experiences in mercury spill clean-up at ucla presented to the american chemical society april 3,...

31
Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Upload: xiomara-ryall

Post on 29-Mar-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA

Presented to

the American Chemical Society

April 3, 2001

Joe Raab, CIH

University of California, Los Angeles

Page 2: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

The Mercury Haz Mat Story:“When a Good Element Goes Bad”

• Overview of mercury

• Examples of mercury spill clean-ups

• Mercury clean-up tools

• Absorbents and indicators

• Determining “how clean is clean”

• Mercury reduction steps

Page 3: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury

• Elemental / organic / inorganic compounds.

• Liquid rather than solid at room temperature.

• Low vapor pressure (evaporates slowly) but often produces significant vapor at room temp.

• Mostly absorbed through the lungs or sometimes through damaged and broken skin.

• Usually a lack of acute symptoms, chronic affects to CNS.

• Bio-accumulates in the food chain.

Page 4: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Items which Contain Mercury

• Gauges, manometers barometers, and vacuum gauges,

• Blood pressure sphygmomanometers

• Mercury switches and relays

• Thermometers

• Mercury containing thermostat probes.

• Dental amalgam• Hospital equipment• Laboratory solutions• Fluorescent & high

intensity discharge (HID) lamps

Page 5: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Types of Mercury Spills at UCLA 1997-1999

6

1

6

8

26

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Other

Electrical Switches

Sink Traps

Sphygs

Thermometers

Mer

cury

Sou

rce

Typ

e

Number of Incidents on UCLA Campus

Page 6: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Incidents at UCLA Center for Health Sciences vs. Campus

Mercury Incidents at

CHS68%

Mercury Incidents at

other locations32%

Page 7: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Calculating the Costs (1999 data)

• Disposal cost (assuming 80% due to haz mat events)– Disposal cost = $34.65/lb.

– 1,437 lbs.

– Total cost = $39,833

• Haz Mat Response Cost– Labor hours = 280.59

– Personnel cost = $100/hr.

– Total cost = 28, 059

Page 8: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Office Spill from Mercury Above-Ceiling

• The problem = trapped mercury in plumbing lines above the ceiling

• During demolition of the floor above, approx. 0.25 liters of mercury hit the tiles and contaminated the office below.

Page 9: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Office Spill from Mercury Above-Ceiling

Contaminated Materials:• Ceiling tiles and light fixtures

• Leased office copier

• Carpet

• files

• Etc.

+ Phase II from trapped mercury in a light fixture !!!!!

Page 10: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Pathology Laboratory

• B5 fixative (6.6% mercuric chloride & 2.3% sodium acetate solution)

• Was placed into aluminum container and corroded through onto the floor.

Page 11: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Pathology Laboratory

• Air and bulk samples revealed extensive contamination of the floor.

• Many attempts made to clean the floor until finally the decision was made to remove it.

• Additional contamination found in sinks and plumbing systems

Page 12: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Pathology Laboratory

• Floor was ultimately removed and drummed.

• Accomplished using trained abatement workers using jack hammers and controls similar to lead abatement.

Page 13: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Blood Pressure Sphygmomanometers

• Many recent incidents.

• Contamination of care giver and patient is common.

• Pressure applied results in large dispersal of a large volume of mercury.

• Very difficult clean ups.

Page 14: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Thermometers

• Can be well contained or dispersed.

• Drop height increases dispersion.

• Often in ovens, incubators, carts, refrigerators and other difficult areas.

• Haz Mat “Size up” steps are very important.

Page 15: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Clean-up Tools

• Vacuum Cleaners

• Mercury spill kits and pumps

• Absorbent sponges

• Direct Reading Instruments

• Personal Protective Equipment

Page 16: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Vacuum Cleaners

• Advantages:– Easy pick up of bulk materials.

– Different styles and sizes available.

• Disadvantages:– May not work on some

contamination.

– Need routine maintenance and parts replacement.

– May create vapor during clean-up.

– Expensive

Page 17: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Spill Kits and Hand Pumps

• Advantages:– Good for small spills and

individual drops.

– Provide access to difficult areas.

• Disadvantages:– Not efficient for large

spills.

– Requires repetitive action.

– May miss small droplets.

– Eye fatigue.

Page 18: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Sponges• Wetted sponge with

amalgam on one side.

• Advantages:– Best when used with small

spills to accumulate and amalgamate small droplets.

• Disadvantages:– May spread drops around.– Sometimes does not

amalgamate well.– Can be messy.– Amalgam can look like Hg.

Page 19: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Direct Reading Instruments: Jerome Mercury Monitor

• Direct reading instrument which deposits mercury vapor on gold film and reads concentration based on change in electrical resistance.

• LOD = 0.003 mg/m3.

Page 20: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Direct Reading Mercury Instruments

Advantages:• Accurate real time

monitoring of mercury vapor.

• Good for tracking down areas of contamination.

• Aids in the selection of appropriate PPE.

• Aids in identification of contaminated items.

Disadvantages:• Direct reading is not

directly comparable to PEL.

• Background may be high during clean-up.

• LOD limitations. May give a false sense of security.

• Can become saturated.

Page 21: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

• Respirator – Typically tight fitting half

or full face with mercury vapor cartridges.

– End of Service Life Indicator.

• Protective Suit

• Booties– contamination of shoes is

common

• Gloves

Page 22: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Absorbents and Indicators

• Typically applied after some effort has been made to take up the bulk material.

• Many require significant application time to absorb the mercury.

• The characteristics of the contaminated surfaces will determine their success.

• Reapplication or additional agitation may be necessary.

Page 23: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Hg Absorb• Typically granular zinc and

citric acid.

• Acid slightly agitates and frees up the mercury to be absorbed.

• Requires additional clean-up.

• Contact with Hg contamination is important.

• Not good on porous surfaces.

Page 24: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Indicator Powder

• Sulfur, Silicon Dioxide, & Proprietary ingredient.

• Sprinkle over spill and wait at least 24 hours.

• Color change from dull yellow to rust.

• Very helpful in identifying problem areas of contamination.

Page 25: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Liquid Absorbents

• Liquid mixture containing copper sulfate, calcium chloride, potassium iodide, & sodium thiosulfate.

• Apply with sprayer, leave for 24 hours and rinse off.

• Forms mercury sulfide.

• Better on porous surfaces than solid absorbents.

Page 26: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Determining “How Clean is Clean?”

• Direct reading instrument mercury measurements of non-detect.

• NIOSH Method 6009 using hopcalite tubes and atomic absorption analysis – Estimated method LOD = 0.3 g

– What do you compare result to (PEL, 1/10 PEL?)

• Mercury indicator powder - no color change.

• Swipe samples.

• Hazardous waste leachate testing methods.

Page 27: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Mercury Reduction Steps

• Non-mercury alternatives– (i.e. Replacement of blood pressure

sphygmomanometers)

• Literature campaign• Substitute chemicals (i.e. zinc chloride fixatives)• Secondary containment for existing sources• Future mercury round-ups

Page 28: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Conclusions

• Mercury spills are disruptive, expensive, time consuming, etc.

• Mercury spills can be very difficult to clean, requiring a variety of tools and well trained haz mat crews.

• Always check personnel in the area of the spill for contamination on their person.

Page 29: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Conclusions (continued)

• Mercury absorbents and indicators can be essential after the initial clean-up to rid the area of trace material.

• Sometimes a successful clean-up requires the removal of contaminated materials (i.e. carpet).

• Consult waste managers about the disposal of contaminated materials.

Page 30: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles

Conclusions (continued)

• Determining the extent of the contamination is difficult and can require a combination of analytical methods.

• Consider long term exposures prior to “clearing” an area.

• The best method for dealing with mercury spills is to prevent them in the first place by using mercury reduction methods.

Page 31: Experiences in Mercury Spill Clean-up at UCLA Presented to the American Chemical Society April 3, 2001 Joe Raab, CIH University of California, Los Angeles