Preview Newsletter
ACC PM
-
(ACC Mentioned) Weight Loss Plans & Tips: Ditch The Chemicals To Lose Pounds, Manage Diabetes
Sep 29, 2015 | Parent Herald
Scientists have found more links that suggest exposure to chemicals can lead to serious health problems like diabetes and obesity. -
Safer Chemicals Qould Benefit Both Consumers and Workers
Sep 29, 2015 | Medical Xpress
By Heather Buckley
Almost every product we purchase, use in our homes, or give to our children contains tens, if not hundreds, of chemicals. -
Evidence for EDCs 'More Definitive Than Ever’
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
Evidence that some chemicals disrupt hormones, in a way that causes a range of serious health problems, has become more compelling, says international scientific organisation the Endocrine Society. -
Global PFC Group Addresses Best Practice and Inventory
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The OECD and the UN Environment Programme (Unep) have published a report assessing different approaches taken to control per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). -
DOE Seeks to Focus National Lab Research on Top Cyber, Grid Priorities
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Peter Behr
A unique collaboration among the Energy Department's national laboratories is seeking to close high-priority technology gaps facing the U.S. power grid, as it deals with disruptive operating changes and cybersecurity threats. -
Language to Boost LNG Exports Added to House Energy Bill
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
Republican leaders on the House Energy and Commerce Committee have added language to a larger energy bill setting a 30-day deadline for the Obama administration to rule on natural gas export proposals, one of several high-profile additions ahead of a markup scheduled to begin this afternoon. -
House GOP Revises Omnibus Bill; Committee Votes Tomorrow
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Hannah Northey, Geof Koss and Katherine Ling
Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee today unveiled a revised version of a comprehensive energy package that's up for a vote in the lower chamber tomorrow after weeks of negotiations with Democrats. -
EPA Puts Cost of New Refinery Rule at $283 Million
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
EPA estimates that its final rule for refinery emissions, set for release today, will cost $283 million and "have a negligible impact on the costs of petroleum products." -
Obama Admin Cracks Down on Refinery Emissions
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Petroleum refineries will be forced to curb toxic air emissions and beef up monitoring under a rule finalized today by U.S. EPA. -
Ga. Wants Extension for its EPA Proposal
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Kristi E. Swartz
Georgia intends to ask U.S. EPA for a two-year extension when it files an initial plan on meeting carbon-cutting goals next September. -
Under Clean Power Plan, Pa. Confronts Its Deep Ties to Coal
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Climatewire
By Elizabeth Harball
Pennsylvania's status as a nationwide energy giant is evident in the rural outskirts of this community in the state's southwest. -
Minn. Utilities Dislike Clean Power Plan But Still Request Carbon Trading
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Climatewire
By Elizabeth Harball
At one of Minnesota's first meetings to discuss the final Clean Power Plan held last week, the state's utilities were almost united in their dislike of the final federal rule regulating carbon emissions from power plants. -
Greens Ready to Litigate as EPA Preps Ozone Standard
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Environmentalists are threatening legal action if U.S. EPA fails to finalize a new ozone standard that they believe protects public health. -
EPA Evaluating Scope of Proposed Methane Rules
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
It will become clear in the next few years whether U.S. EPA's proposed methane rules should be extended to include existing oil and natural gas operations, the Office of Air and Radiation's top lawyer said today. -
Carbon-Capture Projects Lose Out on DOE Stimulus Cash
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Darius Dixon
The Energy Department is poised to send about $2.48 billion in unspent stimulus funds back to the Treasury this week, and just four stalled carbon-capture and sequestration grants account for more than half of that figure. -
EPA Expects Success from New Methane Rules
Sep 29, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A top environmental regulator said Tuesday that he expects new federal standards for methane emissions will succeed in cutting down on the potent greenhouse gas. -
Senate Dem to EPA: Protect 'God's Planet'
Sep 29, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Tim Devaney
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) urged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to protect “God’s planet” during a testy climate hearing Tuesday. -
Bush to Press for GOP Energy Priorities, Skirt Climate Change
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Darren Goode
Jeb Bush will throw his support behind a checklist of Republican energy priorities on Tuesday that he says will jump-start the economy, but he'll steer clear of discussing climate change. -
Obama Climate Official Predicts 'Monumental Undertaking' at UN
Sep 29, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
President Obama’s climate change point person at the United Nations laid out the stakes Monday for an international global warming conference later this year. -
House Impeachment Push, Senate Hearing Target CWA Rule Development
Sep 29, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
Congressional Republicans are targeting what they see as flaws in the crafting of the Obama administration's Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule, with a handful of GOP lawmakers pushing an impeachment resolution against EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy over the rule and senators planning a hearing on development of the policy. -
McCarthy Vows to Fund Highways, Revamp Federal Agencies
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sean Reilly and Kevin Bogardus
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), likely soon to become House speaker, today predicted that the chamber will quickly pull off a feat that has eluded it for years: passage of long-term surface transportation funding legislation.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Weight Loss Plans & Tips: Ditch The Chemicals To Lose Pounds, Manage Diabetes
Sep 29, 2015 | Parent Herald
Scientists have found more links that suggest exposure to chemicals can lead to serious health problems like diabetes and obesity. The study, released via the Endrocrine Society in a press release, points out that chemical exposure can adversely affect the body's hormones, when it's vital to regulating a person's physiology and behavior.
The chemicals identified by the experts include bisphenol A and phthalates, which are found in food and personal care products people use at home, according to NBC News. They are in canned goods, bottled waters, perfumes, soaps, toothpastes and shampoos, as well as certain pesticides, according to Web MD.
It's not the first study to point out the dangers of chemical exposure, but the latest findings highlight why changing eating habits by avoiding chemicals could be advantageous to people who have diabetes or are trying to battle obesity.
"I think when doctors talk about lifestyle to their patients, they typically emphasize a healthy diet and exercise. But I would be surprised if, as part of the healthy diet conversation, they talk about ... trying to remove processed foods, or staying away from microwaving the plastics," said pharmacologist Andrea Gore, according to Healio. "You may have a healthy meal, but if it's in a [microwaved] plastic container, it's leaching chemicals," she emphasized.
Gore is part of task force that reviewed over 1,300 studies to come up with convincing evidence that chemicals disrupt the hormones. Aside from what was already suggested, Gore and her team also also hope for better safety testing of products and the implementation of tighter regulations among manufacturers.
"With more chemicals being introduced into the marketplace all the time, better safety testing is needed to identify new endocrine disrupting chemicals and ensure they are kept out of household goods," said Gore, via NBC News.
As a result, giant retail shops like Target and Walmart are already taking a pro-active stance. Target is expanding its list of banned chemicals and suppliers have to comply to their standards, according to Safechemicals Org. On the other hand, Walmart also has a list of products with harmful chemicals, according to anotherSafechemicals report.
However, chemical manufacturers have issued a statement to address the report by Gore's team. In part it said via American Chemistry Council, "The Endocrine Society's report fails to differentiate between chemicals that are 'endocrine-active,' meaning they interact with the endocrine system, and those that are 'endocrine disruptors,' meaning that the levels of exposure associated with that interaction cause scientifically-proven adverse health effects."
Read more: http://www.parentherald.com/articles/10552/20150929/weight-loss-plans-tips-ditch-the-chemicals-to-lose-pounds-manage-diabetes.htm#ixzz3n9ICOixw -
Safer Chemicals Qould Benefit Both Consumers and Workers
Sep 29, 2015 | Medical Xpress
By Heather Buckley
Almost every product we purchase, use in our homes, or give to our children contains tens, if not hundreds, of chemicals. The United States chemical industry alone produced $769.4 billion worth of chemicals in 2012. The electronics that light up our smart phones and make today's cars safe contain metals, plastics, ceramics and a host of other materials. Even plastic packaging is a complex mixture of molecules, and each one plays a role: they provide the strength, color, texture, elasticity and durability we associate with performance.
Few people would say it's worth the risk of a hazardous chemical exposure to check football scores or calm a fussy toddler. And consumers in North America and Europe are starting to expect that regulation will protect us from harmful chemicals in the products we buy. Unfortunately hazardous chemicals are still all around us – every time a child picks up a plastic toy she may be exposed to a myriad of hormone disruptors, neurotoxins, dermal sensitizers, asthmagens, or carcinogens.
Regulators are starting to take steps toward protecting end-users from these risks. Consumer awareness and community activism exert pressure on manufacturers, and early-stage legislation is testing the waters of government involvement in the United States.
But when considering the dangers of hazardous chemicals in our products, manufacturers often underestimate risk by evaluating only the best-case scenario and considering only consumers. How these products are made by real workers in unregulated environments offers a stark contrast.
As chemist pursuing green chemistry – developing chemical processes and products that are inherently safer for humans and the environment – I have seen this problem firsthand. We imagine production lines using top-of-the-line safety equipment, full containment of hazards, and well-trained workers, but this is rarely the reality in our global economy. We need to design products that are inherently safer not just for consumers, but for workers in un- or under-regulated environments.
Acute versus chronic dangers
Our widespread lack of awareness of the risks workers face along the production pipeline hit home for me on a recent visit to India. I was part of a team developing greener building materials for low-income housing. It became obvious that we can't assume recommended safeguards will be universally adopted when chemicals are part of the manufacturing process in under-regulated workplaces.
Safety goggles, gloves, and even shoes are beyond the means of workers in factories like the one where I worked in Ahmedabad, and are rarely mandated or provided by employers. People are working without the simplest protection, at times with chemicals that we know have affiliated health risks.
No one I worked with was overtly disturbed by this lack of protection that delivered to their lungs and skin a daily cocktail of chemical additives. Even in a company producing "greener" building materials made primarily from recycled cardboard, our workers were exposed to hazardous airborne dust and gases, and handled ingredients whose chemical composition was a mystery to everyone on the factory floor.
In my experience, safety has a different meaning to the average Indian laborer than it does to a North American chemist. For them, the acute hazards of even getting to work overshadowed the chronic dangers they were exposed to once they arrived. India has one of the highest rates of deaths from traffic accidents in the world, with over 200,000 per year. 48,000 more Indians die annually from accidents in their workplaces, and countless undocumented injuries destroy people's lives and livelihoods.Activists protest on the anniversary of the Union Carbide pesticide plant disaster in Bhopal. Credit: Bhopal Medical Appeal, CC BY-NC
Furthermore, there are few protections for Indian laborers who become unable to work. Concerns about job security for the working poor overshadow questions of job safety, particularly in the face of invisible, chronic hazards. It's not that workers are cavalier about their health; they just often don't have better options or the power to demand improved conditions.
Workers largely lack protections consumers are starting to demand
In North America, we are gradually becoming aware of the risks to consumers of hazardous materials that are ubiquitous in our homes and workplaces. We know about hormone-disrupting flame retardants in furniture and baby clothing, asthma-inducing diisocyanates in spray foam polyurethane insulation, neurotoxic formaldehydes in particleboard resins, and a host of others.
The growing body of evidence has mobilized scientists, advocacy groups, public health experts, and legislators and has led to such groundbreaking laws as the California Department of Toxic Substance Control's (DTSC) Safer Consumer Product (SCP) regulations. Little federal regulation exists, but the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is also taking action by acting as an information clearing house. At the same time, reforms of the Toxic Substances Control Act currently under review could bring more authority to EPA.
It is important that movement toward controlling chemicals in the United States considers those most affected by chronic chemical exposure: not only consumers, but also workers.
Since their passage in 2013, the DTSC SCP regulations have taken a clear stance on the importance of worker safety in California; one of the first three chemical-product combinations regulated was diisocyanates in spray-foam insulation. Studies have shown that workers who install this insulation and therefore experience chronic exposure to diisocyanates have an increased incidence of allergic sensitization and asthma. There are some risks to building occupants associated with ongoing release of diisocyanates from improperly cured insulation. But in this case, the SCP regulations successfully pinpoint the most at-risk group for exposure to this hazardous chemical, and require suppliers to consider how worker safety is affected by proposed alternatives.
Imports allow us to export work with chemicals
The environment in which diisocyanates and their safer alternatives are used can be controlled in California by active regulation and enforcement. Many of the other chemicals and products of concern identified by the DTSC are manufactured in parts of the world with considerably less safety oversight.
For instance, the US imports about 14 times more clothing, mostly from China and Vietnam, than it exports (by dollar value). Clothing production can include dangerous chemicals, such as formaldehyde additives to create "wrinkle-free" products. By the time a wrinkle-free shirt gets to the store, the levels of formaldehyde it off-gases are likely too small to be dangerous for most customers. But when the finish is applied, workers are exposed to the chemical at significant doses.
Grassroots activism typically focuses on issues close to home such as what babies ingest when they drink from plastic bottles, whether certain soaps produce a skin rash in sensitive children, and what nanoparticle antimicrobials in clothing might do to fish in the local watershed. These are critically important issues and local concerns are often what leads to the creation of legislation such as the Safer Consumer Product Regulations.
But American consumers are not the only ones who need protection. With implementation of the SCP Regulations, the California Department of Toxic Substance Control is poised to be a national and international leader in defining what it means for a product to be "safer". Safety for all people – workers and consumers – and ecosystems as they actually interact with the chemistry at all stages of the product lifecycle should be a priority. The gold standard for safe material formulations should be that they can be manufactured without chronic health impacts on workers, even in unregulated environments.
Toward a truly green chemistryParents' concerns about what their children are exposed to can trigger industry changes. Credit: nerissa's ring, CC BY
During my last days in Ahmedabad, as I was preparing samples to ship back to North America, I felt something soft hit me on the shoulder. In the 110F heat, I was startled to turn around and see one of my coworkers playfully dodging a hail of snowballs. I quickly spotted the source of this mysterious "snow" – we were testing sodium polyacrylate as a processing agent, and a scoopful had fallen into a washbasin. The benign desiccant had quickly swelled to 300 times its original volume. Umya, my assailant, had been the first to recognize its mischievous potential.
As "snowballs" flew through the air, I realized that this was the embodiment of safer chemistry – materials so safe that we could play with them, never worrying that they covered our hair, our hands and faces. No protection necessary.
-
Evidence for EDCs 'More Definitive Than Ever’
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
Evidence that some chemicals disrupt hormones, in a way that causes a range of serious health problems, has become more compelling, says international scientific organisation the Endocrine Society.
Yesterday – the same day that a key UN conference on global chemicals management opened in Geneva - the organisation published a review of the evidence from the last five years. This concludes that exposure to chemicals, such as bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, flame retardants and pesticides such as atrazine and DDT, is associated with an increased risk of diabetes and obesity, infertility, hormone-related cancers, prostate conditions, thyroid disorders and neurodevelopmental issues.
“The evidence is more definitive than ever before – endocrine disrupting chemicals disrupt hormones in a manner that harms human health,” said Andrea Gore, professor and Vacek chair of pharmacology at the University of Texas, and chair of the task force that produced the statement.
“Hundreds of studies are pointing to the same conclusion, whether they are long-term epidemiological studies in humans, basic research in animals and cells, or research into groups of people with known occupational exposure to specific chemicals.
“It is clear we need to take action to minimise further exposure,” said professor Gore. “With more chemicals being introduced into the marketplace all the time, better safety testing is needed to identify new EDCs and ensure they are kept out if household goods.”
In the statement, the society calls for:regulation to ensure that chemicals are tested for endocrine activity, including at low doses, prior to being permitted for use;additional research to infer more directly cause-and-effect relationships between EDC exposure and health conditions;advice for the public and policymakers on “how to keep EDCs out of food, water and the air, as well as ways to protect unborn children from exposure”; andchemists to create products that test for and eliminate potential EDCs.
“The science is clear and it’s time for policymakers to take this wealth of evidence into account as they develop legislation,” said society member Jean-Pierre Bourguignon, professor of paediatrics at the University of Liège.
A global issue
The statement executive summary says, although some countries and US states have banned some EDCs, “the fact that EDCs are ubiquitous makes it a global issue that requires international partnerships among developed and developing nations.”
It also backs the “evidence integration” philosophy of the US National Toxicology Program in deciding whether a chemical may have a health impact.
“When high-quality endocrinological studies demonstrate that a chemical interferes with hormone actionin vivo and in vitro at environmentally (human) relevant concentrations, and when we have a high degree of evidence that these hormone systems are essential for normal development, it is reasonable to infer that these chemicals will produce adverse effects in humans,” says the summary.
To back up its call for the provision of “substantial information” before a chemical can be used in household products, it says BPS, which has been used to replace BPA, “is now shown to have endocrine-disrupting activity on a par with BPA”.
-
Global PFC Group Addresses Best Practice and Inventory
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The OECD and the UN Environment Programme (Unep) have published a report assessing different approaches taken to control per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs).
The substances are used as ingredients, or intermediates, of surfactants and surface protectors for a wide range of industrial and consumer applications, but are in the process of being replaced because of their ability to persist and bioaccumulate.
With information from 15 countries, the report from the Global Perfluorinated Chemicals (PFC) group –Good Practices and Options to Support Shared Challenges in the Development and Implementation of PFAS Risk Reduction Approaches – aims to provide a snapshot of current activities and inform other countries about options they might take.
It has been presented at the fourth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management – which is currently underway in Geneva. The group is also presenting options for a global emission inventory for PFASs at ICCM4.
It says:the OECD 2007 list of 920 should be updated;their global production, use and release should be surveyed and the results made public; andsynergies between stakeholders should be made, along with links between existing programmes.
-
DOE Seeks to Focus National Lab Research on Top Cyber, Grid Priorities
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Peter Behr
A unique collaboration among the Energy Department's national laboratories is seeking to close high-priority technology gaps facing the U.S. power grid, as it deals with disruptive operating changes and cybersecurity threats.
Tomorrow is the deadline for federal laboratories to submit bids for research grants to initiate the program. The grants span a wide agenda of technology issues, including integrating renewable energy generation, storage devices, electric vehicles and "smart buildings" into power networks; improving cybersecurity of utilities' vendor supply chain; and giving control room operators more tools to manage the grid in emergencies. The grants are projected to total nearly $200 million in all over the next three fiscal years. DOE's 17 laboratories have an annual budget of about $13.5 billion.
The project calls for the creation of a single operating plan between DOE headquarters and the laboratories.
"I've only worked here 35 years, and I've never seen something like that, so we're pretty excited about that," said Carl Imhoff, manager of electricity infrastructure at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and lead lab representative on the consortium.
The push to achieve better coordination among the labs is a response to DOE's initial Quadrennial Energy Review, issued last April, which made grid modernization a top priority.
It also follows a report by Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz's national labs task force warning that a "proliferation of duplicative and burdensome [administrative] requirements are choking the DOE National Laboratories."
Citing tensions "throughout the laboratory complex" over program administration, the task force recommended that the labs' work be tied more closely to DOE and national priorities. Proposals to reform the labs' management have bipartisan support in Congress, but there isn't bipartisan consensus on most national energy priorities (E&E Daily, June 8).
To steer the project, DOE has created the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium, which will set priorities and award the research grants.
The grants, due to be awarded in November, will launch the first three years of the project as a single, integrated strategy across DOE, said Imhoff. "It calls for major new approaches, including making cyber and general security and resilience more tightly coupled to grid modernization," he said in an interview.
Imhoff's colleague, Paul Skare, PNNL chief cybersecurity program manager, added, "We are collaborating collectively to make sure that we are able to work in partnership with DOE to identify where the gaps are in the research."
The national labs' agendas on cyber research displays both the ambition and diversity of the projects, some of which are being promoted by the Department of Homeland Security's Transition to Practice (TPP) commercialization program (EnergyWire, July 13).
For example, the CodeDNA technology developed at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory assigns "fingerprints" to families of attack malware and looks for similarities in software code to find new attacks.
DigitalAnts, created at PNNL, employs mobile sensors that "roam" like foraging ants within interconnected computers and devices in a network, gathering and evaluating key operational indicators such as memory or processing activity. When a sensor spots activity out of the ordinary, it triggers an alarm, PNNL said. Sandia National Laboratories' WeaselBoard technology addresses cyber vulnerabilities in grid PLCs (programmable logic controllers) on grid networks. WeaselBoard, when added to a network, analyzes communications between PLCs to spot unusual activity and detect threats.
An underlying assumption behind the QER and the new laboratory project appears to be that the changes underway in the electric power sector are irreversible, no matter what happens to the debate in Washington and the states over the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan to cut power plant carbon emissions.
More solar and wind generation and microgrids are coming, the DOE plans anticipate. Linkages between electricity supply and natural gas deliveries will grow tighter. Smart meters and sensors, and other "intelligent" digital devices on the grid's edge, now numbering in the tens of thousands, will increase to millions, Imhoff said, causing a huge increase in diagnostic information flowing to grid operators.Tides of data
The tide of data changes the nature of the operating emergencies grid operators are likely to face, and the technologies they will need to cope with fast-moving crises.
When the high-voltage network in eastern Ohio was nearing a "cliff edge" collapse on Aug. 14, 2003, grid operators for FirstEnergy Corp. in Akron were flying blind, ignorant of the escalating signs of the approaching Northeast blackout, DOE's investigation of the event concluded. Their control center did not have a map board representing major lines and plants on the wall facing the operators, and critically, their balky control room alarm system and system tracking software failed. But the operators did not know the alarms weren't working.
As the information flow into control rooms escalates, the problem may be too much information, Imhoff and Skare said.
"Much of what we do today is anywhere from 10 seconds to 6 minutes in retrospect in terms of risk and what is that is doing to the system, whether it is hit by physical attack or cyberattack or storms, or just equipment damage," Imhoff said. But digital data is generated in milliseconds. "We're trying to switch that paradigm to more real-time predictive tools that leverage new math and advanced computation, where we can actually see where the system is heading and better detect how to protect it."
Skare said a second challenge is developing a system of alarms that guides operators toward actions that give the grid the best chance of overcoming threats, whether from nature or humans.
The triggering event of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant emergency in 1979 was the failure of a critical pressure control valve, allowing the escape of cooling water required to keep the reactor core from a meltdown, the accident investigation determined. Within seconds, the plant's alarm systems, including a loud horn and more than 100 flashing lights on the control panels, signaled the escalation of the accident. But they only confused operators, said Nuclear Regulatory Commission historian J. Samuel Walker. "I would have liked to have thrown away the alarm panel," one operator said later.
The national laboratory research project must look for ways of presenting information about increasingly complex grid emergencies in ways the operators can handle, Skare said.
"We will be looking at how the brain processes that information, which then identifies which type of data should be put on the screen [to] get the results as fast as you can," he said. "What are the most critical things to pay attention to? Then you have to do the additional analysis to say, how do I absorb that information in my brain" as fast as possible.
Charles Hanley, senior manager of grid modernization at Sandia National Laboratories, said, "It's too early to tell how well this experiment will turn out, but it's definitely a worthy endeavor."
It shows DOE's recognition of the need for a concerted effort to coordinate technology research on the grid's future, dealing with national security threats to a critical infrastructure and opening potentially tremendous economic opportunities if the United States can lead the way on these fronts, Hanely said.
"There are definitely opportunities for false starts and inefficiencies" in the grant process, he said. "Hopefully, it will lead to new, prioritized funding on a national scale."
Part of the project will support innovative grid projects in states such as California, Vermont and New York, DOE said.
"There is going to be a significant challenge, in fact, in how we track these opportunities. In general, the continuing bureaucratic pressures being placed on the labs are indeed affecting morale in a bad way," Hanley added. "But this project really works to enhance morale and cut through some of the bureaucratic overhead issues."
-
Language to Boost LNG Exports Added to House Energy Bill
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
Republican leaders on the House Energy and Commerce Committee have added language to a larger energy bill setting a 30-day deadline for the Obama administration to rule on natural gas export proposals, one of several high-profile additions ahead of a markup scheduled to begin this afternoon.
The manager's amendment to the committee's bill, for which Republicans have long hoped to win bipartisan support, gives the Energy Department a narrower window to rule on plans for export of liquefied natural gas than the bipartisan Senate energy bill.
The House amendment also adds language to repeal a 2007 phase out of fossil fuels in federal buildings; similar language is included in the Senate bill.
The American Gas Association hailed the inclusion of that new fossil-phase-out repeal, as well as "significant changes to" the way DOE handles adoption of codes for energy-efficient buildings. The building-code changes are based on a separate proposal from Reps. Kurt Schrader and Marsha Blackburn.
The House amendment also would set up a new modernization fund for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, eyed for management reform by members of both parties. The House's initial proposal included a "mission readiness plan" for the SPR's future, while the new amendment would allow the Energy Secretary to sell oil from the stockpile in order to achieve the new fund's objectives. The same section of the House amendment would set up a separate grant program for states and localities to increase electricity reliability.
-
House GOP Revises Omnibus Bill; Committee Votes Tomorrow
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Hannah Northey, Geof Koss and Katherine Ling
Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee today unveiled a revised version of a comprehensive energy package that's up for a vote in the lower chamber tomorrow after weeks of negotiations with Democrats.
The 208-page manager's amendment to H.R. 8, the "North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act of 2015," contains provisions included in an earlier draft that would speed natural gas exports and efficiency, as well as new language aimed at bolstering hydropower and requiring reviews of how the Clean Power Plan would affect the grid.
Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said the amendment reflects input from several witnesses, including Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and the private sector.
A Republican aide said the amendment was written by the majority but merits bipartisan support.
"Keeping the lights on and engines running across America should remain a top priority -- we have crafted a thoughtful, substantive package to update our laws for the 21st century that will hopefully end up on the president's desk for his signature," Upton said in a statement.
The language arrives after weeks of debates over a host of policy issues that derailed an earlier markup of the bill. Republicans have said they will follow regular order and take amendments in marking up the legislation starting tonight, but just how much bipartisan agreement can be reached is unclear. A spokeswoman for Energy and Commerce Democrats did not respond to a request for comment today on whether the minority supports the manager's amendment.Strategic Petroleum Reserve facilities
The package includes language to establish a budget-neutral fund for building, maintaining, repairing and replacing Strategic Petroleum Reserve facilities. It would also set up a competitive grant program for states, local governments and Indian tribes to enhance grid reliability. Under the bill, the Energy secretary would be authorized to sell crude from the SPR to reinvest in energy security projects.
Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) said during an interview earlier this month -- after the full committee punted on marking up the bill -- that Republicans had included the SPR provision to appease their Democratic colleagues while receiving little in return (Greenwire, Sept. 17).Clean Power Plan
Yet another section of the bill appears to take aim at U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan and other major utility-sector rules by requiring the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the country's grid operators to analyze the effects of complying with any proposed or final "billion-dollar" federal rule that affects electric generating units. Those rules would include environmental rules like the Clean Power Plan, which has become a target for Republicans.
Under the bill, FERC and system operators would need to complete an independent review of how a rule would affect reliability, the nation's energy mix, wholesale markets, and infrastructure like transmission and gas pipelines.LNG
The revised bill also revives a provision that would require the Energy Department to make final decisions on liquefied natural gas exports within 30 days of the conclusion of National Environmental Policy Act review requirements. That requirement was included in an earlier draft of the bill but was dropped before the measure moved through subcommittee in July (Greenwire, July 22).
The energy package that passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in July contains similar language.Building efficiency
The manager's package would repeal part of a 2007 law that required the phaseout of fossil-fuel-generated power in new and significantly renovated federal buildings by 2030. The American Gas Association today said the repeal is accompanied by a compromise negotiated by Sens. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) that would beef up existing federal building targets.
Additionally, the revised measure includes language from a controversial bill, H.R. 1273, sponsored by Reps. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.), that would impose procedural requirements on DOE for setting building efficiency codes.
An earlier version of that provision was a sticking point for efficiency advocates, who said it would unnecessarily tie DOE's hands in setting building codes. It's unclear whether those earlier concerns have been addressed.Other efficiency standards
The changes revise and clarify DOE's process for setting energy efficiency standards to allow industry more time for review and input about the data and models the agency bases its decisions on. Under the revised bill, DOE would have to finalize what it will test to ensure new appliances meet the standards -- known as test procedures -- at least 180 days before the end of the public comment period for a proposed rule. The agency would also have to start a rulemaking procedure under the new provisions to ensure accessibility and public availability of its technical and economic assumptions, methods and models used to justify a standard.
Under the Obama administration, DOE has picked up the pace on updating and reviewing energy efficiency standards, some of which were years past the statutory deadline and were the subject of several lawsuits from efficiency advocates and states.
But industry has complained that DOE's accelerated schedule has led to test procedures and rules being finalized in parallel, uncalculated cumulative regulatory impact, and a lack of time to gather sufficient information and feedback from stakeholders -- as exemplified by a recent backlash against a water heater and gas furnace standard (Greenwire, July 14).
The new language also offers more flexibility for DOE to adopt recommendations from consensus agreements developed by working groups of industry, advocates and other stakeholders. And it would repeal several studies including on residential energy efficiency, weatherization and energy saving potential.Hydropower
Unlike an earlier version, the revised language includes provisions to bolster hydropower. It would amend a 2005 law to reauthorize incentives and incentive payments to owners and operators of hydroelectric facilities on existing dams through fiscal 2025.
The language appears to address a sticking point that triggered partisan grumblings in the past by minimizing the amount FERC infringes on property owners and users when issuing hydropower licenses. Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) during an interview before the August recess said that he was working with his Republican colleagues on the hydropower provision and that the agency's role was playing into the disagreement.
"I don't think FERC is intentionally lobbying for that; I think what the Republicans want is to have one agency so they can have everyone be responsible to that agency and they can get it done," McNerney said at the time. "I think that's the big point of contention -- it's giving too much authority, decisionmaking authority, to one agency."Carbon capture
Another change is the inclusion of provisions meant to boost fossil fuel research and development, particularly carbon capture, utilization and sequestration (CCUS) efforts to help coal plants burn cleaner.
Originally, House Republicans opted to leave carbon capture out of their broad energy package, focusing instead on helping coal through efforts to roll back Obama administration rules, including a requirement for new coal plants to include carbon capture.
The new language includes an effort to promote large-scale demonstration and commercialization of CCUS. It would also task DOE with evaluating government-backed CCUS projects every two years for accountability.
This week, DOE announced it was returning almost $2.5 billion to the Treasury in unspent research and development dollars from the 2009 stimulus bill, including $1.27 billion from CCUS technology.
Projects like Summit Power Group LLC's Texas Clean Energy Project and Hydrogen Energy California LLC's carbon capture venture were not able to spend all the money allotted by the end of the fiscal year deadline (ClimateWire, Sept. 23; Greenwire, July 10).
In the Senate, both Republican and Democratic versions of broad energy reform legislation include CCUS provisions. Pro-coal lawmakers prefer language championed by Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).
Reporter Manuel Quiñones contributed.
-
EPA Puts Cost of New Refinery Rule at $283 Million
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
EPA estimates that its final rule for refinery emissions, set for release today, will cost $283 million and "have a negligible impact on the costs of petroleum products."
The final version of the rule, which is being rolled out one day ahead of a court-mandated deadline, includes some changes to coker emissions projections that slightly lower its previously estimated annual reductions in pollutants such as benzene and toluene, as well as the expected reductions in the release of volatile organic compounds.
When it comes to fenceline tracking of benzene emissions from refineries, the final rule includes "room for alternative monitoring methods that will allow for real time monitoring in the future," EPA stated in a summary of the regulations.
Check out a fact sheet and a summary of changes to the final rule from its proposed version.
-
Obama Admin Cracks Down on Refinery Emissions
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Petroleum refineries will be forced to curb toxic air emissions and beef up monitoring under a rule finalized today by U.S. EPA.
Released this afternoon ahead of a court-ordered deadline tomorrow, the rule encompasses New Source Performance Standards and maximum achievable control technology for refineries under the Clean Air Act.
"The common-sense final rule will improve air quality and protect the health of families who live near refineries," EPA said.
There are 142 petroleum refineries considered major pollution sources under the Clean Air Act, as well as seven small area sources.
Among contaminants targeted by the rule: benzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, nickel and hydrogen cyanide. EPA said the final rule would reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants by 5,200 tons per year, as well as eliminate 50,000 tons of volatile organic compounds annually.
First proposed in May 2014, the rule requires refineries to upgrade emissions controls and to continuously monitor concentrations of benzene pollution levels at their property lines.
Refiners will be required to encircle their facilities with monitors so that they can detect pollution depending on the wind, install technology that can detect benzene at very low levels and take corrective actions if monitored emissions exceed limits.
"This rule will, for the first time ever, provide important information about refinery emissions to the public and neighboring communities by requiring refineries to monitor emissions at their fence lines," EPA said in a statement sent to environmental justice advocates.
The rule will also put in place a national program to reduce smoking flare emissions and emissions by pressure-release devices. Refineries will be required to monitor flares. The rule will limit flaring events to no more than three events in three years per device, EPA said in its fact sheet.
Storage tanks and delayed coking units also face new emission limitations under the final rule.
The oil industry had opposed the refinery regulation's fence-line monitoring and flaring requirements, warning that the agency's proposal overall would cost refiners more than $20 billion on top of millions of dollars in annual costs.
To address concerns raised by the oil industry about real-time monitoring, EPA's final rule allows refiners to choose alternative methods in the short term that will allow for real-time monitoring in the future.
EPA said the final rule will cost $283 million in capital costs and $63 million annually.
The White House Office of Management and Budget hosted a handful of meetings on the final rule this month, including with key oil industry groups, but the release of the standards has been overshadowed by EPA's more contentious proposal to lower the national ozone standard. The final ozone rule is due out this week under a court order (seerelated stories).
-
Ga. Wants Extension for its EPA Proposal
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Kristi E. Swartz
Georgia intends to ask U.S. EPA for a two-year extension when it files an initial plan on meeting carbon-cutting goals next September.
The state must cut its power-sector carbon emissions rate 34 percent from 2012 levels by 2030 to meet targets set by EPA's Clean Power Plan. Georgia will need "every bit of those two years" to develop a flexible state plan that allows for interstate trading of carbon emissions, said Karen Hays, Air Protection Branch chief of the state's Environmental Protection Division.
"We're going to take our time to try to do this right," Hays said at a town hall meeting here on options to comply with the Clean Power Plan.
States must file an initial plan by September 2016, though a number have signaled they will file legal challenges once the rule is filed to theFederal Register. Though many of Georgia's elected officials, including all five state utility regulators, oppose the plan because they think EPA is overreaching its authority, the state has a different reason to want more time.
"I think the biggest reason is that this is very complicated," Hays toldEnergyWire. "We want to do this right; we want to evaluate all of our options thoroughly."
Officials from Georgia's electric companies, environmental groups, solar companies, nonprofits and others reviewed the state's options for meeting the Clean Power Plan at the afternoon meeting, hosted by the Georgia Institute of Technology's School of Public Policy and Emory University's Climate@Emory.
Hays said the state must describe to EPA what options it is considering for meeting its target and also the stakeholder process. She frequently meets or talks with officials from neighboring states and knows everyone is still in "reviewing and analyzing mode."
This is partly because the state's goals changed dramatically from the draft rule, which had a carbon reduction target of 44 percent. Also, Georgia can count the two under-construction nuclear reactors at Georgia Power's Plant Vogtle toward compliance.
The change between the draft and the final rule was so significant that Hays said officials are waiting for new models to come out before the state makes its first big decision, which is whether it wants to pursue a rate-based or a mass-based plan.
A rate-based plan would require the power fleet to adhere to an average amount of carbon per unit of power produced. A mass-based plan would cap the total tons of carbon the power sector could emit each year.Rate vs. mass
While some experts say a mass-based program would be cheaper, simpler and more efficient, not everyone thinks that could be the best plan for Georgia because of the state's new nuclear plant. Such discussion came up among small groups at yesterday's meeting.
"I think we maybe need to back up and slow down a little bit," said Boyd Vaughan, principal environmental specialist at Oglethorpe Power Corp. "I think that least-cost is key, and we may find because of the Vogtle units, we may be in a different, unique situation."
The twin, 1,100-megawatt reactors are expected to start up in 2019 and 2020. The reactors have been under a microscope for being the first to be built from scratch in 30 years. But when it comes to the Clean Power Plan, they have a separate significance.
Georgia would benefit directly from those reactors if the state uses a rate-based plan, Vaughan said. The state gets an indirect benefit from the additional emission-free nuclear power if a mass-based plan is followed, he said.
There was some discussion of nuclear being emission-free when Georgia Power first presented its plans to the state Public Service Commission. But Georgia Power's chief plan for expanding Vogtle was not to replace coal-fired plants that are being closed because of environmental rules.
"It was really to handle load growth," said Tracy Hawkins, Georgia Power's environmental affairs general manager.
Georgia is cutting one-third of its coal fleet and has been adding solar as well as wind and biomass to its electricity mix. PSC Chairman Chuck Eaton said those things have put the state in a much better position to meet its targets.
The Public Service Commission is preparing to review Georgia Power's next 20-year resource plan next year. That plan will be a key road map for how the state will meet its targets, as well.
"We're all in this together," Eaton said, noting that the PSC is charged with coming up with a plan to meet carbon reductions at the lowest price possible.
"We're going to be the ones who are going to take the political heat for that, as well," he said.
-
Under Clean Power Plan, Pa. Confronts Its Deep Ties to Coal
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Climatewire
By Elizabeth Harball
Pennsylvania's status as a nationwide energy giant is evident in the rural outskirts of this community in the state's southwest. A nearby church is dwarfed by the towering silos of Consol Energy Inc.'s Bailey Preparation Plant. Conveyor belts for carrying coal from nearby mines weave snakelike between the hills surrounding the operation.
And in nearby Ryerson Station State Park, an empty field that was once a favorite swimming spot has driven years of litigation and activism after land movement blamed on underground longwall mining caused the lake to completely drain in 2005, leaving a line of rails for tying up boats looking very much out of place.
But the area is also home to staunch coal defenders. In 2013, the Pennsylvania Coal Alliance estimated that longwall mining directly employed about 3,500 workers in the region and pumped approximately $1.94 billion into Greene and Washington counties' economies. Consol's Pennsylvania complex alone has 2,200 employees.
Last year, Jimmy Brock, chief operating officer of Consol's coal division,told the Pittsburgh Business Times, "I don't believe coal is going away anytime soon." But now that the Obama administration has released the final Clean Power Plan, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, it is undeniable that Pennsylvania -- one of America's top coal-producing states, the nation's No. 1 electricity exporter and its third-biggest greenhouse gas emitter -- is taking a hard look at its relationship with the black rock.
Conveyor belts feed newly mined coal to the Bailey Preparation Plant, owned by Consol Energy Inc. Photo by Elizabeth Harball.
"We are no longer at the point of political talking points for any side; we're at the point where coal-fired power plants and other plants are shutting down," said Pennsylvania Coal Alliance CEO John Pippy before a Clean Power Plan listening session in Pittsburgh last week. "What can our infrastructure handle? What will the costs be? Which plants are going to be dispatched? There's a lot of very technical and real-world questions that haven't been answered yet."
The state's Democratic governor, Tom Wolf, is pursuing answers to those questions, pushing for Pennsylvania to submit a final state compliance plan to U.S. EPA in one year. It is an audacious move, given that most states are expected to ask for a two-year extension on EPA's September 2016 deadline (ClimateWire, Sept. 10).
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Quigley called developing a state compliance plan an "opportunity to demonstrate national leadership, to model sustainability to the nation."
When asked what place coal will have in that plan after last week's Pittsburgh meeting, Quigley replied it is "too early to say," citing uncertainty related to market forces like the explosive growth of natural gas production in his state.
Quigley added, "We do see and the governor expects there to be a role for coal even in our Clean Power Plan. The question is what that role looks like."Coal interests seek to shape -- or slow -- Pa.'s plan
The state's fossil fuel industry and local lawmakers are fighting for coal as Pennsylvania develops its Clean Power Plan strategy. Before last week's listening session in Pittsburgh, Pippy criticized DEP's intention to submit a state plan by next year as "super-accelerated." Although the prominent coal supporter said he believes it is better for Pennsylvania to develop its own plan rather than risk dealing with a federally implemented plan, he also supports litigation to fight the rule.
Pippy is rankled by EPA's CO2 reduction goals for Pennsylvania -- the state must lower its power-sector carbon emissions rate 33 percent by 2030, or by 547 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour.
"You can't maintain significant coal presence in the portfolio and still reach those target goals," Pippy said.
State Rep. Pam Snyder, a Democrat who serves Greene and Washington counties, where Consol's Bailey Preparation Plant is located, is also deeply concerned about the Clean Power Plan. This led Snyder to introduce Act 175 of 2014, which was signed into law by then-Gov. Tom Corbett (R). Act 175 requires DEP to submit its state plan to the now Republican-led General Assembly for a vote before turning it in to EPA (Greenwire, Oct. 16, 2014).
Snyder thinks Pennsylvania should seek an extension with EPA on its state implementation plan and hopes Act 175 will accomplish that goal.
"I have the largest producing coal mine in the free world in Greene County," Snyder said in a phone interview. "For me, [Act 175] is about so many different things. It is about jobs. It is about the ancillary jobs that provide services to the coal mines and the coal companies. It is about grid reliability for our electric users and consumers, and it is about electricity costs."
"I don't think we need to rush this -- I think we need to make sure that it is right for Pennsylvania," Snyder continued. "There are other ways to cut CO2 emissions other than just from the coal industry."
Quigley said DEP has built Act 175 into its planning process, saying, "Hopefully, we can stay on this timeline to submit a final plan by September."Coal lovers and haters speak out
Two of DEP's recent listening sessions on the Clean Power Plan illustrate Pennsylvanians' wide variety of opinions on coal. In Pittsburgh, speakers largely identified with the environmentalist community and condemned burning fossil fuels.
Brian Wolovich, a teacher from Pittsburgh's Millvale neighborhood, brought up a recent Harvard University study determining that pregnant women exposed to fine particulate pollution are more likely to give birth to babies who later will be diagnosed with autism (Greenwire, Dec. 18, 2014). Wolovich said his 4-year-old son is autistic.
"It matters particularly to me, living in a community in the Pittsburgh region that has particularly high exposure," Wolovich said.
But the next evening, a listening session in the Greene County borough of Waynesburg saw locals defending coal on economic grounds.
"Recently, we consolidated our elementary schools and built a new West Greene Elementary center, after years of wrestling with the issues of need, cost, and safety," said Thelma Szarell, a superintendent with the West Greene School District, according to her written testimony. "This endeavor would not have been possible without adequate tax dollars. Our school district has been supported by the coal industry."
It is unlikely that such testimony will restore Pennsylvania's coal industry to its former glory, Clean Power Plan or no Clean Power Plan. As gas drilling in the state's Marcellus Shale boomed, Pennsylvania's coal production steadily declined after 2000, according to data compiled for the DEP by Commonwealth Economics LLC. This mirrors trends seen nationwide -- a recent report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration noted that "the number of new and reactivated coal mines that began production in 2013 fell to the lowest level in at least the past 10 years."Lake that disappeared strikes a nerve
Back in southwestern Pennsylvania, however, coal's presence remains gargantuan -- the mines beneath the land surrounding the Bailey Preparation Plant still produce tens of millions of tons of coal each year, even as natural gas wells multiply on nearby hilltops.
Talk continues of damage to nearby properties and water sources linked to longwall mining, which can remove essentially all of the coal from a broad coal face. The coal is carried out by conveyor belt, and the mine's roof and overlying rock collapse into the void behind, while maintaining a safe working space along the face for the miners. But the practice leads to land subsidence, which creates political problems (Greenwire, March 31).
[+] Longwall mining caused a dam to break and led to the loss of Duke Lake, a favorite swimming hole. What's left is the rail where boats were tied up.Photo by Elizabeth Harball.
Greene County native Veronica Coptis, deputy director of the Washington, Pa.-based environmental justice group the Center for Coalfield Justice, works to raise awareness of property damage linked to longwall mining, drawing the ire of Consol and other big coal companies in the region.
Looking out over the field that was once Duke Lake in Ryerson Station State Park, Coptis recalled visiting with her family as a child. "This is such an important part of me," Coptis said.
Last week, the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources held a meeting to discuss how to spend a $25 million settlement with Consol on upgrading the park after it was determined that continued ground movement will prevent the lake from being restored.
Coptis doesn't see the Clean Power Plan as a panacea for coal-related issues near her home, although she is intrigued by the Obama administration's POWER+ Plan, which aims to send federal dollars to places where coal jobs are disappearing.
"The coal companies and operators are going to pull out of our communities one way or another, whether or not regulations get implemented," said Coptis. "I'm hoping that the county and elected officials will really take advantage of the opportunity of the POWER+ money and use it to transition our community through a change that could be much more devastating without these resources."
Asked about the Center for Coalfield Justice's claims about longwall mining and Ryerson Station State Park, Brian Aiello, Consol's director of communications, said only this in an email: "They are virtually 100% funded by big money, extreme environmental special interests and have zero credibility as far as we're concerned. They spend each and every day doing everything they can to put our employees out of work."
State Rep. Snyder called the Duke Lake incident "a travesty," but she maintains that she will continue to fight the Clean Power Plan's ability to further push coal out of the energy mix, in Pennsylvania and beyond.
"Am I going to tell you there aren't negatives to the coal industry? Of course there are," Snyder said. "You're always going to have challenges, but you have to weigh the challenges to the benefits. And what I know is that if you close every coal mine tomorrow, I've got a lot of people that are going to be out of work."
-
Minn. Utilities Dislike Clean Power Plan But Still Request Carbon Trading
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Climatewire
By Elizabeth Harball
At one of Minnesota's first meetings to discuss the final Clean Power Plan held last week, the state's utilities were almost united in their dislike of the final federal rule regulating carbon emissions from power plants.
However, nearly all who testified before the state Legislative Energy Commission meeting requested that some form of carbon trading be included in whatever implementation plan the state submits to U.S. EPA.
Eric Olsen, vice president and general counsel for Maple Grove, Minn.-based electric cooperative Great River Energy (GRE), said that electricity rates for Minnesotans would almost certainly go up.
"In the Clean Power Plan, EPA has adopted perhaps the most far-reaching and complex environmental regulation in history," Olsen said. "We expect compliance will be very difficult."
But Olsen also said, "GRE believes that the trading of emissions allowances or credits is the most economically efficient way to implement the Clean Power Plan."
Hearing this from Olsen and other utilities like the Fergus Falls, Minn.-based Otter Tail Power, commission co-Chairman Pat Garofolo (R) said, "Obviously, people like me face some difficult choices in the years ahead, because while historically we have not been supportive of a regional trading system for carbon, it's clear that if it's going to happen, our engagement to make sure that it is done in the most fair way for Minnesota ratepayers and to the benefit of ratepayers and the least costly fashion is the most prudent course of action."
Most of the representatives for Minnesota's utilities also stressed that their operations extended into other states and that coordination with neighbors like North Dakota will be essential. Bill Black, government relations director with the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association, estimated that about 30 percent of the state's energy comes from out of state.
None of the utilities present was able to provide an opinion on whether it preferred a rate-based or a mass-based approach to implementation, and the utilities said they needed more time to review the rule.
Representatives from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, which will be responsible for writing the state plan to submit to EPA, were positive about the state's ability to meet EPA's targets, adding that EPA resolved all of their concerns about the proposed rule in the final version.
"We don't need to build enormously upon where we already are," said Frank Kohlasch, manager of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Air Assessment Section, Environmental Analysis & Outcomes Division.
The final plan requires Minnesota to cut its carbon dioxide emissions rate by 42 percent from 2012 levels.
-
Greens Ready to Litigate as EPA Preps Ozone Standard
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Environmentalists are threatening legal action if U.S. EPA fails to finalize a new ozone standard that they believe protects public health.
EPA is said to be ready this week to finalize a standard of 70 parts per billion -- a number that greens find lacking.
"The 70-part-per-billion option would be just blatantly unlawful," said David Baron, managing attorney at Earthjustice.
Ground-level ozone is a key ingredient in smog, which forms when nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds react in sunlight. Ozone gas been linked to negative health effects such as exacerbation of asthma and reduced lung function.
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA must set pollution standards that provide an ample safety margin for protecting public health.
The current standard, 75 ppb, was set by the George W. Bush administration in 2008. In its proposal to lower the limit last November, EPA said it determined through a review of public health science that the 75 ppb level no longer met the requirement of the law. It proposed to tighten the standard to within a range of 65 to 70 ppb.
EPA faces a court-ordered deadline of Oct. 1 to pick a final limit. Sources say the agency will pick 70 ppb.
In a call with reporters yesterday, environmental groups argued there was consensus in the medical community that a 70 ppb limit wouldn't protect the public, particularly children and the elderly, from the adverse health effects.
"It is not defensible or responsible to set the standard at 70," said John Walke, a senior attorney and air specialist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The American Lung Association, American Thoracic Society and American Academy of Pediatrics have called on the Obama administration to set a new standard no higher than 60 ppb (see related story).
Last year, EPA's own scientific advisers said a new limit of 70 ppb would likely not pass the ample-margin-of-safety test of the Clean Air Act and recommended that EPA choose a limit more toward the 60-to-65-ppb range.
"We deserve better, frankly, than 70 parts per billion, which is the weakest and the least health protective option that's under consideration," said Mary Anne Hitt, director of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign. "This is not just a number on a page. It's someone's child being rushed to the hospital, it's the death of a loved one and it's basic fairness."
The groups also expressed concerns that a 70 ppb limit would give the public a false sense of security because it is tied to EPA's Air Quality Index, a system that alerts the public when air quality has fallen below the national standard.
"We sued the Bush administration for adopting a 75-parts-per-billion standard," Earthjustice's Baron said, "and I think there's a good likelihood that we would sue if the Obama administration adopted a 70-parts-per-billion standard."
Business and industry groups have waged an aggressive campaign against a new standard on Capitol Hill, in the administration and over the airwaves. Led by the National Association of Manufacturers, they have argued that a new standard would impose crippling economic costs and halt expansion of businesses across the country.
Although environmentalists will likely view a 70 ppb limit as a concession to industry, a NAM representative said last week that his group would also not be satisfied unless EPA retains the existing limit of 75 ppb.
"Our view is that the only appropriate outcome is for EPA to allow manufacturers and states to comply with the existing 2008 standards," said Greg Bertelsen, the trade group's director of energy and resources policy.
Baron hinted that environmental groups would likely intervene on behalf of EPA in an industry challenge to the standard while at the same time pushing the court for a lower limit.
Compounding environmentalists' concerns about the administration bowing to industry pressure is the Obama administration's decision in 2011 to punt on a new ozone standard as elections loomed.
NRDC's Walke called that choice the "worst environmental decision" of President Obama's first term and characterized this week's decision as a way of making things right with environmental groups.
"The question remains," he said, "whether the smog health standard will remain unprotective when the Obama administration leaves office."
-
EPA Evaluating Scope of Proposed Methane Rules
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
It will become clear in the next few years whether U.S. EPA's proposed methane rules should be extended to include existing oil and natural gas operations, the Office of Air and Radiation's top lawyer said today.
Joe Goffman said on the sidelines of an event today at the Newseum that the agency moved forward with its draft rules for methane and volatile organic compounds (VOC) in August because "those were what we were ready to do."
But the agency continues to update and refine its data about the petroleum sector's methane leakage, he noted. And new data are always becoming available about the industry's progress in curbing its own emissions -- including through participation in voluntary EPA reduction programs. Meanwhile EPA has proposed expanding its VOC rules to cover existing oil and gas operations in ozone nonattainment areas, and states like Colorado are phasing in methane curbs of their own.
So a future EPA may find it unnecessary to regulate methane directly from existing sources, Goffman said.
"There will be a record a couple of years from now that I anticipate will be compelling in one direction or the other," he said. "If we were having this conversation six months from now, we would be better informed than we are now. And so the answer may be different."
Existing sources are not expected to come under regulation during Obama's administration, though the rule for new sources will be final next spring or summer. And Goffman acknowledged that the Clean Air Act does not require EPA to promulgate a rule for existing sources within a set period of time after the new source rule takes effect -- a fact that could give subsequent administrations an easy out if they don't share the current administration's climate goals.
But Goffman said at the event in Washington, D.C., hosted by The Hillnewspaper that Obama's Climate Action Plan in itself will "lay the groundwork for our successors whether it's in this decade or the decades after to continue to take on the challenge of climate change."
The Obama administration has set a goal of reducing overall methane between 40 and 45 percent by 2025 compared with 2012 levels.
EPA is taking comment now on its August draft, including on whether it should require controls for liquids unloading, which clears gas wells of accumulated liquid to increase production. Goffman said the equipment was not covered by the draft because of a lack of data, but "we will be going back for more information."
EPA's new proposal does require both oil and gas well operators to perform green completions to contain emissions, and it addresses leaks from pneumatic pumps, compressors and other equipment in the oil and gas system (Greenwire, Aug. 18).
The public comment period began Sept. 18 and closes in December.
The methane draft has attracted relatively little attention from congressional Republicans, especially when compared with the maelstrom surrounding EPA's Clean Power Plan. There have been no committee hearings on the rule to date. And while the American Petroleum Institute and other trade groups pushed back against the proposal -- arguing that it is unnecessary given industry's progress and on shaky legal footing -- companies themselves have been relatively quiet.
Goffman said the muted response could be due to ongoing EPA outreach.
"I think the extent to which we've had a constructive working relationship with the industry itself has contributed to the current atmosphere that we're doing these proposals in," he said.
Speaking later in the morning at The Hill event, Mark Boling, general counsel and secretary of Southwestern Energy, said the administration's overall methane reduction target would be achievable if producers participate in voluntary reduction programs.
-
Carbon-Capture Projects Lose Out on DOE Stimulus Cash
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Darius Dixon
The Energy Department is poised to send about $2.48 billion in unspent stimulus funds back to the Treasury this week, and just four stalled carbon-capture and sequestration grants account for more than half of that figure.
The refunds amount to a small portion of the $31.8 billion sent to DOE in the massive 2009 stimulus law, but they are emblematic of the struggles "clean coal" has faced in recent years. Of the money that DOE is returning, $1.27 billion had been set aside for carbon-capture projects that failed to win agency approval because of cost overruns, tricky negotiations and lengthy regulatory hurdles.
The elimination of government support does not necessarily mean all the projects are dead, although for the controversial FutureGen project that was first proposed under President George W. Bush, it is the second time that its government lifeline has been cut.
In total, the funds to be returned add up to more than a third of the $3.4 billion in stimulus money directed to the fossil energy office at DOE. Overall, DOE received more than all but five other federal agencies from the Recovery Act.
“I think that when DOE was looking to fund these projects they were hoping that it could be market-wide. What has emerged is that CCS has been a really niche application in areas where there’s enhanced oil recovery," said Cheryl Wilson, an energy policy analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence, referring to the process of pumping carbon dioxide into oil wells to stimulate production.
And the coal industry views DOE's efforts to promote CCS as stymied by barriers against coal-fired power that have erected by other agencies, such as EPA's climate rules.
“For all intents and purposes, the Clean Power Plan is a plan to push renewables at the expense of everything else," said Laura Sheehan, a spokeswoman for the industry-backed American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. “It’s a real case of the administration talking out both sides of its mouth. You have the DOE doing one thing and the administration doing the polar opposite."
DOE's authority to spend that money expires with the end of the 2015 fiscal year on Wednesday, and the four projects — in Louisiana, Illinois, Texas and California — simply won't meet necessary milestones in time.
The rest of the $1.21 billion in unspent DOE funds come from about 8,000 other projects, including renewables, other fossil energy endeavors, grid modernization and Cold War nuclear cleanup work. Those projects have already wrapped up or broke ground, the agency says, and some of the refunds were under $100.
While some stimulus-born programs will live on, such as loan authority for DOE’s quasi-independent Western Area Power Administration, the new fiscal year will spell the end of federalfunding for a wide range of government ventures, including rural broadband efforts.
DOE points out that it funded four other carbon-capture utilization and storage projects that met their deadlines. For example, there's NRG’s 240-megawatt Petra Nova project, which broke ground last fall and used $163 million of the $167 million in stimulus funds DOE made available.
“DOE’s return of these [American Recovery and Reinvestment Act] funds to Treasury is a reflection of the significant challenges faced by businesses that are introducing innovative, early-stage energy technologies to markets and not a negative reflection on the readiness of [carbon-capture utilization and storage] technologies,” DOE spokesman Bartlett Jackson said in an email. The agency said it’s committed to advancing the technology knowing that fossil fuels will be in use around the world, particularly developing nations, for years to come.
The biggest challenges to CCS, Wilson said, have been low oil and natural gas prices. Cheap oil has dampened interest in using carbon dioxide for enhanced oil recovery — which makes CCS significantly more cost-effective. And cheap gas has shifted utilities’ attention away from coal.
“CCS with coal isn’t completely off the table anywhere but it’s not the obvious economic option for any utility," Wilson said.
Even at NRG, the success of Petra Nova has not led to plans for additional carbon-capture projects. NRG chief David Crane told investors earlier this month that the technology "obviously does not currently make economic sense at $30 to $40 a barrel."
The four fossil projects that lost the DOE funding had already received about $477 million in total, and environmentalists like Ben Schreiber, climate and energy program director for Friends of the Earth, argue that that's "money that’s being diverted away from reducing the cost curve on renewable energy and getting us where we need to be on battery storage."
Nevertheless, DOE believes that even the projects that might not survive have provided useful lessons.
“All of these large projects are difficult to pull off. ... They take time and there are many, many stakeholders involved, and the financial circumstances of the world change, and the cost of capital changes and the cost of labor changes,” said one senior DOE official with intimate knowledge of the fossil programs. “All of these things add delay but when you’ve got this hard deadline, eventually you just hit up against the clock.”
The Lake Charles project in Louisiana, which DOE agreed to support in 2009, ended up being one of its biggest stimulus shortcomings. The facility was supposed to convert petroleum coke into synthetic gas for methanol, hydrogen and other products, while also capturing carbon dioxide that would be pumped into depleted oilfields to enhance their production.
DOE agreed to put up $261 million of the project's $436 million price tag, but the agency’s primary industry partner, Leucadia Energy, LLC, backed out last fall, citing “the likely ultimate cost of completion” — aka a ballooning price tag. DOE only spent about 5 percent of its money, so $249 million will be going back to Treasury this week.
While DOE does not decide whether any of project developers should throw in the towel, the loss of millions of dollars in stimulus funds can put some of them into a tailspin.
FutureGen, perhaps the best known and most frustrating advanced coal project in the country, was initially pitched by former President Bush, who later spiked the project. The Obama administration brought it back as slimmed-down FutureGen "2.0."
Slightly more than $1 billion from the stimulus was earmarked for the estimated $1.68 billion project to retrofit a coal-fired power plant in Illinois to capture and store at least 90 percent of its carbon dioxide emissions. DOE spent $200 million on the project before its industry backers in the FutureGen Industrial Alliance ran into delays from “factors including legal challenges and its inability to secure necessary financing,” according to DOE’s inspector general.
That meant FutureGen 2.0 would miss key milestones, and the DOE decided in January to end its funding and return $795 million in unspent money to Treasury — its largest single refund. And without that large pot of money, the project has basically flat-lined. Despite the collapse in federal support, a DOE webpage for the project says it "provided tangible benefits and valuable information" to advance carbon capture research.
While the loss of stimulus money can seem like pulling the rug out from under a project, some developers are better equipped to handle the shortfall than those behind FutureGen.
Summit Power Group is still on track to complete its Texas Clean Energy Project, a 400-megawatt coal plant that aims to capture 90 percent of its carbon for use in enhanced oil recovery, despite missing out on $104 million from DOE.
DOE had set aside $211 million from the stimulus for Summit, and about half will not be spent. But the federal support made up less than 10 percent of the project's total estimated $2.4 billion cost, and Summit has all of its permits and contracts, including deals to sell its CO2, its power generation and its production of an organic compound called urea.
“It’s hard to not call that a setback,” the DOE official said of Summit losing $104 million, “but these people have a lot of very strong fundamentals.”
Summit still remains eligible for other DOE support and federal tax credits. It received $239 million in DOE Clean Coal Power Initiative grants, and could tap another $313 million in Section 48A Treasury Department tax credits, federal incentives for power plants that demonstrate carbon, capture and sequestration technologies.
Another project known as Hydrogen Energy California, which would turn coal and petroleum coke into hydrogen for a power station while capturing the CO2, has seen its struggles fall somewhere between those of Summit and FutureGen.
HECA, as it’s called, was slated to get up to $275 million in stimulus funds — $122 million of which has gone unspent (another $133 million was coming from DOE’s clean coal initiative and $103 million in potential tax credits).
Its costs jumped to $4 billion from the original 2009 estimate of $2.8 billion, according to asummary by the DOE IG. It has offtake agreements for some of its power, but it still lacks a buyer for its CO2. California regulators also have not granted all its necessary permits and approvals, and the project has run into opposition from environmentalists led by the Sierra Club, which urged the state’s public utility commission to kill it earlier this year. The group cited the expected loss of DOE stimulus funds to bolster its case.
Rather than terminating HECA’s application, in July CPUC required project developers to hit a separate set of milestones to demonstrate that the process is “not indefinite,” including documentation of a sequestration agreement.
“We subsidize solar, we subsidize wind and we’ve tried to, in a different way, subsidize CCS," Wilson said. "CCS is just a lot more expensive and technologically challenging and very location-specific. It’s a very challenging environment to build a CCS project and I don’t think that it’s going to get any less challenging."
-
EPA Expects Success from New Methane Rules
Sep 29, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A top environmental regulator said Tuesday that he expects new federal standards for methane emissions will succeed in cutting down on the potent greenhouse gas.
Joseph Goffman, the associate assistant administrator at the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Air and Regulation, said Tuesday that the agency’s new methane standards, combined with expanded voluntary programs, will help the natural gas industry reduce its methane emissions.
“If we develop a meaningful expansion of our voluntary programs, we will see industry succeed, both in achieving its voluntary commitments and achieving its legal obligations, while continuing to thrive economically,” Goffman said at an event hosted by The Hill and sponsored by the Environmental Defense Fund.
“That’s the definition of success, as far as we’re concerned.”
The EPA proposed new rules on methane emissions at new natural gas sites in August after pitching a plan to expand its voluntary leak tracking program the month before.
Officials said the new rule would cut between 340,000 and 400,000 short tons of methane annually by 2025, roughly the equivalent of 7.7 to 9 million metric tones of carbon dioxide.
The proposed rule and voluntary programs are part of a government-wide effort to cut emissions of methane, the main component of natural gas and an especially powerful greenhouse gas, by 45 percent over the next decade. Officials hope to finalize the rule by next spring.
Republicans have promised to fight the regulations, which some have characterized as another Obama administration assault on the fossil fuel industry.
Natural gas interests have similarly pushed back against the rule, saying they have a financial incentive to cut down on methane leaks on their own. Many have said a voluntary methane leak program, such as the one the EPA is proposing to expand, is all the industry needs to work on the issue.
But Bob Perciasepe, the president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, endorsed the EPA’s regulatory approach on Tuesday.
“You can definitely get results from voluntary programs, and this has happened time and time again in environmental and other types of programs,” he said at The Hill event.
“However, here you have half a million existing wells, you have several thousand operators out there. You have a very diverse world working on this. I think EPA did the right thing to come up with a mix here of some regulatory, some voluntary.”
The methane effort is part of the Obama administration’s climate agenda, which, along with the EPA’s climate rule for power plants and other steps, has injected energy into the government’s focus on climate change, Goffman said.
“The president, the administrator and the administration as a whole is committed to the kind of follow-through that is needed to achieving a meaningful, long-lasting climate policy,” he said, “that will not only achieve reductions in the short-term, promote innovations and technologies and practices, but will also lay the groundwork for our successors, whether it’s in this decade or the next decades after, to continue to take on climate change.”
-
Senate Dem to EPA: Protect 'God's Planet'
Sep 29, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Tim Devaney
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) urged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to protect “God’s planet” during a testy climate hearing Tuesday.
The EPA is expected to release controversial air pollution rules later this week that business groups have called the “most expensive regulation in history.”
Republicans are skeptical of the EPA’s upcoming ozone rules, but Democrats say they are the world’s last hope to fight climate change. Lawmakers argued about the rules during a heated Senate hearing.
“It’s God’s planet,” Boxer declared at the hearing. “We’ve got to protect it.
The EPA is expected to strengthen the air pollution rules by lowering the levels at which businesses and communities are allowed to emit ozone. The current ozone limit is 75 parts per billion (ppb), but the agency is expected to lower it to between 70 ppb and 68 ppb.
Repbulicans say this would make it the most expensive regulation in history, with one disputed study claiming it could cost businesses $1.7 trillion to comply.
Senate Environment Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) accused the EPA of colluding with “extremist environmental groups” on the rule.
“The EPA is essentially cutting corners in a shameless attempt to promote President Obama’s environmental legacy,” Inhofe said at the hearing.
Republicans contend that the ozone standards will raise energy costs for Americans and question how effective the rules will be at fighting climate change.
Their concerns haven’t phased the EPA or Democrats.
“I have not had one constituent tell me, ‘The air is too clean. Stop cleaning up the air,’ ” Boxer remarked.
“If you cling to the dirty old energies of the past, you’re doomed in this world, because the people are not going to support dirty energy when they see what it’s doing to the planet,” she said.
-
Bush to Press for GOP Energy Priorities, Skirt Climate Change
Sep 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Darren Goode
Jeb Bush will throw his support behind a checklist of Republican energy priorities on Tuesday that he says will jump-start the economy, but he'll steer clear of discussing climate change.
In a summary released by his campaign, the GOP presidential candidate will call for lifting the crude oil export ban, getting rid of EPA climate regulations, building the Keystone XL pipeline and giving states more say over where to drill.
“Taken together, these policies will fully unleash the energy revolution creating more jobs, higher wages, cheaper gas and cheaper electricity while better protecting our interests abroad and our environment,” Bush will say.
Bush has staked out a more moderate stance on climate change than other Republican candidates, stating that he believes the planet's climate is changing and that human activity has contributed to it. But he has eschewed any measures that he says would hurt the economy, including President Barack Obama's new regulations on power plants.
Eliminating the federal "overregulation" will put the country on a path to economic growth of 4 percent year, and reduce energy costs for consumers and businesses, Bush says in the summary.
The summary offers a teaser of additional proposals to come “in the coming months,” including one hinting at overhauling the current energy tax structure.
“We must create a level playing field for all energy sources including, but not limited to, nuclear, renewables, coal, natural gas, oil and alternative fuels,” Bush notes in the summary. “We unnecessarily drive up energy costs on Americans when we play favorites and suppress the dynamism of free markets.”
Bush will also call in the coming months for measures to “further accelerate the discovery of game-changing technologies by boosting funding for high-priority basic research and increasing the effectiveness of our national labs,” according to the summary.
“The private sector often underfunds energy research that could greatly benefit society,” it adds. “Government can correct that.”
He advocates that producers and consumers “must have better access to new technologies such as ‘intelligent’ electricity management devices, unconventional transportation fuels, advanced nuclear power designs, and cutting-edge energy conservation methods.”
For now, Bush is sounding a lot like his fellow Florida Republican running for president, Sen. Marco Rubio, who has also advocated innovation over regulation in his energy plan last month that also stuck close to the more traditional Republican fossil fuel platform.
It is also an effort by Bush to roll out a specific policy agenda and avoid the personality conflicts that have been a major focus of campaigns like that of Republican front-runner Donald Trump. Bush and Rubio are currently fighting for fourth place behind conservative outsiders Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina.
The agenda he is focusing on Tuesday in a speech at Rice Energy — a company that has used fracking to join in the natural gas boom in Pennsylvania and Ohio — includes calling for an end to the 40-year-old crude oil export ban, as well as “liberalizing” natural gas exports.
He also cites “at least two states, Alaska and Virginia” which have “expressed an interest in further developing energy resources but have been thwarted or constrained by the Obama administration” in calling for “Washington [to] generally defer to the will of states and tribes” who are “best able to weigh the benefits and costs of oil and gas development.”
And Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, he adds, is “even more extreme” in her stance against allowing for drilling in Arctic waters off Alaska. Bush is presumably not calling for opening up the eastern Gulf of Mexico near Florida. Bush, as governor of the tourist-rich Sunshine State, fought even the administration of his brother, President George W. Bush, when it sought to open new waters to drilling.
-
Obama Climate Official Predicts 'Monumental Undertaking' at UN
Sep 29, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
President Obama’s climate change point person at the United Nations laid out the stakes Monday for an international global warming conference later this year.
Todd Stern, the State Department's special envoy for climate change, told Climate Week participants that world governments are on the verge of a “monumental undertaking” if a UN conference leads to a climate agreement this December.
“We will either succeed in accelerating a fundamental transformation of the energy base of the global economy and avert the worst effects of climate change, or we will fail, to the benefit or detriment of our children and theirs,” he said.
“A great deal of this effort will be driven by national governments, subnational actors, enterprising businesses, creative scientists and engineers, and an enlightened global public that demands its leaders take heed and take action.”
Stern said the talks in Paris, if successful, will mark a “fundamental pivot” for government leaders and lead to a new focus on climate policies around the world.
But he said the world’s countries need to be on the same page in order for the effort to succeed.
“All of this depends upon a belief that world leaders have finally come together and aligned themselves in a global regime that will push us onward and upward to confront climate change together,” he said.
“Countries will not do their best unless they see their partners and competitors doing the same, unless they see themselves engaged in a race to the top, and unless the salutary pressure of leaders leading pushes all of us forward.”
Officials hope the Paris talks will yield a global accord to reduce greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and help ease future global warming.
The greenhouse gas plans so far announced aren’t enough to keep warming under the 2-degree Celsius mark scientists say is critical to stop the worst impacts of global warming. But officials, including Stern, have said the conference is a first step toward the kind of emissions reductions that are necessary.
“We will not yet be at the inflection point from which emissions head downwards, but will have taken a crucial and necessary step toward that point,” he said.
Stern’s speech comes the day after Brazil became the latest major polluter to announce a greenhouse gas reduction target for the climate talks.
The United States has committed to reducing its emissions by 26 to 28 percent before 2030. Stern plugged a handful of major Obama administration climate policies designed to achieve that goal.
“I may be biased, but I think you’d be hard pressed to find another leader who has been more personally engaged to such striking effect than our president,” Stern said.
-
House Impeachment Push, Senate Hearing Target CWA Rule Development
Sep 29, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
Congressional Republicans are targeting what they see as flaws in the crafting of the Obama administration's Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule, with a handful of GOP lawmakers pushing an impeachment resolution against EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy over the rule and senators planning a hearing on development of the policy.
The Senate Environment & Public Works Committee's (EPW) water and wildlife subcommittee will hold a Sept. 30 hearing on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' role in crafting the final rule, a joint regulation by EPA and the Corps. Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Jo-Ellen Darcy will testify, and could face questions about internal memos released by the GOP that highlighted Corps staff's concerns about the rule.
The subcommittee hearing could give EPA's Republican critics a chance to echo claims by House lawmakers that McCarthy made false statements to Congress about the crafting of the water rule.
In the House, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) on Sept. 11 introduced H. Res. 417, which says the alleged false statements and perjury by the EPA chief warrant McCarthy's impeachment. At press time the resolution had 22 co-sponsors and had been referred to the House Judiciary Committee where it awaits further action.
House Republicans claim the released Corps memos show that McCarthy lied to three congressional hearings when she said the CWA rule had full support from the Corps. The resolution would impeach McCarthy for her alleged “high crimes and misdemeanors” based on her testimony at the three hearings.
A House Judiciary Committee spokesman did not respond by press time to a request for comment on any plans to move the resolution. If the House were to pass articles of impeachment for McCarthy, which requires a majority vote, she would be tried before the full Senate, and could be removed from office. However, conviction would require 67 votes against McCarthy -- an improbable total with only 54 Republicans in the chamber.
The statements the resolution targets were made by McCarthy at a July 29 hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, at a July 9 hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and a Feb. 4 joint hearing of EPW and the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee.
The resolution does not name the specific remarks at issue, but a statement from Gosar's office announcing its introduction points to McCarthy's claims that “we relied on . . . the science that’s available to us,” at the July 9 hearing, and that “all of the changes that the Army Corps was interested in making . . . had been fully satisfied” at the July 29 hearing. Gosar's office also cites McCarthy's comments at the Feb. 4 hearing that “we are in fact narrowing the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act consistent with sound science and the law.”
EPA's critics say the statements are at adds with the internal Corps memos that showed concern about the rule, and justify concerns that the rule is unlawful and exceeds EPA's authority. EPA's defenders counter that the regulation is legally valid and resolves long-running uncertainty about the water law's scope.
The memos, posted online by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, are part of the internal dialogue between EPA and the Corps in the run-up to signing the final CWA rule on May 27. They include often strongly worded critiques of the rule and EPA's economic and scientific analysis supporting it.
Republican members of the House science committee previously wrote McCarthy on Aug. 11 challenging as potentially “false and misleading” some of her statements on both the CWA rule and the agency's upcoming ozone air standards, urging her to quickly clarify the comments.
-
McCarthy Vows to Fund Highways, Revamp Federal Agencies
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sean Reilly and Kevin Bogardus
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), likely soon to become House speaker, today predicted that the chamber will quickly pull off a feat that has eluded it for years: passage of long-term surface transportation funding legislation.
With the help of money generated from tax code changes, "we're going to find a bill done next month that is a six-year highway bill," McCarthy said today on the MSNBC talk show "Morning Joe."
McCarthy, the favorite to succeed outgoing Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), cited passage of a long-term bill as one of two policy priorities he intends to pursue if elected to the post, the other being a significant refiguring of federal agencies.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. government used independent military base-closing commissions to help reduce the cost and sprawl of the defense budget. McCarthy said something similar should be tried with agencies, which frequently overlap each other.
"We're going to make sure we transform these agencies because these agencies that we have today, we've never crafted them in the same manner," McCarthy said. "Look at the flow chart, look at the duplication. Why don't we go through and revamp the entire process so they work?"
But transportation is the issue that more immediately piques lawmakers' interest.
Like Boehner, McCarthy ruled out an increase in the 18.4-cent-per-gallon federal gas tax but alluded to efforts by House Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to produce more transportation revenue by changing the tax treatment of U.S. multinationals' earnings held overseas. Ryan has yet to spell out a plan, however, by which such changes could generate the approximately $100 billion in new revenue that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, will be needed to stabilize road and transit funding over the next six years.
Congress last approved a six-year surface transportation bill in 1998, followed by a four-year measure in 2005 and -- after a series of short-term extensions -- an approximately two-year bill in 2012.
Since July 2014, lawmakers have passed three stopgap extensions, the latest of which expires at the end of next month.
The recurring roadblock to a new long-term measure has been financing. Federal gas and diesel taxes no longer bring in enough money to keep up with congressionally imposed spending demands. As a result, lawmakers have had to repeatedly tap general Treasury revenue. Under budget-scoring rules, those bailouts have to be offset by savings or revenue from other sources.
Finding those offsets has been a struggle, likened by some observers to scratching for change in the couch cushions. A road, rail and transit authorization bill approved by the Senate in July, for example, would on paper run for six years but contains funding for three.
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which had been expected to mark up its version of a long-term bill earlier this month, has yet to proceed because members are waiting to hear from Ryan how much money will be available, the panel's top Democrat, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, said in a recent interview.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Add recipients
Suggested