Chemical Safety Assessment , under

Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC), it must cover all intended uses through a specified branch of a supply chain. Under REACH, the results of such chemical safety assessments must be documented as chemical safety reports (CSR). 

Risk is assessed under Chemical Safety Assessment and risks are controlled... 

The European Union s chemical management law known as REACH requires chemical manufacturers and importers to assess risks and describe conditions under which their chemical substances can be safely used. Although REACH is required in Europe, data generated under the law has global impact. Among the data generated for a chemical substance is a Chemical Safety Assessment, Derived No Effect Level (DNEL),... 

Cenfral to regisfration is fhe Chemical Safety Assessment (CSA), in which the registrant identifies and describes the conditions under which the manufacturing and use of a subsfance are considered to be safe. A CSA must be performed by registianfs for substances manufactured and imported in quantities at or above 10 tonnes per year and by downstream users if their uses are not addressed by their supplier. The CSA entails three major steps, hazard assessment, exposure assessment, and risk characterization, which are documented in the Chemical Safety Report (CSR). Figure 3.4 summarizes the process [95]. 

The RC1 is an automated laboratory batch/semi-batch reactor for calorimetric studies which has proven precision. The calorimetric principle used and the physical design of the system are sound. The application of the RC1 extends from process safety assessments including calorimetric measurements, to chemical research, to process development, and to optimization. The ability of the RC1 to generate accurate and reproducible data under simulated plant scale operating conditions may result in considerably reduced testing time and fewer small scale pilot plant runs. 

Additionally, the test materials used in the validation process should be as closely related as possible to the characteristics of the unknowns to be tested. It is clear from the literature, for instance, that many cytotoxicity assays give good correlations with the in vivo ocular irritancy data for surfactants, but the correlations fail when compounds from other chemical classes are tested. Since any particular assay may be used differently by individual safety assessment programs, users must evaluate potential methods under conditions likely to be encountered in their own situations. 

Chemical interactions are almost always detrimental to the product because they usually indicate an incompatibility that gives rise to chemical compounds that would be classified as degradation products under ICHa Q3B, thus leading to requirements for quantitation, identification, and ultimately qualification (some form of safety assessment) depending on the level found. 

The Phase 1 quantitative risk assessment for Pueblo and several other stockpile sites with assembled chemical munitions completed several years ago showed that the stockpile at Pueblo presents risk to public health several orders of magnitude lower than any other site. This is because it contains only mustard agent, which is less volatile than other agents, and therefore would not be carried very far in the event of a fire or explosion. Nevertheless, the Army has undertaken several risk and safety assessments to meet the legislative requirement that the technology chosen for Pueblo be as safe as or safer than the baseline system. The committee believes that the incineration technologies under consideration will have very low risk and will meet reasonable interpretations of safety criteria, even if the actual risk numbers marginally exceed the baseline criteria. 

Harmonization Project Documents are a family of publications by the World Health Organization (WHO) under the umbrella of the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) (WHO/ILO/UNEP). Harmonization Project Documents complement the Environmental Health Criteria (EHC) methodology (yellow cover) series of documents as authoritative documents on methods for the risk assessment of chemicals. 

Even more significantly, risk assessment responsibilities have been devolved to the private sector. Registration of chemicals produced or imported in quantities of at least 10 t per manufacturer and per year (pm/py) must be accompanied by a Chemical Safety Report (CSR), which is a renamed but other otherwise largely unchanged risk assessment as formerly required from NRAs under Directives 67/548/EEC20 and 93/67/EEC.21... 

To ensure safety during lab development and scale-up, a complete chemical hazard assessment must be done. Not all reactions need to be thoroughly subjected to analysis For instance, the basic hydrolysis of an ester in water under relatively dilute conditions would not be expected to pose an extreme safety hazard. Safety testing can determine how exothermic a reaction is and whether the reaction can be conducted safely on scale [4, 5]. For instance, by knowing the amount of heat evolved in a reaction and having assessed the system s ability to remove heat from a reactor, it is possible to calculate the amount of time needed on scale to add a reagent that produces an exothermic reaction. 

A relatively early, and highly influential work, Of Acceptable Risk Science and The Determination of Safety, by William Lowrance (William Kaufman, Los Altos, CA, 1979) sets forth the basic issues in the determination of safety. Also widely-cited is Peter Barton Hutt s Legal considerations in risk assessment under federal regulatory statutes in Assessment and Management of Chemical Risks, (J.V. Rodricks and R.G. Tardiff, Editors, ACS Symposium Series 239, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C. 1984). Fred Hoerger offers an excellent perspective on the role of risk assessment in corporate decision-making in this same volume (Chapter 10). 

The statutory guidance describes how, in general terms, the assessment of land under the new regime should be based on the principles of risk assessment. These principles have been applied in areas such as chemical safety testing for many years and they include a recognition that risk is a function of hazard and exposure. In simple terms, this means that the mere presence of a hazardous substance on a site is not indicative of a need for clean-up. Instead, it is a trigger for further examination of the likelihood of harm occurring, or that such harm has already occurred, prior to a decision on whether or not clean-up is warranted. 

The first requirement is mainly important for the assessment of chemical reactions. In the overwhelming majority of chemical processes, not only the chemical conversion into the single desired product takes place. Instead, the desired reaction is accompanied by numerous parallel and consecutive reactions. Under the defined operating conditions resulting from the optimization work, the effect of these simultaneous reactions on yield and selectivity has been minimized by the choice of mode of operation (continuous, batch or semibatch) and of process parameters, such as pressure, temperature, concentration, pH-value, mass flow rates etc. A performance of the safety tests under conditions deviating fi-om those chosen for the plant process would inadvertently favour those secondary reactions in a different manner. Values for the gross value of heat output and reaction rate obtained this way would not be suitable for any process safety evaluation. Modem reaction calorimeters, like those commercially available today, enable the conduction of experiments with sufficient similarity to actual plant conditions. 

The flow chart showing the iterative safety assessment procedure for a chemical process under normal operating conditions (c.f. Section 2.1) has its central step in the evaluation of an adequate thermal design of the process. This is shown in a simplified form as the comparison of the chemically produced heat and the heat removal capacity of the system. A necessary prerequisite to this assessment of the suitability of the design is the knowledge of the time course of the heat production rate, which itself is directly proportional to the chemical reaction rate. This explains the pivotal significance of the identification of a reaction rate law that describes the investigated process with sufficient accuracy, and its parameters. 

Before discussing the safety assessment of chemical processes under normal as well as under upset conditions in detail, the classical heat explosion theory shall be treated. The first scientists to investigate the so-called runaway of an exothermic chemical reaction were Semenov and Frank-Kamenetzidi [18,19]. They were the pioneers in investigating and describing the self-heating process of reacting systems up to an explosion-like temperature rise in its dependence on different heat loss conditions to the environment. The criteria they derived are still valid today and form the basis of any safety assessment. 

Two quite frequently occurring questions regarding the safety technical assessment of chemical reactions cannot be placed directly into the order presented here so far. The first case is the evaluation of reactions performed imder reflux conditions. The safety assessment of such processes does not depend primarily on the general mode of operation, which in most cases is either discontinuous or semi-continuous, but on the peripheral installations to the reactor itself. In industrial practice, numerous designs can be found. Consequently the discussion here has to focus on two examples to outline the general assessment procedure. If these examples demonstrating the fimdamental approach to the assessment of processes under reflux are combined with the assessment criteria presented so far, the basis is provided to perform the safety evaluation for any other unique design as required. 

Such qualified specialists could be persons (1) who, because of education, training, or experience, or a combination of these factors, is capable of understanding the health and environmental risks associated with the chemical substance which is handled under his or her supervision, (2) who is responsible for enforcing appropriate methods of handling, treating and disposing of chemicals to minimize risks, and (3) who is responsible for the safety assessments and clearances related to the procurement, storage, use, and disposal of the chemical substance as may be appropriate or required. 

---