National Academy of Sciences Study, 21223-21225 [2010-9422]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 78 / Friday, April 23, 2010 / Notices
1982 planning rule. The Kaibab
National Forest has concluded that most
of the materials developed for the plan
revision process to date are appropriate
for continued use in the revision
process. The following foundation
documents are available at: https://
fs.usda.gov/goto/kaibab/plan_rev_docs.
• The Comprehensive Evaluation
Report (CER) that was signed April 14,
2010, after substantial public
collaboration forms the basis for need to
change the existing Forest Plan and the
proposed action for the plan revision.
• The CER supplementary document,
which supplemented the CER with
additional information to conform to the
Analysis of Management Situation
(AMS) need for change provisions of the
1982 planning rule, dated April 16,
2010.
• The Ecological Sustainability
Report (ESR), completed in December
2008, will continue to be used as a
reference in the planning process as
appropriate to those items in
conformance with the 2000 planning
rule transition language and 1982
planning rule provisions. It primarily
contains scientific information that is
not affected by the change of planning
rule. This information will be updated
with any new available information.
• The Social and Economic
Sustainability Report completed in
August 2008 is not affected by the
change in planning rule and will
continue to be used as a reference in the
planning process. This information will
be updated with new information as it
is available.
Additional background reports,
assessments, and information will be
used, some of which is available on the
Kaibab National Forest at: https://
fs.usda.gov/goto/kaibab/plan_revision.
As necessary or appropriate, the
material listed above will be further
adjusted as part of the planning process
using the provisions of the 1982
planning rule.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
[FR Doc. 2010–9425 Filed 4–22–10; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY: The Fiscal Year 2010
appropriations legislation for the
Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board (CSB) provides
funding for a study by the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) to examine
the use and storage of methyl
isocyanate, including the feasibility of
implementing alternative chemicals or
processes and an examination of the
cost of alternatives at the Bayer
CropScience facility in Institute, West
Virginia. With this notice, the CSB is
outlining the scope of the study to be
undertaken by the NAS and requesting
public comments regarding the study.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by the CSB on or before May
10, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments, identified by docket number
CSB–10–01, by either of the following
methods:
• E-mail (preferred):
nascomments@csb.gov. Include CSB–
10–01 in the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board, Office of
Congressional, Public, and Board
Affairs, Attn: D. Horowitz, 2175 K
Street, NW., Suite 650, Washington, DC
20037.
Instructions: All comment
submissions must include the agency
name and docket number. All comments
received, including any personal
information provided, will be made
available to the public without
modifications or deletions. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments
electronically, including acceptable file
formats, see the ‘‘Electronic Submission
of Comments’’ heading in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document. Comments received by
the CSB will be posted online in the
Open Government section of the CSB
Web site, https://www.csb.gov/
open.aspx.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Daniel Horowitz, Director of
Congressional, Public, and Board
Affairs, at (202) 261–7613.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
Background
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1600–1614; 36 CFR
219.35 (74 FR 67073–67074).
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Dated: April 16, 2010.
Michael R. Williams,
Forest Supervisor.
CHEMICAL SAFETY AND HAZARD
INVESTIGATION BOARD
[Docket No. CSB–10–01]
National Academy of Sciences Study
AGENCY: Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Apr 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
Bayer CropScience Incident
On August 28, 2008, a fatal explosion
and fire occurred at the Bayer
CropScience (BCS) plant located in
Institute, West Virginia. The explosion
occurred during the restarting of the
plant’s methomyl production unit,
when highly toxic and reactive
methomyl waste was overloaded into a
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21223
residue treater vessel. A violent
runaway reaction ruptured the 5,000pound vessel and sent it through the
production unit, breaking pipes and
equipment. The explosion and resulting
chemical release and fire fatally injured
two employees. Six volunteer
firefighters and two others showed
likely symptoms of chemical exposure.
The blast wave damaged businesses
thousands of feet away.
Congressional Testimony
On April 21, 2009, John S. Bresland,
Chairman of the CSB, testified before
the House Energy and Commerce
Committee regarding the CSB’s ongoing
investigation at the BCS site. Chairman
Bresland testified that the CSB
investigation had revealed significant
lapses in process safety management.
Plant operators had received inadequate
training on a new computer control
system, which was being used for the
first time. Written operating procedures
were outdated and could not be
followed during startups, due to
longstanding equipment problems. The
heater for the residue treater was known
to be undersized. This regularly forced
operators to defeat critical safety
interlocks during startups—increasing
the chance of dangerously overloading
the treater with methomyl.
Chairman Bresland also stated that
the blast could have propelled the
residue treater in any direction. About
80 feet from the original location of the
treater, there was a 37,000-pound
capacity tank of methyl isocyanate
(MIC), which held 13,800 pounds of the
highly toxic and volatile liquid on the
night of the accident. Chairman
Bresland announced that the CSB was
further investigating whether this tank
was located in a safe position and
whether alternative arrangements to
using or storing MIC had been
considered at Bayer, or should be
considered in the future.
Interim Public Meeting
On April 23, 2009, the CSB
investigation team presented its initial
findings to the Board at a public
meeting in Institute, West Virginia. In
its presentation the CSB team stated that
it planned to conduct further studies on
how MIC was used and stored at the
facility, in light of the preliminary
findings.
Bayer Announcement
In August 2009, Bayer officials
announced a plan which they said
would reduce both the maximum and
the average inventory of MIC at the
Institute site by approximately 80%.
This would be accomplished in part by
E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM
23APN1
21224
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 78 / Friday, April 23, 2010 / Notices
eliminating the on-site production of
two MIC-derived carbamate pesticides,
and in part by restricting the inventory
of MIC needed for producing two
remaining pesticides. Bayer officials
also stated the company would end the
bulk storage of MIC in aboveground
tanks, including the 37,000-pound
capacity MIC tank that was near the
August 2008 explosion site. That tank,
as noted in Congressional testimony in
April, was exposed to potential
projectiles and other hazards from the
explosion.
Congressional Appropriations
On October 30, 2009, the President
signed the Fiscal Year 2010
appropriations legislation for the CSB.
See Public Law 111–88, 123 Stat. 2949.
This legislation contained the following
language regarding the CSB’s ongoing
investigation of the Bayer CropScience
incident, ‘‘Provided further, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading,
$600,000 shall be for a study by the
National Academy of Sciences to
examine the use and storage of methyl
isocyanate including the feasibility of
implementing alternative chemicals or
processes and an examination of the
cost of alternatives at the Bayer
CropScience facility in Institute, West
Virginia.’’ Public Law 111–88, 123 Stat.
2950.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Study
In order to accomplish the study
called for by the CSB’s appropriations
legislation, the agency has drafted the
following task statement for the NAS:
Proposed Task Statement for National
Academy of Sciences Study on
‘‘Inherently Safer Chemical Processes:
The Use of Methyl Isocyanate at Bayer
CropScience’’
Public Law 111–88 (the Department of
the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010)
directs the Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board (CSB) to conduct ‘‘a
study by the National Academy of
Sciences to examine the use and storage
of methyl isocyanate including the
feasibility of implementing alternative
chemicals or processes and an
examination of the cost of alternatives at
the Bayer CropScience facility in
Institute, West Virginia.’’ 1
The study is needed because of
concerns about the potential for an
airborne release of the chemical, which
is highly toxic by inhalation and could
adversely impact the health and safety
of workers and the public in West
1 Congress appropriated $600,000 for conducting
the study.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Apr 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
Virginia’s Kanawha Valley.2 Depending
upon the progress of the study, the
availability of funding, and other
factors, the CSB may contract for a
second, related study to examine
inherently safer technology (IST)
alternatives to other high-volume toxic
chemicals used in industry.
For a number of years, the Bayer
facility in Institute 3 has stored
approximately 200,000 pounds of
methyl isocyanate (MIC), which has
been used as an intermediate to produce
carbamate pesticides, including
carbofuran, carbaryl, aldicarb,
methomyl, and thiodicarb (Larvin). It is
the only remaining site in the U.S.
which manufactures and stores large
quantities of MIC. In August 2009, one
year after a serious explosion and fire
near an aboveground MIC storage tank,
Bayer announced a plan to reduce the
maximum inventory of MIC at the
Institute site by 80% and to eliminate
aboveground storage of the chemical.
This plan, which is currently being
implemented, would leave
approximately 40,000 pounds of MIC
stored underground at the site on an
ongoing basis. To achieve the inventory
reduction, Bayer plans to use its existing
carbamate manufacturing technology
but to discontinue the production of two
MIC-derived carbamate pesticides,
methomyl 4 and carbofuran.5
Tasks
The National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) study will focus on further riskreduction opportunities, above and
beyond the envisioned 80% reduction
in MIC inventory. To perform the study,
the NAS shall convene an expert panel
with diverse representation, including
individuals with industry, academic,
community, environmental, and labor
experience and backgrounds. The expert
panel shall produce a detailed written
report and recommendations on the
following subjects:
2 On December 3, 1984, the uncontrolled release
of MIC from an underground storage tank at a
Union Carbide pesticide manufacturing facility in
Bhopal, India, killed thousands of residents and
disabled or injured thousands of others.
3 The facility was constructed in the 1940’s and
was developed as a carbamate pesticide
manufacturing complex by Union Carbide, which
owned the facility from 1947–1986. Bayer
CropScience acquired the facility in 2002.
4 The methomyl production unit was heavily
damaged in the August 2008 explosion. Bayer opted
not to rebuild the unit but to begin purchasing
methomyl from other sources and convert it into
thiodicarb (Larvin) at the Institute site. The
conversion of methomyl to thiodicarb does not use
MIC.
5 On December 31, 2009, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency revoked all tolerances for the
pesticide, having determined that ‘‘dietary, worker,
and ecological risks are unacceptable for all uses of
carbofuran.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1. Review and evaluate the state of the
art in inherently safer process
assessments and implementation:
• Provide a working definition of
Inherently Safer Technology (IST), as
the term applies to the chemical
industry and other process industries.
• Review and evaluate current
practices for inherently safer process
assessments, including the goals and
applicability of these tools. Specifically,
do existing methods adequately account
for all the potential life-cycle benefits
and risks from adopting inherently safer
technologies?
• Review and evaluate current
economic valuation methods for
estimating the cost of alternative
chemicals and processes. Specifically,
do these methods accurately estimate
capital investment costs, operating
costs, and payback periods?
• Review and evaluate current
standards and metrics for measuring the
effectiveness of inherently safer
technology applications in the chemical
and process industries.
• Review and evaluate the impact of
existing State and local regulatory
programs that seek to promote
inherently safer processes, such as the
Industrial Safety Ordinance in Contra
Costa County, California, and the Toxic
Catastrophe Prevention Act in New
Jersey.
• Provide guidance on best practices
for inherently safer process assessments,
metrics, and IST cost evaluation
methods.
2. Examine the use and storage of MIC
at the Bayer CropScience facility in
Institute, West Virginia:
• Review the current industry
practice for the use and storage of MIC
in manufacturing processes, including a
summary of changes adopted by
industrial users of MIC following the
1984 Bhopal accident.
• Review current and emerging
technologies for producing carbamate
pesticides, including carbaryl, aldicarb,
and related compounds. The review
should include:
—Synthetic methods and patent
literature.
—Manufacturing approaches used
worldwide for these materials.
—Manufacturing costs for different
synthetic routes.
—Environmental and energy costs and
tradeoffs for alternative approaches.
—Any specific fixed-facility accident or
transportation risks associated with
alternative approaches.
—Regulatory outlook for the pesticides,
including their expected lifetime on
the market.
• Identify the best possible
approaches for eliminating or reducing
E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM
23APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 78 / Friday, April 23, 2010 / Notices
the use of MIC in the Bayer carbamate
pesticide manufacturing processes,
through, for example, substitution of
less hazardous intermediates,
intensifying existing manufacturing
processes, or consuming MIC
simultaneously with its production.
Examine these approaches using the
best practices for inherently safer
process assessment identified under
Task 1.
• Estimate projected costs of
alternative approaches identified above.
• Compare the inherently safer
process assessments conducted by Bayer
and previous owners of the Institute site
with benchmarks established under
Task 1.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Deliverables
For each task, the NAS shall provide
a monthly progress report to the CSB
from inception to completion. The NAS
should promptly notify the CSB of any
problems encountered or other matters
that require CSB attention.
The principal deliverable item is a
detailed written report of the expert
panel addressing each point in Tasks 1
and 2, above. The report should be
produced within 12 months of the
initiation of the project. The panel may
conduct public hearings in West
Virginia, or elsewhere, as appropriate.
Questions for Public Comment
1. Does the proposed Task Statement
include the appropriate topics for
consideration by the NAS? Are there
any additional general or specific topics
the NAS panel will need to consider in
order to reach a satisfactory answer on
the feasibility and costs of reducing the
use and storage of MIC?
2. If funds are available, should the
CSB initiate a second, related study to
consider the feasibility, costs, and
benefits of inherently safer alternatives
to other chemicals? For example, should
a study consider alternatives to the use
of hydrogen fluoride in refinery
alkylation processes and/or to the use of
chlorine in water treatment? What other
chemicals or processes should be
considered if a second study is
undertaken?
3. What kinds of backgrounds and
expertise should be represented on the
NAS panel?
4. Is the proposed timetable
appropriate?
Electronic Submission of Comments
Electronic submission of comments is
preferred. Comments should be
submitted by e-mail to
nascomments@csb.gov. Comments may
be submitted in the body of the e-mail
message or as an attached PDF, MS
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Apr 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
Word, or plain text ASCII file. Files
must be virus-free and unencrypted.
Please ensure that the comments
themselves, whether in the body of the
e-mail or attached as a file, include the
docket number (CSB–10–01), the agency
name, and your full name and address.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(6)(F), (N);
Pub. L. 111–88, 123 Stat. 2950.
Dated: April 19, 2010.
Christopher W. Warner,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2010–9422 Filed 4–22–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6350–01–P
COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting
of the Utah Advisory Committee
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to
the provisions of the rules and
regulations of the U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights (Commission), and the
Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), that a planning meeting of the
Utah Advisory Committee to the
Commission will convene by conference
call at 10 a.m. on Thursday, May 6,
2010. The purpose of this meeting is to
provide a brief overview of recent
Commission and regional activities,
discuss civil rights issues in the state,
hear from a subcommittee on the Utah
Anti-Discrimination Division’s state
audit report, and plan future activities
and projects.
This meeting is available to the public
through the following toll-free call-in
and conference ID numbers: 1–866–
364–8798; conference ID 70344123. Any
interested member of the public may
call this number and listen to the
meeting. Callers can expect to incur
charges for calls they initiate over
wireless lines, and the Commission will
not refund any incurred charges. Callers
will incur no charge for calls they
initiate over land-line connections to
the toll-free telephone number. Persons
with hearing impairments may also
follow the proceedings by first calling
the Federal Relay Service at 1–800–977–
8339 and providing the Service with the
conference call number and conference
ID.
To ensure that the Commission
secures an appropriate number of lines
for the public, persons are asked to
register by contacting Evelyn Bohor of
the Rocky Mountain Regional Office and
TTY/TDD (303) 866–1049 by noon on
May 3, 2010.
Members of the public are entitled to
submit written comments. The
comments must be received in the
regional office by June 7, 2010. The
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21225
address is: U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights, Rocky Mountain Regional Office,
1961 Stout Street, Suite 240, Denver, CO
80294. Comments may be e-mailed to
ebohor@usccr.gov. Records generated by
this meeting may be inspected and
reproduced at the Rocky Mountain
Regional Office, as they become
available, both before and after the
meeting. Persons interested in the work
of this advisory committee are advised
to go to the Commission’s Web site,
https://www.usccr.gov, or to contact the
Rocky Mountain Regional Office at the
above e-mail or street address.
The meeting will be conducted
pursuant to the provisions of the rules
and regulations of the Commission and
FACA.
Dated in Washington, DC, 19 April 2010.
Peter Minarik,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs
Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2010–9383 Filed 4–22–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
The Department of Commerce will
submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for clearance the
following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.
Title: 2008 Panel of the Survey of
Income & Program Participation, Wave 7
Topical Modules.
OMB Control Number: 0607–0944.
Form Number(s): SIPP–28705(L)
Director’s Letter; SIPP/CAPI Automated
Instrument; SIPP28003 Reminder Card.
Type of Request: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Burden Hours: 143,303.
Number of Respondents: 94,500.
Average Hours per Response: 30
minutes.
Needs and Uses: The U.S. Census
Bureau requests authorization from the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to conduct the Wave 7 interview
for the 2008 Panel of the Survey of
Income and Program Participation
(SIPP). The core SIPP and reinterview
instruments were cleared under
Authorization No. 0607–0944.
The SIPP represents a source of
information for a wide variety of topics
and allows information for separate
topics to be integrated to form a single
and unified database so that the
interaction between tax, transfer, and
E:\FR\FM\23APN1.SGM
23APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 78 (Friday, April 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21223-21225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9422]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CHEMICAL SAFETY AND HAZARD INVESTIGATION BOARD
[Docket No. CSB-10-01]
National Academy of Sciences Study
AGENCY: Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Fiscal Year 2010 appropriations legislation for the
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) provides funding
for a study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to examine the
use and storage of methyl isocyanate, including the feasibility of
implementing alternative chemicals or processes and an examination of
the cost of alternatives at the Bayer CropScience facility in
Institute, West Virginia. With this notice, the CSB is outlining the
scope of the study to be undertaken by the NAS and requesting public
comments regarding the study.
DATES: Written comments must be received by the CSB on or before May
10, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments, identified by docket number
CSB-10-01, by either of the following methods:
E-mail (preferred): nascomments@csb.gov. Include CSB-10-01
in the subject line of the message.
Mail: Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board,
Office of Congressional, Public, and Board Affairs, Attn: D. Horowitz,
2175 K Street, NW., Suite 650, Washington, DC 20037.
Instructions: All comment submissions must include the agency name
and docket number. All comments received, including any personal
information provided, will be made available to the public without
modifications or deletions. For detailed instructions on submitting
comments electronically, including acceptable file formats, see the
``Electronic Submission of Comments'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document. Comments received by the CSB will
be posted online in the Open Government section of the CSB Web site,
https://www.csb.gov/open.aspx.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Daniel Horowitz, Director of
Congressional, Public, and Board Affairs, at (202) 261-7613.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Bayer CropScience Incident
On August 28, 2008, a fatal explosion and fire occurred at the
Bayer CropScience (BCS) plant located in Institute, West Virginia. The
explosion occurred during the restarting of the plant's methomyl
production unit, when highly toxic and reactive methomyl waste was
overloaded into a residue treater vessel. A violent runaway reaction
ruptured the 5,000-pound vessel and sent it through the production
unit, breaking pipes and equipment. The explosion and resulting
chemical release and fire fatally injured two employees. Six volunteer
firefighters and two others showed likely symptoms of chemical
exposure. The blast wave damaged businesses thousands of feet away.
Congressional Testimony
On April 21, 2009, John S. Bresland, Chairman of the CSB, testified
before the House Energy and Commerce Committee regarding the CSB's
ongoing investigation at the BCS site. Chairman Bresland testified that
the CSB investigation had revealed significant lapses in process safety
management. Plant operators had received inadequate training on a new
computer control system, which was being used for the first time.
Written operating procedures were outdated and could not be followed
during startups, due to longstanding equipment problems. The heater for
the residue treater was known to be undersized. This regularly forced
operators to defeat critical safety interlocks during startups--
increasing the chance of dangerously overloading the treater with
methomyl.
Chairman Bresland also stated that the blast could have propelled
the residue treater in any direction. About 80 feet from the original
location of the treater, there was a 37,000-pound capacity tank of
methyl isocyanate (MIC), which held 13,800 pounds of the highly toxic
and volatile liquid on the night of the accident. Chairman Bresland
announced that the CSB was further investigating whether this tank was
located in a safe position and whether alternative arrangements to
using or storing MIC had been considered at Bayer, or should be
considered in the future.
Interim Public Meeting
On April 23, 2009, the CSB investigation team presented its initial
findings to the Board at a public meeting in Institute, West Virginia.
In its presentation the CSB team stated that it planned to conduct
further studies on how MIC was used and stored at the facility, in
light of the preliminary findings.
Bayer Announcement
In August 2009, Bayer officials announced a plan which they said
would reduce both the maximum and the average inventory of MIC at the
Institute site by approximately 80%. This would be accomplished in part
by
[[Page 21224]]
eliminating the on-site production of two MIC-derived carbamate
pesticides, and in part by restricting the inventory of MIC needed for
producing two remaining pesticides. Bayer officials also stated the
company would end the bulk storage of MIC in aboveground tanks,
including the 37,000-pound capacity MIC tank that was near the August
2008 explosion site. That tank, as noted in Congressional testimony in
April, was exposed to potential projectiles and other hazards from the
explosion.
Congressional Appropriations
On October 30, 2009, the President signed the Fiscal Year 2010
appropriations legislation for the CSB. See Public Law 111-88, 123
Stat. 2949. This legislation contained the following language regarding
the CSB's ongoing investigation of the Bayer CropScience incident,
``Provided further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading,
$600,000 shall be for a study by the National Academy of Sciences to
examine the use and storage of methyl isocyanate including the
feasibility of implementing alternative chemicals or processes and an
examination of the cost of alternatives at the Bayer CropScience
facility in Institute, West Virginia.'' Public Law 111-88, 123 Stat.
2950.
Proposed Study
In order to accomplish the study called for by the CSB's
appropriations legislation, the agency has drafted the following task
statement for the NAS:
Proposed Task Statement for National Academy of Sciences Study on
``Inherently Safer Chemical Processes: The Use of Methyl Isocyanate at
Bayer CropScience''
Public Law 111-88 (the Department of the Interior, Environment, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010) directs the Chemical Safety
and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) to conduct ``a study by the
National Academy of Sciences to examine the use and storage of methyl
isocyanate including the feasibility of implementing alternative
chemicals or processes and an examination of the cost of alternatives
at the Bayer CropScience facility in Institute, West Virginia.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Congress appropriated $600,000 for conducting the study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The study is needed because of concerns about the potential for an
airborne release of the chemical, which is highly toxic by inhalation
and could adversely impact the health and safety of workers and the
public in West Virginia's Kanawha Valley.\2\ Depending upon the
progress of the study, the availability of funding, and other factors,
the CSB may contract for a second, related study to examine inherently
safer technology (IST) alternatives to other high-volume toxic
chemicals used in industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ On December 3, 1984, the uncontrolled release of MIC from an
underground storage tank at a Union Carbide pesticide manufacturing
facility in Bhopal, India, killed thousands of residents and
disabled or injured thousands of others.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a number of years, the Bayer facility in Institute \3\ has
stored approximately 200,000 pounds of methyl isocyanate (MIC), which
has been used as an intermediate to produce carbamate pesticides,
including carbofuran, carbaryl, aldicarb, methomyl, and thiodicarb
(Larvin). It is the only remaining site in the U.S. which manufactures
and stores large quantities of MIC. In August 2009, one year after a
serious explosion and fire near an aboveground MIC storage tank, Bayer
announced a plan to reduce the maximum inventory of MIC at the
Institute site by 80% and to eliminate aboveground storage of the
chemical. This plan, which is currently being implemented, would leave
approximately 40,000 pounds of MIC stored underground at the site on an
ongoing basis. To achieve the inventory reduction, Bayer plans to use
its existing carbamate manufacturing technology but to discontinue the
production of two MIC-derived carbamate pesticides, methomyl \4\ and
carbofuran.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The facility was constructed in the 1940's and was developed
as a carbamate pesticide manufacturing complex by Union Carbide,
which owned the facility from 1947-1986. Bayer CropScience acquired
the facility in 2002.
\4\ The methomyl production unit was heavily damaged in the
August 2008 explosion. Bayer opted not to rebuild the unit but to
begin purchasing methomyl from other sources and convert it into
thiodicarb (Larvin) at the Institute site. The conversion of
methomyl to thiodicarb does not use MIC.
\5\ On December 31, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency revoked all tolerances for the pesticide, having determined
that ``dietary, worker, and ecological risks are unacceptable for
all uses of carbofuran.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tasks
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study will focus on further
risk-reduction opportunities, above and beyond the envisioned 80%
reduction in MIC inventory. To perform the study, the NAS shall convene
an expert panel with diverse representation, including individuals with
industry, academic, community, environmental, and labor experience and
backgrounds. The expert panel shall produce a detailed written report
and recommendations on the following subjects:
1. Review and evaluate the state of the art in inherently safer
process assessments and implementation:
Provide a working definition of Inherently Safer
Technology (IST), as the term applies to the chemical industry and
other process industries.
Review and evaluate current practices for inherently safer
process assessments, including the goals and applicability of these
tools. Specifically, do existing methods adequately account for all the
potential life-cycle benefits and risks from adopting inherently safer
technologies?
Review and evaluate current economic valuation methods for
estimating the cost of alternative chemicals and processes.
Specifically, do these methods accurately estimate capital investment
costs, operating costs, and payback periods?
Review and evaluate current standards and metrics for
measuring the effectiveness of inherently safer technology applications
in the chemical and process industries.
Review and evaluate the impact of existing State and local
regulatory programs that seek to promote inherently safer processes,
such as the Industrial Safety Ordinance in Contra Costa County,
California, and the Toxic Catastrophe Prevention Act in New Jersey.
Provide guidance on best practices for inherently safer
process assessments, metrics, and IST cost evaluation methods.
2. Examine the use and storage of MIC at the Bayer CropScience
facility in Institute, West Virginia:
Review the current industry practice for the use and
storage of MIC in manufacturing processes, including a summary of
changes adopted by industrial users of MIC following the 1984 Bhopal
accident.
Review current and emerging technologies for producing
carbamate pesticides, including carbaryl, aldicarb, and related
compounds. The review should include:
--Synthetic methods and patent literature.
--Manufacturing approaches used worldwide for these materials.
--Manufacturing costs for different synthetic routes.
--Environmental and energy costs and tradeoffs for alternative
approaches.
--Any specific fixed-facility accident or transportation risks
associated with alternative approaches.
--Regulatory outlook for the pesticides, including their expected
lifetime on the market.
Identify the best possible approaches for eliminating or
reducing
[[Page 21225]]
the use of MIC in the Bayer carbamate pesticide manufacturing
processes, through, for example, substitution of less hazardous
intermediates, intensifying existing manufacturing processes, or
consuming MIC simultaneously with its production. Examine these
approaches using the best practices for inherently safer process
assessment identified under Task 1.
Estimate projected costs of alternative approaches
identified above.
Compare the inherently safer process assessments conducted
by Bayer and previous owners of the Institute site with benchmarks
established under Task 1.
Deliverables
For each task, the NAS shall provide a monthly progress report to
the CSB from inception to completion. The NAS should promptly notify
the CSB of any problems encountered or other matters that require CSB
attention.
The principal deliverable item is a detailed written report of the
expert panel addressing each point in Tasks 1 and 2, above. The report
should be produced within 12 months of the initiation of the project.
The panel may conduct public hearings in West Virginia, or elsewhere,
as appropriate.
Questions for Public Comment
1. Does the proposed Task Statement include the appropriate topics
for consideration by the NAS? Are there any additional general or
specific topics the NAS panel will need to consider in order to reach a
satisfactory answer on the feasibility and costs of reducing the use
and storage of MIC?
2. If funds are available, should the CSB initiate a second,
related study to consider the feasibility, costs, and benefits of
inherently safer alternatives to other chemicals? For example, should a
study consider alternatives to the use of hydrogen fluoride in refinery
alkylation processes and/or to the use of chlorine in water treatment?
What other chemicals or processes should be considered if a second
study is undertaken?
3. What kinds of backgrounds and expertise should be represented on
the NAS panel?
4. Is the proposed timetable appropriate?
Electronic Submission of Comments
Electronic submission of comments is preferred. Comments should be
submitted by e-mail to nascomments@csb.gov. Comments may be submitted
in the body of the e-mail message or as an attached PDF, MS Word, or
plain text ASCII file. Files must be virus-free and unencrypted. Please
ensure that the comments themselves, whether in the body of the e-mail
or attached as a file, include the docket number (CSB-10-01), the
agency name, and your full name and address.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(6)(F), (N); Pub. L. 111-88, 123
Stat. 2950.
Dated: April 19, 2010.
Christopher W. Warner,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2010-9422 Filed 4-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6350-01-P