Preview Newsletter
ACC AM Oct 29
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Seeks Broad Recommendations From SAB Economy-Wide Model Panel
Oct 28, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
EPA is asking a panel of economic and scientific advisors for broad recommendations on how the agency should approach economy-wide modeling in future regulatory analyses, while the panelists are questioning whether to focus their work on small-scale applications of the technique or larger models that some worry could miss crucial details. -
TSCA Supporters Blast Burr, Others For Blocking Floor Action
Oct 28, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
Democratic sponsors of a chemical safety bill that boasts broad, bipartisan support took some of their colleagues to task on the Senate floor today for raising procedural barriers to floor consideration of the plan. In a colloquy among Democratic Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Ed Markey of ... -
Markey Calls Chemical Reform Senate Standoff ‘Nothing Short Of Absurd’
Oct 28, 2015 | BNA Energy & Environment Blog
By Pat Rizzuto
Senators took to the floor yet again today to talk about the standoff between a vote on a clean TSCA-reform bill and permanent reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Act. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) called the situation “nothing short of absurd.” -
PHMSA Leaves Out Leak Detection
Oct 28, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Morning Energy
By Eric Wolff
PHMSA Leaves Out Leak Detection : The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration may be getting tougher with pipeline safety regulations, but its most recent rule does not address what many see as low-hanging fruit: New standards for leak detection technology... -
EPA Inspector General Outlines Chemical Safety Board Management Challenges
Oct 28, 2015 | Safety + Health Magazine
The Chemical Safety Board needs to address several management challenges to strengthen its influence and protect workers and the public, according to a report from the Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General. EPA OIG on Oct. 22 issued an 18-page document outlining CSB’s management challenges... -
(ACC Mentioned) Congress OKs Deadline Extension For Rail Safety System, Averts Shutdown
Oct 28, 2015 | The Chicago Tribune
By Richard Wronski
Metra riders can breathe a sigh of relief after Congress acted Wednesday to extend a safety system deadline and avert a threatened Jan. 1 railroad shutdown. The Senate approved a House-passed measure that gives railroads an additional three years, to Dec. 31, 2018, to install the safety system known as positive train control. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Railroads Win Reprieve From Congress
Oct 28, 2015 | ICIS News
By Mark Milam
The US Congress passed a bill on Wednesday that gives railroads an additional three to five years to implement positive train control (PTC), designed to slow or stop a locomotive to prevent a collision or derailment. Under the 2008 original PTC safety law, railroads had until 31 December 2015 to install the new technology... -
(ACC Mentioned) Railroads Get PTC Reprieve Through Congressional Stopgap Measure
Oct 28, 2015 | Railway Age
By William C. Vantuono
The rail industry’s frenzied push to extend the Congressionally imposed deadline for implementing Positive Train Control—one of the largest unfunded mandates ever foisted upon a U.S. industry—finally came to fruition on Oct. 28, 2015. On that day, the U.S. Senate approved H.R. 3819... -
(ACC Mentioned) Congress Passes Three-Year PTC Deadline Extension
Oct 28, 2015 | Railway Track & Structures
By Mischa Wanek-Libman
A blanket three-year extension to the Positive Train Control (PTC) implementation deadline has passed in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The legislation also gives railroads the option to seek a waiver granting an additional two years to install PTC. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chamber Asks An Extention Of Train Plan
Oct 29, 2015 | The Daily Star-Journal
By Jack “Miles” Ventimiglia
Railroads continue to sound whistles over a deadline that could idle their engines starting Jan. 1. The Warrensburg Chamber of Commerce has joined the railroads and others in urging a deadline extension. Congress mandated the deadline. Lawmakers told railroads to either install Positive Train Control by the end of the... -
(ACC Mentioned) NACD: Positive Train Control Extension Ensures Continued Shipment of Goods
Oct 28, 2015 | PR Newswire
Today, the National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD) applauded the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives' passage of short-term highway funding legislation that, among other provisions, extends the deadline for railroads to implement positive train control (PTC) technology... -
Senate Passes Highway, Hazmat Extension
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Senate passed Oct. 28 by a voice vote a surface transportation bill that would extend authorization for hazardous materials transportation programs through Nov. 20. The House passed the bill (H.R. 3819) Oct. 27 by a voice vote. The bill now will go to President Barack Obama's desk for his signature. -
Senate Approves Stopgap Funding Bill, Confirms Rail Chief
Oct 28, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
The Senate gave final approval this afternoon to a stopgap road and public transportation funding bill intended to give lawmakers until Nov. 20 to work out a final deal on a longer-term measure. The voice vote on H.R. 3819 came after Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) briefly attempted to whittle down an... -
Senate Approves Obama Rail Nominee
Oct 28, 2015 | The Hill - Transportation
By Keith Laing
President Obama's choice to lead the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) was approved on Wednesday by the Senate. Obama's nomination of Sarah Feinberg, who has been leading the FRA on an interim basis since January, was approved by the full Senate in a voice vote. -
Senate Passes Three-Week Extension for Highway Programs
Oct 28, 2015 | The Wall Street Journal
By Laura Stevens
The Senate passed a bipartisan three-week extension of highway programs due to expire on Thursday, a measure that also pushes off for three years a controversial deadline for railroads to install new safety technology. The bill was approved by voice votes in the House on Tuesday and the Senate on Wednesday. -
Schedule for Clean Power Plan Stay Requests Proposed
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
The Environmental Protection Agency asked a federal appeals court to set a schedule for considering immediate stay requests for the Clean Power Plan, which the agency said could allow the court to move more quickly to the merits of the case (West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1363, motion filed 10/28/15). -
Four GOP Senators Press For New Approach To Environment
Oct 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Andrew Restuccia
Four moderate Senate Republicans — including two facing tough reelection bids — are joining forces to rethink how the GOP approaches environmental issues. Sens. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) will launch a new informal coalition on... -
Colorado Governor, AG Argue Over Clean Power Plan Lawsuit
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) said Oct. 28 the state attorney general does not have the authority to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan without his permission. Hickenlooper responded to a decision by Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman (R) to join with 23 other states in a federal court challenge... -
Vulnerable GOP Senator Touts Support For Obama Climate Rule
Oct 28, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), who is facing a tough reelection contest next year, is touting her support for the Obama administration’s climate rule for power plants. In a web video released by her campaign on Wednesday, Ayotte highlighted her support for the Clean Power Plan, saying it “will help address climate change”... -
Kirk's Opposition To Power Plant Rule Is Political Issue At Home
Oct 29, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Jean Chemnick
Reports this week that Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) would vote to kill U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan left many people in his home state wondering what had become of their moderate senator. Kirk told Politico Tuesday afternoon that he would back Congressional Review Act resolutions to scuttle the new and existing power plant rules -- striking at the heart ... -
EPA's McCarthy to Lead U.S. Delegation on HFC Use
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy will lead the U.S. delegation at an upcoming international meeting on ozone-depleting substances that is set to include discussions on the use of hydrofluorocarbons, which are short-lived greenhouse gases that have significant global warming potential. -
Whitfield Eyes Quick Votes on EPA Carbon Rule Challenges
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) told Bloomberg BNA he expects the House to take up within weeks two resolutions (H.J. Res. 71 and H.J. Res. 72) to block the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan and its regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from new and modified power plants. -
Greens Could One Day Stand Without EPA In Defending Carbon Rule
Oct 28, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Alex Guillén
Environmentalists and their allies this week took a routine step to help the Obama administration defend its landmark climate change rules in court — but they could end being that last line of defense in a perfect storm of administration losses in court and Republican victories in 2016.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Seeks Broad Recommendations From SAB Economy-Wide Model Panel
Oct 28, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
EPA is asking a panel of economic and scientific advisors for broad recommendations on how the agency should approach economy-wide modeling in future regulatory analyses, while the panelists are questioning whether to focus their work on small-scale applications of the technique or larger models that some worry could miss crucial details.
At the first in-person meeting of EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) panel on whole economy modeling, Oct. 22-23 in Washington, D.C., agency officials working on whole economy modeling said that while the group's work will focus most directly on high-cost air rules, EPA is seeking input on how to apply the models in any of its program offices.
"If you want to offer us advice in any area, we're happy to have it. . . . The focus of this is more the non-[greenhouse gas (GHG)] side of air regulations, but of course we welcome comments in other areas as well," Ann Wolverton, the EPA economist leading its whole economy modeling work group, told the panel.
However, she noted that calculating the costs of complying with non-climate air regulations such as the national ambient air quality standards has been "where we struggle" with economy-wide modeling due to the myriad indirect impacts such rules can have on employment, productivity and other factors.
Wolverton added that the agency is asking SAB to develop recommendations on short-term practices as well as economy-wide modeling techniques that could be applied in the long term.
"Given the time and resource constraints, what can EPA do defensively now? That might mean 'don't use the models,' or it might mean 'use the models this way,'" she said.
Unlike the existing cost-benefit process EPA uses to evaluate its proposed rules, economy-wide modeling -- also termed whole economy modeling -- seeks to model all costs of regulation, including the indirect effects, such as job losses, that might occur across the economy because of higher energy costs created by a regulation. Industry and other agency critics have charged that the existing process chronically understates the costs of rules.
But EPA has traditionally been skeptical of economy-wide computable general equilibrium (CGE) models because they often do not account for a rule's benefits and are highly dependent on the quality of assumptions used in the model.
Speaking to the SAB panel, Wolverton said EPA is concerned that "the aggregate nature of CGE models might miss details about compliance strategies that matter, especially social costs. We've been trying to figure out which of those details might matter, and which of those details might matter less from the perspective of estimating social costs."
Panelists echoed Wolverton's comments that a large-scale CGE study could miss important information. For instance, V. Kerry Smith, an emeritus professor of economics at Arizona State University's W.P Carey School of Business, questioned whether SAB should be investigating "all-encompassing models" rather than developing a comprehensive picture that would focus on a smaller scale.
Smith said the panel should also consider "strategic, generally focused general equilibrium models that will allow you to look at very specific questions and would never be used to produce absolute values or numbers, but would rather be used in a sort of relative sense" to compare impacts between sectors instead of assigning a total numeric value to the nationwide costs of a rule.
Robert Shimer, an economics professor at the University of Chicago, said the panel should also take care to make sure its recommended CGE framework has "some measure of forecastability," which he argued could become a problem if the process becomes overly complex, to the point where a small change in inputs might drastically change the result.
"Where I worry about complex models is that different teams of staff in a different year might reach dramatically different conclusions. I think that's problematic not just because of how it affects decisions but because it would create an uncertain environment," he said.
Panelists did not raise specific suggestions for how EPA should develop or apply its models. In a July 15 phone meeting of the panel, Wolverton said one possible approach is "trying to link" EPA's traditional single-sector approach with an engineering or model plant method with a CGE model "in a hybrid model to get the best of both worlds. But that comes with its own challenges," she said.
In public comments, the American Chemistry Council's (ACC) Brian Zumwalt echoed calls for EPA to use detailed models, although he did not weigh in on whether the panel should explicitly call for the use of smaller-scale models.
"While it is important for cost-benefit modeling to capture economy-wide impacts, it should not be accomplished at the expense of reducing the level of modeling detail, such as employment losses and plant shutdowns, regarding highly-impacted industries," he said in his written comments to SAB. Relevant documents are available on InsideEPA.com. (Doc. ID: 185972)
Zumwalt spoke on behalf of ACC, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Forest & Paper Association, the American Petroleum Institute and the American Wood Council -- all of which also signed joint written comments to the panel before its July 15 meeting.
The only other commenter at the meeting was Elaine Shen, representing California's South Coast Air Quality Management District, which includes the Los Angeles area. She urged the panel to include rigorous consideration of rules' employment impacts in whatever recommendations it makes to EPA, in part because California policies require air regulators to fully analyze such impacts.
If EPA's economy-wide modeling process does not meet California's standards, she said the state could have to find another solution -- despite the pitfalls of state and federal regulators using separate metrics for their rules' costs and benefits.
"While I believe it's extremely important that EPA organizes this panel and look for ways to improve benefit-cost analysis with economy-wide models, I am also concerned by the potentially further divergence between EPA's analytical approach and our practice . . . At times, the lack of resemblance or comparability to EPA's analysis could subject us to external criticism. Therefore, I would like to urge EPA and the panel members to carefully investigate the issue of modeling employment impact," Shen said.
The Oct. 22-23 meeting focused exclusively on laying groundwork for recommendations on using economy-wide modeling to determine a regulation's social costs, as opposed to its direct economic impacts. SAB will eventually examine procedures for economic modeling as well, but Wolverton said EPA is asking the panel to deal with the two types of impacts separately. She added that another reason for addressing social costs first is that agency officials are still working on a white paper designed to guide the advisors on the difficulties the agency faces developing and using economy-wide models of economic impacts. She told Inside EPA during the meeting that her goal is to deliver a draft of the paper to the SAB panel "about a month" before they take up economic impact modeling.
-
TSCA Supporters Blast Burr, Others For Blocking Floor Action
Oct 28, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
Democratic sponsors of a chemical safety bill that boasts broad, bipartisan support took some of their colleagues to task on the Senate floor today for raising procedural barriers to floor consideration of the plan.
In a colloquy among Democratic Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Ed Markey of Massachusetts -- all co-sponsors of S. 697, or the "Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act" -- the trio blasted Senate leaders, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and other lawmakers for linking their bill to the reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).
The exchange reflects the new political calculus surrounding the effort to update the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. With objections from liberal senators like Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) no longer standing in the way of the bill, Republicans hoping to use the issue as leverage for other priorities are now the biggest threat to Senate passage.
Even as the bill has more than 60 Senate co-sponsors, supporters have been unable to bring it to the floor amid a disagreement over an unrelated program, the LWCF. The fund, which expired last month, is broadly popular among lawmakers, but some conservative Republicans would like to see structural reforms to the program before it is reauthorized.
In a process similar to a floor exchange a week ago, Merkley asked for unanimous consent to take up a stand-alone bill to permanently reauthorize LWCF, which expired last month, but Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) rose to object.
Lankford asked instead for unanimous consent to pass S. 2169, a bill introduced last week by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), to extend LWCF until Dec. 11, with an amendment to use LWCF funds for land maintenance, but Merkley objected to the proposal.
Merkley asked for unanimous consent to proceed to S. 2165, which would permanently reauthorize the LWCF, but that also failed to win agreement.
Then Udall asked for unanimous consent to proceed to the chemicals bill, with only one amendment -- recent changes to the bill announced earlier this month by supporters -- allowed on the floor, but Burr objected.
Burr, himself a co-sponsor of Udall's bill, has demanded a vote on an amendment to attach a permanent reauthorization of LWCF, but other supporters and advocacy groups have said the issues should be considered separately. Last week, Udall tried and failed to add the LWCF reauthorization as an amendment to Burr's bill, S. 754, or the "Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act," which passed the Senate yesterday (EnergyWire, Oct. 28).
Burr "objects to making an unrelated amendment to his bill, but he insists on one to ours," Udall said then.
Speaking on the Senate floor today, Burr was unapologetic for linking the two issues.
"Let me just stand up and take all the blame," Burr said. "I'm the guy holding up the chemical bill, TSCA."
Burr blasted his colleagues' steps to bring the bill to the floor, while knowing it lacked unanimous consent, as "a charade" and "an absolute joke."
"I'm holding it up because I'm an equal member of the United States Senate," Burr said.
Though Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) could bring both a LWCF reauthorization and the chemicals bill to the floor separately, he so far has declined to use procedural tools that could circumvent Burr's opposition.
McConnell spokesman Don Stewart said lawmakers of both parties are already working to end the impasse, but he declined to speculate whether McConnell would file for cloture on S. 697 over other Republicans' objections.
The gridlock showed that "the leadership needs to step in and say, 'Both of these have huge support in the Senate, bipartisan support; let's get a vote on it,'" Udall said. "Let's not continue to have this gridlock and dysfunction."
Correction: In an earlier version of this article, Sen. James Lankford’s amendment to use funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for land maintenance during his request for a unanimous consent to pass S. 2169 was omitted.
-
Markey Calls Chemical Reform Senate Standoff ‘Nothing Short Of Absurd’
Oct 28, 2015 | BNA Energy & Environment Blog
By Pat Rizzuto
Senators took to the floor yet again today to talk about the standoff between a vote on a clean TSCA-reform bill and permanent reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Act.
Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) called the situation “nothing short of absurd.”
At issue are votes on two issues. First, a bill, the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (S. 697), which would modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act for the first time in 40 years.Second, an amendment—attached to the TSCA reform bill or another bill—to permanently reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which uses oil and gas royalties for recreation and conservation projects.
S. 697 is backed by 60 senators, and about the same number of senators is said to support permanent reauthorization of the conservation fund.
Markey summed up the situation: “First a handful of Senate Republicans won’t allow a vote on Land and Water Conservation Fund because they don’t like the program.
“Then other Senate Republicans, who do like the Land and Water Conservation Fund, won’t allow a vote on TSCA [S. 697] because we couldn’t act on the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This is nothing short of absurd.”
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who objects to S. 697 proceeding to the floor unless it has an amendment permanently reauthorizing the conservation fund, replied: “Let me just stand up and take all the blame. I’m the guy holding up the chemical bill, TSCA.”
“To suggest that I shouldn’t have the right to amend any piece of legislation is to take every right I have as a U.S. senator,” Burr said.
“I’m going to hold up the chemical bill until there’s an opportunity to either amend it or to offer the Land and Water Conservation Fund be permanently extended on another piece of legislation,” he said.
-
PHMSA Leaves Out Leak Detection
Oct 28, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Morning Energy
By Eric Wolff
PHMSA Leaves Out Leak Detection : The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration may be getting tougher with pipeline safety regulations, but its most recent rule does not address what many see as low-hanging fruit: New standards for leak detection technology. Pro's Elana Schor and Andrew Restuccia have the story: "Better leak detection systems could have helped avert disasters like the 2010 Michigan pipeline rupture that went unnoticed for 17 hours, allowing it to spew more than 800,000 gallons of oil into the Kalamazoo River, and a 2013 Arkansas pipeline breach that spilled 210,000 gallons. ... The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's critics say they’re dumbfounded that the federal regulator hasn't set minimum standards for detecting leaks."
Congress gave PHMSA an order: "The absence of any minimum standards for leak detection was especially striking because Congress had told PHMSA in its bipartisan 2011 pipeline safety bill to issue stronger standards pending the outcome of an external audit. That audit found that a successful leak detection system 'can easily pay for itself' in smaller spills and inspire 'greater public confidence' in pipeline safety." http://politico.pro/1LYjoTo
-
EPA Inspector General Outlines Chemical Safety Board Management Challenges
Oct 28, 2015 | Safety + Health Magazine
The Chemical Safety Board needs to address several management challenges to strengthen its influence and protect workers and the public, according to a report from the Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General.
EPA OIG on Oct. 22 issued an 18-page document outlining CSB’s management challenges. The report follows several tumultuous years at CSB, which has sought a fresh start in recent months under the leadership of new chairperson Vanessa Sutherland.
According to EPA OIG, CSB’s three management challenges for fiscal year 2015 are: Address employee morale. Increase investigations and enhance investigative management controls. Assess the need for a chemical incident reporting regulation.
The report cited findings of “a toxic work environment” at CSB under previous leadership, which came under scrutiny by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. CSB also does not investigate every incident that it should, EPA OIG claims. Meanwhile, the agency has not published a reporting regulation for chemical incidents as called for in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
“CSB is in a transition period and stated it is working on these areas to strengthen its agency,” EPA OIG stated in its report.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Congress OKs Deadline Extension For Rail Safety System, Averts Shutdown
Oct 28, 2015 | The Chicago Tribune
By Richard Wronski
Metra riders can breathe a sigh of relief after Congress acted Wednesday to extend a safety system deadline and avert a threatened Jan. 1 railroad shutdown.
The Senate approved a House-passed measure that gives railroads an additional three years, to Dec. 31, 2018, to install the safety system known as positive train control. The measure, part of a larger transportation funding bill, now goes to President Barack Obama for his signature.
"Today's action will ultimately enable us to avoid a shutdown of Metra commuter rail service on January 1, 2016," Metra Executive Director/CEO Don Orseno said in a statement.
"This news can finally put the minds of our customers and employees at ease, knowing that Metra's trains will continue operating in January. As always, Metra remains committed to implementing PTC as quickly and safely as we can."
A shutdown would have had a huge impact on Chicago, the nation's rail hub. Each day, the city sees some 1,300 freight, Amtrak and Metra trains.
Metra alone operates 753 trains a day, providing some 300,000 trips to commuters on 11 lines.
If Congress had not acted, Metra and other commuter and freight railroads across the country said they would have to shut down by Dec. 31 because they have not had enough time to install the complex system that uses GPS, radios and other equipment to slow or stop speeding trains and override human error. As safety deadline looms, railroads look to Congress to avert shutdown
The Association of American Railroads, which represents the railroad industry, also hailed the action.
"Members of the House and Senate are to be commended for taking the responsible action to extend the PTC deadline. This provides the certainty American industries and businesses need to serve the millions of Americans who rely on rail every day," said AAR president and CEO Edward Hamberger.
The railroad association and other industry groups have for months been warning of dire consequences if Congress did not extend the deadline. The stoppage would have halted the flow of goods across the country, from farm products to coal and manufactured goods.
The American Chemistry Council, for example, said a shutdown would prevent shipments of chlorine that are used to purify drinking water.
Railroads say the extension means they can continue with the installation, testing and validation of the PTC technology. The measure approved by Congress will also grant railroads an additional 24 months beyond 2018 to have PTC fully operational. Bill to extend safety system deadline would avert rail shutdown, help Metra
Metra estimates that it will cost over $350 million to install PTC on its 1,200 miles of track. Metra says it plans to have the system installed by the end of 2018, but it likely won't be fully operational until at least mid-2019.
Critics have maintained that railroads have had ample time to install PTC, which Congress mandated in 2008. The technology is intended to prevent accidents like the Amtrak wreck in Philadelphia on May 12 that killed eight people.
Experts say PTC would have prevented two derailments that occurred in 2003 and 2005 on Metra's Rock Island tracks on Chicago's South Side.
The National Transportation Safety Board blamed both on engineers who failed to slow their trains as required at a crossover that has since been removed.
In addition, the Federal Railroad Administration determined that PTC would have prevented three incidents last year, two in which Metra trains were speeding and a third case where a train passed a stop signal.
FRA Administrator Sarah Feinberg said Wednesday that railroads must still implement PTC as soon as possible.
The measure approved by Congress, she said, will give the agency additional tools "to allow us to hold railroads accountable so that they meet critical milestones on the path to full implementation."
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Railroads Win Reprieve From Congress
Oct 28, 2015 | ICIS News
By Mark Milam
The US Congress passed a bill on Wednesday that gives railroads an additional three to five years to implement positive train control (PTC), designed to slow or stop a locomotive to prevent a collision or derailment.
Under the 2008 original PTC safety law, railroads had until 31 December 2015 to install the new technology but had repeatedly warned that they would not meet the deadline. As a result, they said they would have to stop hauling toxic commodities like ammonia and chlorine.
The Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act of 2015 will extend the deadline until 31 December 2018, with a provision that railroads can seek a waiver for an additional two years if necessary. The act was part of a bill designed to extend the government’s authority to fund transportation programs. The House passed the measure on Tuesday and the Senate voted for it on Wednesday. It now goes to the White House, where most political and industry observers expect President Barack Obama to sign it into law. A House panel introduced the bill on 21 October.
There had been growing concern that halting railroad transport would greatly and immediately impact the US economy across multiple sectors.
The American Chemistry Council had warned that if Congress did not extend the deadline, the effects could push the US into recession, causing GDP to shrink by 2.6% in the first quarter and stripping $30bn from the economy.
Twenty-one passenger and commuter railroads and the seven Class 1 freight railroad companies operating within the US had requested the extension. Earlier this month Norfolk Southern said that with the deadline closing in it would stop accepting shipments of toxic commodities effective 1 December.
Union Pacific had also threatened to shutter hazardous shipping during December to comply with the federal measure.
Norfolk Southern's ban also would apply to passenger and commuter trains operated by Amtrak, Virginia Railway Express and Metra.
PTC utilizes a system of GPS, wireless radios and a computer network to track trains and would be able to either reduce speed or stop movement on all lines used by trains carrying passengers or toxic chemicals. The railroad industry estimates the cost of implementing the technology could reach $70bn.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Railroads Get PTC Reprieve Through Congressional Stopgap Measure
Oct 28, 2015 | Railway Age
By William C. Vantuono
The rail industry’s frenzied push to extend the Congressionally imposed deadline for implementing Positive Train Control—one of the largest unfunded mandates ever foisted upon a U.S. industry—finally came to fruition on Oct. 28, 2015.
On that day, the U.S. Senate approved H.R. 3819, the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2015, which extends federal transportation funding through Nov. 20 to prevent a Highway Trust Fund shutdown. H.R. 3819 includes language for a PTC deadline extension identical to that in H.R. 3763, the Surface Transportation Reauthorization and Reform (STRR) Act of 2015, passed Oct. 22 by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
That the blanket three-year-minimum PTC implementation deadline extension came about as the direct result of its attachment to another bill is no surprise to Capitol Hill insiders. House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee Chair Bill Shuster (R-Pa.) felt that the PTC extension language contained in H.R. 3763 would be acceptable to Sen. John Thune (R-S.Dak.), Senate Commerce Committee Chair. Shuster was right, and as a result there was a fallback position to move the PTC language via another legislative vehicle. That vehicle was H.R. 3819, the short-term surface transportation bill extension, which needed to be passed prior to Oct. 29 to keep the Highway Trust Fund from going belly up.
The legislation also gives railroads the option to seek a waiver granting an additional two years beyond Dec. 31, 2018 to install PTC. H.R. 3819 now goes to President Obama, who has voiced his displeasure with delaying implementation of PTC, but is still expected to sign the legislation.
The Association of American Railroads puts the amount freight railroads have spent on PTC development, testing and installation at close to $6 billion,with an additional $4 billion to be spent before the technology is fully operational. The rail industry has been stressing that, without a deadline extension, there would be an embargo imposed on certain hazmat freight and passenger operations, a move that would have idled the movement of millions of dollars in commodities, as well as stranded millions of rail passengers. The American Chemistry Council estimated that a one-month shutdown of rail service would cost the U.S. economy $30 billion and would lead to approximately 700,000 lost jobs.
“Members of the House and Senate are to be commended for taking the responsible action to extend the PTC deadline.The extension means freight and passenger railroads can continue moving forward with the ongoing development, installation, real-world testing and validation of this complex technology,’ said AAR President and CEO Edward R. Hamberger. “The rail industry remains fully committed to being accountable and transparent in completing PTC."
Mandatory installation of PTC dates back to the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, which stipulated that freight rail lines over which trains hauling TIH (toxic inhalation hazard) commodities and passenger trains operate implement PTC by Dec. 31, 2015. Over the course of at least two years, it became apparent that the deadline could not be met, for various technical and financial reasons. A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) study on the issue confirmed that railroads have faced numerous problems in implementing the complex technology.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Congress Passes Three-Year PTC Deadline Extension
Oct 28, 2015 | Railway Track & Structures
By Mischa Wanek-Libman
A blanket three-year extension to the Positive Train Control (PTC) implementation deadline has passed in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The legislation also gives railroads the option to seek a waiver granting an additional two years to install PTC.
The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 mandated that freight rail lines carrying certain toxic materials, passenger railroads and commuter railroads implement PTC by December 31, 2015. However, most of those rail providers required to install the technology will not meet the deadline. A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) study on the issue confirmed that railroads have faced a number of challenges in implementing the complex technology and most would not be able to meet the deadline.
The Association of American Railroads (AAR) puts the amount freight railroads have spent on PTC development, testing and installation at close to $6 billion with an additional $4 billion to be spent before the technology is fully operational.
The rail industry had been clear that without a deadline extension, there would be a cessation of certain freight and passenger operations, a move that would have idled the movement of millions of dollars in commodities, as well as stranded millions of passengers. The American Chemistry Council estimated that a one-month shutdown of rail service would cost the U.S. economy $30 billion and would lead to approximately 700,000 lost jobs.
"The extension means freight and passenger railroads can continue moving forward with the ongoing development, installation, real-world testing and validation of this complex technology," said Edward R. Hamberger, AAR president and chief executive officer. "The rail industry remains fully committed to being accountable and transparent in completing PTC..."
Michael Melaniphy, president and CEO of the American Public Transportation Association, also stated the transit industry's commitment to installing the technology and applauded the congressional vote as a way to avoid a potential economic and commuting crisis, "By implementing a realistic timeline for PTC, the disruption of Americans who take nearly 2 million daily trips on commuter rail systems every weekday was avoided. This extension prevents the shifting of these daily commuter rail trips onto overburdened roads, which could have contributed to an unsafe commuting environment."
Don Orseno, executive director/CEO of the Chicago area's suburban passenger rail service, Metra, said, "Today's action will ultimately enable us to avoid a shutdown of Metra commuter rail service on January 1, 2016. This news can finally put the minds of our customers and employees at ease, knowing that Metra's trains will continue operating in January."
Not all reactions to the extension have been positive.
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), a well-known opponent to a PTC extension, took to Twitter to "express my disappointment that I was unable to shorten the delay of the Positive Train Control."
She also issued a statement that said in part that she "will continue to shine a spotlight to ensure that PTC is implemented properly within the new time frame."
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) called the legislation flawed and added, "For a variety of reasons, we all know [the Dec. 31 deadline] is not feasible for all railroads. But we can't let this drag on indefinitely. It's a matter of public safety. We must get this done."
The PTC deadline extension was part of a short-term funding bill for surface transportation programs, which extends federal spending through Nov. 20.
With passage in both chambers of Congress, the bill now moves to President Obama. The president has voiced his displeasure with delaying implementation of PTC, but he is still expected to sign the legislation.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chamber Asks An Extention Of Train Plan
Oct 29, 2015 | The Daily Star-Journal
By Jack “Miles” Ventimiglia
Railroads continue to sound whistles over a deadline that could idle their engines starting Jan. 1.
The Warrensburg Chamber of Commerce has joined the railroads and others in urging a deadline extension.
Congress mandated the deadline. Lawmakers told railroads to either install Positive Train Control by the end of the year, or choose between heavy fines or a shutdown.
The House passed a PTC extension Tuesday that goes to the Senate.
Sen. Claire McCaskill said Wednesday she is among senators who back an extension.
“I believe we have the votes to pass it and I think it is the right answer. It is holding the railroads’ feet to the fire to get it done, but it’s realistic about a timetable so the trains would not stop running,” she said.
A total rail service shutdown 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 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. PTC is 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.
Amtrak passenger railroad, which stops in Warrensburg, is among companies Congress requires to install the PTC system by 2016.
Business implications involved in a possible shutdown of railroads led the Warrensburg Area Chamber of Commerce to ask the City Council to take a position on the issue Monday.
“In 2008, Congress required that PTC be installed,” chamber Chairman Casey Lund told the council. “Railroads continue to make enormous effects to implement Positive Train Control technology across the U.S.; however, implementation challenges make it impossible to meet the end of 2015 implementation deadline.”
The chamber board reviewed the issue from an economic impact standpoint, Lund said
“We decided as a group to support an extension. In doing so, we believe we are going to help those 15,000 people who either on-load or off-load inside Warrensburg alone, as well as potentially avoid an economic downturn that could impact Warrensburg,” he said.
Lund asked the council to send a letter asking federal lawmakers to support an extension.
“There is strength in numbers and there are some deadlines looming,” Lund said. “We don’t want to wait until the end of the year. They need to do something now.”
The sense of urgency is based on railroads needing months to start and stop delivery agreements, with the end of October being the point when companies will have to start refusing orders.
“The rail industry is not able to shut down and fire back up overnight, so if (lawmakers) do not act very, very soon, there’s going to be some type of economic impact,” Lund said.
Councilman Charlie Rutt reacted to Lund’s request.
“We need to accept the challenge and draft a letter,” Rutt said.
The council voted 5-0 to send the letter.
-
(ACC Mentioned) NACD: Positive Train Control Extension Ensures Continued Shipment of Goods
Oct 28, 2015 | PR Newswire
Today, the National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD) applauded the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives' passage of short-term highway funding legislation that, among other provisions, extends the deadline for railroads to implement positive train control (PTC) technology that would prevent train collisions and derailments caused by speeding.
Under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, railroads are required to implement PTC on lines that ship toxic inhalation hazard (TIH) chemicals and on passenger rail by Dec. 31, 2015. TIH chemicals include chlorine, anhydrous ammonia, ethylene oxide, and hydrogen fluoride. These chemicals are used in both consumer and industrial goods and processes, including water treatment, fertilizers, industrial refrigeration, paper production, and much more.
The Association of American Railroads, the Federal Railroad Administration, and the Government Accountability Office have all said that the railroads did not have enough time to comply with the previous law before the Dec. 31 deadline. This would have resulted in severely negative consequences to the U.S. economy, including disruptions to the nation's food, energy, and water supplies, as well as transportation, construction, and other industries vital to our economy. According to the American Chemistry Council, a one-month halt of rail service would cost $30 billion to the U.S. economy and would lead to roughly 700,000 lost jobs.
NACD President Eric R. Byer stated, "Our national railroad system is crucial not only for the movement of people, but also for the movement of goods vital to the American economy. We applaud the Congress' efforts to pass a PTC extension and ensure the continued shipment of products critical to life in the 21st century. We now urge President Obama to quickly sign the legislation into law extending PTC so railroads and industries that rely on them can continue delivering goods to their customers."
-
Senate Passes Highway, Hazmat Extension
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Senate passed Oct. 28 by a voice vote a surface transportation bill that would extend authorization for hazardous materials transportation programs through Nov. 20. The House passed the bill (H.R. 3819) Oct. 27 by a voice vote. The bill now will go to President Barack Obama's desk for his signature. Authorization for hazmat programs would expire Oct. 29 without this bill. The short-term extension buys a few weeks for the House to pass its own six-year authorization bill (H.R. 3763) and for the two chambers to go to conference with that and the Senate's six-year bill (H.R. 22) that it passed in July. The chambers' existing bills are similar, and Republicans in both chambers have expressed optimism that this could be the final short-term extension for these programs for a while (208 DEN A-21, 10/28/15).
-
Senate Approves Stopgap Funding Bill, Confirms Rail Chief
Oct 28, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
The Senate gave final approval this afternoon to a stopgap road and public transportation funding bill intended to give lawmakers until Nov. 20 to work out a final deal on a longer-term measure.
The voice vote on H.R. 3819 came after Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) briefly attempted to whittle down an accompanying provision that would give railroads at least another three years to implement the automated rail safety system known as positive train control (PTC). The existing deadline is Dec. 31; after suggesting that the extension instead run only one year, Boxer immediately dropped her objection when Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) warned that it would be "a big mistake" to try to modify "something that people have worked so hard to get to."
Positive train control is an umbrella term for an approach that uses wireless radio signals to provide an automated safety backup that can stop or slow a train from afar if its engineer fails to do so.
Congress ordered large freight and commuter railroads to put PTC in place by this December in a 2008 law signed after a train crash in the Los Angeles area killed 25 people. Most railroads, however, have said they can't meet the existing timetable, with freight carriers warning that they will stop passenger trains and some toxic chemical shipments from moving on their tracks if they don't get an extension.
But the bill will also replace an existing transportation funding measure that expires tomorrow. Delaying passage risked disrupting the flow of federal dollars for road and public transportation projects around the country.
Before the vote, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the 22-day extension would allow the House and Senate to go to conference on a long-term bill that would likely provide highway and transit program with assured funding through fiscal 2018. The Senate passed its version of the bill, H.R. 22, in July. The House could take up a counterpart next week, according to a House Rules Committee notice posted yesterday.
Immediately following the vote on the transportation bill, the Senate also approved Sarah Feinberg's nomination to lead the Federal Railroad Administration. Feinberg, who has been the agency's acting head since January, was tapped in June by President Obama to get the job permanently. The Commerce Committee had voted out Feinberg's nomination yesterday.
-
Senate Approves Obama Rail Nominee
Oct 28, 2015 | The Hill - Transportation
By Keith Laing
President Obama's choice to lead the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) was approved on Wednesday by the Senate.
Obama's nomination of Sarah Feinberg, who has been leading the FRA on an interim basis since January, was approved by the full Senate in a voice vote.
The approval clears the way for Feinberg to take full control of the agency after nearly a year at the helm that has multiple passenger and freight railway accidents. Feinberg was seen as unconventional choice to lead the FRA when she was tapped to replace the agency's former chief Joseph Szabo, who was career railroader that retired from government service at the end of 2014.
Prior to assuming the role of FRA chief, Feinberg served as Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx's chief of staff, making her a non-traditional choice to oversee the nation's railroad industry at a time when multiple passenger and freight-train accidents have raised questions about safety.
Lawmakers who supported Feinberg's nomination said she deserves a shot at the full-time FRA chief position after handling multiple accidents since she became interim rail administrator earlier this year.
"Over the past nine months, I believe she has proven herself to be an effective and engaged leader with the courage to make tough decisions and the character to except criticism," Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) said.
"She was baptized by fire after being appointing to this position on Jan. 9 of this year, leading the agency's response to six major incidents in her first 60 days," Manchin continued.
Feinberg has won plaudits for her communication with the public and members of Congress since she took over the FRA, and she has been out front on a number of railway accidents, including a deadly Amtrak crash in Philadelphia in May.
Lawmakers in the Senate had pressed Feinberg on her lack of prior experience in the rail industry and her insistence on enforcing a December deadline for automating trains during a confirmation hearing in September that proceeded the vote in her favor on Wednesday.
"While Ms. Feinberg clearly has substantial communications experience and an admirable commitment to public service, some have raised concern that her background does not include a deep expertise or experience on issues regarding railroads or railroad safety," Sen. Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) said at the start of a September hearing on Feinberg's nomination.
"In addition to asking Ms. Feinberg to respond to such concerns, I will also be asking Ms. Feinberg about the looming deadline for railroads to implement Positive Train Control," he continued. "The reality is that, if only a few railroads could not meet the deadline, perhaps we could conclude there is an issue with those railroads. But if nearly every railroad in the country will not meet the deadline, we need to acknowledge there is an issue with the deadline."
Feinberg defended her lack of rail experience prior to her appointment to lead the FRA temporarily during her earlier confirmation hearing, saying she has been baptized by fire through multiple accidents since taking over in January.
"Just one month after I became acting administrator, a Metro-North train traveling out of New York City with hundreds of passengers hit a car at a grade-crossing," she said, noting six people died in the crash.
"Days later, in Sen. [Joe] Manchin’s and my home state of West Virginia, a mile-and-a-half long train carrying 109 tank cars loaded with crude oil derailed near the town of Montgomery," Feinberg continued, noting one person died in the West Virginia crash and another eight passengers were killed in a deadly Amtrak crash in May.
Democrats in the Senate backed Feinberg's nomination on Wednesday, but they also pressed her to take a hard line on railway safety improvements at the FRA's full-time chief.
"It is imperative that Ms. Feinberg end the FRA’s old, stale way of doing business, crossing its fingers that railroads comply with the law, and instead adopt a new approach that relies on strong, aggressive enforcement practices, regardless of whether the industry likes it," Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said in a statement ahead of Wednesday's vote.
-
Senate Passes Three-Week Extension for Highway Programs
Oct 28, 2015 | The Wall Street Journal
By Laura Stevens
The Senate passed a bipartisan three-week extension of highway programs due to expire on Thursday, a measure that also pushes off for three years a controversial deadline for railroads to install new safety technology.
The bill was approved by voice votes in the House on Tuesday and the Senate on Wednesday. Next it is headed to the White House for President Barack Obama’s signature.
It’s a big victory for the railroads, which are only about halfway done installing new safety technology to prevent collisions and derailments, known as “positive train control,” which was previously due by the end of the year. Railroads had started notifying customers that they would stop taking some hazardous-material shipments and passengers as soon as December, threatening a major disruption to the U.S. economy.
Under the new timetable, railroads are granted an additional three years to complete installation, with the potential to apply for a two-year extension after that. The bill also adds stricter reporting requirements that call for railroads to outline their implementation plans for approval and review by the Transportation Department and to report to the regulators on their progress.
The Association of American Railroads commended the bill’s passage on Wednesday. “This provides the certainty American industries and businesses need to serve the millions of Americans who rely on rail every day,” said AAR President Ed Hamberger in a statement.
The three-week extension will allow lawmakers to again take up a six-year, $325 billion surface transportation bill, which has been held up for two years as Congress passed a series of short-term extensions. If the House is able to approve the long-term bill before Nov. 20, members would negotiate with the Senate over differences in a July-approved rival plan.
-
Schedule for Clean Power Plan Stay Requests Proposed
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
The Environmental Protection Agency asked a federal appeals court to set a schedule for considering immediate stay requests for the Clean Power Plan, which the agency said could allow the court to move more quickly to the merits of the case (West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1363, motion filed 10/28/15).
Under the schedule outlined in the Oct. 28 motion, all briefing on the requests to immediately stay the regulation slashing carbon dioxide emissions from the nation's power plants would be due by Dec. 23.
All motions seeking a stay would be consolidated by Nov. 5, and the EPA would submit its initial response by Dec. 3 under the proposed schedule.
“The purpose of this motion is to avoid the chaotic and duplicative briefing of stay motions that has sometimes occurred in recent cases involving review of significant EPA Clean Air Act rules,” the motion said. “Extended and disorderly motions practice places excessive burdens on both EPA and the Court and delays the process of reaching the merits for an ultimate decision.”
None of the petitioners initially objected to the EPA's motion, although several said they would continue to review it.
Lawsuits challenging the Clean Power Plan aren't due until Dec. 22. If the court were to grant the briefing schedule, the EPA suggested any requests for stay that are filed after Nov. 5 be held in abeyance until the court rules on the earlier stay motions.
20 Lawsuits Already Filed
A majority of states challenged the final EPA Clean Power Plan (RIN 2060-AR33) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit almost immediately upon its publication in the Federal Register (80 Fed. Reg. 64,661). Those cases already have been consolidated by the court (206 DEN A-14, 10/26/15).
Nine public health and environmental groups asked the court Oct. 27 to intervene in the case, and a coalition of states backing the rule are expected to make a similar request shortly.
The Clean Power Plan sets a unique carbon dioxide emissions rate for the power sector in each state, and state regulators will have to develop a compliance plan for meeting the cuts, which are phased in between 2022 and 2030.
The EPA's motion stems, in part, from previous litigation over emissions cases involving power plants. In particular, the agency cited the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule in which 19 separate stay requests were filed over a two and a half month period (EME Homer City Generation LP v. EPA, 2015 BL 239912 (D.C. Cir. 2015)).
“A reasonable consolidated process and schedule for submitting and briefing motions for stay is required to avoid chaotic and duplicative briefing and most effectively move the case toward merits briefing,” the EPA's motion said.
The EPA said there already have been 20 petitions for the D.C. Circuit to review the regulation and anticipates “numerous additional petitions will be filed within the 60-day period” provided under the Clean Air Act.
-
Four GOP Senators Press For New Approach To Environment
Oct 29, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Andrew Restuccia
Four moderate Senate Republicans — including two facing tough reelection bids — are joining forces to rethink how the GOP approaches environmental issues.
Sens. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) will launch a new informal coalition on Thursday in an effort to broaden the Republican conference's approach to environmental policy beyond its crusade to overturn EPA regulations, POLITICO has learned.
The Energy and Environmental Working Group will "be a way for us to bring together members of our party and start an ongoing conversation about these topics — like how we can best protect our environment and climate, pursue common sense and market-based reforms to grow our economy and promote cleaner energy production," Ayotte said in a statement.
The establishment of the working group shows the shifting political dynamics at play over environmental policy, with some in the GOP worried that Republicans' skepticism of mainstream climate science and opposition to air and water regulations isn't sustainable in the long term.
Ayotte, for example, has made the environment a central issue in her campaign for reelection against New Hampshire's Democratic governor, Maggie Hassan. This week she came out in favor of President Barack Obama's climate regulations for power plants, bucking many in her party, and her campaign released a new advertisement touting her environmental record. As far back at last year, she was warning her fellow Republicans about the risks of not coming up with their own solutions to issues like climate change.
"I hope … that we can actually get to legislating on some of these issues, rather than just having a fight on what we agree or disagree with with what the administration has proposed," Ayotte said during a December 2014 speech, adding that GOP lawmakers have to act, "not just, 'We disapprove of this.' What’s your alternative? What is your alternative that is going to make a difference?"
Kirk, one of the most vulnerable Senate Republicans up for reelection in 2016, is more moderate on environmental issues than many of his Senate colleagues. He supported the 2009 cap-and-trade bill when he was in the House, for example.
But unlike Ayotte, he has been critical of EPA's climate regulations and he suggested to POLITICO earlier this week that he would support a Republican bid to overturn them through a Congressional Review Act challenge.
In a statement, Kirk focused on his push to protect the Great Lakes, a key issue in his native Illinois. "We can protect our environment without hurting the economy and this group is crucial for striking the balance that the American people expect," he said.
Graham, who once supported a bid to pass cap-and-trade in the Senate, has long raised red flags about the GOP's stance on environmental issues, asking earlier this year, "What is the environmental platform of the Republican party? I don't know either."
In a statement, Graham, who is languishing near the bottom of the polls of GOP presidential candidates, said, "I’m tired of sending hundreds of billions of dollars to buy oil from people who hate us. We must have energy independence. And in the process, I believe it is possible to produce a safe, clean environment, and create new well-paying jobs for Americans of all generations.”
Alexander, for his part, is a vocal advocate of expanding nuclear power and has called for greater investments in research and technology, even as he often refers to windmills as "Cuisinarts in the sky."
Aides said climate change will just be one piece of the working group's work and they stressed that each member has his or her own priorities. The aides said the lawmakers hope to huddle in the coming weeks and will meet regularly after that, though there is no set schedule.
One aide declined to say whether they hope to propose legislation, instead saying that their first goal is to create a "broader dialogue" among Senate Republicans.
-
Colorado Governor, AG Argue Over Clean Power Plan Lawsuit
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) said Oct. 28 the state attorney general does not have the authority to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan without his permission.
Hickenlooper responded to a decision by Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman (R) to join with 23 other states in a federal court challenge of the EPA's proposed rule under Clean Air Act Section 111(d), commonly referred to as the Clean Power Plan, which was officially published in the Federal Register Oct. 23(206 DEN A-14, 10/26/15).
“The law makes it clear that except in limited circumstances—which don't exist here—the attorney general is not permitted to file such lawsuits unless directed to do so by the governor,” Hickenlooper said in an Oct. 28 statement sent to Bloomberg BNA.
Hickenlooper said Coffman has filed an “unprecedented” number of lawsuits—without support or collaboration with the governor's office—“raising serious questions about the use of state dollars and the attorney-client relationship between the governor and the attorney general.”
Such lawsuits create conflicts in statewide policy that are contrary to the best interest of the state, Hickenlooper said. The governor said Coffman's challenge could hamper the state's ability to implement strategies to meet the emission plan's requirements, which call on Colorado to achieve an overall 28 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 compared with 2012 levels.
Discretionary Authority Questioned
“The attorney general is an independent elected official who has some discretionary authority under Colorado law. No question about that,” the governor said. “But what is at stake here is the authority to file costly suits on the state's behalf.” Hickenlooper has said he intends to appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court to provide clarification on whether Coffman independently can file the challenge on behalf of Colorado.
Coffman issued a statement Oct. 27 to Bloomberg BNA saying she was “disappointed” the governor was “taking this course,” which she felt was not in the state's best interest.
“The governor's action is an expression of his frustration with the legal challenges I have filed against the federal government,” she said. “I am pursuing those challenges because it is my responsibility as the independently elected Attorney General to serve as a check against the abusive, unlawful exercise of federal power over the lives of Colorado's citizens.”
“If the Governor is arguing that the Attorney General cannot take legal action in the best interest of the State without his express permission, he is departing from past examples during his own tenure and decisions of the Colorado Supreme Court,” she said.
Coffman issued a statement Oct. 23 saying the legal challenge by the states aims at clarifying whether the EPA has authority under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act to “usurp the States’ control over their power grids, and to establish federal limits not just on existing power sources but on all carbon emissions from the States’ energy economies.”
She called the rule “an attempt to expand federal power over the States through administrative regulation in violation of the law.” The lawsuit asks the court to stay the rule.
-
Vulnerable GOP Senator Touts Support For Obama Climate Rule
Oct 28, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), who is facing a tough reelection contest next year, is touting her support for the Obama administration’s climate rule for power plants.
In a web video released by her campaign on Wednesday, Ayotte highlighted her support for the Clean Power Plan, saying it “will help address climate change” in the years ahead.“As your atorney general, I fought to protect New Hampshire from out of state polluters, and I’ve done the same in the Senate, crossing the aisle to protect New Hampshire’s clean air and water,” Ayotte said in the 30-second video.
“Now, I’m supporting the Clean Power Plan, which will help address climate change with clean energy solutions that preserve our environment.”
Ayotte’s support for the climate rule — and her willingness to publicize it — is in sharp contrast to many other Republicans in the Senate.
A group led by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) introduced a series of resolutions to undo President Obama’s power plant rules this week, and the Senate is expected to vote on them later this fall.
In a floor speech on Tuesday, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said he expects a vote against the resolutions to be a political problem for some senators, saying the votes will “[force] accountability by people who are answerable to the public.”
But in New Hampshire, circumstances might be different. Ayotte faces a stiff challenge next year from Gov. Maggie Hassan, who is seeking the Democratic nomination in the Senate race and has already attacked the senator on climate issues.
Last week, Hassan accused Ayotte of backing “corporate special interests over New Hampshire’s environment” by supporting tax credits for oil firms and opposing environmental regulations.
On Sunday, Ayotte came out in favor of the climate rule, which looks to cut power sector carbon emissions by 32 percent.
In her video on Wednesday, she pledged to work on climate issues and push energy efficiency legislation in the Senate, saying, “protecting the environment is truly a bipartisan issue.”
-
Kirk's Opposition To Power Plant Rule Is Political Issue At Home
Oct 29, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Jean Chemnick
Reports this week that Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) would vote to kill U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan left many people in his home state wondering what had become of their moderate senator.
Kirk told Politico Tuesday afternoon that he would back Congressional Review Act resolutions to scuttle the new and existing power plant rules -- striking at the heart of the Obama administration's climate agenda.
But while the votes have long been a priority for his chamber's Republican leadership, Illinois environmentalists and clean energy advocates were caught off-guard when Kirk -- who has sometimes been an ally -- pledged his support. The move was all the stranger, they said, because Kirk is one of the nation's most endangered Republican incumbents in the 2016 election cycle -- and all his current competition comes from liberal Democratic challengers.
"This is one that has all of us scratching our heads," said Environmental Law & Policy Center Executive Director Howard Learner. "Everybody's reaction is just to be puzzled and wonder what he's thinking."
Kirk, after all, is not what activists frequently call a "climate denier." He was one of the eight Republican House members who broke ranks with their party leaders to help a carbon dioxide cap-and-trade bill clear the lower chamber in 2009. Last January, he joined three other Senate Republicans on an amendment declaring that human emissions are a "significant" driver of warming, and in March, he backed a budget amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) calling for policies "protecting Americans from the impacts of human-induced climate change."
In July, he circulated an email touting his role in removing a policy rider to the State Department's fiscal 2016 spending bill before the Appropriations Committee that would have prevented the United States from making good on its pledge to fund international efforts to cut carbon.
"I am writing to let you know that this week we demonstrated more bipartisan support for reducing the effects of climate change around the world," he told constituents.
But now Kirk has promised to vote to kill the core policy supporting the U.S. pledge to cut emissions between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025 -- a promise the Obama administration hopes will help deliver a global emissions deal in Paris in six weeks' time. The Senate vote is likely to occur before the U.N. conference.
To be sure, Kirk has been a kind of legislative "Where's Waldo?" when it comes to climate change. Neither his campaign nor his Senate office responded to calls to comment for this story. And the senator has refused to discuss the cap-and-trade vote in the years that followed, and even sometimes seemed to dispute climate science. He told Greenwire in January that the fact that explorer Leif Erikson chose the moniker "Greenland" for that frozen landmass might be evidence that climate change is natural, not man-made (Greenwire, July 9).
Learner called that statement "curious" but said he was comforted by the science amendment and budget resolution votes.
Then, in June, Kirk used the same Appropriations Committee perch to vote several times to preserve language in the Senate's fiscal 2016 spending bill that would prevent EPA from implementing the Clean Power Plan.
Greens in Illinois felt betrayed by Kirk, who they said had always been an ally on renewable energy and Great Lakes preservation issues. But they also wondered what prompted him to take this position.
"We do meet frequently with his staff, and we didn't see this coming," said Amy Francetic, CEO of the Chicago-based Clean Energy Trust, which promotes low-carbon energy.
The EPA rule is both popular and profitable in Illinois, Francetic argued. She pointed to her group's polling from August -- immediately after EPA released the final version of the Clean Power Plan -- which showed that Illinois voters generally support it.
Sixty-seven percent of the state's voters backed the rule. The number was the same for independents, whom Kirk will need to woo next year.
"I don't think he's necessarily aligned with the state on this," Francetic said.
Kirk is also not aligned with Chicago-based Exelon Corp., the nuclear-heavy utility that is his fifth-largest campaign funder. Exelon has endorsed the rule as a boon to its six Illinois nuclear plants, which have struggled to remain online.
"The EPA's Clean Power Plan, which requires significant reductions in carbon emissions from power plants, calls for states and the power sector to find the most cost-effective solutions to achieve the reductions," said a company spokesman.
"Indeed, it's nearly impossible to meet the Clean Power Plan targets without the benefit of the existing nuclear fleet," he said. States like Illinois will need to support nuclear or find costlier compliance options elsewhere, he argued.
In discussing his decision to support the Congressional Review Act maneuver with Politico, Kirk referenced concern for Illinois' coal-mining communities.
"I have been very pro-employment to southern Illinois," he said, referring to the state's coal country. "With this rule applied, I don't think we can keep a lot of people in Illinois happily employed."
But Francetic said the green energy industries the rule would encourage are actually bigger employers in-state than the dwindling coal industry, with 104,000 workers finding employment in the clean energy sector in 2014 -- excluding ones in natural gas and nuclear fields.
The National Mining Association reports that Illinois had 4,164 employed coal miners in 2013.
Learner said he didn't understand Kirk's political calculus in backing this vote. His main opponents thus far are Rep. Tammy Duckworth and Andrea Zopp, the former president & CEO of the Chicago Urban League, who are competing for the Democratic Senate nomination. If he fears a tea party-backed Republican primary challenge at this date, that candidate would have a month to file for a mid-March primary -- a scenario that seems unlikely.
A July poll by the Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling showed Duckworth 6 points ahead of Kirk.
"This is not Wyoming," said Learner. "And certainly, given his relatively endangered status in a re-election campaign in a state that is purple if not blue, why Senator Kirk thinks it's in his best interest to pander to climate deniers is a head-scratcher." 'Fiscal and social sanity'
A moderate GOP strategist was just as perplexed by Kirk's recent decision to swing to the right. Even if Kirk -- who spent his House career representing a suburban district that, like Illinois, leans slightly blue -- does fear a primary, this is an odd way to burnish his conservative credentials, the strategist said.
"Why would you pick the environment to go conservative if you were worried about a challenge?" he said. "Why this issue and why now? He's had an entire career of middle-of-the-road fiscal and social sanity."
And Kirk is not going to the right on everything. He was the only Republican to buck leadership last week to block legislation that would crack down on cities that oppose enforcement of federal immigration laws. The vote drew conservative ire but was likely calculated to appeal to Illinois' growing immigrant and Latino voting blocs.
Dick Simpson, a political science professor at the University of Illinois, Chicago, said the announced votes on the CRA resolutions may be intended to balance the immigration vote, which was politically important.
"To be completely anti-immigration like some of the Republican Party is would be a dangerous position here," said Simpson, a former Chicago alderman.
Kirk's task, he said, is to keep "the conservative wing from putting anybody up to challenge him and getting the independent and some Democratic votes that he will need in the [general election] Senate race."
But Daniel Weiss of the League of Conservation Voters questioned this premise. "The threat from a right-wing primary is more imaginary than real because the filing deadline is a month away and the primary would be three months away," he said.
Weiss said that he was not surprised by the news that Kirk would back the CRA resolutions.
"After his three votes this summer to kill the Clean Power Plan, it's not surprising that he would take that position again," he said.
The CRA votes seem likely to further irritate environmental political action groups that in July ran television and digital media ads attacking Kirk for his support for the appropriations riders (Greenwire, July 6).
But the move might win some kudos from conservatives who once sharply criticized Kirk for his cap-and-trade vote.
"Illinois residents and businesses would see a dramatic increase in energy costs due to the regulations, with the poor being disproportionately harmed by increased costs," said David From of the Illinois branch of Americans for Prosperity. "Any elected official who wants to decrease rather than add to the financial burden borne by Illinois families and wants to grow, not kill, jobs in southern Illinois should oppose the Clean Power Plan."
-
EPA's McCarthy to Lead U.S. Delegation on HFC Use
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy will lead the U.S. delegation at an upcoming international meeting on ozone-depleting substances that is set to include discussions on the use of hydrofluorocarbons, which are short-lived greenhouse gases that have significant global warming potential.
The White House Oct. 28 announced that McCarthy, along with officials from the State Department, White House and Agriculture Department, will attend the Nov. 1-5 meeting of the parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, an international agreement to control the production and use of methyl bromide and other ozone-depleting substances. The agenda for the meeting, which will be held in Dubai, includes consideration of several proposals to address the use of HFCs.
HFCs are used as refrigerants to replace substances that have already been phased out under the Montreal Protocol. While HFCs do not deplete the ozone layer, the substances do have global warming potential between 140 and 11,700 times that of carbon dioxide.
McCarthy is heading to the Dubai meeting to “promote U.S. climate and environmental goals” and meet with her international counterparts, the White House said.
Reducing HFC emissions is part of President Barack Obama's Climate Action Plan, which also called for the EPA to limit carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and directed federal agencies to develop a comprehensive plan to curb methane emissions. McCarthy in July signed a final rule (RIN 2060-AS18) under the Significant New Alternatives Policy to phase out the use of some HFCs that were permitted for use in retail food refrigeration, motor vehicle air conditioning, foam blowing and aerosols (80 Fed. Reg. 42,870; 128 DEN A-4, 7/6/15).
U.S. Proposes Phasedown
The agenda for the upcoming meeting includes consideration of four separate proposals to address HFC use, including an amendment filed by the U.S., Canada and Mexico that would require a gradual phasedown of HFC use.
The U.S.-backed amendment supports a gradual reduction in HFC use, rather than a phaseout, in recognition of the fact that there may not be available alternatives to replace all current uses of HFCs. The proposal includes a provision that would require a review of available alternatives within the next 10 to 15 years, which could lead to adjustments in the phasedown schedule.
The U.S., Canada and Mexico said their proposal has the potential to produce cumulative environmental benefits of more than 90 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2050. That is roughly equivalent to two years worth of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions at current emissions levels.
The parties to the Montreal Protocol also will consider proposed amendments from the European Union, India and a coalition of Pacific island nations.
The European Union's amendment would require industrialized nations to largely phase out their production and use of HFCs by 2035 (86 DEN A-9, 5/5/15).
-
Whitfield Eyes Quick Votes on EPA Carbon Rule Challenges
Oct 29, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) told Bloomberg BNA he expects the House to take up within weeks two resolutions (H.J. Res. 71 and H.J. Res. 72) to block the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan and its regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from new and modified power plants.
“We hope to get that up certainly sometime in November—early November,” Whitfield, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Energy and Power Subcommittee, said Oct. 28.
Whitfield introduced the resolutions of disapproval Oct. 26 under the Congressional Review Act for both regulations. The EPA published its Clean Power Plan (RIN 2060-AR33), which sets carbon dioxide emissions standards for existing power plants in each state, and its new source performance standards for carbon dioxide emissions from new and modified power plants (RIN 2060-AQ91) in the Federal Register Oct. 23.
A spokesman for House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who controls the floor schedule, did not respond to a request for comment.
An Energy and Commerce Committee aide told Bloomberg BNA Oct. 28 the committee plans to mark up both resolutions soon.
In the Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) introduced companion resolutions Oct. 26. Those measures enjoy support from nearly half the Senate, but from few Democrats (208 DEN A-1, 10/28/15).
Congress intends to pursue its efforts to scuttle the centerpiece of President Barack Obama's efforts to address climate change despite low odds of success. Both the House and Senate would need the votes of two-thirds of both chambers to override a certain veto from the president in order to block both regulations.
-
Greens Could One Day Stand Without EPA In Defending Carbon Rule
Oct 28, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Alex Guillén
Environmentalists and their allies this week took a routine step to help the Obama administration defend its landmark climate change rules in court — but they could end being that last line of defense in a perfect storm of administration losses in court and Republican victories in 2016.
For now, the Natural Resources Defense Council, American Lung Association and other groups will be providing backup for EPA as the agency defends its landmark Clean Power Plan. But their formal addition to the cases also means they could ultimately be responsible for bringing the cases to the Supreme Court.
Such an outcome is unlikely but possible, legal experts say. It would first require EPA to lose in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where more than two-dozen states and numerous industry groups filed lawsuits to overturn the climate rule. The likely Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who has pledged to defend and expand upon the Clean Power Plan, would have to lose the White House next November to a Republican who would welcome its demise, as every GOP candidate has said he or she would.
While EPA and its supporters insist they will win at the D.C. Circuit, they acknowledge that those circumstances would allow environmentalists to ask the Supreme Court to review the case, even without the new administration’s support.
The ability to appeal is one of the “main perks” of intervening in a case, says Sean Donahue, an attorney who works with the Environmental Defense Fund, one of the groups intervening in the carbon rule suits.
Donahue has done it before — in Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy, a 2007 case that he argued before the Supreme Court.
Environmentalists convinced the Supreme Court to reconsider a lower court ruling shielding Duke from penalties tied to air permit violations. Despite losing the case in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, the Bush administration had been willing to let that lower court ruling stand because it also expanded EPA's enforcement discretion in a way the administration supported. EDF appealed the district court ruling to the 4th Circuit and then to the Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court's rulings. Duke and EPA just reached a final settlement in the case this year.
Anyone who wanted to appeal without EPA would have to prove they have a concrete interest in the case, but it is not clear whether the groups defending the Clean Power Plan would be able to convince the Supreme Court that climate change specifically affects their members, said Matthew Hall, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law who has studied intervenor standing issues.
“Environmental groups that are defending a regulation may have a harder time showing a personal stake because their interest may appear purely ideological,” he said.
Not everyone agrees that environmentalists would be able to go to the Supreme Court on their own. For example, supporters of the Clean Air Interstate Rule promulgated under President George W. Bush were unable to appeal without the Obama administration, said Jeff Holmstead, a Bush-era EPA air chief who now represents industry clients.
“Petitioners and respondents can appeal an adverse ruling, but intervenors cannot — no matter how much they like the rule,” said Holmstead.
To be sure, the crystal ball is cloudy.
The details of exactly why the court would have struck down the Clean Power Plan are important because that could change whether environmentalists have standing to appeal, according to David Bookbinder, a former Sierra Club climate attorney who has recently represented natural gas companies.
A Republican president also could move quickly to pull the rule if the D.C. Circuit strikes it down, and Bookbinder said he thinks the Supreme Court would be unlikely to accept a green appeal if EPA were to agree with the circuit's ruling. However, other EPA supporters said justices are aware of the political ramifications of a potential change in party control at the White House.
On Tuesday, the American Lung Association, the Environmental Defense Fund, the NRDC, the Sierra Club and other groups asked the court to allow them to get involved in the case. Two clean energy groups, Advanced Energy Economy and the American Wind Energy Association, have also asked to get involved.
A group of states supportive of the rule, including New York and California, are expected to become intervenors, as are a coalition of utilities that support the rule.
The court is expected to grant their requests, as is typical in such cases, but it has not yet formally weighed in.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested