Advertisement

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCES TO C&EN

Environment

Government Concentrates

June 20, 2005 | A version of this story appeared in Volume 83, Issue 25

DRAINED
[+]Enlarge
Credit: ARMY CHEMICAL MATERIALS AGENCY
Workers empty VX nerve agent from containers in chemical agent transfer system.
Credit: ARMY CHEMICAL MATERIALS AGENCY
Workers empty VX nerve agent from containers in chemical agent transfer system.

VX spill at disposal facility

A 30-gal spill of deadly VX nerve agent at the Army's Newport, Ind., disposal facility on June 10 has been cleaned up. The spill occurred after more than 3,000 gal of VX had been neutralized at the facility, and the cause is believed to be a malfunctioning valve diaphragm. The spill is the first since the Newport facility began neutralizing VX in May and occurred in a highly contained toxic cubicle where VX is transferred from a holding tank to the neutralization reactor. No VX was released to the environment, and no workers were in the cubicle. The toxic cubicle has been decontaminated with sodium hydroxide and water, and, at press time, the Army's contractor, Parsons, planned to replace the faulty valve and conduct a test run. If there are no leaks, the facility will resume neutralizing VX this week. The Army plans to ship the hydrolysate--the product of VX neutralization--to DuPont's Chamberworks facility in New Jersey for secondary treatment and disposal into the Delaware River. However, local opposition is currently preventing the Army from carrying out this plan.

Toxicogenomics for regulation under study

Two major international organizations are jointly studying how governments could use toxicogenomics data in regulating chemicals. The Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD) and the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS), which is run by the World Health Organization, are exploring the use of genomic techniques in assessing chemical hazards or risks, according to Drew Wagner, principal administrator of OECD's test guidelines program. A goal of the group is describing for the toxicogenomics research community the type of information government regulators need, Wagner explains. The OECD-IPCS group is examining issues such as how to employ toxicogenomics to fill gaps in data on existing chemicals and to screen substances to determine whether they need further toxicity testing, he says. In addition, the group is interested in toxicogenomics techniques to extrapolate results from tests in laboratory animals to humans and other animals, especially for ecotoxicity assessments. The group, formed in late 2004, will report its progress in February 2006 to a joint meeting of OECD's Chemicals Committee and Working Party on Chemicals, Pesticides & Biotechnology, Wagner says.

Federal court hands air act victory to utility

A federal appeals court last week sided with Duke Energy in a Clean Air Act case that likely will have ramifications for similar, pending suits against other utilities. In the case, lodged by the Clinton Administration, the U.S. government contended that Duke Energy violated the Clean Air Act when the utility modified coal-fired generating units at eight plants located in the Carolinas. The upgrades allowed the units to increase the number of hours they could operate each day and thus increased the amount of air pollution the utility emitted each year. The government contended that Duke Energy needed permits for this increase in annual air pollution but did not obtain them. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit determined that utility modifications trigger a need for new permits only if a facility's hourly rate of pollution increases.

Suspect BSE case raises questions about U.S. tests

A U.S. cow brain sample that recently tested positive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) has raised new questions about whether the USDA's testing program to detect mad cow disease is sensitive enough. Last fall, samples from three cows tested positive for BSE with the rapid BioRad test, but were negative with the slower, more accurate immunohistochemistry (IHC) test. During the week of June 6, USDA's Office of Inspector General ordered that the three samples be subjected to the Western blot BSE test, and one of them tested positive. Western blot assay, which is more sensitive than IHC, can detect BSE at an earlier stage of infection. European countries and Japan routinely use the Western blot on any positive results from the more rapid assays. The positive U.S. brain sample will now be sent to the world's premier BSE laboratory in Weybridge, England, for further testing using Western blot and IHC tests. The suspect sample is from a Texas cow born before 1997, when the ban on feeding cattle-derived meat and bone meal to cattle went into effect. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) have asked USDA to explain why new tests were ordered and why it took many months to request them.

GOVERNMENT & POLICY ROUNDUP

  • The White House announced the recipients of the 2004 Presidential Early Career Awards for Scientists & Engineers last week. A total of 58 researchers are being honored with the nation's highest award for professionals at the start of their independent research careers. A list of recipients is available at www.ostp.gov/html/PECASE20046-13-05.pdf.

  • President Bush has nominated John S. Redd to head the newly established National Counterterrorism Center. Redd, former commander of the Navy's Fifth Fleet in the Middle East, served most recently in Baghdad as deputy administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority. He has never been involved in counterterrorism operations.

  • Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman announced $100 million for seven projects to move carbon sequestration technology from the lab to commercialization. The public-private sector consortia include businesses, state agencies, and universities. The research is being done under the President's Global Climate Change Initiative.
Advertisement

Article:

This article has been sent to the following recipient:

0 /1 FREE ARTICLES LEFT THIS MONTH Remaining
Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.