The U.S. Chemical Safety Board () has deployed an investigation team to the site of an anhydrous ammonia release that occurred on July 15 at Tanner Industries, located south of Swansea, South Carolina.
According to media reports, a woman driving her car near the facility was overcome by the ammonia vapor and was fatally injured. Seven other individuals were taken to a local hospital for what were thought to be non-life threatening injuries.
Ammonia is a strong irritant that affects the respiratory system. It is a chemical used in a variety of industries, including the manufacture of fertilizers and in commercial refrigeration systems.
The CSB team will be headed by Investigation Supervisor, Robert Hall, PE. CSB Board Member, William E. Wright, will accompany the team and act as the chief spokesperson.
The CSB is an independent federal agency charged with investigating industrial chemical accidents. The agency’s board members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. CSB investigations look into all aspects of chemical accidents, including physical causes such as equipment failure as well as inadequacies in regulations, industry standards, and safety management systems.
CSB does not issue citations or fines but does make safety recommendations to plants, industry organizations, labor groups, and regulatory agencies such as OSHA and EPA.
House Committee Requests Information on Bottled Water
“Our hearing brought a great deal of information to light regarding the differences between the regulation of bottled water and tap water,” Stupak said. “We also found that neither the public nor federal regulators know nearly enough about where bottled water comes from and what safeguards are in place to ensure its safety. The majority of consumers purchase bottled water because of perceived health and safety benefits but they actually know very little about the quality of the water they are buying.”
Among the information requested of the companies is all documentation related to testing of bottled water and its sources, as well as lists of names and locations of each company’s water sources.
Walking or Riding a Bike to Work Pays Off
People who walk or cycle to work have fewer risk factors for heart disease, a U.S. study has found. The study included 2,364 men and women who worked outside the home. At physical examinations conducted in 2005 and 2006, the participants reported details about their commute to work, including length in minutes and miles, and the percentage of the journey taken by car, public transit, walking, or cycling.
The researchers found that 16.7 percent of the participants walked or cycled to work (active commuting), and those men and women appeared to be more fit. Those who were active commuters were less likely to be overweight or obese and had healthier triglyceride, blood pressure, and insulin levels.
The study, published in the July 13 issue of the journal Archives of Internal Medicine, adds to evidence that cycling or walking to work improves health, said Penny Gordon-Larsen of the School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and colleagues.
“Public support for policies that encourage active commuting has been shown, particularly for individuals with experience using active commuting and with positive attitudes toward walking and biking,” they wrote. “Furthermore, increasing active commuting will have the dual benefits of increasing population health and in reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental supports for commuting, such as physical environment and sociocultural factors, have been shown to promote active forms of commuting.”
Further research should be done to identify other potential benefits of active commuting, they concluded.
California Finds that BPA is not a Reproductive or Developmental Toxicant
The California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment’s (OEHHA) recently reported that BPA need not be classified as a reproductive or developmental toxicant under California’s Proposition 65.
Steven G. Hentges, Ph.D., of the American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Polycarbonate/BPA Global Group said, “The American Chemistry Council (ACC) is pleased that a panel of independent scientific experts convened by the State of California concluded today that bisphenol A is not a reproductive or developmental toxicant. After a thorough review of the scientific evidence, the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee determined that bisphenol A should not be listed under California’s Proposition 65.”
The Proposition 65 conclusion today that bisphenol A is not a reproductive or developmental toxicant is consistent with the consensus view of regulatory bodies around the world on the safety of bisphenol A. From the U.S. and Canada, to Europe, Japan and Australia-New Zealand, at least eleven national regulatory bodies have recently reviewed the science and concluded that bisphenol A is safe for use in consumer products.
“ACC and its member companies have long-supported research to advance scientific understanding about chemicals and promote public health,” Hentges stated. “We support the State of California’s comprehensive chemical management efforts and today’s decision that bisphenol A does not meet the criteria for listing under Proposition 65.”
Chemical Skin Hazard Strategy Revised by NIOSH to Provide More Useful, Detailed Notations
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) announced a new strategy it will use to help employers, workers, and others to better identify the occupational hazards posed through skin contact with chemicals in the workplace, and to take effective precautions.
It revises and updates the framework used by NIOSH for developing notations in the “NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards” to identify occupational skin hazards posed by workplace chemicals. Work-related skin diseases account for an estimated 15 percent to 20 percent of all reported occupational diseases in the U.S., with total annual costs of up to $1 billion. The Pocket Guide is widely used by safety and health professionals, businesses, and workers to identify and safeguard against potential occupational hazards from workplace chemicals.
“In preventing an adverse exposure, it is critical to be aware at the outset that the hazard exists, and to know its exact nature,” said NIOSH Acting Director, Christine M. Branche, Ph.D. “‘The NIOSH Pocket Guide’ is one of our fundamental ready-access resources. We are pleased to advance and improve the means by which it can be used for identifying skin hazards at a work site and designing appropriate protections for workers.”
Under the new strategy, NIOSH will develop notations for the Pocket Guide to identify whether skin contact with a given chemical can result in direct effects such as skin irritation or skin corrosion, immune-mediated effects such as allergic contact dermatitis or asthma, systemic effects (e.g., toxic effects to the body’s biological systems, resulting from the absorption of the chemical through the skin), and/or fatal effects from extreme toxicity. For example, a chemical for which skin contact would result in the direct effect of irritation would have the notation “SK: DIR (IRR).” Also, when numerous hazards are associated with skin contact, notations would be assigned accordingly; for example, a chemical associated with systemic toxicity and corrosion through skin contact would be identified with the notation “SK: SYS-DIR (COR).”
Notations will also be used to identify chemicals that do not cause any effects associated with skin contact; chemicals for which insufficient data exist as to whether skin contact is associated with a hazard; and chemicals that have not yet been evaluated under the new framework, and whose potential for risk through skin contact is unknown will be identified with the notation.
Currently, skin notations in the Pocket Guide simply say “skin,” and are meant only to indicate that the chemical can be harmful to the body’s biological systems as a result of absorption through the skin. The current notations are not intended to identify other adverse effects. The new strategy will help avoid unintended misuse of skin notations, will help users more quickly identify the specific nature of the hazard or hazards associated with skin contact with a given chemical, will promote greater standardization in developing skin notations, will reflect contemporary scientific knowledge, and will make the process of developing the notations more transparent.
NIOSH will assign skin notations based on a critical assessment of a chemical’s physical and chemical properties, reports of human exposures and health effects, empirical data from laboratory testing, and data from computer algorithms and mathematical models. Bulletin 61 describes these decision-making processes in detail.
Jury Awards $9.6 Million to Worker Injured in Industrial Accident
An industrial worker who suffered severe eye damage after he was doused in acid in an April 2006 workplace accident has been awarded $9.6 million by a Houston jury, according to Arnold & Itkin LLP, the Houston law firm that represents the worker.
The jury in the 295th State District Court of Harris County found that Occidental Chemical Corp., a unit of Occidental Petroleum Corp., negligently designed the acid addition system to which Equistar Chemicals L.P. worker Jason Jenkins was adding acid at the Lyondell Bayport facility when the accident occurred.
Jenkins, who lost most of his vision in one eye, alleged that Occidental’s system lacked a pressure indicator and it failed to properly vent pressure to prevent worker injury. The system vented pressure near Jenkins’ face, according to trial evidence. Occidental denied the allegations.
The trial in Judge Tracy Christopher’s court lasted more than two weeks, but the jury only deliberated for a day and a half before returning the verdict that found Occidental 75% responsible, Equistar 20% responsible, and Jenkins 5% responsible.
The case is “Jason Jenkins v. Occidental Chemical,” Cause No. 2007-73468, in the 295th District Court of Harris County, Texas.
