Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 6/15
-
(ACC Mentioned) Weekly Resin Report: Supply/Demand Dynamics Contribute to Slide in Spot PE, PP Pricing
Jun 14, 2016 | Plastics Today
Despite a steady stream of interest from both resin buyers and sellers, transactions were soft last week, reports the PlasticsExchange (Chicago) in its Market Update. Polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) supplies continued to build and spot prices slid further. -
(ACC Mentioned) Americans Get Better Protection from Toxic Substances
Jun 14, 2016 | Delaware ONline
By Tom Carper, Chris Coons & John Carney
These days, most of the news coverage from Washington is focused on our nasty presidential campaign or congressional gridlock, but last week, Congress actually came together to pass legislation that is not only good for the whole country but particularly important to our home state of Delaware, too. -
Ryan, Hatch Sign TSCA Legislation
Jun 14, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Colby Bermel
House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate President Pro Tempore Orrin Hatch signed chemicals reform legislation today, a necessary step before sending it to the White House for President Obama's approval. -
States Can Regulate Chemicals Under TSCA-Reform Bill
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
States needing to regulate chemicals can do so despite federal preemption provisions in the Toxic Substances Control Act overhaul Congress passed, an attorney and a legislative analyst said in recent days. -
Pipeline Bill Follows TSCA to West Wing
Jun 14, 2016 | Bloomberg Government
By Mark Drajem
Senate Democrats are renewing a push for oil train safety legislation after a fiery crude-by-rail derailment, with the risks set to be a focus at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources hearing today. -
Historic Chemical Regulation Law Sets the Stage for a Safer Future
Jun 14, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Lynn R. Goldman
A landmark bill that was just passed by Congress now gives the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the power to regulate thousands of potentially toxic chemicals, many of them found in every day household products. -
Pollution in People: Cancer-Causing Chemicals in Americans’ Bodies
Jun 14, 2016 | EcoWatch
By Environmental Working Group
Hundreds of cancer-causing chemicals are building up in the bodies of Americans, according to the first comprehensive The Pollution in People inventory of carcinogens that have been measured in people, which was released Tuesday by the Environmental Working Group (EWG). -
Humans Exposed to Hundreds of Carcinogens,Warns EWG
Jun 15, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Human biomonitoring studies have detected up to 420 known or likely carcinogens in humans, according to a review by US NGO, the Environmental Working Group (EWG). -
Momentum Slows for Major Energy Bill
Jun 14, 2016 | The Hill
By Devin Henry
Lawmakers and energy reform advocates are pushing the Senate to quickly join a House energy bill conference committee amid concerns that progress is stalling. -
Murkowski to Press Colleagues for Energy Bill Conference
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said she planned to urge her Democratic counterpart on the committee and others to move forward with an energy bill conference during a meeting scheduled for June 14. -
Key Lawmakers Promise to Keep Talking on Bill Conference
Jun 15, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
Top House and Senate lawmakers huddled behind closed doors yesterday evening to discuss how a formal conference committee might reconcile the chambers' competing energy reform packages. -
Senate Subcommittee Clears $32 Billion Interior-EPA Bill
Jun 14, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
The Senate’s Interior-EPA appropriations subcommittee today approved its 2017 funding bill. -
Senate Spending Bill Trims EPA Spending, Blocks Regs
Jun 14, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A Senate panel on Tuesday approved a GOP-backed spending bill that blocks regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). -
EPA Fracking Report Needs Qualifiers, Scientists Say
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
A much-debated summary on the risks posed by hydraulic fracturing to drinking water was kicked around again June 14 by scientists discussing recommendations to improve an Environmental Protection Agency report. -
Hatch Optimistic on Senate Action for Energy Tax Credits
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee said June 14 he expects the Senate to extend tax credits for a handful of clean-energy technologies that were left out of a deal in the omnibus funding legislation passed in December that extended tax credits for the wind and solar industries. -
Portland Mayor to Gov. Kate Brown: Say No to More Oil Trains
Jun 14, 2016 | The Oregonian
By Rob Davis
Portland leaders including Mayor Charlie Hales and Multnomah County Chairwoman Deborah Kafoury on Tuesday called on Oregon Gov. Kate Brown to use her bully pulpit to pressure Washington's governor to reject a large oil train terminal in Vancouver. -
Ozone Legislation Focus of Senate Subcommittee Hearing
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
A pair of bills that would alter compliance obligations under the Environmental Protection Agency's 2015 ozone standards will be the subject of a Senate Environment and Public Works subcommittee hearing June 22. -
Ryan's Regulatory Agenda Ruffles Environmentalists
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Cheryl Bolen
Many financial, environmental and energy-related rules would be scaled back next year under a regulatory-overhaul plan unveiled by House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and a dozen other House Republican leaders. -
Ryan's Policy Plan Seeks To Scrap EPA Climate Rules
Jun 14, 2016 | Inside EPA
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) is floating a policy blueprint for House Republicans that calls for scraping all EPA climate change rules developed under the Clean Air Act, along with a broader regulatory reform effort that would put new constraints on agencies seeking to issue new rules. -
Senate Appropriators Tie Policy Riders to EPA Spending
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
Senate Republicans dropped a bombshell at a June 14 appropriations subcommittee markup of the Environmental Protection Agency's funding bill, pledging to tack on a host of policy riders that Democrats say would gut key environmental regulations. -
U.S. Chamber and Its Board Disagree on Climate, Senators Say
Jun 15, 2016 | E&E News
By Lisa Friedman
Nearly half of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's board of directors have taken positions in favor of tackling global warming, despite helping to run a lobbying group that campaigns against climate policies, according to a new report by seven Senate Democrats and an independent.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
Jun 14, 2016 | Plastics Today
Despite a steady stream of interest from both resin buyers and sellers, transactions were soft last week, reports the PlasticsExchange (Chicago) in its Market Update. Polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) supplies continued to build and spot prices slid further. Processors were often seen probing the market and seeking reduced price levels, but they appeared more satisfied to confirm the downward trend than to actually procure material.
The spot PE market was pressured by growing supplies and lackluster demand. HDPE for injection and blowmolding lost a penny, as did LLDPE and LDPE film grades. Some lower volume commodity grades, such as high flow LDPE and LLDPE for injection, as well as material for rotomolding, remained a challenge to source, however, and those prices remained firm.
Preliminary results from the American Chemistry Council indicate that in May, PE production bounced back to over 3.4 billion lb, 245 million more than in April. Total demand was relatively weak—domestic sales were 2.56 billion lb, 50 million below the 12-month average—and export sales were 677 million lbs, the lowest in 16 months. The slack demand could not absorb the increased production, which resulted in an upstream PE inventory build of 183 million lb, reports the PlasticsExchange.
Processors mostly have been picking away with small orders, awaiting relief from the $0.09/lb of price increases that were implemented during March and April. While spot prices have been softer, particularly for off-grade, widespread discounting for generic prime railcars has been elusive. Some are hopeful that a $0.04 to 0.05/lb decrease can still be negotiated for June contracts, but others are conceding that July might be more realistic time frame. Exports remain sluggish, resin production has been increasing and upstream inventories are growing. However, processor PE procurement has been off for two months in a row, so they need to buy. Let’s see who blinks first, writes the PlasticsExchange.
PP trading was about average, with supplies continuing to increase and prices falling further. There is good availability of both domestic and imported PP warehoused around the country. Spot HoPP, which fell $0.02/lb, is more abundant than CoPP, which only shed a cent. While previously imported resin supplies are depleting, this alternative competitively priced material has left some domestic resin without buyers, giving new life to the generic prime railcar market, which had been in deep hibernation.
According to initial reports, domestic PP production rates increased for the third straight month to over 97% capacity, yielding just more than 1.5 billion lb in May. This level has not been eclipsed since March 2015, according to PlasticsExchange analysts.
Despite strong sales, all of the domestic PP production could not be absorbed, so 36 million lb were added to producers’ collective inventories. These upstream supplies have grown 140 million lb over the past three months; June began with 1.65 billion lb on hand, the most since May 2012. The current supply/demand imbalance has weighed on PP contract pricing, generating two recent $0.05/lb decreases, the first in May and the second currently implemented on June contracts.
http://www.plasticstoday.com/weekly-resin-report-supplydemand-dynamics-contribute-slide-spot-pe-pp-pricing/53125724780/page/0/1
-
(ACC Mentioned) Americans Get Better Protection from Toxic Substances
Jun 14, 2016 | Delaware ONline
By Tom Carper, Chris Coons & John Carney
These days, most of the news coverage from Washington is focused on our nasty presidential campaign or congressional gridlock, but last week, Congress actually came together to pass legislation that is not only good for the whole country but particularly important to our home state of Delaware, too.
