Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 5/18/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) CEFIC: Members Will Only Sell GHB Intermediate to Legitimate Industry Users
May 18, 2017 | In-PharmaTechnologist.com
By Gareth MacDonald
Cefic has agreed to make sure its members only sell the intermediate gamma butyrolactone (GBL) to legitimate users to stop it being abused or used in “date rape” drug GHB. -
Democrats Prod Trump Interior Nominee over Lobbying Work
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Senators dug into the background of an Interior Department nominee on Thursday, raising concerns about conflicts of interest and his time in the George W. Bush administration. -
(ACC Mentioned) Regulatory Reform Bills Clear Senate Committee
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
A Senate committee has advanced a slate of regulatory reform measures, including the hotly contested Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA). -
US EPA Issues Conditional New Substance Approval Under TSCA
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has issued a conditional section 5(a)(3)(C) determination for a substance that was the subject of pre-manufacture notice (PMN). The substance is: -
States Urged To Address PFC Contamination In Absence Of EPA Standard
May 18, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Environmentalists and others are pressing state governments to more aggressively address perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs), a class of emerging contaminants, in drinking water, urging them to set strict enforceable standards in the absence of regulation from EPA. -
US Considering Measure on Menstrual Products Ingredient Disclosure
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US Congress is considering a bill that would require labelling of ingredients in menstrual products. -
OECD Test Guidelines Should Have New Endocrine Disrupting Endpoints, Says JRC
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Most available mammalian in vivo assays do not inform endocrine disrupting chemicals' mechanisms of action, according to an expert survey by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC). -
EU Commission Delays EDC Criteria Vote
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission decided not to put its latest proposed criteria to identify endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) to a formal vote at today’s meeting of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (SCoPAFF). -
Can Linings Switch from BPA Epoxies to PVC, Say NGOs
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Three NGOs have released an updated report on BPA in can food liners that shows a decline in its use – and that in some cases, they say, firms have switched to using PVC linings instead. -
US EPA and Swiss Institute to Put UVCB Structures in Open Databases
May 18, 2017 |
By Emma Davies
Scientists from the US EPA and the Swiss Federal Institute for Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag) are working together to put "representative" structures for chemicals of unknown or variable composition (UVCBs) into virtual chemical libraries. -
New York Proposes Revisions to Perc in Dry Cleaning Regulations
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
New York State's Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has proposed repealing and replacing state regulations on the use of perchloroethlyene (perc) and alternative solvents in commercial dry cleaning facilities. -
EU Member States Back Chromates Authorisation Applications
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
EU member states have agreed to grant two companies authorisation for uses of certain chromates and one company for a use of bis(2-methoxyethyl)ether (diglyme). These substances are listed as SVHCs under REACH Annex XIV. -
GOP Senators Push Trump for DOE Research Funding
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Six Senate Republicans sent President Trump a letter Thursday to advocate for strong funding for the Department of Energy’s research programs, which the president has threatened to cut. -
Energy Grant Freeze Worries Senators, Including Murkowski
May 17, 2017 | Roll Call
By Jeremy Dillon
Senators are seeking assurances that a Trump administration freeze on certain grants by the Department of Energy does not become permanent. -
Despite Four Decades and $500 Billion, The Energy Department Hasn't Accomplished Much
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By Mark P. Mills
Four decades ago, the movie Star Wars was released and the first Apple II computer went on sale. That same year, 1977, newly-inaugurated President Carter established the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in an attempt to launch a government-inspired tech revolution... -
West Coast Natural Gas Coup
May 17, 2017 | Wall Street Journal
By Editorial Board
Markets reeled on Wednesday at the sign of turmoil in Washington, but some good news came out of Coos County, Oregon, where three-quarters of voters on Tuesday rejected a referendum seeking to block the Jordan Cove liquefied natural gas terminal and a connecting... -
Revamping Natural Gas Policy Will Make America Build Again
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By Dave McCurdy
There are 2.7 million miles of paved roads in our country, and many Americans can attest to the substandard state of our streets, highways and bridges. -
(ACC Mentioned) By Delaying Chemical Safety Rule, Pruitt Endangers First Responders and Refinery Towns
May 18, 2017 | Truth-Out
By Daniel Ross
At 8:48 a.m. on the morning of February 18, 2015, an explosion at the ExxonMobil Torrance refinery in Southern California ripped through the facility with such ferocity, the resulting shockwaves registered on the Richter scale. -
Non-Routine Activity Caused 2015 Del. Flash Fire
May 18, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
The flash fire that broke out at the Delaware City Refining Co. in 2015 and gave a worker second- and third-degree burns was caused by a non-routine maintenance operation, according to the U.S. Chemical Safety Board. -
EPA Asks Judges to Back Ruling Avoiding National CWA 'Blending' Order
May 18, 2017 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
EPA is asking a federal appeals court to reject municipal wastewater authorities' call to rehear a ruling that blocked their bid for a court order enforcing nationwide restrictions on the agency's Clean Water Act (CWA) authority to bar “blending” at treatment plants...
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) CEFIC: Members Will Only Sell GHB Intermediate to Legitimate Industry Users
May 18, 2017 | In-PharmaTechnologist.com
By Gareth MacDonald
Cefic has agreed to make sure its members only sell the intermediate gamma butyrolactone (GBL) to legitimate users to stop it being abused or used in “date rape” drug GHB.
...In a statement this week Cefic said the “code served a starting point for an international code that was developed together with the American ChemistryCouncil...
§ Access to full text unavailable – subscription required.
Story can be found here: http://www.in-pharmatechnologist.com/Ingredients/CEFIC-members-will-only-sell-GHB-intermediate-to-industry-users
-
Democrats Prod Trump Interior Nominee over Lobbying Work
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Senators dug into the background of an Interior Department nominee on Thursday, raising concerns about conflicts of interest and his time in the George W. Bush administration.
David Bernhardt faced the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee three weeks after President Trump nominated him to be the Interior Department’s deputy secretary.
Democrats used a hearing to probe his work as a lobbyist and the possible influence he could have over government decisions involving his former clients.
“Mr. Bernhardt is a now seeking to come back through this revolving door and be part of regulating and overseeing the same issues for which he was lobbying in the private sector,” Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the ranking Democrat on the committee, said.
Cantwell based her questioning around any role Bernhardt might have played in Trump administration decisions so far this year.
One of Bernhardt’s firm’s clients, Cadiz, Inc., received federal permission in March to move forward with a water project that had previously been denied by the Obama administration.
Bernhardt said he was not involved in that decision or others made so far this year. But Cantwell said he should recuse himself from any decisions involving former clients for his entire tenure, not just the one-year period established by administration ethics rules.
“If I get a whiff of something coming why that involves a former client or my firm, I will make that item go straight to the ethics office and whatever they decide, that will be it for me,” Bernhardt said.
Bernhardt serves as chairman of the natural resources law practice at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, a position that earned him at least $1.1 million last year from both the firm and lobbying work for more than a dozen energy and mining firms, according to financial disclosure forms.
Bernhardt has said he will recuse himself from deciding matters involving his former clients for up to one year.
“I have signed the exact same agreements my predecessors have, and I will stand by that,” he said.
Democrats also raised concerns about Bernhardt’s history in the Bush administration’s Interior Department, where he served for eight years.
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) asked about his approach to science, noting reports that Interior changed scientific research related to oil drilling during his tenure.
“I’ve looked at your long history of lobbying for oil and gas stakeholders and the fact that you’ve even litigated against the Interior Department on behalf of private interests,” she said.
Bernhardt said he wasn’t involved in changing scientific data. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), also noting Bernhardt’s career working for oil and gas firms, asked about his use of science as a federal official.
“We’re going to look at the science, whatever it is, but policy decisions are made,” Bernhardt said. “This president ran, and he won, on a particular policy perspective. That perspective’s not going to change, to the extent we have the discretion under the law to follow it.”
Despite Democrats’ concerns, the hearing was less contentious than was expected, given the intense opposition Bernhardt’s nomination has garnered.
Greens and environmental groups have blasted Bernhardt over his lobbying background, worrying he will favor energy and mining firms over conservation interests.
On Wednesday, 150 groups sent a letter to Congress calling Bernhardt a “walking conflict of interest” given his private-sector history.
But Republicans lined up to support Bernhardt’s nomination on Thursday, saying his experience in the Interior Department and his expertise in energy and environmental policy makes him qualified for the position.
“I believe Mr. Bernhardt is an excellent choice for deputy secretary,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), the chairwoman of the committee, said.
Bernhardt’s backers looked to boost his conservation credentials, passing out letters supporting his nomination from western water associations, conservation organizations, tribes, sportsmen’s groups and others.
Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), who introduced Bernhardt, called him a “a strong voice for the West and extremely well-qualified for the nomination to be deputy secretary.”
Gardner looked to relieve concerns about Bernhardt’s lobbying history.
“There have been other nominees considered by this committee who have practiced public law before and between public service appointments to Interior,” he said.
“Dave Bernhardt’s integrity and ability are two of his strongest qualifications for this nomination.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/334073-dems-prod-trump-interior-nominee-over-lobbying-history
-
(ACC Mentioned) Regulatory Reform Bills Clear Senate Committee
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
A Senate committee has advanced a slate of regulatory reform measures, including the hotly contested Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA).
The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved the bipartisan bill (S 951) yesterday on a 9-5 vote.
Like a similar measure passed by the House (HR 5), the RAA would impose new cost-benefit analysis, invite earlier public participation on significant rules, and build in an automatic review process for major regulations.
Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D–North Dakota), co-sponsor of the measure with Rob Portman (R–Ohio), said the bill contains "commonsense, effective reforms that support job growth, improve certainty and keep our communities safe".
In February, Ms Heitkamp was one of two Democratic senators to vote to confirm Scott Pruitt as EPA administrator.
The committee also advanced several additional regulatory reform measures. These were:
· Midnight Rules Relief Act of 2017 (S 34);
· Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act (S 21);
· Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act (S 577);
· Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act (S 584); and
· Early Participation in Regulations Act (S 579).
The push to change how the federal government manages regulations has been a prominent feature of the early months of the Trump administration. While Congress considers a slate of bills, federal agencies arereviewing regulations that could be repealed, reformed or modified, in keeping with one of several regulatory executive orders.Lines drawn on RAA
The US Chamber of Commerce is championing the RAA on behalf of more than 600 industry groups.
In a letter to the committee, it said that regulations should be "narrowly tailored, be supported by strong and credible data and evidence, and impose the least burden possible". It has urged swift passage of the bill.
Among signatories to the chamber's letter are the National Association of Chemical Distributors and American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) registered its support for HR 5 in January, but has not publicly shared a position on the Senate's version.
But NGOs remain strongly opposed to the legislation. A coalition of 14 consumer and environmental advocacy groups – including the Natural Resources Defense Fund (NRDC), the advocacy arm of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), and Earthjustice – also wrote to senators on the eve of the markup, urging opposition.
The measure would "impose new, almost insurmountable barriers to rulemaking … [and] make even the most critical safeguards nearly impossible to attain by tilting the entire regulatory system against those who think a new rule is needed to protect the public," it said.
Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, called the measure "a thinly disguised assault on the government’s ability to protect us from polluters and dangerous products".
Some in industry have dismissed concerns that the measures would impede the successful implementation of the new TSCA. However, others in the NGO community have questioned whether the RAA would effectively re-impose the "least burdensome" requirement for risk management actions that stymied the EPA's ability to regulate substances under the pre-reformed law.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55965/regulatory-reform-bills-clear-senate-committee
-
US EPA Issues Conditional New Substance Approval Under TSCA
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has issued a conditional section 5(a)(3)(C) determination for a substance that was the subject of pre-manufacture notice (PMN). The substance is:
· generic 2-alkenoic acid, 2-alkyl-, alkyl ester, polymer with 2-alkyl 2-propenoate and -(2-alkyl-1-oxo-2-alken-1-yl--alkoxypoly(oxy-1,2-alkanediyl), ester with -2-alken-1-yl--hydroxypoly(oxy-1,2-alkanediyl), intended for use as an open, non-dispersive additive.
It was determined not likely to present an unreasonable risk, based on low human health and environmental hazard. But the decision includes a "polymer exemption flag", which says the substance must be manufactured such that it meets polymer exemption criteria.
The agency also made a "not likely" determination for a microbial commercial activity notice (MCAN).
The EPA issued these decisions on 27 April. Both reviews began on 1 February.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55863/us-epa-issues-conditional-new-substance-approval-under-tsca
-
States Urged To Address PFC Contamination In Absence Of EPA Standard
May 18, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Environmentalists and others are pressing state governments to more aggressively address perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs), a class of emerging contaminants, in drinking water, urging them to set strict enforceable standards in the absence of regulation from EPA.
Earlier this month, Delaware Riverkeeper Network petitioned Pennsylvania regulators to set a statewide, enforceable drinking water standard for one of the most common PFCs, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), primarily in response to high levels of the chemical found in drinking water wells in southeastern Pennsylvania communities. In addition, the group sent out a call in April among its members to take action to urge New Jersey regulators to move forward on another, less common PFC -- perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) -- by setting a permanent groundwater standard and promulgating a drinking water level for the chemical.
Furthermore, lawmakers in New Hampshire are weighing legislation in the state House that would give state environmental regulators the authority to set a drinking water standard for PFCs, rather than relying on EPA health advisories, as current regulations require, according to a May 9 article by WMUR News 9 in New Hampshire.
Vermont last year set a drinking water standard for the two most common PFCs -- PFOA and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) at 20 parts per trillion (ppt) -- more stringent than EPA's 2016 non-enforceable health advisories of 70 ppt for the two chemicals.
States particularly in the Northeast appear heavily focused on the issue, with the Northeast Waste Management Officials' Association (NEWMOA) hosting workshops earlier this month for state regulators to provide information on investigating and treating sites with PFCs contamination.
The chemicals were used in a slew of consumer and industrial applications and in fire fighting foam, contaminating fire-fighting training sites across the country. They have been linked to adverse health effects, including several cancers.
Robert Bilott, a lawyer with the law firm Taft Stettinius & Hollister who has long urged EPA to set drinking water standards for PFOA and investigate and remediate PFC sites, sees a push among several states to take action on PFC drinking water contamination under state laws or regulations, "[g]iven the persisting lack of any enforceable federal limits for PFCs in drinking water."
He tells Inside EPA in a written response to questions that as PFCs are being found in drinking water servicing millions of people, "residents are understandably demanding immediate clean water supplies and blood testing/health monitoring, and states are looking for ways to allocate those costs to the appropriate responsible parties."
In addition to Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, some level of activity on developing state limits or safety levels is also occurring in New York, Michigan and Minnesota, he said. Bilott, who has represented thousands of plaintiffs potentially exposed to PFCs in their drinking water from DuPont's Washington Works, WV, facility, has pressured EPA for more than 15 years to investigate and remediate PFOA contamination in drinking water. He also has long asked EPA to set enforceable regulatory limits on PFOA and has called for stricter health advisory levels.
States' 'Initiative'
A source with Delaware Riverkeeper says the "lack of action on the part of EPA is one reason states need to take the initiative," noting it is crucial for states to adopt safe drinking water standards. The source says while EPA still needs to adopt a federal safe drinking water standard, known as a maximum contaminant level (MCL), for PFC chemicals, states should also adopt such standards, addressing the specific conditions within their state, and where needed set stricter levels than any federal level.
EPA has not established any MCL since the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act outlined the current process for doing so and has only identified one contaminant -- perchlorate -- as needing federal regulation. Under a consent decree with environmental groups, EPA committed to proposing a perchlorate standard by Oct. 31, 2018, and finalizing a standard in December 2019, but that timeline has been called into question after peer reviewers recently questioned the ability of a model EPA intends to use in setting the perchlorate standard to perform its purpose.
In his confirmation process, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt told Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) that, if confirmed, he planned to evaluate PFOA's health effects under both the Toxic Substances Control Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. But he did not provide specifics on how he would do that other than to say that he would work collaboratively with state and local governments on the issue and suggested small communities apply for a newly authorized grant program that could enable them to test water systems for emerging contaminants.
Another environmentalist says that under Obama EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, EPA considered PFCs to be a state issue, so it was a natural move for states to take the lead. This source cautions, however, that "many states will not adopt advisory levels, to say nothing of enforceable standards."
But one state official last year noted obstacles for New Jersey in pursuing potentially responsible party cleanups of PFCs, citing the lack of clear federal regulatory authority, funding and remediation standards.
With environmental issues getting a lot of national attention in the current political climate, the second environmentalist expects to see heightened attention to PFCs among state regulators and legislatures, and as a result environmental standards. The source says this is because the class of chemicals can be measured in the blood of children and adults. The source also notes that the issue is bipartisan as some of the hotspots of contamination are in congressional districts represented by Republicans.
In Pennsylvania, Delaware Riverkeeper May 9 announced it had submitted a petition to the state's Environmental Hearing Board and Department of Environmental Protection, asking the board to set a statewide MCL for PFOA. The group is seeking immediate action to set an MCL between 1 and 6 ppt, according to a May 9 press release.
"The EPA health advisory level does not provide the protection people need because it allows PFOA to remain in the water at dangerous concentrations," the release says. It notes that responses to discovering PFOA in drinking water "has been uneven and lacks comprehensive policy."
Further, it says, "Adoption of [an] MCL for PFOA will require regular sampling for PFOA in Pennsylvania water systems, removal of the toxic compound, uniformly consistent protection practices, and will help to locate the pollution so it can be cleaned up," it says.
The Riverkeeper source says the group has not yet received a response from the state.
Water Standards
In New Jersey, the group has called on members to urge the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to add PFNA to the list of hazardous substances under the state's spill act, adopt an interim groundwater quality standard for the chemical as a permanent standard, and adopt MCLs for PFOA and PFNA at the recommended levels.
New Jersey has undertaken an effort to promulgate a formal groundwater quality standard for PFNA, after the state set an interim standard of 10 ppt, a state official said last fall. But the Riverkeeper source argues New Jersey has let the state Drinking Water Quality Institute recommendation on the chemical languish for almost two years.
While PFNA is a less commonly detected PFC, the levels and spread of PFNA in the vicinity of Paulsboro, NJ, and the Solvay Specialty Polymers USA plant in West Deptford, NJ, are far higher than anywhere else, a Delaware Riverkeeper source has said
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/states-urged-address-pfc-contamination-absence-epa-standard
-
US Considering Measure on Menstrual Products Ingredient Disclosure
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US Congress is considering a bill that would require labelling of ingredients in menstrual products.
The Menstrual Products Right to Know Act (HR 2416) was reintroduced in the House of Representatives last week by Grace Meng (D–New York) and Carolyn Maloney (D–New York).
Like a similar measure presented last session, it would seek to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to deem as misbranded any menstrual product that does not bear a label listing the name of each ingredient or component, in order of predominance.
"Consumers are being denied access to crucial information that affects their safety and enables them to make informed choices," said Ms Meng. The bill – which would cover menstrual cups, pads and tampons; therapeutic vaginal douche apparatuses; and obstetrical and gynecological devices – "would finally change that", she added.
Ms Maloney also reintroduced a separate bill (HR 2379) that would direct the National Institute of Health (NIH) to research the risks posed by the presence of dioxin, chlorine, colourants, dyes, preservatives, fragrances and other chemicals used in feminine care products.Supporters rally
Women’s Voices for the Earth is hosting a rally on 23 May in support of the measures.
Erin Switalski, WVE executive director, said that disclosure of ingredients in feminine products "is necessary so that women can have the information they need to make safe choices to protect their reproductive health".
Several NGOs will be joining in support at the rally, including the Environmental Working Group, Safer Chemicals Healthy Families and the Sierra Club.
Personal care products manufacturer Seventh Generation – which already discloses ingredients – is also backing the measure.
"We are teaming up to empower women to make informed decisions when it comes to the products we are putting in our bodies, and strongly believe we have a right to avoid ingredients like fragrance – no matter how those ingredients are regulated," said the company's director of mission advocacy and engagement, Ashley Orgain.
Both bills have been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55950/us-considering-measure-on-menstrual-products-ingredient-disclosure
-
OECD Test Guidelines Should Have New Endocrine Disrupting Endpoints, Says JRC
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Most available mammalian in vivo assays do not inform endocrine disrupting chemicals' mechanisms of action, according to an expert survey by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC).
The JRC asked 40 experts, representing 15 countries and different stakeholder groups, a series of questions on EDC test methods in order to identify gaps.
OECD test guidelines (TGs) should be upgraded with new endocrine disrupting endpoints, said the experts. General mechanistic information from the enhanced TGs could then be used to inform adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) and identify key events that can be targeted by new or existing in vitro methods, they added.
When it comes to developing new or enhanced test methods for relevant endocrine-related diseases/disorders, thyroid-related disorders top the priority list, followed by metabolic and immune-related disorders.
One key element, missing from tests on endocrine disruption pathways, is the ability to take into account metabolism and bioavailability in vitro. This could be addressed by adding external metabolising systems and improving prediction models, suggested the experts.
OECD conceptual framework
The survey also asked for opinions of the current OECD conceptual framework, which focuses on oestrogenic and androgenic effects. Comments suggested that "this should be widened to other relevant pathways", according to a JRC summary.
For example, several experts suggested that there should be a greater emphasis on thyroid mechanisms of action.
The survey also asked the experts about the potential use of epigenetic tests within the conceptual framework. One expert pointed out that whether epigenetics plays a role in environmental chemical induced disease remains an open question. It is "still an open area of research", said another.
The survey results will be used to guide an expert workshop to set priorities for future test method development for endocrine disruption. Held by the Commission's DG Environment and the JRC, the workshop will take place in Brussels from 30 May to 1 June.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55968/oecd-test-guidelines-should-have-new-endocrine-disrupting-endpoints-says-jrc
-
EU Commission Delays EDC Criteria Vote
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission decided not to put its latest proposed criteria to identify endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) to a formal vote at today’s meeting of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (SCoPAFF).
Chemical Watch understands that an indicative vote recorded 15 member states in favour of the latest proposal, three against and nine abstentions, while France took no position.
The Commission said it would reopen discussions and a possible vote at the next meeting on 30 May.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55983/eu-commission-delays-edc-criteria-vote
-
Can Linings Switch from BPA Epoxies to PVC, Say NGOs
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Three NGOs have released an updated report on BPA in can food liners that shows a decline in its use – and that in some cases, they say, firms have switched to using PVC linings instead.
The study, from the Center for Environmental Health, Safer Chemicals Healthy Families and the Campaign for Healthier Solutions, follows up a 2016 report which tested for the presence of the potential reproductive toxicant in canned goods.
It found 38% linings contained BPA, down from 67% in last year's report. This was based on testing of 252 cans from four major retailers and dollar stores.
But the authors say that despite these advances, "more work is needed" by the nation’s leading retailers.
And some substitute linings, they say, have "not been adequately evaluated for safety", while other companies have transitioned to "toxic substitute" linings like PVC.
The report authors have reiterated their call for retailers to eliminate BPA from all food cans and packaging, while ensuring substitutes are safe.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55969/can-linings-switch-from-bpa-epoxies-to-pvc-say-ngos
-
US EPA and Swiss Institute to Put UVCB Structures in Open Databases
May 18, 2017 |
By Emma Davies
Scientists from the US EPA and the Swiss Federal Institute for Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag) are working together to put "representative" structures for chemicals of unknown or variable composition (UVCBs) into virtual chemical libraries.
The plan is to help screen complex chemical mixtures in the environment, using high resolution mass spectrometry. Many UVCB chemicals are currently absent from databases.
"The challenges here are to select representative structures in a systematic and reproducible way with careful assumptions, that will enable us to use current cheminformatics methods on these select members of UVCBs," said the institute's Emma Schymanski.
Increasing numbers of "chemicals of interest", coupled with ever-decreasing detection limits, pose a tough challenge when it comes to screening complex samples, write Dr Schymanski and Antony Williams from the EPA, in a viewpoint article in Environmental Science and Technology.
Addressing these challenges requires freely available cheminformatics tools and database resources, they say.
The EPA and the institute are collaborating to improve levels of open science to help identify "known unknowns" – chemicals that are unknown to an investigator but contained in a database or literature source.
For example, the institute is involved in the EPA's Comptox chemistry dashboard. Launched in 2016, the dashboard now contains information on 747,000 chemicals.
Both are also part of the Norman network, which was originally established with EU funding and brings together reference labs, research centres and related organisations to monitor emerging environmental chemicals. The network has a "suspect list exchange" and lists are gradually being integrated into CompTox.
Drs Schymanski and Williams call for researchers to put scientific data into accessible online resources.
High resolution mass spectrometry will also detect chemicals not yet captured in chemical databases (unknown unknowns) and those hidden by industry confidentiality, they write.
"If these structures aren't in any databases … then it is hard to 'deal' with them. We are working on changing that," Dr Schymanski told Chemical Watch.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55964/us-epa-and-swiss-institute-to-put-uvcb-structures-in-open-databases
-
New York Proposes Revisions to Perc in Dry Cleaning Regulations
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
New York State's Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has proposed repealing and replacing state regulations on the use of perchloroethlyene (perc) and alternative solvents in commercial dry cleaning facilities.
DEC aims to align the state's requirements with the EPA's National Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities rule issued in 2008. That includes the incorporation of the existing federal ban on the installation of perc dry cleaning machines in residential buildings, and the required removal of all perc dry cleaning machines from residential buildings by 21 December 2020.
The state also plans to establish an approval process for alternative dry cleaning solvents. Prohibition of unapproved alternative solvents is scheduled for 180 days after the rule proposed rule takes effect.
DEC is currently accepting stakeholder comments on the proposal and plans to hold a public hearing soon.
Several states have regulations restricting the use of perc in commercial dry cleaning, including Maine, Ohio, Delaware and Texas.
Perc – also known as tetrachloroethylene – has been named as one of the first ten substances to be subject to risk evaluation under the new TSCA.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55951/new-york-proposes-revisions-to-perc-in-dry-cleaning-regulations
-
EU Member States Back Chromates Authorisation Applications
May 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
EU member states have agreed to grant two companies authorisation for uses of certain chromates and one company for a use of bis(2-methoxyethyl)ether (diglyme). These substances are listed as SVHCs under REACH Annex XIV.
At its 10 May REACH Committee meeting, member states backed an application from Praxair Surface Technologies for two uses of chromium trioxide with these conditional uses:
· industrial spraying or brush application of chromium trioxide mixtures for the coating of metallic articles subject to harsh environment. This is to ensure a high temperature corrosion and oxidation resistance, as well as deposit-resistant properties of the surface or lubricity at high temperature. It is for automotive, aviation, power generation machinery, oil and gas and marine applications. The recommended review period is seven years, expiring on 21 September 2024; and
· industrial spraying of chromium trioxide mixtures for the coating of metallic articles subject to harsh environment to ensure either a low temperature-cured coating for corrosion protection, or a high temperature corrosion and oxidation resistance with reduction of surface roughness, or a high temperature adhesive. This is to be used for aviation, power generation machinery, oil and gas and marine applications. The recommended review period is 12 years, expiring on 21 September 2029.
Member states also approved a Nexter Mechanics application for the following industrial uses of chromium trioxide in a mixture for:
· the hard chromium plating of military armament parts in order to ensure surface hardness, resistance to atmospheric corrosion, abrasive wear resistance and friction coefficient for parts in relative movement. There is a recommended review period of seven years, expiring on 21 September 2024;
· the black colour hard chromium plating of exterior surface of steel weapon barrels designed for military use. This is to ensure, during the whole gun barrel service life, stealth, erosion, corrosion and high temperature resistances in the conditions of uses. This also has a recommended review period of seven years, expiring on 21 September 2024; and
· the hard chromium plating of military armament steel parts, which are thermomechanically stressed and in contact with oxidising gas at high temperature. This is to ensure a thermal barrier with high melting point, resistance to wear and oxidation associated with weapons, as well as resistance to impact and atmospheric corrosion. There is a recommended review period of 12 years, for this, expiring on 21 September 2029.
Nexter Mechanics and Nexter Systems were also granted authorisation for the industrial use of chromium trioxide, in a specific mixture by spraying or immersion, and of dichromium tris(chromate) in a specific mixture by pen application, for the chromate conversion coating of welded mechanical structures of armoured vehicles and associated parts. These parts are made of high mechanical property aluminium alloys for military use, and require a maintained electrical conductivity after severe climatic environments, atmospheric corrosion resistance and paint adhesion. The recommended review period is seven years, expiring on 21 September 2024.
In addition, committee members permitted Novartis Ringaskiddy the use of bis(2-methoxyethyl)ether (diglyme) as a solvent in the manufacturing process of an intermediate for further conversion into a pharmaceutical compound used in medicinal products for treatment of respiratory diseases. The recommended review period is seven years, expiring on 22 August 2024.
Expressions of concern were received late in the day from member states on a joint application from Kromatek, Cr-Te Plating, Kova-Kromi, Pirkan Kovakromaus, Saizeri Plating, Turun Kovakromi and Veljekset Wallenius for the use of chromium trioxide in Cr(VI)-based functional plating. This resulted in the postponement of a vote until the next REACH Committee meeting in June.
In March, the Committee approved applications by four companies to authorise the use of chromates.
https://chemicalwatch.com/55953/eu-member-states-back-chromates-authorisation-applications
-
GOP Senators Push Trump for DOE Research Funding
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Six Senate Republicans sent President Trump a letter Thursday to advocate for strong funding for the Department of Energy’s research programs, which the president has threatened to cut.
The senators, led by Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), didn’t specify a funding level they want Trump to seek in fiscal year 2018, but they attempted to outline the importance of DOE research for the future.
“Government-sponsored research is one of the most important investments our country can make to encourage innovation, unleash our free enterprise system to create good-paying jobs and ensure American competitiveness in a global economy,” the senators wrote.
“We cannot lose the technological advantages we have gained through our country’s investment in research and development,” they continued. “Governing is about setting priorities, and the federal debt is not the result of Congress overspending on science and energy research each year. We urge you to continue to invest in the Department of Energy’s research and development programs in fiscal year 2018.”
Alexander is one of the senate’s top advocates for DOE research funding, owing in part to the presence of DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. He is also the chairman of the Appropriations Committee’s subpanel that oversees DOE’s budget.
GOP Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Susan Collins (Maine), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), all appropriators, signed the Thursday letter, along with Republicans Sens. Cory Gardner (Colo.) and Mike Rounds (S.D.).
In Trump’s budget proposal for 2018, released in March, he proposed cutting DOE’s budget by 5.6 percent below the 2016 level. He is reportedly eyeing a 70 percent cut to DOE’s renewables office, 54 percent to its fossil energy office and 31 percent to the nuclear programs.
Trump is planning to unveil a detailed budget proposal for 2018 next week.
DOE research funding is frequently a target of conservatives, who complain that it amounts to the government picking winners and losers in a sector that should be driven by market forces.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/334034-gop-senators-push-trump-for-doe-research-funding
-
Energy Grant Freeze Worries Senators, Including Murkowski
May 17, 2017 | Roll Call
By Jeremy Dillon
Senators are seeking assurances that a Trump administration freeze on certain grants by the Department of Energy does not become permanent.
Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said Wednesday that she sought “assurances” from DOE about the future of DOE research funding — currently on hold for a department-wide review — and indicated she endorsed inquiries to ensure those assurances are met.
Energy Department officials “did kind of give assurance that they were going to be doing this case-by-case review, and I do want to know that that is in fact in process,” Murkowski told reporters. “I did not know that [Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash.] had sent something out, but knowing where we are in the process is not a bad thing.”
Murkowski’s comments followed a letter sent Tuesday by 28 Senate Democrats, who suggested that the Department of Energy may be skirting appropriations law by withholding the research funding.
In the letter to Energy Secretary Rick Perry, the lawmakers, led by Cantwell, the top Democrat on Murkowski’s panel, called on the department to end its grant freeze and follow congressional intent on research funding.
“We are deeply troubled by reports that the Department of Energy (DOE) has delayed awarding funds and, in some cases, is refusing to release funds altogether for various activities for which Congress has already provided appropriations,” the letter said. “These actions not only ignore Congressional intent, but are explicitly prohibited by law.”
DOE instituted a wide-reaching grant freeze earlier this month as it reviews previously awarded research funding and how it applies to the priorities of the Trump administration.
A DOE spokesman was not immediately available for comment on the letter.
The Democratic lawmakers say that reports from labs and universities across the country indicate the money pause could be drastically harmful to research.
“It appears that the Department may already be ignoring Congressional direction,” the letter said. “We have heard from small businesses, universities, and research institutions, as well as media reports that the DOE has slowed down or frozen some of its essential research and development programs that promote American innovation, economic competitiveness, and cutting-edge science.”
In its “skinny budget” released in March, the Trump administration proposed slashing the department’s research dollars by almost $2 billion. Congress largely rejected the administration’s priorities in its omnibus spending law for the remainder of fiscal 2017, appropriating even more research dollars for DOE than in the previous fiscal year.
Among the grant-issuing programs the lawmakers say they have heard concerns about are the Weatherization Assistance program, the State Energy Grant program, the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy program, the Loan Program Office, the Office of Science and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
Each of those programs is likely to be targeted for cuts in the Trump budget for fiscal 2018, set for release next week. Some, like ARPA-E and the Weatherization program, would be eliminated entirely if the “skinny budget” offered by the White House on March 16 is any indication.
Murkowski, who also serves on the Appropriations Committee, cautioned that many of those programs have broad support, including from her.
“I take perhaps a more comprehensive view of some the things, and say we can work to address some of the concerns you might have about these programs,” she said. “But eliminating them in [their] entirety, in my view, is not the way we ought to go.”
http://www.rollcall.com/news/policy/energy-grant-freeze-worries-senators-including-murkowski
-
Despite Four Decades and $500 Billion, The Energy Department Hasn't Accomplished Much
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By Mark P. Mills
Four decades ago, the movie Star Wars was released and the first Apple II computer went on sale. That same year, 1977, newly-inaugurated President Carter established the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in an attempt to launch a government-inspired tech revolution in energy.
The history of the computer-tech revolution is well storied. Far from exhibiting “irrational exuberance”—as infamously asserted by economist Alan Greenspan in 1996—tech entrepreneurs were not only quite rational, but from the ‘bottom up’ literally created an entirely new kind of infrastructure and permanently transformed society. Policies and institutions have been forced to embrace the implications or be assimilated.
Meanwhile, the history of a top-down policy attempt to effect an energy tech revolution is quite different. But start with the goals.
In April 1977, still in the penumbra of the economic and geopolitical fallout from the 1973/74 Arab oil embargo, President Carter announced the creation of DOE in his “moral equivalent of war” address to the nation. Government action, he said, was needed for “the greatest challenge that our country will face during our lifetime” in order to “balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources.” Carter added that if DOE failed “the alternative may be a national catastrophe.” That was quite a burden for one agency.
Give Carter credit for an enduring legacy in at least this regard: that speech’s “10 fundamental principles” have anchored all energy policies since. The first principle was “that we can have an effective and comprehensive energy policy only if the government takes responsibility for it and if the people understand the seriousness of the challenge.” And DOE’s 40-year mission? It has been almost entirely focused on reducing the use of, or trying to completely replace, oil and gas. That mission remains the same today, although the motives have changed.
After all these decades of government programs consuming some $500 billion in that pursuit, what’s happened?
America uses 140 percent more oil for transportation today than it did in 1977. Electricity consumption is up 200 percent. (The recent slow growth in power demand looks a lot like a recession effect: we’ll soon know for sure when the economy fully recovers.) Lavishly subsidized biofuels have grown from an irrelevant 0.25 percent in 1977 to an unremarkable 5 percent share of transportation energy use today. Solar power rose from essentially zero, back then, to today’s irrelevant 0.15 percent share of U.S. energy. Wind power has been the biggest success: but even those heavily subsidized turbines now supply only 1.5 percent of America’s energy.
The fundamental energy sources available to power society have remained unchanged not just since 1977 but since 1957. Politicians and pundits often intone that there are “a multitude” of new energy options, but that’s rhetorical hyperbole. There is no new physics in energy nor new energy sources, just better ways to use those that exist.
The most remarkable and unpredicted energy tech change didn’t come from DOE or the super-major oil companies. Thousands of small and midsized companies perfected new shale oil and gas technologies and transformed the landscape.
Shale tech has added 2,000 percent more to U.S. energy supply in the past decade than solar and wind combined. That’s the fastest and biggest addition to world energy supply — not just hydrocarbons, but all forms of energy — that has occurred in history. The only time something nearly as dramatic occurred was in the decade following the 1968 opening of Saudi Arabia’s giant Ghawar oil field. America is, after a 40-year hiatus, exporting crude oil again.
Despite these lessons from history, many policymakers continue to exhibit an “irrational exuberance” in their aspirational goals to replace oil and gas. The rhetoric is as apocalyptic today as in 1977; this time because of worries about global warming. But for the physics of energy, that’s a distinction without a difference. And the reality is that now, with the maturation of cloud and sensor tech, the digital revolution will advance oil and gas at a rate faster than it will alternative energy tech.
There is one other transformation since 1977. America is now far more dependent on electricity. Back then, electricity accounted for 39 percent of all nontransportation energy use. Today that share has risen to 55 percent. This has happened in large measure because of a new trillion-dollar computing and communications infrastructure, one that requires a uniquely reliable and always-on electric grid.
There is a real risk now in pursuing policies to save energy and push alternatives onto the grid that make it less reliable and in particular easier to hack. For a lesson in the risks, consider the 1977 New York City blackout that lasted 25 hours and led to rampant looting and disorder.
And the overall policy lessons on this 40th anniversary? Energy revolutions don’t emerge from top-down manifestos. Of course, new science will emerge one day. But accelerating that day will only come from supporting basic research, not policies and subsidies focused on yesterday’s technologies.
Mark P. Mills is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, which is celebrating its 40th anniversary this year. He is the author of the report, ”Shale 2.0: Technology and the Coming Big Data Revolution.”
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/333894-despite-four-decades-and-500-billion-the-energy
-
May 17, 2017 | Wall Street Journal
By Editorial Board
Markets reeled on Wednesday at the sign of turmoil in Washington, but some good news came out of Coos County, Oregon, where three-quarters of voters on Tuesday rejected a referendum seeking to block the Jordan Cove liquefied natural gas terminal and a connecting 231-mile pipeline.
Canadian-based Veresen has been working for more than a decade to develop the nation’s first West Coast terminal, which was conceived to import natural gas amid flagging North American production. Lo, advances in hydraulic fracturing have unlocked vast shale deposits, and U.S. natural gas production has surged by a third over the past decade. But prices have tumbled due to a supply glut and insufficient pipeline capacity, hurting producers and workers.
Jordan Cove would give producers in the Rocky Mountain gas fields access to fast-growing Asian markets, which in February made up a quarter of U.S. LNG exports. Half of Jordan Cove terminal’s capacity has been reserved by Japanese companies, and the project should make U.S. exports more competitive with those from Australia and the Middle East.
The $7.5 billion project would also provide significant economic benefits to a rural region suffering from government actions locking up public lands: 240 permanent positions and 4,000 construction jobs with pay that would average about $85,000 a year—more than double that of Coos County’s median household income.
A politicized Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) last year rejected Jordan Cove on the pretext that there was insufficient market demand or public benefit to justify harming landowners. Veresen is reapplying and hoping to get a fairer shake from a reconstituted commission. Last week President Trump nominated two Republicans to the commission, which now seats two Democrats. An estimated $50 billion in projects are on hold because the commission lacks a quorum.
National Economic Council director Gary Cohn last month said permitting an LNG export facility in the Northwest is a top Administration priority, and liberals are imploring Senate Democrats to stall the President’s FERC nominations to halt energy projects such as Jordan Cove. If Democrats play the delay game, President Trump might consider recess appointments.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/west-coast-natural-gas-coup-1495063538
-
Revamping Natural Gas Policy Will Make America Build Again
May 18, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By Dave McCurdy
There are 2.7 million miles of paved roads in our country, and many Americans can attest to the substandard state of our streets, highways and bridges. This public infrastructure relies on local and federal funding for its upkeep. America’s infrastructure has earned persistent D averages since 1998, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers.
There is an equal amount of natural gas pipelines — approximately 300,000 miles of transmission pipelines that move natural gas from the fields where it is produced to the more than two million miles of distribution pipelines that deliver natural gas for heating and cooling, water heating, cooking and drying clothes. Unlike our nation’s highways, these pipelines are largely owned and operated by private companies.
You may not notice this network of pipes tucked beneath our streets, and we are glad about that. There is nothing more important to natural gas utilities than the safety of the customers we serve and the communities in which we live and work. We are constantly enhancing the safety of our system by upgrading pipes that may no longer be fit for service and replacing them with ones made from more modern materials, spending $22 billion annually in the process.
We also remain vigilant about the emerging threats to our security and maintain a commitment to cybersecurity alongside our long-standing commitment to physical security. Safety is a core value at every one of our more than 200 member companies and it shows. The U.S. Department of Transportation says that natural gas pipelines are the safest method of transporting energy in the nation.
But there are plenty of Americans who are all too aware of our pipeline network because it does not reach their neighborhood. Our nation’s abundance of natural gas has kept prices affordable and stable for years, and we expect that to continue for decades into the future. Households that use natural gas for heating, cooking and drying clothes save nearly $900 each year.
More homes and businesses use natural gas today than ever before, and the numbers continue to increase because people want access to those benefits. Yet many areas and customers are unserved or underserved by natural gas infrastructure. Thirty-nine states have adopted or considered innovative proposals to expand the pipeline network so that more citizens and businesses can access this domestic fuel source.
This week is Infrastructure Week, a time of education and advocacy to encourage policymakers to invest in the projects, technologies and policies necessary to ensure America is competitive, prosperous and safe. American businesses, workers, elected leaders and everyday citizens have joined together in this effort because upgrading our infrastructure improves the quality of life for millions of Americans and makes our economy prosper.
Businesses operate more efficiently when the cost of energy remains low and consistent, helping boost local economies across the nation. Extending our natural gas infrastructure is a key link in helping achieve that goal. Clean natural gas has led to $76 billion in savings for American businesses since 2009. If you include the lower cost of goods from more affordable fuel, low-priced natural gas put $1,337 back in the pocket of the average American family.
In the years since we discovered an efficient and economical way to extract energy from shale deposits, American companies have been bringing jobs that were previously oversees back to our shores, reviving industries such as steel and chemical manufacturing. While many businesses have suffered the effects of globalization and automation, industries that rely on natural gas either as a feedstock or to fuel their factories have been a bright spot in our economy.
Greater access to natural gas can help move our communities and our nation forward. Because America’s natural gas infrastructure is privately owned and operated, we are not asking for government funding to meet the market’s demand.
Instead, we consistently advocate for reforms to policies developed during a time of perceived scarcity. To deliver more natural gas to more customers throughout the country, we encourage modernization of federal permitting policies. To reach that end, America’s natural gas utilities are leading a fact-based dialogue about our energy choices that reflects today’s reality.
With natural gas as a foundation fuel, our nation will continue to have a clean and secure future. All Americans stand to gain if we make investments and update our policies to realize the full potential of a natural gas-fueled future. We want to see more Americans share in our nation’s prosperity.
Dave McCurdy (@aga_naturalgas) is president and CEO for the American Gas Association, which represents more than 200 local energy companies that deliver clean natural gas throughout the United States. From 1981 to 1995, he represented the Fourth Congressional District of Oklahoma in the U.S. House of Representatives.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/333907-revamping-natural-gas-policy-will-make-america-build
-
May 18, 2017 | Truth-Out
By Daniel Ross
At 8:48 a.m. on the morning of February 18, 2015, an explosion at the ExxonMobil Torrance refinery in Southern California ripped through the facility with such ferocity, the resulting shockwaves registered on the Richter scale. Dust was scattered over the densely populated neighborhood up to a mile away from the blast. Four workers suffered minor injuries. A hulking 40-ton chunk of debris from the refinery's Electrostatic Precipitator narrowly avoided hitting a tank containing tens of thousands of pounds of highly toxic modified hydrofluoric acid.
The damning findings of a Chemical Safety Board (CSB) review of the accident were made public earlier this month. Among some of the problems identified in the report: the refinery repeatedly violated ExxonMobil's corporate safety standards leading up to the incident, while multiple gaps existed in the refinery's safety systems.
"It was only sheer luck that the hydrofluoric acid tank wasn't hit," said Dr. Sally Hayati, president of the Torrance Refinery Action Alliance. If it had been hit, the collision could have released a toxic ground-hugging cloud with the potential to kill for nine miles and cause serious and irreversible injuries for up to 16 miles under worst-case scenario projections, she added.
"This is yet another symptom of how in our country we always put profit ahead of safety," Hayati said.
Just before Obama exited office, his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) put in place a new federal rule setting tougher safety procedures at facilities covered by the EPA's Risk Management Program (RMP). The rule is designed to prevent accidents like the 2015 Torrance refinery explosion from happening again, and to better protect first-responders and the communities perched in the shadow of facilities that store and use potentially dangerous chemicals.
According to EPA data, over 1,500 accidents were reported by RMP facilities between 2004 and 2013, causing more than $2 billion in property damages.
The new rule was supposed to come into effect in March. But after a petition opposing the rule was filed by a coalition of trade associations, the EPA initially stayed its implementation for three months. Then, after various states and companies in the refining, oil and gas, chemical and manufacturing sector filed further petitions, the EPA proposed to extend the stay an additional 20 months -- until February 19, 2019 -- in order to win time to consider these various petitions, and to possibly "revise" the RMP amendments.
Fearing that the EPA under Scott Pruitt will take the side of industry and further delay, weaken or even try to abrogate the new rule entirely, a coalition of community groups, scientists and environmental organizations filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit last month.
"We don't expect Pruitt to defend [the rule]," said Gordon Sommers, associate attorney with Earthjustice, who filed the motion on behalf of the coalition. In a letter to the EPA last year when still Oklahoma attorney general, Pruitt asked the agency to withdraw the rule, citing national security concerns.
"We know where he stands and we know that his arguments are the same arguments that the big industries are making," said Sommers. "We know his priority is not protecting these communities."
Targeting Marginalized "Fenceline Communities"
The new rule -- the first significant updates to the RMP in some 20 years -- impacts roughly 12,500 facilities, including oil refineries, large chemical manufacturers, pulp and paper mills, and even wastewater treatment plants and food packing plants. And it addresses plant safety in a number of critical areas, such as emergency response, accident prevention and information disclosure.
After an accident occurs, for example, facilities are required to conduct more thorough investigations to better understand what caused them. In some cases, an independent third party must be brought in to conduct its own audit. Facilities must be more transparent about certain information critical for first responders and local residents, such as what chemicals are stored on site. And as is pointed out in the amendment, "one of the factors that can contribute to the severity of chemical accidents is a lack of effective coordination between a facility and local emergency responders." As such, facilities are required to better coordinate with first responders and local emergency planning committees.
In an email to Truthout, an EPA spokesperson wrote that the proposal to further delay the effective date of the amendments will allow the agency time to consider other issues that may benefit from additional public input, and ensure that "all provisions in the RMP Amendments are in accordance with the explicit mandate granted to EPA by Congress."
But environmental groups consider the new rule, which was finalized after more than three years of negotiations, watered down as it is. And they argue that any delay or further weakening of the rule will unfairly impact fenceline communities around the nation's chemical plants and refineries -- communities that are disproportionately Black, Brown and poor.
"We are really setting ourselves up for what we're calling in our communities the potential for environmental genocide," said Michele Roberts, national co-coordinator of the Environmental Justice Health Alliance. "If we really want to make American great 'again,' then why not honor our commitment to letting everyone live in a healthy and thriving community and environment."
Schools in the Shadows of Refineries
At 6:33 p.m. on the evening of August 12, 2012, flammable gas seeping from a ruptured pipe at the Chevron refinery in Richmond, California, caught alight, triggering a huge blast that sent 18 employees running for cover, and another fleeing to a fire engine, just in time to avoid a fireball that engulfed the truck. The surrounding community was placed on a level 3 alert -- the most serious of community warning alerts. And in the weeks that followed, some 15,000 people from the surrounding communities sought medical treatment for health problems like chest pains, shortness of breath, sore throats and headaches.
The subsequent CSB investigation found all sorts of systemic failures at the refinery, including with its emergency response system the day of the incident. The CSB also found broader industry deficiencies relating to comprehensive inspection, effective facility upgrades and minimum safety requirements.
But the Richmond incident is just one example of the sorts of accidents that happen routinely at chemical facilities every year. According to EPA data, the more than 1,500 reported accidents reported by RMP facilities between 2004-2013 caused nearly 60 deaths. Some 17,000 people were injured or needed medical treatment, with almost 500,000 people needing to be evacuated or kept indoors. The research institute Swiss Re found recently that the US has three to four times the accident rate of the European refinery industry, where regulations are more stringent.
A 2014 Center for Effective Government report also found that at least one third of America's schoolchildren attends a school within the vulnerability zone of a high-risk RMP chemical facility. Half of those students (over 10.3 million schoolchildren) are in schools located in more than one chemical vulnerability zone. Indeed, a number of metro areas -- including Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Memphis, Tennessee and Wilmington, Delaware -- contain many schools in multiple vulnerability zones, according to the same report.
Houston, the beating heart of the nation's petrochemical industry, is another densely populated area where many schools sit in the shadow of multiple RMP facilities. An eight-part Houston Chronicle investigation started last year reveals how hundreds of potentially dangerous chemicals stored at facilities across greater Houston go largely unmonitored at all levels of government. According to Stephanie Thomas, who lives in the outskirts of Houston, and is a member of the Healthy Port Communities Coalition, residents living at the fenceline of RMP facilities in her area are largely unaware of the sorts of chemicals being stored on their doorstep.
"I have been feeling much more concerned about something happening because there's just not enough communication about what's going on," said Thomas, a geologist who previously worked in oil and gas exploration for companies like Chevron. "This is really serious stuff that we're dealing with in Houston."
Only, those who oppose the rule argue that it's in the nation's security interests to allow companies to keep secret portions of their chemical inventory. Truthout reached out to the American Chemistry Council (ACC) -- one of the groups that filed a petition against the new rule. Though the organization declined an interview, it forwarded a transcript of comments made by an ACC spokesperson at a Washington hearing on the new rule last month.
In the statement provided, the spokesperson said the new information requirements could leave chemical facilities and communities vulnerable to those with "ill intent," and that the new rule lacked requirements that would actually improve safety. Proponents of the rule have mischaracterized a fatal 2013 explosion of ammonium nitrate at a fertilizer plant in West, Texas, the spokesperson also argued.
That accident caught then president Obama's attention, and spearheaded the push for RMP reform. But because the accident was found to have been started deliberately, and because ammonium nitrate isn't one of the substances regulated under the RMP, the ACC spokesperson argued that the rule "does virtually nothing to prevent a similar West, Texas event from happening in the future."
Others see it differently.
What Does Safety Look Like for Fenceline Communities?
That chemicals like ammonium nitrate don't fall under the auspices of the RMP is "just another example of how weak the regulations are," said Neil Carman, Clean Air program director with the Sierra Club and a former Texas Commission on Environmental Quality investigator.
He described as "pure bunk" the claim that "national security interests" trump the need for chemical plants to be more transparent about what chemicals they're using and storing. This justification has been widely promulgated since the 9/11 terror attacks.
"The problem's not with terrorists," Carman said. "The problem is, you've got hundreds of thousands of people living on the fenceline of chemical plants in Texas alone."
A 2008 report found that upwards of 80 million Americans live within range of a worst-case toxic gas release from at least one of the 101 most hazardous chemical facilities nationwide.
The new rule came together only after more than three years of deliberations, multiple public comment periods, as well as input and analysis from a variety of stakeholders, including industry groups. It gives teeth to what's referred to as the Bhopal provisions -- the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act that established the RMP.
In 1984, an accident at a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, released at least 30 tons of highly toxic gas into the surrounding neighborhood, mostly shanty towns. The accident affected an estimated 600,000 people in that night alone and killed an estimated 15,000 over the years. The sheer magnitude of the disaster shocked US lawmakers into tightening safety standards at chemical plants on home soils. In 1990, the Bhopal amendment sought, among other things, to obligate plants to switch to safer processes if necessary to prevent catastrophic releases of their own from occurring. But when the EPA moved to enact this clause in the wake of 9/11, the George W. Bush administration quashed the proposals.
And now, all these years later, the "very least" that can be done to ensure the safety of fenceline communities -- particularly those in urban neighborhoods, where emergency escape routes can be limited -- is to implement the "modest amendments" outlined in the new rule, said Charise Johnson, research associate at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
"Putting the stay on the RMP amendment is really just putting local communities and first responders at risk," she said. "I think this is a pretty blatant example of environmental injustice, and we need to keep amplifying these community voices."
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/40631-by-delaying-chemical-safety-rule-pruitt-endangers-first-responders-and-refinery-towns
-
Non-Routine Activity Caused 2015 Del. Flash Fire
May 18, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
The flash fire that broke out at the Delaware City Refining Co. in 2015 and gave a worker second- and third-degree burns was caused by a non-routine maintenance operation, according to the U.S. Chemical Safety Board.
CSB released a safety bulletin today that says the night shift operator recalled "hearing a pop and suddenly seeing a wall of fire advancing toward him."
The daytime operators at the gasoline production plant had performed non-routine maintenance work that day on a valve after a section of piping was leaking and didn't seal properly. The next available valve had equipment not included in the original isolation plan that needed to be drained to remove flammable hydrocarbons.
"Prior to the incident, DCRC did not have general procedures for preparing equipment for maintenance or procedures for taking those pieces of equipment out of service," said CSB Supervisory Investigator Johnnie Banks. "If DCRC had identified and addressed potential hazards before commencing this work, this incident would not have happened."
On a call with reporters this morning, CSB Chairwoman Vanessa Allen Sutherland said that 1 out of every 3 incidents CSB investigates revolves around maintenance activities.
The report identifies five safety lessons that CSB says "can be applied to many high hazard facilities." It includes using closed systems to control draining hazardous materials and creating standard procedures for non-routine maintenance operations.
"Non-routine operations warrant careful attention," Sutherland said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/05/18/stories/1060054756
-
EPA Asks Judges to Back Ruling Avoiding National CWA 'Blending' Order
May 18, 2017 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
EPA is asking a federal appeals court to reject municipal wastewater authorities' call to rehear a ruling that blocked their bid for a court order enforcing nationwide restrictions on the agency's Clean Water Act (CWA) authority to bar “blending” at treatment plants, arguing that the ruling avoiding such an order was legally correct.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a May 16 brief on EPA's behalf with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia opposing any rehearing of Coalition for Regulatory Reasonableness (CRR) v. EPA and saying the court was right to hold that any suit over the blending issue should have been filed in district court, which was the main holding the court used in invalidating CRR's challenge.
“While from a CWA perspective the Panel’s decision may be one of first impression -- or even 'novel,' it does not conflict with any binding precedent. Neither the Supreme Court nor this Court has ever addressed whether statements of the kind at issue here may trigger a direct challenge” in circuit court, DOJ says.
A unanimous three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit ruled on Feb. 28 that CRR, which represents some municipal wastewater authorities, could not use an appellate suit to pursue its claims over blending -- in which treatment plants mix partially- and fully-treated wastewater during wet weather events to avoid overflows.
CRR is arguing that EPA has unlawfully decided not to follow nationwide a 2013 8th Circuit ruling that said it may not use CWA permit terms to bar blending, known as Iowa League of Cities (ILOC) v. EPA, in states outside that court's jurisdiction. The 8th Circuit covers Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Arkansas.
The D.C. Circuit opinion, authored by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, did not address whether the agency has actually violated the law, instead holding that the memos CRR cited to show EPA has rejected ILOC are “non-acquiesence statements” that must be challenged in district court, not appellate court.
But CRR has sought rehearing of the case, either before the same D.C. Circuit panel or with the full court sitting en banc, saying there is no basis in the CWA for exempting those statements from review and that the decision sets a precedent allowing EPA to dodge court review of many unlawful actions.
Section 509 of the water law sets out certain types of agency action that can be challenged in circuit court, while all other suits against EPA over water issues must be filed in district court. CRR argued that a decision on how to manage blending falls under that section as an “effluent limitation,” but the D.C. Circuit disagreed.
DOJ's Filing
DOJ's new filing argues that that decision is correct, because rather than definitively establishing a blending position in the challenged memos, the agency was “reserving any policy decision about blending, secondary treatment, or bacteria mixing zones for another day, most likely in the context of a particular” CWA permit.
It argues that treating the statement as an effluent limit “would stretch beyond its breaking point. For the letters at issue to announce an effluent or other limitation, EPA would have had to do a lot more and speak with far greater specificity.”
DOJ continues that it is standard practice for the agency to reserve definitive decisions on such issues for a case-by-case process. “EPA’s approach is anything but unusual,” because past D.C. Circuit decisions “hold that agencies generally may choose between rulemaking and case-specific procedures to develop law and policy,” the brief says.
DOJ is also arguing that CRR is wrong to claim Kavanaugh's ruling contradicts the D.C. Circuit's 2014 decision in National Environmental Development Association's Clean Air Project (NEDA/CAP) v. EPA. There, the court vacated an EPA memo that sought to narrow the reach of an adverse 6th Circuit air permitting ruling to only the states in that circuit, because it could lead to differing permit requirements among the states.
CRR said in its rehearing petition that NEDA/CAP shows a memo declining to apply an adverse court decision can be considered a “final agency action” that had been formally promulgated by the agency, making it subject to court challenge. But DOJ says the D.C. Circuit never found that the CWA memos were not final action, only that they did not fall under CWA section 509, which has no equivalent in the air law -- meaning there is no conflict with NEDA/CAP or other cases over the definition of “final action.”
“The Panel’s decision does not conflict with any of these decisions because neither lack of finality nor lack of promulgation formed the basis for dismissing the Center’s petition,” the brief says.
Finally, DOJ says the court should reject CRR's argument that if the D.C. Circuit stands by Kavanaugh's ruling, it should nonetheless revive the suit by transferring it to the 8th Circuit, where the petitioners could ask judges to enforce their ILOC ruling. There is no deadline preventing CRR from filing such a case on its own, rather than using its D.C. Circuit suit as a vehicle, the government says.
“Regardless, nothing but the Center’s own strategy prevented it from seeking relief elsewhere at an earlier point in time,” the brief continues.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-asks-judges-back-ruling-avoiding-national-cwa-blending-order
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested