Why: Critics rip lan to relax chemical-release rules - every other year?

[Guest guest]

Why do I feel that fetuses, infants, and toddlers are surrounded by an

enemy continually seeking to cause toxins to enter the human body?

Why do I feel that policies which encourage toxins into the environment

and into the human body serve the families and individuals that own

pharmaceutical companies?

Why do I feel that too many politicians give their souls unto the pharmco

owners as to obtain the posh retirement benefits paid for six years in the

House or Senate?

* * *

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/245592_polluters22.html

Critics rip plan to relax chemical release rules

EPA wants to let companies report every other year

Saturday, October 22, 2005

By ROBERT MCCLURE

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

The Bush administration is proposing to relax requirements for factories,

shipyards and other businesses to inform the public about their releases

of more than 600 toxic chemicals.

Now required annually, these reports would be skipped every other year

under a proposal by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. And for most

of the chemicals, businesses would get to release10 times as much waste

before being required to submit detailed records about their practices.

[foto] Ducey / P-I / Steam rises from plants along the Duwamish

River at sunrise Friday. Under a Bush administration plan, businesses

could release far greater amounts of chemicals before having to make

detailed reports.

Seattle environmentalists are alarmed by the proposal, and so is a

Washington Department of Ecology pollution-control official. Spokeswomen

for both of the state's U.S. senators called the proposal " outrageous. "

Administration officials defend the idea, though, saying they can save

businesses some of the money they spend to track chemicals' handling and

release.

" We're looking for some real opportunities for businesses, particularly

small companies, " said Kim , the EPA's assistant administrator in

charge of environmental information.

" We're asking: How much of this (information) is really useful? How much

are people using and doing any analysis on, and can we do anything to make

it easier (on businesses.) ... We're trying to balance the needs of all

our stakeholders, " said.

Among those concerned about the proposals is Idell Hansen, an Ecology

Department official who tracks the pollution reports for the state.

" The communities, this is their one source of information in many cases

for releases into the environment, " Hansen said. " We feel like we're

losing a valuable information source. "

At issue is a federal program called the Toxic Release Inventory, or TRI,

that affects 42 businesses in Seattle and 345 around the state.

Congress ordered the annual reports in the wake of a 1984 accident at a

Union Carbide factory in Bhopal, India, that released a poisonous gas,

killing thousands. Many Bhopal residents didn't even know the pesticide

was being made in their midst.

Since the pollution reports were required in 1987, waste dumping by

American firms has plummeted. Industry, government and environmentalists

agree that it prompted corporate executives to institutionalize

waste-cutting programs that, in the long run, saved many companies money

by preserving valuable byproducts that once were wasted.

The EPA on Sept. 21 notified Congress that the agency intends next year to

consider changing to the biennial reporting.

But the agency is pushing forward more quickly with a related proposal. It

would allow some businesses to give out much less information about their

chemical releases.

Currently, any business releasing more than 500 pounds a year of most

chemicals on the TRI list must fill out a form each year stating how much

of it goes into the air, the water, the ground, or down the drain or

through some other disposal route.

A company that releases less than 500 pounds fills out a form saying it

releases the chemical, but it doesn't have to say how much.

The EPA is pushing to increase the limit tenfold, so that businesses could

avoid quantifying their chemical releases up to 5,000 pounds.

It would save businesses $7.4 million a year nationwide, the EPA

estimates. (For a small subset of chemicals that accumulate in the

environment, companies would have to continue to report any releases.)

The proposals both have strong backing from business.

Mike Walls, managing director of the American Chemistry Council, said the

EPA's own figures show that businesses spend $650 million annually on

tasks required under the Toxic Release Inventory program.

" We've gotten the benefit out of TRI. You've made the companies aware of

where emissions go that could be better controlled to control costs, "

Walls said.

But he added: " We've probably reached the technological limit of how far

we can go to reduce emissions without affecting productivity. ... What

we're talking about now is how you best manage this process. "

Kirk Thomson, director of environmental affairs for The Boeing Co., which

has sliced its TRI-reported emissions 39 percent over the past five years,

said the biennial reporting " wouldn't make a difference to us. "

" We're set up to do it annually, " he said. " It's just a good business

practice to track your hazardous materials, how much you're using of each

product and how much you're losing to the environment. "

Supporters of the proposals note that the Census is done just once every

10 years, and then analyzed extensively. Similarly, they reason, by

providing the EPA an " off " year every other year, environmentalists and

others would get more in-depth analysis by the EPA.

" That basically makes as much sense as selling your car engine so you can

afford to paint your car, " said Moulton of OMB Watch, a Washington,

D.C.-based non-profit that focuses on budget and information-access

issues. " It doesn't make sense to get rid of the substance of a program so

you can have more fluff and analysis. "

While it now takes three to four years to spot trends in a plant's

emissions, it would take six to eight years under the Bush proposal, he

said.

In Seattle, residents concerned about chemicals in their neighborhoods

frequently turn to the Community Coalition for Environmental Justice. And

pretty much the first thing the activists there do is consult the Toxic

Release Inventory.

" We provide technical assistance to communities, and TRI is a real vital

part of that, " said Yalonda Sinde, the group's executive director.

Under the proposed changes, " We will get less information, less

frequently, and I think this whole thing is being motivated by industry

interests. I think the EPA is forgetting who they're actually supposed to

be protecting here. "

" The regulatory changes being proposed by EPA are both disturbing and

dangerous, " said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. " This administration has

consistently tried to roll back rules that are in place to protect the

health and well-being of our communities. "

One problem with the TRI information is that it is already dated when it

comes out. The most recent readings available, from 2003, show Seattle's

biggest polluter to be Puget Sound Coatings, a South Park company

specializing in paints and other coatings for industrial materials.

In 2003, it reported releasing some 54,000 pounds of solvents: xylene and

methyl ethyl ketone.

However, since then the company has greatly reduced its use and release of

toxic chemicals, according to the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency.

Rich Tieman, the company's manager, said it bought more efficient

equipment, persuaded customers to opt for less-hazardous coatings and put

better shop practices into effect.

Similarly, at Art Brass Painting, the No. 3 Seattle chemical emitter in

2003, the firm has substituted a new, non-toxic chemical for the degreaser

it once used, said engineer Bob Hay.

And at Asko Processing in Fremont, which applies platings to equipment

used in the aerospace industry, spokesman Sandy Hallberg was surprised to

hear the company ranked the fourth-highest discharger for Seattle.

" We used to be way down on the list, " he said. However, with other firms

reducing their waste, Asko moved up

What about the idea of biennial Toxic Release Inventory reporting?

" It's almost easier to do it every year, instead of having to keep track

of it for two years, " he said.

GETTING INVOLVED

The deadline to comment on the Environmental Protection Agency's current

rule-making on the Toxic Release Inventory is Dec. 5.

Information is available online at www.epa.gov/tri Comments can be

e-mailed to oie.docket@..., faxed to , or mailed to:

Office of Environmental Information Docket, Environmental Protection

Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C.

20460. Attention Docket ID No. TRI-2005-0073.

To find out about toxic releases by Zip code or city, visit www.rtknet.org

or www.scorecard.org.

P-I reporter McClure can be reached at or

robertmcclure@....

*

The material in this post is distributed without

profit to those who have expressed a prior interest

in receiving the included information for research

and educational purposes.For more information go to:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html

http://oregon.uoregon.edu/~csundt/documents.htm

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this

email for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you

must obtain permission from the copyright owner.