Preview Newsletter
ACC am feb 4
-
Weighty Questions Raised by Academies' Endocrine Panel
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A National Academies committee Feb. 3 discussed characteristics affecting the quality and reliability of toxicity studies, health effects that should be considered and many other issues that could affect the Environmental Protection Agency's conclusion about whether low doses of a chemical affect hormone function. -
Eradicate Chemicals in Products
Feb 3, 2016 | Albany Times Union
By Kathleen A. Curtis
Last year, researchers went to New York City stores and easily bought a dozen popular children's products — shoes, lunch boxes, clothing, necklaces, school supplies and jewelry — containing lead, cadmium, and arsenic, dangerous chemicals linked to cancers and learning disabilities. -
World Cancer Day: Congress Acts to Reduce Causes
Feb 4, 2016 | Public News Service
By Eric Tegethoff
Today is World Cancer Day, and if you look around your house, you might find water bottles, canned food, and an old mattress contaminated with chemicals that could give you cancer. -
Andriukaitis Promises EDC Criteria 'Before the Summer'
Feb 4, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
European Health Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis has pledged to present scientific criteria for the identification of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) “before the summer”. -
Seven Railroads To Miss US Safety Deadline
Feb 3, 2016 | ICIS News
By Mark Milam
Federal officials released a schedule for positive train control (PTC) on Wednesday that shows at least seven of the nation's carriers will not meet the congressional deadline to install the safety system. PTC, due to be implemented by 2018, is designed to slow or stop trains and prevent collisions or derailments. CSX Transportation and Norfolk... -
Crude Oil Rail Hub Operator Sued Over Alleged Air Violations
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By John Herzfeld
A coalition of environmental and community groups alleged Feb. 3 that a crude oil rail transportation terminal in Albany, N.Y., is operating in violation of the Clean Air Act (Benton v. Global Cos. LLC, N.D.N.Y., No. 1:16-cv-00125, 2/3/16). In a civil complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, the groups... -
Revised Fracking Rules Survive Board Scrutiny
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
A nearly five-year process to update Pennsylvania's oil and gas drilling regulations to include standards on hydraulic fracturing inched closer toward completion on Feb. 3 after an environmental review board approved the proposal. The Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board (EQB) voted 15-4 in favor of the final rulemaking... -
SAB Panel Steps Back From Broad Criticism Of Draft EPA Fracking Study
Feb 3, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Lara Beaven & Bridget DiCosmo
An EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) panel appears to be stepping back from its broad disagreement with the agency's draft study that found no “widespread, systemic” impacts to drinking water from hydraulic fracturing, instead questioning the ambiguity of the conclusion and calling for better definitions from EPA in its findings. -
Senate Endorses DOE Review Of California Methane Leak
Feb 3, 2016 | InsideEPA
Senators have agreed to add an amendment to pending energy legislation that would require the Department of Energy (DOE) to create a task force to review and respond to a massive methane leak at a Southern California natural gas storage facility, and for the task force to weigh in on whether to continue operations at the facility. -
686 Miles of Gas Pipelines Approved to Move Shale Gas
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jonathan N. Crawford
About $4.22 billion of U.S. shale gas pipeline projects by companies including Spectra Energy Corp. and Williams Partners LP cleared federal approval, a move that could ultimately help Northeast producers who are grappling with a supply glut. The three pipeline projects, which will carry as much as 1.1 billion cubic... -
Sempra's ‘Don't Worry’ View on Huge Gas Leak Isn't Working
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Bebe Raupe
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) plans to introduce legislation requiring quicker state and federal responses for communities suffering lead contamination in their drinking water supplies. Brown will file a bill Feb. 4 requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to automatically notify affected areas if responsible state or local agencies fail... -
Clean Power Plan Opponents Fear MATS Repeat
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Opponents of the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan fear states will be forced to comply with the carbon dioxide reductions for power plants long before courts decide whether the rule is legal unless the U.S. Supreme Court halts its implementation. -
McCabe Faults House's EPA Air Rule Compliance Bills
Feb 3, 2016 | InsideEPA
Acting EPA air policy chief Janet McCabe is criticizing two pending House bills aimed at easing compliance with agency rules for utilities burning coal waste and for brick manufacturing companies, warning that the measures would undermine public health protections by allowing an increase in emissions from both industries. -
Lawmakers Seek Rule Leniency to Protect Key Sectors
Feb 4, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sean Reilly
A House subcommittee appeared split along party lines yesterday over bills to relax air quality regulations on brick makers and a small niche of the electric power business. -
Brick, Coal Refuse Industries Support Air Rules Bills
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Industry representatives told a House subcommittee that a pair of bills on Environmental Protection Agency air regulations would address key compliance concerns for the brick and coal refuse-to-energy sectors, but Democrats on the panel appeared disinclined to support the measures. -
Energy Bill in Limbo After Flint Deal Collapses
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The fate of a broad Senate energy bill was in limbo Feb. 3 after a deal to include funding to help with a crisis caused by lead-tainted water in Flint, Mich., fell apart, leading Democrats to vow to block the underlying legislation. While Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) told reporters she thought she had secured a deal for an amendment... -
Flint Fight Threatens Energy Bill
Feb 3, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Devin Henry
The fight over the water crisis in Flint, Mich., is threatening to tank the Senate’s broad energy reform bill. Negotiations to attach an aid package were increasingly breaking down on Wednesday, with one key Democrat warning her caucus could block the underlying legislation if it isn’t satisfied.“I still don’t know where we are”... -
Flint Drinking Water Crisis Rattles Congress
Feb 3, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Annie Snider
Partisan anger over the Flint, Michigan, water crisis flared in Congress on Wednesday — spawning finger-pointing at a House hearing while threatening to scuttle a wide-ranging Senate energy bill. Lawmakers of both parties clashed over blame for the crisis during a House Oversight and Government Reform ...
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
Weighty Questions Raised by Academies' Endocrine Panel
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A National Academies committee Feb. 3 discussed characteristics affecting the quality and reliability of toxicity studies, health effects that should be considered and many other issues that could affect the Environmental Protection Agency's conclusion about whether low doses of a chemical affect hormone function.
The committee eventually will say whether it thinks the toxicity tests and risk assessment approaches the EPA typically would use to reach a conclusion are robust enough to identify decreased fertility, early puberty and other health problems many scientific studies have associated with hormonally active chemicals or “endocrine disruptors.”
The advice that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine committee will provide the EPA—due in 2018—has important human health and marketplace implications.
Public concern about endocrine disruptors such as bisphenol A (BPA)—combined with the availability of easily substituted chemicals—already has prompted retailers around the globe to pull BPA-based infant products from their shelves.
Baby bottle manufacturers, for example, have substituted less-studied chemicals to make bottles even as many governments' scientific panels have said BPA is safe for such common applications (164 DEN B-1, 8/23/13).
Committee Exploring Scope of Its Work
At the Feb. 3 meeting, the academies' “low dose committee” discussed the reported health effects caused by two chemicals and one group of chemicals: 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, more commonly called dioxin or TCDD (Chemical Abstract Service No. 1746-01-6); bisphenol A (CAS No. 80-05-7); and seven phthalates.
The panel is considering using these chemicals and related health effects information as case studies.
The case studies would evaluate whether the EPA's current regulatory toxicity-testing practices adequately consider the possibility that low doses of chemicals that mimic, block or alter hormones, cause health effects that wouldn't be predicted using the higher doses traditionally associated with laboratory animal studies.
The panel would examine chemicals that mimic, alter or block the actions of estrogen, the female reproductive hormone, and androgen, the male reproductive hormone.
The panel also is supposed to use systematic reviews to evaluate animal, human and mechanistic data (detailed in vitro, genetic and other biological data) and offer the EPA advice on how the different types of data can be integrated to make a causal association.
Questions Panel Asked Scientists
The panel asked academic and government scientists to weigh in on Feb. 3 on questions such as:
• questions it could explore in its case studies;
• whether TCDD, BPA and phthalates would be appropriate case studies;
• whether the health effects the panel listed would be the right ones to consider;
• what species of laboratory animals should be included in the studies it evaluates;
• what characteristics of a toxicity study would make it more or less valid or reliable; and
• whether the database about the chemical or chemical group was sufficient to conduct a systematic review.
The government scientists that the committee invited were selected based on their expertise as researchers, not as agency representatives. The advice these scientists offered represented their own opinions, not the views of the agencies for which they worked.
Scientists Offer Panel Advice
Brenda Eskenazi, an epidemiologist at the University of California's School of Public Health, urged the committee to consider the effects of dioxin-like chemicals if it uses TCDD in a case study.
The human studies of dioxin involve not only the single chemical, dioxin but also dioxin-like chemicals, Eskenazi said. The combination of dioxin-like chemicals contributes to the health problems TCDD can cause, scientists say.
Earl Gray, an EPA toxicologist and expert on effects that disrupt androgen, commented on study quality issues.
The results of endocrine studies in laboratory animals can easily be misunderstood if the researchers involved fail to test the animals' feed, bedding and other surroundings for background levels of the chemicals being studied, Gray said.
BPA, Phthalates Called Ubiquitous
Bisphenol A and phthalates are ubiquitous industrial chemicals found throughout people's and animals' environments and in their bodies, said Daniel Doerge, a toxicologist with the Food and Drug Administration, who has long studied BPA.
Both chemicals are used in plastics and thus can be in laboratory equipment, migrate into food and reach many other parts of the environment.
Studies that examine internal doses of a chemical also are particularly useful, Doerge said. The reason is data that show how a chemical moves through the body and is transformed by and eventually eliminated from the human or animal body help scientists take information from one type of study and apply it to understanding the data from another study.
During the public comment period, Pat Casano, a government affairs attorney with the General Electric Co., urged the academies panel to narrow the scope of the case studies it undertakes.
It could be an impossible task for the panel to complete in the time allowed a systematic review of animal, human and mechanistic data for each of the health effects of each chemical or group of chemicals discussed during the meeting, she said.
If the panel were to expand the TCDD case study to include dioxin-like chemicals, it should consider research published in 2015 that found some dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls to be less potent than previously estimated, Casano said.
-
Eradicate Chemicals in Products
Feb 3, 2016 | Albany Times Union
By Kathleen A. Curtis
Last year, researchers went to New York City stores and easily bought a dozen popular children's products — shoes, lunch boxes, clothing, necklaces, school supplies and jewelry — containing lead, cadmium, and arsenic, dangerous chemicals linked to cancers and learning disabilities.
It was no anomaly. Few Americans of any age can get through a day without encountering products with chemicals that can harm their health. These include bisphenol A, or BPA (in food can liners and plastics, which can damage the brain, liver, heart, and reproductive and immune systems); flame retardants (in children's products and furniture, which can impair brain development and cause cancer); and perfluorinated chemicals, or PFCs (in waterproof coatings on pans, food wrappers and clothing, which can disrupt hormones and cause cancer).
This is a TU+ story. Click for more information.Why, in 21st-century America, are everyday products containing chemicals with well-known toxicity still readily — and legally — for sale?
A partial answer is that our nation's system to regulate toxic chemicals is dangerously inadequate. It is based on the federal Toxic Substances Control Act, known as TSCA, which became law when Gerald Ford was still president.
In fact, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has adequate hazard information on only 200 of the 83,000 chemicals in commerce, and it has banned or restricted the use of only five. Not 50. Five. And none since 1990.
Congress finally is making an effort to reform TSCA. The House and Senate each passed versions and are now hammering out differences in a conference committee. Fortunately, Rep. Paul Tonko, representing New York's 20th District, and ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee's Environment and Economy Subcommittee, is one of the conferees and played a major role shaping his chamber's version.
They're big and complex bills. But a wide range of public health and environmental advocates, and even many businesses, are hoping the conference committee will jettison at least three poison pills embedded — with the help of the chemical industry — in the Senate's version.
The Senate would allow some potentially harmful chemicals to be designated low-priority, with "safe harbor" status offering a false sense of security while insulating against regulation.
The Senate would roll back EPA's current ability to regulate toxics in imported products, leaving families perilously exposed: Most products are imported, and many U.S. trading partners disregard concerns about toxics.
The Senate bill would halt state or local regulation of a chemical once formal EPA review begins, which could take upward of a decade before any action on the chemical occurs. This aims to stop protections coming from states, counties and cities today. Their actions have led the charge to shield people from dangerous chemicals.
For example, in 2009, Suffolk County became the first U.S. jurisdiction to ban sale of baby bottles and sippy cups containing BPA. Albany and Schenectady counties and cities and states across the country followed Suffolk's lead. Baby bottle makers responded by removing BPA entirely.
Numerous states and counties, including in New York, restricted sale of products containing other toxic chemicals, prompting companies to respond with safer products for everyone. We can't afford to lose essential protection like this.
In fact, New York state is poised yet again to limit toxic chemicals in children's products, following county leads. This must move forward in 2016, regardless of the final language in federal law.
No one should have to wonder whether a product at a nearby story is safe to use. For the first time in four decades, our leaders can put us on the path to that reality. The stakes are high; it's literally about life and death.
Kathleen A. Curtis, LPN, is the executive director of Clean and Healthy New York, an advocacy, education and research group that promotes safer chemicals, a sustainable economy and a healthier world.
-
World Cancer Day: Congress Acts to Reduce Causes
Feb 4, 2016 | Public News Service
By Eric Tegethoff
Today is World Cancer Day, and if you look around your house, you might find water bottles, canned food, and an old mattress contaminated with chemicals that could give you cancer.
While some states have banned these potential cancer causers, federal agencies have had their hands tied in terms of regulation. Oregon Congressman Kurt Schrader(D-OR 5th District) says a new bill passed by the House and Senate changes that.
"I think it'll mean less cancer-producing substances or toxics in the environment, and frankly better, more clear enforcement if there's an occasional, hopefully rare, bad actor."
Schrader cosponsored the bill, which passed through Congress almost unanimously.
The new bill is actually an attempt to modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. Federal agencies' evaluation of harmful chemicals has come to a standstill in recent decades because of a lack of firm deadlines. Schrader says the updated bill removes these barriers, allowing federal agencies to test potential carcinogens and keep consumers safe.
"That's the essence of good legislation, that's the essence of bipartisanship, and that's the essence of getting something done that improves the environment and gives business some regulatory certainty that they can count on," he says.
Congress is now working on merging the House and Senate versions of the bill.
In addition to items around the house, you should also keep an eye on your wallet, because what you find, or don't find, there could affect your chances of surviving cancer.
New research published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology shows cancer patients who file for bankruptcy during treatment are much more likely to die from the disease. Coauthor of the study Aasthaa Bansal, Research Assistant Professor at the University of Washington, says doctors can reduce this risk by making sure patients understand that experimental and expensive treatment does not mean better treatment.
"If a treatment doesn't have clear, strong evidence of working, but it has potentially high out-of-pocket costs, that might be something to consider before prescribing it to patients," says Bansal. - See more at:
-
Andriukaitis Promises EDC Criteria 'Before the Summer'
Feb 4, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
European Health Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis has pledged to present scientific criteria for the identification of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) “before the summer”.
Speaking in a European Parliament debate on the issue earlier this week, he defended the time it is taking the Commission to finish its impact assessment into the various options.
Last year the European Court of Justice upheld a claim by Swedenthat it had breached the law by failing to publish the criteria by the December 2013 deadline set out in the biocidal products Regulation (BPR).
In response the Commission said it would continue to conduct the impact assessment and aim to finish it by the end of 2016. The statement outraged NGOs and was criticised by the Swedish government.
In the debate Mr Andriukaitis told MEPs the Commission will “move as fast as possible” to finalise the criteria, but an impact assessment is an “essential” tool to guide its decision.
There are still “diverging views on some critical points on how EDCs should be identified,” he said. “The science is not unanimous; and the member states are divided between supporting a hazard-based approach, or a risk-based one.”
He added that the criteria must be “manageable” from a regulatory viewpoint, as well as ensuring a high level of protection for human health.
Pressure from MEPs
But some MEPs said the delay was due to extensive industry lobbying.
Green MEP Martin Häusling said the Commission had “bent to the wishes of the agricultural chemicals lobby”. He urged Mr Andriukaitis to take consumer protection seriously by accepting the draft criteria proposed back in 2013.
And Jytte Guteland from Sweden's Social Democrats said his country is proud to have forced the Commission to “respect its duties”.
“[I] hope you are going to stop putting off [the] process and take full responsibility to protect the health of EU citizens, which is your duty according to the EU treaties,” he said.
Other MEPs supported Mr Andriukaitis, saying an impact assessment is the best way to produce scientifically reliable criteria.
“I appreciate that the Commission is ready to speed up the process. The goal in the end is to find criteria that can best identify substances which cause harm under realistic conditions, and to regulate their use appropriately,” said Cristian-Silviu Buşoi from the European People's Party.
Mr Buşoi, who the previous week hosted a discussion in the parliament on the issue, also said “there is no legal vacuum now; people are being protected by legislation that is in place: by the REACH Regulation”.
His comments echo those on Cefic’s website that “despite claims to the contrary in some quarters, endocrine disruptors are already addressed by the current strict EU regulatory framework."
The NGO ChemSec says it is "problematic that the Commission keeps mixing science and policy by sticking to the need of a socio-economic impact assessment in order to establish scientific EDC criteria ... The criteria should be set based on science only."
But speaking in the discussion hosted by Mr Buşoi the week before the debate, Laura Fabrizi of the Commission’s health directorate, DG Sante, stressed that the options presented by the Commission cover both science-based criteria and policy options.
Mr Andriukaitis said the final proposals will be issued as two separate legal texts:an implementing Regulation containing the criteria which will be applied to substances falling under the plant protection products Regulation; anda delegated act containing criteria applicable under the BPR.
-
Seven Railroads To Miss US Safety Deadline
Feb 3, 2016 | ICIS News
By Mark Milam
Federal officials released a schedule for positive train control (PTC) on Wednesday that shows at least seven of the nation's carriers will not meet the congressional deadline to install the safety system. PTC, due to be implemented by 2018, is designed to slow or stop trains and prevent collisions or derailments. CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern are among the seven carriers that expect to miss the deadline.
In October, after much outcry from the railroad industry and industries such as agriculture and chemical producers that rely on rail service, the US Congress passed a bill giving carriers extra time to install PTC.
Yet a group of railroad companies have informed the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) that they do not expect to have the technology installed until 2020. Such a delay would require special permission for the individual carriers from Anthony Foxx, US secretary of transportation.
FRA officials said they are encouraged that many railroads have submitted plans to either meet the deadline or finish installation ahead of schedule. There are approximately 31 freight and passenger carriers that will achieve the safety mandate before or by the deadline.
Originally, companies were to have PTC across the nation's rail system by 2015. The measure came about in 2008 with the passage of a safety law.
The PTC technology is a system of GPS, wireless radios and a computer network to keep track of trains. It can either reduce speed or stop movement on all lines carrying passengers or toxic chemicals.
For government authorities and the general public the issue was solely about safety, but for the railroad industry the impact was about cost and time. Most estimates say implementing the technology would cost the railroad industry around $70bn.
Railroads began repeatedly warning authorities and the public that they would fall short of the year's end deadline, and as a result they would stop hauling toxic, yet vital, commodities such as ammonia and chlorine.
Congress then passed the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act of 2015, which pushed back the PTC deadline until 31 December 2018, with a provision that railroads can seek a waiver for an additional two years if warranted.
Twenty-one passenger and commuter railroads and the seven major freight railroad companies operating within the US had urged Congress to extend the deadline to 2018, and at least two of the majors had threatened to halt hazardous shipments.
Norfolk Southern announced in October that it would no longer accept shipments of poisonous-inhalation-hazard commodities effective 1 December 2015, while Union Pacific also threatened to shutter hazardous shipping in December as the original deadline loomed. Neither company followed through with the transportation halt.
Norfolk Southern officials declined to comment on their inability to achieve PTC, until after the 2018 deadline.
According to the FRA schedule, Union Pacific will meet the deadline by 2018.
CSX Transportation said safety is the company’s highest priority and it is fully committed to deploying PTC on its network as soon as possible, especially considering the logistical undertaking.
A spokesperson said CSX on 26 January submitted its PTC plan to FRA detailing how the carrier will deploy all necessary technology by the end of 2018 and, following an extensive period of testing and training, have a fully operational system in place in 2020.
“For CSX, accomplishing that goal means conducting a complete airborne laser-imaging survey of our entire 21,000-mile network, with all assets mapped to within 7 feet of their precise location. Installing 4,600 wayside units, replacing signals along 7,500 miles of track, installing 1,285 radio base stations, equipping 3,200 locomotives and training approximately 19,000 employees,” said a CSX spokesperson.
“Deploying an interactive PTC system is a complex undertaking requiring the creation and integration of new systems which, as a safety-critical component of CSX’s operating systems, must perform flawlessly from the moment it is activated. CSX is committed to deploying such a system as soon as we can safely do so.”
At this time, CSX has installed more than 2,400 wayside units, replaced signals on over 4,700 miles of tracks and completed 500-plus radio base stations.
The carrier said more than 160 locomotives also are fully equipped and 2,895 locomotives have been at least partially equipped, with nearly 12,000 employees trained. CSX also has begun the final development and testing phase of PTC on some of the regional subdivisions of its network.
The carrier currently has 1,000 employees working on PTC deployment and through the end of 2015 had invested $1.5bn. CSX expects to spend a total of $2.2bn before the system is complete in 2020.
-
Crude Oil Rail Hub Operator Sued Over Alleged Air Violations
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By John Herzfeld
A coalition of environmental and community groups alleged Feb. 3 that a crude oil rail transportation terminal in Albany, N.Y., is operating in violation of the Clean Air Act (Benton v. Global Cos. LLC, N.D.N.Y., No. 1:16-cv-00125, 2/3/16).
In a civil complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, the groups claim Global Companies LLC failed to obtain a required new source review air pollution permit and put in requisite pollution controls when it modified its Albany facility in 2012. The modifications allowed a fivefold increase in the facility's capacity, according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs, which include the Albany County government, also alleged the company violated a state Department of Environmental Conservation permit by handling crude oil from the Bakken region of North Dakota, which they said emits more air pollution than conventional crude oil.
The lawsuit seeks an injunction requiring the company to apply for a new permit and prohibiting the facility from handling Bakken crude oil. It also seeks fines of $37,500 a day.
Environmental Justice Area
The Global facility is in Albany's South End, which has been designated by the Department of Environmental Conservation as an environmental justice area, the groups said. The facility is near residences, schools, churches, businesses and social service agencies, they said.
Moreover, it is adjacent to a housing project, Ezra Prentice Homes, with some 400 residents, including more than 200 children, according to the groups. The president of the project's tenant association, Charlene Benton, is the lead plaintiff in the case.
Pollutants emitted by Global's operations include benzene and other volatile organic compounds and contribute to ground-level ozone, the groups said.
“Global has operated its massive crude-by-rail terminal with no regard for the health and safety of the hundreds Ezra Prentice residents who live on the facility's doorstep, and the thousands who live, work, and go to school within blocks of the Global facility,” Earthjustice attorney Christopher Amato said in a statement.
Global's permit was based on claims in its application that it would “handle conventional crude oil during marine loading operations,” but the company instead has “imported large quantities of Bakken crude oil, which is extremely volatile and emits significantly more [volatile organic compounds] than conventional crude oil,” said Roger Downs, conservation director of the Sierra Club's Atlantic Chapter.
Other plaintiffs are the Center for Biological Diversity, Riverkeeper Inc., Scenic Hudson, Natural Resources Defense Council and Catskill Mountainkeeper.
Company Denies Allegations
In a statement, Edward J. Faneuil, Global Partners executive vice president and general counsel, said the company “is and has been in compliance with regulatory and permitting requirements at that facility, including requirements under the Clean Air Act.”
He added: “We remain fully committed to operating all of our facilities in a safe, legal and environmentally responsible manner, and we will vigorously defend ourselves against any claims to the contrary.”
-
Revised Fracking Rules Survive Board Scrutiny
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
A nearly five-year process to update Pennsylvania's oil and gas drilling regulations to include standards on hydraulic fracturing inched closer toward completion on Feb. 3 after an environmental review board approved the proposal.
The Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board (EQB) voted 15-4 in favor of the final rulemaking, “Environmental Protection Performance Standards at Oil and Gas Well Sites,” more commonly referred to as Chapter 78 and 78a of the Pennsylvania Code.
The 20-member board, which is responsible for reviewing all DEP regulations before their adoption, includes representatives from 11 state agencies, five citizen advisors and four members of the state legislature.
The rulemaking will now be sent to the state's Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) and the House and Senate Environmental Resources and Energy committees for a final review. The IRRC is an independent agency that does the final review of all proposed regulations to make sure they are consistent with other laws and statutes.
The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) first initiated the rulemaking in April 2011 and has since held 20 advisory board and committee meetings, 12 public hearings and opened the rule to 135 days of public comment that generated almost 28,000 comments, according to Scott Perry, DEP's deputy secretary for oil and gas management.
“We received comments on all ends of the spectrum on this rulemaking,” Perry told the EQB during its meeting Feb. 3. Some of the comments were “diametrically opposed,” and it was impossible to incorporate everything, he said. “Sometimes consensus is just not possible.”
Rulemaking Received Extensive Review
DEP Secretary John Quigley, who serves as the board's chairman, asked the EQB to approve the rulemaking, which had gone through what he called “one of the most transparent and engaged public processes in the history of the agency.”
The regulations were last revised in 2001.
EQB members who voted against the proposal questioned whether the rules were ripe for approval, noting that two advisory boards tasked to review the measures had raised questions.
The Conventional Oil and Gas Advisory Committee (COGAC), formed in March 2015 to review the regulation as it applied to conventional oil and gas drilling,recommended in its report that the board reject the rules that applied to conventional oil and gas operations.
And a 78-page report from the DEP's Oil and Gas Technical Advisory Board (TAB), which focused on the chapter of the regulation that applies to unconventional drilling, also raised questions and suggested revisions to the rules.
“If you have two advisory boards which you appointed, basically, and they both say ‘don't do it,’ or at least are lukewarm, my question is, why are we here?” Sen. Gene Yaw (R), an EQB board member and chair of the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, asked during the board's meeting.
29 New Forms Required
Rep. John Maher (R), chairman of the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee and an EQB board member, told Bloomberg BNA in a phone call Feb. 3 after the vote that complying with the proposed standards will require 29 new forms, “and none of them exist on the public record.”
Maher suggested eight “mostly technical” revisions to the rules during the EQB meeting on Feb. 3, all of which were rejected.
The IRRC could review the regulation as early as this spring, according to the DEP (04 DEN A-9, 1/7/16).
The Senate and House have until 24 hours before the IRRC meets to disprove the regulation or file a notice of intent to review, DEP spokesman Neil Shader told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail Feb. 3. If a committee passes a resolution to disapprove the regulation, and if the resolution passes both chambers and is signed by the governor, the regulation is killed, Shader said.
The governor and Legislature have only once in Pennsylvania history overturned a regulation in this way, Maher told Bloomberg BNA.
-
SAB Panel Steps Back From Broad Criticism Of Draft EPA Fracking Study
Feb 3, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Lara Beaven & Bridget DiCosmo
An EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) panel appears to be stepping back from its broad disagreement with the agency's draft study that found no “widespread, systemic” impacts to drinking water from hydraulic fracturing, instead questioning the ambiguity of the conclusion and calling for better definitions from EPA in its findings.
During a Feb. 1-2 teleconference, the panel wrestled with how the agency should acknowledge documented impacts from fracking to drinking water in certain locations while making clear that these impacts have not been found at most sites -- a question that will inform the panel's eventual final recommendations to the agency.
There is “no doubt” that there are impacts to drinking water in some locations, Shari Dunn-Norman of Missouri University of Science and Technology said. But those impacts are not systemic across the entire fracking industry, she added.
“It's kind of hard to say” if EPA's conclusion is accurate, another panelist said. “It does depend on how those words are defined.”
Abby Li of Exponent Health Sciences agreed, noting that while the EPA draft report has some data gaps, the agency may be correct that impacts are not widespread.
“The issue is about the word 'widespread,'” Susan Brantley of Pennsylvania State University said. “I do have an issue with this word.”
Dean Malouta of White Mountain Energy Consulting cautioned that the panel should not condemn hydraulic fracturing as a practice, but noted that there are some places with widespread impacts to water supplies.
The panel is reviewing its Jan. 7 draft consensus report advising EPA on how to improve its massive draft study, released in June, which identifies mechanisms by which fracking could potentially impact drinking water. The SAB panel has wrestled with the agency's draft conclusion that, “We did not find evidence that hydraulic fracturing mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States."
In its draft review of the study, the SAB panel says EPA's statement “does not clearly describe the system(s) of interest (e.g., groundwater, surface water) nor the definitions of 'systemic,' 'widespread, or 'impacts.'” During the call, however, the panelists discussed removing the word “impacts” from the sentence, noting that EPA's report does include a definition of impacts.
The SAB panel also raised concerns that statement does not reflect uncertainties and data limitations related to such impacts, but during the Feb. 1-2 call discussed ways EPA could address some of the uncertainties either through long term research or utilizing existing data.
For example, the panel found “significant data gaps” with respect to hazard data on chemicals commonly used in fracking, panel chairman David Dzombak said Feb. 2, adding that the panel is poised to address whether EPA utilized all available toxicological data.
The panel's draft recommendations include a call for EPA reduce uncertainties in its assessment of well cementing and casing integrity by expanding its review to more of the 20,000 well files the agency references in the draft report and conduct more of a statistical analysis.
But Brantley cautioned against “an overly broad brush” approach of telling EPA to expand its review. And another member said, “It's difficult to pull back from a strong recommendation” that EPA expand the review.
Potential Impacts
Debate over the scale of impacts was a major issue during the public comment portion of the meeting, where both industry and environmental group representatives stressed the importance of EPA finalizing the report quickly.
Katie Brown of the industry group Energy In Depth criticized SAB's concerns about the EPA report, saying the panel “admits these events [of contamination] are infrequent” and that asking EPA to prove impacts are not widespread “is asking EPA to prove a negative. SAB has produced a document that confirms EPA.”
However, “there's more to the widespread, systematic line than the dictionary definition,” Hugh MacMillan of Food & Water Watch said. “There's the question of scale.”
Nichole Saunders of the Environmental Defense Fund said EPA has developed a good report and urged SAB to finalize its review before the value of the report is diminished, adding that she is encouraged to see the panel expressing concerns about the agency's conclusions.
Referring to the alleged contamination problems in Dimock PA, Pavillion, WY, and Parker County, TX, Saunders said that even if these sites are outliers, they show there can be impacts from fracking. Therefore, EPA needs to acknowledge that hydraulic fracturing can have significant impacts, even if they are not found at all locations, and the agency needs to better document its data gaps, she said.
Saunders comments were echoed by John Noel of Clean Water Action, who said EPA should discuss upfront any uncertainties and should include information from Dimock, Pavillion and Parker County in the final report.
The SAB's draft cover letter to EPA, as well as the executive summary and comments to various charge questions, recommends the agency should include and explain the status, data and potential releases, and findings if available for the EPA and state investigations conducted in Dimock, Pavillion and Parker County.
Those location are “where hydraulic fracturing activities are perceived by many members of the public to have caused significant local impacts to drinking water resources. Examination of these high-visibility cases is important so that the public can understand the status of investigations in these areas, conclusions associated with the investigations, lessons learned for hydraulic fracturing practice if any, plans for remediation if any, and the degree to which information from these case studies can be extrapolated to other locations,” says the draft letter.
High-Profile Cases
Brantley said that in re-reading EPA's report she realized the agency does mention these high-profile cases but not by the location names most people use. For example, the issues in Pavillion are referred to as alleged water quality problems in the Wind River formations in Wyoming. “That's confusing for the public,” she said “I think it's important that EPA provide more clarity,” she said, calling on EPA to provide “critical analysis” of the three case studies.
But Walter Hufford of Talisman Energy USA Inc.-REPSOL cautioned that SAB “needs to be very careful about what we'd be asking EPA to do. I would not be comfortable asking EPA to opine on” studies conducted by state agencies.
Scott Bair, an emeritus professor at Ohio State University, asked whether it would be worthwhile to ask EPA to identify what stages of the water cycle were impacted at the three sites. He noted that approximately 20 percent of the public comments have been about those sites and that it could be helpful to identify what went wrong, especially if regulations and/or industry practices have changed.
-
Senate Endorses DOE Review Of California Methane Leak
Feb 3, 2016 | InsideEPA
Senators have agreed to add an amendment to pending energy legislation that would require the Department of Energy (DOE) to create a task force to review and respond to a massive methane leak at a Southern California natural gas storage facility, and for the task force to weigh in on whether to continue operations at the facility.
The Senate in a voice vote late Feb. 2 approved an amendment to the pending bipartisan energy bill that would require DOE to issue findings within six months, with interim reports as necessary. The task force would also include representatives from EPA, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Interior, the Department of Commerce and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
The amendment could help “get the answers we need to ensure nothing like the Aliso Canyon leak happens again,” said a statement from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), who co-sponsored the amendment with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA).
The leak at the Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas) facility has sparked calls from environmentalists for EPA to issue a stronger rule to regulate emissions of methane, the potent greenhouse gas, at oil and gas facilities, than the version it proposed last year.
It has also drawn a lawsuit from California Attorney General Kamala Harris (D) charging that the gas company violated health and safety codes, public nuisance laws and hazardous materials reporting requirements, and also engaged in unfair business practices, according to a Feb. 2 report in the Los Angeles Times.
Separately, Los Angeles County filed four misdemeanor criminal charges against SoCalGas for failing to notify state authorities about the leak, the report says.
The Senate energy bill, S. 2012, includes a host of energy-related provisions, ranging from fossil fuel-friendly language to measures that could help curb GHG emissions.
Sponsors are trying to avoid any sharp partisan disputes in an effort to ensure the bill has broad enough support to be passed by Congress and ultimately signed by President Obama.
But the new methane language in the bill could impact the SoCalGas facility, with the task force slated to issue recommendations on “whether to continue operations at Aliso Canyon and other facilities in close proximity to residential populations based on an assessment of the risk of a future natural gas leak.”
While the amendment would not specifically require the task force report to include discussion about the climate impacts of the leak, it would require an assessment of the leak's impact on “health, safety and the environment,” in addition to the nearby economy.
-
686 Miles of Gas Pipelines Approved to Move Shale Gas
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jonathan N. Crawford
About $4.22 billion of U.S. shale gas pipeline projects by companies including Spectra Energy Corp. and Williams Partners LP cleared federal approval, a move that could ultimately help Northeast producers who are grappling with a supply glut.
The three pipeline projects, which will carry as much as 1.1 billion cubic feet a day of gas to Florida and the southeast, were approved for construction and operation, according to an order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Feb. 2.
Approval of the 686 miles (1,104 kilometers) of new pipelines from Alabama to Florida comes as utilities are scrambling to build out networks to secure cheap fuel supplies. A boom in production as a result of advanced drilling technologies has helped drive gas prices down to a decade low.
“What is driving this project partly is the growth of the Marcellus, and these guys are just trying to find places to go with the new gas, and you have a big demand sink in Florida,” Eric Fell, a Houston-based senior gas analyst with Genscape Inc., said in a phone call Feb. 3. “It should reduce the price of delivered gas to some extent in Florida and it will help alleviate pipeline constraints.”
The projects consist of Williams Partners’ $459.8 million Hillabee Expansion, which includes a 44-mile conduit in Alabama. The 515-mile, $3.22 billion Sabal Trail project, by Spectra, NextEra Energy Inc. and Duke Energy Corp., extends from Tallapoosa County, Ala., at the Transco system to a point near Intercession City, Fla. The last conduit, the $537.3 million Florida Southeast Connection Project by NextEra, includes 126 miles of new pipeline, extending from an interconnect at the Sabal Trail pipeline to the Martin power plant in Martin County, Fla.
Florida, the second-largest user of gas for power generation, has seen overall use of the fuel grow to 3.7 billion cubic feet per day in 2015 from 3.1 billion in 2010, according to Genscape.
Natural gas for March delivery gained 3.5 cents, or 1.7 percent, to $2.060 per million British thermal units on the New York Mercantile Exchange at 1:36 p.m. Feb. 3.
-
Sempra's ‘Don't Worry’ View on Huge Gas Leak Isn't Working
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Bebe Raupe
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) plans to introduce legislation requiring quicker state and federal responses for communities suffering lead contamination in their drinking water supplies.
Brown will file a bill Feb. 4 requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to automatically notify affected areas if responsible state or local agencies fail to do so within 15 days of discovering the contamination.
Currently, local and state officials are responsible for notifying the public, which they failed to do in a timely manner in the cases of Sebring, Ohio, and Flint, Mich., “allowing families to be kept in the dark for months,” he told reporters during a Feb. 3 conference call.
The bill would require communities to have a plan in place to fix the lead contamination problem within six months, Brown said, noting the current requirement is up to 18 months.
Meanwhile, communities would have to have a plan in place to assure that citizens have access to clean, safe water, he said.
To improve transparency for all, the measure would require the EPA to make annual state water quality reports available online in an easy-to-access place, said Brown.
“We need a proactive strategy to protect families from being exposed to lead in the first place,” he said, calling the upcoming bill “just one piece of that puzzle.”
End Finger-Pointing
Last month a drinking water advisory was issued for Sebring, Ohio, after lead levels exceeding federal standards were found at testing sites (16 DEN A-4, 1/26/16).
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency opened a criminal investigation into the city's water treatment operator and attributed the threat to improper conduct on his part.
Brown said the Ohio EPA knew of Sebring's excessive lead levels as early as August 2015, based on discussions he's had with local officials, yet the agency “failed to step in.”
When the Sebring crisis first broke, the Ohio EPA's director Craig Butler said the field office responsible for the area was “too patient” with the water system. Butler said the agency released a drinking water advisory Dec. 3, 2015, but the system had not notified its 8,100 customers as of Jan. 21, 2016, prompting the Ohio EPA to issue a “notice of violation” requiring consumers be notified immediately.
As with the Flint situation, “there's been a lot of finger-pointing after the fact” among local, state and federal environmental regulators, Brown said. His bill would circumvent this type of struggle among agencies, he said, and put the focus on protecting the health of citizens.
Asked about top state leaders, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) “clearly failed” in Flint, said Brown, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) “is going to have to answer questions about his EPA.”
Any governor or state official has to be held accountable if a state's environmental agency knew about a contamination threat and the people impacted were not notified for months, he said.
The Kasich administration has demonstrated “little interest in environmental issues,” Brown said, particularly when they come into conflict with economic development concerns.
“Ohio needs an EPA more on the side of the public and less on the side of the polluters,” he said.
A spokesman for Kasich could not be reached for comment.
-
Clean Power Plan Opponents Fear MATS Repeat
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Opponents of the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan fear states will be forced to comply with the carbon dioxide reductions for power plants long before courts decide whether the rule is legal unless the U.S. Supreme Court halts its implementation.
One day before the EPA is required to respond to petitions to the Supreme Court to stay implementation of the Clean Power Plan, attorneys general leading the fight against the rule said they fear a repeat of the litigation over the agency's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, where the rule was sent back to the agency for correction long after utilities had already made the pollution control investments necessary to comply.
“We won that case but it took us three years,” Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt said on a Feb. 3 press call with Americans for Prosperity, the American Energy Alliance and West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey.
“Unfortunately, the utility companies across the country had already started putting emissions controls measures in place, so the costs were already being passed on to the consumers, and though we won the case, we ultimately didn't win practically because of the glacially slow process of litigation,” Pruitt said.
The Supreme Court in 2015 found that the EPA had failed to properly consider costs when it determined it was necessary to regulate toxic pollutants from power plants. The rule was subsequently sent to the EPA for correction, but by then utilities had made the investments necessary to comply with the standards (Michigan v. EPA, 135 S. Ct. 2699, 80 ERC 1577, 2015 BL 207163 (2015); 15 DEN A-15, 1/25/16).
McCabe Says Stay Unlikely
Janet McCabe, the EPA acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, cast doubt Feb. 3 on the likelihood of a stay.
“My lawyers tell me a stay is highly unlikely,” McCabe told the Energy Utility and Environment Conference in San Diego. “As to the final carbon pollution standards, I can say that, in the past, utility rules have been stayed, but ultimately validated.”
She said the level of engagement on the Clean Power Plan has been unprecedented. “I'm not aware of a single EPA rule where there has been this much engagement after it has been finalized, let alone the engagement we had while developing the rule.”
EPA Circumventing Courts
Morrisey said the EPA is forcing states and utilities to make regulator choices and investment decisions before the Clean Power Plan can be fully litigated. “The EPA is attempting to make the Supreme Court's eventual review of this rule a nullity.”
Morrisey and Pruitt have led the fight against the EPA's Clean Power Plan (RIN 2060-AR33), which sets carbon dioxide emissions limits on the power sector in each state. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is scheduled to hear oral argument in the lawsuit in June (West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1363, order issued, 1/21/16).
After the D.C. Circuit denied petitions to stay the rule, opponents made similar requests to the Supreme Court with the agency's response due by Feb. 4 (West Virginia v. EPA, U.S., No. 15A773, order issued, 1/27/16; 19 DEN A-1, 1/29/16).
“We are hopeful the decision to ask for the briefing means they're looking at these arguments very closely and they'll see the parallel to the Michigan v. EPA case,” Morrisey said.
-
McCabe Faults House's EPA Air Rule Compliance Bills
Feb 3, 2016 | InsideEPA
Acting EPA air policy chief Janet McCabe is criticizing two pending House bills aimed at easing compliance with agency rules for utilities burning coal waste and for brick manufacturing companies, warning that the measures would undermine public health protections by allowing an increase in emissions from both industries.
Although the Obama administration does not have an official position on either of the two bills, McCabe provided a written statement to the House Energy & Commerce Committee's power panel, which held a hearing on the measures Feb. 3.
One bill, H.R. 3797, introduced by Rep. Keith Rothfus (R-PA), aims to ease the compliance burden on the Pennsylvania-based coal waste electric utility industry of EPA air rules. It would provide utilities burning the material more sulfur dioxide (SO2) allowances under EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) emissions trading program, and would relax the acid gas limits imposed by the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), EPA's rule setting maximum achievable control technology (MACT) to control air toxics from the sector.
The other bill, known as the BRICK Act and drafted by Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH), would delay implementation of EPA's air toxics rule for brick manufacturers until litigation over the rule is complete.
McCabe, who did not attend the hearing, says that EPA sees the bills “as unnecessary and harmful to public health and the environment.”
The coal waste bill would “remove economic incentives to reduce emissions at coal refuse units,” she writes. “The bill would interfere with and manipulate market conditions, since the allowances allocated to this set of [power plants] would be unavailable for use by any other sources and would be surrendered at retirement. The result would be in the aggregate a less efficient and more costly compliance with the CSAPR.”
Further, the bill would seemingly interfere with states' ability to allocate SO2 allowances to sources under their state plans for CSAPR compliance, she warns.
The BRICK Act, meanwhile, “would harm both public health and the environment by extending compliance deadlines that would allow further emissions of toxic air pollution into the atmosphere,” McCabe said.
She noted that EPA has already allowed “flexible compliance options” under the rule. EPA set some emissions limits using “health-based” standards that are less stringent than traditional MACT limits.
McCabe also touted a one-year compliance extension that brick manufacturers can seek from EPA. The Oct. 26 brick rule allows existing major sources more than three years to comply.
Attorney John Walke, testifying at the hearing for the Natural Resources Defense Council, largely agreed with McCabe's points, although he conceded that under certain circumstances combusting coal waste is still acceptable. Advocates of the process point to the advantages of burning coal waste to cost-effectively reduce waste piles that otherwise pollute waterways and periodically catch fire, releasing uncontrolled air pollution.
GOP lawmakers at the hearing and industry witnesses said the bills were necessary, pointing to the large additional costs that the coal waste utilities and brick manufacturers will likely have to bear in order to comply with EPA air rules and other government regulations. These costs threaten coal waste utilities, which are limited by their ability to only burn coal waste, and brick manufacturers, which tend to be small businesses with limited resources to install new controls, lawmakers said.
-
Lawmakers Seek Rule Leniency to Protect Key Sectors
Feb 4, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sean Reilly
A House subcommittee appeared split along party lines yesterday over bills to relax air quality regulations on brick makers and a small niche of the electric power business.
"Hopefully, we can provide some relief to these industries as they protect jobs," said Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Energy and Power Subcommittee.
But during a hearing yesterday, Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) countered that the legislation seeks to maintain a status quo "that isn't good enough."
The partisan divide, coupled with pushback from U.S. EPA, clouds the chances of either bill becoming law, despite warnings from industry advocates that some companies' survival could be at stake.
While Whitfield told reporters afterward that he hoped to move ahead quickly with a committee vote and House floor action on the measures, Senate Democrats have so far succeeded in bottling up other proposals to weaken EPA regulations.
After easily passing the House last June, for example, Whitfield's H.R. 2042, to let states opt out of the Clean Power Plan, has gone nowhere in the Senate.
Of the bills on the agenda yesterday, H.R. 3797, by Rep. Keith Rothfus (R-Pa.), would ease emissions limits on plants that burn "coal waste" to produce power.
Made up of low-quality coal, dirt and rocks, that waste has been left over from decades of mining. Using it for fuel helps to get rid of mountains of refuse that would be costly to remove, advocates says.
But some coal-waste operations are threatened by tighter limits imposed by EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), Rothfus told the subcommittee yesterday.
Although all plants can meet MATS's mercury restrictions, he said, many won't be able to comply with the accompanying limits on releases of hydrogen chloride and sulfur dioxide.
The bill would instead set "alternative compliance standards that are strict but achievable," Rothfus said. The legislation would also give plants extra credits for sulfur dioxide emissions in the second round of CSAPR implementation scheduled to begin next year, he said.
But John Walke, clean air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the upshot would be poorer air quality in states both upwind and downwind of coal-waste plants. The proposed increases in CSAPR emission credits, Walke added, would come at the expense of other coal-fired power generators.
"It's a zero-sum game," he said.
Acting EPA air chief Janet McCabe echoed Walke's caveat. Although McCabe did not testify at the hearing, she furnished a lengthy statement warning that Rothfus' bill would "economically advantage" coal waste plants. The overall result, she said, would be "less efficient and more costly compliance" with the CSAPR.'Survival in doubt'
McCabe was also critical of the other bill on the panel's agenda, which would bar EPA from enforcing new air toxics standards on brick and ceramic manufacturers until all court challenges are resolved.
Many brick firms are family-owned small businesses. And Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) said the new standards put "the industry's very survival in doubt." He plans to formally introduce the legislation in the next few days, an aide said.
The new rules, published in the Federal Register in December, are already entangled in lawsuits from both industry groups and environmentalists that could take years to clear away.
In her statement, however, McCabe said the bill would create an incentive to drag out the litigation as long as possible. For every month that implementation is delayed, she said, EPA estimates that another 30 tons of toxic pollutants will end up in the atmosphere.
The regulations come as brick makers are still struggling to recover from a long homebuilding slump. At Henry Brick Co., an Alabama clay brick manufacturer, one plant has sat idle since 2008, CEO Davis Henry told lawmakers.
Although his company is committed to protecting the environment, Henry said, "we are concerned this could become a moving target."
As evidence, he pointed to the fate of an earlier EPA attempt to set air toxics regulations for the brick industry. Those Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) emissions standards, rolled out in 2003, were struck down by an appellate court four years later but not before Henry Brick had spent some $1.5 million on new kiln pollution controls.
Despite the court decision, Henry said, existing air permits wouldn't let him turn off that equipment, which had to keep running at "significant cost" over the past eight years.
Under the new, more stringent regulations, Henry Brick could have to rip out the existing controls and put in new systems for its two kilns that together could cost more than $7 million.
Henry's firm was one of several featured in a report released Tuesday by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce blasting EPA's handling of the brick emissions regulations (Greenwire, Feb. 2).
Henry acknowledged, however, that EPA regulators believe there may be another workable approach with a price tag in the $3 million range. But because that option is untested on a brick kiln, "I am uncomfortable relying on that estimate," he said in his prepared testimony.
Absent from the hearing was the subcommittee's top Democrat, Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois. In an email, a spokeswoman said that the Chicago-area congressman returned to his district Tuesday night because his wife had been hospitalized. In a statement, Rush voiced opposition to both bills.
As currently drafted, Rush said, they "follow along the same tactic that we have witnessed my Republican colleagues deploy towards every regulation that the EPA has proposed since becoming the majority party in Congress: Stall and delay."
-
Brick, Coal Refuse Industries Support Air Rules Bills
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
Industry representatives told a House subcommittee that a pair of bills on Environmental Protection Agency air regulations would address key compliance concerns for the brick and coal refuse-to-energy sectors, but Democrats on the panel appeared disinclined to support the measures.
Supporters of the coal refuse-to-energy sector, during a Feb. 3 hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power, urged members of the panel to back legislation (H.R. 3797) that would alter the regulation of power plants burning coal refuse under a pair of EPA regulations: the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards.
Representatives of the industry trade group ARIPPA and the Western Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation said the bill would help prevent overregulation of a power source that provides great benefits to the environment by removing coal refuse piles and using the refuse as a fuel source.
The subcommittee also heard testimony from a pair of brick manufacturers in support of a draft bill that would delay compliance obligations under the EPA's air emissions limits for that industry until litigation over the regulation is resolved. The manufacturers said the legislation, known as the Blocking Regulatory Interference from Closing Kilns (BRICK) Act, would provide them with regulatory certainty.
Bills Would Make ‘Targeted Changes.'
Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) said the two bills would make “targeted changes” to EPA regulations to avoid adverse consequences on the regulated industries.
While Whitfield and other Republican members of the panel described the bills as common-sense proposals that would prevent businesses in the brick and coal refuse-to-energy sectors from being overburdened, several Democrats on the panel strongly objected to the legislation. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said the proposals would “undermine” EPA air regulations, while Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) said it would be “irresponsible and morally bankrupt” to delay implementation of a regulation intended to improve public health.
Proposal Would Alter Limits, Allowances
H.R. 3797, titled the Satisfying Energy Needs and Saving the Environment (SENSE) Act, would provide coal refuse plants with an alternative means of complying with emissions limits for hydrogen chloride and sulfur dioxide under the EPA's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards.
The bill also would provide coal refuse plants with additional sulfur dioxide allocations under the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which regulates power plant emissions that cross state lines and affect the ability of downwind states to comply with national air quality standards.
Rep. Keith Rothfus (R-Pa.), who introduced H.R. 3797, said during the hearing that the additional allocations are needed under CSAPR (RIN 2060-AP50) because the regulation provided coal refuse power plants with insufficient credits under Phase II of the program, which will begin in 2017. The bill would provide coal refuse plants with the same level of emissions allocations as they received in Phase I.
John Walke, clean air director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, offered strong opposition to H.R. 3797 during his testimony. He described the proposal as a “flawed bill” that would weaken air pollution control standards; increase emissions of sulfur dioxide, particulate matter and hazardous air pollutants from the power sector; and pick “winners and losers” by favoring waste-coal plants over other power sources.
Bill Would Delay Compliance
The BRICK Act would stay compliance obligations under the EPA's maximum achievable control technology standards for toxic pollutants from the brick industry, commonly known as the Brick MACT rule (RIN 2060-AP69), until legislation over those standards is complete. The methodology used by the EPA to set those standards is being challenged by environmental and industry groups in federal court (Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1487, statements of issues filed 1/28/16; 21 DEN A-2, 2/2/16).
The subcommittee heard testimony on the legislation one day after the U.S. Chamber of Commerce issued a report that said the EPA underestimated the costs and compliance burden its regulation would have on the brick manufacturing sector (22 DEN A-3, 2/3/16)
Davis Henry, president and chief executive officer of Henry Brick in Alabama, and Creighton McAvoy, president of the McAvoy Brick Co. in Pennsylvania, both offered testimony on the difficulty that brick manufacturers will have in obtaining the necessary capital to install required pollution controls to meet the Brick MACT standards. Henry and McAvoy both said they support the BRICK Act because it would prevent the industry from seeing a repeat of what happened with the EPA's 2003 brick emissions rule, which was vacated by a federal appeals court after the industry had invested in pollution controls to meet the regulation (Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875, 64 ERC 1097 (D.C. Cir. 2007); 49 DEN A-1, 3/14/07).
Pallone was critical of the BRICK Act's proposal to delay compliance until litigation is complete, which he said would “create a very bad precedent.”
-
Energy Bill in Limbo After Flint Deal Collapses
Feb 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The fate of a broad Senate energy bill was in limbo Feb. 3 after a deal to include funding to help with a crisis caused by lead-tainted water in Flint, Mich., fell apart, leading Democrats to vow to block the underlying legislation.
While Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) told reporters she thought she had secured a deal for an amendment that would provide “less than half” of the $600 million originally sought by Senate Democrats to replace the city's water infrastructure and other priorities, Republicans balked at the cost of the measure and other issues.
“If they don't work with us, I think it's a big question if they get cloture,” Stabenow said. “If they want a bill, we want to help the people of Flint.”
In a statement, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said the compromise was rejected because of Senate rules that require spending bills to originate in the House, a procedure known as a blue slip.
“The offset that was under consideration—but not agreed to—does not work according to the Congressional Budget Office,” Murkowski said. “It would also present a blue slip problem with the House, preventing the bill from reaching conference, and the people of Flint from ever receiving assistance. We are still looking for an offset and still trying to help.”
Negotiations Said to Be Ongoing
Later in the afternoon, Stabenow and Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) said negotiations were ongoing, but a compromise had yet to be reached.
Stabenow said an earlier compromise, proposed via an amendment filed by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), was “a complete insult” because it would use funding through an Energy Department program for vehicle research.
The underlying 424-page energy bill, which includes language to expedite the federal approval process for liquefied natural gas exports among many other measures, was approved in the committee on an 18-4 vote, but at least six Democrats would need to vote for it with Republicans to reach the 60-vote threshold required to cut off debate on the legislation and proceed to a vote on the bill.
Democrats Vow to Block Bill
Democrats emerged from a lunchtime caucus meeting vowing to block the bill.
“Our caucus feels like we have to do something about Flint now, and they ought to back off,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the Senate's No. 3 Democrat, told reporters. “It seems to be the hard right is blocking it and we'll have trouble. We've got to do something.”
The Flint crisis emerged after the state's appointed emergency manager decided to switch from the city of Detroit's water system to using water from the Flint River, but measures to control corrosion weren't put in place at the time of the switch. This allowed lead to leach out of aging pipes and into residential tap water and resulted in elevated levels of lead in children's blood and other health issues (09 DEN A-2, 1/14/16).
Republicans, for their part, were still considering what, if anything, should be done about Flint and if the bill was the appropriate legislative vehicle, Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) told reporters after the party's lunchtime caucus meeting.
Action Called Premature
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told reporters the Senate's action was premature.
“I think that is part of the concern that this seems a little premature to write a multi-hundred-million-dollar blank check when the state hasn't actually assessed their needs,” he said.
Cornyn hinted Senate Republicans may hold the cloture vote scheduled for Feb. 4 and “see if the Democrats want to block an energy bill they've supported all along over this issue.”
If enacted into law, the legislation, which also includes provisions that would increase cybersecurity protections for the electricity grid and expedite the licensing process for hydropower projects, would be the first broad rewrite of energy policy since the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
Amendments Approved
Late Feb. 2 the Senate approved 11 amendments by voice vote, including one by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) that would require the federal government to set “clear and simple policies for the use of biomass as an energy solution, including policies that reflect the carbon-neutrality of forest bioenergy.”
The Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups criticized the amendment, saying in a Feb. 2 letter, “This requirement would result in substantial damage to forests and climate by undermining the scientific process established by the [Environmental Protection Agency] in the Clean Power Plan to review and assess the impacts of certain forms of ‘qualifying biomass' under that Plan.”
Also approved by voice vote was an amendment by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) that would establish a task force to analyze and assess the Aliso Canyon natural gas leak at Southern California Gas Co.'s Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Storage Facility in Los Angeles County (22 DEN A-2, 2/3/16).
-
Flint Fight Threatens Energy Bill
Feb 3, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Devin Henry
The fight over the water crisis in Flint, Mich., is threatening to tank the Senate’s broad energy reform bill.
Negotiations to attach an aid package were increasingly breaking down on Wednesday, with one key Democrat warning her caucus could block the underlying legislation if it isn’t satisfied.“I still don’t know where we are,” said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), who has taken the lead in negotiating for Flint aid with Republicans.
“We want to do something that will help people that need help,” she said, warning Democrats are “not going to support moving forward” without something that helps the people of Flint.
Democrats want a $600 million aid package, with $400 million to match state funds to repair and replace old pipes in the city and the balance going to a research and education center on lead poisoning.
Republicans are balking at the cost of the package and are irked at the threats to delay the underlying bill, which has had bipartisan support. The bill includes a number of measures aimed at modernizing the country’s energy systems and policy.
“We don’t really know yet what the Democrats want other than a blank check,” Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Wednesday.
He called Stabenow’s threat to block the bill “cynical” and said it tells him the Democrats are “really not interested in passing an energy bill, they just want to try to embarrass their political opponents, which is too bad.”
Stabenow signaled she was willing to accept an offer that was less than half the original $600 million proposal but accused Republicans of bringing up procedural issues.
“Now we can’t even get agreement on that because we’re hearing procedural excuses, procedural excuses that are overcome every single day on this Senate floor when we want to,” she said. “Well, if they don’t work with us, I think it’s a big question of whether they get cloture.”
The water supply for Flint, a city of 100,000 people, was switched by an emergency manager appointed by Gov. Rick Snyder in 2014 from Detroit’s municipal supply to the Flint River for budgetary reasons.
Water from the Flint River is more corrosive; without the proper corrosion controls, it caused lead from old pipes in the city to leach into the drinking water, making it far too dangerous to drink.
The crisis has become a major political problem for Snyder, and Democrats have sought to tie him to Republicans in D.C.
The GOP, including House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), in turn has blamed the Environmental Protection Agency for realizing there was a problem with Flint’s water supply but doing little about it.
The Senate is scheduled to hold a cloture vote on the energy bill Thursday, meaning 60 votes are necessary to end debate.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said the caucus is behind Stabenow in her push.
“Before we rush off into the congratulatory phase of this legislation, there has to be an opportunity to work something out on Flint, Mich., and the tremendous problems they have,” he said.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) on Wednesday introduced a compromise package worth $200 million that would expand loan programs to help out Flint and other cities with lead problems. But it would use money taken from the Energy Department’s advanced vehicle manufacturing loan program, a high priority for Michigan.
Michigan’s delegation took that as an insult.
“That’s not something we’re interested in,” Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) said.
Stabenow called it “a complete insult” and a “slap in the face,” and accused the GOP of using Flint to cut a program that they’ve targeted for years and that is a huge boon to the auto industry, including Flint’s General Motors plant.
“So they’re saying they can drink the water, but lose their jobs.”
Separately on Wednesday, Republicans and Democrats alike were furious with officials who skipped a House Oversight hearing on the issue.
Two officials involved in the water crisis — the former emergency manager for Flint, Darnell Earley, and Susan Hedman, the EPA regional director who resigned in January — declined invitations to testify.
Chaffetz subpoenaed the two to appear before members. He said of Earley, “We are calling on the U.S. marshals to hunt him down and give him that subpoena.”
Earley’s attorney, Scott Bolden, relented after the hearing and said he would cooperate with the panel.
Among those who showed up, the EPA’s Joel Beauvais repeated the agency’s contention that officials did what was required of them: Once finding out about lead concentrations in Flint’s water, they informed state regulators charged with executing clean drinking water laws there.
But Chaffetz questioned why there was a lag between the EPA’s water report and its notification to state officials, and he pressed an agency administrator on why the department didn’t make public its findings.
“The crying shame here is, when they knew there was problem, they should have told the public, they should have told [state regulators],” he said.
Keith Creagh, the director of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, said Flint itself should have played a bigger role in the crisis.
But Michiganders on the panel, especially Democratic Rep. Brenda Lawrence, rejected that argument. An emergency manager for the city, appointed by Snyder, was behind the decision to switch Flint’s water supply, she said, supplanting local authority under a state law.
Democrats had hoped Republicans would have called Snyder to testify. They said Wednesday that they would look to use procedural rules to compel his testimony.
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking member of the committee, said the goal should be to find the responsible parties no matter which branch of government they’re from.
“I don’t care whether it’s EPA, whether it’s local, whether it’s state. I want everybody who is responsible for this fiasco to be held accountable,” he said.
“I’m not protecting anybody, because that’s not our job. We are the last line of defense.”
-
Flint Drinking Water Crisis Rattles Congress
Feb 3, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Annie Snider
Partisan anger over the Flint, Michigan, water crisis flared in Congress on Wednesday — spawning finger-pointing at a House hearing while threatening to scuttle a wide-ranging Senate energy bill.
Lawmakers of both parties clashed over blame for the crisis during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, as Republicans tore into President Barack Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency for failing to alert the public for months about lead contamination in the city’s drinking water. In turn, Democrats battered the administration of GOP Gov. Rick Snyder — and by extension the Republican Party’s anti-regulation approach to governing.
"This is the consequence of putting ideology ahead of human beings and their needs and their welfare," said Democratic firebrand Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia. "The difference in political philosophy matters. I do accuse. I do lay this at the doorstep of those who hold that philosophy."
To Republicans, the issue was the latest example of EPA failing in its job, and they pointed to the departure of the agency's top Midwest official last month over the crisis.
"We've had something festering at the EPA for a long period of time, and often where there’s smoke there’s a bigger fire," committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said. "It’s important for the EPA to tell the public that they’re poisoning their kids if they drink the water — why didn’t they do it? ... Why did it take a year?”
Across the Capitol in the Senate, Michigan Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters led a Democratic push to use a broad, bipartisan energy bill to provide at least $300 million to help Flint address the water contamination. But despite a tentative deal with Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), most Republicans balked at the spending, and the energy bill that was passed out of committee last summer suddenly seemed on the verge of collapse.
“You know what, I gotta have help for [Flint],” Stabenow said. “You can’t build and rebuild pipes out of smoke and mirrors.”
Murkowski held out hope the Senate could still reach a deal on aid for Flint and salvage the energy bill. “What we’re trying to do is figure out ... how you can allow for a fix and do so in a way that will not jeopardize the bill. It’s as simple as that,” she told reporters.
Flint also intruded into the presidential race. Democratic contenders Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders agreed Wednesday to hold one of their two newly announced debates in the city on March 6, guaranteeing that the crisis will remain in the political spotlight.
But the focal point of Wednesday’s squabbling was the nearly four-hour House hearing, which was punctuated with applause, groans and sobbing from an audience of Michiganders clad in "Flint Lives Matter" T-shirts who brought along bottles of dirty drinking water for the cameras.
Even as some Democrats thanked Chaffetz for holding it, others derided the hearing as a media stunt — noting that Snyder, who has faced calls for his resignation, was conspicuously absent from Chaffetz’s witness list. Also absent was the former head of the state's Department of Environmental Quality, who resigned under pressure.
Democrats noted that it was Snyder's hand-picked emergency manager who, in the name of saving money, had orchestrated the fateful switch of drinking water sources for the hard-hit city's 100,000 residents — from Lake Huron to the notoriously polluted Flint River. And it was Snyder’s Department of Environmental Quality that failed to heed drinking water regulations that would have prevented the water from corroding old lead pipes and fixtures.
"How crazy is that? How interested are we really in getting to the facts when they bring here witnesses who don't know what went on?" Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.) said during his questioning of Keith Creagh, who took over as director of the Michigan DEQ only last month.
Chaffetz said the hearing was only the start of his panel's investigation of the issue, but he intended to focus on the EPA because Congress primarily has jurisdiction over federal agencies. Still, he will aggressive pursue testimony from at least one state player: Darnell Earley, the former Flint emergency manager appointed by Snyder. Earley declined an invitation to testify at the hearing, and his lawyer refused a subpoena from the committee.
"We’re calling on the U.S. marshals to hunt him down and give him that subpoena," Chaffetz said. Earley stepped down from his post as emergency manager for Detroit's schools this week.
Democrats argued that the Republicans' focus on EPA and local officials was a bid to deflect responsibility from Snyder and GOP appointees.
"There’s an effort to sort of obfuscate and shift responsibility – I mean, it’s a public relations campaign," Rep. Dan Kildee, the Democrat who represents Flint, told reporters after testifying before the panel.
After Chaffetz declined their request to bring Snyder before the panel, the committee's Democrats formally demanded their own set of hearings on Flint crisis.
"I’m not protecting anybody because that’s not our job," said Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the committee. "We are the last line of defense and if we don’t do it nobody’s going to do it."
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested