Preview Newsletter
ACC 1/7
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Plans 'Concrete' Sustainability Efforts In 2016 Under Voluntary Program
Jan 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
EPA's waste office plans to implement "more concrete actions" on sustainable materials management (SMM) in 2016, according to the office's top official, with the agency planning to place a priority on reuse and recycling in the "built" environment, food management and sustainable packaging. -
Lawmakers Try to Get Ball Rolling on TSCA Conference
Jan 7, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
House lawmakers will meet next week to discuss the first steps in reconciling chemicals legislation that has passed both chambers of Congress. -
Food Wrapper Chemicals Banned
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
Three perfluoroalkyl ethyl containing substances that repel grease and water can no longer be used to coat paper that comes into contact with food sold in the U.S., on Jan. 4. FDA’s action comes in response to a 2014 petition by environmental and public health groups that claim the chemicals are linked to cancer and birth defects. -
Cancer Hazard of Metal Fluid, Flame Retardant Analyzed: NTP
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Metal working fluids, to which more than a million U.S. workers are exposed, showed mixed results in their tendencies to cause lung cancers in laboratory animal studies, according to a draft technical report recently released by the National Toxicology Program. -
'Strong' California Microbead Bill Paved Way for National Ban
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The recent federal law banning plastic microbeads has preempted several state-level bans that would have allowed for biodegradable plastics to remain in rinse-off cosmetics (CW 4 January 2015). -
Industries Raise Concerns Over EPA Arsenic Risk Assessment Process
Jan 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Industries concerned about EPA's long-pending reassessment of the human health risks of exposure to inorganic arsenic are protesting the agency's process for conducting the assessment and its delay in releasing publicly more preliminary documents, and are pressing the agency to consider a trio of recent arsenic studies by industry consultants. -
Fracking Fluid Contains A Stew Of Known Toxic Chemicals -- And That May Not Be The Worst Of It
Jan 6, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Lynne Peeples
Arsenic, benzene, formaldehyde, lead and mercury are among more than 200 toxins found in fracking fluids and wastewater that may pose serious risks to reproductive and developmental health, according to a paper published on Wednesday. -
Ecetoc Roadtests its Nanomaterial Assessment Strategy
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Philip Lightowlers
The European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (Ecetoc) says the safety of nanomaterials can now be assured through its grouping and testing framework, known as DF4nanoGrouping. -
Formulators Progress on Safe-Use Information for Mixtures
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Chynoweth
European chemical formulator associations have published a document that aims to address the significant challenge of communicating substance-based, REACH safe-use information for mixtures down the supply chain. -
Limit Use of Direct Test in Hazardous Liquid Rule: NTSB
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
Direct assessments should only be allowed to be used to evaluate the integrity of certain pipelines as a last resort in the upcoming hazardous liquids final rule, the National Transportation Safety Board recently told the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. -
House GOP Still Determined to Combat Obama Agenda
Jan 7, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Amanda Reilly
House Republicans say they are not backing down from challenging the Obama administration's climate agenda, though their options are growing short as the president's second term winds down. -
NRG Says States Should Consider Dropping RGGI
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald B. Silverman
A major electric power company is bucking the trend in its industry and urging states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to consider abandoning the nine-state greenhouse gas emissions trading program in favor of individual state approaches. -
Group Can't Sue Power Plant Over Emissions: Court
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie Pappas
An environmental group in Pennsylvania has no grounds to sue a coke plant for failure to comply with emissions standards, an appeals court ruled, upholding the finding of a lower court dismissing the lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Grp. Against Smog and Pollution, Inc. v. Shenango Inc., 3d Cir., No. 15-2041, 1/6/16).
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Plans 'Concrete' Sustainability Efforts In 2016 Under Voluntary Program
Jan 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
EPA's waste office plans to implement "more concrete actions" on sustainable materials management (SMM) in 2016, according to the office's top official, with the agency planning to place a priority on reuse and recycling in the "built" environment, food management and sustainable packaging.
SMM is "a systemic approach to using and reusing materials more productively over their entire lifecycles," EPA says on its website. In addition to reducing waste and conserving resources, EPA ties SMM to reducing climate impacts as well.
The office began pursing SMM opportunities following a 2009 EPA report, "SMM: The Road Ahead," which recommended steps the agency could take to promote integrated materials management. The initial steps were "challenges" in the electronics and food sectors as well as the "Federal Green Challenge" aimed at lowering federal agencies' environmental impacts.
While SMM has played a prominent role in 2015, "I do believe that we are putting more concrete actions [in place] over the next year," Mathy Stanislaus, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Land & Emergency Management (OLEM), told Inside EPA in a Dec. 10 interview. EPA recently renamed the Office of Solid Waste & Emergency Response (OSWER), adopting the Office of Land & Emergency Management title to more closely reflect the office's work.
In September, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced a first-ever national food waste reduction goal of 50 percent by 2030. And the agency in 2015 also undertook efforts in the international arena to promote resource efficiency -- an approach to reusing materials more productively.
Both efforts will see more actions in 2016, Stanislaus said.
On food recovery, the agency is collaborating with state and local governments and the food sector industry to issue an action plan to tackle wasted food in the United States by Earth Day, Stanislaus said. The commitment came at a first-ever Food Recovery Summit, co-sponsored by EPA in November 2015, where Stanislaus stressed the environmental, social and economic needs to act on food waste.
On the international front, EPA plans in 2016 to follow through on commitments the United States made in Group of 7 (G7) meetings in 2015. At those meetings, the United States and other economically powerful countries agreed to take "ambitious action to improve resource-efficiency," and agreed to establish a network of best practices in working with businesses to advance a so-called circular economy, which involves recirculating materials. As part of that commitment, EPA plans to host a workshop in early spring to consider supply chain resource efficiencies, featuring work the auto industry and its suppliers have already advanced to maximize the recovery and reengineering of materials.
In the Dec. 10 interview, Stanislaus said the event will not be limited to the auto industry. "We expect that to be a major effort to look at the supply chain to drive sustainable management materials' outcomes," he said.
In addition, part of the G7 effort is to establish a network of best practices -- what are the metrics and measurements, Stanislaus said.
In advocating SMM, the agency points to the rise of global raw materials use in the last century, noting on its website that for every 1 percent rise in gross domestic product, raw material use increased by 0.4 percent. EPA links materials management to an estimated 42 percent of the United States' greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and says increased consumption has had other environmental impacts, including habitat and biodiversity loss, desertification and stressed fisheries.
While EPA draws its basis for the SMM program from the Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA), which stresses resource conservation over disposal, EPA relies on voluntary actions -- working as a promoter, educator and facilitator -- for many SMM efforts it launches.
Tim Fields, a former EPA OSWER assistant administrator during President Clinton's administration and now chair of the Sustainable Materials Management Coalition (SMMC), told Inside EPA that while SMM efforts are voluntary, nearly every major company in the United States in the past couple of years has designated a chief sustainability officer who focuses on decreasing GHG emissions and embracing SMM measures. They see it as good for their bottom line, as saving resources, and as something customers want, he said.
Although voluntary, "I've seen industry step up to the plate," and embrace it, he said. The coalition that Fields chairs, SMMC, is a multi-stakeholder public-private partnership that gives advice to EPA and others on national policy direction on SMM.
Fields sees momentum building for SMM, noting that EPA has never had more input into SMM as it does now compared to his tenure when the agency's focus was more on Superfund site completions and RCRA corrective actions.
In a recently released strategy, the agency laid out its several-year focus for the SMM program, naming its three priority areas as the "built" environment, sustainable food management and sustainable packaging. These "present significant opportunities for environmental, economic, social and program performance results," says EPA's "Sustainable Materials Management Program Strategic Plan" for fiscal years 2017-2022, released this past fall.
While management of material and waste largely rests at state and local levels, EPA says it sees its role as providing "national consistency" and co-implementing waste law with states "by providing states, businesses and other stakeholders with national standards, guidelines, and technical support to more effectively conserve and manage materials and waste," the plan says.
The plan builds on initiatives started in 2010 when EPA launched SMM. The plan says the agency will continue to seek to improve measurement systems to track and evaluate trends related to "prevention, reuse, recycling, disposal, processing capacity, feedstocks for markets, and public access to recycling or reuse options."
Further, "EPA will maintain and improve the analytical tools and methods for quantifying the environmental and economic impacts of SMM efforts," the plan says. It builds on the the three SMM "Challenges" -- electronic, food and federal green challenges -- to bolster support for the three strategic priorities. And, the agency will strengthen its collaboration with stakeholders on the national and international levels, it says.
Fields told Inside EPA that the new strategic plan embodies efforts the agency began several years ago and ensures their continuation in the future.
For each of the three priorities, the strategic plan lays out objectives and anticipated outcomes by 2022.
Under the "built" environment, EPA calls for weaving lifecycle SMM concepts into the marketplace, for instance by increasing the safe reuse and recycling of construction and demolition (C&D) materials, and bolstering the safe beneficial use of certain types of industrial byproduct materials. It also calls for advancing climate adaptation measures by developing a national data tracking approach to measuring debris generated and improving disaster debris management plans to boost resilience to disasters, among other measures.
Further, to improve data and measurement of C&D materials, the plan says EPA will create a national baseline and trend data for generating, reusing, recycling, and disposing of C&D materials, and improve and expand its Waste Reduction Model (WARM) and other tools used to quantify environmental and economic benefits of managing C&D materials and industrial byproducts. EPA created WARM to aid solid waste planners in the tracking and voluntary reporting of GHG reductions and energy savings from waste management practices, EPA's website says.
Sustainable food management is considered a major priority for EPA, Fields says, pointing to the joint food waste initiative by McCarthy and Vilsack. Under this priority, the plan calls for developing an infrastructure to provide support for alternatives to landfilling wasted food, and expects to accomplish this by increasing the number of composting and anaerobic digestion facilities that accept wasted food.
Second, EPA calls for promoting "opportunities across the entire food life cycle to reduce wasted food from landfills," with anticipated outcomes of making progress toward the 50 percent wasted food goal by lowering the amount of wasted food from retailer to consumer and the amount disposed of in landfills.
One environmental law attorney with industry says this aspect of the effort -- to lower food waste -- is interesting because past attention has been on converting discarded waste to energy, but that has been spinning wheels for five years because facilities such as anaerobic digestion facilities are expensive. EPA's focus seems to be on reducing GHGs and lowering food waste, rather than seeking funding from Congress for farms to do anaerobic digestion, the source says.
EPA calls for improving and standardizing the measurement of wasted food, in part by aligning its measurements with other measurement protocols, quantifying the number of composting and anaerobic digestion facilities, and calculating food loss to identify methods to target source reduction and diversion activities within the food lifecycle.
A spokeswoman for the American Chemistry Council (ACC), which represents the chemical industry, responded in writing to questions on EPA's SMM efforts. On food waste, she expressed support for voluntary efforts EPA is undertaking to lower such waste, and noted the role of plastic packaging that can keep food fresher for longer periods of time and therefore reduce the likelihood of it spoiling.
"In addition to reducing food waste, this approach also prevents the resources that went into growing, harvesting, storing, transporting and preparing that food from being wasted," she said.
To address the third priority, sustainable packaging, EPA calls for collaborating with states and others on policies and practices regarding lifecycle-based approaches, such as through national dialogues to reduce packaging; working within EPA and other agencies to coordinate packaging-related policies, research and development and recycling processes for hard-to-recycle materials.
Also under sustainable packaging, EPA is advocating increasing the availability of information that supports the recycling of packaging, among other measures.
Stanislaus and the environmental law attorney also point to the definition of solid waste rule EPA issued in early 2015 as encouraging recycling. The rule strengthens Bush-era requirements for recycling hazardous waste, but allows "verified" recyclers to obtain a variance from strict hazardous waste requirements. Industry and environmental groups are currently suing the agency over the rule, with the former calling it too strict and the latter too lax.
Stanislaus says, "When you look at the definition of the solid waste rule, that also informed us. We did all this analysis about the opportunity for closed loop behavior in the private sector."
And the environmental law attorney says with DSW, EPA promotes reuse and recycling where it is possible, but only where the end result is environmentally protective. Stanislaus is looking up and down the supply chain with an inclination toward reuse, the source says.
But the spokeswoman for ACC, which is one of the groups challenging the DSW rule, differs with them on the rule's recycling impacts. She says recycling is "well-integrated" into chemical companies' operations, often reusing valuable secondary materials and closed loop recycling, but adds, "That's why we were so disappointed to see EPA's final [DSW] rule, which adds a number of unnecessary requirements to longstanding exclusions that have historically encouraged recycling and reclamation."
"EPA should ensure that its regulatory efforts do not hinder the benefits of sustainable materials management or our industry's ongoing responsible management of these materials," she said.
Asked whether SMM could in the future reduce regulatory requirements or enforcement, Stanislaus said, "I can't say. I think you always have to begin with a floor of protection. Once you get beyond the floor, there are all these opportunities," he said.
Beyond 2016, sources projected a likelihood that the SMM voluntary efforts would continue. Fields said he believed no matter the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, the efforts will continue because the business community has embraced the concept, and state and local governments have adopted goals for zero waste, waste diversion and related measures. "This is not a Republican or Democratic set of issues," he said.
The environmental law attorney believes a Democratic or moderate Republican president would likely continue with SMM, but was unsure if it would continue should Donald Trump win the election.
-
Lawmakers Try to Get Ball Rolling on TSCA Conference
Jan 7, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sam Pearson
House lawmakers will meet next week to discuss the first steps in reconciling chemicals legislation that has passed both chambers of Congress.
Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said yesterday he plans to meet with Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) on Monday to discuss the path forward for merging the competing bills.
Both pieces of legislation aim to update the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 to grant U.S. EPA new authority to review untested chemicals while restricting some state actions.
Late last year, the Senate approved S. 697, or the "Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act," by voice vote, capping a year of negotiation and debate over the proposal (E&E Daily, Dec. 18, 2015).
Meanwhile, the House approved its own legislation by Shimkus, H.R. 2576, or the "TSCA Modernization Act," by a vote of 398-1 last summer (E&E Daily, June 24, 2015).
Both bills aim to fix the dated chemicals law, but differ significantly.
With lawmakers in both chambers granting their stamp of approval, Shimkus said he was more encouraged than ever that the long-standing issue can be resolved soon.
"I'm pretty optimistic about it," Shimkus said. "It's kind of exciting."
Lawmakers say it's still not clear whether the House and Senate will convene a formal conference committee or can hash out an agreement in private that will then be approved by both chambers.
"There are things that we can do" to cut a deal on the outstanding provisions, Shimkus said.
Shimkus said Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee met yesterday morning and will meet again today. Shimkus and Upton will talk Monday, as well, about the TSCA issue, the former said.
"I think this is something we want to do relatively soon," Shimkus said.
An aide to Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), who introduced the Senate bill with Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), said the details have not been determined.
"We don't want to rush the process," Udall spokeswoman Jennifer Talhelm said, though she was hopeful the legislation would become law soon.
A conference committee "may or may not be convened at a later time, and that's an issue for the House and Senate leadership to decide," she said.
-
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
Three perfluoroalkyl ethyl containing substances that repel grease and water can no longer be used to coat paper that comes into contact with food sold in the U.S., on Jan. 4. FDA’s action comes in response to a 2014 petition by environmental and public health groups that claim the chemicals are linked to cancer and birth defects.
The substances have been used in microwave popcorn bags, pizza boxes, fast-food wrappers, and other paper food packaging. The chemicals have not been made in the U.S. since 2011. But food packaging that contains the compounds could be made in other countries and imported into the U.S., FDA says.
The basis for FDA’s action is new toxicity data for substances which are structurally similar to these compounds. “There is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm from the food-contact use of these food-contact substances,” the agency says.
The groups that petitioned FDA welcome the ban but say it is just a small step toward improving U.S. food safety.
FDA’s action does nothing to stop food packaging companies from using nearly 100 related chemicals that may also be hazardous, says the Environmental Working Group (EWG), one of the petitioners.“We know very little about the safety of these next-generation perfluorinated compounds in food wrappers,” says David Andrews, senior scientist at EWG. “But their chemical structure is very similar to the ones that have been phased out,” he says. “Limited safety testing that has been done suggests they may have some of the same health hazards.”
The Natural Resources Defense Council, which also signed the 2014 petition, is urging FDA to quickly act on filed last year that asks the agency to ban used in food, claiming they too cause cancer.
-
Cancer Hazard of Metal Fluid, Flame Retardant Analyzed: NTP
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Metal working fluids, to which more than a million U.S. workers are exposed, showed mixed results in their tendencies to cause lung cancers in laboratory animal studies, according to a draft technical report recently released by the National Toxicology Program.
Similar tests conducted on antimony trioxide, a flame retardant, showed evidence of carcinogenicity depending on whether rats or mice were tested, according to a second draft technical report NTP released.
The toxicology program, which studies the carcinogenic and other hazards of chemicals to which a substantial number of people may be exposed, released the two draft reports for public comment and peer review.
Public comment is due Feb. 2, and the peer review panel will critique the draft reports Feb. 16, the NTP said in a Federal Register notice announcing the technical reports would be released by Jan. 5 (80 Fed. Reg. 72,979); (225 DEN A-18, 11/23/15).
The Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association has asked the NTP to extend the public comment period. The association's members make and sell more than 75 percent of the metalworking fluids used in the U.S., it said in a Dec. 11 letter.
NIOSH Nominated Metal Working Fluids
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, asked the toxicology program to study a mixture of metal working fluids called Trim VX, because it and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration estimate that more than a million U.S. workers use metal working fluids daily for cutting, milling, drilling, stamping and grinding activities.
“Despite changing formulations and reduced occupational exposure levels, adverse respiratory effects in workers continue to be a persistent problem,” NIOSH told the toxicology program in its nomination of Trim VX.
Yet little public data are available for occupational health experts to evaluate the cancer risk posed by metal working fluid mixtures, NIOSH said.
Data from NTP's two-year inhalation tests provided equivocal evidence of lung cancer in male and female Wistar Han rats but clear evidence of lung tumors in a particular strain of mice, male and female B6C3F1/N mice, NTP's draft technical report said.
The peer review panel that will review NTP's draft reports will provide its assessment of the evidence on Feb. 16.
Consumer Products Nominated Flame Retardant
The picture was somewhat clearer for antimony trioxide (CAS No. 1309-64-4), a flame retardant used in canvas, textiles, paper and plastics and in combination with some chlorinated or brominated flame retardants on commercial furniture, draperies, wall coverings and carpets.
More than 5 million pounds of antimony trioxide were made in or imported into the U.S. in 2011, according to the most recent data available from the Environmental Protection Agency. Companies that made or imported the chemical included the BASF Corp., Dupont and Sabic Innovative Plastics U.S. LLC.
Metal ore smelting and mining workers hold the primary jobs that involve exposures to antimony, NTP's draft report said.
The Consumer Products Safety Commission and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, which manages NTP, nominated antimony trioxide for testing due to the potential for substantial human exposure in occupational settings and the lack of adequate two-year exposure carcinogenicity studies.
Two-year inhalation tests showed some evidence of lung cancer in male and female Wistar Han rats and clear evidence of lung cancer in male and female B6C3F1/N mice.
-
'Strong' California Microbead Bill Paved Way for National Ban
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The recent federal law banning plastic microbeads has preempted several state-level bans that would have allowed for biodegradable plastics to remain in rinse-off cosmetics (CW 4 January 2015).
Unlike microbead measures passed in states such as Illinois and Wisconsin, which provided an exemption for biodegradable plastics, the federal measure (HR 1321) more closely mirrors California's recently passed law, which bans all plastic microbeads (CW 12 October 2015).
According to Blake Kopcho, oceans campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity, California was a “battleground state” for microbeads legislation, and “the community of activists and organisations engaged there felt we won the battle.”
This, he said, eased the passage of a national rule that excluded the biodegradable exemption: “If we hadn't succeeded in California, if we weren't able to settle a strong law, that would likely have been reflected in the federal bill.”
Environmental advocacy groups have criticised the so-called “Illinois model” of microbead bills, passed in many states, for failing to define “biodegradable”. This ambiguity allowed manufacturers to replace plastic microbeads with alternatives that will not necessarily degrade under typical use, they argued (CW 31 July 2014).
Several industry groups had protested against the plastic microbead definition proposed in California's bill (AB 888), saying, in a coalition statement, that it would “have the perverse effect of stifling innovation and slowing the transition to more environmentally friendly alternatives”.
Yet during the development of the California law, a pathway for seeking authorisation of biodegradable plastics was not agreed by industry and lawmakers. The resulting act banned all plastic microbeads in rinse-off cosmetics.
The federal bill sailed through the House (CW 8 December 2015) and Senate (CW 21 December 2015), following the passage of California's law. And it was supported by several industry trade groups, which had previously spoken out against California's plastic microbeads definition.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association, which was part of the coalition opposing California's bill, said that it was “pleased” with the approval of the federal rule “because it establishes national uniformity for policy related to these ingredients”.
The Consumer Healthcare Products Association, which also opposed it, said that it “supports efforts to phase out microbeads for the appropriate products, within appropriate timelines and that enable headroom for innovation; and the new federal law does this”.
According to Mr Kopcho, industry valued having a uniform microbead policy across the nation more than advocating an exemption for biodegradable plastics.
The federal Act bans the manufacture of rinse-off cosmetic products containing microbeads – defined as “solid plastic particle that is less than five millimetres in size and is intended to be used to exfoliate or cleanse the human body or any part thereof” – by 1 July 2017, and their sale after 1 July 2018.
Microbeads in leave-on cosmetics will not be covered by the law, nor are other possible consumer sources, such as cleaning products.
A spokesperson for the House Energy and Commerce Committee said that it may consider legislation addressing these areas as the new law is implemented.
-
Industries Raise Concerns Over EPA Arsenic Risk Assessment Process
Jan 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Industries concerned about EPA's long-pending reassessment of the human health risks of exposure to inorganic arsenic are protesting the agency's process for conducting the assessment and its delay in releasing publicly more preliminary documents, and are pressing the agency to consider a trio of recent arsenic studies by industry consultants.
The industry-backed Arsenic Science Task Force outlined its concerns and pushed for consideration of additional studies in letters to EPA that were written in advance of the December meeting of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) committee that will be peer reviewing the agency's draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment of arsenic. The committee in a 2013 report provided recommendations on how EPA should undertake the assessment.
EPA has yet to release a draft IRIS assessment, and IRIS Director Vincent Cogliano told the NAS panel last month it would be six to nine months before the assessment is ready for internal agency review. NAS will receive a copy of the draft assessment after it has been through this internal review process and public comment, Cogliano said.
But the Arsenic Science Task Force says it is concerned that EPA has yet to produce more of the preliminary documents that had been promised for public release at a public stakeholders meeting in June 2014.
The group in a Nov. 19 letter to Cogliano's boss, Ken Olden, director of EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment, says it "note[d] with alarm" the agenda for the December NAS meeting, which indicated EPA staff would address numerous issues surrounding the development of the draft IRIS inorganic IRIS assessment. "Despite your promises of increased transparency, less than three weeks in advance of this important meeting no background information on these topics has been made publicly available to stakeholders for review and analysis. This makes meaningful stakeholder engagement or credible response to EPA approaches impractical, if not impossible," the task force says.
The group's chairman, William Adams, presses Olden to "to make immediately available relevant materials for review in advance of the NAS meeting on Dec. 2," but it does not appear that the agency did so.
Meanwhile, industry also contacted NAS before the Dec. 1-2 meeting, raising concerns about some of the committee members NAS staff selected to serve on the panel, an industry source says. The source indicated concerns that some of the members could be biased, but declined to specify the nature of the concern. An NAS spokeswoman did not return requests for comment.
In other instances where industry groups have raised concerns about members of peer review panels considering EPA risk analysis work, the groups have questioned peer reviewers that received EPA funding for their own research, reviewers that made public statements about the environmental compound in question, or who authored studies considered in the risk analysis under review. Committee members Habibul Ahsan, professor of public health and medicine at the University of Chicago, and Yu Chen, an associate professor of population health at New York University, are authors of a large epidemiological study of Bangladeshis exposed to arsenic in their drinking water that EPA is evaluating as part of its assessment.
'Revised Thinking'
Meanwhile, the Arsenic Science Task Force also apprised Olden in a Nov. 23 letter of three recent publications that members felt were "sufficiently significant to warrant revised thinking as [EPA] develops its [IRIS] assessment . . ." The first study, by Garry et al. in the October issue of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, discusses "the association between in utero and early life exposures to [inorganic arsenic] and risk of adverse health effects," an issue EPA is considering on NAS' recommendation.
The study followed up on a series of arsenic toxicology studies completed by National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) researchers, the most recent published in the summer of 2014 by Michael Waalkes and coauthors. At the time, an EPA source indicated the study was of interest to EPA's IRIS arsenic chemical managers because the study's low-dose results could have important implications for assessing arsenic's human health risks. The source noted the study's unusual, human-relevant dosing design and the results, which found tumors evident at the lowest doses of arsenic tested, but not at the highest doses tested in the study.
Waalkes' unusual study seeks to replicate the whole-life exposure that people might experience from drinking low levels of arsenic in their water. Earlier work by Waalkes and others used much higher levels of arsenic, "ranging from 6 to 24 [parts per million (ppm)] doses which are, generally speaking, at or well above the upper range reported for human inorganic arsenic exposure from the drinking water," the study, published in Archives of Toxicology, states. The study notes that at 24 ppm arsenic in drinking water, mice produced lung tumors, but not at 5 ppm.
The Waalkes study's findings prompted industry concern, including a letter to the journal's editor from Sam Cohen, a University of Nebraska medical school researcher often funded by industry.
In the Nov. 23 letter, the task force writes that the Garry study "examined methodological and other critical issues that may have contributed to variable results and concluded that the available data neither provide evidence of a causal association between in utero exposure to arsenic and cancer nor indicate early life-stage susceptibility to arsenic-induced cancer, particularly at environmentally relevant doses. [Garry] et al. showed that it is not possible to conclude from these studies that in utero exposure of mice to [inorganic arsenic] leads to tumor development later in life."
Second, the industry group highlights a systematic review and assessment of early life, low-level arsenic exposures and neurotoxicity in children published by Joyce Tsuji et al. in the November 2015 issue of the journal Toxicology. Tsuji and colleagues examined 24 epidemiology studies "and found that the overall evidence does not consistently show a causal dose-response relationship at low doses. . . . Thus the evidence for U.S. populations does not indicate a clear effect of arsenic exposure on developmental toxicity."
Lastly, the industry letter points to a study by Kenneth Bogen and published in the July edition of Risk Analysis, regarding EPA's default linear approach to conducting many of its cancer risk assessments, and the influential advice given the agency by the NAS in its 2009 report "Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment."
Dose-Response Relationships
The task force writes that Bogen critically examines the NAS advice that EPA should "replace the traditional Point of Departure (POD) with a default assumption of linear-no-threshold (LNT) low-dose dose-response relationships for noncarcinogens, as well as for carcinogens with nonlinear modes of action (MOA). Dr. Bogen demonstrates not only that key claims cited as the basis for this [NAS] recommendation are incorrect mathematically, but also that very simple mixtures of low-dose patterns of dose-response relationships that are highly nonlinear (e.g. S-shaped) can masquerade as patterns of epidemiological response that at very low doses cannot, as a practical matter, be distinguished statistically from falsely-hypothesized LNT patterns of response."
Furthermore, the group writes that Bogen examines several examples, including arsenic, to demonstrate in this publication that "LNT dose-response assumptions are also biologically implausible at low levels of increased risk for a wide range of adverse noncancer or cancer endpoints that involve nonlinear MOAs triggered by chemically induced cell killing." The group asks that Olden and IRIS staff consider Bogen's publication "given the importance placed on this issue by the" 2009 NAS report.
-
Fracking Fluid Contains A Stew Of Known Toxic Chemicals -- And That May Not Be The Worst Of It
Jan 6, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Lynne Peeples
Arsenic, benzene, formaldehyde, lead and mercury are among more than 200 toxins found in fracking fluids and wastewater that may pose serious risks to reproductive and developmental health, according to a paper published on Wednesday.
And that list may just be just the tip of the iceberg, said Nicole Deziel, an environmental health expert at the Yale School of Public Health and senior author of the new study.
Many more chemicals known to be used in fracking could pose similar risks, yet remain unstudied, Deziel said. Other substances involved in oil and natural gas production remain undisclosed by fracking companies.
In their study, Deziel and her team investigated more than 1,000 chemicals used in and created by the controversial drilling process, which shoots a mix of pressurized water, sand and chemicals into shale rock to unlock hydrocarbon reserves. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency used the same list in its assessment of the available science, which found no evidence that fracking has led to widespread, systemic contamination of drinking water.
For most of the chemicals, insufficient information thwarted the researchers' efforts to determine potential toxicity.
"That's not really surprising," said Deziel. "There are thousands of chemicals in commerce that people are routinely exposed to and for which we have limited data." (Hence, the major push to overhaul the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, which environmentalists argue doesn't give the EPA enough authority to study and regulate chemicals.)
Of the 240 chemicals for which the Yale team did have adequate data, they found that 157 were associated with some kind of reproductive or developmental problem, such as adverse birth outcomes, derailed brain development or infertility.
And, of course, these health concerns come in addition to worries over air pollution, noise, greenhouse gas emissions and even earthquakes, which have also been linked to fracking.
The fracking industry was quick to note that the study doesn't prove a link to any such health risks.
"The real question is whether people are actually being exposed to those chemicals at concentrations that would be harmful. There is nothing in this study that suggests that is occurring," Steve Everley, senior adviser for Energy in Depth, the oil and gas industry's education and public outreach arm, told HuffPost in an email.
It's a point that Deziel acknowledged, while again lamenting the significant gaps in understanding the science of fracking and its potential consequences. Some previous research does, however, suggest that even tiny doses of chemicalsreleased during phases of oil and natural gas production could pose serious health risks -- especially to developing fetuses, babies and young children.
Andrea Gore, an expert in hormone disruption at The University of Texas at Austin, co-authored a scientific statement in September that underscored that point.Combine these chemicals -- just as fracking fluid and wastewater naturally does -- and the risks may become more unpredictable and worrisome, according to the statement from the Endocrine Society, a professional medical organization.
Gore praised the new paper. "This was a good first step to identify some chemicals that give cause for concern, and to draw attention to the lack of knowledge about hundreds of chemicals getting into the environment, and from there, into our water sources," said Gore, who was not involved in the study.
Zacariah Hildenbrand, a researcher with Inform Environmental, an environmental consulting group, co-authored a separate paper published this week that he said builds on findings from his group and others that fracking chemicals can make their way into the water. While simply living close to a gas or oil well doesn't mean a person faces contamination, living in an area with a high density of wells could indeed raise that risk, he said.
"We found a number of things that shouldn't be in the water," said Hildrenbrand.
"This research needs to be done. In my opinion, it's one of the most important issues in terms of climate science," Hildrenbrand added. "We're looking at shale energy as a kind of bridge towards more renewable sources, so it's best for us to understand what the risks are."
-
Ecetoc Roadtests its Nanomaterial Assessment Strategy
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Philip Lightowlers
The European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (Ecetoc) says the safety of nanomaterials can now be assured through its grouping and testing framework, known as DF4nanoGrouping.
The framework was published in March, last year, by the Ecetoc Nano Task Force (CW 2 April 2015), and has since been tested by an international group of scientists, using a wide range of nanomaterials as case studies.
A paper accepted by the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology in December explains how a range of 24 commercially relevant nanomaterials are classified by the framework, particularly in regard to inhalation exposure. These include carbonaceous substances, metal oxides and metal sulphates, amorphous silica and organic pigments.
DF4nanoGrouping involves testing nanomaterials using a three-tier framework, which classifies them according to four categories. The key questions under each tier are:tier one: is the material water soluble?;tier two: is the material fibrous (with a high aspect ratio) and bio-persistent?; andtier three: is the material passive (with low capacity for cytotoxicity, dispersion and surface reactivity) or active (presenting various toxicities and dispersion)?
The first two tiers rely exclusively on non-animal test methods. Under the third tier, data from a short-term in vivo inhalation study might be needed.
The four major classification groups (MGs):MG1 - soluble nanomaterials;MG2 - biopersistent fibrous (high aspect ratio) nanomaterials;MG3 - passive nanomaterials; andMG4 - active nanomaterials.
The authors, who mostly work for chemical multinationals, say the results demonstrate the usefulness of the tool for hazard assessment, and particularly allow the identification of those nanomaterials that may undergo such without further testing.
These are the soluble nanomaterials (MG1), whose further hazard assessment should rely on read-across to the dissolved materials, the fibrous nanomaterials (MG2) which may be assessed as asbestos-like fibres, and the passive nanomaterials (MG3) for which a general dust threshold may be applicable.
In identifying these three groups, they say, the framework highlights the active (MG4) nanomaterials, which are likely to require a detailed assessment of their potential toxic effects.
The authors also say the exercise has set some standards, which can be used for read-across to evaluate many more nanomaterials.
-
Formulators Progress on Safe-Use Information for Mixtures
Jan 6, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Chynoweth
European chemical formulator associations have published a document that aims to address the significant challenge of communicating substance-based, REACH safe-use information for mixtures down the supply chain.
The document, Sector-specific approaches towards developing and communicating information for the safe use of mixtures, has been developed by the Downstream Users of Chemicals Coordination (Ducc) group.
The safe use of mixtures (Sumi) approach, described in the document, takes information on uses of mixtures as its starting point. It aims to:provide realistic and meaningful information, based on sector-level knowledge;improve standardisation and harmonisation by using the same template; andsimplify information, making it easier for end users to apply.
Each Sumi links to a specific worker exposure determinant (Swed). Sweds are also being developed, at sector level, to describe how workers are exposed, during typical uses, as well as to assess risks and determine safe operating conditions and risk management measures. Sumis will extract the information relevant to end users, which can be attached to the safety data sheet (SDS) to meet REACH obligations.
Under REACH, downstream users must provide their professional and industrial users with information on the hazards and safe use – including operating conditions and risk management measures – of any mixtures that meet the classification criteria. This can be done in various ways through the SDS.
According to the Ducc document, a formulator will have to identify the correct Swed for the sector of use of its mixture. Then the selected Swed should be validated against the exposure scenarios, received for substances in the mixture. If correct, the formulator can identify the corresponding Sumi, and append it to the mixture’s SDS.
Various options are suggested if the Swed is deemed to be wrong.
Ducc points out that as Sumis are linked to worker exposure determinants, environmental factors are not accounted for. Formulators handling mixtures, classified for environmental hazards, may have to include additional information.
The work was conducted under the Echa Chemical Safety Report/Exposure Scenario roadmap – and is known as the bottom-up approach (GBB November 2015). A top-down approach, being developed by the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) and the German Chemical Industry Federation (VCI), is based on information on the substances in a mixture that contribute to exposure for each endpoint.
Ducc expects formulators’ sector associations to develop Sweds and Sumis, based on information they have or can collect from their end users – the first Sumis should be published in the first half of 2016.
It has ten associations that are members, ranging from detergents, cosmetics and fragrances, to paints, adhesives and construction chemicals, among others.
-
Limit Use of Direct Test in Hazardous Liquid Rule: NTSB
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
Direct assessments should only be allowed to be used to evaluate the integrity of certain pipelines as a last resort in the upcoming hazardous liquids final rule, the National Transportation Safety Board recently told the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
The proposed rule currently would require integrity management assessments for pipelines and onshore gathering lines located outside of high consequence areas every 10 years, using primarily tools that run through the pipeline. Direct assessments are offered as an alternative method; however, the board said direct assessments won't result in as thorough an assessment of the pipe's risks.
Direct assessments include data analysis and direct examinations of the pipe as part of the process but are limited to corrosion-related risks, the board said. These assessments are “an ineffective alternative technology” that identify fewer risks compared to other inspection tools and tests such as technology that runs through the pipeline, it said.
“PHMSA should include a strong cautionary statement to stress that direct assessment is an ineffective alternative technology for [integrity management] when applying the 10-year assessment requirement for the integrity of an entire pipeline,” the board said in its comments on the proposed rule.
The board's comments come as the comment period for PHMSA's proposed hazardous liquid rule (RIN 2137-AE66) comes to a close on Jan. 8. The proposal would add or change inspection, repair and leak detection requirements for pipelines and gather lines carrying hazardous liquids (197 DEN A-14, 10/13/15).
Urges Hard Deadline on Provision
The board also proposed tightening the rule's requirement that hazardous liquid pipelines in or near high consequence areas be able to accommodate tools that run through pipelines—in-line inspection tools—within 20 years. PHMSA should add progress reporting requirements and make 20 years the hard deadline for more affected pipelines, the board added.
Finally, the board said PHMSA should add a clear “trigger date” to distinguish whether pipelines under construction but not operational when the rule takes effect must comply with the expanded leak detection requirements for all new hazardous liquid pipelines.
-
House GOP Still Determined to Combat Obama Agenda
Jan 7, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Amanda Reilly
House Republicans say they are not backing down from challenging the Obama administration's climate agenda, though their options are growing short as the president's second term winds down.
"If you think that it's over -- it's not over," said Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy.
Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power, yesterday told E&E Daily that compliance timelines in the Clean Power Plan could be one area that opponents target this year.
Though it's mostly an appropriations issue, Whitfield said that his committee may also take up the president's pledge to provide funding for the Green Climate Fund, an international mechanism to provide poor countries with money to address climate change.
Whitfield said his other priorities in the new year are addressing grid security and EPA's recently finalized ozone regulation in the Energy and Commerce Committee, as well as seeing that the Senate takes up comprehensive energy legislation.
But Whitfield also said that opponents of the administration will be closely following court action, an acknowledgement that most of what happens with the Clean Power Plan -- the key component of the president's domestic climate agenda -- is out of Congress' hands.
"We've got a great team of lawyers who are going to be pursuing that aggressively," Whitfield said. "A lot of lawsuits have been filed, and there will be a lot of lawyers making a lot of money right now."
The momentum, though, appears to be with the Obama administration after the Paris climate negotiations, where nations agreed to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius and to revisit national emissions reduction targets periodically.
Obama then subsequently vetoed resolutions under the Congressional Review Act that would have killed the Clean Power Plan, as well as U.S. EPA's new carbon rule for new power plants. Republican opponents had sought to use the CRA measures to slow the international climate deal.
The administration also scored a climate victory with the omnibus spending bill signed into law at the end of the year. While critics sought to add a policy rider restricting the government from funding the Green Climate Fund, that rider was removed in the final version. Riders targeting the Clean Power Plan also did not make the final cut.
"What we'll look at," said Shimkus, who is in the running for the House Energy and Commerce Committee gavel next year, "is the agreement and what is doable under his executive fiat and what's not doable when he starts moving money around from wherever he's going to move money around to pay for his pledge to the international community" (E&E Daily, Jan. 5).
Whitfield said he had received "conflicting information" on the diversion of U.S. funds to the Green Climate Fund.
"If that crystallizes more," he said, "we might look into that more even though that's primarily an appropriations issue."
Bob Perciasepe, president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions and EPA's former No. 2, said that passing legislation targeting the Obama's climate agenda this year would be "very hard to do," given the need to open the Clean Air Act and obtain a signature from the president.
Still, Perciasepe said he expects to see some response from Congress on the Paris climate agreement.
"I think nothing of consequence happens in the Congress this year," he said, "but certainly things will happen."
Paul Bledsoe, a former White House climate official during the Clinton administration, said that the major battles have shifted to the judicial branch.
"This has now become a legal battle," Bledsoe said. "Congress does not have the ability to defund or otherwise undermine the Obama regulatory agenda."
But Whitfield suggested that opponents in Congress will try to force Obama to use his power of veto against climate-related legislation before the year's end.
"We're going to continue to come back with more legislation on it, as well, because we want to send more bills to him to have to veto," Whitfield said, adding, "He is a president who does believe in doing his own thing. We just want to remind him that there is another branch of government."
-
NRG Says States Should Consider Dropping RGGI
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald B. Silverman
A major electric power company is bucking the trend in its industry and urging states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to consider abandoning the nine-state greenhouse gas emissions trading program in favor of individual state approaches.
NRG Energy Inc., in formal comments submitted to RGGI as part of the program's ongoing review, said it favors a “state measures” approach for the nine RGGI states as a way to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan (RIN 2060-AR33), which limits carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants. State measures would include policies and programs that would not be federally enforceable but are intended to reduce carbon dioxide emissions beyond the standards imposed directly on power plants. However, states would be required to include federally enforceable backstop programs should those measures fail to achieve the required emissions reductions.
“We recommend the RGGI states do not automatically implement RGGI as its only compliance option and instead consider the state measures approach,” Shawn Konary, senior environmental director for NRG's east region, said in written comments to RGGI.
NRG, which has 13,000 megawatts of electric generating capacity in the RGGI region, said RGGI should endorse a national program and “avoid restrictions from a regionally restricted based program.”
“We recommend that each RGGI state review its state-specific structure and apply a state measures plan that may or may not be based on RGGI,” he said.
NRG's position is a significant departure from other electricity companies, which favor RGGI as the best vehicle for complying with the Clean Power Plan. It also differs from the views of many environmental groups, state regulators and others who have heralded RGGI as a model for compliance.
RGGI Program Undergoing Review
NRG's comments were submitted as part of an ongoing program review being undertaken by RGGI. Eight other companies in the power sector were among the 26 formal comments that have been submitted.
RGGI will hear from power companies, environmentalists and others Feb. 2 at a stakeholders' meeting in Wilmington, Del. The agenda for the meeting will be released in late January, but the key topics are expected to follow up on those raised at the first stakeholders meeting in November (223 DEN A-3, 11/19/15).
NRG said a state measures approach, as opposed to an emissions standards approach, would include other sectors of the economy and other programs such as renewable portfolio standards, conservation and fuel efficiency.
Steve Corneli, NRG's senior vice president for sustainability policy and strategy, told Bloomberg BNA that “a state measures approach can achieve very large emission reductions at a very low cost without imposing a costly burden on all affected existing generators and on electric consumers.”
‘Shock the System.'
In an e-mail following up on the NRG comments, he said “it makes more sense to start with no-cost and low-cost emission reductions, rather than attempting to shock the power system with ever higher prices on carbon emissions.”
Corneli said NRG, like other companies with coal plants, can best reduce emissions with the least cost to customers and investors “through fleet-wide optimization that includes retiring or re-purposing the least economic of existing plants, rather than imposing a costly tax on all of them.”
“The state measures approach is tailor made to achieve these low–cost emission reductions first, with the expectation of a future price on carbon, should the less costly state measures not achieve the emission reductions required by the CPP.”
Near Unanimity From Other Companies
Other power companies that submitted comments are virtually unanimous in endorsing the RGGI model, and most favor a mass-based approach, which would cap the total tons of carbon dioxide emissions that could be emitted, versus a rate-based approach, which would limit carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector per megawatt-hour of electricity generated. They also support expanding RGGI to include other states beyond the nine-state region.
The other companies, all of which participate in RGGI's quarterly auctions as so-called compliance entities, include: BP plc, Brookfield Renewable Energy Group, Calpine Corp., Consolidated Edison Inc., Dynegy Inc., Emera Energy Inc., Exelon Corp. and TransCanada Corp.
Con Edison, one of the largest power companies in the region, urged RGGI to consider the possibility of using a rate-based approach to comply with the Clean Power Plan, although it said it generally supports the mass-based method.
“The option of shifting to a rate-based program after 2020 should not yet be removed from consideration given potential state and federal policies to encourage the electrification of the transportation sector,” it said in its comments. “The RGGI states should not foreclose the electricity sector from contributing to reducing carbon emissions across the economy by establishing prohibitively stringent emissions caps for the electricity sector.”
Christopher Wentlent, vice president of energy policy at Constellation, which is owned by Exelon Corp., said RGGI should consider reducing emissions beyond the requirements of the Clean Power Plan.
Exelon Favors Stringent Goals
Exelon, which has 8,600 megawatts of generation capacity in the RGGI region, recommended that RGGI consider a range of more stringent goals, including meeting the goal shared by many RGGI states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050. Exelon generates more than 62 percent of its total electricity from nuclear power, which is not regulated by the Clean Power Plan.
“The RGGI states should establish emission goals that continue the downward trajectory they have already embraced, and should consider even more ambitious long-term carbon reduction goals,” Wentlent said in his comments.
RGGI Should Include Transportation
Twenty-six environmental groups submitted joint comments that urged RGGI to go beyond the emissions limits in the Clean Power Plan and to consider expansion of the program to the transportation sector.
They asked RGGI to model three scenarios that would meet the states' long-term emissions reduction goals: a power sector cap that reduces emissions by 89 percent by 2050; a power sector cap that would reduce emissions by 100 percent by 2038; and an emissions reduction program for the transportation sector.
“At least through 2030, the electric sector will need to continue to account for the bulk of the overall emission reductions,” the environmental groups said in their comments. “While reducing emissions from the transportation sector is a critical piece of reaching states’ long-term climate goals, progress in the transportation sector is incremental, tracking in large part turnover of the vehicle fleet and necessitating significant penetration of low- and zero-emitting vehicles.”
The groups said the program review presents “a good opportunity to begin to dig into” the issue of expansion to the transportation sector, but it will likely require additional time beyond the EPA's September 2016 deadline for submitting state plans.
Five states have begin to explore a program to limit carbon emissions in the transportation sector (02 DEN B-1, 1/5/16).
Higher Reserve Price Needed
Wentlent of Exelon also said RGGI should consider raising the minimum reserve price for allowances sold in its quarterly auctions, as a way to set a strong market signal to support low- and zero-carbon generation.
“A more robust reserve price provides a strong signal to support investment in the very assets that will drive RGGI states towards meeting their emission reduction goals, while potentially increasing the revenue available for energy efficiency and other programs that help reduce emissions in a cost-effective manner and protect consumers from higher electric prices,” he said.
RGGI requires that states use most of the proceeds from the quarterly auctions of carbon allowances to fund energy efficiency, renewable energy and other consumer benefit programs.
Calls for Allowance Limits
Emera Energy, a Canadian-based company with three natural gas plants in the RGGI region, recommended that RGGI consider limiting the amount of allowances that can be purchased by commodities firms, traders and other so-called non-compliance entities.
In its comments, Emera recommended that non-compliance entities be prevented from purchasing more than half the allowances sold at each RGGI auction. There are no current limits on the type of entities that can purchase allowances, although no single entity can purchase more than 25 percent of the allowances offered for auction.
Under RGGI, electricity generators must hold one carbon allowance for each short ton of carbon dioxide emissions. Some electric companies have expressed concern about the growing number of allowances owned by non-compliance entities.
NRG said “speculative activity has greatly increased” in the past two years. “As compared to the early years of the program, there is now significantly more opportunity for market intervention and speculation that can run counter to the intended efficient operation of the RGGI market,” it said.
NRG recommended that RGGI consider placing holding limits on non-compliance entities that would control the number of allowances they may hold.
According to RGGI, 45 percent of the carbon allowances in circulation were held by non-compliance entities following its last auction.
-
Group Can't Sue Power Plant Over Emissions: Court
Jan 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie Pappas
An environmental group in Pennsylvania has no grounds to sue a coke plant for failure to comply with emissions standards, an appeals court ruled, upholding the finding of a lower court dismissing the lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Grp. Against Smog and Pollution, Inc. v. Shenango Inc., 3d Cir., No. 15-2041, 1/6/16).
In a Jan. 6 opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that the Group Against Smog and Pollution Inc. (GASP) cannot bring a civil action against Shenango Inc., which operates the Neville Island Coke Plant in Allegheny County, Pa., because the state was already “diligently prosecuting” the company for air standards violations.
State and federal environmental regulators took Shenango to court in 2012, claiming that the company was violating emissions standards under the Clean Air Act, the opinion says. The company entered into a consent decree that year to resolve violations.
GASP sued the company in 2014, citing violations of the same emissions standards.
Legislative history of comparable citizen suit provisions in the Clean Water Act suggests that “the citizen suit is meant to supplement rather than to supplant government action,” the opinion says. However, the court acknowledged that no circuit court has “squarely addressed whether the term ‘prosecuting' in the diligent prosecution bar of the Clean Air Act requires an agency enforcement action to be pending in court when the citizen suit is filed.”
The Allegheny County Health Department, which has the authority in Pennsylvania to enforce the air pollution laws in the county, “diligently prosecuted the same three Clean Air Act violations GASP now attempts to litigate,” the opinion says. “We hold that when a state or federal agency diligently prosecutes an underlying action in court, the diligent prosecution bar will prohibit citizen suits during the actual litigation as well as after the litigation has been terminated by a final judgment, consent decree, or consent order and agreement.”
The litigants could not be reached for comment.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested