United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA/600/SR-92/014
Feb. 1992
EPA Project Summary
Limited-Use Chemical Protective
Clothing for EPA Superfund
Activities
Jack C. Sawicki, Carla Mond, Arthur D. Schwope, and Susan Watkins
Because contractor field personnel
complained about the poor durability
and fit of limited-use chemical protec-
tive clothing (CPC) most commonly
used at hazardous waste site opera-
tions, the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) initiated a study to
• characterize use of CPC
• determine problems encountered
• develop solutions to problems
• communicate results in publica-
tions and procurement guide-
lines
Personnel at two Superfund hazard-
ous waste sites were surveyed about
CPC problems. Poor fit of coveralls
and lack of fabric durability resulted
in garment failures, especially in the
seat, crotch, and underarms. Some
fabrics were identified that provided
improved performance.
The commercial market was sur-
veyed, and commercial fabrics for lim-
ited-use CPC were identified and ob-
tained, in addition, two experimental
fabrics were obtained. All available
fabrics were tested for breaking
strength and flexibility. Based on
these tests and the field survey, ac-
ceptable minimum values for break-
ing strengths of coated and uncoated
fabrics and acceptable maximum val-
ues for stiffness were determined.
One of the experimental fabrics,
DuPont Tyvek® 1445* coated with poly-
ethylene, was found to be especially
promising when compared with these
values.
Available standards and specifica-
tions describing size and fit param-
eters for limited-use CPC were identi-
fied and reviewed relative to EPA Su-
perfund CPC needs. None of the stan-
dards were found to be fully accept-
able. American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) Standard 101-1985,
however, provided a satisfactory
baseline for further standards devel-
opment. Problems with CPC were ana-
lyzed and suggested changes to ANSI
101 were developed as a proposed
procurement guideline. This informa-
tion was presented to the Industrial
Safety Equipment Association, which
developed the ANSI standard.
This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Risk Reduction Engi-
neering Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, to
announce key findings of the research
project that is fully documented in a
separate report of the same title (see
Project Report ordering information at
back).
Introduction
EPA has responsibility for hazardous
substances/hazardous waste (HS/HW) in
the United States. To address risks to
personnel from HS/HW, the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
promulgated 29 CFR 1910.120, Hazard-
ous Waste Operations and Emergency
Response, in 1988. This regulation re-
quires personal protective equipment
(PPE) to be provided for HS/HW activi-
ties. PPE for hazardous waste opera-
tions and hazardous substance emer-
* Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
gancy response Is divided into four lev-
els, A, B, C, and D, with Level A encom-
passing the most protection, Level D the
least, and Level C being the most com-
monly used level. Health and safety
personnel select CPC based on several
factors, including the chemical composi-
tion and physical form of the HS/HW.
Most of the CPC used by EPA and its
contractors is discarded after each use.
Since coveralls typically cost between
$10 and $20 apiece, the total yearly cost
for all CPC is estimated at over
$5,000,000. To assist field personnel in
cost-effectively complying with 29 CFR
1910.120, the EPA sponsored this study
to identify and help solve problems that
have been observed during the use of
limited-use CPC.
Field Investigation
When EPA contractor personnel were
surveyed and interviewed about limited-
use CPC, the problems they most com-
monly voiced concerned durability/tear-
ing and fit.
In general, only one or two sizes were
available in the field, and the exception-
ally large and the small person had the
most problems. The coveralls bound in
the hood, chest, back, seat, armholes,
and thighs, especially when worn with
winter clothing. The survey suggested
that the current sizing in the industry
was inadequate.
The coveralls tore, both those of
uncoated Tyvek® 1422 and those coated
with polyethylene or laminated to Saranex
23-P®. The coated and laminated fab-
rics were more durable but still inad-
equate. Duct tape was used not only to
seal the garments but also to tailor them.
Kleenguard®, another brand of non-
woven fabric, provided better durability
than uncoated Tyvek 1422, but it is not
available in coated forms. The newer
and more expensive fabrics such as Bar-
ricade®, Responder®, and Chemrel
Max® were found to be tougher but much
stiffer and thus required more sizes to fit
the personnel. Sijal Chemtex®, a coated
woven fabric, was found to be tougher
but uncomfortable because of its weight.
The stiffer or heavier fabrics are not
readily tailored with duct tape.
The Chemtex suits cost about $40 and
are usually cleaned and reused rather
than being discarded. There appears to
be a cost point between $20 and $40
where disposal after one use is prohibi-
tive and, in practice, discouraged.
Laboratory Investigations
Fabric Evaluation
Tests and Results
Physical properties of fabrics are re-
lated to both durability and comfort.
Available commercial and experimental
fabrics were tested for weight, breaking
strength, and flexibility using American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
standard test methods (Table 1).
Results are presented in Table 2. The
fabric most commonly found to fail in the
field, Tyvek 1422, showed the lowest
breaking strength of any fabric tested,
5.2 x 7.5 Ib. (Test specimens were cut
from the garments at a 90° angle to one
another. The results for each direction
are reported using the format A x B.)
Kleenguard, which was reputed to have
better durability, tested higher, at 9.8 x
12.2 Ib. The most commonly used coated
fabric, Tyvek 1422/PE, demonstrated a
breaking strength of 11.7 x 12.5 Ib., and
the more durable Tyvek 1422/Saranex
23-P measured higher, at 13.6 x 13.6 Ib.
The breaking strengths of two experi-
mental fabrics, Tyvek 1443/PE and
Tyvek1445/PE, were greater (12.7 x 13.9
and 14.2 x 15.6 Ib., respectively) than
that of standard Tyvek 1422/PE.
The uncoated fabrics exhibited the best
flexibility, with bending lengths ranging
from 1.15 x 1.3 to 1.7 x 2.15 in. (higher
bending lengths indicate greater stiff-
ness). The coated nonwoven fabrics
showed a much wider range of flexibility,
with bending lengths ranging from 1.65 x
1.80 in. to over 10.0 x 3.0 in.
The coated woven fabrics, Chemtex,
Chemgard®, and Neonyl®, were the
strongest fabrics and were relatively flex-
ible; but they were also the heaviest.
Discussion
The fabrics tested can be divided into
two distinct stiffness categories: bend-
ing lengths less than or greater than 2.5
in. One could infer that for garments to
be accepted in the field, bending length
should be less than 2.5 in. This is sup-
ported by comments from the field that
Tyvek 1422/Saranex 23-P garments are
the stiffest fabrics considered acceptable.
There is a similar well-defined gap in
fabric breaking strength; fabrics testing
less than 9 Ib. were not acceptable in
the field. Fabrics in the second grouping
(> 9 Ib.) provided greater durability than
those in the first but typically at the ex-
pense of reduced flexibility. This sup-
ports the comments that, for durability in
the field, Tyvek 1422/Saranex 23-P is
considered to be the minimum accept-
able coated fabric, and Kleenguard is
considered the minimum acceptable
uncoated fabric.
A promising fabric, the experimental
Tyvek 1445/PE, was compared with stan-
dard Tyvek 1422/PE. The comparison
demonstrated that approximately 30%
greater strength can be achieved with an
increase of less than 10% in weight and
stiffness. This suggests that fabric engi-
neering can increase strength while mini-
mizing increases in stiffness and weight.
Evaluation of Fit and Sizing
Procedure
Many limited-use garments are de-
signed to meet the requirements of ANSI
Standard 101-1985, Men's Limited-Use
and Disposable Protective Coveralls-Size
and Labeling Requirements. This volun-
tary consensus standard was developed
by the Industrial Safety Equipment Asso-
ciation (ISEA). ANSI 101 defines five
sizes: small through extra-extra-large,
and lists measures for seven dimensions,
as summarized in Table 3.
Table 1. Standard Test Methods for Evaluating Chemical Protective Clothing Fabrics
Test Number Test
ASTM* D 1682 Breaking Load and Elongation of Textile Fibers
ASTM D 1388 Stiffness of Textile Fabrics
ASTM D 3776 Mass per Unit Area of Textile Fabrics
'American Society for Testing and Materials, 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
-------
Table 2. Physical Characteristics of Limited-Use Chemical Protective Clothing Fabrics
Fabric
Weight* Breaking Strength" Bending Length •
(so «•; CSD, so; (so, so;
Uncoated Nonwovens
Enhance 1.88
(0.2)
Kleenguard 1.85
(0.1)
Kleenguard LU
Tyvek 1422 1.24
(0.15)
Coated/Laminated Nonwovens
Barricade 6.39
(0.45)
Blue Max
Chemrel 4.08
(0.45)
Chemrel Max 5.19
(0.5)
Chemtuff 3.60
(0.35)
Encase II 2.33
(0.3)
Greenguard
PP/Saranex 23-P
Responder
Tyvek/Saranex 23-P
Tyvek 1422/PE
Tyvek 1443/PE
Tyvek 1445/PE
Coated Wovena
Chemgard
Chemtex
Neonyl
3.53
(0.25)
8.23
(0.9) ,
3.60
(0.2)
2.14
(0.15)
2.18
(0.2)
2.23
(0.25)
10.40
(1.1)
9.52
(1.2)
15.19
(0.6)
9.5x9.8 1.7x2.15
(0.9, 0.9) (0.15, 0.1)
9.8X12.2 1.65x1.6
(0.7, 1.2) (0.05, 0.05)
Sample Not Received
5.2x7.5 1.15x1.3,
(0.2, 0.6) (0.05, 0.05)
24.9x31.4 5.95x4.2
(6.1,4.0) (0.35,0.2)
Received insufficient sample for testing
27.6x15.0 5.2x3.3
(1.1, 1.0) (0.6, 0.2)
44.9x33.1 >10.0*x3.0*
(3.1,5.5) (NA, 1.0)
41.6x51.2 5.2x4.5
(2.9, 4.7) (1.35, 1.4)
11.1x13.8 1.1x1.65
(2.0,2.4) (0.2,0.15)
Sample Not Received
16.0x10.1 1.85x1.85 .
(1.7, 1.9) (0.1, 0.15)
40.3x34.8 4.5x4.35
(4.9, 4.4) (0.4, 0.35)
13.6x13.6 1.85x2.2
(1.5, 1.4) (0.2, 0.25)
11.7X 12.5 1.65X 1.80
(1.8, 1.1) (0.25, 0.25)
12.7x13.9 1.75x1.90
(1.2, 1.1) (0.15, 0.3)
14.2 X 15.6 1.85x2.1
(1.2, 2.2) (0.45, 0.3)
115.8x91.7
(9.5, 5.9)
61.2x70.0
(2.8, 9.3)
130.4 X 104.13
(12.7, 9.0)
1.85X 1.5
(0.1,0.15)
1.9x1.0
(0.1,0.05)
1.62x1.53
(0.2,0.1)
ASTM D 3776, option C; ounces/square yard.
ASTM D 1682, rate of extension, 5 inch/minute; pounds, direction A x direction B, where
direction A is 90° to direction B.
ASTM D 1388, option A; inches, direction A x direction B, where direction A is 90° to
direction B.
Standard deviation, n=5.
Samples curled upward through full range of apparatus.
Samples curled downward without flexing.
A small sample of commercial CPC
coveralls was measured and compared
against the standard. Full compliance
with ANSI 101 was found in only one
case. The variations, however, were not
considered great enough to cause the
garment failures seen in the field. This
suggests that the standard itself, rather
than poor compliance, is the problem.
A military specification and a General
Services Administration (GSA) schedule
for limited-use coveralls were identified.
Two pairs of coveralls, one conforming
to each, were measured and examined.
Neither coverall appeared likely to pro-
vide better durability or fit than commer-
cial garments meeting ANSI 101.
The National Fire Protection Associa-
tion (NFPA) is currently preparing a speci-
fication on certain limited-use coveralls.
The present version of this specification,
however, does not incorporate a sizing
requirement.
Because of the problems noted in the
field and the lack of acceptable limited-
use coverall specifications or standards,
garment design was investigated to de-
velop a better sizing system than that
currently used in ANSI 101. The follow-
ing was determined:
• The current range of five'sizes
should be expanded to six to pro-
vide a better fit range, especially
for women and large males.
• The field data suggest that
present coverall designs do not
• include sufficient back body
length. Tearing under the arm
may be related to inadequate
back width and armhole width.
Additional back length and ease
for the armhole is required to fit
over winter clothing.
• Additional sleeve outseam and
leg inseam length will increase
the range of fit for tall workers.
• A range of sleeve openings will
keep excess bulk from.hindering
smaller sizes and allow easier
donning and doffing for larger
males.
• An increase in leg opening size
will provide a wider range of fit,
especially when donned over
safety shoes.
• An increase in the difference be-
tween front and back width will
increase range of motion, espe-
cially for the arms when reach-
ing.
• An increase in the range of front
opening lengths will ease don-
ning for larger males.
• ANSI 101 does not currently in-
clude hood dimensions; however,
hoods are considered desirable
for EPA activities and must fit
when worn over hard hats. Hood
-------
Ttblo 3. ANSI' 101-1985 Minimum Requirements
Size"
Smell
Medium
Large
X-Large
XX-Large
Chest
21 Vi
23 'A
25 Vt
27 Vi
29 Vi
Leg
Inseam
27 '/*
28
29
29 V*
30
Sleavs
Outseam
31'6
32' /i
33 '/i
35
36 '/i
Body
Length
35
36
37
38 Vi
39
Sleeve
Opening
6'k
7
7
7
7
Leg
Opening
9'/2
10
10
10
10
Front
Opening
Length
29'6
29 '/2
30
30 '/*
31
American National Standards Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018.
All dimensions In inches.
opening length and hood depth
specifications are required.
* Neckline length requirements are
needed to ensure fit when worn
over winter clothing.
Proposed measurement procedures for
measuring coveralls are summarized in
Table 4.
Minimum requirements for the Table 4
dimensions were developed for six sizes
of limited-use coveralls, and are summa-
rized !n Table 5.
Discussion
In the proposed sizing system, extra-
small and small have been optimized for
smaller persons, while extra-large and
extra-extra-large are optimized for up-
per-percentile large persons. Size ex-
tra-extra-large should fit a 95th percen-
tile worker wearing temperate climate
winter clothing.
Conclusions
Improvements described for both fab-
rics and coverall sizing are considered a
starting point for continuing efforts to pro-
Ttblo 4. Proposed Limited-Use Coverall Measurement Procedures
A. Back Body Length. Measure from the top of the neckline at the center back collar seam to
tha crotch seam.
B. Front Body Length. Measured from the top of the neckline at the center back point to the
crotch seam with the coveralls flat and front side up.
O. Armhole Width. Establish a line from the base of the armhole that is parallel to the center
front. Measure up from the annhole base to the top of the sleeve with the coveralls stretched
flat.
D. Sleeve Outseam. Measure from the center back point to the top of the sleeve at the wrist
edge.
£ Sleava Opening. Flatten sleeve at wrist end, completely stretching elastic if present. Measure
from one folded edge to the other.
F. Front At Cheit Measure from the base of the armhole across the front chest to the base of
tfje other armhole. If there is no underarm seam on either sleeve or body of coverall, lay the
sleeve and body of coverall at an angle where both are flat and establish an underarm point at
the juncture of the sleeve and torso.
G, Back At Chest Measure from the base of the armhole across the back to the base of the
other armhole, Including all of the fullness that lies between these two points. If there is no
underarm seam on either sleeve or body of coverall, lay the sleeve and body of coverall at an
angle where both are flat and establish an underarm point at the juncture of the sleeve and
torso.
H. Lag Intoam. Measure from the crotch seam down the leg inseam to the bottom edge.
I. Leg Opening. Flatten the leg at the ankle end, completely stretching elastic if present.
Measure from one folded edge to the other folded edge.
J, Front Opening Length. Measure from the center back collar base to the bottom of the front
opening with the coverall flat and front side up.
K. Hood Opening Length. Flatten the hood along the center seam so that the sides are
superimposed. Measure on a flat vertical line that extends upward from the neckline seam to
the highest point on the top of the hood.
L Hood Depth. Flatten the hood along the center seam so that the left and right sides are
superimposed. Measure on a horizontal line from the center front (face) edge to the back of
the hood at the point of greatest depth.
M. Neckline Length. With front of coverall facing up, stretch neckline seam flat. Measure from
one end of seam to the other. '
vide improved protective clothing for EPA
hazardous waste workers. This study
has identified a promising, experimental,
coated, limited-use CPC fabric, DuPont
Tyvek 1445. It is hoped that further
development will continue.
Fabric and garment performance and
sizing information have been formatted
for use as a Procurement Guideline for
EPA personnel. This information has
also been presented to the ISEA for use
in updating ANSI 101.
The study identified several questions
that should be investigated further. One
was the role of seams, closures, and
uncoated fabrics in providing effective
protection from liquids. Another was the
realization that many waste sites contain
solvents and petroleum products that are
flammable or combustible, yet flame re-
sistance test methods appropriate for op-
erations at the sites have not yet been
identified. Finally, field personnel sug-
gested that better CPC training programs
and a PPE "hot line" should be devel-
oped.
The full report was submitted in partial
fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-3293 by
Arthur D. Little, Inc., under the sponsor-
ship of the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency.
-------
Table S. Minimum Finished Dimensions
Dimension*
A. Back Body Length
B. Front Body Length
C. Armhole Length
D. Sleeve Outseam
£ Sleeve Opening
F. Front Chest
G. Back Chest
H. Leg Inseam
1. Leg Opening
J, Front Opening Length
K. Hood Length
L Hood Depth
M. Neckline Length
XS
38
33
12
31
6
22
23
28
13
29
16
11
16
S
39
34
13
32
6
23
24
29
13
30
16
12
16
Size
M
40
35
13
33
7
24
26
30
14
30
17
12
18
L
41
36
14
34
7
26
29
31
14
30
17
13
19
XL
42
38
14
35
8
28
32
32
15
31
18
13
20
XXL
43
40
15
37
8
30
34
33
15
32
18
14
20
* All measurements in inches.
•&U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1991 - 648-080/40231
-------
-------
-------
J.C. Sawkki, C. Mond, and AD.Schwope are with Arthur D. Little, Inc.,
Cambridge, MA 02140 and S. Watkins is with Cornell University, Ithaca,
NY, 14853.
Michael Gruenfeldis the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "Limited -Use Chemical Protective Clothing for
EPA SuperfundActivities," (Order No. PB92-143 494AS; Cost: $17.00,
subject to change) will be available only from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental
Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/600/SR-92/014
------- |