September 12, 2012
Toxics Use Reduction Institute Science Advisory Board Meeting Minutes
September 12, 2012
DEP Boston, 2nd Floor Conference Room C
1:00 PM
Members present: Dave Williams (Chair), Larry Boise (Vice-Chair), Ken Weinberg, Martha Mittelstaedt, Robin Dodson
Others present: Mary Butow (TURI), Liz Harriman (TURI), Heather Tenney (TURI), Carol Rowan-West (DEP), John Raschko (OTA), Sean Moynihan (MCTA), Steve Rosario (ACC)
Members not present: Igor Linkov, Amy Cannon, Hilary Hackbart
Welcome and Introductions
Members and visitors introduced themselves.
Program Updates
• TURI’s Fall Continuing Education Conference will be held Tuesday, November 13th.
• The Information and Outreach Manager position at TURI (formerly held by Janet Clark) has been posted.
• The program’s on-going Priority User Segment work includes building on the existing ERP program and providing voluntary information regarding alternatives to all perc using dry cleaners that currently file under ERP.
• TURI noted there are many upcoming events listed on the website calendar including an on-site demonstration at Independent Plating on October 10 in Worcester.
Minutes
May: John Raschko’s name spelling was corrected. Motion to approve the minutes; 4 in favor, 1 abstaining.
June: The following corrections were noted:
• Mike Ellenbecker attended but was not listed.
• In the section on methylene chloride the second sentence regarding follow up phone calls to companies reporting TCE waste codes : edit to ‘calls to companies reporting hazardous waste codes for chlorinated solvents that could contain TCE.’
Motion to approve minutes with indicated revisions: 4 in favor, 1 abstaining.
HFEs
Dave Wawer is arranging for a toxicologist from Dupont to attend the November meeting and answer questions for the Board. The Board discussed what type of information he could share. Based on the prior two meetings there were some questions and a desire for more science and use information with regard to the HFEs.
Heather will share what the Board has already reviewed with Dupont and see if they have additional information to share. Dave Williams suggested sending a checklist/inventory of the information that has been distributed (i.e. a bibliography for each of the substances). The Board would like to hear if the Dupont representative has any comments on the current information under review as well as any additional information. Additionally, ACC has a panel on HFEs that can be contacted.
Phthalate Esters
Heather reviewed the history of the ‘Phthalate Esters’ as a CERCLA Category listed under TURA. The phthalate esters category, along with several other CERCLA categories, are on the TURA list but have never been reportable due to DEP policy. These categories were retained during the 2006 CERCLA review and highlighted as an area where more work should be done. The Board is being asked to better define this category, review these substances, and provide DEP with a recommendation on the category in the event that they want to revise the policy regarding reporting on these substances.
At the last meeting the Board asked for additional information on reproductive and developmental toxicity. The goal for this meeting was to bring the Board the updated information and additional info regarding reproductive effects and the mechanism. TURI would like the Board to take a look at the information on the repro effects, metabolites, and mechanisms and comment on whether this information gives insight into other substances that should be considered.
A Board member asked about the chemicals in the EPA Chemical Action Plan, all of which are included in the current group for which information was gathered. It was noted that EPA is also working on a DfE project which program staff have participated in calls for, mainly in connection with the work from Green Screen/GC3. Green Screens are being performed and additional information will be available from Tox Screens on the phthalates. Also the EU may have information in dossiers regarding the substances of high concern. EPA intends to add 6 phthalates to TRI. There may be a few that are missed in the overlap.
The Board would like more information about the mechanism and then could possibly categorize by mechanism (e.g. advise DEP to define category a certain way based on mechanism/toxic effect). The Board is looking for areas where the compound will be active.
Staff will send the Board the EPA document, DfE document, and the CPSC document. They will also maintain a bibliography of documents circulated on the subject. Another request of the Board was to review REACH registration and determine (based on what has been submitted) if there are other phthalates that should be considered. The Board also requested a copy of the CPSC Chronic Hazard Advisory Panel report due out this year (hazard assessment).
The current list comprises most of the substances that are commercially available. Can MCTA and ACC provide a reasonable list of phthalate esters in commerce? The ACC representative volunteered to have their organization identify additional information.
Also, the Board requested a review of the TSCA inventory to see if there are additional substances being used as alternatives. Staff will Include a list of search terms used to create the list.
The Board asked if a clinical database exists of those who report illnesses or reproductive problems to a physician? Specifically are there any ‘occupational reproductive effects registries’? Staff will check AOEC for more information.
Finally, MEHP has primate studies, not just rodent studies. Can staff locate human studies on DEHP metabolites? (Also studies for MEOHP and MEEHP). Staff will follow up with Robin regarding metabolite studies.
Methylene Chloride
Methylene chloride is currently on the ‘More Hazardous’ list. The Board added it to More Hazardous list in 2002, due to a petition and a change in TLV.
Recently, there have been several pieces of emerging information on methylene chloride:
● OTA’s finding that several companies were using methylene chloride -not TCE- when OTA was doing follow up calls on TCE. Dave Wawer provided information from a company contact that methylene chloride was not a TCE replacement. However, the OTA calls demonstrated that companies reporting the solvent waste codes are using it (but likely not as a replacement).
● CDC put out a Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report on reported deaths of bathtub refinishers from methylene chloride in February 2012.
● Also, 12th Report on Carcinogens (ROC) listed methylene chloride as reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen.
Information distributed included the 12th ROC, the most recent IARC monograph on methylene chloride (1999), and ACGIH information from 2001.
The volatility of methylene chloride is a major concern from industrial hygiene standpoint. The flash point is not as critical.
Motion: MeCl2 be added to HHS list.
Discussion: Two others that are essentially the same from a hazard standpoint (TCE/Perc) are on the higher hazard list. Volatility of methylene chloride is even worse. It is unlikely it is being substituted in vapor degreasing – the same waste code is reported for halogenated solvents.
A member asked how many facilities are reporting methylene chloride and in what amounts. Heather looked up this information from the TURA data site: approximately 10 companies file a little over 2.5 million pounds of methylene chloride under TURA. It was noted that one of the members present works at a company which files under TURA for methylene chloride.
The subject of recusal came up with regard to the reporting of this methylene chloride. Heather will research recusal further and report back at the next meeting. It was noted that information from those using the substance is vital.
Motion withdrawn.
nPB
When added to the TURA list, program staff agreed to watch for emerging information on nPB. There are two new pieces of information emerging:
● ACGIH has proposed a reduction in TLV from 10 ppm to 0.1ppm.
● NTP has released a carcinogenicity report on nPB. The NTP report found some evidence of carcinogeneicity for male rats, clear evidence of carcinogenicity in female rats, no evidence of carcinogenicity in male mice and clear evidence of carcinogenicity in female mice.
nPB is currently used as a substitute for PCE. The Board would like to know how many filers reported the use of nPB in 2011.
The Board requested a list of any of the chemicals that are A3 but not on the more hazardous list. The Board also requested a list of chemicals with TLV equal to or less than the proposed ACGIH (that are currently on the TURA list). Also they inquired as to how the A3 classification compares to an IARC rating? Does A3 come from the biological table from OSHA (the Z table)? Program staff will collect background information on this for the next meeting.
Next Meeting – November 7th, 8th or 14th
Handouts:
HFE data sheet
IARC Monograph Summary for Methylene Chloride
ACGIH TLV criteria document for Methylene Chloride
12th ROC document for Methylene Chloride
Updated Comparison EHS summary spreadsheet for TCE, Perc and Methylene Chloride
Proposed ACGIH TLV Criteria Document for NPB
Current ACGIH TLV Criteria Document for NPB
Fabjan, E. et al, A Category Approach for Reproductive Effects of Phthalates, Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 36:695-726, 2006.
Phthalate Ester data sheet