Preview Newsletter
NI - ACC PM 10/8/2015
-
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy Drops out of Race for House Speaker
Oct 8, 2015 | Washington Post
By Mike DeBonis
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Thursday abruptly dropped out of the race to replace John Boehner for speaker, a stunning move that further complicates an already chaotic House leadership contest. -
McCarthy Drops Speaker Bid, Plunging House into Chaos
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Daniel Bush
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy shocked Washington, D.C., today by abruptly dropping out of the speaker's race, throwing the deeply divided GOP conference into further turmoil as it seeks to replace retiring Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). -
Homeland Security Gives Glimpse of Restructuring for Cyberthreats
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
Senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security offered lawmakers an advance look at a shakeup in the agency's critical infrastructure protection branch. -
Poll Finds Wide Support for Plant Safety Upgrades
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
The broad majority of Americans support requiring chemical facilities to implement new safety tools to reduce the threat of industrial accidents, according to a poll released today by groups pushing for the policies. -
(ACC Mentioned) Foes of New Ozone Curbs Set Sights on EPA Permitting
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Manufacturers that fought U.S. EPA's bid to tighten the national ozone standard are now raising concerns that they'll be stuck in permitting limbo. -
EPA's New Ozone Rule Will Crush Jobs and Communities
Oct 8, 2015 | Americans for Tax Reform
By Edwin Portugal
Last week the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized new regulations that could cripple the American manufacturing resurgence and negatively impact communities throughout the nation. -
States Seek Answers on Clean Power Plan Delay
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Fourteen states seeking to challenge the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan in federal court are pushing U.S. EPA to release any internal communication explaining why the rule has not yet been published in the Federal Register. -
N.C. May Stay 'Inside the Fence Line,' Setting up EPA Battle
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Kristi E. Swartz
North Carolina may be one of the few states that doesn't ask U.S. EPA for more time to craft an emission-reduction scenario for the agency's Clean Power Plan. -
Senate Democrats Block Energy Spending Bill
Oct 8, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darren Goode
Senate Democrats blocked a $35.4 billion Energy Department spending bill as part of their effort to get Republicans to negotiate a new budget deal. -
House GOP Pressured Over Maritime Add-Ons to Exports Bill
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Geof Koss
Ideological divisions among conservatives is spilling into the House debate over lifting the crude oil export ban. -
House Oil Export Vote on Track Despite Leadership Chaos
Oct 8, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
Tomorrow's House vote on crude exports legislation will continue despite the turmoil sparked by Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy's decision to withdraw from the race for Speaker, a GOP leadership aide told POLITICO today. -
Interest Groups Appeal to Congress on Oil Exports
Oct 8, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Activists on both sides of the crude oil export ban are making their final pitches to lawmakers before the House votes on lifting the restriction later this week. -
Passing POWER Act Will Drive Cleaner Energy and Lower Costs
Oct 8, 2015 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By Joshua Reichert
What if every time you stopped to buy gas, you spilled two gallons for every one you put in the tank? -
Ky. Democrat Promises Not to Implement Clean Power Plan
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Manuel Quiñones
Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway, the Democratic nominee for governor in next month's election, promised today not to implement U.S. EPA's new Clean Power Plan pending litigation against the rule. -
9th Circuit Urged To Rehear Ruling Avoiding Merits Of CWA 'Transfer' Rule
Oct 8, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
Environmentalists are urging a federal appeals court to rehear its decision that rejected their suit over EPA's rule exempting many water transfers from Clean Water Act (CWA) discharge permits ... -
D.C. Water Begins Harnessing Electricity From Every Flush
Oct 7, 2015 | Washington Post
By Katherine Shaver
The next time you flush in the nation’s capital, you might consider this: You — or, more precisely, whatever you have flushed — will help generate clean energy. -
Obama Backs Dec. 31 Deadline for Rail Safety Requirement
Oct 8, 2015 | Newsmax
President Barack Obama plans to enforce a deadline for rail operators to install safety technology by the end of the year, despite warnings from railroads including Union Pacific Corp. and Amtrak...
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
-
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy Drops out of Race for House Speaker
Oct 8, 2015 | Washington Post
By Mike DeBonis
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Thursday abruptly dropped out of the race to replace John Boehner for speaker, a stunning move that further complicates an already chaotic House leadership contest.
McCarthy announced his decision at a meeting of House Republicans who had gathered to select their choice for speaker ahead of the official floor vote scheduled for Oct. 29.
“We need a fresh face,” said McCarthy in post-meeting press conference, who said he would remain as majority leader…I don’t want making voting for speaker [on the House floor] a tough one.”
“If we’re going to be strong, we’re going to be 100 percent united…let’s put the conference first,” he added with his wife at his side.
McCarthy addressed questions about whether his statement on the Select Committee on Benghazi — indicating its goal was to nick Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers — was fatally damaging.
“Well, that wasn’t helpful. I could have said it much better.” McCarthy admitted, adding he “should not be a distraction” from the panel finding the “truth.” “That’s part of the decision as well.”
Following themeeting in which McCarthy announced he was out of the race, Rep. John Fleming (R-La.), a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, said he was “shocked just like everyone else…[McCarthy] said something to the effect of I’m not the guy.”
Fleming said the 30 to 40 member Freedom Caucus will start with a clean slate of candidates and meet possibly as early as Thursday to discuss who to throw their support behind.
“I think Kevin McCarthy was doing what he believes was the highest thing for this conference and for America,” said conservative Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.).
Several Republicans leaving the meeting,, including moderate Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), said it’s unclear who will emerge as the leading candidate for speaker. Boehner is slated to step down on Oct. 30 and the House floor vote is scheduled for Oct. 29.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) is the top choice of many GOPers but he reiterated that he is not interested after McCarthy (R-Calif.) dropped out.
“Kevin McCarthy is best person to lead the House, and so I’m disappointed in this decision,” Ryan said in a statement. “Now it is important that we, as a Conference, take time to deliberate and seek new candidates for the speakership. While I am grateful for the encouragement I’ve received, I will not be a candidate. I continue to believe I can best serve the country and this conference as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.”
Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), interviewed live on CNN, said McCarthy withdrew because although he could have won a majority of the Republican Conference, he would not have had 218 votes on the House floor.
Dent said it might be necessary to form a “bipartisan coalition” with Democrats to elect the next speaker and avoid having to appease the “rejectionist wing” of his own party, which he said has made the House ungovernable by insisting on “unreasonable demands.”
Other names that were floated amid Thursday’s chaos were Rep. Trey Gowdy (S.C.) and Jim Jordan (Ohio), head of the Freedom Caucus.
To claim the speaker’s chair, a Republican will have to claim a secure a majority of those present and voting in an Oct. 29 vote on the House floor. Without Democratic votes, a Republican nominee for speaker can’t afford to lose more than 29 votes.
McCarthy’s hopes of uniting Republicans took a blow Wednesday when a close-knit group of roughly 40 hard-line conservatives, the House Freedom Caucus, said it would back a low-profile Florida lawmaker, Rep. Daniel Webster, instead.
[House conservatives spurn McCarthy, flex muscle ahead of speaker vote]
The group said it intended to vote as a bloc in Thursday afternoon’s party election and left open the possibility that they might unite against McCarthy on the House floor in three weeks, denying him the speakership. They didn’t even get that far.
In a statement announcing their endorsement, the Freedom Caucus suggested their position might change if “significant changes to conference leadership and process” were made, and that their numbers give them leverage to demand those changes from the next speaker.
“He has three weeks to make systemic changes,” Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-Idaho) said of McCarthy. “Not just talk about the changes, but to show exactly what he’s going to do.”
-
McCarthy Drops Speaker Bid, Plunging House into Chaos
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Daniel Bush
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy shocked Washington, D.C., today by abruptly dropping out of the speaker's race, throwing the deeply divided GOP conference into further turmoil as it seeks to replace retiring Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).
The California Republican announced his last-minute decision in a brief speech at a closed-door meeting this afternoon where the House GOP caucus had gathered to vote for speaker.
McCarthy said he wasn't the "face that the party needs at this time," according to several House Republicans who attended the meeting.
"This was a shock to me and everybody in the room," Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) said in a brief interview after McCarthy's announcement.
"Over the last week, it has become clear to me that our Conference is deeply divided and needs to unite behind one leader," McCarthy said in a statement released just before 1 p.m.
After McCarthy dropped out, Boehner, who is slated to leave at the end of the month, postponed the speaker's vote and did not say when it would take place, a House GOP lawmaker said.
"Today's leadership election has been postponed until a later date," House Republicans said on their Twitter account this afternoon.
McCarthy was widely expected to win the GOP endorsement. But his path to securing the 218 votes needed to become speaker in a floor vote later this month suffered a major setback yesterday when the House Freedom Caucus endorsed Rep. Daniel Webster (R-Fla.) for speaker, ensuring that no candidate would have enough support to win the post.
Webster allies said McCarthy never had a path to 218 votes.
"Kevin recognized he had no path to get to 218 votes on the House floor," Rep. David Jolly (R-Fla.) told reporters. "I think he made the right decision."
"The appropriate decision for Kevin and his family was to remain in the post of majority leader," Jolly added.
With McCarthy out of the speaker's race, the contest will become even more chaotic in coming weeks as potential candidates jockey for support for the post.
For now, it's a two-way battle between Webster and Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), but several other candidates could jump into the race, including Majority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 3 House Republican, who has been running to replace McCarthy. Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), a moderate, was quoted in media outlets this afternoon saying he may eye a run for speaker as well.
"We'll see a whole slate of candidates come out and the show will go on," Davis said.
One member who will not be a candidate is House Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who commands great sway in the GOP conference. In a statement, Ryan expressed disappointment that McCarthy would not be speaker and said he could best serve the country in his current post.
-
Homeland Security Gives Glimpse of Restructuring for Cyberthreats
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
Senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security offered lawmakers an advance look at a shakeup in the agency's critical infrastructure protection branch.
DHS's National Protection and Programs Directorate is reshaping itself to counter new threats in a "world in which cyber and physical ... are increasingly intertwined," said Suzanne Spaulding, undersecretary at the NPPD, during a hearing yesterday at the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection and Security Technologies.
"We know that cyberattacks can have physical consequences, such as disrupting the electric grid, or causing a dam to malfunction, just as physical events such as storms and flooding can cause cyber outages," Spaulding said.
The three DHS officials who testified at the subcommittee yesterday could confirm few details about the restructuring, which Spaulding described as an "ongoing process." But the NPPD is aiming to organize its many offices under a simplified set of three directorates: one for infrastructure security, one for cyber-specific operations, and one for protecting federal facilities from physical and online threats.
House lawmakers were at turns welcoming and confrontational with the witnesses. Subcommittee Chairman John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) kicked off the hearing by expressing his "disappointment" at DHS's lack of openness to date. Last month, the subcommittee sent a bipartisan letter to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson voicing concerns that the agency was skirting congressional oversight with the shuffle (EnergyWire, Sept. 17). "Transparency with Congress and the American people is not a choice," Ratcliffe said, noting "I hope our message is clear."
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chairman of the full Homeland Security Committee, softened the tone somewhat by assuring the DHS officials that they had no greater allies than the members of the subcommittee.
"This [restructuring] has to be done right, because I can't think of a more important mission than this one," he said.
The NPPD houses the Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team, a band of computer experts on call to assist private utilities and critical infrastructure operators with cyber emergencies. Spaulding and her two colleagues present told lawmakers they would have further information about the changes by the end of the year.
The fourth witness at the hearing, Chris Currie of the Government Accountability Office, warned of what could happen if the DHS reorganization went forward without enough oversight.
"Oftentimes, what we've seen when organizations rush through these things to address a real, pressing mission need -- often it's later on that management issues creep up, acquisition problems, human capital problems," he said. "A lot of these things take time."
-
Poll Finds Wide Support for Plant Safety Upgrades
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
The broad majority of Americans support requiring chemical facilities to implement new safety tools to reduce the threat of industrial accidents, according to a poll released today by groups pushing for the policies.
The poll, released by the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters, found 79 percent of likely voters back forcing chemical facilities to use safer chemicals and processes -- a policy opposed by the industry.
The poll was conducted Aug. 20 to 23 on behalf of the BlueGreen Alliance, the Center for Effective Government, Communications Workers of America, Greenpeace, the Union of Concerned Scientists and the United Steelworkers. It surveyed 1,009 adults and had a 3.5-point margin of error.
In a similar poll conducted two years ago, the groups found 55 percent of respondents favored policies to limit the release of poisonous gases or explosions, while 7 percent were opposed and 37 percent were undecided (E&ENews PM, Oct. 11, 2013).
"For many this is a no brainer," said a memo released by polling firm Lake Research Partners.
The coalition -- a group of more than 100 organizations urging the Obama administration to adopt new regulations for chemical facilities -- is pushing for agencies to do more as signs mount that efforts have stalled.
The groups favor requiring facilities to evaluate whether they can operate their plants using safer processes, such as storing lower quantities of chemicals on site, to reduce the impact of an unplanned incident.
The coalition cited the poll results in a letter sent to the White House today. The groups wrote that the show of support means the administration should include "cost-effective inherently safer technologies" in a pending rulemaking to update U.S. EPA's risk management program.
That rulemaking is behind schedule, with EPA missing a deadline to propose a rule last month. A planned small-business review panel has yet to convene (Greenwire, Oct. 5).
The letter to President Obama warned that the groups "fear that the EPA may fall far short of the prevention policies you advocated for in the Senate, and the principles your administration advanced on Capitol Hill."
-
(ACC Mentioned) Foes of New Ozone Curbs Set Sights on EPA Permitting
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Manufacturers that fought U.S. EPA's bid to tighten the national ozone standard are now raising concerns that they'll be stuck in permitting limbo.
The Clean Air Act compels manufacturers to show compliance with the new limit when applying for pre-construction air permits, but EPA hasn't released guidance yet for how to go about making that demonstration.
The American Chemistry Council said the issue hits manufacturers that apply for permits in areas that meet the old standard but are projected to not meet the new, tighter limit.
"This has always been a problem," said Lorraine Gershman, the trade group's senior director of regulatory and technical affairs. "There's a disconnect between implementation and when the standards are set."
EPA last week lowered the national ambient air quality standard from 75 parts per billion -- the level set in 2008 during the George W. Bush administration -- to 70 ppb.
Manufacturers last year aired similar concerns with permitting as the House took up and passed legislation that aimed to ease the way for pre-construction permits. With the new ozone standard out, there may be renewed interest in taking up that legislation again.
Green groups, Democrats and the nation's leading association for state and local air regulators strongly objected last year to the "Promoting New Manufacturing Act." The bill, they argued, would ensure that the burden of complying with new air pollution limits fell on existing industrial facilities.
Under the Clean Air Act, manufacturers that are located in Prevention of Significant Deterioration areas -- places that meet ambient air quality standards -- must show that they won't deteriorate the air with expansion or new construction projects. They must be permitted under the most up-to-date air quality standard.
Environmentalists say it's fair to ask that of manufacturers. A lack of immediate EPA guidance, they say, has not held up projects after other new standards were put in place.
"We are not aware of any specific examples in which EPA, state or local permitting authorities were unable to issue pre-construction permits to new construction or modifications following revisions to ambient air quality standards," Natural Resources Defense Council Clean Air Director John Walke told Congress last year.
Greg Bertelsen, director of energy and resources policy at the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), said permitting concern was "very real" for areas with ozone concentrations falling between 70 and 75 ppb.
EPA won't designate areas that are in nonattainment with the new standard for at least two years. Until then, he said, "the problem is, you're treated as an attainment area, but you have to be able to show that your facility won't put the area into nonattainment with the current standard. It's effectively an impossibility because before you even start putting pen to paper on your permit, your area is already over the threshold."
According to the chemistry group, the issue affects nearly $140 billion in chemical industry investment that's been largely spurred by plentiful supplies of shale gas.
Gershman said that, for chemical manufacturers, it's a bigger issue now than when the 2008 ozone standard was finalized because the industry was not in as good a position as it is now.
"There was not a wave of huge investments waiting," she said. "Seven years later, we're now at the peak of the investment cycle. Folks who were seven years ago not planning new projects are. There are a lot of questions coming."
EPA acknowledged potential permitting difficulties and included a "grandfathering" provision in last week's rule setting the final ozone standard. Facilities with a pre-construction permit that's been deemed complete, as well as those that have received a public notice of a draft permit, are allowed to continue acting under the 75 ppb standard.
EPA put a similar grandfather provision in its 2012 standard for fine particulate matter.
EPA also released a memo to regional offices last week in which it pledged to soon give guidance on how to handle permitting in PSD areas.
"We recognize that the owners and operators of emissions sources need clarity and certainty about regulatory requirements," EPA acting air chief Janet McCabe wrote in the memo, "especially when there are changes in air quality standards that may affect their construction and operations."
Manufacturers acknowledged the memo but say it doesn't answer their questions.
"EPA noted that it intends to provide additional tools. There's a recognition by EPA that these are needed tools," Gershman said. "But obviously, we don't know what EPA will be requiring."
In public comments on EPA's ozone proposal, the American Chemistry Council had asked that EPA extend that grandfathering provision to all new construction projects that have started the permitting process and have gone through public notice.Eyes on Congress
NAM's Bertelsen urged Congress to take an active role.
"We need Congress to step in here and fix the problem," Bertelsen said. "That's the solution."
Under the Promoting New Manufacturing Act, manufacturers would not have to comply with a new standard when obtaining permits if EPA does not issue guidelines on how to demonstrate compliance.
The bill would also require EPA to make public the total number of pre-construction permits, the percentage of them issued within a year of filing and the average amount of time appeals of permit decisions take. The House passed the measure last November (Greenwire, Nov. 20, 2014).
Earlier this year, Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) reintroduced the bill in the House, while Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) introduced a version in the Senate.
The permitting issue may also help fuel other pieces of legislation aimed at halting, including legislation introduced in the House and Senate that would stop implementation of the new standard until 85 percent of counties obtain the old 75 ppb limit (E&E Daily, Oct. 7).
"I think a lot of folks in Congress were waiting to see where EPA set the final standard," Gershman said. "Now that that's out there, there will be a deeper dive in implementation projects."
Capito said earlier this week that she saw an opportunity for the Promoting New Manufacturing Act to move given the concerns over EPA's new standard.
Scalise has already pushed the bill in the wake of EPA's decision to set a 70 ppb standard. Scalise said the act would fix "EPA's flawed system that is holding back manufacturing projects."
The Louisiana Republican pledged to fight EPA's final "extreme" decision.
"It is despicable that unelected bureaucrats in Washington are preventing new manufacturing facilities from being built and are raising the cost of doing business," he said, "especially when so many Americans are in need of jobs."
The National Association of Clean Air Agencies, which represents state and local air regulators, last year strongly opposed the permitting legislation, saying it would sacrifice health in favor of expedited permits.
Terry McGuire, a Washington representative for the Sierra Club who specializes in Clean Air Act issues, said the concerns about permitting highlighted a false dichotomy between cleaning up the air and growing the economy.
"In a lot of ways, I think that this is a solution in search of a problem," he said. "I would go back to the fact that the Clean Air Act has worked consistently for many decades to clean the air and grow our economy."
-
EPA's New Ozone Rule Will Crush Jobs and Communities
Oct 8, 2015 | Americans for Tax Reform
By Edwin Portugal
Last week the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized new regulations that could cripple the American manufacturing resurgence and negatively impact communities throughout the nation. The EPA tightened the national standard on ozone to 70 parts per billion (ppb), a five-point drop from the Bush-era 2008 standard set at 75 ppb. According to industry experts, this new ozone standard is poised to be the "most expensive regulation in U.S. history."
The manufacturing sector has experienced resurgence in recent years. Manufacturing is a major component of the nation's economy - employing more than 12 million Americans and contributing $2.09 trillion to the U.S. economy annually. The new EPA ozone rules threaten to erase this economic progress.
Manufacturers will be required to install costly new technology to comply with the regulation or pay hefty fines. Such technology costs millions of dollars, and will undoubtedly cause many firms, especially small businesses, to shut down. Stifling the manufacturing industry will have drastic effects on the national economy; the regulation will shrink the country's GDP by billions and destroy thousands of jobs. Once a new ozone standard takes effect, it is difficult - if not impossible - to revert back to an older standard. This renders the economic damage permanent.
These new standards will cost taxpayers billions of dollars. From the EPA's own estimates, lowering the standard will cost the federal government roughly $3.9 billion to implement. However, this cost is a mere fraction of the cost on local government.
Such stringent regulations also present a huge cost for thousands of communities throughout the nation. Local governments will be required to install pollution-control equipment on manufacturing facilities, power plants, chemical plants, and even cars. Numerous counties throughout the nation already face difficulty complying with the 75 ppb standard. Failure to comply with the standards subjects these communities to increased federal oversight.
Government officials will be forced to submit State Implementation Plans to the EPA that detail how communities in nonattainment will reach the ozone goal. If they fail to reach these goals they can lose federal funding for local revitalization, notably highway funding. Lowering the standards means even more communities will fall prey to the control of the federal government. For this reason, numerous local and state officials from both parties oppose tightening ozone standards.
The new rules could also force many businesses to shutter their doors, causing thousands of people to lose their jobs, including in Obama's hometown Chicago. To illustrate, Timothy Cullerton, a seasoned Chicago city councilman, said these standards are estimated to cost the state $9 billion and destroy 35,000 jobs.
As evident, the new 70 ppb ozone limit will stifle American manufacturing, kill jobs, and have drastic economic impacts on communities throughout the nation. The standard will create disastrous effects on the national economy and erode the autonomy of local government.
The EPA's recent actions are another egregious example of federal regulatory overreach. These new regulations are not only unnecessary given recent emissions trends, but will negatively impact the livelihoods of thousands of workers, the vitality of American manufacturing, and the country's economic future.
-
States Seek Answers on Clean Power Plan Delay
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Fourteen states seeking to challenge the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan in federal court are pushing U.S. EPA to release any internal communication explaining why the rule has not yet been published in the Federal Register.
The states, led by West Virginia, filed a Freedom of Information Act request Tuesday, asking EPA to turn over emails, faxes and any other documents related to the publication schedule.
The groundbreaking climate rule was released on Aug. 3 but not submitted for final Federal Register publication until Sept. 4. The states cannot challenge the rule in court until it is finalized in the register.
"This request is intended to help the public understand why one of [the] most touted -- and widely criticized -- rules in this Nation's history is being subject to such unexplained delays that harm the States and undermine the availability of judicial review," the states said in theirrequest.
The states have suggested that EPA is purposely delaying publication to deter litigation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected an attempt by states to challenge the rule before it is made final (EnergyWire, Aug. 14).
In the meantime, they say, states are already suffering "irreparable harm" because they have to begin crafting implementation plans now to meet Clean Power Plan deadlines.
"As a result, the States are now experiencing significant and irreparable harms attempting to comply with the Rule, because the Rule imposes ... certain deadlines for submission of States Plans by the States -- September 6, 2016, and September 6, 2018," the request said. "These compliance deadlines have been set by EPA irrespective of the date of publication."
EPA has denied any intentional effort to delay legal challenges. Administrator Gina McCarthy noted in congressional testimony that EPA's less controversial Mercury and Air Toxics Standards spent 62 days being prepared for publication by the Office of the Federal Register.
OFR staff last month detailed the meticulous process of preparing a rule for publication, an especially onerous task for a rule with as many amendments as the Clean Power Plan (EnergyWire, Sept. 25).
Dorsey & Whitney attorney Thad Lightfoot, who previously worked for the Justice Department, said in a statement yesterday that the long delay may not be the agency's fault. But any agency meddling would be "highly unprofessional," he said.
"The Federal Register's delay in publishing the final Clean Power Plan is inexplicable and EPA may have nothing at all to do with that delay," Lightfoot said. "However, if it turns out that the agency was involved in the publication delay, such involvement by EPA would be unprecedented and highly unprofessional."
-
N.C. May Stay 'Inside the Fence Line,' Setting up EPA Battle
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Kristi E. Swartz
North Carolina may be one of the few states that doesn't ask U.S. EPA for more time to craft an emission-reduction scenario for the agency's Clean Power Plan.
But the state may focus solely on improving the efficiency or "heat rate" at coal-fired power plants, which means its plan likely won't meet the federal plan's goal of cutting carbon emissions by 32.1 percent, the director of Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions said yesterday.
"That plan as I understand will only have a Building Block 1 approach and only reflect the reductions that can be made inside the fence line," said Tim Profeta. "What the state is saying it will produce is going to be somewhat de facto insufficient."
EPA's draft Clean Power Plan focused on four "building blocks," or ways states could meet their emission-reduction targets. Those were coal plant efficiency, increased use of natural gas, development of renewables and increased demand-side efficiency. Energy efficiency was removed in the final rule, but states can still use it to comply with EPA's targets.
Some states say that only the first building block is inside the traditional fence line of EPA air regulation, and they are looking at filing a plan that focuses on that portion only.
If North Carolina does that, it "may be the first state that has a real confrontation with EPA about what the plan is supposed to be," Profeta said during a Clean Power Plan discussion at the N.C. Sustainable Energy Association's "Making Energy Work" conference here.
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 the Federal Register. Several others have said they will file a plan but then ask for a two-year extension.
North Carolina plans to sue. It also has started to consider using nuclear to meet its goals, a state official said recently (EnergyWire, Sept. 28). The Energy Policy Council is exploring the option, a spokesman for the North Carolina lieutenant governor confirmed.
Arvin Ganesan, vice president for federal policy at Advanced Energy Economy, said the driving factor in how North Carolina wants to comply with the Clean Power Plan is that the state expects the law to be overturned. He encouraged the state to develop long-term energy planning to operate in a carbon-constrained world.
"Planning is actually a silver bullet to any cost and reliability issues," he said, noting North Carolina's significant clean energy industry, which essentially gives the state a leg up in meeting EPA's goals. North Carolina also was the only one in the Southeast to adopt a mandatory renewable energy standard.
"I'm hoping that over time, in a less political environment, North Carolina is able to take advantage of those opportunities," Ganesan said.
States have to decide whether they want to pursue a mass-based plan or a rate-based one. They also can set up regional markets to trade emissions.
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.
North Carolina's main power provider is Duke Energy Corp., which also supplies electricity to neighboring South Carolina and several other states. That Duke serves such a large area strengthens the argument that North Carolina should be open to working with other states, Profeta said.
He used another large Southeast utility, Southern Co., as an example.
"Southern Co. spans four states in the South. They don't want to have to do something on rates in Mississippi and then have to do something on mass in Georgia," he said.
North Carolina stands to benefit further from regional cooperation if Duke does pursue additional nuclear reactors. This is because the reactors that Duke continues to seek federal approval for would actually be in South Carolina, just across the state border.
Profeta pointed out that Duke, as an electric company, manages the North Carolina-South Carolina border as if it doesn't exist. But the states are taking two very different approaches to preparing their Clean Power Plan responses, he said.
While South Carolina's officials also object to the rule, the state is still developing a plan, Profeta said.
"They are doing something that's vastly different than North Carolina," he said. "That's where you might have a problem in the inefficiency of two systems that just don't align with each other."
-
Senate Democrats Block Energy Spending Bill
Oct 8, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darren Goode
Senate Democrats blocked a $35.4 billion Energy Department spending bill as part of their effort to get Republicans to negotiate a new budget deal.
The 49-47 vote fell short of the 60 necessary to proceed to a bill funding DOE and water infrastructure programs. As the Senate opened its vote, the White House threatened to veto the bill.
The same fate is expected when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in the coming weeks tries to bring up a range of FY16 spending bills covering EPA, Interior and other agencies. Spending bills overseeing the Defense Department, military construction and veterans affairs have also been blocked.
McConnell complained Democrats decided on an "arbitrary political strategy to indiscriminately filibuster every last funding bill." He touted the energy and water spending bill as one that "would enhance our energy security." The Appropriations Committee approved it 26-4 in May.
Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin blamed Republicans for refusing to negotiate a budget deal that increases non-defense spending and that doesn't use war-time funds to boost Defense Department funding.
The budget impasse is likely to lead to lawmakers moving a catch-all omnibus spending measure later this year.
-
House GOP Pressured Over Maritime Add-Ons to Exports Bill
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Geof Koss
Ideological divisions among conservatives is spilling into the House debate over lifting the crude oil export ban.
Upset by the addition of more funding for a federal program that compensates privately owned vessels that assist the military (E&ENews PM, Oct. 5), Heritage Action for America warned House members today that it will "key vote" an amendment to strike the provision from the underlying bill, which would repeal the export ban and will be on the floor tomorrow (E&E Daily, Oct. 8).
The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), would remove the funding for the Maritime Security Program from the bill. In a blog post this morning, Heritage Action said the addition of the provision "has caused a good bill to become entangled in corporate welfare and a $500 million labor union buyoff." Should the Amash amendment be adopted, the group will key vote in support of the underlying bill.
As House Republicans huddle today to choose a new speaker to replace the retiring John Boehner (R-Ohio) at the end of the month (E&E Daily, Oct. 8), Heritage Action spokesman Dan Holler also took a swipe at GOP leaders over the maritime add-on to the bill.
"To be clear, the last 24 hours should be viewed as yet another failure by this leadership team and relevant chairmen," Holler wrote. "Rather than passing a strong, principled free-market energy bill, they allowed the debate to become entangled in a half-billion dollar buyoff for Democrat votes. It puts good members in a bad position and distracts from yet another important debate."
Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), the sponsor of the exports bill who has led repeal efforts in the lower chamber, said yesterday that he "respectfully disagrees" with Heritage Action's position on the shipping funds. He told Greenwire that the provision is supported by the House Armed Services Committee, which was limited by budget rules from boosting the funds in the defense authorization bill.
"We supported using some of the money to increase the stipend of these ships, and after taking a look at the program, we felt it helped us strategically and agreed to do it," Barton said. "It's an authorized program, subject to appropriations. ... I don't know what conservative principle that violates."
Heritage's position on the crude exports bill sets it apart from other like-minded conservative groups, including the American Energy Alliance, which key voted in favor of Barton's bill earlier this week.
However, AEA's statement contains its own caveat -- that lifting the oil export ban should be considered "on its own merits" and not linked to an extension of renewable energy tax credits or a partial repeal of the renewable fuel standard.
While business groups are largely in favor of repeal, the Industrial Energy Consumers of America today urged House members to oppose the bill.
The group, which represents large industrial energy users, noted that the provision of the 1975 law restricting crude exports that would be repealed also gives the president the authority to restrict exports of natural gas, petroleum products, coal and petrochemical feedstocks "in the event of unforeseen circumstances to protect the national interests of the country."
"This is a vital Executive Branch responsibility that should be maintained for the welfare of the country," the group wrote in its letter.
On the other side of the political spectrum, the League of Conservation Voters yesterdayurged House members to oppose the export bill, warning that it will "strongly consider" including the vote in its annual environmental scorecard.
-
House Oil Export Vote on Track Despite Leadership Chaos
Oct 8, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
Tomorrow's House vote on crude exports legislation will continue despite the turmoil sparked by Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy's decision to withdraw from the race for Speaker, a GOP leadership aide told POLITICO today.
The vote on the overseas oil sales bill is on track to take place less than 24 hours after McCarthy's stunning cancellation of his campaign leaves the House GOP conference in a leadership vacuum.
The legislation is still expected to pass, although its Democratic support could prove weaker than supporters had hoped following Wednesday's veto threat from the White House.
-
Interest Groups Appeal to Congress on Oil Exports
Oct 8, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Activists on both sides of the crude oil export ban are making their final pitches to lawmakers before the House votes on lifting the restriction later this week.
Letters supporting and opposing lifting the ban have poured into Congress ahead of Friday’s vote on the matter. Green groups, industry associations and conservative political groups have said they will score members’ votes on Rep. Joe Barton’s (R-Texas) bill or amendments to it.
A coalition of oil groups, including the American Petroleum Institute and the Independent Petroleum Association of America, encouraged House leaders on Tuesday to support lifting the 40-year-old ban.
“Lifting the ban on U.S. oil exports will offer our global allies and trading partners an alternative source of energy, shrink global dependence on oil sourced from hostile regimes, and put America on level fitting with all other producing nations,” the letter said.
In a letter to members on Thursday, the National Association of Manufacturers said the crude oil issue will constitute a key vote this year, writing that lifting the ban would “place the U.S. into compliance with its international commitments and send a strong message to the global community that we intend to honor the basic rules of the global economy.”
The House will vote on the export ban this Friday, and a group of senators are hoping to bring the bill to the floor there soon. The White House has promised to veto the House bill, but supporters hope to find a compromise that will win its support.
Green groups praised Obama’s Wednesday veto threat. In a letter to lawmakers, 42 such organizations said lifting the ban would have a dire impact on the environment.
“There is no doubt that repealing or weakening current law, which forbids crude oil from being exported, will significantly increase climate-disrupting carbon pollution at a time when leading scientists and world leaders agree we must urgently reduce these emissions,” the groups wrote.
In a separate letter, the League of Conservation Voters called the bill a “massive giveaway to Big Oil at the expense of America consumers.” The group said it will score lawmakers’ votes.
Heritage Action, which opposes a provision in the bill boosting payments for unionized maritime shipping companies, was urging members Thursday to vote for an amendment stripping toe funding from the bill.
Rather than passing a strong, principled free-market energy bill, [leadership] allowed the debate to become entangled in a half-billion dollar buyoff for Democrat votes,” spokesman Dan Holler said. “It puts good members in a bad position and distracts from yet another important debate."
-
Passing POWER Act Will Drive Cleaner Energy and Lower Costs
Oct 8, 2015 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By Joshua Reichert
What if every time you stopped to buy gas, you spilled two gallons for every one you put in the tank?
That's akin to what happens in many power plants and factories, where up to two-thirds of the energy generated escapes, typically as steam sent skyward through smokestacks.
This is not only wasteful and costly; it's unnecessary. We have proven, affordable technologies that can capture this unused heat and harness it to generate electricity, heating and cooling.
Combined heat and power (CHP) and waste heat to power (WHP) both create electricity — and, in the case of CHP, produce thermal energy — from the hot exhaust vented during power production. And considering that, according to studies by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the energy wasted in the U.S. utility sector annually is greater than total energy use in Japan for an entire year, you'd think businesses would be lining up to install CHP and WHP systems.
But they aren't, for a variety of reasons, including a lack of awareness of the technology and the upfront cost of installing a CHP or WHP system.
Fortunately, Congress is considering a bipartisan bill that would help industry lower energy costs — including the expense of installing CHP or WHP — while reducing pollution and greatly increasing resilience to grid failures and other power interruptions.
Known as the Power Efficiency and Resiliency Act, or POWER Act, the bill would provide a 30 percent tax credit for the installation of CHP and WHP systems — the same incentive given for deploying other clean energy technologies, such as wind and solar power. The POWER Act has been introduced in both the House (H.R. 2657) and the Senate (S. 1516), and Congress should move quickly to reconcile and pass this critical legislation as part of a larger package of tax extenders.
The 30 percent tax credit for wind and solar has been a powerful tool in our national energy arsenal; thanks in part to increased investment in the two technologies, the Department of Energy says that solar and wind will account for more than half the country's new generating capacity installed in 2015. To ensure parity and make our energy use even more efficient, the credit should be extended to the lesser-known CHP and WHP systems.
Companies that can afford the significant capital necessary to install a CHP system can see substantial benefits. The Cox Interior Inc. manufacturing plant in Campbellsville, Ky., for instance, which makes home wood products, operates a five-megawatt CHP system that saves the company $4.5 million per year — and also produces more electricity than the company needs, allowing it to sell about $50,000 worth of power back to the local utility every year.
And Lorin Industries, a Michigan company that anodizes aluminum for the building industry and has recycled its wasted heat since 1943, added capacity to its CHP system in 1990. The move paid for itself in just four years, saving the company $540,000 annually largely because the company no longer needs to purchase electricity during peak times, when rates are elevated.
But without the tax credit offered by the POWER Act, many small and midsize manufacturing and commercial energy users will not be able to reap the long-term financial benefits that companies like Cox Interior and Lorin Industries have enjoyed — savings that the companies have been able to invest right back into their businesses and communities.
There's one more reason our policymakers should be doing all they can to encourage CHP and WHP adoption. When Hurricane Sandy knocked out electricity to more than 8 million people in 2012, communities, institutions and businesses with CHP generation systems were able to operate independently from the local grid. That allowed places such as Co-op City in the Bronx, Salem Community College and Princeton University in New Jersey, and New Milford and Danbury hospitals in Connecticut to keep the lights and heat on, providing refuge for residents and maintaining essential functions.
Similarly, when Hurricane Katrina struck in 2005, a CHP system meant that Baptist Medical Center in Jackson, Miss., was the only hospital in that metro area to stay open continuously — and to take patients from other medical facilities.
Congress has the opportunity to encourage adoption of technologies that will increase efficiency, reduce pollution, save energy and money, and boost resiliency to grid failures. Passing the POWER Act would be a powerful move in that direction.
Reichert leads the environment work at the Pew Charitable Trusts.
-
Ky. Democrat Promises Not to Implement Clean Power Plan
Oct 8, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Manuel Quiñones
Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway, the Democratic nominee for governor in next month's election, promised today not to implement U.S. EPA's new Clean Power Plan pending litigation against the rule.
"I am not going to submit a state implementation plan to EPA as long as this lawsuit is going," Conway said during a Kentucky Coal Association meeting to hear candidate positions this morning.
Conway boasted of being the only Democratic attorney general in the country to sue EPA against rules to control greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, particularly coal-fired generators. His remarks drew applause from the audience.
"We're going to win. We're going to win that lawsuit," Conway said. He noted that a federal appeals court rejected a move to block the rule pending litigation. But he said, "We've got a good case. We've got a really good case."
Conway, who said he had sued EPA eight or nine times, cheered the recent Supreme Court decision against the agency's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. The rule remains in place, however, and many coal power plants have retired in preparation.
"It sort of felt that the medicine got there after the patient had already died," Conway said. But he promised to continue fighting to keep coal burning at the Big Sandy power plant near Louisa, Ky., which is transitioning to natural gas.
Andy Beshear, Democratic candidate to replace Conway as attorney general and son of current Gov. Steve Beshear (D), also promised today to keep fighting EPA. "I agree with Jack. We will win that lawsuit," he said. "And we have to do it as soon as possible."
Conway talked about his family's ties to the coal industry and how he helped a coal producer, Democrat Paul Patton, become governor in the 1990s. And he promised coal a seat at the table if he is elected.
Conway also promised to keep supporting the Shaping Our Appalachian Region economic development initiative and look at incentives for the industry. "Look, folks, I do believe in regulation," he said. "I just want it to be prudent and reasonable."
Asked whether he would support the Democratic candidate for president next year, one likely to support the Obama administration's regulatory agenda, Conway said, "I'm a Democrat and tend to vote Democratic. How active I will be, I don't know."
Conway has been ahead in polls against businessman Matt Bevin (R). Reports show Conway is also ahead in the cash race, raising more than $6 million compared with Bevin's $1.6 million for the latest reporting period.
This evening, the entire Republican congressional delegation from Kentucky, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, is hosting a fundraiser for Bevin in Washington, D.C., according to an invitation.
Bevin is scheduled to speak at the coal association gathering this afternoon and may repeat accusations against Conway that the attorney general is too close to anti-coal Democrats or has received money from fuel opponents (E&E Daily, Oct. 7).
Conway tried to pre-empt Bevin by saying, "There's 20 years of proof with me and my commitment to the coal industry. There's years and years of proof of me taking on the EPA because it was the right thing to do."
-
9th Circuit Urged To Rehear Ruling Avoiding Merits Of CWA 'Transfer' Rule
Oct 8, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
Environmentalists are urging a federal appeals court to rehear its decision that rejected their suit over EPA's rule exempting many water transfers from Clean Water Act (CWA) discharge permits without considering the actual merits of the rule, saying the judges' decision was procedurally improper and based on disputed facts.
In an Oct. 5 petition, advocates ask for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit for either rehearing by the three-judge panel that initially decided the case, Oregon Natural Resources Council (ONRC) Action v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, or rehearing en banc by the full court. The filing asks that the court either amend the existing opinion in the case or write a new opinion, then remand the dispute to a lower court for further proceedings.
The 2008 CWA rule generally says a transfer of water between distinct waterbodies does not require a CWA discharge permit unless it is subject to intervening industrial, agricultural, or other use.
ONRC was hoping to win vacatur of the rule through its challenge to an unpermitted transfer between Oregon's Klamath River and Klamath Straits Drain, but instead the 9th Circuit in its unanimous Aug. 21 ruling held that the two waters are not legally separate, meaning the transfer rule does not apply as no permit was necessary.
The court in its unanimous Aug. 21 decision said there was no reason to consider whether EPA's rule is legal, because the transfer in question did not move waters between “meaningfully distinct” waterbodies.
ONRC in the new petition says that ruling is improper because the case only reached the summary judgment phase, in which judges can only rule on questions of law, rather than deciding disputes over matters of fact. Whether the waters in question are truly part of the same waterbody is a factual issue that should have been settled at trial, the advocates argue.
“Had the panel looked at the entire factual record, the panel would have determined that the 'meaningfully distinct' issue, with its disputed facts, was not appropriate for summary judgment,” the petition says.
Unless the court decides to review the case again, the only remaining live litigation over the water transfer rule is a pending 2nd Circuit suit, Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. et al. v. EPA, et al. In that case, the agency and its allies are appealing a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that partially vacated the rule, with oral arguments set for Dec. 1.
The ONRC court based its decision in part on the Supreme Court's 2013 ruling in Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural Resources Defense Council, where the high court held that no permits were necessary for the county to move stormwater through channelized portions of the Los Angeles River that formed part of its storm sewer system.
But ONRC's petition for rehearing counters that since both sides in the Los Angeles case agreed that the sewer and the river were part of the same waterbody, the high court did not set a test there for deciding when waters are separate for permitting purposes.
Instead, the advocates say, the appeals court should have looked to other circuit decisions, especially the 11th Circuit's 2009 decision in Friends of the Everglades v. South Florida Water Management District (FOE I) that set criteria for a “meaningfully distinct” finding. All of the established tests require fact-finding, they argue.
“Given the only 'meaningfully distinct' test that has been accepted by a court of appeals, FOE I, the panel should have determined that whether the Drain and the River are meaningfully distinct is an issue for trial,” the petition says
-
D.C. Water Begins Harnessing Electricity From Every Flush
Oct 7, 2015 | Washington Post
By Katherine Shaver
The next time you flush in the nation’s capital, you might consider this: You — or, more precisely, whatever you have flushed — will help generate clean energy.
D.C. Water, which also treats sewage from much of the Maryland and Northern Virginia suburbs, recently became the first utility in North America to use a Norwegian thermal hydrolysis system to convert the sludge left over from treated sewage into electricity.
Yes, to put it bluntly, the city’s sewage treatment plant is turning poop into power.
“It’s a huge deal on so many fronts,” D.C. Water General Manager George S. Hawkins said after Wednesday’s official unveiling of the system. “It’s a public utility leading the world in innovation and technology. We have private and public water companies coming from all over the world to see this.”
Other utilities have generated electricity from sludge, and some — as D.C. Water plans to do soon — sell a byproduct of such systems as a compost-like soil mixture to fertilize landscaping and even vegetable gardens.
But the Blue Plains Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant, officials say, is the first in North America to do so using “pressure cooker” technology that can fit such a system in the relatively tight confines of an urban treatment plant. D.C. Water officials say it’s the largest of its kind in the world.
Hawkins said the system, which began producing electricity in September, will provide one-third of the 157-acre plant’s power, saving about $10 million annually. Vast amounts of water and sewage need a lot of power to move through pipes and pumps, making D.C. Water the city’s biggest consumer of electricity.
The utility expects to save an additional $2 million or so annually on treatment chemicals and $11 million annually in trucking expenses. Previously, the plant produced 1,200 tons of “Class B” biosolids daily, the industry term for the dark gunk left over from treated sewage. That wet, smelly residue had to be carried away in 60 truckloads every day, traveling about 75 miles to farms in Virginia. The new system produces about half as much of a cleaner “Class A” biosolid, which requires half the number of truck runs and smells more like damp mulch.
The Class A compost-like substance could show up in the next year or so on the shelves of Home Depot as a soil nutrient for home gardens, officials said.
D.C. Water officials say the $470 million system, which took four years to build, will end up paying for itself and shrink the plant’s overall carbon footprint by one-third.
At the dedication ceremony, officials from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Energy Department touted the system as an example of how localities can invest in infrastructure while conserving energy and cleaning the environment. Officials noted that water and sewer utilities account for 4 percent of the country’s overall energy usage, making them the largest energy consumers in most communities.Ryu Suzuki, an engineer at the new Bailey Bioenergy Facility, walks past the state-of-the-art machinery that creates thermal hydrolysis. (Katherine Frey/The Washington Post)
“This is on the cusp of science, my friends,” D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) told the crowd of about 100 local officials and utility workers. “This is the kind of magic that results when science is put to its 21st-century use.”
D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) said the system dovetails with the city’s sustainability efforts.
“We can’t afford to have waste be just waste,” Bowser said. “Every dollar spent to convert that waste into energy will help us to reach our goals.”
Here’s how it works: When you flush or send soapsuds down the drain, the contents travel through miles of pipe and ultimately reach Blue Plains, off Interstate 295 in Southwest Washington . There, what looks like brown, murky water flows through screens that remove debris and then sits to allow solids to settle. Then, enormous centrifuges spin off the water and concentrate the remaining solids. (Don’t think too long about that part.)
The liquid is sent off to be treated and then returned to the Potomac River, and the concentrated sludge is pumped into large steel Cambi reactors, named for the Norwegian manufacturer. The reactors function like pressure cookers, using 338-degree steam and pressure to cook the sludge. Then it gets pumped to another tank at a much lower pressure, which causes the cell walls of the unhealthful pathogens and other microbes to burst.
“We’re not just burning up the bacteria,” Hawkins explained. “We destroy it.”
The sludge is then sent into one of four “digesters” — concrete cylinder tanks as tall as eight-story buildings — that each hold 3.8 million gallons. There, it spends about three weeks as microbial bugs nibble at it. The bugs convert the organic matter into methane gas, which is cleaned and sent to a nearby building, where turbines burn the methane gas and produce electricity. The entire system covers about five acres.
The key, Hawkins said, is the Cambi pressure cookers that burn off much of the sludge, leaving less of it to be treated. That allowed D.C. Water to have only four enormous cylinder-like digester buildings instead of eight, which it didn’t have room for.
Hawkins lauded the crowd of local leaders for their support, saying that they and D.C. Water customers had made the project possible.
“One could say it’s a project generated by you, too,” Hawkins said, as the crowd of toilet-flushers chuckled. “I’ll let you think about that one a minute.”
-
Obama Backs Dec. 31 Deadline for Rail Safety Requirement
Oct 8, 2015 | Newsmax
President Barack Obama plans to enforce a deadline for rail operators to install safety technology by the end of the year, despite warnings from railroads including Union Pacific Corp. and Amtrak that they can’t meet the mandate and would have to suspend some service without an extension.
“Congress enacted this law, including the December 31, 2015, deadline, and we believe it is important that the Department of Transportation enforce the law that Congress passed,” Frank Benenati, a White House spokesman, said Wednesday, the day after lawmakers released a letter from Amtrak saying it might suspend some passenger service if the delay isn’t enacted.
House transportation leaders last week introduced legislation to extend the deadline for three years. House and Senate negotiators have been discussing ways to get the measure through both chambers. Benenati declined to comment on whether Obama would sign legislation extending the deadline because nothing has advanced in Congress.
Railroads have had seven years to install positive train control technology, which can slow or stop trains to avoid crashes, on their locomotives and tracks where passengers or hazardous materials move. The National Transportation Safety Board has been urging deployment of such technology for more than 40 years. The U.S. required it in a 2008 law passed by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush after a texting commuter train engineer in Los Angeles drove his train into a freight train, killing 25 people.Latest News UpdateGet Newsmax TV At Home »
Three-Year Delay
Railroads are asking Congress to allow for a three-year delay to install the systems and another two years before they must be fully operational, saying the mandate has been expensive and they’ve faced regulatory delays from agencies including the Federal Communications Commission to get it installed. Senate legislation would require the system to be installed by 2018, though not necessarily fully operational. A House bill introduced last month would also require installation by 2018 and would lay out provisions for two more extensions.Special: New Probiotic Fat Burner Takes GNC by Storm
Amtrak this week was the latest railroad to warn Congress it may halt or delay some service if the Dec. 31 deadline stays in place. While Amtrak says it will have the technology up and running on the track between Washington and Boston that it owns, passenger trains in most of the country run on freight rail tracks.
Freight railroads including Union Pacific and BNSF Railway Co., owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc., have told Congress they won’t be able to meet the deadline.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Add recipients
Suggested