Review of OSHA Chemical Incident Data
Abstract not provided.
37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “OSHA”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
An S=1 Iron(IV) Intermediate Revealed in a Non-Heme Iron Enzyme-Catalyzed Oxidative C—S Bond Formation
Ergothioneine (ESH) and ovothiol A (OSHA) are two natural thiol-histidine derivatives. ESH has been implicated as a longevity vitamin and OSHA inhibits the proliferation of hepatocarcinoma. The key biosynthetic step of ESH and OSHA in the aerobic pathways is the O 2 -dependent C—S bond formation catalyzed by non-heme iron enzymes (e.g., OvoA in ovothiol biosynthesis), but due to the lack of identification of key reactive intermediate the mechanism of this novel reaction is unresolved. In this study, we report the identification and characterization of a kinetically competent S=1 iron(IV) intermediate supported by a four-histidine ligand environment (three from the protein residues and one from the substrate) in enabling C—S bond formation in OvoA from Methyloversatilis thermotoleran, which represents the first experimentally observed intermediate spin iron(IV) species in non-heme iron enzymes. Results reported in this study thus set the stage to further dissect the mechanism of enzymatic oxidative C—S bond formation in the OSHA biosynthesis pathway. They also afford new opportunities to study the structure-function relationship of high-valent iron intermediates supported by a histidine rich ligand environment.
37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tank A-101
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air purifying respirators (APR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors emanating from the headspace of tank A-101 on the Hanford Site. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing a cartridge change schedules.[3] Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to ensure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted over a period from July 22-24, 2016, using headspace vapors from Hanford tank A-101 under static conditions2 fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed on separate days with A-101 headspace vapors. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge, and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. Key conclusions from the assessment of the 59 COPCs in this study are described below: • Based on d measured cartridge inlet vapor concentrations from tank A-101 headspace, both ammonia and N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) exceeded their Occupational Exposure Limits (OEL).3 These measurements were generally consistent with maximum A-101 headspace measurements previously obtained for these two compounds. • Ammonia had respirator cartridge outlet concentrations that exceeded 10% of the OEL for both cartridges tested, indicating breakthrough for each. For the SCOTT 7422-SD1 cartridge, ammonia appeared to breakthrough above 10% of its OEL after 2 hours. For the SCOTT 7422-SC1 cartridge, ammonia breakthrough appeared to occur after 8 hours. 1 “Adequate performance” refers to the breakthrough criteria used in this analysis—that is, sustained cartridge outlet concentrations above 10% of the OEL. For some COPCs, an alternate threshold has been applied when necessary due to higher detection limit (DL)/reporting limit (RL) values for specific compounds. Ultimately, Industrial Hygiene professionals will use these results along with specific hazard assessments to determine service life and cartridge use that provides the necessary performance. 2 These tests were conducted under static conditions absent waste-disturbing activities in the subject tank or tank farm. 3 Occupational Exposure Limits accepted for Hanford Tank Farm use are based on OELs established by a U.S. governmental agency or national professional organization (e.g., OSHA, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists), or if no U.S. OEL exists, standard toxicological practices are applied to develop OELs using non-U.S. exposure limits, other established OELs for chemical surrogates when available, or other standard procedures. The OEL for NDMA was established in 2005 based on the MAK (Maximale Arbeitsplatzkonzentration) Commission standard adopted in Europe. iv • Despite respirator inlet measurements for NDMA that were in excess of its OEL, all corresponding outlet measurements, from both respirator cartridges, were below analytical DL 1 for the
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AP Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream (Volume 1)
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) tested four types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators (APR) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR). These tests were undertaken to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors exiting the Hanford AP tank farm exhauster slipstream. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing to be a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedules. Testing commonly is applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Cartridge testing on a slipstream from the Hanford AP tank exhauster was conducted on March 23-24, 2018. This testing focused on both APR and PAPR cartridges. Previous testing of APR cartridges was conducted on the AP exhauster in June of 2016. However, an AP exhauster upgrade was completed in September 2016. In the most recent testing, slipstream vapors from the new AP exhauster were fed to two respirator cartridge test stands, one for the PAPR respirator cartridges and the other for the APR respirator cartridges. Both the APR and PAPR test stands were developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose APR cartridges—SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina)—were assessed on separate days using the APR cartridge test stand. Multipurpose PAPR cartridges—MSA OptiFilter TL (MSA Safety Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and 3M FR-57 (3M Company, Maplewood, Minnesota)—were also tested consecutively over the same two days as the APR cartridge tests, using the PAPR cartridge test stand. Sample media (i.e., sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridges, and the samples then were analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. The key conclusions from the analysis are described below.
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks SX-101 and SX-104 (Vol.1)
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors exiting the headspaces of Hanford tanks SX-101 and SX-104. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedules.2 Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist and where other approaches such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to ensure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from June 16-17, 2017, and June 23-24, 2017, using headspace vapors from Hanford tank SX-104 and Hanford tank SX-101, respectively. Headspace vapors under static conditions were fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina), were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridges, and subsequently were analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Radon Survey of Los Alamos National Laboratory Buildings and Los Alamos County Residential Buildings
A radon survey of office spaces was of interest to LANL for several reasons. First, exposure to natural radon in LANL office spaces has been considered to be outside the regulatory reach of the federal regulations and the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) orders, and thus has not been studied as extensively as occupational exposure to other radionuclides and is not subject to the same rigorous radiological controls. Second, a general survey of radon concentrations in LANL workspaces was of interest to management to ensure safe environments for workers and is in keeping with the intent of OSHA requirements. Though radon in LANL offices would not be derived from enhanced radioactive sources, radon exposure in general office spaces has the potential to significantly impact worker risk. The purpose of the 2009 radon survey was to measure and document indoor radon levels across a broad spectrum of office-type workspaces and neighboring homes. The measured concentrations were compared against those measured across the United States and across the world. The results were also compared against a wide variety of radiation protection thresholds such as (1) the action levels of 148 Bq m -3 (the U.S. EPA action level for public housing), (2) ≈1,200 Bq m -3 OSHA threshold for office spaces, (3) effective dose threshold of 1 mSv threshold for defining a radiological worker, (4) 50 mSv occupational effective dose limit, and (5) 0.1 mSv and 1 mSv limits for public exposures from the air pathway and all pathways, respectively.
07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks BY-108 and BY-110 Volume 1
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) tested four types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators (APR) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR). These tests were undertaken to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors exiting the headspaces of Hanford BY-108 and BY-110 waste storage tanks. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing to be a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedules. Testing commonly is applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Cartridge tests were conducted over two days from February 23-25, 2018, using headspace vapors from Hanford tanks BY-108 and BY-110. Headspace vapors from the BY-108 tank were fed to the PAPR respirator cartridge test stand, while vapors from the BY-110 headspace were fed to the APR respirator cartridge test stand. Both the APR and PAPR test stands were developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Two different cartridges were assessed on each tank. Multipurpose APR cartridges—SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina)—were assessed for vapors from BY-110 using the APR cartridge test stand. Multipurpose PAPR cartridges—MSA OptiFilter TL (MSA Safety Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and 3M FR-57 (3M Company, Maplewood, Minnesota)—also were assessed for vapors from BY-108 over the same two days using the PAPR cartridge test stand. Sample media (i.e., sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridges, and the samples then were analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. The key conclusions from the analysis are described below.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AX Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream Volume 1
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests of four types of chemical cartridges for air-purifying respirators (APR) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors exiting the Hanford AX tank farm exhauster slipstream. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing to be a valid approach for establishing a cartridge service life. Testing is applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Cartridge testing using vapors from a Hanford AX tank farm exhauster slipstream was conducted from August 25–27, 2017. Vapors from the exhauster slipstream were fed to two respirator cartridge test stands developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Four different cartridges were assessed. Multipurpose APR cartridges—SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina)—were assessed on separate days using an APR cartridge test stand. Multipurpose PAPR cartridges—MSA-TL (TL1) (MSA Safety Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and 3M FR57 (TL2) (3M Company, Maplewood, Minnesota)—also were tested over the same two days using a separate PAPR cartridge test stand. Sample media (i.e., sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridges and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. The key conclusions from the analysis are described below.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks SX-101 and SX-104 Volume 1
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests using two types of chemical cartridges for use in powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance for PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors exiting the headspaces of Hanford tanks SX-101 and SX-104. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing to be a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedules. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from June 16-17, 2017, from headspace vapors from Hanford tank SX-101 and from June 23-24, 2017, from Hanford tank SX-104. Headspace vapors were fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose high-efficiency PAPR cartridges, MSA-TL (TL1) (MSA Safety Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and 3M FR-57 (TL2) (3M Company, Maplewood, Minnesota) were assessed on separate days. Sample media (i.e., sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. The key conclusions from the analysis are described below.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AN Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air purifying respirators to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors exiting the exhauster at the Hanford AN tank farm. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedule. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from September 30−October 2, 2016, on a slipstream from the AN Exhauster under static conditions fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AP Tank Farm Primary Exhauster Slipstream
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air purifying respirators (APR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 for APRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors exiting the exhauster for the Hanford AP tank farm. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing a cartridge change schedules. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from June 24-26, 2016, on a slipstream from the AP exhauster fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford Tank SY-102
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators (APR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 for APRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors emanating from the headspace of tank SY-102 on the Hanford Site. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing a cartridge change schedule. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, worker breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from July 8–10, 2016, on headspace vapors from Hanford tank SY-102 under static conditions2 fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.
42 ENGINEERING↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford Tank SY-102
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators (APR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors emanating from the headspace of tank SY-102 on the Hanford Site. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing a cartridge change schedule. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, worker breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from July 8–10, 2016, on headspace vapors from Hanford tank SY-102 under static conditions fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on the 702-AZ Primary Exhauster for the Hanford AY/AZ Tank Farms
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air purifying respirators to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors exiting the 702-AZ primary exhauster for the Hanford AY/AZ tank farms. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedules. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from August 26–28, 2016, on a slipstream from the 702-AZ exhauster, under static conditions fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1(SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge, and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and change-out frequency.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on the 702-AZ Primary Exhauster for the Hanford AY/AZ Tank Farms during a Waste-Disturbing Event
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests using two types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators (APR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 for APRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors exiting the 702-AZ Primary Exhauster for the Hanford AY-AZ tank farms. Unlike prior cartridge testing on the 702-AZ Primary Exhauster, the recent tests were performed during a waste-disturbing event. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing a cartridge change schedules. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from February 10–11, 2017, on a slipstream from the 702-AZ exhauster fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina), were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) and canisters (e.g., Summa) sampling were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AW Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream
Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators (APR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors exiting the exhauster for the Hanford AW tank farm. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing a cartridge change schedules. Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service-life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from September 23-25, 2016, on a slipstream from the AW exhauster, under static conditions fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina), were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge, and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
The Impact of Surficial Biochar Treatment on Acute H2S Emissions during Swine Manure Agitation before Pump-Out: Proof-of-the-Concept
Acute releases of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) are of serious concern in agriculture, especially when farmers agitate manure to empty storage pits before land application. Agitation can cause the release of dangerously high H2S concentrations, resulting in human and animal fatalities. To date, there is no proven technology to mitigate these short-term releases of toxic gas from manure. In our previous research, we have shown that biochar, a highly porous carbonaceous material, can float on manure and mitigate gaseous emissions over extended periods (days–weeks). In this research, we aim to test the hypothesis that biochar can mitigate H2S emissions over short periods (minutes–hours) during and shortly after manure agitation. The objective was to conduct proof-of-the-concept experiments simulating the treatment of agitated manure. Two biochars, highly alkaline and porous (HAP, pH 9.2) made from corn stover and red oak (RO, pH 7.5), were tested. Three scenarios (setups): Control (no biochar), 6 mm, and 12 mm thick layers of biochar were surficially-applied to the manure. Each setup experienced 3 min of manure agitation. Real-time concentrations of H2S were measured immediately before, during, and after agitation until the concentration returned to the initial state. The results were compared with those of the Control using the following three metrics: (1) the maximum (peak) flux, (2) total emission from the start of agitation until the concentration stabilized, and (3) the total emission during the 3 min of agitation. The Gompertz’s model for determination of the cumulative H2S emission kinetics was developed. Here, 12 mm HAP biochar treatment reduced the peak (1) by 42.5% (p = 0.125), reduced overall total emission (2) by 17.9% (p = 0.290), and significantly reduced the total emission during 3 min agitation (3) by 70.4%. Further, 6 mm HAP treatment reduced the peak (1) by 60.6%, and significantly reduced overall (2) and 3 min agitation’s (3) total emission by 64.4% and 66.6%, respectively. Moreover, 12 mm RO biochar treatment reduced the peak (1) by 23.6%, and significantly reduced overall (2) and 3 min total (3) emission by 39.3% and 62.4%, respectively. Finally, 6 mm RO treatment significantly reduced the peak (1) by 63%, overall total emission (2) by 84.7%, and total emission during 3 min agitation (3) by 67.4%. Biochar treatments have the potential to reduce the risk of inhalation exposure to H2S. Both 6 and 12 mm biochar treatments reduced the peak H2S concentrations below the General Industrial Peak Limit (OSHA PEL, 50 ppm). The 6 mm biochar treatments reduced the H2S concentrations below the General Industry Ceiling Limit (OSHA PEL, 20 ppm). Research scaling up to larger manure volumes and longer agitation is warranted.
Chen, Baitong (ORCID:0000000266071253)↗
Enhancing Worker Safety During Off-Site Construction of Energy-Efficient, Low-Carbon Exterior Envelope
The construction industry is not doing enough to embrace off-site modular construction. It is a missed opportunity for optimized energy efficiency because prefabricated exterior wall envelopes are lower in cost and faster and easier to install. Factory off-site construction offers improved safety for construction workers because work is done in a controlled environment, but lack of intent, understanding, and data is also a missed opportunity for enhancing worker safety. This research looks specifically at the prefabricated wall exterior envelope in the context of safety. The research question is "off-site factories build with ease of energy efficiency and lowered carbon emissions, but is the process safer?" This research was funded by NREL Student Training in Applied Research (STAR) program, University Partnerships Program, and Wells Fargo Bank. Key finding is that modular and prefabricated construction are perceived to be safer, but the accident rates are much higher than in the general construction and manufacturing industries. Proposed solutions to decrease accidents in off-site prefabricated construction includes safety training for workers, provide movable kiosks with PPE at workstations, ensure tools are well-maintained and place safety posters in visible locations. Future work includes improving worker safety to increase worker productivity, perform pilot demonstration, work with factory designers for new modular layout for worker safety, i.e., easy access to PPE kiosks, and work closely with OSHA so that they take notice of this safety niche.
drywall↗