DOCSLIB.ORG

Dowdupont: Justice out of Sight, the Bhopal Tragedy 1984-2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dowdupont: Justice out of Sight, the Bhopal Tragedy 1984-2017 Greenpeace Justice for Section International People and Planet Case Studies DowDuPont: Justice out of sight, the Bhopal tragedy 1984-2017 Decades after the Bhopal disaster which killed Company 20,000, impacted half a million and contaminated Company: DowDuPont the local water supply, victims have been unable Union Carbide was founded in 1917 in Texas, USA and to secure adequate justice or remedies from became a subsidiary of Dow Chemical in 2001 (17 years chemical giant DowDuPont; a challenge made after the disaster in Bhopal). The Dow Chemical Company greater by a series of purchases and mergers. merged with DuPont on August 31, 2017.9 Problem Analysis Head office: DowDuPont is dually headquartered in a) Midland, Michigan and b) Wilmington, Delaware, United The Bhopal gas disaster was one of the biggest industrial States.10 accidents in history, a tragedy resulting from corporate gross negligence and insufficient security measures.1 Thousands Subsidiary: The Bhopal plant directly was owned died and many others are still affected by pollution from and operated by Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL),11 heavy metals in and around the company sites and the subsidiary of the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC).12 groundwater.2,3,4,5 Bhopal has since become an example of how mergers and acquisitions create corporate impunity Company background by making it more difficult to prosecute the companies and Publicly traded company individuals who bear responsibility. Shareholders: Vanguard Group Inc (7.17%), Capital There is no regulatory framework in place that can prevent Research and Management Company (6.40%), Fidelity and provide redress for human rights abuses such as this Management & Research Company (2.28%), BlackRock one. In February 2015, the UN’s special rapporteur on Fund Advisors (1.59%), and State Street Global Advisors hazardous substances and wastes, Mr. Tuncak, said that (Aus) Ltd (1.44%).13 he is “deeply concerned” that the current merger between CEO: Andrew N. Liveris,14,15 $23 million income (2016).16 Dow Chemical and DuPont may erase the possibility of justice: “The victims have faced insurmountable obstacles Executive Chairman until 2014: Union Carbide in getting past the corporate veil of Dow and UCC to find Corporation chairman Warren Anderson, who was accountability and justice. […] “This merger creates yet charged for culpable homicide in India but remained another layer of legal hurdles for victims to arrive at any outside Indian jurisdiction in the US until his death in semblance of an effective remedy and accountability for a 2014. preventable disaster now more than 30 years old.”6 Bhopal Estimated profit and turnover: Dow and DuPont also illustrates that companies can deny, and continue combine for nearly $73 billion in annual sales. On the to deny for decades, any responsibility for human rights basis of recent stock prices, DowDuPont has a market 7 abuses – unless they are subjected to significant pressure. capitalization approaching $150 billion.17 This case illustrates many of the substantive, procedural, • Dow Chemicals: Profit: US$ 2.5 billion & turnover US$ conceptual, and practical obstacle that arise in dealing with 12 billion18 human rights violations by TNCs.8 The obstacles include, 19 amongst others, a lack of home state responsibility, difficulty • Du Pont: US$ 24.5 million net sales piercing the corporate veil, misuse of forum non conveniens, Presence: a lack of resources, and access to courts. • Dow Chemicals: Africa (8), Asia (15), Europe (24), Latin America (7), Middle East (5), and North America (2) Justice for People and Planet 77 • DuPont: Africa (12), Asia and the Pacific (16), Europe The cause of the disaster remains under debate. The and the Middle East (34), North America (3), South Indian government and local activists argue that slack America (6) management and deferred maintenance created a situation where routine pipe maintenance caused Number of employees: > 100,000 (Dow Chemicals +/- a backflow of water into an MIC tank, triggering the 56,000 + DuPont +/- 52,000) disaster. Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) contends Company activity water entered the tank through an act of sabotage.36 DowDuPont, one of the largest global chemical companies, Since the disaster many local and international human currently pursues a separation into three independent, rights and environmental groups, including the Pesticide publicly traded companies: an agriculture, a materials Action Network, International Campaign for Justice for science, and a specialty products company.20 Bhopal, Greenpeace and Amnesty International have been involved in the search for remedies. Country and location in which Bhopal led to complex litigation in both India and the the violation occurred United States seeking to impose criminal and civil Bhopal, India liabilities on UCIL and UCC .37,38 As the US-based Union Carbide company controlled its Indian subsidiary UCIL Summary of the case it made sense to sue in US courts, however, for victims Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant a this proved very difficult. A law was passed giving the massive leak of toxic methyl isocyanate (MIC), caused Indian government the exclusive right to represent all more than 20,000 casualties.21 Most victims died from victims, inside and outside India. In 1986, claims in the suffocation. Approximately 560,000 of the 895,000 US were dismissed on grounds of forum non conveniens. inhabitants of Bhopal were affected in some way.22,23 They Proceedings in India began. The Indian case ended in suffer from acute breathlessness, brain damage, menstrual 1989 with a US$ 470 million settlement, far below most irregularities, loss of immunity, cancer and tuberculosis.24 estimates of the damage at the time. An intervention An investigation by The New York Times produced evidence filed on behalf of the victims before India’s Supreme of at least ten violations of standard procedures by both the Court in 1988 had claimed that INR10 billion (around parent corporation Union Carbide Company (UCC) and its US$ 628 million) was needed as interim relief alone.39 Indian-run subsidiary Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) The settlement was also criticised for being negotiated that led to the disaster.25 without the participation of the victims.40 Survivors, civil society groups and others overwhelmingly rejected this The disaster also had an enormous environmental impact. settlement as utterly inadequate.41 The gas was absorbed by nearby rivers, contaminating water and soil in the area, harming health and access to The Supreme Court in India later reinstated criminal charges clean drinking water.26 The site was never fully restored against UCC/UCIL. No conviction was forthcoming until by Union Carbide or the Indian government27 and the June 2010, when a local court found UCIL and seven of its contamination has remained untreated for decades. executives guilty of criminal negligence, sentenced them Researchers estimate that more than 400 tons of poisonous to two years imprisonment and a fine of about US$ 2,000 chemicals are still buried there, leaking into groundwater each, the maximum punishment allowed by Indian law.42 and soils.28,29,30,31,32 The search for justice continues to this day.43 Little attention has been paid to the state of the UCIL site On 3 December 1984, one of the world’s worst industrial and its immediate surroundings with respect to other disasters took place in Bhopal. In a Following the 2015 contaminants that may have been present for reasons not announcement of a planned merger of Dow Chemical connected to the accident.33 As such, the impact of the and DuPont, Baskut Tuncak, the UN’s special rapporteur plant on human rights is not confined to the gas leak. Since on hazardous substances and wastes, said that he was the opening of the plant in 1970, it had been a source of “deeply concerned” and that the merger may erase any environmental pollution.34 UCC’s engineering department remaining possibility of the victims of the Bhopal disaster warned in 1973 that the design of the Bhopal plant, which seeing an “effective remedy”.44 The Bhopal Medical used solar evaporation ponds for waste effluent, posed Appeal launched a campaign targeting the Dow-DuPont a “danger of polluting sub-surface water supplies in the merger urging: “Don’t bury Bhopal.” The merger took Bhopal area”.35 effect in 2017. 78 Justice for People and Planet Greenpeace Justice for Section International People and Planet Case Studies After the disaster UCC began attempts to dissociate Endnotes itself from responsibility for the gas leak and to shift the 1 Sreekant Khekar Suman Dubey, “Bhopal - City of death,” India responsibility to UCIL.45 UCC stated that the plant was Today, 31 December 1984 at http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/bhopal- wholly built and operated by the Indian subsidiary. This gas-leak-worst-industrial-disaster-in-history-2500-people-die-injures- thousands/1/361222.html (accessed at 21-11-2017) argument is still being used today: “The 1984 gas release 2 “UNEP Offers Contamination Assessment of Bhopal Disaster Site to from the plant in Bhopal, India was a terrible tragedy,” Government of India,” The Bhopal Medical Appeal, 25 February 2015 at a statement from DowDuPont reads. “It is important to https://bhopal.org/unep-offers-contamination-assessment-of-bhopal- disaster-site-to-government-of-india (accessed at 21-11-2017) note that Dow never owned or operated the plant, which 3 I. Labunska.,“The Bhopal Legacy - Toxic contaminants at the former today is under
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Dow Chemical Company Incoming Letter Dated February 7, 2014
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 DIVISION OF CORPORATION FINANCE March 18, 2014 Ronald 0. Mueller Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP [email protected] Re: The Dow Chemical Company Incoming letter dated February 7, 2014 Dear Mr. Mueller: This is in response to your letter dated February 7, 2014 concerning the shareholder proposal submitted to Dow by Amnesty International USA, the Unitarian Universalist Association and Calvert Investment Management, Inc. on behalf of the Calvert VP SRI Large Cap Value Portfolio, the Calvert S&P 500 Index Portfolio, the Calvert Large Cap Value Fund and the Calvert Equity Income Fund. We also have received a letter on behalf of the Calvert VP SRI Large Cap Value Portfolio, the Calvert S&P 500 Index Portfolio, the Calvert Large Cap Value Fund and the Calvert Equity Income Fund dated March 7, 2014. Copies of all ofthe correspondence on which this response is based will be made available on our website at http://www.sec.gov/divisions/comfin/cf-noaction/14a-8.shtml. For your reference, a brief discussion of the Division's informal procedures regarding shareholder proposals is also available at the same website address. Sincerely, Matt S. McNair Special Counsel Enclosure cc: Cheryl Barth Amnesty International USA [email protected] Timothy Brennan Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations [email protected] Sanford Lewis *** FISMA & OMB Memorandum M-07-16 *** March 18,2014 Response ofthe Office ofChief Counsel Division of Corporation Finance Re: The Dow Chemical Company Incoming letter dated February 7, 2014 The proposal requests that the company prepare a report to shareholders assessing the short- and long-term fmancial, reputational and operational impacts that the legacy of the Bhopal disaster may reasonably have on Dow's Indian and global business opportunities and reporting on any actions Dow intends to take to reduce such impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is the Dow Chemical Company?
    What Is The Dow Chemical Company? The Dow Chemical Company is headquartered in Midland, USA, and was formed in 1897. The Dow Chemical Company is a diversified, worldwide manufacturer of more than 3,500 basic and performance chemicals and plastics, and agricultural products that are primarily used by customers as raw materials to manufacture a diverse range of products that serve various consumer markets. The Company serves the following industries: appliance; automotive; agricultural; building and construction; chemical processing; electronics; furniture; housewares; oil and gas; packaging; paints, coatings and adhesives; personal care; pharmaceutical; processed foods; pulp and paper; textile and carpet; utilities, and water treatment. Dow conducts its worldwide operations through global businesses that are organized in six operating segments: Performance Plastics, Performance Chemicals, Agricultural Sciences, Plastics, Chemicals, and Hydrocarbons and Energy. The Dow Chemical Company is the world’s largest manufacturer of chemicals, with annual sales exceeding USD30 billion. As the world's largest producer of chlorine, an essential component of the potential cancer-causing chemical, dioxin, Dow is undoubtedly the largest root source of dioxin on the planet. In addition, through its subsidiary Dow AgroSciences, Dow is one of the largest producers of insecticides (Dursban), herbicides (Clincher) and fungicides, and has produced some of the most dangerous pesticides known to man, including DDT, Dursban, and 2,4,5-T, the active ingredient of Agent Orange. Dow is now increasing its investment in genetically modified crops that can withstand high doses of its pesticides. About Dow South Africa Dow's headquarters in Africa are located in Bryanston (Johannesburg), South Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bhopal Disaster of 1984
    BULLETIN OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCE /10.1177/0270467604273822Varma, Month 2005 Varma / BHOPAL DISASTER The Bhopal Disaster of 1984 Roli Varma University of New Mexico Daya R. Varma McGill University The 20th anniversary of the Bhopal calamity fell on ter for Human Resources and Development, was the December 3, 2004. The world’s worst industrial disas- Chief Minister of MP in 1984. Singh played a key role ter in Bhopal, India, happened because of inadequate in having the agricultural office of Union Carbide maintenance by Union Carbide and poor monitoring India Limited (UCIL) move from Bombay to Bhopal by the Indian authorities. Malfunctioning safety mea- in 1968. It was supposed to help in the development of sures, inappropriate location of the plant, and lack of MP.In 1969, the Bhopal plant was built as the formula- information about the identity and toxicity of the gas tion plant: The Sevin Technical Concentrate was worsened the effects of the accident on people and imported from the United States, and the work of livestock. The Bhopal disaster has raised questions blending and grinding was done in Bhopal. The manu- about the implications of the transfer of potentially facture of the pesticide Sevin using methyl isocyanate hazardous technology to the developing countries. (MIC) was started in 1980. Even after 20 years, Bhopal has not recovered. In this Within 4 years of operation, on December 2, 1984, article, we present what happened and why and what 30 metric tons of highly poisonous MIC gas spewed lessons can be learned at this terrible cost. from the UCIL plant.
    [Show full text]
  • THE BHOPAL LEGACY Toxic Contaminants at the Former Union Carbide Factory Site, Bhopal, India: 15 Years After the Bhopal Accident
    TheThe BhopalBhopal LegacyLegacy THE BHOPAL LEGACY Toxic contaminants at the former Union Carbide factory site, Bhopal, India: 15 years after the Bhopal accident. Authors: Labunska, I., Stephenson, A., Brigden, K., Stringer, R., Santillo, D. & Johnston, P.A. Technical Note 04/99 Greenpeace Research Laboratories, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter UK November 1999 Address: Greenpeace Research Laboratories, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4PS, UK Acknowledgements: Special thanks are due for assistance from the Bhopal Group for Information and Action and Bhopal Gas Peedit Mahila Udyog Sanghatan. Also the field work from Nityananand Jayaraman, Stan Vincent, Alan Greig and Shailendra Yashwant. ISBN: 90 73361 59 1 Front Cover: Victims of the Union Carbide disaster attend a weekly meeting. c Greenpeace/Yashwant Toxic contaminants at the former Union Carbide factory site, Bhopal, India: 15 years after the Bhopal accident. Labunska, I., Stephenson, A., Brigden, K., Stringer, R., Santillo, D. & Johnston, P.A. Technical Note 04/99 Greenpeace Research Laboratories Exeter 1999 Executive summary The Union Carbide India Ltd. (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, which used to manufacture (among other products) the pesticide Sevin (carbaryl) gained world-wide recognition as a result of the tragic chemical disaster on the night of 2-3rd December 1984. The accident, involving a massive release of methylisocyanate (MIC) gas, resulted in the death or injury of many thousands of people in the surrounding residential areas. A number of studies, conducted in the aftermath of the accident, understandably focused on the long-term consequences of acute exposure to MIC. Very little attention was paid then to the state of the UCIL site and immediate surroundings with respect to contaminants other than MIC which may have been present not only as a result of the accident, but also the routine operation of the plant.
    [Show full text]
  • Dow Chemical Company and Union Carbide Corporation File No
    Analysis of the Complaint and Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment The Dow Chemical Company and Union Carbide Corporation File No. 9910301, Docket No. C-3999 I. Introduction The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted for public comment a Decision and Order (“Order”), pursuant to an Agreement Containing Consent Orders (“Consent Agreement”), against The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) and Union Carbide Corporation (“Carbide”) (collectively “Respondents”). The Order is intended to resolve anticompetitive effects stemming from the proposed merger of Dow and Carbide (the “Merger”). As described below, the Order seeks to remedy anticompetitive effects of the merger in polyethylene, ethyleneamines, ethanolamines and methyldiethanolamine (“MDEA”). The Order remedies those anticompetitive effects by requiring Respondents to divest and license certain intellectual property and other assets relating to polyethylene to BP Amoco plc (“BP”); to divest Dow’s worldwide businesses in ethyleneamines to Huntsman International LLC (“Huntsman”); and to divest Dow’s worldwide ethanolamines business and its MDEA business in the United States and Canada to Ineos Group plc (“Ineos”). The Commission has also issued an Order to Maintain Assets that requires Respondents to preserve the businesses they are required to divest as a viable, competitive, and ongoing operation until the divestiture is achieved. The Order, if finally issued by the Commission, would settle charges that the Merger may have substantially lessened competition in the markets for polyethylene and polyethylene technology, ethyleneamines, ethanolamines and MDEA. The Commission has reason to believe that the Merger would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The proposed complaint, described below, relates the basis for this belief.
    [Show full text]
  • Dow Chemical / Union Carbide Regulation
    EN Case No COMP/M.1671 – DOW CHEMICAL / UNION CARBIDE Only the English text is available and authentic. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8(2) Decision Date: 03/05/2000 This text is made available for information purposes only and does not constitute an official publication. The official text of the decision will be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Commission Decision of 03.05.2000 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement Case No COMP/M.1671 – DOW CHEMICAL/UNION CARBIDE (Only the English text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 57(2)(a) thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings1, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/972, and in particular Article 8(2) thereof, 1 OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 1; corrected version OJ L 257, 21.9.1990, p. 13 2 OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 1. Rue de la Loi 200, B-1049 Bruxelles/Wetstraat 200, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium Telephone: exchange 299.11.11 Telex: COMEU B 21877. Telegraphic address: COMEUR Brussels. This text is made available for information purposes only and does not constitute an official publication. Having regard to the Commission’s Decision of 22 December 1999 to initiate proceedings in this case, Having given the undertakings concerned the opportunity to make known their views on the objections raised by the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the Advisory Committee on Concentrations3, WHEREAS : 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 National Air Toxics Assessment
    2014 National Air Toxics Assessment August 27, 2018 by Wilma Subra [email protected] Graphics by Michael Orr [email protected] On August 22, 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the 2014 National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA). The previous 2011 National Air Toxics Assessment, released December 17, 2015, focused on air emissions of Chloroprene. Chloroprene has been released into the air in St. John the Baptist Parish of Louisiana for 49 years from the DuPont/ Denka facility in LaPlace/Reserve. NATA estimated higher than expected levels of Chloroprene in the community of LaPlace/Reserve based on the 2011 NATA report and identified the DuPont /Denka facility as creating the greatest offsite risk of cancer of any manufacturing facility in the United States. The 2014 National Air Toxics Assessment focuses on Ethylene Oxide. Louisiana has 13 facilities that release air emissions of Ethylene Oxide. Three of the five facilities in the Unite State, releasing the largest quantities of Ethylene Oxide into the air, are located in Louisiana. The number two ranking air emissions facility of Ethylene Oxide in the US (Union Carbide in Hahnville) is located in St. Charles Parish, Louisiana, just down river from DuPont /Denka. The Ethylene Oxide air emissions from the Union Carbide facility along with the Ethylene Oxide air emissions from the Evonik Materials facility in Reserve, St. John the Baptist Parish, are responsible for St. John the Baptist and St. Charles parishes having the highest risk of cancer from Ethylene Oxide in all of Louisiana and all of the United States. St. John the Baptist Parish also has the highest risk of cancer in the United States from air emissions of Chloroprene.
    [Show full text]
  • Case Study: Bhopal Plant Disaster
    International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science and Engineering Case Study Series Bhopal Plant Disaster – Situation Summary M.J. Peterson Revised March 20, 2009 During the night of 2-3 December 1984, a leak of some 40 tons of methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas mixed with unknown other gasses from a chemical plant owned and operated by Union Carbide (India) Limited, a partly-owned subsidiary of the US-based Union Carbide Corporation, caused one of the highest-casualty industrial accidents of the 20th century. At least 2000 people died immediately and another 200,000 to 300,000 suffered respiratory and other injuries of varying severity. Property damage consisted mainly of contamination to nearby areas by various chemical residues. The defoliation of trees immediately afterward is clearly attributable to the gas leak; contamination in the nearby settlements may have multiple sources, the contamination of the plant site resulted from many years of general production activity. India’s Economic Ambitions When India attained independence from Great Britain in 1947, its new political leaders wanted to make the country wealthier by encouraging development of modern industry. It had strong support from the citizens, who generally agreed that India’s current lack of industrialization and economic development were the result of these colonial-era policies. Thus, the new government could expect widespread support for any policy that appeared to set the country on the path to industrialization. The new political elite brought to this task a set of beliefs about economic policy that sought a middle way between the heavy reliance on private enterprise that had characterized British industrialization in the 18th and 19th centuries and the reliance on central planning of the whole economy characteristic of the Soviet Union’s industrialization effort since 1917.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbicide Company “Genealogy” February 2018
    Herbicide Company “Genealogy” February 2018 The following chart is intended to show the history of the major U.S. herbicide companies. The information depends largely on people’s memories, which sometimes can be inexact, on records from the headquarters of major companies, and from histories on the internet. No guarantees are made for accuracy, although I think it is pretty close. The dates of the founding of companies or of acquisitions and mergers sometime vary slightly from one reference to another, so they should not be considered as solid historical facts. Only U.S. companies are listed. International companies are listed only if they had subsidiaries in the U.S., such as Bayer or BASF. I have tried to include mergers or acquisitions of entire companies or the ag divisions of companies, but acquisition of individual products are mentioned only occasionally. In many cases, the major company continues in existence and it is the agricultural division that becomes part of another company. Example: Aventis sold its ag products division to Bayer while the pharmaceutical portion of Aventis continues. Acquisitions of seed companies are not included. The major companies included are those with a history of synthesis, screening, and development of herbicides in the U.S., even if their parent company is overseas. This excludes marketing companies, post-patent distributors, and those companies dealing only with non-herbicide pesticides. Some companies have a distinguished herbicide history but no longer develop new herbicides. These are so noted. Numerous companies and individuals have been consulted and have been very helpful. But I have not always followed suggestions exactly if I felt I had more accurate information from a different source, so all the errors and omissions are mine.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Trap-Telegraph
    he immensity of the death toll would seem to demand silence, but nature is indifferent to suffer- ing. As you walk through the derelict Union DEATH TRAP TCarbide factory in Bhopal there is the sound of birdsong and the chirruping of cicadas. Sunlight streams through the trees, dappling the vines that creep over the Twenty-five years since lethal gas escaped from the Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal, rusting gantries, pipelines and towers. Grass has overgrown the killing thousands and injuring hundreds of thousands, the poison still lingers. Mick Brown paved footpaths. In any other country in the world, you think, all travelled to India to meet the victims of the world’s worst industrial accident who have not given up this would have been demolished long ago, all trace of its terrible history swept into oblivion, but here it stands, like a surreal art the fight for compensation, justice and their lives. Photographs by David Graham exhibit of industrial catastrophe. Few people come here nowadays. At the main gate, guards in khaki uniforms, killing time over a game of cards, scrutinise your papers with bored expressions before waving you through. Lizards scuttle into the undergrowth as you pass. In the old control room, the floor is strewn with rubbish. Along one wall, the dials that signalled the disaster have long since been ripped from their panel, leaving a row of neat, circular holes. A sign attached to the wall mockingly announces safety is everybody’s business. ‘And this is tank number 610,’ said TR Chouhan, who worked here as an engineer for nine years before that fateful night of December 2 1984, and whose life ever since has been dedicated to telling the world the truth about what happened.
    [Show full text]
  • Union Carbide: Disaster at Bhopal
    Jackson Browning Report - Union Carbide Corp. UNION CARBIDE: DISASTER AT BHOPAL by Jackson B. Browning Retired Vice President, Health, Safety, and Environmental Programs Union Carbide Corporation Copyright 1993 Reprinted with permission from Crisis Response: Inside Stories on Managing Under Siege, edited by Jack A. Gottschalk, Visible Ink Press, a division of Gale Research, Detroit, Michigan. THE TRAGEDY In the early hours of Monday, Dec. 3, 1984, a toxic cloud of methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas enveloped the hundreds of shanties and huts surrounding a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India. Later, as the deadly cloud slowly drifted in the cool night air through streets in surrounding sections, sleeping residents awoke, coughing, choking, and rubbing painfully stinging eyes. By the time the gas cleared at dawn, many were dead or injured. Four months after the tragedy, the Indian government reported to its Parliament that 1,430 people had died. In 1991 the official Indian government panel charged with tabulating deaths and injuries updated the count to more than 3,800 dead and approximately 11,000 with disabilities. Although it was not known at the time, the gas was formed when a disgruntled plant employee, apparently bent on spoiling a batch of methyl isocyanate, added water to a storage tank. The water caused a reaction that built up heat and pressure in the tank, quickly transforming the chemical compound into a lethal gas that escaped into the cool night air. The plant was operated by Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL), just over 50 percent of which was owned by Union Carbide Corporation. The first report of the disaster reached Union Carbide executives in the United States more than 12 hours after the incident.
    [Show full text]
  • FORM 10-Q Dow Inc. the Dow Chemical Company
    Table of Contents UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-Q ☑ QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2019 or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from __________to__________ Commission Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter, State of Incorporation or I.R.S. Employer File Number Principal Office Address and Telephone Number Organization Identification No. 001-38646 Dow Inc. Delaware 30-1128146 2211 H.H. Dow Way, Midland, MI 48674 (989) 636-1000 001-03433 The Dow Chemical Company Delaware 38-1285128 2211 H.H. Dow Way, Midland, MI 48674 (989) 636-1000 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Name of each exchange on Registrant Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) which registered Dow Inc. Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share DOW New York Stock Exchange The Dow Chemical Company 4.625% Notes due October 1, 2044 DOW/44 New York Stock Exchange Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Dow Inc. ☑ Yes ☐ No The Dow Chemical Company ☑ Yes ☐ No Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).
    [Show full text]