Subject: Removing DDT powder
Penny Edmonds <pedmonds [at] mov__vic__gov__au> writes >The Museum of Victoria has recently identified the presence of DDT >powder on a pair of hide moccasins from North America... >Has anyone had experience in the handling and cleaning >of objects afflicted with such a powder? Preservation Services at the Australian Archives, National Office Canberra has had a number of recent experiences with toxic substances being found on archival material. When a particular government agency encountered an unknown white powder in a collection of old volumes, they engaged the services of the Occupational Health and Safety officer of the Australian National University. Mr Stephen Altree-William carried out testing and initiated a cleaning procedure for removal of DDT from the volumes. When the volumes were later transferred to the custody of the Australian Archives a small quantity of this pesticide remained. Mr. Altree-Williams was again consulted and on his advice the powder residue was removed by wiping with an acetone soaked cloth, by an officer wearing latex gloves and working in a fume hood. Removal of this trace quantity was not necessary from the point of view of toxicity but alleviated any further staff concerns by removing any visible traces of powder. Further detailed information on the original cleaning procedure can be obtained from a paper coauthored by Altree-William. "DDT Contamination in a Library Storeroom" Effective Occupational Hygiene Management Conference Proceeding 1993, Australian Institute of Occupational Hygienists. Another case we have dealt with recently arose when quantities of white powder were found on First World War file material held in the Australian Archives custody . This substance was tested by Mr Zyg Adamczyk of Australian Government Analytical Laboratories (AGAL). Ion Chromatography confirmed that the substance was Sodium Hexafluorosilicate and not DDT. Apparently sodium hexafluorosilicate did not represent a serious health risk in the small quantities in which it was found to occur on the files. However, it was felt to be prudent to treat the substance as toxic and to have it vacuumed off the files by staff working with latex gloves and using a fume hood. A Nilfilsk GM 80 vacuum (with a HEPA filter) for hazardous or fine dust was purchased and tested by AGAL to ensure that it collected the substance properly. High staff awareness and concern with this OH&S issue has meant many staff discussions and reports have been written. A standard procedure is in place for handling this material and appears to have minimised any potential hazards. If you would like further information I would be happy to provide it to you directly. Karen Caldwell Preservation Officer Preservation Services Australian Archives, National Office PO Box 34 Dickson ACT 2602 +61 6 209 3509 Fax: +61 6 241 7711 *** Conservation DistList Instance 9:33 Distributed: Tuesday, October 10, 1995 Message Id: cdl-9-33-001 ***Received on Tuesday, 10 October, 1995