EPA Announces Two Regulatory Reform Meetings On Rules Promulgated Under TSCA and EPCRA

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") announced that it will host two meetings regarding regulations developed under the Toxic Substance Control Act ("TSCA") and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act ("EPCRA").  
 
Specifically, EPA seeks public input on rules that could be made less burdensome.  EPA's actions are in line with Executive Order 13777, "Enforcing the Regulatory Agenda," which, among other things, "requires each agency to create a Regulatory Reform Task Force to evaluate existing regulations and to identify regulations that should be repealed, replaced, or modified."
 
Both meetings will be held on May 1, 2017 at EPA.
 
The first meeting will be held from 9 AM to 12 PM and address regulations developed under Subchapters I, II, and VI of TSCA (Control of Toxic Substances, Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response, and Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products, respectively), as well as Subchapter II § 11023 of EPCRA (the Toxic Release Inventory).  
 
The second meeting will be held from 1 PM to 2:30 PM and address regulations developed under Subchapter IV of TSCA (Lead Exposure Reduction).
 
To attend in person or via web conference, register here for the first meeting,
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/regulatory-reform-agenda-meeting-for-ocsppoppt-tsca-tri-registration-33533387264

 and here for the second meeting
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/regulatory-reform-agenda-meeting-for-ocsppoppt-lead-registration-33533763389

Registration for both meetings is open until April 27, 2017.   
 
Additionally, EPA is accepting comments until May 15, 2017.

---
USA--On Monday, April 24, the EPA will be hosting a public teleconference from 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM EDT to seek public and stakeholder input on the impacts of air and radiation regulatory actions.  Registration for the teleconference is not required.

Participant dial-in number: (800) 305–3182 
Conference ID number: 8535873

Further details about EPA's stakeholder outreach can be found here
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190

--
USA--EPA to Repeal and Replace WOTUS With Two Separate Rulemaking Processes
EPA to Repeal and Replace WOTUS With Two Separate Rulemaking Processes

April 10, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") Administrator Scott Pruitt, in a letter inviting state and local leaders to Washington D.C. to discuss EPA's strategy to rescind and replace the Waters of the United States ("WOTUS") rule, stated that the agency plans to use an "expeditious, two-step process" to reach that goal.

EPA's actions are in line with Executive Order ("EO") 13778, titled "Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the 'Waters of the United States' Rule," which directs EPA to repeal or re-write the regulation.

Upon repeal, EPA would revert back to the 1986 definition, further explained by guidance issued during the George W. Bush administration, of WOTUS.  This definition is currently the status-quo, as the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed the regulation, pending litigation.

---
USA--D.C. Circuit Strikes Down Farm Pollution Rule

Today (April 11), in Waterkeeper Alliance, et al. v EPA, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's ("EPA") Farm Pollution Rule, which would exempt most farms from air pollution reporting requirements for emissions from animal waste under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act ("EPCRA") and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA").

In its opinion, the three-judge panel unanimously agreed that Congress did not give EPA the authority to make such exemptions.  Specifically, the opinion notes that EPA cannot ignore a statute "whenever it decides that the reporting requirements aren't worth the trouble" and that EPA did not properly consider the tools at its disposal to fight such emissions.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008-12-18/pdf/E8-30003.pdf

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/2E91F70B0AF28BBE852580FF004E33FF/$file/09-1017-1670473.pdf

--
USA--EPA Proposes Delayed Implementation of Risk Management Program Rule
 
April 3, the EPA proposed pushing back the effective date of the Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs under the Clean Air Act to February 19, 2019.  According to EPA, the delayed effective date will allow the agency "time to consider petitions for reconsideration of this final rule," including possible regulatory action or revision of the rule.  The EPA is accepting comments on the proposal until May 19, 2017.

on March 2, Sens. Inhofe (OK), Cornyn (TX), Barrasso (WY), Moran (KS), and Johnson (WI) introduced a Congressional Review Act resolution seeking to repeal the final RMP rule.  Rep. Mullin (OK-2) previously introduced a CRA resolution on the rule in the House.

---
USA--The DOT HM-215N Final Rule

The HM-215N Final Rule was officially published March 30 in the Federal Register. In this final rule, PHMSA is amending the HMR to maintain consistency with international regulations and standards by incorporating various amendments.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-03-30/pdf/2017-04565.pdf

---
USA--EPA Releases Initial Mercury Inventory Report

March 29, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the release of its initial report on mercury supply, use, and trade in the United States, pursuant to section 8(b)(10)(B) of the Toxic Substances Control Act ("TSCA"), as amended by the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act ("LCSA").

The report focuses on mercury as a commodity and identifies "any manufacturing processes or products that intentionally add mercury."  Specifically, EPA addresses this in three parts:

1.    An introduction, including those laws affecting mercury supply and trade and the sources of information contained in the report;
2.    Elemental mercury, including its supply, sources of the supply, uses, and trade; and
3.    Mercury compounds, including their supply, uses, and trade.

The inventory report was to be released by April 1, 2017, and will be published every three years thereafter.  EPA has stated that in future inventory reports, in addition to identifying any manufacturing processors or products that intentionally add mercury, it will "recommend actions, including proposed revisions of Federal law or regulations, to achieve further reductions in mercury use." 


--
cANADA-- WHMIS 2015 Compliance, Deadlines and Recent Technical Guides

On February 11, 2015, the federal government launched WHMIS 2015 to align with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), revision 5 of the Purple Book. CPCA wishes to remind all manufacturer/importer members that they must ensure full compliance of their significant data sheets and labels with WHMIS 2015 by the fast-approaching implementation deadline of May 31, 2017.
 
Since the WHMIS 2015's introduction in Canada, CPCA has developed and updated its own technical guidance document with regard to new GHS conversion requirements. This document is a compilation of numerous sector-related Q&As obtained from CPCA members and addressed to the WHMIS desk. This document complements the Technical Guidance Parts I & 2 Report published last year by Health Canada as well as the general information on the legislation and training currently available on the WHMIS.org portal. You can find this CPCA document, entitled "CPCA WHMIS 2015 Preliminary Conversion Guidance for Paint Manufacturers" in the Members Only section of canpaint.com under "Resources." If you do not have access to this section, please contact Micheline Foucher to obtain your company's access and log-in information.
 
Extensive information such as courses, fact sheets, posters and webinars are available on the WHMIS.org portal, as well as references to the legislative statutes and related requirements in all provincial and territory jurisdictions across Canada.
 

I. WHMIS Compliance Deadline for Manufacturers and Importers

All industrial paint manufacturers and importers must ensure their products sold in Canada are converted to WHMIS 2015 as of June 1, 2017. Other criteria include: 

•    All your SDS/labels of products manufactured or shipped after that date should be WHMIS 2015 compliant
•    Manufacturers and importers should end the sales of old labels/MSDS
•    All staff must be trained for WHMIS 2015

II. Other WHMIS 2015 Implementation Deadlines 

•    December 1, 2017: Health Canada will only accept employer claims with WHMIS 2015 SDSs and labels.
•    June 1, 2018: Distributors should have cleared all their old labels from the market.
•    December 1, 2018: Any remaining purchases of old MSDS/labels in the workplaces end by this date. The transition to WHMIS 2015 must be completed for all employers and workers. Note: Related requirements with respect to WHMIS 2015 completion may vary slightly from one provincial jurisdiction to the next. However, all manufacturers, importers, distributors, and federally regulated employers using hazardous products in the workplace must comply with WHMIS 2015 fully.

III. WHMIS 2015 Implementation e-Training from Health Canada/CCOHS 
 
The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS) is Canada's national resource for workplace health and safety. CCOHS offers WHMIS 2015 online training materials—developed jointly with Health Canada—that are available for purchase on its website. Please also note that CPCA offers rebates for online training materials developed by the ICC.
 
Upon a CPCA enquiry, Health Canada noted that it could not provide any kind of spreadsheet or template to share with SMEs for ease of conversion of labels and safety data sheets with WHMIS 2015. However, the CCOHS is offering several SDS templates and pictograms: 
•    WHMIS 2015 SDS Template and MSDS to SDS Whitepaper
•    WHMIS 2015 (GHS) Pictograms
•    Other WHMIS 2015 informatio

FREE Webinar: Better Incident Management is no Accident

Thursday, May 4th at 10AM CDT REGISTER NOW

Webinar Summary A recent news release from Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor, states that there were 2.9 million nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses reported by private industry employers in 2015, a rate of 3 cases per 100 equivalent full time workers. This trend has been found to be a reoccurring theme every year, a challenge that Rivo Software, a Sphera company, has taken on since 2003 to reduce incidents in the workplace. Workers tunnel vision, lack of safety precautions, inadequate training are just a few of the many root causes of injury incidents. Both private and government sector organizations can proactively reduce penalties, and related insurance claims and premiums by making it easier to train and to enable workers to follow safety procedures. This webinar will outline key components that are an integral portion of a strong and effective safety aware culture enabled by a mobile platform driven solution. Register Now

Learn how to: • Equip your employees to easily record issues with quick 1-2-3 steps • Manage the full workflow from recording to investigation to correction all in one integrated SAAS system • Run geospatial pattern analysis, track closures, prepare executive dashboards and lay the foundation for a strong learning environment

Overview of the Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG) 2016

Excellent video overview by Canada 

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/mediaroom/video-7758.html 

​

Transcript

When there's an incident involving the transportation of dangerous goods, the first thing you need to keep yourself and the public safe is information.

That's why there's the Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG).

For more than three decades, the ERG has helped first responders identify dangerous goods and their hazards so they can make informed safety decisions when arriving at the scene of an incident.

Every four years, officials in Canada, the U.S., Mexico and Argentina revise the guide to keep it up to date with the latest dangerous goods research and transportation technologies, and to make it even easier to use.

The ERG is divided into colour-coded sections for quick reference.

First, let's look at the white pages at the front of the guide. On the very first page is a flowchart that walks you through every step of the decision-making process.

We'll go over the flowchart in more detail at the end of this video.

This section includes information about the placards, labels and markings used to identify the different classes of dangerous goods.

Beside each set of placards is a black circle with a three-digit number. This corresponds to a specific guide in the orange section that describes how to respond to an incident involving that kind of material.

You'll also find guide numbers for different types of railcars and road trailers based on their shape and the common dangerous goods usually transported in each.

If you know the material's four-digit UN number (also known as its ID number), start with the yellow pages. Here, dangerous goods are listed in numerical order by UN number followed by a three-digit number corresponding to a guide in the orange pages.

If an entry is highlighted in green, you may need to refer to the green pages for the initial isolation and protective action distances.

The blue pages work the same way, but the dangerous goods are listed alphabetically by name rather than UN number.

Watch for any guide numbers followed by a "P". This means the material may undergo violent polymerization if heated or contaminated — which could cause its container to rupture or explode.

The orange pages are the most important in the ERG. They include 63 safety guides, each covering a group of materials with similar characteristics.

Here you'll find details on potential hazards and health risks, public safety measures such as immediate isolation and evacuation distances, and emergency response actions to be taken in case of a fire or spill.

When a Canadian flag appears at the bottom of a page, Canadian responders should take note. It means an Emergency Response Assistance Plan may be required for the dangerous goods involved.

For any materials highlighted in green in the yellow and blue pages, the tables in the green section provide more detailed initial isolation and protective action distances.

Table one gives recommended distances for downwind, day and night conditions for both small and large spills.

Table two lists dangerous goods that produce large amounts of toxic gases when spilled in water, and identifies the gases produced.

For large spills of the six most common toxic-inhalation hazard gases, Table three gives recommended isolation and protective distances based on container type and wind speed.

The white pages at the end of the ERG contain a glossary of terms and other important information, including safe standoff distances for improvised explosive devices, distances for boiling liquid expanding vapour explosions (or "BLEVE"), and the user's guide.

For in-the-field decision-making, the ERG includes a colour-coded flowchart that walks you through each step.

Here's how it works. Consider, for example, a large gasoline spill.

You don't see an "explosive" placard or label on the container but the UN number is clearly visible: 1203.

That takes us to the yellow pages, where we see the material involved is gasoline. The three-digit guide number for gasoline is 128. Since there's no green highlighting and no "P" for polymerization we can go directly to guide 128 for instructions.

Now let's consider a more complex scenario: a railcar is leaking at a facility in your area.

You don't see an "explosive" placard or the UN number but an employee confirms that the railcar has chlorine inside of it. Since you know the name of the dangerous good, you go to the blue pages and see that the three-digit guide number for chlorine is 124. Be sure to note its UN number as well: 1017.

You see that the entry for chlorine is highlighted in green. So, in addition to using orange guide 124, you'll also need to check Table one in the green pages for initial isolation and protective distances.

Whether you go to the green or orange section next depends on if the material is on fire.

In this case it is not, so you can proceed to Table one. If it was, you would first check guide 124 for fire and evacuation details.

You see that the listing for UN 1017 has a note saying to check Table three.

In this case, the initial isolation distance is suggested at one-thousand metres. Protective distances are then determined by the time of day and wind speed at your location.

Don't forget to consult guide 124 for more general information on potential hazards and emergency response measures.

But what if you don't know either the name or the UN number when you arrive on the scene?

Say the only thing you can see on the railcar is a white placard with a skull above the number "2". In this case, go to pages eight and nine and find your placard among the illustrations. For this one, you'd go to guide 123 for instructions.

These guides can help you determine the best course of action until you can get the exact U-N number or name of the material.

No matter the situation, never rush in. As a first responder, safety is your primary goal. With the ERG by your side, you have everything you need to quickly make the right decisions to protect both yourself and the public.

For more information on how to get your copy of the 2016 Emergency Response Guidebook, visit CANUTEC's website today at tc.gc.ca/canutec.

A mobile app is also available for Apple and Android devices.

​

NIOSH online network helps healthcare facilities address bloodborne pathogens and other hazards

NIOSH's Occupational Health Safety Network (OHSN) can help reduce worker injuries

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has established a web-based injury and exposure monitoring system available at no cost to healthcare facilities. This secure system enables participating facilities to analyze worker injury and exposure data that they already collect. Trends for traumatic injury and hazardous exposures are visualized using a chart function. The system allows facilities to track five common work-related injuries and exposures in healthcare: sharps injuries; blood and body fluid exposure; slips, trips, and falls; patient handling injuries; and workplace violence. Visit the OHSN webpage for more information and to begin the enrollment process.

Workers' Memorial Day — April 28 — honors lives lost on the job

Every year, more than 4,000 workers die on the job and nearly four million workers are injured or made sick at work. Workers' Memorial Day is held on April 28 to honor those workers and renew the commitment to protect the safety and health of all workers. Regional OSHA offices, worker organizations, and individuals affected by these tragedies will hold events to honor workers across the country. For a full list of events, and to find one near you, visit the Workers' Memorial Day webpage.

EPA is Seeking Feedback on Reducing Regulatory Burden

​EPA is Soliciting Recommendations on Regulations that could be Repealed, Replaced or Modified to make them Less Burdensome

On February 24, 2017, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13777 on Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda. The order establishes the policy of the United States to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens placed on the American people. Among other things, it requires each agency to create a Regulatory Reform Task Force to evaluate existing regulations and to identify regulations that could be repealed, replaced or modified to make them less burdensome.

As part of implementing the order, EPA is soliciting public comments and engaging in additional outreach to identify such regulations. We will be accepting comments through May 15, 2017 at docket EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190. Go to https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/regulatory-reform to learn more about this effort.

In addition, EPA's Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM), will host a public meeting to obtain additional stakeholder feedback on Tuesday, May 9, 2017, from 9:00am to 5:00pm EDT in Arlington, Virginia.  The intent of the meeting is to provide an opportunity for interested parties to present recommendations specific to OLEM's regulations. Please see https://www.epa.gov/rcra/office-land-and-emergency-management-seeking-feedback-reducing-regulatory-burden on how you can submit comments and participate in or listen to the OLEM public meeting.  

For more information on OLEM programs, please see https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-office-land-and-emergency-management.​

How much recycled material actually goes to industry?

Most waste professionals know that the amount of material collected in recycling programs differs from the amount that is eventually used in making new products - because of contamination and processing losses. Unfortunately, there are very few comprehensive accounts of how much is actually lost.

 

A recent study<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.12506/full> in Yale's Journal of Industrial Ecology quantifies this gap with rigor. The authors, from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, examine Switzerland, a country with both a high waste generation rate and an extensive recycling system, quantifying these differences and finding not only gaps between collection and recycling rates, but also differences with official, published rates. The study also quantifies how much occurs as closed vs. open loop recycling, another calculation rarely done for municipal recycling programs.

 

This analysis also has interesting implications for circular economy and zero waste strategies, raising questions about the goals of recycling: (1) - is the central goal to divert waste from disposal or to displace primary (virgin) materials in production? And (2) is the primary goal of the circular economy improving resource utilization (from secondary sources, etc.) or the minimization of environmental impact?

See full at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.12506/full

CDC- Worker Recovery and Return to Work ​Resources

Via CDC: Work-related disability is associated with many negative health and social outcomes including reduced quality of life, job loss, reduced lifetime income, injuries among family caregivers, and premature death. For example, a recent NIOSH-funded study found that workers who suffer serious injuries requiring days away from work are more likely to die sooner than workers with injuries requiring only medical treatment.

Other studies have shown that the chances of returning to work drop dramatically the longer the worker remains away from work. While more serious diagnoses are associated with longer periods off work, minor diagnoses can also lead to disability if the recovery and return-to-work processes are not properly managed.

We are interested in learning from you about resources related to worker recovery and helping them return-to-work. To start the discussion, we have listed some resources below and we welcome your suggestions, as well as input on the following questions.

• What evidence-based resources exist?
• How can best practices be shared?
• What specific research is needed?

 

Worker Recovery

​​

Resources:

Division of Federal Employees' Compensation (DFEC) POWER Initiative: The Protecting Our Workers and Ensuring Reemployment (POWER) Initiative collected and analyzed data on the causes and consequences of frequent or severe injury and illness among Federal employees, and identified effective safety and health management programs. This includes resources on achieving successful return-to-work of injured employees:

• Return-to-Work Tool Kit
• Returning Injured Employees to Work

Washington State Department of Labor and Industries Centers of Occupational Health and Education (COHEs): These Washington State centers work with medical providers, employers, and injured workers in a community-based program. COHEs improve injured worker outcomes and reduce disability by training providers and coordinating cases.

Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) Stay-at-Work / Return-to-Work: The Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) is a non-regulatory federal agency that promotes policies and coordinates with employers and all levels of government to increase workplace success for people with disabilities. Since 2013, ODEP has utilized a Community of Practice and policy work groups led by subject matter experts to guide their SAW/RTW work. Through this collaboration, ODEP continues to explore effective practices to inform policy recommendations targeting federal and state agencies, as well as the private sector. For example, one policy working group is focused on adapting the Washington State WC COHE program.

International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions (IAIABC): IAIABC is a not-for-profit trade association representing government agencies charged with the administration of workers' compensation systems throughout the United States, Canada, and other nations and territories.

• Return-to-Work: A Foundational Approach to Return to Function: This paper authored by the Disability Management and Return-to-Work Committee of the IAIABC discusses the link between return to function and return-to-work as equally important in restoring a person to health.

The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM): ACOEM represents more than 4,500 physicians and other health care professionals specializing in the field of occupational and environmental medicine.

• ACOEM Coding Initiative Guidance Statement: ACOEM supports changing the rules for documentation of care in workers' compensation cases in order to provide reimbursement and other incentives for delivering care that adheres to best practices.

The Institute for Work & Health (IWH): The IWH is an independent, not-for-profit organization whose mission is to conduct and share research that protects and improves the health of working people.

• Return-to-Work: The IWH conducts research on return-to-work as practiced by workplaces, workers' compensation boards, insurance companies and rehabilitation providers. Return-to-work includes disability management and prevention, vocational rehabilitation, and work rei
  ​​
  ntegration.
• Clinical Treatment: The IWH conducts research on evidence-based practice for health care in treating back pain, neck pain, chronic pain, upper extremity disorders, and other soft-tissue injuries. This includes studies on health-care delivery and policy.
• Compensation-Benefits (Canadian Provinces): The IWH has examined trends in workers' compensation claims and benefits, their adequacy and equity, and their effects on workers.
• Measuring Health-Function: The IWH conducts research to measure worker health, function, and disability; predict the course and pattern of recovering from disability; and determine the prevalence of certain health conditions among workers.

​By: ​

​​

Steve Wurzelbacher, PhD, is the Director of the NIOSH Center for Workers' Compensation Studies (CWCS)

America’s Toxic Workplace Rules

NYtimes: By RACHEL CERNANSKY

Last month, President Trump's nomination of R. Alexander Acosta to be secretary of labor was approved by a Senate committee, even though the nominee's testimony had left unclear whether he would be more interested in protecting employers' prerogatives than in guarding workers' interests.

We may soon find out, and here's one test — an issue of worker health that President Barack Obama's Labor Department tried to resolve, without much success: Why does the department's Occupational Safety and Health Administration allow workers to be exposed to dangerous chemicals at limits far higher than those set for everyone by the Environmental Protection Agency?

Mr. Acosta should know that issue. He served on the National Labor Relations Board during George W. Bush's presidency. And OSHA was making slow progress toward equalizing some standards when Mr. Obama's presidency ended.

The issue of toxic hazards at work went national nearly 20 years ago, when former employees brought more than 200 lawsuits against IBM, accusing it of having concealed knowledge that it was exposing them to carcinogenic chemicals. Ultimately, IBM settled the suits, with the details sealed.

Continue reading the main story

Perhaps the most striking feature of those suits was that IBM seems to have not violated any OSHA regulations. The real problem was that OSHA's standards, across the board, allowed — and still allow — workers to be exposed to much higher concentrations of chemicals than are permitted in the general environment. For example, its standard for lead allows up to 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air, averaged over eight hours; the E.P.A. ambient air quality standard is 0.15 micrograms.

Standards for other chemicals are similarly unbalanced — so much so that David Michaels, an epidemiologist who headed OSHA under President Obama, told me in 2015 that because of the current law, the agency's chemical exposure standards were much too weak.

Today's limits "are driven more by economic and technological feasibility than they are by the risk assessments," he said. "Congress would have to change that."

OSHA has estimated that chemical exposure kills 50,000 American workers a year and sickens more than 190,000, but Dr. Michaels and other experts say these figures are gross underestimates.

One explanation for the disparity between OSHA and E.P.A. standards, offered by Amanda Hawes, a California lawyer, is that E.P.A. rules "are supposed to protect the most vulnerable in the population — typically children, fetuses, the elderly and folks with pre-existing health problems." Environmental standards, she added, "more often look at chronic effects."

Dr. Robert Harrison, an occupational medicine specialist at the University of California, San Francisco, explained that cancer and other chronic diseases are usually not recognized as occupational illnesses. Doctors often don't know when patients have been continually exposed to carcinogens like lead or formaldehyde.

The IBM case also illustrates how difficult it is in court to pinpoint chemical exposure as the cause of illness. To show that IBM knew it was risking workers' health, the plaintiffs obtained a company study of employee deaths. An epidemiologist said the data showed abnormally high rates of some cancers. IBM said the data's purpose was intended to determine survivor benefits. The judge refused to admit it. Two years later, an IBM-supported study found an elevated rate of mortality from brain cancer among former employees.

The American Chemistry Council, a trade association, says safety is a core concern of the industry. "In addition to strictly adhering to OSHA's worker health and safety standards," it said in an email, its members accept recommendations from other organizations. Nevertheless, Ms. Hawes says she has argued enough cases involving birth defects to understand that voluntary standards don't work.

Dr. Michaels adds that some OSHA standards are so weak they send a false message of safety. In an interview this winter, he said OSHA did eke out some progress last year after a public dialogue among industry, unions and advocates. The agency moved to revoke the most outdated workplace exposure limits in favor of general-duty standards. It also set new limits for beryllium and silica.

But those measures "don't deal with the bigger issue," Dr. Michaels said. "There are many, many chemicals that either have no permissible exposure limits, or that have out-of-date permissible exposure limits."

OSHA does encourage companies to comply with limits set by other organizations. And Congress took a first step in June by requiring the E.P.A. to regulate more chemicals and add vulnerable populations, including workers, to health risk assessments. Dr. Michaels said this is the first time "that workers will be treated like other populations."

Still, he added, "It's only going to be done on a chemical-by-chemical basis, and only for certain uses."

Continue reading the main storyShare This Page

Occupational exposure to magnetic fields increases risk of ALS

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a rare neurodegenerative disease of unknown origin that is currently untreatable. New research suggests that workplace exposure to magnetic fields may be responsible for the disease.

Written by Ana Sandoiu

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/316663.php

Previous research has pointed to a variety of occupational exposures that may drive the illness. Some of these include extremely low-frequency magnetic fields (ELF-MFs), electrical shocks, metals, and toxic substances such as solvents and pesticides.

The correlations found in these studies, however, have been questioned due to methodological flaws in the analysis.

A new study aims to succeed where previous research has failed, examining the existing evidence and analyzing the effects of the above-mentioned occupational exposures on ALS mortality.

The research was carried out by scientists from Utrecht University, Maastricht University, and the University Medical Center Utrecht - all in the Netherlands - and the results were published in the journal Occupational & Environmental Medicine.

Studying the link between ALS mortality and occupational exposures

The researchers used the data available from the Netherlands Cohort Study - a large-scale, cohort study that examined diet and cancer risk in more than 58,000 men and 62,500 women.

Using job exposure matrices - a validated tool commonly used to assess occupational health hazards - the scientists estimated the occupational exposure to metals, electrical shocks, ELF-MFs, and to pesticides and solvents.

Men exposed to ELF-MFs more than twice as likely to develop ALS

Men who were occupationally exposed to high levels of ELF-MFs were 2.19 times more likely to develop ALS than those who had never been exposed to them. Additionally, those in the top tertile (or the top 30 percent) of cumulative exposure were almost twice as likely to develop ALS.

The study did not find a proportional link between ALS risk and the amount of exposure.

The authors conclude that their study "strengthens the evidence" and provides "further support for an association between occupational exposure to ELF-MF and an increased risk of ALS mortality."

Free Webcast on Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)- The deadline is July 1st! @jjkeller

The Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) deadline of July 1, 2017, is quickly approaching.  If you manufacture, process, or otherwise use EPCRA Section 313 chemicals, then this Federal requirement at 40 CFR 372 may be applicable to your facility. 

Join us for an upcoming webinar to learn the details of this annual reporting requirement, whether you are a new or seasoned filer, you won't want to miss the information that will be covered.

This free webcast - hosted by J. J. Keller & Associates, Inc. and U.S. Compliance Corporation - will help you gain a better understanding of:

• What is EPCRA 313 chemical and where do I find them?

• Reporting applicability and threshold determinations

• Common TRI reportable chemicals (including commonly missed ones)

• Overview of the TRI Form R and Form A

• Reporting exemptions

• Using the EPA Central Data Exchange (CDX)

This complimentary one-hour webcast will also include a question and answer session. 

Free Webcast!

Tuesday, April 11th, 2017 

10:00 AM Central Time

(11:00 ET, 9:00 MT, 8:00 PT)

Register now for this free Webcast!

EPA Hosts Webinar on Innovative State Water Agency Practices: Working Toward Resilience

State agencies are developing innovative practices to build resilience into the water resource programs they administer. This webinar will highlight three innovative state initiatives that address novel stressors and improve the resilience of program operations. These examples are drawn from the Innovative State Water Agency Practices database, which includes additional practices and is a collaborative effort between the Association of Clean Water Administrators, Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, Association of State Wetland Managers, and the EPA's Office of Water.

The webinar will be held from 1–3 p.m. Eastern on April 27, 2017.

To register, visit: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7126072679312246531

For more information on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Innovative State Water Agency Practices, please visit the online database. 

https://www.epa.gov/climate-change-water-sector/state-water-agency-practices-climate-adaptation-database

New study of neonicotinoids in Iowa drinking water (evidence farm pesticides in drinking water)

There is newly published evidence from a team from U.S. Geological Survey and University of Iowa that they found neonicotinoids (thought to harm insect pollinators such as bees) in treated drinking water samples from Iowa. It marks the first time that anyone has identified this class of pesticide in residential tap water, the scientists write in Environmental Science & Technology Letters.

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.estlett.7b00081

See the article from the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/04/05/iowa-scientists-find-first-evidence-of-popular-farm-pesticides-in-drinking-water

Employers reminded to post injury and illness summaries through April

OSHA reminds employers of their obligation to post a copy of OSHA's Form 300A, which summarizes job-related injuries and illnesses logged during 2016. The summary must be displayed from February through April in a common area where notices to employees are usually posted. Businesses with 10 or fewer employees and those in certain low-hazard industries are exempt from OSHA recordkeeping and posting requirements.

FREE Safety seminars available online

Recordings of two recent training seminars are available to watch online. One is a symposium on ladder safety hosted by the OSHA Education Center at the University of Texas, Arlington. The other is a webinar on "Communicating with Workers about Hazardous Materials" hosted by the American Staffing Association as part of its alliance with OSHA.

OSHA releases three new publications on Process Safety Management

OSHA has released three guidance documents to help employers comply with the agency's Process Safety Management standard. PSM is critically important to facilities that store highly hazardous chemicals. Implementing the required safety programs helps prevent fires, explosions, large chemical spills, toxic gas releases, runaway chemical reactions, and other major incidents. The new documents focus on PSM compliance for Small Businesses, Storage Facilities and Explosives and Pyrotechnics Manufacturing.

National campaign aims to prevent roadway worker deaths and injuries

Objects and vehicles striking workers are the leading cause of roadside-related construction deaths.

As road construction projects ramp up this spring, the Federal Highway Administration is partnering with OSHA, the American Traffic Safety Services Association, and other groups to encourage safe driving in work zones. The campaign, called National Work Zone Awareness Week, is an annual event set for April 3-7 this year. Tragically, 700 people, including 130 workers, were killed in crashes at roadway worksites in 2015. Many states and localities across the country will hold events to bring attention to these hazards and encourage safe driving around work zones.

A national kick-off event is planned for April 4, at 10:30 a.m., at the Maryland state Randolph Road/Georgia Avenue Interchange Project. In addition, the Georgia Struck-By Alliance, which includes OSHA, will hold stand-downs at highway construction locations throughout Georgia this week to train workers on the dangers of distracted drivers and flying debris. For more information on the Georgia events, see the news release.

Cancer added to 1-bromopropane health concerns

A new Health Hazard Alert from the Hazard Evaluation System and Information Service adds cancer to the growing list of negative health effects that may be caused by 1-bromopropane.

1-Bromopropane, also called 1-BP, is a solvent used in degreasing, spray adhesives, aerosol solvents, and dry cleaning. We have known for some time that 1-BP harms the reproductive and nervous systems. There is now evidence that 1-BP may also damage the genes and cause cancer.

The alert details health damage 1-BP can cause, citing recent scientific findings on its cancer risks. It provides a list of products that contain 1-BP and offers comprehensive recommendations for reducing exposure.

The Hazard Evaluation System and Information Service, or HESIS, investigates new and unrecognized workplace hazards, provides early warning, and works to prevent illness and disease on the job.

For more information, see Health Hazard Alert: 1-Bromopropane.

EPA RMP Rule Delayed Again

​(PAINT.ORG) ​On March 13, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt signed a final rule that provides a three-month (90-day) administrative stay of the effective date of the Risk Management Program (RMP) final rule amendments. The RMP effective date is now delayed until June 19, 2017.

The final RMP rule amendments have encountered extreme resistance since EPA first issued them in mid-January. EPA stated that the amendments made to the final rule were aimed at modernizing RMP by (1) making changes to the accident prevention program requirements, (2) enhancing the emergency response and preparedness requirements, and (3) modifying the information availability requirements. However, numerous industry members and trade associations have continued to push back against implementation of these amendments.

After the White House's regulatory freeze pushed back RMP's effective date to March 21, ACA and 20 other trade associations signed onto a coalition petition to Congressional leaders urging them to utilize the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to block implementation of this rule. ACA and the other trade associations maintained that the final RMP rule not only imposes significant new costs without identifying or quantifying the safety benefits that will be achieved through these new requirements; but that it may compromise the security of facilities, emergency responders, and communities. Moreover, ACA and the other trade associations underscored that the current RMP regulations are not in need of revision because they include requirements that have produced and will continue to drive continuous safety improvements and already provide robust protection for our employees and the public.

Because of this coalition effort, Representative Markwayne Mullin (R-OK-2) introduced H.J.Res.59 on February 1 that would allow RMP to be overturned in Congress if the CRA joint resolution of disapproval passes in both the House and Senate. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) is the Senate sponsor of this CRA joint resolution. Industry members and trade associations are continuing their lobbying effort in D.C. to try and push this joint resolution through Congress.

In the meantime, newly confirmed EPA Administrator Pruitt further delayed the effective date of the final RMP rule amendments last week. The further delay to June 19 will provide the Administrator and his staff more time to reconsider these amendments. It will also allot additional time for industry members and trade associations to make their case against implementation. In fact, EPA announced that it will prepare a notice of proposed rulemaking soon that will provide industry members and the public an opportunity to comment further on the issues raised in the petition for reconsideration and other potential matters.

Lastly, a lawsuit filed in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on March 13 against implementation of the RMP rule amendments challenges the legality of the final RMP rule amendments. The suit brought by the American Chemistry Council against EPA claims that the agency exceeded its statutory authority in issuing that final rule; failed to follow procedures required by the Administrative Procedures Act and Clean Air Act for agency rulemaking; did not adequately consider costs or assess benefits; and did not adequately respond to all significant comments.

These responses to the final RMP rule amendments now leave options for industry to block RMP through EPA action, a win at the D.C. Circuit Court, or by legislative repeal under the CRA.

Congress Passes Resolution to Overturn OSHA Final Rule on Recordkeeping Citations

​(PAINT.ORG) ​On March 22, the U.S. Senate voted 50-48 to pass H.J. Res. 83 under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), to repeal the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) "Clarification of Employer's Continuing Obligation to Make and Maintain Accurate Records of Each Recordable Injury and Illness," also known as the "Volks Rule." A related House resolution passed on March 1 by a vote of 231-191. President Trump is expected to sign the resolution into law, effectively overturning the rule and barring OSHA from issuing a similar one.

Last December, OSHA released its final rule clarifying an employer's continuing obligation to make and maintain accurate injury and illness records.

The amendments in the final rule didn't add any new compliance obligations or require employers to make records of any injuries or illnesses for which records are not already required. However, the final rule did extend the statute of limitations for which the agency can issue citations for recording, keeping violations to five years and six months, as opposed to just six months that most employers interpreted previously. OSHA maintained that it can cite employers for recordkeeping violations for up to six months after the five-year retention period expires, not just six months after the initial failure to record (first day of occurrence, or injury), without running afoul of the OSH Act's statute of limitations.

The rule was the result of the AKM LLC v. Secretary of Labor (Volks) decision in 2012, a case decided against OSHA. In that case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that OSHA citations for recordkeeping violations must be issued within six months of the first day of an alleged failure to record the injury or illness; a citation issued after the six-month period is barred. OSHA had subsequently issued its final rule to go against the D.C. Circuit ruling.

Reminder: New OSHA Penaties - FREE Webcast @jjkeller

New OSHA Penalties:  Impacts to expect, ways to minimize risk

Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM Central Time

(11:00 ET, 9:00 MT, 8:00 PT) – Register Now!

In August 2016, as a result of Congressional action, OSHA increased their maximum penalties by approximately 80 percent. What does this mean for you as an employer? Is OSHA frequently using the full amounts at their disposal? Has the increase changed the way local area offices are giving penalty reductions? This webcast will answer these questions and more.

Join us to learn more about OSHA enforcement trends and statistics, so you can be prepared should you face an inspection! 

Link

https://events-na11.adobeconnect.com/content/connect/c1/1090750165/en/events/event/shared/default_template_simple/event_landing.html?sco-id=1578010148&campaign-id=Reminder%20EM

  

$54 Billion Boost in U.S. Defense Budget Comes as Pluristem's "100% recovery rate" Radiation Antidote Nears FDA Approval

ACCESSWIRE  (YAhoo) The largest increase in defense spending in history was proposed by the Trump administration last month. The budget increases military and defense spending by $54 billion. "This budget will be a public safety and national security budget…" Trump stated. If we take the President at his word, that public safety and national security will be a priority, then a major boost in spending to stockpile radiation antidotes may be in the future.

As Pluristem Therapeutics (PSTI), a cell therapy company, moves its acute radiation syndrome (ARS) antidote towards U.S. FDA approval, the proposed increase in defense spending is very favorable timing for Pluristem and potentially, for the U.S. population.

The U.S. already has a $600 billion annual defense budget, the largest in the world by far. Increasing this by $54 billion and making public safety a priority must mean spending on protecting Americans at home against a potential nuclear or dirty bomb attack, or a nuclear meltdown akin to Fukushima, resulting from earthquakes or other natural phenomena.

Deadly ARS is caused by exposure to high doses of radiation to the entire body in a very short period of time. This results in a depletion of immature parenchymal stem cells in specific tissues. Bone marrow can be damaged or destroyed, leading to the inability to produce blood cells and fight infection. PLX-R18 is potentially the perfect antidote because it is a stem cell therapy product that boosts production of platelets, red blood cells and white blood cells.

A 100% recovery rate was shown in animals exposed to radiation when they were treated with PLX-R18. This compares with the placebo group in which only 30% recovered. Bone marrow blood cell production returned to normal within just 48 hours of injecting PLX-R18.

Data is expected in the first half of 2017 from the U.S. National Institutes of Health's (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) dose finding study of PLX-R18 in large animals.

The NIAID is expected to complete the study any day now, if it hasn't already. The aim of the study is to determine the proper dosage for PLX-R18 in humans. Due to ethical reasons, PLX-R18 studies for ARS cannot be conducted in humans. FDA approval for PLX-R18 as an ARS antidote therefore falls under the Animal Rule, which can lead to FDA approval without testing in humans. Exposure to radiation is the concern. The FDA has already cleared PLX-R18 for a Phase I clinical trial in humans for the treatment of hematopoietic recovery following bone marrow transplants, an indication to treat the side effects of radiation and chemotherapy. That study is expected to commence enrolling patients soon.

The NIAID has indicated that once optimum dosage has been established, it plans to move into the pivotal and final trial, under the Animal Rule, for full FDA approval of PLX-R18 as an ARS antidote for use in humans. It appears the costs these ARS studies are covered by the NIH, leaving Pluristem more room in its budget to move several other indications forward on its own dime. By 2018, Pluristem may have an FDA approved ARS antidote. Amgen's (NASDAQ:AMGN) blockbuster cancer drug Neupogen® became the first FDA drug approved for the indication of radiation induced myelosuppression, following a nuclear incident, the hematopoietic syndrome of ARS. The FDA granted Amgen this approval under the Animal Rule.

A $157.5 million contract was granted to Amgen for Neupogen by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority's (BARDA) Project BioShield.

BARDA made two more purchases in 2016 to add to its stockpile. $37.7 million worth of Neulasta was purchased from Amgen and $37.6 million worth of Leukine was bought from Sanofi. These are both leukocyte growth factor products but not specifically FDA approved for ARS.

Assuming BARDA gets a major boost in its budget, based on a $54 billion increase in defense spending, PLX-R18 may be next on BARDA's shopping list. As an off-the-shelf cell therapy product, with a long shelf life and no tissue matching required, PLX-R18 is ideally suited for defense stockpiles. One hopes that there is a miniscule chance that the American homeland will ever face a nuclear bomb incident or a Fukushima like event. However, by definition, defense spending should mean defending U.S. citizens. The U.S. government should invest in protecting its people from radiation threats. Pluristem should reap the benefits of its work in developing cell therapies that can save lives.

Read full: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/54-billion-boost-u-defense-120000432.html

Ramifications of the Three Mile Island Incident

In the end, Unit 2 at Three Mile Island was shut down because it was too badly damaged to continue operations. Cleanup for the reactor started almost immediately after the accident in August of 1979. It wasn't completed until nearly 15 years later in December of 1993 at the cost of nearly $1 billion.

Contaminated radioactive material is removed from Three Mile Island during cleanup of the accident. [Image by Paul Vathis/AP Images]

Immediately following the accident, the governor of Pennsylvania, Dick Thornburgh, advised that pregnant women and pre-school age children within 20 miles of the reactor should evacuate. This caused nearly 140,000 people to be displaced for almost a month. However, within that time, 98 percent of the evacuees returned to their homes.

There were concerns about the venting of radiological materials into the atmosphere during the accident, and this was the focus of numerous lawsuits against both Metropolitan Edison, the owners, and the various governments of Pennsylvania, the local borough, and the United States. All were dismissed, primarily because studies showed that the release of material amounted to minimal additional exposure to residents.

According to a study released at the time, the average dose to a resident was roughtly 8 millirems, which is about the amount of radiation exposure received from a chest x-ray. Numerous studies by the Pennsylvania Department of Health on residents in the area saw no uptick in the number of cancer diagnoses or a rise in infant mortality.

As far as the nuclear power industry in the United States is concerned, the Three Mile Island incident was a turning point. Because of heightened fears, several other plants under construction were shut down and a temporary ban on new reactors was put into place. While Three Mile Island didn't kill the nuclear power industry, it did put a stop to its historic growth. After the accident, of 129 approved power plants, only 53 were finished. Additionally, no new nuclear power plants were authorized until 2012.

Read full: http://www.inquisitr.com/4097831/the-three-mile-island-incident-anniversary-38-years-later/

H.R. 1430, Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment (HONEST) Act of 2017

​H.R. 1430 would amend the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating a "covered action" unless all scientific and technical information relied on to support that action is publicly available online in a manner that is sufficient for independent analysis and substantial reproduction of research results. Covered actions would include assessments of risks, exposure, or hazards; documents specifying criteria, guidance, standards, or limitations; and regulations and regulatory impact statements.

Although H.R. 1430 would not require the EPA to disseminate any scientific or technical information that it relies on to support covered actions, the act would not prohibit the agency from doing so. Whether the EPA would choose to disseminate such information would determine the cost of implementing H.R. 1430.

Based on information from the EPA and other federal agencies, as well as organizations and researchers in the scientific community that publish in peer-reviewed journals, CBO estimates that the agency could spend between a few million dollars per year to more than one hundred million dollars per year over the 2018-2022 period to ensure that data and other information underlying studies are publicly available in a format sufficient to allow others to substantially reproduce the results of studies. That range reflects the uncertainty about the number of studies the EPA would choose to rely on to support covered actions, the extent to which the agency would invest in data infrastructure to make researchers' data and models available to others, and in the number of covered actions the agency would issue in future years. The range also reflects the uncertainty in the extent to which the research community would tailor their data management activities to comply with the requirements of the act and how quickly those changes might occur.

EPA officials have explained to CBO that the agency would implement H.R. 1430 with minimal funding and generally would not disseminate information for the scientific studies that it uses to support covered actions. That approach to implementing the legislation would significantly reduce the number of studies that the agency relies on when issuing or proposing covered actions for the first few years following enactment of the legislation. In total, CBO estimates the EPA would spend about $5 million over the 2018-2022 period; such spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.​

​Full here;
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/costestimate/hr1430.pdf​

Huge nuclear cost overruns push Toshiba's Westinghouse into bankruptcy

CNBC- Westinghouse Electric, a unit of Japanese conglomerate Toshiba, filed for bankruptcy on Wednesday, hit by billions of dollars of cost overruns at four nuclear reactors under construction in the U.S. Southeast.

The bankruptcy casts doubt on the future of the first new U.S. nuclear power plants in three decades, which were scheduled to begin producing power as soon as this week, but are now years behind schedule.

The four reactors are part of two projects known as V.C. Summer in South Carolina, which is majority owned by SCANA, and Vogtle in Georgia, which is owned by a group of utilities led by Southern Co.

Costs for the projects have soared due to increased safety demands by U.S. regulators, and also due to significantly higher-than-anticipated costs for labor, equipment and components.

Pittsburgh-based Westinghouse said it hopes to use bankruptcy to isolate and reorganize around its "very profitable" nuclear fuel and power plant servicing businesses from its money-losing construction operation.

Westinghouse said in a court filing it has secured $800 million in financing from Apollo Investment, an affiliate of Apollo Global Management , to fund its core businesses during its reorganization.

For Toshiba, the filing will help keep the crisis-hit parent company afloat as it lines up buyers for its memory chip business, which could fetch $18 billion. Toshiba said Westinghouse-related liabilities totalled $9.8 billion as of December.

Toshiba said it would guarantee up to $200 million of the financing for Westinghouse. Toshiba shares closed up 2.2 percent but have lost half their value since the nuclear problems surfaced late last year.

The Apollo loan needs court approval and is expected to carry Westinghouse for a year, people familiar with the matter said. The funds would support the company's global operations, including its healthier services and maintenance businesses, and pay for construction workers on site in Georgia and South Carolina, the people said.

However, the money cannot be used to repay the liabilities stemming from cost overruns and delays at the projects, the people said.

SCANA told investors on a conference call on Wednesday that 5,000 workers would continue working on its South Carolina site for 30 days while the company weighed options.

"Our preferred option is to finish the plants. The least preferred option is abandonment," said SCANA CEO Kevin Marsh. Southern Co said in a statement it would hold Westinghouse and Toshiba accountable for its contract.

State regulators have approved costs of around $14 billion for each project but Morgan Stanley has estimated the final bill of around $22 billion for the South Carolina project and around $19 billion for the Georgia plant.....

Read full at:

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/29/huge-nuclear-cost-overruns-push-toshibas-westinghouse-into-bankruptcy.html