Document v19ORqpGzM5BkM1rxky8ZONe9

American Petroleum Institute --4?1220 L Street;-Northwest Washington. D.C. 20005 Date: From: To: Re: January 31, 1997 rdBM~ern.zyePnne;~~~v-;o\rc~ (BTF) Results of January 29 meeting memo BP-00011129 BENZENE TASK FORCE (BTF) of the American Petroleum Institute Wednesday, January 29,1997 Pecos Room Houston.Airport Marriott Meeting Minutes - Subject to Approval Attendees Affiliation Bea, Don Beatty, Pat Bird, Michael Del Pup, John Divine, Barbara Fairbrother, <:arol Irons, RichardMahagavkar,_Suneeta Paxton, Mary Raabe, Gerry Schnatter, Rob Steup, Dave Strother, Dale Williams, Gary Olevron <:hevron Exxon Texaco Texaco Exxon University of <:olorado Pennzoil API Mobil EBSI Shell BP American Health Foundation ! Chairman Pat Beatty convened this meeting of the Benzene Task Force (B'IF) at 8:35. He explained that the BTF was seeking to re-evaluate its objectives in light of the biologically-based risk assessment (BBRA) model's approaching completion and the perspective that the proposed cancer risk assessment guidelines give into where EPA is headed. Our guests, Drs.-Lrons and Williams, then made presentations on research areas concerning bone marrow differentiation and genotoxicity, respectively, that might resolve outstanding issues associated with the risk ofleukemia posed by benzene_exposure. The rest of the morning session was spent in group discussion of the possibilities. When our visitors left after lunch, the BTF members briefly went over updates on-issues and projects: Mary Paxton reported that there still is no word on when lhe revision or the U.S. EPA's benzene document will be released for external review. More detail has recently been obtained on how North Carolina has been deriving RfCs and RIDs for numerous chemicalslncluding benzene. This information with be conveyed to David Bayliss at U.S. EPA, and possibly followed up with a letter expressing our concerns. Pat Beatty reported that WSPA has contracted with EBSI to produce an advocacy document for submission to California EPA this spring. It is expected that benzene will be listed as a reproductivel developmental toxicant The associated no-significant-risk level (NSRL) has not been determined, but is expected to:bechigher than the current value for cancer. January 31, 1997 BP-00011130 Rob Schnatter reported that ESBI's benzene risk assessment has been submitted to the European Union through the raporteur country, Germany, and comments are expected by June. The EU's objective is for benzene to be one of five compounds for which the process is completed in 1997. The Dutch Health Council recently concluded that, even with the body ofinfonnation presented at Benzene '95, there is not enough evidence to merit change of-their benzene risk assessment ACGIH will be passing its recommendation for a benzene TLV at 0.5 ppm with a 2.5 ppm S1EL on to its membership for vote in late May. The change would then be considered offiG.ially adopted, and it would appear in the new lLV booklet in August At the B1F's next meeting, we will-compile our concerns about the process (not taking any further issue with the numbers for benzene) for a letter to be submitted in the summer. Note was made of the fact that benzene symposia are on the-agendas at both the Toxicology Forum in Washington on February 26 and at the Society of Toxicology in Cincinnati on March 11. It was decided to respond positively to ChemRisk's proposal to prepare a rebuttal article on the Utterback and Rinsky (1995) of the Paustenbach estimates of benzene exposure in the Pliofilm cohort It was noted that working from the conunents that API submitted to ACGIH on the subject should minimize their effort A draft of DynCorp' s report on its development ofa database of benzene monitoring results was circulated for comment The three chemical-specific work groups have received-their instructions from [LSI's "genotoxicity panel,'' and the drafted case studies are expected in the early summer. Gerry Raabe will speak to Jeff Foran about the B'IF's concern that the project has become too focused on the proposed EPA paradigm and suggest that, if the project proceeds as now planned, it should be more restrictively entitled "How Nontumor Data Could Be Used in EPA's Proposed Cancer Risk Assessment Guidelines." ,' In discussing plans for the 1998 budget, it was decided that minimal provision should be made for the BBRA model. Overall, however, the group sees so many up-coming challenges-to benzene that a budget nearly level wi1h current funding would be advisable. The three topics proposed by Rich Irons (BLymphocyte Differentiation and Metabolism, Lymphocyte Biology, and Long-term Bone Marrow Culture) should be pursued simultaneously. Gary Williams should be asked to prepare a letter protx>sal with costs on the four-step projecthe_suggested, with the first (Comprehensive Review of Genotoxicity -Data) being a definite-priority. Having Otto Wong prepare-a paper on non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was raised another possibility. A date for the next B'IF meeting was not selected at this time. The meeting was adjourned at 2:30. ' Respectfully submitted, Mary Burr Paxton 2 January 31, 1997 BP-00011131