storage building, a sampling port connected to a MINICAMS in the RRS was installed in the storage area. No perimeter monitoring was carried out during the Fort Richardson campaign.31 The monitor at the exhaust of the RRS filter bank is regarded as a perimeter monitoring system since it is the only outlet for the chemicals being handled in the glove boxes.32

Four of the five alarms that were sounded in this campaign came from the storage building. Each of the four was a false positive for cyanogen chloride (CK) and/or chloroform. In each case, a colorimetric tube failed to confirm the presence of CK. It was judged likely that interferents such as chlorinated solvents gave rise to the alarms. The one alarm coming from within the RRS was a signal for CK at 0.73 TWA (just above the 0.70 TWA alarm setting) at a filter bed midpoint. As with the storage area alarms, it was not confirmed by the colorimetric tube in place at that point. None of the alarms led to a work stoppage, but the operators donned masks.

31  

Letter from Paul Joe, Medical Officer, Chemical Demilitarization Branch, National Center from Environmental Health, CDC, to William J.B. Pringle, Chief, Environmental Monitoring Office, Program Manager for Chemical Demilitarization, January 9, 2003.

32  

John Leed, SAIC, Briefing to the committee, August 3, 2004.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement