Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 9/5/2016
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Groups Urge EPA to Consider Substance Use Under TSCA
Sep 5, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Industry groups have urged the US EPA to focus on the conditions of a substance's use during its prioritisation and risk evaluation under the recently reformed TSCA. -
US FDA Bans 19 Substances from Antibacterial Soaps
Sep 5, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a final rule banning 19 major antibacterial active ingredients from antiseptic wash products. They include triclosan and triclocarban. -
EU Authorities Need to Invest in Substitution Expertise
Sep 5, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Echa and EU member state authorities have been told they need to "significantly grow" their staff capacity to be able to fully support the substitution of harmful substances with safer alternatives. -
Federal Judge Approves Malibu Campus Modernization Plan
Sep 5, 2016 | LA Canyon News
By Shatai Melvin
U.S. District Court Judge Percy Anderson of the Central District of California agree with the decision taken by the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District to renovate two of its Malibu schools. -
OBAMA LEGACY: Quiet But Big Changes in Energy, Pollution
Sep 4, 2016 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Seth Borenstein and Josh Lederman
Mostly unnoticed amid the political brawl over climate change, the United States has undergone a quiet transformation in how and where it gets its energy during Barack Obama’s presidency, slicing the nation’s output of polluting gases that are warming Earth. -
US Gulf Coast September Distillate Exports to Europe at 920,000 MT
Sep 5, 2016 | Platts
By Iain Stevenson and Maude Desmarescaux
Exports of distillates from the US Gulf Coast to Europe in September stand at 920,000 mt so far, according to data from cFlow, S&P Global Platts trade flow software. -
No Doubt About It: Oil-by-Rail is Threat
Sep 5, 2016 | The Olympian
By Jared Smith
On this Labor Day, longshoremen look back on a summer that vindicated our opposition to America’s largest proposed oil-by-rail project. After a terrifying oil train derailment in Mosier, weeks of public hearings, and a unanimous vote to ban oil terminals by Vancouver’s City Council...
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA 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) Industry Groups Urge EPA to Consider Substance Use Under TSCA
Sep 5, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Industry groups have urged the US EPA to focus on the conditions of a substance's use during its prioritisation and risk evaluation under the recently reformed TSCA.
The comments came in response to the EPA's request for feedback on two separate rulemakings it must complete within a year of passage of the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act (LCSA):
· a rule defining how the agency prioritises substances for assessment; and
· a rule governing the risk evaluation process.
Under the statute, 'conditions of use' are those under which a substance is "intended, known, or reasonably foreseen" to be manufactured, processed, distributed, used, or disposed of.
The Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) said this is important, as it will give the EPA "flexibility and discretion to tailor risk evaluations to relevant conditions of use and not 'all' conditions of use."
The International Fragrance Association (Ifra) North America said the EPA must carefully consider how it defines such a "reasonably foreseen" use of a substance.
The agency should not base prioritisations or evaluations on "any outcome that is physically possible", wrote the trade group.
"If EPA does not exercise judgement and discipline on this issue, every chemical will be a high priority and will require severe restriction."
Real world exposure scenarios
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) encouraged the agency to distinguish between intentional use of a substance in a product and its use as an intermediate during the prioritisation phase.
And it urged soliciting such information from stakeholders early in a substance's candidacy for prioritisation.
On risk evaluation, the ACC said the EPA should not consider exposures that are:
· in violation of Osha workplace limits;
· inconsistent with a product's labelling requirements for safe use; or
· outside exposures from an unintended use of a consumer product.
It also said the agency should not factor in exposure scenarios that are regulated under different federal laws than TSCA.
Ifra commented on the agency's statutory requirement to consider the risk a substance poses to potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations (Pess). It said the identification of such populations is "intrinsically linked to the reasonably foreseeable uses of a chemical".
The EPA should therefore only consider such populations where problematic exposures are reasonably likely to occur, it wrote.
Inconsistent with statute?
But a coalition of more than 30 NGOs said it was "surprised and troubled" by industry suggestions that a substance's use should factor into the prioritisation process. "This is flatly inconsistent with TSCA", it said.
In separate comments, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) said the LCSA is "unambiguous in stating that chemical substances, not particular uses or conditions of use, are to be subject to prioritisation".
And on risk evaluation, the EDF said product misuse or accidental conditions of use should be "reasonably foreseen". And they should be incorporated into risk evaluation.
The broader NGO coalition said that it would be an "impermissible reading" of TSCA to use the risk evaluation scoping process to determine that certain substances do not present an unreasonable risk. And, even if the agency does set aside certain uses during scoping, then it must still consider those exposures.
To ignore incremental exposure from such 'set aside pathways' "undermines the agency's ability to conduct aggregate exposure assessments, thereby leading to a potentially significant understatement of risk", said the coalition.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49383/industry-groups-urge-epa-to-consider-substance-use-under-tsca
-
US FDA Bans 19 Substances from Antibacterial Soaps
Sep 5, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a final rule banning 19 major antibacterial active ingredients from antiseptic wash products. They include triclosan and triclocarban.
"Manufacturers haven't proven that those ingredients are safe for daily use over a long period of time," the agency says.
And, it adds, they "haven’t shown that these ingredients are any more effective than plain soap and water in preventing illnesses and the spread of certain infections."
Manufacturers will have a year to comply with the rule by removing products from the market, or their antibacterial active ingredients.
The 19 substances covered by the rule are:
· cloflucarban;
· fluorosalan;
· hexachlorophene;
· hexylresorcinol;
· 6 individual iodophors (iodine-containing ingredients);
· methylbenzethonium chloride;
· phenol (greater than 1.5%)
· phenol (less than 1.5%);
· secondary amyltricresols;
· sodium oxychlorosene;
· tribromsalan;
· triclocarban;
· triclosan; and
· triple dye.
Under the final rule, the FDA has classified the ingredients as not Generally Recognized as Safe and Effective (GRAS/GRAE) for use in consumer antiseptic wash drug products.
Antiseptic products containing these ingredients will be considered new drugs. Approved new drug applications will be required for them.
Typical antiseptic products covered include:
· liquid;
· foam;
· gel hand soaps;
· bar soaps; and
· body washes.
The agency issued a proposed rule in 2013 requiring manufacturers to submit data demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of certain antibacterial ingredients used in over-the-counter antibacterial washes.
But, it says, either no additional data was submitted, or the data and information submitted were insufficient for the agency to find that these ingredients are GRAS/GRAE.
The FDA has deferred rulemaking for one year on three other ingredients:
· benzalkonium chloride;
· benzethonium chloride; and
· chloroxylenol (PCMX).
This is to allow for the "development and submission of new safety and effectiveness data for these ingredients."
The final rulemaking does not apply to consumer hand sanitisers, hand wipes, antiseptic products used in healthcare settings, and antiseptics used in food handler settings.
Co-founder and president of the NGO the Environmental Working Group Ken Cook praised the announcement. He says it's a "huge victory on behalf of human health and the environment".
But the American Cleaning Institute (ACI) says washing hands with antiseptic soap can help reduce the risk of infection beyond that provided by non-antibacterial soap and water.
"The FDA already has in its hands data that shows the safety and effectiveness of antibacterial soaps," it says.
"Manufacturers are continuing their work to provide even more science and research to fill data gaps identified by FDA."
The ACI says it will submit, in the coming year, additional safety and effectiveness data on the three deferred ingredients.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49428/us-fda-bans-19-substances-from-antibacterial-soaps
-
EU Authorities Need to Invest in Substitution Expertise
Sep 5, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Echa and EU member state authorities have been told they need to "significantly grow" their staff capacity to be able to fully support the substitution of harmful substances with safer alternatives.
The recommendation is one of ten in a report by the Lowell Center for Sustainable Production commissioned by Echa.
Based on a survey of member states, the report – Improving the identification, evaluation, adoption and development of safer alternatives – found that of those responding (around half of EU countries), the main obstacles to substitution are:
· lack of information on alternatives; along with
· lack of relevant expertise and resources in companies.
And it cites the ability to conduct technical feasibility and performance assessments s the main challenge for member states' alternatives assessment work.
To resolve the issue of limited expertise, the report says Echa should establish a dedicated group of staff with expertise in:
· chemical hazard evaluation;
· chemistry;
· technical assessment; and
· economic analysis.
This group should provide training and support to other authorities and industry. The agency could also help develop external networks of experts, comprised of academics, consultants and government research institutes.
These networks could be an online resource, the report suggests.
In addition, it says web-based data resources based on REACH dossiers would help with screening and evaluation of alternatives.
Lack of funds
The report notes a 'disconnect' between industry's need to identify alternatives to SVHCs and research into substitutes. It says only three member states engaging in and providing funding for alternatives research.
It recommends Echa coordinate EU and member state grants and private/public partnership funds to invest in innovative research to support the development of alternatives.
To achieve this, Echa could analyse the agencies that offer funding to research and innovation at union and government levels to engage their support.
Collaboration
Sharing of resources and coordination between authorities becomes "a critical priority", the report says.
Echa could create or expand mechanisms for greater supply chain collaboration and engagement. These should include:
· shared performance testing and evaluation; and
· demonstration sites, the report recommends.
An evaluation of existing supply chain partnership and collaboration models at EU and member state levels and mechanisms might enhance supply-chain communication around substitution.
Echa could analyse technical support capacities for SMEs in particular at the EU and member state level (including trade associations) that are engaged in supporting chemical substitution activities.
Another opportunity would be to establish a committee for inter-authority analysis of alternatives and chemical substitution. This could "discuss challenges to substitution, share lessons, open doors to collaboration, provide support to smaller member states and identify concrete projects that could be undertaken across member states".
Further report recommendations include:
· a possible 'safer chemical ingredient' listing programme. This could use REACH data to identify safer alternatives for different functional classes of chemicals;
· more detailed guidance materials to complete analyses of alternatives in applications for authorisation and restriction proposals, outlining minimum components and quality criteria; and
· enhanced analysis of alternatives support and training to improve quality and consistency. Echa could also establish a "certified analysis of alternatives practitioner" programme.
"The findings and recommendations of this report are very interesting and highly valuable to our work to stimulate the replacement of substances of concern by safer alternatives," says Geert Dancet, Echa’s executive director.
"I believe that this work lists concrete proposals that regulators and industry should seriously consider to implement.
"Echa will take the recommendations forward with its co-regulators and stakeholder organisations in the coming months."
A second substitution report focusing on industry is being conducted by RPA for DG Environment's strategy for a non-toxic environment. The Lowell report includes some findings from that study.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49426/eu-authorities-need-to-invest-in-substitution-expertise
-
Federal Judge Approves Malibu Campus Modernization Plan
Sep 5, 2016 | LA Canyon News
By Shatai Melvin
U.S. District Court Judge Percy Anderson of the Central District of California agree with the decision taken by the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District to renovate two of its Malibu schools. Both Malibu High School and Juan Cabrillo Elementary School began renovations this summer. Renovations include construction of two new buildings, technology upgrades, and the replacement of pre-1979 windows and doors in several buildings that might have polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in caulk.
“We respect the court’s determination in this case,” said Board of Education President Laurie Lieberman. “With the planned modernization already in the works at Malibu High School and nearly complete at Cabrillo, which is the court’s endorsed remedy, we’re very pleased to now turn back to our primary purpose of providing quality education for our students.”
According to the press release from the SMMUSD, the court case began on March 23, 2015. America Unites for Kids, which is a group of Malibu community members, and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a Washington, D.C.-based lobbying group, filed suit against the district. America Unites, et al. v. Sandra Lyon, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-02124.
The defendants which are the officers and directors of the district, had violated the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) the lawsuit alleged. Regulations are being implemented due to the use of caulk around the window at Malibu High School and Juan Cabrillo Elementary School. The schools out of the District’s 17 campuses that contained PCBs in excess of 50 parts per million. The district has worked with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the management of PCBs and materials that contain PCBs at both schools.
Exposure tests were conducted of the air and dust at the two schools. The test show that the schools were safe for students and staff. No further testing is needed. The press release states that the court concluded that it is likely that additional caulk contains PCBs in excess of TSCA’s permitted limits, the court concurred that there was no need for a costly caulk removal operation in light of the planned modernization. The EPA has been involved in oversight of PCB issues at the two campuses since 2013 and has confirmed the District’s approach. The court concurs in the EPA’s approach and policy regarding the management of PCBs in building materials.
The two schools have buildings that were built in the 1950s and 1960s and are using Measure BB and Measure ES funds for the planned modernization project. Two buildings on the high school campus will be demolished and replaced with new buildings, as well as of the replacement of the middle school building and modernizing the windows and doors on both campuses. The court requires the renovations to be completed by December 31, 2019. At Juan Cabrillo Elementary School renovations is nearly complete with the exception of the F building which should be completed during this semester.
According to The Malibu Times, the SMMUSD initiated the “Windows, Paint, Floors and Doors” modernization program, which intends to replace all building materials that have not been replaced in the past 25 years. This modernization program was slated to complete by 2018, though according to court documents the school district gave a deadline of 2020 for the project.
“We respect the court’s determination in this case,” said Board of Education President Laurie Lieberman in the letter to parents. “With the planned modernization already in the works at Malibu High School and nearly complete at Cabrillo, which is the court’s endorsed remedy, we’re very pleased to now turn back to our primary purpose of providing quality education for our students.”
http://www.canyon-news.com/federal-judge-approves-malibu-campus-modernization-plan/55680
-
OBAMA LEGACY: Quiet But Big Changes in Energy, Pollution
Sep 4, 2016 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Seth Borenstein and Josh Lederman
Mostly unnoticed amid the political brawl over climate change, the United States has undergone a quiet transformation in how and where it gets its energy during Barack Obama’s presidency, slicing the nation’s output of polluting gases that are warming Earth.
As politicians tangled in the U.S. and on the world stage, the U.S. slowly but surely moved away from emissions-spewing coal and toward cleaner fuels like natural gas, nuclear, wind and solar. The shift has put the U.S. closer to achieving the goal Obama set to cut emissions by more than a quarter over the next 15 years, but experts say it is nowhere near enough to prevent the worst effects of global warming.
The overlooked changes took center stage Saturday in China. Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping entered the world’s two worst polluters into a historic agreement to ratchet down heat-trapping pollution. Obama hailed “the investments that we made to allow for incredible innovation in clean energy.”
U.S. Department of Energy statistics show jolts in where America gets its volts:
—In 2008, 48 percent of America’s electricity came from coal, the dirtiest power source; now it’s about 30 percent. That’s less than the combined U.S. output of carbon-free nuclear and renewable energy.
—There are now more than three solar power jobs in the U.S. for every job mining coal.
—In just the first five months of 2016, more solar power was generated than 2006 through 2012.
—In 2008, the U.S. imported about two-thirds of its oil, and politicians spoke longingly of energy independence. Now, America imports less than half its oil.
—U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide — the main greenhouse gas — are down more than 10 percent, and this year is on pace to be the lowest in about a quarter-century.
“There were gigantic changes happening in the energy world, gigantic tectonic changes,” said Peter Fox-Penner of the Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy. “It’s a sea change. There is no question.”
Facing steep obstacles in Congress, Obama never aggressively pursued new emissions-curbing legislation, aside from a half-hearted attempt at cap-and-trade in his first term that was politically disastrous for Democrats. Instead, he relied on executive authority and regulations at home while largely going above lawmakers’ heads by focusing on brokering global deals to curb carbon and other greenhouse gases.
So how much credit does Obama deserve? And how much was completely outside his control? That debate is playing out in Obama’s final months in office, as the president tries to go out with a bang on climate and the environment.
Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas lobby, pointed out that Obama pitched his sweeping pollution limits on coal-fired power plants as the main driver of lower future emissions — but the courts have put those rules indefinitely on hold. Meanwhile, emissions have fallen due to a dramatic increase in cleaner-burning natural gas, which Obama was slow to try to regulate.
“We are leading the world in carbon reductions today, and it’s driven primarily by cleaner-burning, affordable natural gas that was brought to you by innovation and technological advances in the oil and natural gas industry,” Gerard said.
But Brian Deese, Obama’s senior adviser, said the seeds of the fracking technology that enabled the natural gas revolution were found in federal Energy Department research conducted in the 1970s. He noted that the people who warned Obama’s policies — like his “Clean Power Plan” emissions limits — would be disastrous are the same people now celebrating the natural gas revolution.
“You can’t on the one hand argue that the Clean Power Plan is an overarching regulation that’s going to impose all these costs, enforce all these changes in the industry, and on the other hand argue that change is happening independent of what government is doing and therefore these regulations are meaningless,” Deese said in an interview.
The advent of fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, produced much more natural gas, which became much cheaper and elbowed out coal as America’s fuel of choice. That has surprised all sorts of experts.
In 2000, Dana Fisher, director of the University of Maryland’s Program for Society and the Environment, predicted the U.S. was unlikely to wean itself off coal because it was cheap and plentiful. And John Reilly of MIT’s Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, predicted heat-trapping gas emissions would grow.
Both admit they were wrong, with an embarrassed Reilly calling the subsequent decline “a dramatic turnaround from what everyone has expected.”
Obama had little to do with the fracking boom, except to not get in the way with regulations, energy experts said. But Obama pushed through 2009’s stimulus package that goosed spending and research in renewables, like solar, wind and hydro. His administration also increased fuel mileage requirements for cars and trucks and ratcheted up appliance and building energy efficiency standards.
“His war is against fossil fuels, and natural gas is a fossil fuel,” said Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., the Senate’s most prominent climate change doubter. “You can’t separate that out and say it’s somehow different than other fossil fuels. It’s not.”
Natural gas is a “bridge fuel” from coal, which spews about twice as much heat-trapping carbon dioxide, but America still needs to wean itself from that fossil fuel too, said Granger Morgan, Carnegie Mellon University engineering and public policy professor.
And there are some downsides to these significant changes — like higher power bills in a few places — said Jeff Holmstead, a Bush-era environmental official who lobbies for utilities that depend on coal.
“It’s a shame that we’ve shut down a lot of plants that were continuing to provide low-cost power,” Holmstead said.
The change in America’s energy supply is still too slow and pollution cuts are not enough to prevent dangerous global warming, Morgan said, adding “but it’s certainly better than the alternative, which is continuing to sail on as if we weren’t heading into the big storm.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/obama-legacy-quiet-but-big-changes-in-energy-pollution/2016/09/04/ea958ba4-726d-11e6-9781-49e591781754_story.html
-
US Gulf Coast September Distillate Exports to Europe at 920,000 MT
Sep 5, 2016 | Platts
By Iain Stevenson and Maude Desmarescaux
Exports of distillates from the US Gulf Coast to Europe in September stand at 920,000 mt so far, according to data from cFlow, S&P Global Platts trade flow software.
By comparison, a total of 1.21 million mt crossed the Atlantic during the same period in August, the data shows.
The inbound clean products are set to arrive in European ports in 22 cargoes, with eight of these comprising 340,000 mt heading towards Mediterranean destinations.
In a reversal of the usual flow of distillates from US to European ports, some cargoes have been crossing the Atlantic laden with product in the opposite direction.
Exports out of Europe to Latin America were helping clear some summer volumes from Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp, where vessels were seen loading product from Primorsk, Amsterdam and Rotterdam.
A strong Gulf Coast market has been put down to some unexpected refinery outages both there and in Latin America, which have provided a price floor for spot barrels.
LyondellBasell's 263,776 b/d Houston facility reported a plant-wide power outage Thursday after a fire at the plant Wednesday, while PDVSA reported that it was gradually restarting its 310,000 b/d Cardon refinery in Venezuela after a blackout Thursday.
"Demand is good, it's the end of winter... it's always more or less the case... plus there are still some problems in Venezuela so refining is down so [they] import instead of exporting, it changes the balance," a trader said.
The Naviga8 Andesine, High Efficiency, Citrus Express, Arctic Bay and Star N have all been fixed to Brazilian ports, according to sources.
"There has been some European cargoes heading to South America because it seems the US Gulf Coast is not supplying. So the arbitrage from Europe has been sending material," a source said.http://www.platts.com/latest-news/oil/london/us-gulf-coast-september-distillate-exports-to-26537548
-
No Doubt About It: Oil-by-Rail is Threat
Sep 5, 2016 | The Olympian
By Jared Smith
On this Labor Day, longshoremen look back on a summer that vindicated our opposition to America’s largest proposed oil-by-rail project. After a terrifying oil train derailment in Mosier, weeks of public hearings, and a unanimous vote to ban oil terminals by Vancouver’s City Council, longshoremen continued to load wind turbines through the same port where Tesoro plans its massive terminal.
The future our members support includes sleek, pale wind blades — not smoldering oil cars.
If built, Tesoro’s oil terminal would bring five mile-long trains carrying 100 or more tank cars right through downtown Spokane and Vancouver. That’s 3 million gallons of volatile crude oil per train, much of it destined for overseas ports.
Tesoro’s oil trains would be a near-constant presence and hazard to longshore workers. The Mosier derailment offers the clearest possible justification of our concerns and a blaring signal that Gov. Jay Inslee should reject Tesoro’s terminal.
Also this summer, local and state leaders joined ILWU in speaking out against the oil terminal. ILWU supported the city of Vancouver’s unanimous vote to ban future oil terminals like Tesoro’s. And Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson and Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark sided with ILWU, tribal nations, and Vancouver during a month-long hearing, urging the Washington Energy Council to deny the Tesoro proposal.
We hope that this summer’s unmistakable lesson remains clear for Gov. Inslee. He must deny the Tesoro project to protect worker safety and the possibility of a cleaner energy future
Jared Smith, President of International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) Local 4, Vancouver
http://www.theolympian.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/article99652327.html
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA 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