PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
ASSOCIATED WITH A HYDROCLAVE CYCLE
AT KINGSTON GENERAL HOSPITAL
CONDUCTED BY: Tom Beardall
ON: 1988.11.17
REQUESTED BY: Richard Vanderwal
Hydroclave System Corp.
1. At the request of Hydroclave Systems Corporation, a preliminary evaluation of volatile organic compounds associated with certain aspects of a Hydroclave sterilization cycle was conducted on November 17, 1998.
The objective of the survey was to determine volatile organic contaminant concentrations at these worst-case locations in terms of potential exposures of site personnel The results have therefore been compared to occupational exposure limits.
The results are representative of the conditions existing at the time of the sampling, including the make-up of waste being sterilized, sterilization temperature, pressure, and duration etc. At the time of the survey, the Hydroclave operator reported that the waste being sterilized had been collected from a variety of locations throughout the hospital and that the unit was fully loaded with 12 trays of waste.
Following the 5 to 10 minute venting/depressurization stage, a finishing cycle occurred for approximately 15 minutes, after which time the unloading door was slowly opened and a 3 litre air sample was collected in the rising airstream, as it discharged from the Hydroclave.
The Silco canisters were then submitted to a laboratory for gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis utilizing a direct cryogenic trapping technique for an EPA target list of approximately 40 compounds (Method TO-14). Also included in the analysis was the "tentative" identification of the 10 to 15 most abundant volatile substances observed in the samples, which were not otherwise included on the target list.
The GC-MS results are reported in Table 1. Table 1a shows the standard EPA target list of volatile contaminants, from the two sampling locations. Table 1b lists the other highest concentration contaminants that were tentatively identified from the two samples.
Table 1a. Results of volatile organic compound analysis by U.S. E.P.A. Method TO-14,
KGH Hydroclave unloading door, 1998.11.17
| Airborne compound |
Airborne Concentration (ppm) |
Occupational Exposure Limits: (OELs): TWAEV, STEV (ppm) [other limits in brackets] |
| EPA target Compounds: |   |   |
| chloromethane (methyl chloride) |
<0.010 |
50, 100(S) |
| vinyl chloride |
<0.008 |
2, 10 |
| bromomethane (methyl bromide) |
<0.005 |
5S (1A4) |
| chloroethane (ethyl chloride) |
<0.008 |
1000, (100S) |
| acetone |
0.380 |
750,1000(500, 750, A4) |
| trichlorofluoromethane |
<0.004 |
1000C |
| 1,1-dichloroethene (vinylidene chloride) |
<0.005 |
5, 20 |
| methylene chloride |
<0.006 |
50 (A3) |
| trichlorotrifluoroethane |
<0.003 |
1000, 1250 |
| carbon disulphide |
0.092 |
10 S |
| trans-1,2-dichloroethene |
<0.005 |
- |
| 1,1-dichloroethane |
<0.005 |
200, 250 (100) |
| methyl tert-butyl ether |
<0.006 |
(40) |
| vinyl acetate |
<0.006 |
10, 20 (10, 15) |
| 2-butanone (methyl ethyl ketone) |
0.020 |
200, 300 |
| cis-1,2-dichloroethene |
<0.005 |
- |
| chloroform |
<0.004 |
10 |
| 1,2-dichloroethane (ethylene dichloride) |
<0.005 |
10 |
| 1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform) |
<0.004 |
350, 450 |
| benzene |
<0.006 |
1/5, 15M (0.5,2.5,A1) |
| carbon tetrachloride |
<0.003 |
2,3 S |
| 1,2-dichloropropane (propylene dichloride) |
<0.004 |
75, 110 |
| bromodichloromethane |
<0.003 |
- |
| trichloroethene (trichloroethylene) |
<0.004 |
50, 200 (100) |
| cis-1,3-dichloropropene |
<0.004 |
- |
| 4-methyl-2-pentanone (methyl isobutyl ketone) |
<0.005 |
50, 75 |
| trans-1,3-dichloropropene |
<0.004 |
- |
| 1,1,2-trichloroethane |
<0.004 |
10S |
| toluene |
0.011 |
100, 150 (50 S A4) |
| 2-hexanone (methyl n-butyl ketone) |
<0.005 |
1 |
| dibromochloromethane |
<0.002 |
- |
| 1,2-dibromoethane (ethylene dibromide) |
<0.003 |
Ά, S (A3) |
| tetrachloroethene (perchloroethylene) |
<0.003 |
50 (25), 200 (100) |
| chlorobenzene |
<0.004 |
75 (10) |
| ethylbenzene |
<0.005 |
100, 125 |
| xylenes (o-,m-, & p-isomers) |
<0.009 |
100, 150 |
| bromoform |
<0.002 |
0.5 S (0.5) |
| styrene |
0.039 |
50, 200 (20, 40, S, A4) |
| 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane |
<0.003 |
1S |
| 1,3-dichlorobenzene |
<0.003 |
- |
| 1,4-dichlorobenzene |
<0.017 |
75 (10), 110 |
| 1,2-dichlorobenzene |
<0.003 |
50C (25, 50) |
< Denotes sample below detection limit (i.e. not detected).
TWAEV Time-weighted average exposure value (8 hr).
STEV Short-term exposure value (15 min).
C Ceiling exposure value/limit.
M Maximum concentration exposure limit
S Skin notation (cutaneous route may represent a potential significant contribution to the overall exposure).
Recommended 8-hr exposure limit (e.g. RRO 1990, Reg 839-benzene)
ACGIH 1998 TLV
Ά Exposure value not established, any exposure should be avoided (RRO 1990, Reg. 833).
A1 Confirmed human carcinogen
A2 Suspected human carcinogen.
A3 Animal carcinogen.
A4 Not classifiable as a human carcinogen.
A5 Not suspected as a human carcinogen.
Table 1b. Tentatively identified compounds analyzed by gas chromatography / mass spectrometry, KGH Hydroclave unloading door, 1998.11.17
| Tentatively Identified Compounds |
Airborne Concentration (mg/m3) |
Occupational exposure Limits (OELs): TWAEV, STEV (mg/m3) |
| acetaldehyde |
0.9 |
180, 270 |
| ethanol |
6.0 |
1900 |
| isopropyl alcohol |
10 |
980, 1225 |
| n-pentane |
0.2 |
1770, 2210 |
| isobutylaldehyde |
0.2 |
- |
| isovaleraldehyde |
0.2 |
- |
| 1-butanol |
0.2 |
150 C |
| 4-methylheptane |
0.2 |
- |
| 2,4-dimethyl-1-heptene |
0.5 |
- |
| cyclohexanone |
0.3 |
100 S |
| benzaldehyde |
0.4 |
- |
| 2-ethyl-1-hexanol |
0.5 |
- |
| d-limonene |
0.3 |
(167) |
| C11H24 alkane |
0.3 |
- |
| tetradecane |
0.6 |
- |
+ Shown in order of appearance on gas chromatogram
TWAEV: Time-weighted average exposure value (8 hr)
STEV: Short-term exposure value (15 min)
C: Ceiling exposure value
S: Skin notation
American Industrial Hygiene Association Workplace Environmental Exposure (WEEL) guide
Volatile organic compound levels sampled in the airstream released when the Hydroclave unloading door was opened (Table 1a and 1b) were low relative to the cited occupational exposure limits.
|