nolee and potential dustiness were observed nerif the machine that puts the finished edges on eeVbtam shingles. pneoMioN The current controversy about a suspected rela tionship between inhaled asbestos and eanoers of the lungs and peritonei Justifies oareful and continued aurvellanee of any and all uaea of asbestos, and the shaping (like sewing, grinding, eta.) of asbestos pro ducts. one school of thought blaaas only erooldollte R M C 4 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 941 Dr. J. M. MacMillan Pig 2 February 7, 1968 (asbestos fibers) and exonerate chrysolite (asbestos fibers), but others are inclined to Indict "asbestos . The faot that only "ions fiber" chrysolite asbestos is used at the Stratford plant is fortunate, no doubt. The dust found In staples Mo. 1 end No. 2 was ao little as to seem non-hacardoua so far as asbestosla (as distinguished from cancer production) is concerned. Under the mloroaeope, no fibers were seen that had the oharaeterletle appearance of asbeetoa fibers and this suggestsi (l) the dust was all either osent or 1late*tone (both are added along with asbestos to make the slurry), or (2) the asbeetoa fibers were present but eo slender, say 0.01 to O.lu In disaster, that even fibers 10 to 20|t In length could not be seen using the standard Methods of looking at dust with s mloroaeope. The point of this part of the dissua sion la intended to suggest that additional staple aust be oolleeted to confirm, if possible, the possibility that few or no significant number of asbestos fibers get Into the work area. Other procedures nay be used, perhaps, to greater advantage for this purpose. Sample No. 2 was unusual because the operator, while per forming the routine operation of filling a conveyance by shov eling into it a proper amount of ground sorep shingles, oaueed a high section of the sorep to oesoade to the floor generating a brief but heavy aloud of duet. This probably aeoounte for the greater amount of duet found In this sample, since no similar epiaode aeoompanied the earlier work oyolo during whloh Sample Mo. 1 waa collected. Unless there was a significant but unde tected masher of asbestos fibers in these samples, there need be no great oonoem about dustiness near the slurry tank. NaCOMBBATZOMi Additional, samples need to be oolleeted to adequately appraise the gnamtlal dustiness of the manufacturing proaesses at the 1 trebling pleat. Moles level measurements should be made during same future visit to the plant. Award J. Largant RM C45000200001942