Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=yjac20

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation

ISSN: 0197-1360 (Print) 1945-2330 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/yjac20

Investigation of Residual Contamination InsideStorage Cabinets: Collection Care Benefits from anIndustrial Hygiene Study

Rebecca A. Kaczkowski, Kathryn A. Makos, Catharine Hawks & Michael Hunt

To cite this article: Rebecca A. Kaczkowski, Kathryn A. Makos, Catharine Hawks & Michael Hunt(2017) Investigation of Residual Contamination Inside Storage Cabinets: Collection Care Benefitsfrom an Industrial Hygiene Study, Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, 56:2, 142-160,DOI: 10.1080/01971360.2017.1326242

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01971360.2017.1326242

Published online: 12 Jun 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 139

View Crossmark data

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDESTORAGE CABINETS: COLLECTION CARE BENEFITS FROM AN

INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE STUDY

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI , KATHRYNA.MAKOS *, CATHARINEHAWKS

AND MICHAEL HUNT

Museum Conservation Institute, Smithsonian Institution, Suitland, MD, USANational Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA

Office of Safety, Health & Environmental Management, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC,USA

Closed storage cabinets become the repository for hazardous vapors emitted by collections, deteriorating cabinetconstruction materials, and/or collection storage materials, especially wood products and many plastics. Cabinetreplacement has been a major goal in the collection care program at the Smithsonian’s National Museum ofNatural History. The museum has targeted over old storage cabinets with interior wood framing andwooden drawers for disposal or surplus as funding permits. These cabinets had housed, or continued to house,anthropology and vertebrate zoology collections as well as papers, books, and photographic materials. The cabinetsand their past or present contents were known to have been subjected to various pesticide treatments, many ofwhich were presumed to have adsorbed onto or absorbed into cabinet interior materials. In order to understandthe risk and to best sequence a staged replacement of old cabinets, the museum administration sought the expertiseof occupational health and safety specialists to analyze both the cabinet interior environment and the healthexposure risks to anyone accessing the cabinets. Forty volatile organic chemicals were detected in parts perbillion (ppb) levels within the cabinets, using the USEPA TO- Compendium Method. This dataset and the per-sonal exposure monitoring data set collected showed levels that were significantly less than respective OccupationalExposure Levels, suggesting that human health risk in accessing these cabinets was low. However, the identifiedchemicals suggest a risk to the collections themselves from continued use of the cabinets. Based on the results ofthis study, the museum was able to prioritize cabinets for replacement.

KEYWORDS: Collection care, health and safety, storage environment, collection hazards, past treatments, residualcontaminants, exposure monitoring, industrial hygiene

. INTRODUCTION

Although engaged in the rehousing of collections forseveral decades, the Smithsonian Institution’s NationalMuseumofNaturalHistory (NMNH) still has collectionsthat are housed inwood-framed, sheet-metal cabinets thathave been in use for the better part of a century (Jackson) (fig. ). Staff using the collections raised concernsabout the gas-phase emissions thatwere readily detectablewhen accessing these cabinets. To understand thepotential impact on human health and safety, theNMNH conservation, collection management, facilities,and administrative staff developed a partnership with

industrial hygienists from the Smithsonian’s Office ofSafety, Health, and Environmental Management(OSHEM) to determine whether chemicals known tohave been used in past collection treatments (Williamsand Hawks ; Goldberg ) had accumulatedwithin these old storage cabinets and if so, to whatdegree these posed hazards to human health or risk ofcross-contamination to any collections now housed inthe cabinets.

The study was coordinated by the NMNH Collec-tions Program. Collection managers knew cabinetcontents, past treatments of cabinets, and lengths oftime cabinets had been unopened (i.e., which ones

* Present address: National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA

© American Institute for Conservationof Historic and Artistic Works DOI: ./.. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

were likely to have the greatest vapor accumulation).Facility staff knew which departments previously usednow-empty cabinets. The museum’s conservator knewpast treatment histories and the pollutants known todamage collections. Industrial hygienists fromOSHEM had expertise in environmental monitoringmethods. Scientists from Analytics Corporation, a lab-oratory accredited by the American Industrial HygieneAssociation (AIHA), determined the most realistic com-bination of sampling methodologies for the wide rangeof suspect agents. Because there were + cabinets ofconcern, the primary challenges were determiningwhich cabinets would be used as the sample set,which chemicals could or should be studied, andwhich environmental sampling methods would mostefficiently and cost-effectively identify and quantifythese chemicals.The results were designed to allow the stakeholders

to arrive at decisions regarding cabinet access restric-tions, if needed; storage space constraints from disposalof contaminated cabinets; potential re-purposing ofcabinets for other uses; and the need for new cabinetpurchases. The results supported this design, allowingthe museum’s administration to secure resources tomove the cabinet replacement program forward at anincreased pace.

. DEFINING THE CABINET SAMPLE POPULATION

The first step was to gauge the magnitude of the samplesize and any commonalities that could allow validsample set groupings. Cabinets from several storage con-ditionswere considered indefining the samplepopulation.

• Cabinets housing treated collections, with probableaccumulated interior vapor contaminants fromthose collections and/or the cabinet constructionmaterials.

• Cabinets re-purposed to store office supplies, per-sonal files, and personal reprint libraries, with theconcern that contaminants from past holdingswould still pose a health hazard and/or contaminatethe non-collection personal materials.

• Now-empty cabinets awaiting re-assignment to otherdepartments or awaiting disposal, which may havead/absorbed volatile chemicals from previouslytreated holdings.

The museum’s detailed records provided the locationand tag numbers of the cabinets originating from eachdepartment.Cabinets from the same departments, which were cur-

rently filled or had been empty for at least two years,could yield data on the degree to which empty cabinetsretained contaminants, and thus pose risk to futurestorage use. Collection managers and the museum con-servator identified both empty and specimen/object-filledcabinets that represented past uses and treatment his-tories. Sample sets were then grouped as follows:

() Mammals ( cabinets)• filled cabinets, mixed representative study

skins, skeletal materials, and taxidermy mounts(fig. )

• “special” cabinets, filled with mixture of speci-mens and grease-saturated skeletons that weresuspected of being heavily treated with toxicchemicals in the past and had been access-restricted for at least one year

• empty cabinets

() Anthropology ( cabinets)• filled cabinets randomly selected by collec-

tion staff, targeting physical, ethnological, andarchaeological materials

• cabinets now used for non-collection materialstorage

• empty cabinets, randomly selected bysurveyors

The sample cabinets were either verified by thedepartments not to have been opened recently ortagged as restricted access for several months prior to

FIG. . Example of an empty wooden storage cabinet. Notethat the cabinet is accessed by removing the door, and bothare constructed of a wood frame with metal cladding.Wooden drawers (not pictured) can be installed, as needed,in the wooden tracks. The gasket material is red felt.

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDE STORAGE CABINETS

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

this study. This ensured accumulated interior concen-tration of vapors.

. SELECTING CHEMICAL AGENTS FOR STUDY

The primary basis for determining the compounds to bestudied was the extensive literature and oral historyreview of NMNH pest control measures undertaken byGoldberg in . Particulates were not the focus of hersurvey as identification of these residuals had been pre-viously conducted by the NMNH and controlledthrough safe work practices such as barrier gloves, labcoats, respirators (as needed), and routineHEPA-vacuumcleaning of cabinets, work areas, and where warranted,collections. These agents included: non-volatile particu-lates (DDT and isomers, sulfur, strychnine) and heavymetal particulates (arsenic, lead from paints on cabinetsand room walls, and lead from some old specimen tags).

In consultation with the analytical laboratory che-mists, the non-particulate compounds documented byGoldberg were examined as to their volatility, as a poss-ible measure of persistence, and ease of detectability bymethods with low limit of detection and high percen-tage recovery rates from sampling media. The chemi-cals were sorted as shown below:

• Highly volatile, with least likelihood of persistenceover time: ethylene oxide, ethylene chlorohydrin.

• Volatile, likelihood of retention via specimen andwood ad/absorption, with dynamic revaporization:carbolic acid (phenol), the mixture of carbon tetra-chloride and ethylene dichloride (Dowfume®), ethyl-ene dibromide and methyl bromide; and vapor fromrecrystallized particulate residues: naphthalene and,-dichlorobenzene (PDB) (Ormsby et al. ;Makos and Hawks ).

