Document ykpZzopeg1ayg2xGeLmO3gern

OWENS COINING FIBEBGIAS BERLIN, N. J. May 11, 1961 PURPOSE* This visit was made at the request of our Philadelphia Engineering Department to evaluate the employee asbestosis exposure associated with your batch, cutting and routing operations* CONTACTS* In company with our Philadelphia Engineering Superintendent, Mr* D* M. Stayton, I contacted tout Plant Manager, Mr* 0* V* Pfeifer. PROCEDURE? Air was sampled at the rate of 0*1 cubic feet per minute utilizing midget im> pingers with isopropyl alcohol as collecting media* The samples were taken in the general area of the units and operations surveyed as well as in the employees' breathing zones at specified locations* Dust counts were made on a light field as prescribed by the United States Public Health Service method for dist counting. '\ FIHDIKjS: . Our findings, as well as pertinent remarks can be studied and interpreted from the attached Appendix A* , CRITERIA* Tf .. ' The threshold limit adopted at the 22nd AnndAl Meeting of Governmental Idustrial Hygienists for mineral dusts containing asbestos is 5 million particles per cubic foot of air* DISCISSION* With reference to ths above, it can be seen that in only two of "the operations studied has the threshold limit been exceeded* It should be pointed out, however, that although the threshold limit value has been exceeded in both operations that the limit in one instancews only slightly exceeded end in the other operation, the exposure was intermittent. ^70. It was not possible fer us to mate a dust study at the feed end of the flat ware finishing line since the line was not operating after the lunch hour. The counts at the other locations on the line, viz. the turnover, and the two packaging sta tions were close to or exceeding (See sample No. 3 in Appendix A) tile threshold 2- limit. We would like to point out, however, that at all these stations, there was a considerable improvanait from that noted on our Hr, Robinson's 1959 survey. In addition, we were assured that -the employee exposed to the highest concentrations normally wears a respirator. We would scommend, how* ever, that the exhaust systems, on this line be properly maintained and kept operating at peak efficiency, - The dust-.levels noted near your trim saws were well below the prescribed threshold limit, Sandies were taken at operator's breathing level near trim saws A and B, Both of these were working on 3x1 pieces. The noted concentra tions at both levels were approximately the same. The Trim Saw C which operates on the larger 12x2^ pieces was not runring luring our survey. The general area dust concentrations in the Batch House was well within the pre scribed limits. The counts noted at operator's breathing level during the mixing operation wassLightly higher. Since dusts of a nuisance category such as lime, limestone and other ingredients would also score in our counts and since this is an intermittent operation, 12 minutes per batch for approximately 8 to 10 batches per day, it is our believe that the exposure here is not serious, CONCLUSIONS ` The list counts made from the air samples taken at the various locations in your asbestos operations were found to be within the prescribed threshold limits. There are no recommendations being submitted at this time,. The writer wishes to express,his appreciation for the courtesy extended to us during his visit. 73 *3 a B, Rjy, Research Division fsf 70 001 0014 # c 1 'O CM CM .3 eo CM NO u\ eo H iH O n/ d * *V ** CM I 1 s5 e 43 .8 * *Q* *w 83 8 *S o & ( BP^ ' |S SGtSP. a&&* A. gJ- JS o p 5 :& JS s* i 43 CM I I J I I II 1 Is 6b a'S -s I n * ; ill sss e9g--fSSe' s8 Xw 3s S 3> e 2 6 o 4 i s s&< .c 9i <<_ X 0 o s s- m3 rt M s ,5? j!3 ( (0 H Is w 3 e * CO CO X *5 * Hm o cm en X \A >0 3 sc H ca M3 o p s o o !> m H P ttt CL o i Q o X * CQ