..4'

. \

\

I

,, I

~

' .

Health :_ Hazard Evaluation

Report

HETA 84-006-1639FIRST NATIONAL BANK

CHICAGO~ ILLINOIS

. '

PRfFACE I

The Hazard Evaluations and T~chnical .Assistance Branch of NIOSH conducts field investigations of possible health hazards in th! workplace. These investigations are conducted ~nder the authority of Section 20(a)(6) of the Q_ccupat10,:1al _Safety and Health Act of 1970 . 2S u!s.c. 669(a)(6) whfch authorizes the Secretary of Health an~ Human Services, following a written. request from any employer or authorized .representati"ve of employees, to determine whether any substance normally found in the place of employment has potentially toxic effects in such concentrations_as .used or found.

The Hazard Evaluations and Technical Assfstance Branch also i,rovfdes,. upon -r&quest, medical, nursing, and industrial hygiene technical and consultative assistance (TA) to Federal, state. and local agencies; labor: industry and other groups or individuals to control occupational health hazards and to prevent re1ated tra~a and disease.

--

Mention of coinpany nan:es or products does not constitute endorsemen-t by the National Institute for Occupational Safety_ and Health.

. "! - ...

,,

HETA. 84-006-1639 NIOSH INVESTIGATORS: DECEMBER, 1985 PETER ORRIS, M.D., M.P.H. FIRST NATIONAL BANK JOHN KOMINSKY, C.I.H.

.. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

I. SUMMARY

On September 28, 1983, the National Institute for Occupational Safety . . and Health (NIOSH) was contacted by the Chicago Fire Department,

requesting. technical assistance concerning potential toxic effects of a . . .. :-, . ~ : fire then in progress in a Commonwea 1th Edison transformer vault beneath

. ' ~ ! . ' the First National Bank Building, Chicago, Illinois. The fire resulted in the loss of 15 gallons of oil, composed of 65% PolychlorinatedBiphenyls (PCB - Arochlor 1260), and 35% trichlorobenzene, from one of

. . . . . four transformers in the vault

During the next 24 hours representatives from the utility company and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency collected environmental . wipe samples, air samples, and air filters from the ventilation systemto determine the areas of PCB contamination. NIOSH investigato~sinterviewed and drew blood samples for PCB, Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans (PCDF), and Polychlorinated .. Dibenzodioxins (PCDD) analysisfrom 2 fi'refighters who were hospitalized for .smoke fohalation after a 15 minute exposure, and 2 maintenance workers who were in areas adjacentto the vault for 3 and 12 hours following the fire. None of these exposed individuals wore respiratory protection at that time.

Analysis of the environmental samples indicated the PCB contamination was limited to the vault at 20,900 micrograms per square foot (ug/ft2). The adjacent fan room which supplied ventilation to the plaza butlding and sublevels revealed 22,000 to 39,100 micrograms per gram (ug/g) on the air handling filters. The ventilation shafts from the vault itself had 16,800 and 14,300 ug/ft2. The exterior surface of the one-story plaza building contained 8,900 ug/ft2. PCB levels from the office tower (~03-1. 1 ug/ft2) were comparable to background . surface concentrations taken from uninvolved areas of adjacent buildings (0.5 to 4.7 ug/ft2), while PCB levels in adjacent areas of the parking garage (18.9 .to 47.6 ug/ft2) were above background. The air . concentration of PCB in the vault 4 hours after the fire was 58 ug/m3,which is i.n excess of the NIOSH recommended exposure limit of 1 ug/rn3.

The soot from a surface wipe sample taken from the. ceiling of the transformer vault contained 114 ug/ft2 of total PCDF/PCDD (tetrathrough octa compounds). The transformer oil contained 5.l parts per million (ppm) of total PCDF.

Serum PCB levels were less than 10 parts per billion (ppb) on all 4 exposed individuals. No PCOFs or PCDDs were detected in the blood of these individua1s at a detection limit varying between samples of 3 to

. : : ' .. 40 parts per trillion (ppt).

Based on the results, of this study it has been determined that a potential health hazard existed due to exposure to PCB, pcoo, and PCDF at this Chicago transformer fi~e. Despite this pote~~ial, no absorptionof PCB, PCOF, nor PCDD could be detected in the blood of four exposedindividua 1 s.

Key Words: SIC 9224(fire protection.), 491He1ectr1ca1 serv1ces), Firefighters, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB), Polychlorinated Dibenzo Dioxins (PCDD), Polychlorinate~ ,Oibenzo Furans (PCDF), TCDO, Dioxin

. , .. ' ''

II. INTRODUCTION

Qn September 28, 1983, the tJational Institute For Occupational Safety and -:.Health was contacted_by _the Chicago Fire Department, .r.equesting technical assistance concerning potential- -toxi-c effects of a -fire then in prooress in a Commonwealth Edison transformer vault beneath the First National Bank Building, Chic.ago~ Illinois. Advice was offered as to appropriate medical evaluations and tests, subs~ances potentially involved, and individuals exposed.

I I I BACKGROUND

Ccmmonwealth Edison, the electrical utility company in the City of Chicago, maintains approximately 1,900 transformers containing

polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) askarels beneath the streets of the Loop business area of Chicago. On September 28, 1983, a. fire occurred in a bus bar between a tratisforl"er and the switchqear in a transfonner vault located under the plaza on the same block as the First M;:1tional Bank Building, Chicago, I1Unois . Although the transformer was de-energized after 10 minutes, smoke continued to rise from the ventilation shaft onto the sic!ewalk for approximately 45 minutes. One of the four transformers in the vault had leaked approximately 15 gallons of askarel coolant consisting of 65% Aroclor 1260 and 35% chlorinated benzenes. The source of the leak was a Sl'lall hole in the transfonner casing that was caused by the heat generated by the fire or by electrical arcing.

IV . METHODS AND 'MATERIALS

A. Environmental

During the next 24 hours, the 1,1ti1ity company and the 111 i noi s Environmental Protection Agency collected wipe sal'l'lples, a-ir samples , and air filters from .the ventilation systems to assess the areas of PCB contamination. PCB wipe .samples were collected using Whatman filter paper saturated with hexane. The area wiper Has one sauare foot. Air samples collected for PCB content were collected on Flori si l tubes at a fl ow rat

PCB environmental samples were analyzed by the utility company using hexane extraction and. gas chromatography. PCB blood samples were analyzed by Metpath Laboratories using gas chromatography with an el_~~tron capture detector.

Samples . for -. PCDD and PCDF . analysis were sent to the Brehm Laboratory at Wright State University. The PCDDs and PCDFs. were extracted from the blood with hexane and cleaneo using a combination of silica and

: alumina.geL chromatography. The askarel proceeded through a two-step cleanup procedure: 1) separation of the PCBs and any PCDFs and PCDDs. from the askarel matrix by column chromatography on

.: flor~sil and liquid-liquid partition; and 2) separation of the PCBs from any PCDFs and PCDDs by selective absorption on alumina. The cleanup procedure was effective in removing approximately 99% of the PCBs from a 3.66 gram sample of askarel. Analysis of the cleaned-up extracts was completed using a high resolution capillary column gaschromatograph {HR/GC) interfaced to a mass spectrometer operated in the selected ion monitoring mode {SIM-MS). The samples were analyzed for PCDFs and PCDDs by chlorine isomer group {tetrachlorothrough octachloro compounds).1

V. EVALUATION CRITERIA

As a guide to the evaluation of the hazards pose~ by workplace exposures, NIOSH field staff employ environmental evaluation criteria for assessment of a number of chemical and physical agents. These criteria are intended to suggest levels of exposure to which rnost workers may be exposed up to .10 hours per day, 4.0 hours per week for a working lifetime without experiencing adverse health effects. It is~ however, important to note that not all workers will be protected from adverse health effects if their exposures are maintained below these levels. A small percentage rnayexperience adverse hea]th effects because of individual susceptibility, a pre-existing medical conrlit:ion, and/or a hypersens i ti vi ty { a.11 ergy)

In addition, scme hazardous substances may act in ccmbination with other workplace exposures, the general environment, or with medications or personal habits of the worker to produce healt~ effects even if the occupational exposures are controlled at the level set by the evaluation criterion. These combined effects are often not considered in the evaluation criteria. Also, some substances are absorbed by direct contact with the skin and mucol!s membranes, and thus pote.nti ally increase the over a 11 exposure.Finally, evaluation criteria may change over the years as new infonnation on the toxic effects of an agent be~ome available.

The primary sources of environmental evaluation criteria for the workplace are: 1) NIOSH Criteria Documents and recommendations, 2)the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists'{ACGIH) Threshold .Limit Values {TLV's)' and 3) the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration's {OSHA)

occupational health standards. Often, the NIOSH recommendations and ACGIH TLV's are lower thar. the corresponding. OSHA standards. Both NIOSH recorrmendations and ACGlH TLV's usually are based on more recent infonnation than are the OSHA standards. The OSHA standards

-