Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - November 15, 2018
-
First TSCA Draft Risk Evaluation Finds No Unreasonable Risk
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
In the first draft risk evaluation of an existing substance issued under the reformed TSCA, the US EPA has preliminarily determined that the assessed substance – pigment violet 29 – does not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. -
(ACC Blog) Letter To The Editor – Pediatrics – Re: Food Additives and Child Health
Nov 15, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)[1] has put forth a set of policy recommendations based on a hypothesis that the presence of certain chemicals in the diet suggests potential adverse effects on children’s health. -
EPA Releases Draft Safe Daily Dose For Chemours’s GenX Chemical
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing a safe daily level for people to ingest of Chemours’s GenX fluoroether surfactant and its acid. The draft number suggests drinking or eating these chemicals is safe at a level four times as high as recommended for the industrial substances perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorosulfonic acid (PFOS), but that level is still extremely low. -
Washington State’s Flame Retardant Committee Meets For More Stakeholder Input
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Washington state’s Stakeholder Advisory Committee on Flame Retardant Chemicals has met for a third time to examine the use of six substances and help develop a report for the legislature. -
Draft EPA Study Finds Newer Nonstick Compound May Be Harmful
Nov 15, 2018 | The Associated Press (In The New York Times)
By Ellen Knickmeyer and Jonathan Drew
Long-term exposure to a chemical compound currently used for making nonstick coatings appears to be dangerous, even in minute amounts, according to draft findings released Wednesday by the Environmental Protection Agency. -
Brexit: UK, EU Chemicals Industry Welcomes Agreed Draft Deal
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel and Luke Buxton
European Chemical Industry Council Cefic, and the UK Chemical Industries Association (CIA) have welcomed an agreed draft text on the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union. -
Canada Provisionally Clears Nine Polyamines As 'Not Harmful'
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The Canadian government has provisionally concluded that nine polyamine substances are not harmful to human health or the environment. -
Dangerous Levels of Mercury Found in Skin Creams Purchased on Amazon, eBay
Nov 15, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Melanie Benesh
Today, 51 environmental and public health groups, including EWG, called on Amazon and eBay to remove illegal skin care products containing dangerous levels of mercury. The products, purchased and tested by the Mercury Policy Project, in some cases contained as much as 30,000 parts per million, or ppm, of mercury – an astounding 30,000 times the legal limit of 1 ppm set by the Food and Drug Administration. -
White House Taking Two-Pronged Approach to Boost LNG Exports to Europe
Nov 15, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
The Trump administration looked to advance Lower 48 liquefied natural gas exports to Europe along two fronts Tuesday, with one official saying the White House wants to help facilitate U.S. exports to the continent and another urging European allies not to participate in a pair of pipeline projects backed by Russia. -
Cheniere Energy To Export First LNG Shipment From Texas
Nov 15, 2018 | Chron
By Sergio Chapa
Houston-based Cheniere Energy is expected to export its first shipment of liquefied natural gas from its complex near Corpus Christi Thursday afternoon. -
Trump Team Plans To Promote Fossil Fuels At UN Climate Event: Report
Nov 15, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Megan Keller
The Trump administration plans to again promote fossil fuels at the annual U.N. climate talks next month, three sources told Reuters. -
Pelosi Wants To Make Climate A 'Pre-Eminent' Issue In Next Congress
Nov 15, 2018 | PoliticoPeo - Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi vowed to address jurisdictional concerns surrounding her plan to revive a climate select committee as she pledged to make climate change a "pre-eminent" issue for Congress next year. -
Insight: US Voters Give Boost To Clean Energy Policies But Stop Short Of Carbon Tax
Nov 15, 2018 | Platts
By Kate Winston and Maya Weber,
From ballot measures to statehouses, what do the results of the US midterm elections mean for oil, gas and power markets? Kate Winston and Maya Weber report
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
First TSCA Draft Risk Evaluation Finds No Unreasonable Risk
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
In the first draft risk evaluation of an existing substance issued under the reformed TSCA, the US EPA has preliminarily determined that the assessed substance – pigment violet 29 – does not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment.
The EPA says the finding is based on a review of reasonably available information, which indicates that the substance poses: "a low hazard to human health and environmental receptors, low solubility, low vapour pressure, low bioaccumulation potential, low absorption, limited environmental releases and low potential for resulting exposures".
This initial determination of PV 29’s safety is aligned with a "preliminary conclusion" – presented in its June ‘problem formulation’ – that the colourant represents a low hazard to human health and the environment. As Chemical Watch reported at the time, the emergence of such a conclusion early in the evaluation process suggested the substance presented little controversy, in stark contrast to others being assessed in the first wave of evaluations, like asbestos and a variety of solvents of high concern.
Nevertheless, the EPA's acting administrator Andrew Wheeler said that the release of the first draft assessment "shows that the agency is delivering on its promise to meet the statutory deadlines and ensure the safety of chemicals currently on the market" under the reformed TSCA.Next steps
The "EPA has made tremendous progress fulfilling our new responsibilities for existing chemicals," he added.
PV 29 – also known as anthra[2,1,9-def:6,5,10-d'e'f'] diisoquinoline-1,3,8,10(2H,9H)-tetrone) – is one of the first ten substances undergoing risk evaluation under the amended TSCA. It is used as a colourant, primarily in inks, paints, coatings and plastics, as well as in consumer art products, and is used as an intermediate for other perlyene pigments.
Its draft evaluation will undergo peer review by the EPA’s Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) before being finalised. It will also be subject to a 60-day comment period. This period falls short of the 120 days recently recommended by four NGOs, but longer than the 30-day statutory minimum.
All public comments will be provided to the SACC peer review panel. The agency says it will consider public comments, along with peer review comments and recommendations, before finalising the evaluation.
The EPA has a three-year statutory deadline for finalising all ten risk evaluations, which ends December 2019. However, it may seek a single six-month extension.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71997/first-tsca-draft-risk-evaluation-finds-no-unreasonable-risk
-
(ACC Blog) Letter To The Editor – Pediatrics – Re: Food Additives and Child Health
Nov 15, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)[1] has put forth a set of policy recommendations based on a hypothesis that the presence of certain chemicals in the diet suggests potential adverse effects on children’s health. “Phthalates” are among the chemical names in the policy recommendations and accompanying technical report (Trasande et al. 2018).[2] To prevent misunderstandings that could arise from these documents, we would like to point out the following:People typically are not exposed to phthalates through microwaveable plastics, and not all recycling code 3[3] vinyl contains phthalates)
Phthalates are primarily used as softening agents to make rigid vinyl flexible, and are typically not used in rigid vinyl products identified by recycling code 3. Hence, only flexible vinyl products, such as flooring, wire and cable, roofing, etc., would contain phthalates[4] or other plasticizers. A recent US FDA evaluation of food contact packaging such as food wraps and cap gaskets of jarred food products confirmed that these products contain mostly non-phthalate plasticizers (Carlos et al, 2018). For example, the only US food-contact clearance for di-isononyl phthalate (DINP) is 21 CFR §178.3740 which permits its use in a narrow range of food-contact applications at temperatures not exceeding room temperature. Thus, this type of plasticizer is unlikely to be present in a microwaveable food contact article.DINP and DIDP have received multiple health and safety evaluations from global regulatory agencies, which have concluded they expect no risks via food under existing conditions of use.
Trasande et al. note that DINP and DIDP “have not been banned or restricted[5] by regulatory agencies.” This is with good reason. DINP/DIDP are two of the most studied phthalates and have been evaluated multiple times, by multiple regulatory agencies over the past 20 years. For example, the European Commission (EC) published two rigorous risk assessment reports on DINP and DIDP in 2003 (EU RAR, 2003) and 2013 (European Chemicals Agency, 2013; European Commission, 2014). In both cases, these European Union (EU) agencies found no risk expected from dietary exposure to DINP or DIDP (or in combination) for children (as young as 0-6 months) and adults. The specific comment by European Chemical Agency (ECHA) is: “no risk is expected from combined exposure to DINP and DIDP for children exposed via food and the indoor environment” (European Chemicals Agency, 2013). More recently, ECHA’s Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) published a final consensus opinion that no classification for adverse effects to reproduction or development was warranted for DINP under the EU’s classification, labelling and packaging (CLP) regulation (European Chemicals Agency, 2018). Similar in-depth hazard and risk evaluations on DINP or DIDP have also been conducted in Canada[6] and Australia.[7] Both have reached the same conclusion, that DINP and DIDP do not pose a health concern for existing consumer applications. Furthermore, in 2011, the UK Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT), an independent scientific committee that provides advice to the UK Food Standards Agency, evaluated the risk of dietary exposure to phthalates, including DINP and DIDP.[8] The committee concluded that the estimated dietary exposures “do not indicate a concern for health of consumers.” In October 2017, the New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) released a report on the risk characterization of packaging chemicals (phthalates, printing inks/photoinitiators) in food.[9] The MPI concluded that for all but one of the compounds evaluated (including DINP and DIDP), “dietary exposure estimates showed no risk to human health.” In March 2018, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) released a survey on the health risks of plasticizers (including DINP and DIDP) in Australian foods.[10] Overall, FSANZ concluded that exposures to these chemicals in food packaging “are low and unlikely to pose a public health and safety concern.”
In the US, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recently published a final rule based on an evaluation of certain phthalates, including DINP and DIDP, that used a number of conservative assumptions.[11] The CPSC’s rule restricts the use of DINP in toys and childcare articles.[12] The interim restriction on DIDP was lifted, as the CPSC concluded that DIDP does not cause adverse effects on male reproductive development and other risks attendant to its use are low.Association is not causation
Trasande et al note associations in cross-sectional studies between DINP and DIDP exposure and insulin resistance and systolic blood pressure in children and adolescents. They cite two articles (also by Trasande et al), but do not carry over the caveat from one of them that “causation cannot be inferred from a cross-sectional study” (Attina & Trasande, 2015). That article, regarding insulin resistance, also points to several potential confounders that were unmeasured and thus could not be controlled for in their study. Furthermore, Attina & Trasande provide a more plausible alternative explanation to their findings: that insulin-resistant children have unhealthy eating habits that include consumption of packaged food that happens to contain higher phthalate levels than the unpackaged foods consumed by healthier children. This alternative explanation would then suggest that the association of DINP/DIDP with insulin resistance is merely a non-causal association that simply occurs by default (Sharpe & Drake, 2013).
Trasande et al. also cite Trasande & Attina (2015) that concluded that there was an association between DINP and DIDP and increased blood pressure in children and adolescents. However, the evidence provided in that paper was poor, inconsistent and likely of little to no clinical relevance. First, this article identified a significant association with systolic blood pressure, but not diastolic blood pressure, increased risk of pre-hypertension, triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) with DINP and DIDP.[13] Secondly, as the authors note, the association with systolic blood pressure appeared to be small and of limited clinical relevance. The same article also raised some significant limitations associated with cross-sectional studies, including the problem of unmeasured confounders, reverse causation (i.e. that children and adolescents with increased systolic blood pressure have increased urinary excretion of phthalates simply because they consume higher levels of packaged foods, which foods simultaneously raise their blood pressure and their phthalate exposure), and the use of spot samples (which the authors considered “weak indices of exposure,” since half-lives of phthalate metabolites are typically <48 hours) that are not indicative of the temporal variability of DINP/DIDP exposure over time. In addition, Trasande & Attina (2015) erroneously claimed that DINP and DIDP “have not been substantially studied for toxicity in laboratory studies.” In fact, the 2018 ECHA RAC assessment of DINP included at least five (5) 90-day toxicity studies and four (4) lifetime studies in rodents, none of which identified any cardiovascular effects of DINP, even at high doses. As we have also noted above, these substances have been the subject of multiple risk evaluations by several regulatory agencies, especially with respect to dietary exposure. In citing only ‘supporting’ references, Trasande et al failed to cite other independent review articles that conclude that the available evidence is not sufficient to establish a relationship between phthalates and obesity, diabetes or cardiovascular effects in humans (Beydoun et al, 2013; Buckley et al, 2016; Goodman et al, 2014; Kuo et al, 2013; Sharpe & Drake, 2013).Studies of DINP and DIDP show no evidence of hypospadias and cryptorchidism, changes in men’s hormone concentrations or morphological changes in sperm
The 2018 ECHA RAC opinion on DINP clearly stated that DINP does not induce gross-structural malformations such as hypospadias and cryptorchidism (European Chemicals Agency, 2018). The same report also reviewed several epidemiological studies to evaluate a potential association between DINP exposure and adverse reproductive effects (Joensen et al, 2012; Mieritz et al, 2012; Specht et al, 2015; Specht et al, 2014). These studies examined more than 1,500 boys and young men across Europe and found no evidence that DINP caused adverse changes to fertility measures such as sperm parameters and hormone levels.
***
High molecular weight phthalates have been used safely in consumer and commercial applications for more than 50 years, ranging from use in building and construction, automotive and many other applications. Aside from their history of safe use, these phthalates offer significant benefits for which similarly effective and safe alternatives (subjected to the same level of scientific and regulatory scrutiny) are not readily available. High molecular weight phthalates are among of the most studied chemicals in commerce today and rigorous evaluations of these phthalates by regulatory agencies around the world continue to confirm that these chemicals are safe in their current applications. More importantly, several regulatory agencies have re-affirmed the safety of dietary exposure to low levels of phthalates as used in food packaging.
References
Attina TM, Trasande L (2015) Association of Exposure to Di-2-Ethylhexylphthalate Replacements With Increased Insulin Resistance in Adolescents From NHANES 2009–2012. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 100: 2640-2650.
Beydoun H, Khanal S, Zonderman AB, Beydoun M (2013) Is Exposure to Bisphenol-A and Phthalates Associated with Obesity, Metabolic Disturbances and Insulin Resistance among U.S. adults? The FASEB Journal 27: 630.624-630.624.
Buckley JP, Engel SM, Mendez MA, Richardson DB, Daniels JL, Calafat AM, Wolff MS, Herring AH (2016) Prenatal Phthalate Exposures and Childhood Fat Mass in a New York City Cohort. Environ Health Perspect124: 507-513.
Carlos KS, de Jager LS, Begley TH (2018) Investigation of the primary plasticisers present in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) products currently authorised as food contact materials. Food additives & contaminants Part A, Chemistry, analysis, control, exposure & risk assessment 35: 1214-1222.
EU RAR (2003) 1,2-BENZENEDICARBOXYLIC ACID, DI-C8-10-BRANCHED ALKYL ESTERS, C9-RICH AND DI-“ISONONYL” PHTHALATE (DINP); CAS Nos: 68515-48-0 and 28553-12-0 EINECS Nos: 271-090-9 and 249-079-5 – RISK ASSESSMENT https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/83a55967-64a9-43cd-a0fa-d3f2d3c4938d.
European Chemicals Agency (2013) Evaluation of new scientific evidence concerning DINP and DIDP in relation to entry 52 of Annex XVII to REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/31b4067e-de40-4044-93e8-9c9ff1960715.
European Chemicals Agency (2018) Opinion proposing harmonised classification and labelling at EU level of 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C8-10-branched alkylesters, C9- rich; [1] di-“isononyl” phthalate; [2] [DINP]. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/56980740-fcb6-6755-d7bb-bfe797c36ee7.
European Commission (2014) Phthalates entry 52 Commission conclusions on the review clause and next steps.
Goodman M, LaKind JS, Mattison DR (2014) Do phthalates act as obesogens in humans? A systematic review of the epidemiological literature. Critical Reviews in Toxicology 44: 151-175.
Joensen UN, Frederiksen H, Blomberg Jensen M, Lauritsen MP, Olesen IA, Lassen TH, Andersson AM, Jorgensen N (2012) Phthalate excretion pattern and testicular function: a study of 881 healthy Danish men. Environ Health Perspect 120: 1397-1403.
Kuo C-C, Moon K, Thayer KA, Navas-Acien A (2013) Environmental Chemicals and Type 2 Diabetes: An Updated Systematic Review of the Epidemiologic Evidence. Current diabetes reports 13: 831-849.
McKee R, Adenuga M, Carrillo J-C, Cawley L (2015) Characterization of the Toxicological Hazards of Hydrocarbon Solvents. Critical Reviews in Toxicology 45: 273-366.
Mieritz MG, Frederiksen H, Sorensen K, Aksglaede L, Mouritsen A, Hagen CP, Skakkebaek NE, Andersson AM, Juul A (2012) Urinary phthalate excretion in 555 healthy Danish boys with and without pubertal gynaecomastia. International journal of andrology 35: 227-235.
Sharpe RM, Drake AJ (2013) Obesogens and obesity—An alternative view? Obesity 21: 1081-1083.
Specht IO, Bonde JP, Toft G, Lindh CH, Jönsson BAG, Jørgensen KT (2015) Serum Phthalate Levels and Time to Pregnancy in Couples from Greenland, Poland and Ukraine. PLOS ONE 10: e0120070.
Specht IO, Toft G, Hougaard KS, Lindh CH, Lenters V, Jonsson BA, Heederik D, Giwercman A, Bonde JP (2014) Associations between serum phthalates and biomarkers of reproductive function in 589 adult men. Environ Int 66: 146-156.
Trasande L, Attina TM (2015) Association of Exposure to Di-2-Ethylhexylphthalate (DEHP) Replacements With Increased Blood Pressure In Children and Adolescents. Hypertension 66: 301-308.
Trasande L, Shaffer RM, Sathyanarayana S (2018) Food Additives and Child Health. Pediatrics 142: e20181410.
Zota AR, Calafat AM, Woodruff TJ (2014) Temporal trends in phthalate exposures: findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001-2010. Environ Health Perspect 122: 235-241.
[1] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/2/e20181408
[2] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/2/e20181410
[3] https://www.epa.gov/recycle/how-do-i-recycle-common-recyclables#pla
[4] https://www.chemicalsafetyfacts.org/polyvinyl-chloride-post/#uses-benefits
[5] The US and EU have conservatively placed restrictions on DINP and, in the EU, DIDP, specifically for certain toys and childcare articles.
[6] Health Canada phthalate draft screening assessment
[7] Australia NICNAS fact sheet on DINP
[8] https://cot.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/cot/cotstatementphthalates201104.pdf
[9] https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/21871/loggedIn
[10]https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/publications/Documents/Survey%20of%20plasticisers%20in%20Australian%20foods.pdf
[11] https://www.cpsc.gov/newsroom/news-releases/2018/cpsc-prohibits-certain-phthalates-in-childrens-toys-and-child-care-products
[12] We note that the CPSC’s conclusions on DINP are at odds with the conclusions from Health Canada, ECHA RAC and Australia NICNAS, which found no concern for reproductive effects from DINP. On the other hand, these agencies are unanimous in finding no concern for reproductive effects from DIDP.
[13] It is interesting that for every endpoint where a significant association was not found (HDL, triglycerides and pre-hypertension), the authors claim that this was as a result of a lack of sufficient power in a study population of 1,329.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2018/11/letter-to-the-editor-pediatrics-re-food-additives-and-child-health/
-
EPA Releases Draft Safe Daily Dose For Chemours’s GenX Chemical
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing a safe daily level for people to ingest of Chemours’s GenX fluoroether surfactant and its acid. The draft number suggests drinking or eating these chemicals is safe at a level four times as high as recommended for the industrial substances perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorosulfonic acid (PFOS), but that level is still extremely low.
Chemours makes and uses GenX, which it substitutes for PFOA as a polymerization aid, at a plant in Fayetteville, N.C. The chemical is the ammonium salt of hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA). HFPO-DA is found in the Cape Fear River downstream of the Chemours facility as well as in nearby groundwater, rain, and treated drinking water.
EPA issued on Nov. 14 the so-called draft chronic reference dose of 80 ng/kg of body weight per day for the two fluoroethers combined. A reference dose is a maximum acceptable human exposure level likely not to cause appreciable health risks during a lifetime. The agency’s numbers are based on laboratory animal studies showing adverse effects in the liver, kidney, blood, and immune system and in fetuses.
In contrast, EPA chronic reference doses for PFOA and PFOS, substances no longer used but still found widely in drinking water supplies, are 20 ng/kg per day each. The agency in 2016 used those numbers to set a health advisory level of 70 ppt for the chemicals individually or together in drinking water.
Based on those 2016 calculations, the draft dose level for the two fluoroethers translates to a drinking water concentration of about 300 ppt, says Laurel Schaider, a researcher at the Silent Spring Institute, which studies the links between chemical exposure and women’s health. Translating a dose level into a drinking water concentration requires making assumptions such as the amount of water people drink each day and whether they’re exposed to the chemical through other routes, and regulators could make different assumptions than Schaider, she notes.
In addition to hazard assessment for GenX, EPA also released a draft chronic reference dose for perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS), used as a substitute for PFOS. That draft number is 10,000 ng/kg per day, based on thyroid and kidney effects in laboratory animals. Using the assumptions from the agency’s PFOS calculations, this amount to about 37,000 ppt in drinking water, Schaider says. PFBS has been detected widely in drinking water, waste water, and food packaging, EPA says.
The agency is accepting public comments on its draft toxicity assessments through mid-January and will finalize them in the future.
https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/EPA-releases-draft-safe-daily/96/i46
-
Washington State’s Flame Retardant Committee Meets For More Stakeholder Input
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Washington state’s Stakeholder Advisory Committee on Flame Retardant Chemicals has met for a third time to examine the use of six substances and help develop a report for the legislature.
The report requires input from stakeholders and the Department of Ecology in arriving at policy options and recommendations. Previous meetings took place in June and September.
Last week’s event included the presentations flame retardants in building insulation; halogenated flame retardants in building insulation; and flame retardants in residential furniture and juvenile products.
The final report on policy options for the substances of concern is expected next July.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72070/washington-states-flame-retardant-committee-meets-for-more-stakeholder-input
-
Draft EPA Study Finds Newer Nonstick Compound May Be Harmful
Nov 15, 2018 | The Associated Press (In The New York Times)
By Ellen Knickmeyer and Jonathan Drew
WASHINGTON — Long-term exposure to a chemical compound currently used for making nonstick coatings appears to be dangerous, even in minute amounts, according to draft findings released Wednesday by the Environmental Protection Agency.
It was the first time EPA weighed in on newer, supposedly safer versions of an increasingly scrutinized family of stick- and stain-resistant compounds. Older versions of the compound are turning up in dangerous levels in drinking water supplies around the country.
Drinking water contamination has been the main concern cited by public health officials and regulators in connection with the compounds, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalyl substances, or PFAS.
The EPA findings said animal studies show the so-called GenX nonstick compound has the potential of affecting the kidneys, blood, immune system, liver and developing fetuses following oral exposure. "The data are suggestive of cancer," the draft report said.
"Toxicity is only one piece of information that public officials consider when determining whether there is a risk to public health," the report said. "Other factors, such as exposure, must also be considered."
Lee Ferguson, an environmental analytical chemist and associate professor at Duke University, said those findings would mean "the compounds that we're replacing toxic compounds for are also toxic."
Concern over GenX, used in Teflon and other materials, has been strongest in North Carolina. Authorities have found it in water supplies serving hundreds of thousands of people downstream of a Chemours Co. plant that makes it outside Fayetteville.
Wednesday's draft findings suggest chronic exposure to GenX is dangerous at levels as low as a few hundred parts per trillion, Ferguson said. Two older versions from the same family of compounds — taken out of manufacturing in the United States — have been found to be dangerous at less than a hundred parts per trillion.
PFAS are used in nonstick coatings on things ranging from pans to fast-food wrappers, as well as firefighting foam. Federal toxicology officials determined recently that the two phased-out versions of the compound are dangerous at levels far lower than previously known. An unidentified White House official in an email released through open-records laws called that finding a "potential public relations nightmare" earlier this year.
Chemours media representatives didn't immediately respond to a phone call and email seeking comment on the EPA report.
U.S. Rep. Richard Hudson, a Republican whose district stretches into the Fayetteville area, said he looks forward to the completion of a pending EPA management plan that the agency says will help guide state and local governments.
"I encourage swift action to help the state better understand what we need to do going forward to keep our water clean and keep our citizens safe," he said in a news release.
In one of the North Carolina areas dealing with GenX contamination, New Hanover County public health director Phillip Tarte said he was reviewing the report, calling it an important step.
There are no federal health standards for GenX. The EPA classifies it as an "emerging contaminant" needing research.
The chemical is related to other fluorinated chemicals including PFOA, which has been blamed for causing health problems. In February 2017, Chemours and DuPont — which spun off Chemours two years ago — agreed to pay nearly $671 million to settle thousands of lawsuits related to the release of PFOA from a Parkersburg, West Virginia, plant more than a decade ago.
The EPA held a series of hearings on the contaminants earlier in the year. State and local officials and others used the hearings to urge the agency to take the lead in regulating the compounds.Sign Up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer
A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.SIGN UP
Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a statement Wednesday that the "EPA is delivering on its commitment to provide our state and local partners the tools and information they need to address PFAS."
The EPA will now seek 60 days of public comment on its findings.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/11/14/us/politics/ap-us-epa-nonstick-compound.html
-
Brexit: UK, EU Chemicals Industry Welcomes Agreed Draft Deal
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel and Luke Buxton
European Chemical Industry Council Cefic, and the UK Chemical Industries Association (CIA) have welcomed an agreed draft text on the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union.
Published on 14 November, the 585-page document sets out clauses of Britain’s exit but does not include finer detail around chemicals legislation.
In a statement, Cefic and CIA said that ensuring continued participation in REACH through Echa is "the best outcome" for the chemical industry on both sides of the English Channel, as well as for the health and environment agenda across the continent.
Cefic director general Marco Mensink said its position remains unchanged: "Industry needs regulatory certainty on the arrangements between the EU and the UK for the period after March 29 and the sooner these arrangements are agreed on, the better the industry can prepare and the less disruption it will cause for trade."
Meanwhile, CIA chief executive Steve Elliott said the association will continue to work with MPs and members of the House of Lords to ensure minimal disruption.London conference
At a conference organised by CIA in London on 15 November, Mr Mensink said that while the finer details are to be ironed out, the agreed draft text contains two areas that are significant to the chemicals industry:Article 7 stipulates that the UK will be excluded from nominating, appointing or electing members of the EU agencies – such as Echa – and will not be permitted to attend agency or affiliated meetings or participate in decision-making activities; andArticle 15.7 stipulates that UK authorities will no longer act as leading authority for risk assessments, examinations, approvals and authorisation procedures under EU law.
Another, Article 8, is also key as it says the UK will cease to access any EU-established network, information system and database.
"I’m slightly less optimistic on the Echa part of the deal," Mr Mensink told Chemical Watch. This is because even with associate membership, the UK will not have access to the Echa database.
Access "very much depends" on the final agreement, he told delegates in London. "We don’t know what that associate membership means in terms of access to the database. Data cannot be transferred without the permission of the 27 other countries."
Associate membership has to be agreed, he said. Details of talks on this are expected next week, Mr Mensink said.
It does not make sense, he added, to duplicate the database or the agency’s activities.
At a recent government Brexit workshop, the UK’s Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said companies will need to submit a "full" data package in order to register their chemicals under a UK version of REACH in a no-deal Brexit scenario.
Speaking in London on 15 November, Mr Mensink also urged companies to prepare for a no-deal Brexit, saying "the smartest people" in industry will be those who are prepared now because "you don’t know what’s going to happen after March". But he added that no-one was "that prepared" for a hard Brexit.‘So far, so good’
Meanwhile, Tom Crotty, president of CIA and director of manufacturer Ineos, said the association is continuing to closely analyse the text and it is "so far, so good".
The deal "would make sense for us", he said, as it contains elements CIA supported from the start:frictionless free trade;regulatory consistency; andfree movement and access to skilled people.
The chemicals industry is "still very high on the negotiators’ radar", he told delegates.
Before the deal text was published, Echa had recently updated its Brexit web pages, which provide advice for industry.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72074/brexit-uk-eu-chemicals-industry-welcomes-agreed-draft-deal
-
Canada Provisionally Clears Nine Polyamines As 'Not Harmful'
Nov 15, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The Canadian government has provisionally concluded that nine polyamine substances are not harmful to human health or the environment.
If confirmed, the result would effectively rule out regulatory action against them under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (Cepa).
The draft screening assessment, published on 10 November, divides the substances into three sub-groups: poly(DADMAC), poly(EDMA) and poly(ASPCA). They are mainly used in water and wastewater treatment, pulp and paper production, and oil field applications.
The government previously evaluated them under the second phase of its "polymer rapid screening". It identified low potential to cause harm to human health but a need for further evaluation on their potential to cause ecological harm.
The draft screening assessment therefore expands on environmental risk.
The substances contain functional groups that may be associated with adverse effects to fish, invertebrates and algae, the assessment says. However, they are not are not expected to remain in water when used appropriately during wastewater treatment. Furthermore, any residual amounts reaching the aquatic environment are expected to form solids, settle into sediments and be unavailable thereafter.
As a result there is low risk of harm to the environment from these substances, it concludes.
The government has launched a 60-day public consultation until 9 January 2019.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71999/canada-provisionally-clears-nine-polyamines-as-not-harmful
-
Dangerous Levels of Mercury Found in Skin Creams Purchased on Amazon, eBay
Nov 15, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Melanie Benesh
Today, 51 environmental and public health groups, including EWG, called on Amazon and eBay to remove illegal skin care products containing dangerous levels of mercury. The products, purchased and tested by the Mercury Policy Project, in some cases contained as much as 30,000 parts per million, or ppm, of mercury – an astounding 30,000 times the legal limit of 1 ppm set by the Food and Drug Administration.
Mercury is a highly toxic heavy metal. Mercury exposure can cause kidney damage, skin rashes, skin discoloration and scarring, as well as a reduction in the skin’s resistance to infections. Other effects include anxiety, depression, psychosis and nerve damage that can result in pain or numbness in the hands, arms, legs and feet.
These health risks aren’t limited to people who use skin products containing mercury. Mercury vapors can get into the air and cause harm to other people and even pets. People can also be exposed by touching washcloths or skin that has come in contact with one of these products. Babies and children are especially at risk of harm because of their developing brain and nervous systems. Newborns can be exposed to mercury through breastmilk.
Mercury is used in cosmetics as a skin lightening agent and preservative. Cosmetics with mercury are often marketed as skin lightening creams and anti-aging treatments that remove age spots, freckles, blemishes and wrinkles. Adolescents sometimes use these products as acne treatments.
Manufacturers selling products that contain mercury often do not label their products. Companies that do may use any of the following names: mercury, Hg, mercuric iodide, mercurous chloride, ammoniated mercury, amide chloride of mercury, quicksilver, cinnabaris (mercury sulfide), hydrargyri oxydum rubrum (mercury oxide), or mercury iodide. Directions to avoid contact with silver, gold, rubber, aluminum, and jewelry could also indicate the presence of mercury. Marketers of these products tend to target the Asian, African, Latino and Middle Eastern communities.
The FDA banned the use of mercury in most cosmetics at levels higher than 1 ppm in 1973. The agency has investigated skin lightening creams and also created an import alert for skin whitening creams containing mercury, which allows FDA agents to detain certain products at the border.
In recent years, state and local authorities have also taken action against mercury in skin care products.In 2011, doctors in Hidalgo County, Tex., alerted poison control to an increase in heavy metal poisoning in the county. The Texas Department of State Health Services linked the poisoning to a Mexican beauty product containing mercury.The Minnesota Department of Health purchased and tested products in 2011 and 2016 and found mercury levels as high as 54,000 ppm.In April 2018, the New York City health department purchased 10 skin lightening creams from Pakistan and two medicated soaps from Spain, all of which had elevated levels of mercury. The health department issued an alert to health care providers and worked to remove the products from the shelves.
Despite these actions, skin care products that contain mercury remain on the market, readily accessible to many consumers. The Mercury Policy Project easily purchased the skin lightening creams it tested from the online retailers Amazon and eBay.
The FDA has limited resources and authority to regulate cosmetic imports, even illegal ones like mercury-containing skin creams. In a June 2017 letter to Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J. – who in January will become chair of the House committee that oversees the FDA – the agency acknowledged that it was able to inspect only a small fraction of the growing number of cosmetics imported each year. When the FDA does test imported products, it often finds contaminants or illegal ingredients like mercury, despite the import alert.
Both Amazon and eBay have restricted item policies. Amazon’s policy states that “Products offered for sale on Amazon must comply with all laws and regulations and with Amazon’s policies. The sale of illegal, unsafe, or other restricted products listed on these pages . . . is strictly prohibited.” Amazon also has categories of products that require its approval before being sold. By simply enforcing these policies, both companies could help protect the public from a significant health risk.
Outdated federal cosmetics policies must also be updated. The cosmetics section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act has not been updated since 1938. The FDA lacks both the resources and authority to adequately regulate products like illegal mercury-containing skins creams and hundreds of other legal, but potentially harmful cosmetic ingredients.
Bipartisan legislation introduced by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, and by Rep. Frank Pallone D-N.J., would require the FDA to review the most dangerous chemicals in cosmetics, require companies to tell the FDA when contaminated products are in the marketplace and give the FDA the power to act to keep us safe.
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2018/11/dangerous-levels-mercury-found-skin-creams-purchased-amazon-ebay
-
White House Taking Two-Pronged Approach to Boost LNG Exports to Europe
Nov 15, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
The Trump administration looked to advance Lower 48 liquefied natural gas exports to Europe along two fronts Tuesday, with one official saying the White House wants to help facilitate U.S. exports to the continent and another urging European allies not to participate in a pair of pipeline projects backed by Russia.
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/116488-white-house-taking-two-pronged-approach-to-boost-lng-exports-to-europe?v=preview
-
Cheniere Energy To Export First LNG Shipment From Texas
Nov 15, 2018 | Chron
By Sergio Chapa
Houston-based Cheniere Energy is expected to export its first shipment of liquefied natural gas from its complex near Corpus Christi Thursday afternoon.
Crews wrapped up construction for Train 1 at the company's Corpus Christi LNG export terminal this summer and spent the past five months commissioning the equipment.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott and Cheniere CEO Jack Fusco will be on hand to watch an LNG tanker named Golar Tundra to leave with the first shipment from the Port of Corpus Christi facility.
Under the company's business model, the South Texas facility will receive natural gas from the Eagle Ford Shale, Permian Basin and other sources via pipeline, liquefy the gas and use tankers to export it to customers in Europe, Latin America and Asia.
It's not immediately clear where the Golar Tundra will take the first shipment from Port of Corpus Christi, but the export terminal's customers hail from three continents —Europe, Asia and Australia. They include three Spanish companies, Endesa, Iberdola and Gas Natural Fenosa, Petamina of Indonesia, Woodside of Australia, the French company Electricite De France, and the Portuguese company Energias de Portugal SA.
Cheniere's first export shipment was sent from its Sabine Pass LNG in Louisiana in February 2016. Since then, Cheniere has shipped 475 cargoes of LNG to 29 nations.
Trading under the stock ticker symbol LNG, the Houston company endured years of losses while the Sabine Pass export terminal was under construction. Once the company started shipping LNG, the profits followed.
The company said it earned a $65 million profit on $1.7 billion of revenue during the third quarter of 2018.
A second processing unit at the Corpus Christi facility known as Train 2 is expected to be completed during first quarter 2019 and placed into commercial service by the second half of 2019.
Crews with general contractor Bechtel started construction for a third processing unit known as Train 3 during the summer.
Over the past year, Cheniere has landed long-term supply agreements with a subsidiary of China National Petroleum Corp. and Poland's state-run Polish Oil and Gas Company.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Cheniere-Energy-to-export-first-LNG-shipment-from-13393239.php
-
Trump Team Plans To Promote Fossil Fuels At UN Climate Event: Report
Nov 15, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Megan Keller
The Trump administration plans to again promote fossil fuels at the annual U.N. climate talks next month, three sources told Reuters.
“Quite frankly, the U.S. is the only party to the convention that appears to be willing to push a rational discussion on the role of cleaner, more efficient fossil [fuels] and the role of civilian nuclear energy,” a source involved in the planning of the event said, according to the news service.
President Trump's team intends to repeat the strategy they employed in 2017 in Germany, the sources added, where they highlighted the benefits of technologies that burn fossil fuels more efficiently.
The administration also plans to send State Department officials to continue negotiating the climate accord, Reuters reported.
“The White House seems to have taken the view that it’s important to let technocrats complete the work of the rule book. It’s in the U.S. national interest to be at the table and see an outcome that emphasizes transparency, holds countries accountable,” said one of the sources.
The Hill was not able to reach The White House or State Department for immediate comment at the time of publication.
Climate activists and progressives condemned last year's fossil fuels event.
Since then, several Trump administration officials who supported keeping the U.S. in the Paris climate accords, though under different terms, have left.
Some of their replacements, such as top economic adviser Larry Kudlow and national security advisor John Bolton, oppose it.
The same is true for Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who has been vocal about his opposition to the accords, Reuters reports.
Earlier this year, Trump announced the withdrawal from the Paris agreement.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/416866-trump-team-plans-to-promote-fossil-fuels-at-un-climate-event-report
-
Pelosi Wants To Make Climate A 'Pre-Eminent' Issue In Next Congress
Nov 15, 2018 | PoliticoPeo - Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi vowed to address jurisdictional concerns surrounding her plan to revive a climate select committee as she pledged to make climate change a "pre-eminent" issue for Congress next year.
"We will have conversations about some of the objections they may have, but there is tremendous interest on the outside for us to return to that place where the climate issue is pre-eminent," Pelosi said a press conference today. "We have to find the best way to engage the public to make the change that is necessary to put us on a different course of action."
The California Democrat said that while climate was an urgent issue when she first formed the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming in 2007, it is "even more urgent now." She called climate change her "flagship issue" when she became speaker back then.
Several current ranking members, most notably the Energy and Commerce Committee's Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), have said that reviving the panel is unnecessary because the existing committees are capable of addressing the issue. Incoming Democrats have urged her to strengthen the panel with the power to write bold legislation.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Insight: US Voters Give Boost To Clean Energy Policies But Stop Short Of Carbon Tax
Nov 15, 2018 | Platts
By Kate Winston and Maya Weber,
From ballot measures to statehouses, what do the results of the US midterm elections mean for oil, gas and power markets? Kate Winston and Maya Weber report
On November 6, US voters shied away from key statewide environmental initiatives that would have imposed near-term costs on oil, gas and traditional utility interests. But they backed candidates, including nine new Democratic governors, with aggressive renewable energy and environmental goals. Advocates may now look to states fully under Democratic control – such as Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado – to take quick action on clean energy, since divided government at the federal level lowers prospects for this in Washington.
The defeated
Several green ballot initiatives offered critical test cases, and their defeat could discourage other states from pursuing similar measures. Washington’s carbon fee and Colorado’s drilling setback were seen as bookending what is politically possible at the moment.
Washington Initiative 1631 would have been the first carbon fee in the US. If passed, it would have set a carbon fee of $15/mt starting in 2020 and boosted costs for oil refineries, gas-fired power plants and other large users of fossil fuels.
Colorado Proposition 112 would have increased oil and gas drilling setbacks on non-federal land from 500 feet to 2,500 feet. The measure, strongly opposed by the oil and gas sector, could have reduced oil production in some basins by more than 50% by 2023.
If the Colorado measure had passed in a state that leans heavily on industry revenue, it could have been copied elsewhere. The failure of the Washington measure in a state with low carbon intensity suggests it could be a heavy lift elsewhere.
“We viewed both states as litmus tests for potential policy contagion,” ClearView Energy Partners said in a post-election note. “In Colorado, where proceeds from a fast-growing oil and gas industry fund schools and local governments, voter support for a de facto drilling ban could have pointed towards emulation by other, less-revenue-reliant producer states,” the note said.
Carbon tax
Scott Segal of Bracewell said Washington state has a balance of urban and rural voters, and of conservative and liberal voters. As a result, there were two well-funded sides battling over a fairly aggressive carbon tax. “It in many respects was a test case for the politics of the carbon tax on what I would call neutral ground,” he said in a post-election webinar.
But Tom Steyer, founder of the nonprofit NextGen Climate Action, pushed back against the narrative that the failure of the Washington initiative means a carbon fee would be politically infeasible at the national level. “I don’t think that for a second because obviously the largest, most populous state in the United States is California and we have a comprehensive plan,” Steyer said at a post-election event.
Environmental advocates blamed the defeat of some initiatives on industry spending. Advocates spent $15 million backing the Washington initiative while opponents spent about $30 million to defeat it. Proponents of the Colorado initiative spent $1 million and opponents spent $30 million.
Industry groups countered that some initiatives failed when put to the test by voters. “Where energy bans were on the ballots, many of them failed when it was put to a vote of the people,” said Benjamin Marter, communications director for the American Petroleum Institute.
Elsewhere, Alaska voters also shot down Ballot Measure 1, which would have strengthened permitting regulations for any activity that could affect salmon habitats. Oil and gas producers said the rules could delay projects and increase costs, potentially prohibiting developments on the state’s North Slope and elsewhere.
Renewable gains
While several high-profile ballot initiatives disappointed environmental groups, their policy goals gained ground in governors’ mansions. Seven switched to Democratic hands.
The League of Conservation Voters tallied nine new governors who committed to move their states toward 100% clean energy: Tony Evers of Wisconsin, Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, J.B. Pritzker of Illinois, Janet Mills of Maine, Jared Polis of Colorado, Kate Brown of Oregon, Gavin Newsom of California, Steve Sisolak of Nevada and Ned Lamont of Connecticut.
Michelle Lujan Grisham in New Mexico, another Democratic governor pickup, is expected to tighten venting and flaring requirements for oil and gas production, in addition to backing 50% renewables by 2030 and 80% by 2040.
Governor-elect support for clean energy goals overlaps with six states in which Democrats moved from divided control to holding the governorship and both chambers of the state legislature: Colorado, Illinois, Maine, New Mexico, New York and Nevada. The combination increases the likelihood of measures advancing.
That makes a difference in places like Colorado, where Senate Democratic control combined with the election of a governor who has backed 100% renewable energy by 2040 and favors tighter regulation of the oil and gas industry.
The New York state Senate flip to Democratic hands also could give life to more ambitious renewables goals than embraced by Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo. The push for a higher concentration of renewables “will be baked into the nationwide platform approaching 2020 and beyond” in the Democratic Party, said Rob Rains of Washington Analysis.
Dan Lashof, director of the World Resources Institute–United States, said after the election he sees Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico as poised for quick action on renewable standards. Wisconsin experienced the biggest ideological shift, Lashof said, with Democrat Tony Evers unseating Republican Governor Scott Walker, while Michigan and Illinois governors-elect could strengthen the existing goals on renewables.
With no action on climate legislation at the federal level, many environmental groups are focusing on state-level and sector-specific progress, Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club said. “The commitments on 100% clean energy coming from these governors, we feel will be deeply transformative.”
Going in a different direction, Ohio elected Republican Attorney General Mike DeWine, improving prospects for efforts to relax renewable mandates.
Results were mixed for ballot initiatives to raise renewable energy targets. Arizonans rejected a ballot initiative to require electric utilities to get 50% of their power from renewables by 2030. Arizona Public Service fought the measure, saying it could force the 3.9 GW Palo Verde nuclear plant to retire early.
A Nevada initiative to increase the state’s renewable portfolio standard to 50% by 2030 won easily with 60% of the vote, despite the state’s utility remaining neutral on the issue. While the initiative needs to pass again in 2020 to go into effect, environmental groups hope the state legislature will pass a law making that mandate binding even sooner. Prospects are improved by the election to governor of Sisolak, who ran as a clean energy advocate combating climate change.
https://blogs.platts.com/2018/11/15/us-voters-clean-energy-carbon-tax/
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested