November 29, 2011

Science Advisory Board Meeting Minutes

November 29, 2011

Location: Massachusetts DEP: 2nd Floor

1 PM

Members present: Larry Boise (Acting Chair), Anne Marie Desmarais, Veronica Vieira, Ken Weinberg, Martha Mittlestaedt, Robin Dodson

Others present: John Raschko (OTA), Heather Tenney (TURI), Mary Butow (TURI), Liz Harriman (TURI), Carol Rowan-West (DEP), Sean Moynihan (MCTA), Bonny Betancourt (ACC), Dave Wawer (MCTA)

Welcome and Introductions

Program Updates
- The Higher Hazard Substances (HHS) regulations are out for public comment.  Comments have been received from several parties to date.

- As a result of the Council not approving the PrUS designation, OTA has done outreach to ¾ of the 80 facilities whose hazardous waste data indicated possible Trichloroethylene (TCE) use. Eight facilities indicated they used Methylene Chloride, 4 indicated they used n Propyl Bromide (nPB), and 4 indicated they used water based methods.

- There is a TUR Planning training planned for drycleaners tomorrow afternoon.

- There was a session at the November 9th continuing education conference on HBCD flame retardants that SAB members may be interested in. Heather will send a link.

-Janet Clark is retiring after 19 years at TURI. Her latest project was the launch of TURI’s new website – take a look.

-Liz distributed new 4-page nPB fact sheet

October Meeting Minutes
Items that require fixing:

• Typo in name at DEP (Greg Braun). 
• General comment about defining acronyms in the future.  
• Other comments on the halogenated compounds discussion section that need to be amended:

“Other brominated compounds similar to nPB”
“Same physical state”
Correct CAS # 156-60-5

• Names of specific Board members in dialogue to be removed.

Vote: To approve minutes as amended.  4 in Favor, 0 opposed, 2 Abstaining

Continuation of the VMS Discussion
The Executive Summary from the Canadian Board of Review was distributed prior to the meeting.

Heather recapped the discussion of D5 from earlier meetings:

The goal of this process was to look at common replacements to the Higher Hazard Substances to determine whether they should be listed on the TURA list.

Concerns with D5 listed in previous meetings were as follows:
•    uterine tumors
•    bioconcentration factor (BCF)
•    neurotoxicity

SAB comments:
You had to dig to find the hazard information below the risk information but it is there.
Canada wasn’t tasked to look at the occupational levels to determine if they would be hazardous. They were only tasked w/ PBT issues and the environment.
They (Canada) seem convinced about the information on breakdown products.  There is persistence in sediment. The D5 doesn’t biomagnify though.

There was a motion to table the discussion of D5 for 6 months.  More information is needed.

We are not seeing increased amounts in the environment - wait for more data.

What information should the program be giving companies considering switching to D5?

In 5 years there is likely to be an occupational study.  Also, levels in the environment should be monitored. New data may be available from EPA’s Consent Agreement with industry on D5. Also, SEHSC says they have studies that will be available in the new year.

It was noted that OEHHA listed other effects for D5 in table.

It was noted that the Program could still recommend listing on a policy basis.

Vote: 4 in favor, 2 opposed.
List of Board’s ongoing concerns with VMS:

• Potential for interference with dopamine mechanism in body
• Mild estrogenic activity/potential reproductive effects
• What doses are relevant to human health
• PELs
• Occupational exposures, especially in dry cleaning
• Continue to add in measured data (as opposed to modeled) as it becomes available
• Send links of emerging articles on this topic to SAB via the SAB Greenlist.

Continued Work on Certain Halogenated Compounds Category
The Board continued their work looking at substances structurally similar to nPB. Based on the Board’s request from last time full EHS sheets were prepared on 4 specific substances.
The full EHS sheets for 1-bromopropane/1-chloropropane were handed out first.

• Both have CNS effects
• Both have negative mutagenicity tests.
• There was a question on the nPB LD50.  It was confirmed in meeting via HSDB that it is greater than 2,000 mg/kg.
• The vapor pressure ranges from 111-345 mm Hg.

In addition the full EHS sheets for acetylene tetrachloride/acetylene tetrabromide were handed out.

Motion to include CHCC as a category defined as 4 or less carbons with at least one halogen and only hydrogen as the other constituent.

Discussion

• The Central Nervous System (CNS) effects are consistent.
• The chlorinated compounds are more volatile than the brominated compounds.
• This would not preclude taking up a substance from the category in the future to be listed individually. 
• This category would include the halogenated compounds that are not otherwise listed. (e.g. 2-bromopropane – and likely 2-chloropropane)

Vote: 6 in favor

Next Meeting
Heather to schedule for either January 11th or 18th.