Taking Carcinogens Out of the Workplace:

A win-win for workers and industry in Massachusetts

kNOw cancer in the workplaceDecember 10, 2009Australian National University, Canberra

2

• Why manage use of toxics?

• Massachusetts’ goal

• The TUR Program

• Lessons Learned

• Newer Activities

3

4

• Cancer associated with occupational exposure: … “the resulting cancer risks are generally so low that they cannot be measured directly.”

• Measuring exposure challenging

• Cumulative risks should be avoided

5

Toxics in Toxics in the the

WorkplaceWorkplace

The Massachusetts The Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction ActToxics Use Reduction Act

•1989

•Goals– 50% reduction in byproduct

– Promote the competitive advantage of Massachusetts Industry

– Reduce the production and use of toxic chemicals

6

77

What Companies Must DoWhat Companies Must Do

• Report annually on amount of toxics used

• Conduct toxics use reduction planning every two years

• Pay an annual fee

• Chemical use

• Byproduct generated

• Chemicals generated in or

as products

• Economic activity index

TURA Data TURA Data on the on the

InternetInternet

10

11

Toxics Use Reduction Toxics Use Reduction TechniquesTechniques

•Direct– Chemical Input Substitution– Product Redesign

• Indirect– Process Modification– Operations and Maintenance

Improvements– In-Process Recycling

TUR Program TUR Program StructureStructure

12

Office of Technical

Assistance

Department of Environmental

Protection

Administrative Council

Toxics Use Reduction Institute

Use … DOWN 40%

Byproduct … DOWN 70%

Emissions … DOWN 90%

Shipped in Product …

DOWN 60%

17

LightolierLightolier

VH BlackingtonVH Blackington

• Eliminated1.2 million pounds TCE• Energy/Water conservation• $2,000,000 saved

• Eliminated1.2 million pounds TCE• Energy/Water conservation• $2,000,000 saved

• Eliminated TCE• 85% reduction in Copper and Zinc• 95% reduction in Cyanide

• Eliminated TCE• 85% reduction in Copper and Zinc• 95% reduction in Cyanide

{{

{{

{{

Vicor Corp.Vicor Corp.

• Eliminated 3,400 lb lead annually• 98% reduction in emissions• Maintained Mass. mfg base

• Eliminated 3,400 lb lead annually• 98% reduction in emissions• Maintained Mass. mfg base

18

{{

{{Ceramics Process SystemsCeramics Process Systems

• Eliminated triple acid bath• Reduced haz waste costs• Safer working environment

• Eliminated triple acid bath• Reduced haz waste costs• Safer working environment

{{• Reformulated product• 88% reduction in VOC emissions• $1.25M in savings annually

• Reformulated product• 88% reduction in VOC emissions• $1.25M in savings annually

IntelliCoatIntelliCoat

Inner TiteInner Tite

• 97% reduction of TCE• 98% reuse of plating chemicals • $12,000 saved annually

• 97% reduction of TCE• 98% reuse of plating chemicals • $12,000 saved annually

19

Carc

inog

en

Carc

inog

en

ss30%30%

21

22

23

24

25

26www.cleanersolutions.org

27

• Over 200 small dry cleaners use perc

• TURI provides some $ to switch to wet cleaning

• Eliminate perc and associated emissions

• Significant operating cost savings28

• Companies have saved millions of $$

• Companies maintain competitive advantage

• Reductions have been significant

• Working environment safer

29

• Balance Voluntary/Mandatory

• Set Clear Stretch Goals

• Establish Good Metrics

• Develop Stable Funding

• Provide for Confidentiality

Key ElementsKey Elements

• Get Industry and Advocates to the Table!

• Emphasize Facility Planning

• Build Capacity

• Provide Technical Assistance

• Promote Adoption

Lessons LearnedLessons Learned

32

• Keep Companies Informed of Changes on the Horizon

• Include Key Sectors

• Plan for Flexibility

• Use collective wisdom of gov’t agencies for labor, public health and environment

Lessons LearnedLessons Learned

Current Activities in Current Activities in Massachusetts Massachusetts

• 2006 Amendments to TURA

– Lowers thresholds for higher hazard chemicals

– Allows alternative planning techniques 33

TURI’s Five Chemicals TURI’s Five Chemicals Alternatives Assessment StudyAlternatives Assessment Study

Safer Alternatives Exist!

• There’s No Excuse For It

• Drop-In Substitutes

• Process Changes

• Different Materials

• Emerging Opportunities

35

37

Table 7.4.2 C: Summary of Plasticizer Alternatives Assessment for Medical Devices

Key Assessment CriteriaDEHP

(Reference)

Comparison Relative to DEHP

TOTM DEHA BTHCDINC

HDINP

Table 7.4.2 J: Materials Alternatives Assessment Summary for Medical Devices

39

Table 7.4.2 J: Materials Alternatives Assessment Summary for Medical Devices

Key Assessment Criteria

DEHP/PVC

Reference

Comparison of Materials to DEHP/PVC

EVA Polyole

finGlass

Silicone

TPU

40

“Choosing safer alternatives will

not only help prevent widespread

suffering, it will reduce the burden

on our economy by averting high

health care and special education

costs as well as lost productivity.”

-Alliance for a Healthy Tomorrow

Contact Contact Us!Us!

41

42

Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute

www.turi.org 978-932-3275

University of Massachusetts Lowell1 University Avenue, Lowell, MA 01854

www.uml.edu

Pam Eliason, pam@turi.org 978-934-3142