1 / 21

Engineering Controls for Furniture Strippers to Meet the New OSHA PEL for Methylene Chloride

Engineering Controls for Furniture Strippers to Meet the New OSHA PEL for Methylene Chloride. Cheryl Fairfield Estill, Daniel S. Watkins, Stanley A. Shulman, Robert W. Kurimo, Ronald J. Kovein. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

josh
Télécharger la présentation

Engineering Controls for Furniture Strippers to Meet the New OSHA PEL for Methylene Chloride

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Engineering Controls for Furniture Strippers to Meet the New OSHA PEL for Methylene Chloride Cheryl Fairfield Estill, Daniel S. Watkins, Stanley A. Shulman, Robert W. Kurimo, Ronald J. Kovein National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

  2. Methylene Chloride OSHA PEL • PEL reduced to 25 ppm • Action level of 12.5 ppm • exposure monitoring • medical management • April 10, 2000 • effective date for furniture strippers

  3. Study Goal • To design engineering controls to reduce employee exposures to below the 25 ppm PEL

  4. Furniture Stripping • Methylene chloride, methanol, toluene • One employee • Alternates between two workstations • stripping, 40% of time • rinsing, 44% of time

  5. Previous Ventilation Design • 1991 study at this facility • Local exhaust ventilation • strip tank only • two slots, front and back • Exhaust volume • 2900 cfm • Employee exposure • 59 ppm

  6. Four Preliminary Surveys • Survey 1, Aug ‘97 - test existing system, • unrestricted make-up air • Survey 2, Mar ‘98 - test existing system, • no make-up air • Survey 3, Jun ‘98 - upgrade and clean stripping area ventilation • Survey 4, Jul ‘98 - add rinsing area ventilation

  7. Results of Preliminary Surveys

  8. Final Survey Ventilation Design • Changes to Stripping Tank • 60° transition piece • new fan • larger ductwork • eliminated elbows in ductwork

  9. Ventilation Design • Rinse Area • ½ HP axial fan • Enclosure - 3 sides and a top • swivel table

  10. Ventilation Results • Stripping Tank • exhaust volume 2700 cfm • slot velocity 2600 fpm • Rinsing Area • exhaust volume 2100 cfm • face velocity 120 fpm

  11. Methods • Breathing zone samples - one employee • Area samples, stripping and rinsing area • Bulk solution samples • OSHA Method 80 (ORBO tubes) • Two sampling days • 10 - one hour samples

  12. Methods • Employee Training • Employee watched a one-hour video • Talked with employee about work practices • Stripping Solution • Height of stripping solution • Paraffin wax

  13. Results • Stripping solution - 14 inches from top • Paraffin wax was added • Methylene chloride content was 50% Preliminary Survey 4 Final Survey

  14. Results - Final Survey • Two runs were eliminated. • Geometric mean - 8 ppm • Upper confidence limit - 13 ppm

  15. Comparison of Results

  16. Factors Which Reduced Exposure to Below PEL • Local ventilation • Stripping solution height, paraffin wax • Employee training

  17. Local Ventilation Note: No ventilation measurements were taken during Survey 2.

  18. Stripping SolutionEmployee Training • Solution in the tank must be kept high. • Paraffin wax must be used in the solution • Employees must be trained

  19. Costs $6840 $4545 $4340 Operating costs of make-up air system - $1000/year

  20. Limitations • Methylene chloride concentration - 50% • Costs are high • Three factors • Ventilation • Stripping Solution • Work Practices • It may take many iterations to reduce exposures to the PEL

  21. Conclusions • Technically feasible to reduce exposures to below the OSHA PEL • Use of this system can reduce exposures below the action level. • The 95% upper confidence level was 13 ppm, slightly above the action level.

More Related