MEC&F Expert Engineers

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

RISKS FROM FORMALDEHYDE CHEMICAL IN HARDWOOD FLOORS




MARCH 10, 2015

Installing a new wood floor is usually about aesthetics: brown or black? Glossy or matte?

Now, some Americans and businesses are grappling with another feature: formaldehyde.



What is Formaldehyde?
Formaldehyde is a colorless, reactive, strong-smelling gas at room temperature. It is one chemical in a large family of chemical compounds called volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The term volatile means that the compounds vaporize or become a gas at room temperature.

Formaldehyde can be manufactured as a liquid (formalin) or a solid (paraformaldehyde). Formaldehyde is an important industrial chemical used to make other chemicals and different types of products, such as: home furnishings, household cleaners, paints, textiles, landscape and yard products, medicinal and personal care products, and pesticides. Chemicals that are created with formaldehyde or have formaldehyde added to them include the following:

·         resins and lubricants
·         polyoxymethylene plastics
·         1,4-butanediol
·         methylene diphenyl diisocyanate

Formaldehyde can be released into the air (off-gas) from materials and products made with it. Formaldehyde can also be released into the air by automobiles, cigarettes, and burning wood, kerosene or natural gas.  It is also a naturally occurring substance.

Why Should You Be Concerned?

Formaldehyde exposure may potentially cause a variety of symptoms and adverse health effects, such as eye, nose, throat, and skin irritation, coughing, wheezing, and allergic reactions.  Long- term exposure to high levels of formaldehyde has been associated with cancer in humans and laboratory animals.  Formaldehyde can affect people differently. Some people are very sensitive to formaldehyde at a certain level while others may not have any noticeable reaction to the same level.

Formaldehyde is just one of several gases present indoors that may cause adverse health effects and illnesses.  Many other gases, as well as respiratory illnesses (e.g., colds and the flu), can cause similar symptoms to those caused by formaldehyde.

What Levels of Formaldehyde Are Present in Consumer Environments?

Formaldehyde is normally present at low levels, usually less than 0.03 parts per million (ppm), in both outdoor and indoor air.  The outdoor air in rural areas has lower concentrations while urban areas have higher concentrations (due to sources such as automobile exhaust). Residences or offices that contain products that release formaldehyde into the air can have levels greater than 0.03 ppm.



Uneasy consumers have flooded state and federal safety agencies with inquiries about Lumber Liquidators, the discount flooring retailer accused in a “60 Minutes” episode of selling laminate wood with high levels of formaldehyde, a known carcinogen. Should they rip it out? Leave it in? And what are the dangers to adults, children or even pets?

Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman of New York has now opened an inquiry into whether the company violated safety standards. Safety officials in California are also likely to investigate.

But federal regulators, armed with murky rules or none at all, have scrambled to respond, leaving consumers largely responsible for assessing the risk. Formaldehyde exposure can cause immediate health problems like respiratory and sinus effects, but the effects of long-term exposure remain unclear.


Consumers flooded safety agencies with questions about Lumber Liquidators after “60 Minutes” raised questions about one of the store’s products. 

That has left many Lumber Liquidators customers concerned about what they should do.

Sol Hesney, 66, and his wife, Lynne, said they were mystified when their two dogs became sick shortly after they moved into their apartment in Fort Lee, N.J., five years ago.
“The vet was stumped. We were stumped,” said Mr. Hesney, who ultimately had both dogs euthanized.
After the news of Lumber Liquidators’ high-formaldehyde flooring broke on March 1, Mr. Hesney said he and his wife decided that they would replace their floors — they had installed the company’s Chinese-made laminate floors before moving in.

“We looked at each other and said, ‘Maybe that’s what explains this. It’s just too coincidental,’ ” he said. Since they moved in, he said, he had three serious sinus colds requiring antibiotics within a year’s time, something that had never happened to him before, and his wife had bronchitis.
But regulators, at least for now, are advocating a more tempered approach.
“We are not encouraging people to rip out their flooring right now,” said Lynn Baker, an air pollution specialist with the California Air Resources Board, which enforces the state formaldehyde rules that Lumber Liquidators is accused of breaking.

Commercial customers could also be affected, although Lumber Liquidators estimates that commercial sales make up less than 10 percent of the market for laminate flooring, a cheaper alternative to hardwood. Homeowners account for the bulk of its sales.
Laminate flooring itself is commonly used in some types of commercial spaces, experts say.

Lumber Liquidators disputes the “60 Minutes” report and says its flooring is safe. The company also said it was considering offering air testing services to reassure concerned consumers.

Installers, too, find themselves on the front lines after the report.
“The installers literally don’t want to install it,” said David Hill, president of Texas Best Flooring in Dallas. Mr. Hill, who does not work with Lumber Liquidators products, said he had received hundreds of emails and at least 15 calls a day from worried consumers.

 “It’s confusion. Everybody’s confused, and everybody wants it out of their house,” Mr. Hill said. A spokesman for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration said the agency was paying close attention to the Lumber Liquidators issue, though as of Tuesday it had received no formal complaints.
But while federal rules exist for workers, no federal rules protect consumers from formaldehyde or most other airborne chemicals in their homes. And while research exists on formaldehyde’s health effects, experts have difficulty correlating levels of exposure with cancer risk since so many factors can affect the development of the disease.

“Any exposure to a carcinogen can increase your risk of cancer,” said Marilyn Howarth, a toxicologist at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine.
Mr. Baker, with the California agency, said consumers should ask two questions: How long has the flooring been installed, and have they been feeling sick?
“If the flooring has been installed more than a couple of years ago, most of it has probably already off-gassed,” he said, meaning that the chemical would probably have been released. “If it was just installed last week, that’s a different story — you definitely want to ventilate the home.”

The floorboard controversy bears a resemblance to the cases of Chinese-made drywall that released sulfur gases into thousands of homes built after the 2005 hurricane season, which resulted in metal corrosion and health complaints. But while the drywall gases were expected to be released for decades, formaldehyde emissions in flooring may not last as long.

“You’ll get a fairly large amount that off-gasses early on, and then it starts to become less over a period ranging from months to a couple of years depending on the amounts contained in the product,” Mr. Baker said.
Most new floors emit small levels of formaldehyde. But it also seeps out of adhesives used to bind furniture and other household items, affecting the quality of the air residents breathe.

To combat its harmful effects, governments around the world have limited the use of formaldehyde in household products, particularly those made of wood. In Europe, chemical emissions from composite wood products are tightly regulated, and Japanese regulators put the onus on home builders to limit formaldehyde levels over all within houses they construct.

The United States, however, trails when it comes to such regulations. California enacted rules to cap emissions from composite wood products sold in the state. As far back as 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency said it was considering adopting California’s limits nationwide, and it issued a proposed rule in 2013.

But after many delays at the request of the wood products industry, the E.P.A. has yet to complete its rule. On Tuesday, the E.P.A. said it had no plan to investigate Lumber Liquidators, citing the lack of a finished rule. The agency says it is trying to give consumers “actionable guidance” when it comes to formaldehyde from composite woods, according to Bob Axelrad, a policy adviser in the office of air and radiation.

That includes proper ventilation, when possible, and using reliable air testing methods.

David Krause, an environmental consultant at the consulting firm Geosyntec and the former state toxicologist of Florida, said ventilation helped but was not always a solution: Humidity, for example, can intensify the problem.
Testing indoor air quality is also not a simple proposition — mainly because federal standards are geared toward workplaces, not homes. There are no definitive testing levels, and people react in different ways to the chemical.



“We really don’t have anything that is enforceable,” Dr. Krause said.




Still, based on current knowledge of the Lumber Liquidators’ product, he added: “This is not a ‘Your hair’s on fire’ emergency.”




The Consumer Product Safety Commission may take a lead role in investigating Lumber Liquidators. The commission can push for a recall if it can prove direct harm to human health.




But that would involve a long regulatory inquiry. Several consumers have begun pursuing a different path: suing the company.



 

What are the Major Sources of Indoor Formaldehyde Emissions in Our Homes Today?




Measuring formaldehyde emissions from individual consumer products is difficult because a variety of products in the home can release formaldehyde or trap formaldehyde emitted from other sources. Products with greater emissions and larger surface areas in the home will most likely have a greater contribution to indoor air formaldehyde levels. Keep this in mind when prioritizing the different product types below.  Also, not all brands within each product type contain formaldehyde.

Wood floor finishes:  Wet commercial, base- and top-coat floor finishes.
·         May emit high levels of formaldehyde.
·         Emissions decrease 24 hours after application.
·         Finishes are not typically available to the consumer, but they can be (re-) applied by commercial floor contractors at residences or factories.

Pressed-wood and wood-based products: Pressed-wood (i.e., hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium-density fiberboard (MDF)) and wood-based products, especially those containing UF resins, may be a significant formaldehyde source.
·         Formaldehyde emissions from pressed-wood products have been reduced 80-90% from levels in the 1980’s and earlier due to mandatory formaldehyde emission standards in California and national voluntary formaldehyde emission standards, which are described later in this booklet.
·         Emissions decrease 6-10 months after initial testing.

Wallpaper and paints:

·         Moderate levels of formaldehyde initially following application.
·         Levels formed during the curing process may be higher than after initial application.
·         Emissions are sometimes still detectable 1-3 months following application.
·         Some paints are now found with low-VOC formulations.

Combustion:  Cigarette smoke and the combustion of other materials, such as wood, kerosene, oil, natural gas, and gasoline, produce formaldehyde.

Other materials:  Formaldehyde can be created from the chemical reaction between ozone and other VOCs during the use of personal computers, laser printers, and photocopiers.

Re-emitters:   Because they are porous, products, such as carpets or gypsum board, do not contain significant amounts of formaldehyde when new. However, they may trap formaldehyde
that is emitted into the air from other products and later release it into the indoor air.
 

3 WORKERS KILLED FOLLOWING OIL RIG (PULLING UNIT) EXPLOSION IN UPTON COUNTY, TEXAS






MARCH 10, 2015

UPTON COUNTY, TEXAS

Three people were killed Tuesday morning following an explosion at an oil rig in northern Upton County. According to the Upton County Sheriff's Office, the rig explosion happened on Farm-to-Market Road 2401, east of Texas State Highway 349, about four miles inside Texas 49.  Three workers were killed in the explosion. Authorities have not released the identity of the victims. Additional information was not available on the accident at this time.

 Although officials have not released the names, family members told NewsWest 9 Rojelio Salgado, Arturo Martinez Sr. and Arturo Martinez Jr. were killed.  Salgado, 19, had two children and had just started with the company two months ago.

The victims are all from Andrews, Texas.  We're told all three men were related. Officials say there was a fourth man on site but he was not transported. They were all working for Mason, a pulling unit company, that was contracted by Parsley Energy.

"Right now everything is in the preliminary stages. We don't know exactly what happened. We don't know what caused the explosion," Dusty Kilgore, Investigator with the Upton County Sheriff's Office, said.

OSHA is expected to arrive but the investigation will be at stand still until it's safe for officials to be on site.
"Right now, the scene is unsafe for anyone to be on there besides fire department crew.  As soon as some safety crews from another oilfield company get here to make sure it's safe to get on location then we'll finish the investigation," Kilgore said.

Kilgore said he did not have exact statistics for oil field fatalities in Upton County.

“I think the last fatality was the middle of last year, off the top of my head,” Kilgore said.

What is a Pulling Unit
A pulling unit is one of the mechanical oilfield applications used to remove the casing and other tubing apparatuses inside a well bar. It is also used to remove drilling rods inside a wellbore. A pulling unit is called in when a wellbore shows signs of internal damage, such as an obvious leak or a sudden drop in pressure of the drilling fluid at the surface. When a wellbore is displaying production problems that cannot be repaired through more simple means, the pulling unit is charged with physically lifting the casing and any of the drilling equipment that appears to be damaged out of the wellbore to be examined and repaired in a timely manner.

There have been explosions of pulling units because these workers are not very familiar with the well that is being drilled, or the units are used when there is a problem with the well, or gas are released during the pulling of the casing or other tubing.
 
The construction of a pulling unit apparatus is different among different brands and manufacturers. The construction method may also differ depending on the intended use of the unit. Some pulling units are vertical in form and telescope upward after being connected to the instruments in the wellbore; others are shaped into the form of a wheel, with the pump system attached to the wheel’s axis and cranked around the wheel axle in a winch formation. No matter the shape or form of function, the purpose of the pulling unit is to remove an underground well or pumping system without being required to dig or destroy the surface the system is located under. 

Most pulling units are portable to be easily moved from pump system to pump system, or from wellbore to wellbore in oilfields. The unit itself is typically mounted onto the back of a heavy duty truck or vehicle, making it easy to move. Most pulling unit operators are independent contractors who travel to the oilfield or tract of land that they’ve been hired to remove a system from.

Total Petroleum Puerto Rico Corp. Agrees to Spend $1.6 Million to Improve Leak Detection in At Least 125 Gas Stations Across Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands




 MARCH 9, 2015

NEW YORK, NY 

A settlement announced today between the United States and Total Petroleum Puerto Rico Corp. (Total Puerto Rico) resolves Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) violations alleged at 31 gas stations in Puerto Rico and four gas stations in the U.S. Virgin Islands that contain underground storage tanks (USTs) owned by Total Puerto Rico. These USTs typically hold large quantities of gasoline and can cause significant environmental damage if allowed to leak. Total Puerto Rico has agreed to pay a $426,000 civil penalty, implement compliance measures valued at approximately $1 million and undertake a supplemental environmental project (SEP) consisting of a centralized monitoring system estimated to cost approximately $600,000.

In the complaint filed simultaneously with the lodging of the consent decree, the United States alleged that Total Puerto Rico, as an owner of the USTs at the gas stations, violated RCRA and the Puerto Rico Underground Storage Tank Control Regulations (PRUSTR) by failing to report and investigate suspected leaks, monitor for leaks; provide adequate protection against corrosion and overflows, adequately secure dispensers and lines against tampering when facilities were temporarily closed, adequately secure monitoring wells against tampering and maintain records of release detection monitoring.

This settlement incorporates provisions consistent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Next Generation enforcement efforts, which focus on increasing compliance with environmental regulations by combining the use of advanced technologies, such as pollution detection systems and information technologies, with traditional compliance measures. The centralized monitoring component of today’s agreement is a Next Generation technology that will enable Total Puerto Rico to rapidly identify and respond to actual or potential gas leaks at its gas stations with actively operating USTs, each of which will be equipped with on-site electronic release detection monitoring equipment that will be enhanced with the Next Generation capability to transmit monitoring data to one central location on a 24/7/365 basis.

“This settlement will require Total Puerto Rico to address the risk of gas leaks comprehensively by installing advanced electronic release detection monitoring equipment in all gas stations at which Total owns actively operating USTs,” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden for the Environment and Natural Resources Division. “The settlement also obligates Total Puerto Rico to install state-of-the art centralized monitoring technology, a Next Generation tool that will enable the company to provide around-the-clock surveillance from a single location for over one hundred gas stations.”

“Leaking underground petroleum tanks are a serious problem because they can contaminate groundwater with pollutants such as benzene, which is known to cause cancer,” said Regional Administrator Judith Enck for EPA. “This agreement includes an innovative centralized monitoring system, which will protect the environment by helping to ensure that the underground tanks at many gas stations across Puerto Rico and in the U.S. Virgin Islands will now be properly monitored and maintained.”

Total Puerto Rico will install, or upgrade to, a fully automated electronic release detection monitoring system at 137 facilities with Total-owned USTs in active operation and will operate the systems for at least three years. This compliance measure, valued at approximately $1 million, will connect lines with probing sensors within the USTs to an on-site computer console unit that has audible and visible alarms capable of alerting nearby gas station personnel of gas leaks and other potentially dangerous events. The obligation to install automated release detection monitoring systems will extend to any additional facilities with actively operating USTs acquired by Total Puerto Rico after the date of lodging of the consent decree. In addition, Total Puerto Rico’s voluntary undertaking of a SEP – the implementation, operation and maintenance of a centralized monitoring capability estimated to cost approximately $600,000 – will connect at least 125 of the facilities with electronic release detection monitoring systems to a central location. Total Puerto Rico will also provide quarterly reports to EPA regarding its operation of these systems, and will be required to provide information regarding their operation upon EPA’s request.

This is the second judicial settlement in Puerto Rico requiring a defendant to implement company-wide automated electronic release detection with a centralized monitoring capability. A settlement in 2011 with Chevron Puerto Rico covered over 140 gas stations for a period of five years. With today’s proposed settlement with Total Puerto Rico, more than 250 gas stations throughout Puerto Rico will have electronic release detection equipment and centralized monitoring.

The settlement is subject to a 30-day public comment period and is conditioned upon approval by the United States District Court before becoming final.