2
Government Watch © 2003 American Chemical Society NOVEMBER 1, 2003 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 387 A California first in U.S. to prohibit flame retardants Products containing the flame retar- dants penta- and octabrominated diphenyl ether (pentaBDE and octaBDE) will be banned from sale in California in 2008. California Governor Gray Davis (D) signed the regulations, the first in the country, into law on August 9. PentaBDE is used in upholstered furniture, and octaBDE is used in the plastic hous- ing for electronics. Recent studies indicate that some polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are rapidly bioaccumulating in humans, wildlife, and the environ- ment—doubling every two to five years (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36, 50A– 52A). The chemicals have been shown to affect thyroid system function in laboratory mice. Human health con- cerns center around the possibility that low-level exposure could subtly harm the developing brain and the female reproductive system. Environmentalists and some legis- lators hope that other states and the federal government will follow Cali- fornia’s lead. “I think it will give a big push to the federal EPA to enact a ban,” said Assemblywoman Wilma Chan (D) of Oakland, who authored the legislation. U.S. EPA staff never evaluated in- formation about PBDEs because they were on the market when an invento- ry of existing chemicals was devel- oped under the Toxic Substances Control Act. At this point, EPA can’t regulate them unless it can prove that existing chemicals pose significant risks to human health or the environ- ment. The agency is conducting re- search and gathering data through the Voluntary Children’s Chemical Evaluation Program on PBDEs and is working with companies to devise substitute flame retardants. High levels of flame-retardant chem- icals have been found in the fat of peo- ple living in California, Indiana, and Texas. Most recently, flame-retardant chemicals were found in the breast milk fat of 47 Texas women at levels of 6.2 parts per billion (ppb) to 419 ppb, which are 10–100 times higher than levels reported outside of North America. The study was published in Environmental Health Perspectives in November (Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111, 1723–1729). PentaBDE is a chemical used to flame-retard the polyurethane foam in upholstered furniture, automobile seats, and office furniture. U.S. de- mand was roughly 7100 metric tons (t) in 2001. OctaBDE is added to plas- tics used in housings for electronic devices such as televisions and med- ical equipment. Demand in 2001 was about 1500 t, according to Great Lakes Chemical Corp., the sole U.S. producer of both flame retardants. Decabromodiphenyl ether (deca-), also used in electronic casings, is not subject to the ban because deca- does not appear to bioaccumulate. California’s action mirrors that of the European Union, which will re- quire manufacturers to stop using the chemicals by next summer. —REBECCA RENNER Separate and unequal soft drinks? Tests conducted for the Indian gov- ernment found pesticide residues in soft drinks sold by PepsiCo and Coca- Cola, leading to plans to set national limits on pesticide residues in bottled soft drinks. The government’s results show lower levels of contamination than those found by the Center for Science and Environment (CSE), an environ- mental group based in New Delhi, which in July claimed that 12 major soft drink brands sold in India contained residues of lindane, DDT, malathion, and chlorpyrifos. The group found that samples of the same drinks sold in the United States did not contain these residues. Health Minister Sushma Swaraj told the Indian Parliament in August that tests conducted by two state-run lab- oratories found that the residues in the drinks “were well within the [Indian] safety limits prescribed for packaged drinking water at present.” However, some samples contained pesticide levels higher than those al- lowed in the European Union (EU). One state lab found that out of 12 sam- ples, 3 samples conformed to the EU limits for total and individual pesti- cides. Six samples exceeded EU limits for organochlorine pesticide residues, seven samples for organophosphorus pesticide residues, and six samples for total pesticide residues. The soft drink companies hailed the government’s announcement that the drinks were within India’s current safety limits as vindication of the soundness of their products. None- theless, the government has asked a Joint Parliamentary Committee to look into the matter. This inquiry is not expected to delay the new limits for soft drinks. Currently, no separate limits exist for pesticide residues in soft drinks in India. Earlier this year, the Indian Health Ministry proposed new, tighter limits for pesticide residues for bot- tled water to correspond with EU lim- its. Now it plans to extend these to soft drinks as well. The new norms will be- come effective in January 2004. EU Positive tests led to the Indian govern- ment’s proposal to set pesticide residue limits for bottled drinks. RHONDA SAUNDERS

Government Watch: Separate and unequal soft drinks?

  • Upload
    maria

  • View
    213

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Government Watch: Separate and unequal soft drinks?

Government▼Watch

© 2003 American Chemical Society NOVEMBER 1, 2003 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ■ 387 A

California first in U.S. to prohibitflame retardantsProducts containing the flame retar-dants penta- and octabrominateddiphenyl ether (pentaBDE andoctaBDE) will be banned from salein California in 2008. CaliforniaGovernor Gray Davis (D) signed theregulations, the first in the country,into law on August 9. PentaBDE isused in upholstered furniture, andoctaBDE is used in the plastic hous-ing for electronics.

Recent studies indicate that somepolybrominated diphenyl ethers(PBDEs) are rapidly bioaccumulatingin humans, wildlife, and the environ-ment—doubling every two to five years(Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36, 50A–52A). The chemicals have been shownto affect thyroid system function inlaboratory mice. Human health con-cerns center around the possibilitythat low-level exposure could subtlyharm the developing brain and thefemale reproductive system.

Environmentalists and some legis-lators hope that other states and thefederal government will follow Cali-fornia’s lead. “I think it will give a bigpush to the federal EPA to enact aban,” said Assemblywoman WilmaChan (D) of Oakland, who authoredthe legislation.

U.S. EPA staff never evaluated in-formation about PBDEs because theywere on the market when an invento-ry of existing chemicals was devel-oped under the Toxic SubstancesControl Act. At this point, EPA can’tregulate them unless it can prove thatexisting chemicals pose significantrisks to human health or the environ-ment. The agency is conducting re-search and gathering data throughthe Voluntary Children’s ChemicalEvaluation Program on PBDEs and isworking with companies to devisesubstitute flame retardants.

High levels of flame-retardant chem-icals have been found in the fat of peo-ple living in California, Indiana, andTexas. Most recently, flame-retardant

chemicals were found in the breastmilk fat of 47 Texas women at levelsof 6.2 parts per billion (ppb) to 419ppb, which are 10–100 times higherthan levels reported outside of NorthAmerica. The study was published inEnvironmental Health Perspectives inNovember (Environ. Health Perspect.2003, 111, 1723–1729).

PentaBDE is a chemical used toflame-retard the polyurethane foamin upholstered furniture, automobileseats, and office furniture. U.S. de-mand was roughly 7100 metric tons(t) in 2001. OctaBDE is added to plas-tics used in housings for electronicdevices such as televisions and med-ical equipment. Demand in 2001 wasabout 1500 t, according to GreatLakes Chemical Corp., the sole U.S.producer of both flame retardants.

Decabromodiphenyl ether (deca-),also used in electronic casings, is notsubject to the ban because deca- doesnot appear to bioaccumulate.

California’s action mirrors that ofthe European Union, which will re-quire manufacturers to stop using thechemicals by next summer. —REBECCARENNER

Separate and unequal softdrinks?Tests conducted for the Indian gov-ernment found pesticide residues insoft drinks sold by PepsiCo and Coca-Cola, leading to plans to set nationallimits on pesticide residues in bottledsoft drinks.

The government’s results showlower levels of contamination thanthose found by the Center for Scienceand Environment (CSE), an environ-mental group based in New Delhi,which in July claimed that 12 major softdrink brands sold in India containedresidues of lindane, DDT, malathion,and chlorpyrifos. The group foundthat samples of the same drinks soldin the United States did not containthese residues.

Health Minister Sushma Swaraj toldthe Indian Parliament in August that

tests conducted by two state-run lab-oratories found that the residues in thedrinks “were well within the [Indian]safety limits prescribed for packageddrinking water at present.”

However, some samples containedpesticide levels higher than those al-lowed in the European Union (EU).One state lab found that out of 12 sam-ples, 3 samples conformed to the EU

limits for total and individual pesti-cides. Six samples exceeded EU limitsfor organochlorine pesticide residues,seven samples for organophosphoruspesticide residues, and six samples fortotal pesticide residues.

The soft drink companies hailedthe government’s announcement thatthe drinks were within India’s currentsafety limits as vindication of thesoundness of their products. None-theless, the government has asked aJoint Parliamentary Committee tolook into the matter. This inquiry isnot expected to delay the new limitsfor soft drinks.

Currently, no separate limits existfor pesticide residues in soft drinksin India. Earlier this year, the IndianHealth Ministry proposed new, tighterlimits for pesticide residues for bot-tled water to correspond with EU lim-its. Now it plans to extend these to softdrinks as well. The new norms will be-come effective in January 2004. EU

Positive tests led to the Indian govern-ment’s proposal to set pesticide residuelimits for bottled drinks.

RHON

DA S

AUN

DERS

Page 2: Government Watch: Separate and unequal soft drinks?

388 A ■ ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NOVEMBER 1, 2003

limits for total pesticide residues inwater used for “food” are 0.0005 mil-ligrams per liter (mg/L) and for indi-vidual pesticide residues 0.0001 mg/L,or 0.1 parts per billion.

In the July report that initiallyspurred the government’s testing,CSE blamed contaminated ground-water used by the soft drink indus-try. A dramatic fall in the water tablehas raised pesticide contaminationlevels in groundwater in many partsof the country, says CSE’s SouparnoBanerjee. —MARIA BURKE

New watershed approachrooted in TMDLLanguage in the newly issued guid-ance from the U.S. EPA to the stateson water quality permits suggeststhat regulators should focus on anentire watershed. The guidance alsostresses that the states take steps tomimic and support the Total MaximumDaily Load (TMDL) program.

Considering the water qualitystressors of an entire drainage basin,instead of individual sources one byone, can lead to greater pollution cutsat less cost, add EPA and state offi-cials. But noting that the entire TMDLprogram is under fire by the BushAdministration, some environmental-ists are concerned that the processsubstitutes one general dischargepermit for individually designed facil-ity permits, a move that could resultin a loss of accountability.

The draft guidance, released onAugust 25 (Fed. Regist. 2003, 68,51,011–51,012), sets out six steps to fol-low in developing a watershed-basedpermit. The draft recommends thatregulators first define watershedboundaries and consult with pollutersand state, local, and federal officials

before they collect data that are similaror identical to data used in developingTMDLs for impaired water bodies.

The Clinton Administration over-hauled the TMDL program, whichcalculates the maximum amount ofpollution a river or lake can absorbwithout damage. But those revisedrules were never implemented, andon March 19, 2003, EPA officials with-drew them. “EPA is working on newrules but may or may not issuethem,” says Patrick Bradley, a biolo-gist with EPA’s water permits division.

The Connecticut Department ofEnvironmental Protection (CDEP)started a program in keeping withEPA’s new guidance when it developeda watershed-based permit for nitrogendischarges into the Long Island Sound,says Gary Johnson, a CDEP senior en-vironmental engineer. A TMDL formedthe backbone of one general permitthat replaced individual permits for79 sewage treatment plants. This gen-eral permit will cut nitrogen loads by58% and should lead to the achieve-ment of the TMDL in the sound by2014, according to Johnson.

There’s less accountability when youhave many sources under one generalpermit, says Melanie Shepherdson, anattorney with the Natural ResourcesDefense Council, an environmentalgroup. It’s unclear what will happenif one or more of the participantsdoes not comply, she adds. UnderConnecticut’s watershed-based per-mit, nitrogen output from each sewageplant is tracked. If a plant exceeds itslimit, it’ll be in violation of the permitand receive a fine, Johnson says. JANET PELLEY

Canada launches solventtrading schemeCanada will introduce the first na-tionwide cap and trade program forindustrial users of solvents in NorthAmerica on January 1, 2004. Theregulations aim to cut the use oftrichloroethylene (TCE) and tetra-chloroethylene (also known as per-chloroethylene [PERC]) for cleaningparts by nearly 65% and will affectboth large and small businesses,including automakers and metal fin-ishers. These performance-basedregulations are superior to the U.S.approach, which requires use of max-imum available control technology,according to independent experts.

The new regulations, published

on August 13 (Canada Gazette Part II,137(17), 2185–2215), apply only tobusinesses that use 1000 kilograms(kg) or more of TCE and PERC eachyear for vapor and cold degreasing toclean parts. These users account formore than 90% of Canadian consump-tion of TCE, a probable human car-cinogen, and 20% of consumption ofPERC, a listed toxic chemical, accord-ing to Environment Canada.

Beginning in 2004, companies can-not use more than 1000 kg of TCE andPERC annually unless they apply toEnvironment Canada for additionalconsumption units. The cap tightensin 2007: From 2004 through 2006, the1000-kg threshold, plus consumptionunits, may add up to 100% of present-day annual average consumption. In2007 and for every year after that, thethreshold plus consumption unitsmay only add up to 35% of present-day consumption.

“The regulations allow industry toset up a clearinghouse to trade con-sumption allowances, but I am notanticipating a lot of trading because alot of businesses are already reducingtheir use,” says Rick Loughlin, a se-nior program officer at EnvironmentCanada.

Since 1997, the U.S. EPA has re-quired companies that use degreasersto implement maximum availablecontrol technology, which has result-ed in a 65% drop in solvent use, saysBruce Walker, research director of STOP,an environmental group in Montreal,Quebec. Although the Canadian regu-lations call for the same reduction, thefocus on performance fosters morepollution prevention and may encour-age some facilities to eliminate theiruse of solvents, according to JeffreyBurke, executive director of the U.S.-based National Pollution PreventionRound Table, a nonprofit educationalorganization.

Canadian companies would havepreferred the U.S. approach becausethe Canadian consumption units arevery complicated, says Steve Risotto,executive director of the HalogenatedSolvents Industry Alliance, Inc., inArlington, Va. Companies had untilOctober 1 to apply for their con-sumption units, and many were ex-pected to miss the deadline, he adds.

“Canadian companies were stake-holders in developing the regulationsand have not complained about theapproach or the timing,” Loughlin says.—JANET PELLEY

Environmentalists find fault with EPA’ssolution aimed at clearing up state waterpollution troubles.

ART

EXPL

OSIO

N