Emergency management plan for Perdue's hexane-releasing factory in Pa. By Ray Wallace

Hexane:

HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION 

Emergency Overview

Appearance: liquid, clear, colourless 

DANGER!Warning EXTREMELY FLAMMABLE LIQUID AND VAPOR. VAPOR MAY CAUSE FLASH FIRE. MAY AFFECT THE CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM CAUSING DIZZINESS, HEADACHE OR NAUSEA. MAY BE HARMFUL IF INHALED....

Potential Health Effects

Exposure routes 

     Inhalation, Skin absorption, Skin contact, Eye Contact, Ingestion 

Eye contact 

     Can cause eye irritation. Symptoms include stinging, tearing, redness, and swelling of eyes. 

Skin contact 

     Can cause skin irritation. Symptoms may include redness and burning of skin, and other skin damage. 

Ingestion 

     This material can get into the lungs during swallowing or vomiting. This results in lung inflammation and other lung injury. 

Inhalation 

     Breathing of vapor or mist is possible. It is possible to breathe this material under certain conditions of handling and use (for example, during heating, spraying, or stirring). Breathing small amounts of this material during normal handling is not likely to cause harmful effects. Breathing large amounts may be harmful. 

Aggravated Medical Condition 

     Preexisting disorders of the following organs (or organ systems) may be aggravated by exposure to this material: Skin, Upper respiratory tract, lung (for example, asthma-like conditions), Central nervous system, male reproductive system 

Symptoms 

     Signs and symptoms of exposure to this material through breathing, swallowing, and/or passage of the material through the skin may include: stomach or intestinal upset (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea), irritation (nose, throat, airways), central nervous system depression (dizziness, drowsiness, weakness, fatigue, nausea, headache, unconsciousness)....

     -- Dated April 25, 2014, the above “Safety Data Sheet” was prepared by Nexeo Solutions of Woodlands, Texas.

JUDY: "hired an environmental firm to look at the plant and cited some of their objections. She said emissions from the plant will exceed what Perdue has stated, that there could be explosion hazards and that the environmental rights amendment to our state constitution that guarantees people the right to clean air has not been adhered to.

     "'The burden is on DEP [the Pa. Dept. of Environmental Protection] to show that this project complies with the amendment,' she said.

     "That, she added, has not been done."

     -- Both sets of above news quotes -- Randy Gockley's and Judy Nissley's -- come from “Praised and bashed, Perdue soybean plant gets one final public hearing,” by Larry Alexander, at this March 31, 2015 Lancaster, Pa. LNP site:

http://lancasteronline.com/news/local/praised-and-bashed-perdue-soybean-plant-gets-one-final-public/article_94571122-d80e-11e4-81be-a360effdcc89.html

WHO'S ON THE PERDUE FACTORY'S "EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM"?

Called to order by Randy Gockley, the Emergency Planning Committee meeting of October 4, 2012 concerned what has since become Perdue's five-year-old attempts to get approval for its hexane-releasing, explosion-prone factory. 

At that meeting, the factory was confirmed to operate 24 hours a day, with a night crew of:

     "approximately 6" 

Though it was stated that Perdue's factory would: 

     "have an emergency response team"

...no mention was made of: how big such a team would be; its hours of availability; the suitability, capability, and training requirements of its members; the emergency equipment required; how long it would take and how many miles such equipment plus the response team itself would need to travel when being called to the factory for an emergency; the cost of maintaining such a response team; who pays that cost (taxpayers?); and the potential risks to Susquehanna Valley residents before, during, and after such an emergency.  

FURTHERMORE:

Perdue's Mark Stanley advised Randy Gockley and others at the above-mentioned Emergency Planning Committee meeting that a critical BAI environmental report commissioned by Nissley Vineyards & Winery was:

     "not accurate"

...but Mr. Stanley would give no details.

Nonetheless, the BAI report appears to have been sufficiently accurate to contribute to Perdue's revoking its own DEP application. A DEP spokesperson described Perdue's surprising action as follows:

     "It is very uncommon for a company to ask for its own plan approval to be revoked."

And today, in 2015, all air-breathing families of the Susquehanna Valley have Judy Nissley to thank for continuing to fund independent environmental research on Perdue's subsequently altered (but no better) DEP application. 

Concerning that application, August Mack Environmental has supplied --to Thomas J. Hanlon, Environmental Engineering Manager of the Air Quality Program of the Pa. DEP -- extensive scientific documentation supporting this conclusion:

     "The application submitted by Perdue is deficient and should be denied until important concerns related to adversely affecting the environment, public safety, and air quality have been adequately addressed....

     "The emission of more than 208 tons of VOCs from this location including more than 104 tons of n-hexane emissions along with the storage of 40,000 gallons of hazardous hexane at this site is an environmental hazard, a safety hazard, and a public health hazard. The only way this facility would be acceptable would be if it eliminated the use of hexane."