Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 25/10/17
-
(ACC Mentioned) GOP Senators Advance Trump EPA Nominees Over Dems' Objection
Oct 25, 2017 | AP (In The New York Times)
A Senate committee voted along party lines Wednesday to advance President Donald Trump's picks for key posts at the Environmental Protection Agency over the objections of Democrats who pointed to the nominees' past work for corporate clients they would now regulate. -
(ACC Mentioned) Senate Advances Two of Trump's EPA Nominees Despite Democratic Complaints
Oct 25, 2017 | The Washington Examiner
By Josh Siegel
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Wednesday advanced the nominations of two controversial Environmental Protection Agency nominees, teeing them up for confirmation votes on the Senate floor. -
(ACC Mentioned) Senate Committee Narrowly Approves Notorious Industry Apologist to Run EPA Chemical Safety Office
Oct 25, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
In a vote along party lines, President Trump’s nominee Michael Dourson was approved by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to be the head of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention at the Environmental Protection Agency. The full Senate will likely vote on Dourson’s confirmation in the coming days. -
(ACC Mentioned) City of South Lake Tahoe Considers Styrofoam Ban
Oct 25, 2017 | Tahoe Daily Tribune
By Claire Cudahy
South Lake Tahoe City Council is again considering varying degrees of a polystyrene ban — often referred to by the brand name Styrofoam — in restaurants and other retail stores. -
Senate Panel Advances Trump's Controversial EPA Chemical Pick
Oct 25, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A Senate Committee voted Wednesday to approve the nomination of President Trump’s controversial nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) chemical safety office. -
EPW Panel Approves Controversial EPA Picks, Dem for NRC
Oct 25, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee this morning approved four of President Trump's top U.S. EPA picks, including the controversial nominations of Michael Dourson to lead the chemicals program and Bill Wehrum for air chief. -
EPW Clears EPA Nominees, Including Controversial Dourson
Oct 25, 2017 | Politico Pro
By Alex Guillen
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee today narrowly approved several EPA nominees, including a chemist who has drawn scrutiny in recent days by moving to EPA ahead of his confirmation as an adviser to Scott Pruitt. -
Chemical Industry Hired Gun Would Be a Big Step Backward for Chemical Safety
Oct 25, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Sen. Tom Udall
Last year, Republicans and Democrats reached a rare bipartisan agreement on a major environmental law and passed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. The Lautenberg Act – for the first time – provides the Environmental Protection Agency with the authority to protect our kids from dangerous chemicals. -
(ACC Mentioned) Trump Administration Wants to Limit Review of Toxic Chemicals
Oct 25, 2017 | Health Day
Firefighter, construction workers and others are condemning a Trump administration plan that would remove millions of tons of asbestos, flame retardants and other toxins in buildings nationwide from a congressionally mandated Environmental Protection Agency review. -
The Home Depot Announces New Strategy to Remove Toxic Chemicals in Building Products
Oct 25, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
By CJ Frogozo
Today, The Home Depot announced a new Chemical Strategy to remove harmful chemicals in building products such as paints, carpet, and flooring. The policy addresses dangerous chemicals like flame retardants, phthalates, and nonylphenol ethoxylates. -
Home Depot Eliminating Chemicals of Concern From Products
Oct 25, 2017 | Floor Daily
Home Depot is eliminating substances like formaldehyde and lead in several categories, reports Bloomberg News. -
Firefighters Often Unaware of Hazards From Chemicals, Smoke
Oct 25, 2017 | Firefighter Nation
By Mike Wagner and Lucas Sullivan
Rine doesn't know which of the 200 fires he responded to since he began his career with the Columbus Fire Division in December 2006 caused his terminal cancer. -
Landmark EPA Report on Chemicals and Children’s Health at Odds With Pruitt’s Cancellation of Chlorpyrifos Ban
Oct 25, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Alex Formuzis
A new report from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences warns that the neurotoxic pesticide chlorpyrifos can severely harm children’s developing brains. But in March, in one of his first decisions as EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt cancelled an expected ban of chlorpyrifos with no scientific basis for his decision. -
UK Government 'Fails to Recognise' Chemicals Regulatory Issues
Oct 25, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK government’s response to a parliamentary committee report on chemicals regulation after Brexit "fails to recognise the unique nature of the regulatory issues facing industry", the Chemical Business Association (CBA) has said. -
Norway Finds Illegal Substances in Promotional Gift Items
Oct 25, 2017 | Chemical Watch
An inspection of promotional gift items in Norway has found that almost half breached the law by containing prohibited substances or for being inadequately labelled. -
(ACC Mentioned) LyondellBasell Plans New $2B Chemicals and Plastics Project Along Gulf Coast
Oct 25, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Jordan Blum
LyondellBasell said it's planning to build a multibillion-dollar chemicals and plastics plant along the Gulf Coast, and very possibly in the Houston area, although a final decision may still be a year away. -
Post-Harvey, the Arkema Disaster Reveals Chemical Safety Risks Were Preventable
Oct 25, 2017 | The Union of Concerned Scientists
By Charise Johnson
Halloween is right around the corner, but the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been a perpetual nightmare to public safety since Administrator Scott Pruitt arrived, sending long-awaited chemical safety amendments to an early grave this year. -
Enviro Toll Uncertain as Industrial Warehouse Burns
Oct 25, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
Officials still do not know what caused a massive blaze at an industrial warehouse in Parkersburg, W.Va. — which continues to burn — or how the burned materials might affect local air quality. -
Ex-EPA Official: Trump Worse Than Bush on Respecting Science
Oct 25, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Josh Delk
A former adviser for the Environmental Protection Agency said that President Trump and his administration have been worse on respecting climate science than officials working for President George W. Bush, who would at least seek background before making decisions. -
Greens Prepare Battle Plan for Trump's Answer to Carbon Rule
Oct 25, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen and Benjamin Storrow
Officials at U.S. EPA could replace the Clean Power Plan with a rule focused only on improving power plant efficiency, but environmental groups are already preparing arguments against that potential outcome.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) GOP Senators Advance Trump EPA Nominees Over Dems' Objection
Oct 25, 2017 | AP (In The New York Times)
A Senate committee voted along party lines Wednesday to advance President Donald Trump's picks for key posts at the Environmental Protection Agency over the objections of Democrats who pointed to the nominees' past work for corporate clients they would now regulate.
Republicans on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works used their one-vote majority to move five nominations forward to the full Senate. They include Michael Dourson to lead EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and Bill Wehrum to lead the agency's Office of Air and Radiation.
The Associated Press reported last month that Dourson, a toxicologist, has for years accepted payments from chemical companies to write papers pushing back against peer-reviewed studies raising health concerns about his clients' products. Past corporate clients include Dow Chemical Co., Koch Industries Inc. and Chevron Corp. His research has also been underwritten by industry trade and lobbying groups representing the makers of plastics, pesticides, processed foods and cigarettes.
Wehrum is a lawyer in private practice whose clients have included pro-fossil fuel groups opposed to mandated reductions of planet-warming carbon emissions — including the American Petroleum Institute, the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers and the American Chemistry Council.
Democrats said those longstanding financial relationships represented a conflict of interest for Dourson and Wehrum as they become the regulators of their former corporate clients.
Committee Chairman John Barrasso called Trump's nominees well-qualified and experienced.
"Their confirmation will fill critically important roles in ensuring that all Americans benefit from clean air, clean water and clean land," said Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican.
The committee also advanced the nominations of Matthew Leopold to serve as EPA's assistant administrator for the EPA's Office of General Counsel, David Ross to lead EPA's Office of Water, Paul Trombino III to serve as administrator for the Federal Highway Administration and to reappoint Jeffery Baran as a member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/10/25/us/politics/ap-us-congress-epa.html?_r=0
-
(ACC Mentioned) Senate Advances Two of Trump's EPA Nominees Despite Democratic Complaints
Oct 25, 2017 | The Washington Examiner
By Josh Siegel
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Wednesday advanced the nominations of two controversial Environmental Protection Agency nominees, teeing them up for confirmation votes on the Senate floor.
The committee voted 11-10 along party lines to advance the nominations of Michael Dourson to run the EPA chemicals office, and Bill Wehrum to lead the agency's air office.
Democrats opposed both nominees and said their ties to industry will prevent them from being effective and faithful enforcers of environmental law.
Dourson "is the most troubling nominee I have ever considered in 17 years on this committee," said Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware, the committee's top Democrat, before the vote.
After the vote, Democrats gave lengthy speeches denouncing Dourson and Wehrum. Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., called the committee's approval of Dourson and Wehrum "one of the low points of my entire career."
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., called Dourson the "absolute worst person I can think of to be in charge of chemical safety in this country."
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, meanwhile, commended Republicans for advancing the nominations. The committee also advanced the nominations of Matthew Leopold, President Trump's nominee to be assistant administrator for the Office of General Counsel; and David Ross, chosen to be assistant administrator for the Office of Water.
"I want to thank Chairman John Barrasso and members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee for granting our nominees a fair hearing and approving their nominations," Pruitt said. "These top leaders in their fields will bring positive change to EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment. We look forward to a full Senate vote on these highly-qualified leaders."
Wehrum, an energy industry lawyer and former EPA official, would oversee a portfolio dealing with climate change regulations.
The post is widely considered the EPA's second most important job, and Democrats say Wehrum's industry ties would complicate his ability to re-evaluate carbon emissions regulations that Pruitt wants to review, such as the Clean Power Plan. Concerns over his industry connections led to Wehrum being rejected by Congress to serve in the same position in the George W. Bush administration.
Back then, however, nominees needed 60 votes to advance to a confirmation vote in the Senate, and under rules changed by Democrats in 2013, Dourson will only need 50.
Dourson is a toxicologist and University of Cincinnati professor. Democrats criticized him for his ties to the chemical industry, which he would be expected to regulate. He founded a consulting group that represented companies that produced chemicals now under EPA review for their public health risks.
"His record is clear," Carper said of Dourson. "He has sold science to the highest bidder and recommended [safety] standards that are tens, hundreds, even thousands less protective than EPA's own standards."
Some Democrats suggested Republicans had imperiled the ability of the committee to work in a bipartisan fashion by voting for Dourson.
Last year, Congress passed a bipartisan bill that updated the Toxic Substances Control Act, a 1976 law that had made it difficult for regulators to ban or regulate chemicals by requiring the EPA to meet a high burden of proof before taking action.
The new law streamlined the regulatory process, and directed the EPA to review at least 20 high priority chemicals and emphasize the riskiest ones. Democrats say they doubt Dourson will enforce the law as its written.
"On our side, we have become accustomed to nominees [from Republicans] who have massive conflicts of interest, having them overlooked and rammed through on partisan votes," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. "With Dourson, it's a little different because we just worked together in a bipartisan fashion to do something about toxic chemicals. We came to a reasonable, fair and productive result. Today's vote breaches the faith of that result."
The Environment and Public Works Committee last week had delayed the nomination votes of Wehrum and Dourson after some Republicans suggested they may not approve them as retaliation for the Trump administration's plan to weaken the EPA's biofuel mandate.
Those concerns from Midwestern Republicans were resolved because Pruitt assured GOP senators later in the week that he would keep intact the Renewable Fuel Standard, which requires a certain amount of biofuels to be blended into the nation's fuel supply.
Democrats on Tuesday demanded information from the EPA about why Dourson is already working in an advisory role at the agency before being confirmed.
"I have never been this troubled in 17 years," Carper said after the vote. "We have not done the right thing. On the nomination of Dourson, we will never give up in opposition to it."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/senate-advances-two-of-trumps-epa-nominees-despite-democratic-complaints/article/2638580
-
Oct 25, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
In a vote along party lines, President Trump’s nominee Michael Dourson was approved by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to be the head of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention at the Environmental Protection Agency. The full Senate will likely vote on Dourson’s confirmation in the coming days.
Public health and environmental organizations’ alarm over the possibility of Dourson running the nation’s chemical safety programs is unprecedented. Nearly 170 national, state and local organizations, representing millions of Americans, oppose or have expressed deep concerns over Dourson’s nomination. Pediatrician, firefighter, farmworker, state and local public health, environmental, labor, reproductive and business organizations were among those raising concerns.
Dourson has spent more than two decades as a scientist-for-hire for major chemical and pesticide companies, including Dow, Monsanto and Koch Industries, and the lobby groups CropLife America and the American Chemistry Council.
“Just because President Trump insists on nominating someone so exceptionally unfit to serve as Mr. Dourson, doesn’t mean the Senate should throw their support behind him,” said EWG President Ken Cook. “If the Senate confirms Dourson, he will almost certainly tear down barriers in place at EPA to protect the public from toxic chemicals and the diseases they trigger.”
https://www.ewg.org/testimony-official-correspondence/senate-committee-narrowly-approves-notorious-industry-apologist#.WfDJy1uCzIU
-
(ACC Mentioned) City of South Lake Tahoe Considers Styrofoam Ban
Oct 25, 2017 | Tahoe Daily Tribune
By Claire Cudahy
Gone may be the days of steaming Styrofoam containers keeping that take-out Pad Thai warm.
South Lake Tahoe City Council is again considering varying degrees of a polystyrene ban — often referred to by the brand name Styrofoam — in restaurants and other retail stores.
Polystyrene is a cheap, durable and light synthetic material used to make everything from packing peanuts to take-out food containers. Environmentalists have long criticized polystyrene for its lengthy lifetime in landfills and its breakability, which results in small pieces finding their way into the environment and the stomachs of wildlife.
Back in 2013, City Council discussed banning single-use plastic bags and polystyrene at retail establishments within the city. Though the city moved forward with a ban on plastic single-use carryout bags — later bolstered by a statewide ban on plastic bags — no action was taken to prohibit polystyrene.
At the Oct. 17 council meeting, following councilmember direction, city staff brought forward the different tiers of a polystyrene ban for discussion. These tiers range from a ban that only eliminates polystyrene take-out food containers to one that prohibits the sale of products packaged with polystyrene outside of the city, like egg cartons and meat at grocery stores.
Council requested staff bring back more information on how the various tiers might impact local businesses.
"I just want to make sure we look hard at unintended consequences," said councilmember Tom Davis.
The League to Save Lake Tahoe spoke out in support of a ban.
"This year alone we hosted 17 organized cleanup efforts and just with polystyrene, which is expanded foam, we found 2,000 pieces," said Marilee Movius, community engagement manager for the League. "This does not include other plastics that we also found, which is over 16,000 pieces."
Movius also noted that polystyrene is considered the fifth largest source of hazardous waste in the United States by the Environmental Protection Agency.
American Chemistry Council, an industry trade company for chemical companies, wrote in to council to object to any sort of ban.
"This ordinance falsely assumes that banning one type of food packaging material will result in a reduction in litter; overlooks many environmental benefits associated with polystyrene food service containers; [and] incorrectly assumes biodegradable or compostable alternatives have a lower footprint on the environment," wrote Tim Shestek, senior director of State Affairs for American Chemistry Council.
Shestek also asserted that any ban would impose higher operating costs on restaurants, especially smaller businesses — an opinion shared by the California Restaurant Association.
"I've seen those estimates in the tens of thousands of dollars per year per restaurant," said Sharokina Shams, vice president of publication affairs for the association.
The Lake Tahoe South Shore Chamber of Commerce's restaurant industry group is meeting today to discuss their position on the polystyrene ban, according to facilitator Emily Abernathy.
"People don't always know this but polystyrene is actually a recyclable product. So we find that recycling it rather than having a product-by-product ban is a better way to remove litter from numerous kinds of waterways," continued Shams.
Though polystyrene can be recycled, it rarely is; most municipal recycling plants don't accept it because it's bulky, difficult to clean and has a low resale value. For South Lake Tahoe, the closest plant that accepts recycled polystyrene is ACH Foam Technologies located in West Reno. It's the only recycling center of its kind in the region — and it only accepts polystyrene that is used in packaging, not food service.
South Tahoe Refuse and Recycling Service, the garbage collection service for the South Shore, is still in the process of formulating a statement to issue to City Council on the ban, according to its administration.
Over 100 cities have enacted polystyrene bans around the country, including Seattle, Portland and New York City. Across California there is a hodgepodge of different local polystyrene restrictions. In Santa Monica, only food service containers are banned, while in San Francisco, the ban extends to products like foam coolers.
Instead of a ban, San Diego recently opted to institute curbside recycling pickup for polystyrene food and beverage containers at single-family homes. It will cost the city $90,000 a year, which will come out of the $3.3 million in yearly revenue it collects from residents recycling other items like glass bottles and aluminum cans.
South Lake Tahoe City Council will revisit the topic of the polystyrene ban at a future meeting. In the meantime, a survey (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/GKNTVSR) is circulating to gather community input.
http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/news/local/city-of-south-lake-tahoe-considers-styrofoam-ban/
-
Senate Panel Advances Trump's Controversial EPA Chemical Pick
Oct 25, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A Senate Committee voted Wednesday to approve the nomination of President Trump’s controversial nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) chemical safety office.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted 11-10 to advance Michael Dourson's nomination. The vote fell along party lines, with all Republicans in favor and all Democrats opposed.
By the same 11-10 party-line vote, the panel approved William Wehrum, a lawyer for industry clients, to lead the EPA’s important air and radiation office, which oversees air pollution, climate change regulations, car pollution standards and other major programs.
The votes send both nominees to the full Senate, where Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) can schedule a vote for confirmation.
Dourson is a toxicologist, and has worked for two decades at a firm he founded to conduct toxicology assessments, often for companies that make or sell chemicals.
In that role, he often came to conclusions that were far more industry-friendly than those reached by the EPA, states, universities or other researchers.
Dourson started working at the EPA as a “senior adviser” to EPA head Scott Pruitt last week, raising objections from Democrats.
The panel’s Democrats repeatedly ripped into Dourson and Wehrum for what they saw as clear conflicts of interest.
“Dr. Dourson’s record is clear. Throughout much of his career, Dr. Dourson has essentially sold science to the highest bidder and recommended standards for toxic chemicals that were tens, hundreds, sometimes even thousands of times less protective than EPA’s own standards,” said Sen. Tom Carper (Del.), the top Democrat on the panel.
“Can this be the best person the administration can find to entrust responsibilities of this critical leadership post? God, I hope not.”
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) said Dourson and Wehrum “so clearly are in conflicts of interest on the issues that they are now going to be in charge of making decisions on that will impact directly the American public.”
Democrats also lamented the approval of Dourson as a loss for last year’s bipartisan Toxic Substances Control Act reform, which overhauled the nation's chemical safety rules. The act got nearly unanimous approval in both chambers of Congress.
They said Dourson didn’t sufficiently show that he supports the goal of the law, named after the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.).
“Mr. Dourson does not represent a person who can carry out the work of this committee in the TSCA reform legislation that we passed,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
“I can’t believe that this would go down to a party-line vote. If it does, I think it doesn’t bode well for the bipartisan cooperation in this committee to pass legislation that would be effectively implemented in a manner in which it’s negotiated in this committee.”
Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) spoke only briefly about the nominees at the hearing, saying they “have proven themselves to be well-qualified, experienced, and dedicated public servants.”
Pruitt also thanked the panel for the vote.
"These top leaders in their fields will bring positive change to EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment," he said in a statement. "We look forward to a full Senate vote on these highly-qualified leaders."
The committee also voted to approve Matthew Leopold to be the EPA’s general counsel and David Ross to lead its water pollution office, along with Jeffrey Baran for a new five-year term at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The votes for those nominees were all by voice.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/357074-senate-panel-advances-trumps-controversial-epa-chemical-pick
-
EPW Panel Approves Controversial EPA Picks, Dem for NRC
Oct 25, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee this morning approved four of President Trump's top U.S. EPA picks, including the controversial nominations of Michael Dourson to lead the chemicals program and Bill Wehrum for air chief.
The bids of Dourson and Wehrum passed on party-line 11-10 votes. The other EPA nominations — Matthew Leopold for general counsel and David Ross for water chief — were sent to the Senate floor by a voice vote.
The committee packaged Leopold and Ross with Paul Trombino, Trump's pick to serve as head of Federal Highway Administration, and Jeff Baran, a Democratic member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, who is up for another term.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt celebrated the results of today's EPW Committee meeting. "These top leaders in their fields will bring positive change to EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment," he said in a statement. "We look forward to a full Senate vote on these highly-qualified leaders."
Before the votes, Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) described all but Baran as "well-qualified" and "dedicated public servants" and urged his colleagues to support them.
Dourson's nomination advanced despite passionate opposition from Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware, the top Democrat on the committee.
Carper called Dourson, who spent two decades at the helm of a nonprofit firm that often downplayed the risks of chemicals for industry clients, "one of the most troubling nominees I have ever considered during my 17 years on this committee."
Carper said his nomination "to lead EPA's chemical safety office and implement [Toxic Substances Control Act] reform makes a mockery of that entire process of which we were so proud."
The ranking member was particularly troubled by the revelation, first reported by E&E News, that Dourson left the University of Cincinnati after his confirmation hearing to take a job advising Pruitt (E&E Daily, Oct. 18).
That news "further underscored that we'd be foolish to expect any straight answers from this nominee," Carper said before calling on his Republican colleagues to "join me in rejecting this nomination."
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) also slammed Dourson's record. Cardin warned that passing him along party lines would undercut the compromises necessary to pass TSCA reform and would make Democrats less likely to work across the aisle in the future.Wehrum
After Dourson, the EPW Committee moved on to Wehrum, who is currently a partner and head of the administrative law group at the law firm Hunton & Williams LLP.
Wehrum spent six years at the EPA air office during the George W. Bush administration, serving from 2001 to 2007, first as counsel and then as acting chief.
Wehrum quit after Democrats, who controlled the Senate during part of that time, blocked his bid to get the top job permanently from getting out of committee.
This time around, Democrats and environmental groups renewed their objections to Wehrum's fitness for the job, charging that he had worked to weaken air quality standards as a corporate attorney.
But the only real peril to his winning the panel's approval came from Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who had threatened to vote against him unless Pruitt committed to specific steps in support of the renewable fuel standard. After Pruitt signed off on a deal last week, Ernst supported Wehrum's nomination this morning.
Barrasso allowed Democrats to sound off on the nominees after the voting was done. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) began his remarks by slamming Barrasso's decision to delay the minority's remarks.
"It's a very different thing to be allowed to speak after a vote is taken than to have the opportunity to try to convince your colleagues before the vote is taken," Whitehouse said. "And it's a signal to me that this process is simply not on the up and up."
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), who had placed a symbolic hold on the nominations of Dourson and Wehrum last week, used her remarks to question the legal validity of Pruitt's renewable fuel commitments and said the committee should have delayed action until a rulemaking on the issue is complete.
"There was simply no need to risk devastating communities throughout the Midwest by rushing Mr. Wehrum's nomination," Duckworth said, referring to corn-producing areas that depend on biofuel manufacturing.Outlook
Barrasso told E&E News afterward he didn't expect any of the nominees who'd just cleared committee to get a floor vote in the near future.
"It seems like there is quite a bit of backlog because the Democrats have been opposing so many of the Republican nominees," he said. "They continue to make us file cloture and wait the 30 hours. I'd like to get these moved more quickly."
Carper told E&E News that he would continue to oppose advancing EPA nominees until the agency improves its responsiveness to the minority's oversight requests. And during the markup, the Democrat specifically vowed to keep trying to block Dourson.
Susan Bodine, a former committee staffer nominated for EPA compliance chief, is waiting for a vote by the full Senate but is also already at the agency.
She offered a detailed response to questions from Whitehouse and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) about her current role. The senators released those answers during today's meeting.
"I think most of us would support her nomination on the floor," Carper said, speaking for Democrats. "We'll do so when we receive timely response to questions that Sen. Ernst and others have received with respect to Wehrum and the renewable fuels standard. We'd like to have equal treatment under the law. That's not asking too much."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/10/25/stories/1060064649
-
EPW Clears EPA Nominees, Including Controversial Dourson
Oct 25, 2017 | Politico Pro
By Alex Guillen
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee today narrowly approved several EPA nominees, including a chemist who has drawn scrutiny in recent days by moving to EPA ahead of his confirmation as an adviser to Scott Pruitt.
The panel approved Michael Dourson to run EPA’s chemical office by a party-line 11-10 vote. Dourson “has essentially sold his science to the highest bidder,” Sen. Tom Carperof Delaware, the top EPW Democrat, said before the vote. In addition, EPW Democrats on Tuesday sent a letter to Dourson questioning whether his early appointment to EPA violates the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998.
The committee also approved William Wehrum to run EPA’s powerful air office by another party-line vote of 11-10. Democrats opposed Wehrum because of his industry connections.
A vote previously scheduled for last week was delayed after Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) threatened to withhold support for Wehrum amid a fight with EPA over the Renewable Fuel Standard. Pruitt resolved the matter with a letter last week, and Ernst resumed her support.
Other nominees were given the green light with a voice vote: Matthew Leopold to be EPA’s general counsel; David Ross to run EPA’s water office; Jeff Baran’s re-nomination to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and Paul Trombino to head the Federal Highway Administration.
WHAT’S NEXT: It is unclear when the nominations will get floor time. Democrats have indicated they will work to delay Dourson and Wehrum from moving forward, though they cannot necessarily block the nominees.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Chemical Industry Hired Gun Would Be a Big Step Backward for Chemical Safety
Oct 25, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Sen. Tom Udall
Last year, Republicans and Democrats reached a rare bipartisan agreement on a major environmental law and passed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. The Lautenberg Act – for the first time – provides the Environmental Protection Agency with the authority to protect our kids from dangerous chemicals.
A year later, that new law is in a critically important phase as the EPA works to implement provisions that Congress wrote to promote safety. Environmental advocates and industry agreed that passage was a critical step to restore confidence in the safety of products in our homes and workplaces. And that can only happen if the EPA is allowed to do its work free from political interference. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will take a crucial vote today on whether to advance President Trump’s nominee to head the EPA’s office responsible for implementing the new law. If Michael Dourson is confirmed, the EPA’s current and future progress on chemical safety will be at risk.
The American people have a vested interest in the EPA’s unbiased process. We come in contact with tens of thousands of chemicals—they prevent stains on our carpets, reduce static in our laptop, prevent the spread of fire, and keep our shirts wrinkle free. Yet, while we know that some can cause serious health impacts, the EPA didn’t have the authority to restrict their use until the Lautenberg law was passed.
For example, certain “flame retardant” chemicals can still be found in nearly every American home, despite evidence that they affect children’s brain development. The Lautenberg Act explicitly requires the EPA to review every new and existing chemical on the market. Late last year, the agency assembled its list of the first 10 existing chemicals to review for safety. It includes the industrial solvents TCE and 1-bromopropane, and 1,4-dioxane, a carcinogen found in cosmetics and drinking water.
And that’s why the nomination of Dourson, a chemical industry hired gun, is so concerning. Dourson, whose nomination is pending before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has spent his career helping industry cover up the damage caused by dangerous substances – from second-hand smoke to PFOA, the chemical in Teflon tied to cancer.
As has been reported by several news outlets, Dourson’s firm, TERA, has had a clear business strategy: Industry would ask TERA to review a chemical, and Dourson would reliably suggest a looser standard than government scientists, even when the chemical is linked to serious health impacts. For example, Dourson recommended a safety standard for PFOA that was 2,000 times weaker than that recommended by the EPA. His work helped weaken the standard acceptable in West Virginia – even after a severe spill contaminated groundwater near a DuPont plant outside Parkersburg.
The list of chemicals that Dourson has found safer than relevant government agencies goes on and on. And if he were confirmed for his position, he would take the helm of the EPA’s toxics bureau with serious conflicts of interest. The chemicals Dourson has worked to greenwash include three on the bureau’s top 10 list: TCE, 1-bromopropane, and 1,4-dioxane. Anyone who believes Dourson could simply avoid conflicts should consider his responses during his Senate confirmation hearing. When asked if he agreed with the EPA’s safety analyses of petcoke, which diverged greatly from his own, Dourson refused to answer three times until he finally responded, “I’m not ready to answer that question.”
The American people already have reason to worry about his impact at EPA. Although he has not been confirmed, Dourson is currently working as an “adviser” to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. Of course, Dourson is free to make a living however he chooses outside of government. But a toxicologist for hire has no place overseeing what the American people expect is a neutral process by which chemicals are evaluated for safety. By confirming Dourson to head the toxics bureau, Congress would – just a year after passing chemical safety reform – take a huge step toward undermining public confidence in the new law.
Dourson has made a career as a hired gun. But we don’t have to hire him, and we shouldn’t. The Senate should reject Dourson.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/356992-chemical-industry-hired-gun-would-be-a-big-step
-
(ACC Mentioned) Trump Administration Wants to Limit Review of Toxic Chemicals
Oct 25, 2017 | Health Day
Firefighter, construction workers and others are condemning a Trump administration plan that would remove millions of tons of asbestos, flame retardants and other toxins in buildings nationwide from a congressionally mandated Environmental Protection Agency review.
Instead of looking at chemicals already in widespread use, the Trump administration wants to restrict the review to products still being manufactured and entering the marketplace, the Associated Press reported.
The review is meant to be the first step toward creating new regulations to protect the public, lawmakers say. But ignoring products already in use defeats that purpose, critics say.
For example, the Trump administration plan would limit the review to just a few hundred tons of asbestos imported each year and ignore nearly all of the estimated 8.9 million tons of asbestos-containing products that the U.S. Geological Survey said entered the national marketplace between 1970 and 2016, the AP reported.
Asbestos fibers can pose a deadly threat when disturbed in a fire or during renovations. the fibers can lodge in the lungs and cause problems such as a form of cancer called mesothelioma.
Despite the known dangers of asbestos, a 1989 attempt to ban most asbestos products was overturned by a federal court, and it remains in widespread use in the U.S., the AP reported.
Firefighters and construction workers are at risk of harm from asbestos due to its presence in materials such as insulation, roofing and flooring tiles in tens of millions of homes.
"Hundreds of thousands of firefighters are going to be affected by this. It is by far the biggest hazard we have out there," Patrick Morrison, assistant general president for health and safety at the International Association of Fire Fighters, told the AP.
"My God, these are not just firefighters at risk. There are people that live in these structures and don't know the danger of asbestos," he added.
A 2015 study by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health concluded that the rate of mesothelioma is twice as high among firefighters than in the general public, the APreported.
The EPA review was ordered last year by Congress and is also supposed to include eight other highly toxic substances, including flame retardants used in furniture and other products.
"It doesn't matter whether the dangerous substance is no longer being manufactured; if people are still being exposed, then there is still a risk," law co-author New Mexico Democratic Sen. Tom Udall Udall told the AP.
"Ignoring these circumstances would openly violate the letter and the underlying purpose of the law," he warned.
The EPA is bending to the chemical industry's wishes rather than safeguarding Americans' health, said Rep. Frank Pallone of New York, ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has been criticized for hiring two people who formerly worked for the American Chemistry Council, the industry's lobbying arm. They are Nancy Beck, the EPA's deputy assistant administrator for chemical safety, and Liz Bowman, the EPA's associate administrator for public affairs, the AP reported.
https://consumer.healthday.com/health-technology-information-18/press-medical-and-health-reporting-news-552/health-highlights-oct-25-2017-727855.html
-
The Home Depot Announces New Strategy to Remove Toxic Chemicals in Building Products
Oct 25, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
By CJ Frogozo
Today, The Home Depot announced a new Chemical Strategy to remove harmful chemicals in building products such as paints, carpet, and flooring. The policy addresses dangerous chemicals like flame retardants, phthalates, and nonylphenol ethoxylates. Hazardous chemicals such as these have been linked to cancer, reproductive harm, asthma, and learning and developmental disabilities.
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families Mind the Store Campaign Director Mike Schade issued the following statement in response:
“We congratulate The Home Depot for developing this important new Chemical Strategy to drive harmful chemicals out of products like paint, wall-to-wall carpet, and flooring. This is great news and builds on Home Depot’s successful policy to eliminate phthalates in flooring. We are pleased to see that The Home Depot is eliminating a more significant use of harmful chemicals such as nonylphenol ethoxylates and other alkylphenol ethoxylates in paint. While we’re pleased that The Home Depot is investigating alternatives to methylene chloride-based paint strippers, they should take the next step and commit to a full phase-out of toxic chemicals in paint strippers. These chemicals pose unacceptable risks to their customers.
We urge Lowe’s and Ace Hardware to join The Home Depot in developing safer chemical policies to restrict a broader universe of chemicals in building products.”
Last November, the Mind the Store campaign released a report card evaluating The Home Depot and other retailers’ safer chemicals programs. The Home Depot is the latest retailer to announce progress in restricting harmful chemicals. Since January, Best Buy, Costco, CVS, Target, and Walmart have all announced new initiatives to address harmful chemicals in products.
http://saferchemicals.org/newsroom/the-home-depot-announces-new-strategy-to-remove-toxic-chemicals-in-building-products/
-
Home Depot Eliminating Chemicals of Concern From Products
Oct 25, 2017 | Floor Daily
Home Depot is eliminating substances like formaldehyde and lead in several categories, reports Bloomberg News.
“The changes are part of a broader plan to minimize or disclose harmful substances in the paints, carpets, insulation and flooring it sells, the Atlanta-based retailer said on Wednesday.
“Home Depot follows Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Target Corp. and other large retailers that have moved to both disclose the chemicals in the products they sell and remove them whenever possible. The world’s largest home-improvement company says it’s working with suppliers and groups like the Green Chemistry & Commerce Council to find safer components.
“Home Depot said it has ‘significantly improved’ its paints in the past decade, removing triclosan, lead, and formaldehyde from the latex-based wall paint it sells in the U.S. and Canada. It has also eliminated substances such as vinyl chloride and perfluorooctanoic acid from the indoor wall-to-wall carpeting it sells.”
http://www.floordaily.net/flooring-news/home-depot-eliminating-chemicals-of-concern-from-products
-
Firefighters Often Unaware of Hazards From Chemicals, Smoke
Oct 25, 2017 | Firefighter Nation
By Mike Wagner and Lucas Sullivan
The blade scrapes across Mark Rine's bare back, grating his cancerous skin like cheese and adding to the maze of scars and spots.
A small hole in his flesh quickly fills with blood. But if Rine feels pain, it's hidden behind his smirk. He and the doctor exchange recipes during the 10-minute procedure, and the physician scolds Rine for considering more tattoos, something that could mask more cancerous spots.
Then Rine glances toward the corner of the dermatologist's office.
His son Blake is sobbing. He's waiting for his own skin to be checked and worrying that his dad will die soon.
Rine is used to running into burning buildings. Blake, a high-school freshman quarterback, is sometimes blindsided by blitzing linebackers. But there is no manual or playbook for handling these moments.
Rine's children are checked twice a year to guard against his biggest fear: that he has exposed his own family to the same poison that will end up killing him.
"I don't like it here, Dad," Blake said, trembling while holding on to his dad's arm. "I just want to go home."
Rine kneels awkwardly in a blue hospital gown. He's almost helpless to comfort his son.
"Blake, look at me. Look at me, son," Rine says. "Everything is going to be OK. We are going to get through this."
Rine doesn't know which of the 200 fires he responded to since he began his career with the Columbus Fire Division in December 2006 caused his terminal cancer.
It could have been the blaze at alarge airport storage unit where, for seven hours, he fought the fire around exploding propane tanks and boxes of bathroom cleaning supplies.
Or was it when he smashed holes through a three-story apartment complex roof at the biggest fire of his career, again without wearing a mask to protect against inhaling dangerous chemicals?
After both of those fires, he crawled back into his bunk at the station house and went to sleep without showering.
Maybe it was the dozens of dumpster and car fires he put out.
Or perhaps it was all of that.
The American Cancer Society says that multiple or repeated chemical exposures, whether big or small, can cause cancer.
"It's impossible for a firefighter to know exactly what exposure was the one," Rine said while chugging water to help combat the side effects of chemotherapy. "We don't have those answers. But we do know what's inside all those materials that were burning."
Battling the heat
Firefighters are their own worst enemy when they don't wear their gear, not only while fighting a fire but also when they go back into a smoldering structure to check for hidden flames or to gut the place.
Often, that work takes longer than the time spent dousing fires, which means longer exposures to toxins while unmasked.
They typically wear nearly70 pounds of gear, including bulky pants, a thick coat, insulated boots, protective gloves, a bulky fabric hood and a rubber mask that's part of a self-contained breathing apparatus with an air tank.
The main reason some don't wear their gear at all times is obvious: It's hot and uncomfortable.
A firefighter's body temperature can rise to 105 degrees when in action. Each often lugs heavy hoses, axes and cutting equipment that can add even more weight.
Some don't wear their gear because they never heard about the cancer threat. Some don't wear it because they either don't care or don't believe the threat is real.
And walking around in a smoldering, hot building with just a helmet and T-shirt is something firefighters have done for decades. It's human nature to want to rip off that heavy equipment and breathe without an air tank as soon as the fire is extinguished.
"It can feel suffocating at times," said Joel Rampe, a Findlay firefighter for the past 15 years. "I'm not making excuses for any of us, because the gear should stay on. But once the fire is out, you can still be at the scene for hours and hours, and you are exhausted."
But the work they call the "overhaul" -- when firefighters are opening walls, ceilings and partitions to check for fire lurking within them -- is the most dangerous for contact with carcinogens. The smoldering ruins typically are at their most toxic levels then. Without a mask, firefighters inhale the gases.
The suit itself also absorbs toxins, which is why it's vital for firefighters to clean their gear rather than throw it in the back of a truck or take it home where it can potentially affect their families.
Keeping the full gear on doesn't eliminate the possibility of firefighters being exposed to the chemicals and toxins that can cause cancer. Small gaps between the hood, coat, pants, gloves and boots can allow smoke to snake up under the clothing and settle on skin.
And the more a firefighter's body temperature rises, the greater the risk the toxins can be absorbed into the skin. With every 5 degrees that body temperature rises, skin absorption rates increase by as much as 400 percent, according to the Firefighter Cancer Support Network, a nonprofit based in Burbank, California.
Toxins at home
Dayton firefighter Jim Burneka Jr. went through every piece of clothing people gave him and his wife for baby-shower gifts.
His wife gasped as he loaded brand new sleepers and onesies into a trash bag and tossed them out. The clothes had flame-retardant chemicals in them.
"They're too dangerous, and they don't do anything but cause cancer," he said. "No one should be using these."
Flame retardants can be a major threat to firefighters because when they burn, carcinogens are released into the air.
The chemical-based retardants are in many household and office items. They can be found in infant clothes, high chairs, mattresses, pillows and even Barbie dolls.
They are supposed to give the public and firefighters more time to escape a fire by smoldering before flames erupt. But study after study from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and several universities have raised questions about their effectiveness.
The flame retardants don't have to ignite to be harmful. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 97 percent of Americans had traces of flame-retardant chemicals in their blood.
The big shift to flame retardants came in the late 1970s and is traced directly to big tobacco.
At that time, there was concern among firefighters and state fire marshals about the number of people falling asleep with lit cigarettes. Lawmakers across the country began pressuring tobacco companies to produce a cigarette that would extinguish after a short period if it was not being smoked.
Tobacco companies were forced to release 13 million documents in 2011 as part of a federal lawsuit settlement involving the tobacco companies' lack of warning to the public about the hazards of smoking. Those documents show that in the 1980s and into the 1990s, tobacco companies balked at making a fire-safe cigarette for fear it would reduce the product quality.
Instead, they planned to put flame-retardant chemicals into things found inside the home.
The records show the industry spent millions and offered grants to fire organizations to get buy-in for the plan. They hired lobbyists to persuade fire officials that this was the path to better fire safety.
The linchpin in the whole plan was to gain support from the National Association of State Fire Marshals and ply the group with grant money. The marshals even put a tobacco lobbyist on their governing board, according to court records.
Tom Brace, one of the founding members of the Fire Marshals Association and once fire marshal for the states of Minnesota and Washington, said the group was unaware of tobacco's influence on flame retardants.
Brace said the group would have done things differently if that had been fully known at the time.
"Cancer wasn't talked about at the time, either, not that I recall," Brace said. "Since then, we've learned a lot more about flame retardants, and some of the bad ones have been eliminated."
And though Burneka's wife and friends might have questioned him throwing out baby products, it appears he was ahead of the curve.
In late September, the Consumer Product Safety Commission voted to warn the public about dangerous chemicals in baby and toddler products, mattresses, upholstered furniture and electronics enclosures. The federal group for the first time said it plans to discuss banning a whole class of flame retardants that have been found to be harmful.
'I can't do this anymore'
Mark Rine kneels down in the street, almost gasping for air. He can't muster the energy to remove his air tank.
He has been fighting a small fire on the second floor of a quadruplex not far from his firefighting home at Station 8 on the city's Near East Side for just 20 minutes.
In the academy, Rine would always beat the other guys during training races when they had to run carrying the bulky 50-foot hose. He mocked them by singing songs while he ran.
Now, his body is betraying him.
After pulling a man to safety, Rine's friend crouches down in front of him.
"Hey man, are you OK?," he asks. "Mark, are you going to be OK?"
It's summer of 2014, about two years into Rine's fight with melanoma. He has been growing weaker every day but doesn't want to admit it. The chemo injections have brought with them insomnia, vomiting, night sweats and constant exhaustion.
Forty pounds have dropped off his once-powerful 225-pound frame in a year.
He knows that the other guys at Station 8 see what is happening to him. They see Rine giving himself chemo shots. Rine worries that they might think he can't carry his weight anymore.
They've never said a word, and neither has Rine.
Rine sits on the fire truck as it turns the corner. He looks back at the last structure he would ever run into as a firefighter.
"I can't do this anymore," he says softly.
Rine is close to finishing out his last 24-hour shift when he meets up with Shawn McConnell, one of his closest firefighting brothers, in the station-house bay.
The two tough guys sit in the back of an ambulance together one last time and fight back tears.
Rine tells McConnell he has to quit.
"I just can't do it anymore," Rine says. "I can't be a real firefighter anymore."
"It's going to be OK man," says McConnell, embracing his buddy.
Soon, Rine begins peppering McConnell with daily calls and texts of stories and statistics about how firefighters all over the world are dealing with the cancer threat. Not enough is being done, he says, to warn fellow firefighters about the dangerous chemicals and flame retardants in burning materials that they immerse themselves in.
McConnell tells Rine that he has an even bigger calling. He needs to share this message.
"You are going to save more lives doing this than before," McConnell said.
Adding more chemicals
Columbus Fire Chief Kevin O'Connor has no doubt that flame retardants have, at times, prevented fires and saved his firefighters from a brutal fire.
"Not having fires has saved my guys from exposures for sure," O'Connor said. "The problem is, there is not enough research out there, and when you add more chemicals such as flame retardants, it's just more chemical we are being exposed to."
Heather M. Stapleton is a chemist and associate professor at Duke University whose work focuses on environmental risks from chemicals such as flame retardants.
Some of her research, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health, found that manufacturers' tests showing that flame retardants increase escape time for firefighters were misleading. The furniture in those tests, Stapleton said, was saturated with more flame-retardant chemical than what is actually sold to consumers.
"There is not good data out there suggesting they are providing a true benefit," Stapleton said.
Stapleton's research is clear, however: Chemicals in flame retardants are linked to cancer.
In 2013, California lawmakers changed rules for flame retardants, saying they had to be able to smolder if exposed to a small open flame for a short period of time. This allowed manufacturers to line furniture with a fire-prevention shield material instead of soaking the foam cushions with flame retardants.
The law is aimed at eliminating the most harmful flame retardants. But it will take years to phase the bad stuff out of homes and offices across the country, including Ohio.
Ohio's law on flame retardants largely mirrors national standards set by the National Fire Protection Association, which vary depending on fabric material but allow numerous chemicals to be used to keep flames at bay.
The city of Boston was able to amend its fire code in 2013, allowing hospitals, schools and campuses with sprinkler systems to use furniture free of toxic flame retardants.
And despite tobacco companies' efforts to keep lawmakers from tampering with their product, every state has passed laws requiring fire-safe cigarettes since 2011.
'This is home'
Firefighters at Station 8 have invited their brother for lunch, but Mark Rine is dreading the reunion.
It's been almost two years since he last stepped foot inside his second home.
Rine misses his brothers and sisters more than he can express. He isn't whole without them.
He is starved for the camaraderie of the station house, the smell of the chow and being on the front lines when an alarm goes off.
He had wanted to be a firefighter since he was a kid.
Rine remembers laying out his dress blue uniform after he graduated from the academy -- the stitching, the six gold buttons on the double-breasted jacket.
His chiefs and fellow firefighters considered him one of the best paramedics in the city. He was what he calls a "real firefighter" for eight years until cancer took it all away.
Now, Rine spends most of his days alone in a dark office at the iconic Station 67 in Franklinton, working directly for the fire union president. He helps the city's active and retired firefighters with medical benefits, pension questions, cancer claims and anything else they might need.
"Time to get this over with," Rine says as he climbs into his 2013 Suburban.
The guys are waiting for him in front of the old station house, and the angst on Rine's face disappears. Instantly, he receives a heavy dose of what he has been craving.
They jab and swear, and Rine, who never cusses, can't stop laughing.
"We have missed you man," says Lt. Steve Kerns as he embraces one of his closest friends. "This place hasn't been the same without you."
They gather around the indoor picnic-style tables to devour taco salad made by a firefighter Rine calls Papa.
Rine starts giving the youngest guy at the station grief for not cleaning the kitchen as spotlessly as he once did. Station 8 might be a gritty, old-school firehouse, but it has a proud reputation as the cleanest in the city.
The old, funny stories about Rine consume the reunion early on.
There was one when they needed to bandage only a man's mouth but took him into the emergency room wrapped like a mummy.
And there were hundreds of runs to the apartment of a crack addict who Rine helped so many times, he considered her family.
No one says the word "cancer." But eventually, someone asks Rine his least favorite question.
"How you feeling, man?"
The jokes abruptly stop. The station goes silent as Rine talks about his chemo treatments, the moles sliced from his body and how he tries to keep it all away from his family.
His mood darkens when he starts walking around the station. He can barely look at his old locker.
When he limps into the bunkroom, he grimaces and sighs.
There are eight bunks in a room that looks like military barracks. Rine's bunk is the third one in on the left. He goes one by one and names off the buddies who slept in each bunk.
"This is home," he says. "This is where I spent a third of my life. I hate this. I was part of something here, and it became part of me. And it was taken from me. It's why I do the talks, so other guys don't have to feel this, or worse, taken from them."
An alarm rings and echoes through the station house.
Rine watches the ambulance pull away, puts his head down and quietly walks out the door.
http://www.firefighternation.com/articles/2017/10/firefighters-often-unaware-of-hazards-from-chemicals-smoke.html
-
Oct 25, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Alex Formuzis
A new report from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences warns that the neurotoxic pesticide chlorpyrifos can severely harm children’s developing brains. But in March, in one of his first decisions as EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt cancelled an expected ban of chlorpyrifos with no scientific basis for his decision.
The sweeping report chronicles the toll of pesticides, industrial chemicals and air pollution on the health of America’s children. It summarizes the results of a 20-year effort by the two federal agencies, which have invested $300 million on dozens of long-term studies of American children. The research links everyday exposures to bisphenol A, flame retardants and pesticides with asthma, cancer, and brain and behavioral problems. It estimates the cost of environmentally related diseases in children at $76 billion a year.
These findings are a striking departure from the direction of the EPA under the Trump administration.
Pruitt was in office for only weeks before he aborted a scheduled ban on chlorpyrifos, one of the most widely used pesticides in the U.S. Based on the results of three federally funded observational studies, the EPA was expected to phase out all remaining uses of the pesticide due to evidence that it caused long-term learning problems and IQ loss in children.
To run the EPA’s office of chemical safety, Trump nominated Michael Dourson, whose science-for-hire consulting firm has a long history of helping industry’s efforts to weaken health protections for a number of dangerous chemicals. The nomination has been met with widespread opposition and concern by public interest and public health advocates. In a highly unorthodox move, Pruitt installed Dourson at the EPA before the Senate had a chance to vote on his confirmation.
If Dourson is eventually confirmed, he will join another notorious political appointee, Nancy Beck, who came to the EPA from the American Chemistry Council, the leading lobby and trade group for the chemical industry. The New York Times recently published an exhaustive exposé on Beck’s role at the EPA and her career of downplaying the risks of chemicals on human health.
“This report is exactly what American taxpayers should expect from the country’s top public health protection agencies and the professional scientists they fund,” said EWG President Ken Cook. “Sadly, that’s not what we’re getting from Pruitt and his team.”
“We hold out hope that the report will inform future decisions when Pruitt and other political appointees at EPA must choose between children’s environmental health and the craven, profit-fueled demands of the chemical industry or the pesticide manufacturers.”
The report found that children exposed to higher levels of chlorpyrifos before birth “displayed adverse cognitive and behavioral outcomes compared to children exposed to lower levels.” It said children with higher exposures score significantly lower on IQ, memory and development tests.
“Exposure to chemicals such as mercury, lead, arsenic, and pesticides can have negative effects on brain development, leading to cognitive delay, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), lower IQ, higher rates of anxiety and depression, behavior and learning disorders, reduced self-regulatory capacities, and shortened attention span,” the report said. “Currently, neurodevelopmental disorders affect 10 to 15 percent of children born annually.”
http://www.ewg.org/release/landmark-epa-report-chemicals-and-children-s-health-odds-pruitt-s-cancellation-chlorpyrifos#.WfC3g1uCzIU
-
UK Government 'Fails to Recognise' Chemicals Regulatory Issues
Oct 25, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK government’s response to a parliamentary committee report on chemicals regulation after Brexit "fails to recognise the unique nature of the regulatory issues facing industry", the Chemical Business Association (CBA) has said.
In early 2017, the House of Commons’ Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) launched its second inquiry into the future of environmental law and policy. Speaking at a recent Chemical Watch Brexit conference, committee chair MP Mary Creagh said the government "did not answer" the main points the committee had raised in its inquiry report.
The EAC subsequently sought stakeholder views on the government’s reply. The CBA said the post-Brexit regulatory and business environment "represents one of the more significant challenges facing the UK chemical supply chain" and that the government response to the EAC’s report "fails to respond to this challenge".
In a press release, Ms Creagh said stakeholder comments show that many working in the chemicals industry "are concerned by the government’s failure to set out a vision for the sector post-Brexit".
Industry is clear, she added, that it will still need to meet EU regulations after leaving the Union in order to export to it. "However, the government position remains vague. This uncertainty could cost the taxpayer millions of pounds and leave our second largest export sector in disarray."
She said government "should act quickly to provide clarity" about the UK’s chemical industry and European regulation after Brexit.Long way to go
In its comments, the UK manufacturers' organisation EEF said the government’s response is "a further reminder of how much still has to be decided and done if the UK is to have a functioning regulatory regime for chemicals in April 2019".
The degree of uncertainty is causing concern not just in the chemicals industry, but also among downstream manufacturing industries, which are reliant on a wide range of substances and chemical formulations, EEF said.
Downstream users are "particularly concerned", it added, about the invalidation of authorisations held by UK firms which are needed for downstream formulation, component manufacture or aftermarket services in the single market.
The evidence submitted to the committee and published documents so far, focus on maintaining regulatory coherence and cooperation with the EU, EEF said. However, recent comments from the Secretary of State "indicate a preference for an alternative approach without specifying the timescale over which that might be achieved".Substance assessment
The British Plastics Federation (BPF) said it wants the government to clarify "at the earliest opportunity" the issue of whether companies will be able to retain their REACH registrations.
Another uncertainty, it said, is the approach the UK government will take to substances proposed for inclusion in REACH Annex XIV – the authorisation list – that are still under discussion in Echa committees on the day of the UK’s exit.
Any future UK government agency may wish to make its own assessment of these substances, or it could adopt these decisions as a matter of policy, BPF added. Although exporting UK companies would need to comply with the Annex XIV requirements for its sales in the EU, "it may be useful to have some form of UK consultation to check that the proposed substance showed a risk to human health or the environment in the UK".
https://chemicalwatch.com/60511/uk-government-fails-to-recognise-chemicals-regulatory-issues
-
Norway Finds Illegal Substances in Promotional Gift Items
Oct 25, 2017 | Chemical Watch
An inspection of promotional gift items in Norway has found that almost half breached the law by containing prohibited substances or for being inadequately labelled.
Norway's Environment Directorate looked at 70 products, including small electronics, such as USB sticks, torches and emergency chargers, and several types of soft plastic products, such as reflexes and bathing balls.
The directorate found toys that contained the phthalate DEHP. It also discovered short-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs) in plastic products and lead and cadmium in several electrical and electronic (EE) products.
Controls showed that manufacturers or importers of this type of product have poor knowledge of the regulations, it says.
"It is essential that industry ensures products are labelled properly so it is clear that small electronics such as USB sticks, charging stations and cables, must be handled as EE waste," Mathieu Veulemans, section leader at the directorate, says.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60475/norway-finds-illegal-substances-in-promotional-gift-items
-
(ACC Mentioned) LyondellBasell Plans New $2B Chemicals and Plastics Project Along Gulf Coast
Oct 25, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Jordan Blum
LyondellBasell said it's planning to build a multibillion-dollar chemicals and plastics plant along the Gulf Coast, and very possibly in the Houston area, although a final decision may still be a year away.
LyondellBasell CEO Bob Patel said the project would cost more than $2 billion and use propane to make chemicals and the plastic polypropylene to serve North and South American markets.
"It'll take us a good part of about 12 months before we get to the point where we make a final decision," Patel said. "But, yes, PDH (propane dehydrogenation) and polypropylene is the next project. It'll likely be somewhere along the Gulf Coast."
Patel said he hopes to move forward with the plans by the end of 2018.
Houston's LyondellBasell already is in the midst of a massive expansion along the Houston Ship Channel, currently building a plastics plant in La Porte and beginning construction on a $2.4 billion chemicals complex spanning two locations in Channelview and Pasadena.
Most of the growth is driven by the U.S. shale boom that's producing cheap and ample natural gas to use as feedstock for chemical plants. But most of the projects rely on consuming ethane, another natural gas liquid like propane. However, ethane is much cheaper than propane because, although they both come from natural gas, ethane is bountiful and largely useless outside of the petrochemical sector, while propane is in demand for heating and other purposes.
The propane is less cost advantaged, but Patel said there's a growing domestic demand for polypropylene as a plastic and fabric in the years ahead. Unlike the world's most common plastic, polyethylene, polypropylene also can be used as a fabric.
Globally, the growth is more about producing plastic packaging and serving the surging middle classes in Asia. It's different in North America.
"Here in the U.S., it's more about substitution into automobiles," Patel said. "Cars are getting lighter, so the polypropylene goes into bumpers and internal trim inside the car, as well some under the hood applications."
LyondellBasell is growing as a major U.S. buyer of propane because the recently announced $2.4 billion project also will consume it.
The new LyondellBasell plant will make propylene oxide, which is used to make bedding, carpeting, coatings, building materials and adhesives, and the by-product tertiary butyl alcohol, which is refined into an additive that makes fuels burn cleaner. The plant will have the biggest production capacity in the world for these chemicals, capable of manufacturing 1 billion pounds of propylene oxide and 2.2 billion pounds of tertiary butyl alcohol a year.
As part of the project, the company will build a plant to refine tertiary butyl alcohol into fuel additives at its nearby Bayport facility in Pasadena. Construction on the project is slated to begin next year, with completion scheduled for 2021.
The projects represents a continuation of the petrochemical boom along the Gulf Coast fueled by cheap and ample natural gas liquids and supported by access to foreign markets through the growing export terminals at the Port of Houston and other Texas ports. The American Chemistry Council, a trade group, estimated the Texas Gulf Coast accounts for about $70 billion of the $185 billion in petrochemical plants completed since 2010 or planned through 2023.
In the last few years, LyondellBasell also has completed ethylene expansions at its Channelview, La Porte and Corpus Christi sites, as well as a plastics expansion in Matagorda.
http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/LyondellBasell-plans-new-2B-chemicals-and-12304946.php
-
Post-Harvey, the Arkema Disaster Reveals Chemical Safety Risks Were Preventable
Oct 25, 2017 | The Union of Concerned Scientists
By Charise Johnson
Halloween is right around the corner, but the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been a perpetual nightmare to public safety since Administrator Scott Pruitt arrived, sending long-awaited chemical safety amendments to an early grave this year. The Risk Management Plan (RMP) is a vital EPA chemical safety rule that “requires certain facilities to develop plans that identify potential effects of a chemical accident, and take certain actions to prevent harm to the public or the environment”—but delays to the effective date of the long-awaited updates are putting communities, workers, and first responders directly in the way of harm, as we have witnessed from recent events following Hurricane Harvey.
Last Friday, the Union of Concerned Scientists released a report finding evidence of harm caused to communities by RMP-related incidents in the wake of Hurricane Harvey. The report serves as a supporting document in a lawsuit UCS is involved with against the EPA decision to delay the long overdue RMP update. Our objective was to further highlight how, if the improvements to the RMP had been allowed to go into place as planned, damage from chemical plants during Hurricane Harvey could have been diminished. We provided an in-depth analysis of the steps the Arkema facility could have taken with the proposed changes in effect, and estimated the toxic burden that the surrounding community was exposed to.
Additionally, we examined other incidents (i.e. spills, releases, explosions) that occurred at chemical facilities during Hurricane Harvey, as well as emphasizing the disproportionate impacts of chemical incidents on communities of color and low-income communities. I have taken “toxic tours” on Houston’s east side with our partners at Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services (t.e.j.a.s.), and am all too aware that disparities in distribution of RMP facilities and concentration of toxic pollutants exist and are mostly unnoticed by the unaffected public.
Could Arkema have been avoided?
In late August of this year, Hurricane Harvey unleashed massive quantities of rain upon Houston and surrounding towns, flooding streets, homes—and chemical facilities. As a result, the Arkema plant in Crosby, Texas, a town 25 miles northeast of Houston, was inundated with floodwater and left without power or working generators. This meant the refrigerators needed for cooling volatile organic peroxides were not operational, which ultimately led to the exploding of 500,000 pounds of the unstable chemicals. Though we cannot say Arkema would not have had an incident, we do know the damage inflicted upon first responders and nearby residents could have been mitigated by implementing the revisions to the chemical safety rule, which would have required:
· Coordination with local emergency response agencies—RMP has standards that would require industries to coordinate and provide information to emergency responders. This would have likely prevented the Crosby first responders from being exposed to noxious fumes—at the perimeter of the ineffective 1.5-mile evacuation zone, I might add—after the Arkema explosion. A group of injured first responders are now suing the plant for failing to properly warn the responders of the dangers they faced.
· Analysis of safer technologies and chemicals—The facility would have had to begin research into safer technologies and chemicals for use in their facility, including less volatile chemicals, or safer storing and cooling techniques to preempt an explosion.
· Root cause analyses—A thorough investigation of past incidents to prevent similar future incidents would have been required of RMP facilities.
Communities are at risk
Real life isn’t an action film, where explosions abound and the dogged hero emerges from a fiery building unscathed, nary a casualty to be found. In real life, the consequences of a chemical explosion, leak, or spill are often dangerous and deadly. We have ways to hold chemical facilities accountable for taking necessary preventative measures, but we must urge the EPA to implement the changes to the proposed RMP rule in order to do so.
http://blog.ucsusa.org/charise-johnson/post-harvey-the-arkema-disaster-reveals-chemical-safety-risks-were-preventable
-
Enviro Toll Uncertain as Industrial Warehouse Burns
Oct 25, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
Officials still do not know what caused a massive blaze at an industrial warehouse in Parkersburg, W.Va. — which continues to burn — or how the burned materials might affect local air quality.
Gov. Jim Justice (R) said yesterday he was unsure how long the fire would continue. Justice declared a state of emergency Monday and asked for federal help to pay for and administer environmental tests.
"I don't have the knowledge or the expertise within me to know what the environmental impact could be to our citizens yet," he said. "And we're trying to source all the professional advice we can source, and do the right things for our people."
The company that owns the building, Intercontinental Export-Import Inc., is working to determine what may have caught fire (Greenwire, Oct. 24).
Possibly contained in the facility were polyvinyl chloride, nylon, carbon black, titanium dioxide, fiberglass, formaldehyde, Teflon and styrene, according to a list from public officials.
Local drinking water should not be affected, state Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety spokesman Lawrence Messina said.
Residents reported air quality issues and several respiratory attacks as the fire burned on.
"The smell of burnt plastic was very prevalent," said Parkersburg resident Heather Royer. "I lasted about 30 minutes in the [local school] building, and I was out. My friend stayed for about two hours, and she said she had a throbbing headache."
Others said they are buying bottled water.
"They can say a lot of things, but we already have water problems," said Christopher Proffitt. "They already have water problems that are linked to the river."
He added, "It looked like an epic out of 'Moses.' I mean, it was a giant column of smoke."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/10/25/stories/1060064621
-
Ex-EPA Official: Trump Worse Than Bush on Respecting Science
Oct 25, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Josh Delk
A former adviser for the Environmental Protection Agency said that President Trump and his administration have been worse on respecting climate science than officials working for President George W. Bush, who would at least seek background before making decisions.
Michael Cox said of the six presidential administrations he has worked with, no EPA leader has ever held such disregard for advice on policy issues. Previous administrations, he said, routinely asked for background information on policies before making decisions.
"Once it got to decision time, Pruitt and his closest staff would just do what they wanted to do, and that was that. And the EPA is a science organization! We're supposed to value facts! Even during the Bush administration it wasn’t like this," Cox said in an interview with the Huffington Post.
A current EPA spokesman slammed Cox after his comments.
“In his own words, Mr. Cox said was planning his retirement before the new administration. Despite the faux outrage, Mr. Cox will receive his six-figure taxpayer funded pension and we wish him the best,” EPA spokesman, Jahan Wilcox, said in response.
Cox was interviewed along with three former administration officials who quit over frustrations with the government.
The veteran agency official accused EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, who opposed many EPA positions on climate issues as Oklahoma attorney general, in his resignation letter of denying "fundamental climate science" and "giving false hope" to the coal miners that the administration had said would find new job opportunities.
The EPA this week cancelled a presentation on climate change by a panel of scientists at a Rhode Island conference focusing on how climate change affects marine life, drawing rebukes for being in denial of science supporting climate change.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/357060-ex-epa-official-trump-even-worse-than-bush-on-respecting-science
-
Greens Prepare Battle Plan for Trump's Answer to Carbon Rule
Oct 25, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen and Benjamin Storrow
Officials at U.S. EPA could replace the Clean Power Plan with a rule focused only on improving power plant efficiency, but environmental groups are already preparing arguments against that potential outcome.
Their battle plan anticipates that EPA will attempt to minimally regulate coal-fired facilities, a move that some greens are arguing could drive up emissions more than if the agency abandoned the Clean Power Plan altogether.
That fight looms in the future, to come after EPA collects public comments on its repeal of the Obama-era climate rule. But environmental groups are already preparing to argue why improving efficiency alone won't stand up under federal environmental law.
They don't want to reveal the full scope of their ideas about how to counter the Trump administration, but environmental groups point to what they say are two obvious problems with power plant regulations that are based only on facility-level efficiency improvements.
The first goes back to the very purpose of the Clean Air Act. The law is meant to control pollutants that endanger human health and welfare, said Vera Pardee, senior attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity.
"If you look at Section 101 [of the Clean Air Act], it talks about preventing or reducing pollution, so that's a pretty strong indication of what Congress wanted to do. And of course if something endangers us, little action is not what is called for," Pardee said.
Another problem is that only requiring efficiency improvements does not follow the Clean Air Act's mandate that EPA regulate based on the "best system of emissions reduction."
"That's not any old system, that's not the system that costs the least," Pardee said. "The benchmark is that the technology should not break the industry. The costs can be high. Even if some players can't reach it, that's not the bar."
The arguments represent a rehash of the long-standing battle lines over the legality of the Clean Power Plan. The Obama administration maintained that the law allows EPA to regulate emissions from the entire power system, and not just set targets for specific plants. Critics of the regulations argued that the government's authority ends at a power plant's fence line.
Some environmental groups have long warned that making plants more efficient at producing energy alone would not do enough to limit CO2 and could actually increase emissions of greenhouse gases.
When power plants improve how efficiently they combust coal to produce energy, they are also making it cheaper for power companies to get energy from coal.
David Doniger, director of the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, explained how this would happen during a recent interview.
When power companies generate electricity, they are continually monitoring energy prices from a range of power plants to see the cheapest way to get power, he said.
"They decide for this 10-minute period, this plant is going to cycle up and cycle down. If coal plants become cheaper to operate, they get moved up the dispatch order," Doniger said. "If a dirty plant becomes cheaper to operate, then net pollution will go up instead of down."
EPA recognized this problem when it developed the Clean Power Plan and decided to include alternative approaches to efficiency improvements, Doniger said.
The definition of what counts as a "best system" was hotly contested during the regulation's development. Pardee noted that the previous administration was also following the lead of industry, which was already looking beyond efficiency improvements.
Since EPA had already determined it needed to take a broader approach with "much greater emissions reductions at reasonable cost," a court could determine that the agency changing course to only implement efficiency improvements would be "arbitrary and capricious," said Sean Donahue, counsel for the Sierra Club.
Donahue noted that EPA is still "a long way away" from developing any sort of replacement rule.
Jeff Holmstead, an attorney at Bracewell LLP, called the environmental group's arguments "pretty far-fetched." It should approach the issue by getting Congress to pass a new statutory program, he said.
"People are going through all this difficult mental gymnastics about how the Clean Air Act can be used, when they should be working with Congress to get legislation passed," Holmstead said.
He noted that the Obama administration's interpretation of what counted as the best system of emissions reduction was vastly different from what had been the standard since the agency's inception in 1970.
"What EPA is authorized to do under Section 111 [of the Clean Air Act] has nothing to do with obtaining any particular reduction of pollution," he said. "There has never been any successful challenge claiming that EPA has an obligation to do more, that it has to reduce pollution by a certain amount."
While lawyers begin to hash out their courtroom arguments, coal-fired power plants will be weighing the practicalities of investing in fixes to limit emissions, or shutting down entirely.Can plants be more efficient?
The efficiency of fossil fuel-burning power plants is generally measured by heat rate. The lower it is, the more efficient the plant is and the lower its emissions are.
Coal plants have seen their heat rate rise in recent years, even as the efficiency of gas-fired plants, their chief competitor, has fallen. The average heat rate of natural gas plants fell 7 percent between 2005 and 2016, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The heat rate of coal plants, by comparison, increased by 1 percent.
Reversing that trend stands to be costly.
A spate of coal plant retirements in recent years largely culled the U.S. of its older, less efficient units. Remaining plants tend to be newer and more efficient, industry analysts said.
That has a practical impact. Additional efficiency improvements at the remaining facilities would likely come with a significant price tag.
Utilities have generally already invested in low-cost efficiency improvements, meaning further reductions would likely have to come from expensive updates, said Sam Korellis, principal project manager at the Electric Power Research Institute, an industry-supported nonprofit that studies the power sector.
"The operating utilities, the power companies have really done a great job of harvesting that low-hanging fruit," he said. "That's how they're staying alive, that's how they're staying competitive. So eight to nine years ago, there was much more available than there is today."
Coal plants are now operating in new ways that undercut their efficiency. Where coal facilities were designed to operate around the clock, today they are being turned on and off to match demand. Their heat rates have suffered as a result, said Robert Godby, an economics professor who studies the power sector at the University of Wyoming.
EPA would likely need to set its new efficiency requirements at levels that are already attainable for existing plants, or risk driving them from the market, he said.
"If it's really not a constraint, they can claim the plants are being operated as efficiently as they can be," Godby said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/10/25/stories/1060064529
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested