Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 5/11/16
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Fumes Over Scientists Picked for EPA Review Panel
May 11, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
The chemical industry is criticizing scientists picked by U.S. EPA to review a draft assessment of a common cleaning solvent as unqualified for the job. -
(ACC Mentioned) SEHSC to Collaborate with EPA on Siloxane Levels
May 11, 2016 | Rubber and Plastics News
By Miles Moore
As part of an agreement reached two years ago, members of the Silicones Environmental, Health and Safety Center of the American Chemistry Council are collaborating with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to assess levels of the siloxane D4 in the environment. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA's Vapor Intrusion Superfund 'Scoring' Proposal Draws Mixed Response
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
EPA's proposed rule to add vapor or water intrusion as a contaminant pathway for placing a site on the Superfund National Priorities List (NPL) is drawing a mix of comments, with industry parties flat-out opposing the addition as unnecessary and lacking a rationale, while some states and advocates are endorsing the proposal. -
(ACC Mentioned) TSCA Reform Deal Could Happen This Week
May 11, 2016 | Chem Info
By Meagan Parrish
Key senators leading the Congressional effort to reform America’s 40-year-old toxic chemical policy have signaled that they are on the verge of striking a deal. -
Lawmakers Tout Possibility of TSCA Deal This Week
May 11, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
Lawmakers working to mesh two versions of legislation to update the nation's chemicals law today continued to voice optimism that a deal is in the works. -
New York Assembly Passes Children's Products Bill
May 11, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
New York’s Assembly has passed a bill aimed at regulating substances of concern in children’s products, through reporting requirements, substance bans and retail signage. -
Can We Really Count On The Cosmetics Industry To Keep Us Safe?
May 11, 2016 | Environmental Working Group
By Tina Sigurdson and Nathalie Prescott
Right now, you can go online and buy GK Hair Taming System with Juvexin® “Curly” or “Resistant” products. You can do this although these products are only intended for use by salon professionals. -
Oil & Gas Industry Sees New Limits For EPA's Staggered Methane Data Call
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA's plan to stagger its oil and gas sector methane emissions information collection request (ICR) in two stages faces challenges, industry officials say, as the White House's apparent pressure for an accelerated time frame for the data collection could hinder the agency's ability to use information from the first phase to inform the second. -
State, Local Officials Tout Methane Programs In Meetings Over EPA NSPS
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
State lawmakers and local officials are touting their programs to curb oil and gas sector methane emissions in meetings with Obama administration officials over EPA's pending new source performance standards (NSPS) rule to cut methane from the sector, hoping to guide the regulation by promoting their programs as strong models. -
This Mystery was Solved: Scientists Say Chemicals from Fracking Wastewater Can Taint Fresh Water Nearby
May 11, 2016 | Washington Post
By Darryl Fears
The boom in unconventional drilling for natural gas known as fracking hit so fast that scientists have had to scramble to determine whether it’s safe for humans and the environment. Mostly they’re still trying to catch up. -
(ACC Mentioned) The Dangers of Houston’s Chemical Corridors — By The Numbers
May 11, 2016 | Chem Info
By Meagan Parrish
The Houston-area chemicals industry has been going through a boom in recent years, thanks to low natural gas prices. Last year, the American Chemistry Council counted at least 99 projects underway in the Lone Star State, including new plants and expansions in Houston, Beaumont and more. -
Bakken Pipeline Rules Split Industry, Landowners
May 11, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Neil Benter got the call last August. An oil company's pipeline had started leaking on his farmland outside Ambrose, N.D. It turned out the leak had been going on for days or weeks, spilling an estimated 4,260 barrels -- 178,900 gallons -- of salty wastewater. -
'Inevitable' Tide of Ransomware Attacks Threatens Critical Infrastructure -- DHS Official
May 11, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
Critical infrastructure operators can expect a surge in so-called ransomware cyberattacks, a Department of Homeland Security official told EnergyWire yesterday. -
Derailed in D.C.: ‘Bomb Trains,’ Poison Tracks and My Chemical Exposure
May 11, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Richard (RJ) Eskow
A CSX freight train derailed in Washington, D.C. last week. The Washington Post reported that ethanol, which is colorless and highly flammable, was leaking out of one of the overturned cars in the accident’s immediate aftermath. -
Senate Energy and Water Spending Bill Clears Procedural Hurdle on Fourth Try
May 11, 2016 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Darius Dixon and Annie Snider
The Senate today advanced an energy and water spending bill that could proceed to final passage as soon as this afternoon after considering a few more water-related amendments. -
EPA Fights Rehearing of 'Belated' Emissions Challenge
May 11, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
The Obama administration is pressing federal judges to reject environmentalists' appeal in a case challenging a 35-year-old U.S. EPA clean air rule. -
Forecast Sees Largest Growth for Renewable Energy Sources
May 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Federal energy analysts are forecasting that renewable energy will see the largest growth in consumption of all energy sources, followed by nuclear power.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Fumes Over Scientists Picked for EPA Review Panel
May 11, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
The chemical industry is criticizing scientists picked by U.S. EPA to review a draft assessment of a common cleaning solvent as unqualified for the job.
The American Chemistry Council maintains 12 of 16 scientists selected for the Chemical Safety Advisory Committee panel that will review the EPA assessment of 1-bromopropane lack "sufficient professional qualifications, including training and experience, to be capable of providing expert comments on the scientific issues."
At issue in the review: EPA's finding that 1-bromopropane -- also known as n-propyl bromide, or 1-BP -- presents acute risks to women of childbearing age and their offspring. The chemical is used in spray adhesives, dry cleaning and spot cleaning compounds, as well as for degreasing, EPA said (E&ENews PM, March 3).
A public comment period on the finding closed yesterday. The subcommittee is scheduled to meet in a web conference this afternoon for the first time.
In comments filed with EPA last month, the trade group highlighted a former EPA environmental health scientist, Weihsueh Chiu, for lacking "a strong background in human biology." Moreover, the group added, it "appears possible" Chiu -- now a professor of veterinary medicine at Texas A&M University -- is "continuing projects with his former [EPA] colleagues (perhaps through cooperative agreements)."
Chiu said today he was never notified of his selection for the panel, and he had withdrawn his name late last month because of scheduling conflicts.
The ACC said other nominees -- including Michael Babich, the director of toxicology and risk assessment at the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, and Melanie Marty, the acting deputy director for scientific affairs at the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment -- are unqualified because they may have conflicts of interest due to their agencies' relationship with EPA.
The group said Daniel Morgan, who leads the respiratory toxicology group at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health, "has relevant expertise, but may have a bias favoring the National Toxicology Program."
Nine other scientists were criticized by name in the comments as lacking appropriate professional experience.
Just two panel nominees -- James Blando, a professor at Old Dominion University and a former DuPont Co. and New Jersey Department of Health scientist, and Elaine Faustman, a professor of environmental and occupational health sciences at the University of Washington -- were deemed by ACC as "appropriate appointees."
In an email, Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said ACC's position was unreasonable.
"Industry is objecting to most of the panel members, and for the most obscure and vague reasons," Sass wrote.
The real plan may be to load the panel with "industry-friendly toxicologists" who will "identify limitations in those data, and then try to posit underlying mechanisms that would explain away the effects, or argue that until the mechanism of toxicity is understood, EPA must take no action to restrict 1-BP," Sass wrote.
In 2012, ACC called EPA's peer-review process for chemical assessments "an important and necessary step."
"We believe the plan should ensure peer review panels are composed of experts across all disciplines based principally on their scientific expertise and should not exclude panelists based solely on their affiliation," the group said. "The process should also provide ample time for meaningful public comment and ensure sufficient time for review of those comments by the peer review panel. EPA should also ensure that the final assessment addresses public comments and the findings and recommendations of the peer review panel."
Meanwhile, environmental groups faulted EPA's assessment of the cleaning chemical on the grounds the agency failed to fully consider exposures to 1-bromopropane.
In comments filed with EPA, Earthjustice; the BlueGreen Alliance; the Environmental Health Strategy Center; NRDC; Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families; and the Sierra Club's toxics committee said EPA had not accounted for communities near where 1-BP is used, processed or manufactured, or for dermal exposures to the chemical.
"Failure to include the full scope of exposures to 1-BP in the risk assessment will result in an underestimation of risk," the groups warned. "This underestimation is of great concern, as it could mean that 1-BP will continue to be used in settings that lead to harmful exposures and serious health impacts."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/05/11/stories/1060037070
-
(ACC Mentioned) SEHSC to Collaborate with EPA on Siloxane Levels
May 11, 2016 | Rubber and Plastics News
By Miles Moore
As part of an agreement reached two years ago, members of the Silicones Environmental, Health and Safety Center of the American Chemistry Council are collaborating with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to assess levels of the siloxane D4 in the environment.
The data generated in the environmental monitoring program, which was co-designed by the EPA and the SEHSC, will facilitate the agency's environmental risk assessment for D4, using actual environmental concentrations rather than computer models, the ACC said.
D4 is a colorless, odorless non-oily silicone fluid used as an intermediate to make silicone polymers, the ACC said. D4 has important applications in a number of industries, including construction, transportation, health care and electronics.
“Generating real-world data from multiple locations throughout the U.S. will help us better understand the fate and distribution of D4 in the environment, which is consistent with our industry's international environmental stewardship efforts,” said Karluss Thomas, senior director of the ACC's Chemical Products and Technology Division.
Shin-Etsu Silicones of America, Dow Corning Corp., Evonik Industries, Momentive and Wacker Silicones are the SEHSC members involved in the monitoring program, Thomas said.
The program requires the SEHSC to provide quarterly reports to the EPA, and all regulatory decisions based on the reports are at the agency's discretion, he said.
In April 2014, the SEHSC and the EPA reached an agreement to be partners in environmental testing and risk assessment for D4, the ACC said at the time.
The EPA had listed D4 as a possible carcinogen after finding trace amounts of it in drinking water. However, the ACC noted that various international government and industry bodies—including Health Canada, the European Scientific Committee for Consumer Safety and the U.S. Cosmetics Ingredient Review—had already conducted thorough scientific reviews of D4 and concluded it presents no risk to human health.
Monitoring programs are ongoing around the world, including Europe and Japan, for D4, D5 and D6, Thomas said.
http://www.rubbernews.com/article/20160511/NEWS/305029986/sehsc-to-collaborate-with-epa-on-siloxane-levels
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA's Vapor Intrusion Superfund 'Scoring' Proposal Draws Mixed Response
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
EPA's proposed rule to add vapor or water intrusion as a contaminant pathway for placing a site on the Superfund National Priorities List (NPL) is drawing a mix of comments, with industry parties flat-out opposing the addition as unnecessary and lacking a rationale, while some states and advocates are endorsing the proposal.
"EPA has not established a sufficient rationale to support the contention that the proposed change would result in the addition of sites to the NPL that would not otherwise be listed," the American Chemistry Council (ACC) tells EPA in April 29 comments on its proposed rule to add a subsurface component to its Hazard Ranking System (HRS).
The Defense Department (DOD) is also highly critical of the rule, and says in its April 25 comments that the agency should delay its issuance until it releases guidance for the rule's implementation.
But some states and environmental advocates are backing EPA's proposal to add vapor or water intrusion, known as "subsurface intrusion" (SsI), as a component of the HRS. The change would open the door to EPA listing sites on the NPL solely due to vapor or water intrusion into occupied structures. While contaminated sites with vapor intrusion can currently be listed on the NPL, they cannot be listed solely because of vapor intrusion, an EPA source has said. The change will overcome this roadblock.
The agency accepted public comment for 60 days on the proposed rule through April 29, and rejected an appeal made by DOD and energy utilities to extend the comment period by 60 days. EPA points out in an April 4 letter to DOD that the department had numerous opportunities to review information and raise concerns during a six-month interagency review period for the proposed rule, as well as the 60-day comment period.
EPA is proposing to add the SsI component to represent contamination stemming from the subsurface environment, such as shallow, unconfined groundwater, into overlying structures, EPA explains in a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document accompanying the proposed rule. SsI can occur either through vapor intrusion -- the most common form of SsI -- or by contaminated groundwater intrusion, such as flooded basements due to high groundwater elevations, EPA says.
Vapor intrusion, which has garnered increasing attention from regulators in recent years, occurs when vapors rise from contamination below ground into buildings through dirt floors, utility line openings or other pathways. EPA generally did not account for such exposure pathways when it crafted its waste cleanup programs in the 1980s and 1990s, but subsequent research showed potential risks -- forcing EPA to develop assessment methods.
The agency is proposing to add the SsI component to the HRS' soil exposure pathway, currently one of four scoring pathways. These pathways -- groundwater, surface water, air and soil exposure -- are used in the HRS to determine which contaminated sites are eligible for placement on the NPL. Under the HRS, a score of 28.50 "is a cut-off point that serves as a screening-level indicator of the highest priority releases or threatened releases," EPA says on the regulatory tracker website.
EPA in the FAQ document says the change is not expected to result in a rise in the number of sites added to the NPL. Rather, EPA expects its site assessment budget will remain flat, and therefore the agency expects to realign and reprioritize its site assessment funds to address sites with SsI, it says.
Industry's Concerns
Industry parties are opposing the proposed addition, saying in comments that EPA lacks a rationale for making the change. In reviewing the proposed rule, "we find no evidence to suggest that a new [HRS] pathway is needed for [SsI]," say April 29 comments from the Superfund Settlements Project (SSP), which represents a coalition of major companies from different industry sectors that originally organized in 1986 to improve the Superfund program's effectiveness. "EPA still has not clearly defined the specific problem that it would solve through its HRS revisions." The four reasons EPA gives do not survive scrutiny, SSP says.
Similarly, ACC says EPA fails to show evidence supporting its contention that any potential risks posed by SsI at eligible sites cannot be addressed through existing federal or state programs.
SSP argues that sites with vapor intrusion posing a significant threat are already part of the Superfund pipeline, and that EPA has been unable to identify sites that would be listed under the proposed rule, but do not meet the scoring level for listing under the existing HRS rule.
Further, SSP disputes EPA's contention that there is substantial public support for the rule, with SSP noting considerable opposition from DOD, trade associations and industry groups.
Third, SSP disagrees with EPA on the scope of vapor intrusion as a problem, with EPA pointing to the identification of 1,073 sites that may possibly qualify for the NPL due to suspected vapor intrusion. But SSP says EPA does not identify these sites or offer details. SSP and ACC say SsI sites are a poor fit for the NPL, given imminent conditions related to SsI such as fire or explosive risks and acute health risks could not be left in place as the site makes its way through listing, and the subsequent remedy process.
Industry parties discount EPA's argument that no other national program can consistently and comprehensively address SsI like the Superfund remediation program. SSP questions these goals and says the NPL addresses high priority sites slated for long-term remediation, with the surrounding population being a weighted factor in scoring a site, while vapor intrusion often affects a few buildings with a limited population. Most SsI sites are addressed by state and local governments, and "[t]o the extent that such sites warrant federal attention, the Superfund NPL program will rarely be appropriate, because it simply does not provide the rapid response that is needed," SSP says.
ACC in its comments also contends that the addition would run "contrary to the [Superfund law] mandate to use the NPL to address the highest priorities for long-term remedial action based on the potential threat to drinking water sources and the largest number of people impacted."
'Ripple Effects'
The Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG), which represents power utilities, in its comments echoes some of the same concerns, and argues that the proposal will have wider impacts, affecting the prioritization of sites for listing on the NPL. The proposed rule "would have ripple effects reverberating throughout the entire HRS," it says.
SSI scoring and related preliminary site assessment and inspection work would add to costs, USWAG says. "Moreover, because the HRS is intended to assess relative risk from one site to another, the Proposal would impact all sites screened under the amended HRS (regardless of whether the SSI component is scored for a given site), and will similarly impact the prioritization of all screened sites," it says.
While USWAG opposes EPA's promulgation of a rule, it says if the agency nonetheless moves forward with the rulemaking, the group concurs on several of the measures EPA is proposing and in some cases asks for clarification. For instance, USWAG generally agrees with EPA's approach to limit SsI scoring to sites with "regularly occupied structures," but says the agency should clarify the meaning of "regularly occupied" in the rule.
'Positive Reviews'
States vary in their position on the proposal, with the Association of State & Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO) indicating in its comments that states had a number of "positive reviews" on the proposal.
But the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality in April 14 comments is critical, joining with DOD in its argument that there are technical gaps and inconsistencies between the proposed rule and EPA's 2015 vapor intrusion guide. Both contend EPA should delay finalizing the rule until EPA develops corresponding guidance for how it plans to implement the rule.
"The proposed rule is lengthy, highly complex, lacks transparency in some places, and the methods for prioritizing vapor intrusion (VI) potential are inconsistent with the June 2015 EPA chlorinated VI and petroleum hydrocarbon (PVI) guidance documents," DOD says.
In a compilation of comments from states submitted by ASTSWMO, the group cites individual state comments, and notes that "States did mention that it will be difficult to meaningfully score the vapor intrusion pathway with limited information, especially when site inspection budgets are limited."
In separate comments, both the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) and Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) endorse the addition of SsI to the HRS.
NJDEP is seeing an increase in the number of SsI contamination incidents reported to the agency annually, and says, "As illustrated by numerous examples in New Jersey, inclusion of this pathway as part of the evaluation of sites for placement on the NPL is essential for those with serious subsurface intrusion contamination." The state says that some sites warranting EPA attention will only meet the HRS threshold with the addition of the SsI component.
Montana DEQ says that at some sites, DEQ cannot identify a viable responsible party and the department may lack the resources to address vapor intrusion, noting that the addition of SsI to the HRS "will allow the use of federal resources to protect human health when warranted."
CPEO's Support
Meanwhile, public interest group the Center for Public Environmental Oversight (CPEO) is expressing supportfor the proposed rule, noting that at many sites, "state regulators do not have the experience, tools, resources, authorities, or will to properly investigate and respond to vapor intrusion."
CPEO tells EPA that the proposed scoring system will work well for scoring sites that clearly qualify or do not obviously qualify for the NPL based on vapor intrusion alone, but says it is unclear how well scoring will work for sites that fall in the middle of the risk continuum. CPEO urges "EPA to monitor how well scoring works in the first year or two, so it might consider adjustments if necessary."
The Pompton Lakes Community Advisory Group is backing the addition of SsI to the HRS. Vapor intrusion in homes in Pompton Lakes, NJ, is being mitigated under the Resource Conservation & Recovery Act corrective action program, rather than Superfund, although environmentalists have sought an NPL listing. The group calls for EPA to take a more conservative approach, for instance saying that EPA should consider applying the additional pathway to sites that are currently in the process of being scored, not just new sites that are proposed after the rule is final.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/epas-vapor-intrusion-superfund-scoring-proposal-draws-mixed-response
-
(ACC Mentioned) TSCA Reform Deal Could Happen This Week
May 11, 2016 | Chem Info
By Meagan Parrish
Key senators leading the Congressional effort to reform America’s 40-year-old toxic chemical policy have signaled that they are on the verge of striking a deal.
At the end of last week, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okl.) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif) indicated that the main part of their negotiations were completed to reconcile differences between the Senate’s broad 200-page bill and the much shorter House version.
Boxer had been a vocal opponent of the bipartisan bill that passed the Senate in December, saying that it didn’t do enough to give states regulatory power over chemicals. She also wanted more power to act swiftly against detected “cancer clusters.” The Senate version nevertheless passed.
Both senators and several House members released statements saying they are working tirelessly to keep the momentum of the negotiations and get reform passed by the end of this week.
“We’re getting close — we are — we really are,” Inhofe said.
The Toxic Substances Control Act regulates chemical manufacturing, transporation and use. The bill is widely seen as needing a revamp. Several major stakeholders have expressed their support of TSCA overhaul including the American Chemistry Council, DuPont, Dow Chemical Co., 3M, BASF and others.
http://www.chem.info/news/2016/05/tsca-reform-deal-could-happen-week
-
Lawmakers Tout Possibility of TSCA Deal This Week
May 11, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
Lawmakers working to mesh two versions of legislation to update the nation's chemicals law today continued to voice optimism that a deal is in the works.
The comments come after Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and ranking member Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said last week that they had resolved a long-standing disagreement regarding how states' legal authority would be affected by the proposed law (E&E Daily, May 10).
The deal ended a main source of tension over the proposals, S. 697 and H.R. 2576. House lawmakers later said they were reviewing the language, which Boxer and Inhofe have not released.
"We're making some real progress," Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), an original co-sponsor of S. 697, said this morning.
Udall added that it is still possible a final agreement could be reached this week -- though lawmakers have made similar predictions for months that have failed to pan out.
"We still have a few outstanding issues," Udall said. "I don't want to get into those."
Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy, said yesterday that he also believed the end was in sight.
"We're close, very close," Shimkus said. "I don't want to spill a lot of beans, because I don't want things to blow up."
Shimkus said the negotiations rested on all parties performing specific roles.
"Everybody had their little jobs they had to do," Shimkus said, "and Senator Inhofe and Senator Boxer got their job done, and we think we've got our job done. Now it's kind of marrying the two together."
The final language is likely to be an amendment to the Senate bill adopted in the House that will then be returned to the Senate, Shimkus said.
"Sooner rather than later," he added.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/05/11/stories/1060037065
-
New York Assembly Passes Children's Products Bill
May 11, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
New York’s Assembly has passed a bill aimed at regulating substances of concern in children’s products, through reporting requirements, substance bans and retail signage.
The “Child Safe Products Act” (AB 5612) passed the Assembly by a 112-29 margin, and now moves to the Senate.
The bill says the state Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) should establish lists of priority chemicals and chemicals of high concern. Requirements for products, containing the substances, would include:
reporting their presence, along with additional data, to the DEC, with the information to be made available on the agency’s website;
a Prop 65-style requirement for retailers to “conspicuously post notice to consumers, identifying such products and the priority chemicals they contain”; and
a sales ban on covered products containing them from 1 January 2019.
The measure would extend to toys, baby products, children’s personal care products, and other items intended for children.
Ten priority substances are named in the bill:
tris (1, 3 dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate;
benzene;
lead;
mercury;
antimony;
formaldehyde;
asbestos;
arsenic;
cadmium; and
cobalt.
There are approaching 70 substances named in the list of chemicals of high concern, which is based on Washington's Chemicals of High Concern to Children (CHCC) list.
The bill would also instruct the DEC to conduct periodic reviews of its chemical lists and, by regulation, add or remove substances from them.
Criteria, such as whether a substance found in children’s products is present in humans, based on biomonitoring studies, or if a substance or children’s products containing a substance has been banned in other states, are named as considerations.
NGO Environmental Advocates of New York (EANY) says it “strongly supports” the measure, and that it offers a “common sense approach to the practice of getting toxic chemicals out of children’s products”.
But Owen Caine, director of state affairs at the Toy Industry Association (TIA), said some aspects of the bill are “very concerning” and they oppose it.
The TIA is “firmly in the position” that regulation of substances be handled at the federal level, he said. A patchwork of state laws creates an “enormous regulatory burden” on all industries, he added, and ends up increasing costs in order to impose regulations that “quite frankly, the federal government is better at doing”.
The association remains supportive of reform to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) as a potential curb to state-level regulation of substances, according to Mr Caine.
And while the extent to which a reformed TSCA would preempt a state’s ability to impose reporting requirements remains unclear, Mr Caine says the association hopes that a modernised federal policy would reassure the concerned individuals, who are currently proposing this type of legislation.
New York has considered similar childrens’ product laws in recent years, but has failed to secure their passage.
In the absence of a state-wide measure, several counties have moved to ban certain substances from children’s products. Litigation of Albany County’s measure, the first to be passed, is ongoing.
The New York legislature is set to adjourn for the year on 16 June. There is no legislative carryover when the body reconvenes in 2017.
https://chemicalwatch.com/47295/new-york-assembly-passes-childrens-products-bill
-
Can We Really Count On The Cosmetics Industry To Keep Us Safe?
May 11, 2016 | Environmental Working Group
By Tina Sigurdson and Nathalie Prescott
Right now, you can go online and buy GK Hair Taming System with Juvexin® “Curly” or “Resistant” products. You can do this although these products are only intended for use by salon professionals. Even more troublingly, you can make your purchase even though the Food and Drug Administration issued a warning letter months ago informing the company that its products are so risky, they’re illegal.
Last fall, FDA testing revealed that samples of the two products contained between 3.9 percent and 4.85 percent methylene glycol. Those amounts are 30 to 40 times higher than what the cosmetics industry itself considers safe.
In April 2011 – just over five years ago – EWG warned the public and FDA that GK Hair treatments contained dangerous levels of formaldehyde.
The maker of the GK Hair Taming System with Juvexin® products, Van Tibolli Beauty Corp., touts Juvexin® as a “keratin anti-aging protein blend … [d]erived from pristine sheep wool through an environmentally friendly process.” But the Taming System “Curly” and “Resistant” products also deliver hefty doses of methylene glycol – which is just formaldehyde suspended in water – which releases formaldehyde gas when treated hair is heated and the water evaporates.
Formaldehyde is associated with potential long-term health dangers such as cancer, and it can also lead to respiratory irritation, rashes, dizziness and even nosebleeds and vomiting.
The federal cosmetics law is so notoriously weak and outdated that FDA had few options to address this threat to public health. Although the FDA sent its warning last September, today there is no sign that the agency has issued a “closeout letter” confirming that Van Tibolli Beauty Corp. has fully addressed these concerns. And while “Curly” and “Resistant” Taming System products no longer appear for sale on GK Hair’s own website, they continue to be available on popular third-party sites.
So what is the cosmetics industry doing about this? After all, some companies contend the industry can effectively regulate itself without greater FDA oversight. The industry established the Cosmetic Ingredient Review decades ago to assesses the safety of ingredients and make recommendations intended to keep members on the up and up.
In 2013, that industry panel concluded that methylene glycol in personal care products was not safe at levels above 0.118 percent, specifically noting that “in the present practices of use and concentration … hair-smoothing products containing formaldehyde and methylene glycol are unsafe.”
Companies that belong to the industry trade association are supposedly obliged to follow the recommendations of the CIR Expert Panel. Yet even though Van Tibolli Beauty Corp.’s products can contain more than 40 times the panel’s recommended limit for methylene glycol, the company remains listed as an active member of the trade association.
Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) have proposed a bill to reform the outdated federal cosmetics laws. Their Personal Care Products Safety Actwould require manufacturers to report “adverse health events” linked to their products to FDA and empower the agency to recall products that prove to be dangerous.
Moreover, companies would have to substantiate that their formulations are safebefore putting them on store shelves, and manufacturers would have to ensure that their products were made in a clean and safe environment. The bill would also finally give FDA authority to review ingredients whose safety has been questioned for years by public health experts.
Consumers need and deserve the stronger cosmetics regulations and FDA enforcement proposed in this bill, not an industry left to regulate itself.
http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2016/05/can-we-really-count-cosmetics-industry-keep-us-safe
-
Oil & Gas Industry Sees New Limits For EPA's Staggered Methane Data Call
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA's plan to stagger its oil and gas sector methane emissions information collection request (ICR) in two stages faces challenges, industry officials say, as the White House's apparent pressure for an accelerated time frame for the data collection could hinder the agency's ability to use information from the first phase to inform the second.
"While White House pressure to act is driving the process, EPA's understanding of oil and natural gas production is limited and trying to use some other ICR framework like refining would really be a reach," one drilling industry source says. "However, I doubt the White House will let EPA learn what it needs to before proposing an ICR."
If EPA is unable to use the data from the first round of the ICR to inform the second, industry charges that the agency may end up with flawed emissions and economics data, which may make it difficult to justify the cost-effective requirements in an eventual rulemaking.
EPA acting air chief Janet McCabe an April 27 event hosted by Bloomberg Government and Sierra Club suggested the ICR will proceed in two stages, which an agency spokeswoman said could be one ICR in which the data would be submitted in phases, with a second round collected after receiving the initial set of responses.
EPA had initially said it would issue a draft ICR in April, and it the data collection is expected to inform a potential rule to curb methane from existing oil and gas operations. The data collection effort will extend into 2017, likely putting the onus on any future administration to develop existing source standards for the industry.
McCabe at the event did not give details on the time frame or format, including whether the second stage would occur only after EPA had received information from the first request, which the agency is yet to release.
But the industry officials suggests that the White House is pushing an ambitious time frame that may not allow for EPA to take the time to digest data from a first ICR before crafting a second, creating problems for how the agency uses the first round of data to inform a potential methane emissions rule for existing operations.
Recent communications with EPA officials on the draft ICR reflect a sense that "there is no clear understanding of how to frame the ICR, but it seems clear that the White House wants something sooner rather than later," the industry source says, but it is possible EPA could "propose something and then let comments define a final package."
Initial Inquiry
A second industry source says they believe EPA intends to launch an initial round of inquiry and review that information before initiating a second round of follow-up questions, and that the draft ICR regardless should provide insight into "how EPA sees the rulemaking process" unfolding under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, which governs regulations for existing sources, while section 111(b) covers new and modified sources.
EPA in April sent for White House review a final new source performance standard (NSPS) to curb the greenhouse gas methane from new oil and gas drilling. The second industry source says it is possible that EPA could release the existing source ICR and the final NSPS -- slated for publication in June -- on the same day.
The timing of a potential proposed and final existing source rule is more uncertain. McCabe at the April event left the door open for the possibility, however remote, of an existing source rule before President Obama leaves office in January. "Nothing is off the table for us, but our focus right now is on" the ICR and NSPS, she said.
Industry sources previously told Inside EPA that the agency appears to be considering issuing a more basic ICR to thousands of operators, concerning straightforward questions such as what is produced at a given operation, how much, the locations of oil and gas facilities and whether they are near pipelines or sources of electric power.
A second, more detailed data query would likely follow the first request, targeting a narrower universe of facilities, and focusing more on specific types of equipment and emissions, the source says.
"My understanding is that the first questionnaire would be fairly high level questions -- where are the wells, what do they produce, what kind of manning, power availability -- and the ICR would go to a large number of producers," the first industry source says.
A second questionnaire would be detailed regarding company economics, types of emissions control, emissions data, cost of controls, that source says. "One of our issues is how would EPA design the second questionnaire without getting information from the first one."
Court's Ruling
Meanwhile, the second industry source says that EPA as it develops oil and gas rules should closely consider what the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ultimately says in its ruling on litigation challenging the agency's existing source performance standards (ESPS) for cutting greenhouse gases from power plants.
The court's eventual ruling could help define the parameters of the universe of controls EPA may impose as it looks to develop a similar ESPS for the oil and gas sector's methane emissions, that source says, given that both rulemakings involve the rarely utilized section 111(d) of the air law. The agency should "take into account the lessons learned in the Clean power Plan (CPP)," including interpretive issues in the section 111(d) process and how the judges will address some of the agency's interpretations of the provision, the second source says.
For example, a major issue in the CPP suit, Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, is whether the rule expands EPA's power by requiring generation shifting beyond the fence line of regulated plants to non-regulated units, the source says, adding that the issue is "likely to bear on the scope of regulation" for the oil and gas sector.
The source says, "section 111(d) isn't particularly common, and everything in play [in the CPP litigation] may be in play on the [exploration and production] E&P side."
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/oil-gas-industry-sees-new-limits-epas-staggered-methane-data-call
-
State, Local Officials Tout Methane Programs In Meetings Over EPA NSPS
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
State lawmakers and local officials are touting their programs to curb oil and gas sector methane emissions in meetings with Obama administration officials over EPA's pending new source performance standards (NSPS) rule to cut methane from the sector, hoping to guide the regulation by promoting their programs as strong models.
The draft final NSPS has been undergoing White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) review since April 4, with OMB's website projecting a publication date of June. Groups are currently meeting with EPA and OMB officials to try and sway the outcome of the rule. A host of state, local and environmentalist representatives met with the administration April 19, while members of the Clean Air Task Force meeting had a separate meeting on April 20.
Sources say that at the April 19 meeting -- which included officials from Colorado, Ohio, and Pennsylvania -- two Colorado government officials pointed to the state's novel methane regulations, which require oil and gas producers to install controls to minimize leakage and to reduce or capture 95 percent of emissions of the potent greenhouse gas (GHG), and to quarterly inspect for leaks and make repairs within 15 days of discovery.
One local Colorado official touts an April 10 Center for Methane Solutions study that praises Colorado's rules, adopted in 2014, and included a series of interviews with 10 oil and gas representatives in the state. The new "case study indicates that industry finds the rules "cost-effective and beneficial," the official says, and a Colorado lawmaker says that "People around the country should have the same protections" offered by the Colorado rules.
County Officials from Lucas County, OH, and a Pennsylvania state representative -- two states also taking steps to reduce methane from the oil and gas sector -- also spoke at the April 19 meeting.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) announced recently that the Ohio EPA is proposing to extend its current emissions control requirements to cover sources of both volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and of methane from new oil and gas operations, requiring operators to conduct quarterly inspections and repair leaks.
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf (D) announced in January a framework to reduce methane from the state's new and existing oil and gas operations that would also include quarterly leak inspections.
EPA's NSPS would impose first-time methane limits on new oil and gas sector operations but would not affect existing oil and gas operations. The rule would also set controls for VOCs and methane for some sources not regulated under an earlier 2012 NSPS, such as hydraulically fractured oil wells and downstream compressors and other equipment. Those controls include first-time leak detection and repair requirements for the industry.
Industry has criticized the rule as too strict and environmentalists have urged the agency to strengthen it further, expand the standards to a wider range of sources and increase the frequency with which industry would have to conduct inspections for leaks. Instead, industry has floated the state efforts as a possible model.
Meanwhile, EPA is also crafting an information collection request for the oil and gas sector that is expected to inform whether the agency eventually crafts a methane rule for existing operations.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/state-local-officials-tout-methane-programs-meetings-over-epa-nsps
-
May 11, 2016 | Washington Post
By Darryl Fears
The boom in unconventional drilling for natural gas known as fracking hit so fast that scientists have had to scramble to determine whether it’s safe for humans and the environment. Mostly they’re still trying to catch up.
But a recent study by the U.S. Geological Survey appears to have answered one burning question about millions of gallons of water laced with chemicals that bubble out of the ground after being injected into the wells to fracture rocks and release trapped gas. When the water is stored, do the chemicals somehow leach into nearby surface water such as streams?
The short answer is yes, said the study’s lead author, Denise Akob, a USGS microbiologist.
“The key take away,” said Akob, who led a team of researchers from Duke University and the University of Missouri in studying a stream near a wastewater storage site in Lochgelly, W.Va., “is really that we’re demonstrating that facilities like this can have an environmental impact.”
Upstream from the site with gray and brown storage tanks, the waters of Wolf Creek tested normal. Downstream, there were detectable levels of chemicals that commonly lace fracking waste — barium, bromide, calcium, chloride, sodium, lithium, strontium. The report called the levels low, not enough to have a noticeable impact on marine life. But they did appear to have an effect on something that could be equally important.
Communities of microbes that help support life were dramatically altered downstream. There was a lower diversity of the life forms downstream, “which could impact nutrient cycling,” a building block of life in the creek, the USGS explained in a statement that announced the study.
“Water samples adjacent to and downstream from the disposal facility exhibited evidence of endocrine disruption activity compared to upstream samples,” the USGS explained. Long story short, endocrine disruptors can wreak havoc on the hormones of mammals. In the Chesapeake Bay watershed that includes bays, rivers, streams and creeks in six states and the District of Columbia, scientists have determined that endocrine disruptors have switched the testes of male smallmouth bass to ovaries.
The finding about the microbes “gives us a sense that the communities are changing downstream,” Akob said. How exactly they don’t know. Science works slowly, and in this case it will likely take another years-long study to determine how. The current finding that the water chemistry is changing “is a first,” she said, opening a window of understanding where there was none.
Hydraulic fracturing is rife in West Virginia, producing hundreds of millions of gallons of wastewater. In the Chesapeake Bay area, Pennsylvania is another state where fracking abounds, with wells being built to drill vertically a few hundred feet, then horizontally so that water can be injected into the hole to break apart shale and release gas. The practice is also widespread in Ohio, Texas, Wyoming, Oklahoma, North Dakota and other states.
Scientists across a range of federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and universities such as Duke and Yale are concerned about the chemical mixtures used to open the rock. Oil and gas companies have refused to reveal what they use, saying the information is proprietary, like the secret ingredients used to make sodas. For that reason and others, Maryland, New York, New Jersey and numerous other states have either placed a moratorium on fracking or delayed it from ever taking place within their borders.
On its website, the EPA lays out its concern. Unconventional oil and gas extraction, or UOG, “can be generated in large quantities and contain constituents that are potentially harmful to human health and the environment,” it says. “Wastewater from UOG wells often contains high concentrations of salt content, also called total dissolved solids. The wastewater can also contain various organic chemicals, inorganic chemicals, metals, and naturally occurring radioactive materials. This potentially harmful wastewater creates a need for appropriate wastewater management infrastructure and practices.”
Oil companies are aware of the concern. They often truck water to public and private wastewater treatment facilities to manage the problem. In Oklahoma, the wastewater is sometimes poured into underground storage wells, a practice thought by many scientists to produce small earthquakes. At other places, it sits in storage, allowing water and chemicals to find a way out.
At the West Virginia site, Akob and her researchers had no idea where leaks might have occurred after three years of study that started in 2013. They also found elevated levels of iron considered unsafe by West Virginia regulators, but that problem couldn’t be blamed on the wastewater because various mine excavations in the state have raised iron levels in many locations.
“The main thing is there are aquatic health guidelines for a single element” such as iron, Akob said. But the complex chemical mixtures produced by fracking “can have different responses.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/05/11/this-mystery-was-solved-scientists-say-chemicals-from-fracking-wastewater-can-taint-fresh-water-nearby/
-
(ACC Mentioned) The Dangers of Houston’s Chemical Corridors — By The Numbers
May 11, 2016 | Chem Info
By Meagan Parrish
The Houston-area chemicals industry has been going through a boom in recent years, thanks to low natural gas prices. Last year, the American Chemistry Council counted at least 99 projects underway in the Lone Star State, including new plants and expansions in Houston, Beaumont and more.
And for those who work at chemical facilities or live nearby, the threat of a dangerous incident is ever present.
Earlier this week, the Houston Chronicle published its first part of an investigative series that reveals exactly which chemicals are being stored where and what the risks are to the public. To assess their data, the Chronicle teamed up with chemical safety experts at Texas A&M and discovered that the chemicals are not only in close proximity to millions of people — those residents are often unaware of the risks.
The investigation also found varying degrees of safety compliance among chemical plants around Houston. Some companies, such as AkzoNobel, stood out for their safety protocols, while others continue to get cited by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
It’s an issue that has been well-documented on this site, as well as others, but many say not enough has been done yet to monitor safety at many chemical plants and keep the public up to date.
Here’s a look at the investigation’s findings, by the numbers.
2,500 = Businesses with chemicals inventories that were analyzed by the Chronicle and Texas A&M.
80 percent = Facilities analyzed that house an amount of chemicals dangerous enough to pose serious harm to the public and also have 10,000 or more people living within a 2-mile radius.
12 = Explosions, fires and toxic releases that have been reported in the Houston area since November 2014, when a methyl mercaptan leak at a DuPont plant in La Porte killed four workers and injured another.
10 million = The amount of methyl mercaptan that LyondellBasell can house in its Houston facilities — more than 430 times what was released during DuPont’s La Porte plant disaster.
17 = People have died in incidents involving hazardous chemicals nationally since 2014. In the 93 reported incidents, 573 people have also been hospitalized.
75,000 = The maximum amount of aluminum phosphide that could be stored at Degesch America’s warehouse just north of Pearland. The pesticide is so dangerous, after 2 pounds of it was placed in the ground around a home in Utah to kill rodents, it also killed a family’s 4-year-old girl and her baby sister. Degesch stores the chemicals within 200 feet of a local theater.
$100,000 = OSHA’s citation for Syntech Chemicals after a 2002 fire ignited several 10,000-gallon tanks of methyl alcohol at the company’s plant. Investigators found that the fire was caused by an overheated oil reactor. Three months later, the tanks caught fire again. OSHA reported that the company ran its plant without properly inspecting its safety valves for 11 years. The company has since rebuilt the plant and updated its safety features.
983 = Substances evaluated by Texas A&M. The chemicals included the likes of triethylaluminium — a colorless liquid that’s used to produce polyethlyne and was part of igniter mix used for the first stage of the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. It also ignites immediately when it comes into contact with air. The Chroniclenoted that AkzoNobel, which handles the chemical at its La Porte facility, gave the paper an in-depth report of its safety precautions when working with triethylaluminium.
http://www.chem.info/news/2016/05/dangers-houstons-chemical-corridors-%E2%80%94-numbers
-
Bakken Pipeline Rules Split Industry, Landowners
May 11, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Neil Benter got the call last August.
An oil company's pipeline had started leaking on his farmland outside Ambrose, N.D. It turned out the leak had been going on for days or weeks, spilling an estimated 4,260 barrels -- 178,900 gallons -- of salty wastewater. Nine months later, Benter is left to wonder how the leak happened and whether the salt will permanently sterilize part of the land.
"That pipeline wasn't even 2 years old," Benter said. "They've got to do a better job of putting these pipelines in."
By the end of the summer, Benter and other landowners will know how strictly the state plans to regulate pipeline construction in an effort to prevent similar leaks and spills.
The North Dakota Industrial Commission is preparing to finalize a package of rules that could impose construction and safety requirements on the largely unregulated network of gathering pipelines that connect to individual oil wells in the state.
The oil industry opposes most of the changes, saying they're too expensive and come at a time when the global crash in oil prices has caused a steep decline in drilling in North Dakota. Environmentalists and landowner groups are pushing for tougher restrictions, saying the state should do more to prevent pipeline accidents like the one on Benter's land.
North Dakota became the second-biggest oil-producing state in the last 10 years after the fracking boom opened up the Bakken Shale field, a layer of rock that lies beneath much of the western half of the state. The boom helped reverse the population drain in North Dakota, but it also led to environmental problems and other side effects.
North Dakota already has tens of thousands of miles of gathering pipelines, and state officials expect another 36,000 to be built as the Bakken Shale matures. In North Dakota, the lines are used not only for oil and gas but also for the wastewater, sometimes known as brine or produced water.
Unlike long-haul pipelines, gathering lines aren't subject to federal regulations, and North Dakota has only a few rules in place for them.
Landowners and environmental groups have been pushing the state for tougher regulations since 2013.
Bigger brine spill prompted rulemaking
In 2015, a gathering pipeline spilled nearly 3 million gallons of brine into Blacktail Creek, a few miles north of Williston, N.D. The pipeline had leaked for a little more than three months before it was discovered, and the wastewater flowed downhill into the Little Muddy and Missouri rivers (EnergyWire, Oct. 29, 2015).
The North Dakota Legislature, which was in session as the Blacktail Creek spill was being cleaned up, ordered a $1.5 million pipeline-safety study from North Dakota State University and told the state industrial commission to write new standards for gathering pipelines.
The NDSU study said it wasn't cost-effective to require automatic shutoff valves and high-tech leak detection systems -- something that landowner groups have been pressing for. Instead, the industrial commission will require bonds for gathering pipelines, better planning for spills and leaks, and tougher construction requirements.
Pipelines will also have to undergo pressure testing after they're built and be designed to allow testing and cleaning with inline instruments known as pigs, according to a draft of the rules. Lines that go through wetlands or other environmentally sensitive areas will have to be bored horizontally.
The commission's oil and gas staff held a series of hearings about the regulations in April and has received 492 pages of written comments. The commission itself, made up of Gov. Jack Dalrymple (R), Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem (R) and Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring (R), will vote on a final version of the rules this summer.
After that, the rules will go to a committee of the state Legislature for final approval. Both the industrial commission and the legislative committee can alter the rules, Allison Ritter, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Mineral Resources, said in an email.
Ron Sylte, who owns the land where the Blacktail Creek spill happened, said the state has a history of lax enforcement against oil companies.
"I think they should have some teeth in the fines and the administration of it," he said in a phone interview.
"Make it hurt. Make them do it right."
The state's major oil producers, though, say the rules would be too costly and question whether the proposed rules go beyond what the Legislature intended.
"We must keep in mind that today's economics cannot absorb the great costs of increasing regulation without substantial increases in health and safety," wrote Ron Ness, executive director of the North Dakota Petroleum Council.
The commission expects the cost to be negligible -- $523,100 across the whole industry -- since many of the requirements are already standard industry practice. It has ample authority to pass the regulations under both the 2015 pipeline safety bill and previous laws, Ritter said.
Calls for tougher rules
The Northwest Landowners Association, which represents farmers and ranchers in the oil field, wants parts of the rules tightened. The bond amounts, for instance, aren't high enough to ensure that companies adequately reclaim drill sites and pipeline rights of way.
"This is an important protection for landowners, especially in the current economic climate with operators becoming insolvent," wrote Troy Coons, the group's chairman.
Benter said he hasn't closely reviewed the regulations but wants to see the state do more inspections to make sure pipelines are installed properly.
The company responsible for the spill, Samson Resources, didn't provide Benter a lot of details. It wasn't until Benter flew over the field in his airplane that he realized how far the spill had spread. Samson declined to comment for this story.
The salt water affected about 5 acres of cropland, according to a report from the state Health Department. Crews removed 2,500 barrels of liquid -- 105,000 gallons -- and replaced the sod and topsoil in the area. During a follow-up visit in March, state inspectors tersely noted, "Additional follow-up will be needed this summer to ensure vegetation growth."
Benter said he'd like the state to take a long-term view of pipeline problems.
"I own the land, and that land's going be here when we're all gone," he said.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/05/11/stories/1060037024
-
'Inevitable' Tide of Ransomware Attacks Threatens Critical Infrastructure -- DHS Official
May 11, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
Critical infrastructure operators can expect a surge in so-called ransomware cyberattacks, a Department of Homeland Security official told EnergyWire yesterday.
Marty Edwards, director of DHS's Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team, predicted that hackers who lock up industrial systems and hold them hostage until a company pays ransom will keep moving up the value chain to power and water utilities and other operators of critical infrastructure.
"Once they determine that they have a high-value system, the ransom usually goes up significantly," Edwards said.
Edwards' office at DHS helps electric utilities, manufacturers, oil and gas companies, and other companies that operate critical infrastructure defend against cyberattacks. Lately that has meant battling hackers who lock up computer files and hold them hostage. Once a malicious encryption program runs its course, victims receive a note demanding payment in exchange for the key to their garbled documents.
In recent ransomware cases affecting hospitals and local government facilities, hackers have asked for thousands of dollars instead of the more typical $300 or so in digital currency, reports indicate.
"We've seen a few [ransomware cases], but I think that it's only a matter of time before there will be an increase in this area," Edwards said.
In a recent newsletter, his DHS team described a ransomware attack on an unnamed water company. The victim refused to pay up, according to the report, potentially losing access to some encrypted customer data.
In a separate incident, a municipal power utility in Michigan saw hackers tie its network into knots last month (EnergyWire, May 2). The Lansing Board of Water and Light said the attack never interrupted the flow of water or electricity to the thousands of people in its service territory.
Edwards and other security officials have urged power utilities and other infrastructure operators to keep their business networks separate from the control systems overseeing physical processes.
Some types of ransomware aren't selective with the types of files they lock up, meaning even highly specialized control system files, not just PDFs or Word documents, could fall prey to hackers if they managed to get that far.
There is an easy way to minimize the damage to corporate networks, Edwards pointed out: His "strongest advice" is to make copies of files and stash them somewhere safe before a ransomware note pops up on your computer screen.
"If you think about it, having a ransomware attack encrypt a disk on one of your systems is no different than having the hard drive fail or a hardware failure on the system that takes it offline," he said. "You should be able to respond or recover from that very quickly, if you have good backups in place."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/05/11/stories/1060037038
-
Derailed in D.C.: ‘Bomb Trains,’ Poison Tracks and My Chemical Exposure
May 11, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Richard (RJ) Eskow
A CSX freight train derailed in Washington, D.C. last week. The Washington Post reported that ethanol, which is colorless and highly flammable, was leaking out of one of the overturned cars in the accident’s immediate aftermath.
The 14-car derailment also “spilled half the liquid contents of a 15,500-gallon tanker” filled with sodium hydroxide onto the ground beside the Rhode Island Avenue Metro Station. That’s nearly 8,000 gallons of something the Post describes as a “highly caustic chemical.”
Sodium hydroxide is also known as “lye.” If that name sounds more familiar, perhaps it’s because killers often use it to dissolve their victims’ bodies on TV crime shows. It has also been used by a host of real-life murderers, including Mexican drug cartel assassins and the 1897 killer known as the “Sausage King of Chicago.” It’s the corrosive of choice because it dissolves flesh and bone more effectively than acid when it’s heated.
(It’s also used in household cleaners.)
Somewhere between 40 and 50 tons of sodium hydroxide may have spilled onto the ground outside the Metro station. (Its weight per gallon depends on its density).
Exposure
Local officials, including D.C. Assistant Fire Chief John Donnelly, insisted that the fumes posed no threat to public health. But I fell ill after spending a few minutes at the accident site a couple of days later. It’s possible that I reacted to something else, like the airborne materials raised by the cleanup operation itself. But my symptoms matched those of sodium hydroxide exposure.
The Centers for Disease Control says that “inhalation of sodium hydroxide is immediately irritating to the respiratory tract. Swelling or spasms of the larynx leading to upper-airway obstruction and asphyxia can occur after high-dose inhalation. Inflammation of the lungs and an accumulation of fluid in the lungs may also occur.”
The CDC notes that “people with asthma or emphysema” - I have mild but chronic asthma - “may be more susceptible to the toxicity of this agent.”
I carry an inhaler, which I used, and felt better shortly after leaving the site. But sodium hydroxide poses risks for another portion of the population.
“Children may be more vulnerable to corrosive agents than adults because of the relatively smaller diameter of their airways,” writes the CDC. There are two elementary schools and a parochial school in the immediate vicinity of the accident site.
The Accident Scene
While a number of derailed cars had been removed by the time I visited the scene, several remained. The elevated platforms where passengers boarded and disembarked from their Metro trains were above the cars. They were downwind from them on the afternoon of my visit.
Around the accident site, people went about their daily lives. Mothers pushed infants in their strollers while older children tugged at the hem of their skirts. An old man leaned against the railing of a pedestrian bridge that crossed the railroad tracks, smoking a cigarette and polishing his dark glasses. A teenager in a button-down shirt hurried by, possibly late to a job at the strip mall a few hundred feet away. Bicyclists, runners, and hikers passed on a footpath that ran alongside the tracks and the derailed cars.
Disaster-movie fans would have found in these scenes the clichéd images of normality that precedes the typical film’s big catastrophe, with one major difference: except for one or two bicyclists, all the people around the site were African American. I don’t want to say that made a difference, either in the government’s response to the accident or the media’s coverage of it.
But it could have.
Movies don’t usually use black neighborhoods for those pre-disaster scenes of everyday life, but life there seems ordinary enough: Apartment buildings. A Popeye’s, a Subway, and a Chinese restaurant. The Greater Mt. Calvary Holy Church. A “warehouse-style clothing retailer.” A private school for children from infancy through the eighth grade.
None of these locations were mentioned in the press reports I read, although each was within 1,000 feet of the accident. On the other hand, at least one report mentioned that the accident took place three miles from the White House.
Threat Level
To be fair, our society has been consistently indifferent to railway accidents everywhere. A series of other disasters and near-disasters all across the country, many involving the CSX Corporation, has so far failed to rally people to the cause of rail chemical safety. For example:
A 60-car CSX train derailed inside a Baltimore tunnel in 2001, starting a chemical fire that kept thousands of workers from their jobs for several days. Fifteen streets were closed down for five days, three Baltimore Orioles games were canceled, and light rail service was suspended for seven weeks.
The 2007 derailment of a CSX train carrying hazardous materials in Kentucky sent 100-foot flames shooting into the air, spread heavy black smoke, and burned the surrounding area. Residents were evacuated and emergency work continued for six days.
“A dark, thick plume of smoke could be seen for miles after two of 15 derailed cars from a CSX-owned train caught fire,” following a collision outside Baltimore in 2013. The fire from the train’s chemical cargo burned for 10 hours.
In 2014, a CSX train crashed in Lynchburg, Va., spilling 30,000 gallons of oil and bursting into flames.
Also in 2014, a train carrying hazardous materials in 16 of its 121 cars crashed into a car near Bear Mountain, NY. Its cargo included hydrogen peroxide, sodium hydroxide, hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid.
Three CSX trains collided and crashed in Indiana in 2012. Residents were evacuated due to fears that hazardous materials might leak from the wreckage.
The fiery crash of a CSX train carrying shale oil in West Virginia in 2015 forced hundreds of local residents to flee their homes.
A CSX oil train crashed in West Virginia in 2015. “Fireball fills West Virginia sky after oil train crash,” said a headline on the BBC’s website. Three days later officials had still not reached the site because the wreckage continued to burn.
This is not a comprehensive list of CSX accidents. According to the Federal Railroad Administration, CSX trains carrying hazardous materials have derailed nine times since the start of this year alone.
And other carriers have had their share of toxic incidents, some even more severe. Two Norfolk Southern trains crashed in South Carolina in 2005, releasing 60 tons of chlorine gas. One person died from the gas. (Nine others died in the crash.) An estimated 554 people were taken to local hospitals for symptoms of chlorine exposure. Seventy-five were admitted for inpatient care and 5,400 people were evacuated from their homes for several days.
A Canadian Pacific Railway train derailed in Minot, North Dakota in 2002, spewing a toxic cloud of anhydrous ammonia that killed one person and injured nearly 100 others. The National Transportation Safety Board found that “11 people sustained serious injuries, and 322 people, including the 2 train crew members, sustained minor injuries. Damages exceeded $2 million, and more than $8 million has been spent for environmental remediation.”
Trains in Vain
These accidents, especially the ones involving loss of life, are tragic enough. But each is a warning. Future “bomb train” accidents could result in much more death and destruction than anything we’ve seen so far.
It’s strange that we don’t seem to worry very much about this ever-present threat of poison clouds and massive explosions. If these incidents had been caused by terrorists, rather than trains, our entire way of life would have changed.
Instead very little has.
Not everyone is indifferent to the danger, of course. In fact, the environmental group 350.org is participating in a mass action against “bomb trains” this Saturday, May 14 in Albany, N.Y., as part of a worldwide wave of actions against fossil fuels.
But the nation’s lack of interest in this subject is striking. Railroads are increasingly demanding that large freight trains, which once carried five-person crews, now be operated instead by one lone engineer. They point to computerization and other technological advances, seemingly unaware of the added safety risks posed by fatigue and isolation.
CSX is currently spending $170 million to expand the Virginia Avenue Tunnel in the Navy Yard district of Washington. Residents say they’re concerned that the added capacity will increase the volume of dangerous cargo CSX ships through the nation’s capital, increasing the risk of a major catastrophe there. (The Virginia Avenue Tunnel is 2.8 miles from the White House, in case you were wondering.)
It will take concerted public action to move the government on this issue. Meanwhile, the nation already seems to have forgotten last week’s accident. The sun was struggling to break through the clouds the day I visited the site. The Capitol Dome could be seen in the distance, surrounded by faintly visible scaffolding as it undergoes its $60-million-dollar renovation.
A few feet from the derailed cars and cleanup crews, crowded Metro trains came and went overhead. And off in the distance, the Capitol building reflected the faint rays of the late afternoon sun, majestic and unmoving as always.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/derailed-in-dc-bomb-train_b_9897792.html
-
Senate Energy and Water Spending Bill Clears Procedural Hurdle on Fourth Try
May 11, 2016 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Darius Dixon and Annie Snider
The Senate today advanced an energy and water spending bill that could proceed to final passage as soon as this afternoon after considering a few more water-related amendments.
On its fourth try in three weeks amid opposition from Democrats on previous attempts, the Senate voted 97-2 to end debate on the bulk of the $37.5 billion fiscal 2017 energy and water bill. The vote came less than two hours after Senate Democrats killed Sen. Tom Cotton’s controversial Iran amendment.
Before proceeding to final passage, which could happen as soon as today, Sen. Lamar Alexander said that amendments from Sens. Ben Cardin and Deb Fischer would be voted on, subject to a 60-vote threshold. An amendment from Sen. Jeff Flake is slated for approval on a voice vote. The amendment votes will happen at 4:30, Alexander said.
Flake’s measure would require the Army Corps of Engineers to foot the bill for reviews of dam operations where its flood control rules reign. Water managers broadly argue that the Corps’ rules are outdated and undercut their ability to shore up water supplies.
Amendments from Cardin and Fischer are more controversial.
Cardin’s amendment would require the Army Corps of Engineers to follow Fish and Wildlife Service recommendations for mitigating damage to wetlands and other natural resources done by its projects. Meanwhile, Fischer’s amendment has to do with the divvying of water along the Republican River, running through Kansas, Colorado and Nebraska, which was the subject of a Supreme Court lawsuit in 2014.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
EPA Fights Rehearing of 'Belated' Emissions Challenge
May 11, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
The Obama administration is pressing federal judges to reject environmentalists' appeal in a case challenging a 35-year-old U.S. EPA clean air rule.
EPA attorneys yesterday urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to deny a request from community groups and greens asking for the full court to rehear the case. A three-judge panel of the court issued a unanimous ruling in March that sided with EPA in the case, finding that the challenge came far too late (Greenwire, March 4).
The Sierra Club de Puerto Rico and other groups want the court to reject an EPA rule from 1980 dealing with how the agency regulates sources of air pollution in areas that have been deemed to be exceeding national standards for certain air pollutants. The groups argue that the rule will allow excessive emissions of lead from an incinerator that received a permit in 2014 to build in Arecibo, Puerto Rico, within an area that's already in violation of national lead limits.
The Clean Air Act requires challenges to new rules within 60 days after they are formally published, and EPA told the court yesterday that the judges got it right when they rejected the challenge in March. "Sierra Club's claim is time-barred under any interpretation of the statute that is faithful to its text and purpose," the administration told the court. "This Court has never allowed a belated challenge to a Clean Air Act regulation based on such a disconnected event."
In urging the full court to hear their appeal, environmentalists argued that it is an "extraordinary case" with broad-reaching impacts. "This case is about whether community groups and environmental organizations may be treated equally with business and industry" when it comes to challenges to rules becoming ripe for review, they said.
Under a "tolling" doctrine used by courts, a petitioner "may challenge a rule when it becomes applicable to it," Sierra Club told the judges. The environmentalists argued that they filed their lawsuit in July 2014, within 60 days after an air pollution permit was granted to Energy Answers Arecibo LLC, the company seeking to build the incinerator. The granting of that permit, they argued, makes their challenge ripe for the court's review.
It takes the votes of a majority of the D.C. Circuit judges to grant an en banc review by the full court, and the judges rarely agree to do so.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/05/11/stories/1060037041
-
Forecast Sees Largest Growth for Renewable Energy Sources
May 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Federal energy analysts are forecasting that renewable energy will see the largest growth in consumption of all energy sources, followed by nuclear power.
The Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) International Energy Outlook, released Wednesday, predicted that energy consumption from renewables will grow an average of 2.6 percent a year through 2040.
Nuclear power is the next biggest player in terms of growth, with an expected 2.3 percent annual increase by 2040, EIA head Adam Sieminski said at a Center for Strategic and International Studies event to roll out the report.
But while environmentalists and other opponents of fossil fuels can celebrate the strong growth of renewables, fossil fuels will still play the largest role in the world energy market for decades, the EIA said. Nonetheless, the use of fossil fuels in 2040 is lower in Wednesday’s report than what the EIA predicted in 2012.
“Even with this growth in renewables and nuclear, fossil fuels will continue to be the dominant provider of energy in 2040 in our reference case, supplying something like three quarters of the world’s energy use,” Sieminski said. “That’s down from a number that was close to 84 percent in 2012. So fossil fuels are diminishing, but they’re still going to be pretty important.”
Natural gas will edge out coal as the top electricity fuel around 2030, Sieminski predicted, as coal’s use plateaus.
Another key finding from the EIA’s report is that developing countries — those outside the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development — will see the highest growth in energy use during the study period, particularly those in Asia, like China and India.
“In the countries outside of the developed world, energy is going to grow faster than it is in the developed countries,” he said. “We’re going to have a situation by 2040 where two thirds of the world’s energy use, roughly, is going to be in the non-OECD countries.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/279504-renewables-to-dominate-energy-growth-worldwide-federal-forecasters
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested