Preview Newsletter

PM ACC Clips Report - May 24, 2019

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) Escalating Tariffs Signal Caution for China Investments
May 24, 2019 | Plastics News
By Steve Toloken

The escalating trade conflict between the United States and China was prompting some plastics investors to hit the pause button at the massive Chinaplas trade fair this week — with Chinese compounder Top Polymer Enterprise among them.

TSCA News

EPA Announces Excess Food Opportunities Map and Section 5 Notices
May 24, 2019 | The National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson

On May 20, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that on May 30, 2019, it will begin publishing Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 5 notices, including premanufacture notices (PMN), microbial commercial activity notices (MCAN), and significant new use notices (SNUN), their attachments, including any health and safety studies, any modifications thereto, and all other associated information in ChemView -- in the form they are received by EPA, without review by EPA.

Chemical Management News

(ACC Blog) Independent Study Finds Flaws in One-Size-Fits-All Approach to Flame Retardants
May 24, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters

In today’s policy arena, one of the most common threats to sound science and the interests of consumers is the misguided push by some to ban, restrict and regulate entire classes of chemicals, regardless of the differences between different members of the class.
Vermont Bill to Update Toxics Law Heads to Governor
May 24, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adrianne Appel

A measure passed by Vermont’s Legislature to update the state’s 2014 hazardous chemicals law is headed to the governor’s desk, where its fate is uncertain.
US EPA Proposes Limit on Perchlorate in Drinking Water
May 24, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue

The Trump administration is proposing several options for limiting perchlorate in drinking water, including leaving the chemical unregulated.
Health Groups Jeer EPA's 'Stunningly High' Perchlorate Limit
May 24, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Ariel Wittenberg

EPA wants to allow perchlorate in drinking water to reach concentrations 10 times higher than standards set by states and three times higher than the agency's own reference level.
Wis. Lawmakers Take Aim at PFAS
May 24, 2019 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
By Todd Richmond

Some Wisconsin legislators are pushing to curtail the use of firefighting foams that contain potentially toxic chemicals and establish standards that limit how much of the substances can safely exist in the state's groundwater, air and soil.
Hundreds of Sunscreens Don’t Work or Have Unsafe Ingredients, Annual Review Finds
May 24, 2019 | EcoWatch
By Sam Nickerson

Summer is fast approaching, which means it's time to stock up on sunscreen to ward off the harmful effects of sun exposure. Not all sunscreens are created equally, however.
Dollar Stores Moving to Pull Dangerous Plastics From Shelves
May 24, 2019 | National Geographic
By Alessandra Bergamin

Dollar stores, those ubiquitous businesses that sell everything from bathroom cleaner to eggs, are starting to take action that begins to right what consumer advocates call a clear wrong: Many of the plastic products on their shelves contain chemicals that can have grave health effects for their customers.
CEN Issues Revised Standard on Substance Migration From Toys
May 24, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Isabel Luetchford

New methods for measuring the migration of certain chemical elements from different categories of toy materials have been published in an EU standard by CEN, the European Committee for Standardisation.

Energy News

Cornyn Bill Targets Emissions of Gas-Fired Power Plants
May 24, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Jeremy Dillon

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) yesterday introduced his planned legislation to spur research and development of carbon capture technologies for natural-gas-fired power plants.
DOT Can’t Shake Lax Pipeline Inspection Claims
May 24, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes

Wildearth Guardians may proceed with claims that the Department of Transportation failed to comply with an annual inspection requirement for all oil and gas pipelines on federal land, the District of Montana ruled.
Frac Sand Expected to Remain Cheap as Supplies Outpace Demand
May 24, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum

Sand prices for oil and gas fracking and for the valuations of sanding mining companies are expected to remain depressed as growing supplies continue to outpace rising demand, research reports say.

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation and Infrastructure News

Rail Demurrage, Accessorial Fees ‘Death’ by 1,000 Cuts
May 23, 2019 | American Shipper
By Chris Gillis

The Class I railroads — in an effort to fine-tune their freight-sprawling North American networks — have stepped up their issuance of demurrage and accessorial charges to shippers during the past two years.
Rail Customers Air Grievances on Railroad Billing Tactics
May 23, 2019 | FreightWaves
By John Gallagher

Manufacturers of the raw materials that go into the end products that American consumers rely on for daily living warned regulators that they may have no choice but to raise prices as a result of what they consider to be systematic overcharging by the railroads.
As Shippers Complain About Surging Railroad Fees, Regulator Considers Turning the Tables
May 23, 2019 | Jacksonville Business Journal
By Will Robinson

An attempt to curtail surging railroad fees that have shippers and manufacturers up in arms could lead to railroads being fined, new mandates being established and policies being changed.
NS Recognizes 58 Chemical Customers for Safe Hazmat Practices
May 24, 2019 | Progressive Rail Roading

Norfolk Southern Railway has recognized 58 of its chemical shipper customers with the Class I's 2018 Thoroughbred Chemical Safety Award.

Environment News

(ACC Mentioned) Association Heads Laud EPA’s Cost-Benefit Analysis Memo
May 24, 2019 | Oil&Gas Journal
By Nick Snow

Oil and gas associations responded favorably to US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Andrew R. Wheeler’s May 13 memorandum stating that the agency should ensure its regulatory decisions are “rooted in sound, transparent, and consistent approaches to evaluating benefits and costs.”
(ACC Mentioned) Scrap Collector: Vermont Passes Nation's 'Toughest' Plastics Bill Yet
May 24, 2019 | Waste Dive
By Rina Li

Heads up, plastic watchers: Vermont legislators have passed what is being credited as the nation's "toughest bill yet" with regard to single-use plastics regulation.

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) Escalating Tariffs Signal Caution for China Investments

May 24, 2019 | Plastics News

By Steve Toloken

The escalating trade conflict between the United States and China was prompting some plastics investors to hit the pause button at the massive Chinaplas trade fair this week — with Chinese compounder Top Polymer Enterprise among them.
The uncertainty around tariffs was causing the Liyang, China-based firm to delay a $15 million investment in its first factory in the United States, near Atlanta, as both its supply chains and profits were taking a hit from rising tariffs.
"Right now, the environment is difficult for everyone, although at the moment it's the worst case scenario," President Marcus Tsong said in an interview at the company's booth at Chinaplas, which ran May 21-24 in Guangzhou and drew an estimated 180,000 attendees.
Tsong said his company remains firmly committed to moving ahead on its U.S. investment and hopes to complete it in early 2020. Original plans called for the factory to open this month.
But the back and forth over relations between the two countries has slowed the company's planning. Tsong's caution echoed others at the fair, which with 3,500 exhibiting firms ranks as one of the world's two largest plastics shows.
U.S. extrusion equipment maker Davis-Standard LLC, for example, noted that tariffs are causing its customers in China to put their orders for machines from the company's U.S. factories on hold.
He said U.S.-built Davis-Standard machines being exported to China will face much higher tariffs starting June 1, because they're in a block of goods targeted in Beijing's response to President Donald Trump's recent decision to raise tariffs from 10 percent to 25 percent on $200 billion in Chinese exports.
For Davis-Standard, China tariffs on those U.S. machines will rise from 5 percent to 25 percent.
"We have got customers [in China] now putting their investment plans for machinery from the U.S. on hold," he said. "We've already had that happen. They've not canceled orders. There's a wait and see thing."
One Chinese executive said the escalating tariffs in the last few weeks — a reversal of the sense that a deal between the governments was at hand — seemed to stop what had been a recovery in plastics machinery markets in China in March and April.
Richard Yan, CEO of publicly traded Chinese injection machine maker Yizumi Precision Machinery Co. Ltd., said plastics industry customers had ramped up purchasing in April in anticipation of a deal between Washington and Beijing.
"Now the situation has changed and customers are hesitating. It's a matter of confidence," Yan said. "People are now back to waiting and seeing."
Challenging conditions
2018 had been a more challenging year in China's industry. For example, the country's largest plastics machinery maker, Haitian International Holdings Ltd., told its shareholders in the Hong Kong stock exchange that the "U.S.-initiated" trade fight "has weakened investors' confidence."
Chinaplas organizer Adsale Exhibition Services Ltd. noted that China's output of plastic products increased by only 1.1 percent in 2018, influenced by a volatile market and tougher environmental policies on industry.
Chinese equipment maker Cosmos Machinery Enterprises Ltd. said it too has felt the impact of trade tensions.
Business slowed in the second half of 2018, and the last few weeks of tariffs and counter tariffs trade issues further hurt sentiment, said Stephen Wong, executive vice chairman of the Hong Kong-based firm.
"In the machinery field, it's not the actual impact on us but the uncertainty that will make people nervous about future investment," he said.Escalating tariffs
Like Davis-Standard, compounder Top Polymer faces escalating tariffs.
The maker of thermoplastic copolyesters and styrenic block compounds will now face 25 percent tariffs on some of its shipments from China to the United States, up from 10 percent.
To keep its market volumes up ahead of building its new factory in Georgia, the company is shipping materials from China, paying the higher tariffs and seeing its margins take a big hit.
"We have to have some volume ready before the plant is ready," Tsong said. "We have to tolerate a loss."
But he argued that the tariffs are also hurting U.S. plastics makers.
Tsong said that's because Top Polymer has been importing significant supplies of raw materials from U.S. plastics firms, including Kraton Corp. and Dow Inc., to make its materials.
But with those U.S. products now facing tariffs in China, his company is no longer buying from the U.S. directly and is looking domestically and elsewhere for new suppliers.
In spite of the difficulties, though, he said his small company, which employs about 150 in two factories in China, remains committed to its U.S. investment. It sees a strong business case for the U.S. factory, in part to be closer to decision makers in multinational firms, he said.
Other material suppliers at the show were also having to managing tariffs and hoping they would end.
But for some specialty products going between the two countries, it's not possible to shift production and the company risks losing business, Martin Pavlik, director of business development, said.
"What you lose is competitiveness in price because there are local producers in Asia or producers in Europe that are not affected," he said. "Although we have a lot of products that are benchmarks in the industry, it's all about the cost.
"We don't see right now an erosion of sales because we are putting a lot of different efforts in place but how long we will be able to hold, is a question of time," he added in an interview at the company's booth.
A regional executive in Dow Inc.'s packaging and specialty plastics business said the company has been able in general to manage the tariff impacts in his unit by shifting sourcing around among its global production base.
Bambang Candra, Dow's Singapore-based commercial vice president of packaging and specialty plastics for Asia Pacific, said it is still seeing healthy 10-20 percent annual demand growth for their plastics in packaging products in China.
"When you're talking about packaging, we believe the fundamental demand is still there," Candra said.
The U.S. plastics materials industry has argued strongly against tariffs by either country, with its lobbying organizations like the American Chemistry Council saying they harm U.S. exports to China, now the world's largest plastics market.
ACC said in early May that the tariffs are starting to damage the industry's supply chain and hurt the competitiveness of the U.S. petrochemical industry.
But companies in other parts of the U.S. plastics industry have welcomed tariffs on items such as plastic packaging and vinyl flooring, saying that they face unfair competition from China. Tariff advocates say China's industrial policies advantage its industry, and they say tariffs will mean more jobs in their U.S. factories.
While the mood at the trade show was generally against tariffs and trade conflicts, the mood within the larger U.S. industry is more split.
That may be in part because the United States runs an annual deficit of about $11.5 billion with China's plastics industry, with deficits in plastic products, machinery and molds. Only the resin sector has a surplus with China, reaching $2.7 billion in 2017.
https://www.plasticsnews.com/news/escalating-tariffs-signal-caution-china-investments

Return to headline | Return to top

TSCA News

EPA Announces Excess Food Opportunities Map and Section 5 Notices

May 24, 2019 | The National Law Review

By Lynn L. Bergeson

On May 20, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that on May 30, 2019, it will begin publishing Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 5 notices, including premanufacture notices (PMN), microbial commercial activity notices (MCAN), and significant new use notices (SNUN), their attachments, including any health and safety studies, any modifications thereto, and all other associated information in ChemView -- in the form they are received by EPA, without review by EPA. EPA states that it will not be reviewing confidential business information (CBI)-sanitized filings before publishing. EPA states that this announcement will be the first of several reminders that EPA sends and, in addition, EPA has incorporated a reminder to check accompanying sanitized submissions as part of the Central Data Exchange (CDX) reporting module for TSCA Section 5 notices.
EPA’s announcement states the following as guidance for submitters to take heed of before submitting their TSCA Section 5 notices:Verify the asserted CBI claims are correct and consistent; and
Verify the sanitized versions of the form, attachments, and file names are checked for proper and consistent CBI redactions and that watermarks or stamps indicating CBI are removed.
On May 21, 2019, EPA announced a new version of a mapping tool designed to assist in the reduction of food waste by displaying facility-specific information about potential generators and recipients of excess food. According to EPA, the Excess Food Opportunities Map serves as an online “matching” service, linking, for example, owners of anaerobic digestion facilities with people looking to dispose of organic waste, including excess food. These anaerobic digestion facilities control organic decomposition in an oxygen-free, sealed tank to produce bioproducts and biosolids for on-site use or sale. This interactive map is part of EPA’s attempt to address the 133 billion pounds of wasted food in the U.S. through the diversion from landfills. It displays locations of potential excess food generators and recipients of excess food in industrial, commercial, and institutional sectors. The interactive and easy-to-use map was initially designed in 2014 by the Office of Research and Development’s (ORD) Regional Sustainability and Environmental Sciences Research Program (RESES). Since then, it was taken over by the Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM) and has evolved from a regional tool to a national one. The most recent version 2.0 includes 1.2 million potential excess food generators and identifies about 4,000 recipients.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/epa-announces-excess-food-opportunities-map-and-section-5-notices

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Management News

(ACC Blog) Independent Study Finds Flaws in One-Size-Fits-All Approach to Flame Retardants

May 24, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters

In today’s policy arena, one of the most common threats to sound science and the interests of consumers is the misguided push by some to ban, restrict and regulate entire classes of chemicals, regardless of the differences between different members of the class. Individual chemicals are often unique, with differing characteristics, structures and intended uses. Painting all chemicals that share some generic trait with a broad brush makes bad policy that can prevent consumers from accessing important, safe and beneficial products that they need. Unfortunately, misunderstanding about chemistry is common and helps promote this blanket approach to chemical regulation.
Last week, an important report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) made headlines for rejecting a single class approach to assessing the potential hazards of organohalogen flame retardants (OFRs). Flame retardants play a pivotal role in public safety for families and businesses across the world, reducing fire risk and helping to ensure product safety. It is critical that any well-meaning regulation of these chemicals is scientifically sound.
This report is an important development in the interests of consumer protection, and it confirms what scientists, regulators and other authorities bodies have already determined: it is not scientifically accurate or appropriate to make broad conclusions about or impose a “one-size-fits-all” regulatory approach on these chemicals. Flame retardants have different physical, chemical and toxicological profiles, meaning no two chemicals are exactly alike and are not universally interchangeable. In fact, key differences between OFRs are highlighted within assessments conducted by regulatory agencies such as the U.S. EPA, Environment and Climate Change Canada and Health Canada, the European Chemicals Agency, and the European Food Safety Authority.
Chemistry plays a critical role in helping people live safe, healthy lives each and every day. Additionally, chemical manufacturing is one of the most regulated industries around the world. In the U.S. alone, more than a dozen federal laws and multiple federal agencies govern the safe manufacture and use of chemicals.
By recommending a sub-class or “cluster approach,” the NASEM report demonstrates the importance of making decisions based on sound science. Fires remain a serious threat to human health and the environment. Flame retardants provide an important layer of fire protection that helps save lives and property, while also helping products meet key fire safety standards.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2019/05/independent-study-finds-flaws-in-one-size-fits-all-approach-to-flame-retardants/

Return to headline | Return to top
Vermont Bill to Update Toxics Law Heads to Governor

May 24, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Adrianne Appel

A measure passed by Vermont’s Legislature to update the state’s 2014 hazardous chemicals law is headed to the governor’s desk, where its fate is uncertain.
The landmark 2014 law requires companies that market children’s toys and clothes in Vermont to report the presence of any of 66 chemicals the state considers dangerous to children.
A similar bill to update the law was vetoed last year by Governor Phil Scott (R), citing concerns that it would make the state’s toymakers and other manufacturers less competitive.
The information on the presence of toxics is posted on a public website, which lawmakers intended as a guide for concerned parents and caregivers. But the list, containing hundreds of thousands of products, isn’t user friendly.
The new bill (S. 55) would direct the state Department of Health to make the information more accessible to the public.
It also would create a committee to develop stronger reporting requirements and would grant the state Department of Public Health more flexibility in listing products as hazardous or even to implement bans. Lawmakers in both chambers agreed to an amended bill late May 22.
2018 Version Vetoed
The bill is nearly identical to one vetoed by Scott last year. His staff hasn’t said if he has changed his position on this version.
Scott will “review the bill and weigh it against his previous concerns before making a determination,” Rebecca Kelley, Scott’s spokeswoman, said May 23.
An update to the law was advocated by environmental groups, including the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, which has said the state needs a better way to present the information about toxic chemicals in children’s products.
It is opposed by the Associated Industries of Vermont, a manufacturing trade group, which has said the bill would weaken the requirement that the Department of Health rely on scientific evidence when evaluating chemicals for their toxicity.
The groups didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment on May 24.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/vermont-bill-to-update-toxics-law-heads-to-governor

Return to headline | Return to top
US EPA Proposes Limit on Perchlorate in Drinking Water

May 24, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News

By Cheryl Hogue

The Trump administration is proposing several options for limiting perchlorate in drinking water, including leaving the chemical unregulated.
Perchlorate interferes with thyroid metabolism, which can damage the nervous system of infants and young children. More than 16 million US residents have perchlorate in their drinking water. The substance is used in solid rocket propellant, fireworks, vehicle-airbag inflators, and flares.
The US Environmental Protection Agencyproposed on May 23 to set a maximum contaminant level of 56 parts per billion of perchlorate in drinking water. In contrast, California, set its maximum contaminant level for perchlorate at 6 ppb in 2007.
In its proposal, the EPA is seeking feedback from the public on a limit of 56 ppb plus 3 other regulatory options: a limit of 18 ppb, a limit of 90 ppb, or simply not regulating perchlorate in drinking water.
Eric Olsen of the Natural Resources Defense Counsel, an environmental group that sued the EPA to set a standard for perchlorate in drinking water, says the agency’s plan puts Americans at risk, stating that the limit should be at least 10 times lower to protect health. He calls the proposal a “Trump administration gift to polluters and water utilities that have lobbied to be off the hook for cleaning up the problem.”
If the EPA finalizes a maximum allowable level for perchlorate in drinking water, the Defense and Energy departments and NASA would face a cleanup liability. Their operations have tainted groundwater used for drinking. The extent of their financial liability depends on the strictness of the standard the EPA ultimately sets for perchlorate—the tighter the standard, the more expensive the cleanup will be.
The agency’s move comes eight years after the Obama administration determined that the EPA would limit perchlorate in drinking water. That move reversed a 2008 decision by President George W. Bush’s administration not to regulate it.
https://cen.acs.org/environment/pollution/US-EPA-proposes-limit-perchlorate/97/web/2019/05

Return to headline | Return to top
Health Groups Jeer EPA's 'Stunningly High' Perchlorate Limit

May 24, 2019 | E&E Greenwire

By Ariel Wittenberg

EPA wants to allow perchlorate in drinking water to reach concentrations 10 times higher than standards set by states and three times higher than the agency's own reference level.
In a proposal released yesterday for regulating the rocket fuel ingredient that has been linked to thyroid problems, EPA suggests setting a maximum contaminant level and health-based maximum contaminant level goal of 56 parts per billion.
That's orders of magnitude higher than standards set by the two states that have regulated perchlorate.
Massachusetts' standard is 2 ppb, while California is considering lowering its standard of 6 ppb to 1 ppb.
EPA's proposal is three times higher than its own 2008 "health reference level" of 15 ppb.
EPA is also asking the public to weigh in on a number of other options beyond its own proposal. Those include setting standards at 18 ppb or 90 ppb.
Moreover, the agency is asking whether it should regulate perchlorate at all and if it should withdraw a 2011 determination on the chemical.
That question comes "in light of new considerations that have come to the EPA's attention since it issued its positive regulatory determination in 2011, including information on lower levels of occurrence of perchlorate than the EPA had previously believed to exist and a new analysis of the concentration that represents a level of health concern," EPA wrote.Advocates react
Environmental and health advocates have been calling on EPA to regulate the chemical since the 1990s. But the Department of Defense, as well as defense industry contractors and drinking water utilities, have lobbied against regulating the chemical.
EPA first decided against regulation in 2008 before reversing course in 2011. The agency should have proposed a rule two years later, according to deadlines in the Safe Drinking Water Act, but never did.
Yesterday's proposal is the result of a 2016 lawsuit filed against the agency by the Natural Resources Defense Council to force the agency to comply with federal law.
Erik Olson, who led NRDC's lawsuit against the agency, called the proposed levels "staggeringly high."
He had been pushing EPA to come out with a single-digit standard closer to those in California and Massachusetts, but he said he expected the agency to propose a level "in the teens," which would have been in line with its own reference level.
"I am stunned that they are really talking about a 56 or a 90," Olson said. "The fact that they are not even proposing to consider a lower number is just shocking."
Olga Naidenko, senior science adviser for children's environmental health at the Environmental Working Group, agreed.
"The science on perchlorate is very clear: It harms infants and the developing fetus," she said. "Perchlorate can cause irreparable damage to both cognitive and physical development. Instead of taking action to lower the levels of this rocket fuel chemical in drinking water, the administration's plan will endanger the health of future generations of kids."
Perchlorate is the first contaminant EPA has attempted to regulate since Congress updated the Safe Drinking Water Act in 1996 (Greenwire, Feb. 5). What happens to this regulation could be a harbinger of things to come as EPA examines other emerging contaminants like PFAS.
"It has taken EPA more than a decade to even move ahead with a proposal for perchlorate, and the proposal is clearly not protective," Olson said. "What that foreshadows for any other contaminant, including PFAS, should give everyone pause."'Can get pretty expensive'
Kevin Morley, who manages federal relations at the drinking water utility trade group American Water Works Association, said his organization is still reviewing the proposal.
The association was in favor of EPA's 2008 determination that "there was no meaningful opportunity to protect public health" by regulating perchlorate, and it has previously expressed concern that EPA's modeling for perchlorate did not include enough epidemiological studies showing no effects from the chemical.
Morley said he couldn't talk about the details of the new proposal until he reviews EPA analysis supporting the proposal, which will be made public when it is published in the Federal Register. A more detailed economic analysis would also be released at that time.
But Morley did describe the difficulties that utilities in Massachusetts and California have had in complying with stringent perchlorate standards.
The most useful technology in removing perchlorate from water, ion exchange, "can get pretty expensive," he said.
Some utilities in Massachusetts decided to simply abandon wells with perchlorate rather than treat them.
"From a resiliency perspective, they have more vulnerability now because they have fewer sources," he said.Cost-benefit
EPA's proposal says that the benefits of regulating perchlorate would not outweigh the costs at any of the three levels EPA is considering.
Regulating perchlorate would require 60,000 public water systems to monitor for it, but under the 56-ppb proposal, only two systems would "exceed the regulatory threshold," EPA wrote.
Only one system would exceed the 90-ppb standard, and 15 would exceed an 18-ppb standard.
EPA says that's one reason why it's asking the public whether it should regulate perchlorate at all.
The agency notes that it has previously decided against regulating contaminants on its candidate list where acting against them would not sufficiently protect public health.
For example, in 2003 EPA decided that because the pesticide aldrin only exceeded reference levels at 2% of water systems, "there was not a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction."
When it comes to perchlorate, however, Olson said that reasoning merely indicates how insufficient EPA's proposed levels are.
"The obvious problem is if you set a ridiculously high standard, very few people are protected, which was apparently the goal," he said.
EPA's current proposal says that only 900,000 people would have been served by drinking water systems that exceed EPA's previous reference level of 15 ppb.
That's not quite what EPA calculated in 2011, when it decided to regulate perchlorate. Then, the agency estimated that 900,000 to 2.1 million people were served by public water systems where concentrations of perchlorate were higher than 14 ppb.
At the time, EPA also estimated that 5.1 million to 16.6 million people were being served drinking water with concentrations of perchlorate higher than 4 ppb.
"If you set the system up to answer the question in a way that results in a very small number of people being protected, well, of course the benefits are going to be small," Olson said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/05/24/stories/1060391347

Return to headline | Return to top
Wis. Lawmakers Take Aim at PFAS

May 24, 2019 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)

By Todd Richmond

Some Wisconsin legislators are pushing to curtail the use of firefighting foams that contain potentially toxic chemicals and establish standards that limit how much of the substances can safely exist in the state's groundwater, air and soil.
Firefighting foam can contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, which are man-made chemicals that research suggests can decrease female fertility, increase the risk of high blood pressure in pregnant women and lower birth weights.
Tyco Fire Products discovered in 2013 that soil and well contamination on its Marinette fire training property contained PFAS. In 2017, the company acknowledged that the chemicals had spread beyond the facility. A month later, the company began distributing bottled water to residents whose private wells may have been contaminated.
Traces of PFAS also have been detected in a number of wells in Madison. A 2017 assessment found heavy concentrations of PFAS in soil and groundwater at the Wisconsin Air National Guard's Truax Field.
Two Republican lawmakers from northeastern Wisconsin introduced a bill Tuesday that would limit the use of firefighting foam that contains PFAS. State Rep. John Nygren and Sen. Rob Cowles' proposal would allow such foam to be used only in emergency firefighting or fire prevention situations. Testing facilities could use the foam only if they have appropriate containment measures.
"This bill strikes a balance in reducing the risks to human health and negative environmental footprint PFAS chemicals pose, while not hamstringing first responders who need to use firefighting foams in real emergencies," Cowles said in a statement.
A group of Democratic lawmakers introduced a bill Wednesday that calls on the state Department of Natural Resources to set standards for PFAS in drinking water, groundwater, surface water, air and soil, and to establish monitoring requirements. The lawmakers announced the bill at a Green Bay news conference flanked by DNR Secretary Preston Cole and Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who has declared 2019 the year of clean drinking water in Wisconsin.
"We must act now to address this environmental and public health threat," state Rep. Chris Taylor, a Madison Democrat sponsoring the bill, said in a statement. "The consequences for communities are too great."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/05/24/stories/1060390725

Return to headline | Return to top
Hundreds of Sunscreens Don’t Work or Have Unsafe Ingredients, Annual Review Finds

May 24, 2019 | EcoWatch

By Sam Nickerson

Summer is fast approaching, which means it's time to stock up on sunscreen to ward off the harmful effects of sun exposure. Not all sunscreens are created equally, however.
The nonprofit Environmental Working Group released its 13th annual Guide to Sunscreens this month, which rated the safety and effectiveness of more than 1,300 sun protection products on the market. It found that two-thirds of those products either contained chemicals the Food and Drug Administration says could be potentially harmful or provide inferior protection from the sun.
EWG experts found that only 40 percent of the products it examined — including sunscreens, moisturizers and lip balms — have active ingredients that meet draft safety regulationsdeveloped by the FDA in February.
According to the FDA, just two of the 16 common active ingredients in most sunscreens, zinc and titanium oxides, have been tested enough to show they are safe and effective. Another two ingredients, PABA and trolamine salicylate, were found to be unsafe according to the proposed standards, while the remaining 12 did not have enough data for the FDA to indicate whether or not they worked and could be considered safe.
"The good news is that the FDA has reaffirmed what EWG has advocated for 13 years: Based on the best current science, the safest and most effective sunscreen active ingredients are zinc oxide and titanium dioxide," said Nneka Leiba, director of EWG's Healthy Living Science program, in a press release. "It's long past time that the chemicals used in sunscreens were tested to show that they will not harm our health."
Many of the chemical ingredients were not tested enough because they had been grandfathered in when the FDA set more rigorous testing regulations in the 1970s, Time reported, as the belief then was that creams, lotions and sprays did not penetrate deep enough beyond the surface of the skin. A recent FDA study, however, confirmed that common sunscreen ingredients avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene and ecamsule all end up in the bloodstream at levels beyond the threshold for further testing.
Oxybenzone is an allergen and potential endocrine disruptor that can have adverse effects on human growth, development and reproduction, USA Today reported, and could be damaging coral reefs. Oxybenzone was found in more than 60 percent of the sunscreens reviewed by the EWG.
Time also reported that sunscreen manufacturers have put stronger chemicals in their products in response to skin cancer concerns or increased listed sun protection factor (SPF) values, while health experts have suggested more frequent use of these sunscreens, potentially increasing the likelihood the chemicals are absorbed.
Legislation has since been enacted to improve the FDA review process, and the EWG supports an FDA proposal to limit SPF ratings, as research has not shown that higher SPF ratings provide additional protection from all ultraviolet rays. If anything, the EWG says, SPF values greater than 50+ provide a false sense of security leading to increased exposure.
The EWG's 2019 sunscreen guide did provide some good news: more than 260 sunscreens meet its safety guidelines and would also meet the FDA's proposed standards. The full list of those products is on the EWG website.
https://www.ecowatch.com/safe-sunscreen-guide-ewg-2638024475.html?rebelltitem=2#rebelltitem2

Return to headline | Return to top
Dollar Stores Moving to Pull Dangerous Plastics From Shelves

May 24, 2019 | National Geographic

By Alessandra Bergamin

Dollar stores, those ubiquitous businesses that sell everything from bathroom cleaner to eggs, are starting to take action that begins to right what consumer advocates call a clear wrong: Many of the plastic products on their shelves contain chemicals that can have grave health effects for their customers.
Earlier this month, Dollar Tree—one of America’s largest dollar store chains—signed onto a program that would help the company phase out heavy metals such as lead and harmful chemicals including the plastic additives bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates from their products.
The Chemical Footprint Project measures a company’s chemical footprint and then tracks their progress toward using safer alternatives throughout their supply chain. Any company involved with the CFP formally submits data to the program, beginning with a survey that establishes a baseline score.
Usually, financial risk and fierce competition between chains drives companies to sign onto the CFP. But with dollar stores, which serve largely low-income communities of color, there was pressure to do right by vulnerable groups.
“Dollar Tree is a case where we felt it was also an issue of social justice,” says Alexandra McPherson, a project manager for the Investor Environmental Health Network, an investor collaborative that encourages companies to join the project. “Are people who can’t afford organic products inadvertently being sold the most toxic ones?”
For the past five years the Campaign for Healthier Solutions—a coalition of organizations stretching from Texas to Maine—has called for dollar stores to phase out hazardous chemicals from their products. While their efforts have translated slowly into action, including Dollar Tree’s recent pledge, the dollar chains haven’t always factored into public concern. The campaign was born when environmental justice advocates realized that although stores such as Target and Walmart were being pressured by consumer groups to address toxic chemicals in their supply chain, that same scrutiny was missing the four major dollar store chains: Dollar Tree, which recently acquired Family Dollar, Dollar General, and the 99 Cents Only Store.
“We have always understood that as people of color in low-income communities, we had a disproportionate exposure to chemicals,” says José T. Bravo, the campaign’s national coordinator. “And it’s these communities that are basically peppered with dollar stores.”
Martha Cisneros, who has been involved with the campaign through the female farmworker network, Lideres Campesinas, lives in one such community. Arvin, California, a town of 30,000 people, predominantly Latino farmworkers, is home to two dollar stores, but is 20 miles away from any big-box grocery store. Without a car, that’s an impossible trip for Cisneros and even if she could get there, the mother of four is not sure she could afford it. Instead, she walks less than a mile from her one-bedroom mobile home to the nearby Dollar Tree. At the dollar store, Cisneros says, she knows that each item—from the half-dozen eggs her family relies upon to the school supplies for her youngest daughter—will cost just one dollar each. But they come with a risk.
“I feel bad shopping at dollar stores,” she says. “But I was never aware; no one told me about the harmful chemicals.”Hidden toxic chemicals
In 2014 members from the Campaign for Healthier Solutions collected more than 160 dollar store products, such as pencil cases and silly straws, that were then tested for chemicals. They found that 81 percent of products tested hazardous for at least one chemical of concern, such as lead or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic. Among the most pervasive, however, were phthalates—a group of chemicals, including DEHP and DIBP, that make plastic soft and malleable.
Phthalates, like BPA, are known endocrine disruptors, chemicals that can interfere with the body’s hormones. Given that they are only loosely bonded to the plastics they’re added to, they easily leach out of products and cause exposure through ingestion, inhalation, and even skin contact. Glittery pencil cases, shell-shaped bathtub mats, and plastic headbands were among the products found to have phthalate levels above U.S. regulatory limits. They are also the kind of bright, cheap, plastic items synonymous with children and with dollar stores.
“If you go into a dollar store, it smells like plastic,” says Carmen Messerlian, an assistant professor of environmental reproductive, perinatal, and pediatric epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “You can smell the phthalates.”
Messerlian is part of the Environment and Reproductive Health Study based out of Boston, Massachusetts, an ongoing body of research that explores how environmental chemicals can affect reproductive health. A 2016 paperpublished by the team found that among women undergoing medically assisted pregnancy, those with the highest concentrations of DEHP—one kind of phthalate—in their urine were 60 percent more likely to miscarry prior to 20 weeks than those with the lowest concentrations, according to Messerlian. The study is the first to look at how phthalate exposure may affect the very early stages of pregnancy among couples with fertility problems.
Other observational studies and animal-based research have linked phthalate exposure to reproductive problems, obesity, type II diabetes, and neurodevelopmental issues in children.
For Deyadira Arellano, the latter is especially worrying. At her daughter’s three-year-old pediatrician appointment, the doctor said he was concerned about her neurological development. Arellano, a frequent dollar store customer and a community health worker for the Houston-based organization Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services, became involved with the Campaign for Healthier Solutions while pregnant. The campaign’s findings left her suspicious of dollar store products made from shiny metal or pliable plastic. After the appointment, she began to question everything.
“I started wondering, could it be the air, the water, the baby food, something I bought?’” Arellano says. “You get stuck in this mind trap of ‘what have I done?’”Hurting the most vulnerable
Exposure to endocrine disruptors, including phthalates, is significantly higher among low-income and minority communities, many of whom are already exposed to other pollutants. One study found that disproportionate exposures to endocrine disruptors may account for the higher rate of diabetes among black and Hispanic communities. More recently, a study broke down exposure to endocrine disruptors by race and found that minorities disproportionately bore the costs and health burdens of diseases associated with endocrine disruptors, including IQ loss and obesity.
“It’s a big concern that segments of the population, people who we generally consider more at risk of health problems, have less access to products with fewer of these chemicals in them,” Messerlian says. “It means they’re more likely to buy products that are less regulated than what we'd want.”
Just over a decade ago, Congress banned the sale or manufacture of “toys and childcare items” with phthalate concentrations of more than 0.1 percent. Eight phthalates including DEHP and DIBP are currently regulated by the act. In California, Maine, and New York state policy further restrict phthalates in children’s products, while Washington state’s governor is expected to sign into law the nation’s strongest phthalate regulation. But while policy plays an important role in protecting human health, it can also be slow moving and limited in scope.
Phthalate levels in common household items such as plastic table covers and non-slip bathtub mats are unrestricted yet are easily accessible to children. Then there’s the issue of banning individual phthalates rather than the entire group. That approach, Messerlian says, leaves researchers and regulators playing a game of “Whack-a-Mole,” where one chemical is banned and another appears in its place. Moreover, research has shown that replacement phthalates can be just as harmful as those that are regulated, as was the case when DINP and DIDP replaced the more common DEHP.Small victories
Rather than wait for government policy to force them to adapt, members of the Campaign for Healthier Solutions have instead encouraged dollar stores to emulate retailers such as Target and Walmart and phase out known chemicals of concern. Dollar Tree, which declined to comment for this article, has already made progress. Bravo and other campaign leaders have also met with executives from Dollar General.
In a statement to National Geographic, Dollar General representatives said the company is committed to selling safe products that meet or exceed their standards as well as legal and regulatory requirements.
“Customers can shop at Dollar General stores with confidence, knowing we firmly stand behind our products and the communities we proudly serve,” the statement says. “We appreciate ongoing and positive dialogue with the Campaign for Healthier Solutions and Mr. Bravo.”
Following a protest outside their Los Angeles headquarters in early April, a representative of the 99 Cents Only Store also agreed to meet with campaign members. 99 Cents Only Store did not reply to National Geographic’s requests for comment.
While Bravo considers even the meetings a small victory, he would like to see dollar stores go beyond what is required of them and become conscious retailers that do right by their customers, workers, and the environment. After all, for most people involved in the campaign and the low-income, rural, and communities of color they represent, the dollar store is often their best and only option.
“We said at the beginning of the campaign that this is not about boycotting dollar stores,” Bravo says. “Why? Our communities lack major supermarkets and even if they existed, they’re way out of our budget. For us, there’s no alternative.”
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/05/dollar-stores-shifting-sales-potentially-dangerous-plastics-phthalates-bpa/

Return to headline | Return to top
CEN Issues Revised Standard on Substance Migration From Toys

May 24, 2019 | Chemical Watch

By Isabel Luetchford

New methods for measuring the migration of certain chemical elements from different categories of toy materials have been published in an EU standard by CEN, the European Committee for Standardisation.
The standard, published on 10 April, also sets out a method for determining the migration level of chromium VI from scraped-off toy materials such as paint. The limit was tightened from 0.2mg/kg to 0.053mg/kg by an EU Directive last year (Directive EU 2018/725) and will apply from 18 November.
The latest standard – EN 71-3:2019, Safety of Toys - Part 3: Migration of certain elements – covers requirements and test methods for the migration of 19 elements (see table).
The standard also includes a modified method for testing organic tin compounds which, according to CEN, has an increased extraction yield improving the detection limit and repeatability.
CEN says other changes include:validated methods for filtration that improve the results and simplify filtration work in the laboratory; andthe method for pH control ensures that the samples are always tested at the pH intended.
The standard is currently awaiting citation in the EU's Official Journal.
The current standard EN 71-3-213+A3: 2018 will be withdrawn by 31 October.
https://chemicalwatch.com/77904/cen-issues-revised-standard-on-substance-migration-from-toys

Return to headline | Return to top

Energy News

Cornyn Bill Targets Emissions of Gas-Fired Power Plants

May 24, 2019 | E&E Greenwire

By Jeremy Dillon

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) yesterday introduced his planned legislation to spur research and development of carbon capture technologies for natural-gas-fired power plants.
The bill — co-sponsored by Sens. Chris Coons (D-Del.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) — is the latest in a line of Republican-led Senate proposals looking to infuse additional research money in technologies that could reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the electric sector.
Republicans like Cornyn have argued that innovation would represent a better approach to addressing climate change than progressive ideas like the Green New Deal (E&E News PM, May 16).
"Instead of a one-size-fits-all mandate that would bankrupt our country, this bill encourages the continued use of natural gas so we can protect the environment and remain a global leader in energy innovation," Cornyn said in a statement.
The legislation would authorize $50 million a year from fiscal 2020 until fiscal 2025 for the Department of Energy to launch and conduct a research program into the capture of carbon from the use of natural gas.
Natural gas has supplemented coal-fired power plants as the nation's No. 1 electric producer. While it does present a cleaner alternative to coal generation on the magnitude of about 50% less carbon, natural gas does produce emissions.
The bill would "require DOE to solicit applications for demonstration projects and submit a report to Congress detailing legislative recommendations, applicant evaluation method, expected goals for technology development, estimations of project costs, and timelines for project construction," according to a news release.
Republicans have increasingly looked to DOE's research capabilities as the preferred alternative to address climate change.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) introduced legislation this week to bolster grid-scale energy storage technology research (E&E News PM, May 22). Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.) introduced the House companion, H.R. 2986, yesterday.
Additional Senate measures are still expected, as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has expressed interest in climate-related legislation.Other bills
In addition to Cornyn's bill, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) introduced legislation, S. 1627, that would tinker and extend the Section 45 tax credit for refined coal from steel industry fuel.
Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) introduced H.R. 2995 to prioritize the collection of nuclear waste from reactor sites with high populations and elevated seismic risks.
In essence, the bill would place the waste from Levin's district at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station toward the top of the list once DOE has a viable nuclear waste management strategy.
"My top priority is protecting my constituents from a potential accident at San Onofre, and the safest thing for the communities I represent is to remove spent nuclear fuel from the region quickly and safely," Levin said in a statement.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/05/24/stories/1060391133

Return to headline | Return to top
DOT Can’t Shake Lax Pipeline Inspection Claims

May 24, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Peter Hayes

Wildearth Guardians may proceed with claims that the Department of Transportation failed to comply with an annual inspection requirement for all oil and gas pipelines on federal land, the District of Montana ruled.
The environmental organization alleged sufficient injury to its members—offensive sounds and smells in the affected areas—to survive dismissal, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana said May 23.
DOT has delegated its duty to examine all pipelines on federal lands to the the Pipeline Hazardous Material Safety Administration.
Wildearth alleges that DOT and PHMSA have failed to comply for at least six years with the Mineral Leasing Act’s mandate to examine all pipelines on federal lands at least once annually.
The court rejected DOT’s argument that the case must be heard in the court of appeals.
The case belongs in the district court because the Ninth Circuit would be in no position to develop an evidentiary record of the failure to act allegations, the court said.
Judge Brian Morris issued the opinion.
The case is Wildearth Guardians v. Chao, D. Mont., No. 18-cv-110, 5/23/19.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/dot-cant-shake-lax-pipeline-inspection-claims

Return to headline | Return to top
Frac Sand Expected to Remain Cheap as Supplies Outpace Demand

May 24, 2019 | Houston Chronicle

By Jordan Blum

Sand prices for oil and gas fracking and for the valuations of sanding mining companies are expected to remain depressed as growing supplies continue to outpace rising demand, research reports say.
Even as more sand mines shutter up North that produce the highest qualities of sand, they're more than outpaced by the growth of new mines in West Texas and even in South Texas' Eagle Ford shale that offer sand at more modest qualities, but at cheaper prices and much nearer to the oil and gas production. Even some Central Texas sand mines have closed in recent months.
Energy companies have used increasingly larger supplies of sand and water per well in the hydraulic fracturing process to help crack open the shale rock and release greater volumes of oil and gas.
A report in Moody's Investor Services said "frac sand castles may crumble" as prices stay low. Sand prices have plunged 20 percent in the last 12 months, Moody's said.
Just this week, Houston sand mining firm Hi-Crush Partners LP said it is converting from a partnership structure to a traditional corporation under the name Hi-Crush Inc. to potentially help stabilize its finances. Hi-Crush's stock has plunged from more than $20 per unit in early 2017 down to just more than $2 t0day.
Likewise, Fort Worth-based Emerge Energy Services, which is trading below $1, said it received a delisting warning from the New York Stock Exchange. Emerge said back in April it is considering filing for bankruptcy under a pre-structured plan with many of its creditors.
In an already over-supplied sand market, the Norwegian research firm Rystad Energy said U.S. oil and gas sand demand will grow by 10 percent this year and by 17 percent in 2020. However, frat sand supplies also will grow by 10 percent this year.
However, Rystad said there could be some relief by the end of 2020 if supplies fall a bit next year because of the ongoing shuttering of mines up North, especially in Wisconsin, that produce the premium Northern White sand.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Frac-sand-expected-to-remain-cheap-as-supplies-13889106.php?cmpid=ffservices

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation and Infrastructure News

Rail Demurrage, Accessorial Fees ‘Death’ by 1,000 Cuts

May 23, 2019 | American Shipper

By Chris Gillis

The Class I railroads — in an effort to fine-tune their freight-sprawling North American networks — have stepped up their issuance of demurrage and accessorial charges to shippers during the past two years.
    These charges, which range from $60 to $500 per instance, can result in the nation’s largest bulk shippers paying millions of dollars annually to the railroads.
    Brad Hildebrand, vice president of global rail and barge for Cargill, called the charges “death by a thousand cuts” during a hearing on railroad demurrage and accessorial charges before the U.S. Surface Transportation Board (STB) on Wednesday.
    The agency, which oversees the competitiveness of the nation’s railroad industry, is considering whether to take regulatory action against the way railroads are now assessing demurrage and accessorial charges against shippers.
Demurrage in the railroad industry has been around for more than 100 years and was put in place by the industry as a way to prevent railcars from being held too long by shippers. However, with the press toward precision scheduled railroading (PSR) in recent years, the railroads have stepped up their penalties against shippers tying up their assets and tracks.
    By January, all seven Class I railroads, for example, updated their tariffs to reflect demurrage charges for private or shipper-owned/leased railcars. Those fees currently range from $60 to $150 per day, according to shippers and their trade associations.
    Until recently, most railroads granted 24 to 48 hours of free time to shippers before assessing demurrage or storage charges on equipment. The new tariffs eliminated free time, resulting in near immediate assessment of demurrage fees for many rail shippers.
    “That means when a private car, whether empty or loaded, arrives at the yard of the delivering railroad on day one, the receiver, if a closed-gate facility, has until midnight of that same day to order the car for delivery to its plant on the next local train before storage charges begin to accrue. It doesn’t matter if the railroad notifies the receiver of the car’s arrival at 12:01 a.m. or 11:59 p.m.; the shipper only has until midnight. In theory, the receiver could have less than a minute to place that car order to avoid storage charges,” explained John Bode, president and CEO of the Corn Refiners Association, in his testimony to the STB.
    On top of the demurrage, shippers have experienced an increase in various accessorial charges involving the handling of railcars on the Class I railroad networks.
According to CSX, the main drivers for demurrage charges are intermodal terminal storage/premise use, carrier car demurrage and private car storage, while accessorial charges mostly come in the form of intermodal per diems on shipper use and detention of railroad-owned equipment, customer switching services and special train services, such as the transport of heavy or large shipments.
    “Prior to 2017, CSX did not consistently update or enforce its accessorial and demurrage tariff items,” Arthur Adams, the railroad’s vice president of sales and customer engagement, told the STB board members. “As a result, CSX absorbed customer inefficiencies, which served as a disincentive for customers to invest more in their plant capacity and appropriately manage their inventory.”
    He added that the changes to CSX’s tariffs in 2017 and 2018 “properly incentivized customers to manage their pipelines more efficiently and turn cars faster. This helped spur improvements in operational performance, network fluidity and capacity, which in turn has led to more efficient service for CSX customers.”
      Rail shippers, however, told the STB that they’re not seeing any significant improvement in rail service and view the increased assessments of demurrage and accessorial charges — mostly on their privately held or leased railcars — as just another way for the railroads to increase their financial bottom lines.
    “Without a shipper’s investment in these private railcars [now accounting for more than 70 percent of nationwide rail equipment fleet], this freight in most cases would not move by rail,” said Herman Haksteen, president of the Private Railcar Food and Beverage Association. “It seems counterintuitive to penalize shippers that bring valuable assets and significant revenues to the railroads.
“The railroads continue to drive their own efficiency and profitability goals,” Haksteen said. “Unfortunately, these are not new efficiencies. They are simply passing on more costs to their customers, either directly through rates and demurrage and accessorial charges or through inefficiencies they are creating at the shippers’ and receivers’ expense. The same shippers, who invested in railroad equipment to help the railroads handle more volume and earn more revenue, are now being penalized by the subsequent revenue-producing policies of the railroads.”
    Some large rail shippers have dedicated staff to auditing and protesting against railroads who they believe unfairly charged them demurrage or accessorial charges. For example, International Paper, which has two employees dedicated to reviewing these charges, successfully disputed more than $2 million in demurrage and other fees from the railroads in 2018, said Jeanne Sebring, the paper manufacturer’s director of logistics for North America.
    Many smaller shippers, however, told the STB that they have limited recourse to dispute these charges from the railroads.
    Consolidated Scrap Resources, based in York, Pa., watched its average monthly demurrage fees from Norfolk Southern Railway Co., which exclusively serves its Harrisburg facility, increase from between $1,500 and $2,700 per month during 2015, 2016 and 2017 to about $11,300 per month in 2018. That amount has now risen to more than $23,000 per month during the first quarter of 2019.
    “[NS] never took the time or did the due diligence about the disparate impact their tariff imposition would have,” said Ben Abrams, Consolidated Scrap’s president and CEO. “NS simply imposed their tariff, unchecked, demanding that after doing business a certain way for years, customers now have to substantially reconfigure their operations or pay huge penal charges to the railroad.”
Even large shippers have faced resistance when attempting to be compensated by the railroads for their service failures.
    “In 2018, we had an individual railcar ‘lost’ on a Class I railroad for 121 days. A normal transit time of seven days turned into 121 days, and our claim for car hire relief was denied,” said Terry McDermott, director of supply chain for rail at Bunge North America. “We received no compensation with a comment from the railroad that ‘service is not guaranteed.’”
    Railroad executives during the STB hearing admitted that their heightened imposition of demurrage and accessorial charges has resulted in some pain for shippers, but they reiterated that the measure is essential to driving efficiency across their networks.
    Union Pacific Corp. said during the past three years that its total average annual charges for demurrage and accessorial charges has been $212 million, or about 1 percent of its total operating revenue. For the first quarter of 2019, the railroad collected $71.6 million related to these charges, compared to $62 million for the same quarterly period last year.
    “The reduction of free time to unload cars from 48 hours down to 24 hours, intermodal storage and the implementation of the bulk train tariff drove the increase in demurrage charges year over year,” said Kenny Rocker, UP’s executive vice president of marketing and sales.
The railroad executives at the STB hearing contended that the rise in demurrage and accessorial charges is merely short term and should diminish as shippers become oriented to precision scheduling railroading.
    “Although these charges have increased, we hope that increase is temporary because the intention is to improve service, not drive cost increases for our customers,” Rocker said.
    The National Industrial Transportation League, which represents some of the nation’s largest rail shippers, urged the STB to take “a variety of actions to ensure that demurrage, storage and accessorial charges are reasonable and commercially fair,” including investigating the fairness of the demurrage and accessorial fees applied to shippers and initiating rulemakings that will require railroads to extend free time on equipment and “publish clear, prompt and fair processes for billing and dispute resolution.”
    “Quite frankly, the railroads may need a nudge to remind them that they have customers to serve, and in many scenarios, their customers do not have another rail option to effectively ship commerce,” Bunge North America’s McDermott said.
    Regulatory discussions about abusive use of demurrage and accessorial fees by the railroads mirrors a similar ongoing investigation by the Federal Maritime Commission for ocean containers. The nation’s air freight forwarders also have become increasingly outspoken about what they view to be unfair demurrage and accessorial fees imposed on them by the airlines when attempting to drop off and retrieve cargo from congested airports.
https://www.americanshipper.com/news/rail-demurrage-accessorial-fees-death-by-a-thousand-cuts?autonumber=848523

Return to headline | Return to top
Rail Customers Air Grievances on Railroad Billing Tactics

May 23, 2019 | FreightWaves

By John Gallagher

Manufacturers of the raw materials that go into the end products that American consumers rely on for daily living warned regulators that they may have no choice but to raise prices as a result of what they consider to be systematic overcharging by the railroads.
The first day of what was scheduled to be a two-day hearing (held at the U.S. International Trade Commission) on May 22-23 was marked by a litany of anecdotal evidence by shippers complaining of storage fees and extra handling charges that were being used by the railroads to generate a new source of revenue, instead of as fair compensation for storage space and use of their assets.
The railroads claim that the fees – knowns as demurrage and accessorial charges – are necessary to incentivize shippers to help railroads carry out precision scheduled railroading (PSR), a cost-cutting operational strategy that almost all of the major railroads have rolled out in some form over the past two years.
However, “these supplemental fees are an apparent and growing revenue opportunity for carriers, while it places a heavy, heavy burden on shippers’ costs, labor, and administrative overhead,” said Jeanne Sebring, a recently retired Director of Logistics for International Paper [NYSE: IP], North America’s largest rail boxcar shipper.
Sebring said International Paper saw railroad demurrage fees more than double to over $7 million in the first quarter of 2019, when compared to the first quarter of 2017 before the railroads began precision scheduled railroading.
“The focus on PSR, and the use of supplemental fees as part of it, only grows more cumbersome and expensive, and left unchecked it will continue to impact shippers, and by extension, the broader economy,” Sebring said.
The hearing was also marked by frustration on the part of the three-member Surface Transportation Board (STB), led by Chairman Ann Begeman, who was appointed by President Donald Trump in March 2018. Begeman, Vice Chairman Patrick Fuchs and Martin Oberman had a difficult time getting the railroads to justify their pricing policies and explain how they worked.
Asked by Oberman how much of CSX’s [NASDAQ: CSX] accessorial charge is compensation and how much is penalty, John Patelli, the railroad’s associate general counsel, said he didn’t want to reveal the breakdown for competitive reasons, and that “there are a variety of different costs associated with demurrage – it’s not an exact science.”
Because of the significant market power held by the railroads over shippers – particularly those that don’t have access to more than one railroad at a particular origin or destination, or where trucking is prohibitively expensive – Begeman was also concerned about the potential for retaliation by the railroads against shippers alleging railroad abuse.
“When we announced the hearing, I didn’t pause wondering if anyone besides the railroads – who asked to be here – would show up,” Begeman said. “The last listening session I attended, I learned later that every single participant had been contacted by the carrier in advance of the hearing not to come.”
The show of force from shippers unafraid to lay out their complaints in front of their rail carriers will not be lost on STB members when it comes to taking action on the accessorial and demurrage charge issue, surmised Michael McBride, who represents rail shippers before the STB as a partner with the law firm Van Ness Feldman.
“They realize it takes a lot for shippers to come forward and complain, because some have gotten their fees raised as a result of complaining,” McBride told FreightWaves on the sidelines at the hearing. “If the railroads do this to anyone else – if fees go up specifically directed at some of those participating here – they’re making a very big mistake.”
Rebecca Dye, a commissioner on the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), provided the STB with an overview of her experience dealing with demurrage issues for overseas containers entering the U.S. domestic supply chain on the railroads.
When asked if she thought a task force similar to one she spearheaded at the FMC , which provided insight into demurrage issues in the port and intermodal rail sector, could be replicated for the rail carload sector, she was noncommittal.
However, she said after her testimony, “We’ve started a very productive collaboration with the STB, which I look forward to pursuing,” Dye told FreightWaves. “The good part is that we have a lot of commonality [with the STB], and it will be good for us to explore that.”
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/rail-customers-air-grievances-on-railroad-billing-tactics

Return to headline | Return to top
As Shippers Complain About Surging Railroad Fees, Regulator Considers Turning the Tables

May 23, 2019 | Jacksonville Business Journal

By Will Robinson

An attempt to curtail surging railroad fees that have shippers and manufacturers up in arms could lead to railroads being fined, new mandates being established and policies being changed.
Shippers proposed a litany of options during a two-day hearing before the Surface Transportation Board, a federal regulator, on Wednesday and Thursday.
Railroad customers decried fees skyrocketing across the country’s seven Class I carriers after many implemented precision scheduled railroading, an operating model popularized in the U.S. by Jacksonville-based CSX.
Their outcry focused on demurrage fees — fines the railroads levy on customers for things like keeping railcars past a defined period.
The railroads collected $1.2 billion from the fees last year. CSX took the largest share with $371 million billed — a 94 percent increase from 2017 — and it is leading again this year with more than $100 million in fee revenue collected in the first quarter.
All seven railroads defended the fee increases during the hearings as a means to incentivize customers to work more efficiently, ultimately making rail networks better for all.
Eighty-six shippers and customer coalitions disagreed. Many called the fees unavoidable, unreasonable and simply a revenue generator for railroad monopolies.
STB board member Martin Oberman said he found the railroads' claims unconvincing, too.
“What we’re being told is it’s an incentive to make you move faster,” said Oberman. “What it sounds like is it’s an incentive for you to stop using the railroad.”
Board member Patrick Fuchs echoed the sentiment, noting that in perfect scenarios when all staff are working all hours, some shippers would still fail to comply and have to pay fees.
“How is that incenting behavior if everyone is working perfectly?” he asked.TRENDINGTRANSPORTATIONRegulators take aim at CSX, railroads at two-day hearingFOOD & LIFESTYLEJacksonville restaurants shut down for rodent droppings, fliesCOMING EVENTFast 50 Awards
July 25
Among the changes that led to to the fee surges was a reduction in the time shippers have to return railcars, the reduction or elimination of credits given when delays are railroad caused and limitations on the number of days facilities receive cars.
Railroads also start the clock running when they say a car is ready, not when a shipper receives it, cutting into the time that shippers have for loading.
Because of this, customers have on occasion been charged a demurrage fee before they've even received a car to unload, shippers told the STB.
“You cannot be incentivized to roll time backwards,” Oberman responded.
Throughout the hearings, board members seemed interested in taking action to curtail rising fees and the operational changes that contribute to them.
“I don’t know what the board will do, but I imagine the board will be doing some things here and there,” Chairwoman Ann Begeman said at one point.
Shippers offered the board several ways to intervene, including:Reciprocal charging: Give shippers the same right to charge railroads for slow behavior that railroads use to charge shippers.Exempt private cars: Railroads were given the right to charge demurrage and similar fines decades ago when they owned the majority of the cars used on their networks. Today, railroads own only 30 percent of cars used. Exempting privately owned cars would prevent railroads from fining shippers over the movement of their own equipment.Establish rules for disputes: Railroads today are judge, jury and executioner on fees. Shippers suggested creating rules to handle fee disputes, rules that would require railroads to disclose the data needed to show if a railroad is at fault, give railroads a deadline to respond to disputes and eliminate fines when customers lose disputes.Extend time to return cars: Railroads have dropped the time shippers have to return cars before being fined, in some cases, from five days to one. Shippers advised the board to mandate a 48-hour window and only allow the clock to start when shippers receive the cars.Ban fees on late cars: When railroads deliver “bunched” cars, cars from backlogged orders along with cars delivered on time, shippers often cannot return them all before incurring fees, customers said. Customers also see fines on cars delivered late in the day since the period to return cars without fees starts at midnight. Eliminating any charges on late cars could alleviate both.Fine railroads: Unsustainable railroad fines are pushing shippers to abandon rail and opt instead for trucks, several shippers said. Therefore, Private Railcar Food and Beverage Association President Herman Haksteen reasoned, trains should pay for the infrastructure and environmental costs. Haksteen proposed the STB fine railroads that are reducing volumes and/or destinations served, with the proceeds from the fines going to support U.S. infrastructure spending.
While insights on the board’s leanings were rare, Oberman, at least, seemed open to the idea of reciprocal demurrage charging. At one point he asked who would net more from such fines, railroads or shippers. Shippers responded they likely would be the winners.
At another point, he asked shippers if they had ever charged railroads for being late in delivering their cars, to which one shipper responded, “I don’t know how we’d charge the railroad for anything.”
“Well, we’re going to figure out a mechanism for that,” Oberman replied.
One option not on the table: eliminating the fees altogether. The board and many of the shippers recognized that the fees serve a purpose in maintaining network fluidity and are a staple in every mode of transportation.
“The question is not about demurrage in concept,” said Fuchs. “The question is and has been about implementation, and certainly implementation has changed.”
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2019/05/23/as-shippers-complain-about-surging-railroad-fees.html

Return to headline | Return to top
NS Recognizes 58 Chemical Customers for Safe Hazmat Practices

May 24, 2019 | Progressive Rail Roading

Norfolk Southern Railway has recognized 58 of its chemical shipper customers with the Class I's 2018 Thoroughbred Chemical Safety Award.
The award is part of an NS initiative to promote safe rail-shipping practices in communities the railroad services, according to an NS press release.
During 2018, the 58 customers — including chemical manufacturers and plants — safely shipped more than 265,370 carloads of regulated hazardous material over the NS network. To qualify for the award, the customers shipped at least 1,000 carloads on NS and handled all shipments without a single incident.
For the year, 55 corporations and three chemical plants achieved the safety record. Fourteen companies safely shipped more than 4,000 carloads each, NS officials said.
“At Norfolk Southern, serving our customers and working safely are core principles of our strategic plan, and we appreciate the shared commitment of the customers earning this safety award," said Ed Elkins, NS vice president industrial products.
NS established the award in 1995.
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/norfolk_southern/news/NS-recognizes-58-chemical-customers-for-safe-hazmat-practices--57654

Return to headline | Return to top

Environment News

(ACC Mentioned) Association Heads Laud EPA’s Cost-Benefit Analysis Memo

May 24, 2019 | Oil&Gas Journal

By Nick Snow

Oil and gas associations responded favorably to US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Andrew R. Wheeler’s May 13 memorandum stating that the agency should ensure its regulatory decisions are “rooted in sound, transparent, and consistent approaches to evaluating benefits and costs.”
The American Petroleum Institute and American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers became the latest business groups to express their approval on May 22, joining the National Association of Manufacturers, American Chemistry Council, and other organizations.
“Many EPA statutes contemplate the consideration of benefits and costs as part of regulatory decision-making,” Wheeler noted in his memo. “However, benefits and costs have historically been treated differently, depending on the media office and the underlying authority. This has resulted in various concepts of benefits, costs, and other factors that may be considered.”
The memo initiated an effort to rectify such inconsistencies through sector-specific actions, it indicated. Wheeler sent it to EPA’s assistant administrators on May 21.
“We applaud EPA’s move to update how it approaches cost-benefit analyses for its regulations. These efforts will create a more consistent and transparent process for evaluating the costs and benefits of EPA rules and will ultimately lead to better regulations,” AFPM Pres. Chet Thompson said.
“Furthermore, EPA’s intention to update the cost-benefit approach for each individual media—air, water, chemicals, and waste—will avoid a one-size-fits-all approach and ensure the most appropriate and accurate analysis for each decision,” Thompson said.
A spokesman for API told OGJ via e-mail, “API applauds EPA’s move to improve their regulatory decision-making and to make their work more transparent and accessible to the public and companies alike.”
The Independent Petroleum Association of America also welcomed Wheeler’s action. “In June 2018, IPAA joined 100 other business trade associations in a letter to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Administrator Neomi Rao regarding the need for greater cost-benefit analysis at EPA,” IPAA Executive Vice-Pres. Lee O. Fuller said.
Fuller noted that cost-benefit analysis, “although not perfect, is the best tool agencies have available to them to ensure that regulations promote the public good and do more good than harm.”
https://www.ogj.com/articles/2019/05/association-heads-laud-epa-s-cost-benefit-analysis-memo.html

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) Scrap Collector: Vermont Passes Nation's 'Toughest' Plastics Bill Yet

May 24, 2019 | Waste Dive

By Rina Li

Heads up, plastic watchers: Vermont legislators have passed what is being credited as the nation's "toughest bill yet" with regard to single-use plastics regulation. S.113, which was sent to Gov. Phil Scott on Wednesday, would ban the distribution of single-use plastic bags, plastic drink stirrers and expanded polystyrene food service products. The bill would also make plastic straws available only upon request.
"Simply put, Vermont is leading the nation in dealing with the toxic blight of single-use plastics," Jen Duggan, vice president and director of Conservation Law Fund (CLF) Vermonth, told Waste Dive via email. "The most important part of this bill is that it tackles four plastics together — bags, straws, stirrers and toxic polystyrene foam. The bill bans all plastic bags that do not have stitched handles, which is a critical detail. This ensures that truly reusable bags will be used, instead of stores just switching to thicker plastic."
"This bill is certainly a model for other states to follow," she added.
S.113 is the latest in a slew of similar bills approved this legislative session, including Maine's statewide ban on polystyrene foam containers, New York's plastic bag ban and Hawaii's sweeping single-use plastics ban. Oregon, Massachusetts and Maryland are also considering their own respective statewide bans on plastic products.
Plastics trade groups, however, question the efficacy of such bans.
"The Vermont legislation is a signal that materials and products that are harder to recycle are facing more scrutiny, but we continue to believe that bans are not long-term solutions," Shannon Crawford, director of state government affairs for the Plastics Industry Association, told Waste Dive in an email. "More can be accomplished through a commitment to modernize and expand recovery and recycling infrastructure."
The American Chemistry Council's Plastic Foodservice Packaging Group also expressed its strong opposition of S.113 to Waste Dive, asserting that a ban on polystyrene foam foodservice containers "could lead to increased solid waste, energy use, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions."
These arguments, however, could prove moot in the face of the bill's popular appeal.
"We're finding tremendous public support for the campaign all across Vermont," Paul Burns, executive director of Vermont PIRG, told Waste Dive via email. "People are sick and tired of plastic pollution. They know the problem is getting worse by the day and they want to see real action."
According to Burns, Gov. Scott has indicated he will "likely" sign the bill — so long as retailers don't oppose it.
"We're taking nothing for granted and encouraging him to sign it," Burns said. "Even if he decides to veto, we could potentially override the veto."
https://www.wastedive.com/news/scrap-collector-vermont-passes-nations-toughest-plastics-bill-yet/555482/

Return to headline | Return to top

Add recipients

Suggested