Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 5/12/16
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Manufacturers Blast EPA's Chemical Assessments
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency shouldn't regulate chemicals in commerce based on the “work plan” risk assessments it has conducted, the American Chemistry Council said May 11. -
(ACC Mentioned) Senators Reach Agreement on 'Key Sticking Points' in TSCA
May 12, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Senators James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) and Barbara Boxer (D-California) have announced an agreement on key sticking points in the bill to reform TSCA, and "look forward to finalising the deal with House negotiators". -
Chemicals Deal ‘Very Close' But Not Yet Done: Lawmakers
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Anthony Adragna
Negotiators agree a deal revamping the nation's primary chemicals law is “very close” but what exactly that means remains a term of art. -
More GOP Lawmakers Request Documents on EPA Review Program
May 12, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
GOP lawmakers are continuing their push for more documents on U.S. EPA's program for reviewing the safety of chemicals, with the House Science, Space and Technology Committee getting in on the action this week. -
Views Differ on EPA's ‘Safe' Dose of Explosive
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency was justified in using a particularly protective approach to estimate a safe dose to a chemical used in explosives, several scientists said May 10. -
IRIS Not Proven by EPA, Science Committee Says
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
The Environmental Protection Agency cannot prove its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) is working, House Committee on Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said in a May 10 letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. -
Northeast States To Meet With EPA Over PFCs, Eyeing Lessons Learned
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
State regulators from the Northeast plan to privately meet with EPA later this month as part of an academic forum in order to exchange information and lessons learned on perfluorinated chemicals (PFC), a class of chemicals that is drawing growing regulatory and public attention. -
EPA Region 1 Grappling With Authority, Technology To Address PFCs
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
EPA Region 1 Administrator Curt Spalding says the region is grappling with how to address the class of emerging contaminants known as perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs) -- especially at non-Superfund sites where there is not clear authority on action levels -- while facing limited laboratory analytical capacity and tightening budgets. -
Mercury Rule Reconsideration Back on Court's Active Docket
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Litigation over the Environmental Protection Agency's handling of reconsideration petitions related to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for power plants has been moved back to a federal court's active docket (ARIPPA v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1180, 5/11/16). -
EPA Expected to Release Methane-Limit Rules on Thursday
May 11, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By Bloomberg
The Obama administration will unveil on Thursday the first explicit U.S. regulation of methane emissions with a rule designed to reduce leaks of the potent greenhouse gas from oil wells. -
Study Says Bakken Oil Field Leaks 275,000 Tons of Methane Yearly
May 11, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By Associated Press
The oil-producing region of North Dakota and Montana leaks 275,000 tons of methane annually, a significant amount of the greenhouse gas but less than previously believed, a study released Wednesday said. -
Latest IEA US Shale Scenario Paints Worsening Outlook Picture
May 12, 2016 | Platts
By Nick Coleman
The International Energy Agency issued a downbeat forecast for US light tight oil production levels through 2020 Wednesday, predicting that overall shale output would not flatten out even at $60/b average oil prices over the period. -
(ACC Mentioned) Perfluorinated Chemicals Taint Drinking Water
May 11, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jessica Morrison
Remnants of past industrial chemical innovation linger in rivers and aquifers that supply drinking water to millions of people in the U.S., and more worldwide, potentially putting their health at risk. Dissolved in the water are perfluorinated compounds that gave rise to iconic household brands such as 3M’s Scotchgard and DuPont’s Teflon. -
Deadly Texas Fertilizer Explosion Intentionally Set, Feds Say
May 11, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
The explosion that killed 15 people at a West, Texas, fertilizer plant in 2013 stemmed from a fire that was set intentionally, federal investigators disclosed today. -
States Seek Better Ozone Models for Exceptional Events
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Andrew Childers
Faced with more stringent ozone standards, state air officials said they need new tools from the Environmental Protection Agency to model emissions from exceptional events like wildfires and uncontrollable emissions blown in from overseas. -
Enviros File Civil Rights Complaint Against Md. Over Power Plant
May 11, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Arianna Skibell
The environmental law group Earthjustice filed a federal civil rights complaint against the state of Maryland today over its approval of a gas-fired power plant. -
EIA: Energy-Related Emissions to Jump by 2040
May 11, 2016 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
The Energy Information Administration predicted Wednesday that global carbon dioxide emissions from energy sources would grow by a third by 2040 — without incorporating any changes driven by the Paris climate accord or EPA's power plant regulations. -
Why Energy R&D Matters More Than Ever
May 12, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Michael S. Lubell
As Congress proceeds with fiscal year 2017 appropriations, it should reject the House and Senate subcommittees’ marks and embrace President Obama’s request for increased support of energy research. But it should do so for reasons that far transcend the White House rationale, which is largely rooted in the Paris climate accord 20 nations agreed to last December.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Manufacturers Blast EPA's Chemical Assessments
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency shouldn't regulate chemicals in commerce based on the “work plan” risk assessments it has conducted, the American Chemistry Council said May 11.
The assessments have significant problems that undermine their credibility, and they “cannot be used as a basis to regulate substances,” Christina Franz, ACC's senior director of regulatory and technical affairs, told the EPA's new Chemical Safety Advisory Committee.
Franz was among three chemical industry representatives who addressed the advisory committee that held its first meeting May 11. No other individuals spoke during the meeting's public comment period.
Jeffrey Morris, deputy director of the EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), told committee members that, initially, the panel will focus on advising the agency on scientific questions arising from the work plan initiative.
90 Commercial Chemicals
Under the initiative, the agency is assessing the risks posed by specific uses of about 90 commercial chemicals.
If the EPA identifies health or environmental risks through those assessments, the agency will follow up with voluntary or regulatory actions to reduce them.
Refining the work plan risk assessment process and proposing rules to ban or restrict certain uses of trichloroethylene (TCE), n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) and methylene chloride, which have already been evaluated, are among the EPA's priorities for 2016, agency officials said in March (57 DEN A-2, 3/24/16).
The advisory panel meeting introduced committee members to the initiative, methods the agency uses to calculate risks and additional information about the Toxic Substances Control Act.
ACC: Refine Assessments
Franz said the work plan risk assessments the EPA has issued constitute screening level assessments. Screening level means the agency presumes the chemicals have more hazardous characteristics than they may, and it assumes that exposures to the chemicals may be higher than they are.
“When a screening level assessment indicates concern, this does not mean there is an actual risk that warrants action; it means the risk assessment should be refined,” Franz said.
“EPA has not refined its screening level assessments when it has identified risk in it work plan chemicals,” she said.
As an example of the difference between a screening level and a refined risk assessment, Franz pointed to worker exposures OPPT typically assesses.
A refined risk assessment would make plausible assumptions about potential exposures by using exposure scenarios that are consistent with the manufacturer's recommendations, Franz said.
For example, safety data sheets and labels for products containing the solvent NMP advise the use of gloves, but the EPA's assessment presumed no gloves would be worn.
“EPA should not assess risk from a product's misuse,” Franz said.
Exposure Reduction Tools
Kathleen Roberts, manager of the NMP Producers Group, said the EPA can't accurately determine whether additional risk management is needed unless its work plan assessments consider exposure reduction tools—such as gloves—that already are recommended by manufacturers.
The NMP Producers Group submitted comments to the panel prior to the meeting detailing flawed procedures it said the EPA is using in its work plan risk assessments (82 DEN A-12, 4/28/16)
Steve Risotto, senior director of chemical products and technology at ACC, said the process used by the EPA to select the chemicals listed on its work plan is flawed.
ACC is challenging the quality of the information used for three work plan assessments that have been completed or are planned, Risotto said. He referred to three requests for correction the chemistry council has filed in accordance with the Information Quality Act Chemistry Council.
The presentations made by chemical industry representatives at the May 11 committee meeting and three information-correction requests the ACC has filed illustrate some of the strategies industry groups are using to challenge the EPA's increased efforts to manage chemicals in commerce.
The panel meets May 24-25 to review the agency's assessment of the risks posed by 1-bromopropane when used in spray adhesives and for dry cleaning and degreasing.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=89284578&vname=dennotallissues&fn=89284578&jd=89284578
-
(ACC Mentioned) Senators Reach Agreement on 'Key Sticking Points' in TSCA
May 12, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Senators James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) and Barbara Boxer (D-California) have announced an agreement on key sticking points in the bill to reform TSCA, and "look forward to finalising the deal with House negotiators".
However, details on what has been agreed, and which key issues were agreed to, have not been released. Sources say that issues related to the preemption of state regulations were probably part of the agreement. This is consistent with the position held by Ms Boxer earlier in the process that a reformed TSCA maintain states' right to address substances of concern.
Efforts to reconcile bills that passed the House and Senate in 2015 have been ongoing since early this year.
Michael Boucher, a partner at law firm Dentons, told Chemical Watch that it's "good news" that the Senate now has a unified position, and that negotiations are continuing. But he said that while it's "important and necessary" that the Senate reached this agreement, "it's not sufficient".
"I think the House is going to want to ... insert enough of its own provisions from [the bill it passed] to show something for having participated in this process," he said. “"We're still, in a sense, back at square one."
And he pointed out that there will be challenges with integrating new language into the complicated Senate bill. "If you start replacing provisions, in whole or in part, then you need to ensure" the final measure will still work as intended, he said.
Advocacy continues
And leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee have issued a statement in response to the Boxer-Inhofe announcement. This calls the agreement an important step forward. "We look forward to keeping the momentum going," they say.
Meanwhile, NGOs continue to promote their concerns as the negotiations continue.
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families this week called on the House to stand firm on state preemption issues. It says the House is "under intense pressure by the Senate" to accept the upper chamber's position on preemption. Whether, and to what extent, the Senate's position on preemption may have shifted due to the Boxer-Inhofe agreement has not been publicly disclosed. However, sources say that some form of early preemption remains.
The Environmental Working Group (EWG) published a report this week on confidential business information (CBI). It is an issue their vice president of government affairs, Scott Faber, says is often overlooked.
The group says that close to two-thirds out of the 22,450 new chemicals manufactured since July 1979 are "shrouded under cloak of secrecy".
According to EWG legislative attorney Melanie Benesh, this amount of CBI protection – especially as it relates to health and safety studies where chemical names are withheld – makes it harder for advocates and public health researchers to identify potential risks and chemicals of concern. It also blocks state regulators from accessing information that could help inform their chemicals management policies.
"It's so important that the trade secret provisions of this bill ultimately ensure that states and the marketplace continue to drive reformulation," says Mr Faber.
But Richard Denison, lead senior scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), says he is "still optimistic about where things seem to be headed and hopeful that members will move ahead more quickly now."
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) also lauded the Senators' announcement, saying it "paves the way for final passage".
Earlier this year, ACC president Cal Dooley had said he cautiously expects the bill to be passed by Memorial Day (30 May). And Senator Ed Markey (D-Massachusetts) remarked in early April that there is a high probability that a reformed TSCA would be enacted within a few weeks’ time.
https://chemicalwatch.com/47342/tsca-negotiations-move-forward
-
Chemicals Deal ‘Very Close' But Not Yet Done: Lawmakers
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Anthony Adragna
Negotiators agree a deal revamping the nation's primary chemicals law is “very close” but what exactly that means remains a term of art.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), lead Senate sponsor of a broad overhaul of the Toxic Substances Control Act (S. 697), told reporters May 11 he expects a bicameral deal within days and said Congress could send that compromise legislation to the president's desk before it leaves for its Memorial Day recess the week of May 30.
“We still have a few outstanding issues—I don't want to get into those—but I think we'll be able to get it done this work period, if not sooner,” he said.
“We're in a good place; we're just not there yet.”
—Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.)
But Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), author of the House's narrower TSCA revamp (H.R. 2576), wavered on whether a deal could be completed this week as other top negotiators have suggested.
Shimkus Less Certain
“It depends on what hour you're asking me,” Shimkus, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy, told reporters. “In all honesty, had you asked me that at eight o'clock this morning, I would have said yes [it will be finished this week]. If you ask me about it now [midafternoon], I'm saying maybe.”
Shimkus wouldn't say what changed in those intervening hours but said he nevertheless thought it possible the House would be able to vote on the deal the week of May 16 under suspension of the rules, which requires a two-thirds majority to pass a bill. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) first indicated quick House action was possible a day earlier (91 DEN A-2, 5/11/16).
Neither Shimkus or Udall would characterize the remaining obstacles to a deal, though several other sources said the issue of federal preemption of state chemical laws and regulations remained a sticking point.
‘Tough' to Alter Senate Deal
Shimkus said the House appreciated the work in the Senate to gain Boxer's support and acknowledged it would be difficult to fiddle too much with that chamber's carefully negotiated compromise.
“We asked the Senate to help resolve this and bring Senator Boxer on board, which they did,” Shimkus said. “We have to give them great credit for that and that's very helpful. So it's tough for us to mess with that too much... Bottom line is their work is very helpful, and we just need to finish it.”
“We're in a good place; we're just not there yet,” he added.
Separately, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, told Bloomberg BNA he chatted about the chemicals bill with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) during a meeting.
“We did discuss it,” Inhofe said, but declined to say whether McConnell had promised him floor time on the measure.
Talk of Press Conferences
Udall saw other signs that negotiators were close to an agreement, noting that there was already talk of scheduling press conferences to announce a deal.
“As you get near the end, it takes a little time,” Udall told reporters. “[But] we're getting close—we really are.”
Boxer told Bloomberg BNA that lawmakers continued to work an agreement throughout the day and were closing in on a deal.
“We're wrapping it up, but it's not done until it's done,” Boxer, ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said. “It's getting closer to the finish line.”
Coalition Remains Opposed
Despite the efforts to gain Boxer's support, a coalition of health, environmental, consumer, labor, business and religious organizations said May 11 it remains opposed to the Senate's bill based on the early preemption language that appears to remain in it, according to Andy Igrejas, co-founder of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.
Statements Boxer recently made to reporters indicate the bill would continue to preempt states' ability to regulate a chemical in commerce up to seven years before the Environmental Protection Agency took action to manage it, Igrejas told Bloomberg BNA.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=89284570&vname=dennotallissues&fn=89284570&jd=89284570
-
More GOP Lawmakers Request Documents on EPA Review Program
May 12, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
GOP lawmakers are continuing their push for more documents on U.S. EPA's program for reviewing the safety of chemicals, with the House Science, Space and Technology Committee getting in on the action this week.
EPA's Integrated Risk Information System program, which provides the scientific underpinnings for future chemical regulations under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, can be controversial because it serves as the earliest venue for industry and public health groups to make their case for extra scrutiny for hot-button substances.
In a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy on Tuesday, House Science Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) asked for documents on a slew of agency actions since 2008, including development of program guidance documents, rulemakings and hiring decisions.
Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee made a similar request earlier this year (Greenwire, March 9).
The letter quoted from passages of a Greenwire article on IRIS Program director Vincent Cogliano describing his ambitious goals for completing chemical reviews (Greenwire, March 30, 2011).
"The program, however, has proven unable to produce risk assessments in a timely and transparent manner," the letter said.
In addition, lawmakers said, EPA officials told committee aides they would stop announcing the availability of draft IRIS assessments in the Federal Register, a step that was taken recently.
The program's finding in June 2010 that formaldehyde is a "known carcinogen" has prompted escalating scrutiny from industry groups and sympathetic lawmakers. The program has appeared on the Government Accountability Office's high-risk list since 2008 and has many reviews that have dragged on for a decade or more.
Lawmakers are especially interested in how EPA makes the initial decision to review a chemical -- something the House letter says lacks formal policies and procedures. Lawmakers also want the agency to develop a "handbook" laying out specifically how the program is supposed to operate from start to finish.
The roots of the controversy date back years, as the program struggles to implement new transparency and procedural changes while not unnecessarily delaying its work.
On several occasions, the National Academies has reviewed the program, sometimes at the behest of congressional appropriations riders.
As EPA began to advance its formaldehyde review, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) in 2009 used the threat of a hold on the nomination of an EPA official, Paul Anastas, then under consideration to lead the Office of Research and Development, until EPA agreed to send the review to the National Academies for a second opinion.
According to the House committee letter, the resulting study represented "an independent scientific review requested by EPA."
In 2011, the National Academies completed the review of EPA's draft report on formaldehyde and found that the agency had failed to fully explain its findings, among other shortcomings. It also suggested procedural changes meant to make the program more efficient and transparent about how it operates.
EPA was then instructed by language inserted in an annual appropriations bill to delay all pending review until it could adopt the recommendations of the National Academies' report.
In 2014, the National Academies reviewed EPA's work again and found it had made "substantial improvements" to the program (Greenwire, May 6, 2014).
The changes have not led to an increase in completed assessments. In 2015, the program failed to finalize any chemical assessments.
Critics say the changes erected new procedural barriers that essentially delayed chemical reviews and ultimately benefited chemical producers at the expense of the public.
The changes "had the effect of crippling IRIS, rather than putting EPA on a path to streamlined production of IRIS entries," Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) said at a hearing in 2014.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/05/12/stories/1060037103
-
Views Differ on EPA's ‘Safe' Dose of Explosive
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency was justified in using a particularly protective approach to estimate a safe dose to a chemical used in explosives, several scientists said May 10.
A retired Army scientist, however, called the agency's methods for assessing the risk of Royal Demolition Explosive, or RDX, arbitrary and inappropriate.
The scientists and interested parties met to discuss a draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment of RDX that the agency released in March (48 DEN A-21, 3/11/16).
The agency will consider the information discussed at the May 10 public science meeting as it reworks the draft RDX assessment prior to submitting it to a peer review panel, IRIS Director Vincent Cogliano said.
IRIS assessments evaluate the human health hazards of chemicals and identify doses at which those hazards may result in adverse health effects. The assessments also provide potency information for carcinogens.
EPA and state regulatory offices then combine the health, dose-response information and potency information with exposure estimates and technical feasibility or other considerations and set water quality, soil cleanup or other regulatory standards.
Current, Former Military Sites Key
Based on Department of Defense records analyzed for a 2012 study, RDX-contaminated soil or groundwater was on 76 active military sites, nine closed sites, and 15 facilities included in the Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) program. As of 2015, RDX also was detected in surface water, groundwater, sediment or soil at 34 current National Priorities List or Superfund sites, according to the EPA's draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment of the explosive.
RDX can harm the nervous system at lower doses than previously estimated, the agency said in its draft assessment. The agency proposed a safe dose, called a reference dose or RfD, of 0.003 milligrams per kilogram bodyweight per day (mg.kg-day). The previous RfD, set in 1988, was 0.3 mg/kg-day.
The more protective the EPA is as it calculates a safe dose the more stringent subsequent cleanup standards or other regulations can be.
The EPA also found suggestive evidence that RDX may cause cancer based on liver and lung tumor incidence in experimental animals.
Lower Benchmark Response Level Used
The EPA's use of a lower-than-typical benchmark response level to set the RfD spurred the most discussion May 10.
The EPA derived its RfD using a benchmark response (BMR) of 1 percent. That means the agency estimated the dose of RDX that caused a response—in this case convulsions—in 1 percent of the laboratory animals tested. The EPA then lowered that dose using safety factors to estimate the RfD, a dose of the explosive the agency maintains people, including sensitive populations, could ingest every day of their life without harm.
The agency's use of a benchmark response of 1 percent is very protective. Usually the agency bases its reference doses on responses experienced by 10 percent of laboratory animals.
The EPA chose the more protective 1 percent, because convulsions, and the deaths they may cause, are severe effects, said Lou D'Amico, the chemical manager for the RDX assessment.
Maria Braga, a professor and neurological researcher at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, said there likely are more subtle health problems that occur prior to convulsions that the EPA also would like to prevent.
Braga, Marion Ehrich, a toxicologist teaching at the Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, and Evelyn Tiffany-Castiglioni from Texas A&M University, supported the EPA's protective approach.
People Said to Respond Differently
However, Desmond Bannon, a toxicologist at the U.S. Army Public Health Center, and Larry Williams, a neuroscientist who retired from the Army's health center, disagreed saying the EPA's approach exaggerated the human health concerns RDX raises.
EPA is correct that convulsions can be caused by exposure to RDX, but it overestimated the probability the chemical would cause such effects, Bannon said.
Williams said the EPA's decision to use the 1 percent benchmark response rate instead of the typical 10 percent was arbitrary and inappropriate.
“I agree wholeheartedly that RDX, at very high doses, kills rats, but it has not killed any people,” Williams said.
Soldiers have consumed RDX because it can cause euphoric effects, Williams said. “None of those soldiers died.”
D'Amico said as the IRIS program rewrites the draft assessment it will strive to make it clearer that it used the BMR of 1 percent—not because convulsions can kill—but because the agency considers convulsions themselves to be a severe effect that should be prevented.
IRIS Director Vincent Cogliano and Ken Olden, who directs the EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment, which oversees IRIS, said the meeting spurred the wide ranging scientific discussion the agency had hoped for.
“There are multiple legitimate interpretations of the science,” Cogliano said.
The agency would consider the perspectives the scientists raised May 10 as it prepared a new, draft version of RDX assessment before it is peer reviewed, Cogliano said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=89284553&vname=dennotallissues&fn=89284553&jd=89284553
-
IRIS Not Proven by EPA, Science Committee Says
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
The Environmental Protection Agency cannot prove its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) is working, House Committee on Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said in a May 10 letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. The committee sent the letter following an April 27 briefing IRIS staff gave the committee. During that briefing, Smith said, “EPA staff could not identify policies and procedures used to identify and determine which substance would receive an assessment.” EPA staff also failed to tell the committee the status of an IRIS handbook the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommended the agency develop, Smith said. The letter reiterates concerns raised several years ago by the Government Accountability Office and requested the agency provide the committee additional information about the IRIS program. The committee's letter is available at http://src.bna.com/eTr.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=89284577&vname=dennotallissues&fn=89284577&jd=89284577
-
Northeast States To Meet With EPA Over PFCs, Eyeing Lessons Learned
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
State regulators from the Northeast plan to privately meet with EPA later this month as part of an academic forum in order to exchange information and lessons learned on perfluorinated chemicals (PFC), a class of chemicals that is drawing growing regulatory and public attention.
The May 23 meeting to be held in Worcester, MA, will include EPA and representatives from Northeastern states' waste site cleanup, drinking water and health departments in order to discuss the toxicology, fate and transport, sampling and remediation of poly- and perfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substances, which also are often referred to as PFCs.
They also plan to discuss state and EPA guidelines and standards, recent state experiences and lessons learned in New York, New Hampshire and Vermont, and research questions and next steps, according to a notice of the meeting.
The meeting is being sponsored by the Northeast Waste Management Officials' Association (NEWMOA) and Brown University's Superfund Research Program.
The class of chemicals known as PFCs -- known for their non-stick, persistent qualities -- "is presenting a significant challenge to several NEWMOA states and is likely to [affect] all the northeast states due to its widespread use," the notice says. PFCs have been used widely in carpet and fabric protection and food packaging, as well as in aqueous film-forming foams used in firefighting. Studies conducted by an independent panel created as part of a lawsuit settlement around a DuPont plant in Parkersburg, WV, found probable links between perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a PFC, and six adverse health impacts including kidney and testicular cancer.
The meeting comes as some states are wrestling with what safety levels for PFOA in drinking water to apply in communities amid conflicting advisory levels among states and EPA, and as states, environmentalists and others press EPA to set a uniform health advisory for PFOA for long-term exposures to the chemical in drinking water.
One state, which in the face of discovering PFOA in drinking water quickly set an aggressive, interim groundwater quality enforcement standard of 20 parts per trillion (ppt), now is confronted with a lawsuit filed by a chemical manufacturer challenging the standard.
The April 13 suit, filed in Vermont Superior Court, contends that Vermont violated state requirements as it failed to involve the public in the rulemaking and derived the standard from a draft health effects document EPA developed that has yet to be finalized. The Vermont standard applies the most sensitive receptor -- a young child -- to EPA's draft oral reference dose for the chemical.
The lawsuit, filed by Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics (SGPP) Corporation, says the state has applied the groundwater standard to the company demanding that it undertake certain investigatory and remedial actions at a former industrial facility in North Bennington, VT. But SGPP argues that the interim standard was adopted in violation of Vermont law, "without regard to the public participation and other requirements set forth in [Vermont statute on groundwater protection], and is based solely on a draft document that is still under review," referring to EPA's 2014 draft health effects document for PFOA.
EPA Advisory
EPA is developing a first-time, long-term exposure health advisory based on the draft oral reference dose from the 2014 draft health effects document, expecting to issue it this spring. The agency is under increasing pressure to release it following EPA Region 2's advice earlier this year to residents of Hoosick Falls, NY, where PFOA was identified in drinking water supplies.
EPA Region 2 in January advised Hoosick Falls residents to refrain from consuming private well water that exceeds 100 ppt PFOA, a much lower level than the agency's existing short-term exposure health advisory level of 400 ppt -- a disparity EPA has been widely criticized for.
New York, Vermont and New Hampshire's governors in March called on EPA to give states uniform guidance for assessing safe levels of PFOA. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) also added the site in Hoosick Falls to the state's Superfund list and issued an emergency regulation to classify PFOA as a hazardous substance.
One attorney with expertise on PFCs believes Vermont and New York's prompt actions on the chemical are the "new bellwether" for state action on PFOA, a change from previous state reaction, the source says. The source notes that in response to PFOA contamination that previously arose in southeast Ohio, the state of Ohio lacked a response.
The attorney says the scientific evidence is available for states to act on PFOA, and they should not use the excuse that they are waiting for EPA to act before addressing the chemical.
Another state that has started to take action is Michigan, which in April released draft enforceable drinking water standards for PFOA and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), calling for a standard of 89 ppt for PFOA and 120 ppt for PFOS in drinking water, according to a state source.
An environmentalist following the issue doubts there will be a rush by states to adopt the new long-term exposure health advisory level EPA issues, if for instance it follows along the lines of the level derived from the draft health effects documents -- which would equate to 100 ppt. State scientists closely tracking the issue may not believe such a level is much of an advance, the source says. Some environmentalists believe the long-term exposure level should be more stringent than 100 ppt. This source believes a 100 ppt standard would also provide "cover for industry" to say anything below that level is safe.
But another state source believes states will take a "hard look" at what EPA releases as its long-term exposure health advisory for PFOA "and take it from there." The source believes states are looking for the chemical at manufacturing locations and sites where fire-fighting training repeatedly occurred.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/northeast-states-meet-epa-over-pfcs-eyeing-lessons-learned
-
EPA Region 1 Grappling With Authority, Technology To Address PFCs
May 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
EPA Region 1 Administrator Curt Spalding says the region is grappling with how to address the class of emerging contaminants known as perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs) -- especially at non-Superfund sites where there is not clear authority on action levels -- while facing limited laboratory analytical capacity and tightening budgets.
Spalding, speaking during a May 9 webinar hosted by Northeastern University’s Superfund Research Program, noted in contrast that the agency has many tools it can use when determining if PFCs are a contaminant at Superfund National Priorities List sites.
“It’s important to note that the federal response is very different when we are dealing with a known site within our Superfund program. Then we have lots of tools,” Spalding said.
According to slides Spalding presented, the region’s Superfund program is “evaluating possible presence of PFCs at several National Priorities List sites.” One state source says this effort seems to be reflective of a growing awareness among regions’ program offices of PFCs.
Region 1, which covers several Northeast states, is also helping Vermont sample for PFCs at non-Superfund sites though the detection of any PFCs raises more challenges, he said. “[T]hen comes the question, well, what if we find it? Is it a high enough level for us to act? And that’s a big question as we go forward,” he said.
The region has been at the forefront of dealing with PFCs as a contaminant in drinking water supplies, including issuing last year a first-time Safe Drinking Water Act administrative order for the Air Force to clean up PFC contamination at the former Pease Air Force Base in New Hampshire. The contaminants are commonly found in firefighting foams that were used by the Air Force to extinguish fires at its facilities and airports.
Vermont recently established a strict interim groundwater quality standard of 20 parts per trillion (ppt) for the PFC perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) after discovering the chemical in drinking water. A chemical manufacturer is challenging the standard in state court.
But the region has struggled to be able to test for the chemicals due to a lack of laboratory analytical capability, Spalding said. “Limited laboratory capacity has been a big problem for us when it comes to perfluorinated compounds,” he said, noting that one of the region’s labs could not perform the analysis work when PFCs first emerged in Vermont and New Hampshire. The agency “spent a scrambled period getting our methods together to actually do the work,” he said.
Additionally, continual budget cuts have made it harder to address emerging contaminants, Spalding said. “In our Superfund program the resources are getting more and more strained as we go forward,” he said, noting that EPA’s flat annual budget of $8 billion really reflects a 5 percent decline every year. “So we’re looking at a declining resource base against new problems. Very challenging,” he said.
Growing Problem
Spalding noted that the more regulators look for PFOA, the more they will find it, due to its widespread use in a variety of applications, including Teflon.
EPA and state regulators are under escalating pressure to apply stricter drinking water treatment levels to water supplies contaminated with PFOA, a toxic and persistent non-stick chemical, amid conflicting health advisory levels EPA and states are currently using, and as more communities have become aware of the chemical’s presence in their drinking water.
State regulators from the Northeast plan to privately meet with EPA later this month as part of an academic forum in order to exchange information and lessons learned on PFCs.
EPA officials have said the agency will issue a health advisory for long-term exposures to PFOA in drinking water this spring, coming under increasing pressure to release it after EPA Region 2 bypassed the agency’s provisional short-term exposure advisory level of 400 ppt and advised private drinking water well users in a New York community with PFOA-contaminated water not to consume water above 100 ppt.
Provisional short-term advisories, which EPA has for PFOA and another PFC, perfluorooctane sulfonate, have helped guide action, Spalding said, but noted that it “got a bit complicated” when Region 2 advised 100 ppt for PFOA. While the agency has an “official advisory” for short-term exposures of 400 ppt, “we’ve moved to [a] potentially practical outcome of 100 ppt,” he said.
“We’re now working on potentially clarifying that in the next couple weeks,” when the agency releases a long-term health advisory for PFOA, he said.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-region-1-grappling-authority-technology-address-pfcs
-
Mercury Rule Reconsideration Back on Court's Active Docket
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Litigation over the Environmental Protection Agency's handling of reconsideration petitions related to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for power plants has been moved back to a federal court's active docket (ARIPPA v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1180, 5/11/16).
Utility industry groups and environmental groups are challenging the EPA's decision to deny all remaining reconsideration requests on the MATS rule, a 2012 regulation that the agency estimated to cost the power sector $9.6 billion per year. The litigation over the reconsideration petitioners has been held in abeyance since August 2015.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit May 11 ordered that the litigation be moved from abeyance back to the court's active docket.
The court's decision follows the EPA's April release of a supplemental finding (RIN:2060-AS76) that it is “appropriate and necessary” to regulate power plants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. That finding was issued in response to a 2015 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that held the agency erred when it didn't consider cost in its threshold decision on whether to regulate the power sector (Michigan v. EPA, 135 S. Ct. 2699, 2015 BL 207163, 80 ERC 1577 (2015); 74 DEN A-2, 4/18/16).
The D.C. Circuit set a June 10 deadline for all parties to file motions to govern future proceedings in light of the EPA's supplemental finding on the MATS Rule.
The industry groups that are challenging the EPA's reconsideration decisions include the Utility Air Regulatory Group and ARIPPA, which represents independent producers of anthracite coal. The environmental organizations involved in the ligation include the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Environmental Integrity Project.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=89284571&vname=dennotallissues&fn=89284571&jd=89284571
-
EPA Expected to Release Methane-Limit Rules on Thursday
May 11, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By Bloomberg
The Obama administration will unveil on Thursday the first explicit U.S. regulation of methane emissions with a rule designed to reduce leaks of the potent greenhouse gas from oil wells.
The measure will require oil and gas companies to do a better job finding and plugging methane leaks at new wells, pumps, pipes, compressors and other equipment. It will be released by the Environmental Protection Agency, according to three people told of the plans who asked not to be identified prior to the formal announcement.
The primary ingredient of natural gas, methane is pound for pound 84 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at warming the atmosphere when measured over two decades. Previous regulations pared traditional air pollutants from some natural gas wells but did not specifically target methane.
“This is an incredibly important step,” said Mark Brownstein, vice president of the Climate and Energy Program at the Environmental Defense Fund, in a phone interview earlier this month. “Methane is responsible for 25 percent of the warming that our planet is experiencing right now, and in the United States, the oil and gas industry is the largest source of methane emissions.”
The mandates will apply only to new and modified oil and gas industry sources of the greenhouse gas, but they set the framework for the EPA to impose similar requirements on nearly 1 million existing wells and other equipment nationwide.
President Barack Obama promised the U.S. would go after methane from those existing oil and gas sources during a March summit with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. While the EPA might not finish writing a proposed rule before Obama leaves office, the agency is set to start the work soon by formally asking oil and gas companies for detailed information about methane emissions.Industry leaders have lobbied against the rule, describing it as unnecessary in light of companies’ continuing work to pare methane emissions. American Petroleum Institute Vice President of Regulatory and Economic Policy Kyle Isakower credited “innovations by the oil and natural gas industry” as achieving “great progress” on the issue. “We are spending more than ever on reducing emissions,” he told reporters in an April 19 conference call.
Energy companies have a financial interest in keeping methane bottled up as it moves from the wellhead to compressor stations and into storage tanks, but some gas does seep out. As proposed, the rule would require energy companies to upgrade some equipment, use special emissions-capturing techniques when completing new oil wells and regularly search out leaks.Under the draft rule proposed last August, those inspection surveys would generally have to be conducted semi-annually. It was not immediately clear whether the EPA had stepped up the inspection schedule in the final rule in response to environmentalists’ pleas for quarterly monitoring.
Environmentalists also took aim at the EPA’s initial plan to exempt low-producing wells that generate less than 15 barrels per day of oil or its equivalent.
“Some of these oil wells that are only producing a few barrels of oil a day are leaking huge amounts of gas,” Lena Moffitt, director of the Sierra Club’s Dirty Fuels Campaign, said in a May 3 interview. “To really get at the intent of this rule, they need to be covering these facilities that are leaking a lot.”
The scope of the rule on new and modified sources is significant because it largely dictates how far the EPA can go with any future mandates for existing wells and equipment. It’s like a gate swinging open, said Conrad Schneider, senior counsel and legal director of the Clean Air Task Force, a nonprofit that seeks to reduce pollution.Â
Climate Pledge
“If they only open it halfway, existing sources will be narrow,” he said. “There is an opportunity to open the gate as wide as possible” so “a comprehensive existing source rule will follow from this.”The Obama administration has pledged to cut methane emissions 40 to 45 percent by 2025 over 2012 levels. Meeting that target requires an expansive approach, Schneider said.
But oil industry leaders warned that aggressive new rules — especially coming on top of additional proposed mandates for wells on federal land — could shut in some marginal wells and wipe out small, independent producers. Companies could spend more paring incremental methane emissions than they will recover by selling the natural gas they keep from leaking, industry groups said.
An EPA cost-benefit analysis of the rule last year assumed natural gas prices would climb to about $3.90 per million British Thermal Units. On Tuesday, futures contracts were trading at $2.17 per MMBtu.
“Smaller independents, many conventional well operators, and operators of wells that are marginally economical will not be able to weather the storm until natural gas reaches” EPA’s assumed price, the Independent Petroleum Association of America and American Exploration and Production Council warned in joint comments last year. “Wells will not be drilled or will be shut in prematurely, and other companies will simply go out of business because of EPA’s erroneous assumption on the price of natural gas.”
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/05/11/epa-expected-to-release-methane-limit-rules-on-thursday/
-
Study Says Bakken Oil Field Leaks 275,000 Tons of Methane Yearly
May 11, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By Associated Press
The oil-producing region of North Dakota and Montana leaks 275,000 tons of methane annually, a significant amount of the greenhouse gas but less than previously believed, a study released Wednesday said.
The data, collected in two years ago by an airplane over the heart of western North Dakota’s oil patch, was the first field study of methane emissions done in the Bakken shale formation that spans western North Dakota and eastern Montana, said Jeff Peischl, the study’s lead author from the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado in Boulder.
After carbon dioxide, methane, the primary component of natural gas, is the second-most prevalent greenhouse gas emitted from the U.S. and the majority of such emissions come from natural gas and petroleum systems, the Environmental Protection Agency has said.
Methane emissions from the Bakken were less than what had been reported by some satellites and slightly lower than U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that were based only on production levels, Peischl said. And the data show the amount of methane leaking from the Bakken is similar to the emission rate from the oil-rich Denver-Julesburg Basin in Colorado, Peischl said.
Researchers said using low-flying aircraft, like the one the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration flew over the oil field in May 2014, improves accuracy of emission collection data.
A separate study released last month showed that the Bakken leaks about 250,000 tons of ethane annually, and enough to be detected by monitors in Europe. Ethane also is a significant component of natural gas, a valuable byproduct of oil production in the Bakken. Drillers currently burn off, or flare, more than 10 percent of the gas because development of pipelines and processing facilities to capture it hasn’t kept pace with oil drilling.
At least 95 percent of methane and ethane emissions are burned by flaring, said Dave Glatt, chief of North Dakota Department of Health’s environmental health section. Glatt said the state been using infrared cameras since last summer to detect emissions coming from oil operations.
“There are emissions happening,” Glatt said. “We are finding problems and they are not widespread but at the end of the day we need to do a better job.”
Methane can be emitted by natural sources such as wetlands, or by other industries such as cattle feedlots, but researchers said almost all methane detected in the study was attributed to oil and gas operations.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/05/11/study-says-bakken-oil-field-leaks-275000-tons-of-methane-yearly/
-
Latest IEA US Shale Scenario Paints Worsening Outlook Picture
May 12, 2016 | Platts
By Nick Coleman
The International Energy Agency issued a downbeat forecast for US light tight oil production levels through 2020 Wednesday, predicting that overall shale output would not flatten out even at $60/b average oil prices over the period.
In a presentation at the Platts Global Crude Oil Summit, IEA chief economist Laszlo Varro gave an updated set of scenarios that appeared more negative than the agency's previous World Energy Outlook, published in November 2015.
Varro also addressed the effect of climate change policies on investment and said even under a scenario that sees global temperatures rise 2 degrees Celsius, investment in oil production would still be needed.
Long-term demand for diesel looks "quite robust" despite recent air quality concerns, he added.The latest forecast expects US light tight oil production to decline by 3 million b/d in the 2015-2020 period if oil prices average $40/b over the period and would still decline slightly at $60/b.
Only at $70/b prices would light tight oil production rise slightly, while $100/b prices would result in a 1.5 million b/d increase over the period, according to the forecast.
"The US oil industry is fighting very hard and I'm really impressed by how hard they fight, but they cannot overcome the laws of gravity. So investment is declining in the US quite significantly," Varro said.
November's World Energy Outlook forecast that a $60/b oil price in the 2014-2020 period would be enough to lift light tight oil output slightly and that output would rise by 2 million b/d at a $100/b average price. It said output would fall by a little over 2 million b/d at a $40/b oil price.
Varro highlighted the contribution made by shale developments to the flexibility of global supply, saying this reversed a half-century trend.
"There's roughly a 4.5 million b/d flexibility in US light tight oil production depending on oil prices, which can come to the market very, very rapidly," he said.
"For almost half a century, the oil industry was moving into bigger and bigger, more and more complex ... projects. The industry was moving from two or three-year North Sea offshore projects to a 10-year Brazilian deep offshore project ... projects became bigger, the investment forecasts became more and more rigid," Varro said.
"Then suddenly came light tight oil in the US, where the average project type is $10 million not $10 billion, where the project implementation time is three months and not 10 years. So a half-century long trend toward increasing complexity and increasing project size was broken and that led to a very different oil supply which can react to the demand changes much more rapidly," he added.
On Tuesday, the US Energy Information Administration forecast US oil production would fall from 9.43 million b/d in 2015 to 8.6 million b/d in 2016 and 8.19 million b/d in 2017, attributing the decline entirely to onshore plays in the Lower 48 states.
Amid pessimism on US shale and gloom about the possibility of replicating the industry elsewhere in the world, Michael Davis, director of market development at IntercontinentalExchange, said the region's influence was still being felt in other upstream plays.
Davis gave an upbeat assessment of the North Sea, which he suggested was taking on board some of the lessons from North America relating to agility and standardization.
"There are lots of changes going on in the North Sea that to some extent echo the changes that happened in shale. It's a totally different exploration and production environment, but the kinds of drilling that are going on, the kinds of technology change, has the capability of extending the life of these fields longer than people certainly expected five or 10 years ago," he said.
CLIMATE CHANGE
Addressing whether switching to clean energy might marginalize oil, the IEA's Varro predicted continued demand in transportation, particularly freight and aviation.
Over the IEA's outlook period to 2040 "aviation has a very strong growth all around the world," Varro said.
"Even if you have a very rapid [take-up] of electric cars, that will have a major impact on oil demand, but does not eliminate the use of oil for heavy-duty transportation -- aviation, petrochemicals are still in the game," he said.
Under a two degree C global temperature increase scenario, oil demand peaks in 2020 before returning to current levels in 2024 and then declining, he said.
However, "given the importance of heavy duty transportation, aviation and petrochemicals, even with a very strong climate policy the decline of oil demand is actually slower than the decline of existing production ... That will mean you actually need new upstream investment even with a very strong climate policy," he said.http://www.platts.com/latest-news/oil/london/latest-iea-us-shale-scenario-paints-worsening-21434369
-
(ACC Mentioned) Perfluorinated Chemicals Taint Drinking Water
May 11, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jessica Morrison
Remnants of past industrial chemical innovation linger in rivers and aquifers that supply drinking water to millions of people in the U.S., and more worldwide, potentially putting their health at risk. Dissolved in the water are perfluorinated compounds that gave rise to iconic household brands such as 3M’s Scotchgard and DuPont’s Teflon.
In places such as Parkersburg, W.Va., where a DuPont plant used perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) for decades, residents are turning to bottles of water rather than turning on unfiltered taps because of contamination of the local water supply. DuPont and other firms that made or used PFOA are likely to be on the hook financially for personal injury claims or cleanup for years to come.
PFOA, sometimes called C8, has been linked to disease, including high cholesterol, thyroid disease, and some cancers.
Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency began working with the fluorochemicals industry more than a decade ago to phase out production, some say the agency has been slow to provide advice to health officials for PFOA and a related compound, perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), which was once a key material in 3M’s Scotchguard products. Both chemicals are chains of eight fluorinated carbon atoms with either a terminal sulfonic acid (PFOS) or carboxylic acid group (PFOA). Neither is made or used in the U.S. for manufacturing anymore, but the chemicals persist in the environment because of the strength of the carbon-fluorine bond.
In a matter of days or weeks, EPA is expected to suggest a maximum level of PFOA and PFOS in drinking water that would likely be safe if a person drank the water over a lifetime. The move would not force regulators to limit these synthetic chemicals in drinking water, but it would, for the first time, provide technical guidance to state and local government officials charged with protecting the public’s health. EPA’s guidance would account for continuous rather than short-term exposures to the contaminants.
PFOA and PFOS contamination in drinking water is thought to stem from two main sources: factories that formerly manufactured or used the chemicals, and locations, including military bases, where they were used in firefighting foams. In addition, PFOA and PFOS may also end up in the environment as fluorochemical-containing consumer products such as stain-resistant fabric or grease-proof food wrappers break down. Both PFOA and PFOS are found at very low levels in the blood of the general population across the U.S., according to EPA.
For those who have been drinking contaminated water near primary sources for decades, the upcoming federal guidance comes too late, some argue.
Environmental attorney Robert A. Bilott tells C&EN that he and others for years have asked EPA to do more about long-term exposure to perfluorinated chemicals.
“That is something that could have been and should have been done 15 or 16 years ago,” says Bilott, the environmental attorney known for taking on corporate giant DuPont at the behest of a West Virginia farmer whose land and water was tainted with PFOA from the Parkersburg plant. Because EPA officials “waited so long and the chemical is now being found in so many places,” he says, “I think they’re going to have a hard time explaining why they didn’t act sooner.”
For decades, studies have suggested health risks associated with PFOA and PFOS, which have been found in drinking water supplies that serve millions of people in the U.S. For instance, in 2005, a panel of external science advisers to EPA said the agency should classify PFOA as “likely to be carcinogenic” in humans. Most of the panel said enough evidence existed from human biomonitoring studies to evaluate the environmental risk of PFOA for the general population. EPA’s upcoming guidance is expected to reflect the findings of that decadelong evaluation. Meanwhile, researchers have linked PFOA to other health problems.
“People started looking over the last 10 years for adverse effects” from exposure to PFOA and related compounds, says Philippe Grandjean, an environmental health scientist at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who studied immunotoxicity in children and found a link between exposure to perfluorinated compounds and weakened response to vaccines. “We were thinking in the beginning that a carbon chain wrapped in fluoride ions seems like it won’t do anything. It’s certainly very stable, but the question is, will it interact with biological molecules and cause any adverse effects?”
The answer to that question has been sought in courtrooms as well as laboratories.
A team of independent researchers, known as the C8 Science Panel, was formed in 2005 as part of a settlement of a class-action lawsuit against DuPont. That suit alleged that residents living near DuPont’s Washington Works plant outside of Parkersburg, W.Va., were harmed by exposure to PFOA released by the facility that reached groundwater and contaminated wells that supply public drinking water.
The C8 Science Panel between 2005 and 2013 carried out a series of exposure and health studies and released a string of reports about the links, or lack thereof, between PFOA exposure and over 30 diseases. The team found probable links between exposure to PFOA and six of those diseases: high cholesterol, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, testicular cancer, kidney cancer, and pregnancy-induced hypertension.
Funding for the panel was part of a $107.6 million settlement DuPont paid in the class-action lawsuit. DuPont later reached a separate $16.5 million deal with EPA to clear allegations that the company withheld information from the agency about PFOA detected in its workers’ blood.
Now, DuPont faces some 3,500 personal injury cases related to PFOA exposure from Washington Works. Financial liability, however, will fall to DuPont spin-off Chemours, which now manages the larger company’s fluoropolymers business.
DuPont lost the first of these cases last year, with a jury awarding $1.6 million to an Ohio woman who alleged PFOA exposure from DuPont’s facility caused her kidney cancer. Beginning in spring 2017, the judge overseeing the cases expects to schedule 40 trials per year.
The original maker of PFOA, 3M, is also facing class-action lawsuits. Litigation is ongoing near places where 3M manufactured the chemical in Cottage Grove, Minn., and Decatur, Ala.
As lawsuits continue, communities and state regulators facing contaminated water supplies are questioning why EPA hasn’t established a lifetime health advisory for perfluorinated chemicals in drinking water.
In 2009, EPA set a preliminary health advisory for drinking water of 400 parts per trillion for PFOA and 200 ppt for PFOS. Many expect the agency’s upcoming lifetime health advisory for PFOA to be tighter, at or near 100 ppt. That lower number would reflect a recommendation EPA made in January to Hoosick Falls, N.Y., where PFOA contaminates drinking water wells: The agency suggested residents use bottled water for drinking and cooking when levels of the chemical in their household water supplies is measured at 100 ppt or higher.
In Hoosick Falls, New York officials traced PFOA contamination in public and private wells to manufacturing facilities owned by Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics and Honeywell International. The state wants the companies to cover the costs of providing safe drinking water to area residents and remediating the pollution. Regulators there have installed a municipal activated-carbon filtration system to remove PFOA as well as more than 200 individual carbon filtration systems for homes with private wells. They’ve received requests for hundreds more, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation says.
Other states facing drinking water tainted with PFOA and related compounds have set their own health advisories that are lower than the current 400-ppt preliminary guidance from EPA. Their stricter advisories reflect, in part, a desire to mitigate potential health effects associated with chronic exposure to contaminated drinking water rather than short-term exposure.
For example, in Vermont, where a fabric manufacturing plant in North Bennington is the suspected source of PFOA contaminating municipal and private wells, the state health department set a health advisory level of 20 ppt. Vermont considered EPA’s preliminary guidance for PFOA then chose to establish its own health advisory level that would account for long-term exposure.
“We did not think it was appropriate to use a short-term health advisory,” says Sarah Vose, state toxicologist for the Vermont Department of Health.
New Jersey also took a stronger stance on identifying and mitigating contamination from PFOA and related chemicals after finding contamination in surface and groundwater near manufacturing sites throughout the state. New Jersey set its health advisory level for PFOA at 40 ppt in 2007.
EPA issued its preliminary health advisory based on short-term potential toxicity, while New Jersey, like Vermont, made mitigating long-term chronic health effects a priority, says Lawrence Hajna, a spokesperson for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. “When you’re evaluating a standard for a short-term risk, you’re basically saying that you’re looking to protect somebody who’s just visiting a house. Our approach has been that somebody actually lives in that house.”
While states and EPA work to keep drinking water supplies safe, action is also coming from the U.S. Air Force and other branches of the military that have used aqueous firefighting foams containing PFOS and related fluorochemicals that can degrade to PFOA or PFOS. Late last year, the Department of Defense began looking for contamination at more than 600 training sites in the U.S., two-thirds of which are Air Force bases. The Air Force began to curtail its use of foams containing perfluorinated compounds for firefighting training exercises in the 1980s. However, it still uses the foams in actual emergency responses.
Chemical makers, too, have taken steps to curb the use of PFOA and PFOS. 3M, which began producing PFOA, PFOS, and related fluorinated chemicals in the 1940s, announced unexpectedly in 2000 that it would end production of PFOS. Nearly six years later, in an EPA-led effort, 3M, DuPont, and six other chemical manufacturers agreed to voluntarily eliminate PFOA and related fluorinated compounds from their products and facility emissions worldwide by 2015.
FluoroCouncil, part of the industry trade group American Chemistry Council, says the stewardship program is “a solid example of how industry and EPA can work together to ensure that concerns are addressed without compromising the many important benefits that these chemistries provide.”
Earlier this year, EPA said the companies had met their commitments, but it has not released an anticipated final report on the companies’ efforts. The companies have switched to shorter-chain perfluoroalkyl alternatives that—though their health risks are not yet fully understood—are still persistent, but less bioaccumulative.
Most applaud these companies’ voluntary move to eliminate some fluorinated chemicals from their inventories and, by consequence, the environment. Still, some experts say that PFOA and PFOS may be entering the environment anyway because new fluorinated chemicals and their intermediates may degrade to form PFOA and PFOS.
The complex chemistry of perfluorochemicals poses a challenge to researchers trying to tease out the sources of these substances and how they behave in the environment, says Christopher P. Higgins, an environmental chemist and professor at Colorado School of Mines.
Higgins, who studies the environmental fate of poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) used in firefighting foams and consumer products, says many compounds may break down into PFOA and PFOS. “We are still figuring out what some of those are.”
Because PFOA was a minor component in the production of many of the aqueous firefighting foams and consumer products that Higgins studies, he says elevated PFOA in groundwater impacted by these materials is evidence of likely transformation of other fluorochemicals to PFOA over time.
PFOA doesn’t break down in the environment. EPA says the chemical “does not hydrolyze, photolyze, or biodegrade under environmental conditions.” Neither does PFOS. Both substances accumulate in living things, with elimination half-lives of three to five years, before returning to the environment.
Research has shown that the length of a perfluorinated chemical’s carbon chain affects its ability to bioaccumulate. That finding has led manufacturers to produce shorter perfluorinated molecules with chains of six fluorinated carbons or fewer as replacements for PFOA and PFOS.
But shortening the chain length doesn’t affect the stability of perfluorocarbons in the environment, says Jessica C. D’eon, a chemistry professor at the University of Toronto.
“We haven’t really changed the persistence, but we have changed the accumulation ability,” D’eon says. “A chemical that won’t accumulate in your body won’t get to a concentration where it’s going to be a problem.”
Because perfluorinated chemicals aren’t known to degrade under conditions found in the environment, PFOA, PFOS, and their new shorter-chain successors will continue to linger indefinitely.
“Some people have said these compounds redefine persistence,” D’eon adds.
http://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i20/Perfluorinated-chemicals-taint-drinking-water.html
-
Deadly Texas Fertilizer Explosion Intentionally Set, Feds Say
May 11, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
The explosion that killed 15 people at a West, Texas, fertilizer plant in 2013 stemmed from a fire that was set intentionally, federal investigators disclosed today.
Speaking at a news conference in West today, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives officials said that all possible accidental causes of the blaze had been ruled out -- and that the fire was found to have started in part of the building where seeds were stored in bins adjacent to 40 to 60 tons of ammonium nitrate.
Robert Elder, special agent in charge of ATF's Houston field division, said ATF had "conclusively proved where the fire originated."
It's not clear whether whoever started the fire intended to cause an explosion, Elder said.
Elder said ATF has interviewed more than 400 people "specifically about this."
ATF has not arrested anyone in connection with the explosion, Elder said. He said the agency is offering a $50,000 reward for information on the fire. The agency's findings will not be shared publicly until the conclusion of the criminal investigation.
"We're not going to share any physical evidence that we have," Elder said. "Obviously, at the scene, we've collected numerous evidence."
The agency said it re-enacted the West fire at its Fire Research Laboratory in Beltsville, Md.
Other investigations of the West explosion had failed to determine the origin or cause of the fire.
The Chemical Safety Board found that sometime before 7:30 p.m., a fire started in the building. At 7:51 p.m., about 30 tons of ammonium nitrate detonated, killing 12 emergency responders and three residents of a nearby apartment complex.
"Although there were numerous combustible products inside, the CSB was unable to determine the source of ignition or exactly where in the building the fire began," the report said.
In a statement, CSB spokeswoman Hillary Cohen said the agency is continuing to push for the safety recommendations in the report.
"While the CSB's final report did not identify the origin of the fire, our investigation focused on identifying the conditions that allowed for the initial fire to result in a massive detonation," Cohen said.
West Fertilizer Co. stored its products in a 12,000-square-foot building made mostly of wood with no sprinkler system. An apartment complex, two schools, a park and a nursing home were nearby.
The facility had no fences, alarms or security guards, and burglars repeatedly entered the site and tampered with toxic chemicals over the years, Reuters reported in 2013.
Burglars often sought to steal anhydrous ammonia kept at the site because it can be used to cook methamphetamine, the report found. However, anhydrous ammonia was quickly ruled out as a cause of the fire because those storage tanks did not rupture during the blast. At one point, authorities were examining as many as 100 leads, including one tip that there was a fire at West Fertilizer Co. earlier the same day of the blast, the report found.
ATF and the Texas State Fire Marshal's Office previously said the cause had been narrowed to three possibilities: bad electrical wiring, a spark from a golf cart or arson (Greenwire, May 17, 2013). The agencies said there was insufficient evidence to identify a particular cause.
Greenpeace Legislative Director Rick Hind said the findings raised questions about preventing future incidents at chemical plants.
"Security is the wild card that eliminates the pretense of safety from an inherently dangerous facility," Hind said.
He added the findings were "surprising" but only underscored the need for tougher rules for chemical storage sites.
"If you were using a deweaponized formulation of the fertilizer, you wouldn't have this tragedy," Hind said. "You could have a fire, but you wouldn't have the injury and loss of life."
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/05/11/stories/1060037083
-
States Seek Better Ozone Models for Exceptional Events
May 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environmental Report
By Andrew Childers
Faced with more stringent ozone standards, state air officials said they need new tools from the Environmental Protection Agency to model emissions from exceptional events like wildfires and uncontrollable emissions blown in from overseas.
The modeling needs are particularly acute in the West where the EPA's new national ambient air quality standards for ozone of 70 parts per billion approach background levels of the pollutant in some places, state officials said May 11 at the Electric Power Research Institute's ENV-Vision conference in Washington, D.C.
While the EPA allows states to exclude emissions from events like wildfires when they demonstrate compliance with the ozone standards, providing evidence of the link between those events and elevated ozone concentrations can require a significant investment in state time and resources without assistance from the EPA, Tom Moore, air quality program manager for the Western States Air Resources Council, said.
“Exceptional events is kind of an unfunded mandate,” he said.
States also need better tools to model uncontrollable emissions such as ozone precursors that blow into the U.S. from China as they try to meet the ozone standards, Moore said.
The EPA has proposed (RIN:2060-AS02) an update to its exceptional events policy intended to make the process less cumbersome for states. The proposal would allow states to use approved pollution control plans to satisfy the criterion that the event was “not reasonably controllable or preventable” and removing the criterion that states show a regulatory violation wouldn't have occurred “but for” the event (219 DEN A-4, 11/13/15).
EPA Looking at Modeling Improvements
Rohit Mathur, a senior scientist at the EPA, said new modeling of long-term transportation trends indicates that stratospheric transport of precursors like volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides have a “pretty significant” contribution to ground level ozone formation in the U.S.
Reviewing data from 1990 through 2010 has shown “an increasing trend in the contribution of long range transport to surface ozone in the U.S.,” he said.
That finding suggests that additional ozone monitors placed at the top of tall buildings could yield valuable data about how transported pollution contributes to ground-level ozone in the U.S., Mathur said.
Moore agreed that additional data on pollution transported to the U.S. would be particularly beneficial to Western states that are working to reduce ambient ozone concentrations.
“We need to understand for planning purposes more about this trend,” he said.
Modeling Personal Exposure Levels
The EPA is also doing more work on modeling personal exposure levels to ozone, including a better understanding of how a changing climate will impact ozone exposure, Lisa Baxter, a branch chief at the EPA, said. Changing climate conditions will affect how populations are distributed, meteorological conditions and air quality, all of which could affect human exposure.
While the EPA is looking at how climate will affect ozone exposure now, Baxter said the agency plans to look at the effect of climate on other air pollutants as well.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=89284561&vname=dennotallissues&fn=89284561&jd=89284561
-
Enviros File Civil Rights Complaint Against Md. Over Power Plant
May 11, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Arianna Skibell
The environmental law group Earthjustice filed a federal civil rights complaint against the state of Maryland today over its approval of a gas-fired power plant.
The group filed the complaint on behalf of groups and residents in the majority black community of Brandywine, Md., saying the plant would have disproportionate pollution impacts on the basis of race.
Under Title VI of the federal Civil Rights Act, states are required to consider whether the use of federal funds for a project has an unequal and negative impact on the basis of race.
Earthjustice says the state's Public Service Commission, the Department of the Environment and the Department of Natural Resources, all of which had a hand in approving the plant, failed to properly consider options to avoid impacts.
The group filed its complaint with the civil rights offices within U.S. EPA and the Department of Transportation, the federal agencies responsible for such investigations.
Brandywine, an unincorporated portion of Prince George's County, is 72 percent black. The power plant, proposed by Mattawoman Energy LLC, would be the fifth fossil-fueled power facility to operate within 13 miles of the community.
Prince George's County, which borders Washington, D.C., is already in violation of national air quality standards for ozone.
The groups behind the complaint, the Brandywine/TB Southern Regional Neighborhood Coalition and Patuxent Riverkeeper, expressed concerns about increasing air pollution, noise pollution, traffic congestion and decreased property values.
"We have a fundamental right to clean air, land, water and food," said Kamita Gray, president of the neighborhood coalition, in a statement.
EPA's civil rights office has long been under fire from environmental justice advocates for failing to resolve a lengthy backlog of objections to environmental permits.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/05/11/stories/1060037084
-
EIA: Energy-Related Emissions to Jump by 2040
May 11, 2016 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
The Energy Information Administration predicted Wednesday that global carbon dioxide emissions from energy sources would grow by a third by 2040 — without incorporating any changes driven by the Paris climate accord or EPA's power plant regulations.
The International Energy Outlook from the Department of Energy's statistical arm considers "existing policies and regulations" in its base case, EIA chief Adam Sieminski explained in a public briefing on the report, and using that framework, energy-related CO2 emissions would swell to 43 billion metric tons in 2040 from 32 billion tons currently, boosted by rising energy consumption that would outpace population growth thanks to industrial demand. Fossil fuels would provide about three-quarters of global energy, down from nearly 84 percent in 2012.
Environmentalists and some energy economists have criticized EIA's forecasts for their large degree of uncertainty and failure to incorporate how major policy shifts, such as the U.N.'s Paris climate deal and EPA emissions regulations, may affect trends.
Sieminski acknowledged that challenging EIA's forecasts for their lack of certainty is a "fair question," and he left room for the agency to probe how the international climate pledges will affect future energy use and demand.
"What actually happens with the implementation of the Paris agreement will be very important," he told the briefing at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, adding that there would be "plenty of time for things to continue to change."
EPA's power-plant regulations will be considered in the domestic projections EIA is set to release later this year, Sieminski said. Even without the presence of those regulations in the international forecast's base cases, renewable energy emerged as the fastest-growing energy source until 2040, with annual consumption rising an average of 2.6 percent.
Green groups were nonetheless frustrated by EIA's omission of major climate policymaking. Oil Change International campaigns director David Turnbull said in a statement that the agency's base case is "a recipe for disaster, and indicates that we need a new set of ingredients to create the clean energy economy necessary to solve the climate crisis."
EIA did add the new EPA regulations to the mix at various points in its analysis, noting that the agency's power-plant standards — if they survive a court challenge — would push U.S. renewable energy use up by 7 percent in 2020, relative to the base case, and by 37 percent in 2040. The regulations also are expected to push consumption of oil and gas "slightly lower," EIA said.
Looking around the world, growth in China's share of global natural gas production and related emissions are expected to far outpace the U.S. Chinese production is anticipated to grow 6 percent between 2012 and 2040, relative to 1.4 percent in America, while gas-related emissions are projected to rise 6.2 percent in China over the same period, but 0.5 percent in the U.S. EIA also expects India's share of gas-related emissions to see a significant, 3.9-percent bump over that period.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2016/05/eia-energy-related-emissions-to-jump-by-2040-112626
-
Why Energy R&D Matters More Than Ever
May 12, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Michael S. Lubell
As Congress proceeds with fiscal year 2017 appropriations, it should reject the House and Senate subcommittees’ marks and embrace President Obama’s request for increased support of energy research. But it should do so for reasons that far transcend the White House rationale, which is largely rooted in the Paris climate accord 20 nations agreed to last December.
Mission Innovation, as the accord is known, would double spending on energy research over five years with the goal of developing sources of clean energy that reduce carbon emissions and alleviate global warming without causing economic stress.
Substituting solar, wind and safe nuclear energy for fossil fuels is a big plus for safeguarding the global environment. But it is also a vital step in fighting terrorism and reducing the corrosive whipsaw impacts of price volatility on economies that have come to rely overwhelmingly on oil and natural gas production.
For many decades, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC as the international cartel is commonly known, successfully regulated world oil supplies and thereby the price of a barrel of oil on the international market. By doing so it filled the national treasuries of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela and nine other nations across the globe, giving them an outsized role on the stage of world affairs.
To say their interests often have not aligned with ours is to state to the obvious. The divergence, after all, has been a prime motivation behind the bipartisan goal of making America energy independent.
But even if we succeeded in achieving our goal, oil-producing nations such as Saudi Arabia and Iran would retain their clout so long as the rest of the world continues to feed at the petroleum trough. Weaning the entire world off oil is the only answer.
Jeffrey Goldberg’s March interview of President Obama in the “Atlantic” lays bare the Administration’s frustration with the Saudis. According to Goldberg, the president implicates “allies like Saudi Arabia with abetting the radicalization of Muslims worldwide” by financing madrassas that teach Wahhabism, the ultra-conservative brand of Sunni Islam espoused by al-Qaeda, the Islamic State (also known as ISIS, ISIL or Daesh) and Boko Haram, which has been on a killing spree in Nigeria, Niger, Chad and Cameroon.
Almost 25 years have passed since al-Qaeda’s first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. But renewed focus on possible Saudi complicity in the second attack eight years later and the kingdom’s current blackmail threat to divest itself of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of U.S. assets if Congress passes the 9/11 bill, demonstrates how much credence there might be to the president’s allegation.
As recent events in Paris, Brussels and San Bernadino prove, extremist Islam poses a continuing threat to the United States and the rest of the Western world. And that threat is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.
We need to keep our nation as safe as possible now, but we also need a durable strategy that will destroy the capabilities of Al Qaeda, the Islamic State and other Islamic terrorist groups in the long term by developing energy technologies that will make petroleum largely obsolete. Mission Innovation is a step in the right direction, and Congress ought to provide the resources necessary to achieve it.
Funding Mission Innovation would also send a signal to oil-producing nations around the world that they need to begin to diversify their economies. Venezuela – no friend of ours, incidentally – which has been crippled by tumbling oil prices, is a prime example. At home, Congress and the Administration should support Mission Innovation initiatives in states such as Wyoming and Alaska that have been hit hard by the collapse of oil prices.
The time is ripe for action on Mission Innovation, even for policymakers and elected officials who think climate change is a scientific hoax. Putting a dagger in the financial heart of Islamic terrorism should be reason enough. Congress needs to embrace the call for investing in energy research.
Michael S. Lubell is the Mark W. Zemansky Professor of Physics at the City College of the City University of New York. He writes and speaks widely about scientific research and science policy.
http://www.thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/279387-why-energy-rd-matters-more-than-ever
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested