Preview Newsletter

acc am feb 12

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) ACC Board Of Directors Approves Six New Members
Feb 11, 2016 | Recycling Today

The board of directors for the American Chemistry Council (ACC), Washington, has announced the addition of six new members, as well as welcoming two new companies as Responsible Care Partners. The additions include three new regular members, two new affiliate members and one new associate member.
(ACC Mentioned) New Materials Require New Joining Techniques
Feb 12, 2016 | Automotive World
By Xavier Boucherat

Lightweighting and fuel efficiency have been hot topics since the birth of the automobile, and so when it comes to discussing how quickly the industry is making progress, it’s easy to get carried away. That’s according to Rajat Agarwal, Head of Innovation and Development at Henkel’s Transportation Division. “As much as we talk about it,” he...
(ACC Mentioned) Economists, CEOs: Recession Risk Rising
Feb 11, 2016 | Nasdaq
By Josh Zumbrun

A growing number of corporate leaders and economists see mounting risk of the U.S. tipping into a recession, a nod to headwinds posed by the global growth slowdown and early-year convulsions in financial markets. The odds of recession in the next 12 months have climbed to 21%, double the level of a year ago...

Chemical Management News

Inhofe: House Moving Too Slowly on TSCA
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter and and Anthony Adragna

House negotiators aren't moving fast enough in their efforts to merge their version of the Toxic Substances Control Act with the Senate's, the chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee told Bloomberg BNA. “I think the House is not moving the way they should,” Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said Feb. 10.
US Team Maps Chemical Landscape Using ECHA Data
Feb 12, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Davies

A team from Johns Hopkins University in the US has used REACH safety data on 10,000 chemicals to create a database that it hopes will make read-across more accessible to non-experts. “We have made publicly available REACH data computable,” says study leader Thomas Hartung, from the university's Bloomberg School of Public... Health.
FDA Decides 3 PFCs Are Unsafe: Detailed Look At The Decision
Feb 11, 2016 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Tom Neltner

On Jan. 4, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it changed its regulations to remove the agency's approval of three specific long-chain perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) as food additives. The agency approved use of these chemicals between 1967 and 1997, allowing them to be added to paper and paperboard...
BPA Toxicity Reclassification Could Open Door to EU Ban
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner

A reclassification in the European Union of the widely used chemical bisphenol A (BPA) into a higher toxicity bracket could open the way for a general prohibition of the substance in the 28-country bloc, according to environmental groups. A regulatory committee of EU member state representatives...

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Energy and Environment News

(ACC Mentioned) Blue Skies Over Houston Port Even As Oil Storm Rages
Feb 11, 2016 | The Houston Chronicle
By Sarah Scully

The Port of Houston is likely to provide some much-needed ballast to a regional economy tossed about by the crude-oil price collapse. Yet the 52-mile Ship Channel that winds from Galveston Bay to downtown Houston, and which hosted 165.5 million tons of cargo worth $136.3 billion in international trade in 2015, is an afterthought for many...
March 4 Deadline Set for Briefs on Fracking Rule
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski

States and oil and gas industry groups will file court briefs by March 4 in their consolidated lawsuits to overturn new federal regulations governing hydraulic fracturing on federal and Indian lands, the plaintiffs said in a Feb. 9 filing (Wyoming v. Interior, D. Wyo., No. 2:15-cv-43, schedule set 2/9/16).
Pa. Dems Squabble Over Fracking -- And Guess Who's For It?
Feb 12, 2016 | E&E Daily News
By Jennifer Yachnin

In the battle for Pennsylvania's competitive Senate seat this fall, candidates have spent recent weeks squabbling about the future of hydraulic fracturing in the state as well as taking aim at each other over campaign contributions tied to the energy industry. But this isn't a fight between Republican Sen. Pat ...
House Bill Would Ban Fossil Fuel Leasing on Public Lands
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) introduced House legislation Feb. 11 to ban new fossil fuel leases on public lands and waters. The Keep It in the Ground Act (no bill number yet) would stop adding new leases and end nonproducing federal lands leases for coal, oil, gas, oil shale and tar sands, and similarly stop new ...
Gas Leak Near Los Angeles Temporarily Controlled
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel

Southern California Gas Co. said Feb. 11 it has temporarily controlled the flow of natural gas leaking from a well at its underground storage facility near Los Angeles. The next step is to permanently seal the leaking well, a process that could take several more days, Jimmy Cho, senior vice president at SoCalGas, said in a written statement.
Oil Industry Groups Sue EPA Over Multi-Year RFS
Feb 11, 2016 | InsideEPA

Oil sector and refining groups are suing EPA over its renewable fuel standard (RFS) for 2014 through 2016 in a bid to force reductions in ethanol volumes required to be blended in the fuel supply in 2016 under the program, warning that EPA's rule proposes unachievable targets for renewable fuels and will force a rise in consumer fuel prices.
Greens back House bill to block leasing
Feb 12, 2016 | E&E Daily News
By Hannah Hess

Environmentalists are throwing their weight behind legislation to permanently bar new fossil fuel leases on all federal public lands and waters. Well-known advocates like Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune and 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben yesterday touted California Democratic Rep. Jared Huffman's new "Keep It In The Ground...
Clean Power Plan Stay Won't Alter Congressional Action
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna

Senate Republicans hailed Supreme Court action to stay the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan, but said Feb. 11 the decision likely would not alter their efforts to push back against the rule on Capitol Hill. More than half a dozen senators told Bloomberg BNA they would push forward with aggressive oversight...
EPA Chief Urges States To Stick With Power Plan Despite SCOTUS Stay
Feb 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry

President Obama’s chief environmental regulator is encouraging states to stick with their plans to lower carbon emissions from their energy sectors despite the Supreme Court’s halting of a federal rule this week. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy told state regulators Thursday that market forces are already...
Obama: Don’t ‘Despair’ Over Supreme Court Stay Of Carbon Rule
Feb 11, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillén

President Barack Obama today said not to “despair” over the Supreme Court’s decision to stay EPA’s Clean Power Plan, although he admitted the move was "unusual.” “In the last couple of days I've heard people say, 'The Supreme Court struck down the clean power plant rule.’ That's not true, so don’t despair people,” Obama said at a Democratic...
McCarthy Says ESPS Stay 'Adds Some Time' To GHG Rule
Feb 11, 2016 | InsideEPA

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy is indicating that the agency will have to extend at least some deadlines under its greenhouse gas standards for existing power plants even if the rule is ultimately upheld in court, given the Supreme Court's unexpected stay of the rule pending resolution of litigation.
McCarthy: Clean Power Plan Stay Doesn't Stop States
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers

Two days after the U.S. Supreme Court halted the Environmental Protection Agency's signature climate change rule, Administrator Gina McCarthy struck a decidedly optimistic tone, vowing to support ongoing state efforts to shift toward a cleaner power sector. “We'll move forward. We'll get this done.
McCarthy On Rule Freeze: 'It Is Not Going To Slow Us Down'
Feb 11, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Amanda Reilly

U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy expressed disappointment today about the Supreme Court's decision to freeze the Clean Power Plan but vowed before a gathering of state regulators that her agency would forge ahead with actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. "It is not going to slow us down," McCarthy said at a Washington, D.C...
Republicans See Signs of Pushback Against Government
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Lee

The Supreme Court's recent decision to block the Obama administration's greenhouse gas rules offers the latest sign of growing judicial pushback against a runaway executive branch, a former Republican White House counsel said. “That's a really strong signal,” C. Boyden Gray, ex-counsel to President George H.W. Bush, said Feb. 10 of the high...
House Subcommittee Advances 12 Energy Bills
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rebecca Kern

A House Energy and Commerce subcommittee approved by voice vote 12 bills, including measures that would affect natural gas pipeline permitting and the Federal Power Act. The Energy and Power Subcommittee approved the bills during a Feb. 11 markup. The majority of the bills affect the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which weighed...
Obama Sees Warming As Science And Technology Challenge
Feb 11, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Christa Marshall

Last year's Paris climate agreement wasn't perfect but stands as the "biggest single step the world has ever taken toward combating global climate change," President Obama says in a new interview with Popular Science that also touches on the Death Star, actor Matt Damon and robotic giraffes.
EPA: Michigan Officials Failed on Flint Crisis
Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Lee

An Environmental Protection Agency official admitted Feb. 11 that Michigan officials could have responded more effectively to the Flint, Mich., water crisis. “In this case, clearly there was a falling down of the appropriate measures,” Susan Shinkman, director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Civil Enforcement...
EPA Faces Questions On Why It Didn't Act Sooner In Flint
Feb 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Lydia Wheeler

Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) on Thursday pressed an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enforcement official on why the agency did not step in sooner and take action to address the drinking water crisis in Flint, Mich. During a hearing on agency discretion in setting regulatory fines, Peters said the emergency order the EPA issued...

Full Text of Stories Below

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) ACC Board Of Directors Approves Six New Members

Feb 11, 2016 | Recycling Today

The board of directors for the American Chemistry Council (ACC), Washington, has announced the addition of six new members, as well as welcoming two new companies as Responsible Care Partners.

The additions include three new regular members, two new affiliate members and one new associate member.

The new ACC regular members include: CSW Industrials Inc., a diversified industrial growth company with businesses in three segments: industrial products; coating, sealants and adhesives; and specialty chemicals;H.B. Fuller, a leading global industrial adhesives manufacturer; andQuadrant Chemical Corp., a leader in chemical outsource manufacturing and packaging. The two new affiliate members include: Magnetrol International Inc., a manufacturer of level and flow controls; andYokogawa Corporation of America, a leading provider of Industrial Automation and Test and Measurement solutions At the associate level, ACC’s board approved the addition of BSI Group America Inc., a leading provider of business improvement solutions.

In addition to the new member companies, ACC’s board of directors also approved two new Responsible Care Partner companies: Agility Chemical Logistics USAQuest Liner Inc. ACC President and CEO Cal Dooley says, “ACC had a strong year of growth in 2015 and continues to add to that with the addition of these new members. As our membership expands, ACC continues to strengthen its position as the leading voice of the chemical industry throughout the value chain.”

He adds, “2015 was a landmark year for ACC’s policy objectives and we owe that in large part to our engaged, supportive, and diverse membership.”

The Responsible Care Partnership Program is open to companies that have direct and substantial involvement in the distribution, transportation, storage, use, treatment, disposal or sales and marketing of chemicals, according to the ACC. Responsible Care Partners adhere to the same Responsible Care requirements as ACC members—their CEOs have made a commitment to uphold the following Responsible Care program elements:
endorsing the Responsible Care Guiding principles;measuring and publicly reporting performance on an annual basis;implementing the Responsible Care security code within a firm time frame;implementing the Responsible Care Management System® to achieve and verify results; andobtaining independent certification that a management system is in place and functions according to professional specifications.
Partner companies are separated into different sectors based on their primary business operation. ACC says the companies that participate in the Responsible Care Partnership Program strive to continually improve environmental, health, safety and security performance for all of their operations and business activities involving products manufactured by ACC member companies.

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) New Materials Require New Joining Techniques

Feb 12, 2016 | Automotive World

By Xavier Boucherat

Lightweighting and fuel efficiency have been hot topics since the birth of the automobile, and so when it comes to discussing how quickly the industry is making progress, it’s easy to get carried away. That’s according to Rajat Agarwal, Head of Innovation and Development at Henkel’s Transportation Division. “As much as we talk about it,” he says, “of the 80 million vehicles built every year, the number of vehicles actually exploiting lightweight multi-material solutions today is very small.”
In 2015, demand for traditional automotive sheet steel reached around 80 megatons (mt). By comparison, lightweight automotive aluminium reached just 1mt. Aluminium suppliers such as Novelis have been forthcoming on the matter – their products will not replace steel any time soon. Even though the total aluminium weight by its very nature would be considerably lower than the total steel weight, the current difference is marked.
That said, the 2015 figure does represent increased uptake; in 2010, overall demand was far lower at 0.2mt. A similar five-year growth figure is expected until 2020, when demand is predicted to reach 2.2mt. Aluminium might never supplant steel entirely, but there is a clear role for it in the multi-material strategies now being widely adopted by manufacturers. What’s more, it’s not alone, and this is great news for an adhesives and sealant supplier like Henkel.
Some assembly required
“We’ve entered a phase where we see the broadest variety of new materials being used in the automotive sector since its birth,” says Agarwal. All of these new materials will help OEMs to realise lightweighting and safety targets, but all will require OEMs to move away from the traditional joining techniques which the industry has grown up with, such as riveting and spot welding.
The use of adhesives enables products using new material sets to come to fruition
Bonding’s ability to join diverse ranges of materials remains its greatest strength, and according to Agarwal will account for a significant part of adhesive and sealant uptake. “Over the next ten years,” says Agarwal, “the biggest opportunities for us will come through joining steel to aluminium, aluminium to aluminium, aluminium to magnesium, magnesium to composites, and plastics to metals.”
The American Chemistry Council has suggested that using just one kilo of adhesives instead of spot welds and rivets can take 25 kilos of weight out of a vehicle. “Our work with Ford on the 2015 F-150 helped reach that saving of 700 pounds (317 kg),” says Dan Wohletz, Vice President of Henkel’s Automotive Division in North America. “We’re enablers – the use of adhesives enables products using new material sets to come to fruition.” Henkel, he adds, expects growth in demand for automotive sealants and adhesives to outpace the wider global growth in demand for vehicles.
In addition, adhesives can help to build safer cars. Traditionally welded parts can suffer stress at the joints, whereas adhesives provide a long bond line that distributes stress more evenly, and as a result is less likely to tear. “Many OEMs have been taking advantage of the safety benefits of adhesives for a long time,” says Wohletz, “even before the significant growth in multi-material sets.”
Following aerospace’s lead?
The key challenge moving forward, says Agarwal, will be educating and converting manufacturers in an industry that has been riveting for over 80 years. Understandably, a risk-averse industry will stick with what it knows, but Henkel is confident the knowledge and data now available on adhesives has seen acceptance of bonding rise in the automotive industry. No longer is opting for the company’s solutions associated with risk.
True innovation comes in when we partner with OEMs to optimise things from an overall system perspective
“It’s not simply some academic curiosity any more,” says Agarawl, adding that Henkel expects to see the same increase in uptake it experienced in the aerospace industry over previous decades. “If you look at a plane today, there are very few rivets compared to 30 years ago. They learnt how to bond. What will be interesting is watching the adoption take place on a completely different scale. Plane manufacturers build between 6,000 and 10,000 units a year. Automotive manufacturers build around 80 million.”
It’s telling, adds Wohletz, that Alan Mulally, former Chief Executive at Ford and one of the main proponents of the aluminium-intensive F-150 programme, moved to Ford from Boeing. “Sometimes it really takes an external force to kick-start the industry,” he says, “and we’re involved in so many industries, such as aerospace, composites and windmills, that there are many areas from which we can transfer knowledge.”
The need for innovation, coupled with the pressure of the regulatory environment, could accelerate the transition. Stefan Gmeiner, Head of Global Market Development & Technology Management at Henkel’s Automotive, Aerospace and Metal Division, suggests that external drivers such as CAFE and its European equivalents will drive suppliers like Henkel into closer partnerships with OEMs. This could transform the role of Henkel into that of design partner.
Many OEMs have been taking advantage of the safety benefits of adhesives for a long time, even before the significant growth in multi-material sets
“True innovation comes in when we partner with OEMs to optimise things from an overall system perspective,” he says. “This gives us the chance to really think holistically, and not just optimise the different joining and bonding spots, but provide additional functions. The adhesive solution has to provide added value.” Such additional functions could include minimising noise, vibration and harshness (NVH), or protecting electronics and HMIs. Increasing use of electronics and electrification in vehicles will also require both insulated and conductive materials.
Another development that could mean closer collaboration is the widespread adoption of global platforms, in which OEMs will seek to roll out identical designs across all five regions of the world in a very short time. This allows an industrial giant like Henkel to play to its strengths. “We can deliver the same solutions across all regions, whilst manufacturing locally to ensure consistent, reliable long-term supply,” says Agarwal.
In addition, rolling out global platforms entails greater risk. This requires suppliers to perform far more testing, and in turn, make significantly higher investments upfront. Only those with an established presence, and the necessary capital, will be able to work with OEMs on this. “We’re happy to make that upfront investment,” says Agarwal.
Smarter factories use glue
Adhesives could also help vehicle manufacturers build more efficient factories. “In many instances, adhesives will enable higher degrees of automation, and can replace labour-intensive manual processes,” says Gmeiner. There are also greater opportunities for parts consolidation. “You no longer need rivets in your factory,” notes Wohletz. “The technology is also more flexible, and can be used in different configurations. This means OEMs don’t need to invest so much in retooling a line when they move from one design to another.” This could prove especially attractive in an age when mid-cycle refreshes are becoming more radical.
Working upfront with OEMs provides the most significant opportunities to implement multi-material application
The other big saving, adds Agarwal, comes with reduced floor space, as bonding can consolidate processes. “You can perform more operations in parallel than you can with welding,” he says, “and this allows for shorter assembly lines. This can then translate into a more efficient factory, either by running a smaller factory with reduced energy costs, or by using the floor space saved to increase true production.”
However, stresses Wohletz, for OEMs to truly benefit, the key once again lies in early collaboration. Inserting processes into brownfield sites to take advantage of efficient materials can be costly, whereas technologies for use in greenfield designs can provide OEMs with significant savings.
“Working upfront with OEMs provides the most significant opportunities to implement multi-material application,” he says. “We have the expertise with adhesives, the automotive suppliers have their expertise in designing parts, and the OEMs know what the government regulations and customer needs are. When you put all that together, you can do really good things that are greener, healthier and safer for the end consumer.”

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) Economists, CEOs: Recession Risk Rising

Feb 11, 2016 | Nasdaq

By Josh Zumbrun

A growing number of corporate leaders and economists see mounting risk of the U.S. tipping into a recession, a nod to headwinds posed by the global growth slowdown and early-year convulsions in financial markets.
The odds of recession in the next 12 months have climbed to 21%, double the level of a year ago and the highest since 2012, according to the average estimate in The Wall Street Journal's monthly survey of economists. Economists at Bank of America Merrill Lynch peg the chance of recession in the next 12 months at 25%.
"The toxicity of the global economic environment continues to be a threat," said Sean Snaith, director of the University of Central Florida'sInstitute for Economic Competitiveness.
Against this backdrop, Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen said Thursday in testimony before the Senate Banking Committee that she sees several risks to the U.S. economy and that the central bank is carefully monitoring global financial markets and economic developments that could affect growth.
But she reiterated her view that a contraction isn't imminent. "There is always some chance of a recession in any year, but the evidence suggests expansions don't die of old age," Ms. Yellen said. "It is not what I think is the most likely scenario."
She also emphasized that the Fed is staying flexible on the outlook for rates, noting several times that interest rates aren't on a "preset course." Yet she added that it's premature to say whether recent developments have shifted the balance of risks to the downside.
The broad slump in financial markets, however, is feeding into downside concerns from business leaders and private economists.
Take the situation at PepsiCo Inc., where quarterly profit surged but Chief Executive Indra Nooyi cautioned of a " delicate" recovery. Ms. Nooyi said the U.S. economy could be dragged down by weaker economies and political upheaval in places like Brazil, the Middle East and China that have sent foreign currencies sharply lower.
"Over my several decades in business I have never seen this combination of sustained headwinds across most economies, combined with high volatility across global financial markets," she said.
At networking-equipment giant Cisco Systems Inc., which reported a 31% jump in quarterly net profit on Wednesday, there were signs that weakening economic conditions have taken a toll on corporate customers.
Chuck Robbins, Cisco's chief executive, said the company began hearing signs of caution among some customers in January, toward the end of the quarter. In response to developments such as declining stock prices, he said, companies began holding up orders on nonessential purchases such as some types of the switching systems used on corporate campuses.
Market and corporate sentiment has taken a negative turn, but only some economic indicators have followed suit. Industrial production has declined, primarily due to drops in oil drilling and output from utilities. Employment in the oil sector has fallen sharply.
The decline in energy production, as well as a strong U.S. dollar, has put pressure on manufacturers. U.S. factory activity contracted in January for the fourth month in a row, according to the Institute for Supply Management.
Still, other domestically oriented sectors are performing solidly. Household spending has continue to rise--up 3.2% . Although incomes have been growing slowly, the plunge in gas prices means that incomes have outpaced inflation. Various labor-market barometers have been giving healthy readings, including the 4.9% unemployment rate, down from 5.7% a year ago and a broader underemployment rate that's fallen to 9.9% from 11.3%.
Initial jobless claims, a weekly measure of layoffs, fell to the lowest level since December, according to a Labor Department report Thursday. Initial claims--usually one of the first indicators of trouble in the economy--remain near the lowest level of the past 40 years.
"Economic activity remains on track despite financial market turbulence, " said Ram Bhagavatula, an economist at hedge fund Combinatorics Capital LLC.
This disparity between sentiment and indicators underscores the conundrum the central bank faces: The Fed is projecting continued modest U.S. economic growth and gradual increases in inflation and interest rates in the months ahead.
However, the Fed leader acknowledged risks to the outlook that could alter the central bank's path. "A lot has happened since" the Fed's December meeting, when officials said it likely would be appropriate to continue gradually raising interest rates, she said.
"Foreign economic developments, in particular, pose risks to U.S. economic growth," she said. Pointing to the slowdown in China's economy, she said "this uncertainty led to increased volatility in global financial markets and, against the background of persistent weakness abroad, exacerbated concerns about the outlook for global growth."
She said the central bank will have more to say about the growth outlook following its next policy meeting March 15-16, when Fed officials will deliver a new summary of economic projections. "We're in the process of evaluating...our assessment of the balance of risks."
Of particular concern to many economists is the long slide in oil prices. While Ms. Yellen points to the consumer benefits of paying less on gasoline, the boom in U.S. oil production over the past decade now means that a substantial U.S. industry is directly harmed when prices drop so steeply.
"Falling oil prices are bad news for 2016 growth," said Thomas Costerg, senior economist at Standard Chartered PLC, who showed the greatest alarm of participants in the Journal's economists survey. He put the odds of recession in the next year at 50%.
While the current economic expansion has been underwhelming, it has lasted a long time by historical standards. The average economic expansion since World War II has lasted for slightly less than six years. The current expansion, which began in June 2009, has lasted for more than 6 1/2 .
"We are in the bottom of the seventh on this cycle," said Kevin Swift, chief economist of the American Chemistry Council.

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Management News

Inhofe: House Moving Too Slowly on TSCA

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Ari Natter and and Anthony Adragna

House negotiators aren't moving fast enough in their efforts to merge their version of the Toxic Substances Control Act with the Senate's, the chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee told Bloomberg BNA.
“I think the House is not moving the way they should,” Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said Feb. 10. “They are just a little slow in starting.”
Inhofe's remarks come as he previously said he hoped a conference to reconcile the differences between the Senate's broader version of the legislation (S. 697) to overhaul the nation's primary industrial chemical law with the House's narrower version (H.R. 2576) could be completed quickly, possibly before the end of January.
A spokesman for Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), who leads the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on the Environment and the Economy, didn't respond to a request for comment.
The legislation, which would update the Toxic Substances Control Act for the first time since it became law in 1976, is supported by companies that include 3M, BASF, and the Dow Chemical Co.
State Chemical Programs
Among the differences between the two bills that will need to be addressed include state chemical program preemption, how to handle confidential business information and how the Environmental Protection Agency should address new chemicals.
Shimkus previously told Bloomberg BNA that those issues may be decided when a formal conference is convened after informal talks (22 DEN A-14, 2/3/16).
In a Feb. 11 interview, Inhofe said the House bill gives the EPA “too much latitude.”
“I'd like the reins to be a little tighter,” he said. “But that's where the negotiation is right now.”
Still, lawmakers have expressed optimism that differences in the two bills will be worked out and the legislation will be sent to the president's desk sometime this year.
“TSCA's going well,” Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), the author of S. 697, told Bloomberg BNA. “We're having some good discussions.”

Return to headline | Return to top
US Team Maps Chemical Landscape Using ECHA Data

Feb 12, 2016 | Chemical Watch

By Emma Davies

A team from Johns Hopkins University in the US has used REACH safety data on 10,000 chemicals to create a database that it hopes will make read-across more accessible to non-experts.
“We have made publicly available REACH data computable,” says study leader Thomas Hartung, from the university's Bloomberg School of Public Health. The team used Echa datasets to extract in vitro and in vivo data from 816,000 research studies of 10,000 chemicals registered under REACH between 2008 and 2014.
The information's “narrative” form has previously made it difficult to access for computational toxicology, says professor Hartung. However, the Hopkins team used a series of linguistic search engines to pull out relevant data,. This is now in a structured, “machine-readable” format.
“The consequence is that we have in our hands the largest toxicological database in the world,” says professor Hartung, who also directs the Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT) at Hopkins. “It's a pure goldmine because you can understand the chemical landscape, compare chemicals and do read-across.”
The researchers have grouped chemicals by toxicity to create similarity maps. They claim this will help regulators, manufacturers and scientists to decide whether a chemical with little or no test data may be harmful to health. The idea is that an untested, or new compound, could be entered next to similar chemicals in the map to give an indication of potential adverse heath effects.
Because many REACH substances have been tested multiple times, the database also allows researchers to assess how reproducible certain tests are, says professor Hartung. The team has so far used the database for case studies on oral toxicity, skin sensitisation, and Draize eye irritation, illustrating how often repeat tests are carried out. For example, two chemicals in the dataset were tested 90 times using the Draize test, says professor Hartung. “Read-across is the most pragmatic way of reducing animal testing needs,” he adds.
Collaborations to mine the database have begun with the US EPA, the National Institutes of Health and some academic and industry groups.
Next, the team plans a spin-off company called ToxTrack. This will offer a read-across web tool, based on the database and other publicly available datasets. The plan is that the tool, called REACH-across, will allow users to enter a structure and obtain toxicity information suitable for use with Iuclid.
The tool will be similar to Cefic's Ambit for managing cheminformatic data. Professor Hartung says it will be “extremely user-friendly for non-specialists” and will also allow companies to incorporate proprietary data.
Professor Hartung is part of an expert group from academia and industry to develop a Good Read-Across Practice (Grap) guidance. This will be discussed at a CAAT-Europe and Cefic-LRI workshop in Brussels on 26 February, and at a CAAT read-across workshop hosted by the FDA in Washington, DC on 1 March.
The Hopkins team released details of the database on 12 February at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's meeting in Washington, DC. Details of the database and initial analyses are all published in the open-access journal Altex.

Return to headline | Return to top
FDA Decides 3 PFCs Are Unsafe: Detailed Look At The Decision

Feb 11, 2016 | Environmental Defense Fund

By Tom Neltner

On Jan. 4, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it changed its regulations to remove the agency's approval of three specific long-chain perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) as food additives. The agency approved use of these chemicals between 1967 and 1997, allowing them to be added to paper and paperboard that comes in contact with aqueous and fatty foods. Until the late 2000s, they were commonly used in pizza boxes, sandwich wrappers, and paper in frozen food packaging – virtually anywhere a food manufacturer wanted to use paper packaging that would repel oil and water.
Domestic PFC manufacturers report that these food contact substance (FCS) uses have been abandoned, although others report trace levels still appearing in paper products used for food, most likely as a result of contamination. There are reports, however, that foreign companies have begun producing PFCs. As long as these additives are officially allowed by FDA, there is a possibility that food manufacturers who are not diligent could resume their use without knowing it. The agency’s decision makes it less likely that will happen.
FDA’s decision marks the first time it has used a food additive petition to remove an approval based on safety concerns; a few years ago, it removed approvals for use of bisphenol A in infant formula packaging and baby bottles and sippy cups – but those removals were based on market abandonment, not safety. This safety-driven decision sets a precedent and serves as a roadmap for how safety decisions should be made for all additives including those considered by industry to be ‘generally recognized as safe’ (GRAS).
No longer safe – unpacking the agency’s reasoning for a class of chemicals and safety concerns
In the Jan. 4, 2016 Federal Register notice, the agency stated that it removed the approval for the three FCSs “because new data are available as to the toxicity of substances structurally similar to these compounds that demonstrate there is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm from the food-contact use of these FCSs.” In other words, without evidence establishing ‘a reasonable certainty of no harm’ – the agency’s safety standard for food additives – the use of these three FCSs is essentially considered unsafe. The agency’s safety assessment is described in detail in its July 27, 2015 Toxicology Memo referenced in the notice. Here’s a summary.Class: The agency designated as a class of long-chain PFCs any chemical with at least one linear, perfluorinated chain of eight or more carbon atoms. The class designation was based on published in vitro and animal studies demonstrating similar metabolic conversion of the chemicals to long-chain fluorotelomer alcohols (FTOH) and perfluorinated carboxylic acid (PFCA). The agency made this designation by applying the ‘Guidance for Grouping of Chemicals’ by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The OECD guidance provides five criteria – referred to as rationales – for defining a group of chemicals as a category or class. FDA used a combination of two of the five:
• Common functional group(s) (e.g., aldehyde, epoxide, ester, specific metal ion); and
• The likelihood of common precursors and/or breakdown products via physical or biological processes that result in structurally similar chemicals (e.g., the “metabolic pathway approach” of examining related chemicals such as acid/ester/salt).Data gaps: FDA identified developmental and reproductive toxicity as the endpoints of concern in addition to cancer. It reached this conclusion when it found that a subset of chemicals in the class was associated with pre- and post-natal developmental toxicity and reproductive toxicity. The agency applied the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) for the most hazardous member of the class, perfluorooctanoic acid or PFOA, to all chemicals where the risks were not adequately studied. The agency calculated an ADI of 0.3 µg/kg-bw/day for the developmental toxicity endpoint of ‘increased percent litter loss’ corresponding to a dietary concentration of 6 parts per billion (ppb). This dietary concentration was in the same range as the 1 ppb FDA had calculated when it determined that PFOA was a carcinogen in 2002 and 2007.Study methods: The agency noted that biopersistence was a significant concern. Already in 2010, FDA had concluded that its recommended toxicity studies should be upgraded to better assess this issue. Animal studies showed that fluorotelomers (FTOH’s) have half-lives of up to 100 days and are persist in fat. Perfluorinated carboxylic acid metabolites accumulate in the liver and blood. Human data on long-chain PFCs show that the half-lives in humans is longer than in rodents. The agency used the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC) definition of biopersistence, and noted that this characteristic complicates risk assessment because
“there is not a simple correspondence between the daily dietary exposure to each compound and the systemic exposure to this compound and its metabolic byproducts. As such, the normal safety factors used in the risk assessment of this exposure would need to be adjusted to account for the systemic exposure produced by a given chronic dietary exposure. This would, in turn, require pharmacokinetic data for, at minimum, the FTOH components of the FCSs in both rodents and humans . . . .”

What does FDA’s decision mean for other long-chain PFCs?
The eight public interest organizations1 that submitted the petition to FDA selected the three long-chain PFCs for two reasons: 1) FDA had already documented the health risks they pose and effectively concluded they were unsafe and should not be used; and 2) a food additive petition was the best means to get the agency to act. In other words, the petitioners picked the most compelling case for FDA to make a precedential safety decision with an innovative use of an existing tool.
While FDA’s decision only directly affects the three long-chain perfluorinated compounds mentioned in the petition, it indirectly impacts two other groups of long-chain PFCs. These chemicals fit in the class.Seven long-chain perfluorinated compounds approved by FDA as food contact substances through its notification program between 2000 and 2006. For notifications, FDA’s approval consists of a letter stating it has no objections to the safety assessment made by the company and a posting of the decision on its website. The regulations don’t change. In 2011, at the agency’s urging, the manufacturers of these compounds voluntary suspended their use; an unenforceable option not described in FDA’s regulations. FDA should have notified each company that the use was no longer safe, given the companies an opportunity to respond. If the information submitted was not persuasive to change the agency’s opinion FDA would have published a notice in the Federal Register stating the notice(s) was no longer effective. A food additive petition is not necessary for FDA to act.Two sulfonated long-chain perfluorinated compounds approved by FDA that meet the agency’s definition of class of long-chain PFCs but were not mentioned in its evaluation of the petition. The industry maintains they have been abandoned. FDA can also act on its own without a food additive petition.
These nine chemicals lack the necessary safety data and should be considered unsafe. Presumably, FDA is preparing to take action.
With regard to short-chain PFCs – those with chains of six or fewer carbon atoms – they were not included in the petition. However, in the decision FDA indicated that these were not in the class because they were not biopersistent even though it lacks adequate studies on reproductive and developmental toxicity.
Overall, FDA’s action establishes important precedents that anyone must follow when evaluating the safety of chemically-related substances, especially those that lack relevant data and are biopersistent. It lays out a roadmap to the safety assessment that starts with defining a class of chemicals, addressing data gaps by assigning the ADI to the inadequately studied chemicals based on available information for a subset of chemicals in the class, and defining what toxicology studies would be needed to develop an ADI.

Return to headline | Return to top
BPA Toxicity Reclassification Could Open Door to EU Ban

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Stephen Gardner

A reclassification in the European Union of the widely used chemical bisphenol A (BPA) into a higher toxicity bracket could open the way for a general prohibition of the substance in the 28-country bloc, according to environmental groups.
A regulatory committee of EU member state representatives agreed at a Feb. 3-4 meeting to move BPA from category 2 for reproductive toxicity to category 1B for reproductive toxicity. The reclassification must still be adopted by the European Commission, the EU's executive arm.
The European Chemicals Agency told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 10 that the change means that BPA now meets the criteria laid down in Article 57(c) of the EU's REACH law (Regulation No. 1907/2006 on the registration, evaluation and authorization of chemicals) for listing as a substance of very high concern (SVHC), a designation that could lead to an eventual decision to prohibit the use of a chemical in the EU.
The reclassification of BPA was proposed by France. ECHA's Risk Assessment Committee supported the French proposal in March 2014 (55 DEN A-13, 3/21/14).
France has already taken various measures to restrict BPA on its territory, including a ban in food contact materials. France has also proposed an EU-level REACH restriction on BPA in thermal paper used in cash register receipts (235 DEN A-11, 12/8/15).
From Reclassification to Prohibition?
BPA is a widely used chemical produced in high volumes. Applications of BPA include linings for food and drinks cans, and manufacture of polycarbonate plastics.
BPA is a suspected endocrine disruptor, and ECHA said that even before its reclassification for reprotoxicity, the substance “could previously have been eligible” for SVHC listing on the basis of having endocrine-disrupting properties.
However, environmental groups said the reprotoxicity reclassification would make the SVHC listing more likely.
Tatiana Santos, senior policy officer for chemicals at the European Environmental Bureau, said in a statement Feb. 9 that EU countries now had “a clear signal to take action to protect EU citizens from the exposure to BPA, and avoid spending millions of euros on treating diseases linked with this substance.”
The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation said that the “very important” reclassification “opens the way for banning BPA.”
Currently, 168 substances are listed as SVHCs under REACH, meaning they can be prioritized for phaseout orders, which ban their use in the EU without specific continued-use authorizations. Phaseout decisions have so far been taken for 31 of the substances.

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Energy and Environment News

(ACC Mentioned) Blue Skies Over Houston Port Even As Oil Storm Rages

Feb 11, 2016 | The Houston Chronicle

By Sarah Scully

The Port of Houston is likely to provide some much-needed ballast to a regional economy tossed about by the crude-oil price collapse.
Yet the 52-mile Ship Channel that winds from Galveston Bay to downtown Houston, and which hosted 165.5 million tons of cargo worth $136.3 billion in international trade in 2015, is an afterthought for many Houstonians who don't work its docks or ship chemicals overseas. But the port has aided Houston's growth for decades.
"It's a source of stability," said Patrick Jankowski, senior vice president of research at the Greater Houston Partnership. "It's an anchor on one end of the economy for us at a time when the other end of the economy, the oil and gas industry, is adrift."
The shale boom helped Houston, formerly a net importer, become the biggest exporting region in the U.S. and Texas the top exporting state.
"Products that were typically imported were now being exported in significant volumes," said James Prazak, Performance Director at Tricon Energy and chairman of the Lonestar Harbor Saftey Committee, a port-wide coalition.
The total value of goods shipped through Houston has tumbled, however, dropping Houston to seventh in that category last December. But the chemicals, lumber, cars, frozen meat, couches and jeans will keep moving. Measured in weight, the amount of cargo passing through the port of Houston kept growing in 2015.
The drop in oil prices and budget cuts across the energy sector likewise influence the port, but activity there overall does not seem headed the way of the oil and gas industry.
"I sense that the overall health of the industry here is good," said Steve Nerheim, who directs the U.S. Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Service, overseeing all traffic in the Ship Channel along with a team monitoring 30 screens showing radars and videos feeds from 200 different points along the port.
Last year, 8,379 oceangoing ships arrived in Houston's port, slightly more than in 2014, the Greater Houston Port Bureau reported. The vessel traffic service counted about 279,000 ship movements through the port in 2015, including multiple stops by chemical tankers, ferries, and the tow boats that stay within the channel.
As oil and gas companies stopped drilling new wells last year, shipments of oilfield equipment dropped off. Likewise, the steel that was being imported at record levels for those projects plummeted. Steel through Port of Houston Authority docks dropped 29 percent from 2014 to 2015, and in December steel movement was down 79 percent from a year earlier, when steel was still in high demand. Business Company tries to limit path to courthouse Pandora is said to have held talks about selling itself Morgan Stanley settles case tied to 2008 crisis In brief: Trump, Univision settle lawsuit Blue skies over Houston port even as oil storm rages Student sues Lone Star College for tardiness punishment
Yet the total numbers from 2015 are mixed, busy with steel imports in the first half of the year. Port Authority executive director Roger Guenther said steel imports and exports are returning to more typical levels after a boom period.
The Port of Houston Authority operates about 15 percent of the docks in Houston's port and acts as the public face of the port.
Low prices might not be good for those taking oil out of the ground to sell, but they have benefited companies that buy it. Those who refine it into gasoline, make chemicals for fertilizer or to produce plastic have seen their cost of goods drop 70 percent in two years.
Houston is by far the biggest exporter of gasoline and other fuels. Though the value of these fuels exported from Houston dropped by nearly a quarter in the first 11 months of 2015, cheap gasoline prices are driving up demand.
Tom Marian, of Buffalo Marine Shipping, said his company has had to lower the prices it charges to move petroleum products on barges. That reduces margins, but the company has twice as much business.
"Even if the value goes down, the transaction volume will be there to support those jobs," Jankowski said.
The people tying up ships, trucking diapers to Walmart stores and making petrochemical sales don't face the same job uncertainty as many in the energy sector. A study commissioned by the Port Authority estimated that the port directly supported about 56,000 jobs in 2014.
Cheap natural gas spurred a rush to build and expand petrochemical plants along the western Gulf Coast in recent years. Between 2010 and 2023, according to an American Chemistry Council count, 59 petrochemical projects worth $30.9 billion will go up around the Houston Ship Channel, with more at neighboring ports. Each increases demand for construction labor and materials.
As many of the new sites go into operation beginning about a year from now, the Port Authority expects a boom in plastic exports through its container terminals as plastic is shipped to manufacturing plants overseas.
After a record year for its container terminals, which handled more than 2.1 million 20-foot long containers in 2015, Guenther predicts continued growth this year. In 2017 he expects plastic exports to drive a spike in demand for container shipping. The Port Authority is investing at least a $1 billion in the next five years to keep up with demand and attract more business, he said.
"Container trade will just continue to grow and continue to grow and continue to grow," Jankowski said. "It's just a lot easier to put things in a box and ship them across the world."
Containerized trade is more labor-intensive and tends to create more jobs than other cargo, the Port Authority study said. Most retail goods are shipped in containers, and there's a huge consumer market for them in Houston, San Antonio, Austin and Dallas that will keep ships moving.
And although job uncertainty in the energy sector has many people in Texas feeling cautious, consumers are benefitting from low gasoline prices and a strong U.S. dollar.
On the other hand, the strong dollar makes things tougher for Houston's many exporters, whose products are more expensive to international buyers. Marian, who reports monthly on the Greater Houston Port Bureau's vessel arrival data, said fewer ships arrived in the port in January from a year earlier.
The Panama Canal's expansion, the opening date for which was recently pushed back to next summer, also offers promise for the port. Container ships in particular have been getting bigger in recent years and now the largest can't pass through the canal. But a new, wider lane will allow those ships to transport goods between the Gulf Coast and Asia.
Asian trade now makes up a quarter of container business, though a decade ago Houston received no regular calls from that continent. The Port Authority receives two ships weekly from Asia and the wider canal will allow it to try to recruit more shippers to Houston.
"The demand is very high right now," Guenther said. "Those opportunities are there to bring even more cargo once the Panama Canal is complete."
Jankowski added that much of the conversation around the Panama Canal expansion has been with import opportunities, but there's also incredible potential for exports, especially for the new petrochemical plants coming into play.
"It's going to be a boon for companies in Houston that want to export to Asia," he said. "All these chemical companies that are expanding are going to look for ways to get their products to overseas markets in Asia and those markets are going to be reach through the expanded Panama Canal."
With more than 150 different entities along Ship Channel trading goods all over the world, the port doesn't see dramatic ups and downs like the oil and gas industry does, Jankowski said. It stays more steady overall as one import fades and another export booms.
"It forms a safety net," he said. "It prevents the economy from getting worse because there's always going to be that activity there."
Correction: An earlier version misstated the tons of cargo that came through the Houston Ship Channel in 2015.

Return to headline | Return to top
March 4 Deadline Set for Briefs on Fracking Rule

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Alan Kovski

States and oil and gas industry groups will file court briefs by March 4 in their consolidated lawsuits to overturn new federal regulations governing hydraulic fracturing on federal and Indian lands, the plaintiffs said in a Feb. 9 filing (Wyoming v. Interior, D. Wyo., No. 2:15-cv-43, schedule set 2/9/16).
The four state plaintiffs, led by Wyoming in their suit against the Interior Department, also used the occasion Feb. 9 to comment on the Obama administration's attempt to prevent disclosure of thousands of documents concerning the rulemaking on hydraulic fracturing.
The Bureau of Land Management, an Interior Department agency, published the fracking rule (RIN 1004-AE26) on March 26, 2015, and filed an incomplete administrative record Aug. 28 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming in the consolidated cases.
“The BLM improperly withheld nearly half of the administrative record on the asserted basis of privilege,” the state plaintiffs said Feb. 9.
The BLM filed an amended administrative record Jan. 19 after the court had warned the federal defendants they wouldn't get another deadline extension to provide the court with the record of the rulemaking.
Nearly 4,000 Documents in Record
The amended record contained 3,739 documents (333,692 pages) that previously were withheld on a claim of privilege, the state plaintiffs said. The record was amended sufficiently that the plaintiffs withdrew their motions seeking a complete record.
The lead lawsuit against the BLM fracking rule was filed by Wyoming and joined by Colorado, North Dakota and Utah. Another lawsuit, now consolidated with the state case, was filed by two industry groups, the Independent Petroleum Association of America and the Western Energy Alliance.
Federal defendants along with Interior and the BLM are Interior Secretary Sally Jewell and BLM Director Neil Kornze.
The court issued a preliminary injunction Sept. 30 halting enforcement of the rule (190 DEN A-8, 10/1/15).
The state and industry plaintiffs have already indicated their basic objections—the states calling the federal rule an interference in state sovereignty and the industry groups saying the rule is arbitrary and capricious in its impractical elements and in the lack of a justification on the basis of need.
Briefs to Explain Arguments
Their briefs to be filed by March 4 will explain in detail their arguments in support of their petitions for federal court review of the rule.
Fracking has now been used about 2 million times in the U.S., industry officials have said. The process forces water, sand and chemical additives into subsurface layers to create fracture pathways for the flow of oil or natural gas.

Return to headline | Return to top
Pa. Dems Squabble Over Fracking -- And Guess Who's For It?

Feb 12, 2016 | E&E Daily News

By Jennifer Yachnin

In the battle for Pennsylvania's competitive Senate seat this fall, candidates have spent recent weeks squabbling about the future of hydraulic fracturing in the state as well as taking aim at each other over campaign contributions tied to the energy industry.
But this isn't a fight between Republican Sen. Pat Toomey and his challenger; it's just the Democratic primary taking shape.
A trio of Democrats are vying in an April 26 primary for the right to take on Toomey in the Keystone State: former Rep. Joe Sestak, former White House Council on Environmental Quality Chairwoman Katie McGinty and Braddock, Pa., Mayor John Fetterman.
In the competition to win the Democratic nod, the candidates have split over energy policy, sparring over the issue in a recent debate at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and in a series of digital ads and newspaper op-eds.
On one side is McGinty, a former head of Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection, who has called fracking the state's "secret sauce" for job growth, and on the other is Sestak, who has long supported a moratorium on drilling the oil-and-gas-rich Marcellus Shale.
In the middle is Fetterman, who has endorsed significantly stricter environmental regulations on the process and endorsed taxing natural gas drilling.
Although fracking rarely lands on top of the list of Pennsylvania voters' concerns, according to Franklin & Marshall College Poll Director Terry Madonna, striking the right balance on the issue could still prove important to undecided voters -- particularly the party's more liberal wing found in Philadelphia and its suburbs -- in a closely divided primary.
"Voters in the state are not opposed to fracking, and they don't have an animosity toward the industry, toward the folks who do fracking," Madonna said. But he noted that voters have generally supported limits on the practice, like a moratorium on fracking on state public lands that Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf reinstated in 2015.
"They don't want any fracking on state forest lines and in our parks. We have a huge and extensive parks system in this state," Madonna said. "They want it done safely. They want to make sure the air is clean and the water is pure."
Sestak has taken the hardest line among the trio of candidates, arguing that hydraulic fracturing in the state should be suspended until stricter health and environmental regulations, including water protections, are enacted.
"Unfortunately, since the very beginning of the Marcellus Shale boom, too many of our leaders and regulators let the voice of the shale industry drown out the desires of Pennsylvanians to have safe water, and too many argued for industry interests to the detriment of Pennsylvanians," Sestak wrote in the York Daily Record earlier this month. His campaign supplied the op-ed along with a news release when asked for comment for this article.
The former House lawmaker -- who lost the 2010 Senate race to Toomey by 2 percentage points but has been rebuffed by the Democratic establishment, who openly searched for another candidate this cycle -- has also called for a ban on drilling until the state adopts a new severance tax.
Wolf proposed a 6.5 percent severance tax in his annual budget released this week, an increase over the 5 percent tax he unsuccessfully sought in his first year in office.
Sestak has also touted his ongoing opposition to fracking in a 20-second video highlighting remarks he made at last month's Democratic primary debate.
"In 2010, when I ran for the U.S. Senate, I was for a moratorium on fracking, as I am today," Sestak states in the video.
McGinty has openly rejected Sestak's proposed ban, arguing in both her failed 2014 gubernatorial primary bid and her current Senate campaign that hydraulic fracturing can be done safely while benefiting the state's economy.
"I don't support a moratorium," McGinty told NPR's StateImpact Pennsylvania last month. She did not respond to a request for comment for this article. "I think the responsible production and use of the Marcellus Shale gas is actually part of the secret sauce as to how we will create jobs and how we will compete and win."
But McGinty -- who served as Wolf's chief of staff before stepping down to launch her Senate bid and is widely seen as the establishment Democrat in the contest -- has drawn fire for her moderate stance from her competitors for the Democratic nod.
Fetterman launched a video attack against McGinty earlier this month criticizing the Democrat for asserting at the Democratic debate that she had not accepted campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry.
The video features footage from the January debate, in which McGinty touts her endorsements from both the steelworkers union and the League of Conservation Voters, before responding "no" to a moderator's question about whether she has received support from the oil and gas industry.
In the background, Fetterman can be heard stating: "From oil and gas, really?"
The video then asserts that McGinty has received $198,600 from energy industry-related donors during both her gubernatorial and Senate primary bids.
McGinty's campaign disputed those figures, along with data culled by America Rising, a Republican political action committee, arguing that she has received funds from individuals with varying energy interests and not from oil and gas industry-related PACs.
"It is absurd that Pat Toomey and his allies are making accusations about Katie's support when Toomey has received $300,000 from the oil and gas industry and has a consistent record that is dangerous to the environment -- such as voting to roll back clean water protections and voting against taking action on climate change," McGinty spokeswoman Sabrina Singh told Allentown's Morning Call last week.
Both Toomey and McGinty have likewise tangled over McGinty's employment history -- a mix of public positions dating to her tenure as an aide to Al Gore when he was the Senate and private posts including her work for the environmental consulting company Weston Solutions, a former member of the Marcellus Shale Coalition.
"Pennsylvania's abundant energy resources play a crucial role in our state economy. If handled correctly, Pennsylvania is in a great position to lead our country's efforts to become energy independent," Toomey campaign spokesman Steve Kelly said in a statement. "While Democrats across the state run left on energy issues, Senator Toomey is proud to stand with the hard working men and women who work every day to help reach this goal."
But McGinty has touted her resume -- which also includes posts on the board of wind and natural gas firm Iberdrola and NRG Energy -- arguing that it shows her dedication to renewable energy development.
"It's been my honor and my privilege to work throughout my career on global warming and climate change," McGinty said at last month's debate. "When we take action on climate change, we enhance our national security, we protect public health, and we grow our economy."
McGinty has said that if elected, she would seek to expand investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency programs, including construction and transportation.
Sestak has pointed to his House tenure, including his support for the carbon cap-and-trade measure, and vowed to push similar legislation if he returns to Capitol Hill, along with production and investment tax credits for the renewable industry.
According to a recent survey by Harper Polling, the Democratic race remains closely contested, with Sestak leading McGinty by single digits.
The Jan. 22-23 poll of 680 likely primary voters gave Sestak 33 percent to McGinty's 28 percent, followed by Fetterman with 11 percent. Another 28 percent of voters remained undecided. The survey had a 3.8-point margin of error (E&E Daily, Jan. 28).
Sestak likewise maintains an advantage in fundraising, with $2.6 million in the bank at the end of 2015, while McGinty reported nearly $1.2 million at that time. Fetterman, who has described his campaign as a grass-roots effort, had $132,000 in his campaign coffers at the end of December.

Return to headline | Return to top
House Bill Would Ban Fossil Fuel Leasing on Public Lands

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Rachel Leven

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) introduced House legislation Feb. 11 to ban new fossil fuel leases on public lands and waters.
The Keep It in the Ground Act (no bill number yet) would stop adding new leases and end nonproducing federal lands leases for coal, oil, gas, oil shale and tar sands, and similarly stop new and end nonproducing offshore drilling in the Pacific Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. It also would bar offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean and the Arctic.
Huffman's bill is a companion to Senate legislation introduced by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) in November 2015—the Keep It in the Ground Act (S. 2238). The House version has 16 co-sponsors.
“There is an urgent need to keep fossil fuels in the ground if we want to protect the planet for future generations,” Huffman told reporters during a Feb. 11 call. “The Keep It in the Ground Act represents a crucial step that the federal government can take to protect the public, prevent carbon emissions, and fight climate change.”
The bill is important in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent stay of the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan because it underscores the importance of acting on multiple fronts to address climate change, Huffman said. It also is intended to—like efforts to license the Keystone XL Pipeline—harness public energies and show support for aggressive government action on climate, he said.
Huffman introduced the bill weeks after the Interior Department paused federal coal leasing as it under takes an assessment of how its program administrators should consider climate change and other factors in its decision-making.
Environmentalists, including ones who expressed support for Huffman's efforts during the call with reporters, have been hoping the coal mining ban would become permanent and that the administration would take similar action with oil and gas (14 DEN A-6, 1/22/16).
“Clearly there is a strong will for the administration [to act],” Michael Brune, Sierra Club executive director, told reporters on the call.

Return to headline | Return to top
Gas Leak Near Los Angeles Temporarily Controlled

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Carolyn Whetzel

Southern California Gas Co. said Feb. 11 it has temporarily controlled the flow of natural gas leaking from a well at its underground storage facility near Los Angeles.
The next step is to permanently seal the leaking well, a process that could take several more days, Jimmy Cho, senior vice president at SoCalGas, said in a written statement.
To seal the leak, cement must be injected from a relief well into the base of the leaking well, the utility said.
Plans are continuing to drill a back-up relief well, in case it's needed to stop the leak, the Sempra Energy subsidiary said.
Once state oil and gas regulators and local officials confirm the well has been permanently sealed and the leak stopped, the utility will begin winding down its temporary relocation program for residents, it said.
Terms of a recent agreement with the Los Angeles city attorney give residents relocated to hotels and other short-term housing eight days to return to their homes, once officials determine the leak has stopped (26 DEN A-19, 2/9/16).
Residents moved to rental homes will have until the end of their leases to return.
More Than 6,000 Families Relocated
Discovered Oct. 23, the gas leak at the 3,600-acre Aliso Canyon storage field has led to the relocation of more than 6,000 families from the nearby Porter Ranch community.
The leak has triggered dozens of lawsuits, regulatory orders against SoCalGas and new statewide emergency regulations for underground gas storage facilities (26 DEN A-7, 2/9/16).
“Stopping this leak is critical to ensure the safety of the Porter Ranch community, but this isn't the end of the story,” Damon Nagami, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's Southern California Ecosystems Project, said in a Feb. 11 written statement. “We must do everything we can to protect families in California and across the country—as well as our climate—from harmful gas leaks.
“That means reforming California's broken system for regulating injection wells like this one, and setting new limits on methane and other pollutants from oil and gas facilities currently in operation nationwide.”

Return to headline | Return to top
Oil Industry Groups Sue EPA Over Multi-Year RFS

Feb 11, 2016 | InsideEPA

Oil sector and refining groups are suing EPA over its renewable fuel standard (RFS) for 2014 through 2016 in a bid to force reductions in ethanol volumes required to be blended in the fuel supply in 2016 under the program, warning that EPA's rule proposes unachievable targets for renewable fuels and will force a rise in consumer fuel prices.
Pro-ethanol groups who had already filed suit over the rule in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit meanwhile in their Feb. 11 statement of issues to be raised in the litigation argue that the rule is flawed because the renewable fuel targets are too low and will discourage needed ethanol production.
EPA in its multi-year RFS volumes rule released Nov. 30 and published in the Dec. 14 Federal Register sought to breach the “blendwall,” or the point at which oil sector groups say no more renewable fuel can be blended into the fuel supply, because of vehicle and infrastructure constraints, without driving up fuel prices.
The RFS requires that increasing volumes of renewable fuels be blended into the fuel supply, and the bulk of the fuel requirement is still met by corn-based ethanol through an implied mandate to produce that fuel, despite the intent of Congress under the program to move toward “advanced” and cellulosic biofuels.
EPA acknowledged fuel distribution limitations in setting the 2016 RFS volumes below statutory levels -- drawing the suit from ethanol groups that claim EPA unlawfully lowered the volume requirements.
Oil sector groups have intervened on EPA's behalf in that lawsuit, Americans For Clean Energy, et al. v. EPA, et al., to head off any increase in biofuel volumes.
However, oil sector and refinery groups say the agency still went too far in its volume requirements for 2016, prompting their litigation. “We will continue to shine a light on this outdated and broken mandate and the need for positive change for the American consumer,” said Frank Macchiarola, American Petroleum Institute (API) downstream group director, in a Nov. 11 statement announcing the group's D.C. Circuit suit over the RFS.
“EPA’s 2016 mandated ethanol volumes push more ethanol into our fuel supply than is safe for the vast majority of cars on the road. This action could harm consumers who could face higher fuel costs and damaged engines as a result,” he added.
The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), also intervening in Americans For Clean Energy, filed its own suit over the multi-year RFS volumes rule Feb. 10.
In addition, Pennsylvania-based refiner Monroe Energy filed suit Feb. 9 over the multi-year RFS, though similar to the oil groups' filing its complaint does not list specific criticisms of the rule.
Monroe is also pursuing a separate lawsuit in the D.C. Circuit challenging an underlying 2010 RFS rule that the company says wrongly puts the burden of compliance on refiners, when it should fall on fuel blenders.
Meanwhile, ethanol groups in their statement of issues to be raised in Americans For Clean Energy say they intend to challenge EPA's interpretation of “inadequate domestic supply,” the grounds cited by the agency for issuing a waiver to set fuel volumes lower than Congressionally mandated levels.
Also, the petitioners will challenge EPA's treatment of banked renewable fuel credits traded under the RFS, known as renewable indentification numbers (RINs). Pro-ethanol groups have said that EPA should have set volumes higher, based on an abundance of “carryover” RINs from previous compliance years that refiners could use to comply, but the agency arbitrarily declined to do so.

Return to headline | Return to top
Greens back House bill to block leasing

Feb 12, 2016 | E&E Daily News

By Hannah Hess

Environmentalists are throwing their weight behind legislation to permanently bar new fossil fuel leases on all federal public lands and waters.
Well-known advocates like Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune and 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben yesterday touted California Democratic Rep. Jared Huffman's new "Keep It In The Ground Act."
The legislation is the latest attempt to push for changes in the oil and gas leasing program in the wake of the Obama administration's decision to freeze new coal leases (Greenwire, Feb. 9).
Later this month, the Obama administration will likely release its next draft five-year plan for offshore oil leasing, with a final version expected by the end of the year.
"This administration is not finished at all on actions on climate and energy," Brune said during a conference call with reporters yesterday.
The environmental community's hope is for more action by the administration against fossil fuels. Brune said the Huffman bill provided a "concrete plan" to help meet the climate goals set by the landmark international deal reached in Paris last year.
"We should seize this opportunity and lead the world in the fight against climate disruption by keeping dirty fuels where they belong -- in the ground," Brune said.
Environmentalists welcomed the president's proposal to charge oil companies $10 for every barrel of crude. But climate activists noted it wouldn't cover oil pumped domestically, a detail they called a "free pass" in an otherwise good plan.
Huffman's bill has slim prospects for advancing in the Republican-controlled House. Yesterday, 16 Democrats signed on as co-sponsors. A Senate version introduced Nov. 4, 2015, with six Democratic backers, including Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, is also stalled.
McKibben, however, thinks the message of climate activists is already resonating in the 2016 election cycle. "Public leaders of all kinds pick up on those movements," he said.

Return to headline | Return to top
Clean Power Plan Stay Won't Alter Congressional Action

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Anthony Adragna

Senate Republicans hailed Supreme Court action to stay the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan, but said Feb. 11 the decision likely would not alter their efforts to push back against the rule on Capitol Hill.
More than half a dozen senators told Bloomberg BNA they would push forward with aggressive oversight of the Clean Power Plan, other EPA regulatory actions and the international climate change agreement reached in Paris. But they said new legislation to fight the Clean Power Plan was unlikely, given President Barack Obama's vetoes of past efforts.
“We'll still do deep oversights on impacts of this rule—I think we may change the focus a bit,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 11. The stay “opens up some new avenues to talk about.”
The Supreme Court delivered a surprising and unprecedented response to the Obama administration's efforts on climate change when it blocked the Clean Power Plan before a federal appeals court had even considered it. The regulation (RIN 2060-AR33), the centerpiece of the administration's domestic climate efforts, would curb carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants (27 DEN A-1, 2/10/16).
Tone Change on International Actions
One area of oversight interest where the court's decision might intensify efforts concerns the Paris Agreement, in which developed and developing nations alike agreed for the first time to climate actions.
Republicans were already skeptical the U.S. could meet its pledge of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 26 percent to 28 percent by 2025 from 2005 levels, but said the Clean Power Plan stay would further force the administration to address skepticism surrounding that commitment.
“The Supreme Court decision changes sort of dramatically the tone of that debate,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Republican leadership, told Bloomberg BNA. “I think when the Supreme Court kind of smacks you down like they did, it's going to be more difficult for them to argue that this initiative is something that can be carried out.”
An aide to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee told Bloomberg BNA the panel was still considering whether to push for a Senate floor vote on a resolution to undercut the administration's approach to the Paris climate deal. Such a vote would likely occur before the April 22 date when the Paris deal is formally opened for signature at United Nations headquarters in New York (06 DEN B-15, 1/11/16).
“We'll use every conceivable tool to stop his actions,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), another member of the Senate Republican leadership, told Bloomberg BNA.
New Legislative Push Unlikely
Senators said they would continue to keep their options open for attacking the Clean Power Plan. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said, “We're going to keep fighting against these regressive regulations” on Feb. 10—but new legislation is unlikely.
“I don't think action is necessary legislatively,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, told Bloomberg BNA. “[New legislation] would have been [necessary] in the absence of this [stay].”
Congress made a number of attempts to block the EPA rules in 2015, but all came up short. Those efforts included House legislation (H.R. 2042) allowing states to opt out or delay compliance with the regulation and a Senate bill (S. 1324) that would have immediately killed off the regulations.
Both the House and Senate passed resolutions on the Congressional Review Act in 2015 that would have immediately nullified the Clean Power Plan and a similar rule for new and modified power plants, but Obama vetoed both measures.
Senior Democrats also said they didn't expect much direct impact on Capitol Hill from the court's decision.
“[Republicans] are waiting for the court cases to unfold,” Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works, told Bloomberg BNA. “What will matter is [what happens] once they hear all the cases.”
Opening for Clean Coal?
Several senators hoped the court's decision would make the administration, including the EPA, more open to developing carbon capture and sequestration as well as other technologies that could help combat climate change.
“We're still looking for technology,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) told Bloomberg BNA. “It should be a signal that the White House and the EPA should work with us, and I'm trying to work with them.”

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Chief Urges States To Stick With Power Plan Despite SCOTUS Stay

Feb 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire

By Devin Henry

President Obama’s chief environmental regulator is encouraging states to stick with their plans to lower carbon emissions from their energy sectors despite the Supreme Court’s halting of a federal rule this week.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy told state regulators Thursday that market forces are already pushing the power sector toward cleaner energy, a trend that began before the Obama administration finalized the Clean Power Plan rule that the Supreme Court delayed on Wednesday. “This is the market momentum we have been thinking about and hoping for and seeing happen, and it is already happening,” she told regulators at a National Association of State Energy Officials meeting in Washington.
“States, really try to continue to seize the opportunities. We know that the market is moving in this direction, we all want to grab it for all of its benefits and squeeze that dry, and I don’t think that this decision changes any of our emphasis and enthusiasm to work on these issues together.”
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision Tuesday night, halted the EPA’s climate rule for power plants — called a "stay" in legal terminology — while state and industry lawsuits against it move forward.
The ruling means states don’t have to submit compliance plans under the regulation until the courts — and ultimately the Supreme Court itself — rule on the legality of the plan.
But McCarthy said that, despite the order, states should keep working on emissions reduction plans and coordinating with the EPA on them.
“Are we going to respect the decision of the Supreme Court? You bet, of course we are,” she said.
“But it doesn’t mean it’s the only thing we’re working on and it doesn’t mean we won't continue to support any state that voluntarily wants to move forward.”
States and utilities hostile to the rule cheered the court order this week. The American Energy Alliance trade group said Thursday that it was sending regulators a “stop work” order to convince them to cease their compliance planning.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has sued against the rule, told reporters on Wednesday that his state, for one, will not work on its compliance plan during the legal process.
“We’ve got a stay,” Paxton said. “The whole point of the stay is to stop us from having to provide any implementation plan, so we’re not moving forward with anything until this case is resolved.”
But McCarthy, in an often defiant speech at Thursday’s conference, said it’s in states’ best economic interest to begin greening their energy mix even while litigation moves forward.
After the stay order, several states have said they will continue implementing the plan, including Colorado, Virginia and Pennsylvania.
Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton, typifying many Democrats’ response to the stay, said Thursday, “While the Court’s temporary stay is disappointing, it does nothing to diminish our resolve in Minnesota to keep moving forward on clean energy initiatives, including the development of our state’s Clean Power Plan.”
McCarthy struck a similar tone with regulators Thursday.
“Am I disappointed in the Supreme Court's decision to stay the Clean Power Plan? My answer would be absolutely yes. Why not? I really wanted to be the one to sign that first plan approval,” she said.
“But does it stop or even slow down this country in terms of our transition to a low carbon future? Absolutely not.”

Return to headline | Return to top
Obama: Don’t ‘Despair’ Over Supreme Court Stay Of Carbon Rule

Feb 11, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard

By Alex Guillén

President Barack Obama today said not to “despair” over the Supreme Court’s decision to stay EPA’s Clean Power Plan, although he admitted the move was "unusual.”
“In the last couple of days I've heard people say, 'The Supreme Court struck down the clean power plant rule.’ That's not true, so don’t despair people,” Obama said at a Democratic National Committee fundraiser in California.
“This a legal decision that says, 'Hold on until we review the legality.' We are very firm in terms of the legal footing here,” Obama added, according to a pool report.
Obama noted that the Supreme Court has already ruled that EPA has the obligation and the authority to regulate greenhouse gases.
And he added that climate change is “an enormous generational challenge” and “there are going to be people constantly pushing back and making sure we keep clinging to old dirty fuels and a carbon-emitting economic strategy that we need to be moving away from.”
"We need to be investing in the future, not the past,” Obama said. “Instead of subsidizing … the oil industry, we should be investing in solar and wind and battery technology — all the things that promise us we can generate enormous power without destroying the planet for our kids and grandkids.”
And Obama touted the December climate deal the U.S. helped cinch in Paris.
“That's the essence of American leadership, but that American leadership depends on us, depends on an administration that believes in science, for example.”

Return to headline | Return to top
McCarthy Says ESPS Stay 'Adds Some Time' To GHG Rule

Feb 11, 2016 | InsideEPA

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy is indicating that the agency will have to extend at least some deadlines under its greenhouse gas standards for existing power plants even if the rule is ultimately upheld in court, given the Supreme Court's unexpected stay of the rule pending resolution of litigation.
During a Feb. 11 House agriculture committee hearing, McCarthy said that EPA's existing source performance standards (ESPS) rule is “still in effect,” but that the high court's Feb. 9 order staying the rule “adds some time.”
The administrator also echoed prior arguments from Obama administration officials that EPA is “very confident the rule will be upheld as lawful under the Clean Air Act.”
The remarks confirm widespread speculation that even if the rule is ultimately upheld, deadlines for states to submit compliance plans, and perhaps the start to the compliance period, would have to be extended to account for the lengthy litigation.
Under the high court order, the stay will remain in effect until after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rules, and also until any high court review concludes.
The D.C. Circuit has scheduled June 2 oral argument in consolidated litigation over the rule, and could issue a ruling by the fall. It is almost certain that losing parties will seek Supreme Court review of any ruling, and a high court decision likely won't come until at least mid 2017.
During that time, EPA cannot require states to submit any compliance plans, meaning that between one and two years likely would be added to deadlines for states to submit final plans. Under the rule, such plans would be due in September 2018, assuming that states received a two-year extension offered in the rule.

Return to headline | Return to top
McCarthy: Clean Power Plan Stay Doesn't Stop States

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Andrew Childers

Two days after the U.S. Supreme Court halted the Environmental Protection Agency's signature climate change rule, Administrator Gina McCarthy struck a decidedly optimistic tone, vowing to support ongoing state efforts to shift toward a cleaner power sector.
“We'll move forward. We'll get this done. We'll have the [Clean Power Plan]. We'll continue our work together,” McCarthy vowed Feb. 11 at a joint meeting of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and the National Association of State Energy Officials.
Although the Clean Power Plan, which limits carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector in each state, won't go into effect while the rule faces legal challenges from 27 states and several utility and industry groups, McCarthy said the EPA will continue to support state efforts to comply with the rule on a voluntary basis.
“It doesn't preclude states, tribes and utilities from continuing to act on climate,” McCarthy said. “They're already saying they're going to keep moving forward. We have Colorado, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Connecticut and others have already stood up and within 24 hours of this decision have said for them nothing has changed.”
Obama Weighs In
Meanwhile, President Barack Obama, making his first comments since the Supreme Court's action, called the stay “unusual” but said he remained convinced the Clean Power Plan would ultimately survive judicial review.
“In the last couple of days I've heard people say, ‘The Supreme Court struck down the clean power plant rule.' That's not true, so don't despair people,” Obama said at a fundraiser in Palo Alto, Calif. “This a legal decision that says, ‘Hold on until we review the legality.’ We are very firm in terms of the legal footing here.”
Back in Washington, McCarthy said the stay also won't deter the EPA from pursuing additional climate change regulations using its existing Clean Air Act authority.
“It doesn't preclude us from moving forward on climate. It doesn't slow us down. Are we going to respect the decision of the Supreme Court? You bet,” McCarthy said.
McCarthy underscored that the power industry is already making the shift away from coal-fired power plants to renewables or cleaner burning natural gas and that the Clean Power Plan merely followed and locked in place that transition.
“This is the market momentum that we have been thinking about and hoping for and seeing happen, and it is already happening,” McCarthy said. “So if you ask me, ‘Am I disappointed in the Supreme Court's decision to stay the Clean Power Plan?’ My answer would be, ‘Absolutely yes.’ Why not? I really wanted to be the one to sign that first plan approval. But does it stop or even slow down this country in terms of our transition to a low carbon future? Absolutely not.”
Supreme Court Issued 5-4 Decision
On a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court issued an order Feb. 9 staying the EPA's carbon dioxide standards for power plants (RIN 2060-AR33) until the rule can be fully litigated (West Virginia v. EPA, U.S., No. 15A773, 2/9/16; 27 DEN A-1, 2/10/16).
Prior to the stay, states had until Sept. 6 to submit their initial compliance plans to the EPA. Now, some states have already said they will halt those efforts, while others will continue with their preparations in the event the rule is ultimately upheld (28 DEN A-1, 2/11/16).
Janet McCabe, the EPA's acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, said the agency will continue to work with states that want to prepare should the rule be upheld and is moving forward with development of a system for states to submit compliance plans.
“We're going to continue doing that work, but it will be in the spirit of a program we're not implementing now,” she said.
Clean Power Plan ‘Symbolic.'
The Clean Power Plan was the centerpiece of the U.S. commitment to curb greenhouse gas emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025 as President Obama pressed for the international climate deal reached in Paris in December.
The Supreme Court's intervention is being closely watched by other nations to see how that will affect the U.S. pledge (28 DEN A-18, 2/11/16).
“There's a symbolic value to the Clean Power Plan, and there's a problem with that when the Supreme Court stays it,” Joanne Spalding, the Sierra Club's chief climate counsel, told reporters Feb. 11. “There's no doubt that's an issue. But in terms of actually achieving the goals in the electric sector, we're on a trajectory to achieve that.”
Nations Said Watching Litigation
Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy with the Union of Concerned Scientists who is currently attending an international climate strategy meeting in Berlin, said other nations are watching the litigation progress but acknowledge that the court's stay is a preliminary measure and not a ruling on the Clean Power Plan's legality.
“I sense a general willingness to wait and see how this plays out in the months to come,” he said.

Return to headline | Return to top
McCarthy On Rule Freeze: 'It Is Not Going To Slow Us Down'

Feb 11, 2016 | E&E News PM

By Amanda Reilly

U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy expressed disappointment today about the Supreme Court's decision to freeze the Clean Power Plan but vowed before a gathering of state regulators that her agency would forge ahead with actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
"It is not going to slow us down," McCarthy said at a Washington, D.C., workshop on the plan. "Are we going to respect the decision of the Supreme Court? You bet. Of course we are. But that doesn't mean that it's the only thing that we're working on."
She added, "We ain't done."
The regulators gave McCarthy a standing ovation.

In a 5-4 decision backed by its conservative wing, the Supreme Court on Tuesday froze the Clean Power Plan while complicated litigation over the program plays out. The decision threw into disarray state planning efforts to comply with the program, which calls for a reduction in carbon emissions from the power sector.
Obama administration officials throughout the week have sought to reassure international partners that the Supreme Court's move would not affect the ability of the United States to meet its greenhouse gas reduction goals.
This is the first time the EPA chief has publicly addressed the stay.
"Am I disappointed in the Supreme Court's decision to stay the Clean Power Plan?" she said. "My answer would be absolutely yes. Why not? I really wanted to be the one to sign that first plan approval."
But the administrator maintained she was confident in the legal underpinnings of the rule and predicted that the rule would survive court challenges that are expected to make it to the Supreme Court.
"One decision to stay doesn't mean that the CPP isn't alive and isn't going to survive," McCarthy said.
McCarthy said that the U.S. transition to a low-carbon future would continue even while the program is stayed. She said that the recent action by Congress to extend wind and solar energy tax credits would ensure that power sector would continue moving toward renewable energy.
"Congress pretty much ensured that renewables will continue to dominate in the marketplace," McCarthy said. "Nothing has changed."
McCarthy argued the Clean Power Plan was always meant to reflect where the market was already going -- toward renewables and increased efficiency.
A handful of Democratic-led states have said they would forge ahead with their planning efforts, but many states are putting the brakes on planning efforts in the wake of the ruling. Others are still reassessing whether they should continue to move forward (ClimateWire, Feb. 11).
While saying the agency would respect the Supreme Court's decision, McCarthy applauded those states that are moving forward and invited others to do the same.
"The stay does not overturn years of effort and collaboration on the Clean Power Plan," she said of state planning efforts. "That happened. It brought us all together. We now understand our universes incredibly well, and we have developed a partnership that will continue."
John Coequyt, the Sierra Club's director of federal and international climate campaigns, today urged states to continue their planning processes to comply with the Clean Power Plan, regardless of the rule's ultimate legal fate.
"We believe it's always better for states to push forward with an orderly process, to engage stakeholders and to come up with durable plans that work for their state," Coequyt said.
For the states that are putting the brakes on planning, he said, "the transition away from coal to clean energy is going to happen anyway."
Environmental organizations today also continued to downplay the importance of the Clean Power Plan to the shift in the electricity sector away from coal.
"There's a symbolic value to the Clean Power Plan, and there's a symbolic problem with it. There's a problem that when the Supreme Court stays it, there's no doubt that that's an issue," said Joanne Spalding, the Sierra Club's chief climate counsel. "But in terms of actually achieving the goals in the electric sector, we are on a trajectory already to do that."
Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy with the Union of Concerned Scientists, today said that other countries are looking to the administration to divulge more on what the stay means for the United States' 2020 and 2025 carbon reduction goals.
"There's a lot of interest in hearing more directly from the administration on the outlook for the Clean Power Plan," Meyer said, "on overall progress toward the 2020 commitment and prospects for the 2025 goal, as well as on plans for the U.S. to sign and give executive approval for the agreement."

Return to headline | Return to top
Republicans See Signs of Pushback Against Government

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Stephen Lee

The Supreme Court's recent decision to block the Obama administration's greenhouse gas rules offers the latest sign of growing judicial pushback against a runaway executive branch, a former Republican White House counsel said.
“That's a really strong signal,” C. Boyden Gray, ex-counsel to President George H.W. Bush, said Feb. 10 of the high court's Feb. 9 decision to block the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan (West Virginia v. EPA, U.S., No. 15A773, 2/9/16).
Going forward, Gray said he foresaw the Supreme Court continuing to hold the line against the federal bureaucracy.
“I think you're going to see the Supreme Court do what it can to really send a signal to the rest of the appellate courts and to the district courts beneath them,” said Gray, speaking at a gathering convened by the American Enterprise Institute. “Do I think it's going to be enough to encourage more people to challenge [the executive branch in court]? No, it's not enough, but it's absolutely essential.”
To bolster his case, Gray pointed to a series of “nine or 10” unanimous decisions by the high court over the last few years rejecting the overreach of the federal government.
“I believe the courts are onto this,” he said.
Backlash Fueling Trump
At the same time, an out-of-control federal bureaucracy is also fueling the current populist backlash at the polls, Cleta Mitchell, a prominent Republican attorney, said at the same gathering.
“The arrogance is so palpable,” Mitchell said, referring specifically to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs but more generally to the federal government as a whole. “And it is what is giving rise to the Donald Trump phenomenon. It's time that Congress and the courts did something to rein in this unchecked expansion of the state.”
John Yoo, a University of California at Berkeley law professor and the former Justice Department lawyer who wrote the legal memos authorizing the use of enhanced interrogation under President George W. Bush, pinned the problem in part on a legal notion that gives deference to agencies' interpretations of their own rules.
The principle, known as Chevron deference, “almost rubber stamps what the agencies decide to do,” Yoo said.
No Deregulation, Even Under Republicans
Daniel Gallagher, a former commissioner at the Securities and Exchange Commission under President Barack Obama, added that, under both Democrats and Republicans, agencies' natural tendency is to grow.
“You never see an exercise in deregulation,” Gallagher said. “This notion that we've all heard for decades that Republicans take over and deregulate—I wish I had seen that.”
Further, the voice of small businesses has fallen silent in recent years, Gallagher said. While the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy “sometimes is a good agency,” it has “completely fallen away in this administration,” said Gallagher, referring specifically to SEC rulemakings.
He also said a Republican president in 2016 would help shrink the size and scale of the federal government.

Return to headline | Return to top
House Subcommittee Advances 12 Energy Bills

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Rebecca Kern

A House Energy and Commerce subcommittee approved by voice vote 12 bills, including measures that would affect natural gas pipeline permitting and the Federal Power Act.
The Energy and Power Subcommittee approved the bills during a Feb. 11 markup. The majority of the bills affect the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which weighed in on the legislation at a Feb. 2 hearing (22 DEN A-9, 2/3/16).
H.R. 3021, the AIR Survey Act, would allow companies to use aerial survey data to complete prefiling processes for gas pipeline certifications at FERC. Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) said the bill had “serious shortcomings” and would decrease public awareness and involvement in the gas pipeline permitting process. Supporters of the legislation say it would help speed up the gas pipeline permitting process at FERC.
The subcommittee also advanced H.R. 2984, the Fair RATES Act, which would amend the Federal Power Act to allow rehearings of FERC decisions affecting rates when a four-member commission is deadlocked at 2-2. Currently, when the commission reaches a 2-2 vote on a rate-setting matter, the process goes forward even though no order is issued, and there's no way to contest the decision via a rehearing process.
Included in the 12 bills that advanced out of subcommittee were five that were passed by unanimous consent that would extend the construction timelines for hydroelectric power plants overseen by FERC.
The full committee hasn't set a date to take up the bills, a committee aide told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 11.

Return to headline | Return to top
Obama Sees Warming As Science And Technology Challenge

Feb 11, 2016 | E&E News PM

By Christa Marshall

Last year's Paris climate agreement wasn't perfect but stands as the "biggest single step the world has ever taken toward combating global climate change," President Obama says in a new interview with Popular Science that also touches on the Death Star, actor Matt Damon and robotic giraffes.
"The question now is what we do about climate change because there is such a thing as being too late. And I think that regardless of their party, if candidates for elected office want to resign your children and grandchildren to a world that's broken beyond repair, then there's simply no way they deserve your vote," the president says in the magazine interview on "how to win the future," which was released by the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
When asked whether had had done enough on the issue, the president listed various administration actions ranging from new fuel standards for cars and trucks to the now-in-question Clean Power Plan before saying he thinks of the issue in terms of his daughters and unborn grandchildren. "I imagine myself pushing a little boy or girl on a swing set, out in the open air, looking up in the sun. In that moment, I want to know the planet's going to be in pretty good shape," he said. "And I want to have contributed to that."
Obama also said his administration has "restored science to its rightful place" via initiatives ranging from advanced manufacturing to training science and math teachers.
The comments come as Obama's climate agenda is under fire with the Supreme Court's stay of his signature plan to curb carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Despite the court action, administration officials maintain the United States can meet its climate goals with help from things such as renewable tax credits (E&ENews PM, Feb. 10).
Obama has long maintained that he views the climate issue very much in terms of science and technology innovation, as existing clean energy may not be able to cut emissions enough to meet stricter emission targets over time. It's a theme in this week's budget request, which among other things, calls for renewable energy, efficiency and sustainable transportation research funding to jump 30 percent or more in fiscal 2017 at the Department of Energy as part of a broader Obama push on climate change. It remains unclear how much key appropriators in Congress who have long supported energy research and development will buy into the administration's plan (E&E Daily, Feb. 10).
Outside of a funding push, the Obama administration also started initiatives such as a science fair and the first-ever Demo Day and Maker Faire at the White House to showcase inventive efforts by entrepreneurs and students, including a gigantic robotic giraffe.
On a lighter note, Obama told Popular Science he has "a little nerd credibility," as well, considering things such as an administration analysis of why building the Death Star in "Star Wars" is not practical.
As for whether he would rather have Mark Watney from the movie "The Martian" or Ellen Ripley from "Alien" as his Mars companion, Obama told the magazine: "If I've got Matt Damon growing potatoes and Sigourney Weaver taking care of any unwelcome intruders, I like my chances."

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA: Michigan Officials Failed on Flint Crisis

Feb 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Stephen Lee

An Environmental Protection Agency official admitted Feb. 11 that Michigan officials could have responded more effectively to the Flint, Mich., water crisis.
“In this case, clearly there was a falling down of the appropriate measures,” Susan Shinkman, director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Civil Enforcement, told a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee.
The Safe Drinking Water Act gives primacy to the states to enforce the statute, Shinkman said. EPA's Region 5 had been monitoring the Flint situation over several months, she said.
“Obviously, a significant amount of time passed in which perhaps other action should have been taken,” Shinkman said.
Shinkman was less clear in admitting any direct EPA culpability in the crisis, saying her office became aware of the crisis last fall and immediately swung into response mode, working with Region 5.
Emergency Action
“We monitored them as well as we could,” she said. “When we realized that the situation required emergency action, we took the action on January 21 and issued that order.”
The emergency order was issued to the city of Flint, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and the state of Michigan. The EPA is monitoring compliance with the order on “a daily, almost hourly basis to make sure we try to bring the city back into compliance and improve the drinking water in the City of Flint,” Shinkman said.
“If that doesn't work, we will obviously follow it with enforcement actions, potentially judicial,” Shinkman said.
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) asked Shinkman why the EPA hadn't taken emergency action months ago.
“I can't answer for everyone who was involved in it,” Shinkman said, reiterating that her office acted swiftly.
‘An Immense Failure.'
Peters called the crisis “an immense failure of Michigan state government.”
He also said he was “extremely disappointed with the EPA's response on this. We can never tolerate the EPA not going public immediately when you have a building crisis of this magnitude.”
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) echoed those concerns, noting the case of Sebring, Ohio, where lead levels exceeding federal standards were recently found, prompting a drinking water advisory (23 DEN A-17, 2/4/16).
“We want to make sure EPA is providing federal expertise and providing the kind of oversight that they are required to but also providing transparency,” Portman said.
Critique of EPA's Regulatory Posture
The hearing then pivoted to a discussion about the EPA's regulatory and enforcement activities, which Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) characterized as out of touch with the realities business people face.
“There are a lot of bureaucrats out there that will simply throw out rules and regulations, without understanding the full impact, from start to finish—both the labor intensity of any of these rules and regulations or the cost to the businesses,” Ernst said. “It's disregarded so many times. I would like to see leaders leading from the front.”
She also said the EPA's formula for calculating penalties seemed open to “a tremendous amount of discretion” by agency officials.
Shinkman acknowledged that the formula may appear byzantine to people who aren't as familiar with it as EPA staffers are but noted that all the discretionary elements are worked out in collaboration with the company being fined.

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Faces Questions On Why It Didn't Act Sooner In Flint

Feb 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire

By Lydia Wheeler

Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) on Thursday pressed an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enforcement official on why the agency did not step in sooner and take action to address the drinking water crisis in Flint, Mich.
During a hearing on agency discretion in setting regulatory fines, Peters said the emergency order the EPA issued on Jan. 21 stated that the presence of lead in the city’s water supply was principally due to the lack of corrosion control treatment and that EPA region five staff members first expressed concerns about the lack of corrosion control back in May.
“That means the emergency order was issued at a minimum of seven months after the EPA’s concern was first communicated to the state,” he said, pointing out that under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the EPA only has to wait 30 days before taking enforcement action of its own.
"If your agency’s own policy document encourages judicial action when a situation is escalating, why did the EPA wait so long to take action in Flint?” he asked Susan Shinkman, the director of the EPA’s Office of Civil Enforcement, during the hearing held by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management.
Though Shinkman said it was the primary responsibility of the state to enforce it's safe-drinking-water laws, she admitted the agency could have done more.
“In this case, clearly there was a falling down on the appropriate measures,” she said. “The EPA regional office, region five, was monitoring what was going on with the state over a period of time. Obviously a significant amount of time passed in which perhaps other action should have been taken.”
When her office realized the situation needed emergency action, Shinkman said it issued an order that forces the state to take immediate action to improve the drinking water.
“We are monitoring that order on a daily, almost hourly basis to make sure that we try to bring the city back into compliance and improve the drinking water in the city of Flint,” she said.
If the state fails to meet the requirements of the order, she said, the EPA plans to follow-up with additional enforcement actions that are “possibly judicial.”

Return to headline | Return to top

Full Text of Stories Below

Add recipients

Suggested