Preview Newsletter
ACC AM Jan 20
-
(ACC Mentioned) Plastics Makers Working to Further Improve Benefits of Packaging Through Increased Recycling and Recovery
Jan 20, 2016 | CCFGroup
The World Economic Forum (WEF) issued a report entitled “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the future of plastics,” which looks at the economic and environmental attributes of plastic packaging. The American Chemistry Council issued the following statement... -
Report: Poor Children Live Near Potential Chemical Accidents
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Poor black and Latino children are more than twice as likely to live within a mile of a facility using one or more extremely hazardous chemical than are white children living above the poverty line, according to a report from the Center for Effective Government. -
Inspection Proposal May Cause Pipeline Shutdowns: Industry
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The costliness of an integrity assessment requirement in a proposed hazardous liquid pipeline rule could force pipe closures and lead to decreased safety, oil and gas groups recently told the nation's pipeline safety regulator. This requirement that hazardous liquid lines in “high consequence areas” be able to accommodate within... -
Regulators Tighten Enforcement of Rail-Safety Rules
Jan 20, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By Andrew Tangel and Laura Stevens
Federal regulators are enforcing rail-safety rules more stringently, issuing more alleged violations against Amtrak and freight carriers amid worries over shipping crude oil and hazardous chemicals. The Federal Railroad Administration leveled 6,485 violations carrying civil penalties against railroads in the fiscal year... -
PHMSA Makes Special Hazmat Permit Exemptions Permanent
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
Almost 100 special permit exemptions from hazardous materials transport rules are being made permanent by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. PHMSA unveiled on Jan. 15 the final version of a new rule (RIN 2137-AF00) that formally enshrines 96 special permit exemptions into the Hazardous Materials Regulations. -
LNG Trade Group Picks New Leader
Jan 19, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Kevin Bogardus
The Center for Liquefied Natural Gas has chosen a new executive director. Charlie Riedl will now head the trade association representing LNG exporters. Riedl had been director of market development for America's Natural Gas Alliance. "Charlie comes with a wealth of experience within the industry and ... -
Plan to Capture, Burn Leaking Gas at L.A. Facility Scrapped
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
Regulators' safety concerns have forced Southern California Gas Co. to abandon a plan to capture and burn off some of the natural gas leaking from its underground storage facility near Los Angeles. Southern California air quality officials said Jan. 19 they are continuing to seek approval of a proposed order that included the capture-and-destroy... -
Pennsylvania Announces New Methane Rules
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
Pennsylvania will implement new regulations to reduce methane leaks in the oil and gas industry, the state's governor, Tom Wolf (D) announced during a Facebook town hall meeting Jan. 19. “These regulations will improve our air, address the urgent crisis of climate change and help businesses reclaim product now wasted,” Wolf said. -
Pennsylvania Governor Rolls Out Methane Regulations That Go Further Than EPA's
Jan 19, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
Pennsylvania's Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf today unveiled plans to rein in the oil and gas industry's methane emissions from both new and existing sources, a step that takes the state further than still-pending Obama administration regulations affecting only new facilities. -
Chamber: EPA's Renewable Energy Targets Flawed
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
The Environmental Protection Agency based its Clean Power Plan on flawed assumptions about the availability of renewable energy resulting in unrealistic targets that are prohibitively expensive for utilities and states, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a Jan. 19 report. -
Supreme Court Declines Greenhouse Gas Permits Case
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
The U.S. Supreme Court Jan. 19 declined to hear a lawsuit that sought to compel the Environmental Protection Agency to repropose its greenhouse gas permitting requirements following a court decision limiting the program's scope (Energy-Intensive Mfg. Working Grp. on Greenhouse Gas Regulation v. EPA,, U.S., No. 15-637, cert denied... -
Making Buildings More Energy Efficient Is Big Business
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By James Nash
California building owners already employ a small army of consultants to navigate the nation's strictest energy standards, and many will soon spend millions to make old buildings more energy efficient. As the U.S. redoubles its commitment to reducing greenhouse gases, that experience could be replicated nationwide. -
Mass. On Track To Meet Emissions Rules, Report Says
Jan 19, 2016 | The Boston Globe
By David Abel
The state remains on course to meet its legal obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a quarter below 1990 levels by the end of the decade, according to a report released Tuesday by state officials. A significant portion of those cuts, however, rely on the Legislature passing a bill that would compel utilities to sign long-term contracts to... -
Drawing Range Of Views, RGGI Faces Complicated Bid To Comply With ESPS
Jan 19, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Abby Smith
Northeast states participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) are facing a broad range of stakeholder views over how to adjust the program so it can be used to comply with EPA's GHG rule for existing power plants, complicating the region's planning as states work to submit compliance plans to EPA later this year. -
Supreme Court Rejects Review Of GHG Permitting Suit
Jan 19, 2016 | InsideEPA
The Supreme Court has rejected manufacturers' petition asking the justices to review a federal appeals court ruling that backed EPA's plan for how to set a minimum level for when greenhouse gases (GHGs) must be included in Clean Air Act permit emissions control reviews, an approach the agency plans to publish in a rule this June. -
Groups Slam EPA Rules In Scathing Senate Report
Jan 20, 2016 | E&E Daily News
By Hannah Hess
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee found environmental regulations ranked chief among the concerns of industry leaders in a monthslong outreach project. U.S. EPA's recently adopted ozone standard, the Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule and permitting rules... -
New Pentagon Directive Assigns Climate-Change Duties
Jan 19, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Bryan Bender
The Pentagon has issued a 12-page directive assigning key responsibilities for adapting the military to climate change, asserting that changing weather conditions require "deliberate preparation, close cooperation and coordinated planning" to ensure the armed forces are best prepared for the unpredictable consequences. -
Defense Department Issues Climate Change Directive
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Defense Department outlined how it plans to address climate-related risks to its operations. “The DoD must be able to adapt current and future operations to address the impacts of climate change in order to maintain an effective and efficient U.S. military,” it said in a directive issued Jan. 14. -
Environmentalist GOP Donors Are Losing Hope
Jan 20, 2016 | National Journal
By Jason Plautz
Republican donor Andy Sabin had a great seat on the floor for Thursday’s GOP presidential debate and found himself increasingly impressed with the way Ted Cruz answered some questions. But overall, Sabin left frustrated with a lack of discussion of his pet topics: energy and climate change. -
Lawsuit Filed Over Industrial Boiler Air Standards
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Four environmental organizations challenged an Environmental Protection Agency rule that updated the air toxics standards for major source industrial boilers in response to petitions for reconsideration of the requirements (Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1021, 1/19/16). -
EPA Aims To Ensure Haze Air Plan Lawsuit Heard In Federal Appeals Court
Jan 19, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA is urging a federal district court to dismiss tribal groups' lawsuit over the agency's regional haze emissions reduction federal implementation plan (FIP) for a major coal-fired power plant on Indian land, arguing that challenges to such FIPs are suits over federal rules that the Clean Air Act requires to be filed in federal appeals courts. -
Obama Vetoes Congressional Resolution to Block Water Rule
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
President Barack Obama vetoed legislation Jan. 19 that would have nullified the administration's rule defining the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. The rule, written jointly by the Environmental Protection agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, would have been negated by a joint resolution of Congress passed under authority... -
Obama Vetoes GOP Attempt To Block Water Rule
Jan 19, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
President Obama on Tuesday rejected an attempt by congressional Republicans to overturn his landmark regulation asserting federal power over small bodies of water. The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) rule, dubbed the Clean Water Rule or “waters of the United States,” would ensure that water used for drinking, recreation, economic... -
Flint Residents Sue Over Water Contamination
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Nora Macaluso
A group of Flint, Mich., residents filed two separate class actions alleging Gov. Rick Snyder (R), other government officials and the state health and environment departments knew contaminated drinking water presented a public health emergency but instead chose to make public statements that the water was safe to drink... -
Flint Mayor Meeting With Obama
Jan 19, 2016 | Politico
By Nolan D. McCaskill
The White House expects President Barack Obama to meet with Flint, Michigan, Mayor Karen Weaver later Tuesday, press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters. Weaver, who is visiting the White House for a conference of U.S. mayors, has already met with Valerie Jarrett, a senior Obama adviser, to discuss the water crisis facing Flint.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
Jan 20, 2016 | CCFGroup
The World Economic Forum (WEF) issued a report entitled “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the future of plastics,” which looks at the economic and environmental attributes of plastic packaging. The American Chemistry Council issued the following statement:
“WEF’s new report highlights that plastics and plastic packaging are an integral and important part of the global economy. According to the report:
Plastic packaging not only delivers direct economic benefits, but can also contribute to increased levels of resource productivity – for instance, plastic packaging can reduce food waste by extending shelf life and can reduce fuel consumption for transportation by bringing packaging weight down (page 7).
WEF also underscores opportunities to improve plastics’ environmental profile by recovering more post-use plastics for recycling or energy conversion and by preventing used plastics from ending up in our oceans.
“A 2014 life cycle inventory study conducted by Franklin Associates across the U.S. market confirms the benefits of plastic packaging. The 2014 study, “Impact of Plastics Packaging on Life Cycle Energy Consumption & Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States and Canada,” found that replacing six types of packaging with non-plastic alternatives in the United States would:
Require 4.5 times as much packaging material by weight, increasing the amount of packaging used in the U.S. by nearly 55 million tons (110 billion pounds);
Increase energy use by 80 percent—equivalent to the energy from 91 oil supertankers; and
Result in 130 percent more global warming potential—equivalent to adding 15.7 million more cars to our roads.
“America’s plastics makers are working to increase plastics’ recycling and to recover for energy those plastics that cannot yet be economically recycled. Today in the United Sates, we recycle over 6 billion pounds of plastics annually. Plastics makers actively support programs designed to dramatically increase plastics recycling, especially for newer categories, such as rigid and film plastics. Recycling of rigid plastics—a category that includes wide mouth containers, tubs, caps and lids—has tripled since just 2007. Film plastics recycling, which includes a variety of flexible wraps and bags, has doubled since 2005. Individually, both categories have grown to over one billion pounds annually, and plastics makers are partnering with organizations including the Association of Plastics Recyclers, the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, the Recycling Partnership and Keep America Beautiful to further boost plastics recycling across the United States.
“In addition, plastics associations around the world have committed to address plastics ocean debris by committing to a series of principles known as the Declaration for Solutions on Marine Litter. Signed by more than 60 plastics associations in 34 countries, the plastics industry has launched over 185 projects to address marine litter since 2011.
“We in the plastics industry welcome additional opportunities to partner with others in the shared effort to recycle and recover more plastics, and to keep plastics out of the marine environment. -
Report: Poor Children Live Near Potential Chemical Accidents
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Poor black and Latino children are more than twice as likely to live within a mile of a facility using one or more extremely hazardous chemical than are white children living above the poverty line, according to a report from the Center for Effective Government.
Children's developing bodies and poverty combined with proximity to a site where chemical accidents could occur place the health and safety of poor black and Latino children at greater risk, said the Jan. 16 report, “Living in the Shadow of Danger: Poverty Race and Unequal Chemical Facility Hazards.”
People of color make up nearly half—11.4 million of the 23 million people—living within a mile of a facility using very hazardous chemicals, the report continued. The center timed the report's release to precede Martin Luther King Jr. Day.
Report Released as EPA Reviews Requirements
The EPA is considering whether it should revise its regulations for facilities that use certain flammable and toxic substances. Such facilities are regulated under EPA's Risk Management Program, which implements Section 112(r) of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments.
Covered work sites are required to consult with local fire, police, and emergency response personnel to prepare plans to prevent chemical emergencies and develop risk management plans to respond to emergencies should they occur.
The report analyzed the demographics of people living near the 12,545 facilities subject to the RMP rules and graded states with an A to F score based on a set of 16 metrics that included not only children living nearby but also the percentage of elderly. Details on each state are available from the center's website, which also said it would post an interactive map providing users local information.
The report provided recommendations for states, counties and municipalities, for the EPA as it revises its Risk Management Program regulations, for state and federal environmental and occupational safety enforcement divisions and for chemical facilities themselves.
As the EPA revises its Risk Management Program, it should require companies to switch to inherently safer chemicals and technologies, the center said.
The agency is considering making changes to its RMP regulations to reduce the likelihood and severity of accidental releases and improve emergency response, according to the fall 2015 Regulatory Agenda. In August 2013, President Barack Obama signed Executive Order No. 13,650, directing federal agencies to improve the safety and security of chemical facilities .
EPA's Guidance for Rule Development
If the agency updates its regulations, it is supposed to consider the effect those regulations have on environmental justice under guidance the agency released in May 2015.
The agency will apply that guidance on a “rule-by-rule basis” to strive to incorporate “environmental justice adequately when and where it needs to be,” Matt Tejada, the director of the EPA's Office of Environmental Justice, told Bloomberg BNA in June 2015 (115 DEN B-1, 6/16/15).
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;}
-
Inspection Proposal May Cause Pipeline Shutdowns: Industry
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The costliness of an integrity assessment requirement in a proposed hazardous liquid pipeline rule could force pipe closures and lead to decreased safety, oil and gas groups recently told the nation's pipeline safety regulator.
This requirement that hazardous liquid lines in “high consequence areas” be able to accommodate within 20 years in-line integrity inspection tools is one that state pipeline regulators support. However, advocacy groups say the two-decade time frame for the requirement is too long, and the number of pipelines it would apply to too limited.
“[M]any operators—particularly those with gathering lines—may be faced with the choice of either abandoning a pipeline and shutting production due to the decreased economic viability of the project or using alternate methods (e.g. trucks) to transport the products,” the American Petroleum Institute and the Association of Oil Pipe Lines said in comments to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
“The latter choice runs contrary to PHMSA's mission of increased safety to the public and the environment, as pipelines remain the safest mode of transportation for hazardous liquids,” the oil and oil pipeline groups said in comments supported by the American Gas Association.
Safety for Almost 200,000 Miles of Pipe
These comments that were due Jan. 8 center on PHMSA's proposed rule (RIN 2137-AE66) that aims to improve safety of nearly 200,000 miles of pipelines carrying hazardous liquids such as crude oil. The proposal addresses repair criteria and timelines for pipelines in and out of highly populated or critically environmentally sensitive areas, leak-detection installation stipulations, natural-disaster inspection needs and reporting requirements for certain exempt lines (04 DEN A-16, 1/7/16).
Revamping a hazardous liquid line to be able to accommodate the in-line inspection tools—tools that move through pipes to identify potential corrosion, cracks, deformations or other issues—could reach costs in the $100 million range and the agency hadn't shown “commensurate benefits,” the oil groups said. That cost would depend on the type and design of line, its age and location. Instead of implementing a process to petition PHMSA for an exemption, the requirement should be removed, they said.
However, the watchdog Pipeline Safety Trust and five environmental groups including the Natural Resources Defense Council argued in their comments that this requirement was too lenient. Offering 20 years to implement a technology that was discussed in the context of regulation as early as 1988 is “simply too little change and too much time allowed to implement it,” the trust said.
Groups Want 20-Year Time Frame Shortened
The environmental groups urged PHMSA to shorten the time frame for compliance and to add a tiered compliance framework based on age, prior leaks and other factors. The trust said the agency should expand the number of pipelines this requirement would apply to—to “most” hazardous liquid pipelines regardless of whether they were inside or outside of high consequence areas.
The National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives generally supported the proposed integrity inspection tool requirements.
This was just one of a broad range of issues debated from the proposed rule.
For several environmental groups including the Sierra Club and the trust, what wasn't included in the rule was as notable an issue as what was. Notably, the agency chose not to address certain leak-detection and valve requirements, safety rules for nonregulated gathering and gravity lines and revamping the scope of high-consequence areas. Additionally, the groups generally found PHMSA's requirements too lenient for industry and called for shorter deadlines, more frequent pipeline assessments and more.
For the oil and gas groups, safety and clarity issues related to inspection requirements within 72 hours of cessation of extreme weather events, 10-year assessment requirements for pipelines outside of high-consequence areas and repair criteria and timelines were some other key issues of focus. These comments focused on safety of employees, and distribution of resources where they could have the most impact.
-
Regulators Tighten Enforcement of Rail-Safety Rules
Jan 20, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By Andrew Tangel and Laura Stevens
Federal regulators are enforcing rail-safety rules more stringently, issuing more alleged violations against Amtrak and freight carriers amid worries over shipping crude oil and hazardous chemicals.
The Federal Railroad Administration leveled 6,485 violations carrying civil penalties against railroads in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, up 23% from the previous year, according to the agency’s annual enforcement report expected to be announced Wednesday.
The agency said it collected $15 million in civil penalties. The amount represents 75% of fines initially assessed, marking the highest such collection rate on record for the agency.
The railroad administration’s chief, Sarah Feinberg, said her agency had boosted inspector ranks and adopted a “no tolerance, no patience” policy for safety-rule violations on routes carrying passengers or shipments of crude oil and hazardous materials.
The agency has also been auditing railroads’ mechanical, track and other systems along such routes, which often wind through populated areas.
“Where we find violations, we’re writing them up,” Ms. Feinberg said in an interview. “That’s frequently more time-consuming, but it’s important for railroads to know that when we find violations, there will be consequences.”
An Amtrak spokeswoman said late Tuesday there weren’t any “consistent violations” and the railroad thoroughly reviews each one. She attributed Amtrak’s uptick in fiscal 2015 violations in part to issues such as improper reporting that didn’t affect safety. Amtrak’s 70 violations represent a fraction of the total.
A spokesman for the Association of American Railroads said safety has been improving over the past several decades, and railroads continue to take action to better safety including increased track inspections and implementing new technologies.
Union Pacific Corp. said safety is a primary focus, and last year it set safety records for both employees and safety-grade crossings. Norfolk Southern Corp. declined to comment. CSX Corp. and BNSF Railway Co. had no immediate comment late Tuesday.
FRA said the railroads hadn’t necessarily responded to the alleged violations noted in the enforcement report.
Crude-by-rail has become an increasingly important issue for the safety regulators and railroads due to a string of fiery derailments, including one in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, that killed 47 people in 2013. But over the past year, the carloads of petroleum and petroleum products shipped by rail have fallen by nearly 10% as domestic drilling becomes less profitable with the declining price of oil.
Under Ms. Feinberg’s tenure, the agency has struck a tough note on safety. In May, the U.S. Transportation Department unveiled a stricter-than-expected rule on shipping crude by rail, including new tank-car standards and a requirement for new brakes on trains hauling more than 70 cars of hazardous flammable materials. The Transportation Department estimated the rule would cost the railroad industry $2.5 billion over 20 years, and save between $912 million and $2.9 billion due to fewer accidents. Railroads and other entities appealed the rule to the agency and were rebuffed.
Ms. Feinberg also flexed her muscles on the proposed $30 billion merger between Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. and Norfolk Southern Corp., telling The Wall Street Journal last week she expected to scrutinize “significant safety hurdles” to any merger between major freight railroads.
Challenges include combining safety cultures of two different organizations, including determining which company’s safety rules and protocols will take precedence and how to restructure a combined workforce to maintain the same level of communication and protection each had individually.
Canadian Pacific has said it would make Norfolk Southern safer. Of the Class I railroads cited by the agency, Canadian Pacific paid the least in fines, $639,000.
-
PHMSA Makes Special Hazmat Permit Exemptions Permanent
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
Almost 100 special permit exemptions from hazardous materials transport rules are being made permanent by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
PHMSA unveiled on Jan. 15 the final version of a new rule (RIN 2137-AF00) that formally enshrines 96 special permit exemptions into the Hazardous Materials Regulations. Prior to this new rule, PHMSA had made permanent 94 special permits in total since 2008 (20 DEN A-15, 1/30/15).
The administration was required to take the action as a part of the surface transportation act passed by Congress in 2012, also known as the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act or MAP-21 (Pub. L. No. 112–141).
The law instructed PHMSA to review all special permits that have been in effect for at least 10 years and see if any of them can be codified into the Hazardous Materials Regulations.
More Special Permits
Boyd Stephenson, a senior official with American Trucking Associations, said the special permits formalized by PHMSA are widely used and have demonstrated safety track records.
“It's right that PHMSA incorporate these changes into the HMRs,” Stephenson told Bloomberg BNA via e-mail. ATA is looking forward to “working with PHMSA to find more special permits that can be adopted in the future mandated rulemakings.”
The new special permit exemptions won't take the force of law until 30 days after its final rule is published in the Federal Register. However, PHMSA said it would not require mandatory compliance with the final rule until one year after its Federal Register publication.
-
LNG Trade Group Picks New Leader
Jan 19, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Kevin Bogardus
The Center for Liquefied Natural Gas has chosen a new executive director.
Charlie Riedl will now head the trade association representing LNG exporters. Riedl had been director of market development for America's Natural Gas Alliance.
"Charlie comes with a wealth of experience within the industry and understands the challenges and opportunities associated with developing new natural gas markets. We're delighted that he'll be leading the effort to educate and develop policies promoting LNG," Dena Wiggins, president and CEO of the Natural Gas Supply Association (NGSA), said in a statement.
The Center for LNG and NGSA have now completed their merger, which was announced in May last year (EnergyWire, May 8, 2015).
"Joining the two associations exponentially increases the effectiveness of both organizations and gives CLNG an even stronger platform for its advocacy and education efforts," said Richard Lammons, the center's chairman and manager of commercial support and strategy for Chevron Supply and Trading.
"The associations have complementary missions and goals, with each organization promoting well-functioning markets and the economic benefits of LNG. We believe Charlie will do a great job leading CLNG's efforts."
Riedl replaces Bill Cooper, who left the trade group last year to be staff director for the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources and a senior policy adviser (E&E Daily, Jan. 22, 2015).
-
Plan to Capture, Burn Leaking Gas at L.A. Facility Scrapped
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
Regulators' safety concerns have forced Southern California Gas Co. to abandon a plan to capture and burn off some of the natural gas leaking from its underground storage facility near Los Angeles.
Southern California air quality officials said Jan. 19 they are continuing to seek approval of a proposed order that included the capture-and-destroy plan, but the project is now off the table.
“Our proposed order would have required SoCalGas to capture and dispose of a portion of leaking gas only if SoCalGas along with federal, state and local regulatory agencies deemed it safe to do so,” South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Executive Officer Barry Wallerstein said in a Jan. 19 statement. “While that provision is now moot, the order still contains many important requirements to minimize leaking gas, monitor emissions and help prevent a similar incident in the future.”
The SCAQMD hearing board will meet for a third time Jan. 20 at the agency's Diamond Bar headquarters to consider the proposed order.
Relief Well Project ‘Ahead of Schedule.’
SoCalGas, a subsidiary of Sempra Energy, said Jan. 18 that after “extensive” study and “consultation” with the SCAQMD and other state agencies, it decided against the capture-and-destroy project. The utility said its project drilling a relief well to stop the natural gas leak “is proceeding ahead of schedule” and it “expects to stop the leak by late February, if not sooner.”
The SCAQMD proposed order would require SoCalGas to permanently shut down the leaking well and bar any future injections or withdrawal of natural gas. Other provisions would require the utility to fund an independent health study to study the leak's impacts on nearby residents, development of a leak detection system, continuous air monitoring and creation of a plan to notify residents when leaks occur.
Discovered Oct. 23, the leak has released an estimated 1.9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent, according to the latest available data collected by the California Air Resources Board.
CARB's preliminary estimates show more than a 60 percent drop in emissions since the peak in November, SoCalGas said in a Jan. 18 statement.
Health Issues, but No Acute Hazards
“Our top priority remains the safety of those working on the site and of the nearby community,” Jimmy Cho, the utility's senior vice president of gas operations and system integrity, said. “We are focused on stopping the leak as quickly and safely as possible, mitigating the environmental impact, and supporting the community.”
Many residents in Porter Ranch, a community downwind of the facility, have reported headaches, nausea and other health problems. The state's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment released an evaluation of SoCalGas emissions data Jan. 14 that found the health effects being reported can be attributed to odorants in natural gas. OEHHA's analysis, however, found the levels of chemicals being released pose no acute health hazard (11 DEN A-14, 1/19/16).
SoCalGas has relocated about 2,500 of the residents and is providing indoor air filters and weatherizing other homes.
Call for Federal Regulation
The ongoing leak has triggered calls from nearby residents and environmental groups for closure of the massive underground storage facility, which predates nearby housing developments.
The leak “illustrates the need for stronger federal regulation of our nation's energy infrastructure to protect public health and safety, consumers and the climate,” the Washington-based advocacy group Public Citizen said in a Jan. 19 statement. “Hundreds of poorly regulated gas pipelines and storage facilities like the one near Porter Ranch are sprawled out across the nation. Most Americans have no idea their homes and workplaces, schools and churches are sitting on top of unsafe, disaster-prone energy infrastructure.”
Gov. Jerry Brown (D) issued a proclamation Jan. 6 declaring the natural gas leak, discovered Oct. 23, an emergency. At the same time, Brown directed state agencies to take steps to address the leak, mitigate its impacts and reduce the risk of more leaks.
Along with the SCAQMD's proposed order, state oil and gas regulators have proposed new regulations for natural gas storage facilities. Expected to become final later this month, the regulations would require the facilities to conduct daily inspections of well heads and have risk management plans in place (11 DEN A-14, 1/19/16).
State lawmakers introduced legislation Jan. 11 calling for closure of the oldest wells at the Alison Canyon facility and other measures to the stop the leak and hold SoCalGas financially accountable for the incident (07 DEN A-2, 1/12/16).
-
Pennsylvania Announces New Methane Rules
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
Pennsylvania will implement new regulations to reduce methane leaks in the oil and gas industry, the state's governor, Tom Wolf (D) announced during a Facebook town hall meeting Jan. 19.
“These regulations will improve our air, address the urgent crisis of climate change and help businesses reclaim product now wasted,” Wolf said. “It's a win-win for everybody.”
Pennsylvania will adopt standards and practices that are used by leading companies in the industry, are required by federal regulations or are mandated in other states, Wolf said.
The state's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has developed the cost-effective four-point strategy to reduce methane emissions, Wolf said. The new regulations will reduce methane leaks by requiring more efficiency upgrades, implementation of best practices and more frequent use of leak-sensing technologies, Wolf said.
Wolf did not offer specifics on the plans, which will be detailed in a webinar on Jan. 20 by DEP Secretary John Quigley.
Methane has been identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as the second most prevalent greenhouse gas in the U.S. that is emitted through human activity, and has 25 times more warming potential than carbon dioxide, Wolf said.
-
Pennsylvania Governor Rolls Out Methane Regulations That Go Further Than EPA's
Jan 19, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
Pennsylvania's Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf today unveiled plans to rein in the oil and gas industry's methane emissions from both new and existing sources, a step that takes the state further than still-pending Obama administration regulations affecting only new facilities.
Wolf's plans, announced during an online town hall, also include changes to permitting for the oil and gas extraction that has helped Pennsylvania tap into the Marcellus Shale region's ample resources to become the second-ranked natural gas producer. The state's Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Quigley described the coming changes as "streamlined permitting in exchange for enhanced environmental protections."
Pennsylvania's methane proposal, which Quigley estimated would take between a year and 18 months to complete, would go beyond methane regulations that EPA proposed in August as part of the White House's plan to slash emissions of the greenhouse gas by upwards of 40 percent over the next decade. EPA's methane measures frustrated some environmentalists by stopping short of limiting emissions from existing sources.
Another component of Wolf's plan would stop new oil and gas leasing on state-owned forest lands. The governor said his plan "reduces climate change and helps businesses."
In response to another questioner during the town-hall, Wolf also promised to remain committed to another once-influential Pennsylvania resource imperiled by EPA's power-plant emissions rules.
"We want coal to play an important role in the energy future for the world," Wolf said.
-
Chamber: EPA's Renewable Energy Targets Flawed
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
The Environmental Protection Agency based its Clean Power Plan on flawed assumptions about the availability of renewable energy resulting in unrealistic targets that are prohibitively expensive for utilities and states, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a Jan. 19 report.
The EPA assumes that new wind generation will continue to grow at the same rate it did in 2012 just before the expiration of the production tax credit. The carbon dioxide standards for the existing fleet of power plants also rests on unrealistic projections of the potential for new geothermal generation and flawed projections of capacity factors for other renewables, the Chamber of Commerce said in the report, “What's in a Target?”
“While the U.S. Chamber remains a strong and steadfast supporter of continued efforts to advance renewable technologies to drive down costs and achieve parity with traditional electricity sources, the advancements that we aspire to someday realize should not be relied upon as the present-day basis for sweeping regulations,” the Chamber said.
The report said the EPA's flawed renewable energy projections will impose billions of dollars in additional compliance costs and require carbon dioxide emissions to be reduced by 93 million tons more each year than would have been otherwise feasible.
The EPA's Clean Power Plan (RIN 2060-AR33) sets a unique carbon dioxide emissions standard for the power sector in each state, which will be implemented by state regulators. The Chamber as well as 27 states and several other industry groups have filed legal challenges to the EPA's rule.
Several petitioners have asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to set an expedited schedule for the lawsuits that could see them decided before states are required to submit their initial compliance plans to the EPA by Sept. 6 (West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1363, motion filed 12/8/15; 06 DEN B-1, 1/11/16).
-
Supreme Court Declines Greenhouse Gas Permits Case
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
The U.S. Supreme Court Jan. 19 declined to hear a lawsuit that sought to compel the Environmental Protection Agency to repropose its greenhouse gas permitting requirements following a court decision limiting the program's scope (Energy-Intensive Mfg. Working Grp. on Greenhouse Gas Regulation v. EPA,, U.S., No. 15-637, cert denied 1/19/16).
The Energy-Intensive Manufacturing Working Group on Greenhouse Gas Regulation, an industry trade coalition, had argued the EPA was compelled to reissue its greenhouse gas permitting rules after the Supreme Court found that the requirements only applied to those industrial sources that are already required to obtain prevention of significant deterioration and Title V permits for other pollutants such as sulfur dioxide and particulate matter (Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. EPA, 2014 BL 172973, 78 ERC 1585, 34 S. Ct. 2427 (2014)).
Following that decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated only those provisions of the EPA permitting program it deemed no longer in effect but left the remaining requirements in place. The EPA subsequently issued a rule that stripped those vacated provisions from its permitting requirements (80 Fed. Reg. 50,199; 158 DEN A-5, 8/17/15).
Jack McMackin, principal at Williams & Jensen PLLC, who represents the trade group, said the manufacturers now plan to shift their focus to working with the EPA on the permitting requirements, which have traditionally focused on energy efficiency as a means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
“It's a very unusual scheme of regulation,” he told Bloomberg BNA Jan. 19. “We've always been interested in reducing our energy costs. That's mostly what that scheme of regulation is about. It's probably unnecessary, but that also means we probably have some common ground” with the EPA.
-
Making Buildings More Energy Efficient Is Big Business
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By James Nash
California building owners already employ a small army of consultants to navigate the nation's strictest energy standards, and many will soon spend millions to make old buildings more energy efficient. As the U.S. redoubles its commitment to reducing greenhouse gases, that experience could be replicated nationwide.
With the state poised to halve building energy use by 2030 and the nation about to start curbing greenhouse-gas emissions under last month's Paris accord, more structures across the U.S. will need renovations. Buildings account for 39 percent of carbon dioxide emissions, exceeding transportation and industrial uses, according to the U.S. Green Building Council.
“Most of the focus has been on new construction, but now people are really taking a look at existing buildings,” said Cliff Majersik, executive director of the Institute for Market Transformation, a Washington nonprofit that promotes more efficient buildings. “If you really want to move the needle on climate change, you can't ignore the 99 percent of buildings that are already there.”
A decade of progressively stricter laws aimed at reducing energy use and consumer desire to lower costs have already bred a $20 billion-a-year industry in the U.S., according to Majersik. Consultants guide property owners through the regulatory maze and help them file paperwork. Contractors retrofit old ventilation systems and fixtures, replace drafty windows, doors and roofs, and install state-of-the-art environmental controls.
California and New York have taken the lead in prodding building owners toward greater energy efficiency with a mix of rebates and tax breaks to help offset the costs.
Dozens of consulting firms, such as New York-based CodeGreen Solutions, have built businesses around compliance and paperwork requirements in cities such as New York, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Founded in 2008, CodeGreen now is responsible for energy auditing in 250 million square feet of offices around the country, said Christopher Cayten, a principal in the closely held company.
“The laws have given us more business, granted, but they've also broadened the concept of sustainability beyond big, shiny, brand-new buildings,” Cayten said.
Because regulators historically went after gas-guzzling cars and smokestack industries to improve air quality, office buildings and apartments attracted relatively little scrutiny until the past decade. Now, policy makers are switching their attention from simply requiring periodic energy audits to compelling property owners to replace inefficient fans, windows, lighting and other components.
Demand Response
California was the first to impose building-efficiency standards almost four decades ago, and its regulations have been tightened periodically since. Those rules lowered electric bills by $74 billion since 1978, California regulators say.
In New York and San Francisco, building owners are required to periodically assess energy use and look at new appliances, fixtures or other measures to become more efficient. Cities such as Kansas City and Atlanta also have moved to require energy audits of buildings.
In 2008, Pennsylvania required utilities to come up with plans to encourage energy efficiency through programs such as rebates for new appliances, lighting and windows and by requiring periodic energy audits and “smart meters” to measure real-time power use.
New York and California have measures to encourage building owners and occupants to automatically reduce air conditioning, idle assembly lines and dim lighting during periods of stress on their electric grids. That process, known as demand response, has fueled growth for companies such as Milwaukee, Wis.-based Johnson Controls Inc., which predicted an increase of between 9 percent and 11 percent this year in its $14 billion building efficiency business.
Other states are expected to embrace demand response, which is required under a California bill Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law last October.
Terrill Laughton, vice president and general manager of demand response for Johnson Controls, said in an interview that a “favorable legislative environment” should accelerate growth in his business.
“There's only so many new buildings that get built,” Laughton said. “States aren't going to achieve their environmental goals without getting to older buildings and facilities. Broadly speaking, most of our work is in older buildings and facilities. There's a lot of low-hanging fruit.”
The California bill originally called for every building to cut energy use in half by 2030, but it was made less stringent after the California Business Properties Association and other commercial groups objected. The final version only calls for an overall reduction, meaning that the burden won't fall equally on all buildings. It was backed by lobbyists for energy-consulting firms as well as unions representing building trades that stand to gain work from the retrofit requirements.
Commercial landlords remain concerned that regulators could impose millions of dollars in fixes on old buildings that barely eke out a profit as it is, said Matthew Hargrove, the Business Properties Association's chief lobbyist.
“As the state pushes forward with making building energy codes more complex and tougher to meet, it just makes it that much more complicated and expensive for the average businessperson,” said Hargrove. “People need to hire energy consultants and sustainability specialists because they can't do it internally anymore.”
-
Mass. On Track To Meet Emissions Rules, Report Says
Jan 19, 2016 | The Boston Globe
By David Abel
The state remains on course to meet its legal obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a quarter below 1990 levels by the end of the decade, according to a report released Tuesday by state officials.
A significant portion of those cuts, however, rely on the Legislature passing a bill that would compel utilities to sign long-term contracts to buy hydroelectric power from Canada or other renewable energy from outside Massachusetts.
“A greenhouse gas emissions reduction of at least 25 percent by 2020 is attainable,” said Matthew Beaton, the state’s secretary of energy and environmental affairs, in a letter accompanying the report. “Reaching this goal requires consistent effort and collaboration across all sectors.”
The administration’s report stands in stark contrast to the assessment of environmental advocates, who have challenged the state’s numbers and raised questions about whether its hydropower plans are viable.
In the report — the first update of the state’s clean energy and climate plan since it was issued in 2010 — officials say the state expects to cut emissions 26.4 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, surpassing their obligations under the 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act.
The plan expects that nearly 17 percent of the required emissions cuts would come from hydropower or other clean energy imports. Another 23 percent would come as the result of policies to increase energy efficiency, while nearly 16 percent would come from new vehicle efficiency standards.
The plan envisions the rest of the cuts coming from a range of other policies, including new building codes, requirements that utilities plug leaks in natural gas pipelines, and incentives to increase the amount of solar and wind energy projects.
“While progress to reduce greenhouse gas emissions has been made on many fronts, the plan update highlights the need for immediate action on our legislation for clean and affordable hydroelectricity and other renewable resources in order to achieve our 2020 goal and position us to meet the long-term reduction targets,” Governor Charlie Baker said in a statement.
But environmental advocates have raised doubts that the state will be able to comply with the law.
In fact, lawyers for the Conservation Law Foundation in Boston this month argued before the state’s top court that the Baker administration, as well as that of former governor Deval Patrick, violated the law by failing to enact policies that would result in the required emissions reductions. The challenge of making those cuts, they note, will be greater with Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station — the state’s largest provider of clean power — set to close as early as next year.
Advocates insist the state has fallen behind and needs a major course correction — not just action on the hydro plan — to meet the law’s requirements. They also note that even if lawmakers pass a hydroelectric bill, the expensive power lines might never get built. Some would likely pass through New Hampshire, where the proposal remains highly controversial, and others would require an expensive extension of lines to Vermont.
In 2014, before Pilgrim announced it would close, a collaborative effort by local environmental groups called the Global Warming Solutions Project released a report that projected that Massachusetts would cut its emissions by only 20 percent below 1990 levels. A more recent report by the Conservation Law Foundation, which factors in the closure of Pilgrim, estimates that the state, without any significant policy changes, is more likely to cut its emissions between 16 and 19 percent.
The reliance on hydropower, they add, doesn’t appear to take into account that hydropower is not entirely carbon-free energy. It relies on reservoirs that flood forests, decimate trees, and release carbon dioxide.
“A significant portion of the plan relies on unidentified Canadian hydro resources, with unidentified greenhouse gas emissions profiles, based on an assumption that the transmission lines will be permitted, constructed, and operational prior to 2020,” said Greg Cunningham, director of the clean energy and climate change program at the Conservation Law Foundation. “All of those assumptions leave the Commonwealth’s assertion that it will meet its 2020 goal highly tenuous.”
Ken Kimmell, who served as commissioner of the state’s Department of Environmental Protection during the Patrick administration, said the state has left little room for error.
“It would be helpful to start developing other policies in case this strategy doesn’t pan out, such as a greater commitment to electric vehicles, carbon pricing for transportation and heating, and expanding solar and onshore wind, and developing offshore wind,” said Kimmell, who is now president of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Administration officials acknowledged in an interview that their plan relies on hydropower to meet the emissions targets.
But they noted they’re also pressing other initiatives to reduce emissions, such as planting more trees, reducing the use of refrigerants that produce carbon emissions, and investing in developing energy storage, which would make it easier to harness power from solar and wind energy.
And they said they’re looking past 2020. The law requires the state to cut its emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Administration officials noted that they have joined eastern Canadian premieres and New England governors in signing a resolution calling for a 35 to 45 percent cut in greenhouse gases by 2030.
“The Commonwealth has made great progress in addressing climate change, and the plan update lays out many innovative strategies to reach our 2020 goal,” Beaton said.
-
Drawing Range Of Views, RGGI Faces Complicated Bid To Comply With ESPS
Jan 19, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Abby Smith
Northeast states participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) are facing a broad range of stakeholder views over how to adjust the program so it can be used to comply with EPA's GHG rule for existing power plants, complicating the region's planning as states work to submit compliance plans to EPA later this year.
In comments submitted to RGGI last month, utilities were divided among themselves -- and with environmentalists -- over how the group should reset its emissions cap to synchronize it with EPA's limits.
A coalition of environmental groups, as well as Exelon, a clean energy utility, urged RGGI to make its program cap stricter than what is required by EPA's existing source performance standards (ESPS), though other utilities in the region warn a stricter cap could jeopardize RGGI's ability to trade with other states.
The commenters were similarly divided over how or whether to overhaul the cost containment reserve (CCR), as well as the never-used offset program, so it can still be available for use consistent with EPA's rule, with some utilities calling for the mechanisms to be maintained to preserve market stability, while environmentalists and other utilities called for their elimination or modification.
Officials from the nine RGGI states -- Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Hampshire, Delaware and Maryland -- are slated to review and update the program in 2016, an effort that will focus in part on whether or how to extend the program's current emissions cap, which runs through 2020, so it is aligned with EPA's ESPS, which runs through 2030.
If the RGGI states decide to adopt post-2020 targets that are significantly stricter than EPA's, it could limit the number of credits available to other states, reducing both their compliance options and the RGGI states' revenue. But if the states decide to set targets consistent with EPA's, it may signal limits on the RGGI states' future GHG reduction efforts, a prospect that is already drawing opposition from environmentalists.
Most states that participate in RGGI intend to use the program as a central feature of their ESPS compliance plans, and observers believe the program will extend its cap -- which currently runs through 2020 -- to align with the ESPS' final compliance date in 2030.
RGGI officials have already signaled part of their preferred approach, writing in a memo late last year that they favor an “emissions standards” approach -- in which states apply default emissions standards that EPA has set for coal- and gas-fired power plants and enforce them using federal authority.
The memo said that officials would then discuss with stakeholders “a potential pathway” to creating a “trading ready” program -- meaning the program would share common elements with other state plans allowing for allowance trading without direct linkages -- or EPA approval -- in the future.
However, to pursue an emissions standards approach, RGGI may have to eliminate key flexibility measures, including its cost containment reserve mechanism that increases the number of available allowances as a way to limit prices.
Stricter Cap
One of the most divisive issues is how RGGI should overhaul its emissions cap after 2020. In their comments, a coalition of environmental groups reiterated their long-standing calls for RGGI states to strengthen the program's cap post-2020, arguing that doing so would ensure the region could continue to be a nationwide leader in GHG reductions.
In its Dec. 4 comments, the coalition, which includes the Acadia Center, as well as the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Union of Concerned Scientists and several state and local groups, urged the RGGI states to “establish a declining cap trajectory between 2020 and 2030 that is consistent with least-cost compliance with state climate goals.”
EPA's combined mass-based target for the nine RGGI states is roughly 80 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2030, a figure that includes both existing power plants and new plants projected to be built during that period.
If the region were to extend its 2020 cap without its flexibility mechanisms, it would be in compliance with the EPA rule, with a total cap of about 78 million metric tons.
But in their comments, environmentalists encourage RGGI states to model three additional scenarios that would better align with state-level climate goals: a region-wide electric sector cap that declines starting in 2021 by a fixed annual quantity of allowances equivalent to 2.5 percent of 2012 emissions -- achieving an 89 percent reduction of affected sources by 2050; an electric sector cap that declines starting in 2021 by a fixed annual quantity of allowances equivalent to 5 percent of 2012 emissions -- achieving a 100 percent reduction by 2050; and a “high transportation reduction sensitivity in which RGGI states achieved emission reductions in the transportation sector consistent with” a recent announcement from five RGGI-participating states and the District of Columbia to develop a market-based program to reduce that sector's GHGs.
Exelon, the merchant generator, is also calling for RGGI states to strengthen their overall program cap, making it one of the only utilities in the region to do so.
The utility in its Dec. 4 comments writes that the region should consider a range of goals “more stringent than the minimum requirements” of the EPA power plant rule, including a goal of achieving 80 percent reductions from 1990 levels by 2050.
The utility also encourages RGGI to consider an increase in the auction minimum reserve price. “In evaluating and choosing the goals, RGGI must ensure that allowance prices provide an adequate market signal to support investments in new and existing zero-carbon generation that are essential to achieving even modest emission reduction goals, and are sufficient to support the program goals that states achieve through auction revenues,” Exelon writes.
But other utilities in the region, including Calpine Corp., Dynegy Inc. and NRG Energy Inc., warn against considering a cap more stringent than the ESPS requirements.
“[A]ny further regional restrictions or cap reduction that are more stringent than the [ESPS] targets would undermine the concept of an equitable, national program that seeks to establish common obligations as it would place additional burdens on only one region,” NRG writes in its comments. It adds that “any material deviation from EPA's carefully considered budgets would disturb EPA's assessment and disadvantage the owners of generation in the 9 RGGI states as well as consumers.”
Cost Containment Reserve
Beyond adjusting the emissions cap, RGGI states may need to eliminate key flexibility mechanisms to align its program with the ESPS requirements, particularly in order to adopt the emissions standards approach officials prefer.
As written, EPA's rule bars the RGGI states from maintaining the program's cost containment reserve and offset mechanisms if the states adopt an emissions standards approach, noting that if the program maintains such elements that “functionally expand the emission budget” it must submit a “state measures” plan, under which states use their existing renewable energy, energy efficiency and other programs -- without making them federally enforceable.
NRG and other fossil fuel utilities in the region are urging RGGI to maintain the cost containment reserve in particular, arguing that it creates market stability. Elimination of the offset program, which according to RGGI “allows for up to 3.3 percent of compliance obligations to be met with offset allowances from specific projects,” is less of a concern, as no RGGI state has been awarded an offset allowance since the program began -- though NRG notes that the program should be revised.
Several other utility commenters and environmentalists, however, say the cost containment reserve must be eliminated or restructured in order align with the ESPS language. Dynegy in its comments calls for the mechanism's complete elimination after 2022, when ESPS compliance begins, stressing the importance that RGGI be able to use an emissions standards plan approach.
“The RGGI program may seek to phase the CCR provision out during the RGGI program fourth control period either by reducing the size of the CCR allowance pool available or by raising the CCR trigger threshold,” Dynegy writes.
But other utility stakeholders and environmentalists suggest ways the cost containment reserve might be restructured to be deemed acceptable under the ESPS language. “If the RGGI states choose to retain the CCR, it should be modified to draw allowances from beneath the cap, rather than creating new allowances when price thresholds are met. This would ensure that aggregate emissions limits are not exceeded, while preserving a mechanism to mitigate price volatility,” the environmental groups write.
Calpine suggests in its comments that if RGGI states were to adopt a program cap stricter than that required by the ESPS, they could maintain the cost containment reserve as the difference between the RGGI cap and the ESPS cap for the region. “This would allow the RGGI states to continue their leadership in emission reductions, while maintaining the cost moderation effects of the CCR,” the utility writes. Even so, Calpine also notes that a cost containment reserve mechanism may not be necessary if RGGI engages in trading with non-member states under the ESPS. “Once the [ESPS] is in effect, if RGGI participates in a broader trading market, the CCR may not longer be necessary. Participation in a broad market would insure against allowance price spikes, and against leakage to neighboring states,” Calpine writes.
-
Supreme Court Rejects Review Of GHG Permitting Suit
Jan 19, 2016 | InsideEPA
The Supreme Court has rejected manufacturers' petition asking the justices to review a federal appeals court ruling that backed EPA's plan for how to set a minimum level for when greenhouse gases (GHGs) must be included in Clean Air Act permit emissions control reviews, an approach the agency plans to publish in a rule this June.
In its Jan. 19 list of orders the justices without comment rejected the petition to hear the case, Energy-Intensive Manufacturers (EIM) Working Group on Greenhouse Gas Regulation v. EPA, et al, which for now ends the legal battle over the plan.
The manufacturers' group, which represents iron and steel, paper and pulp, aluminum, glass, cement, and chemical interests, in November asked the court to grant its petition for a writ of certiorari and direct EPA on how GHG limits should be triggered in stationary source air permits.
The case was seen as a long-shot effort to re-litigate the agency's power to regulate GHGs, which the Supreme Court largely backed in a prior ruling.
The industry group had urged the high court to overturn a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which remanded portions of the agency's GHG “tailoring rule” to EPA.
The rule had generally sought to set GHG thresholds above which new and modified stationary sources would be subject to prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permits under the air law. PSD permits apply in areas currently attaining federal ambient air standards and aim to prevent any degradation of air quality.
But the Supreme Court, in a 2014 ruling in Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, narrowed the rule's reach after finding that the agency lacked authority to require permits for facilities' GHGs alone. The justices said EPA should set a de minimis threshold for when GHGs trigger best available control technology reviews, which are the emissions control reviews required for PSD permits, but gave no direction on how to craft the threshold.
The high court remanded litigation over the permitting program back to the D.C. Circuit, which then heard additional briefing on how to proceed. The court ultimately sided with EPA by scaling back the permitting rule to comply with the UARG ruling and remanding it to the agency to craft the new threshold.
The EIM group in its petition to the Supreme Court countered that the D.C. Circuit should have scrapped the tailoring rule outright and said the appellate court did not address the problems with the rule identified in the UARG decision. But the petition was seen more as a broader attack on EPA's entire GHG permitting regime and authority to regulate GHG emissions through air permits rather than a narrow attack on the threshold issue.
EPA waived its right to respond to the cert petition, suggesting the agency did not believe the court would agree to hear the case -- exactly as the high court ultimately decided.
The agency last year in its Action Initiation List (AIL) of rulemakings launched in April said that it expects to complete a proposed rule setting a GHG de minimis threshold for air permits in June.
The rule will “propose a [GHG] Significant Emission Rate (SER) under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) air permitting program,” according to the AIL. The rulemaking was formally launched April 22 and EPA expects it to take “more than 12 months,” the agency said.
-
Groups Slam EPA Rules In Scathing Senate Report
Jan 20, 2016 | E&E Daily News
By Hannah Hess
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee found environmental regulations ranked chief among the concerns of industry leaders in a monthslong outreach project.
U.S. EPA's recently adopted ozone standard, the Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule and permitting rules for greenhouse gases drew the most criticism from 49 private-sector stakeholders who offered feedback on the federal government's expansive regulatory system in response to a request from the Senate watchdogs.
Since Republicans took control of the chamber last January, panel Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) has been exploring how to cut red tape (E&E Daily, Jan. 23, 2015). The 1,036-page report released last week represents an effort to better understand the "real-world" effects of rulemaking and inform legislative proposals for regulatory reform.
In March, leaders of the subcommittee with jurisdiction over regulatory affairs, Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), joined Johnson and full committee ranking member Tom Carper (D-Del.) to solicit input from organizations representing industry, labor unions and environmental advocates. They sent letters asking stakeholders to identify older rules that needed to be updated or eliminated, explain the impact of any significant rulemaking delays on "your business or members of your organization," and suggest improvements.
Fifteen respondents noted concerns about the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, including the National Association of Manufacturers, Society of the Plastics Industry, Brick Industry Association and American Farm Bureau Federation, which warned the stringent air standards would make it "harder to stay in business."
Twelve respondents commented negatively on the expanded definition of WOTUS, noting it "vastly expands the regulatory scope of the federal government beyond protectable downstream U.S. waters," according to the report. ConocoPhillips Co., the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Petroleum Institute and the National Black Chamber of Commerce were among the critics.
"Only after the proposed rule was published did affected entities understand that the proposed WOTUS definition clarifies nothing, and actually makes it more difficult (if not impossible) to understand if and how the rule would apply in the real world," wrote Harry Alford, the black chamber's president. "This significant uncertainty will delay, or stop altogether, projects across the country; and will add untold investigation, engineering and permitting costs for projects that are ultimately pursued."
On greenhouse gas reporting requirements and attempts to reduce emissions, the American Iron and Steel Institute's Thomas Gibson expressed concern that the new regulations "will lead to a less affordable and reliable electricity supply."
The Edison Electric Institute, representing all U.S.-investor-owned electric companies, and 10 other groups submitted similar responses on the Clean Power Plan.
Groups representing labor organizations, environmental protection and consumers, like the Natural Resources Defense Council and Waterkeeper Alliance, weighed in with strong support for the value of many regulations to protect public health and public safety. Several of them also raised concerns about the regulatory process, including implementation timelines, pointing to instances when delays led to adverse impacts.
United Steelworkers blasted the timetable for the long-delayed Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulation on exposure to crystalline silica.
"The passage of time and the advances in science and technology have rendered the 1971 standard weak and inadequate to properly protect worker health," said Anna Fendley, the group's legislative representative. "Unfortunately, the updated silica standard is a classic example of delays in the regulatory process that cost lives."
Respondents also took aim at workplace regulations from the Labor Department and financial regulations arising from the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. But the bulk of the comments related to EPA mandates.
"In recent years, EPA has used the [Clean Air Act] as a battering ram to further the administration's ambitious environmental agenda. In the Agency's rush to promulgate as many pollution control rules as possible in a short period of time, mistakes have been made and deliberate oversights have gone uncorrected," the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners responded.
Exxon Mobil Corp. complained that regulations for the renewable fuel standard are "unrealistic, unworkable and should be repealed." The company cited Congressional Research Service estimates that by 2022, the RFS could increase food costs for Americans by $4 billion annually.
National Mining Association President Hal Quinn slammed the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards' rulemaking process.
"The MATS regulation -- the most expensive in EPA history -- is a poster child for unbalanced regulations that dismiss the real costs and inflate the benefits to convince the public that the enormous expense is justified," Quinn stated in his response.
Though the committee's report does not suggest specific legislation, Johnson noted it was "just the start of our important work on regulatory issues." After four full committee hearings and several subcommittee roundtables in 2015, he said he hopes to move reform proposals forward with bipartisan support in the next year.
"Though we may disagree on specific points, many of us fundamentally agree that the current regulatory system is just too burdensome to the American economy and in need of common-sense changes," Johnson said.
-
New Pentagon Directive Assigns Climate-Change Duties
Jan 19, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Bryan Bender
The Pentagon has issued a 12-page directive assigning key responsibilities for adapting the military to climate change, asserting that changing weather conditions require "deliberate preparation, close cooperation and coordinated planning" to ensure the armed forces are best prepared for the unpredictable consequences.
"The DoD must be able to adapt current and future operations to address the impacts of climate change in order to maintain an effective and efficient U.S. military," states the Jan. 14 directive from Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work.
The document defines climate change as "variations in average weather conditions that persist over multiple decades or longer."
The policy order assigns key responsibilities to a range of DoD components to prepare for the impact of climate change on installations, to assess any changes required for weapons systems and to ensure test ranges remain available for training.
For example, the undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics has been tasked to establish a series of "climate change boards, councils and working groups" to integrate climate change considerations into DoD programs.
And the assistant secretary of defense for energy, environment and logistics is designated as DoD’s "primary climate change adaptation official."
-
Defense Department Issues Climate Change Directive
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Defense Department outlined how it plans to address climate-related risks to its operations. “The DoD must be able to adapt current and future operations to address the impacts of climate change in order to maintain an effective and efficient U.S. military,” it said in a directive issued Jan. 14. The directive describes how different officials within the department should bring climate change considerations into their work. It builds on an adaptation roadmap that the department issued in 2014 after an executive order directed all federal agencies to prepare for the effects of climate change. Climate change has been called a “threat multiplier” because it has the potential to worsen many of the security challenges the U.S. military already faces, including terrorism and infectious disease (199 DEN A-10, 10/15/14). Sea level rise, floods and other effects can also pose a physical risk to military bases.
-
Environmentalist GOP Donors Are Losing Hope
Jan 20, 2016 | National Journal
By Jason Plautz
Republican donor Andy Sabin had a great seat on the floor for Thursday’s GOP presidential debate and found himself increasingly impressed with the way Ted Cruz answered some questions. But overall, Sabin left frustrated with a lack of discussion of his pet topics: energy and climate change.
“Zero. None. It’s a nonissue,” Sabin said.
Just another lonely night in the life of a green GOP donor.
Sabin, president of the New York-based refining company Sabin Metal Corporation, may seem like a paradox. He’s given to Karl Rove’s Crossroads USA PAC and the state Republican Party, but also last year gave $3.5 million to Columbia University’s school of climate-change law. He’s vowed to try to get the party to fight climate change, even as many standard-bearers on the Right deny that it is happening.
Even though the party on the whole hasn’t embraced any climate-change action, there are a handful of donors trying to get the GOP on board. North Carolina businessman Jay Fasion, for example, got plenty of press over the summer (including in National Journal), for announcing a $10 million 501(c)(4) political action group and a $165 million foundation called ClearPath to back Republican candidates who want to work on clean energy.
So far in the presidential race, that money hasn’t made much of a dent—and now donors are left figuring out what’s next.
Of the candidates with strong enough poll numbers to make last week’s main-stage debate, only former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has acknowledged that humans play some role in the changing climate, although it’s hardly an endorsement of the scientific consensus. And with dwindling support that puts him around fifth place in the polls, nobody is counting on Bush’s stance to make much headway.
Cruz and front-runner Donald Trump have both been scornful of climate-change action (Cruz on Tuesday said climate change was the “perfect pseudo-scientific theory” backed by “big-government politicians”). Sen. Marco Rubio had to run from a story last week that he had supported a cap-and-trade system in Florida.
The candidates who offered the most full-throated support for climate action—former New York Gov. George Pataki and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina—both dropped out of the race after toiling in the low single digits (Graham on Friday endorsed Bush, but didn’t mention climate change in his endorsement).
“These people, they don’t understand,” Sabin said, calling out some candidates as “clueless” on the environment. “They think if we mention carbon reduction, it’s shutting down American industry. You and I know that’s not true.”
Faison, in an interview, said his expectations “weren’t too high for the primary season” but that he was hopeful the Republican nominee would have a clear energy agenda when the general election came around. Faison said his ClearPath spending group didn’t even cut a check to a presidential candidate in the fourth quarter of 2015—his last donation was a $1,000 gift to Rubio’s campaign reported in September.Rubio, he said, has positioned himself on clean energy in a “smart” way. Last week, Rubio said in New Hampshire: “Let’s be No. 1 in wind, let’s be No. 1 in solar, let’s be No. 1 in biofuel, No. 1 in renewables, No. 1 in energy efficiency. Let’s lead in all of these things.”
“We’re all about a conservative clean-energy agenda, and we are seeing candidates talk about that,” Faison said. “We don’t have to talk about the science of climate change to talk about clean energy, so to that extent we’re happy.”
But, Faison added: “If you look at the whole spectrum of elected officials, we don’t have to support a presidential candidate.”
Indeed, there are more glimmers of green on the congressional level. Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire has won plaudits from environmental groups for backing President Obama’s carbon-pollution limits on power plants (Faison gave her $500,000 last summer). Republican Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois, facing a tough reelection fight, has been less clear on his climate positions, although he voted against a Senate measure to kill the power-plant rules in November. Sabin gave two $2,700 donations to Kirk’s campaign in 2015.
And a smattering of House Republicans backed a nonbinding resolution saying that human activity contributes to climate change and encouraging action to fight it.
Seeing more action down the ballot, Sabin said that he’s begun to refocus his efforts on bringing together members of Congress—including Rep. Chris Gibson of New York, Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado, and Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana—to discuss environmental priorities, like nuclear power and natural gas.
But in a telling detail, Sabin said they’re talking about “carbon reduction,” not “climate change.”“We’re talking about the same thing, just a different title,” he said. “I think for some reason, Republicans think ‘climate change’ is a Democratic thing.”
-
Lawsuit Filed Over Industrial Boiler Air Standards
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Four environmental organizations challenged an Environmental Protection Agency rule that updated the air toxics standards for major source industrial boilers in response to petitions for reconsideration of the requirements (Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1021, 1/19/16).
The Sierra Club, Clean Air Council, Environmental Integrity Project and Chesapeake Climate Action Network filed a Jan. 19 petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit over the EPA's November 2015 reconsideration rule, which established alternative work practice standards for boiler startup, including work practices that allow the use of clean fuels during startup and shutdown.
The maximum achievable control technology standards (RIN 2060-AQ25; RIN 2060-AR13) for boilers, commonly referred to as boiler MACT, apply to more than 14,000 boilers at industrial facilities and are estimated by the EPA to cost industry about $1.6 billion annually.
The final rule (RIN 2060-AS09) being challenged by the environmental groups included several provisions that were welcomed by industry organizations, which said the changes would allow for the safe startup of boilers and alleviate the need for wood product manufacturers to install costly retrofits to comply with boiler MACT (216 DEN A-2, 11/9/15).
Environmental Groups Criticize ‘Loophole.'
James Pew, an Earthjustice attorney representing the environmental petitioners, said his clients are concerned that the EPA created a “loophole” for facilities during startup and shutdown. Additionally, Pew cited the EPA's decision to retain a carbon monoxide emissions floor of 130 parts per million as an issue of concern for the environmental groups.
The four environmental groups had petitioned the EPA to raise the boiler MACT rule's minimum carbon monoxide emissions limit, a request the agency rejected in the reconsideration rule.
The EPA in 2011 established carbon monoxide limits as a surrogate for all organic hazardous air pollutants, except for dioxins, that are emitted by boilers. The agency in 2013 established a minimum floor for those standards of 130 parts per million, a decision that effectively raised some of the limits included in the rule.
The Sierra Club and the other environmental petitioners argued in their petition for reconsideration that the EPA's new minimum floor for carbon monoxide emissions does not satisfy the Clean Air Act's requirements, which mandate that minimum emissions limits reflect the average emissions level achieved by the best performing 12 percent of sources for which the agency has data.
Standards ‘Much Less Protective.'
Pew said that the 130 ppm floor for carbon monoxide established by the EPA is “much less protective” than what the floor would be if the agency had followed the Clean Air Act's requirements. He noted that carbon monoxide serves as surrogate for pollutants like benzene and formaldehyde, which can be very harmful to human health.
“They are the very things our clients shouldn't be breathing,” Pew said. “We want EPA to do a better job of protecting people from toxic pollution.”
Pew said that concerns about the startup and shutdown loophole and the minimum carbon monoxide limit are not a comprehensive list of all the objections the environmental groups may raise before the court.
The Sierra Club and other environmental groups have challenged the legitimacy of using carbon monoxide as a surrogate for organic hazardous air pollutants in the main litigation over the boiler MACT rule. The D.C. Circuit heard arguments in that litigation in December, but it has not yet issued a decision (U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 11-1108, argued 12/3/15; 233 DEN A-5, 12/4/15).
-
EPA Aims To Ensure Haze Air Plan Lawsuit Heard In Federal Appeals Court
Jan 19, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA is urging a federal district court to dismiss tribal groups' lawsuit over the agency's regional haze emissions reduction federal implementation plan (FIP) for a major coal-fired power plant on Indian land, arguing that challenges to such FIPs are suits over federal rules that the Clean Air Act requires to be filed in federal appeals courts.
“This Court lacks jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim, however, because the Clean Air Act . . . provides that any challenges to a regulation such as the final rule at issue here must be brought in the Court of Appeals, not district court,” says the Department of Justice (DOJ) on EPA's behalf in a Jan. 14 motion filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco in To' Nizhoni Ani, et al., v. Jared Blumenfeld, et al.
Tribes in the case claim that EPA and the Department of the Interior (DOI) founded a federal advisory committee that failed to conform to legal requirements, cutting certain tribal groups out of the process for developing the haze FIP, which aims to reduce haze-forming emissions from the Navajo Generating Station (NGS) power plant.
Some tribal groups and environmentalists are challenging EPA's decision in the FIP to accept an “alternative” to the best available retrofit technology (BART) pollution controls that would otherwise apply. They claim the alternative -- created by the alleged advisory committee -- imposes weaker pollution controls than BART.
DOJ, however, argues in the motion that challenges to FIPs must be heard in an appellate court, and asks the district court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction or failure to state a contestable claim.
“[P]laintiffs fail to allege sufficient facts that either federal agency defendant, EPA or the Department of the Interior. . . , established or utilized the working group, as they must to state a claim” under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which sets requirements for the establishment of official advisory committees.
At press time the court had not ruled on DOJ's motion to dismiss, but the case could lead to an important ruling on the correct legal venue for challenging haze FIPs such as the NGS haze plan crafted by DOI and EPA.
DOI contracts for power produced by NGS, a large coal-fired plant on the Navajo Nation reservation in Arizona. DOJ says in the motion to dismiss that the plant impacts visibility at 11 “Class 1” areas -- national parks or wilderness areas -- in several states. Under EPA's regional haze rule, states, tribes and the agency must work together to produce plans that will mitigate haze-forming pollutants and restore visibility to natural conditions by 2064.
Federal Plan
Various parties with a stake in the outcome of the haze plan for NGS took part in a technical working group to explore alternatives to an earlier proposal by EPA to impose BART controls at the facility, including the utility Salt River Project, the Navajo Nation, the Gila River Indian Community, the Environmental Defense Fund, Western Resource Advocates, the Central Arizona Water Conservation District and DOI officials.
EPA first proposed the imposition of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from the plant, but then accepted working group recommendations for less-expensive controls.
EPA in its Aug. 8, 2014, FIP for the plant asserts that the alternative control technologies required by the plan, such as low-NOx burners and overfire air, are “better than BART” and hence permissible, because they ultimately achieve greater NOx reductions than the SCR initially proposed by EPA would have.
Some environmental groups disagree, saying the plan unlawfully delays emissions cuts required by the air law and fails to demonstrate greater benefits than BART would provide. Also, some tribal groups are pursuing legal action because, they say, they were effectively excluded from decision-making by EPA and DOI, in violation of FACA.
However, DOJ in its motion to dismiss says that, “Section 307 of the Clean Air Act unambiguously provides that review of a final action under the Act may be filed only in the United States Court of Appeals.”
DOJ cites legal precedent established by the Supreme Court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit -- which hears challenges to EPA rules with “nationwide scope or effect” - holding that FACA committees are those formally “established” and “utilized” by federal agencies, and that the definitions of these terms are narrow.
“Tangential involvement by an agency in the activities of a group, such as occasional communications or even attendance at meetings, is not enough to find that an agency 'actually formed' an advisory committee,” DOJ says.
A committee may be considered subject to FACA where it is “utilized” by a federal agency. However, DOJ says this term has been read by the courts to require that a committee is managed by the agency, for example by setting agendas or chairing meetings, and does not apply to simple use of a committee's work product by the agency.
Pending Litigation
Meanwhile, tribal groups and environmentalists are challenging the substance of the haze FIP for NGS and also the alleged exclusion of some groups from decision-making on the FIP in two cases now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, Yazzie v. EPA and Hopi Tribe v. EPA. In Yazzie, briefing is complete but argument has not been scheduled, while briefing is still ongoing in Hopi Tribe, DOJ notes in the district court motion to dismiss.
Among the accusations leveled at the federal government in Yazzie is that EPA misapplied its Tribal Authority Rule (TAR) which allows for treatment of certain Indian tribes as states for the purposes of Clean Air Act implementation. Tribes covered by the rule are presumed capable of producing their own tribal implementation plans for air law compliance. Indian tribes not treated in this manner are subject to direct regulation by EPA. The agency relied on the TAR in order to extend haze rule compliance deadlines, EPA's critics say.
“EPA incorrectly relied on TAR because the Navajo Nation contractually waived its right to regulate NGS in 1969 and therefore was never eligible for treatment as a state. However, even assuming arguendo the Navajo Nation was able to regulate NGS and that TAR is somehow applicable, EPA misapplied TAR when it ignored the plain language of the [air law] and used TAR to extend regional haze emission reduction deadlines at NGS,” tribal groups including To' Nizhoni Ani say in their March 16 opening brief in the Yazzie suit.
-
Obama Vetoes Congressional Resolution to Block Water Rule
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
President Barack Obama vetoed legislation Jan. 19 that would have nullified the administration's rule defining the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act.
The rule, written jointly by the Environmental Protection agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, would have been negated by a joint resolution of Congress passed under authority of the Congressional Review Act. The resolution (S.J. Res. 22) was passed by the Senate in November and the House Jan. 13.
The veto was fully anticipated and is expected to stand, given that neither house of Congress in approving the resolution mustered the two-thirds majority needed for a veto override (09 DEN A-1, 1/14/16).
In his veto message, Obama said, “The rule, which is a product of extensive public involvement and years of work, is critical to our efforts to protect the nation's waters and keep them clean; is responsive to calls for rulemaking from the Congress, industry, and community stakeholders; and is consistent with decisions of the United States Supreme Court.”
He added, “Because this resolution seeks to block the progress represented by this rule and deny businesses and communities the regulatory certainty and clarity needed to invest in projects that rely on clean water, I cannot support it.”
The Clean Water Rule, also widely referred to as the “waters of the U.S.” rule, or WOTUS, is the subject of litigation in many courts, leaving its fate in limbo. It has been put on hold by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit pending a decision on what court jurisdictions are appropriate for lawsuits against the rule (236 DEN A-1, 12/9/15).
-
Obama Vetoes GOP Attempt To Block Water Rule
Jan 19, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
President Obama on Tuesday rejected an attempt by congressional Republicans to overturn his landmark regulation asserting federal power over small bodies of water.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) rule, dubbed the Clean Water Rule or “waters of the United States,” would ensure that water used for drinking, recreation, economic development and other purposes is kept safe, Obama said in a message to Congress late Tuesday.“We must protect the waters that are vital for the health of our communities and the success of our businesses, agriculture, and energy development,” Obama wrote in his veto message.
“Because this resolution seeks to block the progress represented by this rule and deny businesses and communities the regulatory certainty and clarity needed to invest in projects that rely on clean water, I cannot support it.”
The House passed the resolution last week under the Congressional Review Act, which gives lawmakers a streamlined process to disapprove of regulation, blocking it and any similar rules. The Senate passed it in November.
The EPA wrote the rule with the Army Corps of Engineers, saying it essential to clarify that small waterways like ponds, streams and wetlands are protected under the Clean Water Act.
Obama said in his veto message that the rule responded to requests from Congress and industry, and is in line with Supreme Court rulings.
But the GOP made it a priority to block the rule. Republicans and business advocates say it extends federal reach over puddles, wet areas and other water and land that was never meant to have federal control.
Farmers, developers and other land users say that the rule would require federal permits for simple, everyday tasks like digging ditches and spraying pesticides.
The EPA is currently prohibited from enforcing the rule. A federal court blocked it last year to allow the court system to review whether it is legal.
It’s the second time Obama has vetoed a congressional attempt to overturn a major environmental rule in just over a month.
In December, he rejected the GOP’s resolution to stop his landmark climate rules for power plants.
-
Flint Residents Sue Over Water Contamination
Jan 20, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Nora Macaluso
A group of Flint, Mich., residents filed two separate class actions alleging Gov. Rick Snyder (R), other government officials and the state health and environment departments knew contaminated drinking water presented a public health emergency but instead chose to make public statements that the water was safe to drink (Mays v. Snyder, Mich. Ct. Claims, docket number unavailable, 1/15/16; Mays v. Flint, Genesee County Cir. Ct., docket number unavailable, 1/19/16).
The latest lawsuits, which come after another challenge filed in a federal court that also seeks class action status, say “prolonged and repeated false assurances made by public officials” resulted in serious harm to residents' health, the law firm of Pitt McGehee Palmer & Rivers, which represents the residents, said in a Jan. 19 statement. Moreover, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services erred in not reporting a spike in Legionnaire's disease cases that may have been linked to the decision to switch the city's drinking-water source, the law firm said.
In a lawsuit filed Jan. 15 in the Michigan Court of Claims, Melissa Mays and others allege, on behalf of “tens of thousands” of Flint residents who “have experienced and will continue to experience serious personal injury and property damage,” that state officials “knowingly took” their safe drinking water and replaced it with a “toxic alternative.” The lawsuit also alleges denial of the residents' constitutional right to fair and just treatment, as officials waited 18 months from the time they first received evidence that water pumped from the Flint River was exposing residents to hazards before taking action.
The families filing the suit said they have experienced health effects including high levels of lead and copper in their bloodstreams, brains, bones and other organs, in addition to property damage from corroded pipes and substantial losses in the value of their properties.
Damages, Monitoring Sought
The lawsuit seeks an order certifying it as a class action, an order declaring the defendants' conduct unconstitutional, an order of equitable relief including property repairs and the establishment of a monitoring fund, in addition to compensatory damages and attorney fees.
The other lawsuit, filed in Genesee County Circuit Court, alleges the city of Flint and state officials knew the switch to the Flint River without treatment with anti-corrosive agents would create a dangerous condition but continued to assure residents that the water was safe even as they had evidence of high lead levels. “Tens of thousands of innocent people” consumed the unsafe water and were “seriously and irreparably harmed” as a result of this “gross negligence” and “misconduct,” the lawsuit says. The lawsuit asks the court to enjoin the city from shutting off water to users and to declare that Flint water users not be required to pay future bills for harmful water.
The switch to the Flint River from the Detroit water system was made under a state-appointed emergency manager and was designed to save money. The city has since switched back to the Detroit system, and state and federal efforts to distribute bottled water and water filters to residents are underway.
-
Flint Mayor Meeting With Obama
Jan 19, 2016 | Politico
By Nolan D. McCaskill
The White House expects President Barack Obama to meet with Flint, Michigan, Mayor Karen Weaver later Tuesday, press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters.
Weaver, who is visiting the White House for a conference of U.S. mayors, has already met with Valerie Jarrett, a senior Obama adviser, to discuss the water crisis facing Flint.
“And obviously as a newly elected mayor, she’s got a lot of responsibility that she’s trying to juggle, and so we felt it was important for staff at the White House to have an opportunity to hear at some length the challenges that are facing the city,” Earnest said. “And I would expect, before the end of the day, that the president will have an opportunity to visit with Mayor Weaver as well while she’s here. And again, it’s an opportunity for the president to hear from the mayor of Flint on the significant challenges that are facing that city.”
Obama last weekend signed a declaration allowing the federal government to provide an additional $5 million in assistance to state and local officials in Michigan and Flint, a deeply impoverished city with a majority African-American population that has been plagued by lead-contaminated water.
Earnest said the Department of Health and Human Services will appoint Nicole Lurie, assistant secretary of preparedness and response, to lead the federal response. “Obviously the city of Flint and the citizens of Flint are going through a very difficult time, and the U.S. government is determined to do what we can to support the state and local officials who are responsible for responding to this incident,” Earnest said.
Weaver earlier Tuesday praised Hillary Clinton, who has been the most outspoken presidential candidate on the crisis in Flint. At Sunday’s Democratic debate, Clinton was the first person to bring up the ongoing water crisis, saying in her closing remarks that every American should be outraged by what’s happening there.
“When Secretary Clinton talked about this in the debate, it really—if you thought we had a national spotlight on it, this gave us an added spotlight,” Weaver told reporters on a conference call. “So it was really good to have her step up and speak out about what’s going on in the city of Flint.”
Asked whether that was an endorsement, she said: “It does sound like it, doesn’t it? I want Hillary.”
Obama will stop in Detroit on Wednesday to meet with residents before attending a car show and delivering remarks on the city’s progress in regard to the U.S. auto industry.
But with all going on Tuesday between Weaver and the White House, “I would not expect that the president will stop in Flint on his trip tomorrow,” Earnest said. “He’s obviously got a full schedule where he’ll spend some time talking about the tremendous economic recovery that the city of Detroit has made.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/flint-michigan-obama-water-217974#ixzz3xm3KvokQ
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested