Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 9/20/16
-
(ACC Mentioned) Active August Produces Resin Pricing Changes
Sep 20, 2016 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
A quiet July for North American commodity resins gave way to a more active August, with prices for polypropylene and solid polystyrene climbing while prices for PET bottle resin fell. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Manufacturers Say New Fees Could Impact Industry Innovation
Sep 21, 2016 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
Although the chemical industry, in general, supported an overhaul of the nation's chemical oversight lawspassed earlier this year, some industry groups warned the government that excessive fees under the new law could stifle new advancements. -
TSCA Reform Casualties Likely Start With Asbestos
Sep 20, 2016 | Science 2.0
By Angela Logomasini
With the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform passed into law, environmental activists are developing lists of chemicals they want banned in short order. Asbestos are near the top of the list, as easy targets. After all, it seems logical to get rid of such obvious carcinogens, but it isn’t that simple. In fact, some bans could actually undermine public health and safety. -
(ACC Mentioned) The Chemical Erin Brockovich Warned About Is in Water All Over America
Sep 20, 2016 | Takepart
By Sara Jerome
Thousands of Americans drink tap water poisoned by unsafe levels of a cancer-causing heavy metal, and government authorities are doing little to stop it, according to a new report from clean water activists. -
(ACC Mentioned) Hazards of Inhaled Ammonia Detailed in Final EPA Assessment
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
High concentrations of inhaled ammonia can harm the respiratory system and may impair the functions of the liver, kidney and spleen, according to a final analysis the Environmental Protection Agency released Sept. 20. -
EPA Ammonia Assessment Signals IRIS Program's Increased Productivity
Sep 20, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA has published its final assessment of the human health risks of ammonia, marking the release of a second Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment in a month after a nearly two-year drought of productivity while agency managers sought to overhaul the influential but long-stalled IRIS program. -
Chemical Exposure Linked To Lower Vitamin D levels
Sep 20, 2016 | Science Daily
Exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) and other endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) may reduce levels of vitamin D in the bloodstream, according to a new study published in the Endocrine Society's Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. -
NGO Access To Restricted EDC Files A Step Closer After ECJ Ruling
Sep 20, 2016 | ENDS Europe
The European Commission may be pressured into handing over files containing information on endocrine disrupting chemicals, following a ruling by the European Court of Justice -
OECD Publishes New ‘Toxicity Pathways' for Chemical Regulators
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rick Mitchell
Five new “toxicity pathways” developed in an international effort to help regulators identify toxic chemicals are online for public access, the OECD announced Sept. 20. -
Senate Committee To Convene Hearing On Cosmetics
Sep 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
A US Senate committee is set to hold a hearing to examine the current practices, governing the safety of cosmetics. -
After Early Losses, Industry Stops Anti-Fracking Measures
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
The oil and natural gas industry in Colorado was losing the public relations game. One industry association executive said it was “caught flat-footed” as oil and gas companies watched voters in Longmont pass a ban on fracking and other drilling activities in November 2012. -
EPA Should Limit Fracking Discharges in Gulf, Group Urges
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Offshore oil and gas drillers in the Gulf of Mexico should adopt zero-discharge operations or otherwise face tighter restrictions to protect water quality and endangered species, the Center for Biological Diversity said in a comment letter to the EPA. -
Critic Says NEPA Guidance Could Slow Clean Power Plan
Sep 21, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
The Obama administration's new guidance to agencies on incorporating greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews could slow down implementation of the Clean Power Plan, one prominent critic said during a briefing yesterday ahead of a hearing today. -
Greens Urge Obama To Block New Arctic, Atlantic Drilling
Sep 20, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Key environmental groups are pushing President Obama to block any potential offshore drilling operations in the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. -
On The Dakota Access Pipeline, Let’s Stick To The Facts
Sep 21, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Craig Stevens
Any large infrastructure project will generate some opposition, and that is understandable. Progress is often initially challenged; eventually, though, calm and respectful dialogue usually brings supporters and opponents together to find common ground. Facts have a way of emerging with great clarity as passions subside. -
Agencies Aim to Clear Confusion on Hazard Labeling Rules
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
OSHA and the Department of Transportation aimed to clear up stakeholder confusion on labeling requirements for bulk shipments of hazardous chemicals with new guidance. -
Benicia Nixes Valero’s Plan To Run Crude Oil Trains Through Sacramento, Davis And Roseville
Sep 20, 2016 | The Sacramento Bee
By Tony Bizjak
The Benicia City Council on Tuesday unanimously rejected a controversial plan by the Valero Refining Co. to ship crude oil trains through Sacramento and other Northern California cities to its bayside refinery. -
(ACC Mentioned) Novolex's Indiana Plant Proves That Bags Can Be, And Are Recycled Every Day
Sep 20, 2016 | Plastics News
By Gayle S. Putrich
There are plenty of myths and misunderstandings floating around when it comes to plastic bag and film recycling. But most of those myths are quietly busted all day long in a small southeastern Indiana town. -
EPA Retains Existing Lead NAAQS
Sep 20, 2016 | Inside EPA
EPA has issued a final rule retaining its existing lead (Pb) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) of 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) for both the primary health-based standard and the secondary limit designed to protect the environment, a win for states and a lead industry group that backed the existing standard. -
Environmental Reviews for NEPA Average Five Years, Group Says
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
It took an average of five years to complete the environmental impact statements that reached their final form in 2015, according to an annual report from the National Association of Environmental Professionals. -
Bill Would Expand Greenhouse Data Collection
Sep 21, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) yesterday introduced legislation that aims to make available information about greenhouse gas emissions generated from the global oil industry.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Active August Produces Resin Pricing Changes
Sep 20, 2016 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
A quiet July for North American commodity resins gave way to a more active August, with prices for polypropylene and solid polystyrene climbing while prices for PET bottle resin fell.
The regional PP resin market was able to slam on the brakes in August, ending a five month pricing skid by moving prices up an average of 3.5 cents per pound. That number matches a similar price increase for propylene monomer feedstock. Market sources said propylene supply issues played a role in the resin hike, as did a moderate decline in the amount of imported PP available in North America.
High North American PP prices early in 2016 made the region attractive to foreign resin makers, according to Ashish Chitalia, senior research analyst with the PCI Wood McKenzie consulting firm in Houston.
“High margins and prices justified un-bagging facilities in North America, making it possible to import significant volume of polypropylene into a region that’s dominated by railcar transportation for polymers,” he said in an email.
In the last few months, lower North American PP prices and global maintenance turnarounds combined to reduce imports from the levels achieved earlier in the year, he added. Those low prices, in turn, triggered an increase in domestic demand, allowing PP prices to increase.
Prior to August, five straight months of PP price drops had lowered prices by a total of 10 cents per pound.
North American PP demand grew only 0.5 percent in the first seven months of 2016, according to the American Chemistry Council in Washington. Domestic sales were flat, but the overall market was lifted by a 24 percent jump in export sales.
Solid PS rises
Regional selling prices for solid PS resin also increased in August, bouncing up an average of 2 cents per pound. That increase was tied to a jump in prices of benzene feedstock, which is used to make styrene monomer. Benzene prices for August were up 17 cents to $2.29 per gallon, a hike of 8 percent vs. the prior month.
The August PS increase basically cancels out a 2 cent drop that hit the market in June. Prices for the material had been flat in July.
North American PS sales through July were down 2 percent compared to the same period in 2015. Sales of the material into the electrical/electronic end market jumped almost 3 percent.
PS growth in the E/E segment “likely has to do with North American production advantages around energy and workforce efficiency,” according to Brad Crocker, president of PS maker Americas Styrenics in The Woodlands, Texas.
Fall for PET, while PE, PVC are flat
Regional prices for PET bottle resin went in a different direction than PP and PS in August. Prices for the material fell by an average of 1 cent per pound, due in part to a drop in prices for paraxylene feedstock.
The PET price drop ends a run of three straight months in which prices for the material were flat. Regional PET prices hadn’t moved since climbing 2 cents per pound in April.
Recent news from Niagara Bottling LLC of Ontario, Calif., should have a positive impact on future North American PET demand. The firm announced that it’s adding new water bottling plants in Virginia and Connecticut this year. Both new Niagara buildings are reported to be in excess of 400,000 square feet. The firm makes a variety of PET bottles with high density polyethylene caps.
Regional PE prices were flat for the fourth consecutive month in August. Prices for the material now haven’t moved since climbing 4 cents per pound in April. PE prices stayed the same in August even though crude oil prices increased slightly from $41 per barrel to $43 during the month. Oil is a global price setter for PE, although natural gas is the most common PE feedstock in North America.
U.S./Canadian PE sales were mixed in the first seven months of 2016. The HDPE market was the strongest, growing just over 3 percent, as export sales growth of almost 11 percent overcame a domestic sales loss of almost 1 percent.
Low and linear low density PE sales results through July in the region were unimpressive, with each material down almost 1 percent. For LDPE, export sales fell almost 8 percent, wiping out a domestic sales gain of more than 1 percent. In the LLDPE market, domestic sales essentially were flat through July, while export sales fell almost 2 percent.
In spite of these mediocre PE sales totals, Dow Chemical Co. executive Karen Carter was optimistic about new PE capacity in a recent interview with Plastics News. “We’re very excited about the expansion,” said Carter, who serves as commercial vice president of Dow’s packaging and specialty plastics unit. “It will better position us to meet customer demand in the Americas.”
Midland, Mich.-based Dow plans to add more than 2 billion pounds of PE capacity at its petrochemicals complex in Freeport, Texas, by mid-2017. Dow and several other plastics and chemicals firms are adding capacity for PE and for ethylene feedstock as a result of increased supplies of low-priced natural gas throughout North America.
“This is really about population growth,” said Carter, “A rising middle class around the world is increasing demand for packaging. We’re seeing polyethylene demand growth at 1.3-times global GDP, which comes out to 4 percent global PE demand growth per year.”
Low domestic PE demand growth can be balanced out by increased export sales, according to Carter, a 22-year Dow veteran. “The North American market is challenging today, but it will recover,” she said. “There will be places for plastics to grow. We’re able to export around the world, and the world will absorb this new material.
Dow also “still is seeing customers growing and adding [production] lines ... and some conversion is being repatriated” to North America, she added.
Regional PVC prices were flat for the second consecutive month in July after strong construction activity had sent prices for that material up an average of 2 cents per pound in June. PVC continues to be doing better than any other North American commodity resin in 2016, due in part to a rebound in the U.S. housing market.
Through July, U.S./Canadian PVC sales were up more than 5 percent, with domestic sales growth of almost 5 percent augmented by a 6.5 percent surge in export sales. Sales of the material into its flagship rigid pipe and tubing sector were up more than 7 percent in that period.
The U.S. housing market is on track to record around 1.2 million housing starts this year, which would be up almost 10 percent from 2015. More than 60 percent of domestic PVC sales went into construction markets in the first seven months of 2016.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20160920/NEWS/160929979/active-august-produces-resin-pricing-changes
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Manufacturers Say New Fees Could Impact Industry Innovation
Sep 21, 2016 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
Although the chemical industry, in general, supported an overhaul of the nation's chemical oversight lawspassed earlier this year, some industry groups warned the government that excessive fees under the new law could stifle new advancements.
Chemical Watch reports that the American Chemistry Council and other groups submitted comments to the Environmental Protection Agency about the proposed fee structure of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act.
The law, in part, establishes new procedures to evaluate thousands of chemicals currently used in commerce and requires the EPA to make affirmative safety decisions for new chemicals.
The legislation will be funded with help from fees imposed on the chemical industry, but the ACC called for the EPA to limit imposition of those costs to once per substance and for flexibility "on how those fees should be allocated among different market participants," CW reported.
The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers added that innovation is "much stronger" in the U.S. than in rival chemical-producing regions in large part due to the low costs to enter the market.
The Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates, meanwhile, cautioned against excessive prices onnotices for new chemicals, and the National Association of Chemical Distributors expressed concern about definitions for smaller manufacturers that could be disproportionately impacted by new costs.
The EPA hopes to publish a proposed rule for chemical testing fees — one of many new rules needed to implement the Lautenberg Act — by mid-December.
https://www.chem.info/news/2016/09/chemical-manufacturers-say-new-fees-could-impact-industry-innovation
-
TSCA Reform Casualties Likely Start With Asbestos
Sep 20, 2016 | Science 2.0
By Angela Logomasini
With the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform passed into law, environmental activists are developing lists of chemicals they want banned in short order. Asbestos are near the top of the list, as easy targets. After all, it seems logical to get rid of such obvious carcinogens, but it isn’t that simple. In fact, some bans could actually undermine public health and safety.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) attempted to ban all asbestos back in 1991, but a federal court overruled the agency’s proposal. That failure became a driving force for passing TSCA “reform.” Activist groups maintained that if the EPA couldn’t ban such dangerous chemicals, the law must be too weak.
Asbestos were once widely used because they have heat insulating and flame retarding effects and were beneficial in a host of building materials—including roofing, siding, insulation, and tiles—as well as machinery, from cars to spacecraft. Yet, many types have been phased out because of serious health risks. And in 1991 the EPA proposed a rule designed to ban the rest.
When inhaled, asbestos can cause three serious health conditions: lung cancer, asbestosis (a breathing condition), or mesothelioma (cancer of the lung lining. The most dangerous asbestos (amphibole asbestos, which are relatively long and thin and easily embed in human tissue) are rarely used in the United States. The overwhelming majority of asbestos used in the United States are chrysotile asbestos, which are shorter and thicker and lower risk because they embed less freely in human tissue.
All types of asbestos can cause cancer given regular and sufficient exposures. Occupational exposures to these chemicals, particularly decades ago when miners and others working with the chemicals did not where sufficient protective equipment, caused a substantial number of health problems. The risk levels from shorter, lower exposures to consumers and others is not as clear. [For more details see the American Council on Science and Health’s (ACSH) excellent paper on asbestos risk and its shorter fact sheet].
While inhaling asbestos on a regular basis poses serious risks, the question remains as to whether we can gain benefits associated with these products while limiting exposure enough to keep risk low, such as by taking measures to protect workers. In 1991, the court basically said: Yes we can and in fact do. And it denied the EPA’s ban request because it promised to produce anet loss of human life.
The court pointed out that the EPA’s rule would remove asbestos from automobile brakes, which could increase brake failures and thereby increase highway fatalities. Moreover, the chrysotile asbestos the EPA wanted to ban were contained inside the brakes, which prevented human exposure. In addition, as ACSH’s paper details, the occupational risks were well managed and low for auto mechanics and other potentially exposed workers (see additional studies listed here).
The court was able to stop the EPA because the agency had violated TSCA’s requirement that the agency select the “least burdensome” regulations to achieve safety goals under the Act. The court explained that the proposed asbestos rule didn’t meet that standard.
One would think that’s a good thing. Yet, the EPA’s failure to ban all uses of asbestos served as a primary justification to pass TSCA reform. And guess what? The new law no longer requires the EPA to select the “least burdensome” regulatory option.
So now activist groups are calling for a ban on all types of asbestos uses—regardless of their benefits or whether risks can be managed. Without the requirement that the agency apply the “least burdensome” regulatory option, “green” activists may succeed in getting these and many other products banned.
Unfortunately, science and legitimate safety concerns take a back seat in such a politically charged debate. And the impacts will likely go beyond brake safety.
Chem.info reports that an asbestos ban may adversely affect chlorine producers. While activists seem to hate chlorine as much as asbestos, it is essential in controlling deadly pathogens indrinking water, hospitals, homes, and elsewhere. Clearly, there is plenty evidence that without adequate chlorination, more people would die.
What will become if those applications are compromised? Apparently, no one bothered to think too hard about that when they pushed through TSCA reform.http://www.science20.com/angela_logomasini/blog/tsca_reform_casualties_likely_start_with_asbestos-180436
-
(ACC Mentioned) The Chemical Erin Brockovich Warned About Is in Water All Over America
Sep 20, 2016 | Takepart
By Sara Jerome
Activists are warning residents of some major cities to avoid drinking water straight from the tap.
Thousands of Americans drink tap water poisoned by unsafe levels of a cancer-causing heavy metal, and government authorities are doing little to stop it, according to a new report from clean water activists.
The chemical hexavalent chromium, also known as chromium-6, gained notoriety as the carcinogenic water contaminant that Erin Brockovich sued a utility over in California—and the new report from advocacy organization Environmental Working Group finds that it shows up in the water systems of major cities all over the country.
The data estimates that water supplies serving 218 million Americans—more than two-thirds of the population—contain more chromium-6 than California scientists have deemed safe. The group estimated that if nothing changes, chromium-6 in tap water will lead to more than 12,000 excess cases of cancer by the end of the century.
The findings are one more sign of a broken state and federal regulatory system that enabled crises in Flint, Michigan, and Hoosick Falls, New York, among other cities where dangerous contaminants in tap water threatened public health, advocates say.
“This is a repeating story of the lack of regulatory oversight and scientific updates to ensure clean drinking water,” Bill Walker, a coauthor of the report, told TakePart. “A basic aspect of public health is being able to drink the tap water. We have not achieved that in the U.S.”
The EWG report analyzes data on chromium-6 collected for the first time under a federal monitoring rule passed four years ago. The current federal standard for chromium in drinking water was set in 1991, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency set a limit of 100 parts per billion for total chromium, including chromium-3, a less threatening contaminant. Back then, chromium was linked to skin rashes, but the potential cancer threat posed by the pollutant had not been thoroughly researched. Knowing what we know now, activists say the federal standard is meaningless.
Despite mounting evidence that chromium-6 is carcinogenic, only one state has passed a limit focused on this contaminant, which can occur naturally or seep into the water supply through industrial pollution. California began enforcing a chromium-6 limit of 10 parts per billion two years ago.
Citing instances of cancer helped Brockovich build a case against Pacific Gas and Electric Company over contaminated water in Hinkley, California, in 1993. For her, the looser federal standards on chromium-6 are disappointing.
“This is an abject failure by the EPA, including members of Congress charged with overseeing the agency, and every American should be outraged by this inaction,” Brockovich said in a statement released by EWG.
California scientists also came up with a considerably more stringent but unenforceablegoal for the contaminant: Set at 0.02 parts per billion, it was designed to prevent more than one in 1 million people from getting cancer if the person consumed a half gallon of water daily over 70 years. The goal was established as part of a health proceeding before official rules were set, a common precursor to regulatory action. The final rulemaking proceeding considers not just health risks but also what is achievable for industry—and industry balked at meeting the standard, resulting in the looser standard and the lingering frustrations of activists.
The EPA says its work on chromium-6 is ongoing. It is studying the potential risks linked to the contaminant, which may be a step toward regulating the chemical. The agency expects to release a draft of its risk report for public comment next year, according to Monica Lee, EPA press secretary, in a statement emailed to TakePart.
She also pointed out that data gathered by the EPA show most U.S. drinking water systems are beating California’s enforceable standard for chromium-6—the 10 parts per billion standard. “While this standard only applies to water systems in California, less than 2 percent of the systems that collected data under [the 2012 monitoring rule] reported hexavalent chromium at levels exceeding this standard,” she wrote.
In many cities, chromium-6 sample data exceeded the public health goal set by California scientists but not the enforceable limit, according to the EWG report, which ranked water systems serving more than 1 million customers. The worst offenders: City of Phoenix, Missouri American Water (St. Louis County), City of Houston, City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Suffolk County Water Authority in New York.
Yet in Phoenix and St. Louis, water officials say customers should not worry.
The average level of chromium-6 in Phoenix water samples was 7.853 parts per billion, well above the public health goal set by California scientists. The authors of the EWG report said they did not study why the levels are higher in some cities than others and that it would be hard to extrapolate where the pollution is coming from based on the data they used.
Susan Kinkade, a civil engineer in the environmental services division at the City of Phoenix Water Services Department, cast doubt on the usefulness of the figures in the EWG report, emphasizing that Phoenix’s water is safe to drink and that the system is abiding by federal rules.
“That number is skewed,” she said in a phone interview with TakePart. “That is an average of all the samples we collected. We sampled at groundwater wells, surface water points, and within the distribution system. The highest number came out of our groundwater wells, but that’s only 2 percent of our supply.”
Kinkade said there are natural reasons chromium-6 shows up in Phoenix samples. “It’s a naturally occurring element. The Southwest is one of the regions in the U.S. with the highest level of naturally occurring chromium. The wells are situated where there is a natural chromium deposit. It’s the geology. It’s not industrial contamination,” she said.
Missouri American Water had the second-highest average chromium-6 levels for water systems serving more than 1 million customers. The average was 1.258 parts per billion. But Brian Russell, a spokesman for Missouri American Water, emphasized that it is safe to drink the water in St. Louis.
“We test for total chromium, which includes chromium-6, every year as required and consistently come in well below EPA requirements for safe drinking water, and we tested specifically for chromium-6 only in 2013 and found levels that ranged from 0.9 to 1.6 parts per billion on average. There are no federal requirements to test for chromium-6, or prescribed levels to achieve, but at that level we even come in below the state of California’s stringent level of 10 parts per billion,” he wrote in an email to TakePart.
Russell added that it is unclear how chromium makes its way into the water supply in his system. “It occurs naturally from the breakdown of a number of different products and via industrial processes, so trying to name the exact source would be little more than hypothesis on our part,” he said.
Nevertheless, the EWG report authors have clear-cut advice for residents of Phoenix and St. Louis County: Use water filters.
“In areas like St. Louis or Phoenix, people should not wait around for a cleanup by their local agencies. They should take action to protect themselves by buying a home water filter,” said Walker, the report coauthor. He uses water filters in his home and recommended the watchdog group’s buying guide for the products.
Kinkade, the Phoenix official, warned about the potential downsides of filters.
“I always caution customers about point-of-use water filters if the customers aren’t good at maintaining them,” she said. Failing to follow the directions can create a “little factory for microbes growing under your kitchen sink.”
For the EWG report authors, the data highlights a problem that is bigger than chromium-6. They see a regulatory system hijacked by industry influence at the state and federal levels.
“The process of setting standards has been sandbagged by the chemical and electrical power industries,” Walker said.
“It’s extremely surprising and frustrating that as the science changes, including what we know about the toxicity and its prevalence of this contaminant, there’s the inability of our government to keep pace with that change,” report coauthor David Andrews said.
Bryan Goodman, a spokesman for the industry group American Chemistry Council, told TakePart by email that the data available on the health effects of chromium-6 are limited.
“Because of the limited scientific data available to inform how low environmental levels of this naturally occurring substance could impact human health, ACC supported a third party research organization to undertake a large, multiple institution research study. ACC believes [regulators] should consider the entire scientific database on hexavalent chromium as they make regulatory decisions about this substance,” he wrote.
In setting their public health goal, scientists in California cited studies that link chromium-6 to cancer. For instance, they said their analysis of data from China “found increased rates of stomach cancer in people exposed to high levels of chromium-6 from drinking water.”
http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/09/20/water-chromium
-
(ACC Mentioned) Hazards of Inhaled Ammonia Detailed in Final EPA Assessment
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
High concentrations of inhaled ammonia can harm the respiratory system and may impair the functions of the liver, kidney and spleen, according to a final analysis the Environmental Protection Agency released Sept. 20.
EPA's analysis, called a toxicological review, examined the health effects—other than cancer—of ammonia and the dose or doses at which those effects shouldn't manifest.
Released by the agency's Integrated Risk Information System, or IRIS, program, the document is designed for use by the agency's and states’ regulators as well as risk assessors in federal agencies other than the EPA. Risk analysts combine IRIS reviews with exposure data to assess the risks of particular sites or scenarios.
Ammonia occurs naturally in air, soil and water and is produced by humans and other animals as part of normal biological processes; it also is an agricultural and commercial chemical, the agency said.
Chevron Corp., Koch Industries Inc. and Tanner Industries Inc. were among dozens of companies that produced more than 38 billion pounds of ammonia in 2011, the most recent year for which the EPA has production volume data.
Analysis is Second Under Reformed IRIS
For years companies, trade associations, some members of Congress and scientific panels convened by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine criticized the IRIS program. Central concerns included that the agency's IRIS assessments were too long; that they took too many years to complete; and that the program failed to provide its study selection rationale and failed to clearly explain its reasoning for reaching conclusions.
The ammonia assessment is the second final IRIS assessment to be released in September and the second to be partially developed under major reforms the agency announced in 2013. The firstassessment, issued Sept. 9, evaluated three trimethylbenzenes, which are found in gasoline.
As a result of the reforms, both the ammonia and trimethylbenzenes assessments are shorter than past IRIS assessments often were, and they use clearer language designed for a somewhat broader audience. The documents also were developed with more opportunities for interested parties to offer their perspectives, although industry participants continued to dominate meetings.
The American Chemistry Council has been the most frequent and vocal critic of the IRIS program.
Agency Hasn't Fully Implemented Reforms
Asked by Bloomberg BNA Sept. 20 to comment on the ammonia assessment, Nancy Beck, senior director of regulatory science policy at the council , said the association hadn't yet reviewed either assessment in depth. A quick review, however, showed the EPA hadn't fully implemented reforms promised in 2013, she said by e-mail.
“Neither document contains any response to public comments,” Beck said. The Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee, which advises the IRIS program, doesn't have to respond to public comments, but the agency does, she said.
“We recommend that EPA provide responses to public comments in new addendums to both [documents] and also ensure that EPA follows the 2013 IRIS process in all future releases,” Beck said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97543535&vname=dennotallissues&wsn=499080000&searchid=28448625&doctypeid=1&type=date&mode=doc&split=0&scm=DELNWB&pg=0
-
EPA Ammonia Assessment Signals IRIS Program's Increased Productivity
Sep 20, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA has published its final assessment of the human health risks of ammonia, marking the release of a second Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment in a month after a nearly two-year drought of productivity while agency managers sought to overhaul the influential but long-stalled IRIS program.
EPA's Sept. 20 release of the ammonia assessment follows the Sept. 9 finalization of the IRIS assessment of threetrimethylbenzes (TMBs). Prior to the release of the two assessments this fall, IRIS' most recent publication was the December 2014 Libby amphibole asbestos assessment.
The ammonia, TMBs and a third assessment of ethylene oxide (EtO) were the first three to be peer reviewed by EPA's Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee, one of a handful of improvements EPA sought to make to the IRIS program after a critical review of draft IRIS assessment of formaldehyde by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in 2011. The trio of assessments also represent efforts by IRIS staff to incorporate changes made to address NAS' recommendations. An agency source says that the final EtO assessment will be released “soon.”
The ammonia assessment, however, is limited in scope. Unlike many IRIS assessments, it contains neither an oral risk estimate (RfD) nor a cancer risk analysis, citing a lack of data. EPA's response to peer review comments indicates that EPA intends to undertake in the future an ammonia assessment focused on ingestion risks. “Specific recommendations pertaining to the evaluation of oral health effects data, derivation of the oral RfD, and evaluation of cancer data will be considered in a separate assessment of the health effects of ammonia following oral exposure,” the document says.
The new assessment, which updates EPA's previous 1991 assessment of ammonia, calculates a reference concentration (RfC), or the largest amount of ammonia that EPA estimates can be inhaled daily over a lifetime without experiencing an adverse effect, of 0.5 milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/m^3). The new RfC is slightly less stringent than the 1991 risk estimate of 0.1 mg/m^3 and the 2013 draft RfC estimate of 0.3 mg/m^3.
EPA staff have been working on an update to the 1991 IRIS assessment of ammonia since 2008. The IRIS assessments are widely influential, often forming the basis for EPA and other agencies' regulatory decision making. The agency first released a draft of the update in June 2012, and after taking public comments released a second draft for peer review in August 2013.
The RfC will likely disappoint industry critics, who had pressed EPA to even more dramatically relax the ammonia risk estimate. In comments on the draft assessment and during its peer review, industry representatives argued that the agency should instead use the much weaker value of 17.7 mg/m^3, similar to what the agency calculated for use in acute exposure scenarios and which the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have published to protect workers.
EPA also retains the use of a 1989 study by Canadian researcher Linn Holness as the basis for the new RfC. The study was also the basis for EPA's 1991 assessment, and risk analyses performed by other agencies, including NIOSH, OSHA and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
Holness Study
Industry representatives during peer review questioned the quality of the Holness study and suggested the peer reviewers consider recommending that EPA use another study if staff were unable to obtain the raw data from Holness to perform the additional calculations recommended in the panel's draft report.
The peer review panel, however, declined to recommend against using the Holness study, though they did urge EPA to contact Holness to see if individual data for the 58 workers included in the study could be obtained for additional analysis.
In its response to peer review comments, EPA notes that an IRIS manager contacted Holness' office in February 2015 to request this information. But Holness' assistant said that “no original data from the study were retained.”
EPA then sought to undertake other recommendations that its Science Advisory Board provided regarding its derivation of the RfC, resulting in the slight change to the value.
Ammonia is one of an increasing number of "background" chemicals or metals on IRIS' agenda that are produced by industrial processes or pollution but also exist naturally in the environment or in the human body.
Close to one-third of the IRIS assessments in progress and the chemicals prioritized in the IRIS agenda last December for the program to take up in the next several years are chemicals with these background issues, according to a presentation Lynn Flowers, associate director for health at EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), gave last February at the annual winter ToxForum meeting. "It's quite a list, so you can see why we're interested in this," she said.
Background Chemicals
Such assessments often bear close scrutiny from regulated entities -- with some, particularly ethylene oxide (EtO) and formaldehyde, in progress for years in the face of harsh criticism.
In the case of ammonia, EPA's new Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee peer review panel pressed EPA to address such issues in more detail in the final assessment. As one example, industry critics had questioned the draft RfC being smaller than the amount of ammonia present in exhaled breath.
EPA in its response to comments summarized the peer reviewers' remarks as observing “that the concentration of ammonia in the mouth is not a major contributor to either the systemic or inhaled concentration of ammonia. . . . The panel recommended that the assessment clearly state that exhalation of air and ammonia is a clearance mechanism of an otherwise toxic contaminant.”
The final IRIS assessment explains that “Given its important metabolic role, free ammonia is homeostatically regulated to remain at low concentrations in blood . . . Consideration was given to the presence of ammonia in exhaled air because the range of ammonia concentrations in exhaled breath (0.009−2 mg/m3) overlaps the ammonia RfC (0.5 mg/m3).”
Further, the assessment states that “the level of ammonia in breath, even at concentrations that exceed the RfC, does not necessarily raise questions about the appropriateness of the RfC. The exhalation of ammonia is a clearance mechanism for a product of metabolism that is otherwise toxic in the body at sufficiently high concentrations. Thus, ammonia concentrations in exhaled breath may be higher than inhaled concentrations. However, the presence of ammonia in exhaled breath is not considered an uncertainty in the RfC.”
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-ammonia-assessment-signals-iris-programs-increased-productivity
-
Chemical Exposure Linked To Lower Vitamin D levels
Sep 20, 2016 | Science Daily
Exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) and other endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) may reduce levels of vitamin D in the bloodstream, according to a new study published in the Endocrine Society'sJournal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism.
The study is the first to find an association between EDC exposure and vitamin D levels in a large group of U.S. adults.
EDCs are chemicals or mixtures of chemicals that can cause adverse health effects by interfering with hormones in the body. The Society's Scientific Statement on EDCs examined more than 1,300 studies that found links between chemical exposure and health problems, including infertility, obesity, diabetes, neurological problems and hormone-related cancers.
"Nearly every person on the planet is exposed to BPA and another class of endocrine-disrupting chemicals called phthalates, so the possibility that these chemicals may even slightly reduce vitamin D levels has widespread implications for public health," said the study's first author, Lauren Johns, MPH, a PhD candidate at the University of Michigan School of Public Health in Ann Arbor, MI. "Vitamin D plays a broad role in maintaining bone and muscle health. In addition, low vitamin D levels have been implicated in outcomes of numerous conditions such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer."
EDCs are found in everyday products and throughout the environment. There are more than 85,000 manufactured chemicals, of which thousands may be EDCs. BPA, a known EDC, is often found in plastics and other consumer products. Another group of chemicals linked to hormone disruption, phthalates, are found in personal care products such as cosmetics, children's products, food packaging and medical tubing.
The study examined data from 4,667 adults who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) between 2005 and 2010. NHANES is a cross-sectional study designed to collect health and nutrition data from a sample of adults from across the United States. The participants provided blood samples so their vitamin D levels could be measured. To measure EDC exposure, the participants had their urine analyzed for substances left behind after the body metabolized phthalates and BPA.
The study found people who were exposed to larger amounts of phthalates were more likely to have low levels of vitamin D in the bloodstream than the participants who were exposed to smaller amounts of the EDCs. The link was strongest in women. There also was an association between exposure to higher levels of BPA and reduced vitamin D levels in women, although the relationship was not statistically significant in men.
"More research is needed into why an association exists, but it is possible that EDCs alter the active form of vitamin D in the body through some of the same mechanisms that they use to impact similar reproductive and thyroid hormones," said Professor John D. Meeker, MS, ScD, senior author of the study. "Confirmatory studies are needed to show whether this association exists in other populations."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160920130828.htm
-
NGO Access To Restricted EDC Files A Step Closer After ECJ Ruling
Sep 20, 2016 | ENDS Europe
The European Commission may be pressured into handing over files containing information on endocrine disrupting chemicals, following a ruling by the European Court of Justice
Subscription required, for full story: http://www.endseurope.com/article/47091/ngo-access-to-restricted-edc-files-a-step-closer-after-ecj-ruling
-
OECD Publishes New ‘Toxicity Pathways' for Chemical Regulators
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rick Mitchell
Five new “toxicity pathways” developed in an international effort to help regulators identify toxic chemicals are online for public access, the OECD announced Sept. 20.
When it launched the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) knowledge base in 2014, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development described its joint effort with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and European Commission Joint Research Center as a Web-based platform for gathering knowledge on so-called toxicity pathways through which chemicals cause adverse effects in humans and wildlife.
The Paris-based organization announced the publication of a series of five new pathways from the AOP-wiki, as well as a user guide for developing the pathways and plans to release more on an annual basis.
The OECD said the new AOPs address:
• protein alkylation leading to liver fibrosis;
• alkylation of DNA in male premeiotic germ cells leading to heritable mutations;
• aromatase inhibition leading to reproductive dysfunction (in fish);
• chronic binding of antagonist to N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) during brain development induces impairment of learning and memory abilities; and
• binding of agonists to ionotropic glutamate receptors in adult brain leading to excitotoxicity that mediates neuronal cell death, contributing to learning and memory impairment.
The OECD said AOPs are a key part of its project for developing integrated approaches to hazard testing and assessment, which encourage regulatory acceptance of non-test data, allow reduction of animal testing, and enable assessment of larger numbers of chemicals based on factors such as similarity in structure, mode of action and metabolic pathways.
The new AOPs will help better understand toxicity mechanisms of substances suspected of causing developmental neurotoxicity, or learning and memory impairment, to allow developing screening tools to replace existing test methods, which are expensive and require using many animals, according to the OECD's environment, health and safety division head, Bob Diderich.
Develop Screening Tools
While an adverse outcome pathway posted on the wiki can be regularly updated through crowdsourcing, an AOP published in the new OECD series is an advanced snapshot-version of the pathway that has been thoroughly reviewed by the scientific community based on OECD procedures, the organization said.
It said AOPs are a closely related concept to “modes of action” developed by the World Health Organization and International Program on Chemical Safety, adding that the organizations coordinate their work.
The organization said it plans to incorporate adopted AOPs into work to bring new in vitro test methods—which allow avoiding use of animals for chemical safety tests—into test guidelines in its multilateral Mutual Acceptance of Data (MAD) system, under which participating countries exchange results of toxicity testing conducted using OECD-approved methods and principles.
The OECD's 35 member countries, which include the world's advanced economies, have signed the legally binding MAD multilateral agreement, as have non-OECD members Argentina, Brazil, India, Malaysia, South Africa and Singapore as full adherents.
MAD testing allows hazard identification, which with exposure information allows regulators to make risk assessments for chemicals, the organization said.
The OECD said it also plans to use AOPs in its Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships (QSAR) project for developing new methods and profilers for grouping chemicals.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97543532&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97543532&jd=97543532
-
Senate Committee To Convene Hearing On Cosmetics
Sep 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
A US Senate committee is set to hold a hearing to examine the current practices, governing the safety of cosmetics.
Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) will serve as panellists. Representatives from the industry trade group Personal Care Products Council (PCPC) and the NGO Environmental Working Group (EWG) will also be appearing as witnesses.
The hearing, “Exploring current practices in cosmetic development and safety”, will be heard by the full Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions on 22 September.
Ms Feinstein and Ms Collins introduced the bipartisan Personal Care Product Safety Act (S 1014) last year.
A discussion draft of a similar measure was recently brought forth in the House. Ms Feinstein applauded the proposal, saying it ““includes key policies in my legislation with Senator Collins: independent ingredient review conducted by the FDA, reporting of adverse health events, recall authority and product registration”.
She added that she is “working hard” to advance the Senate’s bill.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49758/senate-committee-to-convene-hearing-on-cosmetics
-
After Early Losses, Industry Stops Anti-Fracking Measures
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
The oil and natural gas industry in Colorado was losing the public relations game.
One industry association executive said it was “caught flat-footed” as oil and gas companies watched voters in Longmont pass a ban on fracking and other drilling activities in November 2012. A year later, voters approved four more citizen initiatives, imposing fracking moratoriums in Boulder County, Broomfield and Fort Collins and a permanent ban in Lafayette.
Oil and gas producers knew it was time to respond. They quickly invested in the creation of new issue committees and information campaigns designed to beat back bans. They stressed the importance of energy exploration and production to the state economy.
Meanwhile, environmentalists and community activists accused the industry of rigging the political process, creating “disinformation” campaigns and even harassing volunteers who were out in public gathering signatures in support of the proposed drilling restrictions.
Industry groups outspent them by a 15-to-1 ratio, paying freelancers to write paid newspaper commentaries and flooding radio and TV outlets with pro-industry messages, environmental advocates said.
In the 2016 election cycle, one of the new issue groups, Protecting Colorado's Economy, Environment, and Energy Independence, launched a counter-campaign urging voters to “Decline to Sign” petitions in support of two proposed anti-fracking ballot measures it described as “job-killing” and “too extreme” for the state.
The strategy worked. At the end of August, Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams (R) announced that the campaigns behind the two measures had failed to gather enough signatures to qualify the initiatives for the ballot.
Successful Model
The successful approach taken in Colorado presents a pathway for the oil and gas industry to take in other states where fracking restrictions are being sought by statewide and local initiative campaigns, sources told Bloomberg BNA.
“There's a lot to be gleaned” from what happened in Colorado, said Kathleen Sgamma, vice president of government and public affairs of the Western Energy Alliance, an industry group in Denver. “It demonstrates the need to designate significant resources for public outreach and education. When we see these crop up elsewhere, industry is going to be much-better prepared seeing the successful model of Colorado,” she said.
Environmentalists and community activists who promoted the two proposals, Initiatives 75 and 78, say they were outmaneuvered by industry's disinformation effort designed to confuse voters and make them second-guess signing the petitions to put the measures on the ballot.
“They hired people to go out there and harass signature gatherers,” Micah Parkin of 350Colorado, one of the groups driving the petition campaign, told Bloomberg BNA. “They followed our petition circulators around, holding signs that said, ‘Don't destroy Colorado's economy’ and ‘Don't take my job,’” she said.
Volunteers Videotaped
Parkin said she and her husband were videotaped by three men while collecting voters’ signatures in downtown Denver. “It's an alarming thing when they are videoing you and you don't know who these people are.”
When she and her husband confronted the cameramen, they said they “had been paid by oil and gas” to take photographs and videos of petition gatherers, but they had no other comment, she said.
“It was an uncomfortable thing. Other volunteer signature gatherers faced similar harassment, which made their jobs much harder,” she said. “Petition gathering is an exercise of free speech. It's supposed to be protected” by the First Amendment, she said.
Karen Crummy, communications director for Protecting Colorado's Economy, Environment, and Energy Independence, or Protect Colorado for short, told Bloomberg BNA her organization didn't direct its members or associates to videotape signature gatherers. “Never once did we advise or want anyone to harass signature gatherers,” she said. The intent of Protect Colorado's “Decline to Sign” campaign was to make sure voters knew what they were agreeing to, she said.
The American Petroleum Institute and its member companies “have not and will not ever participate in an activity that denies someone their rights as a voter,” Tracee Bentley, executive director of the Colorado Petroleum Council, a division of the API, told Bloomberg BNA. The industry argument prevailed, she said, because “we told people ‘Here's what you should know: Fracking is safe, air and water are going to be safe, and Colorado has the safest rules and regs in the country.”
Difficulty Gathering Signatures
But in the face of industry's unprecedented $15 million anti-signature campaign, voters were intimidated, and signature gathering was suppressed, Suzanne Spiegel of Frack Free Colorado, said in a statement. Supporters of the ballot measure had difficulty raising enough signatures for the initiatives, although recent polls showed 57 percent of state residents supported Initiative 78, which would have increased setbacks, the minimum distances between wells and occupied buildings such as homes, schools and hospitals, from the current 500 feet to 2,500 feet.
Spiegel said the supporters of Initiatives 75 and 78 will be back. “The actions of the industry have only served to galvanize supporters, and we intend to fight the destructive and dangerous fracking practices that harm our health and destroy our environment.”
Initiative 75 would have given local governments the authority to regulate and even ban fracking. Initiative 78 would have made more than 90 percent of the state off limits to new drilling. Industry viewed both measures as de facto bans on their operations.
Colorado was “a big test case” for proposals restricting fracking, Sgamma said. “We won a big battle here, because if they had gotten on the ballot and the voters had voted for them, we would have seen these types of initiatives in other states—Utah, Wyoming, Texas,” she said.
‘Turned a Corner.’
“We're not going to assume this is going to go away,” she said, “but the spectacular failure” of the Colorado proposals to get on the ballot could mean the industry “has turned a corner” on these kinds of citizen efforts.
“I do think wiser heads are prevailing,” she said. “The American public in general has understood over the last few years that fracking is not this scary, unregulated process that radical environmental groups would have you believe. The responsible development of oil and natural gas has broad support across the political spectrum.”
In the state ballot wars, the anti-fracking forces struck first. Longmont became the first city in Colorado to enact a ban with a voter-approved ballot measure in November 2012.
At about the same time, the Natural Resources Defense Council, hearing from members across the country who were increasingly concerned about drilling in their localities, launched the Community Fracking Defense Project with the goal of offering legal and policy aid to communities “seeking protection from industrial gas drilling.”
Assisting Communities
The intent of the project “is to assist communities that want to establish ordinances that protect their environment and quality of life from the risk of fracking,” Amy Mall, senior policy analyst at the NRDC, told Bloomberg BNA. “Communities are trying to step in where states and the federal government have not done enough to protect clean air and water. They are trying to protect their citizens’ way of life, and we think communities should have the right to say no.”
A similar “community rights” movement was being advanced by the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, a public-interest law firm in Ohio that was helping cities and towns address “key barriers to local self-governance.” The group encouraged municipalities to pass a “Community Bill of Rights” giving local governments the authority to control all sorts of industrial activities—including fracking—within their jurisdictions.
Lafayette, Colo., passed such a “bill of rights” in November 2013 on the same ballot that voters in Boulder, Broomfield and Fort Collins approved fracking moratoriums. The anti-fracking movement in the state was scoring victory after victory.The 2012 and 2013 elections “caught us flat-footed,” Dan Haley, president and chief executive officer of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, said during a presentation at its annual meeting in August. The industry's right to operate in the state had always been assured by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Act, but oil and natural gas companies were unaccustomed to fighting skirmishes at the local level.
The association sued Longmont and Fort Collins and ultimately prevailed in May 2016 when the Colorado Supreme Court ruled the state law preempts local fracking restrictionsCity of Fort Collins v. Colo. Oil and Gas Ass'n, Colo., No. 15SC668, 5/2/16, City of Longmont v. Colo. Oil and Gas Ass'n, Colo., No. 15SC667, 5/2/16. But Haley and others knew something had to be done to slow the advance of these citizens’ initiatives.
Other State Campaigns
Similar campaigns were moving in other states. In March 2014, the Denton Drilling Awareness Network and Earthworks initiated a push to get the City Council in Denton, Texas, a city of 120,000 people near Fort Worth, to ban fracking. When the effort failed in July, they turned to the ballot, winning approval with 59 percent of the vote.
At the time, Denton—known as the birthplace of fracking—had 270 active gas wells, some of them within 200 feet of homes. Less than 24 hours after polls closed, oil and gas producers sued to nullify the ban, ultimately winning in court Texas Oil and Gas Ass'n v. City of Denton, Tex. Dist. Ct., No. 14-08933-431, 11/5/15. The industry then lobbied the Texas Legislature to approve a law prohibiting local fracking bans.
In June 2016, supporters of a proposed fracking ban in Michigan announced that although they had gathered more than 207,000 signatures in support of the measure, it wasn't enough to get on the November ballot. They also sued election officials in state court on the constitutionality of restrictions on the signature-gathering time period. A judge dismissed the case in August, saying the plaintiffs didn't have standing Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan v. Thomas, Mich. Ct. Cl., No. 16-000122-MM, Summary Disposition 8/8/16.
The plaintiffs in the case, the Committee to Ban Fracking in Michigan, say the oil and gas industry is behind recent actions taken by the state Legislature to confine the petition circulation period to a strict 180 days, in an effort targeted to stop the committee. The legislation (S.B. 776) passed both the Senate and the House and awaits action by the governor, the committee said.
Ohio Dispute
Residents of three counties in Ohio—Athens, Meigs, and Portage—filed a lawsuit in August alleging the secretary of state there illegally blocked from the November ballot citizen-sponsored charter initiatives proposed in part to “protect people and the environment from the harms associated with oil and gas drilling projects,” the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund said. Several industry groups—including the petroleum institute and the Ohio Oil and Gas Association—filed briefs with the court supporting the secretary of state's decision to disallow the measures of the ballot.
“The gameplan with these extreme fractivist groups is to start small, ban fracking and put on moratoriums at the local level, then go statewide,” Crummy said. “It's easier to get on the ballot in Colorado than in a lot of states, and we have this kind of libertarian, purple-state way about us. What happened here could be something for others to look at, but it isn't a one-size-fits-all thing.”
Industry has faced a backlash for the amount of money it has spent fighting ballot measures, Crummy acknowledged. According to Sept. 6 filings with the Colorado secretary of state, Protect Colorado had received $13,407,184 in monetary contributions and spent $7,146,411 from the start of the year through Aug. 31. The Yes for Health & Safety Over Fracking campaign, the funding organization for the anti-fracking initiatives, had received $526,202 and spent $451,499 in the same time period. The industry group spent 15 times what the anti-fracking campaign spent and raised 25 times as much.
“Scaring people is cheap. Giving them the facts and accurate information is really expensive,” Crummy said. “The gist is, what we've learned from all this is you can't just think the public knows what fracking is, or understand oil and gas development. The more we talk about it, the more people say, ‘I get it.’”
Not PR Types
“This is a very practical industry run by engineers and geologists,” Sgamma said. “They are not PR types; they don't want to engage in that. They want to go out, find oil and gas and do it in the most environmentally responsible way possible. But when faced with an existential threat, they said, ‘You know what ... we do need to educate the public.’ And that's when companies started stepping up to the plate and putting the dollars behind the public education that's necessary.”
In the midst of the 2013 election cycle, as four more anti-fracking measures loomed in Colorado, Anadarko Petroleum Corp. and Noble Energy formed Coloradans for Responsible Energy Development with the aim of educating voters about the safety of fracking and the benefits of the industry to the state.
The failure of Initiatives 75 and 78 demonstrates state residents “recognize the strong regulatory structure already in place and the disastrous impacts these measures would've had on our state,” Robin Olsen, spokeswoman for Anadarko, told Bloomberg BNA. “This is good news for all Colorado businesses and a victory for the state's economy.”
Supporting Coloradans for Responsible Energy Development and Protect Colorado was another coalition, “Vital for Colorado,” formed in March 2014 and including representatives of several industries, chambers of commerce, business advocacy groups and elected officials in the state.
Business Groups Rose Up
“What we saw in Colorado was a lot of local businesses rise up as they have in the past to talk about these issues and show the importance of the industry, and what these proposals really are, which was to effectively ban oil and natural gas development,” Reid Porter, spokesman for the API, told Bloomberg BNA.
API's Bentley said given the industry's recent success in Colorado, she is fielding questions from industry organizations outside the state about the campaign. “They want to know what our messaging was and who our targets were and how did we use it with the new folks who have moved to Colorado.” Most of the inquiries come from oil and gas producers facing initiatives at the local, as opposed to the state, level, she said.
Despite the defeat in Colorado, environmentalists and community groups across the country will continue to pursue ballot measures to restrict drilling.
“For legal and technical reasons, the communities in Colorado may not have achieved everything they set out to do, but that doesn't mean people are less concerned about the health of their children and their community,” Mall said. “Community efforts are not going away.”
Said Parkin: “We are going to keep trying. We're going to keep attacking it from every angle possible.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97543515&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97543515&jd=97543515
-
EPA Should Limit Fracking Discharges in Gulf, Group Urges
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Offshore oil and gas drillers in the Gulf of Mexico should adopt zero-discharge operations or otherwise face tighter restrictions to protect water quality and endangered species, the Center for Biological Diversity said in a comment letter to the EPA.
A general permit the Environmental Protection Agency proposed to reissue (NPDES General Permit No. GEG460000) would allow oil and gas drillers to continue discharging wastewater under certain conditions into the eastern portion of the Gulf--including the mixture of water and chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing and acid treatments. Comments on the draft permit are open through Oct. 19.
The center, in a Sept. 17 comment letter, said the draft permit would fail to protect the ocean from unreasonable degradation, as required by the Clean Water Act, and that the EPA hasn't produced an environmental impact statement or completed the necessary endangered species consultations, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act.
“They basically just allow oil companies to release unlimited amounts of fracking wastewater and other produced water,” Kristen Monsell, attorney for the center, told Bloomberg BNA on Sept. 20. “Some of the chemicals used in fracking are among the most toxic in the world with respect to aquatic life.”
The Gulf is the latest front in a battle over offshore oil drilling and fracking in particular. The center gave notice in August that it will become the third group to sue the federal Bureau of Ocean Management and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement over an environmental assessment that allowed fracking and acidization to continue in federal waters off the California coast.
EPA: Permit Provides Protections
The agency disagreed with Monsell's characterization of the Gulf of Mexico draft permit in a written statement provided to Bloomberg BNA on Sept. 20, saying it complies with federal requirements and will protect the Gulf.
“The general permit is consistent with the requirements of the Clean Water Act and NEPA,” according to the EPA statement. “The permit includes a number of toxicity limits and other conditions to ensure that the marine environment is protected. The EPA will consult with the appropriate Agencies as required by various Acts, such as the Endangered Species Act, prior to issuing the final permit.”
Along with its draft permit, the EPA issued an environmental assessment with a preliminary finding of no significant impact. The existing general permit expired March 31, 2015, and has been administratively continued.
Inventory of Chemicals Required
The center applauded the EPA for a new permit condition requiring oil companies to keep an inventory of well-stimulation chemicals used, but said the requirement “does not go nearly far enough to protect Gulf ecosystems or marine species.”
Wastewater from fracking and other oil drilling operations can contain chemicals such as benzene, arsenic, lead, hexavalent chromium, barium, chloride, sodium, sulfates, and boron, according to the center's letter.
Drilling operations in coastal state waters of the Gulf, California and Alaska already require zero-discharge operations that don't release any wastewater, Monsell said.
“We think EPA should adopt the same standard for federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico,” she said.
Endangered and threatened species living in the Gulf include sperm whales, West Indian manatees, and multiple species of sea turtles and birds, among others, the center told the EPA.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97543529&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97543529&jd=97543529
-
Critic Says NEPA Guidance Could Slow Clean Power Plan
Sep 21, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
The Obama administration's new guidance to agencies on incorporating greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews could slow down implementation of the Clean Power Plan, one prominent critic said during a briefing yesterday ahead of a hearing today.
The White House Council on Environmental Quality released the guidance last month after years of delay. The idea was to get agencies on the same page when incorporating climate in National Environmental Policy Act reviews.
Scott Segal, a partner at Bracewell LLC, echoed other critics of the document by saying it would slow the permitting procedure for energy and infrastructure projects.
And that, he said, could delay implementation of U.S. EPA's Clean Power plan, which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is slated to consider next week (Greenwire, Sept. 20).
Segal said the EPA rule requires power plants to improve efficiency, which would necessitate environmental review and permitting. The guidance could delay or thwart that effort at many facilities.
"There are ironies within ironies here," he said during the briefing sponsored by the Natural Resources Committee's Republicans.
David Doniger, head of the climate and clean air program for the Natural Resources Defense Council, responded in en email: "This is not a serious concern. NEPA is not likely to affect clean air permitting and implementation rules under the CPP."
Kevin Book, managing director of ClearView Energy Partners LLC, which conducts research for energy investors, said the guidelines didn't specify a minimum reference level for greenhouse gas emissions, making it difficult for an agency to conclude that a project would have "no significant impact" on the environment.
Book said the nonbinding directive recommends agencies complete a comprehensive assessment for both "direct" and "indirect" carbon emissions.
"This has been a tension in the nationwide permitting program, a tension in the NEPA process in general. How far do you have to look?" he said. "How much into the state and surrounding area do you have to get at the big picture to make sure the environmental is properly appreciated and mitigation options are identified?"
House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) lamented the guidance, which he says does nothing to balance the "social benefits" of carbon emissions with the "social costs." Bishop will preside over today's hearing.
Environmentalists, on the other hand, support the guidance, with some maintaining it doesn't go far enough (ClimateWire, Aug. 3). Christy Goldfuss, managing director for CEQ, is set to be at the hearing to defend the administration.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/09/21/stories/1060043154
-
Greens Urge Obama To Block New Arctic, Atlantic Drilling
Sep 20, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Key environmental groups are pushing President Obama to block any potential offshore drilling operations in the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans.
In a Tuesday letter to Obama, the groups said the world “needs leadership on policies that help limit global warming by addressing fossil fuel supply," starting with public lands and waters.
Blocking drilling in the Atlantic and the Arctic, they said, would “present a key opportunity for you to complete major first steps on this front before leaving office.”
"No existing oil drilling jobs are at stake,” said the letter, signed by the heads of seven environmental groups.
“The current lack of infrastructure for drilling either oceans’ outer continental shelves means oil production — if feasible at all — would be decades away, arriving too late to fuel America’s transition to a low carbon economy. It would also require massive public and private investments that should instead go into clean energy.”
The heads of the Natural Resources Defense Council, NextGen Climate, League of Conservation Voters, Earthjustice, Sierra Club, Environment America and Defenders of Wildlife signed on to the letter.
The Obama administration hopes to finalize a five-year offshore drilling plan before the end of his term. The proposed plan would block drilling in the Atlantic Ocean despite an earlier proposal to allow operations there, and it would allow up to two drilling lease sales in the Arctic Ocean.
Oil industry groups have urged the Obama administration to at least allow drilling in the Arctic as part of the plan.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/296796-greens-make-offshore-drilling-pitch-to-obama
-
On The Dakota Access Pipeline, Let’s Stick To The Facts
Sep 21, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Craig Stevens
Any large infrastructure project will generate some opposition, and that is understandable. Progress is often initially challenged; eventually, though, calm and respectful dialogue usually brings supporters and opponents together to find common ground. Facts have a way of emerging with great clarity as passions subside.
During the ongoing protests of the Dakota Access Pipeline, the public has had a harder time getting to the facts about this important project. Untrue claims are circulating again, and the record needs to be set straight.
To start, the pipeline’s path, which has been set for two years, does not enter the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. The portion being protested is on private property and does not run on previously undisturbed land. It follows a pre-existing energy corridor in which electricity transmission lines and the Northern Border natural gas pipeline already lay.
An ancient burial or other sacred site simply cannot exist in the fill laid down by the modern construction crews that covered those transmission and oil lines.
The entire route through North Dakota was approved by the state Historic Preservation Office, which issued a “no significant sites affected” determination in February. The state’s chief archaeologist said in early September that “due diligence under existing regulatory law and regulation was done.”
If anything of archaeological significance were to turn up during the pipeline’s construction, trained archaeologists are on site to investigate.
The protests might also give the false impression that Native American tribes had no input to the project. The public record shows that they did. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers held 389 meetings with 55 tribes to discuss the Dakota Access Pipeline. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe met with the corps nearly a dozen times to discuss archaeological issues and to help finalize the pipeline’s route.
That route was determined with the help of tremendous public input. Project leaders participated in 559 meetings with community leaders, elected officials and organizations in areas surrounding the Dakota Access Pipeline. To collect public input, 29 open houses, public meetings and regulatory hearings were held throughout the four states where the pipeline travels.
That the pipeline was to be routed along its current corridor was neither a secret nor a surprise to any tribe. That is why it was so disappointing to see the Obama administration cite tribal input when ordering a halt to construction of a small portion of the pipeline on Corps of Engineers land through and around Lake Oahe.
Not only did tribes have significant input into the siting of the route, but a federal court found no reason to halt construction of the small, disputed portion of the route based on tribal claims.
On Sept. 9, U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg denied the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s request to halt construction of the pipeline near its reservation. Judge Boasberg concluded after an extensive review that “the Tribe has not shown it will suffer injury” if construction proceeds as planned.
The Obama administration did not contradict the federal court’s ruling or conclude that anything was done improperly. It argued instead that the Corps of Engineers should go back and double check to “determine whether it will need to reconsider any of its previous decisions regarding the Lake Oahe site.”
No one has shown that any sensitive tribal land is being jeopardized by the pipeline. Nor is there reason to fear that the pipeline would compromise the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s water supply. The Missouri River in North Dakota already is traversed by eight pipelines that safely transport energy products every day. And the tribe’s water intake is scheduled to be moved later this year to a spot roughly 70 miles from the Dakota Access Pipeline’s river crossing.
When we can get past the shouting and look at the facts, it is clear that the pipeline’s route was thoroughly vetted, that tribes offered significant input that helped shape the route, and that claims of damage to ancient lands or water supplies are unfounded.
When completed, the Dakota Access Pipeline will bring low-cost U.S. oil to markets in the Midwest, reducing our dependence on foreign oil. The pipeline’s builders take local concerns very seriously, which is why they went to such lengths to build broad public support for the project. While there should always be room for dialogue, no infrastructure project, especially one so tremendously beneficial, should be delayed because of false claims and misinformation.
Craig Stevens is a spokesman for the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now Coalition. MAIN is a project of the Iowa State Building and Construction Trades Council, with members in Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Illinois – the states crossed by the Dakota Access Pipeline.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/296926-on-the-dakota-access-pipeline-lets-stick-to-the-facts
-
Agencies Aim to Clear Confusion on Hazard Labeling Rules
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
OSHA and the Department of Transportation aimed to clear up stakeholder confusion on labeling requirements for bulk shipments of hazardous chemicals with new guidance.
In a memo released Sept. 19, the two agencies tried to answer “a number of questions from stakeholders” about how DOT labeling requirements under the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's Hazardous Materials Regulations relate to similar rules under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Hazard Communication Standard.
Confusion over which agency had authority over labeling during transportation arose with a 2015 OSHA enforcement directive raised jurisdictional questions.
The new guidance document “provides an overview of each agency's scope of authority, and guidance on the applicability of PHMSA and OSHA labeling requirements with an emphasis on bulk packaging used in transportation and in the workplace,” the agencies said in a statement Sept. 19.
The changes are “incredibly important” for stakeholders, Cynthia Hilton, a co-facilitator of the Interested Parties for Hazardous Materials Transportation, an industry group, told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 20.
The memo provides clarity for companies because it “clearly establishes DOT as the sole authority over what [hazard communication] to use in transportation,” Hilton said.
OSHA Interpretation Spurred Questions
OSHA issued an enforcement directive (CPL 02-02-079) in July 2015 outlining how its inspectors would implement the Hazard Communication Standard. OSHA last updated the standard in 2012 to align it with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals, or GHS. The GHS sets international standards for what health and safety information must be included on hazardous materials labels.
The 2015 directive stated that chemical manufacturers and importers that package containers for shipment “must label each and every container” with labels that comply with OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard “prior to shipping.”
The new memo, “Labeling of Hazardous Chemicals for Bulk Shipments Joint Guidance Memorandum,” noted that PHMSA's standard requires labeling to be displayed or provided during transportation, while OSHA's requirements apply to shipments before and after transportation. OSHA-compliant labeling “is not required on shipping containers in transport,” even when the DOT standard does not call for labeling during transportation, the memo stated.
The memo also stated that displaying a marking or label that conforms to OSHA standards but is not required by PHMSA is not a violation of PHMSA's rules as long as it is consistent with the Globally Harmonized System.
OSHA officials could not be reached for comment Sept. 20.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97543544&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97543544&jd=97543544
-
Benicia Nixes Valero’s Plan To Run Crude Oil Trains Through Sacramento, Davis And Roseville
Sep 20, 2016 | The Sacramento Bee
By Tony Bizjak
The Benicia City Council on Tuesday unanimously rejected a controversial plan by the Valero Refining Co. to ship crude oil trains through Sacramento and other Northern California cities to its bayside refinery.
The 5-0 vote, taken after four years of bitter debate, represents a victory for environmentalists and offers relief to Sacramento-area leaders who said the oil trains would put local residents and habitat at risk of a catastrophic oil spill and fire.
The Valero proposal, if approved, would have sent up to two 50-car crude oil trains rolling daily through Roseville, downtown Sacramento, Davis and other rail cities, as well as along mountainsides in the Feather River Canyon.
“I’m over the moon,” Yolo County Supervisor Don Saylor said Tuesday night. “The community of Benicia, in the crosshairs of history, made one of those decisions that will make a difference for the country. They stood up and said the safety of our communities matters.”
Sacramento County Supervisor Phil Serna said he believed letters and legal briefs from local leaders, as well as lobbying by Sacramento-area activists, played a role in persuading the Benicia council to say no to that city’s biggest employer. “I’m very pleased,” he said.
A coalition of environmental groups, including Benicia-area residents, Stand.earth, and the Natural Resources Defense Council, issued a statement Tuesday night calling the decision “a victory for the right of communities to say no to refineries’ dangerous oil train projects.”
Valero officials expressed disappointment with the decision. The company had previously said it likely would challenge an adverse decision in court, but it did not indicate Tuesday what its next steps will be.
“After nearly four years of review and analysis by independent experts and the city, we are disappointed that the city council members have chosen to reject the crude by rail project,” company spokesman Chris Howe wrote. “At this time we are considering our options moving forward.”
Increased oil train shipments in the United States and Canada in the last five years have led to a serious of crashes and explosions, including one that killed 47 people in a small Canadian town three years ago. Federal officials have issued new safety regulations, but officials in many rail cities have said the government has not gone far enough to ensure safer shipments.
A Benicia environmental impact report last year concluded that the trains would pose significant health and safety risks along the rail line, but also concluded that a harmful spill would be a rare event.
Benicia City Council member Christina Strawbridge said she made up her mind this summer after a Union Pacific crude oil train derailed in Mosier, Ore., causing an explosion and fire that forced evacuations in the area. She called that “a game changer for me” because the rail company involved was UP, the company that Valero would use, and the rail cars that punctured were newer, supposedly safer models.
“The railroad industry has not kept up with safety standards,” Strawbridge said.
Councilman Mark Hughes commended Valero for its safety record, but added: “That said, bad things do happen. At this point, there is too much uncertainty (for) me.”
The Valero refinery currently receives its oil via marine shipments and pipeline. The oil company applied in 2012 for a permit to build a rail transfer station on its refinery grounds to allow it to receive oil via train. Officials said it would help the refinery remain competitive in a changing oil industry.
The Benicia planning commission denied Valero’s request earlier this year, citing safety issues for up-rail cities, as well as concerns about negative impacts to a creek in Benicia and to the city’s nearby industrial park. The denial also included concern about the possibility of an explosion at the refinery.
Valero appealed that decision to the City Council. It also asked the federal Surface Transportation Board to issue a ruling saying that Benicia does not have the right to deny Valero’s request to build a rail transfer station. The oil company argued that federal interstate commerce regulations preempt cities from saying yes or no on rail-related projects.
In a statement issued Tuesday, the Surface Transportation Board denied Valero’s request, pointing out that Valero is not a railroad company, so it could not claim federal pre-emption protection for its transfer station project. The board issued further “guidance,” however, warning that cities cannot unreasonably interfere with rail transportation.
Several city council members said they were waiting for the transportation board’s comments before deciding on Valero’s request. The council instructed city staff to come back with a list of findings to support their denial. Several council members cautioned that those findings should focus on safety concerns at the Benicia site rather than risks to rail cities, saying that locally focused findings would be easier to defend in court if Valero sues the city.
A similar hearing is set for Thursday in San Luis Obispo County, where Phillips 66 is proposing a rail transfer station at its refinery that will allow it to ship crude oil via train, some of it likely through Sacramento and other northern California cities.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article103108307.html#storylink=cpy
-
(ACC Mentioned) Novolex's Indiana Plant Proves That Bags Can Be, And Are Recycled Every Day
Sep 20, 2016 | Plastics News
By Gayle S. Putrich
North Vernon, Ind. — There are plenty of myths and misunderstandings floating around when it comes to plastic bag and film recycling. But most of those myths are quietly busted all day long in a small southeastern Indiana town.
There is the myth that plastic bags can’t be recycled. Or that they can’t be recycled more than once. There is the myth that there is no value to recycled plastic or plastic bags as a recyclable material and even the myth that recycled-content plastics are inferior to virgin.
Novolex’s recycling and bag-making facility, under its Hilex Poly brand in North Vernon, is a place perhaps the rest of the country — particularly California — could look to for a dose of myth-busting before banning plastic bags altogether.
MYTH: Plastic bags can't be recycled
Environmental groups, most notably the group leading the charge to ban plastic bags in California, Californians Against Waste, typically throw out the statistic of 5 percent. Only about 5 percent of plastic bags get recycled, goes the claim, as though a low recycling rate somehow proves a physical impossibility of recycling.
It’s not that used plastic bags, wraps and film can’t be recycled, it’s that so many curbside programs can’t take them because the municipal systems don’t have the right equipment, said Novolex Senior Director of Sustainability Phil Rozenski, who also puts estimates the plastic bag recycling rate at closer to 15 percent.
The lack of curbside collection is actually good for Novolex and the North Vernon plant, where 20 million to 24 million pounds of film is collected and recycled every year, but not great for recycling rates overall.
According to the most recent National Postconsumer Plastic Bag & Film Recycling Report, complied by Moore Recycling Associates Inc. for the American Chemistry Council, film recycling is on the rise, albeit slowly. In 2014, that market segment saw a 3 percent increase in recycling, totaling 1.17 billion pounds. Overall, plastic film recycling is up by nearly 80 percent over the past decade.
The biggest barrier to recycling, Rozenski says, is actually consumer reuse.
“The greatest competition I have for recycling materials is that consumers reuse about 50 to 60 percent of the bags out there in their homes,” he said.
MYTH: Plastic bags can't be recycled more than once
The sign in front of the closed-loop recycling facility on 2nd Street in North Vernon is quite literal: Bag 2 Bag.
Rozenski said they often see recycled-content film, and even Hilex Poly recycled-content bags, having a “homecoming” on the loading dock. Bags and other film and sheet come into the facility baled, are processed back into pellets and then back into bags on the other side of the factory. Sometimes the resin is still warm from recycling as it into the hopper to begin another new life as a plastic bag.
Though it has been slow going, consumers are coming to know T-shirt bags are recyclable, Rozenski said. But there is some concern that the thicker, multiple-use bags encouraged by some bag ban and fee ordinances may discourage reuse and recycling.
“What keeps me up at night is the 100-use bag idea,” he said. “Regarding reusable bags, people use them less and less — a fraction of the times they are meant for. We know when people are forced to use non-woven polypropylene reusable bags, the after-use is only about 15 times,” as opposed to the 100 times for which they are rated.
“When I talk to environmentalists, they say ‘That’s not me, I use mine 100 times.’ But we’re not talking about environmentalists, we’re talking about the public at large and these bags [non-woven PP] aren’t reusables to them. And they are not getting recycled. Last year we imported more than half a billion and that is increasing.
“Reusable bags have quickly become the new disposable item,” Rozenski said.
MYTH: There is no value to recycled film
“There’s a belief that there is not value in recycling plastic bags,” Rozenski said. “That is a myth. There is value.”
The company can’t keep up with demand for recycled-content products, he said, and works with outside providers to beef up its bale deliveries. The North Vernon plant gets a lot of grocery store and retail film, a combination of low and high density polyethylene, Rozenski said, while linear LDPE stretch film tends to go a sister plant in Wisconsin, which can handle more diverse resins.
With the October 2015 acquisition of Wisconsin Film & Bag Inc., Novolex got not only a custom film and packaging conversion plant and 175 more employees, it also got a recycling plant near Shawano, Wis.
Lessons learned and processes that were innovative early in the Indiana plant’s life are being applied in Wisconsin, Rozenski said.
All the bales are labeled so their origins can be tracked and the stores collecting the film can be mentored by Hilex on collection efforts, he said. Recyclers need a consistent film source and a consistent process to get a consistent product. The process can be adjusted for different stores’ needs and different resins, Rozenski said, but the relationships with collectors are most important to maintain.
“Recycling is really about relationships,” he said, from collection to customer.
Even in-house recycling has value in North Vernon. About 10 percent of every single-use bag is cut out when it’s made. Those cutouts go back into the recycling process on the post-industrial line.
“Like cookie dough — roll it back out and make another cookie,” Rozenski says.
MYTH: Recycled-content is inferior to virgin
“I understand where a lot of the myths come from,” Rozenski said, and the long-standing myth that recycled-content plastics are inferior to virgin is one he particularly understands. Thirty years ago, brown or gray recycled resin was referred to as “off spec” material in the plastics industry and beyond. Like a child’s watercolors, mixing all the colored plastic in the recycling process results in a muddy-colored final product.
Buyers who wanted a specific color were — and still are — hamstrung into using virgin resin, which helped perpetuate the myth that virgin was somehow “better” plastic.
A completely white bag plastic bag can only contain 10 to 15 percent recycled plastic without impacting the color, Rozenski said, and the rest is virgin white resin. Other colors may be able to take a little more recycled content in the mix before the final color is affected, but virgin content will still be high — well over 50 percent.
But when the customer can be happy with a gray or light brown bag? The recycled content will be “a whole lot more,” he said. “And then everybody wins.”
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20160920/NEWS/160929983/novolexs-indiana-plant-proves-that-bags-can-be-and-are-recycled
-
EPA Retains Existing Lead NAAQS
Sep 20, 2016 | Inside EPA
EPA has issued a final rule retaining its existing lead (Pb) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) of 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) for both the primary health-based standard and the secondary limit designed to protect the environment, a win for states and a lead industry group that backed the existing standard.
The rule, signed by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy Sept. 16 ahead of its pending publication in the Federal Register, concludes the latest review of the lead standards by EPA. The previous review in 2008 resulted in a tenfold tightening of the prior standard, set at 1.5 ug/m3 in 1978.
The agency in the rule concludes that, based on new evidence gathered since 2008, “the current primary standard provides the requisite protection of public health with an adequate margin of safety, including protection of at-risk populations,” citing the Clean Air Act's criteria for setting the primary NAAQS.
Meanwhile, EPA also says that, “the current secondary standard is requisite to protect public welfare from known or anticipated adverse effects.” Secondary NAAQS are intended to protect the environment.
However, the agency also notes a great deal of scientific uncertainty associated with low-level lead effects on health and the environment. EPA notes “increasing uncertainty of risk estimates for lower air Pb concentrations,” with respect to health, and “substantial limitations in the current evidence that complicate conclusions regarding the potential for Pb emissions under the current, much lower standard to contribute to welfare effects.”
EPA's widely anticipated decision comports with advice received from the agency's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), which reviews EPA's scientific analysis and advises the agency on where to set the level of the NAAQS. The agency under the Clean Air Act must review the NAAQS for its six criteria pollutants every five years, although it has fallen behind with prior reviews for some of its standards.
In a June 4, 2013, letter to then-acting EPA Administrator Robert Perciasepe on a draft policy assessment document, which in turn informed EPA's NAAQS rule, then-CASAC Chairman Chris Frey backed the existing NAAQS.
“The application of the evidence-based framework and the use of the health risk and exposure information from the previous Pb NAAQS review seem appropriate and provide a sufficient rationale to support retaining the current primary standard without revision,” Frey wrote. Further, “Given the existing scientific data, the CASAC concurs with retaining the current secondary standard without revision,” according to his letter.
However, Frey on behalf of the committee also noted that “research is needed to address uncertainties and data gaps” about the effects of low levels of lead on health and the environment.
EPA's separate Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee (CHPAC) has previously suggested a need to tighten the limit down to 0.02 ug/m3, the same level it endorsed during the last lead standard review that led to the 2008 limit. CHPAC has argued that evidence of harms to children under the current lead standard has “become even more compelling” since the panel called for the 0.02 ug/m3 standard.
But states and a lead industry group in written to comments to EPA backed the agency's proposal to retain the existing standard, which it has now finalized.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/epa-retains-existing-lead-naaqs
-
Environmental Reviews for NEPA Average Five Years, Group Says
Sep 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
It took an average of five years to complete the environmental impact statements that reached their final form in 2015, according to an annual report from the National Association of Environmental Professionals.
The association found that 194 final EIS documents were issued in 2015. The five-year average time to prepare them was measured from notice of intent to final EIS. Sixteen percent of the EIS documents were prepared in two years or less.
The figures from the professional society were recently summarized in its Annual National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Report 2015, a compilation of data on the current state of NEPA compliance.
In 2015, the U.S. courts of appeal issued 14 substantive decisions involving implementation of NEPA, the association said. The 14 cases involved 11 departments and agencies, with the agencies prevailing in 79 percent of the cases.
In 2015, announcements of 381 draft, final and supplemental environmental impact statements were published in the Federal Register, just three fewer than the 384 published in 2014, the association said.
Forest Service Tops List
The U.S. Forest Service published 71 of the EIS documents, or 19 percent of the total, followed by the Bureau of Land Management (40 documents, or about 10.5 percent), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (also 40 documents), the Federal Highway Administration (23 documents, or 6 percent) and the National Park Service (17 documents, or 4 percent).
The association didn't release its full annual report. The report was available to association members.
The numbers were drawn from the Environmental Protection Agency database of EIS documents athttp://www.epa.gov/Compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97543534&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97543534&jd=97543534
-
Bill Would Expand Greenhouse Data Collection
Sep 21, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) yesterday introduced legislation that aims to make available information about greenhouse gas emissions generated from the global oil industry.
"As the saying goes, you can't change what you don't measure," Huffman said in a statement. "In terms of climate impacts, not all oil is created equal, but current law makes it impossible to know how specific oil choices affect greenhouse gas emissions."
The "Know Your Oil" bill would direct the U.S. Department of Energy to measure and report emissions from different extraction and refining methods.
Currently the U.S. Energy Information Administration can only analyze broad trends in emissions.
The legislation would give the secretary of Energy the authority to perform a mass collection of data on carbon, methane and other emissions from the oil supply chain. This includes extraction, transportation and refining all the way to the gas pump.
The legislation would make this information publicly available to consumers, investors and policymakers.
"Extracting and burning oil scars our land, pollutes our water, harms our health and warms our climate," Amy Mall, senior policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement. "The Know Your Oil Act would provide much-needed transparency so that Americans can truly understand the dire consequences of our oil addiction."
The legislation is co-sponsored by Reps. Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.), Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), and Doris Matsui (D-Calif).
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/09/21/stories/1060043156
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested