Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 9/30/16
-
Use of New Toxicity Tests Aided by Changes to Chemicals Law
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA's need to quickly receive toxicity data under an amended chemicals law may do more than the law's specific animal welfare provisions to broaden the use of non-animal toxicity tests, a law professor recently told federal agency advisers. -
Changes to EPA Risk Reviews May Tighten Chemical Controls
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven Gibb
Changes the Environmental Protection Agency may make to its chemical risk reviews would strengthen protections against chemical exposures and make rules more costly for industry, former EPA and Labor Department policy officials told Bloomberg BNA. -
EPA Close to Settling Lawsuit Over Perchlorate Regulation
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Amena H. Saiyid
The Environmental Protection Agency is close to settling a lawsuit over its failure to regulate perchlorate in drinking water based on the Justice Department's letterLink to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Nat. Res. Def. Council v. EPA, S.D.N.Y., No. 16-01251, letter 9/28/16). -
Phthalates SVHC Vote Faces Blocking Minority
Sep 29, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A possible vote on a European Commission draft Decision identifying four phthalates as SVHCs, due to their endocrine disrupting effects on human health, has been postponed due to opposition from some member states. -
EDCs: An Area of Growing Concern
Sep 29, 2016 | Medpage Today
By Kristen Monaco
The Endocrine Society's Second Scientific Statement on Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals(EDC-2) was developed "to bridge [the] gap between basic, translational, clinical, and public health knowledge, EDCs," according to its lead author. -
(ACC Mentioned) Saudi Chemical Company Expands Houston Hub, Eyes Sites For Massive Plant
Sep 29, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
Saudi Arabia's top petrochemical company made Houston its North American hub this summer and will soon decide whether to build a multibillion dollar chemical plant here that would create thousands of construction and hundreds of manufacturing jobs. -
Maryland Regulators Meet Deadline, Propose Fracking Regulations
Sep 29, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Shale gas development in western Maryland returned to the realm of possibility on Monday after regulators with the state Department of the Environment (MDE) met a key deadline and proposed rules governing hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to a panel of state lawmakers. -
Companies Sue Over Wash. Carbon Rule
Sep 29, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Amanda Reilly
Natural gas companies this week filed a lawsuit to overturn Washington's new climate change rule aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions from the state's largest emitters. -
A Flimsy Legal Attack on Clean Air
Sep 30, 2016 | The New York Times
By Editorial Board
In eight years, President Obama has established a strong record in fightingclimate change, including ambitious fuel efficiency standards aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions from cars and trucks. -
EPA Submits Final Oil & Gas Methane ICR For OMB Review
Sep 29, 2016 | Inside EPA
EPA has submitted for White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) review the final version of its information collection request (ICR) to gather data on methane emissions from existing oil and gas operations, the last major regulatory step before the agency distributes the ICR that could inform a future methane rule. -
Latest Act 13 Ruling Seen Having Few Implications For PA Oil/Gas Industry Operations
Sep 29, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
A decision from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Wednesday that again struck down parts of the state's oil and gas law, known as Act 13, was applauded by environmental advocates, while the energy industry and others met it with indifference, saying the opinion won't have much effect on daily operations. -
Sierra Club to Roll Out Map of Anti-Trade Deal Efforts
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Flood
The Sierra Club launched a tool to raise awareness about energy investments that could be the subject of arbitration under the Trans-Pacific Partnership or the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. -
W.Va. Residents Push Chemical Board for Broader Look at Spill
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
Complaints from West Virginia residents led U.S. Chemical Safety Board members to vow more work on a report on a Charleston-area chemical leak that left 300,000 people without water in January 2014. -
Boxer Urges EPA To Strengthen Storage Rules
Sep 29, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Gabriel Dunsmith
California Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) asked U.S. EPA today to strengthen regulations for chemical facilities. -
Sen. Boxer Urges EPA To Tighten Facility Safety Rule
Sep 29, 2016 | Inside EPA
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) is urging EPA to tighten its proposed rule overhauling the agency's industrial facility accident prevention program by requiring that certain facilities use inherently safer technologies (IST) such as alternative chemicals or process changes, arguing that the rule as drafted fails to adequately improve safety. -
Lawmaker Urges USDOT To Consider Further Crude-By-Rail Regulations
Sep 30, 2016 | American Shipper
By Ben Meyer
U.S. House Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Wash., is urging the Department of Transportation to consider further regulation of freight trains carrying crude oil. -
Oil-Train Bans Put Northwest Economy At Risk
Sep 29, 2016 | The Seattle Times
By Ozzie Knezovich and John Stuhlmiller
AS representatives of Washington’s law enforcement and agriculture communities, we would encourage a more thoughtful discussion on oil-train bans, one that includes the bigger economic picture for our state’s economy. -
(ACC Mentioned) North Carolina County Joins WRAP Campaign
Sep 29, 2016 | Recycling Today
The Flexible Film Recycling Group (FFRG) of the American Chemistry Council (ACC), Washington, has joined officials from Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and Charlotte to introduce a campaign designed to increase recycling of plastic wraps and bags throughout the county. -
UN Official: Climate Deal's Entry Into Force Now Weeks Away
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The Paris climate pact is now poised to enter into force even before nearly 200 nations resume talks in November at a United Nations climate summit in Morocco, with India set to join Oct. 2 and a handful of European nations queuing up to join as early as next week, a UN official said Sept. 29.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
-
Use of New Toxicity Tests Aided by Changes to Chemicals Law
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA's need to quickly receive toxicity data under an amended chemicals law may do more than the law's specific animal welfare provisions to broaden the use of non-animal toxicity tests, a law professor recently told federal agency advisers.
The agency's need to quickly receive toxicity data from chemical manufacturers for its screening assessments and risk evaluations may compel it to demand the use of newer, quicker toxicity tests, ahead of strategic plan requirements under the law, the legal scholar said.
By June 2018, the EPA must develop a strategic plan to promote the development and use of toxicity testing methods that would reduce, refine or replace vertebrate animal testing. The alternatives must be “scientifically reliable, relevant, and capable of providing information of equivalent or better” than studies of test animals exposed to toxics, the recently amended chemicals law says.
But Tim Malloy, a law professor at the University of California Los Angeles, said “necessity is the mother of invention” and predicted that the daily work of identifying and evaluating chemicals creates demand for these types of data, more than strategic planning and coordination with other agencies.
In June, Congress passed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, which requires the Environmental Protection Agency to evaluate some of the thousands of chemicals that have never been assessed before. It updated the 1976 Toxics Substances Control Act.
Malloy told the Scientific Advisory Committee on Alternative Toxicological Methods Sept. 27 that the Lautenberg Act's “soft” incentives won't address institutional inertia and other barriers to the use of non-animal tests. The advisory committee offers recommendations to the EPA, the Food and Drug Administration and 13 other departments serving on the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods, which reviews non-animal tests to determine whether and when they could be used for regulatory purposes. The EPA's pesticide program is already beginning to accept more non-animal test data.
“It's not these explicit provisions [of the Lautenberg Act] that may have most impact, but other provisions that have deadlines,” Malloy said. He referred to the law's deadlines EPA must meet as it screens chemicals in commerce, determines which are priorities for risk evaluations and conducts those evaluations.
Advising and Meeting
The advisory committee met to offer the interagency panel advice on the development of a federal strategy to replace slow and expensive one-chemical-at-a-time, animal-based toxicity tests with more automated cell and tissue tests that predict the toxicity of many chemicals simultaneously.
Jim Jones, assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention at EPA, told Bloomberg BNA by e-mail the interagency committee will play “an important role to develop a strategy for the safe, effective, and timely implementation of new approaches to toxicity testing. Its work gains heightened importance with the passage of the Lautenberg Act.”
Risk assessors from the EPA's chemicals office already are becoming more familiar with alternative toxicity tests due to a mandate in the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. No. 114-182), which amended the chemicals law on June 22, an EPA assessor told Bloomberg BNA.
Survey of 1,300 Toxicologists
Malloy reached his conclusions based on a global survey of 1,300 toxicologists his university conducted. A lengthy survey asked about their views on the value of alternative tests, their viability, barriers to their use, drivers spurring their use, and the extent to which these scientists used such tests, he said.
Technical familiarity with these new types of tests was critical in helping toxicologists conclude which tests could produce useful information, Malloy said.
Catherine Willett, an advisory committee member, urged more training and education to the interagency committee and the National Toxicology Program's Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods.
“If we want these methods to be taken up, we need leadership to be behind this. We've seen that at EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs. The leadership is firmly behind it,” Willett said.
She referred to several efforts, including one announced by Jack Housenger, director of the pesticide's office, that is an initiative to reduce the use of animals in short-term, high-exposure, or “acute,” biological effects testing.
Global Meeting Aims to Boost Acute Dermal Tests
Anna Lowit, senior science adviser for pesticides, shared similar information during a Sept. 22-23 acute inhalation toxicity workshop co-hosted by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals International Science Consortium Ltd. and the interagency center.
More than 50 laboratory animals—typically rodents—are used for the required set of six acute toxicity, or “6-pack” studies, she said.
The office receives around a dozen 6-packs as part of a much broader package of information submitted by manufacturers of new active pesticide ingredients, she said during the Sept. 22 workshop.
Each year, the office receives between 200 and 300 6-packs as pesticide manufacturers test new formulations of pesticides, Lowit said. That number of 6-packs would use between 10,000 and 15,000 animals.
The thousands of animals that would be saved annually if alternative, non-animal tests could provide acute data and the simplicity of acute tests compared to ones involving longer exposures, prompted the pesticides office to focus on replacements for the acute tests, Lowit said.
Good progress also has been made on finding alternatives for skin sensitization, Lowit said.
Regulators from around the world, including Brazil and China, will gather Oct. 4-5 in Ispra, Italy, to identify regulatory requirements for skin sensitization that could be satisfied with non-animal approaches, she said. The meeting will include representatives of companies that designed the alternative tests, researchers that have validated them and regulators that may have questions about them, she said.
Progress also is being made internationally on finding non-animal tests to collect eye irritation data, Lowit said. EPA's pesticide office already accepts some data from non-animal tests, she said.
Final Pesticide Guide Coming
Later this fall the pesticides office expects to release final guidance on waiving the requirement for acute dermal toxicity tests for pesticide formulations, Lowit said.
As part of its general animal reduction efforts, between Dec. 8, 2011, and Aug. 4, 2016, the pesticides office granted more than 700 short-term exposure, or “subchronic” tests, Lowit said.
A number of EPA chemicals office staff are attending scientific conferences and working with the EPA's pesticide programs and research office scientists to become more familiar with alternative toxicity tests, she said.
Dow: Amended Toxics Law May Catalyze Alternative Tests
The Dow Chemical Co. has invested significant time and money building databases and buying equipment to increase its use of toxicity data generated through non-animal tests, according to presentations Dow toxicologists Jon Hotchkiss and Dan Wilson gave during the Sept. 22 workshop.
Non-animal tests are available for dermal tests and significant progress has been made toward alternatives for tests involving oral exposures, Hotchkiss told Bloomberg BNA.
Dow is now focused on alternative tests for acute inhalation exposures, he said. Conducting those complex tests well requires a lot of animals and is expensive, he said.
During the scientific advisory committee's Sept. 27 meeting, panel member Pam Spencer discussed chemical manufacturers reasons for moving toward non-animal tests. Spencer is Dow's scientific director for toxicology, environmental research and consulting.
Chemical manufacturers want to move towards human-relevant models and outcomes, she said.
The amendments made to TSCA could provide a catalyst the interagency committee could use to encourage broader development, use and regulatory acceptance of non-animal tests and the data generated with them, Spencer said
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98061986&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98061986&jd=98061986
-
Changes to EPA Risk Reviews May Tighten Chemical Controls
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven Gibb
Changes the Environmental Protection Agency may make to its chemical risk reviews would strengthen protections against chemical exposures and make rules more costly for industry, former EPA and Labor Department policy officials told Bloomberg BNA.
The review changes were recommended by the National Research Council to more fully account for health problems other than cancer. The new reviews could wind up boosting the economic benefits considered by the White House Office of Management and Budget when it evaluates EPA regulatory proposals enhancing agency arguments for stricter—and costlier—chemical regulations, the sources said.
EPA science policy analysts are responding to the research council's recommendations for changing its chemical risk reviews as the agency implements the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. No. 114-182), which amended the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act.
Under the amended toxics law, the EPA can't consider costs when assessing chemical risks but begins to consider costs and benefits when the agency proposes regulations for controlling toxics.
Risk Advances
The panel for the 2009 research council report, “Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment,” was chaired by current EPA science adviser Thomas Burke when he was with Johns Hopkins University.
The report said that historically “assessments have been conducted differently for cancer and noncancer effects, and the methods have been criticized for not producing the most useful results. Consequently, noncancer effects have been underemphasized, especially in cost-benefit analysis. A consistent approach to risk assessment for cancer and noncancer effects is scientifically feasible and should be implemented.”
Chapter 5 in the report details the council's recommendations, urging the EPA to flesh out how noncancer health risks vary at different levels of exposure. Currently, the EPA selects a single “safe” level to characterize risks other than cancer, ignoring how risk varies as those exposure levels change. That approach doesn't convey the greater magnitude of risk for someone exposed to say 20 times the “safe” exposure level to a toxic versus someone with chemical exposures just over the safe limit.
Public Health Impact
Former EPA officials emphasized that changes to EPA risk reviews will shape the public health impact of the nation's chemical control system.
Bill Farland, former EPA research official and professor of environmental sciences at Colorado State University in Ft. Collins, said he agrees with the effort to alter EPA noncancer risk reviews. “The Toxic Substances Control Act always had and will continue to have an impact on public health. . . Improvements in the law and in risk assessment will continue to have an impact.”
EPA risk reviews need to change, said Tracey Woodruff, director of the Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment at the University of California, San Francisco and a former EPA policy official. The Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic Substances, which is implementing the amended toxics law, “has not been using the right tools to get at noncancer health risks in real populations,” she said.
The right tools would describe risk at different levels of exposure—a more realistic and informative way to characterize risks. This is in contrast to the current EPA method of selecting a single “safe” level of exposure above which all are considered endangered and below which all are considered safe, she said.
Adam Finkel, a panelist on the research council's report and professor at the Philadelphia-based Penn Program on Regulation at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, echoed Woodruff's call for the EPA to move beyond using single safety numbers for a chemical's noncancer risks. Decision makers and the public deserve information about risk, rather than assurances about safety, he said. Finkel served in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and oversaw multiple agency chemical risk assessments during his tenure.
Risk, Costs and Benefits
The single safety number approach “is like kayaking down a river and seeing a sign that says ‘waterfall ahead’ without telling you how far it is or how much of a drop,” Finkel said. By way of contrast, EPA cancer reviews would have multiple signs along the way with that missing information, he added.
Finkel said if the EPA's current approach to noncancer health effects isn't modernized, it also will shortchange its chemical control rules by not counting the full economic benefits from preventing immunological, developmental, nervous system and other health problems. If and when EPA does adjust its risk reviews, this could lead to more health protective—and costlier—chemical regulations for industry, he added.
Risk analysts and economists said such an overhaul also would be more informative for policymakers. It could strengthen the EPA's hand when it presses for chemical control rules proposed under the amended toxics law by elevating the benefits ledger during White House reviews, Finkel said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98061981&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98061981&jd=98061981
-
EPA Close to Settling Lawsuit Over Perchlorate Regulation
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Amena H. Saiyid
The Environmental Protection Agency is close to settling a lawsuit over its failure to regulate perchlorate in drinking water based on the Justice Department's letterLink to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Nat. Res. Def. Council v. EPA, S.D.N.Y., No. 16-01251, letter 9/28/16).
“I write jointly with counsel for Plaintiff Natural Resources Defense Council (“NRDC”) to advise the Court that the parties have reached a tentative resolution in this case, subject to final approvals from those with authority in the Government,” Preet Bharara, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, told the federal court Sept. 28.
Bharara advised the court that the EPA and the NRDC agreed to push the deadline for the advocacy group to submit its motion for summary judgment by a week to Oct. 12. The Justice Department also told the court that it was in agreement with the NRDC to push all other deadlines also by a week, including the EPA's initial response date of Oct. 26.
The NRDC charged the EPA in February with missing deadlines to propose and issue a final drinking water standard, mandated under the Safe Drinking Water Act, following a 2011 agency determination that outlined the rationale for regulating perchlorate. The contaminant can affect thyroid function. Although it occurs naturally, it also is used in the manufacture of rocket fuel, explosives, road flares and fireworks.
The environmental advocacy group declined to comment on the ongoing negotiations with the Justice Department. “We are not able to comment beyond the public court filing at this time. We will have more to say in the coming weeks,” Anne Hawke, the advocacy group's spokeswoman, told Bloomberg BNA in a Sept. 29 e-mail.
The EPA refused to comment on Bharara's letter, deferring instead to the Justice Department. In the meantime, the EPA is moving forward with its rulemaking process to set a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for perchlorate in drinking water. MCLs are based on the maximum concentration of a contaminant allowed in drinking water below which no known health risks are expected to occur.
Seeking Comment on Pivotal Model
To that end, the EPA is publishing a notice Sept. 30 that seeks public comment on the draft model itself and an accompanying draft model report on perchlorate's potential effects on infants and mothers.
The EPA will use the draft model to derive contaminant goals. Actual regulatory levels are based on maximum contaminant level goals plus cost-benefit considerations. The science model is critical because of its role in determining the goals, which in turn helps determine the enforceable contaminant levels that businesses and other parties must comply with. EPA science advisers recommended the EPA use this model, rather than other types of models available, to simulate perchlorate's health effects.
According to the EPA, the draft model is focused on low levels of thyroid hormone as an indicator of potential adverse health effects. This draft model predicts the effects of perchlorate on serum thyroid hormone concentrations in pregnant and lactating mothers exposed to perchlorate in the diet. It also encompasses infants exposed via ingestion of perchlorate in formula or breast milk.
Kevin Morley, federal relations manager for the American Water Works Association, as well as Scott Biernat, regulatory affairs and scientific program development manager for the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, said the model is significant because it will inform the rulemaking process.
Regarding the notice, Morley said it was a “necessary step” that informs the decision-making process, and shows the EPA was responsive to Science Advisory Board advice that the model be more responsive to the general effects of the chemical on the body.
The EPA said the draft model and the accompanying report can be accessed fromhttp://www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0438. The agency said it will receive comments until Nov. 14. The draft reports will be peer reviewed so the EPA urged those members of the public who wish to be part of the peer review not to submit comments.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98061977&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98061977&jd=98061977
-
Phthalates SVHC Vote Faces Blocking Minority
Sep 29, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A possible vote on a European Commission draft Decision identifying four phthalates as SVHCs, due to their endocrine disrupting effects on human health, has been postponed due to opposition from some member states.
At last week's REACH Committee meeting, the Commission presented the draft, saying that four phthalates - BBP, DBP, DEHP and DiBP - have endocrine disrupting properties, the human health effects of which give rise to an "equivalent level of concern", according to REACH Article 57(f).
The candidate list entries for the four phthalates already state endocrine disruptive effects in relation to the environment. The entries also refer to their status as toxic for reproduction.
But they do not extend this to human health effects because Echa's Member State Committee was unable to reach unanimous agreement that the evidence on the phthalates' endocrine activity and the link between this and adverse health effects to human health gave rise to an "equivalent level of concern".
At the REACH committee meeting, four member states said they would vote against the proposal and two that they would abstain. This constitutes a blocking minority, and so the proposal was not put to a vote.
Some member states also said they want to see the proposed EU criteria for identifying EDCs finalised before taking their position on the four phthalates.
The Commission published its draft criteria for identifying EDCs in June and launched a public consultationin July. It is understood to be considering a revision of these, after members of the public, scientists, NGOs and some member states called for changes.
The Commission will now consider how to move forward – there is currently no indication of when the draft Decision will be scheduled for another discussion or vote.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49917/phthalates-svhc-vote-faces-blocking-minority
-
EDCs: An Area of Growing Concern
Sep 29, 2016 | Medpage Today
By Kristen Monaco
The Endocrine Society's Second Scientific Statement on Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals(EDC-2) was developed "to bridge [the] gap between basic, translational, clinical, and public health knowledge, EDCs," according to its lead author.
"About 10 years ago, the Endocrine Society began working with a group of scientists and physicians to consider the evidence that EDCs are a significant concern for human health,"Andrea C. Gore, PhD, of the University of Texas Austin, told MedPage Today. "In 2009, I led a group of authors in writing a review paper, which led to the Society's first Scientific Statement. Five years later, the evidence linking EDCs to chronic endocrine diseases involving reproductive, thyroid, cardiovascular, type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, and even hormone-sensitive cancers, had mounted. We wrote EDC-2 to review this evidence based on animal models and epidemiology, and the resulting paper allows us to draw much stronger conclusions about concerns about EDC exposures."
Gore, who is also editor-in-chief of Endocrinology, highlighted findings from the 2015 scientific statement in a recent review in JAMA Internal Medicine.
While acknowledging limitations on establishing causal evidence between the estimated 1,000 identified EDCs and diseases such as obesity, various cancers, reproductive, and neurological issues, Gore's review emphasized the correlational body of literature linking environmental EDC exposure to a number of adverse health outcomes.
Growing concern over EDCs can be seen across the medical community. In 2011, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) endorsed the Endocrine‐Disrupting Chemicals Exposure Elimination Act (SB 1361) proposed by then Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass). The bill was introduced to the floor and then referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, whose chairmen did not call for a vote on the bill.
In June 2016, progress was made when The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act was signed into effect, which provides some regulation on environmental use of chemicals.
When asked what she would like to see accomplished regarding U.S. policy on EDCs, Gore highlighted two main issues. "First, regulatory policy should be done pre-market, not post-market. What I mean is that chemicals that come into contact with food (e.g. plastic water and food containers, cans, etc.) are not regulated by the FDA, since they're not actually added to food and beverages. We know that many such chemicals, including bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates, are proven EDCs, yet these chemicals and their replacements continue to be used with a minimum of testing."
She pointed out that standard toxicological testing does not require looking at the low doses to which humans are exposed, but such low doses are linked to endocrine diseases.
"I will add that while we are vulnerable and exposed to EDCs for our entire lives, we are particularly concerned about developmental exposure to the fetus and infant, when our endocrine systems are developing most rapidly," she said.
"Second, I would like to see greater transparency. Every product should include a list of its components. We do that for food, but I'd like to see the same for the food container, personal care products, inactive ingredients of medications, etc.," she stated. "The chemical industry insists that the chemicals they use in these products' manufacture are safe. If that's the case, what is the harm of publishing that list so that consumers can make decisions about which products to purchase?"
Coming soon in MedPage Today's exclusive "Pearls From" video series, Leonardo Trasande, MD, of NYU Langone Medical Center, joins the discussion on EDCs.
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Endocrinology/GeneralEndocrinology/60520
-
(ACC Mentioned) Saudi Chemical Company Expands Houston Hub, Eyes Sites For Massive Plant
Sep 29, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
Saudi Arabia's top petrochemical company made Houston its North American hub this summer and will soon decide whether to build a multibillion dollar chemical plant here that would create thousands of construction and hundreds of manufacturing jobs.
The plant would include world's largest ethane cracker, which turns a component of natural gas into ethylene, the primary building block of most plastics. The Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., known as SABIC, is considering sites along the Gulf Coast in Texas and Louisiana, and expects to make the selection by the end of the year.
The plant, a joint venture with Exxon Mobil, is another step in SABIC's ambition to grow not only in the Houston area, but also in the United States and around the world, SABIC Chief Executive Yousef Al-Benyan said in an exclusive interview with the Houston Chronicle. In July, the company finished moving more than 200 new employees from Massachusetts to Houston and its new SABIC Americas headquarters in its expanded Westchase office space.
"The move to consolidate our activities in North America into Houston is not just for the sake of bringing people together," said Al-Benyan, who visited Houston this week. "It's looking at Houston as the hub for us to grow globally."
The chemical and plastics plant is the first U.S. joint venture for SABIC and Exxon, two of the world's biggest energy giants. The partners will choose among four potential sites in Texas and Louisiana.
Al-Benyan wants to begin construction by the middle of next year. The project could come online as early as 2020, which would coincide with the anticipated rebound in the global petrochemical market, which, like its feedstocks, oil and natural gas, is struggling with a supply glut. The plan is to take advantage of cheap and ample shale natural gas available here to make chemicals and plastics.
"We have agreed with our partners to accelerate our activities as much as we can because the timing is very important," Al-Benyan said. "We want to make sure the project comes on stream in 2020 or 2021 when, hopefully, the market is going to be in the right mood for us."
The two potential Texas sites include an area near Victoria as well San Patricio County in the Corpus Christi area. The Louisiana sites are in Ascension and St. James parishes, both between Baton Rouge and New Orleans.
The project, built on more than 1,000 acres, would create 11,000 construction jobs and more than 600 permanent positions. The petrochemical complex would include the world's largest ethane cracker, capable of producing 1.8 million metric tons of ethylene annually. An ethane cracker takes ethane, a component of natural gas, heats it, and transforms it into ethylene.
The joint venture also would build units to churn out polyethylene, the most common plastic, as well as a unit for monoethylene glycol, which is used in plastics, latex paints, automotive coolants and anti-freeze, according to Exxon. Much of the products would be exported.
SABIC is the biggest publicly traded company in the Middle East, but 70 percent of the shares are owned by the Saudi government. SABIC is the world's third-largest chemical company after Germany's BASF and Michigan-based Dow Chemical.
Al-Benyan took over as SABIC's chief executive early last year. He calls Houston his second home because he lived in Houston for about 11 years during two SABIC job assignments in the 1990's and 2000's.
He first joined SABIC in 1987 and was named chief executive and vice chairman in early 2015. The move coincided with longtime SABIC CEO Mohamed Al-Mady becoming the head of Saudi Arabia's Military Industries Corp.
SABIC first developed a major U.S. presence nine years ago when it bought General Electric's plastics division for nearly $12 billion. SABIC closed its Massachusetts facilities, which were part of the legacy GE business.
The consolidation tripled SABIC's employment in Houston to more than 300 from about 100 and led the company to lease two more floors in the building at 2500 CityWest Blvd. in Westchase. SABIC also has a technology centers at Industrial Boulevard in Sugar Land, where Al-Benyan said he also wants to expand.
SABIC's Gulf Coast expansion fits with Saudi Arabia's plans to diversify its economy and grow its non-oil revenue through its new "Vision 2030" reforms, spearheaded by 31-year-old Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Al-Benyan said SABIC has a key role to play in the strategy, which aims to make Saudi Arabia a global player in refined products as well as crude oil.
The Gulf Coast petrochemical sector has taken off in recent years because its access to natural gas made cheap and plentiful by the shale drilling boom that began nearly a decade ago. The American Chemistry Council, a chemical industry trade group, estimates that more than 250 petrochemical projects are under construction or planned across the country through 2023 and they will create about 70,000 jobs. The combined cost is about $160 billion, including about $50 billion in Texas.
Exxon also is expanding its petrochemical plants in Mont Belvieu and Baytown, where it is adding a 1.5 million-ton ethane cracker. Exxon and SABIC have worked together on various projects for more than 30 years, but never within the United States.
Saudi Arabia has a major Texas presence already through its Motiva Enterprises, a refining operation and joint venture with Royal Dutch Shell. Saudi Arabia and Shell are negotiating an end to the venture, but the Saudis are expected to hold on to the Motiva brand, the Port Arthur refinery — the largest in North America — and 26 distribution terminals.
Motiva also is considered one of the bidders for LyondellBasell's Houston Refinery, which is up for sale.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Saudi-chemical-company-grows-in-Houston-9443419.php
-
Maryland Regulators Meet Deadline, Propose Fracking Regulations
Sep 29, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Shale gas development in western Maryland returned to the realm of possibility on Monday after regulators with the state Department of the Environment (MDE) met a key deadline and proposed rules governing hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to a panel of state lawmakers.
Two years ago, the Maryland General Assembly passed SB 409, requiring MDE to create fracking regulations by Oct. 1, 2016 (see Shale Daily, June 3, 2015). The law also established a two-year moratorium on the practice, which expires on Oct. 1, 2017.
MDE submitted its proposed rules on fracking to the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review (AELR). It also submitted draft regulations for underground injection wells to the panel.
"These will be the most stringent and protective environmental shale regulations in the country," Maryland Environment Secretary Ben Grumbles said. "If fracking ever comes to western Maryland, these rigorous regulations will be in place beforehand to help ensure safe and responsible energy development."
Only two western panhandle counties in Maryland -- Allegany and Garrett -- overlie the Marcellus Shale, which the U.S. Geological Survey estimates could contain as much as 2.383 Tcf of technically recoverable natural gas.
Rules on water protection, well construction
Under MDE's proposed fracking regulations, a well pad may not be located within 2,000 feet of a private drinking water well; within 2,000 feet parallel to and above the surface water intake of a public drinking water supply or the discharge of a spring used for drinking water; or within 1,000 feet of a wellhead protection area.
Well pads would also be prohibited within the watersheds of Bradford Lake, Piney Reservoir and Savage Reservoir. They would also not be permitted within 300 feet of a stream or wetland of special state concern; within 100 feet from any other wetland; or within the watershed of Deep Creek Lake. MDE has the option of listing additional reservoirs if oil and gas production occurs outside Allegany and Garrett counties.
MDE would require operators to conduct one year of baseline water monitoring of the surface and groundwater in the vicinity of the well pad before operations can begin. Operators would be required to take samples from private drinking water wells within 2,500 feet of a proposed well pad.
Operators would also be required to use four concentric layers of steel casing and cement for well construction, as well as be required to conduct integrity and pressure testing at several points when casing and cement is placed. In addition, they would have to certify the well's integrity before fracking operations. Ongoing integrity testing would be required throughout the life of the well.
Air quality, emergency response rules
MDE also would require that operators deploy the best available technology for controlling air emissions, especially from compressors, control devices, storage tanks and pipelines. A leak detection and repair program will also be required of operators.
Operators would have to estimate annual methane emissions from their well pads. If they are notified by MDE that allowances are available, they must purchase them to offset methane emissions. Meanwhile, MDE would also amend its existing air toxics regulations to include equipment associated with fracking. Companies would be required to estimate emissions from those operations as well, and demonstrate, through modeling, that ground-level concentrations aren't harmful to neighboring residents.
Permit applicants under the rules would have to submit an emergency response plan outlining procedures and responses to events such as spills, releases, fires and blowouts. They would have to also notify MDE within 30 minutes of an incident and immediately clean up and spills or releases and properly dispose of the waste. Each well must also be equipped with at least two redundant blowout preventers.
Wastewater management, well plugging and bonding
MDE would require that operators keep flowback and produced water in a closed loop system and recycle at least 90% of wastewater at the well pad, unless they can demonstrate that it would not be practicable to do so. Flowback and produced water may not be applied to land or used for de-icing; it could only be sent to a wastewater treatment facility.
Under the proposed rules, the disposal of flowback or produced water would be prohibited at Class II underground injection wells. Revisions to existing underground injection control regulations would also prohibit the construction of new Class II underground injection wells in Maryland.
Operators would also be subject to detailed procedures for plugging wells and reclaiming a site. They would be required to post a bond of at least $50,000 to cover the cost of plugging a well and site reclamation, and maintain insurance to cover personal injury, property damage and liability for environmental pollution.
MDE said that after a review by the AELR, the proposed rules are to be published in the Maryland Register and be open for public comment for 30 days.
Republican Gov. Larry Hogan, who was elected in 2014, during the gubernatorial campaign said he supported fracking and Marcellus development in the state (see Shale Daily, Nov. 26, 2014). But he declined to veto SB 409 when it came across his desk months after taking office.
Reaction
Drew Cobbs, executive director of the Maryland Petroleum Council, said upon first blush MDE's proposed regulations appear to be the strictest in the country.
"Looking at all of the setbacks and different requirements, there are a lot of areas that would not be open [to development]," Cobbs told NGI's Shale Daily on Wednesday. "They seem much more restrictive than any other state regulations. Compared to most other states, it looks like it would be really difficult and expensive to develop [wells] here."
Cobbs added that several state lawmakers have threatened to introduce legislation that would ban fracking altogether. The General Assembly is in session from January through April.
"If the normal process occurs, [MDE's proposed rules] would be adopted before the legislature started," Cobbs said. "But then obviously if they went ahead and banned fracking, that's a whole different story."
Environmentalists continued to voice opposition to the proposed rules.
"The Hogan administration should be listening to our pleas to heed the growing body of scientific evidence against fracking," said Nadine Grabania, board secretary for the environmental group Citizen Shale. "Instead, MDE has released regulations that weaken protections already proposed.
"[We have] no confidence in the state's ability to regulate this hazardous activity, nor in its commitment to monitor and enforce those regulations. We urge the General Assembly to save our communities from the Hogan administration's plans for a misguided experiment, and to ban fracking."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107918-maryland-regulators-meet-deadline-propose-fracking-regulations
-
Companies Sue Over Wash. Carbon Rule
Sep 29, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Amanda Reilly
Natural gas companies this week filed a lawsuit to overturn Washington's new climate change rule aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions from the state's largest emitters.
The complaint filed Tuesday in federal district court claims that the rule violates the Constitution in part by discriminating against interstate commerce.
"Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a matter that needs to be addressed," the four electric utilities and natural gas local distribution companies said in their complaint. "But the importance of a problem does not warrant the imposition of unconstitutional obligations, nor an unjustified burden on interstate commerce."
The Washington Department of Ecology finalized the Clean Air Rule two weeks ago, calling it a "first-of-its-kind" approach to addressing carbon dioxide emissions. It is scheduled to take effect next month.
Overall, the rule aims to reduce the state's carbon emissions to 1990 levels by the end of the decade and 25 percent below that in 2035.
Rather than one economywide carbon cap, the rule subjects the state's 24 largest emitters to individual caps that decline by 5 percent every three years. The 100,000-metric-ton threshold that determines which businesses have to comply will also drop every three years until 2035 (ClimateWire, Sept. 16).
"We are taking leadership under our clean air act, adopting a strong and practical plan to reduce greenhouse gases, and doing our fair share to tackle climate change," Ecology Director Maia Bellon said in a statement.
Avista Corp., Cascade Natural Gas Corp., Northwest Natural Gas Co. and Puget Sound Energy Inc. filed their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. They are natural gas distributors located in Washington and petroleum product producers located in or importing to the state.
The rule is a form of "economic protectionism," the lawsuit alleges.
The companies say the rule creates barriers to interstate commerce by limiting the generation of credits under the program to in-state sources and by gradually limiting the ability of parties to use credits from external markets for compliance.
The rule "benefit[s] local industries at the expense of out-of-state industries by creating in-state demand for a service and permitting only in-state entities to meet that demand," the complaint says, "even though out-of-state entities could meet the demand just as well."
The companies asked the court to declare the rule unconstitutional and to halt the state from enforcing its provisions.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/09/29/stories/1060043644
-
A Flimsy Legal Attack on Clean Air
Sep 30, 2016 | The New York Times
By Editorial Board
In eight years, President Obama has established a strong record in fightingclimate change, including ambitious fuel efficiency standards aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions from cars and trucks.
But one very important part of his strategy remains in legal limbo — the Clean Power Plan, a rule created by the Environmental Protection Agencythat would place strict limits on carbon dioxide emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants and would force many of the dirtiest to shut down.
The rule orders states to make big cuts in carbon dioxide emissions from power plants over the next 15 years, setting individual goals for each state while giving them considerable flexibility in how to get reach them. This framework is wholly consistent with the federal-state partnerships that for years have governed the nation’s environmental statutes.
On Tuesday, however, 28 states, scores of power companies and industry groups were before the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to challenge the E.P.A.’s authority to use this approach under the Clean Air Act, on which the rule is based. Opposing them were 18 states that support the rule and dozens of environmental and public interest groups, as well as the Obama administration.
There is no question that the Clean Air Act allows the federal government to regulate carbon dioxide emissions; the Supreme Court has said it does. And there’s no question that the government can regulate these emissions from power plants; the Supreme Court has said so.
The issue is whether the E.P.A. can use an approach to regulating greenhouse gases, different from the way it has regulated other types of pollutants, like mercury emissions. Traditionally, in reducing those pollutants, the agency has required power plants to make technological improvements. But no economically feasible technology is yet available to control carbon dioxide emissions at the plant level.
The agency has therefore told the states that to meet their targets they must move “outside the fenceline” of existing power plants by, say, switching to cleaner fuels, investing in alternative forms of energy like wind and solar power and setting up cap-and-trade systems with other states. Opponents say this is a prime example of “executive overreach.” But this pragmatic strategy is entirely consistent with the Clean Air Act’s fundamental mandate to seek “the best system of emission reduction.”
he opponents also offer other objections, including a long-forgotten legislative glitch that occurred when Congress amended the Clean Air Act in 1990. The House version of the legislation said the agency could not regulate a new pollutant under one section of the law (the one it is relying on now) if it were already regulating other pollutants under another section. The Senate, in effect, said that such overlapping regulation was fine. The argument that this clerical discrepancy should keep the agency from regulating carbon dioxide is preposterous.
Of the court’s 10 judges, six are Democratic appointees, which gives the rule a good chance of surviving, as it should. Despite apocalyptic warnings from some of the opponents that the rule would destroy America’s energy system, it would in fact move that system in the same direction that the marketplace and modern technology are already driving it — toward cleaner energy alternatives, and away from the oldest and dirtiest fossil fuels.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/30/opinion/a-flimsy-legal-attack-on-clean-air.html?_r=1
-
EPA Submits Final Oil & Gas Methane ICR For OMB Review
Sep 29, 2016 | Inside EPA
EPA has submitted for White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) review the final version of its information collection request (ICR) to gather data on methane emissions from existing oil and gas operations, the last major regulatory step before the agency distributes the ICR that could inform a future methane rule.
In a Sept. 29 Federal Register notice EPA says it sent the “Information collection effort for Oil and Gas Facilities” to OMB. The updated ICR revises an earlier draft on which the agency sought public input through Aug. 2, and the new notice triggers a 90-day public comment period under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
Potential comments on the new version of the ICR could weigh in on whether it complies with the PRA, which one industry source says could be among OMB's possible concerns with the request.
Oil and gas groups that weighed in on the earlier draft version of the ICR raised a host of concerns, including about its scope given that it could provide data that would help EPA craft a methane rule for existing oil and gas operations -- but the source expects fewer of those comments on the new ICR.
The ICR is part of the agency's ongoing efforts to address air pollution concerns from the industry. EPA has finalized an update to its new source performance standards to set limits on the potent greenhouse gas methane from future industry operations. But the agency opted against such a rule for existing sources. Instead, the data collected by the ICR could help a future administration craft that regulation.
Industry groups, including the American Petroleum Institute (API), Independent Petroleum Association of America and American Exploration and Production Council, and others have previously outlined a host of concerns about the ICR's timing and scope, such as whether it will yield a “targeted collection” of data that will inform a “remaining useful life” determination, according to API.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/epa-submits-final-oil-gas-methane-icr-omb-review
-
Latest Act 13 Ruling Seen Having Few Implications For PA Oil/Gas Industry Operations
Sep 29, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
A decision from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Wednesday that again struck down parts of the state's oil and gas law, known as Act 13, was applauded by environmental advocates, while the energy industry and others met it with indifference, saying the opinion won't have much effect on daily operations.
Struck down as unconstitutional are provisions included in the 2012 law that prevented doctors from sharing information about chemical drilling additives with their patients; a requirement that regulators only notify public water authorities instead of private water well owners in the event of a hazardous spill, and eminent domain privileges for natural gas storage operators.
The high court deemed the provisions "special law" that benefited the industry instead of public interest, validating a long-time charge by the plaintiffs’ attorneys and environmental advocates. The Justices also reaffirmed a lower court ruling that denied the state Public Utility Commission's (PUC) ability to withhold impact fees from communities if local ordinances didn't comply with state drilling laws, ruling it unconstitutional.
"I think a lot of what the court struck was just legislative portions of the law that benefit the industry over citizens," said John Smith of Smith Butz LLC, who represented some of the townships that challenged Act 13 in 2012. "This is taking more away from the state and industry and giving it back to local governments. All these things weren't necessarily desired by the industry when the law was written."
Seven townships, a doctor and others challenged the law’s constitutionality four years ago. A year later, in Robinson Township et al v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the state Supreme Court struck down crucial provisions in a landmark ruling that returned to municipalities their right to change or enforce local zoning laws (see Shale Daily, Dec. 20, 2013; Dec. 27, 2013). The court remanded parts of that case to the state Commonwealth Court, which ruled in favor of the industry in 2014 on storage eminent domain, spill reporting and the medical gag order (see Shale Daily, July 17, 2014). The plaintiffs appealed to the high court and won Wednesday.
While Wednesday's ruling could give industry opponents more firepower, it is insignificant for the industry's daily operations, said Michael Krancer, an energy attorney at Blank Rome LLP, who served as secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) when Act 13 was passed.
"I really don't think these four points made here mean anything. It's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things," Krancer said. "There's a lot of rhetoric in this opinion that the opponents will use...I think this is the Supreme Court going into an academic exercise here."
Krancer said the Act 13 provision that provided eminent domain to gas storage operators first became law with the Oil and Gas Act of 1984. "The Supreme Court has portrayed this as some special deal in 2012. It's ridiculous, it's been there since 1984."
PUC spokesperson Nils Hagen-Frederiksen said the PUC is reviewing the court's decision but added that the commission has yet to issue orders denying impact fees based on a review of local zoning ordinances. DEP spokesperson Neil Shader also said the agency is reviewing the opinion but didn’t say how it might be affected. Smith said operators conduct pre-drilling water testing that would make it easy for the agency to know what water supplies might be affected in the event of a spill or leak. Krancer added that the DEP has usually notified both public and private water users regardless of the law.
Smith added that in striking the public water notification, that part of the law has been stayed for six months to give the state legislature time to rewrite it. Whether lawmakers view that as a "directive or request" from the court "only time will tell," Smith said. Krancer added that he believed the court's decision to strike down the medical gag provision removed vendors' obligations to share information altogether, rather than having to share it under a confidentiality agreement as the law was originally written.
"I'm not sure that's a win for anybody, but if it is, it's a little strange."
The Marcellus Shale Coalition had nothing to say about which aspects of the ruling might affect the industry more than others.
"We're disappointed in aspects of the court's ruling, which will make investing and growing jobs in the commonwealth more, not less, difficult without realizing any environmental or public safety benefits," MSC President David Spigelmyer said in a statement.
The environmental advocacy organization PennFuture applauded the court's decision and called it a "win for the rights of citizens, public health and safety."
The 2013 ruling, however, hinged largely on a reading of Article I, Section 27 in the state's constitution, which provides for people's right to clean air, pure water and natural scenery. Drilling opponents have used that aspect of the case to challenge local drilling permits and even executive actions in recent years (see Shale Daily, Jan. 22, 2015; Dec. 1, 2014). The validity of the amendment and how it can be used against oil and gas development is set to be decided in another case. But Krancer said Wednesday's ruling completely ignored the amendment, saying the opinion was a "lot of inside baseball on constitutional law" rather than something that could have a serious impact on the industry.
Smith said Wednesday's decision brings the Act 13 challenge to an end with a win for local governments and communities across the state.
"The legislature ignored all these constitutional rights of citizens," he said of Act 13. "I've never seen a ruling, that in such a vast fashion, knocked down so many unconstitutional aspects. The court had no trouble striking these down and calling out the industry and the legislature for running roughshod over everybody's rights."
Krancer said Act 13 was a bipartisan effort that updated a nearly 30 year-old law at the time. While Krancer agreed with Smith in saying the Robinson Township case is over, he said aspects of Act 13, its application and unrelated cases that involve the 2013 landmark ruling, will continue to be litigated for years.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107924-latest-act-13-ruling-seen-having-few-implications-for-pa-oilgas-industry-operations
-
Sierra Club to Roll Out Map of Anti-Trade Deal Efforts
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Flood
The Sierra Club launched a tool to raise awareness about energy investments that could be the subject of arbitration under the Trans-Pacific Partnership or the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
On Sept. 29, the environmental group released an interactive map of fossil fuel investments in the U.S. owned by corporations that would be entitled to investor-state dispute settlement under either of the two trade deals.
Investor-state dispute settlement is a controversial aspect of many trade deals that allows foreign investors to challenge host governments for violations of the investors’ rights in an international arbitration tribunal.
Critics say it allows large companies to circumvent domestic court systems and discourages laws and regulations designed to address legitimate public concerns, such as environmental protection.
Trade supporters, including business groups, have argued that companies are entitled to legal protection of their investments and these groups have said their actions do not force countries to change their rules and standards.
The map covers more than 70 coal mines, 30 oil refineries, more than 100 gas power plants, tens of thousands of miles of fossil fuel pipelines and millions of acres of oil and gas drilling leases and fracking projects.
Polluter Map
“Toxic trade deals shouldn't empower these corporations to undermine community efforts to keep fossil fuels in the ground,” Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program, said in a statement.
“This map is the first comprehensive look at the polluter power-grabs that the TPP and TTIP would enable—for the first time it gives people a chance to see if toxic trade is in their own backyard.”
The Sierra Club will also soon launch a significant advertising buy against “toxic trade,” a spokesman told Bloomberg BNA.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98061987&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98061987&jd=98061987
-
W.Va. Residents Push Chemical Board for Broader Look at Spill
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
Complaints from West Virginia residents led U.S. Chemical Safety Board members to vow more work on a report on a Charleston-area chemical leak that left 300,000 people without water in January 2014.
The board voted unanimously Sept. 28 at a public meeting in Charleston, W.Va., to approve the final report on the Freedom Industries leak, but directed staff to add to the report after members of the public said it could push for broader national changes.
CSB staff will add “a possible supplement or appendix to follow as we explore some of the issues raised in public comment tonight,” Chairperson Vanessa Allen Sutherland said in an unusual move.
Sutherland did not give a timetable for the change.
Board Notes Shoddy Maintenance at Site
The report found that Freedom Industries, the operator of a Charleston above-ground storage tank facility, could have prevented the leak of the chemical crude methylcyclohexanemethanol, or MCHM, on Jan. 9, 2014.
CSB investigators said there was no record anyone had inspected the inside of the tanks in at least a decade. As a result, the company had no idea that corrosion was slowly forming holes in the equipment, the board said.
Residents and water utility West Virginia American Water Co. said the CSB's report missed opportunities to push for broader changes to protect drinking water.
The report declined to issue recommendations to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. The report did include “key lessons” for operators of above ground storage tanks and states to consider, including more inspections and programs to protect sources of drinking water, though these are less formal than safety recommendations.
Maya Nye, president of People Concerned About Chemical Safety, told the board she was “quite surprised” the report didn't include a recommendation for a chemical release prevention program, though board member Rick Engler said the board's past recommendations on the issue still apply.
CSB staff said that it was not necessary to issue recommendations to West Virginia regulators because the state has since strengthened its laws on source water protection.
“States are in better positions, I think, to regulate certain types of above ground storage tanks,” said Michael Corona, CSB attorney and investigator.
In addition, the EPA is developing new Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure regulations under the Clean Water Act by 2019 under a February settlement with environmental groups, CSB staff noted.
Recommendations Stress Preparedness, Coordination
The CSB isn't the first agency to investigate the chemical spill, but it has perhaps the broadest mandate to determine its root cause. Since the incident more than two and a half years ago, federal prosecutors brought criminal charges against six former Freedom executives.
Two officials—Dennis Farrell, former shareholder and president, and Gary Southern, who was the company's president at the time of the spill—served 30 days in jail and were ordered to pay fines of $20,000 after pleading guilty to Clean Water Act violations.
The CSB's report issued recommendations to trade organizations such as the American Water Works Association, American Water Works Co. Inc., the parent company of West Virginia American Water Co., which operated the Charleston system, and to Eastman Chemical Co. Eastman is the company that manufactures MCHM.
The report asked the American Water Works Association to tell its members about the report and the need for source water protection and emergency coordination with local, state and federal agencies and the public. It also directed Eastman Chemical to update its safety data sheet for MCHM to include new information from the National Toxicology Program.
In a statement Sept. 28, West Virginia American Water Co. said it would be “more effective” if CSB made its recommendations to EPA instead of to its parent company “so that any new activities can be implemented in a balanced fashion across the industry instead of at only a very small percentage of the nation's surface water treatment plants.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98061985&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98061985&jd=98061985
-
Boxer Urges EPA To Strengthen Storage Rules
Sep 29, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Gabriel Dunsmith
California Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) asked U.S. EPA today to strengthen regulations for chemical facilities.
Boxer's letter highlights the 2013 West Fertilizer Co. explosion that killed 15 people in West, Texas.
"Millions of Americans live with the daily risk of a devastating chemical disaster," Boxer said.
The West disaster prompted President Obama to sign an executive order that year mandating federal agencies improve their chemical regulations and standards (Greenwire, Aug. 1, 2013).
EPA proposed an update to its Risk Management Program last March, a move Boxer sees as lackluster.
"EPA's proposal ... falls short of what is needed to reduce the risk faced by workers and local communities," Boxer said.
Boxer's letter comes on the heels of a Houston Chronicle report that found gaping holes in U.S. chemical storage oversight (Greenwire, Sept. 19).
Boxer, who is retiring after this term, is known for keeping a watchful eye over chemical regulations as ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. She was a key player in the passage of Toxic Substances Control Act reform legislation this year (Greenwire, June 22).
"EPA's proposed rule does not require all hazardous chemical facilities take steps to prevent, not just manage, disasters," Boxer wrote to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, noting that the agency's safe technology proposal applies to only 12 percent of the over 12,000 chemical facilities monitored by the agency.
Boxer encouraged the agency to implement inherently safer technology promoted by the U.S. Chemical Safety Board and environmental groups. She asked EPA to mandate chemical monitoring and prevention techniques.
"It is not enough merely to assess ... monitoring method[s]. ... [S]uch tools must actually be put in place to save lives," she wrote.
Boxer warned that failure to strengthen the rules will put all Americans at risk.
"EPA's rule is a rare opportunity to save lives and protect children's safety by preventing catastrophic chemical disasters," she said.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/09/29/stories/1060043646
-
Sen. Boxer Urges EPA To Tighten Facility Safety Rule
Sep 29, 2016 | Inside EPA
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) is urging EPA to tighten its proposed rule overhauling the agency's industrial facility accident prevention program by requiring that certain facilities use inherently safer technologies (IST) such as alternative chemicals or process changes, arguing that the rule as drafted fails to adequately improve safety.
EPA is seeking to issue by year-end a final rule revising its Risk Management Plan (RMP) facility accident prevention rule to require that certain facilities investigate "near misses" that could have caused accidents and to consider IST in their hazard assessments, among other changes. EPA's proposal declines advocates' long-standing calls for EPA to mandate that facilities use IST where feasible.
In a Sept. 29 letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, Boxer argues the proposed rule “falls short” of requirements needed to protect workers and communities. In pressing for EPA to require that certain facilities use IST, Boxer notes that EPA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued an alert issued last year calling IST the “first choice” for managing chemical hazards.
“EPA should do more to prevent disasters, including requiring the implementation of [IST],” Boxer says, noting that many high risk facilities are located in environmental justice communities.
“If the rule is not strengthened, every day another generation of children will grow up at risk. All workers and fenceline communities deserve the best available chemical disaster prevention and EPA’s RMP rule is the one chance in a generation to ensure strong nationwide protection,” the letter says.
EPA's March proposal overhauling RMP is part of a broad federal effort led by EPA, OSHA, and the Department of Homeland Security to implement President Obama's Aug. 1, 2013, Executive Order 13650 on improving the safety and security of the nation's industrial facilities. Obama issued the order in the wake of an April 2013 explosion at a fertilizer plant in West, TX, that killed 15 people, including first responders.
The explosion bolstered long-standing calls from environmental and labor groups for EPA to use authority under section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act to require that facilities use IST where feasible to reduce the likelihood or consequences of an attack.
The chemical sector and Republican lawmakers have opposed federal IST requirements, arguing that companies already use the safety measures where feasible, and that federal agencies lack expertise to implement such a mandate.
EPA waste chief Mathy Stanislaus indicated this spring that the agency is unlikely to significantly revise its proposal, noting that staff conducted significant outreach on the rule before issuing the proposal for public comment. He also said the decision to only require consideration, rather than use of IST, struck “very good balance.”
In addition to urging EPA to require certain facilities to use IST, Boxer calls for the agency to expand the proposed requirement for facilities to consider IST in hazard analysis to a broader array of facilities, and to require that companies submit documentation of those reviews to EPA.
Additionally, Boxer says EPA should release summaries of facility hazard reviews, scrubbed of data that would pose security concerns, to potentially-affected residents online. “Workers and surrounding communities must be able to take action locally to help protect themselves and their families,” she says.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/sen-boxer-urges-epa-tighten-facility-safety-rule
-
Lawmaker Urges USDOT To Consider Further Crude-By-Rail Regulations
Sep 30, 2016 | American Shipper
By Ben Meyer
Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Wash., sent a letter to the heads of the Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration asking DOT to study potential methods for reducing the combustib
U.S. House Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Wash., is urging the Department of Transportation to consider further regulation of freight trains carrying crude oil.
Beutler earlier this week sent a letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx, Federal Railroad Administrator Sara Feinberg and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrator Marie Therese Dominguez asking DOT to study potential methods for reducing the combustibility of crude oil trains.
Specifically, Beutler asked DOT to consider whether interspersing oil tank cars with non-volatile commodities might make them less likely to catch fire in the event of a derailment.
Beutler’s letter was prompted in large part by a growing number of destructive derailments involving crude oil trains in recent years, the largest of which claimed the lives of 47 people in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec in July 2013.
Back in June, a Union Pacific Corp. train carrying crude oil derailed near Mosier, Ore., about 68 miles east of Portland, causing some of the tank cars to burst into flames and spill oil into an adjacent section of the Columbia River. That train was en route from en route from Eastport, Idaho to Tacoma, Wash. carrying crude oil from the Bakken formation, which is more flammable and dangerous than other types of crude oil.
“Although far less catastrophic than it could have been, the [Mosier] derailment highlighted the need for strong safety measures to address shipments of volatile and hazardous commodities through the Columbia River Gorge—whether related, or unrelated to oil shipments,” Beutler wrote in the letter. “Subsequently, I am writing to request information on dispersing tank cars carrying oil, or other hazardous materials, with non-volatile products throughout trains.”
She asked DOT to consider whether continuous blocks of oil tank cars increases the risks of combustion, potential benefits of requiring disbursement of cars carrying flammable materials throughout a train, and possible effects on combustibility of use of newer DOT-117 tank cars.
In addition, Beutler asked if federal regulators have studied reducing speed limits for oil trains as a way to mitigate the risk of combustion.
Washington state lawmakers last month adopted new regulations surrounding the transportation of crude oil by rail and pipeline that officially take effect Oct. 1. Developed by the Washington Department of Ecology at the request of the legislature, Chapter 173-185 WAC, Oil Movement by Rail and Pipeline Notification, established reporting standards for facilities receiving crude oil transported by rail and pipeline, and for the department to share information with emergency responders, local governments, tribes and the public.
On the federal level, DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), in coordination with the Federal Railroad Administration, in August released final rules amending the federal hazardous materials regulations related to the transport of crude oil and ethanol by rail.
The rule changes, first introduced by DOT in May 2015 as required by the 2015 Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, include an enhanced tank car standard and an "aggressive, risk-based" retrofitting schedule for older tank cars carrying crude oil and ethanol.
In addition, the rules require trains transporting large volumes of flammable liquids to use a new braking standard; employ new operational protocols such as routing requirements and speed restrictions; share information with local government agencies; and provide new sampling and testing requirements DOT said will “improve classification of energy products placed into transport.”
The Senate in May unanimously passed the Railroad Emergency Services Preparedness, Operational Needs, and Safety Evaluation (RESPONSE) Act, which aims to provide additional training for first responders, specifically for handling freight train derailments that include hazardous materials such as crude oil.
Originally sponsored by Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., the legislation establishes a public-private council of emergency responders, federal agencies and industry stakeholders tasked with reviewing current training methods and prescribing best practices for first responders to Congress. The council will be co-chaired by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and PHMSA. Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis., has introduced a companion bill to the RESPONSE Act in the House of Representatives.
“Currently, oil trains are traveling along the Columbia River Gorge, and my focus is on ensuring federal regulations are making these shipments as safely as possible,” Beutler said in a statement. “Long lines of oil cars are becoming a more familiar sight in our region, and if breaking them up into smaller blocks will better protect our citizens, the Columbia River and nearby forests, we should put a federal standard in place—quickly.”http://www.americanshipper.com/main/news/lawmaker-urges-usdot-to-consider-further-crudebyra-65540.aspx#hide
-
Oil-Train Bans Put Northwest Economy At Risk
Sep 29, 2016 | The Seattle Times
By Ozzie Knezovich and John Stuhlmiller
AS representatives of Washington’s law enforcement and agriculture communities, we would encourage a more thoughtful discussion on oil-train bans, one that includes the bigger economic picture for our state’s economy.
No one argues that rail safety must remain a top priority. Working together with the railroads and first responders, we will continue our vigilance in an effort to keep communities safe.
What’s at issue is the very foundation of our economy — trade — and the manner in which the vast majority of our agricultural and aerospace products are transported to foreign and domestic markets: by rail.
Agriculture is the state’s second largest export category, and we are the third largest food and agricultural exporter in the United States. Our apples, grains, milk products, beef and other commodities all rely on safe rail transport to export terminals. And for more than 100 years, trains have safely carried those products, along with oil, through Washington and the Western U.S.
Yet because of pressure from interest groups, some local elected officials have taken to calling for oil-train bans. [“Northwest communities can’t risk another oil train disaster,” Opinion, Sept. 8.] Not only are these bans illegal and unconstitutional (railroads are stringently governed by federal law), but they jeopardize rail transport of commodities that drive our trade status and economy.
In Spokane, where City Council members debated an oil-train issue this summer, the proposal was propelled by the same well-funded, out-of-state interest groups who are trying to shut down every new pipeline, rail line and power-plant project across the country in an effort to end fossil-fuel use. Widespread outrage and community protest prompted the council to smartly rescind the ordinance and remove it from the fall ballot.
Other communities in our state are battling similar proposals right now. As a result, good-paying jobs are threatened because of the anti-industrial efforts of a few outspoken groups. The chosen battleground isn’t Congress or the Legislature — it’s the local city or county councils. Once those types of skilled jobs are gone, they are very difficult to add back. And the losses can impact communities for generations.
What’s even more worrisome is the capriciousness of these proposed bans. Rail is a major employer in our state. Washington’s two largest railroads, Union Pacific and BNSF, provide more than 3,500 jobs, with an average salary of $78,000. These are good-paying jobs that help feed families, pay taxes and support our police, hospitals and schools. Each year, companies like BNSF make major investments in their rail lines to preserve, maintain and grow freight-rail capacity in our trade-dependent state.
Oil-train bans set a dangerous precedent with respect to our economy and industrial sector, singling out the unpopular commodity of the day. Today, it may be fossil fuels; tomorrow, it could be aerospace parts, health-care supplies or specific agricultural products.
It’s important to note we’re not the only ones who can do this. Other cities in other states could easily retaliate by banning Washington state commodities. Entire economic sectors could be eliminated in one fell swoop.
Whether you live in Spokane or Seattle, trade is what drives our economy here in Washington. Our ports, fed by a strong grid of rail lines, deliver a variety of commodities to all corners of the globe. And the actions of one community can have a profound impact on the rest of us who look at trade-related businesses and industries as the lifeblood of our economy.
We may be hundreds of miles apart on a map, but our rail system connects both sides of the Cascades in many big and small ways.
Ozzie Knezovich has been the sheriff of Spokane County since 2006 and a member of the law enforcement profession for more than 25 years. John Stuhlmiller is the CEO of the Washington Farm Bureau.
http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/oil-train-bans-put-northwest-economy-at-risk/
-
(ACC Mentioned) North Carolina County Joins WRAP Campaign
Sep 29, 2016 | Recycling Today
The Flexible Film Recycling Group (FFRG) of the American Chemistry Council (ACC), Washington, has joined officials from Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and Charlotte to introduce a campaign designed to increase recycling of plastic wraps and bags throughout the county. City and county officials announced the campaign, which is part of the WRAP (Wrap Recycling Action Program), at the Harris Teeter store in the Ballantyne Commons East shopping center, one of many local grocery and retail stores that accept plastic wraps and bags for recycling in storefront bins.
Nationwide, more than 18,000 grocery and retail stores collect flexible plastic wraps and bags (also known as “film”) for recycling—yet consumer awareness remains low, the ACC says.
A recent survey of Mecklenburg County residents found that only half are aware that certain plastic items should be brought to grocery or retail stores to ensure proper recycling. Plus, few residents are aware of the many types of plastic wraps and bags that can be recycled. ACC says the Mecklenburg County campaign is designed to change that.
At the kickoff event, local officials pointed out that although plastic wraps and bags are widely collected for recycling at many grocery and retail stores throughout the county, residents should not place these materials in curbside recycling bins because they can cause significant problems with machinery at the community recycling facility. Putting plastic bags or wraps in curbside bins makes recycling more difficult, time consuming and expensive, officials said.
Shari Jackson, director of film recycling for ACC, echoed these remarks at the event. “As you will hear time and again today, these plastic wraps and bags do not belong in your curbside recycling bins,” Jackson said. “Residents can simply gather their clean and dry plastic wraps and bags in a plastic shopping bag at home and then deposit that bag in a storefront recycling bin at participating Mecklenburg County grocery and retail stores.”
Mecklenburg County residents can learn where and what to recycle at www.RecycleTheWrap.com.
WRAP is a public-private partnership that promotes recycling of plastic film beyond bags. The partnership includes the FFRG, GreenBlue/the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, the Association of Plastics Recyclers, brand companies, retailers, states, cities and other. The Mecklenburg County campaign is expected to serve as a model for other areas in North Carolina and eventually the entire state, ACC says.
The campaign includes advertising on billboards, buses, newspapers, radio and social media. The goals are to increase the amount of plastic wraps and bags being returned to retailers for recycling, reduce unwanted wraps and bags in curbside bins and help reduce litter.
Mecklenburg County residents can recycle the following plastics at Harris Teeter and other participating stores: plastic bags, such grocery bags, produce bags, bread bags, dry cleaning bags, newspaper bags and food storage bags (even sealable food bags and bags with “zippers”); plastic wraps from beverage cases, diapers, bathroom tissue and paper towels; bubble wrap; and shipping pillows. Residents can recycle any thin, flexible plastic wrap labeled with a No. 2, No. 4 or the How2Recycle store drop-off label.
http://www.recyclingtoday.com/article/mecklenburg-county-joins-wrap/
-
UN Official: Climate Deal's Entry Into Force Now Weeks Away
Sep 30, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The Paris climate pact is now poised to enter into force even before nearly 200 nations resume talks in November at a United Nations climate summit in Morocco, with India set to join Oct. 2 and a handful of European nations queuing up to join as early as next week, a UN official said Sept. 29.
India will deposit its instrument of ratification Oct. 2, putting the global climate deal reached just last December in Paris tantalizingly close to entry into force in under a year.
European environment ministers this weekend are to mull over ways to fast-track the bloc's ratification requirements to essentially allow five nations that have already joined the measure to deposit their instruments of ratification as early as next week, said Selwin Hart, director of the UN Secretary-General's Climate Change Support Team.
If the European Union members that have already ratified can go forward—Germany, France, Austria, Slovakia and Hungary—"we will see entry into force of the Paris Agreement in time for the Marrakesh COP,” the Conference of the Parties summit that runs Nov. 7-18, Hart said at a press conference at UN headquarters in New York.
3 Percent Away From Threshold
To take effect, the deal must be joined by at least 55 nations accounting for at least 55 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions; 61 parties have done so, including big emitters such as the U.S. and China. But the parties are still short of the 55 percent emissions requirement.
India's move on Oct. 2 will leave the Paris Agreement just 3 percent shy of the emissions threshold, Hart said.
India accounts for about 4 percent of the global total, while the entire EU accounts for 12 percent.
The U.S. and China--which account for nearly 40 percent of the global total--formally joined the Paris Agreement Sept. 3; they were followed by another top-10 emitter, Brazil, which ratified on Sept. 12.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98061980&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98061980&jd=98061980
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested