Groups Say Great Lakes Under Siege From Toxic Pollution

Apr 21: A report released by Great Lakes-area environmental groups -- Partners in Pollution 2:  An Update on the Continuing Canadian and United States Contributions to Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Ecosystem Pollution -- indicates that reporting facilities released just over 460 million lbs (209 million kg) of pollutants in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence basin in 2007. The report numbers are based on a matched dataset of 2007 data compiled by the Canadian National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) and the U.S. Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). Among the pollutants, over 34 million lbs of known reproductive/developmental toxins were released by 1,834 facilities in the Great Lakes basin. The report was prepared by PollutionWatch, a collaborative project of Environmental Defence and Canadian Environmental Law Association.
 
    John Jackson, Director of Clean Production and Toxics at Great Lakes United (GLU) said, "Imagine 17,000 dump trucks pulling up to your beach and tipping their toxic load straight into the drinking water of 40 million people. These ongoing toxic discharges are a smear on one of the world's greatest sources of freshwater. We need to move beyond promises and put more serious effort into stopping this pollution in the first place." Lake Michigan basin had the second largest number of facilities in the basin (25% of all facilities) that reported to the U.S. TRI and contributed a fifth (approximately 21%) of total releases of pollutants in the Great Lakes basin. 
 
    Meanwhile, the Lake Erie basin is being particularly hard hit. Including the industrial facilities that straddle the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, and the Detroit River, Lake Erie had the most facilities (over 1,300 facilities representing 35% of all facilities) that reported to Canada's NPRI and U.S. TRI. These facilities contributed half of the total releases that affect this watershed. The groups said, "This is particularly troubling considering that Lake Erie is the smallest, shallowest, but most biologically productive lake in the Great Lakes system."
 
    Lin Kaatz Chary, Project Director of the Great Lakes Green Chemistry Network said, "We need to shift away from an 'end of pipe' mentality and toward a strong commitment to pollution prevention. This includes an emphasis on the promotion of 'green' chemistry to help companies design and manufacture products that eliminate or reduce the toxicity of chemicals used in production, while also preventing unnecessary waste." The groups said the prevention focus has long been a principle of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA), an historic pact between Canada and the U.S. to curb pollution to the lakes. Pollution Watch 2 is being released as the United States and Canadian governments renegotiate this landmark agreement, which sets goals for reducing pollution on both sides of the Great Lakes basin.

 

    Access a lengthy release with summary table and additional information (click here). Access the 65-page report (click here). Access the Pollution Watch website for extensive background information (click here).

GLRI Modeling Of Mercury Loadings To Great Lakes Begins

Apr 19: The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) reports that mercury contamination in the Great Lakes is an ongoing concern, with both public health and wildlife health impacts. According to a posting, atmospheric deposition likely contributes more mercury to the Lakes and their watersheds than any other loading pathway. However, the amount, form, spatial distribution, and source attribution for this deposition is not well known. To address this knowledge gap, a project funded by GLRI to estimate the amount of mercury deposited to the Great Lakes from the atmosphere is now beginning. The project will use the NOAA HYSPLIT atmospheric fate and transport model to make these estimates and also the amounts coming from different source regions and source types. It is hoped that the information will be useful in prioritizing local, regional, national, and international actions to reduce mercury loadings to the Great Lakes. GLRI Funds to support the project have just been received by the Air Resources Laboratory (~April 19, 2010) and so work on this project will now commence. This first phase of the project is expected to take approximately one year to complete.

    In the project, mercury released to the air from local, regional, national, and global sources will be modeled from emissions to eventual deposition. The modeling will be carried out using a special version of the NOAA HYSPLIT atmospheric fate and transport model enhanced to simulate atmospheric mercury. Gridded meteorological data from NOAA and other agencies will be used to drive the HYSPLIT model. Mercury emissions inventories from EPA, States, and international agencies / institutions will be used as inputs to the model.

    Access the complete announcement with more details (click here).

EPA Responds To Groups' BP Whiting CAA Petition

Nov 25: U.S. EPA issued a Federal Register announcement [74 FR 61678-61679] announcing that the Administrator has responded to a petition submitted by the Environmental Law and Policy Center, Hoosier Environmental Council, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Save the Dunes, Sierra Club, Susan Eleuterio, and Tom Tsourlis (petitioners) asking EPA to object to an operating permit issued by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to the BP Products North America, Inc., Whiting Business Unit (Whiting) [See WIMS 10/20/09]. According to the announcement, the Administrator granted the petition in part and denied it in part. Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the Act, a petitioner may seek in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit judicial review of those portions of a petition which EPA denied. Any petition for review shall be filed within 60 days from the date the Federal Register notice, pursuant to section 307 of the Act.

Specifically, the Petitioners allege that: (1) The permit application lacks emission information and calculations critical for determining applicable requirements and setting appropriate limits and conditions; (2) the minor source permit fails to comply with New Source Review requirements because the project is a major modification when all project emissions are properly included; (3) the permit does not include applicable Best Available Control Technology and Lowest Achievable Emission Rate limits for flares and other sources; (4) BP and IDEM failed to conduct the proper greenhouse gas Best Achievable Control Technology analysis; and (5) the permit omits compliance schedules that Title V requires to ensure compliance with all applicable requirements, as supported by the Notice of Violation issued by EPA to BP for its Whiting refinery.

In part, the Administrator rules, "I find that the Petitioners have not demonstrated that the title V operating permit does not comply with the Act. Petitioners have failed to demonstrate that the BP Whiting facility is out of compliance with the requirements addressed in the NOV [Notice of Violation], and that the permit must include a compliance plan and schedule with regard to such requirements. I therefore deny the petition with respect to this issue."

Access the FR announcement (click here). Access the 8/19/08 petition (click here). Access the Administrator's response (click here).

Comments Wanted On Mercury Emission Reduction Strategy

Nov 12: The Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) announced a sixty-day public comment period for a Draft Great Lakes Mercury Emission Reduction Strategy. In fulfillment of a Collaboration Strategy recommendation, in April 2008 representatives from the Great Lakes states and U.S. EPA commenced development of a basin-wide Strategy for the reduction of mercury emissions. A draft Strategy is now available for public comment through January 12, 2010. GLRC invites comments on the Strategy itself and on how best to move forward with implementation, as well as commitments from stakeholders to implement components of the Strategy.

A copy of the initial draft document was first distributed to stakeholders for a 30-day review and comment period to provide input on the structure of the report and the emission sources to be covered in detail in the final document. The draft report reflects recommendations based on feedback received. A summary of those comments is also available.

The following information is available: Draft Great Lakes Mercury Emission Reduction Strategy, November 10, 2009; and related document: Mercury Emission Reduction Strategy Development Process and Team Structure; Mercury Emission Reduction Strategy Management Team Members; Response to Public Comments Received on Draft Outline and Background Sections of Great Lakes Mercury Emissions Reduction.

Access an announcement and links to all documents and commenting instructions (click here).

Enviros Still Oppose U.S. Steel’s Draft NPDES Permit

Nov 12: In a release, the Alliance for the Great Lakes announced that the region’s third-largest discharger of arsenic and lead could continue releasing "unlimited amounts of arsenic" and only slightly less lead to Great Lakes waters under a proposed Indiana permit. The Alliance is encouraging the public to demand stricter pollution limits at a hearing on the draft wastewater discharge permit for U.S. Steel’s Gary Works plant, scheduled for 6 PM Wednesday, November 18 in Gary. Those unable to attend the hearing can submit written comments through November 30.

Lyman Welch, the Alliance Water Quality Program manager said, “Strong pollution limits need to be written into the permit now. Or we’ll spend more time and taxpayer dollars getting this pollution out of the water later.” The Alliance said despite numerous permit revisions to resolve objections from EPA as well as comments from their comments and those from other environmental groups, "the revised permit still falls short." Welch said, “While we are pleased with many improvements made in the proposed permit since the last public hearing, Indiana must go further to reduce toxic chemicals dumped into Lake Michigan from storm water runoff.”

On October 15, 2009, U.S. EPA Region 5 withdrew its earlier objections to a 2007 version of Indiana's wastewater discharge permit for U.S. Steel's Gary Works [See WIMS 10/19/09]. EPA said it was withholding final judgment on the new draft permit until Indiana Department of Environmental Management's 45-day comment period, including the November 18 public hearing, is completed and all comments are considered. On October 14, IDEM proposed the revised draft permit for the steel mill that EPA said "addresses objections raised by EPA in October 2007." EPA said, "The new draft permit requires lower discharge levels than currently allowed for a number of pollutants including ammonia, metals, organic compounds and suspended solids. No pollutants can be discharged at a higher rate than the current permit allows."

Access a release from the Alliance with links to additional information including the draft permit (click here). Access more information and background from EPA (click here). Access an IDEM fact sheet (click here).

EPA Accepts Some Petition Claims On BP's Whiting Air Permit

Oct 19: In response to a citizen petition on Indiana's air permit modification for BP's Whiting Refinery [See multiple WIMS], U.S. EPA announced that it has accepted some issues while denying others. In August 2008, the Environmental Law & Policy Center, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Hoosier Environmental Council, Save the Dunes and Sierra Club petitioned EPA to formally object to the State's modification of BP’s operating permit for an expansion project to refine high-sulfur Canadian crude oil.

EPA had reviewed the State's permit before it was issued and worked with Indiana to address several areas of concern. The permit modification was subject to public comment, but the Clean Air Act also provides an additional opportunity for the public to request that EPA review specific matters. Upon this further review, EPA agrees that IDEM did not adequately respond to public comment and that information on some of BP's emissions may have been omitted. Specifically, questions must be answered about emissions from flares, residual emissions from vessel depressurization, increased emissions from coking and coke drum depressurization, fugitive emissions from reduced sulfur compounds and emission factors to account for higher-sulfur crude.

EPA indicated that it did not conclude that the net emissions increase from the project trigger the major modification threshold. However, IDEM must fully respond to the specific questions raised by the petitioners and re-evaluate the emissions calculations for this project. If IDEM concludes that the threshold is triggered, any new requirements developed by IDEM to meet Clean Air Act requirements must be incorporated into the BP operating permit.

EPA denied the petitioners' claims regarding the venting of uncontrolled pressure relief valves, best available control technology for greenhouse gas emissions, and the need for a compliance schedule based on EPA's allegations. IDEM now has 90 days to reconsider, revise as appropriate and submit a proposed permit to EPA.

Access a release from EPA (click here). Access the EPA responding Order (click here). Access information from IDEM on the BP Whiting Air Permits (click here). Access a release from NRDC (click here).

$5 Million RFP For Atmospheric Deposition Network Operations

Jul 22: U.S. EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) is requesting applications for an estimated $5 million in funding over five years for the management and operation of the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN) and to potentially conduct additional special studies and enhancements to IADN. Applications for the funding are due by August 17, 2009 by midnight, CDT.

GLNPO expects to make funding available for the management and operation of IADN October 1, 2009, to September 30, 2014, and for potential additional special studies and enhancements to IADN. EPA is requesting that applicants submit applications for up to $760,000 for Year 1, followed by four more years of funding, adjusted roughly for inflation, for an estimated total of up to $5 million over five years.

IADN is called for in Annex 15 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. IADN is a binational cooperative effort between EPA and Environment Canada aimed at estimating atmospheric deposition of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic substances (PBTs) to the Great Lakes. It is used as a platform for conducting research, monitoring, and surveillance activities to assess the atmospheric deposition of PBTs to the Great Lakes. IADN presently collects data on the deposition of toxic pollutants (PCBs, PBDEs, organochlorine pesticides, and PAHs) to the Great Lakes at 15 sites (5 in the U.S.) through wet and dry deposition and gas exchange.

Access links to the complete application and related background information (click here).

BP Products Cited For CAA Violations

Jun 2: U.S. EPA Region 5 cited BP Products North America Inc. for alleged Clean Air Act (CAA) violations at the company's petroleum refinery at 2815 Indianapolis Blvd., Whiting, IN. According to a release, EPA alleges that for calendar years 2003 through 2008 BP failed to manage and treat benzene waste from the facility as required by the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. The facility's 2008 report showed that benzene waste was almost 16 times the amount allowed.

EPA said these are preliminary findings of violations. To resolve them, EPA may issue a compliance order, assess an administrative penalty or bring suit against the company in Federal court. BP has 30 days from receipt of the notice to meet with EPA to discuss resolving the allegations. EPA indicated that benzene is known to cause cancer in humans. Acute health effects from benzene exposure can include dizziness and lightheadedness; eye, nose and throat irritation; upset stomach and vomiting; irregular heartbeat; convulsions and death. Ecological effects include death in exposed animal, bird and fish populations and death or reduced growth rate in plant life.

Access a release from EPA and link to additional information as it becomes available (click here).

RFP To Address Persistent Toxic Substance Deposition

Jan 29: The Great Lakes Commission (GLC) is requesting project proposals under its Great Lakes Air Deposition (GLAD) program. Pre-Proposals are due March 2, 2009. The purpose of the GLAD program is to safeguard the environment and human health from the adverse effects of atmospherically deposited toxic contaminants in the Great Lakes region. This program supports scientific investigation and the development of assessment tools to identifying the magnitude, sources and impacts of toxic contaminant deposition within the region and to facilitate concerted and strategic actions to mitigate such impacts. The funding available for the current year of the GLAD program is at least $600,000. Previously sponsored projects have ranged from $20,000 to $250,000, with a median of $120,000.

Proposals should focus on contaminants of concern for atmospheric deposition in the Great Lakes region and should demonstrate a likelihood that the contaminant(s) being examined are depositing to the region's waterways from the atmosphere in a quantity that may cause adverse impacts to humans or wildlife. Proposals must describe tangible benefits delivered to the Great Lakes states and how projects will assist the state agencies and their partners in taking informed actions toward assessing and reducing the occurrence and impact of atmospheric deposition of toxic substances.

The 2009 RFP identifies priority project areas that are specifically targeted to be addressed in the upcoming year: Impacts of atmospherically deposited toxic pollutants on Great Lakes wildlife; Effects of climate change on toxic deposition and bioaccumulation; Great Lakes Coordinated Science and Monitoring Initiative; Demonstrate the influence of remaining local, continental and controllable sources; Characterize emissions from burning of agricultural plastics; and Flame Retardants.

Access a posted announcement (click here). Access the RFP (click here). Access the GLAD website for additional information (click here).

ATSDR Report On Chemical Releases In The Great Lakes Region

Jan 27: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), announced the official availability of the report, ATSDR Studies on Chemical Releases in the Great Lakes Region [74 FR 4751]. The report responds to a request from the International Joint Commission (IJC), the binational organization that works to implement the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) between the U.S. and Canada. The GLWQA calls for the two nations to define "the threat to human health from critical pollutants" found in the Great Lakes basin.

The report summarizes previously-published public health assessment products and chemical release information for the 26 U.S. Areas of Concern (AOCs) and 54 counties that are in close geographic proximity to those AOCs. ATSDR says, "It is a descriptive report that does not make associations between health outcomes and chemical exposures." The compilation of environmental data, gathered by ATSDR and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is intended to help decision-makers set future priorities.

The originally controversial report, which had been suppressed for nearly a year was revealed on February 7, 2008, by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) which announced that a massive 400-page study, originally entitled, Public Health Implications of Hazardous Substances in the Twenty-Six U.S. Great Lakes Areas of Concern [AOCs], and completed in July 2007, was being withheld [See WIMS 2/8/08]. The suppression of the study was the subject of an inquiry and investigation from Representatives John Dingell (D-MI), then Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Bart Stupak (D-MI), the Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee [See WIMS 3/14/08].

Access the FR announcement (click here). Access links to the final report and extensive background information (click here).

Comments Wanted On Mercury Emission Reduction Strategy

Nov 19: The Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) Executive Committee directed that a Great Lakes Mercury Emission Reduction Strategy be developed with a goal of producing institutionalized activities to sustain mercury emissions reduction from unregulated sources, and regulated sources with potential for additional reduction. The Strategy should produce recommendations for state action, or available options for state action. It also directed that the group developing the strategy, solicit input from stakeholders on an ongoing basis using the existing Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy mercury workgroup.

A workgroup was formed in April 2008 to develop the Strategy. The workgroup has made significant progress towards the development of the draft Strategy, including developing a detailed table of contents, developing a detailed discussion about mercury emission sources, and the criteria for selecting source sectors that will be addressed in detail in the Strategy. The Strategy Team is seeking input on documents developed so far including the criteria document, and the source sector document. Input would be most helpful if submitted by December 19, 2008.

The work group members selected source sectors based on the criteria communicated in the June 17, 2008 memo to stakeholders. Selection was based on the following criteria: Total emissions within the Great Lakes states; Potential for high deposition within Great Lakes Basin (due to speciation profile) or high local emissions impact (because of big individual sources); Current availability of measures to achieve reductions; and Potential for future emissions growth from the sector.

Sources were further evaluated based on the following criteria: Are mercury emissions from the sector already being adequately addressed?; Do states have the ability to achieve reductions beyond what will be accomplished through existing/forthcoming regulations/programs?; and Are there cost-effective opportunities for additional reduction?

Access a posted request for feedback and comment (click here). Access the draft outline (click here). Access the criteria document (click here). Access the source sector document (click here). Submit contributions and comments to Alexis Cain (click here); and to Deb Jacobson (click here). Access the GLRC Toxics Pollutants Initiative website for additional information (click here).

Groups Seek Signatures For Toxics-Free Great Lakes Pledge

Oct 2: Environmental groups are asking the leaders of the Canadian Federal parties to put their name to a pledge to make toxic pollution in the Great Lakes region a top priority. They said the Pledge for a Toxics-Free Great Lakes establishes the first steps for cleaning up the Great Lakes. The groups include: Canadian Environmental Law Association; Great Lakes United; and Ecojustice.

Specifically, the pledge asks leaders to: (1) Support the vision of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, signed by Canada and the United States, to work toward the elimination of persistent toxic substances in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin. (2) Support the call for zero discharge of persistent toxic chemicals and other toxic substances in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River ecosystem by: Establishing a phase out and elimination strategy for toxic substances; applying a reverse onus that will require chemical users, manufacturers, importers and sellers to demonstrate safety of chemicals before use; assessing and implementing safe alternatives; and applying the precautionary principle. (3) By 2012, complete all actions need for delisting 10 Areas of Concern, and all actions completed for the remaining Areas of Concerns in Canada by 2015. (4) Create a Great Lakes Clean Water Infrastructure fund to upgrade and 'green' municipal wastewater and stormwater infrastructure.

Access a release (click here). Access links to background information, the pledge and find out who signs it (click here).

IOM Says CDC Great Lakes Reports Have Shortcomings

Sep 5: According to a release and a review by the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine (IOM), two drafts of a yet-to-be-finalized report [See WIMS 3/14/08] looking at health and pollution data from the Great Lakes region have problems that diminish the documents' scientific quality. These shortcomings limit the usefulness of the drafts -- prepared by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention -- in determining whether health risks might be associated with living near the lakes.

Questions about the scientific quality of the drafts and concern following the unauthorized publication of one of the interim drafts on a public website [See WIMS 2/8/08] led CDC to ask the IOM for an independent review of the documents. The drafts originated with an international commission's request for CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to evaluate the public health implications of hazardous materials present in certain areas within U.S. states in the Great Lakes basin. The IOM committee focused on a 2007 draft and a 2008 version that was prepared after directors within ATSDR expressed apprehension about the 2007 draft's methodology and conclusions and postponed its public release. No final report has been released.

"We found problems in how each draft was developed, which data were used, and what conclusions the authors drew," said Robert Wallace, Irene Ensminger Stecher Professor of Epidemiology and Internal Medicine, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, and chair of the committee that wrote the report. "Our task was to focus solely on the scientific quality of the drafts and not to assess whether pollution around the Great Lakes poses health concerns," he added. "The problems we found in the drafts would limit the ability of officials and others to draw conclusions from them about whether any health risks are associated with living in or near certain places around the Great Lakes."

Most of the concerns about the 2007 draft raised by CDC's peer reviewers and ATSDR directors -- particularly how data were selected and used -- are valid, the committee concluded. Pollution and health data were lumped together despite differences in where and when the information was collected and despite lack of supporting evidence or explanation of how particular contaminants could lead to any of the identified health problems. The release indicates that, "This juxtaposition of data without explanation or support could lead readers to assume links between contamination and health problems regardless of whether they actually exist. Furthermore, some data that might have provided useful evidence apparently were not considered, and the drafts contained little explanation for why the data used were chosen."

The Committee concluded, "The 2008 draft provides only a summary of selected data on chemical releases and contamination and does not add substantially to the understanding of pollution around the Great Lakes. Though the authors' decision to leave out the health data in the 2008 draft is understandable given its incompatibilities with the available contamination data, it significantly changed the nature of the resulting draft and scope of response to the original request to CDC." The committee also noted problems with using the selected contaminant data as indicators of actual exposures. Moreover, the draft lacks information on other potential sources of contaminants or ways that people could be exposed.

Access a release from the IOM and link to the complete 50-page report (click here). Access the ATSDR website for the Great Lakes report which contains extensive links to background information, the Statement of Concern, the 2004 & 2007 & 2008 drafts, and more (click here).

Obama-Biden Propose $5 Billion For Great Lakes

Sep 16: The Obama-Biden campaign have issued a policy paper saying they are committed to Great Lakes restoration. According to the policy paper, the Obama-Biden vision for the future of the Great Lakes will: Provide New Federal Funding of $5 Billion to Jumpstart Great Lakes Restoration; Designate a Great Lakes Coordinator to Prioritize Coordination of Federal, State and Local Agencies; and Ratify and Fully Implement the Great Lakes Compact to Conserve Water and Protect Against Water Diversions. The paper indicates that, "In contrast, Senator John McCain has repeatedly failed to support critical legislation and even opposed measures to preserve the Great Lakes, including cleanup initiatives and projects to prevent sediment pollution. He also opposed funding to complete the Asian Carp Barrier Project to prevent invasive species from reaching the Great Lakes."

The paper says, Barack Obama has a plan to restore the Great Lakes ecosystem and to revive this engine of economic prosperity. His five-point plan for restoring the Great Lakes includes: $5 billion in new federal funds to jumpstart the restoration; an aggressive toxics plan; a Great Lakes Coordinator within U.S. EPA; Zero tolerance policy for invasive species; and, A "no water diversions compact policy that works for the Great Lakes." The $5 billion to establish the trust fund will be generated from rolling back tax breaks and loopholes for big oil and gas companies.

Access the Obama-Biden Great Lakes Policy Paper (click here).

Utilities Settle For $105 Million In Cooling Water Dispute

Aug 6: A three-year legal battle over the water intake structure at the Elm Road Generating Station (ERGS) in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, ended with a settlement agreement that will provide $100 million for Lake Michigan protection projects over a 25 year period and take significant steps to address global warming including a $5 million investment.

Mark Redsten, executive director at Clean Wisconsin, the state's largest environmental advocacy organization.Mark Redsten, executive director at Clean Wisconsin, the State's largest environmental advocacy organization said, "This settlement provides the long-term commitment of resources necessary to help find solutions to many of the issues Lake Michigan faces today." Clean Wisconsin and the Sierra Club filed suit after the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) issued a permit allowing the use of a once-through cooling system at the coal-fired power plant. The organizations held that once-through cooling did not represent the best available technology for cooling the plant and thus should not be permitted. Under the settlement agreement, the groups will withdraw all legal opposition to the permit.

We Energies, Madison Gas & Electric and Wisconsin Public Power announced a significant new commitment to environmental initiatives. They include reductions in greenhouse gases, investments in additional renewable energy resources, funding to protect Lake Michigan’s ecosystem and the retirement of older, less-efficient generation. Gale Klappa, chairman, president and chief executive officer of We Energies said, “Coupled with other initiatives we have under way, our three utilities are taking a leadership role in providing cost effective energy, maintaining fuel diversity and protecting the environment.

The commitments announced include:

• Greenhouse gas emission reductions – Support legislation to increase Wisconsin’s Renewable Energy Standard to 10 percent by 2013 and 25 percent by 2025, as found in the Final Report of the Governor’s Global Warming Task Force
• Long-term reduction of greenhouse gas emissions – invest $5 million to implement projects consistent with the Final Report of the Governor’s Global Warming Task Force
• Biomass generation – seek regulatory approval to construct 50 megawatts (MW) of non-food crop biomass generation in Wisconsin
• Solar generation – seek regulatory approval for 15 MW of new solar generation which would be developed by providing incentives for customers to install solar capacity, purchasing solar energy output from other generators or constructing solar generation facilities
• Protect Lake Michigan – seek regulatory approval to dedicate $4 million annually for 25 years toward projects that will address water quality issues in Lake Michigan such as invasive species, polluted runoff, toxic loadings and habitat destruction
• Retire older less-efficient coal – retire an additional 116 MW of coal capacity from two generating units at the Presque Isle Power Plant in Marquette, Michigan by no later than the end of 2012
• Conservation and energy efficiency for public buildings – invest in energy efficiency projects for public buildings that are consistent with the recommendations of the Governor’s Global Warming Task Force
• Reporting of greenhouse emissions – provide useful information to customers and the public regarding annual greenhouse gas emissions

Access a release from We Energies (click here). Access a release from Clean Wisconsin (click here).

Latest U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy Report

Jul 17: Environment Canada and U.S. EPA announced the release of the 2007 edition of the U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (GLBTS) Progress Report. Over the past ten years, the governments of Canada and the U.S., along with stakeholders from industry, academia, state/provincial and local governments, Tribes, First Nations, and environmental and community groups have worked together toward the achievement of the Strategy’s challenge goals. Of the Strategy’s 17 challenge goals that were established in 1997, 13 have been achieved and significant progress has been made toward the remaining four challenge goals.

According to an announcement, compared to 1988 levels, Canada achieved over 98 percent reduction in sources, uses and releases for alkyl-lead; eliminated the use, generation or release of octachlorostyrene and five Level 1 pesticides; met its 90 percent reduction goal for mercury and dioxins and furans; and reduced emissions of hexachlorobenzene and benzo(a)pyrene by 73 percent and 52 percent, respectively. Furthermore, Canada destroyed 90 per cent of high-level PCBs in storage, compared to 1993 levels; and achieved a reduction of nearly 70 percent of high-level PCBs in service since 1989.

Similarly, the U.S. eliminated the use of alkyl-lead in automotive gasoline; eliminated the use, generation or release of octachlorostyrene and five Level 1 pesticides; achieved its 50 percent reduction goal for mercury and 75 percent goal for dioxins and furans, and reduced its benzo(a)pyrene emissions by 77 percent, in addition to significantly reducing its hexachlorobenzene releases and PCB equipment in service.

Looking ahead beyond the reduction of legacy contaminants, Canada and the U.S. have also created two new Groups under the Strategy to focus on substances of emerging concerns and sectors of importance in the Great Lakes Basin. These new efforts will enable the identification of management options for addressing the current and future releases of persistent toxic substances into the Great Lakes Basin.

Access the complete 120-page 2007 Report (click here). Access a detailed 22-page overview of the GLBTS (click here). Access links to previous reports and related information (click here). Access additional information about the GLBTS, the innovative public-private binational partnership aimed at reducing toxic chemicals in the Great Lakes (click here).

GLRC Mercury In Products Phase-Down Strategy

Jun 30: The Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) Executive Committee announced the release of the Mercury in Products Phase-Down Strategy. A team of State, Federal, Tribal, and City government staff wrote the Strategy in fulfillment of a GLRC recommendation to phase out mercury in products in the Great Lakes basin by 2015. The Strategy makes more than 60 recommendations for action by Great Lakes states, cities and tribes to take in order to minimize mercury use and releases caused by remaining uses of mercury-containing products. Recommendations include state bans on the sale of some, but not all, mercury-containing products and a variety of mandatory and voluntary measures for managing the disposal of all mercury-containing products.

The Draft Mercury In Products Phase-Down Strategy was released for public comment through November 5, 2007 [See WIMS 9/11/07]. A total of 47 comments were received, including from the following organizations: American Dental Association; Council of Great Lakes Industries; DTE Energy Company; Mercury Free Wisconsin; Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP); Consumers for Dental Choice; Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers; Clean Air Foundation, Environment Illinois; Zero Mercury Working Group; Great Lakes Natural Resource Center - National Wildlife Federation; and Illinois State Dental Society.

Implementation of this strategy is one important element in achieving virtual elimination of mercury inputs into the Great Lakes as envisioned in the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (see Appendix D). The GLRC endorses the recommendations of the Strategy as valid options for consideration by Great Lakes states, tribes, and municipalities. The GLRC does not expect each state, tribe or municipality to commit to implementation of all of the recommendations, but rather to consider implementation of those recommendations that are appropriate and feasible in its individual circumstances. The Phase-Down Strategy also seeks to complement and enhance the recommendations in the Quicksilver Caucus’s Action Plan and Implementation Strategy for reducing mercury in the environment developed as a project of Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) and linked in the report.

The report indicates that while coal-fired power plants represent the largest air emissions source of mercury, a significant fraction of mercury emissions comes from mercury-containing products, whether from melting steel scrap that is contaminated with mercury contained in switches and other devices used in autos, industrial equipment, and commercial and consumer appliances, or from incineration of municipal, hazardous, and medical waste that can include mercury-containing products such as lamps, batteries, thermometers, and thermostats. Additionally, mercury-based amalgam used in some dental fillings is one of the primary sources of mercury in wastewater.

Access the Mercury in Products Strategy (click here). Access the GLRC website for additional information and background (click here).

Controversial AOC Health Report Released For Comments

Apr 30: Dr. Henry Falk, Director, Coordinating Center for Environmental Health and Injury Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), announced that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) had issued a revised report for public comment on what is known about environmental contaminants and human health in 26 Great Lakes “Areas of Concern” (AOCs). The controversial report which had been suppressed for nearly a year responds to a request from the International Joint Commission (IJC) to define the threat to human health from critical pollutants found in the Great Lakes basin. The report analyzes many sources of data on environmental exposures and on human health in the Great Lakes basin. The report is open for public comment for 60 days.

On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) announced that a massive 400-page study, originally entitled, Public Health Implications of Hazardous Substances in the Twenty-Six U.S. Great Lakes Areas of Concern [AOCs], completed in July 2007, was being withheld [See WIMS 2/8/08]. Subsequently, an inquiry and investigation from Representatives John Dingell (D-MI), the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Bart Stupak (D-MI) caused the study to be publicly released [See WIMS 3/14/08]. The latest 2008 draft report released for comment is now entitled, Selected Information on Chemical Releases Within Great Lakes Counties Containing Areas of Concern (AOC).

According to a CDC announcement, the key conclusions of the revised report include: 1) available environmental health data provide a useful but only a partial picture of the burden of chemical exposures people in the region face; 2) current health and environmental data collection cannot define the threat to human health from critical pollutants in the Great Lakes region; and 3) need for additional data collection and analysis to permit scientists, decision makers, and members of the public to define the threat to human health from pollutants in the Great Lakes basin. CDC indicates that comments should be submitted by email to: greatlakes@cdc.gov.

Access the CDC announcement (click here). Access the ATSDR website for the Great Lakes report which contains extensive links to background information, the Statement of Concern, the 2004 & 2007 & 2008 drafts, and more (click here). Access the 2008 draft report (click here).

CDC/ATSDR Release Great Lakes AOC Health Report

Mar 14: Following an inquiry and investigation from Representatives John Dingell (D-MI), the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Bart Stupak (D-MI), the Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has publicly released a study that reportedly demonstrates a correlation between pollution in the Great Lakes and health issues such as cancer mortality and higher infant mortality rates [See WIMS 2/29/08].

On February 7, the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) announced that the massive 400-page study, officially entitled, Public Health Implications of Hazardous Substances in the Twenty-Six U.S. Great Lakes Areas of Concern [AOCs], completed in July 2007, was being withheld [See WIMS 2/8/08]. The report follows several years of work and extensive scientific peer review. CPI released an unofficial redacted copy of the report and said it had been withheld for 7 months because it contained potentially “alarming information” as evidence of elevated infant mortality and cancer rates."

Representative John Dingell issued a statement on the decision to release the report and said, “The good news is that the CDC finally decided to make the report public. The bad news is that it took the urging of this Committee to make them do it. What we still do not know is why this agency, given its historically credible reputation, has kept this report under wraps for almost a year. The Committee will continue its investigation into who made the decision to withhold the publication of the report, the basis for doing so, and how the CDC and ATSDR treated the scientists involved in conducting the study and writing the report.”

In releasing the report, ATSDR also issued what it called a 9-page, "Statement of Scientific Concerns About the Draft Report." According to the Statement Summary, "Understanding environmental conditions in the Great Lakes region and protecting residents from possible health effects is a priority for CDC and ATSDR. Community members in the Great Lakes region deserve accurate information provided in a timely manner. The decision to take additional time to improve the draft report in order to ensure its scientific quality was difficult, but it was necessary. The delay in issuing the draft report has not deprived the public of critical environmental health information because the health assessments and other environmental data on which the draft report was based already are publicly available elsewhere.

"CDC and ATSDR consistently have provided the people living in the Great Lakes states with up-to-date information to help protect them from exposures to toxic chemicals. Between January 2001 and February 2008 in the 8 Great Lakes states, ATSDR has developed and supported 756 documents pertaining to 528 sites and both ATSDR and CDC’s National Center for Environmental Health have many ongoing scientific and programmatic activities in those states. CDC and ATSDR are committed to providing useful, scientifically sound information that will help decisionmakers protect public health and the environment."

ATSDR indicates further that the intent of the draft report was to help decision-makers set future priorities for research and public health action. Accordingly, "ATSDR staff identified and assembled certain existing data related to both environmental pollutants and health, and they distributed a draft report for peer review in 2004. Between April 2004 and July 2007, the draft report underwent revision. When the draft report was reviewed by ATSDR leadership in June 2007, significant scientific shortcomings were identified. Similar concerns also were expressed by multiple levels of scientific leadership within CDC, ATSDR, and among various partners and stakeholders. The report is being rewritten to address those scientific concerns.

"The draft reports from 2004 and 2007 were provided to the Institute of Medicine -- an independent, unbiased, authoritative source of science-based health information -- to conduct an independent review of the science presented in the draft report and the decision to improve its scientific content and communication prior to release. Those drafts are made available here. When the 2008 revised draft is complete, it will also be made available here."

Access the ATSDR website for the Great Lakes report which contains extensive links to background information, the Statement of Concern, the 2004 & 2007 drafts, and more (click here). Access a statement from Representative Dingell (click here).

EPA's Great Lakes 2008 Earth Day Challenge

Mar 4: U.S. EPA Region 5 Administrator and Great Lakes National Program Manager, Mary Gade, has issued a call to join in the Great Lakes 2008 Earth Day Challenge. EPA is striving to mobilize hundreds of thousands of citizens in the Great Lakes basin to connect with their environment this April by helping address the environmental impact of electronic wastes and unwanted medicines. The Challenge is meant to galvanize public participation in collection events for those wastes so that one million pounds of electronic waste can be recycled and one million pills of unwanted medicines can be disposed of responsibly.

Gade said, "I am asking you to become a partner with us in spreading the news about planned collection events during Earth Week and in creating new ones. We need your help both in identifying events to be a part of the Challenge and in getting the word out to the public about these events. If your organization wishes to partner with us, please fill out the web-based partners form you can find at our Earth Day Challenge Website . . . Our partner, Earth 911, is developing an online clearinghouse that will list collection events in the basin to be held April 19-27, 2008, to show people where they can participate near their homes. If your organization is planning a collection event, we invite you to list it by filling out the registration form that can be accessed from the Challenge Web Site.

"In addition, if your organization does not have a collection event planned, but would like to do so, we can provide technical assistance and information to help you set up your event. There will also be an opportunity for Challenge partners to share the results of these collection events to gauge whether the Challenge goal as a whole has been met."

Access the Earth Day Challenge Website for complete details (click here).