United States
                    Environmental Protection
                    Agency
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                   Research and Development
EPA/600/SR-94/214  April 1996
4>EPA        Project Summary

                    Demonstration  of  Split-flow
                   Ventilation  and  Recirculation  as
                    Flow-reduction  Methods  in  an  Air
                    Force  Paint  Spray Booth
                   S. Hughes, J. Ayer, and R. Sutay
                     The report gives results of a demon-
                   stration of split-flow and recirculating
                   ventilation,  individually and  in combi-
                   nation, as safe and cost-effective meth-
                   ods  of reducing paint spray  booth
                   exhaust flow rates to  lower the costs
                   of both conditioning intake air and con-
                   trolling  volatile  organic compound
                   (VOC) emissions in exhaust air.
                     This Project Summary was developed
                   by EPA's National Risk Management
                   Research Laboratory, Research Triangle
                   Park, NC, to announce key findings of
                   the research project that is fully docu-
                   mented in a separate report of the same
                   title (see Project Report ordering infor-
                   mation at back).

                   Background
                     This study was  part  of an  extended
                   program of investigations into the cost and
                   efficacy of innovative approaches for bring-
                   ing U.S. Air Force industrial  operations
                   into compliance with current and antici-
                   pated air  pollution environmental  stan-
                   dards. Adequate ventilation of paint spray
                   booths requires the movement of large
                   quantities  of air, which  are slightly con-
                   taminated during  passage through the
                   booth. Air exhausted from this process
                   requires decontamination, which, although
                   technically achievable at operating flow
                   rates, can be prohibitively expensive. Be-
                   cause emission-control costs depend on
                   the volume of exhaust air being treated,
                   considerable savings can be realized
                   through the  application  of an acceptable
                   flow-reduction method.
                     A first principle of industrial hygiene is
                   to employ engineering  controls to their
                   limit  before invoking personal  protection.
                   In dealing  with exposures to airborne
toxics, the mainstay engineering device is
enhancement of ventilation. However, in-
creased ventilation creates enormous vol-
umes of slightly contaminated air, which
must be treated before discharge, and in
many  situations the cost of  such treat-
ment is excessive. In such circumstances,
a judgment must be made about the rela-
tive cost in increased exposure compared
to the economic benefit in decreased op-
erating cost. The goal of this study was to
provide experimental data to  support the
development of a general Air  Force posi-
tion and  objective criteria for local  deci-
sions  about the acceptability  of using
flow-reduction  methods in  paint spray
booths, based  on local health-risk/cost-
benefit considerations.

Scope
  The study consisted of two sets of ex-
perimental measurements  in  Booth 2,
Building 845, Travis Air Force Base, CA,
plus results of an ancillary effort conducted
at Research Triangle  Institute  (RTI)  to
verify experimentally that the flame ion-
ization detector used in the ventilation con-
trol loop is within its linear response range
at the equivalent  exposure  limit for the
mixture of solvents present in the mixed
top coat. The first set of experimental mea-
surements was a baseline characteriza-
tion of the distribution of toxic pollutants at
the exhaust face and in the exhaust duct
of Booth 2. These data, the RTI results,
and the test plan for the second set of
tests were reviewed before approval was
given to proceed with the  recirculation
tests. For the  second set of tests, the
ductwork in Booth 2  was  reconfigured to
separate exhaust  streams from  the top
and bottom of the booth (split-flow) and to

-------
return the  upper exhaust stream  to the
intake plenum for recirculation through the
booth. During separate painting sessions,
several  sets of concentration  measure-
ments were made of VOCs, particulates,
heavy metals, and isocyanates. Equiva-
lent exposures (Em) were calculated from
these data, and projections of Em were
made for  larger  recirculation  ratios,  to-
gether with an  economic analysis  of the
corresponding costs to apply VOC emis-
sion control devices.

Methodology
  To determine exposure concentrations,
sampling was performed  simultaneously
inside and outside the  respirator,  at 24
locations at the exhaust face, in the ex-
haust ducts, and, during the second set of
tests,  at three  locations at the face  of
each  of the two intake filters. To  deter-
mine  environmental contributions  to the
load of pollutants, background air samples
were  collected  at  the back of the booth
prior to  the release of any paint-derived
materials.  Standard sampling methods
were used. Paint usage was determined
by weighing the gun after each filling and
at the end  of each painting session. The
percent  volatile content of the paint was
determined gravimetrically, as percent
weight loss to evaporation. Airflows were
measured  with  an anemometer  in the
booth and with a pitot tube in the exhaust
ducts. Painting start and stop times were
recorded manually by  an observer, sta-
tioned at the rear of the booth, who also
noted the  dimensions and  locations  of
workpieces painted, coatings applied, and
other details. Projections of equivalent ex-
posures  at  different  recirculation ratios
were  calculated by  a Lotus  1-2-3  pro-
gram.

Test Description
  In  both  test series,  representative
workpieces were prepared and coated ac-
cording to  normal  operating  procedures.
During each such painting run, measure-
ments were made  of one of the four pol-
lutant classes using standard methods. A
typical  painting  session  lasted 30 to
90 minutes, and  included post-painting
cleaning  of the paint spray gun with  me-
thyl ethyl ketone and tidying up  of the
area.  In  general, two sets of tests were
conducted  during an  8-hour  shift, corre-
sponding to a typical workday.

Results
  Concentrations of airborne toxic pollut-
ants are recorded  in  the  tables  of the
report. Strontium chromate occurs as the
major contaminant during primer  coating
and was the largest contributing factor to
the Em.  Organic exposures  were minor
during all painting,  except that high isocy-
anate exposure occurred outside,  but not
inside, the painter's respirator during  top-
coat application inside a comfort pallet
(caused by airflow restrictions in the closed
space, and unrelated to the mode of ven-
tilation in the booth). The newly constructed
recirculation duct was a source of several
metals. These metals were included in Em
calculations, but the  concentrations  are
expected to decrease after the newly con-
structed surfaces are blown clean. Contri-
butions  to  Em  from  recirculation  are
significantly less than the Air Force crite-
rion of 0.25 imposed for these tests, and
much less, in  general,  than  the contribu-
tion from the painting process. The painter
showed no evidence of overexposure dur-
ing the post-test medical evaluation.

Conclusions
  Data  support the prediction that work-
place exposure levels during recirculation
of paint spray booth exhausts, especially
combined  with split-flow extraction of the
pollutant-enriched lower portion of the ex-
haust stream,  can be maintained at less
than an arbitrarily selected criterion (here,
Em = 0.25). Flow splitting  alone is consid-
erably less effective, but,  in combination
with recirculation, it acts to lower the con-
centrations in the recirculated stream at a
given rate of recirculation. Computational
projection of Em to larger recirculation  rates,
and  interpolation  of results  of an earlier
economic  analysis of scale-related  costs
to decontaminate  exhaust air, indicated
that available cost savings allow projected
payback on the order of 1 year for thermal
or catalytic incineration.

Recommendations
  Improvements should be  examined to
augment or replace present-generation fil-
ter and water particulate control systems.
Concurrently, or when the improved tech-
nologies satisfy local standards, a combi-
nation of flow  reduction and VOC control
should be implemented in an  area  of in-
tense regulatory pressure as the definitive
prototype.  Standardized criteria should be
established  to  guide  site selection, de-
sign, installation, and maintenance.

-------
  S. Hughes, J. Ayer, and R. Sutay are with Acurex Environmental Corp., Mountain
    View, CA 94039.
  Charles H. Darvin is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
  The complete report, entitled "Demonstration of Split-flow Ventilation and Recircu-
    lation as Flow-reduction Methods in an Air Force Paint Spray Booth," is a two-
    volume document:
     Volume  I (Order No. ABA 286 807; cost, subject to change, $31.00) contains
         the  main report and Appendices A through C.
     Volume  11 (Order No. ABA 286 808; cost, subject to change, $38.00) contains
         Appendices D through J.
    Both volumes will be available only from
         National Technical Information Service
         5285 Port Royal Road
         Springfield, VA22161
         Telephone: 703-487-4650
  The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at
         National Risk Management Research Laboratory
         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
         Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory (G-72)
Cincinnati, OH 45268
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
         EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
EPA/600/SR-94/214

-------