Preview Newsletter
ACC Oct 22
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industries Outline Early Legal Concerns Over EPA 'Consistency' Proposal
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Groups representing the energy, chemical and other major industries are outlining early legal concerns over EPA's proposal to update its "regional consistency" policy on uniform application of agency requirements, saying the agency's plan to exclude adverse court rulings from the policy could create significant confusion for the sectors. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Urged To Provide Data Justifying Proposed FY17-19 Enforcement Focus
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
EPA is facing calls from major industrial sectors to provide exhaustive data on environmental law violations and harms to justify the agency's proposed new fiscal year 2017-2019 enforcement priorities, with industries such as the chemical and oil sector saying EPA has failed to prove non-compliance to warrant focusing on them. -
U.S., Canada Look at Risk Assessment Alignment Strategies
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A U.S.-Canada technical working group has prepared a draft report describing possible strategies the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Health Canada and Environment Canada could use to align their risk assessments of chemicals in commerce. The Canada-U.S. Regulatory Cooperation Council Risk Assessment Technical Working... -
Sunscreen Chemical Toxic to Coral Reefs, Study Says
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Nora Macaluso
A common chemical found in sunscreen lotions is toxic to coral reefs and even the smallest concentrations can be deadly to young coral, according to a new study. Oxybenzone (benzophenone-3) comes in contact with coral reefs as a result of sunscreen-wearing swimmers, as well as wastewater discharges from municipal sewage outfalls... -
Automakers Urge Suppliers To Improve Communication
Oct 22, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Quicker and more consistent communication throughout the automotive supply chain will improve company reporting on chemicals, said major brands at the industry’s annual chemical compliance conference. Car company representatives speaking at last week's conference – organised by trade association Automotive Industry... -
Macy’s To Stop Selling Furniture With Toxic Flame Retardant Chemicals
Oct 21, 2015 | Safer Chemicals Healthy Families
By Tony Iallonardo
Just hours before planned events at Macy’s stores in ten states calling attention to the retailer’s sale of some furniture products containing toxic flame retardant chemicals, the retailer announced it would end the practice. Mind the Store campaign advocates hailed it as a victory for consumers’ health and the environment. -
Your Nail Polish Could Be Disrupting Your Hormone System
Oct 21, 2015 | Environmental Working Group
By Heather White
As my 10-year old daughter handed me her sleeping bag and pillow after the spa party, I noticed that her nails were decorated with multi-colored stickers. She said that she knew I worked in environmental health and wouldn’t want her to get her nails painted. -
(ACC Mentioned) Major Medical Groups Increasingly Warning Of Toxic Chemical Risks To Unborn Babies
Oct 21, 2015 | The Huffington Post
By Lynne Peeples
During her five-and-a-half-year battle with infertility, Julieta Pisani McCarthy bought organic foods and chose personal care products free of synthetic ingredients such as parabens and phthalates. And when she finally did become pregnant with her first son, Nicolas, she continued her diligence, including ridding her home of any furniture... -
(ACC Mentioned) Plastic Bag Swap Will Be Held at Al's Supermarkets
Oct 21, 2015 | Herald Argus
Bring in plastic bags for recycling and get a reusable bag for free at one of four upcoming America Recycles Day events in November. The La Porte County Solid Waste District has once again teamed up with Al's Supermarkets to promote all forms of recycling available in our county through these in-store events. -
(ACC Mentioned) Businessman Explains ‘Use-By’ Labels
Oct 21, 2015 | The BVI Beacon
By Donald De Castro
On Oct. 14 on my radio show, Straight Talk, I spent more than half an hour talking about dates on food labels and why they are only a guideline, but none of the writers of the two online news sites printed the statistics and other facts that I quoted. I will now try to condense as much of the information as I can. -
Weak System Said to Harm Chemical Workers
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
A weak regulatory system is harming workers at and communities near chemical manufacturing facilities, according to a report the Center for Effective Government was scheduled to release Oct. 22. Cuts to enforcement budgets and the related reduction in chemical facility inspections are part of many problems that, in combination, have resulted... -
House Probes Cyber Threats To Power Grid
Oct 21, 2015 | The Hill - Regulation
By Harper Neidig
House members are raising concerns about the vulnerability of the nation’s infrastructure to crippling cyber attacks. Two subcommittees of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee held a joint hearing Wednesday to assess the energy industry’s preparedness for potential attacks. -
Top Cyber Official Wouldn't Be Surprised If Attack Kills City's Power
Oct 21, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillén
A top government cybersecurity official told lawmakers today that he would not be surprised if a major U.S. city were to lose its electric grid tomorrow to a cyberattack. Systems for detecting such attacks are “not sophisticated enough," Brent Stacey, the associate director for national... -
Cybersecurity, Debt Limit Focus of Next Senate Stretch
Oct 20, 2015 | Bloomberg BNA
By Nancy Ognanovich
A plan aimed at fortifying the nation's cybersecurity defenses as well as legislation to head off a default on the federal debt will dominate the Senate's agenda during the next few weeks, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said. He told reporters Oct. 20 he hopes to move quickly through a long list of amendments... -
(ACC Mentioned) Railroad Executive: Chicago's Drinking Water May Be In Jeopardy If Congress Doesn't Act
Oct 21, 2015 | Business Insider
By Bob Bryan
The statistics show that Congress in recent years has been the most unproductive ever. But even worse than a government shutdown, the ongoing gridlock may cut off the drinking water for a massive swath of the country. According to Keith Creel, chief operating officer of Canadian Pacific Railways... -
(ACC Mentioned) Norfolk Southern To End Hazardous Chem Shipments 1 Dec
Oct 21, 2015 | ICIS Chemical Business
By Mark Milam
With an impending deadline of 31 December to comply with federal requirements to install positive train control (PTC) technology, US railroad company Norfolk Southern confirmed on Wednesday that it will no longer accept shipments of poisonous-inhalation-hazard commodities, effective on 1 December. -
(ACC Mentioned) NFU Appreciates Bipartisan, Bicameral Support For PTC Extension; Urges Swift Passage
Oct 21, 2015 | High Plains/ Midwest AG Journal
National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson applauded the announcement of a proposed three-year extension to the Dec. 31 deadline for railroads to install Positive Train Control. He urged Congress to swiftly pass the extension to ensure American family farmers, ranchers and all those that rely on rail do not experience interrupted service. -
(ACC Mentioned) Train Service Threat Remains
Oct 22, 2015 | The Star-Daily Journal
By Jack “Miles” Ventimiglia
The threat of freight train services beginning to shut down starting this month, with an almost total shutdown of all passenger and freight services starting nationally Jan. 1, remains on the table, though U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt extended hope during a press call Wednesday. -
House, Senate Seem Broadly in Sync on Hazmat Agenda
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The House and Senate seem broadly in sync when it comes to setting an agenda for hazardous materials transportation programs through fiscal year 2021, foreshadowing what a final six-year authorization may address. House and Senate actions on several policy provisions in the recently introduced House Transportation and ... -
Leaders Keep Options Open for PTC Vehicle
Oct 21, 2015 | Politico - Morning Transportation
By Jennifer Scholtes
Leaders Keep Options Open For PTC Vehicle: Lawmakers look now for the surest path to the president’s desk for an extension of the positive train control deadline, since House and Senate negotiators just settled on compromise language palatable enough for both chambers. -
NS Announces Service Changes In Response To PTC Deadline
Oct 21, 2015 | Progressive Railroading
Norfolk Southern Corp.'s rail subsidiaries will no longer accept shipments of poisonous-inhalation-hazard (PIH) commodities starting Dec. 1, in preparation for the federal positive train control (PTC) safety law that will take effect Jan. 1, 2016, the company announced yesterday. -
(ACC Mentioned) LAGCOE '15: Diamond Sponsor Cheniere Energy Changing the Energy Market Through LNG exports
Oct 21, 2015 | World Oil
Cheniere Energy is building the $20 billion Sabine Pass Liquefaction facility in southwest Louisiana. Construction, which began in 2012 and is expected to continue through 2020, is directly employing over 4,000 people. This paradigm shift has brought many benefits—lower energy costs for consumers, a resurgence in American... -
New Oil, Gas Greenhouse Gas Reporting Mandates Finalized
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Oil and natural gas companies will be required to collect and report additional greenhouse gas emissions data under a final Environmental Protection Agency rule to be published Oct. 22. Under the final rule, companies like DTE Energy Co., Dominion Resources Inc. and Pioneer Natural Resources Co. will... -
Strong Oklahoma Quakes Linked to Industrial Activity, Study Says
Oct 21, 2015 | AP (in the Wall Street Journal)
A sharp rise in earthquakes in Oklahoma in the past 100 years is likely the result of industrial activities in the energy-rich state, such as oil and natural gas production, a new study suggests. The paper by the U.S. Geological Survey, which singled out the state of Oklahoma, was released online this week... -
Panelists Discuss Methods for Oil, Gas Wastewater Disposal
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
The complex nature of U.S. oil and gas regulation forces energy producers to engage in more advanced water management planning, speakers said at the American Water Summit 2015 in Denver. “The regulations in the U.S. are the hardest to deal with in the world,” said Drue Ann Whittecar, director of ... -
EPA: Clean Power Plan Extensions Not a ‘Heavy Lift'
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers and Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency has intentionally set a very low bar for states seeking a two-year extension to submit plans to implement the Clean Power Plan, the agency's top air pollution official said. Janet McCabe, the EPA's acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, told the Environmental Council of States... -
Senators Take Aim At Agency's Rulemaking
Oct 22, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Kevin Bogardus
Republican senators picked apart U.S. EPA's rulemaking process that has helped craft some of the agency's most controversial rules. At a hearing held yesterday by the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Superfund, Waste Management and Regulatory Oversight, GOP lawmakers dug into the agency's vast array of... -
Administration Official: GOP Arguments Against Climate Deal Are 'Tired'
Oct 21, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Andrew Restuccia
A senior Obama administration official dismissed Republican attempts to undercut negotiations for a new international climate change agreement, and said the White House is confident its domestic global warming agenda will survive attacks from GOP lawmakers. -
EPA Suggests Utility MACT Reassessment Will Likely Project Lower Costs
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Anthony Lacey
EPA is suggesting that its pending review of the costs and benefits of its power plant maximum achievable control technology (MACT) air toxics rule will likely show lower compliance costs for the rule than previously estimated, aiming to boost its call for a federal appeals court to reject vacatur of the rule while EPA undertakes the review. -
U.S. Chamber Touts Regulatory Bill To Resolve EPA Cost-Benefit Concerns
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Stuart Parker
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is urging Senate Republicans to advance a regulatory reform bill that would create additional hurdles for EPA and other agencies to promulgate expensive regulations, saying the legislation could help to resolve concerns about EPA crafting flawed cost-benefits analyses for its major air, water and other rules. -
Date Set for Arguments on Water Rule Jurisdiction
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
Oral arguments will be held Dec. 8 on whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati has jurisdiction over challenges to the Obama administration's clean water rule, according to the court's Oct. 20 order (In re EPA, 6th Cir., No. MCP No. 135, oral arguments scheduled, 10/20/15). -
Sixth Circuit To Hear Oral Argument On Waters Rule, Dec. 8
Oct 21, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Jenny Hopkinson
The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals will take oral arguments over whether it has the authority to hear a challenge from industry groups and states to the EPA's Clean Water Rule on Dec. 8. The hearing will take place at 1:30 p.m. at the federal court house in Cincinnati, according to a scheduling notice released Tuesday. -
EPA Cautions Court Against Gutting Mercury Rule
Oct 21, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Robin Bravender
The Obama administration is urging a federal appeals court to allow it to tweak a major air toxics rule, rather than scrapping the regulation in its entirety. U.S. EPA asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit today to keep the agency's standards to cut mercury pollution at coal-fired power plants in place while the agency...
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industries Outline Early Legal Concerns Over EPA 'Consistency' Proposal
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Groups representing the energy, chemical and other major industries are outlining early legal concerns over EPA's proposal to update its "regional consistency" policy on uniform application of agency requirements, saying the agency's plan to exclude adverse court rulings from the policy could create significant confusion for the sectors.
A coalition of 16 industry groups including the American Chemistry Council, American Farm Bureau Federation, American Forest & Paper Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, Chamber of Commerce and others said in an Oct. 5 letter to EPA that the proposed revision would "mark a fundamental change in the way that EPA applies its Regional Consistency regulations to judicial decisions" and that such a change would have a "significant effect" on the groups' members, particularly if they operate in more than one court jurisdiction. Relevant documents are available on InsideEPA.com. (Doc. ID: 185858)
The Texas Pipeline Association (TPA), in its own Oct. 13 comments on the proposed revision to the policy that the industry group must give it "careful consideration in order to assess the manner and extent to which the proposed changes would affect TPA members, as well as the legal issues presented by EPA's proposal."
EPA took comment through Oct. 19 on the planned revision to the policy, but announced in a notice slated for publication in the Oct. 22 Federal Register that it will reopen the public comment period through Nov. 3. The proposal would allow EPA to exclude adverse appellate court rulings on its Clean Air Act policies from applying nationwide, which could mean different agency regional offices imposing differing requirements on industries.
The proposal released in August responds to a U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision in May 2014 in National Environmental Development Association's Clean Air Project v. EPA, which vacated an EPA memo that sought to narrow the reach of an adverse 6th Circuit air permitting ruling to only the states in that circuit. The D.C. Circuit said the memo was at odds with the regional consistency policy as it would have led to differing permit requirements among all 50 states -- prompting EPA to now seek exemptions to the policy.
Under the Aug. 5 proposed rule EPA would not apply rulings by other circuit courts on locally or regionally applicable regulations -- such as the agency's regional offices' approvals of state implementation plans for complying with air standards, or Clean Air Act permitting decisions -- to states in other appellate circuits, even though this may result in inconsistent policy application and uneven application of the air law (Inside EPA, Aug. 21).
One legal source previously said the proposal would give each of the 10 regions "wide latitude" to fashion policy absent concurrence from agency Headquarters, saying the language was concerning from an enforcement perspective because "uniformity, even-handedness, and fairness are of paramount importance."
The coalition of 16 industry groups urged EPA to extend the comment deadline for the proposal, saying it needed for time to assess the plan. They asked for a 30-day comment deadline extension saying they are facing significant resource constraints in responding to myriad proposals floated recently by EPA, including its climate utility rules and proposed rule that would set first time methane emissions standards for the oil and gas industry.
"The Associations believe an extension is necessary due to the significance of the proposed rule and its ramifications, as well as the ongoing schedule of comment deadlines for a large number of other proposed rules that EPA has recently issued with overlapping comment periods," the groups say in their letter.
Similarly, TPA in its comments also urged the agency to extend the comment deadline by 60 days, saying the group was also assessing EPA's final Clean Water Act jurisdiction rule, its newly adopted ambient air standard for ozone, the methane proposal and other policies. The group sought a 60-day extension.
EPA in its pending Register notice says that, "After considering the request received from 16 trade and business organizations to extend the public comment period, the EPA has decided to reopen the public comment period" to Nov. 3, to ensure the public has additional time to review the proposed changes to the policy.
EPA acknowledges in the proposed rule the possible outcome of uneven enforcement by allowing some of its regions to opt against adhering to an adverse court ruling in another region. The plan "would be authorizing a region to act inconsistently with nationwide policy or interpretation to the extent that the region must do so in order to act consistently with a decision issued by a federal court that has direct jurisdiction over the region's action," EPA said.
EPA's proposal would revise its consistency policy to acknowledge exceptions to the uniformity approach, saying that "only decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court and decisions of the D.C. Circuit Court that arise from challenges to 'nationally applicable regulations . . . or final action' would apply uniformly nationwide."
The proposal would also revise the rules to clarify that EPA headquarters would not need to issue new "mechanisms," which could potentially include guidance, to address federal court decisions from challenges to locally or regionally applicable actions, as they would not be deemed to affect states in other circuits. A third revision proposes to revise the rules to "clarify that EPA regional offices' employees would not need to seek headquarters office concurrence to act inconsistently with national policy or interpretation if such action is required by a federal court decision arising from challenges to 'locally or regionally applicable' actions."
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Urged To Provide Data Justifying Proposed FY17-19 Enforcement Focus
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
EPA is facing calls from major industrial sectors to provide exhaustive data on environmental law violations and harms to justify the agency's proposed new fiscal year 2017-2019 enforcement priorities, with industries such as the chemical and oil sector saying EPA has failed to prove non-compliance to warrant focusing on them.
Environmentalists, meanwhile, are using their comments on the agency's proposed national enforcement initiatives (NEI) to seek a strict focus on reducing water pollution from animal feedlots. "In light of the size and pollution potential of these facilities, along with the lack of comprehensive information on the industry, and its history of noncompliance, EPA must continue to prioritize animal waste in order to take the meaningful action that the American people deserve," say the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Yale Environmental Protection Clinic.
EPA took comment through Oct. 14 on its proposal to establish three new NEIs: reducing industrial water pollution, targeting accidents and spills at industrial facilities, and reducing air toxics at the community level. The air toxics initiative would be an expansion of an existing NEI to cover additional industries and emissions sources. The agency uses the NEIs to prioritize enforcement funds, a crucial decision at a time of limited budgets. Relevant documents are available on InsideEPA.com. (Doc. ID: 185862)
In the proposal EPA also sought input on whether to revise its six existing NEIs: reducing air pollution from the largest sources, cutting hazardous air pollutants, ensuring energy extraction operations comply with environmental laws, reducing pollution from mineral processing operations, keeping raw sewage and contaminated stormwater out of water and preventing water contamination from animal waste (Inside EPA, Sept. 18).
NEIs allow EPA to focus more of its enforcement budget on high-priority targets. EPA takes comment every three years on which current initiatives it should drop and whether to add new areas of focus.
But the industry groups argue in their comments that EPA must demonstrate a pattern of excessive violations and environmental damage from a sector before designating it for special focus with an NEI, and that the Sept. 15 proposal includes no such support. Various sectors attack the proposal as including little proof supporting the agency's claims of frequent environmental violations requiring special attention in sectors such as the oil industry, concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), wastewater treatment systems and energy extraction.
"In the notice, EPA presents no information or data suggesting that there is significant noncompliance in the petroleum sector or that emissions from the sector present any significant risk to health or the environment. If EPA plans to continue to target this sector as part of a national enforcement priority, EPA should present the data on which the Agency is relying and allow for public comment on these data before EPA finalizes its priorities," the American Petroleum Institute (API) says in Oct. 14 comments.
"Nowhere in the NEI notice has EPA presented any evidence of significant noncompliance in the petroleum sector. More importantly, nothing in the notice or related materials supports a finding that there are significant health or environmental concerns related to this sector," API adds.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) in separate Oct. 14 comments attacks EPA's "broad allegations that industry commits 'widespread violations' of the law, recklessly endangers the public, and that it is 'all too common' for industry to kill or injure employees or emergency responders. It further asserts that 'noncompliance is a growing threat.'"
The group adds that it "strongly disagrees with these characterizations and asks EPA to produce the data it is relying upon to make these statements (to the extent that subjective terms like 'widespread' and 'common' are even capable of validation through data analysis)."
The Corporate Environmental Enforcement Council (CEEC), which represents a host of industrial sectors, in Oct. 14 comments says the proposed NEIs include both claims of outright environmental law violations and claims that sectors exceed projected pollution releases -- which it says are not necessarily violations requiring enforcement action. "For example, EPA's existing and proposed NEI for 'cutting toxic air pollution' is predicated on data showing that toxic air pollution is 'much greater than what had previously been estimated.' While this may go to the importance or relative severity of the problem, it does nothing to show that noncompliance is a significant contributing factor," CEEC says.
Similarly. the National Cattlemen's Beef Association -- whose members include CAFOs subject to the animal waste NEI -- argues that in addition to evidence of violations for new initiatives, the agency should also show that active NEIs are successfully reducing pollution to justify continuing them.
"EPA has not demonstrated a need to reinstate the NEI for animal waste contamination. There is a lack of evidence to show that actions undertaken pursuant to the prior NEI have actually improved water quality. It is unclear then why EPA should reinstate this NEI for 2017-2019," it says in Oct. 14 comments.
Environmentalist groups, meanwhile, focus their comments almost exclusively on a single NEI: the animal waste enforcement initiative, which the advocates said should be among EPA's highest priorities for enforcement.
Many CAFOs currently operate without federal Clean Water Act (CWA) permits on the grounds that they do not discharge waste to protected waters, but environmentalists have long claimed that even "zero discharge" CAFOs cause frequent accidental releases, or discharge surreptitiously.
"Even when these facilities are required to obtain CWA permits, as less than half of them currently are, they are allowed to operate under a 'zero discharge' falsehood, as there are no sampling and monitoring requirements within the EPA-sanctioned permitting scheme to ensure compliance with this no-discharge standard," an alliance of 15 environmental groups say in joint Oct. 14 comments.
EPA at one point tried to require all CAFOs to seek CWA discharge permits, but a 2008 rule to that effect was struck down by a 2011 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, National Pork Producers v. EPA. In that case, a three-judge panel unanimously held that the agency could only require permits for actual discharges, not proposed or probable discharges.
The agency later floated and abandoned a rule proposal that would have required CAFO operators to submit operating data to EPA that regulators could use to track the locations and potential hazards of high-density feedlots. In their separate Oct. 14 comments, NRDC and the Yale Clinic say the lack of a reporting rule means the agency has reliable data on the locations and operations of just 35 percent of CAFOs.
States in their comments generally do not focus on specific NEIs but urge EPA to work more closely with local and state regulators in carrying out the initiatives.
The Environmental Council of the States, which represents many state environment departments, says in Oct. 14 comments that "In order for the final NEIs to be effective, EPA must collaborate with states so that the Agency's actions are informed by how states are addressing these NEI sectors within their state borders. The final NEI notice should specifically discuss how EPA plans to work with states in their implementation as co-regulators and through joint governance."
Wyoming, in separate Oct. 14 comments, urges EPA to embrace a cooperative federalist framework as it implements the NEIs, including sharing information requests with states and providing clear guidance to state regulators on conducting inspections under the new enforcement initiatives. "State compliance staff must be afforded the opportunity to participate in field investigation, case development and enforcement activities that are initiated or directed by the [EPA] Regional Office," the state says.
EPA's final NEIs for FY17-19 will be an important decision in the current budget climate since EPA is facing cuts in the coming fiscal year to both its overall funding and to the enforcement office in particular.
The agency's Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assurance is part of its Environmental Programs and Management account (EPM), currently funded at $2.61 billion. President Obama's FY16 proposal would allocate $2.84 billion for EPM, but both chambers of Congress are seeking reductions instead. The House's now-scrapped FY16 bill would have funded it at $2.47 billion while Senate legislation sought a funding level of $2.56 billion.
Thanks to the expected cuts, EPA says in the proposal it will adapt the plans to its "next generation" compliance framework, which aims to overhaul environmental enforcement to rely less on site inspections to force compliance, and more on advanced monitoring, electronic reporting and self-implementing rules.
But while many industry groups have welcomed the next generation regime, API in its comments on the NEIs outright opposes the change, calling it "an overt and misguided effort by EPA to shift enforcement responsibility away from the Agency." Next generation compliance "imposes undue burdens on regulated entities and encourages third-party enforcement, which is not calibrated by the checks and balances that apply to EPA and Department of Justice enforcement programs. In addition, such ad hoc and inconsistent oversight threatens the privacy and confidentiality of API members' operations. It also erodes the uniformity and regularity of federal requirements," API says in its comments.
-
U.S., Canada Look at Risk Assessment Alignment Strategies
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A U.S.-Canada technical working group has prepared a draft report describing possible strategies the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Health Canada and Environment Canada could use to align their risk assessments of chemicals in commerce.
The Canada-U.S. Regulatory Cooperation Council Risk Assessment Technical Working Group circulated the report as a “thought-starter” to interested parties prior to an Oct. 28 meeting it will hold in Washington, D.C., for working group members.
Proposed ideas include having the three agencies develop common guidance on issues such as the selection of exposure measurement methods and modeling approaches that could be used in both countries.
Use of the same defined terminology for equivalent risk assessment methods, when possible, could be helpful, the report said. The alignment of some terms will not be possible, because of different legal definitions, it said.
Two Chemicals Management Efforts
The binational effort to examine whether risk assessment approaches could be aligned is one of two key ways regulatory officials and interested parties are jointly addressing chemicals management under the Regulatory Cooperation Council.
The countries also are working to develop common approaches for regulatory reporting requirements for new uses of chemical substances, Maya Berci, program coordination and regulatory measures manager at Environment Canada said in March during a chemical regulations conference .
Web conferences to update companies, trade associations, environmental groups and other interested parties on the chemical management efforts are planned in December, according to a timeline the Regulatory Cooperation Council has developed.
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
-
Sunscreen Chemical Toxic to Coral Reefs, Study Says
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Nora Macaluso
A common chemical found in sunscreen lotions is toxic to coral reefs and even the smallest concentrations can be deadly to young coral, according to a new study.
Oxybenzone (benzophenone-3) comes in contact with coral reefs as a result of sunscreen-wearing swimmers, as well as wastewater discharges from municipal sewage outfalls and coastal septic systems and boat discharges, said the study by researchers in the U.S. and Israel, which was published Oct. 20 in the Archives of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology.
The lowest concentration found to be toxic to coral was 62 parts per trillion, the equivalent of one drop of water in more than six Olympic swimming pools, said Tel Aviv University researcher Omni Bronstein. Concentrations of oxybenzone in the U.S. Virgin Islands were found to be 23 times higher, the study said.
“Oxybenzone pollution predominantly occurs in swimming areas, but it also occurs on reefs five to 20 miles from the coastline, as a result of submarine freshwater seeps that can be contaminated with sewage,” Bronstein said. Experiments on coral embryos found the chemical to be “highly toxic to juvenile corals,” he said.
Oxybenzone harms coral by making it more susceptible to “bleaching,” a phenomenon associated with high sea-surface temperature events like El Nino; by damaging corals' DNA, making them unable to reproduce; by serving as an endocrine disruptor and causing young coral to encase itself in its own skeleton; and by causing “gross deformities,” the researchers said.
Oxybenzone is found in more than 3,500 sunscreen products worldwide, the researchers said.
“Current concentrations of oxybenzone in these coral reefs pose a significant ecological threat,” Bronstein said. “Although the use of sunscreen is recognized as important for protection from the harmful effects of sunlight, there are alternatives, including other chemical sunscreens, as well as wearing sun clothing on the beach and in the water.”
Researchers from the Haereticus Environmental Laboratory, the National Aquarium, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Ben Gurion University of the Negev also worked on the study.
-
Automakers Urge Suppliers To Improve Communication
Oct 22, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Quicker and more consistent communication throughout the automotive supply chain will improve company reporting on chemicals, said major brands at the industry’s annual chemical compliance conference.
Car company representatives speaking at last week's conference – organised by trade association Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) – said suppliers must communicate better, to prevent the confusion that arises with reporting through the industry's substance handling and declaration database, the IMDS (GBB April 2014).
Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) also acknowledged they may need to be more responsive to supplier data reporting problems.
Scott Morris, sustainability unit manager with Honda North America, and Matthew Griffin, technical specialist for hazardous materials compliance with Jaguar Land Rover, and chair of the IMDS Steering Committee, both named communication as the biggest “headache” they face with IMDS reporting.
Regulatory issues
Mr Griffin also said there is a need for improving communication to work through challenges presented by the EU's biocidal product Regulation (BPR) (CW 11 December 2014).
It has been “very difficult” for suppliers operating outside the EU to understand and comply with the BPR's provisions, he said.
He noted the importance of communicating responsibly between mid-stream and downstream suppliers when sourcing to the EU, including the proper designation of substances serving biocidal purposes.
And Andrea Rayner, representing the consultancy Arcadis US, emphasised the role of “across-tier communication” when discussing the management of OEM chemical lists that go beyond the global automotive declarable substance list (Gadsl), the industry's list of regulated substances.
According to Ms Rayner, “every single OEM” has either a list or guidance document governing chemicals outside of Gadsl. These include General Motor's GMW3059 or Honda's chemical substance management standard.
Representatives from Honda and Ford both said that their company's additional guidance is intended to be educational and called for suppliers to engage with OEMs on any concerns that their lists may present.
Ford also said suppliers and OEMs should collaborate on regulatory development processes.
Canada, for example,it said, has instituted a “very aggressive chemical management plan which will impact vehicles [and] aftermarket parts”. Included in this plan is a review of substances, such as: HBCD; PFOA; DecaBDE; and PFOS.
Ford encouraged participation from across the automotive industry to ensure that the industry accurately presents the scope of any proposed change to regulators (GBB February 2015).
More that 250 industry representatives attended the conference on the outskirts of Detroit. It aims to convene the full supply chain in discussions to streamline industry processes.
-
Macy’s To Stop Selling Furniture With Toxic Flame Retardant Chemicals
Oct 21, 2015 | Safer Chemicals Healthy Families
By Tony Iallonardo
Just hours before planned events at Macy’s stores in ten states calling attention to the retailer’s sale of some furniture products containing toxic flame retardant chemicals, the retailer announced it would end the practice. Mind the Store campaign advocates hailed it as a victory for consumers’ health and the environment.
“We thank and congratulate Macy’s for taking this big step to make all sofas safe. This is an important victory for our Mind the Store campaign and millions of Macy’s customers nationwide.” said Mike Schade, Mind the Store campaign director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families. “We urge the remaining major retailers who have not acted, like Pier 1 Imports, to follow suit and phase out these unnecessary toxic chemicals once and for all.”
Concerned parents and health advocates had asked Macy’s to commit to adopting a policy eliminating the toxic chemicals in furniture by this year’s Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. They had planned a national “day of action” today at Macy’s Herald Square and other stores around the country. Over the past two weeks, Macy’s had received thousands of e-mails from customers encouraging them to address the harmful chemicals. Macy’s responded to Mind the Store yesterday, saying in part, “We expect that our suppliers (the manufacturers of furniture sold at Macy’s) are no longer using the chemicals in question, and we believe a majority are already in compliance… We will be instructing any remaining suppliers who are using these chemicals to cease doing so…If we do identify a vendor that is still applying the old flame retardants, we will be requiring them to cease doing so immediately.”
Numerous competing retailers like IKEA, Walmart, and Ashley have already announced that they are phasing out toxic flame retardants in furniture. Some chains like Pier 1 Imports, Rooms to Go, and Berkshire Hathaway’s furniture stores have not yet made announcements.
For years, the vast majority of couches and upholstered furniture across the U.S. contained high levels of toxic flame retardant chemicals. Since 1975, furniture foam sold across the U.S. has been laden with these substances to meet the standards of a California “technical bulletin” called TB117. Despite being called “flame retardants,” research by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and other groups has found that these chemicals are not necessary to ensure that furniture is fire safe.
Recent changes to the California flammability standard now provide better fire safety without the use of these toxic chemicals. The new standard, which became mandatory as of January 1, 2015, can be met without the addition of flame retardant chemicals. It does not prevent the use of toxic flame retardants, however, so they may still be used in furniture foam. In response to the changes to the standard, many leading furniture manufacturers and retailers have eliminated the chemicals in upholstered furniture.
In daily use, toxic flame retardants do not stay in the furniture. They migrate out of the products and collect in indoor dust where they enter people’s bodies by being inhaled, ingested, and touched. Some toxic flame retardants do not break down easily, and have been found to persist and travel to waterways and ecosystems virtually everywhere. Studies show that more than 90 percent of American women of childbearing age have toxic flame retardants in their bodies. In a fire, firefighters are exposed to these harmful chemicals and the highly toxic byproducts that result when they burn.
“Carefully executed long-term studies of prenatal exposure to flame retardants have consistently documented lower IQ scores among the most highly exposed,” said Leonardo Trasande, MD, MPP, associate professor of pediatrics, NYU School of Medicine. “Given that children with lower IQs have lower lifetime economic productivity, efforts by major retailers to remove flame retardants not only protect children’s brains but our economy as well.”
Today’s events were to be held by local groups in partnership with the national Mind the Store campaign, a project of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families. The national “day of action” preceded an online petition and a formal letter to Macy’s from the campaign. Macy’s is the tenth largest retailer of furniture and bedding in the U.S. and sold an estimated $1.2 billion of furniture and bedding in 2013, according to Furniture Today magazine. While not all Macy’s furniture contains toxic flame retardants, health advocates were asking Macy’s to work with its suppliers to completely phase out these unnecessary dangerous chemicals.
-
Your Nail Polish Could Be Disrupting Your Hormone System
Oct 21, 2015 | Environmental Working Group
By Heather White
As my 10-year old daughter handed me her sleeping bag and pillow after the spa party, I noticed that her nails were decorated with multi-colored stickers. She said that she knew I worked in environmental health and wouldn’t want her to get her nails painted.
I cringed but simultaneously rejoiced. I had officially become “that mom”—the one whose kid passed on nail polish because it might be toxic. I was especially relieved when I saw the latest report from the Environmental Working Group (EWG), the nonprofit research and advocacy organization where I am executive director.
That report, called “Nailed: Endocrine Disruptor in Nail Polish Gets in Women’s Bodies,” reaffirmed my daughter’s choice to skip nail polish. It recounted the results of a scientific study co-authored by researcher Heather Stapleton of Duke University and EWG toxicologist Johanna Congleton that found that a chemical added to nail polish to make it more flexible and chip-resistant got into the bodies of all 26 women who volunteered to paint their nails for the study. The evidence showed up in their urine within half a day.
These findings could have serious implications for nail polish users, especially for children, ‘tweens and teens. Scientists suspect that the chemical at issue—triphenyl phosphate, or TPHP—disrupts the hormone system. Researchers have linked hormone disruptors such as TPHP to early onset of puberty, neurodevelopmental problems and obesity. The last thing girls need in their bodies as they are developing rapidly is something that may play havoc with their hormones.
What’s worse, nail art is all the rage among the vulnerable age group. The nail industry estimates that nine out of 10 girls between the ages 12 and 14 use nail products, sometimes daily.
These girls are likely to have been exposed to TPHP from multiple sources over years. It is often used as a fire retardant infused into foam furniture. From furniture, it and other fire retardant chemicals migrate into household dust, and from there, into people—especially children. EWG biomonitoring tests conducted in 2008 discovered that babies and toddlers, who play on the floor, typically had triple the amounts of fire retardant chemicals in their bodies as their mothers. A 2014 study by Duke and EWG found that children’s exposure to TPHP was on average nearly three times that of adults. Evidence of the chemical was found in all 26 children tested in the 2014 study.
What do scientists know about the consequences of long-term exposure to fire retardants such as TPHP? Not enough. But I am worried that it is not good for my daughter, or anybody else’s.
We also learned from this study that not all nail polish brands come clean about their TPHP content.
Stapleton’s lab at Duke tested 10 polishes and found TPHP in eight of them. Two of those did not disclose the chemical’s presence on the label even though they listed other ingredients.
EWG’s Skin Deep shows that nearly half of the 1,500 or so nail polishes and treatments in the database disclose TPHP on their lists of ingredients. We’ve compiled a list of some leading brands with TPHP here.
But our list won’t be complete until cosmetic companies verify their ingredients. As the Duke-EWG study showed, more polishes could contain TPHP and fail to disclose it.
The conclusion is inescapable: any girl who paints her nails stands a chance of coming into contact with a potential hormone disruptor. (The exception: the Duke lab did not test special children’s nail polishes sold at toy stores.)
How can the cosmetics industry get away with adding TPHP to popular products? The federal laws meant to regulate toxic chemicals in cosmetics and other consumer products are broken.
But last April, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) introduced S. 1014, the Personal Care Products Act of 2015, which would require Congress to update the federal law governing the regulation of cosmetics. This statute has not been substantially updated since its passage in 1938. Despite the general gridlock on Capitol Hill, this bipartisan compromise bill has real momentum. You can learn more about the legislation here, and take action to tell Washington to support cosmetics law reform. You can use this link to tell nail polish makers to get TPHP out of their products.
The “mani-pedi” culture endangers salon workers and manicurists, too. Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York sent shock waves through the salon community last May when he ordered emergency measures to protect workers at nail salons from toxic chemicals, to make salon managers pay back wages to their employees and to ensure that employees knew their rights. Some groups, such as California’s Healthy Nail Collaborative, are focused on informing both salon patrons and workers and to bring healthy and fair working conditions to salons.
For now, I’ll keep hoping my daughter makes healthy choices as she moves from ‘tween to teen. And I’ll hold my breath until the next EWG report. Who knows what chemicals are lurking in the stickers she put on her nails?
It’s time for all of us to speak up to ensure that “self-care” means rituals, products and services that celebrate women’s wellness, and above all, are safe and just.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Major Medical Groups Increasingly Warning Of Toxic Chemical Risks To Unborn Babies
Oct 21, 2015 | The Huffington Post
By Lynne Peeples
During her five-and-a-half-year battle with infertility, Julieta Pisani McCarthy bought organic foods and chose personal care products free of synthetic ingredients such as parabens and phthalates. And when she finally did become pregnant with her first son, Nicolas, she continued her diligence, including ridding her home of any furniture foam that might contain chemical flame retardants.
McCarthy worried that environmental chemicals could have contributed to her difficulty conceiving. Once pregnant, she worried that toxins could harm her child's healthy development. Such fears are shared by many Americans. More than 80 percent of those polled in 2009 were concerned about the lack of safety testing for chemicals on the market in the U.S. Yet McCarthy didn't find her doctors forthcoming when she posed questions about pollutants, such as PCBs and pesticides, which have been found in nearly all samples of breast milk and cord blood, per studies from the University of California, Berkeley; the nonprofit Environmental Working Group; researchers in Quebec and others.
"When I asked my doctors — from my regular OB/GYN to top-notch research center reproductive endocrinologists — they were all very hesitant to give me any answers," McCarthy, 40, of Berkeley, California, told The Huffington Post as she prepared a party for Nicolas' sixth birthday in early October.
And indeed, a nationwide survey of obstetricians and gynecologists in 2012 found that most did not warn their pregnant patients about how chemicals in food, consumer products or the environment could endanger their unborn babies.
While still frequently dismissed as fringe beliefs, concerns over chemicals are attracting increased attention from professional medical associations. A critical mass of data now connects exposures to some environmental chemicals with infertility as well as long-term health problems. And that, combined with newly crafted positions and petitions -- and even a recently severed industry partnership -- by respected professional organizations, may push doctors to look at this issue anew.
"It used to just be, 'Don't smoke and don't drink,'" said Julie Herbstman, who researches environmental toxins at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. "Now, because of new data and powerful statements from important societies, clinicians are starting to get guidance and can advise their patients on environmental health."
And that advice, she noted, can include potentially powerful, practical steps to reduce toxic exposures.
Medical associations echo consumer concerns
Earlier this month, leading physicians and scientists from around the world convened in Vancouver, Canada, for the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics conference. Central to their discussions were the reproductive health impacts of toxic chemical exposures and the need for physicians and other health professionals to make environmental health part of health care, as well as to advocate for stronger toxic chemical regulation.
The average pregnant woman in the U.S. carries at least 43 industrial chemicals in her body, according to an opinion released ahead of the conference by FIGO, which represents obstetrical and gynecological associations from 125 countries. And exposure to this chemical cocktail, the association warned, may make it more difficult for a woman to become pregnant, carry her fetus full-term, give birth to a healthy baby and trust that her child will grow up a disease-free and fertile adult. They further point to emerging studies that suggest toxic exposures can cause harm across generations.
Exposures very early in life are particularly worrisome, according to FIGO. Even tiny amounts of some chemicals common in plastics, couches, nonstick fry pans and other everyday products can potentially derail the development of a fetus' brain and other organs, possibly setting up a child for long-term health troubles such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and certain cancers.
In this, FIGO’s call echoes a warning published in September by another major medical organization, the Endocrine Society. In its statement, based on a review of the scientific literature, the group concluded that certain chemicals can mimic natural hormones and thereby mess up critical functions in the human body, including reproduction and metabolism. Minute concentrations of bisphenol A, phthalates and dioxin, among others, could exert these potent hormone-disrupting effects.
The American Academy of Pediatrics is also stepping up its involvement on the toxic chemical issue. In March, it signed a petition to the Consumer Product Safety Commission seeking to ban products that contain organohalogen flame retardants. And, in October, news emerged that the AAP will end its corporate ties with Monsanto, whose popular herbicide, Roundup, has been linked by studies to birth defects, cancers and other health problems. The move reportedly came after a mom reached out to the academy with her concerns over the partnership.
“As these more conservative organizations finally acknowledge this in a formal way, it does indicate a transition away from dismissing or overlooking the role of environmental toxins and pollution in human health, towards recognizing this as something we can’t ignore any longer,” said Bruce Lanphear, an environmental health expert at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia.
The chemical industry is critical of both FIGO and the Endocrine Society, suggesting their latest claims of harms posed by certain chemicals remain unproven. "The [FIGO] report also disregards the critical role chemicals play in making modern life safer, healthier, more sustainable, more convenient and more fulfilling," Scott Openshaw, an American Chemistry Council spokesperson, told The Huffington Post in an emailed statement.
Mounting evidence of early-life harms
Columbia’s Herbstman is an author of a study published in October that found that the more polybrominated biphenyl ethers that researchers detected in a woman's cord blood during pregnancy, the more attention problems her child displayed during preschool and early adolescence. Polybrominated biphenyl ethers, or PBDEs, are a class of chemicals used as flame retardants. Herbstman noted that while PBDEs are being phased out, it remains unclear if their replacements are any safer. PBDEs can also linger in homes and the environment via used and discarded furniture.
The new finding is just one of a number of recent headlines concerning the health consequences of exposure to toxic chemicals in the womb and via breastmilk. Studies published over just the last couple months have identified links between prenatal BPA exposure and both low birthweight in baby girls and decreased physical activity in mice. They've also described how exposures to methyl mercury, stain- and stick-resistant chemicals and certain pesticides in the womb may result in risks of lower IQ, low birthweight and childhood obesity respectively. Another pair of studies published in the last month hint at potential links between low sperm counts and premature births and the chemicals used in natural gas drilling, fracturing and production operations.
"Really, we are a little bit late" in addressing this issue, said Dr. Gian Carlo Di Renzo, lead author of the FIGO opinion and director of the Reproductive and Perinatal Medicine Center at the University of Perugia in Italy. "The threat of toxic chemical exposures to human reproduction, especially over the last decades, has been dramatically increasing."
Balancing awareness and alarm
Still, health experts emphasized the importance of not overwhelming patients.
"How do we, as clinicians, balance providing the most appropriate information to our patients so they can be aware without being alarmed?" said Dr. Jeanne Conry, an obstetrician and gynecologist with The Permanente Medical Group in Roseville, California, and an author of the FIGO opinion.
The answer is "tricky," Herbstman said. She recalled the anxiety she felt while pregnant with her child, now 2 years old: "It was a long nine months for me."
"While I tried to take reasonable steps, I also live in the world," she added. "I don't think we can eliminate all exposures. And I didn't want to stress myself out to the point that I'd make myself sick." (Stress, too, it turns out, may be harmful to unborn babies -- possibly making them more prone to anxiety later in life.)
Conry, Herbstman and other experts offered a number of practical steps to reduce the risk of toxic chemicals infiltrating your body (and your baby), such as microwaving in glass rather than plastic, eating organic foods when possible, choosing fish lower on the food chain to minimize mercury levels, regularly cleaning your home with a wet mop, recirculating your car's air when driving on heavily trafficked freeways and frequently washing your hands with soap. (Using hand sanitizer, Herbstman advised, isn't enough.)
Alexandra Destler, another Berkeley mother who has been frustrated by the lack of environmental health information from her doctors, created her own guide for prenatal care providers and patients called My Safety Nest.
"I live in a very progressive, environmentally aware community. Yet I meet moms all the time who have little to no idea of the health risks associated with toxic chemicals," said Destler.
"I think it's going to be a bit of a journey to change the system," she added. "But as more women have the expectation that this should be part of prenatal care, I think that will motivate health care providers to expedite their learning curve on this topic."
During her pregnancy with Nicolas, McCarthy worked with the Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment at the University of California, San Francisco, to compile vetted recommendations into another toolkit for navigating environmental toxins, Toxic Matters. (The brochure is also available in Spanish.)
McCarthy followed up with The Huffington Post after Nicolas' birthday party. She recalled how they sang to him in English and Spanish, her native language, before he blew out his six candles. "In Argentina, we usually make three wishes," McCarthy said. "As he blew, I was making for him the same three wishes I've been making since I started struggling with infertility 12 years ago: Health. Health. Health."
"I look at my kids' bodies and think about the thousands of chemicals already in them despite my best efforts to limit their exposure even before the time I could feel them grow inside me," she added. "And I hope they will be OK."
-
(ACC Mentioned) Plastic Bag Swap Will Be Held at Al's Supermarkets
Oct 21, 2015 | Herald Argus
Bring in plastic bags for recycling and get a reusable bag for free at one of four upcoming America Recycles Day events in November.
The La Porte County Solid Waste District has once again teamed up with Al's Supermarkets to promote all forms of recycling available in our county through these in-store events. Not only will residents be able to swap those pesky plastic bags - a major source of litter in our communities - for a bag they can reuse time and time again, but they can also learn what they can recycle every day at Al's stores in Michigan City and La Porte, snag giveaways, play a game and more.
All events will be held from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Join the Solid Waste District at the specified location on the following dates:
• Nov. 4 - Al's West, 1340 W. Ind. 2
• Nov. 5 - Al's East, 702 E. Lincoln Way
• Nov. 10 - Al's Franklin, 3535 Franklin St., Michigan City
• Nov. 12 - Al's Karwick, 1002 N. Karwick Road, Michigan City
Thanks to Al's and Republic Services, the District's curbside recycling contractor, for donating reusable bags for these events.
We'll hand out one reusable bag for every 50 plastic bags brought in, up to a total of three reusable bags per person.
"Last year we collected 17,897 plastic bags for recycling, and this year we hope to get even more," said Alicia Ebaugh, District education and public outreach coordinator. "That number might seem like a lot, but in reality that huge amount of plastic bags is consumed by only 57 La Porte County residents each year. The convenience of plastic bags comes with a price to wildlife and the cleanliness of our streets when not disposed of properly, so we hope these events provide an incentive for change."
For more information on recycling in La Porte County, visit the District's website at solidwastedistrict.com or call 326-0014.
America Recycles Day is the only nationally recognized day and coast-to-coast community-driven awareness campaign dedicated to promoting and celebrating recycling in the United States. It has been held on - and in the weeks leading into - Nov. 15 since 1997.
"America Recycles Day provides a key moment in time to regain momentum for recycling in America, and to help make recycling a daily social norm across the country," said Brenda Pulley, senior vice president, recycling, Keep America Beautiful. "Get involved by conducting an America Recycles Day event in your hometown. Take the "I Will Recycle" Pledge and invite your friends, family and neighbors to do the same. Let's get people recycling every day - at home, at work and on the go!"
In 2014, the District's plastic bag swap events were among 2,000 America Recycles Day events nationwide, engaging more than two million estimated participants nationwide. More than 200,000 people have taken the "I Will Recycle" Pledge online and in paper form at ARD events, joining a growing movement of caring citizens committed to increase the recycling rate in America and to learn how to recycle right.
America Recycles Day is made possible through the generous support of American Chemistry Council, CyclePoint from Source America; Johnson & Johnson Family of Consumer Companies, Northrop Grumman Corporation and Pilot Corporation of America (Pilot Pen).
-
(ACC Mentioned) Businessman Explains ‘Use-By’ Labels
Oct 21, 2015 | The BVI Beacon
By Donald De Castro
On Oct. 14 on my radio show, Straight Talk, I spent more than half an hour talking about dates on food labels and why they are only a guideline, but none of the writers of the two online news sites printed the statistics and other facts that I quoted. I will now try to condense as much of the information as I can. One of the problems I face with one of the sites is that it seldom prints what I send in: Instead, it takes the article and rewrites it so often it is misleading, while the other site and The BVI Beacon would publish it just as I send it.
Purchase-by, sell-by and use-by dates actually mean three different things when it comes to food safety. None of these dates are literal expiration dates that reflect when a product will become harmful to eat. They only mark the point at which it’s reached peak quality, consistency or flavour, leading to a lot of confusion and still-good food thrown out before its time, according to the Institute of Food Technologists, a Chicago-headquartered international non-profit society of professionals.
Is food fresh until Feb. 1 and then you throw it out on Feb. 2? Ask Jeanne Goldberg, professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition, Science and Policy at Tuffs University. It is an inexact science. Those dates include a margin of safety. Worse, most dates can be misleading. In the United States, both the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Agriculture have a laidback attitude when it comes to food shelf-life labelling. The only items required by federal law to be labelled for expiration dates are baby formula and some baby foods.
Professors
Mark Harrison, professor of science at the University of Georgia, points out that pasteurised milk usually remains fresh for five days after its sell-by date, while eggs can last as long as five weeks after the sell-by date. Ultimately, most of these labels should be used as a guide, rather than a hard-and-fast expiration date. And the confusion might even be a little deliberate on the part of the government. Once the consumer takes it home, not even the government can find out exactly what happened, which is why it’s unlikely you will have a definitive safety label on perishable foods, according to Mr. Harrison.
Because of these dates, there is a big problem in the US whereby people toss out about $640 billion of relatively good food each year, according to the American Chemical Council. An earlier analysis by the Institute of Food Technologists found that consumers throw away about 133 billion pounds of food a year.
A 2013 report by the Natural Resources Council and Harvard Food Law and Policy clinic found that up to 90 percent of consumers have thrown out food based on expiration dates, assuming that the food is unsafe to eat. This sort of mentality only leads to food waste. In other words, let common sense and your senses be your guide, says Dr. Kristin Kirkpatrick of the Well Institute.
Remember, most dates are just guidelines put there voluntarily by the manufacturers. They typically are not required by any US federal law.
Examples
Here are a few examples of dates on food labels that should interest you:
• Beer, unopened, is still good four months after date;
• brown sugar is good indefinitely if stored in a moisture-proof container in a cool dry place;
• chocolate is good one year after production date;
• canned ground coffee is good for two years unopened and for one month opened;
• soft drinks in plastic bottles are good three months from best-buy dates unopened, and do not spoil even when opened, though their taste may be affected;
• dried pasta is good for 12 months;
• unopened frozen dinners are good for 12-18 months;
• frozen vegetables are good for 18-24 months unopened and one month opened;
• honey is good indefinitely;
• bottled apple and cranberry juice are good eight months from production date unopened and seven to ten days opened;
• ketchup is good for one year unopened;
• real or imitation maple syrup is good for one year;
• mayonnaise has an indefinite shelf-life when unopened, and it is good for two to three months opened;
• bleach is good three to six months from purchase-by date;
• dish detergents are good for one year;
• laundry detergent, liquid or powder, is good for nine months to one year unopened and six months opened;
• canned fruits and vegetables will last indefinitely, as long as they are not in dented or rusty cans or exposed to temperatures below 32 degrees or above 90 degrees Fahrenheit.
Saving money
I hope this information will help you to save your hard-earned money and stop throwing it in the garbage. Who do think pays for all the waste? We, the consumers. And who benefits? The manufacturers, of course: It helps to keep their prices high. Remember: “Facts and statistics may change, but the truth remains the same.” The truth is that dates are just guidelines.
-
Weak System Said to Harm Chemical Workers
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
A weak regulatory system is harming workers at and communities near chemical manufacturing facilities, according to a report the Center for Effective Government was scheduled to release Oct. 22. Cuts to enforcement budgets and the related reduction in chemical facility inspections are part of many problems that, in combination, have resulted in 1,483 chemical manufacturing facilities having workplace or environmental violations in the past three to five years, according to the center. The report will be available at the center's website http://www.foreffectivegov.org/.
-
House Probes Cyber Threats To Power Grid
Oct 21, 2015 | The Hill - Regulation
By Harper Neidig
House members are raising concerns about the vulnerability of the nation’s infrastructure to crippling cyber attacks.
Two subcommittees of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee held a joint hearing Wednesday to assess the energy industry’s preparedness for potential attacks.
“We’re all familiar with the increasing frequency of cyber attacks that compromise business and personal information,” said Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.).
“What we’re focusing on today is a different kind of cybersecurity, it’s about securing the electric grid,” she added. “So that a cyber attack doesn’t affect grid operations, which could halt our daily lives, threaten our economic security.”
While cyber espionage has been in the spotlight due to recent attacks on Sony Pictures Entertainment and the Office of Personnel Management, the subcommittee members said cyber threats to infrastructure could be more destructive.
There hasn’t been a case in the United States of hackers shutting down grid operations, but ederal documents obtained by USA Today in September showed the Department of Energy’s (DOE) computers had been hacked over 150 times between 2010 and 2014.
Senate Democrats have also sought to call attention to the issue in recent months after they accused Republicans of hamstringing cybersecurity efforts with a budget proposal they say cuts $11 million from programs safeguarding energy grids.
Bennet Gaines, the chief information officer at FirstEnergy Service Company, called for more sophisticated efforts to respond to attacks during his testimony.
He suggested implementing a system that would share real-time information on cyberattacks with the rest of the industry as well as the government.
“One of the difficulties that we have in the industry is the information we get from the federal government is not timely,” he said. “And so for us to take action on something that really we have no control over is very difficult.”
His comments come as the Senate is preparing to vote on a bill that would boost cyber sharing of threat information between the government and businesses.
-
Top Cyber Official Wouldn't Be Surprised If Attack Kills City's Power
Oct 21, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillén
A top government cybersecurity official told lawmakers today that he would not be surprised if a major U.S. city were to lose its electric grid tomorrow to a cyberattack.
Systems for detecting such attacks are “not sophisticated enough," Brent Stacey, the associate director for national and homeland science and technology at Idaho National Lab, told a House Science subcommittee today.
Utilities and the government have done good work with limited resources, he added. “But we’ve heard from several leaders within the federal government that we likely have people inside the infrastructure, and these are very complex systems, and the complexity — even independent of malware attack — adds a level of vulnerability.”
The other witnesses, including officials from the Electric Power Research Institute and FirstEnergy, conceded that the possibility of such a devastating attack on a metropolitan grid is possible, but said they would be surprised by a city losing its power. There are too many redundancies designed to protect grid reliability, they argued.
-
Cybersecurity, Debt Limit Focus of Next Senate Stretch
Oct 20, 2015 | Bloomberg BNA
By Nancy Ognanovich
A plan aimed at fortifying the nation's cybersecurity defenses as well as legislation to head off a default on the federal debt will dominate the Senate's agenda during the next few weeks, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said.
He told reporters Oct. 20 he hopes to move quickly through a long list of amendments to the measure and pass it next week.
“We intend to pass the cybersecurity bill hopefully early next week,” McConnell told reporters after Republicans' weekly policy meeting.
McConnell said that action will clear the way for the Senate to then be able to respond to whatever bill House Republicans are able to pass dealing with the expiration of the federal debt limit, a deadline expected to arrive Nov. 3. He declined to say what type of bill he will schedule for a vote, only saying that the Senate will have to take a “wait and see” approach.
“Obviously, we don't prefer a clean debt ceiling [bill],” McConnell said. “We'll see what the House sends over and we'll act accordingly.”
Lawmakers in both parties said the developments indicate that budget talks aimed at arriving at a new set of discretionary spending targets to close out fiscal year 2016 appropriations work are likely to remain behind the scenes until the debt limit matter is resolved.
“The focus is on the two-week debt ceiling deadline,” Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) told reporters. “We want to get this done and finished—I hope even this week—and then I'm sure that budget negotiations have a chance to be more productive.”
Two-Week Debt Limit Deadline
McConnell said he's prepared to move next to the cybersecurity bill (S. 754) that was reported by the Senate Intelligence Committee this spring and is similar to legislation approved earlier by the House.
“This is legislation we can conference and pass with the House and actually make some progress,” McConnell said.
Democrats have agreed to moving on to the bill and to a list of roughly 20 amendments that will be considered. But lawmakers said they don't expect other measures—such as the rewrite of the Toxic Substance Control Act (S. 697)—to be taken up soon.
“We've been told we have to wait until after the debt limit bill, but we'll be ready,” Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), one of the bill's primary sponsors, told Bloomberg BNA shortly before McConnell said the measure remains on his to-do list this year.
The Treasury Department announced that the U.S. would exhaust its ability to borrow on Nov. 3 if lawmakers don't increase the amount. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said that is the most urgent matter for the House and Senate to tackle.
“If we don't act we allow the United States to default; the day of reckoning will be terrible,” Reid said. “We'll hurt American jobs, families, and businesses, and the fallout will be felt around the world.”
Budget Talks Called ‘Preliminary.'
Reid also described the talks over providing more relief from the Budget Control Act's discretionary spending caps as preliminary. Reid, McConnell, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have been involved in those discussions with the White House and are tasked with working out a deal that will avoid the threat of a government shutdown on Dec. 11, when a temporary spending act expires.
“Progress has been made in budget talks on the staff level,” Reid said. “But until we get the debt ceiling done, nothing's going to be done of a serious nature.”
-
Oct 21, 2015 | Business Insider
By Bob Bryan
The statistics show that Congress in recent years has been the most unproductive ever.
But even worse than a government shutdown, the ongoing gridlock may cut off the drinking water for a massive swath of the country.
According to Keith Creel, chief operating officer of Canadian Pacific Railways, if Congress doesn't pass an extension to a railway-safety bill, the company would be unable to ship materials that help clean the water in cities across the middle of the country.
"A lot of people — maybe some of the Congress members don't clearly understand the products that we carry that enable them to drink clean drinking water," said Creel in a quarterly earnings call Tuesday. "They produce the products that we consume day in and day out that should we not haul it that those kind of items could be in jeopardy."
This impact would be widespread. According to Creel, the affected areas would span roughly from the Canadian border to the north, east to Chicago, and down to Kansas City.
The bill in question is a provision passed by Congress that mandates that railroad companies implement what is called Positive Train Control. It's a technology that helps trains communicate their positions and prevent collisions, derailments, and worker harm. The deadline for this to happen is December 31.
Creel said that the company is trying to implement the measures. But if Congress holds them to the fast-approaching deadline, deliveries may have to stop.
"If they force that date upon us then we have no choice, but to seriously consider not hauling those products that require us to have PTC in the first place, which is what we are positioning," said Creel. "We have certainly communicated that with Congress. We have communicated that with our customers, obviously. That draws a lot of concern."
The regulations were introduced in 2008, so the industry has had seven years to comply.
Creel estimates that the system could be tested and in place by 2018.
The American Chemistry Council estimates that if the extension does not pass, the US economy would lost $30 billion a month and 700,000 workers would be out of jobs.
A bipartisan bill to extend the deadline was introduced September 30, but so far has not been passed. US Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California) said that the bill would not pass until the highway trust fund was passed, which is also contentious.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Norfolk Southern To End Hazardous Chem Shipments 1 Dec
Oct 21, 2015 | ICIS Chemical Business
By Mark Milam
With an impending deadline of 31 December to comply with federal requirements to install positive train control (PTC) technology, US railroad company Norfolk Southern confirmed on Wednesday that it will no longer accept shipments of poisonous-inhalation-hazard commodities, effective on 1 December.
In addition to halting movement of dangerous chemicals and fertilizers, the ban would apply to passenger and commuter trains operated by Amtrak, Virginia Railway Express and Metra. These operators will be prohibited by law from operating on the Norfolk lines after the 31 December deadline.
The prohibited commodities would include anhydrous ammonia, chlorine, ethylene oxide (EO), hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen fluoride, phosgene and titanium tetrachloride.
Phosgene is a feedstock for toluene di-isocyanate (TDI) and methyl di-p-phenylene isocyanate (MDI), both of which are used to produce polyurethanes. Titanium tetrachloride is upstream from titanium dioxide (TiO2). Hydrogen fluoride is used in alkylation units to produce high-octane blendstock for gasoline.
The railroad said if these hazardous volumes are in transit on 1 December, they will be delivered by the PTC deadline at the end of the month.
A 2008 safety-law required that carriers implement PTC, which is designed to automatically stop a train to prevent a collision or potential derailment due to high speeds.
It uses a system of global positioning system (GPS), wireless radios and a computer network to track trains. It would be able to either reduce speeds or stop movement on all lines used by trains carrying passengers or toxic chemicals.
But the railroad industry estimates the cost of implementing PTC could reach $70bn, and both freight operators and passenger lines have repeatedly told Congress that they cannot meet the deadline and have stated that they will be forced to follow the same course of action as Norfolk Southern.
Twenty one passenger and commuter railroads and the seven Class 1 freight railroad companies operating within the US have requested an extension. One concern is that the federal requirement leaves no allowance for potential technical issues that could arise.
Norfolk Southern officials said the cessation of service will be effective across the company’s entire rail network, which encompasses 20,000 route miles (32,000 km) in 22 states. The termination is the result of the mandate to comply with federal safety laws that become effective at the start of the year.
Despite investment of nearly $1bn to date, the railroad said it will not meet the deadline and joins a list of carriers that have threatened to follow suit if the government does not intervene and grant an extension to the required implementation of PTC.
In a statement to its customers, the railroad said earlier this week that it is reviewing the status of the Northeast Corridor freight operations and non-hazardous traffic, which is interchanged with other railroads.
“We remain hopeful that Congress will grant the railroad industry an extension of the PTC deadline and appreciate the consideration elected officials and regulators are giving this issue. However, in order to conduct lawful operations on Jan. 1, 2016, and beyond, we must plan ahead to clear affected loaded and empty freight cars from our system,” said James Squires, Norfolk Southern president and CEO.
“Norfolk Southern sincerely regrets the inconvenience that customers, passengers, and commuters will experience. Our strong hope is that Congress will act quickly and decisively to allow us to restore full access to our rail network.”
Squires said the company is installing PTC on the required lines as fast as can be in a safe and practical manner but added that it is one of the most complex technology implementations in the railroad’s history and that it is in everyone’s best interest that adequate time is devoted to installation, testing and implementation.
The effects of the PTC requirement extend well beyond the railroad industry.
The American Chemistry Council has warned that if Congress does not extend the deadline, the effects could push the US economy into recession, causing GDP to shrink by 2.6% in the first quarter and stripping $30bn from the economy.
-
(ACC Mentioned) NFU Appreciates Bipartisan, Bicameral Support For PTC Extension; Urges Swift Passage
Oct 21, 2015 | High Plains/ Midwest AG Journal
National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson applauded the announcement of a proposed three-year extension to the Dec. 31 deadline for railroads to install Positive Train Control. He urged Congress to swiftly pass the extension to ensure American family farmers, ranchers and all those that rely on rail do not experience interrupted service.
“NFU appreciates the bicameral and bipartisan support for a three-year extension on the PTC deadline,” said Johnson. “Congress must realize that the economic harm will come well in advance of the December 31 deadline should they not act swiftly, and that they need to pass an extension by early November.”
Johnson noted NFU has been working for the past two months with a wide swath of industry coalitions including the American Chemistry Council and The Fertilizer Institute to educate Congress on the severe impacts a broad rail service disruption would have on the U.S. economy. In fact, the American Chemistry Council estimates that this type of disruption for just one month would pull $30 billion dollars out of the economy and increase the unemployment rate with a loss of 700,000 jobs.
“Family farmers are already experiencing low commodity prices, and delays in rail service would only pile on additional economic strain,” said Johnson. “Congress needs to act swiftly to avoid unnecessary delays in rail service.”
-
(ACC Mentioned) Train Service Threat Remains
Oct 22, 2015 | The Star-Daily Journal
By Jack “Miles” Ventimiglia
The threat of freight train services beginning to shut down starting this month, with an almost total shutdown of all passenger and freight services starting nationally Jan. 1, remains on the table, though U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt extended hope during a press call Wednesday.
A total reduction of rail service would reduce the nation’s work force by about 700,000 jobs and cost $30 billion in the first quarter of 2016, an American Chemistry Council study released this month suggests. The council relies heavily on freight service to move products.
The pending shutdown is based on Congress requiring railroads to install the Positive Train Control safety system by Jan. 1, a deadline railroads have worked to meet, but one they said from the beginning they could not meet. Blunt favors granting railroads an extension, possibly by becoming part of the long-awaited federal highway bill.
“There are lots of reasons why the compliance date was not going to be reached and it’s likely to be a part of the highway bill,” he said. “But I would hope we have this resolved. There is a House and Senate agreement on extending the deadline. … I was very much a part of that agreement.”
Not everyone is in agreement that Congress did not give trains enough time to install Positive Train Control. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, told The Hill he rejected a blanket extension that lets railroads off the hook for improving safety for passengers.
“It has been more than 45 years since the National Transportation Safety Board first urged railroads to implement positive train control – an unacceptable delay in implementation of this critical, life-saving technology that has allowed numerous, preventable tragedies,” Blumenthal said in a statement after the House measure’s introduction.
The alternative to extending the deadline for PTC is not good, Blunt said.
“If you don’t extend the deadline, frankly, our rail systems, both passenger and freight, are not going to be functioning after the first of the year and nobody wants that to happen,” he said. “Everybody suddenly seems to have had the bucket of cold water it takes to get off their soapbox and start talking about the reality of what has to happen for Positive Train Control to have a chance to be implemented.”
Starting at the end of this month, some railroads will stop taking freight orders unless an extension is granted because they will not be able to guarantee delivery, Blunt said in an interview earlier this month.
The harmful effects will start well before the deadline passes. He suggested an extension will be reached in coming days.
“I’m confident that will happen and I would bet that that happens before the 1st of November as part of whatever needs to happen on the extension of the highway bill,” Blunt said.
Amtrak passenger railroad, which stops in Warrensburg, is among railroad companies across the nation that Congress requires to install the Positive Train Control system by 2016.
Railroads suggest an extension of three years would give them time to install PTC.
Positive Train Control is a system designed to slow automatically trains going too fast. The May 12 Amtrak train wreck that claimed eight lives in Philadelphia might not have happened with PTC in place. The train traveled at 102 mph in a 50 mph zone.
Some railroad freight companies may have a difficult time paying for PTC, but the problem for Missouri Amtrak is severe. Neither Amtrak nor the state have money for PTC – Amtrak would pay $12 million and the state $18 million. As a result, Amtrak announced an intention to close in Missouri at the end of the year.
Missouri has the No. 2 and No. 3 biggest railroad exchanges in America, in Kansas City and St. Louis.
Findings in the American Chemical Council study include:
• “(A) disruption of rail service lasting only one month will result in a 2.6 percentage reduction to U.S. real GDP growth during the first quarter of 2016, which would put a major chill on just about every leading indicator in the 1st quarter, including the following:
• “The unemployment rate would increase by 0.3 percent with a loss of 700,000 jobs;
• “Household incomes would fall by over $17 billion, depressing consumer confidence and spending;
• “Vehicle sales would be driven down with 175,000 fewer cars sold, and housing starts would stall with almost 28,000 fewer homes built, all of which would have dire consequences for a multitude of industries throughout the supply chain.”
-
House, Senate Seem Broadly in Sync on Hazmat Agenda
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The House and Senate seem broadly in sync when it comes to setting an agenda for hazardous materials transportation programs through fiscal year 2021, foreshadowing what a final six-year authorization may address.
House and Senate actions on several policy provisions in the recently introduced House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee highway bill and a bill that passed the Senate in July are likely indicators of what is ahead for legislation that will make its way through a conference committee. But finalizing the reauthorization bill may take longer than initially expected, given recent developments with the House leadership race, industry and other observers said.
“I think that so much of what can and will happen is tied into the leadership right now that until that is settled, I don't know what to expect honestly,” Boyd Stephenson, vice president of the international supply chain operations for the American Trucking Associations, said regarding timing for a final reauthorization.
The House committee will mark up its Surface Transportation Reauthorization and Reform Act (H.R. 3763) Oct. 22 at 10 a.m. The short-term patch for surface transportation programs, including hazmat transport reauthorization, will expire Oct. 29 (201 DEN A-14, 10/19/15).
Differences Between House, Senate Measures
One of the largest differences between the two bills is hazmat transport funding authorization, an area where the Obama administration's GROW America Act requested authorization of up to approximately $64 million in FY 2016 and didn't specify for the rest of the years through FY 2021.
The Senate's $350 billion Developing a Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy Act (H.R. 22) proposes allowing these programs to be funded up to roughly $44 million starting in fiscal year 2016, with that increasing to a maximum of $48 million annually by FY 2021. Meanwhile, H.R. 3763 proposes funding of up to $53 million in FY 2016, with that increasing up to $62 million by FY 2021 for hazmat programs in its $325 billion bill.
Similarly, the House bill would offer roughly $29 million for emergency preparedness efforts under the hazmat section, while the Senate bill would offer roughly $28 million for the same programs.
Frederick Hill, a Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee spokesman, told Bloomberg BNA that the hazmat-specific funding isn't the only place in the bill where the Senate's bill supports hazmat transport safety.
“In addition to proposed authorization levels that are higher than those previously passed by Congress as part of MAP-21, the Senate's DRIVE Act also includes unique increases in rail safety grants and other programs that advance the same goal of improving training and supporting the safe handling and transportation of hazardous materials,” Hill said in an e-mail. MAP-21 refers to the previous long-term surface transportation reauthorization.
Cynthia Hilton, a co-facilitator for the Interested Parties for Hazardous Materials Transportation, told Bloomberg BNA that she doesn't expect these funding differences to be a point of contention.
“Usually what happens is that they'll split the difference,” Hilton said. “In the big picture, arguing over a couple of million dollars covering the same activities is not worth the time.”
Proposed Policy Mandates
But the bread-and-butter of the hazmat reauthorization is in the proposed policy mandates.
The House and Senate included several similar hazmat provisions, many targeting the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's recently finalized rule on flammable liquids such as crude oil transportation by rail. For example, both would require that the Transportation Department reconsider electronically controlled pneumatic brake requirements for large flammable liquid shipments.
Additionally, both would require that the administration establish more stringent oil spill response planning requirements for large crude-by-rail shipments, require certain tank cars in this type of transport to have thermal blankets installed and require that certain large shipments in this type of transport notify certain emergency response entities of the location and frequency of these types of shipments.
The House and Senate also both included some policy provisions that address issues the Obama administration requested under the GROW America Act. For example, all three proposals would allow the transportation secretary to temporarily waive compliance with parts of hazardous materials regulations following certain national emergencies such as hurricanes, where hazardous materials such as propane are needed urgently.
The congressional chambers also both excluded to this point certain requests by the Obama administration, such as a request to implement a new user fee for PHMSA's special permits and approvals program and to increase the civil penalty cap for hazmat violations.
Similar Provisions an Indicator
Overall, the hazmat provisions in the bills are similar, a member of the emergency response community told Bloomberg BNA. When similar provisions occur in both chambers, it usually means that there is a conceptual consensus that an issue needs to be addressed and will be in a final conference bill, Stephenson told Bloomberg BNA.
“If the provisions are identical, then that's just what the law will be,” Hilton, also the executive vice president of the Institute of Makers of Explosives, said. “If the provisions are similar … they're likely to work something out.”
Likewise, a member of the emergency response community told Bloomberg BNA that if a provision has been excluded when the bill goes to conference, “I don't really see anyone trying to airdrop anything in.”
That just leaves the areas where the bills differ to be sorted out, areas the hazardous materials and emergency response community have previously taken stances on. The hazardous materials community is hoping that several parts of the House bill, such as changes to the special permit and approval publication requirements and the required withdrawal of PHMSA's “wetlines” proposed rule can be carried into the final authorization, Hilton said.
The individual from the emergency response community said some changes that the House bill makes to its hazmat emergency response and training programs, such as expanding certain grants to include the training of enforcement professionals, also have “a good chance” of making it into the final bill.
Markup, Patch Next Up
There has been plenty of pressure to get the six-year authorization bill completed before this past short-term continuing resolution expires on Oct. 29. But parties tracking the bills say it is almost inevitable that some additional short-term patch is passed to allow more time for the House to pass its bill, and for the two chambers to go to conference.
The emergency response community member said it is possible the long-term bill could be resolved as late as December.
But, no matter the timing, Hilton told Bloomberg BNA that the hazmat industry is just excited to have a long-term bill almost here.
“Tomorrow is a day to celebrate,” Hilton said. “We're looking forward to the [House] markup.”
PHMSA and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee didn't respond to Bloomberg BNA messages requesting comment.
-
Leaders Keep Options Open for PTC Vehicle
Oct 21, 2015 | Politico - Morning Transportation
By Jennifer Scholtes
Leaders Keep Options Open For PTC Vehicle: Lawmakers look now for the surest path to the president’s desk for an extension of the positive train control deadline, since House and Senate negotiators just settled on compromise language palatable enough for both chambers. They’re so far undecided, though, on whether to hold out in hopes of moving the PTC fix within a multiyear highway and transit plan or to pass it before then with the short-term patch they’ll need to clear before transportation policy expires on Oct. 29. The variables to consider: how quickly they can actually get a multiyear infrastructure investment proposal through both chambers and whether naysayers will block a short-term policy extension if it includes PTC provisions.
Deal struck: After our Heather Caygle broke the news Tuesday that House and Senate lawmakers had in fact worked out a PTC compromise, House T&I leaders released the official text of the multiyear transportation bill they plan to mark up on Thursday. And as Heather had foreshadowed, the House panel has added provisions extending the PTC deadline. That compromise language would give railroads until the end of 2018 to implement positive train control technology, with an opportunity for an additional two-year grace period.
The vehicle: Senate Commerce Chairman John Thune told POLITICO that he thinks Congress has “got until about that first week of November” to extend the deadline before the nation starts to see negative effects on the rail industry. And because House leaders look to be at least a few weeks away from passing their multiyear transportation funding plan, the best bet for the PTC language is that short-term policy extension lawmakers have to pass this month to avoid a lapse in transportation authority. But Sen. Barbara Boxer doesn’t want to see the extension tacked onto anything but a multiyear infrastructure investment measure. “I think we need to pass a [long-term] bill, and I think that’s really going to help get it done,” Boxer told POLITICO. “And there’s others who feel the same way.”
IT’S WEDNESDAY: Good morning and thanks for tuning into POLITICO’s Morning Transportation, your daily tipsheet on all things trains, planes, automobiles and ports.
Reach out: jscholtes@politico.com or @jascholtes.
“I thought of breaking down the door, but there's nothing left to say. That Chevy 4x4 says it all, sitting in my place."
FEDS CHALLENGE AUTO SAFETY BILL: A top Federal Trade Commission official is expected to tell House lawmakers this morning that their vehicle safety legislation would actually stifle efforts to keep drivers safe from auto hacks. As Pro Cybersecurity’s David Perera reports, the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s draft bill “would make car hacking grounds for civil penalties of up to $100,000 per incident, applying fines to whoever accesses ‘without authorization’ onboard car computers. But prepared testimony from FTC Associate Director Maneesha Mithal says the prohibition would inhibit researchers who hack cars for the purpose of notifying car companies of those vulnerabilities.”
NHTSA qualms: David also notes that NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind has his own concerns with the measure, arguing in his prepared testimony that it would give auto manufacturers the ability to control recall timelines by preventing the agency from sending safety notices until automakers have compiled a complete list of affected vehicles.
Environmentalist angle: Our Lauren Gardner reports that greens are also up in arms over language in auto safety legislation, which they say would impinge upon California’s ability to set its own greenhouse gas standards for vehicles. Greg Dotson, vice president for energy policy at the Center for American Progress, will testify today that the draft’s provisions to give automakers carbon credits for installing advanced vehicle and connected vehicle technologies would upend California’s authority by giving the state only 30 days to revise its regulations to allow the credits, or else it would lose its Clean Air Act waiver to set its own emissions limits for cars.
Watch the hearing live at 10 a.m.
AMID WATCHDOGGING BUILDUP, FTA EMBRACES METRO OVERSIGHT: The Federal Transit Administration, newly tasked with babysitting D.C.’s ailing Metro system, is still getting a handle on all the new safety oversight powers it received in 2012. But Acting Administrator Therese McMillan tells POLITICO that the agency is ready to begin fixing WMATA, even as the FTA works to build up its watchdogging framework. "We’re not sitting on our hands waiting for all of the regulations to be in place, because our authority is effective today," McMillan said during an interview at DOT headquarters.
Work ahead: Lauren reports that “FTA has yet to finalize a formal public transportation safety program to underpin its new authority to audit, inspect and investigate transit systems. An update to the agency's state safety oversight program, which MAP-21 overhauled to ensure state agencies are legally and financially independent from the transit agencies they manage, isn't expected to be finalized until early next year, and even then those agencies will have years to meet the new requirements.”
NARY A TRANSPO MENTION IN HOUSE AGENDA TALKS: Emerging from the GOP meeting last night, Rep. John Mica told Heather that the House’s highway and transit legislation didn’t come up during the conversation about what the chamber should aim to accomplish in the next few weeks. But both Senate EPW Chairman Jim Inhofe and ranking Democrat Barbara Boxer say they expect lawmakers to wrap up a multiyear highway and transit deal before Thanksgiving. As for movement on a short-term patch before the Oct. 29 expiration of transportation policy, Rep. Peter DeFazio says that tide-me-over measure could get a swift House vote Monday, but that plan hasn’t been firmed up.
RAIL INDUSTRY CHEERS PTC COMPROMISE, URGES QUICK ACTION: The rail industry’s main lobby is praising lawmakers for including newly negotiated language to extend the positive train control deadline within the multiyear transportation bill House T&I is scheduled to mark up on Thursday. "The bill takes a measured but rigorous approach to the PTC issue, … while holding carriers strictly accountable for meeting enforceable implementation metrics," Association of American Railroads President and CEO Ed Hamberger wrote to T&I leaders this week.
Pre-deadline effects: That praise comes with some prodding, however. If Congress doesn’t act soon to extend the deadline, Norfolk Southern plans to stop transporting hazardous materials come Dec. 1. Heather and Pro Technology’s Kate Tummarello report that “the rail giant also said passenger and commuter railroads, including Amtrak, won’t be allowed to operate on its rail lines after Dec. 31 if the current PTC deadline stays in place.”
RYAN LAYS OUT STIPULATIONS FOR SPEAKER RUN: You know that guy who’s supposed to lead the House in coming up with offsets to fund transportation projects for years to come? He just might agree to a much loftier title and a lot more work after all. Rep. Paul Ryan said Tuesday night that he will accept outgoing House Speaker John Boehner’s gavel if he is the GOP’s “unity candidate.” POLITICO’s Jake Sherman, John Bresnahan and Lauren French report that the Ways and Means Chairman “wants to know by Friday if the 247 members of the House Republican Conference support him. If not, he is ‘happy’ to continue as chairman of the powerful tax-writing panel … ”
Transpo impact: All this energy spent pondering a run for House speaker is likely detracting from Ryan’s committee obligations right now, which include the behemoth task of finding enough pay-fors to fund transportation projects for the next three years. And if Ryan ends up taking that post before settling on those offsets, the funding portion of the House’s multiyear transportation bill could be in limbo for a lot longer. On the flip side, the Wisconsin Republican obviously intimately understands the transportation funding process and would likely prioritize that investment if he becomes speaker.
LYFT LAUNCHES ‘McFLY MODE’: Some clever promotions folks are looking to capitalize on the fact that it’s Oct. 21, 2015 — apparently Marty McFly’s time-travel destination in Back to the Future II. Joining with Verizon, Lyft is letting folks digitally hail rides in a DeLorean today, from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. in Manhattan. Harnessing the #WhyNotWednesday hashtag and the power of YouTube, Lyft is calling this limited-time feature McFly Mode. If our calculations are correct, “when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you’re gonna see some serious s---.”
** A message from the Coalition for Transportation Productivity: U.S. manufacturers need trucks that safely carry more freight on Interstates while stopping faster, reducing accident exposure, polluting less, and reducing pavement wear. We need the SAFE Trucking Act (H.R. 3488). With its additional safety requirements, the legislation will create a new world-class standard for truck shipments. Learn more: http://transportationproductivity.org/the-facts **
FARMERS WANT REASONABLE DRONE REGS: Pro Agriculture reports that the National Corn Growers Association is assuring the government that farmers are perfectly willing to abide by new drone regulations, so long as they are reasonable. NCGA, on the heels of the news that DOT will require recreational users to register their flying machines, said drones are becoming increasingly important to American farmers. “Most farmers who use a drone will do so over open cropland in rural areas, far away from airports or large population centers,” NCGA President Chip Bowling said in a statement on Tuesday. “We hope the Federal Aviation Administration will recognize the important commercial applications of UAS technology and create rules that will put the technology in farmers' hands." The corn group says the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International is predicting that the agriculture sector will make up 80 percent of commercial use for drones.
A DIVE INTO THE PERPLEXING WORLD OF AMERICAN BUDGETING: Congress blew straight through its September budget deadline, passed another temporary funding patch and is headed toward a fresh round of budget chicken as we approach the debt ceiling yet again. This month’s issue of The Agenda examines our broken budget process, looks at some expert input on how to fix it, explores new revenue ideas and spotlights favorite sources of imaginary money.
THE AUTOBAHN (SPEED READ):
— Toyota to recall 6.5 million cars over faulty power window switch. Reuters.
— DeFazio wants lithium-ion battery transport ban on planes. POLITICO Pro.
— Part of resurgent Detroit’s transportation retrofit: more bicycle infrastructure. Route Fifty.
— Lawmakers raise alarms over tapping banks to pay for highways. The Wall Street Journal.
— San Francisco may let bicyclists yield at stop signs. The New York Times.
— Expedia's travel sites to list more info on airline fees. The Associated Press.
— Toyota taps Back to the Future nostalgia to pitch clean-energy car. Bloomberg Business.
THE COUNTDOWN: Highway and transit policy expires in 9 days. DOT appropriations run out in 51 days. FAA reauthorization expires in 163 days. The 2016 presidential election is in 383 days.
** A message from the Coalition for Transportation Productivity: U.S. manufacturers don’t just make things; we ship them, too. That’s why we need Congress to pass the SAFE Trucking Act (H.R. 3488) — state-led truck weight reform with 21st century safety improvements. With H.R. 3488, manufacturers can use trucks the size of an 18-wheeler that stop faster, reduce accident exposure, pollute less, reduce pavement wear, and are safe for Interstate bridges — all while carrying more freight to improve highway safety by meeting demand with fewer truckloads. Already equipped with an additional axle, these vehicles also incorporate new safety technology to create a world-class standard for the movement of goods. With nearly 70 percent of U.S. freight moved by trucks, and overall freight tonnage expected to grow nearly 25 percent over the next decade, H.R. 3488 is a critical part of America’s safer, greener, more efficient transportation future. Learn more: http://transportationproductivity.org/the-facts **
Read more: http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-transportation/2015/10/leaders-keep-options-open-for-ptc-vehicle-feds-challenge-house-auto-safety-bill-amid-watchdogging-buildup-fta-embraces-metro-oversight-nary-a-transpo-mention-in-house-agenda-talks-210838#ixzz3pI6mJBrG -
NS Announces Service Changes In Response To PTC Deadline
Oct 21, 2015 | Progressive Railroading
Norfolk Southern Corp.'s rail subsidiaries will no longer accept shipments of poisonous-inhalation-hazard (PIH) commodities starting Dec. 1, in preparation for the federal positive train control (PTC) safety law that will take effect Jan. 1, 2016, the company announced yesterday.
PIH commodities that are in transit on Dec. 1 will be delivered to their destinations by Dec. 31, NS officials said in a press release.
The cessation of service, effective across the entire NS rail network, is required to comply with the federal government's Dec. 31 deadline for railroads to install PTC technology. NS, which has invested nearly $1 billion on PTC, and most freight and commuter railroads have informed the government that they will not be able to complete PTC implementation by the deadline, and have asked Congress to grant an extension.
The Federal Railroad Administration has said that it must enforce the deadline that Congress sets. If there is no extension, many railroads have said they will have to cease at least some service as of Jan. 1 so that they are not operating in violation of federal law.
NS officials said the status of the Class I’s non-PIH traffic interchanged with other railroads and freight operations on the Northeast Corridor after Dec. 31 is currently under review.
"We remain hopeful that Congress will grant the railroad industry an extension of the PTC deadline and appreciate the consideration elected officials and regulators are giving this issue," said NS Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer James Squires. "However, in order to conduct lawful operations on Jan. 1, 2016, and beyond, we must plan ahead to clear affected loaded and empty freight cars from our system."
Squires noted that NS is installing PTC on its required lines and equipment as fast as is safe and practical.
"PTC is one of the most complex technology implementations in our history," he said. "It is in everyone's interest — railroads, customers, suppliers, and communities — that adequate time is devoted to installation, testing, and implementation. Norfolk Southern is committed to getting this right." -
Oct 21, 2015 | World Oil
Cheniere Energy is building the $20 billion Sabine Pass Liquefaction facility in southwest Louisiana. Construction, which began in 2012 and is expected to continue through 2020, is directly employing over 4,000 people.
This paradigm shift has brought many benefits—lower energy costs for consumers, a resurgence in American industrial investment, and now the opportunity to export liquefied natural gas (LNG). By cryogenically cooling and liquefying natural gas, companies can safely transport it to customers around the world—all while creating American jobs and economic growth.
Support for LNG exports has been broad and diverse, with business leaders, elected officials and citizens trumpeting the potential economic benefits. A bipartisan Congressional coalition has pushed federal regulators to expeditiously review and approve pending export projects. And, a study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy found unequivocally that exports of LNG will benefit the United States. The American Chemistry Council, the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have all endorsed LNG exports, arguing that free access to the global marketplace will create economic opportunity for Americans.
The debate over LNG exports has largely been decided in the nation’s capital; however, the benefits of expanded exports will be felt in communities from coast to coast. For those states where LNG export facilities are located, the economic benefits will be tremendous. In Louisiana, Cheniere Energy is building the $20 billion Sabine Pass Liquefaction facility, one of the largest industrial investments in U.S. history. Construction, which began in 2012 and is expected to continue through 2020, is directly employing over 4,000 people. When completed, the facility will create nearly 600 full-time jobs. A recent study by Dr. Loren Scott found that construction at Sabine Pass will expand business sales in Louisiana by $8.4 billion.
The economic benefits of LNG exports will extend well beyond the coastal states where facilities are built. Every 2 Bcfd of exported gas will support 50,000 jobs in the exploration and production sectors. This-far reaching benefit will be felt across the 32 states that produce natural gas. U.S. manufacturers will produce much of the equipment necessary to build LNG export terminals—steel, turbines, piping, compressors, electronic equipment, etc. One study estimates that LNG exports could support up to 452,000 jobs and contribute $73 billion in economic activity each year in the U.S.
LNG exports will also further America’s geopolitical goals. American LNG will provide a stable and secure energy source for our allies in Europe and Asia, many of whom are dependent on Russia and the Middle East for their natural gas supplies. From an environmental perspective, American LNG will displace fuel oil and other more polluting energy sources across the globe. Finally, LNG exports will have a significant impact on the U.S. trade deficit, with Cheniere’s Sabine Pass project alone reducing the deficit by $7 billion a year.
As we gather at LAGCOE to discuss the challenges and opportunities that face our industry, it is important to also note this exciting, global story unfolding right here on the U.S. Gulf Coast. Companies like Cheniere Energy have stepped to the forefront to build export facilities in the U.S.; customers around the world are clamoring for access to American natural gas; and, producers, service companies and manufacturers across the country are poised to reap the benefits.
-
New Oil, Gas Greenhouse Gas Reporting Mandates Finalized
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Oil and natural gas companies will be required to collect and report additional greenhouse gas emissions data under a final Environmental Protection Agency rule to be published Oct. 22.
Under the final rule, companies like DTE Energy Co., Dominion Resources Inc. and Pioneer Natural Resources Co. will be required to gather data from gathering and boosting systems, completions and workovers of oil wells using hydraulic fracturing, and blowdowns of natural gas transmission pipelines beginning Jan. 1, 2016.
There are currently limited data on greenhouse gas emissions from those sources, the EPA says.
The agency says the modifications, originally proposed in December 2014, will improve the quality of information it collects under its mandatory greenhouse gas reporting program (79 Fed. Reg. 76,267). The final rule (RIN 2060-AS37) also comes as the agency seeks to reduce emissions of methane from the oil and natural gas sectors (222 DEN A-1, 11/18/14).
“These amendments provide clear monitoring, calculation and reporting requirements for new segments and sources,” the EPA wrote in the rule. “These amendments will also improve the EPA's ability to assess compliance by adding reporting elements that allow the EPA to more thoroughly verify greenhouse gas data and understand trends in emissions.”
According to an EPA fact sheet, approximately 2,100 oil and natural gas facilities reported their greenhouse gas emissions during the 2013 calendar year.
Any legal challenges to the final rule, which amends the Clean Air Act at 40 C.F.R. Part 98 Subpart W, would be due within 60 days of the rule's publication in the Federal Register. That would be Dec. 21 if the rule is published as scheduled.
Additional Changes to Reporting
According to final EPA analysis, the amendments will impose an additional $29.2 million annually in costs and 317,100 hours annually in new time burdens.
In addition to the new sources covered by the final rule, oil and natural gas facilities will be required to report well identification numbers for oil and gas wells covered in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production segment.
The EPA said that new requirement will allow for easier verification of reported data and increase transparency associated with the greenhouse gas reporting rule.
The final rule also includes confidentiality determinations for certain new data required to be reported to the agency.
Affected facilities in the oil and natural gas sectors must begin reporting new emissions data for 2016 with the first reports due to the agency by March 31, 2017, according to the rule text.
New Industry Segments Affected
The EPA opted in the final regulation to extend its greenhouse gas reporting requirements to two new components of the industry: the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting segment for petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, and the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline segment for transmission pipeline blowdowns between compressor stations.
In addition, the rule adds reporting requirements for oil well completions and workovers with hydraulic fracturing to the existing Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production industry segment.
-
Strong Oklahoma Quakes Linked to Industrial Activity, Study Says
Oct 21, 2015 | AP (in the Wall Street Journal)
A sharp rise in earthquakes in Oklahoma in the past 100 years is likely the result of industrial activities in the energy-rich state, such as oil and natural gas production, a new study suggests.
The paper by the U.S. Geological Survey, which singled out the state of Oklahoma, was released online this week and will be published in December’s Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. It concludes that the injection of massive amounts of the byproduct of oil and gas production—chemical-laced wastewater—deep into the earth likely induced the quakes.
The paper dates wastewater-injection methods to the 1920s in Oklahoma. The modern-day process that produces the wastewater is known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which forces millions of gallons of water, sand and other additives deep into the ground to free up pockets of natural gas.
Both the energy industry and scientists agree that fracking doesn’t directly cause significant earthquakes. Where they part ways is what role injection of the wastewater back into the deep ground plays in inducing the quakes.
“That’s sort of been a red herring: ‘does fracking cause earthquakes?’“ said U.S. Geological Survey seismologist Susan Hough, the lead author of the study. “But that’s not the point you want to argue. They were producing wastewater before (modern-day fracking).”
The research shows that between 1880 and 2008, there were about 25 quakes of 3.5-magnitude or greater in Oklahoma. From 2008-2014, there were roughly 154 of the same strength. That includes the largest recorded earthquake in state history, a 5.6 earthquake centered near the town of Prague in 2011. Some researchers have put its magnitude as high as 5.7
Data on wastewater volumes associated with oil and gas production isn’t readily available before the mid-1990s. However, the volume of injection wastewater produced amounted to around 70 million barrels a month in 1996, Ms. Hough said. By 2013, that figure had more than doubled to around 150 million barrels of wastewater produced a month, she said.
The study relied on Library of Congress data and drill permit records from the Oklahoma Corporation Commission to track how wastewater injection practices evolved in a state where oil production has been going on for more than a century.
The paper’s suggestions were disputed Wednesday by a leading energy industry organization.
“Most induced seismic events are too small to be felt, and there has not been significant damage or injuries as a result of even the largest earthquakes potentially induced by wastewater injection,” said Neal Kirby, a spokesman for the Independent Petroleum Association of America, a Washington, D.C., group representing thousands of oil and natural gas producers.
In response to research suggesting a wastewater disposal-earthquake link, the state’s Corporation Commission has developed a plan covering hundreds of disposal wells to examine if they are injecting too deep into the ground, and requiring that they not be as deep.
The agency has also implemented a volume cutback plan for areas with recently heavy quake activity, such as wells in the towns of Cushing and Crescent, commission spokesman Matt Skinner said Wednesday.
-
Panelists Discuss Methods for Oil, Gas Wastewater Disposal
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
The complex nature of U.S. oil and gas regulation forces energy producers to engage in more advanced water management planning, speakers said at the American Water Summit 2015 in Denver.
“The regulations in the U.S. are the hardest to deal with in the world,” said Drue Ann Whittecar, director of environmental sustainability engineering for National Oilwell Varco, at the “Scalable Solutions” summit. “You have federal, state, county and municipal water districts,” she said. “And the landowner rights are different than anywhere else in the world. You have surface rights, water rights, mineral rights—all these things competing with each other.”
With respect to water decisions, she said, “you need to know if you are doing isolated things or planning an entire field. There has been a shift from worrying about the water when we get there to more of a life cycle approach. We have to know where we're getting it from and how we're going to move it around. Do we need to have a big infrastructure system? Do we have treatment there? And then what are we going to do with the water? Recycle, re-use it? Or are we going to try and re-inject it?”
Centralized or Decentralized?
Whittecar spoke on a panel about centralized versus decentralized water treatment solutions for oil and gas. Joining her was Steven Tipton, senior consulting engineer for ALL Consulting LLC. Tipton showed a diagram of the oil and gas life cycle for water, including acquisition, storage, transport, stimulation, flowback and disposal/recycle.
“Most of us are trying to re-use the water as best we can, but at some point your drilling stops,” he said. “Your water production never stops. And so then what are you going to do with the water? Most of us use saltwater disposal wells because it is the least expensive, least obtrusive way of disposing of the water.”
Another panelist, Kent McManus, vice president of engineering, Eureka Resources LLC, discussed the merits of treating oil and gas wastewater at a centralized treatment facility, which involves the added expense of transporting the water from the wellhead using trucks.
McManus said the key to minimizing the costs of centralized treating of oil and gas wastewater to compete with deep well injection is “maximize recovery of valuable byproducts” such as methane, oil and drilling fluid that can be re-used.
“One of the byproducts is a mixed calcium chloride solution” used to melt ice and snow on roads, but the market for that is not so good in the summer, he said. “People take it in the winter.”
-
EPA: Clean Power Plan Extensions Not a ‘Heavy Lift'
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers and Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency has intentionally set a very low bar for states seeking a two-year extension to submit plans to implement the Clean Power Plan, the agency's top air pollution official said.
Janet McCabe, the EPA's acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, told the Environmental Council of States Oct. 21 that receiving the extension is deliberately “not intended to be a heavy lift.”
“We understand that it may be every single state that needs to seek an extension. There's a lot of work for states to do and a lot of different processes,” McCabe said.
The criteria for receiving that extension has been one of the most frequent questions state regulators have asked the agency, McCabe said.
The EPA Clean Power Plan (RIN 2060-AR33) sets unique carbon dioxide emissions standards for the power sector in each state that will be phased in between 2022 and 2030. State plans are due to the EPA by Sept. 6, 2016, but they can seek a two-year extension if they make an initial submittal to the agency detailing its work toward implementing the rule.
By its nature, that initial submittal will be much less detailed than a state's plan, McCabe said.
“This is not an initial plan. This is an initial submittal,” she said.
States Urged to Comply
States, even those opposed to the EPA's rule, were encouraged to develop their own plans to implement the carbon dioxide standards.
William Reilly, who served as EPA administrator from 1989 through 1993, advised states to move ahead with implementing the Clean Power Plan despite pending legal challenges and widespread opposition to the rule among Republican presidential candidates. Reilly currently serves as a senior adviser at TPG Capital LP.
Reilly said governors and state legislatures should not prohibit their state regulatory agencies from submitting plans to the EPA for implementing the Clean Power Plan, a move he described as “a bad idea.” He predicted that governors and legislatures will eventually relent and allow for the submittal of state implementation plans, because they won't want to see the EPA come in with a federal plan that would make implementation decisions.
“They may be partisan, but they're not stupid,” Reilly said.
Texas and Oklahoma Could Comply
Texas—expected to be one of the leading opponents of the rule—has not ruled out developing its own plan to implement the rule
“We are developing a response,” Bryan Shaw, chairman of the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality, said. “We have not taken anything off the table.”
Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) has said the state will boycott compliance with the standards. However, Michael Teague, the state's secretary of energy and environment, said the state has explored its compliance options. Particularly, he said the mass-based compliance option seems promising.
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey (R) told Bloomberg BNA that West Virginia and other states that oppose the Clean Power Plan intend to file new challenges to the rule the day it is published in the Federal Register (201 DEN B-1, 10/19/15).
Though Texas may pursue its own compliance plan, Shaw still questioned the legality of the EPA's rule given Congress's failure to pass a cap and trade program for carbon dioxide legislatively.
“If my legislature doesn't give me authority, I don't do it,” he said. “That's the rule of law.”
The EPA proposed a model federal plan for implementing the Clean Power Plan that would cap state emissions and establish a carbon dioxide trading program for power plants.
However, states have said that decisions on trading will be significantly affected by what their neighbors choose to do (203 DEN A-8, 10/21/15).
Flexibility Praised
A White House official said during the ECOS meeting that one of the goals of the Clean Power Plan was to give states as much flexibility as possible in implementing the rule.
Megan Ceronsky, senior policy adviser at the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change, said the rule includes two distinct pathways that states can use to achieve their emissions reductions. States can either put together a very structured plan that specifies everything that will happen by 2030 to achieve the state emissions target or use trading mechanisms to meet their carbon emissions goal, Ceronsky said.
The trading option will allow states to be more responsive to changes on the ground, Ceronsky said. She highlighted fluctuations in the cost of natural gas and changes to the economics of wind power as examples of the types of power market factors that states would be able to respond to under a trading program.
Former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman, who is now co-chair of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, said the EPA has encouraged states to be as flexible as possible in reducing power plant emissions, going “about as far as anyone” would be able to go under the Clean Air Act.
“EPA has done the best job I believe it can do in providing flexibility under this rule,” Whitman said.
With publication of the final Clean Power Plan expected shortly, McCabe said the EPA has turned its focus toward helping states make their implementation decisions.
“I would say, from my perspective, that we are off and running about the business of implementing the Clean Power Plan,” she said. “We will be there every step of the way unless you don't want us there on some of those steps.” Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
-
Senators Take Aim At Agency's Rulemaking
Oct 22, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Kevin Bogardus
Republican senators picked apart U.S. EPA's rulemaking process that has helped craft some of the agency's most controversial rules.
At a hearing held yesterday by the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Superfund, Waste Management and Regulatory Oversight, GOP lawmakers dug into the agency's vast array of rules and regulations. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), chairman of the subcommittee, decried the amount and cost of EPA's standards.
"Since President Obama took office in January of 2009, the EPA has issued more than 3,300 new regulations," Rounds said in his opening statement. "Unfortunately, it is those same Americans who shoulder the burden of these broad, overreaching EPA regulations. According to the Office of Management and Budget, over the last 10 years, EPA regulations have imposed an estimated $42 billion in annual costs on this country -- costs paid for by American taxpayers and businesses."
The panel yesterday focused on the creation of those rules -- how EPA justifies their costs and benefits -- and specifically on its use of Regulatory Impact Analyses, or RIAs. That analysis of a proposed regulation is supposed to provide the agency and the public information on how much the rule will cost and what benefits it provides.
Rounds believes EPA has not been up to the task, citing a July 2014 Government Accountability Office report that said the agency did not always adhere to guidelines in developing its RIAs.
"The EPA routinely fails to fully monetize the costs versus the benefits of their regulations, imposes unfunded mandates onto state and local governments, ignores the impacts of regulations on small businesses, and over-relies on ancillary benefits to justify their regulations," Rounds said.
Another frequent EPA critic, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the full committee, called the agency's RIAs "highly speculative," seemingly designed to "mold the RIA to fit a predetermined regulatory outcome," according to his statement submitted into the hearing's record.
Not fully considering the costs of its rules before they are issued has worked against the agency recently. Both Rounds and Inhofe noted that the Supreme Court hit EPA for not considering future compliance costs when drafting its rules on mercury emissions (Greenwire, June 29).
"It must be stated that EPA issues more rules costing over a billion dollars a year than all other agencies combined," said William Kovacs, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs. His written testimony noted that EPA has been responsible for 18 out of the 31 billion-dollar regulations issued by federal agencies between 2000 and 2014.
Kovacs said the agency's more controversial "mega rules," such as the ozone standard, the Waters of the U.S. rule and the Clean Power Plan, were designed without using many of the RIA's tools for studying the regulations.
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) also attended yesterday's hearing. The subcommittee's ranking member defended EPA's rulemaking, talking about the vast health risks from not reducing air pollution.
"History has shown that the benefits of environmental regulations are enormous compared to economic costs, yet whenever EPA proposes a new regulation, the impacted industries always, always cry foul," Markey said in his opening statement.
The senator said the agency was one of the government's best in crafting its rules.
"Do you agree that the EPA produces some of the most sophisticated cost-benefit analysis in the entire government?" Markey asked in a question to Rena Steinzor, a professor at the University of Maryland Carey School of Law.
Steinzor agreed, saying EPA has undergone "trial by fire" throughout its history and has perfected its rulemaking process.
"It has been rigorously criticized and has responded and does an excellent job," Steinzor said.
"God bless Richard Nixon," said Markey in acknowledging that the GOP president created EPA, eliciting laughs from the hearing's audience. "And we thank God he did that."
Rounds said it is important that agencies should tighten up its regulatory process, better explaining their rules' costs and benefits in order to inspire public confidence in the federal regulations.
"Today's hearing is as much about looking at the processes and finding ways to make them even better in the future than what they are today," Rounds said. "When there are shortcomings identified, then we should work for both points of view to make it better than it was in the past. And I think that has worked to the benefit of both sides."
-
Administration Official: GOP Arguments Against Climate Deal Are 'Tired'
Oct 21, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Andrew Restuccia
A senior Obama administration official dismissed Republican attempts to undercut negotiations for a new international climate change agreement, and said the White House is confident its domestic global warming agenda will survive attacks from GOP lawmakers.
"At some point, these arguments just get tired," the official told reporters at a briefing at the White House on Wednesday, arguing that there is no validity to GOP assertions that other countries like China aren't following the United States' lead in taking ambitious steps to tackle climate change.
The official also suggested that Republicans might not be fully engaged on the issue, noting that only one GOP lawmaker, Sen. John Barrasso, showed up to a hearing Tuesday with Todd Stern, the State Department's lead climate negotiator.
"I would note that the attendance at Todd’s hearing didn’t necessarily reflect the degree of passion and commitment. There was one Republican that showed up and he was the chair of the subcommittee," the official said, referring to Barrasso, who chairs the Foreign Relations subcommittee that held the hearing.
The official said the administration is "quite confident" that the president's domestic climate regulations will stand up to Republican scrutiny, including to upcoming challenges in the Senate under the Congressional Review Act.
-
EPA Suggests Utility MACT Reassessment Will Likely Project Lower Costs
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Anthony Lacey
EPA is suggesting that its pending review of the costs and benefits of its power plant maximum achievable control technology (MACT) air toxics rule will likely show lower compliance costs for the rule than previously estimated, aiming to boost its call for a federal appeals court to reject vacatur of the rule while EPA undertakes the review.
The Supreme Court earlier this year remanded the MACT back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit after faulting EPA for not considering costs in its initial review determining that Clean Air Act MACT regulation of utilities was “appropriate and necessary.” The justices in their 5-4 ruling rejected the agency's argument that it considered costs at a later date when it set the rule's actual hazardous air pollutant limits.
The D.C. Circuit in White Stallion Energy Center, LLC, et al. v. EPA, is now weighing how to proceed with the rule. A coalition of state and industry groups opposed to the MACT last month filed motions with the court urging it to vacate the regulation outright, saying the high court invalidated the original basis for crafting the rule.
But the Department of Justice (DOJ) on EPA's behalf counters in an Oct. 21 response that legal precedent shows that the court regularly remands regulations to the agency without vacatur to address legal flaws. And the agency adds that it is working on an accelerated schedule to craft a cost analysis to address the Supreme Court's ruling.
DOJ cites a declaration from acting EPA air chief Janet McCabe that the agency “has already begun the process of reviewing available information relevant to cost” in response to the high court's ruling.
“Relevant staff have been assigned to the project, and [EPA] has established a detailed internal schedule with the goal of completing the proposed consideration in the next few months,” McCabe wrote. The agency has a goal of finalizing its analysis of cost considerations “as close to April 15, 2016 as possible.”
DOJ says that EPA, by analyzing the costs of regulating the utility sector with a MACT, can then use those figures to satisfy the requirement to weigh costs as part of the appropriate and necessary finding. DOJ also notes that the Supreme Court in its ruling on the MACT in Michigan v. EPA “explicitly declined to limit EPA's discretion as to how to consider costs on remand . . . and there are many reasonable approaches for doing so.”
Premature Request
The filing says the request to vacate on the cost issue is premature. Industry and state petitioners seeking vacatur will have an opportunity to comment on EPA's approach and to challenge that final determination in the D.C. Circuit “if EPA concludes that regulation of power plants remains appropriate after considering costs. Any attempt to challenge EPA's consideration of costs is not properly before this Court at this time,” DOJ says.
The agency's critics argue that vacatur is appropriate because the utility MACT will continue to impose costs such as the $158 million recordkeeping requirements if the court leaves it in place. They also faulted the rule as only providing $4 million to $6 million in health benefits to further undermine the case for retaining the rule.
But DOJ counters that the $4 million to $6 million figure only represents quantifiable benefits directly related to the rule's regulation of mercury emissions, and does not account for co-benefits from reducing other hazardous air pollutants, as well as related benefits of reducing criteria pollutants such as fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The total quantifiable benefits of the utility MACT are estimated to be three to nine times the total cost, DOJ says.
Projecting a major benefit to cost ratio would boost any renewed conclusion that it is appropriate and necessary to regulate power plants, and counter claims of large costs for minimal benefits. DOJ hints that EPA in its upcoming cost review will find lower costs than before, noting that the prior cost estimate -- done at the time of crafting the rule's emissions limits -- is already several years old and “likely overestimates compliance costs.”
DOJ also cites EPA's “ambitious” plan to quickly craft the new cost analysis to bolster its push for keeping the rule in place on remand, warning of major disruption if the court scraps it.
If the D.C. Circuit were to vacate the rule, plants that have installed pollution controls to comply might turn them off, DOJ says, which would lead to increases in air pollution harmful to human health. And facilities scheduled to shutter instead of comply could drop those plans and resume operating, DOJ warns.
Critics' Attacks
The coalition of state and industry opponents of the rule counter in an Oct. 21 response that the Supreme Court invalidated the “foundation” of the rule -- the agency's finding that it is appropriate to issue a utility MACT.
“Because the Supreme Court determined the Rule has no lawful basis, the whole Rule exceeds EPA's statutory authority and so must be vacated,” says the filing, echoing earlier arguments.
The industry groups backing the filing are the White Stallion Energy Center, the National Mining Association, the Gulf Coast Lignite Coalition, and the Oak Grove Management Company. The states supporting the filing are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.
They argue that “vacatur is required when there is no possibility an agency can clarify or explain its action; in that situation, any disruptive consequences of vacatur deserve no weight. Here, EPA fully explained its interpretation that costs are irrelevant when deciding whether regulation is appropriate, and the Supreme Court held that interpretation was unreasonable,” and therefore the court must vacate the utility MACT.
The filing also faults EPA's claim that it “might adopt a new rationale on remand” to justify the utility MACT by relying on the benefits from reductions in PM2.5 emissions achieved as a co-benefit of the rule. The filing says that EPA already regulates PM2.5 under a national ambient air quality standard. “If EPA now believes that public health is not adequately protected from fine particulate matter and wants to impose stricter regulations on that pollutant, it should do so under” the national ambient air quality standards program, the industry and state petitioners say.
“Any benefits from further reducing fine particulate matter are not relevant for deciding whether regulating hazardous air pollutants is appropriate” under the air law,” the filing says. “And that rationale is not a clarification of EPA’s action; it is a new basis for a different 'appropriate' finding” compared to once again declaring the initial appropriate finding to be correct “and thus does not support leaving the Rule in place.”
Citing Co-Benefits
EPA's long-running practice of citing co-benefits of reducing pollutants not targeted by a rule in order to justify the regulation faces an uncertain future following the Supreme Court's Michigan decision, observers have said, as the ruling suggests both support for and opposition to the practice.
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the June 29 opinion for the 5-4 majority in Michigan, in which he said, "It is not rational, never mind 'appropriate,' to impose billions of dollars in economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits" -- which appears to echo industry claims that discounting co-benefits from a cost-benefit analysis of the MACT yields minimal benefits yet projects massive costs.
Environmentalists disagree that Scalia's ruling suggests that some Supreme Court justices might not look favorably on the use of co-benefits. One environmental lawyer says EPA should take comfort from the court's failure to take up the co-benefits question, despite intense lobbying from industry groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to do so. "I don't think that point will go unnoticed by EPA," the source says. Further, Scalia explicitly does not require a full-blown quantified cost-benefit analysis in the "appropriate and necessary" finding, only a broad consideration of cost. EPA will likely take a broad, "tapestry" approach to a revised cost-benefit analysis, including consideration of both indirect benefits and costs, the source says.
-
U.S. Chamber Touts Regulatory Bill To Resolve EPA Cost-Benefit Concerns
Oct 21, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Stuart Parker
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is urging Senate Republicans to advance a regulatory reform bill that would create additional hurdles for EPA and other agencies to promulgate expensive regulations, saying the legislation could help to resolve concerns about EPA crafting flawed cost-benefits analyses for its major air, water and other rules.
At an Oct. 21 Senate Environment & Public Works Committee (EPW) oversight panel hearing, GOP senators noted that testimony from several witnesses cited alleged deficiencies in regulatory impact analyses (RIAs) in which the agency outlines the costs and benefits of its rules. For example, relying on the co-benefits of reducing fine particulate matter in rules for other pollutants, and doubts about the benefits of EPA's carbon reduction regulations.
William Kovacs, senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs for the Chamber of Commerce, and other witnesses also attacked the agency's cost-benefits analysis for its Oct. 1 final rule revising its national ambient air quality standard for ozone down from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to 70 ppb. EPA in that rule cut the projected costs and benefits by billions of dollars compared to those in the proposal's cost review.
At the EPW hearing, Superfund, Waste Management, and Regulatory Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) said in his opening statement, “EPA routinely fails to fully monetize the costs versus the benefits of their regulations, imposes unfunded mandates onto state and local governments, ignores the impacts or their regulations on small businesses and over-relies on ancillary benefits to justify their regulations.”
Similarly, full EPW Chairman Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) warned that “defective RIAs are likely to result in inefficient and overly burdensome regulations, many of which are challenged in the court.”
Kovacs backed the senators' concerns and said one solution could be to approve S. 2006, the upper chamber's version of a bill approved by the House, H.R. 185, that seeks to tighten scrutiny of EPA's cost-benefit analyses.
Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) introduced the bill Aug. 6. with co-sponsors Sens. Angus King (I-ME), Susan Collins (R-ME), John Cornyn (R-TX), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Ron Johnson (R-WI) and David Perdue (R-GA).
Pending Legislation
The bill would revise the Administrative Procedure Act to “require federal agencies do a better job of explaining the rationales for new rules and being more open and transparent when they write those rules,” Kovacs said in his written testimony.
The bill would apply various new oversight provisions to rules with an estimated annual cost of $100 million of more (major rules) and those with a cost of $1 billion or more (high impact rules).
For proposed rules meeting these definitions, the bill would require a preliminary determination that the benefits of the proposed rule justify its costs and a discussion of the costs and benefits of alternatives to the rules.
According to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) summary of the bill, it also “expands agency requirements for allowing opportunities for public comment and sets forth requirements for providing public hearings for high-impact and major rules and for petitioning for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule.”
The bill would mandate that “An agency must, in a rulemaking for a major rule or high-impact rule, adopt the least costly rule considered during the rulemaking that meets relevant statutory objectives,” CRS says.
Further, the bill would require the White House Office of Management and Budget -- which reviews rules prior to their publication -- “to establish and update guidelines for the assessment of: (1) the costs and benefits of proposed and final rules, and (2) other economic issues and risk assessments that are relevant to rulemaking.” It also revises the scope of judicial review to prohibit review of a determination of whether a rule is a major rule and to establish a substantial evidence standard for affirming agency rulemaking decisions, according to CRS.
But Democratic witnesses at the hearing, with support from Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), defended EPA's approach to cost-benefit analysis and touted the health benefits of the agency's regulations.
Rena Steinzor, a law professor with the University of Maryland, said EPA's cost-benefit analysis “is the gold standard for all other government agencies,” according to her opening testimony.
She said EPA's “elaborate studies invariably conclude that benefits exceed costs. In fact, in the case of the Clean Air Act rules reserved for especially irrational condemnation by regulated industries, benefits exceed costs by a margin of 30 to one. . . . I urge the Subcommittee to applaud EPA’s diligent, thorough, and creative efforts to carry out one of the most difficult elements of its mission to preserve environmental quality.”
Ozone Rule
In the final ozone NAAQS, EPA projects costs and benefits that are billions of dollars lower than the proposed version of the 70 ppb rule the agency released in November last year.
At the time of the proposal EPA sought comment on setting the NAAQS at a limit within the range of 65-70 ppb and took comment on going above or below that range. In a fact sheet released alongside the proposal the agency estimated that a 70 ppb limit would create annual health benefits of $6.4 to $13 billion compared to $3.9 billion in costs, excluding California. EPA assessed the benefits for California separately given its major ozone problem.
But in the final rule released Oct. 1, the agency revised the cost-benefit assessment to project a 70 ppb limit will create $2.9 to $5.9 billion in annual benefits compared to $1.4 billion in costs.
The agency in its RIA for the final NAAQS said that updated emissions modeling lead to the lowered projections for both the costs and benefits of a 70 ppb ozone limit. “The more geographically refined modeling and improved ozone response factors resulted in fewer emissions reductions needed to meet a revised standard of 70 ppb and an alternative standard level of 65 ppb,” according to the RIA.
In response to a request from Inside EPA for further explanation of why the cost-benefit analysis for the final rule differs so much from the proposal, an agency spokeswoman says, “The changes in costs and benefits for the final rule primary are the result of more refined air quality modeling.”
EPA is “always working to improve methods and models for use in the agency's Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs), and EPA conducted more refined air quality modeling for the RIA for the final ozone standards. The additional modeling allowed us to better characterize the impact of potential emissions reductions closer to air quality monitors (in areas that violated the standards being analyzed),” the spokeswoman says. “Primarily as a result of this additional modeling, EPA estimated that 50 percent fewer emissions reductions were needed in these areas to meet a standard of 70 ppb. Because benefits and costs estimates are derived from how much pollution will need to be reduced, the benefits and costs estimates are now lower compared to proposal,” according to the spokeswoman.
-
Date Set for Arguments on Water Rule Jurisdiction
Oct 22, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
Oral arguments will be held Dec. 8 on whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati has jurisdiction over challenges to the Obama administration's clean water rule, according to the court's Oct. 20 order (In re EPA, 6th Cir., No. MCP No. 135, oral arguments scheduled, 10/20/15). A majority of a three-judge panel stayed the rule nationwide on Oct. 9 over objections from the dissenting judge that the court should not act until it has determined whether it has subject matter jurisdiction or the authority to hear the challenges (197 DEN A-1, 10/13/15). Various states, industry groups and companies have also challenged the rule, which delineates the agencies' regulatory jurisdiction under the act, in federal district court. They claim jurisdiction is proper there.
-
Sixth Circuit To Hear Oral Argument On Waters Rule, Dec. 8
Oct 21, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Jenny Hopkinson
The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals will take oral arguments over whether it has the authority to hear a challenge from industry groups and states to the EPA's Clean Water Rule on Dec. 8. The hearing will take place at 1:30 p.m. at the federal court house in Cincinnati, according to a scheduling notice released Tuesday.
The three judge panel, on Oct. 9, issued a stay to prevent the EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from enforcing the measure until after it has determined if legal challenges must be heard at the district or appellate court level.
-
EPA Cautions Court Against Gutting Mercury Rule
Oct 21, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Robin Bravender
The Obama administration is urging a federal appeals court to allow it to tweak a major air toxics rule, rather than scrapping the regulation in its entirety.
U.S. EPA asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit today to keep the agency's standards to cut mercury pollution at coal-fired power plants in place while the agency fixes problems flagged in June by the Supreme Court. The high court found that EPA erred by failing to consider costs when it found that it was "appropriate and necessary" to regulate hazardous emissions from power plants.
In its brief to the court today, EPA said it intends to "act quickly on remand" and warned that vacating the rule would have "profound adverse consequences for public health and the environment," would have significant "adverse regulatory consequences" for states that relied on the rule, and would cause "disruption for the electric generation sector."
EPA's challengers in the case -- including states and industry groups led by White Stallion Energy Center LLC and the state of Michigan -- are asking the appeals court to toss out the mercury rule entirely.
In their brief submitted today, they told the appeals court it had no choice: "The Supreme Court's ruling, the Administrative Procedure Act, and this Court's precedent all require that the Rule be vacated," they wrote.
EPA and its critics made similar arguments in an initial round of briefs filed to the court last month (Greenwire, Sept. 25).
Although the Supreme Court found that EPA failed to appropriately consider costs, the agency argued that the existing record for the rule contains extensive documentation about the costs of compliance. Based on the cost data that's already available, the agency believes there is a "serious possibility" that EPA will reaffirm its finding.
EPA also said it intends to wrap up its consideration of costs as close to April 15, 2016, as possible.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested