SACRAMENTO, California, June 10, 2008 (ENS) – California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. has filed a lawsuit against companies that manufacture or distribute body care and household cleaning products that have tested highest for the carcinogenic chemical 1,4-dioxane. The lawsuit was filed May 29 in the Alameda County Superior Court.

Named as defendants are Avalon Natural Products, which makes the Alba brand products; Beaumont Products which makes VeggieWash and Clearly Natural brands; Nutribiotic, which makes grapefruit seed extract personal care products; and Whole Foods Market California, Inc., which sells the Whole Foods 365 brand.

The lawsuit seeks an injunction and civil penalties to remedy defendants’ failure to warn consumers that cleaning products such as body washes and gels and liquid dish soaps containing l,4-dioxane sold by defendants expose consumers to chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer.

Some natural personal care products
contain a known human
carcinogen, California alleges.
(Photo credit unknown)

Under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, Health and Safety Code section 25249.6, usually called “Proposition 65,” businesses must provide persons with a “clear and reasonable warning” before exposing them to such chemicals.

The chemical 1,4-dioxane was listed under Proposition 65 as a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer on January 1, 1988.

The California attorney general alleges that each defendant has known since at least May 29, 2004 that the body washes and gels and liquid dish soaps contain l ,4-dioxane and that persons using these products are exposed to the chemical.

In addition to violating Proposition 65, the lawsuit alleges that each defendant has engaged in unlawful business practices which constitute unfair competition.

The defendant companies face maximum fines of $2,500 per day for each violation.

The defendants’ products were tested in a study commissioned by the Organic Consumers Association, OCA, and released in March. The study analyzed “natural” and “organic” brand shampoos, body washes, lotions and other personal care products for the presence of 1,4-dioxane.

Results for all products tested is online here. http://www.organicconsumers.org/bodycare/DioxaneResults08.cfm

A reputable third-party laboratory known for rigorous testing and chain-of-custody protocols, performed the testing, the Organic Consumers Association says.

The chemical at issue in the lawsuit, 1,4-dioxane, is typically produced as a byproduct when ingredients are processed with the petrochemical ethylene oxide, which has become standard practice for many cleansing and moisturizing products.

“The OCA’s 1,4-dioxane study elevated the issue of fake ‘natural’ and ‘organic’ brands that utilize petrochemicals in their formulas in March, and now we are seeing labeling enforcement on a scale never seen before,” says the association’s National Director Ronnie Cummins.

“We used an independent laboratory and found that numerous ‘natural’ and ‘organic’ brands tested positive for 1,4-dioxane, a cancer-causing contaminant resulting from the petrochemical ethylene oxide being attached to one or more ingredients,” Cummins said.

Last week, the Organic Consumers Association sent a letter to the four companies named in the lawsuit asking if they are planning changes to their labeling or product formulations. Only one company responded.

In a letter to the association Beaumont Products of Kennesaw, Georgia wrote, “Upon being notified that there was a problem with our product, we verified that the problem existed, then took immediate action.”

Beaumont says they have reformulated their products to remove the problem ingredient.

“These companies need to stop treating the inclusion of cancer causing chemicals in their products as business as usual and reformulate before consumer confidence in the natural products and organics industry is permanently damaged,” says consumer activist David Steinman, who conducted the OCA study and exposed the presence of 1,4-dioxane in baby bubble bath products in his book “Safe Trip to Eden.”

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services considers 1,4-dioxane as “reasonably anticipated” to be a human carcinogen.

Few studies are available that provide information about the effects of 1,4-dioxane in humans. Exposure to very high levels of 1,4-dioxane can result in liver and kidney damage and death. Eye and nose irritation was reported by people inhaling low levels of 1,4-dioxane vapors for short periods up to several hours.

Studies in animals have shown that breathing, ingesting, or skin contact with 1,4-dioxane can result in liver and kidney damage.

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

HOLLISTER, California, May 1, 2008 (ENS) – People enjoying recreational activities at the Clear Creek Management Area in central California may not realize it but they are exposing themselves to high levels of asbestos in the soil, which increases their risk of developing cancer.

Based on the findings of a new study of asbestos exposure risk to visitors released Wednesday by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Land Management today issued an immediate temporary closure of 31,000 acres, a little less than half of the area.

The area in southern San Benito and western Fresno counties contains the largest deposit in the United States of asbestos, a known human carcinogen.

The Clear Creek Management Area hosts about 35,000 visitors a year – hikers, campers, hunters, botanists, rock collectors, and off-highway vehicle riders, including many families with children.

Vehicles traveling through the Clear Creek
Management Area raise
asbestos-laden dust.
(Photo courtesy EPA)

The EPA study found that riding motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles and driving SUVs creates the highest asbestos exposures by stirring up the naturally occurring asbestos in the soil. These riders and drivers are exposed to asbestos in the range seen in industrial environments, the study found.

“The EPA’s sampling results demonstrate that in areas where asbestos is present in the soil, activities that create dust also create asbestos exposure,” said EPA toxicologist Daniel Stralka, PhD.

“Higher dust-generating activities produce higher exposures and, therefore, higher risks,” he said.

Based on the asbestos exposure levels, the EPA estimated lifetime excess cancer risks. Many activities in the Clear Creek Management Area, CCMA, were found to have risks above the range that EPA considers to be acceptable.

The EPA data showed that children are generally exposed to higher asbestos concentrations than adults participating in the same activities.

In 2004 and 2005, EPA Region 9 collected air samples while EPA employees and contractors participated in typical recreational activities common to the CCMA.

The samples were collected from the breathing zone of individuals riding motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles, driving and riding in SUVs, hiking, camping, sleeping in a tent, fence building, and washing and vacuuming vehicles after use at the CCMA.

“The asbestos levels measured in the breathing zone at CCMA are in the range seen in industrial environments and are at levels of concern, said Stralka. “Reducing or eliminating dust-generating activities in CCMA will reduce exposure and reduce the risk of developing asbestos-related disease.”

The EPA risk assessment only evaluated excess lifetime cancer risks. Asbestos can also cause debilitating and fatal diseases other than cancer, such as asbestosis and pleural disease.

The EPA risk assessment did not take other diseases into account because no asbestos toxicity values exist for non-cancer health effects, Stralka said, adding, “Non-cancer health effects from heightened asbestos exposure in the area may actually be more significant to total disease outcome than cancer.”

The Clear Creek Management Area spans more than 75,000 acres across San Benito and Fresno Counties and includes the Atlas Asbestos Mine Superfund Site. It includes a 31,000 acre outcrop of naturally occurring asbestos.

Most of the area is managed by the federal Bureau of Land Management. Both BLM and the EPA have advised users of the asbestos health hazard existing at the area since the early 1990s.

Now, BLM staffers will use the information provided in the EPA’s risk assessment to evaluate alternatives in an upcoming environmental impact statement for managing the Clear Creek Management Area.

BLM’s Hollister field manager Rick Cooper said protecting the public’s health and safety is the agency’s first priority. “Based on EPA’s results, we believe a temporary closure of most of the CCMA is in the public interest and we ask for the public’s cooperation.”

“With the closure in place, we will immediately move on with developing a long-term resource management plan for the area with the public’s full involvement,” said Cooper.

BLM will continue public scoping started last year for the resource management plan through June 21, 2008. Two public workshops – May 19 in Hollister and May 21 in San Jose – to discuss the planning process have been scheduled.

The BLM also is hosting an informational meeting May 8 at the Convention Center in Santa Clara for EPA representatives to present assessment findings with the public.

Cooper said the BLM will work closely with interested parties to develop management actions best suited to the resources and the needs of the public, taking into account local, regional, and national concerns.

“Early participation by all interested parties is encouraged and will help guide the planning process and determine the future management of public lands,” he said.

For further information contact the BLM in Hollister by phone at: 831-630-5000 or by e-mail, ca190@ca.blm.gov.

To view the EPA Asbestos study, click here [www.epa.gov].

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

WASHINGTON, DC, March 11, 2008 (ENS) – W.R. Grace, a global supplier of specialty chemicals, has agreed to pay $250 million, the highest sum in the history of the Superfund program, to reimburse the federal government for the costs of the investigation and cleanup of asbestos contamination in the town of Libby, Montana, the Justice Department and Environmental Protection Agency said today.

Asbestos, a recognized human carcinogen, is known to cause lung cancer and mesothelioma, a lethal tumor of the chest and abdominal cavities. Exposure to asbestos also can cause asbestosis, a disease characterized by scarring of the lung.

W.R. Grace owned and operated a vermiculite mine and vermiculite processing facilities in and near Libby from 1963 to 1990. The vermiculite ore was contaminated with asbestos and asbestos-laden vermiculite has been found all over town. It was even used as a running surface for the Libby High School track.

The abandoned vermiculite mine above
Libby, Montana (Photo courtesy EPA
Region

The asbestos fibers in vermiculite from Libby have been identified by the federal government as the cause of hundreds of deaths and thousands more illnesses.

The vermiculite was shipped to more than 200 processing and packaging plants throughout North America, where it was made into lawn and garden products and attic and wall insulation that the government has estimated is in up to 35 million homes and businesses.

In March 2000, a class-action lawsuit against Grace & Co. was filed on behalf of thousands of Washington state homeowners and business owners whose buildings contain Zonolite insulation. W.R. Grace and 61 affiliated companies filed for bankruptcy in April 2001.

Today’s legal action settles a bankruptcy claim brought by the federal government to recover money for past and future costs of cleanup of contaminated schools, homes and businesses in Libby.

Opened in 1913, the mine is in the hills six miles from Libby. Grace bought it in 1963 and closed it in 1990. The EPA has been removing asbestos-contaminated soils and other materials in and near Libby since May 2000.

The federal government filed suit against W.R. Grace in March 2001 to recover its investigation and cleanup costs under the Superfund law. The lawsuit also named Kootenai Development Corporation, a W.R. Grace subsidiary, as a defendant due to its ownership of three contaminated properties in Libby.

In 2003, the federal district court in Montana awarded the EPA over $54 million for cleanup costs incurred by the federal agency through December 31, 2001.

That award has not been paid due to W.R. Grace’s bankruptcy. Today’s settlement resolves the 2003 judgment as well as continuing cleanup costs EPA has incurred since December 31, 2001 and will incur in the future. The EPA will place the settlement proceeds into a special account within the Superfund that will be used to finance future cleanup work at the site.

The settlement agreement will be lodged in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware and is subject to court approval after a 30-day public comment period. The settlement requires W.R. Grace to pay the $250 million within 30 days of bankruptcy court approval.

Vermiculite is a naturally occurring mineral and the world’s largest known deposit is in Libby. Before the closing of the mine in 1990, Libby contributed up to 80 percent of the world’s supply of vermiculite.

The unique mineral expands when heated. Expanded vermiculite is included in concrete aggregates, loose-fill insulation, horticultural applications like soil conditioning products, and as a bulk carrier for agricultural chemicals.

The federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, ATSDR, in cooperation with the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, analyzed mortality statistics for Libby, Montana during the period from 1979 to 1998.

For the 20-year period reviewed, mortality in Libby resulting from asbestosis was approximately 40 to 60 times higher than expected, the ATSDR found. Mesothelioma mortality was also elevated.

In February 2005, W.R. Grace and seven of its current or former executives were indicted on federal charges that they knowingly put their workers and the public in danger through exposure to vermiculite ore contaminated with asbestos from the Libby mine.

The company has attempted to bar federal lawyers from introducing many documents, studies and testimony of expert witnesses into evidence in the criminal trial.

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy sitting in Montana ruled for the company in 2006. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed his ruling, but now W.R. Grace lawyers are in the process of filing an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court that is due April 14, 2008.

If the high court accepts the case, it would make a final ruling on whether the government can use that evidence at trial.

W.R. Grace has corporate headquarters in Columbia, Maryland and employees in nearly 40 countries. The company manufactures construction chemicals, building materials and chemical additives.

View This Story On Eco–mmunity Map.

On Monday [www.sundancechannel.com] we started peeking into the production of leather, talking about whether or not it’s a material that gets the TreeHugger stamp of approval. We mentioned vegetable tanning, generally considered to be the least harmful of all leather-tanning methods. Today, we’ll take a closer look at the process known as mineral tanning.

Mineral tanning usually uses chromium and is a fairly chemistry-intensive process. The hides are “pickled,” raising the pH to a high acidity level (about 3) and enabling chromium tannins to enter the hide. For preservation purposes, fungicides and bactericides are also applied (yum). After pickling, when the pH is low, chromium salts are added. To fixate the chromium, the pH is slowly increased through addition of a base of magnesium oxide and more fungicide — sounds like something you’d really want to snuggle up against, no? Chrome tanning is faster than vegetable tanning — less than a day for this part of the process — and produces a stretchable leather which is preferred for use in handbags and garments. Chromium is not very nice stuff for people; studies have clearly established that inhaled chromium is a human carcinogen, resulting in an increased risk of lung cancer. While people aren’t as likely to inhale once it’s been ingrained in the leather hide, it doesn’t bode as well for the people tanning the leather, and, on the whole, isn’t something that will really benefit you by rubbing up against your skin all the time.

For the most part, cow leather is a bi-product of the beef industry; this is a double-edged sword. Cows raised for beef aren’t going anywhere any time soon, so beef-eating TreeHuggers will note that we may as well use as much of the animal as possible, but tanning leather is a dirty, energy-intensive, potentially toxic process. Further, the synthetic “versions” of leather include vinyl and other plastics, which aren’t really very good for anybody either. Unfortunately, there aren’t any regulations or certifications for “organic” or “certified humane raised & handled” leather, as there is with beef and some other leather-producing animal meat (we covered the certification topic here [www.sundancechannel.com]), so there is no easy way to insure that your leather products came from an ethical and/or planet and animal-healthy environment, short of raising the animal yourself. So, in the end, the best thing is to avoid it altogether; replacing a leather product with a vinyl one won’t be doing anyone any good, so for those who simply must have it, we recommend finding it repurposed or second-hand or otherwise reused, rather than buying a virgin product, and if you absolutely, positively have to have new leather, vegetable-tanned is the only way to go.

What do you think about this? Where do you stand on leather? Would you be willing to give it up to help save the planet? Let us know what you think in the discussion board over on the right.