Assessment Project Symposium — October 28, 1999
Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center
Chemical Safety Program Assessment Project
GEORGE BUSH PRESIDENTIAL CONFERENCE CENTER
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS
MARY KAY O'CONNOR PROCESS SAFETY CENTER
CHEMICAL SAFETY PROGRAM
ASSESSMENT PROJECT SYMPOSIUM
OCTOBER 28, 1999
Reporter: Judith G. Werlinger
CSR 731, RMR CRR FAPR
2
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2
DR. SAM MANNAN, Facilitator
3 Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center
4 MS. KARI BARRETT (Group One Facilitator)
Chemical Manufacturers Association
5
MR. BILL ERNY
6 America Petroleum Institute
7 MIKE MARSHALL
OSHA
8
MR. JOHNNY WRIGHT
9 Amoco Corporation
10 MR. DAVID WHITE
Industrial Fire World
11
MR. JIM MAKRIS
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
13 MS. KATHY JONES
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
14
MR. LEE FELDSTEIN
15 National Safety Council
16 MR. WILLIAM ROGERS
Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center
17
MR. LUIS ARANGO
18 HSB Industrial Risk Insurers
19 MR. JIM OVERMAN (Group Two Facilitator)
Dow Chemical Company
20
MR. JOHN STEPHENS
21 Conoco
22 MR. JIM NORONHA
Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center
23
MR. TIM GABLEHOUSE (Group Three Facilitator)
24 Colorado Emergency Planning Commission
25
3
A P P E A R A N C E S
1
2 MS. LOIS EPSTEIN
Environmental Defense Fund
3
MR. JERRY POJE
4 Chemical Safety and Hazard Board
5 MR. ROBERT SMERKO
Chlorine Institute
6
MR. YIGAL RIEZEL
7 (Guest) Israel
8 MS. PAM KASTER
Citizens for a Cleaner Environment
9
MR. ROBERT BARRISH
10 State of Delaware DN Rec.
11 MR. BRAD CLEMENT
Vulcan Chemicals
12
MR. GREG KEEPORTS
13 Rohm & Haas Company
14 MS. IRENE JONES
Huntsman Corporation
15
MR. JERRY BRADSHAW
16 Texas A&M University, Chemical Engineering Dept.
17 MR. DAVE WILLETTE
18 MR. JOHN STEPHENS
19 MR. PHIL COGAN
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
20
MR. IRV ROSENTHAL
21 Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
22
23
24
25
4
1
2
INDEX
3 PAGE
Welcoming Comments - DR. DRAGOMIR BUKUR. 5
4 Introductions........................... 14
Overview/Procedures - DR. SAM MANNAN.... 18
5 Overview - Group One - KELI BARRETT..... 44
Overview - Group Two - JIM OVERMAN...... 46
6 Overview - Group Three - TIM GABLEHOUSE. 47
7 (Breakouts)
8 Lunch Session........................... 56
9 (Breakouts)
10 Conclusionary Session................... 115
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5
1 MORNING SESSION
2 DR. MANNAN: Good morning once again,
3 and welcome to the Chemical Safety Program Assessment
4 Roundtable Meeting. This is the second in a series of
5 roundtables that just started and a summary of the project
6 of what we have done, in a minute; but before I go there,
7 I'd like to introduce Dr. Dragomir Bukur. Dr. Bukur is
8 the Associate Department Head of Chemical Engineering.
9 He's going to give the official welcome.
10 Dr. Bukur.
11 DR. BUKUR: Good morning. Howdy.
12 (Audience reciprocates "Howdy")
13 DR. BUKUR: It's my pleasure to welcome
14 you on behalf of the Chemical Engineering Department. I
15 think I'll tell you a few things about our Department, for
16 those who are not familiar, and about the Center, and we
17 are proud to have the Center in our Department.
18 We are part of the College of Engineering,
19 and the College of Engineering has about 10,000 students
20 here at A&M; one of the largest colleges in the country.
21 And the Chemical Engineering Department has about 800
22 students at this time, and we graduate about 140 B.S.
23 Chemical Engineers, 15 Ph.D.s, and about 16 to 20 Masters
24 students. We are a pretty large program, by national
25 standards. And based on our number of chemical engineers
6
1 that we graduate, we graduate about 3% of all chemical
2 engineers in the United States.
3 What we do here has a large impact on
4 overall education in chemical engineering, and we are
5 fortunate to have the Mary Kay O'Connor Center established
6 at A&M about four years ago, through the generosity of Mr.
7 O'Connor, who endowed the Center, and who has been a great
8 supporter since then, and has contributed very generously
9 his time and great deal of commitment to the success of
10 the Center.
11 Also, the Center has a very active advisory
12 board and all kind of committees: technical, advisories,
13 steering committee; and this group is extremely
14 enthusiastic and very dedicated to the success of the
15 Center.
16 I think the Center has made great strides
17 since it was established four years ago, and its mission
18 is in the areas of education, research, and the service or
19 outreach, and in the area of education, where probably we
20 have great impact, because of the size of A&M's program,
21 in educating engineers.
22 The course in process safety was established
23 and is offered every semester here at A&M, and about 90
24 students take this course every year and are exposed to
25 the -- to the process safety aspects for this course; and
7
1 when they go to industry, then they are promoters of
2 safety from the integrated approach, and -- which ties the
3 safety consideration at the stage of design rather than at
4 the end as an add-on to the existing processes, to make
5 them safer. So I think that's one of the great
6 contributions that the Center makes towards education of
7 the students and promoting safety in chemical plants.
8 In terms of graduate education, I think we
9 are going to soon introduce some graduate courses on risk
10 assessment; again, broaden the area of process safety in
11 our curriculum. In terms of research, the Center has
12 initiated many, many initiatives, although it's a very
13 young center, but it already has very active programs in
14 the area of aerosol formation, dispersal modeling,
15 reactive chemicals, various databases for accidents and
16 hazardous substances; also has worked on the Y2K problem
17 for small- and medium-sized companies; and it has made a
18 great deal of accomplishment in a very short period of
19 time.
20 Also, we are very proud of the Center in
21 terms of its outreach and services; and has --
22 successfully, the second symposium has been completed the
23 last two days. We've had the symposium here to draw a
24 large number of people from industry, and has been very
25 successful. And, also, the Center has a lot of other -- a
8
1 newsletter, and its very active website, where one can
2 find useful information on all aspects of safety. So, so
3 we're really very proud of the accomplishments of the
4 Center during this short time that it has been at A&M.
5 I would like to wish you a success in your
6 meeting today. You're certainly working on an extremely
7 important topic and problem that, in the end, will make
8 all our plants in our community a safer place, and I wish
9 your success in this endeavor. And, once again, welcome
10 to Texas A&M. And I hope you'll have some time in your
11 busy meetings to enjoy some nice weather that we have
12 here. Welcome again. (Applause)
13 DR. MANNAN: Thank you, Dr. Bukur. I
14 think it is important -- very important for all of you to
15 know the kind of support we have. Dr. Anthony couldn't be
16 here today.
17 So, Dr. Bukur, thank you for coming in and
18 stepping in at this short period of time.
19 He has other commitments, so he will
20 probably be leaving in the morning, but coming back during
21 lunchtime. So he will be with us for lunch. If you have
22 questions regarding the Chemical Engineering Department or
23 other University activities, please feel free to stop him
24 and ask him about those things.
25 Again, let me extend a welcome from my part
9
1 on my behalf and for the Center. I think it shows a lot
2 of commitment on each one of your parts to be here; some
3 as far away as Australia, Mark Tweeddale, and our friend
4 from Israel, Yigal Yriezel.
5 Am I saying your name right?
6 MR. YRIEZEL: Yes.
7 DR. MANNAN: Okay. So there is a lot
8 of commitment from different people to participate in
9 these activities. There's a lot of interest in how this
10 activity progresses. Our Israeli friend has told us that
11 they're watching what they are doing -- what we are doing
12 so they can learn from us and maybe implement it there;
13 same as Mark's opinion in terms of what we're doing here.
14 Mark also brings an expedience with regard
15 to measurement systems, and he will participate in that
16 discussion in the measurement breakout.
17 Also, I've been told that there are some
18 people on the European side that may be interested in our
19 activities.
20 And, Kathy, if you want to share some of
21 those thoughts later, that would be interesting.
22 So not only is this project important to us
23 as a nation, as a country, as a community, but this
24 project is important also in the respect that others are
25 watching what we are doing, and they learn from us, or
10
1 have things -- input to give to us which may be
2 important.
3 Without taking anymore of your time, I'd
4 like to do two things; first, go over the agenda and tell
5 you what we want to do today and what the expected
6 outcomes may be. Another thing I want to do is recognize
7 a couple of organizations.
8 You know, the resources for this project and
9 the Center's other activities come from different
10 organizations or different sources. For example, we have
11 the main endowment from the O'Connor gift, and that forms
12 the core funding or permanent funding. There's University
13 support, there's industrial consortium support, and there
14 is project-to-project activities. There is symposium
15 activities, continuing education activities, and then
16 there is specific funding support for this project.
17 And I am pleased to announce today that we
18 have two other organizations joining in this effort, the
19 Chlorine Institute, Bob Smerko, if you would stand up or
20 raise your hand, whatever. (Applause). They have joined
21 the Center recently and I'm happy to have them here.
22 Also, HSB Industrial Risk Insurers, Luis Arango.
23 (Applause). So they have also joined this project, as
24 well as the Center consortium. Again, we're happy to have
25 them here. We're delighted to have the support, not only
11
1 financially, but also your time and your input. That's
2 very important. Really appreciate that personally, also.
3 The other thing I want to recognize is the
4 Presidential Conference Center staff and the Mary Kay
5 O'Connor Center staff. They always do a good job, and I
6 sometimes fail to recognize them by name; but Mark
7 Chalupka, sitting over there. I don't know how he does
8 it; but, you know, he seems to put everything together.
9 Yesterday when we left, this place was set up for the
10 exhibit area and the food area, and look what he's done
11 here. I think you stayed up here till 4 o'clock in the
12 morning. Thank you. (Applause).
13 You know, we always -- it's human nature
14 that when things go wrong, we do want to complain to
15 somebody, but we forget sometimes to recognize people who
16 do well with their jobs, and I don't want to make that
17 mistake. Thank you, Mark.
18 So let me go on into the agenda now. If you
19 look at the agenda, the one that's in your packets or the
20 ones that you picked up that were on the table, coming in,
21 there's several iterations. And even last night, when our
22 Project Advisory Committee met, we looked at it and we
23 said okay, we need to change some more. Okay. So here's
24 what we're going to do. Okay. This first joint part --
25 First of all, everything that happens in
12
1 this room is going to be transcribed by the court recorder
2 here. Let me see if I can say her name right. Judith
3 Weinberger (phonetic).
4 THE REPORTER: Werlinger.
5 DR. MANNAN: Werlinger. Judith
6 Werlinger. She goes by Judy. She says that only when she
7 gets in trouble she is called Judith (Laughter). I hope
8 you don't get in trouble today. So everything that
9 happens in this room is going to be recorded by her. When
10 we go into the breakout rooms, those are not recorded; but
11 when the reports come back from those, they will be
12 recorded again.
13 We'll start in this room for about an hour,
14 okay, maybe even less than that, where I'll give a summary
15 of what happened in June, and then the project progress to
16 date; and then after that, there are three subcommittees,
17 and I will describe those in a little bit more detail in a
18 minute. The three subcommittee chairs will spend a few
19 minutes -- I will leave it up to them how short they want
20 to be -- but a few minutes on telling what their concepts
21 are as to where they want to take their subcommittee
22 activities today.
23 Then we go into the breakout rooms and those
24 are going to be real roll-up-your-sleeves working
25 sessions, where you delve into the issues and come up
13
1 with -- last night I said that I'd like to, in a utopian
2 way, perfect situation, like to have an action plan.
3 Okay. But I'll tell you this very clearly; I recognize
4 that when you go into the breakout room, you may realize
5 that you don't have enough to develop an action plan yet.
6 That's okay. But if you're shooting for an ultimate goal,
7 it is the action plan we're looking for; but if that's not
8 possible, come back and report what you have
9 accomplished and why an action plan is not possible.
10 After -- so the breakout is probably going
11 to go on till noon. At noon, we're going to have lunch
12 brought in. Lunch is going to be typical Texas stuff
13 lunch: Barbecue. I hope y'all enjoy that. After lunch,
14 the subcommittee chairs will spend about 15 minutes each
15 reporting on what their subcommittees did, whether or not
16 they developed an action plan or what their findings were
17 or what they came up with. After that, there is going to
18 be a general discussion again for this whole group here in
19 this room. And then the general discussion shouldn't last
20 more than another half an hour or so. And then the
21 subcommittees are going to be sent back into the breakout
22 rooms to either revise what they have done or do something
23 different. It's up to them.
24 After that, what I want to do is spend maybe
25 about 15, 20 minutes deciding what our next step should
14
1 be: When we should meet again; should it be the whole
2 group; should it be smaller groups; what the Project
3 Advisory Committee should do in the interim; whether or
4 not the project team, the people that are working in the
5 Center, they should be do something that's different;
6 whatever the issues may be. Now, that's the game plan for
7 the whole day today.
8 Before we go to the summary of the June
9 meeting and the project progress to date, there are a
10 couple -- another couple of things I'd like to do; number
11 one, go around the room and have everyone introduced. I
12 know most of you know everybody, but I think it's a good
13 thing to say the names, the organizations, and any other
14 comments they might have. Because the first time we came
15 here, as you know, we really didn't have a good idea where
16 we were going to go. But a lot of people now have a
17 pretty good idea of what we did and where we want to go.
18 So if you want to make a few comments, that's fine. And
19 then the next thing I want to do is have you ask any
20 questions, either procedural or outcome issues.
21 Start right over here with Kari.
22 MS. BARRETT: Kari Barrett, Chemical
23 Manufacturers Association, and I will make some comments a
24 little later.
25 MR. ERNY: Bill Erny with the American
15
1 Petroleum Institute. This is my first meeting, so I'm
2 here to catch up maybe a little bit and get a better idea
3 on where the whole activity is headed, so I know we would
4 like to support the activity.
5 MR. WILLETTE: Hi. I'm Dave Willette.
6 I am here with the Center. And I can only say how
7 exciting it has been to deal with these issues and, and
8 look at what we can do, if we do it right, and the changes
9 we can make for our industry and really for our country.
10 MR. WRIGHT: I'm Johnny Wright with PPM
11 Amoco, Process Safety Specialist.
12 MR. MARSHALL: I'm Mike Marshall with
13 OSHA out of Washington. I'm like Bill, it's my first
14 meeting and I'm excited to be here. I think this is a
15 real good project, and I'm happy to support it.
16 MR. WHITE: Dave White with Industrial
17 Fire World. And I am just really excited from what I see
18 happening here. And I just think that this group and
19 organization will make an impact, and I think that you
20 people should be proud what Sam and everybody is doing
21 here.
22 MR. MAKRIS: I'm Jim Overman from
23 Dow. (Laughter). My name is Jim Makris, and I'm from the
24 Environmental Protection Agency.
25 MS. JONES: Hi. I'm Kathy Jones with
16
1 the Environmental Protection Agency.
2 MR. FELDSTEIN: Lee Feldstein, National
3 Safety Council.
4 MR. ROGERS: Bill Rogers from the
5 Center, Experimental Research.
6 MR. ARANGO: Hi. I'm Luis Arango, HSB
7 Industrial Risk Insurers.
8 MR. OVERMAN: I'm Jim Makris with the
9 EPA, and I'm here to help you. (Laughter).
10 I'm Jim Overman from Dow Chemical.
11 MR. STEPHENS: John Stephens with
12 Conoco.
13 MR. NORONHA: John Noronha from the
14 Center. I just recently retired from Eastman Kodak.
15 MR. GABLEHOUSE: Tim Gablehouse. I'm a
16 member of the Colorado Emergency Planning Commission and
17 also chair the EPC in Colorado.
18 MS. EPSTEIN: Lois Epstein with the
19 Environmental Defense Fund in D.C.
20 MR. POJE: Jerry Poje with the U. S.
21 Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.
22 DR. TWEEDDALE: Mark Tweeddale,
23 semi retired from the Department of Chemical Engineering,
24 University of Sydney.
25 MR. YRIEZEL: Yigal Yriezel, a guest
17
1 from Israel.
2 MR. SMERKO: Bob Smerko with Chlorine
3 Institute, and delighted to be here.
4 MS. KASTER: Pam Kaster, Citizens for a
5 Cleaner Environment, and pleased to be involved with a
6 project that is solution-oriented.
7 MR. BARRISH: Bob Barrish, State of
8 Delaware, representing the state perspective.
9 MR. BESWICK: I'm Paul Beswick. This
10 is also my first meeting. I am really excited to be here
11 as well. I am with the Metropolitan Water District of
12 Southern California. We're water wholesalers, supplyig
13 water to essentially southern California, to 16, 20
14 million people. Also a major user of chlorine for water
15 disinfection. We are very concerned, of course, about how
16 we handle chlorine, and our concern goes beyond that to
17 the water industry in general in the states, and so we're
18 hoping by our participation to gain a leadership role in
19 helping to make the world safer.
20 MR. CLEMENT: Brad Clement with Vulcan
21 Chemicals.
22 MR. KEEPORTS: Greg Keeports with Rohm
23 & Haas Co.
24 MS. JONES: Irene Jones with Huntsman.
25 MR. BRADSHAW: I am Jerry Bradshaw,
18
1 Chemical Engineering Department. Also I assist Sam
2 whenever he needs it, and the Center.
3 MR. COGAN: I'm Carol Brawner
4 (phonetic) from EPA. (Laughter). I'm glad to see Jim
5 Makris has gotten better looking.
6 Phil Cogan with the Chemical Safety Board.
7 MR. ROSENTHAL: Irv Rosenthal, Chemical
8 Safety Board.
9 DR. MANNAN: Thank y'all very much.
10 Now let's spend a few minutes on any questions or issues
11 that you may have on procedure or outcome.
12 Irv.
13 MR. ROSENTHAL: Sam, one of the things
14 I wonder in the afternoon as to whether we could perhaps
15 shorten the report period by 15 minutes each, and I will
16 tell you the reason why.
17 The main objective ultimately is target
18 reduction goals, which are going to depend on metrics
19 based on data. The question is that we need to ask
20 ourselves, when we get the reports, is it possible to get
21 the type of metrics we need from the database. In other
22 words, some time to integrate and see where we stand
23 relative to the three subcommittees. And it might be
24 worth trying to carve out a half hour in which we review
25 the questions: Are these three separate efforts focused
19
1 to get to the common goal.
2 DR. MANNAN: You know, just leave it to
3 Irv to cut to the chase and go right to the heart of the
4 matter.
5 You know, Irv, last night when the Project
6 Advisory Committee met, we spent a little bit of time --
7 quite a bit of time talking exactly about this. And
8 ultimately, I don't know if the consensus was that or not,
9 but we agreed to disagree to the point where we said that,
10 let's let this work parallel for the time being, because
11 each group may come back and tell the other group, saying
12 that y'all work these to modify in this respect, that's
13 what I need in my work. So, yes, we want to proceed
14 parallel for a little while, and then maybe we want to
15 make it sequential later on.
16 Anyone else on the Project Advisory
17 Committee want to add anything to that?
18 MR. OVERMAN: We could have had our
19 meeting in about 10 minutes instead of an hour and a half,
20 if Irv had been there to express it so well.
21 DR. MANNAN: Exactly. Exactly.
22 Well, thank you, Irv. And as I said, you
23 just cut to the chase and go right to the heart of the
24 matter. That's why we like to have you here.
25 Judy tells me that for her to transcribe it
20
1 better, if you will tell your name, then she can
2 transcribe it better, before you speak.
3 MR. MAKRIS: Jim Makris.
4 Sam, there might be some time, if we could
5 figure out how to work through the lunchtime. It might be
6 an advantage -- I assume we're going to have a box lunch
7 or something like that.
8 DR. MANNAN: Well, we don't have box
9 lunches, we have the barbecue; but we can serve ourselves
10 and then sit down.
11 MR. OVERMAN: We may save a half hour
12 if we could, you know, do that.
13 DR. MANNAN: Okay. No problem. Any
14 other questions on procedure?
15 Okay. Let me start then by giving a summary
16 of the project, and move on.
17 You know, I like to give credit where credit
18 is due, because I also like to be critical when people
19 don't do a good job; as many of you do, too. Okay. And
20 in this world, I think there are three types of people:
21 The ones -- there are ones who make things happen, and
22 then there are those ones that are part of things that
23 happen, and then there are ones who watch things happen.
24 Okay.
25 I'd like to believe that all of us in this
21
1 room are probably in the first category: We're trying to
2 make things happen. Okay. But I think one of the
3 foremost in that is probably Jim Makris and some of the
4 others that sat with me and thought of this idea. I thank
5 Jim and Tim Gablehouse and, to some extent, Fred Mylar,
6 when we first started talking about this; but Jim
7 particularly.
8 After the Center was formed and we first had
9 our first symposium, and we started talking about making
10 safety second nature, I did my first presentation about
11 what our thoughts about the Center's activities were. He
12 and I started talking and we had some serious thought as
13 to where chemical safety should go. So I want to give him
14 good credit as one of the persons who wants to make things
15 happen. Has the vision. Okay. It was not -- I don't
16 want to take credit for the whole idea. I did take it and
17 run with it. But he did encourage me. And as Tim
18 Gablehouse would say, he pulled out his pom-poms and
19 became the cheerleader and started jumping up and down
20 (laughter) and encouraged me on.
21 And I think we have made a lot of progress.
22 But I also want to say that this progress is meaningless
23 if we don't keep moving, don't keep the momentum, and then
24 also don't keep wide involvement of all stakeholders.
25 Okay. We are going to make mistakes as we go along, and
22
1 hopefully recover from those mistakes, and those mistakes
2 are not going to be deadly mistakes.
3 One of the things that I want all of you to
4 be aware of at all times is that we must let everyone
5 speak their mind. We must respect everyone's opinion, no
6 matter how extreme or how different those opinions may be
7 from ours.
8 Another thing I want to encourage you to do
9 is, if you feel that a certain stakeholder group is
10 under-represented, is not here, or we don't have the right
11 people, tell me, tell the Project Advisory Committee. We
12 will do our best to get them here. Okay.
13 Sometimes some of these stakeholder groups,
14 particularly non-industry and non-government groups, they
15 don't have funding for travel or expenses. We'll try to
16 help with that, and we have done so in the past. But we
17 will bend over backwards to include all stakeholders.
18 Because, as I said, the success that we might have in this
19 project are meaningless if we don't have wide stakeholder
20 participation. And I for one will do everything possible
21 to make sure that that happens.
22 So if you see something that you see is
23 missing, either in the stakeholder group or the proper
24 representation from the stakeholder group, bring it to my
25 attention, and we will do the best we can.
23
1 That's what I mean by the first bullet here, "The
2 stakeholder consensus."
3 So when we first started talking about it,
4 we said, No. 1, we do want to improve chemical safety and
5 that's one of the steps; but how do we get there? Okay.
6 In order to get there, we have to establish base line, we
7 have to establish measurement systems, we have to
8 establish target introduction goals, and so on. So that
9 is when we get some initial work starting early this
10 year. And -- well, started late last year; but early this
11 year, most of the bulk of the work was done. As we
12 started putting some of the material and some of the
13 documents together, we realized that in order to get more
14 input from the people who were, so to say, in the
15 hinterland or, so to say, in the front lines, we need to
16 get a larger group together and see where we're going to
17 go. So that's when this idea of the June roundtable
18 meeting came about and we pulled that together.
19 The June roundtable meeting...let me first
20 refresh your memory as to how we went about putting that
21 roundtable meeting together. We sat down again with folks
22 from EPA, some from the industry, some from public
23 interest groups. Some of them, we talked directly
24 face-to-face. Some talked on the phone. And we canvassed
25 as to what kind of groups need to be. And I think we came
24
1 out with a long list of federal agencies, state agencies,
2 industry groups, professional trade unions, academia,
3 public interest groups, environmental groups, LEPCs,
4 citizens groups, and so on. And then as we went through
5 there, we started pulling together names of people that
6 would fit certain criteria. For example, they were the
7 right people with the right expertise; second thing, they
8 believed passionately in the subject; and the third thing
9 is that they wanted to make a difference, wanted to
10 contribute.
11 Invitations went out to them. And the
12 invitation group was a total of about 70, or 70 plus.
13 Finally -- schedule issues and other issues -- about 45
14 accepted the invitation, maybe even closer to 50. I can't
15 remember the right number, but those are on your report
16 given to you. About 50 or so came to the June roundtable
17 meeting. Before they came, of course, they were sent a
18 briefing binder with some of the initial thoughts of where
19 we were and where we wanted to go. The briefing binder
20 also contained, what we call five briefing papers and five
21 different issues that the project identified.
22 The group of 45 or 50 studied the briefing
23 binder, came to the June Roundtable Meeting which was held
24 exactly in this same room, and over two full days, pretty
25 intensive days, the first day was used for the initial
25
1 presentations and the briefing papers. The second day was
2 mainly used for working session breakout groups. And
3 ultimately, through an unorthodox, very unscientific way,
4 I'll admit, we threw up everyone's idea, what they wanted
5 to see happen in chemical safety, and there were some
6 flip-charts all over the room, and we collated those. We
7 did not have extensive discussion on each one of those
8 items, I'll grant you that, but there was some discussion
9 back and forth.
10 There was some discussion as to which item
11 was synonymous with another item, combination/collation of
12 items, and then finally we asked everybody to vote on
13 them. And the way we did the voting was that -- you know,
14 I don't know, there were maybe 30 or so items that were
15 thrown up on those flip-charts -- but everyone in the room
16 was given three votes. Pick the three items that are
17 nearest and dearest to your heart. As I said, very
18 unorthodox way, very unscientific way of doing it; but a
19 way to do it.
20 And as we picked -- collated those votes
21 back, I will tell you one incredible thing happened.
22 There was wide consensus in the top three items. I mean,
23 you look at the voting again -- I can't remember the
24 numbers, but if you will look at the report, the top three
25 got like close to 30 votes, and then a very sharp drop-off
26
1 to the fourth one and on to the 29th or 30th, however many
2 there were. I think that's -- the third one was, like, 24
3 votes and the fourth one was nine.
4 So I submitted at that time, I submit to you
5 even now, that basically that group came together and had
6 a consensus of what they saw as a national goal, within a
7 certain margin of error again, that a study like that
8 has. And then the issue was: What do we do about this?
9 Okay.
10 Another thing that happened was that, give
11 them the diversity of the whole stakeholder group. They
12 came together and adopted a very, very profound and
13 thought-provoking vision. There was some debate that that
14 is not possible; but on the other hand, there was wide
15 agreement that any vision shorter than zero chemical
16 accidents is probably not right. Because it doesn't
17 matter which side of the aisle you come from, to say that
18 I'll get up in the accident (sic), assuming that there's
19 -- I will get up in the morning assuming that there's
20 going to be an accident, is not practical or is not
21 right. We should all shoot for a vision of zero chemical
22 accidents. That may not be or that may be a utopian goal
23 in the near future, but that's the vision you have to
24 strive for; anything short of that is probably not
25 right.
27
1 Again, there is, more or less, a unanimous
2 consensus on that. We have some disagreements, there may
3 be some issues that maybe we're going too far ahead
4 without thinking through; but still, I think we had a
5 consensus on that.
6 So after that again, it became: How do we
7 implement this? So what we did is we put together three
8 subcommittees, and the three subcommittees were charged
9 with those three goals. How do you make those three goals
10 happen? The idea being, if you make those three goals
11 happen, we will sooner or later -- hopefully sooner --
12 accomplish the vision that we had all agreed on.
13 Those three subcommittees were led by three
14 chairs or facilitators, if you are more comfortable with
15 that terminology; I don't really care. But the first goal
16 was the national data system, the second goal was the
17 development of a measurement system, the third goal was
18 targeted reduction goals. So we selected three
19 subcommittees.
20 Now I also tell you this; that those three
21 subcommittees that were selected is something that we just
22 pulled together and we don't have to stick with if we
23 don't want to. If they are not the right people that need
24 to be in that subcommittee, we need to change that.
25 That's all possible. Also, we can add people, if we need
28
1 to, okay, if you think the right people are not there.
2 So based on that findings of that
3 roundtable, we also did a couple of other things. We
4 constituted a Project Advisory Committee. Okay? If
5 P-A-C, PAC doesn't sound like the right acronym for you,
6 we can adopt another acronym. But the way I look at that
7 Project Advisory Committee is that it's more of -- more or
8 less a coordinating committee or project oversight
9 committee that works on a more day-to-day basis with both
10 the subcommittee chairs and the project group here at the
11 Center to make sure that the thoughts of the larger group
12 are being implemented. Okay. So we've put some structure
13 and mechanism into place to make sure everyone's input is
14 taking place.
15 The Project Advisory Committee has met only
16 once face-to-face, we had a conference call, there's
17 e-mail conversations, and so on and so forth. I hope the
18 Project Advisory Committee is going to get more active and
19 participate in the whole process. I realize the time
20 constraints of the different people involved, but still I
21 hope that we'll get some more input from them.
22 Project progress to date. We have several
23 people working on this project, and those of you who
24 attended the two days of symposium and met some of the
25 people. But specifically, I want to mention two things
29
1 very briefly. One is the database work that has been
2 going on.
3 On the database work we have done, a lot of
4 database analysis, we have looked at different databases.
5 We have produced an analysis of those different databases.
6 Some of have been published/some have not been published.
7 Also, Eboni McCray, one of the graduate students, is
8 working on this problem and -- as part of her thesis. She
9 will be here later in the morning to talk to you about
10 what she has accomplished. But as far as her thesis, she
11 has come up with a database proposal. And in the database
12 subcommittee, this will be discussed in more detail
13 later. But to this whole larger group I want to caution
14 you, that the database proposal she comes up with is not
15 even a guidance to you; it's -- she's just thrown it up as
16 an example. Okay? Or take it as something to start your
17 talks. Seed talks. Okay? So don't assume that that's
18 something set in concrete. You know, as I said last
19 night, too, she is focused on her thesis, and she wants to
20 show that there is an end to what she has done. So she
21 comes from that point of view and she feels very strong
22 about that. As far as this committee is concerned, take
23 that just as an example.
24 Another work we have ongoing, some of the
25 others in the Center, have been working on coming up with
30
1 a mechanism to describe or relate safety with business
2 objectives or performance issues. The idea is this, okay.
3 Even though that kind of a measurement system really does
4 not measure progress in terms of national chemical safety
5 issues, but we are really struggling with two types of
6 problems; one is how do you encourage chemical safety on
7 an individual company basis; two is, how do you measure
8 progress on a national basis? I think on a national basis
9 is to measure progress. And that's why I'm really
10 delighted to have Mark Tweeddale from Australia over
11 here. He has some ideas of how measurement systems can be
12 used and identify this on an international basis. And he
13 will be happy to make some comments in the measurement
14 system -- or metrics subcommittee.
15 Is that right, Mark?
16 DR. TWEEDDALE: I'll try, Sam. That's
17 all I can say.
18 DR. MANNAN: He's very humble and
19 modest, but I have great hopes of what he can contribute.
20 The other thing is that in terms of the
21 individual company issues, the idea is that, you know, as
22 long as safety is viewed as something that takes away from
23 the bottom line, then we'll always have divergent
24 opinions, depending on which stakeholder group you are
25 coming from. Okay? But I have always felt that safety
31
1 contributes to the bottom line as contrasted or taking
2 away from the bottom line. But the point or the challenge
3 we have is how do we show it to both the person who is
4 running the company and to all the stakeholder groups.
5 We have come up with certain mechanisms --
6 we have not, I think, finalized it or developed it into a
7 state where we can present actual co-relationships, but
8 just come up with certain mechanisms to where we can show
9 that safety is directly related to business objectives and
10 operational issues. One example I can give you is that
11 every company does statistical process control. And that
12 is usually the key two words, "operational issues," like
13 producing specification product. But I will submit to you
14 that the company that has problems with this statistical
15 cost control, with variables going up and down all over
16 the place, that not only produce that -- or off-spec
17 product, which causes a loss for the company, or less
18 profit, but they also have more accidents or more safety
19 problems. Okay? So that's one example of where safety
20 can be related to operational issues, that it can be
21 related to the performance issues and business
22 objectives.
23 There is several other examples like that,
24 and we are working through it, and maybe we will come up
25 with a quantitative way of doing that. So that's some of
32
1 the work that's been ongoing. Again, both of these things
2 with Mark Tweeddale's suggestions or presentation, and
3 Dave Willette's comments on what he has been able to do,
4 treat that not as concrete stuff that needs to be done in
5 this project, but as examples of where we want and might
6 go, or a seeding policy. Okay?
7 Other activity that's been going on is that
8 even before we started this national goals project, we had
9 a couple of students working on compiling different
10 instances and putting them in a database for either our
11 research purposes or access to others. For example,
12 somebody calls and says, "I've got this chemical. Do you
13 know," for instance, "is there hazard in this chemical?"
14 And we can go to the database and tell them. Where do we
15 get these instances? Either from publicly available
16 databases that are in the public domain or from newspaper
17 reports.
18 Okay. The students go through that, sort it
19 out, develop a reasonable description of what happened
20 against it, and put that in the computer database. Right
21 now that database is available. But for today, and for
22 the symposium also the last couple of days, we had made
23 that database available, generally in the computer. If
24 any of you want to go and look through that and see what's
25 in there, again, that's a suggestion of how the database
33
1 might be set up, how access is provided, how that could be
2 used for analysis and so on. Feel free to look through
3 that. It doesn't have to do anything with this project;
4 but again, that's an idea of how things might work
5 together.
6 So those are things that we have been doing
7 up to now. There are other things going on. I don't want
8 to dwell on those anymore. But if you have questions
9 about other things or issues, feel free to bring them up.
10 What we're -- very quickly, I want to remind
11 you, or put in front of you, the vision and the goals. As
12 you go through the day today and during your
13 deliberations, keep this in your mind all the time. In
14 fact, what I would suggest -- we have some flips charts --
15 is we can write up the vision in those three goals and
16 have them made available in each one of the breakout
17 rooms. I think that would work.
18 We have each of the breakout rooms under
19 chairs. Keep this vision and these three goals in mind
20 all the time. Because you may still disagree or have
21 certain issues with the vision and the goals in that
22 report that's been issued, but I want to tell you or
23 remind you that there's been a lot of work in that. There
24 is a lot of agreement from a larger group there. Let's
25 not throw it all away. If we want to tweak some of that,
34
1 we want to add to some of that, we want to change your
2 understanding of some of that, but keep that in front of
3 you all the time.
4 What is the national chemical safety
5 vision? "Reduce chemical process accidents to zero while
6 building public trust through community interaction."
7 That's a very profound statement. Okay. Zero, that we
8 understand. But another thing you need to throw in there
9 is public trust. And that's why I keep saying that the
10 stakeholders that are here/that are not here are going to
11 listen to all of that. Okay? If you increase
12 participation, if you feel that someone is not here, you
13 feel someone needs support to get here, let me know.
14 Okay? Because if we don't open it up, the public trust
15 part, we will never have. Okay?
16 Community interaction, that's also very
17 important. In that case, I want to recognize Pam Kaster
18 for Citizens for a Cleaner Environment for taking the time
19 to come here.
20 And these three goals that I want to keep in
21 front -- that I want you to keep in front of you all the
22 time throughout the whole day, and any other activities
23 that we do, are these. Again, as I said, you may differ
24 in opinion with some of these, but we have done a lot of
25 work to get here, and there's a lot of support and energy
35
1 behind it. So keep these in front of you. You may tweak
2 it a little bit, may add to it. Keep it in front of you.
3 The national data system that we are talking
4 about, couple of things I want to point out to you. This
5 is not just instances, it's also near-misses. Because
6 ultimately, if we don't bring near-misses into the
7 equation, it's not going to be helpful.
8 Also, it has to be related to actual
9 causes. So any data system you come up with, that has to
10 be data, and we should be able to use it to establish a
11 chemical safety base line.
12 Metrics, we've already talked about that and
13 the ones that can relate to performance measures or
14 performance and business objective. And then establish
15 targeted reduction goals. Very lofty and profound goals.
16 And as I said in my earlier remarks, I'd like to come up
17 with an action plan, if possible. But I know that's not
18 very realistic; that's very ambitious; it may not be
19 possible. That's okay. But what we need to do is make
20 sure we move forward in a proper, methodical manner.
21 So with those comments, I will open it up
22 for any questions or issues that you may have. Lois.
23 MS. EPSTEIN: Sam, what is your
24 long-term time frame on this? I mean, are we supposed to
25 come close to an action plan today or is it a two-year
36
1 project?
2 MR. ROSENTHAL: Use the mic, Lois.
3 MS. EPSTEIN: I was asking what the
4 overall time frame is for the project, whether we should
5 aim for a year completion today, or is it two years or
6 what? I just don't have a sense of how long we'll be
7 working on this.
8 DR. MANNAN: Okay. We've discussed
9 this last night, too, in our Project Advisory Committee.
10 And there are two things that we need to keep in mind.
11 First of all, I said, "I would like an action plan." And
12 then a few others in the room said, "Hey, wait a minute,
13 you know. It may not move as fast. And, you know, if you
14 come up with a national plan that's not well thought out
15 and is haphazard, you do more harm than good." But then
16 there are others in the room that said, "Look, there's a
17 lot of energy and momentum and support behind this, and if
18 y'all don't accomplish something pretty soon, that support
19 and momentum is going to go away."
20 So I am going to push the whole group today
21 to go towards a national plan; but if you think that they
22 are not well thought out ideas, half-baked ideas, things
23 that we may be criticized for, then don't push yourself
24 that bad. At the minimum, what I'd like to see is that
25 you come in and say that: Well, we thought about this
37
1 action plan, but here's why we can't do it yet; and in
2 order to do it, we have to go back and create this data.
3 In terms of time frame, at least within the
4 next six months or even less, I think we should have some
5 kind of national plan.
6 MS. EPSTEIN: So you're basically
7 aiming for completion in the short-term of these work
8 groups?
9 DR. MANNAN: No. The support -- the
10 subcommittees, they will stay alive for quite a long time,
11 even after we develop the action plan. Because the
12 action plan would have to be implemented.
13 For example, let's say the data system. If
14 the action plan comes up with here's how we can establish
15 this system, here's the facts, here's how the funding is
16 going to come, here is where it's going to be housed, here
17 is how the reporting is going to be done, here is how it's
18 going to be accessed, that is the action plan. But then
19 how do we get it done?
20 So I would say the subcommittees stay alive.
21 But I would like to see between now and the next six
22 months, at least to get an action plan finalized. Maybe
23 I'm overambitious, but I would like others to comment on
24 it. Paul.
25 MR. BESWICK: I totally agree with you,
38
1 Sam. I think that out of today should come an action
2 plan, whether it be a draft action plan or an initial
3 action plan, with some rough outlines of where we're going
4 to go. I think we have to come away from today with
5 something in the very specifics.
6 The next thought is the zero accident. I
7 think it should be a goal rather than a vision. And what
8 I'm thinking of is that in terms of -- Tim and I had
9 discussion on this -- total quality management. Zero
10 defects is not a vision, it's a goal. And I think we need
11 to be thinking in those terms. And that is achieved not
12 by, you know, a specific group within an organization
13 striving for that, it's achieved by a zero defect culture
14 in the organization.
15 I'm keying off of something that Irv had
16 quoted. We should also be thinking in terms of trying to
17 instill a safety culture in the industry as the method of
18 achieving that, not just the mechanics of establishing
19 database, setting goals; but I think we should also have
20 the underlying objective here to also establish that as a
21 culture within the industry.
22 DR. MANNAN: Okay. I'm going to go to
23 Paul first and then to Jim. I mean -- I said Paul. I
24 mean Pam. It was Paul. I'm sorry.
25 MS. KASTER: Pam Kaster, Citizens for a
39
1 Cleaner Environment.
2 Quick question. Where are small businesses
3 and when are we going to pull them in?
4 DR. MANNAN: Let me answer that very
5 briefly. I think small businesses, if you want to define
6 them -- different people define in a different manner. As
7 I go around the room, there are not many in here that are
8 probably the right definition of small business, depending
9 on who you have --
10 MR. ROSENTHAL: Name one besides Dow
11 that's a small business. (Laughter)
12 DR. MANNAN: Dow is the only one that's
13 a small business.
14 MR. OVERMAN: After the sale, we will
15 be a large business. (Laughter)
16 DR. MANNAN: But if you look at some of
17 the employee institute membership -- and Bob is going to
18 disagree with me, that's fine. But if you look at some of
19 the membership, they are small businesses.
20 Another person that will join us -- or two
21 other people that are supposed to join us later in the day
22 are representatives of small businesses, Dr. Harry West,
23 who is participating in the Center, but he really
24 represents the small businesses, and Angela Summers --
25 Dr. Angela Summers. She is also representing small
40
1 business.
2 But another thing I would like to point out
3 to you...I have tried real hard, for example, to get the
4 National Propane Gas Association here, Texas Propane Gas
5 Association, and some of the others. National Association
6 of Chemical Distributors. But it's really hard to even
7 get their trade associations over here.
8 If you know somebody that's interested,
9 wants to come, even needs some travel support to come, let
10 me know. Yes, we can do everything to get them here, but
11 we can provide some subsidies to get them here. So we
12 will work with them. Okay. Jim. Now, this is Jim
13 Makris.
14 MR. OVERMAN: Yeah, Jim Makris here.
15 MR. MAKRIS: Small agency.
16 MR. OVERMAN: First, I concur. I think
17 we need to move quickly or at least with some
18 determination to get something in place. Because support
19 will dwindle if we don't show some concrete results.
20 Just a comment on goals versus vision. I
21 think we've decided at the last meeting we could spend
22 hours and hours and hours arguing what's the vision and
23 what's the goal. The key thing here is, what all of us
24 see is an environment in which the public and our workers
25 are not adversely impacted by what we do in our business.
41
1 We can make that a vision or a goal, I don't care. We do
2 need to have intermediate steps along. I said last night
3 we needed to find an excuse to celebrate, and say, you
4 know, this -- we will achieve something that's very
5 significant here and we need to celebrate that. And those
6 have to be intermediate steps. And we can call those
7 goals, milestones or whatever; the key here is to
8 demonstrate that we can go in the right direction and we
9 can make an impact on what's going on.
10 MR. MAKRIS: Jim Makris.
11 Yogi Bera once said -- you know, the creator
12 of deja vu all over again -- once said, "If you don't set
13 goals, you can't regret not reaching them." I think we
14 need to keep that in mind. Typical Yogi Bera.
15 On a small- and medium-sized enterprise --
16 Jerry may want to weigh in on this -- but we had a
17 roundtable in Washington a couple of weeks ago where I was
18 astounded at the intellect that two or three small
19 businessmen brought to the table, along with this optimal
20 organization. And I really think we need to reach out to
21 some of those folks, because they bring a very special
22 dimension to this problem. They bring a dimension of
23 conscience of small business into this picture.
24 One of the folks that was at the meeting
25 with Jerry and I there, were the third generation owner of
42
1 a chemical plant in New Jersey who carried an enormous,
2 both economic and family and social conscience to these
3 issues. And I think that those would be -- there are
4 people who have that kind of issue that we would be able
5 to represent the small- and medium-sized enterprise.
6 The third one, I think we think a little bit
7 about why some of us are here, it's because we've decided
8 -- I think we've decided; our goal says we've decided --
9 that we have a common stake in the success of this
10 undertaking. Whether you are representing an
11 environmental action group or you're representing an
12 industry or LEPC or an organization that makes money on
13 consultantships in this industry or whether you're a
14 company itself or a small organization like Dow or big
15 place like CEPPO, you have the opportunity to have some
16 influence on the direction in which we can go, and to
17 share not only -- not only the output, but share the
18 fruits of your labor in an aggregate way and show progress
19 being made.
20 I think that that means we have to move fast
21 on it. Because there are people with more selfish goals
22 that are on the edges of where we are, who want to make
23 their own points. And if we can't get ahead with that
24 process, I think we will indeed be told what to do rather
25 than be able to march to our own drum.
43
1 I think we have the right music, we have the
2 right standard, we have the right direction, we have the
3 right view. Others would probably like to do it instead.
4 And if we cannot move forward, we will be chasing them
5 rather than leading them.
6 DR. MANNAN: I second that opinion
7 completely.
8 Any other comments? Interest? Okay.
9 Comment.
10 MR. BESWICK: Sorry. Sorry. I, I
11 wanted to key off this issue of small business, and I
12 think it's something we can't lose sight of. And I'm
13 wondering whether there should be maybe a fourth
14 subcommittee dedicated to making sure that the message
15 gets out to small businesses. Or else each of the
16 existing subcommittees, when they come back with their
17 action plan, include as part of that action plan
18 specifically how -- what they're recommending will be
19 effective with small businesses.
20 DR. MANNAN: I like the second option
21 better. Okay. Because I think each step of the way you
22 need to think: Will this work for small business? Will
23 this work for small business? Or how do we get small
24 business involved in this? So let's do it the second
25 way.
44
1 Any other comments?
2 Well, then what I will do is let the
3 subcommittee chairs go and make their initial comments.
4 Try to keep them brief, because I'd really like you to
5 roll up your sleeves in the breakout groups.
6 Kari Barrett, Chair of the National Data
7 System Subcommittee.
8 MS. BARRETT: Do I come up or just
9 speak from here?
10 DR. MANNAN: You can speak from there
11 if you're more comfortable, or you can put this on.
12 MS. BARRETT: That's fine.
13 DR. MANNAN: Okay.
14 MS. BARRETT: Can everyone hear me?
15 Kari Barrett.
16 Sam, you just essentially want us to go over
17 what we hope to accomplish in our sessions this morning.
18 I had put together some materials for the
19 subcommittee really only as a starting point; as Sam has
20 said, sort of seeding thoughts. And we will, as we start
21 as a subcommittee, have an opportunity for everyone who's
22 there, to have a few minutes to offer some of those
23 seeding thoughts, to help us with our perspective, and our
24 understanding of the issue. Then we will spend just a
25 brief amount of time talking about some of the conclusions
45
1 on the subject that came out of the June meeting. Then we
2 will talk a bit about the characteristics or essential
3 features of the National Data System. This is essentially
4 the stakeholder needs assessment, what we need in this
5 database, and then spend some time talking about a few of
6 the very significant issues that we are going to face,
7 things such as how do we ensure the quality of the
8 information; some of the very real barriers that are out
9 there. Some of them may be legal or liability issues.
10 The small business issue; how we get their involvement and
11 their participation. And after that, I hope to summarize
12 the many agreements that we reach, as well as have an
13 action plan.
14 I recognize that it may be difficult -- we
15 did talk about, last night, not wanting to get bogged down
16 in the process, but really making progress. And again,
17 this morning, the need to move quickly. And I fully
18 support that, although I also recognize that the
19 consensus-building process sometimes is not always
20 efficient, as you might wish; but obviously very powerful
21 and necessary for success. So we will report back at
22 noon. Thank you.
23 DR. MANNAN: Any questions on -- any
24 questions on that issue? Okay.
25 Second thing is that what happened is that
46
1 on our second subcommittee, which is the Metrics
2 Subcommittee. Ray Skinner from OSHA is the chair or
3 facilitator of that. And Ray called me, I think Friday,
4 or was it Monday this week, and left me a message on
5 Monday. And, boy, he sounded sick. And so I called him
6 back and I said, "You better not come." And so last night
7 we looked around the Project Advisory Committee and said,
8 "Someone needs to take that baton up for him and at least
9 carry it till he's back on his feet." And Jim Overman
10 from Dow Chemical volunteered for that.
11 Jim, you want to take a few minutes to
12 explain what you want to do today? Now, you've got to
13 say --
14 MR. OVERMAN: I think I've gotten what
15 Ray has, by long distance. But at any rate, in the room,
16 the second group as related to the first group, it's
17 really the how of what we're doing. And the third group
18 is what we're going to do with the information once we get
19 it. And the middle group is really what we're going to
20 have and what we need. And I think we'll spend some time
21 looking at that. And we're going to start by having Mark
22 Tweeddale talk to us about what they do in Australia.
23 (Cell phone ringing)
24 DR. MANNAN: The perils of modern
25 technology. They will reach you anywhere you are.
47
1 MR. ROSENTHAL: We'll carry it.
2 DR. MANNAN: The third group is the --
3 are there any questions on the second group, second
4 subcommittee? Okay.
5 The third group is the Targeted Reduction
6 Goal Subcommittee. Tim Gablehouse is chair.
7 MR. GABLEHOUSE: Well, now -- we have
8 both a remarkably easy or a remarkably difficult task.
9 When you look at targeted reduction goals, it's obvious
10 that the goals can come in sort of three areas: People,
11 process and products. It's also very obvious that to be
12 meaningful, these goals have to translate into what you're
13 going to say to the various audiences that you're going to
14 communicate those to.
15 For example -- and this is not something I
16 came up with on my own. But obviously you have to be able
17 to relate reduction of accidents to behavioral things, you
18 have to relate them to engineering items, and so forth.
19 The goals have to be relevant to the audience. That
20 means we have to be able to have a local expression or a
21 small business expression of what amounts to national
22 goals.
23 So I anticipate we're going to spend quite a
24 bit of time just getting our arms around what these goals
25 all look like, what their characteristics ought to be,
48
1 before we get into the idea of what they are. So it
2 should be an interesting session.
3 DR. MANNAN: Questions, issues on
4 that? James.
5 MR. MAKRIS: This morning when we heard
6 Herb Fox talk about -- we heard Herb talk about his views
7 as a CEO of a company, what kinds of things he looked at
8 and he looks for, we traditionally have a fairly narrow
9 view of incidents and injuries and that kind of thing.
10 And really, my view is that we need to be looking at the
11 greater -- the greater company, the greater nation, the
12 greater whatever, and look very broadly and start to
13 measure things we haven't perhaps measured before as a
14 safety professional. And I think if we do that, if we
15 begin to establish a way how you can measure the
16 effectiveness of an organization and how well an
17 organization behaves, then I think we're going to be
18 getting on to where we need to be, and we will really have
19 some metrics to improve things, and be able to spend money
20 where we need to spend money to improve particular
21 situations.
22 DR. MANNAN: Thanks.
23 What I'd like to do now is -- unless there
24 are any other comments -- I don't want to shut anyone up
25 that wants to speak on anything, because that's the whole
49
1 idea. Okay.
2 Oh, Phil.
3 MR. COGAN: Phil Cogan from the
4 Chemical Safety Board.
5 I think I would like to join Irv and Irv's
6 feeling that, I'm still wrestling with the three topics
7 and the way they relate in a unified way to the goal or to
8 the vision. And I think there's a -- although we can't
9 eliminate all overlap, I think there is -- there's a fair
10 amount of overlap, that means that we're going to be -- in
11 the precious hours that we have here today, we're going to
12 be duplicating efforts somewhat in the groups. And I
13 would like just for a moment to reconsider whether the
14 defined areas for each of the groups might be further
15 refined in order to make them distinct and different and
16 very focused. Because in one day, you can't -- you can't
17 afford to waste time by duplicating efforts, when you have
18 the talent pool here that we have.
19 DR. MANNAN: I hear what you say --
20 Jim, I'm going to come to you in a minute, but let me give
21 my thoughts on that.
22 I hear what you say, Phil, but let me
23 suggest this: That I have no problem in refining, and
24 more precisely, defining those goals. But I think that
25 can be done in a smaller group more fastly and more easily
50
1 than in a larger group. Let the smaller group do it and
2 report back to the larger group that that's how --
3 MR. COGAN: Let me -- let me -- I agree
4 that that's possible. But if this were a multi-day
5 session, if you did it in smaller groups, and reported
6 back, and then the groups could act on that. But if you
7 don't do it in a larger session, you're going to end up
8 having independently-developed topics. And these three
9 groups need to be coordinated so that the synergy will be
10 there.
11 If we didn't do it -- I agree also that
12 committees don't define -- don't design very good animals,
13 and large committees do an even worse job. But in the
14 time we have available, if we don't do it together so that
15 each one carves out its own unique nitch, then we are
16 going to risk going over the same turf. And I will shut
17 up now.
18 DR. MANNAN: Jim.
19 MR. OVERMAN: I would just like to
20 respond.
21 I think we sat at the Advisory Committee
22 meeting last night and discussed these various issues.
23 Again, sort of to summarize, that the first group is
24 looking at the how; that's the structure, the database,
25 how that database functions. The second group is going to
51
1 be looking at what we're going to be measuring; what those
2 measurements mean. The third group is going to be looking
3 at how we take those measurements and structure those into
4 a goal. Now, that's the design that we've decided on last
5 night.
6 The other thing we decided is that the
7 original agenda, if you will notice, said that we would
8 come back together and make our reports and quit. An hour
9 for each group. And we said no, each group would come
10 back and spend about 15 minutes describing what they did,
11 show what they put up on their flip chart. The whole
12 group assembled would have a chance to comment on this.
13 One thing for sure, we are not tied down to
14 this division of labor beyond today. But we didn't feel
15 that we should change it prior to this meeting because
16 people had already been assigned groups, they were already
17 in a group, they had already started some stuff; and to
18 redesign the structure of this group today, prior to this
19 meeting, would be a mistake and wouldn't be fair to the
20 people that worked in June.
21 It's my personal belief that when we move
22 into the implementation of these infant action plans that
23 we're going to come up with, we will find that there are
24 better ways to organize. But we decided we couldn't spend
25 a lot of time on redesigning the organization; we need to
52
1 get out there and see what the action plans look like and
2 discuss it.
3 So I agree with you; I just don't think now
4 is the time to do it.
5 MR. GABLEHOUSE: I just want to say one
6 thing in response to your description of the third group.
7 MR. COGAN: I don't know, Tim, if
8 that's -- that doesn't seem to describe what I think the
9 third group was doing. Does it, Tim?
10 MR. GABLEHOUSE: It's clear that it
11 will be a dynamic process. So let's -- we beat ourselves
12 up on this issue at great length last night.
13 MR. COGAN: Then I'm sorry to prolong
14 it.
15 MR. GABLEHOUSE: I am very sensitive to
16 what you're saying because, I mean, I tend to agree. On
17 the other hand, I frankly don't know how to improve the
18 process at the moment. Because we could probably sit here
19 and beat ourselves up for hours, trying to figure out what
20 the three groups ought to do. I just don't see a way out
21 of the process other than sitting down, working for
22 awhile, come back together and see if we get smart.
23 I don't think any of us can predict where
24 these three groups are going to go this morning. I mean,
25 I really -- I don't have -- I mean, I have not sat down
53
1 and written out the report of the group back to the main
2 embodiments. I'm not sure where it's going to go. It
3 will be very entertaining.
4 MR. MAKRIS: I think there's some
5 advantage to the tensions that will be created by groups
6 saying, "I wonder what those other guys are doing?" That
7 will bring questions into a more precise focus, than if
8 they are all in the room and you debate it. You know, you
9 can sort of can put them on a separate chart: This is
10 what we hope one is doing and this is what we hope two is
11 doing as we in three are doing this. I think rather than
12 arguing it, you have to say, "We don't know." And that
13 will become the focus upon which one could then -- that
14 can maybe just start to see where the differences and
15 where the similarities emerge.
16 You know, there is no perfect process. The
17 design of meetings probably began 3- or 4000 years ago in
18 China, and we haven't figured out how to do it yet; but
19 some day we will.
20 MR. BESWICK: Why don't we just see
21 what the groups can do this morning? Why don't we set a
22 goal of having all the group presentations over lunch.
23 Like Jim says, make use of our lunch. And then we have
24 the afternoon to refine things, put it back into the
25 groups for the afternoon. Maybe restructure the groups'
54
1 objectives a little, if that's appropriate.
2 DR. MANNAN: No problem. No problem.
3 Okay. I'm going to go ahead and break -- go -- break the
4 groups into breakout sessions. let me remind you of one
5 thing I want the breakout chairs to take care of. One is
6 pass around a sign-up sheet. And I want the sign-up sheet
7 to have the name, phone number, fax and e-mail. E-mail is
8 very important, because the chair and us, we would like to
9 communicate to you via e-mail. Because that's faster,
10 much easier and becomes simpler.
11 The second thing is to come back with an
12 action plan, if you can; but also come back with
13 recommendations of whether or not your subcommittee is
14 right. Do you have the right people? Do you have
15 recommendations for other people that need to be added?
16 Maybe they are already in the larger group we have, okay,
17 that need to be coached or to make sure that they attend
18 these meetings; or maybe they are out there, but they are
19 not aware of. Come back with some recommendations of what
20 people you want to have.
21 So with that, the breakout groups: Breakout
22 group one, Kari Barrett's group, is in this board room.
23 That doesn't mean that they have higher status. It just
24 happens --
25 MR. COGAN: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
55
1 DR. MANNAN: Break out two is in
2 1011A.
3 MR. CHALUPKA: 1011 is one breakout
4 group. 1011A is the other one.
5 DR. MANNAN: Okay, 1011 and 1011A. But
6 this is not a pretty big complex, so you will be able to
7 find it. Then three is the next room.
8 Okay. We will meet back here at lunch.
9
10 (Recessed at 9:35 a.m.)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
56
1 LUNCHEON PROCEEDINGS
2 DR. MANNAN: Well, folks, while you're
3 still enjoying your lunch, let's get started. We had
4 decided that we were going to have a working lunch, so if
5 you will stop your side-bar conversations and direct your
6 attention over here, I would appreciate that.
7 Couple of things. First let me check and
8 see if we have any schedule constraints. When does --
9 does anyone have to leave at 4 o'clock? Does anyone have
10 to leave earlier than 4 o'clock? Okay. Well, let's shoot
11 for 4 o'clock as the time when everything should wind up;
12 and if one or two have to leave a little bit earlier than
13 that, that's okay. Okay? So let's shoot for 4 o'clock.
14 Another thing is that, you know, these
15 subcommittees went into their subcommittee activities,
16 and from my trips to the rooms, I could see that they've
17 been doing a lot of work. And as they present their stuff
18 and people have things they want to raise, please use the
19 microphone, because Judy here is otherwise going to have a
20 big -- a lot of trouble recording everything because of
21 the noise with the forks and everything. And we'll try to
22 keep the noise down; but at the same time, use the
23 microphone, plus speak your name before you start
24 speaking.
25 So with that, let me ask Kari Barrett, the
57
1 chair of the first subcommittee to come up. Kari, you can
2 come up here.
3 MS. BARRETT: Well, actually I
4 thought --
5 Kari Barrett. If I could stand over here,
6 I'm just going to really work from the flip-chart
7 material.
8 We were looking at the database, and we have
9 some notes here, and I would just ask anybody on the
10 subcommittee, if there is an important point that I
11 missed, to please speak up.
12 But essentially, we went back to talking
13 about the purpose of the database, having that clear in
14 our mind, and picking out the very critical components
15 that -- naturally we were trying to call it a repository
16 at this point. There was some discussion about the
17 connotations that database may have, and so we were trying
18 to bring it back to calling it a repository, and one that
19 is on incidents and near-misses. That allows for
20 tracking; change with time, to understand the nature and
21 cause of chemical releases; to lead to improvements in
22 chemical safety; and to understand the impact of community
23 interaction. So all of this is somehow tied to the
24 purpose of undertaking this activity.
25 Then we wanted to talk a bit about the
58
1 scope. And I guess you could look at these as our --
2 again, our agreements that this would be a national
3 repository at this time. Certainly in the future, it
4 could be broadened to be international, but we're just
5 focusing, right now, on national.
6 We have, as part of our scope, looking to
7 create perhaps a single report that would meet both your
8 regulatory obligations, with regard to reporting these
9 type of incidents, and may go further certainly than that
10 with other relevant information that would need to be
11 captured.
12 As a starting point of what is captured, we
13 said it has to be tied to chemical or process involvement
14 that result, or could have reasonably resulted -- that's
15 the near-miss phrase -- in a fire, explosion or accidental
16 release. And when we defined what processes it includes:
17 Manufacturer, storage, transportation and use. The broad
18 spectrum process. And we have not put any limits right
19 now on chemicals; we've said "all" chemicals.
20 So these were our agreements as a
21 subcommittee.
22 Some of the next steps are path board action
23 items. One is to identify and develop relationships with
24 all organizations that collect data; at the same time,
25 promote, during this process, that the information that
59
1 they collect is more accessible to the public. We want to
2 review the assessments of current data collection.
3 Because we recognize that so much work has gone on
4 already, we want to build off of that. We know we don't
5 need to start new there, but we do need to have an
6 understanding of the current data collections, and it's
7 for the purpose of identifying useable data, as well as
8 beginning to get an idea of how data could be integrated,
9 and also, of course, to then identify whatever limitations
10 or gaps that need to be addressed.
11 Then we will look to determine the
12 repository elements and begin the design process, and
13 identify and address barriers. And we recognize that
14 there are some real significant barriers that are out
15 there: Political, bureaucratic, legal, financial, all of
16 these things. And it's to identify and to address these
17 barriers toward the creation of a single database.
18 So that, in summary, is a summary of both
19 the agreements that we came to and the path board that we
20 saw as a subcommittee, where we need to head.
21 And I don't know if we're going to go
22 through also committee reviews first and then sort of have
23 general discussion or what's the process.
24 DR. MANNAN: Okay. Let's go to the
25 second subcommittee.
60
1 MR. OVERMAN: Jim Overman with Dow.
2 I'd like to thank everybody that was in the
3 room working on this because we do work hard.
4 The first thing we did, we looked at our
5 little goal down here for this group. It said, "Establish
6 metrics that relate safety performance and business
7 objectives." A lot of discussion about that for a few
8 minutes. We would like to change that to "stakeholder
9 objectives." This tends to be very narrow, and we want it
10 to be broader than that.
11 The