Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 26/10/17
-
(ACC Mentioned) Now, It's the New York Times vs. The EPA
Oct 26, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Erik Wemple
Elisabeth Bumiller, the Washington bureau chief of the New York Times, hesitated a bit when asked if she’d ever seen anything like it. “It’s an unusual statement coming out of the EPA, let’s put it that way,” said Bumiller in a Wednesday interview with the Erik Wemple Blog. -
(ACC Mentioned) New Contenders Emerge for Vermont GOP Chair
Oct 26, 2017 | Sven Days Vermont
By Alicia Freese
At least two candidates are vying to replace David Sunderland as chair of the Vermont Republican Party. -
(ACC Mentioned) In 2016 Industry-Funded Paper, Dourson and Beck Sought Weaker Standard for Lethal Paint Stripper Chemical
Oct 26, 2017 | EDF Health Blog
By Richard Denison
The New York Times’ investigation “Why Has the E.P.A. Shifted on Toxic Chemicals? An Industry Insider Helps Call the Shots” published this past Sunday cited evidence that Nancy Beck – a political appointee in EPA’s chemical safety office who until May was a senior official at the American Chemistry Council (ACC) – is questioning the need for EPA’s proposed rule to ban the use of the deadly chemical dichloromethane (also called methylene chloride) in paint and coating removers. These products are responsible for dozens of deaths in recent years. -
(ACC Mentioned) How Some Companies are Trying to Capitalize on Flexible Film
Oct 26, 2017 | Waste 360
By Arline Karidis
Flexible film is entering the waste stream in increasing volumes, but less of it is recycled than many other plastics. Films present unique recycling challenges, with some types more problematic than others. Multilayered films, for example, create the greatest headache due to challenges in separating layers. -
Senate Committee Approves Dourson Nomination on Party-Line Vote
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has approved the nomination of Michael Dourson to head the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention on a party-line vote, sending it to the full Senate. -
EPW Panel Approves Controversial EPA Picks, Dem for NRC
Oct 26, 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. -
Risk Assessments Will Answer Some TSCA Policy Questions
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The first risk assessments under the new US Toxic Substances Control Act, and the process for selecting the next targets, will yield answers to questions of policy and procedure that were not settled by the US EPA’s prioritisation and framework rules, said Jeffery Morris, director of the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (Oppt). -
EPA assisting NC with GenX investigation
Oct 26, 2017 | WNCN
The Environmental Protection Agency said it is providing technical support to North Carolina as the state investigates chemicals in drinking water. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Industry Asks Court to Broaden DSW Ruling
Oct 26, 2017 | Inside EPA
The chemical and energy resource sectors are asking a federal appeals court to broaden a July ruling that vacated in most cases the use of one of four factors included in an Obama-era EPA rule to determine if recycling of hazardous materials is legitimate, arguing the court should also eliminate application of the factor to other exclusions of strict waste requirements. -
Why Businesses and State Governments Aren't Waiting for Federal Action on Chemicals Transparency
Oct 26, 2017 | EDF Business Blog
By Alissa Sasso
As a Trump Administration appointee tries to dismantle EPA’s credibility as a guardian of public health and the environment, other actors have been stepping up. We recently examined retailers leading the way on removing chemicals of concern from the marketplace – but there has also been significant activity from state governments and companies to increase transparency about the chemicals we are exposed to every day and to empower consumers to make informed decisions about their product purchases. -
Hatch Cosmetics Legislation Fails to Protect Consumers From Toxic Ingredients
Oct 26, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
Yesterday, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, introduced legislation that fails to protect families from dangerous chemical ingredients in personal care products. -
California Court Overturns Talc Verdict Against Johnson & Johnson
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Johnson & Johnson has won its second victory in less than a week in its ongoing legal battle over talc, as a Los Angeles county Superior Court judge overturned a $417m jury award, the largest that had been won to date. -
Corals Like the Taste of Plastic — Study
Oct 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
Ocean creatures typically ingest plastic because it looks like prey. To blind corals, it just tastes good. -
Canada Proposes CBI Exemptions for Disclosing Ingredient Concentrations
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The Canadian government has proposed industry-supported changes on disclosure of ingredient concentrations under the updated Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS 2015). Failing to enact the changes could cost manufacturers and importers as much as Can$18m, Health Canada estimates. -
Maintaining REACH 'Only Viable Option' for UK
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Maintaining REACH and remaining within the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice is "the only viable option" for the UK’s future chemicals policy, NGO Greener Alliance has said. -
Germany Proposes EU Restriction on PFCAs
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
German has proposed to restrict the manufacturing, use, placing on the market and import of C9-C14 perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs), their salts and related substances. It has lodged a restriction submission with Echa. -
Echa Round-Up
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Echa's Guidance on requirements for substances in articles is now available in 23 EU languages. The guidance was updated in June this year and gives more clarity on communication and notification obligations when articles contain SVHCs. -
Rover Leading Marcellus, Utica Volumes to Gulf Coast LNG, Says RBN
Oct 26, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
In its first few months of service, the Rover Pipeline has opened up a route connecting Marcellus and Utica shale natural gas to liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports at Cheniere Energy Inc.'s Sabine Pass terminal, and it's shifted how gas flows between Appalachia and the Gulf Coast in the process, according to RBN Energy LLC. -
FERC Rule Review Recommends Few Changes
Oct 26, 2017 | Politico Pro Whiteboard
By Darius Dixon
FERC largely patted itself on the back in its response to the White House’s executive order calling on agencies to sniff out rules potentially burdensome to domestic energy resources. -
Mountaineer NGL Storage to Invest $150m in Ohio Project
Oct 26, 2017 | Kallanish Energy
Mountaineer NGL Storage announced Thursday it intends to invest $150 million over the next three to five years in its natural gas liquids storage facility at Clarington, Ohio, Kallanish Energyreports. -
Irving Oil Ordered to Pay $4M for Offences Related to Lac MéGantic Disaster
Oct 26, 2017 | CBC
By Sarah Petz
Irving Oil has been ordered to pay $4 million for offences under the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act after an investigation related to the Lac Mégantic, Que., disaster. -
Trump's Air Nominee Hasn't Read the Endangerment Finding
Oct 26, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
President Trump's nominee to head U.S. EPA's air office says he has never read the endangerment finding for greenhouse gases.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Now, It's the New York Times vs. The EPA
Oct 26, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Erik Wemple
Elisabeth Bumiller, the Washington bureau chief of the New York Times, hesitated a bit when asked if she’d ever seen anything like it. “It’s an unusual statement coming out of the EPA, let’s put it that way,” said Bumiller in a Wednesday interview with the Erik Wemple Blog.
Unusual, yes, though this particular blast from the communications office of the Environmental Protection Agency surely aligns with the overt media hostility of the Trump administration. “No matter how much information we give you, you would never write a fair piece,” wrote EPA spokeswoman Liz Bowman to New York Times reporter Eric Lipton. “The only thing inappropriate and biased is your continued fixation on writing elitist clickbait trying to attack qualified professionals committed to serving their country.”
If a character-driven narrative about the regulation of chemicals such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perchlorate, methylene chloride and chlorpyrifos; risk assessment standards; “administratively determined” positions; the mechanics of the “nonconcurrence” memo; and, more broadly, the ascension of industry types to pivotal positions at the EPA counts as “elitist clickbait,” then Lipton and his newspaper are guilty as charged. “Why Has the E.P.A. Shifted on Toxic Chemicals? An Industry Insider Helps Call the Shots,” reads the story’s headline, above an investigation detailing how the EPA’s Nancy B. Beck assumed a key position at the agency after a stint at the American Chemistry Council. The trade association’s agenda traveled with Beck into the EPA, as Lipton reports: “Dr. Beck then spent her first weeks on the job pressing agency staff to rewrite the standards to reflect, in some cases, word for word, the chemical industry’s proposed changes, three staff members involved in the effort said. They asked not to be named for fear of losing their jobs,” notes the story.
Among other things, Beck “insisted” on rewriting a rule so as to make it harder to regulate PFOA, a chemical used in nonstick pans and linked to severe health problems including kidney cancer and birth defects. Her deregulatory bent, wrote Lipton, put her in a career-long rivalry with Wendy Cleland-Hamnett, who in September left her position as the agency’s acting assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention. She worked at the EPA for 38 years.
Such storytelling didn’t sit well at the EPA. The “elitist clickbait” reproach came straight off Bowman’s iPhone, according to an archive of reporting materials disclosed alongside the New York Times story.
Asked by the Erik Wemple Blog whether such a response — or even its general attitude — was cleared with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, Bowman responded, “I don’t want to comment on that.” In blasting Lipton, Bowman was responding to a list of questions from Lipton, as seen here.
There are 20-odd questions on the list detailing just how far Lipton had slipped into the trade-journal world of chemical regulation. Through precise explanation and lots of column inches, Lipton shows how chemical regulations commonly evolve. In response to needless deaths, that is. President Barack Obama’s EPA, for instance, had decided that methylene chloride was so dangerous that it should be banned from use in consumer paint removers, Lipton reports. Twenty-one-year-old Kevin Hartley of Tennessee died in April after exposure to the chemical as he refinished a bathtub.
According to Bloomberg BNA, the deaths of at least 17 tub refinishers since 2000 have been attributed to methylene chloride. As Lipton’s story reports, Hamnett and Beck faced off over just this issue:
“How is it possible that you can go to a home improvement store and buy a paint remover that can kill you?” Ms. Hamnett asked. “How can we let this happen?”
Furniture-refinishing companies and chemical manufacturers have urged the E.P.A. to focus on steps like strengthening warning labels, complaining that there are few reasonably priced alternatives.
Ms. Hamnett said Dr. Beck raised the possibility that people were not following the directions on the labels. She also suggested that only a small number of users had been injured. “Is it 1 percent?” Ms. Hamnett recalled Dr. Beck asking.
Standing by her brush-back, Bowman told the Erik Wemple Blog that the agency’s issues relate more to Lipton and less to his employer. “There are a lot of reporters at the New York Times that we are happy to work with. In this particular case, it was clear that Lipton was acting on behalf of other officials with an ax to grind. It was clear he was not going to change his mind and certainly would not produce a balanced story,” said Bowman, who also formerly worked at the American Chemistry Council. More: “If you actually take the time read through detailed questions in that email, you will potentially see why I reacted the way I did,” said Bowman. In many cases, indeed, the questions paraphrase criticisms from detractors of the current EPA leadership — a common procedure in journalism.
“If the current agency management believes that stories are factually incorrect, I would think they’d want to correct them rather than refuse to respond,” Hamnett told the Erik Wemple Blog. “If there’s a side of the story that’s not being heard, then why not get that side of the story out there?”
Getting personal is in vogue at the EPA. As this blog reported in September, this same communications operation blasted an AP reporter by name in a news release following a critical story on the agency’s response to Hurricane Harvey: “Yesterday, the Associated Press’ Michael Biesecker wrote an incredibly misleading story about toxic land sites that are under water.” The AP stood by its story.
And in August, the EPA butted heads with Lipton and Roni Rabinover an article titled “E.P.A. Promised ‘a New Day’ for the Agriculture Industry, Documents Reveal.” At issue was the agency’s decision in March not to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos. “Taking emails out of context doesn’t change the fact that we continue to examine the science surrounding chlorpyifos, while taking into account USDA’s scientific concerns with methodology used by the previous administration,” noted the EPA’s Amy Graham. The New York Times stood by its story, though the EPA isn’t happy about it: “After omitting key words from a one-sentence response to an inaccurate story, Eric Lipton’s editors stood by their decision to splice a 31-word statement, because it discredited the premise of their story,” noted the EPA’s Jahan Wilcox in an email.
Reporting on the EPA, suggests Bumiller, requires an extra level of exertion. “They are not routinely sharing Scott Pruitt’s schedule for public events with reporters,” she said, and “selectively distributing news releases at times” as well as less-than-inclusive background briefings. Lipton said that the agency declined to confirm to colleague Lisa Friedman that Pruitt would be appearing in Hazard, Ky., for a speech mentioning plans to overturn the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan. As a result, the New York Times covered the speech from afar. NPR covered the news this way: “The administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, made the announcement in Hazard, Ky., on Monday, saying the rule hurt coal-fired plants.”
Bowman counters that the speech wasn’t, in fact, an “event” for the purposes of the initiative: “There was no event on [Clean Power Plan]; the proposed repeal was an in-office signing and a press release,” wrote Bowman in an email. “We did not do anything to prevent Eric Lipton from attending our announcement of our announcement. ”
When asked about the newspaper’s concerns regarding selective press-release distribution and briefings, Wilcox responded, “While serving as Attorney General of Oklahoma, Eric Lipton spent two days with Scott Pruitt and it was abundantly clear that he can’t be trusted to write objective stories. All of our releases are available online and we encourage reporters and the public to visit www.epa.gov.” Actually, Lipton never served as attorney general of Oklahoma.
When White House spokespeople rough up the media these days, smart people like to say that they’re not acting pugnacious out of spite. They’re doing it to please the media basher in chief. What’s stopping agency types from following suit? “I think the EPA has stood out,” said Bumiller.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/10/26/now-its-the-new-york-times-vs-the-epa/?utm_term=.d99b640823a2
-
(ACC Mentioned) New Contenders Emerge for Vermont GOP Chair
Oct 26, 2017 | Sven Days Vermont
By Alicia Freese
At least two candidates are vying to replace David Sunderland as chair of the Vermont Republican Party.
Michael Donohue, who moved with his family to Shelburne in 2016, announced his bid in an email Wednesday. Deb Billado of Essex Junction is also putting her hat in the ring.
Party members will gather at the Capitol Plaza Hotel & Conference Center in Montpelier on November 4 to elect leadership positions, including state committee chair, vice chair, secretary and treasurer.
Sunderland, who’s led the party since 2013, said he isn’t running for reelection because he needs to devote more time to his job and his family.
Billado previously served as chair of the Chittenden County Republicans. Her opponent, Donahue, currently holds that post.
While relatively unknown among Vermont Republicans, Donahue says he has been active in national party politics for decades.
Donohue, who could not immediately be reached, wrote in his email announcement that he’s running to “enhance our county efforts, bridge factional divides and assert a professional communications strategy into our advocacy.”
He is currently a self-employed communications and public affairs consultant. Before that, he was communications director for the Catholic Diocese of Arlington, Va., and spent about a decade doing media relations and communications work for the National Federation of Independent Business, the National Restaurant Association and the American Chemistry Council.
Earlier in his career, he served as deputy press secretary for Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) first presidential campaign and, in 1994, worked as a senior coordinator for the Republican National Committee.
"The instability and division of politics today is like nothing I’ve seen in my career. The politics of Washington, D.C., that I witnessed has reached a level of vitriol and disfunction that seems unsustainable," Donohue noted in his email. "The president [Donald Trump] has faced an unparalleled level of media hostility and political obstruction, and division even within our congressional majorities. But we must focus on Vermont and our communities — because the best way to help our national party and all our leaders is to demonstrate unity, common purpose, and success here in the Green Mountain State."https://www.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2017/10/26/new-contender-emerges-for-vermont-gop-chair
-
Oct 26, 2017 | EDF Health Blog
By Richard Denison
The New York Times’ investigation “Why Has the E.P.A. Shifted on Toxic Chemicals? An Industry Insider Helps Call the Shots” published this past Sunday cited evidence that Nancy Beck – a political appointee in EPA’s chemical safety office who until May was a senior official at the American Chemistry Council (ACC) – is questioning the need for EPA’s proposed rule to ban the use of the deadly chemical dichloromethane (also called methylene chloride) in paint and coating removers. These products are responsible for dozens of deaths in recent years.
The Times’ story also noted in its last paragraph that Beck and Michael Dourson – the Trump Administration’s controversial nominee to lead EPA’s chemical safety office – are co-authors on a 2016 paper that was funded by ACC. That paper was published in the industry’s go-to journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, where Dourson has published most of his papers.
The paper is of interest and relevant for another reason as well: Dourson and Beck assert that the acceptable risk levels EPA has set for 24 chemicals are all too stringent and should be relaxed by anywhere from 2.5 to 150 fold. (Funny, isn’t it, how the numbers for all 24 chemicals all went in the same direction?)
Among these 24 chemicals is the paint-stripping chemical dichloromethane (aka methylene chloride). This chemical is a particularly concerning one: It is a likely carcinogen and is linked to numerous other chronic health impacts, but it is also acutely and tragically lethal. Dourson and Beck call for EPA’s standard for the chemical to be relaxed to a level that is 8.3 times less protective.
The Times article makes clear that, despite her prior work on this chemical while at ACC, and the fact that this chemical is made by numerous ACC companies, Beck has not recused herself from making decisions about its risk and regulatory responses – decisions that are being considered at EPA even as I write. Indeed, as I noted earlier this week, her astounding ethics agreement gives her wide latitude to work on issues in which ACC has financial interests in order to ensure those interests are taken into account.
In Dourson’s nomination hearing held by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on October 4, he was repeatedly asked if he would, if confirmed, recuse himself from work on chemicals he had been paid by industry to work on, and he repeatedly refused to say he would do so.
One more reason that Michael Dourson should not be entrusted with our health and the Senate should reject his nomination to head EPA’s toxics office.
Just yesterday, Dourson’s nomination was voted out of the committee by an 11-10 vote. The fight over his nomination now moves to the full Senate.
http://blogs.edf.org/health/2017/10/26/in-2016-industry-funded-paper-dourson-and-beck-sought-weaker-standard-for-lethal-paint-stripper-chemical/
-
(ACC Mentioned) How Some Companies are Trying to Capitalize on Flexible Film
Oct 26, 2017 | Waste 360
By Arline Karidis
Flexible film is entering the waste stream in increasing volumes, but less of it is recycled than many other plastics. Films present unique recycling challenges, with some types more problematic than others. Multilayered films, for example, create the greatest headache due to challenges in separating layers.
Polyethylene is the easiest to work with from a technical standpoint, yet material recovery facilities (MRFs) toss 90 percent of it, mainly due to contamination, according to Tim Buwalda, a senior consultant at Orlando, Fla.-based RSE USA who authored a Closed Loop Foundation study on investment opportunities in film plastic recycling.
Enterprising manufacturers and processors are trying to work with some of these films.
Meanwhile, consumer goods company, Unilever, is funding a pilot using chemicals to separate layers, which Buwalda says is showing promise. “One, it’s technologically feasible. Two, it can operate at a high commercial scale, so it’s potentially economically feasible,” he says.
In another case, IntegriCo Composites based in Sarepta, La., makes composite rail ties from a range of wasted flexible films through its patented processing technology.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) and Sonoma, Calif.-based More Recycling have created two web-based tools to help recycling coordinators, waste managers and other partners more efficiently recycle polyethylene (PE) flexible film. The ACC has also created Wrap Recycling Action Programs (WRAPs) in communities across the country.
“Regarding forward utilization of films … IntegriCo’s appetite is very large,” IntegriCo Composites CEO Scott Mack says. “We are looking for some low-level support today to slightly modify our existing production line in order to accelerate our consumption of films from approximately 200,000 pounds per month to in excess of 1.2 million pounds per month.
“I believe that IntegriCo possesses quite an advantage in the film consumption area, based upon our patented conversion technology in use today,” Mack says. “Now I am looking to see who [in the railroad industry] is serious about making 30 to 40 percent of every one of my 250-pound railroad ties out of flexible film.”
In late 2014 Troy, Ala.-based KW Plastics began a research project to determine if polyethylene films could be recycled at MRFs. It tested material that was semi sorted at the facility.
“During that project, we successfully washed selected MRF film and were able to use it as an additive in some of our extrusion grade resins,” says J. Scott Saunders, general manager of KW Plastics recycling division. “But the cost of converting this material was very high, compared to bottle scrap. And as the market for high-density polyethylene (HDPE) began to fall, not enough spread existed between the cost of the bale and the value of the resin to make this a viable project. If the market for HDPE increases in value to the point that this project would be profitable, we would reconsider the program.”
The way to push forward, says Buwalda, is by investing in emerging technologies and developing markets for this under-recovered stream. He has recommendations to put such efforts into action.
With polyethylene film, which winds its way into MRFs and is often dirty, he recommends wash plants funded by grants and loans to decontaminate.
For polypropylene film Buwalda recommends focusing on market development, first recruiting manufacturers to do product testing, then finding recyclers. “So you began with the product demand side (end user) and then move along the recycling chain, finding a reclaimer, and then collector,” he says.
For the more complex films, where processing methods are in their infancy or nonexistent, he recommends research and development grants to support new technology.
Portland, Pa.,-based Ultra-Poly recycles flexible films from the oil and gas fracking industry, used as liners at drilling sites. It also recycles film from hoop houses. The material is made into medium- and high-density pellets that go into extrusion applications for commodities like lawn and garden products.
But the material comes in very dirty, says Kevin Cronin, the company’s vice president of research and development and sustainability. So Ultra-Poly developed what Cronin calls a robust and commercially viable dry cleaning process.
“The process [tweaked for each of the two films types] yields high-quality products we can clean and reclaim without water, so we conserve resources and avoid needing to treat wastewater,” says Cronin.
To date, the company has made products from 30 million pounds of liner and one million pounds of hoop house materials.
Still, before these challenging materials can realize true value on a large scale, consumers need to know how to separate by film type, says Buwalda.
“There has to be that education component. Then technology for sorting, and then market development for end use demand,” he says.
http://www.waste360.com/plastics/how-some-companies-are-trying-capitalize-flexible-film
-
Senate Committee Approves Dourson Nomination on Party-Line Vote
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has approved the nomination of Michael Dourson to head the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention on a party-line vote, sending it to the full Senate.
The 11-10 vote came on 25 October, a week after originally scheduled. The committee held up votes on several EPA nominations amid reports that Republican senators might be threatening to vote against them over the Trump administration's proposal to reduce the amount of biofuel that gets mixed into gasoline and diesel.
Republicans did not address the nominations before voting, except for a statement by Senator John Barrasso (Wyoming), who said the four nominees under consideration "have proven themselves to be well-qualified, experienced, and dedicated public servants".
Democrats reiterated their opposition to Dr Dourson, whose work, on behalf of chemical companies, they excoriated at a hearing on 4 October.
They said at the 25 October session that Republicans’ willingness to go along with his nomination "makes a mockery" of the bipartisan negotiations that led to the 2016 enactment of TSCA legislation.
"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 (Democrat-Maryland).
"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 (Delaware), the top Democrat on the panel.Current employment questioned
The day before the vote, Democratic senators demanded information from the EPA about the circumstances under which Dr Dourson has already begun working at the agency. The EPA confirmed that Dourson is working as a top adviser to Administrator Scott Pruitt.
A letter to Dr Dourson signed by 10 senators argues that laws governing federal appointments make it "unlawful for you to assume any of the delegated authorities" of the chemical safety position. They said his involvement in related issues "could provide grounds for subjects of EPA regulations and oversight to challenge the legal validity of those decisions in court".
The senators demanded Dr Dourson’s current job description and a detailed accounting of his activities.
They also reiterated questions he declined to answer at his confirmation hearing about whether he agrees with EPA findings on specific chemicals, as well as demands that he recuse himself from deliberations on chemicals he studied on behalf of industry clients.
It is not unprecedented for nominees to work in advisory roles at federal agencies as they awaited confirmation, but the legality of the practice could be open to challenge.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60525/senate-committee-approves-dourson-nomination-on-party-line-vote
-
EPW Panel Approves Controversial EPA Picks, Dem for NRC
Oct 26, 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
-
Risk Assessments Will Answer Some TSCA Policy Questions
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The first risk assessments under the new US Toxic Substances Control Act, and the process for selecting the next targets, will yield answers to questions of policy and procedure that were not settled by the US EPA’s prioritisation and framework rules, said Jeffery Morris, director of the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (Oppt).
While the EPA had only six months to decide on the first ten substances subject to risk evaluation after the law was amended in 2016, the process for selecting the next group will be deliberate and include substantial consultation, Mr Morris said at Chemical Watch’s US Regulatory Summit.
He said the next publicly visible step will be publication "at the beginning of the year" of "problem formulation" documents that will follow on the "scoping documents" already published for each of the ten substances in the inaugural review.
But he urged stakeholders to watch carefully how the EPA handles the five persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) substances subject to more rapid risk management action. The Lautenberg Act required the EPA to take "expedited" action on certain PBTs, by skipping risk evaluation and proposing rules to reduce their exposure by 22 June 2019.
"Whether or not you have interests in these five chemicals," Mr Morris said, the process "will be a preview of sorts of how we move from risk evaluation to risk management".
One specific issue that he expects to come up in the PBT assessments is how the EPA will incorporate "non-risk factors". In evaluating a chemical with many uses, "it may be three uses that are driving the focus on ‘unreasonable risk’", he said, and the agency will have to decide "how we work these non-risk factors into risk management".
Under this expedited authority, the EPA will also have to "more quickly require development of chemical information," Mr Morris said, raising other questions with implications for future chemical assessment.
He said the EPA has to ensure that chemicals are not inappropriately targeted or passed over due to a lack of research. "The EPA has to ensure it is addressing the essential questions needed to fill gaps," he said. "The question is what is the best approach for building a database for chemicals" that "ensures appropriate prioritisation".Identifying the next priorities
At the same time as the EPA is conducting these two groups of initial assessments, the agency is also starting the process of identifying the next chemicals to be assessed. The Lautenberg Act requires at least ten more chemicals to enter that pipeline by December 2019.
That may seem far away, Mr Morris said, but "the process for prioritising chemicals is nine to 12 months".
He said the EPA plans to accept comment in the summer of 2018 on what to prioritise and to issue draft scoping documents once targets have been decided. "Engagement with stakeholders is going to be crucial," Mr Morris said.
This consultation will "initiate a public process for identifying what should go into pre-prioritisation," Mr Morris said, "how you go through the existing chemical space to identify candidates for [designations of] low or high priority".
One of the controversial changes the Trump administration made to the TSCA rules was deleting the "pre-prioritisation process". Industry had argued that the proposed informal process would create a "black box" in which agency staff sort candidate chemicals with little transparency.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60551/risk-assessments-will-answer-some-tsca-policy-questions
-
EPA assisting NC with GenX investigation
Oct 26, 2017 | WNCN
The Environmental Protection Agency said it is providing technical support to North Carolina as the state investigates chemicals in drinking water.
“EPA is committed to protecting public health and supporting states and public water systems,” a spokesperson for the federal agency told CBS North Carolina.
The EPA is now investigating Chemours’s compliance with a 2009 order issued under the Toxic Substances Control Act for the production of GenX.
The Wilmington, Delaware-based company has released the chemical GenX and other products into the Cape Fear River from its factory near Fayetteville.
GenX is used in making Teflon.
The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality requested help from EPA scientists with analyzing Cape Fear River water samples.
The EPA has since shared its findings with the state.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Industry Asks Court to Broaden DSW Ruling
Oct 26, 2017 | Inside EPA
The chemical and energy resource sectors are asking a federal appeals court to broaden a July ruling that vacated in most cases the use of one of four factors included in an Obama-era EPA rule to determine if recycling of hazardous materials is legitimate, arguing the court should also eliminate application of the factor to other exclusions of strict waste requirements.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) and energy resource company Freeport-McMoRan Inc. are jointly petitioning the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to reconsider aspects of its July 7 ruling on EPA's Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) rule in American Petroleum Institute (API), et al. v. EPA. Their petition, filed Oct. 20, adds to others by EPA, environmental groups and API seeking rehearing of different aspects of the ruling.
The court decision generally sided with industry on two key challenges -- vacating most of the verified recycler exclusion for third-party recyclers and reinstating a more relaxed version, and vacating one of the four “legitimacy” criteria for most uses -- and otherwise left the 2015 DSW rule intact.
The rule in general set requirements for recycling hazardous waste, attempting to close what the Obama EPA saw as regulatory gaps in a 2008 Bush-era rule. Exempting hazardous secondary materials from the definition of solid waste also exempts them from hazardous waste regulation under the Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA).
The court found the requirements under factor 4 -- known as the "toxics along for the ride" test -- to prove that a recycled product is comparable to a legitimate product or intermediate in terms of contaminants were “draconian” and vacated factor 4 "insofar as it applies to all hazardous secondary materials via [section] 261.2(g)," the section of the waste regulations that defines sham recycling.
The ruling, however, left factor 4 in place for the generator control exclusion and for a non-waste determination process. The ruling noted that the petitioners had not challenged factor 4's application to these individual exclusions.
But ACC and Freeport-McMoRan say in their petition for rehearing that they did broadly challenge the factor's application and ask the court to grant rehearing and clarify that the factor is "entirely vacated."
"[T]he logic of the Court's existing vacatur of Factor 4 applies with equal force to all applications of Factor 4," they say.
"No party asserted, and this court did not hold, that Factor 4 has a rational basis or record support for some applications but not others," the petition says. "In fact, there is no substantive difference in how the various RCRA regulations utilize Factor 4.”
They argue that preserving factor 4 for these individual exclusions "requires compliance with an otherwise irrational regulation and will produce unnecessary inconsistency in the assessment of legitimacy by EPA, states, and industry." If the court does not broaden its vacatur, this will affect companies seeking to comply with the generator-controlled exclusion, the non-waste determination, and even the transfer-based exclusion, subjecting themselves "to EPA regulation that this Court has already deemed to be beyond the Agency's RCRA jurisdiction in every other context."
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/chemical-industry-asks-court-broaden-dsw-ruling
-
Why Businesses and State Governments Aren't Waiting for Federal Action on Chemicals Transparency
Oct 26, 2017 | EDF Business Blog
By Alissa Sasso
As a Trump Administration appointee tries to dismantle EPA’s credibility as a guardian of public health and the environment, other actors have been stepping up. We recently examined retailers leading the way on removing chemicals of concern from the marketplace – but there has also been significant activity from state governments and companies to increase transparency about the chemicals we are exposed to every day and to empower consumers to make informed decisions about their product purchases.
Regulatory steps in the right direction
Government activity has recently focused on cleaning products, for good reason as the contents of these products are typically the biggest mystery for consumers.
Recent developments include:
· In April, Governor Cuomo of New York State announced the Household Cleaning Product Information Program; the guidance is expected to be finalized soon and will require cleaning product manufacturers to disclose ingredients on their websites.
· And, on October 15th, Governor Brown of California signed a first of its kind act into law: SB-258-The Cleaning Product Right to Know Act, which was crafted through a successful NGO-industry negotiation.
· SB-258 stipulates requirements for disclosing cleaning product ingredients online and on the product label, including for designated chemicals of concern and certain fragrances and contaminants. There are threshold limits for the reporting of designated fragrances and contaminants, as well as some exemption provisions for ingredients claimed to be trade secret, but all in all the bill is a noteworthy step forward. The law goes into effect in 2020 for online disclosure and 2021 for on pack disclosure, giving companies the opportunity to prepare for these requirements and to consider removing chemicals of concern before updating their labels.
· Why did industry come to the table on what has historically been a combative issue? Consumer demand for transparency has grown greatly, and several major retailers and product manufacturers have gained a competitive advantage by enhancing their own ingredient disclosure.
· Companies seeing ingredient disclosure as a competitive benefit
· For a long time, consumers could rely only on “green” companies like Seventh Generation and Method to demonstrate ingredient transparency as a core value. For example, Seventh Generation has listed all cleaning product ingredients on pack since 2008; they’ve listed this information and ingredient function online for even longer. Meanwhile, Method started listing ingredient information (names, function, and safety information) online in 2009 and followed this with on pack disclosure in 2012. But recently, larger companies have realized the competitive advantages of gaining consumer trust through transparency.
· SC Johnson originally launched the “What’s Inside?” website in 2009; currently for individual products the site lists non-fragrance ingredients and the function in the product. They also disclose fragrance ingredients at or above 0.09% in a product formula, or the top 10 fragrance ingredients by volume, whichever method discloses more information. Last year, SC Johnson launched an air freshener collection with complete fragrance transparency. In May, SC Johnson published a list of over 368 potential skin allergens – well beyond the European Union (EU) fragrance allergen list – on its website. SC Johnson is already working to identify these allergens at the product level and plans to complete this by 2018.
· Unilever announced plans in July to provide fragrance ingredient information online for all products across its portfolio. Fragrance components present in products above 0.01% will be disclosed through SmartLabel™ by the end of 2018. Smartlabel™ allows access to ingredient information for products and food through an app, computer, or telephone. Unilever will also label EU fragrance allergens on pack in the US for their full personal care portfolio. Unilever developed a US version of their ingredient website to provide product information including product ingredients, ingredient selection process and ingredient functions.
· Walmart’s 2013 Sustainable Chemistry policy called for suppliers of formulated products to disclose ingredients online by 2015, and all priority chemicals on product packaging by 2018. Walmart updated their policy in September, expanding their full transparency commitment globally and adding the EU fragrance allergens to the ingredients that will be disclosed on pack. It’s important to note that since the policy covers cleaning products its deadline occurs before that of the new California law.
· Procter & Gamble (P&G) P&G launched a site earlier this year that discloses preservatives in their products. In August, P&G announced that they have started to reveal all fragrance ingredients used above 0.01% across their product portfolio online and will complete this work by the end of 2019. Clorox shares ingredient name and function for non-fragrances online at the product level and provides a fragrance palette for its entire portfolio. Clorox also labels any EU fragrance allergens if its concentration in a product is greater than 0.01%.
· Encouraging developments, but there’s still room for improvement
· The new law in California will certainly impact how companies provide ingredient information everywhere in the U.S. But federal action in the US is still lagging. In the meantime, we look to companies to lead on meaningful disclosure practices.
· Being ahead of the curve on transparency is good for business. Strong disclosure builds consumer trust in your products and processes and makes regulatory compliance an easier venture.
http://business.edf.org/blog/2017/10/26/why-businesses-and-state-governments-arent-waiting-for-federal-action-on-chemicals-transparency/
-
Hatch Cosmetics Legislation Fails to Protect Consumers From Toxic Ingredients
Oct 26, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
Yesterday, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, introduced legislation that fails to protect families from dangerous chemical ingredients in personal care products.
EWG instead urged senators to support bipartisan cosmetics reform legislation introduced by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Susan Collins, R-Maine.
The following is the statement of Scott Faber, EWG’s senior vice president for government affairs:
While we agree with Senator Hatch that the time to reform cosmetics law is long overdue, we are strongly opposed to the bill he introduced yesterday. In particular, the Hatch bill would not require FDA reviews of cosmetics chemicals, instead allowing third parties to review chemicals. It would not require the industry to substantiate the safety of its own chemicals, would create a weak and untested safety standard, and would fail to provide the FDA with any resources to oversee a $60 billion industry that impacts the health of every American.
Most troubling is a provision to block state action on dangerous chemicals if they simply appear on a Trump administration list.
By contrast, bipartisan legislation introduced by Senator Feinstein and Senator Collins would require five chemical reviews a year, would require cosmetics companies to demonstrate their products are safe, would include the same safety standard long applied to food and pesticides, would provide the FDA $20 million in annual funding, and would preserve a role for the states.
The Feinstein-Collins bill is broadly supported by cosmetics companies, large and small, and by public health groups. For legislators hoping to finally modernize cosmetics law after 80 years of failure, the choice between the two bills is very clear.”
https://www.ewg.org/testimony-official-correspondence/hatch-cosmetics-legislation-fails-protect-consumers-toxic#.WfIUg1uCzIU
-
California Court Overturns Talc Verdict Against Johnson & Johnson
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Johnson & Johnson has won its second victory in less than a week in its ongoing legal battle over talc, as a Los Angeles county Superior Court judge overturned a $417m jury award, the largest that had been won to date.
The manufacturer’s other recent victory, in a Missouri case, came on procedural grounds. But the California decision has cast doubt on the evidence of a link between talc and cancer.
The 20 October ruling came in the case of Eva Echevarria, who claimed that decades of using the company's talcum powder for feminine hygiene purposes was connected to her ovarian cancer.
The California judge concluded that evidence presented linking talc to ovarian cancer, and to Ms Echevarria’s case specifically, "is not sufficient to support the verdict". She also wrote that the damages awarded by the jury were excessive and incorrectly determined.
Ms Echevarria has died since the jury trial ended in August, but her lawyer, Mark P Robinson Jr, said in a statement that he would appeal the new ruling.
"We will continue to fight on behalf of all women who have been impacted by this dangerous product," Mr Robinson said.
Johnson & Johnson faces lawsuits from another 4,800 plaintiffs nationally who assert similar claims over its talc-based products, including hundreds filed in California.
"Ovarian cancer is a devastating disease — but it is not caused by the cosmetic-grade talc we have used in Johnson's Baby Powder for decades. The science is clear and we will continue to defend the product's safety as we prepare for additional trials in the US," Carol Goodrich from J & J said in a statement.
Missouri cases
The viability of a cluster of Missouri cases is especially doubtful after the Missouri court of appeals, eastern district reversed a $72m verdict because it says the case should not have been tried in St Louis.
The 2016 verdict had been the first loss dealt to the consumer products conglomerate by a Missouri court. The lawsuit was filed by the family of Alabama resident Jacqueline Fox, who claimed her death from ovarian cancer was linked to use of the company's talc-containing products.
The US Supreme Court ruled on 19 June, in an unrelated case, that state courts have limited authority to hear claims against companies that aren’t based within their jurisdiction, regarding alleged injuries that also did not occur there. In light of the ruling in Bristol-Myers Squibb v Superior Court of California, the St Louis court declared a mistrial in a pending talc case this summer.
The Missouri appellate panel also cited the Squibb decision in overturning the verdict in Ms Fox’s lawsuit, which had 64 other plaintiffs, only two of them Missouri residents.
Johnson & Johnson has been ordered to pay $110m, $70m and $55m in three other cases – some with non-resident plaintiffs – heard in a St Louis court.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60518/california-court-overturns-talc-verdict-against-johnson-johnson
-
Corals Like the Taste of Plastic — Study
Oct 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
Ocean creatures typically ingest plastic because it looks like prey. To blind corals, it just tastes good.
A paper published this week in the journal Marine Pollution Bulletin found something in microplastics is desirable to corals, driving them to the self-destructive behavior of eating the waste.
The tiny pieces of weathered plastic are smaller than 5 millimeters in diameter. Their mass presence in the ocean is a threat to marine mammals, birds, turtles, fish and invertebrates, the study said.
"We found that the corals ate all of the plastic types we offered and mostly ignored sand," said Austin Allen, a doctoral student at Duke University and one of the paper's authors.
Plastic is mostly indigestible, and the researchers found it remained stuck in the corals' guts 24 hours after feeding. The material can cause intestinal blockages, a false sense of fullness and energy reductions in the animals that eat it.
The researchers, tied to Duke University's Nicholas School of the Environment, shared a videoof a coral polyp eating a plastic particle.
Conservationists have sounded the alarm on microplastic before. The International Union for Conservation of Nature says the pollution makes up as much as 30 percent of the plastic released into the ocean (Greenwire, Feb. 22).
The new study involved offering corals small amounts of eight types of microplastics and similarly sized items, like sand. Researchers found the corals preferred unfouled microplastics over microplastics covered in bacteria.
"When plastic comes from the factory, it has hundreds of chemical additives on it. Any one of these chemicals or a combination of them could be acting as a stimulant that makes plastic appealing to corals," said author Alexander Seymour.
The scientists suggested manufacturing plastic that intentionally tastes bad to marine organisms, which could "significantly help reduce the threat" of illness, Seymour said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/10/25/stories/1060064637
-
Canada Proposes CBI Exemptions for Disclosing Ingredient Concentrations
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The Canadian government has proposed industry-supported changes on disclosure of ingredient concentrations under the updated Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS 2015). Failing to enact the changes could cost manufacturers and importers as much as Can$18m, Health Canada estimates.
The 21 October Canada Gazette notice proposes amendments to the Hazardous Products Regulations (HPR) allowing manufacturers to report on commercial product labelling a broad range, instead of a specific concentration, of an ingredient if the concentration can be defended as confidential business information (CBI). The proposed schedule of concentration ranges is included in the notice.
The Hazardous Materials Information Review Act (HMIRA) sets out a review process for CBI claims. But the Controlled Product Regulations (CPR), now being phased out in favor of the HPR, allowed manufacturers to avoid specifying chemical concentrations on labels by reporting a range instead. The rule was intended to cover situations where the concentration of an ingredient varied from batch to batch. But manufacturers used it to avoid disclosing ingredient concentrations and evade both the CBI application process and associated fees.
Amendments made in 2015 required reporting of specific concentrations. With the first deadline for HPR compliance looming, manufacturers wishing to continue withholding that information are looking at having to submit CBI applications under HMIRA.
An implementation delay for the new WHMIS, announced in June, was taken in part to deal with the CBI question, Rosslynn Miller-Lee, Director of Health Canada's Workplace Hazardous Materials Bureau, said at a recent conference. The delay pushed the deadline for new manufacturer and importer safety data sheets (SDS) and labels to 1 June 2018, and the compliance date for distributors to 1 September.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60528/canada-proposes-cbi-exemptions-for-disclosing-ingredient-concentrations
-
Maintaining REACH 'Only Viable Option' for UK
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Maintaining REACH and remaining within the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice is "the only viable option" for the UK’s future chemicals policy, NGO Greener Alliance has said.
In comments to the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) consultation on the government’s response to its report on chemicals regulation after Brexit, the NGO says two options being explored by the government are "fundamentally flawed".
One option is that it will be possible to abide by REACH’s rulings without full database access – this is restricted to full participants in the regime; and the other is that the UK could establish its own chemicals regime.
Attempting to create a UK equivalent of REACH, as the Withdrawal Bill indicates might happen, would be "enormously expensive and lengthy", the NGO said.
Copying REACH decisions without full participation, it added, would not provide adequate protection from dangerous chemicals. The NGO said this could happen, even if the government takes up suggestions in the EAC’s original inquiry to remain "as closely aligned to REACH as possible" or adopts the committee’s recommendation to remain involved in the registration process for chemicals.
"Copying decisions could leave the UK open to legal challenges from businesses that want to use dangerous substances," Greener Alliance said. "Without full access to background safety information informing decisions to ban or restrict substances, for instance, the government would lack evidence to justify bans."
It would also lead to increases in animal testing and, the NGO added, if the country does not move as quickly as the EU in implementing bans, "it could become a dumping ground for substances no longer allowed on the single market."REACH alternative
Establishing a UK equivalent to REACH after Brexit would involve "starting from scratch at a time when pressures on resources – both in terms of finances and expertise – will already be strained", Greener Alliance said.
The UK will not be able to copy the existing REACH database, which covers 25,000 chemicals, it added. And the government estimates the cost of taking on the roles currently provided by Echa could be tens of millions of pounds.
UK businesses doing trade with the EU will need to adhere to and register with REACH, meaning a UK equivalent would add more "unnecessary costs and bureaucracy" for industry. And any divergence would subject businesses to "conflicting rules and unnecessary burdens", the NGO said.
In her 9 October statement on leaving the EU, the prime minister said: "There will be areas where we want to achieve the same goals in the same ways, because it makes sense for our economies."
Considering the complexity involved in managing chemicals safely – and the impact that they have on the economy, human health and the environment – "REACH should be prioritised as one of those areas where the UK shares the same goals as the EU," NGO CHEM Trust said in its comments to the EAC consultation.
It is "critically important", the NGO added, that the UK retains the same levels of protection from problematic chemicals after leaving the EU. "This will only be possible if the UK stays in REACH."
Both the Chemical Business Association (CBA) and the Chemical Industry Association (CIA) have publicly backed staying in the Regulation. The CBA has also recently said the government "fails to recognise" chemicals regulatory issues.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60546/maintaining-reach-only-viable-option-for-uk
-
Germany Proposes EU Restriction on PFCAs
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
German has proposed to restrict the manufacturing, use, placing on the market and import of C9-C14 perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs), their salts and related substances. It has lodged a restriction submission with Echa.
"The conclusion of the dossier submitter’s risk assessment is that, despite that no intentional uses were identified so far, a restriction on a Union-wide basis is justified to reduce the release of these substances into the environment and to prevent any future manufacturing, placing on the market and use," the filing said. "This EU-wide measure may be the first step for global action."
The dossier is on Echa’s website.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60552/germany-proposes-eu-restriction-on-pfcas
-
Oct 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Guidance on requirements for substances in articles translatedEcha's Guidance on requirements for substances in articles is now available in 23 EU languages. The guidance was updated in June this year and gives more clarity on communication and notification obligations when articles contain SVHCs.
Eight new consultations on testing proposals
The agency has started eight new public consultations on testing proposals. They will run until 11 December.
The substances are:
· (-)-pin-2(3)-ene;
· 2,2'-[hexane-1,6-diylbis(oxymethylene)]dioxirane;
· 4'-hydroxyacetophenone;
· benzenamine, N-phenyl-, reaction products with 2,4,4-trimethylpentene;
· decamethylcyclopentasiloxane;
· geraniol;
· slags, silicomanganese-manufacturing; and
· tetraammine platinum (II) hydrogen carbonate.
The agency has 40 consultations running. Update to Guidance on Ppord
Echa has made some corrections to its Guidance on scientific research and development (SR&D) and product and process-orientated research and development (Ppord).
https://chemicalwatch.com/60532/echa-round-up
-
Rover Leading Marcellus, Utica Volumes to Gulf Coast LNG, Says RBN
Oct 26, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
In its first few months of service, the Rover Pipeline has opened up a route connecting Marcellus and Utica shale natural gas to liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports at Cheniere Energy Inc.'s Sabine Pass terminal, and it's shifted how gas flows between Appalachia and the Gulf Coast in the process, according to RBN Energy LLC.
Rover, sponsored by Energy Transfer Partners LP, began initial service on Sept. 1 on Mainline A between Cadiz, OH, and Defiance, OH, and has been transporting around 1 Bcf/d east-to-west, most of it delivered onto TransCanada Corp.'s ANR Pipeline.
Following the flow data, "either directly or indirectly" gas is moving from Rover to ANR and "is making it all the way south to the Gulf Coast,” specifically to Cheniere's export terminal at Sabine Pass, RBN's Sheetal Nasta said in a recent note to clients.
"Deliveries to the facility have climbed to nearly 3 Bcf/d in recent weeks as the fourth liquefaction train was brought online,” Nasta said. “Along the way, the Rover-ANR combo is increasing competition with other pipes that feed ANR, including other Marcellus/Utica takeaway pipelines such as" Rockies Express Pipeline (REX) and Dominion Transmission.
Nasta said gas flowing directly into Sabine Pass from Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line (Transco) via the Gulf Trace lateral has picked up in recent weeks, increasing to 860 MMcf/d, about 33% of the facility's total intake. This is in addition to deliveries from Transco to Cheniere's Creole Trail Pipeline.
"Between the Gulf Trace lateral and Creole Trail, Transco's share" of gas flowing into Sabine Pass "has climbed to nearly 1.3 Bcf/d," accounting for around half of the facility's total supply.
This comes as Transco's Zone 3 -- roughly the portion of the pipe that runs through Louisiana -- has flipped to moving gas east-to-west from a null point at Station 50 near Evangeline Parish, LA. Transco Zone 3 used to flow eastward through Zone 3 at around 0.5 Bcf/d net, but has shifted to flowing more than 1 Bcf/d westward starting around Station 50 and heading "toward the Transco laterals feeding Sabine Pass," according to Nasta.
"Not coincidentally, Station 50 is where a confluence of other long-haul pipelines interconnect with Transco. These include ANR and TransCanada's Columbia Gulf Transmission (CGT), and Boardwalk Partners' Texas Gas Transmission (TGT). Also nearby is Plains All American's Pine Prairie gas storage facility, which interacts with that Transco interconnect as well," she said. "Transco's net receipts from these systems in Evangeline Parish, LA, have more than tripled over the past couple of years, from less than 500 MMcf/d to nearly 1.5 Bcf/d, with a good bit of that increase happening in recent months. These receipts are then moving west and south to the Gulf Trace lateral and into Sabine Pass."
Nasta said it's "also not a coincidence" that ANR, CGT and TGT -- north-south long-haul pipes that have been reversing flows to accommodate the Marcellus/Utica -- "criss-cross" with Appalachian takeaway pipelines like Rover and REX.
"Not surprisingly, the growing LNG export demand combined with the addition of takeaway capacity and flow reversal projects are disrupting flow patterns on these connected pipes and increasing competition for transportation capacity moving gas to the Gulf Coast," she said.
Since Rover began flowing on Mainline A, ANR northbound flows have dropped, including cuts to northbound volumes from interconnects with REX and Dominion. Meanwhile, southbound flows on ANR "since Sept. 1 have climbed 60% to an average of over 700 MMcf/d, from about 450 MMcf/d in August." These volumes are finding their way south to the Perryville Hub in Louisiana and eventually to ANR's interconnect with Transco, according to Nasta.
Coinciding with this uptick in ANR southbound flows, receipts onto ANR at Perryville, LA, have decreased, as have volumes coming from the Midcontinent.
"While these shifts aren't earth-shattering, especially on the southern end of the system, they signify a trend that will only deepen as Rover completes subsequent phases of its project and ramps up to the full 3.25 Bcf/d of capacity," Nasta said. "We can already see competition heating up between Rover and REX and some of the other receipts that normally get absorbed by ANR. That will only intensify as Rover fills up. Regardless of who wins, however, it looks like Rover, in combination with ANR, has certainly increased Marcellus/Utica producers' stake in the game."
In a recent webinar, RBN CEO Rusty Braziel predicted that, given the concentration of incremental demand growth from LNG and exports to Mexico, production will increasingly compete for limited capacity to the Gulf Coast and create widening basis differentials outside the region.
Energy Transfer plans to bring Rover’s full designed capacity into service by the end of the first quarter. Phase 1B, including the completion of a supply lateral delayed by a FERC moratorium on horizontal directional drilling, is slated for completion by the end of the year. After receiving a certificate from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energy Transfer has been operating on a tight schedule to construct the 713-mile mega project.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112225-rover-leading-marcellus-utica-volumes-to-gulf-coast-lng-says-rbn
-
FERC Rule Review Recommends Few Changes
Oct 26, 2017 | Politico Pro Whiteboard
By Darius Dixon
FERC largely patted itself on the back in its response to the White House’s executive order calling on agencies to sniff out rules potentially burdensome to domestic energy resources.
The 15-page document says agency staff voluntarily reviewed four areas of FERC work: hydropower licensing, liquefied natural gas facility and gas pipeline siting, electric capacity policy in the three eastern power markets, and electric generator interconnection policy.
Hydropower licensing was the only subject staff said might benefit from reform, highlighting that the commission could consider allowing certain applications to be resubmitted if they’re initially rejected.
When the agency explored its 180-day “pre-filing” process for LNG terminals, the report says that procedure may slow some projects but is worthwhile because it allows potential issues to be addressed early.
“Thus, although this regulation may result in delays or additional costs to the applicant early on in a project's development, its overall result is a more timely application review by considering all issues regarding a project concurrently," staff wrote. "As such, there is no need for the Commission to consider any revision to this regulation.”
When it came to generation interconnection policies, FERC listed a half-dozen orders the agency has issued to make the process as efficient as possible and said: “None of these orders materially burden the development or use of domestic energy resources.”
WHAT’S NEXT: The report is a staff product and the report warns that it “does not specifically recommend actions nor indicate the timing of any potential action.”
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Mountaineer NGL Storage to Invest $150m in Ohio Project
Oct 26, 2017 | Kallanish Energy
Mountaineer NGL Storage announced Thursday it intends to invest $150 million over the next three to five years in its natural gas liquids storage facility at Clarington, Ohio, Kallanish Energyreports.
That investment could top $500 million in private capital investment, depending on market demand, the Denver-based company said.
That $150 million investment could expand the facility to handle up to 10 million barrels (MMBbl) of liquids, including ethane from shale drilling, according to previous statements by company officials.
The facility on the Ohio River in eastern Ohio was being designed to initially store up to 3.25 MMBbl of natural gas liquids from the Utica and Marcellus shales in Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania.
To date, Mountaineer NGL Storage had invested $20 million in the Monroe County project.
“We think our investment will encourage significant additional NGL infrastructure support in the region as well,” said David Hooker, managing director of the company, in a statement.
“We’re pleased to see that the support of this regional effort is as strong as it is, and we believe that the Mountaineer NGL Storage Project highlights how the private sector can take steps to address critical storage solutions for the burgeoning petrochemical industry,” he said.
Last summer, Mountaineer conducted a non-binding open season to judge interest in the storage facility and interest was high, according to Hooker.
Such a facility and other facilities like it in the Ohio River Valley could benefit ethane cracker plants like the one Shell Appalachia intends to build in Beaver County, Pa., and one Thailand-based PTT Global Chemical may build in Belmont County, Ohio.
Winning all the needed state permits will likely take until mid-2018, Hooker said.
The company intends to use the Salina salt at a depth of about 6,800 feet for its facility. The salt is about 130 feet thick at that level.
https://www.kallanishenergy.com/2017/10/26/mountaineer-ngl-storage-to-invest-150m-in-ohio-project/
-
Irving Oil Ordered to Pay $4M for Offences Related to Lac MéGantic Disaster
Oct 26, 2017 | CBC
By Sarah Petz
Irving Oil has been ordered to pay $4 million for offences under the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act after an investigation related to the Lac Mégantic, Que., disaster.
About $400,000 of that is a fine, and almost $3.6 million will be used to implement research programs into federal safety standards and regulations under the act, according to a news release from the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.
Irving Oil pleaded guilty earlier to 34 counts under the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act.
The charges were related to a joint investigation by Transport Canada and the RCMP following the train derailment in Lac Mégantic on July 6, 2013.
The investigation found that Irving Oil failed to comply "with all applicable safety requirements by failing to determine the classification of dangerous goods for the crude oil it transported by train, and that the shipping documents on board the trains were erroneous," the Public Prosecution Service of Canada said in the news release.
The investigation also found that Irving Oil did not adequately train its employees in the transportation of dangerous goods.
The offences occurred between November 2012 and July 2013, when close to 14,000 train cars transported crude oil to Saint John, N.B.-based Irving Oil.
In a statement posted to the company's website on Thursday, Irving Oil said it strongly believes in the importance of safety and regulatory compliance "across all of our operations and we take these charges very seriously."
The company's statement also said the misclassification of crude oil did not contribute to or cause the railway disaster.
"Irving Oil acknowledges and appreciates the work undertaken by Transport Canada to uphold rigorous standards around the safe transport of goods," the statement goes on to say.
"The company will remain vigilant in all of our operations, upholding our commitment to safety for employees, customers, and communities."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/irving-oil-sentenced-lac-megantic-charges-1.4373075
-
Trump's Air Nominee Hasn't Read the Endangerment Finding
Oct 26, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
Bill Wehrum has some reading to catch up on.
President Trump's nominee to head U.S. EPA's air office says he has never read the endangerment finding for greenhouse gases. That scientific decision, issued by the Obama administration, finds that gases like carbon dioxide and methane are harmful to human health and welfare. It forms the basis of EPA's climate regulations.
Yesterday, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee advanced Wehrum's nomination, along with three other EPA nominees, on to a full Senate vote.
If he is confirmed, Wehrum — now an industry attorney at Hunton & Williams LLP — will come into the agency as it faces increasing pressure from certain conservatives to scrap the endangerment finding. As assistant administrator of the air office, Wehrum would be closely involved with EPA's response. Groups such as the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Texas Public Policy Foundation have submitted formal petitions to EPA this year to prompt the agency to reconsider the finding.
Wehrum would have to finally delve into the 2009 document.
The text of the finding published in the Federal Register is 52 pages long. But a technical support document is an additional 210 pages, and appendices and EPA's response to comments are hundreds of pages long.
Wehrum revealed he had not read the finding, or the "record prepared in support of the finding," in responses to written questions for the record from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) during his confirmation process.
Whitehouse had asked Wehrum whether he agreed with the endangerment finding and if he would commit to "not take any steps to narrow the scope or otherwise weaken the endangerment finding."
Wehrum wrote, "I have not read the endangerment finding or the record prepared in support of the finding. Therefore, I currently do not have a view. Otherwise, I cannot prejudge any decision that might be made by EPA if I am confirmed."
That response raised some eyebrows.
"The person charged with protecting Americans' health and safety through the Clean Air Act had best know the most important Supreme Court case in that statute's history and how the EPA implemented it," Whitehouse told E&E News in a statement. He was referring to the case Massachusetts v. EPA, which determined that EPA could regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and set the stage for the endangerment finding.
"An airline wouldn't hire a pilot who says 'I don't know how to land a plane, but I look forward to learning on the job,'" Whitehouse added.
"It is hard to believe Bill Wehrum is the blank slate on endangerment that he pretends to be," David Doniger, director of the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in an email.
Wehrum has a reputation for being one of the top Clean Air Act lawyers in the country, and he's represented industries and trade associations in court, including the American Petroleum Institute. He was previously the acting boss of EPA's air office during the George W. Bush administration. He was nominated for the job but never confirmed.
Some of Wehrum's former colleagues said he only would have had to read the endangerment finding if he had represented clients who had commented on it or challenged it.
"I would be surprised if he had read it; it's a very science-heavy document," said Jeff Holmstead, an attorney for Bracewell LLP. "I have to confess, I haven't read it."
Wehrum worked as legal counsel under Holmstead when Holmstead led the air office during the Bush administration.
"Just knowing Bill, I'm very confident that all of his answers to the [questions for the record] are very honest and carefully written," Holmstead added.
Robert Meyers, the senior counsel at Crowell & Moring LLP who also worked with Wehrum in EPA's air office, agreed it was unlikely Wehrum would have read the full endangerment finding.
"You work on those issues and matters that your clients want you to work on," Meyers said. "The Clean Air Act is huge and multi-varied; if you practice in the Clean Air Act, you can't possibly cover everything."
Wehrum has argued that he does not think EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, which he said was meant to control different kinds of air pollutants (Climatewire, Sept. 8).
Wehrum also echoed his likely future boss, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, when asked about his views on the causes of climate change.
"I believe the degree to which manmade GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions are contributing to climate change has not been conclusively determined," he wrote in response to a separate question from Whitehouse.
Wehrum's nomination to the air office was initially met with resistance from both Republicans and Democrats over his record on the renewable fuel standard. By yesterday morning, all Republicans on the committee voted in favor of his nomination.
Democrats, meanwhile, voiced their continued trepidation about the nominee after a roll call vote on Wehrum's nomination.
"I'm concerned that during this process, Mr. Wehrum mischaracterized his records on the bipartisan renewable fuel program when he testified, as well as in his written responses," said Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.). "He claimed to be unfamiliar with the RFS, despite having led litigation related to the program for organizations like the American Petroleum Institute at least four times."
Meyers described Wehrum as a uniquely qualified and skilled lawyer who would do a "great job" at an office with a heavy workload dealing with everything from hazardous air pollutants and managerial duties to rolling back the Obama-era Clean Power Plan.
"You need someone like Bill who not only has the background but the experience to manage the workflow," Meyers said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/10/26/stories/1060064687
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested