Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 5/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) Author of Hazard Assessment Tool Study Clarifies Findings
May 18, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Sylvia Palmer
A recent study that showed wide variance in results, generated by different hazard assessment tools, was intended to highlight the importance of selecting the appropriate one for certain applications, rather than to critique their value. -
(ACC Mentioned) Senate Aide Joins Chemical Trade Group
May 18, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
A former aide to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has a new job at the chemical industry's largest trade organization. -
EPA, Lawmakers Laud New TSCA Deal as an 'Improvement'
May 18, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
House and Senate lawmakers issued a joint statement last night saying they were "finalizing" the details of a package to update the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, despite the opposition of at least two key Democrats. -
House, Senate Negotiators 'Finalizing' TSCA Deal
May 18, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darren Goode
Key House and Senate negotiators say they are closing in on a deal to update the Toxic Substances Control Act, despite a revolt by two House Democrats who were front and center in the talks. -
Final TSCA Bill Ready to Pass -- GOP Lawmakers
May 17, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
Lawmakers are likely to set up votes on a final bill to update the nation's chemical policy as soon as this week, with all outstanding items agreed to, according to two congressional Republicans. -
Key House Dems Slam Talks on Chemical Safety Bill
May 17, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Leading House Democrats are lashing out at their Republican and Senate colleagues in their ongoing negotiations over reforming federal chemical safety laws. -
Chemical Safety Talks Hit a Snag
May 17, 2016 | The HIll - Overnight Energy
By Timothy Cama and Devin Henry
The leading House Democrats in the negotiations over a new federal chemical safety law are pulling their support from the talks. -
Top House Democrats Mount Opposition To TSCA Compromise Language
May 17, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Two top House Democrats say they oppose Senate-crafted compromise language that was seen as boosting prospects for Congress to approve long-pending Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform, creating fresh doubts over the fate of a final TSCA bill in the House as other Democrats have signaled support for the measure. -
House Plans to Move Chemical Reform Next Week Without Pallone
May 17, 2016 | BNA Energy and Environment Blog
By Anthony Adragna
Congressional negotiators will release language “in the next day or two” overhauling the Toxic Substances Control Act and plan to vote on the legislation next week without the support of Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who has been holding up negotiations, Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) told reporters today. -
House Democrats Unhappy With Status of TSCA Reform
May 17, 2016 | Morning Consult
By Jack Fitzpatrick
Two Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee said they’re unhappy with negotiations over bills reforming the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act. -
House Democrats Oppose Bicameral TSCA Framework
May 18, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darren Goode
Reps. Frank Pallone and Paul Tonko today said they cannot support an emerging deal to update the Toxic Substances Control Act, but they may not be able to stop a bill from reaching the president's desk. -
California Revises Proposal to Update Prop. 65 Warnings
May 18, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
California revised its proposal to update the public warning requirements for the state's landmark right-to-know law, Proposition 65. -
‘Kids Being Poisoned’: Malibu Schools Face PCBs Lawsuit Trial
May 18, 2016 | RT
Parents in the affluent beach city of Malibu, California are suing their school district over toxic PCBs that were found after three teachers were diagnosed with thyroid cancer within months of each other. -
Skipping a Step in the Climate Case
May 17, 2016 | Politico (Morning Energy)
By Eric Wolff
Lawyers battling over whether the Clean Power Plan lives or dies now have about four more months to practice their oral arguments — and to prepare for the larger audience that will hear them. -
The Lessons of the Philadelphia Amtrak Accident
May 17, 2016 | The New York Times
By Vikas Bajaj
A National Transportation Safety Board report about an Amtrak train accident last year in Philadelphia that killed eight people highlights the need for railroads to move faster to install a life-saving technology that the safety board first recommended decades ago.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News - There are no clips to report at this time.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Author of Hazard Assessment Tool Study Clarifies Findings
May 18, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Sylvia Palmer
A recent study that showed wide variance in results, generated by different hazard assessment tools, was intended to highlight the importance of selecting the appropriate one for certain applications, rather than to critique their value.
This is according to Ann Mason, senior director at the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and a co-author on the study. She told Chemical Watch that the study sought to “[explore] the idea, held by some in the marketplace, that all tools provide similar information about a chemical’s hazard”.
A comparative analysis, released earlier this month by the ACC, the Dow Chemical Company and consultancy Cardno ChemRisk, found that major hazard assessment tools, widely used by companies, produced different results when screening the same set of chemicals.
The ACC had said, in a press release announcing the study, that such discrepancies may call into question the extent to which such tools can provide stakeholders – including consumers, retailers and product manufacturers – with “definitive and actionable information about chemical substances in consumer products”.
Last week, providers of the tools told Chemical Watch that the assumption that tools that use different methodologies should generate the same outcome was faulty. Clean Production Action (CPA), provider of GreenScreen, said the study authors intended to “sow confusion” with the report.
Ms Mason has clarified that the study was “never intended to be an evaluation of any particular tool”. The authors, she adds, went out of their way “not to have any qualitative assessment or make judgement”.
She further explains that “it might be obvious to tool providers, but not to the users”, that the tools have differences. Therefore, the study sought to highlight that selecting the correct tool is not always an easy, straightforward process.
Hazard-based assessment tools are frequently used by major retailers and product brands, such as Walmart and HP, to help inform decisions about which chemicals to avoid or phase down in their products.
“It is important that decision makers in the marketplace have a good understanding about what each tool is designed to measure so they can choose the best tool for their needs,” Ms Mason said.
According to Ms Mason, empirical data were not available to demonstrate these differences. So the authors conducted a small pilot study with seven chemicals to investigate the variation in how each of the tools determined the hazard of a chemical, and to identify what factors contributed to this.
“All of the tools analysed in the study,” said Ms Mason, “are of high quality and useful in providing hazard-level information about chemicals.” But the findings indicate that different tools can produce “varied, and sometimes conflicting, results when assessing the same chemical,” she added.
This, she said, is not a criticism of these tools, but was meant to highlight for users the need to be thoughtful about tool selections.
“Users should be aware of the differences and make informed choices when selecting the appropriate tool for the right focus,” she added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/47444/author-of-hazard-assessment-tool-study-clarifies-findings?q=%22American+Chemistry+Council%22
-
(ACC Mentioned) Senate Aide Joins Chemical Trade Group
May 18, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
A former aide to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has a new job at the chemical industry's largest trade organization.
Anna Burhop, a former GOP professional staff member on the EPW Committee, joined the American Chemistry Council last month as a director of regulatory and technical affairs.
ACC spokeswoman Jennifer Scott said Burhop will focus on Clean Air Act issues. Burhop is one of 20 directors who report to ACC Vice President of Regulatory and Technical Affairs Michael Walls.
Burhop started at the committee as an intern to Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) in 2007 and served as a staff assistant and research assistant under Inhofe and former ranking member David Vitter (R-La.).
She also focused on Clean Air Act issues during her time on the committee, according to her LinkedIn profile.
Burhop is not the ACC's first hire from the EPW Committee's Republican staff.
The group also picked up Bryan Zumwalt, the former chief counsel on EPW, last year.
Zumwalt served as a top legal aide to Vitter as he crafted legislation to update the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 and now serves as ACC's vice president for federal affairs (Greenwire, May 12, 2015).
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/stories/1060037429/search?keyword=American+Chemistry+Council
-
EPA, Lawmakers Laud New TSCA Deal as an 'Improvement'
May 18, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
House and Senate lawmakers issued a joint statement last night saying they were "finalizing" the details of a package to update the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, despite the opposition of at least two key Democrats.
"House and Senate negotiators are finalizing a TSCA reform bill that represents an improvement over both the House and Senate bills in key respects," the statement said. "Current federal law only provides very limited protection. We are hopeful that Congress will be taking action soon on reforming this important environmental law."
The statement was signed by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), David Vitter (R-La.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.).
The lawmakers made the update after Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), the ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and New York Rep. Paul Tonko, the top Democrat on E&C's Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy, said they would refuse to support the final product.
Meanwhile, U.S. EPA also released a statement describing the deal as consistent with the administration's priorities.
"The TSCA legislative draft that EPA has seen is a clear improvement over current law and is largely consistent with the Administration's Principles for TSCA Reform," the statement said. "Critically, the bill would address the fundamental flaws that have hindered EPA's ability to protect human health and the environment from chemical risks. We understand that parties continue to work on further improvements to the draft, and EPA stands ready to support the effort to finalize strong legislation to protect public health."
Pallone and Tonko said yesterday that the bill would harm the public and would be worse than doing nothing to update the existing law (E&ENews PM, May 17).
Their opposition sets the stage for House leaders to bring a revised bill to the floor to pass over their objections, Shimkus said.
Richard Denison, a senior scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement yesterday that the group had not seen the legislative text but saw no reason to oppose the plan.
"Barring any unexpected provisions, we fully expect that EDF would support this bill," Denison said.
Industry groups also said the work would continue.
"This deal is a breakthrough that combines the strongest elements of the House and Senate bills, benefiting both manufacturers and consumers and eliminating regulatory uncertainty," Aric Newhouse, the National Association of Manufacturers' senior vice president of policy and government relations, said in a statement.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/05/18/stories/1060037444
-
House, Senate Negotiators 'Finalizing' TSCA Deal
May 18, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darren Goode
Key House and Senate negotiators say they are closing in on a deal to update the Toxic Substances Control Act, despite a revolt by two House Democrats who were front and center in the talks.
Negotiators “are finalizing a TSCA reform bill that represents an improvement over both the House and Senate bills in key respects,” according to a statement from 11 senators from both parties and House Energy and Commerce GOP leaders. “Current federal law only provides very limited protection. We are hopeful that Congress will be taking action soon on reforming this important environmental law.”
The statement is a rebuke to one issued this afternoon from Reps. Frank Pallone and Paul Tonko, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and its environment subcommittee who pulled their support from an emerging deal they said would be worse than current law.
Sources familiar with the negotiations say talks are ongoing among senior White House and EPA officials, Senate negotiators and House Democratic leadership, including Minority LeaderNancy Pelosi and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer.
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy has directly contacted Pelosi, who hasn't decided whether to join Pallone and Tonko's revolt or seek additional concessions, according to sources familiar with the discussions. Sen. Barbara Boxer reached a deal earlier this month on language regarding the preempting of state toxic laws that had been a top concern for her and fellow Californians.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard#
-
Final TSCA Bill Ready to Pass -- GOP Lawmakers
May 17, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
Lawmakers are likely to set up votes on a final bill to update the nation's chemical policy as soon as this week, with all outstanding items agreed to, according to two congressional Republicans.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said today the negotiations were effectively finished.
All changes are "pretty much agreed to," Inhofe said. All that remains is writing up and distributing the final documents, he added.
"It's going to be on the president's desk before we recess," Inhofe said.
Two key House Democrats said this afternoon they would not support the final bill.
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the Subcommittee on Environment and Economy, said the bill would be worse than the existing Toxic Substances Control Act.
Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said lawmakers made a final attempt to woo Pallone yesterday evening, but they are now moving on without him. As a result, Shimkus said, a final bill will probably have to pass the House under a rule governing floor debate, with some Democratic defections, rather than in a suspension vote, which is reserved for less controversial measures and doesn't allow amendments.
In a statement released this afternoon, Pallone and Tonko said House Republicans "walked away from a bipartisan deal we agreed to last month, and are working with Senators on a troublesome legislative framework that we simply cannot support."
"We had hoped to support a strong TSCA bill that would empower the EPA to identify and manage dangerous chemicals, but the current draft is not only significantly weaker than the bipartisan deal we negotiated, it is actually weaker than current law," the lawmakers said. "Unfortunately, at this point, it would be better for us to not act at all than to pass the deal that Energy and Commerce Republican leaders and Senate negotiators are proposing."
Shimkus said legislative language should be released within a few days.
The changes reflect an agreement on pre-emption of state chemical programs reached between Inhofe and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), as well as the rest of the negotiations between members, Shimkus said.
A recent Politico report cited anonymous sources who claimed Pallone was blocking the legislation because of a personal vendetta against Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.). Humane Society of the United States President Wayne Pacelle blamed Pallone for wanting to deny Booker credit for protecting animals (E&ENews PM, May 16).
But Shimkus said Pallone's concerns were broader than simply the issue of animal testing.
"I've had a great relationship with Frank," Shimkus said. "I think there's a couple things that they're troubled by. I hope that in the end he can still be with us -- that's why we're moving cautiously."
At the same time, Shimkus said, the debate was effectively "over" and lawmakers would not do more to sway Pallone, though he credited the New Jersey lawmaker for helping the effort advance.
"We've gone down this long path together, and we'd hate to see a split at the end," Shimkus said, "but I think it's probably too much to ask."
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/05/17/stories/1060037417
-
Key House Dems Slam Talks on Chemical Safety Bill
May 17, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Leading House Democrats are lashing out at their Republican and Senate colleagues in their ongoing negotiations over reforming federal chemical safety laws.
Reps. Frank Pallone (N.J.) and Paul Tonko (N.Y.), the top Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee and its environment subcommittee, said negotiations over improvements to the chemical law have thus far resulted in a draft that’s worse than current law, and they’re abandoning support.
The opposition from Pallone and Tonko, the top two House Democrats in the negotiations, could spell major trouble for efforts to reform the nearly 40-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act.
But since the negotiation process isn’t a formal legislative conference, other lawmakers involved could try to proceed without their support.
“We had hoped to support a strong TSCA bill that would empower the EPA to identify and manage dangerous chemicals, but the current draft is not only significantly weaker than the bipartisan deal we negotiated, it is actually weaker than current law,” Pallone and Tonko said in a Tuesday statement.
“Unfortunately, at this point, it would be better for us to not act at all than to pass the deal that Energy and Commerce Republican leaders and Senate negotiators are proposing,” they said.
The House and Senate passed different bipartisan reform measures last year. They aimed to dramatically improve TSCA, under which it is extremely difficult for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to limit sales of any harmful chemicals, including seemingly obvious ones like asbestos.
Since the negotiations are still behind closed doors, it wasn’t precisely clear what the main problems are for the Democrats.
Pallone in recent days had been objecting to provisions meant to severely limit animal testing.
Earlier Tuesday, other lawmakers were optimistic that a final, negotiated bill would be ready within days for the House and the Senate to vote.
Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), chairman of the environment panel, told reporters Tuesday that the legislation is nearly complete, and he believes Congress could pass it without Pallone and Tonko’s support.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said “things look very good,” and he anticipates that both chambers of Congress can pass a negotiated bill by the end of next week.
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the panel, who had objected to the Senate’s legislation up until she negotiated some changes weeks ago, said the process was almost complete.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/280233-house-dems-slam-chemical-bill-negotiations
-
Chemical Safety Talks Hit a Snag
May 17, 2016 | The HIll - Overnight Energy
By Timothy Cama and Devin Henry
The leading House Democrats in the negotiations over a new federal chemical safety law are pulling their support from the talks.
Reps. Frank Pallone (N.J.) and Paul Tonko (N.Y.), the top Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and its environment subcommittee, said the current draft is worse than the law they're trying to reform.
Their opposition could derail the process. But other lawmakers in the negotiations might just proceed without the support of Pallone and Tonko.
"We had hoped to support a strong TSCA [Toxic Substances Control Act] bill that would empower the EPA to identify and manage dangerous chemicals, but the current draft is not only significantly weaker than the bipartisan deal we negotiated, it is actually weaker than current law," Pallone and Tonko said in a Tuesday statement.
"Unfortunately, at this point, it would be better for us to not act at all than to pass the deal that Energy and Commerce Republican leaders and Senate negotiators are proposing," they said.
Other lawmakers involved in the talks were much more upbeat Tuesday about the process, saying a final bill is likely days away.
Read more here.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/overnights/280256-overnight-energy-house-dems-pull-support-from-tsca
-
Top House Democrats Mount Opposition To TSCA Compromise Language
May 17, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Two top House Democrats say they oppose Senate-crafted compromise language that was seen as boosting prospects for Congress to approve long-pending Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform, creating fresh doubts over the fate of a final TSCA bill in the House as other Democrats have signaled support for the measure.
Reps. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), ranking member on the House Energy & Commerce Committee and Rep. Paul Tonko (D-NY), ranking member on the energy committee's environment panel, said in a May 17 press release that they will oppose the current compromise language unless “significant changes” are made.
“After over a year of bipartisan negotiations to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), our Energy and Commerce Committee Republican counterparts walked away from a bipartisan deal we agreed to last month, and are working with Senators on a troublesome legislative framework that we simply cannot support,” the lawmakers said in the press release. “Unfortunately, at this point, it would be better for us to not act at all than to pass the deal that Energy and Commerce Republican leaders and Senate negotiators are proposing,” they said.
A congressional source says the main sticking points for Tonko included preemption and polychlorinated biphenyls. Meanwhile, House Democrats recently urged Pallone to resolve an apparent dispute over language suggested by senators that aims to limit toxicity testing on animals.
Lawmakers have been working for months toward resolving final differences between the Senate-approved TSCA reform bill S. 697 and the narrower reform bill that cleared the House, H.R. 2576.
In a May 12 interview with Inside EPA, House Energy & Commerce Committee environment panel Chairman John Shimkus (R-IL) said, “As far as I understand it, I'm supportive” of the deal struck between Senate Environment & Public Works Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) and ranking member Barbara Boxer (D-CA).
Shimkus said the deal would “give states time to get caught up” if they begin looking at a chemical for possible new regulation before EPA launches a safety review of a chemical under new TSCA authority therefore preempting any new state restrictions, which was seen as ending concerns about the bill's preemption of state programs.
Rep. Gene Green (D-TX), also told Inside EPA May 12, in response to a question about the language said, that “I'm inclined to support it,” adding that he is “glad they worked out the issue with California,” referring to concerns raised by Boxer and others that overly broad preemption programs could negate the progress California has made through its Proposition 65 and green chemistry programs, and block other states from similar actions.
The language, however, failed to win support from at least some environmental groups. According to an informed source, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families -- a coalition of environmental groups advocating for broad TSCA reform -- is warning members that the compromise language “would force states to delay protections on toxic chemicals for up to four years,” creating a greater time frame for exposure to hazardous chemicals.
In response to a question about the concerns raised by Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, Shimkus noted toInside EPA that the compromise is the result of lengthy negotiations between Boxer and Inhofe. “If you can't trust Sen. Boxer to support and be protective of public health, I don't know who you trust,” he said.
However, Tonko and Pallone in their press release charge that the current draft is not only significantly weaker than the bipartisan deal previously negotiated, it is actually weaker than current law.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/top-house-democrats-mount-opposition-tsca-compromise-language
-
House Plans to Move Chemical Reform Next Week Without Pallone
May 17, 2016 | BNA Energy and Environment Blog
By Anthony Adragna
Congressional negotiators will release language “in the next day or two” overhauling the Toxic Substances Control Act and plan to vote on the legislation next week without the support of Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who has been holding up negotiations, Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) told reporters today.
“We really would like Frank to get on board,” Shimkus, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy, said. “He’s not apt to do that for several reasons.”
Without the support of Pallone, Shimkus said the House will not move the legislation under suspension of the rules, which would require a two-thirds majority to pass. Both Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and James Inhofe (R-Okla.) told Bloomberg BNA today they hope to have legislation to President Barack Obama's desk before Congress leaves for its Memorial Day recess.
Pallone and Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), top House Democratic negotiators, issued a statement this afternoon calling the emerging deal a “troublesome legislative framework that we simply cannot support” and “actually weaker than current law.”The full story is in tonight's issue of Daily Environment Report.
http://www.bna.com/house-plans-move-b57982072548/
-
House Democrats Unhappy With Status of TSCA Reform
May 17, 2016 | Morning Consult
By Jack Fitzpatrick
Two Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee said they’re unhappy with negotiations over bills reforming the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act.
Reps. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) released a statement Tuesday afternoon saying “it would be better for us to not act at all than to pass the deal that Energy and Commerce Republican leaders and Senate negotiators are proposing.”
The House and Senate have both passed bills reforming TSCA and have been working to reconcile differences between the bills. Pallone and Tonko did not specify what provisions they were unhappy with in the negotiations.
“We had hoped to support a strong TSCA bill that would empower the EPA to identify and manage dangerous chemicals, but the current draft is not only significantly weaker than the bipartisan deal we negotiated, it is actually weaker than current law,” they said.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) had a much brighter outlook on the negotiations. “I have had a lot of good conversations on TSCA and we are nearly there,” he said on Tuesday. “I expect we will have this done by Memorial recess.”
https://morningconsult.com/alert/house-democrats-unhappy-status-tsca-reform/
-
House Democrats Oppose Bicameral TSCA Framework
May 18, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darren Goode
Reps. Frank Pallone and Paul Tonko today said they cannot support an emerging deal to update the Toxic Substances Control Act, but they may not be able to stop a bill from reaching the president's desk.
Senate negotiators in both parties this week said they are closing in on having a bill ready for President Barack Obama's signature by Memorial Day and had nearly ironed out all the differences between House- and Senate-passed versions of a TSCA update. Sources closely following the talks said House Republicans may be ready to move a compromise bill next week even without support from Democrats like Pallone and Tonko, the ranking members on the Energy and Commerce Committee and its environment subcommittee.
Pallone and Tonko said House Republicans "are working with Senators on a troublesome legislative framework that we simply cannot support," which they said was weaker than current law.
"Unfortunately, at this point, it would be better for us to not act at all than to pass the deal that Energy and Commerce Republican leaders and Senate negotiators are proposing," they said.
One of Pallone’s targets has been Senate animal testing language sponsored by Sen. Cory Booker, who beat Pallone in a primary three years ago to succeed the late-Sen. Frank Lautenberg, who the Senate bill is named after.
Senate negotiators are optimistic about the bill's chances after Sens. Jim Inhofe and Barbara Boxer reached a deal this month on language preempting state toxic laws and other weighty topics.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard#
-
California Revises Proposal to Update Prop. 65 Warnings
May 18, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
California revised its proposal to update the public warning requirements for the state's landmark right-to-know law, Proposition 65.
Released May 16, the changes reflect recent comments on a rulemaking the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment launched in 2015 to implement reforms Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has sought to reduce litigation and better inform consumers.
Comments on the latest version of the document are due June 6, OEHHA said.
The proposal would repeal and replace regulations written to implement Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. Proposition 65 requires businesses to provide “clear and reasonable” warnings whenever exposing the public to unsafe levels of chemicals the state has linked to cancer or reproductive harm.
Most of the latest changes involve revised text to clarify the proposed new Article 6 of the regulations.
The proposal includes specific guidance to businesses for when warnings are required and what they must look like. In some cases, the rules would provide specific warning signage for amusement parks, parking garages and other types of facilities.
California said it plans on developing additional “tailored” warnings for exposures that may occur at hotels and apartments to include in the regulations as they are phased-in over a two-year period.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=89885191&vname=dennotallissues&fn=89885191&jd=89885191
-
‘Kids Being Poisoned’: Malibu Schools Face PCBs Lawsuit Trial
May 18, 2016 | RT
Parents in the affluent beach city of Malibu, California are suing their school district over toxic PCBs that were found after three teachers were diagnosed with thyroid cancer within months of each other. They had their first day in court on Tuesday.After a 10 minute hearing in Los Angeles, US District Court Judge Percy Anderson said that he would issue a written ruling, or hold a July 11 hearing if needed, reported LA West media.
Parents and teachers, including supermodel Cindy Crawford, claim that the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District has violated the federal Toxic Substances Control Act by allowing caulk and other building materials containing cancer-causing polychlorinated biphenyl compounds (PCBs) to remain in Malibu High School and Juan Cabrillo Elementary School.
PCBs were discovered in Malibu schools more than two and a half years ago after three teachers were diagnosed with thyroid cancer within months of one another.
The suit seeks no monetary damages, but requests an order requiring the school district to remove the toxic chemicals and follow the Environmental Protection Agency’s best management practices for PCB contamination, which involves daily, weekly, monthly, and annual cleaning of dust.
Crawford has removed her two children from the schools, but remains involved in the case.
Parent groups say that tests conducted in 2015 showed very high levels of PCBs in the window caulking at both Malibu schools. They claim the district has spent millions of dollars fighting the issue rather than working to protect its students. One plaintiff said it reminded her of the water contamination problem in Flint, Michigan.
“We want parents to be armed with the facts to make sure they understand the deadly risk of PCBs and are able to protect their children,” said Malibu parent Jennifer deNicola, president of America Unites for Kids and a plaintiff in the suit.
“Everyone claims they don’t want to put kids at risk, yet what happened in Flint is what’s happening in our schools: kids are being poisoned because government officials are unwilling to do their jobs,”she said, according to Malibu Surfside News.
The school district says it has a plan for removing contaminated materials during renovation, as well as continuous cleaning, which was approved by the EPA
“We are confident that we are following the law and that our classrooms are safe for teachers and students based on EPA health-protective thresholds,” District Spokeswoman Gail Pinsker said in a written statement, according to KCAL-TV. “The plaintiffs in this lawsuit disagree with EPA’s regulation of school properties and want to change the law. That dispute is not one for the district.”
PCBs are generally found in older construction materials. Federal regulations banned their use in 1976.
However, the school district has argued it is safe to leave the PCBs in place, maintaining that regularly wiping surfaces with wet rages will be enough to protect students and teachers until future renovation. It also noted that recent testing does not show harmful levels of the toxic chemicals.
https://www.rt.com/usa/343374-kids-being-poisoned-malibu-schools/
-
Skipping a Step in the Climate Case
May 17, 2016 | Politico (Morning Energy)
By Eric Wolff
CLIMATE CASE LEAPFROGS TO FULL D.C. CIRCUIT: Lawyers battling over whether the Clean Power Plan lives or dies now have about four more months to practice their oral arguments — and to prepare for the larger audience that will hear them. The D.C. Circuit decided to skip a step in the proceedings and kick the case to the full circuit, which will hear oral arguments Sept. 27, forgoing the need for a hearing before a three-judge panel that had been scheduled for June 2. Pro's Alex Guillén reports that the delay means President Barack Obama will likely be out of office by the time any judges weigh in on the centerpiece of his climate agenda. It might even mean that the Supreme Court would not get to it until a replacement for the departed Antonin Scalia is confirmed.
Story Continued Below
Both sides OK with more time: Everyone seems confident they will ultimately win — and eager to get the case through the lower court as quickly as possible. Vickie Patton, general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, said the plan “avoids overall delay in achieving judicial resolution in the D.C. Circuit — an especially welcome development in light of the clear and present danger of climate pollution on for our communities and families." West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey welcomed the court’s “unusual step,” which he said “confirms our long-held view that the Power Plan is an unprecedented and transformative rule of a kind the states have never seen.” EPA said, "The Clean Power Plan fits squarely within the four corners of the Clean Air Act. We are confident we will prevail when the CPP has its day in court."
Democratic appointees hold a seven-to-four majority among the 11 active judges on the D.C. Circuit. However, Chief Judge Merrick Garland, who is nominated for the Supreme Court’s open seat, and Judge Nina Pillard, an Obama appointee, both recused themselves from yesterday’s order, indicating they may sit out the hearing, potentially narrowing the ideological split.
Will the plot ever stop twisting? No one thought the Supreme Court would stay the Clean Power Plan, and then it did in one of Scalia's final actions as a justice. And no one expected — no one even asked — for an immediate en banc review, yet here we are. As Scott Segal of the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, which opposes the rule, put it, "When it comes to the Clean Power Plan, it is best to expect the unexpected."
http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-energy/2016/05/court-to-hear-clean-power-plan-arguments-in-september-a-second-front-in-the-war-on-exxonmobil-214333 -
The Lessons of the Philadelphia Amtrak Accident
May 17, 2016 | The New York Times
By Vikas Bajaj
A National Transportation Safety Board report about an Amtrak train accident last year in Philadelphia that killed eight people highlights the need for railroads to move faster to install a life-saving technology that the safety board first recommended decades ago.
Amtrak’s Northeast Regional Train No. 188 derailed on May 12, 2015 because it entered a curve at 106 miles per hour, more than twice the speed at which it should have been traveling. The safety board said it appears that the engineer operating the train, Brandon Bostian, did not realize the train was approaching that curve because he was distracted by radio transmissions about another train. More than 200 people were injured in the derailment.
Like many rail accidents, this derailment could have been avoided if the railroad had been using a safety system called positive train control in that part of its network. The technology can automatically slow or stop trains to avoid collisions or derailments. Amtrak has since finished deploying positive train control on all the tracks it owns between Washington and New York. The system has not yet been installed on tracks used by Amtrak that are owned by other railroads or state governments.
Safety experts have long known that positive train control could save lives. The N.T.S.B. has been pushing railroads to adopt it and lawmakers to require it for a long time. But progress has been slow. Congress required railroads to install the technology by the end of 2015 after a horrific commuter train accident in 2008 killed 25 people in California. In October, lawmakers gave railroads three more years to install train control and an additional two years to finish installation and testing. But in December, Congress passed another provision that effectively gave railroads until the end of 2020 to fully install the technology.
“Unless PTC is implemented soon, I’m very concerned that we’re going to be back in this room again, hearing investigators detail how technology that we have recommended for more than 45 years could have prevented yet another fatal rail accident,” Christopher Hart, the chairman of the safety board, said on Tuesday.
The safety board also highlighted other issues that merit the Federal Railroad Administration’s attention. The board said some passengers killed in the accident were thrown out of the train because the train’s windows came out when its cars slid on their sides. The safety board said the F.R.A. should develop standards to make sure windows do not fall out during accidents. It also told the regulator to study the use of seat belts, which are currently not required on trains, to protect passengers from being thrown from their seats during accidents and derailments. That seems like a no-brainer.
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/the-lessons-of-the-philadelphia-amtrak-accident/
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Add recipients
Suggested