Evaluation of Safety and Environmental Metrics for Potential Application at Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities (2009)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Committee on Evaluation of the Safety and Environmental Metrics for Potential Application at Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities Board on Army Science and Technology Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences 

The National Academies Press   500 Fifth Street, N.W.   Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract/Grant No. W911NF-08-C-0053 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Army. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13:  978-0-309-13092-9 International Standard Book Number-10:  0-309-13092-1 Limited copies of this report are available from Additional copies are available from Board on Army Science and Technology The National Academies Press National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, N.W. 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Room 940 Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20055 (202) 334-3118 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America 

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of S ­ ciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal govern- ment. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org 



Committee on Evaluation of the Safety and Environmental Metrics for Potential Application at Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities J. Robert Gibson, Chair, Gibson Consulting, LLC, Wilmington, Delaware Ronald M. Bishop, AEHS, Inc., San Antonio, Texas Colin G. Drury, State University of New York at Buffalo James H. Johnson, Jr., Howard University, Washington, D.C. Randal J. Keller, Murray State University, Murray, Kentucky W. Monroe Keyserling, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Otis A. Shelton, Praxair, Inc., Danbury, Connecticut Levi T. Thompson, Jr., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Lawrence J. Washington, The Dow Chemical Company (retired), Midland, Michigan Staff MARGARET N. NOVACK, Study Director JAMES C. MYSKA, Senior Research Associate NIA D. JOHNSON, Senior Research Associate ALICE V. WILLIAMS, Senior Program Assistant  

BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MALCOLM R. O’NEILL, Chair, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired), Vienna, Virginia ALAN H. EPSTEIN, Vice Chair, Pratt & Whitney, East Hartford, Connecticut RAJ AGGARWAL, Rockwell Collins, Cedar Rapids, Iowa SETH BONDER, The Bonder Group, Ann Arbor, Michigan JAMES CARAFANO, The Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C. ROBERT L. CATTOI, Rockwell International Corporation (retired), Dallas, Texas DARRELL W. COLLIER, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command (retired), Leander, Texas JAY C. DAVIS, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (retired), Livermore, California PATRICIA K. FALCONE, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California RONALD P. FUCHS, The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington WILLIAM R. GRAHAM, National Security Research, Inc. (retired), San Marino, California PETER F. GREEN, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor CARL GUERRERI, Electronic Warfare Associates, Inc., Herndon, Virginia M. FREDERICK HAWTHORNE, University of Missouri, Columbia MARY JANE IRWIN, Pennsylvania State University, University Park ELLIOT D. KIEFF, Channing Laboratory, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts LARRY LEHOWICZ, Quantum Research International, Arlington, Virginia EDWARD K. REEDY, Georgia Tech Research Institute (retired), Atlanta DENNIS J. REIMER, DFI International (retired), Arlington, Virginia WALTER D. SINCOSKIE, Telcordia Technologies, Inc., Morristown, New Jersey MARK J.T. SMITH, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana MICHAEL A. STROSCIO, University of Illinois, Chicago JUDITH L. SWAIN, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla WILLIAM R. SWARTOUT, Institute for Creative Technologies, Marina del Rey, California EDWIN L. THOMAS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ELLEN D. WILLIAMS, University of Maryland, College Park Staff BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate DEANNA P. SPARGER, Program Administrative Coordinator vi 

Preface By the end of 2009, more than 60 percent of the aged the Army and its contractors to pay more attention global chemical weapons stockpile declared by signa- to safety and to continuously improve its safety and tories to the Chemical Weapons Convention will have environmental programs. been destroyed, and of the 184 signatories, only three The Army and its contractors have responded to countries will possess chemical weapons—the United the Stockpile Committee’s recommendations and States, Russia, and Libya. have, commendably, improved safety performance at In the United States, destruction of the chemical the chemical agent disposal facilities. At this time, weapons stockpile began in 1990, when Congress safety at chemical agent disposal facilities is far better mandated that the Army and its contractors destroy the than the national average for all industries. Even so, stockpile while ensuring maximum safety for workers, the Army and its contractors are desirous of further the public, and the environment. The destruction pro- improvement. To this end, the Chemical Materials gram has proceeded without serious exposure of any Agency (CMA) asked the NRC to assist by reviewing worker or member of the public to chemical agents, and CMA’s existing safety and environmental metrics and risk to the public from a storage incident involving the making recommendations on which additional metrics aging stockpile has been reduced by more than 90 per- might be developed to further improve its safety and cent from what it was at the time destruction began on environmental programs. Johnston Island and in the continental United States. This report is the product of the NRC’s response to While agent safety was of foremost concern during the Army’s request. As chair of the ad hoc Committee the initial years of destruction operations, the more on Evaluation of the Safety and Environmental Metrics traditional occupational safety and health programs for Potential Application at Chemical Agent Disposal were not emphasized as strongly as they should have Facilities, I wish to thank my fellow committee mem- been. The National Research Council’s (NRC’s) long- bers for their hard work and contributions to this report. time Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army The committee is grateful to the CMA for its schedul- Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program (the Stockpile ing of videoconferences and for its quick turnaround of Committee) in a series of reports repeatedly encour- committee questions to allow this report to be written in a timely manner. It is particularly grateful to Raj Malhotra, of the CMA, for facilitating the informa- In 2006, the Committee on Review and Evaluation of the Army tion gathering. The committee is also grateful to the Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program was replaced with the current Committee on Chemical Stockpile Demilitarization. Dow Chemical Company, Inc., and Praxair, Inc., for vii 

viii PREFACE their significant contributions to the committee’s con- research, and producing this report and shepherding it sideration of private sector safety and environmental through the NRC report review process. metrics. Finally, the committee is grateful to the NRC staff for their assistance in gathering data, conducting J. Robert Gibson, Chair Committee on Evaluation of the Safety and Environmental Metrics for Potential Application at Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities 

Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by indi- Robert F. Herrick, NAE, Harvard School of Public viduals chosen for their diverse perspectives and techni- Health, cal expertise, in accordance with procedures approved Kenneth W. Kizer, IOM, Kizer & Associates, LLC, by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report and Review Committee. The purpose of this independent Jimmy L. Perkins, University of Texas Health review is to provide candid and critical comments Science Center. that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report Although the reviewers listed above have provided meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, many constructive comments and suggestions, they and responsiveness to the study charge. The review were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recom- comments and draft manuscript remain confidential mendations nor did they see the final draft of the report to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We before its release. The review of this report was over- wish to thank the following individuals for their review seen by Hyla Napadensky. Appointed by the NRC, she of this report: was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accor- Joan B. Berkowitz, Farkas Berkowitz & Company, dance with institutional procedures and that all review F. Peter Boer, NAE, Tiger Scientific, Inc., comments were carefully considered. Responsibility Richard A. Conway, NAE, Union Carbide for the final content of this report rests entirely with the Corporation (retired), authoring committee and the institution. ix 



Contents SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 5 Chemical Weapons Stockpile, 5 Chemical Weapons Disposal Program, 5 Safety Challenge, 6 Statement of Task, 6 The Committee, Report Scope, and Process, 7 References, 7 2 Summary of current Safety and Environmental metrics at 8 chemical agent diSposal facilities Chemical Materials Agency, 8 Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, 9 Safety and Environmental Performance and Metrics, 9 Communication of Metrics, 10 Newport Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, 11 Safety and Environmental Performance and Metrics, 11 Communication of Metrics, 12 Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, 12 Safety and Environmental Performance and Metrics, 12 Communication of Metrics, 12 Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, 13 Safety and Environmental Performance and Metrics, 13 Communication of Metrics, 14 Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility, 14 Safety and Environmental Performance and Metrics, 14 Communication of Metrics, 14 xi 

xii CONTENTS 3 Review and Evaluation of Metrics Currently Used at 16 Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities Safety Metrics, 16 Environmental Metrics, 18 4 ASSESSMENT OF other metrics POTENTIALLY APPLICABLE TO 19 CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITIES 5 findings and recommendations 21 APPENDIXES A Glossary 27 B Safety and Environmental Metrics Employed by Private Companies Surveyed for 29 This Report C Committee Meetings 34 D Biographical Sketches of Committee Members 35 

Tables and Figure Tables 2-1 Chemical Demilitarization Site Injury Rates as of October 31, 2008, 10 2-2 Numbers of Environmental Enforcement Actions over the Last Five Fiscal Years, 10 2-3 Environmental Noncompliances by Site, 11 3-1 Types of Safety Metrics Employed at Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities, 17 B-1  Safety and Environmental Metrics Employed by Private Companies Surveyed for This Report, 30 Figure 1-1 Location, size (percentage of the original stockpile), and composition of the eight conti- nental U.S. storage sites, 6 xiii 

Acronyms and Abbreviations AIChE American Institute of Chemical LOPC loss of primary containment Engineers LWC lost workday case ANCDF Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility MACT Maximum Achievable Control AWFCO automatic waste feed cutoff Technology MVA motor vehicle accident BBP behavior-based process NECDF Newport Chemical Agent Disposal CDF chemical agent disposal facility Facility CMA Chemical Materials Agency (U.S. Army) CO2 carbon dioxide OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration DAWC day away from work case PBCDF Pine Bluff Chemical Agent Disposal EBS employee-based safety Facility EEA environmental enforcement action EH&S employee health and safety RCI root cause investigation EPA Environment Protection Agency RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ESH environmental, safety, and health RI recordable injury RIR recordable injury rate FAC first aid case RMTC reportable medical treatment case RWC restricted work case GB nerve agent (sarin) TOCDF Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility H mustard agent HD distilled mustard agent UMCDF Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal HT distilled mustard mixed with Facility bis(2-chloroethylthioethyl) ether VPP Voluntary Protection Programs JACADS Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal VX nerve agent System xiv