Abstract
Recent research by Matthews et al. at the Louisiana Tech University Trenchless Technology Center (TTC) regarding styrene emissions produced during steam-cured, styrene-based cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) installation was compared to data from six relevant, independent studies. As part of this analysis, data in the reviewed studies were compared to exposure guidelines published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA). Measurement methodology and goals were considered and briefly described in the analysis. Finally, this paper highlights differences and similarities in the conclusions and measurements of the reviewed studies while searching for and identifying conclusions and trends that are common across the reviewed studies.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are available in a repository online in accordance with funder data retention policies. The data in the study referenced in the text as the NASSCO Phase II study (Matthews et al. 2020) is available at online at https://live-nassco.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/NASSCO_CIPP_Phase_II_Final-Report-Feb-2020-1.pdf
References
Ajdari, E. B. 2016. “Volatile organic compound (VOC) emission during cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) sewer pipe rehabilitation.” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Environmental Science and Technology, Univ. of New Orleans.
Bauer, G., and D. McCartney. 2004. “Odour control—More than sewage when installing cured-in-place sewer pipe.” In Proc., North American Society for Trenchless Technology (NASTT) NO-DIG Conf., NASTT, Paper D-3-02. Liverpool, NY: North American Society for Trenchless Technology.
CDPH (California Department of Public Health—Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control). 2017. “CIPP safety alert.” Accessed September 1, 2017. www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CIPP%20Alert%20fina.pdf.
EPA. 2008. “Styrene: Interim acute exposure guideline levels (AEGLs).” Accessed June 27, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-08/documents/styrene_interim_feb_2008.v1.pdf.
Matthews, J., E. Matthews, S. Alam, S. Eklund, H. Hassan, A. Banjara, G. Hossain, J. Howell, and J. Kraft. 2020. NASSCO CIPP emissions phase 2: Evaluation of air emissions from polyester resin CIPP with steam cure. Final Rep. Ruston, LA: Trenchless Technology Center.
MENP (Ministry of Environment and Natural Protection). 2004. Agriculture and consumer protection (MUNLV) of the North Country Rhine-Westphalia in Bielefeld. [In German.]. Bielefeld, Germany: MENP.
Najafi, M., M. Sattler, K. Schug, V. Kaushal, S. Korky, G. Iyer, and R. Farazifard. 2018. Evaluation of potential release of organic chemicals in the steam exhaust and other release points during pipe rehabilitation using the trenchless cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) method. Arlington, TX: Center for Underground Infrastructure Research and Education (CUIRE), Univ. of Texas at Arlington.
NIOSH (National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health). 2019. “NIOSH pocket guide to chemical hazards.” Accessed December 30, 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/pgintrod.html.
OSHA (Occupational Health and Safety Administration). 2019. “Permissible exposure limits—Annotated tables.” Accessed December 30, 2019. https://www.osha.gov/dsg/annotated-pels/index.html.
Sendesi, S., et al. 2017. “Worksite chemical air emissions and worker exposure during sanitary sewer and stormwater pipe rehabilitation using cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP).” Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 4 (8): 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.7b00237.
Teimouri, S. M., et al. 2017. “Worksite chemical exposure and air emissions during sanitary sewer pipe and stormwater culvert rehabilitation using cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP).” Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 4 (8): 325. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.7b00237.
Willett, M. 2017. Industrial hygiene evaluation: CIPP-styrene exposure. Woodbridge, VA: Prince William County Service Authority.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 13 • Issue 1 • February 2022
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jun 9, 2020
Accepted: Aug 30, 2021
Published online: Oct 8, 2021
Published in print: Feb 1, 2022
Discussion open until: Mar 8, 2022
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
- Salar Bavilinezhad, William Elledge, Burak Kaynak, Mohammad Najafi, Melanie Sattler, Vinayak Kaushal, Paria Hamidzadeh, Environmental Impacts of Emissions from Cured-in-Place Pipe Installation: Initial Results from a Case Study, Pipelines 2024, 10.1061/9780784485576.043, (406-415), (2024).
- Mark A. Knight, Marios A. Ioannidis, Faten Salim, Tadeusz Górecki, Dennis Pivin, Health Risks Assessment from Cured-in-Place Pipe Lining Fugitive Styrene Emissions in Laterals, Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice, 10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000690, 14, 1, (2023).
- Yoorae Noh, Li Xia, Nadezhda N. Zyaykina, Brandon E. Boor, Jonathan H. Shannahan, Andrew J. Whelton, Regulatory Significance of Plastic Manufacturing Air Pollution Discharged into Terrestrial Environments and Real-Time Sensing Challenges, Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 10.1021/acs.estlett.2c00710, 10, 2, (152-158), (2023).
- Elizabeth Matthews, John Kraft, Gazi Hossain, Anthony Bednar, Charles Laber, Shaurav Alam, Tanvir Manzur, John Matthews, Jason Howell, Sven Eklund, Air Quality Dispersion Modelling to Evaluate CIPP Installation Styrene Emissions, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10.3390/ijerph192113800, 19, 21, (13800), (2022).