• Semi-volatile, likelihood of retention with somere-vaporization: carbon disulfide, camphor, thymol,pentachlorophenol, and ,-dimethyl dichlorovinylphosphate (DDVP/Dichlorvos/Vapona), which candecompose through reaction with substrate and airto a host of aldehydes, acids (Williams et al. ).

• Volatile with low likelihood of retention givencontractor-application in commercial trailers exteriorto the building, and purging per regulatory standardsprior to release to the museum: sulfuryl fluoride(Vikane).

• Volatile inorganic mercury, likely to be present in col-lections incorporating or having been treated withmercury salts.

In addition, closed storage containers can becomerepositories for outdoor pollutants, mechanical systemtreatment chemicals, and cleaning chemicals as well asdeterioration of cabinet materials, storage materials,and even the collections themselves (Hawks ;Hatchfield ; Grzywacz ; Gribovich et al.; ASHRAE ; Curran and Strlic ). Theramifications from all these residues are threefold: col-lections are potentially at risk of undergoing physicaland chemical changes that limit their future utility;humans are at risk of health hazards that range fromtemporary irritation to potential exposure to car-cinogens; and contaminants from the collections ortheir environment adversely affect facility indoor airquality, generating complaints from buildingoccupants.

The challenge was to plan the most cost-effective wayto screen for as many of the likely agents as possible,while being efficient with time and personnel. Thesampling goal was to integrate all methods simul-taneously and consistently upon opening each testedcabinet.

. SAMPLING METHODS

Risk to both collections and humans is based on thesame principle: identified hazard multiplied by dur-ation/frequency of exposure. In this case, this equatesto constant contact in closed storage for collections,and concentration inhaled, absorbed, and/or ingestedover time of contact during a typical eight-hourworkday for humans. The severity of risk then involvesthe degree to which the hazardous agent impacts the

FIG. . Example of a wooden case, in use, with mammalstudy skins. Image credit: Evan Cooney, Smithsonian Insti-tution .

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI ET AL.

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

object/specimen through deterioration or degradation,or human body through trauma or illness. Therefore,the methods for hazard identification in this studymust target two different zones of impact: insideclosed cabinets and the worker’s breathing zone. Eachzone required different sampling apparatuses andtechniques.

() Point source monitoring within storage cabinets.Ambient air sampling for pollutants can be accom-plished through direct-reading instruments thatinstantaneously measure agents or a grab samplingtechnique involving air collection in a sample bag,flask, or evacuated canister for subsequent analysisby instrumentation such as gas chromatography(GC), infrared (IR) spectroscopy or mass spec-trometry (MS).

() Personal exposure monitoring via devices withspecific collection media that would be worn bystaff accessing treated cabinets. This technique rep-resents typical work exposures by integratingdetected concentrations over the time sampled.

. POINT SOURCE MONITORING

.. DIRECT-READING INSTRUMENTS

Some direct-reading instruments, such as photoioni-zation detectors, can analyze multiple agents and aremost useful for leak detection or indoor air qualityscreening where the likely contaminant(s) are known.Readings are compared to ionization potential chartsfor selected agents. Field-portable GC–MS units or IRgas analyzers are compact enough to be managed on

a cart, with samples collected through flexible samplingtubes. They require frequent recalibration in the fieldand a qualified analytical operator with access to alarge GC detector or IR spectral library of various com-pounds to interpret spectral interferences and unknownpeaks (Dietrich ; Todd ).Other direct-reading instruments are agent- or

test-gas specific, such as colorimetric detector tubes,electrochemical sensors, or inorganic mercury vaporanalyzers. Mercury vapor was expected to be presentfrom both intrinsic (e.g., pigments) and acquiredsources, such as treatment with mercury salts as fungi-cides or pesticides. Mercury vapor was sampled byOSHEM industrial hygienists using a real-time Jerome-X Mercury Vapor Analyzer.

.. GRAB SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

A preferred method for identifying a mixed-contaminant air stream, especially with multiple,unknown contaminants, would be an instantaneousgrab sample of a known volume of air directly into aspecially designed synthetic plastic bag (e.g., Tedlar®,Teflon®) or preevacuated stainless steel canister, foranalysis by a qualified laboratory. This type of pointsampling technique usually has very low detectionlimits; the rigid canister also provides non-leaking stab-ility after sampling.The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Second Edition of the Compendium of Methods forthe Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds inAmbient Air contains a set of peer-reviewed stan-dardized methods for volatile, semi-volatile, andselected toxic organic pollutants in the air. Industrialhygienists and analytical chemists on this study rec-ommend the “Compendium Method TO- for deter-mination of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in aircollected in specially-prepared canisters and analyzedby gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)”(USEPA ). The TO- Method Analyte List of polar/non-polar VOCs includes those of mostconcern to this study. The limit of detection is very sen-sitive, .-. parts per billion by volume (ppb), whichis the pollutant range of concern in collection storage.Air is collected into a leak-free L stainless steel can-

ister, initially evacuated to . mm Hg (fig. ). Thesampling train is composed of flexible non-absorbenttubing connected to a flow-restrictive inlet, preset bythe laboratory to the desired sampling duration.When the canister is opened to the atmosphere, thedifferential pressure causes the sample to flow into thecanister. For this study, each cabinet was openedslightly, and the tubing was moved through thecabinet interior from bottom to top and in betweendrawers, as consistently as possible to standardize thesample collection methodology. This method always

FIG. . Image of two SUMMA® canisters, similar to thoseused in this study to carry out testing according to “Compen-dium Method TO- for Determination of Volatile OrganicCompounds (VOCs) in Air Collected In Specially-PreparedCanisters and Analyzed by Gas Chromatography/ Mass Spec-trometry (GC/MS)”. Image credit: Con-Test, .

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDE STORAGE CABINETS

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

included lower areas where vapors were expected topool or reside in larger concentrations.

A separately prepared canister was used for each ofthe six sample sets, as defined in Section of thispaper. After each sample set was completed, the canis-ter valve was closed and the canisters were transportedto the laboratory for analysis. The analytical strategyfor Compendium Method TO- involves using ahigh-resolution GC coupled to a MS to identify andquantitate target compounds. MS is considered amore definitive identification technique than singlespecific detectors such as flame ionization detector, elec-tron capture detector, photoionization detector, or amulti-detector arrangement of these. The GC-MSapproach also reduces the chances for misidentification(USEPA ).

. OCCUPATIONAL/PERSONAL EXPOSURE MONITORING

Sampling for employee exposure to gases or vaporsinvolves the use of a device calibrated at a method-specific flow rate to draw air through an adsorbing orabsorbing medium, in order to capture the contami-nant. When the collecting medium is analyzed, the con-taminant concentrations can be averaged over thesample time to obtain the calculated exposure levels.To measure inhalation exposures, as in this study, the

sampling device is worn (with the medium clipped onin the “breathing zone”, or within a -ft. radiusaround the head) throughout the work task to representinhaled dose over that time frame (fig. ). This type ofsampling, representative of the entire exposure periodin a work day, is necessary because worker exposuresmay vary in duration and frequency depending on thetask. Instantaneous grab or point sampling does notintegrate these variables, and thus the results cannotbe directly correlated with established time-weightedaverage occupational exposure standards. Pointsampling does, however, indicate presence of ahazard, and can serve as a red flag for further study.

Personal exposure samplers were worn by () collec-tion care staff accessing cabinets from the Depart-ment of Vertebrate Zoology’s Division of Birds duringpest inspections, routine curation, and specifically forthe purposes of this study, and () by the staffopening cabinets and conducting TO- surveys forthis study. Both pest inspection and curation were con-sidered by collection managers as representative oftypical cabinet access. All personal exposure sampleswere collected on agent-specific media via calibratedGilAir high- and low-flow sampling pumps, in accord-ance with National Institute for Occupational Safetyand Health (NIOSH ) and Occupational Safetyand Health Administration (OSHA ) standardindustrial hygiene methods, and analyzed by an AIHAaccredited laboratory.

Personal samples were collected for certain com-pounds known to be recently used in vertebrate cabi-nets, such as naphthalene and PDB as well as ethylenedichloride and carbon tetrachloride that were part ofa commercial mixture used pre-. The collectingmedia were activated charcoal (SKC -) tubes,analyzed per NIOSH Method (Method fornaphthalene). Also monitored were two VOCs thatwere suspected of being present but not included inthe TO- Analyte List: ethylene chlorohydrin, ahighly toxic chemical formed by the reaction of ethyl-ene oxide (another past fumigant) and objects or speci-mens treated with or containing chlorinated chemicals.These were collected on Anasorb® sorbent tubes,analyzed per NIOSH Method ; and ,-dimethyldichlorovinyl phosphate (dichlorvos/Vapona, usedinside cabinets in the past), collected and analyzed onXAD-/glass fiber filter (OVS) media, per OSHAMethod Modified.

. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

. MERCURY VAPOR

The measured mercury vapor concentrations in eachtested cabinet were less than the instrument’s analyticallimit of detection of .milligrams mercury per cubic

FIG. . Detail of an employee wearing a personal exposuresampler, consisting of a pump clipped onto the pants’ waist-band and the sampling media clipped to the collar, tomonitor the air within the employee’s “breathing zone.”

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI ET AL.

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

meter of air (mg/m); significantly less than the .mg/m as an -hour time-weighted average (TWA)threshold limit value (TLV) established for elementalinorganic mercury vapor by the American Conferenceof Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH ).Mercuric chloride was known to have been used as a

pesticide/fungicide on some anthropological collec-tions, and mercury pigments can be found on many eth-nographic and archaeological objects (Goldberg ;Hawks and Makos ; Cross and Odegaard ).Mercuric chloride was sometimes injected into ver-tebrate specimens as a fixative for soft tissues duringfield preparation of study skins (Williams and Hawks). Mercury salts on cellulose-based materials arealso known to readily emit mercury vapor (Hawksand Bell ; Hawks et al. ).The non-detected mercury levels within anthropol-

ogy cabinets in this study may have been caused bythe previous removal from these cabinets of many eth-nographic materials likely to be sources; also, thearchaeological materials did not appear to be heavilypigmented. Previous surface wipe testing by OSHEMin vertebrate zoology collections had confirmed thepresence of mercury on collections and in storage cabi-nets. However, the non-detected ambient levels in thisstudy may suggest that the applied mercury had chemi-cally bonded to cysteine in specimens, thereby prevent-ing volatilization (Edsall and Wyman ).

. TO- DATA

Forty VOC of the possible sixty-two in the TO-Compendium Method Analyte List were detected inthe cabinets, in parts per billion by volume concen-trations (ppb). However, not all of these VOCs weredetected in every sample set. Data are presented inTable , with the detected results in bold. The highestconcentrations detected were acetone (– ppb),ethanol (– ppb), isopropanol (.– ppb) andpesticide treatments known to have been applied routi-nely throughout these collections: naphthalene (.– ppb), PDB (– ppb), and the mixture ofcarbon tetrachloride (.–. ppb) and ethylenedichloride (.– ppb).The TO- Method can quantify target com-

pounds whose identity can be confirmed against a soft-ware library of over , GC-MS knownstandards. Chemicals observed in the analysis, but noton the “Target Compound List” are referred to asunknown compounds. When this library is searchedfor an unknown compound, it can frequently providea Tentatively Identified Compound (TIC), althoughthe reported concentrations and identity are alwaysan estimate (USEPA ). However, we requestedthe additional TIC results from our analytical labora-tory (Table ) in order to enhance potential future

analyses of possible contaminant sources in thestorage environments as well as possible future healthsurveys by industrial hygienists. For instance, it is inter-esting to note that while aldehydes are not on theTO- Target Compound List, “aldehydes” (expectedfrom wood products) were tentatively identified in allcabinets. The TIC uncertainty factor suggests thatactual concentrations inside the cabinets could behigher than reported, further justifying the museum’sconcern over accumulated contaminants.Data were not significantly different between empty

and filled cabinets in any department. It is not clearwhether specimens/objects have equilibrated to thecabinet environment or the cabinets themselves havereached a state of stasis in terms of vapor accumulationeither inherent (to the cabinet) or acquired from anysource. The age of the cabinets and their past usesseem to have had little discernable impact on thisfinding.Although ambient point source concentrations

cannot directly be compared to established occu-pational health exposure levels (OELs), it is useful tonote that concentrations inside the cabinets were to over times less than their respective OELs(Table ). The only red flag was the detection of ethyl-ene dibromide in all tested vertebrate zoology cabinets,even those that were empty. Both ethylene dibromideand methyl bromide were reportedly used at NMNHin the past, although written documentation is lacking(Goldberg ). Bromide fumigants are listed as oneof the required/approved treatments by the USCustoms and Border Protection for wood packagingmaterials entering the country (USCBP ) and bythe US Department of Agriculture (USDA ); it isunknown if these were the sources of this chemical.The concentrations detected (.–. ppb) werelow as compared with the NIOSH RecommendedExposure Level of . ppb (NIOSH ).However, ethylene dibromide is highly toxic, with ashort-term maximum allowable exposure level of ppb. Further exposure monitoring should occurwhen these cabinets are accessed in the future.

. PERSONAL EXPOSURE DATA

Analytical results for the personal samples reportedconcentrations less than the limit of quantitation(LOQ) (i.e., non-detected in the inhalation breathingzone of the workers) for the six specific chemicalsstudied (Table ). Notably, the LOQ data points them-selves were less than -% of the chemical agents’respective OELs (including the not-to-be exceededceiling concentration for ethylene chlorohydrin). TheTO- Method did detect PDB, ethylene dichloride,carbon tetrachloride and naphthalene within cabinetinteriors (Table ); however personal sample data

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDE STORAGE CABINETS

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

TABLE ANALYTE CONCENTRATIONS (PPB BY VOLUME) IN CASE INTERIORS MEASURED BY USEPA COMPENDIUM METHOD TO-, COMPARED TO THRESHOLD LIMITVALUES (TLV) AND MAXIMUM SHORT-TERM EXPOSURE LEVELS. SAMPLES COLLECTED -- THROUGH --

Mammals Cases Anthropology Cases

Empty

Filledw/SpeciallyTreated

Collections Filled

w/Collections

Empty

OfficeStorage

Filledw/Collections

ACGIH TLV inppb

MaxShort-TermExposureLevel

≤ Less than analytical detection limit

Acetone − ◊ ,Benzene + ◊ * . . . . . .

Bromomethane (methyl bromide) ◊ . < . . <. <. <.

-Butanone (MEK) +− . . . <. . <. , ,Carbon Tetrachloride ◊ . . . . . . ,Chloroform * + . . . . . <. ,Chloromethane (methyl chloride) * . . . . . . , ,Cyclohexane +− . . . <. . <. ,,-Dibromoethane (ethylenedibromide) * ◊

. . . <. <. <. NIOSH limit: NIOSH limit:

,-Dichlorobenzene (ortho) ◊ . . . . <. . , ,,-Dichlorobenzene (meta) ◊ . <. <. <. <. <. (Not established),-Dichlorobenzene (para) (PDB) ◊ ,Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon ) *+

. . . . . . ,,

,-Dichloroethane (ethylenedichloride) ◊

. . . ,

,-Dichloropropane (propylenedichloride) *

. . . <. . <. ,

,-Dioxane +− ◊ . <. <. <. <. <. ,Ethanol ◊ ,,Ethyl Acetate +− ◊ ▪ . . . . . <. ,Ethylbenzene + . . . . . . ,-Ethyltoluene +− . . . <. . <. (Not established)Heptane + ◊ . . . . . . , ,-Hexanone (MBK) . . . . . . ,

Continued

REBECCA

A.KACZKOW

SKIET

AL.

Journalofthe

American

Institutefor

Conservation

,V

ol.No.

,–

TABLE CONTINUED

Mammals Cases Anthropology Cases

Empty

Filledw/SpeciallyTreated

Collections Filled

w/Collections

Empty

OfficeStorage

Filledw/Collections

ACGIH TLV inppb

MaxShort-TermExposureLevel

Isopropanol + ◊ . . . , ,Methylene Chloride − ◊ . . . <. . . , ,-Methyl--pentanone (MIBK) + . . . . . . , ,Naphthalene ◊ . . . .

Styrene +− . . . . . . , ,Tetrachloroethylene * . . . <. . . , ,Tetrahydrofuran − . . . . . . , ,Toluene + ◊ . . . . . . ,,,-Trichlorobenzene * . . . <. <. <. Ceiling

Limit,,-Trichloroethane (methylchloroform) * −

<. . . <. <. <. , ,

,,-Trichloroethane − . . . <. <. <. ,Trichloroethylene ◊ . . . <. <. <. , ,Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon ) * + . . . . . . (Not established),,-Trichloro-,,-trifluoroethane(Freon ) * +

. . . . . . ,,

,,-Trimethylbenzene * . . . . . , for mixedisomers

,,-Trimethylbenzene . . . <. . <.m- and p-Xylene +− ◊ . . . . . . , for

mixed isomerso-Xylene +− ◊ . . . . . .

Possible origins of analytes occurring in storage cabinets*Outdoor Environment (Windholtz et al. ; Lloyd ; Hatchfield ; TRI-Listed Chemicals ).+Indoor Environment (housekeeping, mechanical system, and/or building construction materials) (Windholtz et al. ; Hatchfield ; USEPA ; Curran and Strlic ).−Storage Materials (housings, supports, office materials (paper, photographs, film), and/or cabinet construction materials) (Windholtz et al. ; Nishimura ; Hatchfield ;Curran and Strlic ).◊Museum-Applied Treatments (preparation, pest mitigation, and/or conservation) (Windholtz et al. ; Williams and Hawks ; Duckworth et al. ; Pool et al. ).▪Specimen/Object/Label (Williams and Hawks ).

INVEST

IGATIO

NOFRESID

UAL

CONTAMIN

ATIO

NIN

SIDE

STORAGE

CABIN

ETS

Journalofthe

American

Institutefor

Conservation

,V

ol.No.

,–

TABLE TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUND CONCENTRATIONS (PPB BY VOLUME) IN CASE INTERIORS MEASURED BY USEPA COMPENDIUM METHOD TO-. SAMPLES

COLLECTED -- THROUGH --

Mammals Cases Anthropology Cases

Empty Filled w/Specially Treated Collections Filled

w/ Collections Empty Office Storage Filled

w/ Collections

Acetaldehyde * . . .Acetic acid, ,-dimethylethyl ester +− . .Benzene, ,,-trimethyl- +

Benzene, ,,,-tetramethyl-

Benzene, ,-diethyl- +

Benzene, -methyl--(-methylethyl)

Benzene, -methyl--propyl-

Benzene, -methyl--propyl-

Benzene, -ethyl-,-dimethyl-

Benzaldehyde + . . . .Butanal * + . . . . .Butanal, -methyl- * .Butane * + . . .-Butanol * − . . .-Carene +− ◊ ▪ . .Decane

Ethane, ,-difluoro − * ◊ . .Furan, -pentyl- +− .Furfural − . . .-Heptanone . . .Hexanal . . . . .-Hexanol, -ethyl- .d-Limonene + . . . . .Nonanal . .-Nonanone + .Octanal . . .Pentanal . .

Continued

REBECCA

A.KACZKOW

SKIET

AL.

Journalofthe

American

Institutefor

Conservation

,V

ol.No.

,–

TABLE CONTINUED

Mammals Cases Anthropology Cases

Empty Filled w/Specially Treated Collections Filled

w/ Collections Empty Office Storage Filled

w/ Collections

Pentane + . .-Pentanol + . .-Pentene + .a-Pinene + . . .

Possible origins of analytes occurring in storage cabinets*Outdoor Environment (Committee on Aldehydes and Board on Toxicology and Environmental Health Hazards ; TRI-Listed Chemicals ).+Indoor Environment (housekeeping, mechanical system, and/or building construction materials) (Committee on Aldehydes and Board on Toxicology and Environmental HealthHazards ; Windholtz et al. ; Hatchfield ; Rossol ).−Storage Materials (housings, supports, office materials (paper, photographs, film), and/or cabinet construction materials) (Windholtz et al. ; Nishimura ; Hatchfield; Curran and Strlic ).◊Museum-Applied Treatments (preparation, pest mitigation, and/or conservation) (Windholtz et al. ; Pool et al. ).▪Specimen/Object/Label (Windholtz et al. ; Williams and Hawks ).

INVEST

IGATIO

NOFRESID

UAL

CONTAMIN

ATIO

NIN

SIDE

STORAGE

CABIN

ETS

Journalofthe

American

Institutefor

Conservation

,V

ol.No.

,–

TABLE PERSONAL EXPOSURE SAMPLE RESULTS FROM CASE ACCESS WORK TASKS, COMPARED TO THRESHOLD LIMIT VALUES (TLV)

p-Dichlorobenzene Ethylene DichlorideCarbon

TetrachlorideEthylene

Chlorohydrin DDVP Naphthalene

SampleDate Staff Work Task

Sample +Exposure time

(minutes)ppm

Detected TWA-ppmppm

DetectedTWA-ppm

ppmDetected TWA-ppm

ppmDetected TWA-ppm

mg/m

DetectedTWAmg/m

ppmDetected TWA-ppm

IPM Inspection: Dept. of Vertebrate Zoology, Divof Birds

-- Inspecting skins <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

-- Inspecting skins <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

-- Inspecting skins <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

-- Inspecting skins <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

-- Inspecting skins,skeletons

<LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

-- Inspecting skins,skeletons

<LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

Staff conducting ambient sampling of cases interiors

-- VZ Mammals specially treated cases

<LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

-- VZ Mammals rdfloor Collection-filledcases

<LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

-- Anthropology rdfloor Main filled cases

<LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<. <LOQ.

<.

American Conference of Governmental IndustrialHygienists (ACGIH-) TLV TWA

. ppm . ppm . ppm . ppmCeiling

. mg/m

. ppm

TWA= calculated -hour time-weighted average based on concentration detected during exposure time; <LOQ = less than the analytical limit of quantitation; mg/m =milligrams per cubic meter of air; DDVP (Dichlorvos) = ,-Dimethyldichlorovinyl phosphate.

REBECCA

A.KACZKOW

SKIET

AL.

Journalofthe

American

Institutefor

Conservation

,V

ol.No.

,–

suggests cabinet access work does not pose exposurerisk. Ethylene chlorohydrin and DDVP were not partof the TO- Analyte List.Personal samples are meant to represent actual body

exposure, as averaged over a total work day, reflectingwork task frequency and duration, break times, andcontrol measures taken by the worker to limit exposure.Each staff member sampled was employing museumsafe work practices, minimizing time spent in front ofopen cabinets, and wearing personal protective equip-ment during all of the tasks surveyed. Therefore, thepersonal exposure data suggests that using riskcontrol measures can be effective in significantly lower-ing potential health risk from working with collectionsand cabinets known to be contaminated with past treat-ment chemicals. It is important to caution that naphtha-lene and PDB are reasonably anticipated to be humancarcinogens by the US National Toxicology Program(USDHHS ); therefore continued vigilance inimplementing safe work practice and other exposurecontrol measures is extremely important.Table reports the data in two columns per chemi-

cal: the actual concentration detected, and the -hourTWA calculated by multiplying that concentration bythe sample time (which were also the actual work/exposure times within the collection on those days)divided by minutes. The non-exposure timeduring each of those sample days was time confirmedto be spent in offices or other space without potentialfor contaminant exposure. These TWA concentrationsare then compared to the established OELs to standar-dize the evaluation of potential health risk. The OELsused in this survey were the ACGIH TLVs ().

. POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CHEMICALS

Possible sources of these chemicals are not only thespecimen/objects and the cabinets themselves but alsobuilding systems (e.g., freons), wood/wood productdegradation in the building, finishes such as varnishesand paints, deterioration of synthetic polymers, andcleaning compounds used in housekeeping (Hatchfield; Grzywacz , Curran and Strlic ).According to the USEPA compiled source ofindoor air studies from to , the VOCs mostcommonly detected in indoor air are due to backgroundsources (i.e., naturally occurring, environmental pollu-tants from man-made materials, or industrial/commer-cial sources). These include: benzene, toluene,ethylbenzene, xylenes, chlorinated solvents such aschloroform, carbon tetrachloride, tetrachloroethylene,,,-trichloroethane and trichloroethylene. All thesechemicals, also used as collection pesticide treatments,were detected in the TO- in-cabinet monitoring inthis study, suggesting that indoor background air mayhave contributed to the data results.

However, a comparison of the personal exposureresults from the survey in VZ Mammals rd FloorCollection-filled cabinets (Table ) to correspondingTO- data collected at the same time (Table ,Mammals Cabinets, filled with collections)revealed that both PDB and ethylene dichloride concen-trations within the cabinets (. ppm and .ppm) were higher than the TWA for those two agentson personal samples (less than . ppm and lessthan . ppm respectively). The personal sampleswould have been capturing these VOCs from both theopened cabinet and the background indoor air in thehallways. This indicates that the source of these twocommonly used pesticide treatment chemicals wasfrom the cabinet interiors and not from background air.Further investigation to more precisely determine

whether the primary source of collection storage areacontaminants was the cabinet or the VOCs in thegeneral air circulation system could include stationarysampling both in front of opened cabinets and at thereturn air registers for the space. If the data at the cabinetfronts are significantly greater than at the return air reg-ister, then the primary source would be the cabinet asthis air is then diluted over distance to the return airduct. Concurrent outdoor air sampling on the roof atair intakes might also provide a background profile;however this data may easily be skewed on any singleday by unanticipated and spiked air inversions and adja-cent intermittent point sources like chemical exhauststacks. Environmental pollutant sources are also dis-cussed in Hatchfield (), Publicly Accessible Stan-dard (PAS ), and ASHRAE ().

. POTENTIAL IMPACT ON COLLECTIONS

With the significant exception of methyl bromide, thelife safety issuesdiscovered in themonitoringwereminimalper current OELs. However, while human health is notpermanently impacted in most cases from exposures atvery minimal levels in the parts per million (ppm) range,collections have no recuperative powers. As a conse-quence, contaminants that threaten preservation are bestcorrelated to ppb (Grzywacz ; ASHRAE ).This suggests that many of the compounds detected inthis study could pose risks to collections if they can inter-fere with either long-term preservation or the researchutility of the specimens or objects.Visual and monitoring evidence suggest that both

PDB- and naphthalene-treated specimens retain thesechemicals in lipids. The chemicals tend to recrystallizein deposits of unsaturated fats on the surface of bone,recrystallize elsewhere on or in proteinaceous speci-mens, and appear to increase the mobility of some unsa-turated fats. Research suggests that certain fumigantsdo not negatively impact DNA in the short term(Kigawa et al. ), but long-term ramifications of,

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDE STORAGE CABINETS

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

for example, PDB and naphthalene on material deterio-ration requires research.

. SUMMARY

While the Museum knew prior to the study that vola-tiles would be present, the specific chemicals andtheir concentrations were unknown. This study wasnecessary to accomplish that identification. Bothindustrial hygienists and museum collection staffwere needed to determine the types of analyses andthe target cabinets. Surprisingly to the team, the per-sonal exposure sampling results did not indicate asignificant health risk. The TO- point sampleresults also were significantly lower than establishedOELs, although concentrations of ethylene dichlor-ide, PDB, and carbon tetrachloride were elevatedversus EPA background levels, suggesting thesource was within the cabinets.

Overall, the ppb concentrations of all the VOCsidentified inside the cabinets were sufficient to raisecollection care concerns. The fact that any concen-tration of these VOCs was detected in permanentstorage of collections suggests that there is a potentialfor long-term impact on collection care (Table ). Thiswas a driving factor in accelerated decisions forremoving and replacing cabinets, knowing thatfurther reduction of any potential health risks wouldalso result.

. RISK CONTROL DECISIONS

The stakeholders, each slightly biased toward theirdepartment’s goals, met to discuss the implications ofthe results upon their individual program needs. Thiswas a benefit not a hindrance to the entire decision-making process. The group agreed on collaborativebalance from the outset.

The data suggested that even empty wooden cabinetsretain or off-gas a significant number of chemicals,some highly toxic. The industrial hygienist on theteam argued that while the calculated exposure riskfrom these chemicals appears to be low, and safework practices are designed to further protect staff,further mitigation of unnecessary hazard sources isboth legally and ethically prudent. The museum safetymanager noted that empty cabinets still retained con-taminant odors which, regardless of low concen-trations, resulted in employee indoor air qualitycomplaints. He also stated that excess storage ofempty wood cabinets without fire-retardant treatmentsincreased the museum’s fire-hazard load. Both themuseum’s hazardous waste coordinator and facilitymanager noted that flaking lead-based paint from thewood-core cabinets posed an environmental problem,a hazardous waste disposal expense, and necessitated

special floor cleaning precautions by a speciallytrained labor crew. The greatest impact of the study’sresults was the need to effectively revise theMuseum’s cabinet replacement plan, a major part ofits collection care program, in light of quantitativedata, as well as update the Smithsonian SafetyManual to provide further guidance on collection-based hazards and disposal of collection storage cabi-nets with hazardous material components (SmithsonianInstitution ).

The team agreed that the condition of all the objectsand specimens involved in this study could be nega-tively impacted by the number and concentrations ofthe chemicals detected in the cabinet interiors. Rehous-ing collections into metal cabinets tailored to specificobject or specimen types would alleviate many ofthese concerns. Up to this point, cabinet replacementsequencing generally was planned together with themuseum’s building renovation schedule, unless therewas a distinctly imperative reason to do otherwise.Anthropology and vertebrate zoology collections wereparticularly impacted by this plan, as their departmen-tal areas were not scheduled for building renovationand new storage environments for many years. Themuseum re-prioritized its cabinet replacement sequen-cing, and these departments obtained funding to expe-dite collection rehousing in newer and moreappropriate storage cabinets off-site at the Smithso-nian’s Museum Support Center or onsite at the mainNMNH building on the National Mall. Facility man-agers agreed to develop new material handling plansto meet the needs of this expedited additional cabinetdisposal and replacement.

The study underscored the need to rid the museum ofwood-framed cabinets in current use for any reason andrehouse collections into appropriately designed metalcabinets. In intervening years, cost-benefit analyseshave led the administration to consistently increaseannual funding for cabinet replacement. Additionally,the prioritized cabinet replacement plan has made theNMNH more competitive for in-house Smithsoniangrant opportunities, such as the Collections Care andPreservation Fund administered by the National Collec-tions Program.

Although not an ideal collections storage space dueto environmental and security controls, the corridoraround the fourth floor of the Rotunda of the Mallbuilding have served in this capacity as the collectionsgrew larger than could be accommodated in collectionstorage areas. The Assistant Director for Building Oper-ations informed relevant departments that all old cabi-nets would be removed from these areas, which resultedin the rehousing of those collections into more appro-priate cabinets and locations.

It is financially and logistically impractical to replaceseveral thousand old cabinets at once. Even with

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI ET AL.

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

expedited and re-prioritized cabinet replacement sche-dules, various interim engineering or barrier controloptions are necessary for minimizing risks to collectionsstored in lower priority wooden cabinets. The nature ofthe building as a storage facility is fraught with the chal-lenges of many historic buildings. The size of the build-ing is insufficient for the scope of the collection, whichhas resulted in storage overflow into corridors andother locations with less-than-ideal environmental con-ditions and security protocols.Pollutant scavenger techniques are not currently used

in the old cabinets, but testing of a potentially usefulproduct is underway through a technology transferprogram with the National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration as a possible interim solution forinstances in which cabinet replacement is expected totake several years.

. HAZARD COMMUNICATION AND SAFE WORK

PRACTICES

The data suggest that occupational exposures werelow to non-detectable for routine collection care tasksinvolving cabinet access. Collection managers couldrelay these results to staff, allaying concerns, whilealso using the study as a means to iterate themuseum’s continued commitment to safe work prac-tices, per the Smithsonian Institution Safety andHealth Program policy (SD ) (Smithsonian Insti-tution ). Staff exposures should always be con-trolled through a continuing health managementprogram. The full team of stakeholders had an activepart in funding, implementing, training, and promotingthe additional safety efforts as a measure of prudentpractice.Each department has ready access to a

HEPA-filtered vacuum to be used to clean drawersor cabinet interiors if evidence exists for residualhazardous particulates. Collection managers nowplan resource-saving ways to include HEPA-vacuumuse during other curation, pest management, orsurvey tasks. An OSHEM Occupational HealthNurse assisted the museum conservator to develophazard warning signage, which the CollectionsProgram funded for printing and placement through-out all departments (fig. ). In addition, disposablenitrile glove stations were also provided through thisfunding in all collection storage areas. Each depart-ment was reminded to update and provide hazardcommunication training and fact sheets on the poss-ible hazards of collections and storage furniture tostaff, interns, new employees, contractors, docents,and visiting researchers (OSHA a). Best practicetraining also includes instruction to minimize thetime spent directly in front of an open cabinet, par-ticularly if in doubt about chemical residues.

. CONCLUSION

Those who care for collections are responsible forensuring the utility of these resources for present andfuture generations. Past treatments, detritus from build-ing materials or old storage materials, pollutants fromambient building environments, and inherent hazardsin collections result in residues that can pose risks tothose handling collections as well as to the long-termutility of the collection for research, exhibition, orother uses (Goldberg ; Hawks ; Makos; Pool ; Odegaard et al. ; Cross andOdegaard ; Simmons ).Providing a safe environment for staff, researchers, and

visitors, as well as collections is critical and a universalresponsibility across museum disciplines. However, iden-tifying where collections, human health, and safety risksintersect can be challenging (Hawks and Waller ).Indeed, an instance where a staff member discovers acollection-based hazard can valuably inform health andsafety protocols. Conversely, a question raised in amuseum related to potential health concerns can havean impact on collection care initiatives. Gathering stake-holders from various backgrounds and specialties fromthe outset is critical for identification of all risks associ-ated with a particular scenario.Successfully integrating health and safety evaluations

into collections care protocols involves assistance fromvaried disciplines, such as industrial hygiene,

FIG. . Example of improved hazard communication signswithin collection storage ranges and new glove stations toencourage their use.

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDE STORAGE CABINETS

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

occupational safety, health physics, fire protection,occupational medicine and environmental science.Resources directed at managing risk to workers can(with good planning) be consistent with the cost andeffort expended toward managing risk to the collections(Hawks et al. ).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are especially grateful to Anne Kingery-Schwartzand Kerith Koss Schrager, Conservators and Co-Chairs AICHealth and Safety Committee, and to Lisa Goldberg, Conser-vator in Private Practice, for their input and review of thismanuscript.

The authors are also appreciative of the assistance and con-tributions of the following colleagues: Rudy Anderson,NMNH Safety Manager; Laurie Burgess, Associate Chair,NMNH Department of Anthropology; Carol Butler, Assist-ant Director for Collections, NMNH; Jerome Conlon,Program Manager, NMNH Facilities Operations; RebeccaJahandari, COHN, OSHEM; John Lagundo, NMNH FacilityManager, OFEO; Darrin Lunde, Collection Manager,NMNHDivision ofMammals; Hayes Robinson III, AssociateDirector for Environmental Management, OSHEM; AndrewTeague, CIH, Technical Laboratory Director, Analytics Cor-poration; Chun-Hsi Wong, Assistant Director for Operations,NMNH; and the many contract collection technicians whohelped with the personal monitoring.

APPENDIX

Environmental, Safety, and Health Technical Resources• In North America, art galleries, natural science museums, or

historical parks managed by governmental agencies, such asthe US Department of Interior or the Smithsonian Insti-tution, will have risk management staff.

• Collecting departments and on-site museums affiliated withan academic institution (e.g., state universities) will haveaccess to health and safety staff for monitoring, controls,and training.

• Public health and safety regulatory agencies in countriesaround the world also offer complete program developmentand worker training resources: US Occupational Safety andHealth Administration (OSHA) and National Institute forOccupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the CanadianCentre for Occupational Health and Safety, and the UKHealth and Safety Executive. Some services may be avail-able at little or no cost, such as local fire departments andcounty environmental protection offices.

• Facilities in the US may qualify for free OSHA (b) On-Site Consultation assistance for program development,exposure sampling, and training. These resources shouldbe consulted before beginning work with unfamiliarmaterials and conditions.

Professional organizations world-wide, with technical infor-mation and listings for consultants, experts and clinicians,include:International Network of Safety and Health PractitionerOrganizations www.inshpo.org/index.php

Occupational SafetyAmerican Society of Safety Engineers. www.asse.org/US National Safety Council. www.nsc.org/UK Institution of Occupational Safety and Health. http://iosh.co.uk/Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals. www.bcrsp.ca/

Fire ProtectionNational Fire Protection Association. www.nfpa.org/Society of Fire Protection Engineers. www.sfpe.org/

Industrial/Occupational HygieneAmerican Industrial Hygiene Association. www.aiha.org/International Occupational Hygiene Association. www.ohlearning.com/Canadian Registration Board of Occupational Hygienists.www.crboh.ca/

Radiation SafetyHealth Physics Society www.hps.org/

Occupational Medicine Clinics and PractitionersAmerican College of Occupational and Environmental Medi-cine. www.acoem.org/Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics.www.aoec.org/

ORCID

Rebecca A. Kaczkowski http://orcid.org/---Kathryn A. Makos http://orcid.org/---XCatharine Hawks http://orcid.org/---

REFERENCES

ACGIH (American Conference of Governmental IndustrialHygienists). . TLVs and BEIs based on documen-tation of the threshold limit values for chemical sub-stances and physical agents and biological exposureindices. Cincinnati: ACGIH.

ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating andAir-Conditioning Engineers). . Museums, galleries,archives, and libraries. In ASHRAE handbook-HVACapplications. Atlanta: ASHRAE, Inc.

Committee on Aldehydes and Board on Toxicology andEnvironmental Health Hazards. . Formaldehyde andother aldehydes.Washington,DC:National Academy Press.

Cross, P. S., and N. Odegaard. . The inherent levels ofarsenic and mercury in artifact materials. CollectionForum (–): –.

Curran, K., andM. Strlic. . Polymers and volatiles: UsingVOC analysis for the conservation of plastic and rubberobjects. Studies in Conservation (): –.

Dietrich, D. F. . Sampling of gases and vapors. In Theoccupational environment: Its evaluation and control,ed. S. R. DiNardi. Fairfax, VA: AIHA Press. –.

Duckworth, W. D., H. H. Genoways, and C. L. Rose. .Preserving natural science collections: Chronicle of our

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI ET AL.

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

environmental heritage. Washington, DC: NationalInstitute for the Conservation of Cultural Property.

Edsall, J. T., and J. Wyman. . Biophysical chemistryvolume : Thermodynamics, electrostatics, and the bio-logical significance of the properties of matter.New York: Academic Press.

Goldberg, L. . A history of pest control measures in theanthropology collections, National Museum of NaturalHistory, Smithsonian Institution. Journal of theAmerican Institute for Conservation : –.

Gribovich, A., S. Lacey, J. Franke, and D. Hinkamp. .Assessment of arsenic surface contamination in a museumanthropology department. Journal of Occupational andEnvironmental Medicine (): –.

Grzywacz, C. . Monitoring for gaseous pollutants inmuseum environments. Los Angeles: Getty ConservationInstitute.

Hatchfield, P. B. . Pollutants in the museum environ-ment: Practical strategies for problem solving in design,exhibition and storage. London: Archetype Publications.

Hawks, C. . Conservation considerations in recentmammal collections. In Management of mammal collec-tion in tropical environment: Proceedings of the workshopon management of mammal collection in tropical environ-ment, Calcutta, India, th-th January, , ed. B. K.Tikader. Calcutta: Technical and General Press. –.

Hawks, C. . Historical survey of the sources of contami-nation of ethnographic materials in museum collections.Collection Forum (–): –.

Hawks, C., and D. Bell. . Removal of stains caused bymercuric chloride treatments from herbarium sheetlabels. In ICOM Committee for Conservation preprints.th triennial meeting, Lyon. Paris: ICOM. –.

Hawks,C., andK.Makos.. Inherent andacquiredhazardsin museum objects: Implications for care and use of collec-tions. Cultural Resource Management (): –.

Hawks, C., K. Makos, D. Bell, P. Wambach, and G.Burroughs. . An inexpensive method to test formercury vapor in herbarium collections. Taxon ():–.

Hawks, C., M. McCann, K. Makos, L. Goldberg, D.Hinkamp, D. Ertel, Jr., and P. Silence, eds. . Healthand safety for museum professionals. New York: Societyfor the Preservation of Natural History Collections.

Hawks, C., and R. Waller. . A tale of two systems:Synergy in managing risks to people and collections.Collections: A Journal for Museum and ArchivesProfessionals (): –.

Jackson, H. H. T. . The care of museum specimens ofrecent mammals. Journal of Mammalogy (): –.

Kigawa, R., T. Strang, N. Hayakawa, Y. Naoto, H. Kimura,and G. Young. . Investigation of effects of fumigantson proteinaceous components of museum objects (muscle,animal glue and silk) in comparison with other non-chemical pest eradicating measures. Studies inConservation (): –.

Lloyd, A. C. . California’s approach to air quality man-agement. In Issues in environmental science and technol-ogy, Volume : Air quality management, ed. R. E.Hester and R. M. Harrison. Cambridge, UK: The RoyalSociety of Chemistry. –.

Makos, K. A. . Hazard identification and exposureassessment related to handling and use of contaminatedcollection materials and sacred objects. CollectionForum (–): –.

Makos, K., and C. Hawks. . Collateral damage:Unintended consequences of vapor-phase organic pesticides,with emphasis on p-dichlorobenzene and naphthalene.MuseumPests : IPM for museums, libraries, archivesand historic sites. Williamsburg, VA. http://museumpests.net/wp-content/uploads///--Hawks-and-Makos-paper-formatted.pdf. (accessed //).

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety andHealth). . Methods (Hydrocarbon,Halogenated), (Hydrocarbons, Aromatic), (Ethylene Chlorohydrin) NIOSH Manual of AnalyticalMethods, th ed. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication -(August, ), rd Supplement -. www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/-/ (accessed //).

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety andHealth). . Ethylene dibromide. In NIOSH PocketGuide to Chemical Hazards. February , . www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd.html (accessed //).

Nishimura, D. W. . Film supports: Negatives, transpar-encies, microforms, and motion picture film. In Storageof natural history collections: A preventive conservationapproach, ed. C. L. Rose, C. A. Hawks, and H. H.Genoways. New York: Society for the Preservation ofNatural History Collections. –.

Odegaard,N.,D.R. Smith, L.V. Boyer, and J. Anderson..Use of handheld XRF for the study of pesticide residues onmuseum objects. Collection Forum (–): –.

Ormsby, M., S. Johnson, S. Heald, L. Chang, and J.Bosworth. . Investigation of solid phase microextrac-tion sampling for organic pesticide residues on museumcollections. Collection Forum (–): –.

OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration).. OSHA Sampling and Analytical Method forChlorpyrifos (Dursban), DDVP (Dichlorvos), Diazinon,Malathion, Parathion. www.osha.gov/dts/sltc/methods/organic/org/org.html (accessed //).

OSHA(Occupational SafetyandHealthAdministration).a.Hazard Communication Standard CFR..www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=standards&p_id= (accessed //).

OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration).b. On-Site Consultation Program. www.osha.gov/dcsp/smallbusiness/consult.html (accessed //).

PAS (Publicly Accessible Standard) : . Specificationfor managing environmental conditions for cultural col-lections. London: British Standards Institute, StandardsLimited.

Pool, M. A. . Health and safety technical resources onpesticides for the conservator. AIC News (): sup. –.

Pool, M. A., N. Odegaard, andM. J. Huber. . Identifyingthe pesticides: Pesticide names, classification, and historyof use. In Old poisons, new problems, ed. N. Odegaardand A. Sadongei. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.–.

Rossol, M. . Pick your poison: How our mad dash tochemical utopia is making lab rats of us all. Hoboken,NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDE STORAGE CABINETS

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

Simmons, J. E. . Collections management. In Health andsafety for museum professionals, ed. C. Hawks, M.McCann, K. Makos, L. Goldberg, D. Hinkamp, D.Ertel, Jr., and P. Silence, New York: Society for thePreservation of Natural History Collections. –.

Smithsonian Institution. . Smithsonian directive (SD) Smithsonian Institution safety and health program.In-house policy document, Smithsonian Institution,Washington, DC. www.sifacilities.si.edu/OSHEM/doc/SD.pdf (accessed //).

Smithsonian Institution. . Collection-based hazards. InSmithsonian Institution safety manual. www.ofeo.si.edu/safety_health/Safety_manual/safety_manual_toc.asp(accessed //).

Todd, L. A. . Direct-reading instrumental methods forgases, vapors, and aerosols. In The occupational environ-ment: Its evaluation and control, ed. S. R. DiNardi.Fairfax, VA: AIHA Press. –.

Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)-Listed Chemicals. .Toxic Release Inventory Program. USEPA (U.S.Environmental Protection Agency). www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program/tri-listed-chemicals(accessed //).

USCBP (US Customs and Border Protection). .Frequently asked questions on wood packaging materials.www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/wpm_faq_.pdf (accessed //).

USDA (US Department of Agriculture). . Section fumi-gants–methyl bromide. In Treatment Manual. .www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/ports/downloads/treatment.pdf (accessed //).

USDHHS (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services).. National Toxicology Program th Report onCarcinogens. ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/roc/index-.html (accessed //).

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). .Compendium Method TO- Determination of volatileorganic compounds (VOCs) in air collected in specially-prepared canisters and analyzed by gas chromato-graphy/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). In Compendium ofmethods for the determination of toxic organic com-pounds in ambient air second edition. EPA//R-/b. Cincinnati: USEPA. .

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). .Region III Quality Assurance Team Revision No.:.

TIC Frequently Asked Questions, Date: February ,. Tentatively Identified Compounds: What arethey and why are they important? www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/-/documents/tics.pdf (accessed//).

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). .Background indoor air concentrations of volatileorganic compounds in North American residences(–): A compilation of statistics for assessingvapor intrusion. H. Dawson. U.S. EPA Report No. -R--. Washington, DC: Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response, U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency.

Williams, S., and C. Hawks. . A history of materialsused in the preparation of recent mammal collections.In Mammal collection management, ed. H.Genoways, C. Jones, and O. Rossolimo. Lubbock:Texas Tech Press. –.

Williams, S., C. Hawks, and S. Weber. . Considerationsin the use of DDVP resin strips for insect pest control inbiological research collections. In Biodeterioration , ed.S. Barry and D. Houghton. London: CAB InternationalMycological Institute and the Biodeterioration Society.–.

Windholz, M., S. Budavari, R. F. Blumetti, and E. S.Otterbein, eds. . The Merck index: An encyclopediaof chemicals, drugs, and biologicals. th ed. Rahway,NJ: Merck & Co., Inc.

SOURCES OF MATERIALS

Analytics Corporation Stony Run Ln.Ashland, VA , USATel: () -www.analyticscorp.com

Con-Test Analytical Laboratory Spruce St.East Longmeadow, MA , USATel: () -www.contestlabs.com

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI is the preventive conservator at the Smithsonian’s Museum Conservation Institute (MCI),where she undertakes a variety of projects related to exhibit design,museum environments, the care and storage of col-lections, and collection care training initiatives. Prior to her current position,Rebeccawas engagedwith preventive andinterventive conservation initiatives at theSmithsonian’sNMNHas theSamuelH.KressFellowandhasalsodocumen-ted and treated awide range of historic artifacts and scientific specimens. She is a graduate of theWinterthur/Universityof Delaware Program in Art Conservation where she focused on objects conservation; she also holds a B.A. in arthistory and German language & literature and anM.A. in museum studies from The GeorgeWashington University.Address: Silver Hill Road, MRC , Suitland, MD . Email: kaczkowskir@si.edu.

KATHRYN A. MAKOS, a Certified Industrial Hygienist, recently retired from the Smithsonian Institution’s Office ofSafety, Health and Environmental Management, where she was responsible for developing health risk management

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI ET AL.

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

programs, conducting exposure risk assessments, and providing training to staff in collections care, research labora-tories, and shops. She has lectured and published widely on topics of hazards unique to museums and cultural insti-tutions. Ms. Makos holds a Masters of Public Health from the University of Illinois, and is currently a ResearchCollaborator with the NMNH. She was awarded an Honorary Membership by the American Institute for Conser-vation and is a former Chair of its Health and Safety Committee. Ms. Makos is also a member of the Society for thePreservation of Natural History Collections, the American Industrial Hygiene Association, and a co-editor forHealth and Safety for Museum Professionals. Address: Manorvale Court, Rockville, MD . Email:kamakos@verizon.net.

CATHARINE HAWKS is the museum conservator for the Smithsonian’s NMNH. She was in private practice for years,working with over institutional clients in the U.S. and abroad. At NMNH, she coordinates conservation servicesthroughout the museum, working with buildings management, collections, and exhibitions staff as well as health andsafety professionals. Ms. Hawks is a member of the George Washington University Museum Studies faculty,co-teaching two courses in preventive conservation. She has taught similar courses in Iraq, Taiwan, South Africa,and other countries as well as elsewhere in the U.S. She is a Fellow of the International Institute for Conservation,a Professional Associate and former member of the Board of Directors of the American Institute for Conservation,and served as co-editor for the text, Health and Safety for Museum Professionals. Address: NMNH, SmithsonianInstitution, MRC , PO Box , Washington, DC -, USA. Email: hawksc@si.edu.

MICHAEL HUNT is an industrial hygienist within the Smithsonian’s Office of Safety Health and Environmental Man-agement (OSHEM) Division. Some of his interests include assessing hazards posed to Museum staff and the generalpublic from collections, developing and evaluating methodologies to mitigate hazardous materials, and providingtechnical assistance on the management of asbestos and lead-containing materials. Michael is a Certified IndustrialHygienist (CIH) as established by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene (ABIH). Michael received aMaster’s ofScience in Industrial Hygiene from Purdue University in August . Address: Office of Safety, Health, andEnvironmental Management, Smithsonian Institution, Maryland Avenue, SW, MRC , Washington, DC, USA. Email: huntmi@si.edu.

Résumé - Les armoires fermées de rangement des collections recueillent les gaz toxiques émis soit par les objets, parles matériaux de construction du mobilier de réserve lors de leur dégradation, et/ou par les autres matériaux utilisésdans les réserves, particulièrement les produits du bois et de nombreux plastiques. Le remplacement des armoires aété l’un des aspects majeurs du programme de préservation des collections au Musée national d’histoire naturelle auSmithsonian Institution. Au fur et à mesure que les budgets le permettaient, le musée avait entrepris le remplacementde plus de armoires de rangement désuètes, avec structure intérieure et tiroirs en bois. Elles avaient contenu(jusqu’à leur remplacement pour certaines) des collections anthropologiques, zoologiques (des vertébrés), ainsi quedes papiers, livres et matériaux photographiques. Il était certain que le mobilier, comme son contenu, récent ouancien, avait reçu de nombreux traitements aux pesticides, et on présumait que ceux-ci avaient été adsorbés ouabsorbés par les matériaux constituant l’intérieur des armoires. Afin de comprendre le risque et de mieux organiserl’ordre de remplacement des vieilles armoires, l’administration du musée a demandé l’avis d’experts de la santé autravail, pour qu’ils analysent à la fois l’environnement intérieur des armoires et les risques pour la santé de quicon-que les utilisait. Quarante substances chimiques organiques volatiles ont ainsi été détectées en parties par milliard(ppm), suivant les règles de l’USEPA TO- Compendium Method (méthode de recueil TO- de l’Agence amér-icaine de protection de l’environnement). Ces données, ainsi que celles tirées des dispositifs de contrôle d’expositionpour les employés, demeuraient beaucoup moins élevées que les niveaux recommandés dans le cadre professionnel,indiquant que le travail en contact ou à proximité de ces armoires présentait un risque faible pour la santé. Enrevanche, la composition des produits chimiques identifiés présentait des risques pour les collections elles-mêmes,dans le cas d’un rangement prolongé dans ces armoires. Les résultats de cette étude ont permis de prioriser leremplacement des armoires dans le cadre de la mission de préservation à long terme des collections du musée.Traduit par Claire Cuyaubère et Bruno Pouliot.

Resumo -Os armários de armazenamento fechados tornam-se o repositório para vapores perigosos emitidos pelascolecções, pela deterioração dos materiais de construção dos mesmos e/ou pelos materiais de armazenamento dacolecção, especialmente, produtos de madeira e muitos plásticos. A substituição dos armários tem sido um dos fac-tores mais importantes do Programa de Manutenção das Colecções do Smithsonian´s National Museum of NaturalHistory (NMNH). Omuseu tinha assinalado que restavam mais de . antigos armários de armazenamento com

INVESTIGATION OF RESIDUAL CONTAMINATION INSIDE STORAGE CABINETS

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –

o interior em molduras de madeira e gavetas de madeira para arrumação ou para excedentes no caso de o financia-mento o permitir. Esses armários armazenaram ou continuaram a armazenar colecções antropológicas e zoológicasbem como papéis, livros e materiais fotográficos. Os armários e os seus conteúdos, passados ou presentes, são con-hecidos por terem sido expostos a vários tratamentos com pesticidas, muitos dos quais foram assumidos comotendo sido adsorvidos ou absorvidos pelos materiais no interior daqueles. Com o propósito de compreender orisco e de optimizar a substituição faseada dos antigos armários, a administração do museu procurou a experiênciade especialistas em segurança ambiental para analisar tanto o ambiente interior dos armários como os riscos para asaúde de quem tivesse acesso aos mesmos. Quarenta produtos químicos orgânicos voláteis foram detectados empartes por bilhão (ppb) dentro dos armários, usando o USEPA TO- Compendium Method. Tanto estesdados como a monitorização dos dados de exposição pessoal eram significativamente inferiores aos respectivos«Níveis de Exposição Ocupacional», o que sugere que o risco para a saúde humana era baixa em relação aoacesso a estes armários. No entanto, os produtos químicos identificados sugerem um risco para as próprias coleçõespelo uso contínuo dos armários. Com base nos resultados deste estudo, o museu pode priorizar armários para sub-stituir mantendo os objectivos do Programa de Manutenção das Colecções. Traduzido por Teresa Lança.char o ide

Resumen - Los gabinetes de almacenamientos cerrados se convierten en el repositorio de vapores peligrosos emiti-dos por las colecciones, deteriorando los materiales de construcción de las cajas, y/o los materiales de almacena-miento de las colecciones, especialmente los productos de madera y muchos plásticos. El reemplazo de losgabinetes ha sido un factor importante en el programa de cuidado de colecciones del Museo Smithsonian de HistoriaNatural (NMNH). El museo ha identificado más de , gabinetes de almacenamiento viejos con estructurainterior y gavetas de madera para desechar o identificar como excedente, dependiendo de la disponibilidad defondos. Estos mobiliarios han almacenado o continúan almacenando colecciones de antropología y zoología de ver-tebrados, así como también papeles, libros y materiales fotográficos. Es sabido que estos mobiliarios y sus conte-nidos en el pasado y en el presente, han sido sometidos a varios tratamientos con pesticidas, muchos de loscuales se presume se han adsorbido en, o han sido absorbidos por los materiales interiores de los gabinetes. Paraentender el riesgo y escalonar de la mejor manera un reemplazo de los gabinetes viejos, la administración delmuseo buscó a expertos en seguridad ambiental para analizar tanto el ambiente interior de los gabinetes comolos riesgos de salud por exposición de cualquier persona que acceda a los gabinetes. Cuarenta químicos orgánicosvolátiles fueron detectados en partes por billón (ppb) dentro de los gabinetes usando el Método de CompendioUSEPA TO-. Estos datos y los del monitoreo de exposición personal, fueron significativamente menores quelos respectivos Niveles de Exposición Ocupacional, sugiriendo que el riesgo a la salud humana al acceder a los gabi-netes era bajo. Sin embargo, los químicos identificados sugirieron un riesgo a las colecciones mismas por el uso con-tinuo de los gabinetes. Basado en los resultados de este estudio, el museo pudo establecer prioridades para elreemplazo de los gabinetes y así mismo fomentar los objetivos de cuidado de colecciones. Traducido por HildaAbreu de Utermolhen, revisado por María Esteva y Amparo Rueda.

REBECCA A. KACZKOWSKI ET AL.

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation , Vol. No. , –