The landmark bill makes major, long-overdue reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act, a law that sets chemical safety standards, not only for big, industrial manufacturers, but also for families who are exposed to chemicals every day through household items.
TSCA was first enacted all the way back in 1976 to regulate thousands of chemicals used in products Americans rely on every day, ranging from laundry detergents to Tupperware. Forty years later, though, the evidence is clear: This law is no longer getting the job done. In truth, it hasn’t worked for more than three decades, and our decades-old chemical safety standards are leaving the public at risk of toxic exposures. Many Americans don’t trust that the toys their kids are playing with or the products they clean their house with are safe.
These outdated regulations are also leaving the private sector with a broken regulatory process that has undermined innovation. As the home of some of America’s leading chemical manufacturers like DuPont, Croda and Ashland, Delaware communities up and down the state have experienced the consequences of this broken law firsthand.
We have heard repeatedly from companies in Delaware that because of the unpredictability and lack of clarity in our current laws, innovation has been stifled and chemical companies have been discouraged from innovating new, safer products. In the absence of up-to-date federal standards, different states have enacted their own reforms and restrictions, leaving companies even more in the dark about what products they can produce and sell.
Chemical manufacturers and users deserve clarity and a timely review process for both new and existing products, and the general public should be able to trust that the products they are buying and using are safe. This clarity will encourage innovation to develop new, high-performing chemical products and processes that are safer for workers and for the public.
So, under the new law that will be enacted this year, chemicals will need to meet safety standards before they can enter the market and people’s homes, and businesses will have a predictable and manageable review process to ensure chemicals are deemed safe for commercial use.
TSCA reform is the product of years of bipartisan communication, collaboration and compromise.
It is named after the late Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J., whose career-long passion and dedication for this issue gave these important reforms the spark they needed to move forward after years of inaction.
We have worked closely with our colleagues from both sides of the aisle to ensure this bill included strong protections for public health and the environment before it reached the finish line. In particular, we worked hard to include provisions that will protect children, pregnant women and workers from toxic risks; ensure the EPA has access to information it needs to assess chemical safety; and allow states to enforce federal standards, while also ensuring that innovation in the private sector can continue in Delaware and around the country.
Over the years, all three of us have heard from countless Delawareans, including businesses and industry leaders, researchers, nurses and parents, who all asked for the same thing: TSCA reform. We are proud to have contributed ideas to and helped pass a bill to reform that broken system.
This bill is supported by a range of individuals and groups from across the political spectrum, including the Environmental Defense Fund, the American Chemistry Council, the National Wildlife Federation and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This broad support is a sign of how necessary and timely these reforms are.
In today’s political climate, it is easy to forget that to get things done, we don’t have to agree on every issue, but we do have to work together, across the aisle, to find commonsense solutions to issues that we all face. In this case, we all agreed that continuing to live under chemical safety standards that were written decades ago is not only unacceptable, it’s downright dangerous. We could not afford to endanger our public health and the environment any longer.
This bill not only proves that the choice between a clean environment and a strong economy is a false one, but it also shows that Congress can still come together to work for the American people.
Chris Coons and Tom Carper are Democratic U.S. senators from Delaware, and John Carney is a Delaware U.S. congressman.
http://www.delawareonline.com/story/opinion/contributors/2016/06/14/americans-get-protection-they-deserve-toxic-substances/85830286/
-
Ryan, Hatch Sign TSCA Legislation
Jun 14, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Colby Bermel
House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate President Pro Tempore Orrin Hatch signed chemicals reform legislation today, a necessary step before sending it to the White House for President Obama's approval.
The Senate passed H.R. 2756, the "Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act," earlier this month. But leaders in both chambers must sign it before it can go to the president.
Ryan signed the Toxic Substances Control Act reform measure in a ceremony with bill sponsor Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.).
"This is smarter regulation. Landmark legislation to keep Americans safe from dangerous chemicals," Ryan said in a tweet.
Hatch signed the bill soon after.
The White House has not yet announced plans for a signing ceremony. White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters last week, "The president will sign it, and we'll let you know when he has."
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman James Inhofe, a major force behind the bill, said he would not attend such a ceremony. "No. That's all right," he said. "Doesn't make it any more major, does it?"
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/06/14/stories/1060038817
-
States Can Regulate Chemicals Under TSCA-Reform Bill
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
States needing to regulate chemicals can do so despite federal preemption provisions in the Toxic Substances Control Act overhaul Congress passed, an attorney and a legislative analyst said in recent days.
Several state officials, however, have told Bloomberg BNA they remain disappointed in the preemption language of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (H.R. 2576).
The bill passed the House and Senate on May 24 and June 7, respectively, and is expected to be signed into law by the end of the month.
The preemption provisions of the anticipated law were “the toughest part of the negotiations, not just in recent weeks and months but over the years,” said Richard Denison, lead senior scientist and legislative analyst with the Environmental Defense Fund, a key player in the TSCA-reform negotiations.
Preemption: the Alpha and the Omega
Preemption was the first issue in the debate to arise and the last to be resolved, Denison said during a June 13 webinar held by Bergeson & Campbell P.C.
The final bill allows states to restrict a chemical until or unless EPA takes up that same chemical and addresses the same uses and concerns, he said. The scope of any preemption is directly tied to the scope of EPA's review, leaving states free to address any uses or risks EPA has not addressed, Denison said.
In addition, past and future actions taken under state laws in effect on Aug. 31, 2003, would be protected, and state laws or regulations in effect before April 22, 2016, that address a specific chemical also would be grandfathered, meaning they would remain in force as Bloomberg BNA showed in a previous analysis of the legislation.
States could not regulate a chemical the EPA already has regulated through new use or certain other provisions of TSCA, under H.R. 2576.
States also could not regulate the uses, exposures or other chemical factors that EPA defined in the scope of its risk evaluation for the next 30 months (36 with a brief extension) or until the risk evaluation is completed—whichever is sooner, a period known as the “preemption pause.”
“ECOS' understanding is that the pause applies to the specific use that EPA is studying and as such, states are not preempted from taking action regarding other uses of the same chemical. In addition, states can see a waiver if the pause creates a public exigency in their state,” Alexandra Dunn, executive director and general counsel at the Environmental Council of the States, or ECOS, told Bloomberg BNA in a June 14 e-mail.
Diverse State Responses
The Indiana Department of Environmental Management still is assessing the reforms included in the TSCA-reform bill, agency spokeswoman Courtney Arango told Bloomberg BNA June 12.
So far, however, the legislation would seem to have no immediate impact on the department's work, she said.
The Indiana department expects the bill to improve protections for public health and the environment by making regulations more uniform and increasing transparency about the safety of chemicals that are regulated, Arango said.
Kirk Koudelka, assistant commissioner for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, told Bloomberg BNA June 10 that his agency has concerns about the state preemption provisions in the TSCA-reform bill, but would be unlikely to challenge the final law.
Instead, he said, Minnesota will work with the EPA through the waiver provisions of the legislation.
Michael Globetti, a spokesman for the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC), told Bloomberg BNA the department's s Division of Waste & Hazardous Substances “does not anticipate any changes to its current programs,” and the state does not plan to take independent action on any specific chemicals in response to the TSCA reform.
New York State's Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman voiced the strongest opposition to the TSCA-reform bill.
“I am disappointed that the amended Toxics Substances Control Act passed by Congress expands federal preemption, creating new obstacles to the ability of New York and other states to protect their citizens from the hazards of toxic chemicals,” Schneider said in a June 8 statement.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) voiced a different concern—about excessive regulation—in the floor discussions that preceded the Senate's June 7 passage of H.R. 2576.
“Federal regulations will preempt not only aggressive regulatory states, such as California, but also market-oriented states, friendly states, such as Texas and Louisiana,” Paul said.
“Texas and Louisiana will no longer be able to veto the excesses of Washington,” he said.
With the assistance of Bloomberg BNA correspondents.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=91943681&vname=dennotallissues&fn=91943681&jd=91943681
-
Pipeline Bill Follows TSCA to West Wing
Jun 14, 2016 | Bloomberg Government
By Mark Drajem
Today’s AgendaSenate Democrats are renewing a push for oil train safety legislation after a fiery crude-by-rail derailment, with the risks set to be a focus at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources hearing today. The accident in Mosier, Ore. resulted in a sheen of oil on the Columbia River, but no deaths or injuries; it’s the latest in a string of more than two dozen significant fires and spills involving trains transporting oil. “We need more rail safety, that’s for sure,” Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York told Bloomberg BNA’s Ari Natter in an interview. Schumer is the author of legislation that would implement speed restrictions for oil trains traveling in certain areas and require the phaseout of older tank cars by 2020 — five years sooner than requirements set by the Department of Transportation.
The crash could complicate efforts by refiner Tesoro to build a terminal in Port of Vancouver, Washington. The facility, a joint venture with Savage Cos., would have the capacity to upload 360,000 barrels per day for shipment to refineries on the West Coast and possibly overseas, but first the state’s energy site evaluation council must weigh in. The accident is won’t help that application, said Dan Serres, conservation director for Columbia Riverkeeper, an environmental group. “Having an oil train derail spill and burn is exactly what people have been” worried about, Serres told Bloomberg BNA. “The Tesoro project is a dead man walking.” (Tina Barbee, a spokeswoman for Tesoro subsidiary Vancouver Energy, said it remains committed to the proposed terminal. “We recognize the serious nature of the derailment near Mosier, and will be examining the results of the investigation, once complete, to determine any lessons learned that can be applied to enhance the safety of transporting crude oil by rail.”)
Meanwhile, pipeline safety legislation is headed to the president’s desk, after clearing the Senate last night. Look for Andy Black, head of the Association of Oil Pipe Lines, to applaud that move in today’s Senate Energy Committee hearing on pipeline infrastructure. AOPL, INGAA and AGA all support the bill, particularly after industry lobbyists succeeded in getting lawmakers to tweak it: The negotiated measure softens a provision giving DOT emergency order authority over pipelines and drops another that would have required PHMSA to provide Congress with oil-spill response plans.If you go to the hearing, expect plenty of discussion on the economic significance of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, which is in jeopardy because of low oil production. Black will back up Chairman Lisa Murkowski’s pleas to fill the pipeline, by testifying that TAPS “supports a workforce of 2,500 men and women” and “provides crude oil that support millions of Americans” in the Lower 48.
Here’s an idea that looks tailor-made for Paul Ryan: a carbon tax tied to a corporate-tax cut. Resources for the Future analyzed how best to impose a carbon tax and found that using the revenues from a carbon tax (initially set at $45 a ton) to reduce corporate income tax rates, “significantly reduces the cost of the policy compared to rebating of the revenues to households.” The welfare cost of that approach is below the social-cost of carbon, and so would “pass a cost–benefit test by a significant margin,” its researchers concluded.
It’s expensive to get Obama’s law school mentor to fight Obama’s top environmental regulation. Peabody Energy is set to pay Harvard’s Laurence Tribe $435,000 this year to help the bankrupt coal producer challenge the Clean Power Plan in court. Tribe, a constitutional law expert and legal icon, argues the rule is violates the Constitution, and is an “an extravagant and impermissible overreach by the agency.” Tribe’s Harvard colleague Jody Freeman has picked apart his arguments, and it’s not clear what role — if any — he will play in arguments before the D.C. Circuit in September. Still, from August through December Peabody is set to pay Tribe $75,000 a month, he said in a filing to the company’s bankruptcy docket. For more on this from Jennifer Dlouhy, click here.
The U.S. Chamber has finally found a business tax break it doesn’t like. The Production Tax Credit is causing a boom in wind power at the same time power demand is stagnating, and, as a result, “additional wind generation often creates gluts of electrons,” Karen Harbert from the Chamber will testify to the Senate Finance committee today. One result is that cheap power is making it hard for coal, gas and, especially, nuclear power plants to survive; “The PTC-induced wind generation is glutting many power markets, depressing wholesale power rates,” Harbert will say, according to an advance copy of her testimony. However, that doesn’t mean there are “lower retail rates paid by end-users.” Hmmm, that one is a head scratcher. If that’s the case, shouldn’t the lobbying group’s utility members be flush?Editor’s Note
The U.S. launch of the BP Statistical Review of World Energy will be tomorrow at 9:30 at the Ritz Carlton. Yesterday’s edition mistakenly said it was taking place today, Tuesday.Quotable
“For the first time in some 15 years, nuclear is finally being recognized as a carbon dioxide emission reduction strategy worldwide,” Eugene Grecheck, president of the American Nuclear Society, at an annual meeting in New Orleans Monday. “In fact, we were so successful in Paris that anti-nuclear activists vandalized one of our booths and complained on a blog that pro-nuclear advocates were too visible.” (For more on the future of nuclear, see a Bloomberg View editorial in Up for Debate.)
“The folks that were wanting to build ports to export PRB coal on the West Coast — that was smoking opium,” oil magnate Robert Murray told SNL Energy.The Predictor
Senate appropriators will propose a boost in funding for EPA’s office of chemical safety as they try to give the TSCA overhaul a strong start. (Bonus reason: It has nothing to do with climate change.)Contact Us
Send us your comments and tips. Mark Drajem is the editor (mdrajem@bloomberg.net or @drajem), Catherine Traywick (ctraywick@bloomberg.net or @ctraywick) and Laura Curtis (lcurtis7@bloomberg.net or @LouKCurtis) cover Congress and regulation.Bloomberg Government subscribers can get this and any of our eight other newsletters in their inbox every morning. Click here to modify your subscriptions. Contact Peter Hsu at 202-416-3035 or yhsu24@bloomberg.net for more information or if you have colleagues that would also value access.Chart of the Day
Texas has been gradually raising the offer cap on wholesale power in recent years, to $9,000 per megawatt-hour currently, in order to spur new plant construction. However, anemic demand and renewable generation gains have kept prices low in the U.S. state that consumes more electricity than any other. Since extreme heat pushed prices to the cap for 1,706 minutes in 2011, the proportion of time spent there has fallen dramatically — to 13 minutes in 2013 and zero last year, according to a report this week by Potomac Economics, the Texas grid’s independent market monitor, Harry Weber reports.Inside the Beltway
Interior Approps Outlook EPA funding is once again under the knife this week as both chambers debate their Interior-Environment appropriations bills. The House released text of its proposal, which would cut funding for the agency by $164 million from current levels, at the end of May.Today, Senate appropriators will float their version at a subcommittee mark up. We’ll be watching for whether they’re boosting funds for EPA’s chemical safety program now that President Obama is poised to sign the TSCA overhaul measure. Democrat Tom Udall of New Mexico and a sponsor of TSCA, has said current funding levels are sufficient for the program.
We’ll also be watching for any controversial riders in the Senate bill. The House version contains provisions that would block the EPA’s Clean Power Plan and methane rule and the Interior Department’s Stream Protection Rule; none of those are going to make it past the White House.
The Senate appropriations subcommittee will release its bill summary at the markup today at 9:30 a.m. (124 Dirksen) A full Appropriations Committee markup follows on Thursday at 10:30 a.m. (106 Dirksen). The full House Appropriations Committee marks up its version at a hearing tomorrow at 10:30 a.m. (2359 Rayburn).
Supreme Court Won’t Revisit EPA’s Power Plant Mercury Rule The U.S. Supreme Court announced it will not review a federal appeals court decision that left EPA’s mercury and air toxics rule in place while the agency worked to address a legal flaw in the rulemaking process. The Supreme Court’s decision does not mark the end of litigation over the standards. Coal giant Murray Energy and a power-plant trade association filed lawsuits over EPA’s supplemental “appropriate and necessary” finding, which reaffirmed the basis for the power plant standards after a consideration of cost.
EPA Blocks Drillers from Sending Wastewater to Municipal Plants EPA completed a rule blocking companies from sending hydraulic fracturing and drilling wastewater to municipal treatment facilities. Wastewater associated with unconventional oil and gas extraction “can be generated in large quantities and may contain pollutants that are potentially harmful to human health and the environment,” EPA says. For the final standards, click here.
Valero Escalates Appeal Over RIN Obligation Valero Energy filed a petition for rulemaking to the EPA, asking it to redefine the “obligated party” required to use more biofuels. Under current law, refiners and importers are obligated to blend increasing volumes of renewable fuels into U.S. transportation fuels; Valero petition asks EPA to shift requirement to a subset of fuel blenders known as “rack sellers,” specifically “the entity that holds title to the gasoline or diesel fuel, immediately prior to the sale from the bulk/transfer terminal system to a wholesaler, retailer or ultimate consumer.” That change would benefit merchant refiners that do not have blending infrastructure, such as Valero and HollyFrontier; the petition could also form the basis of a legal challenge if EPA denies it.
U.S. Chamber Urges Senate to Confer With House on Energy Bill “The Chamber urges the Senate to move to formal conference and begin work resolving differences between the House- and Senate-passed versions of S. 2012,” Executive VP for Government Affairs Bruce Josten said in letter to lawmakers. Josten said the Chamber will consider including any votes on whether to proceed to conference in its annual scorecard.
TSCA Changes May Alter Pending Chemical Rules Changes Congress has made to the Toxic Substances Control Act could alter final Environmental Protection Agency rules regulating chemicals in manufactured goods, attorneys said.Outside the Beltway
Moniz Tells Wyoming Fossil Fuels to Remain Important: Star Tribune Energy Sec. Ernest Moniz pledged support Monday for clean coal research, saying fossil fuels would continue to play a role in the country’s energy mix, the Casper Star Tribune reported. He also made reference to the DOE’s loan guarantee program, saying it is “open for business” and would provide funding for major fossil-fuel-based projects. DKRW Advanced Fuels, which had proposed a $2 billion coal gasification plant near Medicine Bow, received initial approval for a $1.75 billion loan guarantee program in 2009. However, a review of the project has yet to be completed, leaving its future in doubt.
Group Sues Duke Energy Over Coal Ash; Cites ‘Contamination’ of Mayo Lake: Raleigh News & Observer Duke Energy is the target of another lawsuit over its coal ash, this one filed by a nonprofit group that advocates for the Roanoke River basin in northern North Carolina. The Roanoke River Basin Association says Duke’s Mayo power plant in Roxboro, near the Virginia line north of Raleigh, violated the federal Clean Water Act. It claims the 6.9 million tons of ash at Mayo has illegally contaminated the popular fishing destination Mayo Lake, a nearby stream, wetlands and groundwater with toxic metals.
Helis Oil Says it Will Start Drilling in St. Tammany on June 29: Times-Picayune Helis Oil & Gas Co. will begin moving a rig into place next week to start exploratory drilling on its controversial St. Tammany Parish well on June 29, a company official said Monday (June 13). Project manager Mike Barham said the company expects to complete drilling of the vertical well northeast of Mandeville before school begins at nearby Lakeshore High on Aug. 8. “We are getting ready to start operations at the well site,” Barham told reporters at a briefing in Slidell. The company’s Louisiana state drilling permit contains a list of pre-drilling requirements, such as air and water monitoring to get baseline data, and Helis has met all of the requirements, he said.Electricity and Renewables
AEP Weighing ‘Several’ Bids for U.S. Power Plant Sale, CEO Says American Electric Power Co., which hired Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in 2015 to advise on the possible sale of Midwest assets, said it’s received bids for the plants and they could be sold by the end of the year. The Columbus, Ohio-based company plans to be in receipt of final bids by the end of July, Chief Executive Officer Nick Akins said Monday in an interview at the Edison Electric Institute conference in Chicago.American Electric is among utilities looking to dispose of plants that compete in wholesale power markets in favor of assets offering stable, regulated returns. Cheap natural gas flowing out of shale formations has dragged down wholesale electricity prices, squeezing profits. The plants up for grabs could fetch $2.5 billion to $3 billion, Andrew B. Smith, a St. Louis-based analyst for Edward Jones, said in a telephone interview. The company is shopping around another set of plants that had above-market sales agreements approved by the state of Ohio before regulators stepped in to examine the arrangements.Oil, Gas and Coal
Market Wrap: Oil extended declines from the lowest close in more than a week amid signs that crude near $50 is triggering resumption of drilling in the U.S. and Canada. West Texas Intermediate for July delivery fell as much as 81 cents to $48.07 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange and was at $48.08 at 9:21 a.m. London time. Natural gas futures for July delivery on the Nymex rose 0.2 percent to $2.590 per million British thermal units at 7:53 a.m. London time. Futures rose as high as $2.635 on June 13, the highest intraday level since Sept. 29.
Refiners Hit Three-Year Low as Oil Price Rebound Pares Margins As oil prices rebound and many producers rally, U.S. refiners are getting hit hard. Profits from processing crude into gasoline and diesel are narrowing as refiners confront the double whammy of rising costs and a gasoline supply glut that’s keeping prices at the pump cheap. The Bloomberg Intelligence North America Refining & Marketing index fell as much as 4.9 percent on Monday to the lowest since 2012, extending its decline this year to more than 35 percent. Marathon Petroleum Corp. slumped.
TransCanada-Sempra Win $2.16 Billion Underwater Gas Pipeline Bid A joint venture between Sempra Energy’s Ienova unit and TransCanada Corp. won a $2.16 billion bid to develop an underwater pipeline from Texas to Mexico.The venture was the sole bidder qualified to participate in the auction, the result of which was announced in Mexico City on Monday by Comision Federal de Electricidad, Latin America’s largest utility company. Infraestructura Energetica Nova SAB, as Sempra’s unit is formally called, rose as much as 0.8 percent before paring gains.Up for Debate
Keep Nuclear Power Going to Fight Climate Change: Bloomberg View
By Bloomberg View
Unloved and underappreciated, America’s nuclear reactors supply almost two-thirds of the country’s low-carbon energy — reliably and without harm to human health or the earth’s atmosphere. Nuclear is the biggest, sturdiest force against climate change there is. It is also threatened by market forces and short-sighted public policy. If energy costs accurately reflected the price of carbon, nuclear would be competitive. They don’t, and it isn’t, but there are other ways governments can make the energy market fairer and cleaner.
One problem for nuclear is the extraordinarily low wholesale price of electricity — held down for now by cheap, abundant natural gas, and intermittently pulled lower when wind power floods the grid. Wind generators, buttressed by a $23-per-megawatt-hour production tax credit, can withstand even negative wholesale prices. Natural gas- and coal-fired plants can simply stop operating when there’s a glut, preserving fuel. But it’s not easy to turn a nuclear plant on and off, and in any case it saves nothing on operating expenses. That’s why nuclear’s best business model is to run at practically full capacity 24/7 — and why the sector now faces such crippling losses.
Every time a nuclear plant closes — the latest to be added to the kill list are two in Illinois operated by Exelon Corp., which together have lost $800 million over the past seven years — its power is replaced mainly by natural gas plants. To the extent that wind or solar (which account for only a small fraction of the U.S. energy mix) can make up for lost nuclear energy, their emissions-lowering potential is wasted: They’re standing in for an energy source that’s already perfectly clean. And once a nuclear plant is closed and its fuel is removed, relicensing and reopening it would be a difficult and expensive proposition.
A well-designed carbon tax would even the playing field. But lawmakers in Congress hate the idea so much, they’re proposing to hold a vote simply to say so on the record. And while several northeastern states participate in aregional cap-and-trade program, the price it sets on carbon emissions is too low to make a difference for nuclear.
States have another way to recognize the value of nuclear power, however: by including it in their goals for clean-energy generation. More than two dozen states have so-called renewable portfolio standards, which set targetsfor increasing reliance on wind, solar, geothermal and other forms of renewable energy. California and New York aim to draw 50 percent of their power from renewables by 2030.
Nuclear Power
For historical reasons, including a stubborn antipathy toward nuclear poweramong many environmentalists, states have no such targets for nuclear power. But if they were to include nuclear in their energy goals — setting“low-carbon portfolio standards” — they would be able to raise their clean-energy targets. Utilities would then be required to buy some nuclear energy, allowing the sector to compete.
There are also more tangible reasons for politicians to support nuclear power: Plants support hundreds of relatively high-paying jobs, and nuclear helps keep consumer electricity prices low — especially when the price of natural gas inevitably rises again. The case for nuclear power rests on its unmatched capacity to provide energy that is dependable, affordable and, above all, clean.
http://about.bgov.com/blog/pipeline-bill-follows-tsca-to-west-wing/
-
Historic Chemical Regulation Law Sets the Stage for a Safer Future
Jun 14, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Lynn R. Goldman
A landmark bill that was just passed by Congress now gives the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the power to regulate thousands of potentially toxic chemicals, many of them found in every day household products.
The measure, called The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, was passed by the Senate on June 7 and sent on for President Obama’s signature.
The legislation effectively overhauls the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), a 1976 law that for decades has essentially left the EPA without the ability to control even the most toxic substances on the market. I have been on the record about the urgent need for such reform since 1993 when I joined the EPA as an Assistant Administrator for Toxic Substances.
Even back then it was clear that TSCA had resulted in a deeply flawed system of regulating chemicals in the United States. Essentially the agency had to document that a chemical posed a risk before it could ask the manufacturer to conduct toxicity or exposure tests. Since then I’ve testified, written letters and visited members of Congress to explain how TSCA has left tens of thousands of chemicals, including potentially toxic ones on the market.
Now that Congress has acted to reform this antiquated law, Americans will finally have the security of knowing that the EPA will be able to ensure that chemicals in furniture, clothing, cleaning products and other common household items are safe before such products are allowed into commerce.
This bill was a compromise, one reached by Republicans, Democrats, the chemical industry, public health leaders like myself, and environmental groups, such as theEnvironmental Defense Fund. And although it is not perfect, this historic measure goes a long way toward fixing a broken system that had allowed two generations of Americans to be exposed every day to potentially toxic chemicals.
Much is at risk. For example, cancer is the second leading cause of death in the United States today. And although cancer is a complex disorder with many different causes, exposure to toxic chemicals is one way that cancers can get a lethal start. Yet cancers induced by exposure to pollution or toxic chemicals can be prevented. So can other diseases triggered by exposure to dangerous chemicals and that’s the beauty in The Lautenberg Act.
Importantly, the bill:
• Requires safety reviews for all chemicals on the market.• Gives EPA the authority to require health and safety testing for new chemicals before they go into commerce.
• Explicitly protects vulnerable populations such as pregnant women and children from exposures to potentially harmful chemicals.
• Makes information about the safety of chemicals available to the public and to health authorities.
Is this legislation without flaws? No, but it is a far better way of regulating chemicals than TSCA, which exposed Americans to toxic chemicals in common products for years, a public health problem that has affected us all. I’ll never know, for example, if my brother’s death from bladder cancer could have been prevented if we had enacted a stronger chemical law years ago.
Looking forward, as Dean of Milken Institute School of Public Health, as a researcher who has studied this issue and as a mother, I can now finally tell my students and my daughter that they and the next generation will have a stronger level of protection from toxic chemicals because Congress passed a good law.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lynn-r-goldman/historic-chemical-regulat_b_10457980.html
-
Pollution in People: Cancer-Causing Chemicals in Americans’ Bodies
Jun 14, 2016 | EcoWatch
By Environmental Working Group
Hundreds of cancer-causing chemicals are building up in the bodies of Americans, according to the first comprehensive The Pollution in People inventory of carcinogens that have been measured in people, which was released Tuesday by the Environmental Working Group (EWG).
EWG spent almost a year reviewing more than 1,000 biomonitoring studies and other research by leading government agencies and independent scientists in the U.S. and around the world. The nonprofit research group found that up to 420 chemicals known or likely to cause cancer have been detected in blood, urine, hair and other human samples.
Studies of the causes of cancer often focus on tobacco, alcohol and over-exposure to the sun. But the World Health Organization and many other scientists believe nearly 1 in 5 cancers are caused by chemicals and other environmental exposures—not only in the workplaces, but in consumer products, food, water and air.
EWG’s review bolsters the findings and ongoing research of the Halifax Project, a collaboration of more than 300 scientists from around the world who are investigating new ways in which combinations of toxic chemicals in our environment may cause cancer. While most cancer research focuses on treatment, the Halifax Project and EWG’s Rethinking Cancer initiative are looking at prevention by reducing people’s contact with cancer-causing chemicals.
“The presence of a toxic chemical in our bodies does not necessarily mean it will cause harm, but this report details the astounding number of carcinogens we are exposed to in almost every part of life that are building up in our systems,” Curt DellaValle, author of the report and a senior scientist at EWG, said. “At any given time some people may harbor dozens or hundreds of cancer-causing chemicals. This troubling truth underscores the need for greater awareness of our everyday exposure to chemicals and how to avoid them.”
EWG estimated that a small subset of the chemicals inventoried in the report were measured at levels high enough to pose significant cancer risks in most Americans—risks that generally exceed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) safety standards. But those estimates are only for individual chemicals and do not account for a question scientists and doctors are increasingly concerned about—how combined exposures to multiple chemicals may increase risk?
EWG’s inventory comes at an auspicious moment for the issue of cancer and chemicals. Last week Congress passed the first reform in 40 years of the nation’s woefully weak toxic chemical regulations, which President Obama is expected to sign soon. In January, the president announced the establishment of the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative, a $1 billion program led by Vice President Joe Biden, “to eliminate cancer as we know it.”
But the law to overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act falls far short of giving the EPA the resources and authority to quickly restrict or ban chemicals known to cause cancer. And the only concrete agenda related to prevention in the Moonshot Initiative is for screening and vaccination. As demonstrated by the success of antismoking efforts, which have cut the rate of lung cancer by more than 25 percent in the last 25 years, to prevent and defeat cancer it is necessary to understand the environmental causes.
It is not clear how or if, the new chemicals law will protect Americans from the hundreds of industrial chemicals that cause cancer.
“Many of the carcinogens this study documents in people find their way into our bodies through food, air, water and consumer products every day. Dozens of them show up in human umbilical cord blood—which means Americans are exposed to carcinogens before they’ve left the womb,” EWG president Ken Cook said. “We should focus on preventing cancer by preventing human exposure to these chemicals.”
Cook said the report should trigger outrage among Americans and urgent action by public health and elected officials. EWG called for the cancer “Moonshot Initiative” announced by President Obama in his state of the union address in January to include federal funding for investigation of the environmental causes of cancer and the development of prevention initiatives.
For more information on the report, watch here:
https://ecowatch.com/2016/06/14/cancer-causing-chemicals-in-bodies/
-
Humans Exposed to Hundreds of Carcinogens,Warns EWG
Jun 15, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Human biomonitoring studies have detected up to 420 known or likely carcinogens in humans, according to a review by US NGO, the Environmental Working Group (EWG).
EWG has analysed more than 1,000 biomonitoring studies of chemicals detected in human samples, such as blood and urine, to identify the main offenders. Of the hundreds of chemicals routinely detected, nine have been measured at levels high enough to pose “non-trivial cancer risks", says EWG.
Its report groups detected carcinogens into: industrial chemicals, consumer products, pesticides, metals/alloys, combustion byproducts and solvents.
“The presence of a toxic chemical in our bodies does not necessarily mean it will cause harm, but this report details the astounding number of carcinogens we are exposed to, in almost every part of life, that are building up in our systems,” said Curt DellaValle, the report's author and a senior scientist at EWG.
EWG calls for the US National Cancer Moonshot Initiative, announced by President Barack Obama in January, to include funding to investigate the environmental causes of cancer. The initiative's current focus is on funding to advance treatment and research in genetics and molecular biology.
“Improved treatments, and better understanding of the genetics and molecular biology of cancer, are crucial in the battle to defeat this disease. But, as the findings of this report make clear, our environment plays a critical role as well,” writes Dr DellaValle.
https://chemicalwatch.com/48018/humans-exposed-to-hundreds-of-carcinogens-warns-ewg
-
Momentum Slows for Major Energy Bill
Jun 14, 2016 | The Hill
By Devin Henry
Lawmakers and energy reform advocates are pushing the Senate to quickly join a House energy bill conference committee amid concerns that progress is stalling.
Despite House’s vote to do so in May, the Senate has yet to appoint members to a committee that would write a compromise energy bill.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, one of the biggest industry groups in Washington, sent the Senate a letter Monday saying it would score members’ votes on a motion to join the committee. The prodding provided an indication that interest groups are eager for lawmakers to move forward on the energy bill as the window for legislative action this year shrinks.
“The consensus approach in the Senate has worked so well so far, and we’d like to see them press ahead with that,” said Ron Eidshaug, the Chamber’s vice president for congressional and public affairs.
“It takes work to get a bill that gets 60 [votes] in the Senate, and it takes a lot of work to get 218 in the House. It’s going to take a lot more work to get to 218 and 60 in both chambers, but we think they can do it.”
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), the bill’s leading Republican sponsor, said Tuesday she remained committed to forging a compromise bill this year. She and other legislative leaders — including the energy committee’s top Democrat, Maria Cantwell (Wash.) — were due to meet on the path forward on Tuesday afternoon.
“My hope is that we will be able to bring it up on the floor and see if we can’t get the votes to go to conference and appoint conferees and get a move on,” she said.
“There’s so much good contained within this bill, but you can’t get to it without a conference.”
The Senate energy bill approved in April is designed to streamline federal policy for the first time in a decade.
The Senate legislation is a pared-down version of the House’s energy bill, which includes red meat for conservatives that drove away Democratic support when it hit the floor last year. House members attached even more controversial provisions when they voted to go to a conference committee in April, such as a GOP package to relieve the California drought strongly opposed by Democrats and a measure to bypass environmental regulations for energy projects on Native American land, among others.
Industry experts say the additions have caused concern among Democrats, especially in the Senate.
“I think they are somewhat disappointed,” Radha Adhar, a policy representative for the Sierra Club, said. “There was a lot of bipartisan momentum and excitement coming off the passage of [the Senate bill], and that momentum has all but ground to a halt after the House passed their bill.”
The Sierra Club, an ally of Democrats, opposes the House bill and doesn’t want the Senate to go to conference on it, Adhar said.
But energy and business groups have aggressively pushed members to go to a conference committee in the hope that lawmakers can pass a bill based around several major Senate provisions, including work to expand energy efficiency programs and clear the way for expanded liquefied natural gas exports.
“We understand there is certainly opposition, or at least concern, on the Senate side about what’s in the House version,” said Ross Eisenberg, the vice president of energy and resources policy at the National Association of Manufacturers.
“But that’s what the conference is for. Our hope is that we get to conference — there’s things in both bills that are great — and that they can make the sausage the way you make sausage.”
Optimism for passing an energy reform package has waxed and waned.
Leadership in both the House and Senate threw their support behind writing reform bills early last year. A series of bipartisan bills approved in late 2015 raised hopes an energy bill could be next, but a fight over funding for the Flint, Mich., water crisis bogged down the Senate bill for months.
The Senate finally passed the energy legislation in April, on an 85-12 vote. But there are still major differences between the House and Senate bills that could complicate a conference committee, should one ever convene.
Time is running short, with Congress set to break in mid-July for the summer presidential nominating conventions. After that, Congress will only be in session for a few weeks before November’s elections and the lame-duck session.
“We’re running out of clock here, we’re running out of calendar here,” Eisenburg said, though he noted other major energy and environment bills have passed after elections.
“So things can get done when there’s a will there. Our hope is that the calendar’s not working against us.”
Eidshaug said he’s optimistic an energy package could come together in light of other congressional deal-making this year, including a major chemical safety overhaul bill passed this month.
“Sen. [James] Inhofe [R-Okla.] and Sen. [Barbara] Boxer [D-Calif.] were able to work with the House and negotiate provisions on the [Toxic Substances Control Act],” he said.
“If Inhofe and Boxer can do that, we have complete confidence that Sens. Murkowski and Cantwell will be able to negotiate with the House on this.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/283515-momentum-slows-for-major-energy-bill
-
Murkowski to Press Colleagues for Energy Bill Conference
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said she planned to urge her Democratic counterpart on the committee and others to move forward with an energy bill conference during a meeting scheduled for June 14.
The meeting between Chairman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) as well as House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and ranking Democrat Frank Pallone (N.J.) comes as Murkowski seeks to wrangle the 60 votes needed for the Senate to pass a formal motion to go to conference to work out the differences between the Senate (S. 2012) and House (H.R. 8) versions of the bills.
“My purpose in calling everyone together is to see where we are and urge us all to be looking forward to how we are going to move a conference in the limited calendar days we have before we get out of here in mid-July,” Murkowski told reporters in the Capitol. “We are going to sit down and talk about where we are right here, right now.”
The House voted along party lines in May to approve an 806-page amendment to the Senate's legislation adding a number of bills opposed by the Democrats and the White House, such as a bill expediting the permitting process for mines and California drought legislation opposed by some environmentalists.
House Bill ‘More One-Sided.'
Cantwell, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee ranking member, who last week referred to the House bill as “a bunch of junk,” appeared to be ratcheting back her rhetoric.
“We are meeting to chit chat about energy, how we can bridge the gap between the wondrous hard worked-out Senate bill that has many, many bipartisan compromises and the House bill which is a little more one-sided,” Cantwell told reporters in the Capitol June 14.
Murkowski said she is optimistic the Senate would vote to go to conference sometime this week.
“My hope is we will be able to bring it up on the floor and see if we can't get the votes to go to conference and appoint conferees and get a move on,” she said. “There is so much good in this bill you can't get to it unless you have a conference.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=91943697&vname=dennotallissues&fn=91943697&jd=91943697
-
Key Lawmakers Promise to Keep Talking on Bill Conference
Jun 15, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
Top House and Senate lawmakers huddled behind closed doors yesterday evening to discuss how a formal conference committee might reconcile the chambers' competing energy reform packages. Even though they didn't say much afterward, the meeting went well enough for them to promise more talks.
Participants, who included energy policy leaders from both chambers, were tight-lipped about the roughly 45-minute gathering in the Capitol but offered positive comments about the tone of the discussion.
"We're talking, we had a good conversation and we're going to talk some more," Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the ranking member on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, told reporters.
Cantwell and Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) met privately for about 30 minutes after the other lawmakers left.
Cantwell said she planned to speak with Democratic colleagues in the coming days, and another meeting of the principal lawmakers was possible by early next week.
Cantwell has been an outspoken critic of the House's revised energy bill, which includes multiple bills that the White House has threatened to veto, and her concerns have raised the possibility of the Senate falling short of the 60 votes necessary to go to conference with the House.
Yesterday's meeting was intended to help clear the air over the differences between each chamber's bill and discuss how the process would unfold (E&E Daily, June 13).
Earlier yesterday, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) told E&E Daily that the chamber could vote as soon as this week on going to conference. The timing remains in flux.
"We're working on that, we certainly hope so," he said. "We don't have anything to announce yet."
Asked last night about the possibility of a vote, Murkowski said, "We are working through all of that right now."
House Energy and Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who has been an outspoken critic of his chamber's efforts to craft a bipartisan energy package, declined to comment after leaving.
"We're having some discussions," he told reporters. "We'll see where it goes."
Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said discussions would continue. Earlier in the day, Upton noted that he had not yet spoken with House Democrats about the conference.
Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), ranking member on the House Natural Resources Committee, said the group would "keep working and get back together again."
Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah), who strongly opposes the permanent reauthorization of the Land and Water Conservation Fund in the Senate's bill, described the huddle as a "get-to-know-you meeting."
Bishop, who last week rejected the idea of taking controversial issues off the table ahead of the conference as "silly," seemed upbeat.
"I think all those issues can be easily dealt with in the conference," he said.
Reporters George Cahlink and Hannah Hess contributed.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/06/15/stories/1060038831
-
Senate Subcommittee Clears $32 Billion Interior-EPA Bill
Jun 14, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
The Senate’s Interior-EPA appropriations subcommittee today approved its 2017 funding bill.
The $32 billion package includes several policy riders attacking EPA’s Waters of the U.S. rule, as well as riders going after Superfund and Endangered Species Act rules, according to the subcommittee’s top Democrat, Tom Udall of New Mexico. Udall indicated he does not plan to support the bill as is in committee, and that he will work to strip out riders he opposes.
The bill also boosts EPA’s two State Revolving Funds, including $1 billion for the drinking water SRF and $1.35 billion for the clean water SRF, a boost from the request from the White House, which frequently raids the program to shift money elsewhere.
And it includes a perennial issue for subcommittee Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski, language allowing for the construction of an emergency access road to a remote Alaskan village, King Cove, through a wildlife refuge. Similar language did not survive in last year’s omnibus.
As is typical, senators held their amendments at the subcommittee markup. The bill does not include language blocking EPA's Clean Power Plan, but additional policy riders targeting that and other rules are expected either at full committee markup, slated for this Thursday, or if and when the bill hits the floor.
The House Appropriations Committee is slated to vote tomorrow on its own $32 billion Interior-EPA measure, which shaves EPA's budget by $164 million down to just under $8 billion. That bill already contains provisions attacking EPA's greenhouse gas regulations and several other rules.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard/2016/06/senate-subcommittee-clears-32-billion-interior-epa-bill-073230
-
Senate Spending Bill Trims EPA Spending, Blocks Regs
Jun 14, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A Senate panel on Tuesday approved a GOP-backed spending bill that blocks regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The Senate’s 2017 Interior and environment spending bill provides $32 billion to the EPA and Interior Department programs — about $1 billion less than President Obama requested in his budget and slightly less than what House Republicans are aiming for.
The bill includes a handful of policy riders designed to block environmental regulations, and it cuts funding for enforcing those rules currently on hold in the courts system, the “areas where the EPA has clearly overstepped its bounds,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said during a subcommittee hearing on Tuesday.
The bill blocks the EPA’s Clean Water Rule — also known as the “Waters of the United States" rule — as well as some mining regulations. It trims the EPA’s $8.1 billion budget by $31.2 million, but Republicans noted it maintains or increases spending for agency clean drinking water programs.
Republicans took a “common-sense approach to the EPA’s budget and focused resources on programs that do concrete things to improve the quality of the environment for the public,” Murkowski said.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) previewed Democrats’ opposition to the bill in the full Appropriations Committee later this week and, eventually, when it hits the floor.
“In many ways I feel like it’s deja vu all over again and it’s very frustrating,” he said, noting past GOP efforts to block EPA rulemaking in spending bills.
“Democrats have been clear — the White House has been clear — we are not prepared to gut environmental laws to get spending bills passed.”
Among other things, the Senate’s bill increases spending for new parks and maintenance across the National Park Service to mark the agency’s 100th anniversary. It also increases funding for Forest Service firefighting efforts.
The Appropriations Committee will consider the bill Thursday.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/283391-senate-spending-bill-trims-epa-spending-blocks-regulations
-
EPA Fracking Report Needs Qualifiers, Scientists Say
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
A much-debated summary on the risks posed by hydraulic fracturing to drinking water was kicked around again June 14 by scientists discussing recommendations to improve an Environmental Protection Agency report.
The EPA draft report said it found no “widespread, systemic impacts” on drinking water from fracking. The agency's Science Advisory Board (SAB) appeared likely to recommend the addition of some explanatory quantification to help justify the statement—if the statement is to be retained in the final report.
Companies now use fracking to stimulate oil or natural gas production in the vast majority of onshore drilling projects in the U.S., giving the report potential significance as a supporting document for regulatory policy.
Companies welcomed the report's summary statement as an indication that the process for creating deep underground fractures for the flow of oil or gas is basically safe. Environmental activists decried the summary.
The science advisers, discussing an advisory panel draft review of the EPA draft report, agreed June 14 that no significant changes were needed in the review, opening the way for final tinkering before a vote to send the review to the EPA. The federal agency is not obligated to make the recommended changes.
Board Sorts Through Ideas
Many other recommendations were in the draft review, and the Science Advisory Board spent much time debating which recommendations to treat as priority items.
Kimberly Jones, a Howard University professor of civil and environmental engineering, appeared to speak for many of the SAB members when she said she was assuming the EPA will not be able to address every recommendation from the advisers. That was followed by much discussion of what recommendations to elevate in importance over others.
The SAB debated the extent to which the EPA report should at least acknowledge the existence of best management practices and the progressive improvement of those practices. The EPA has said it has no intention of listing or recommending best practices.
Gina Solomon, a California Environmental Protection Agency official, said the subject might not be significant, given that regulators and others are most concerned about worst management practices.
“Fundamentally, what EPA's trying to do here is talk about the potential risks from the worst actors, not the best actors,” Solomon said.
Activists Seek Stronger Regulations
The report was requested by Congress as a science-based document, not a regulatory vehicle. Environmental activists who spoke to the science advisers at the June 14 meeting were emphatic in their hopes that it would lead to stronger regulations.
Lynn Thorp of the group Clean Water Action said the EPA report should set out a road map to better protection of drinking water.
Melissa Troutman of the activist group Public Herald denounced the EPA and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for misleading the public and ignoring “rivers of evidence” that fracking harms drinking water. She called for a federal investigation of the agencies and said the state agency “has acted criminally.”
Industry Sees Good and Bad
The draft report's summary statement about finding no “widespread, systemic impacts” may have pleased oil and gas industry officials, but they had criticisms for some other elements of the report.
The EPA made much of the idea that fracking has occurred in “drinking water resources” and that leaks from oil or gas wells have contaminated such resources, but its definition of those resources was not confined to drinkable freshwater. It included much saline water on the theory that such water might be cleaned up enough for drinking someday.
“The draft definition of drinking water is overly broad,” Bruce Thompson, president of the American Exploration and Production Council, told the science advisers during the meeting. He said the broad definition was misleading to the public. The purpose of the report was to inform, not to confuse, he said.
The EPA report appears assured of growing longer, having weighed in at 998 pages in June 2015 following agency work that started in 2011. The report is largely an overview of existing information, with about 3,500 references so far, and the science advisers are offering more than 200 additional references for inclusion.
The SAB also is recommending the addition of information about prominent pollution cases in Dimock, Pa.; Pavillion, Wyo.; and Parker County, Texas, although none of those cases has involved definitive findings from state or federal regulators.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=91943701&vname=dennotallissues&fn=91943701&jd=91943701
-
Hatch Optimistic on Senate Action for Energy Tax Credits
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee said June 14 he expects the Senate to extend tax credits for a handful of clean-energy technologies that were left out of a deal in the omnibus funding legislation passed in December that extended tax credits for the wind and solar industries.
“I suspect we are going to have to remedy that mistake,” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) told reporters. “I've always been for all forms of energy. But we also have to talk in terms of economics, too, and what works and what doesn't.”
Congressional Democrats and groups representing companies such as Sempra Energy, U.S. Gas & Power and DTE Energy had been seeking to a five-year extension of the 48(c) investment tax credit, which provides a 30 percent credit for fuel cells and small wind projects and a 10 percent credit for geothermal and combined heat and power projects.
An extension of the credits had been included in Senate legislation on the Federal Aviation Administration, but it was stripped out before the bill was passed. The deal to include the credits fell apart after it became a magnet for other energy tax provisions, ranging from the extension of a per-ton tax credit for carbon capture sought by companies such as Arch Coal Inc. and Occidental Petroleum Corp. to a tax deduction for commercial energy-efficiency improvements.
Legislative Vehicle Sought
In his comments to reporters, Hatch said a he was optimistic a legislative vehicle would be found by year's end. “We're working on it,” he said.
Extension of the credits faces a steeper climb in the House, however, where the appetite for spending on clean energy is low and members face pressure from groups such as the Koch brothers-backed Americans for Prosperity not to act.
Among the Senate champions of extending the credit is Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, who said during a June 14 hearing on energy taxes that “leftover business” needed to be addressed before turning to broader comprehensive tax reform.
“What I'd like to do is make this round of extenders the last transition,” he told reporters after the hearing. “The sooner we get on with it, the better.”
Separately, Hatch said he thought a tax extenders package at the end of the year could be inevitable.
“We're going to have one whether I am open to it or not,” Hatch said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=91943695&vname=dennotallissues&fn=91943695&jd=91943695
-
Portland Mayor to Gov. Kate Brown: Say No to More Oil Trains
Jun 14, 2016 | The Oregonian
By Rob Davis
Portland leaders including Mayor Charlie Hales and Multnomah County Chairwoman Deborah Kafoury on Tuesday called on Oregon Gov. Kate Brown to use her bully pulpit to pressure Washington's governor to reject a large oil train terminal in Vancouver.
The group, which included a tribal representative and the first emergency responder at the fiery Mosier oil train derailment June 3, said Brown must work with President Barack Obama and Oregon's federal leadership to press for a permanent ban on oil trains.
"It's not safe, and it's not responsible," Hales said. "We need to move in a different direction."
Brown, who previously had not taken a stand on the terminal, responded that she was "concerned" about any new oil facilities on Washington's side of the Columbia River, referring to both the oil train terminal and a refinery proposed downriver in Longview.
The governor stopped short of an outright call for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee to reject the terminal. Inslee has final say over the $210 million terminal, capable of bringing a total of 15 million gallons of oil through the Columbia River Gorge in four trains each day
"I am closely monitoring the evaluation and recommendations about siting that Washington agencies will make to Governor Inslee," Brown said in a statement.
If built, the oil train terminal proposed by Tesoro Corp. and Savage Services would be the Pacific Northwest's largest. Tina Barbee, a Tesoro spokeswoman, said tank cars going to the facility will exceed federal standards, making them stronger than those that punctured in the Mosier wreck.
"We recognize the serious nature of the derailment near Mosier, and will be examining the results of the investigation, once complete, to determine any lessons learned that can be applied to enhance the safety of transporting crude oil by rail," she said in a statement.
The local leaders' opposition isn't new. Months ago, both Hales and Kafoury supported resolutions calling for an end to oil-by-rail transportation locally.
But their continued pressure at an event organized by the Stand Up to Oil Coalition, a consortium of environmental groups, comes with those groups looking for ways to raise the stakes for Inslee after the Mosier derailment.
The June 3 wreck spilled 42,000 gallons of oil, sparked a raging fire and created a small oil sheen on the Columbia River. The incident caused no injuries, but damaged the city's sewage treatment plant and forced nearly 300 people to evacuate their homes.
The derailment has forced oil train safety onto Brown's radar. Her predecessor, John Kitzhaber, ordered a thorough review of state safety in response to the swift rise of oil trains that occurred while he was in office. At Kitzhaber's urging, the Oregon Department of Transportation hired four new rail safety inspectors to patrol railroads across the state. Since Brown took office, crude-by-rail traffic has declined.
Allen Good, a Morningstar analyst who follows Tesoro, said the latest derailment won't help the company's efforts to build the Vancouver terminal. But Good expects it to be built, despite environmental opposition.
Opponents already had evidence of what happens when oil trains derail. Good said he wasn't sure one more derailment "will be material enough to swing the decision one way or another at this point."
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2016/06/portland_mayor_to_gov_kate_bro.html
-
Ozone Legislation Focus of Senate Subcommittee Hearing
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
A pair of bills that would alter compliance obligations under the Environmental Protection Agency's 2015 ozone standards will be the subject of a Senate Environment and Public Works subcommittee hearing June 22.
The Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety hearing will focus on:
• S. 2882, which would delay implementation of the 2015 ozone standards by eight years and make several changes to the EPA's process for reviewing all national ambient air quality standards, including allowing reviews to be conducted less frequently than the current five-year cycle; and
• S. 2072, which would allow areas to avoid being designated as in nonattainment under the 70 parts per billion ozone standards if they were able to achieve and maintain certain air quality goals under an early action compact plan created by state, local or tribal governments.
The EPA's decision to set more stringent ozone standards was opposed by a number of states and industry associations, including the National Association of Manufacturers, which dubbed the rule the “most expensive regulation ever.” The EPA projected that implementing the 2015 ozone standards would cost as much as $1.4 billion in 2025, but industry has argued that the EPA's estimates are too low.
The Senate subcommittee hearing on the ozone bills follows House passageJune 8 of a bill (H.R. 4775) introduced by Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) that would delay implementation of the 2015 ozone standards. S. 2882 is the Senate companion to that bill, which is known as the Ozone Standards Implementation Act of 2016.
While Olson's bill received support from the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other industry groups that oppose the tougher ozone standards, his proposal was the subject of aveto threat from the White House in advance of the House vote. The Obama administration said H.R. 4775 would make “detrimental” changes to important parts of the Clean Air Act and predicted that advisers would recommend that the president veto the bill if it managed to pass the Senate.
In addition to supporting a legislative fix, opponents of the 2015 ozone standards are also looking to the courts for potential relief. A state coalition led by Arizona and various industry petitioners, including coal giant Murray Energy Corp., want a federal appeals court to vacate the ozone standards, which they claim are illegally unachievable (Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1385, briefs filed 4/22/16).
The 2015 ozone standards also are being challenged by environmental and public health organizations that wanted the EPA to set stronger standards than 70 ppb. Many of those petitioners, including Sierra Club, have voiced opposition to legislation that would in any way weaken the ozone standards or the EPA's process for reviewing and revising national air quality standards.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=91943683&vname=dennotallissues&fn=91943683&jd=91943683
-
Ryan's Regulatory Agenda Ruffles Environmentalists
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Cheryl Bolen
Many financial, environmental and energy-related rules would be scaled back next year under a regulatory-overhaul plan unveiled by House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and a dozen other House Republican leaders.
“We are calling for Washington to change the very way it writes its rules—that's why we wrote this plan,” Ryan said at a June 14 press conference outside the Department of Labor.
The ideas in the plan align with many proposals championed by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who has pledged to overturn Dodd-Frank regulations that restrict banks and financial institutions. Like Trump, House Republicans are seeking to overturn or prevent numerous energy and environmental regulations, such as those related to methane emissions and hydraulic fracturing.
“No major regulation should become law unless Congress takes a vote,” Ryan said.
Revisiting Legislation
The Republicans' plan also calls for enactment of legislation such as H.R. 427, the Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act, which would require congressional approval of major regulations with an impact on the economy of at least $100 million.
President Barack Obama has issued a veto threat against that bill and similar versions throughout his term in office.
The 57-page plan is the third part of a six-part agenda dubbed “A Better Way.” This part of the agenda was developed by the task force on Reducing Regulatory Burdens, set up in February.
Environmental Rules Scrutinized
Ryan's plan calls for closer scrutiny of environmental programs such as the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan and its application of the Clean Water Act as well as an update to the National Environmental Policy Act.
Ryan said the Clean Power Plan (RIN:2060-AR33), which limits carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector, jeopardizes tens of thousands of jobs and at least 40 states are expected to see double digit increases in their electricity bills over the next 15 years. Ryan called for legislation to require additional analysis of the rule's impacts on jobs and low-income households.
Ryan also criticized the EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' interpretation of the Clean Water Act and its impact on the farming industry. Ryan said Clean Water Act permits should not be required for farming and ranching activities such as construction of ponds and ditches.
The regulatory plan also calls for an update to the National Environmental Policy Act to “eliminate delays, unnecessary duplication, and frivolous litigation, and give worthy projects a timely green light.”
Trump ‘Comfortable' With Agenda
Ryan said that, based on several conversations, congressional Republicans feel confident that Trump is “comfortable” with their agenda.
“More importantly, [Trump] knows just as well as we do, by listening to the American people, by traveling this country and talking to people who are suffering under these crippling regulations, that these regulations written by these unelected bureaucrats are costing us jobs and costing us prosperity,” Ryan said.
Republicans believe that they, with a Republican president, can implement their Better Way agenda, Ryan said.
Regulations ‘Save Lives.'
Though the agenda responds to many complaints in the business community, some say it goes too far and would compromise public health and welfare.
“Finally, we have an area where Paul Ryan agrees with Donald Trump—that we don't need regulations that save lives,” Amit Narang, regulatory policy advocate for Public Citizen, told Bloomberg BNA.
“I don't know how much more blunt I can be. That would be the impact of this policy agenda if it were to become law,” Narang said, adding that on top of the dozens of individual “dangerous” proposals in the agenda, the cumulative impact would mean no new major regulations concerning clean air, clean water, safe food, finance, worker safety or consumer safety.
John Coequyt, director of the Sierra Club's Global Climate Policy, said that “the only people this plan provides a better way for are fossil fuel billionaires.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=91943699&vname=dennotallissues&fn=91943699&jd=91943699
-
Ryan's Policy Plan Seeks To Scrap EPA Climate Rules
Jun 14, 2016 | Inside EPA
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) is floating a policy blueprint for House Republicans that calls for scraping all EPA climate change rules developed under the Clean Air Act, along with a broader regulatory reform effort that would put new constraints on agencies seeking to issue new rules.
Ryan's June 14 blueprint, “A Better Way: Our Vision for a Confident America,” highlights legislation that would repeal all of the climate rules developed under the air law, in addition to measures to repeal specific rules including EPA's landmark greenhouse gas standards for new and existing power plants.
“Republicans will continue to pursue these and other limits on costly global warming rules,” the document says.
In addition, the blueprint argues that regulations should recognize the jobs benefit of energy production, as well as its role in lowering consumer prices, arguing those factors “likely outweigh any realistic assessment of the risks. In particular, strict limits must be set on the applicability of new regulations to existing power plants and other affected facilities.”
The document also takes aim at a draft GHG guidance for reviews conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The guide, crafted by the White House Council on Environmental Quality, urges agencies to take into account both a project's GHG emissions as well as potential climate change impacts on the project.
But Ryan's proposal says that NEPA “must be amended to prohibit the agency from circumventing the rulemaking process by issuing 'guidance' and using the courts to enforce it. In addition, it must be clarified that NEPA does not allow for the establishment of 'proxy' analysis, including substitution of GHG emissions, in the absence of environmental impacts.”
The Republican proposal also includes a host of broader regulatory reforms, including a “regulatory budget” for agencies to “tame runaway federal regulatory costs.”
It also would target so-called “sue-and-settle” agreements in which advocates file suit after an agency misses a statutory deadline to issue a rule to take another action. Critics say such suits often result in consent decrees requiring the agency to issue the rule by a court-enforced deadline.
“Regulatory agencies too often welcome these suits and willingly sign up to the resulting decrees and settlements, under which they can more easily issue expensive or controversial new regulations -- claiming that 'The court made me do it,'” Ryan's proposal says.
In response, the document calls for greater “transparency” in such settlement talks, as well as increased rights for regulated entities. It would also include greater flexibility for courts to weigh agencies' ability to fulfill the proposed consent decree, while allowing for new administrations and courts to modify consent decrees “in light of changed facts and circumstances and competing duties.”
Regarding other environmental rules, the House GOP proposal calls for withdrawing the Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule developed by EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, arguing that the regulation is “trampling on a successful federal-state partnership.”
“The rule misconstrues the two relevant Supreme Court cases, using them as a justification to broaden its authority over all waters. The rule goes far beyond merely clarifying the scope of waters subject to CWA programs. Rather, it increases the scope.”
The regulatory proposals are part of a broader effort by Ryan to craft a House GOP platform that it would enact after President Obama leaves office in January. Other portions of Ryan's plan cover poverty, national security, the Constitution, health care and tax reform.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/ryans-policy-plan-seeks-scrap-epa-climate-rules
-
Senate Appropriators Tie Policy Riders to EPA Spending
Jun 15, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
Senate Republicans dropped a bombshell at a June 14 appropriations subcommittee markup of the Environmental Protection Agency's funding bill, pledging to tack on a host of policy riders that Democrats say would gut key environmental regulations.
Senate appropriators have so far moved forward with largely rider-free funding bills for fiscal year 2017, and the change in course on that front spurred criticism from Democrats and environmental groups.
The Interior, Environment and Related Agencies measure, a $33.1 billion bill yet to be unveiled, is set to target regulations under the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the EPA's Superfund program, subcommittee Ranking Member Tom Udall (D-N.M.) told the subcommittee.
Udall described the riders as “poison pills” and vowed to oppose the legislation at the full committee markup.
“In many ways, I feel like its déjà vu all over again, and it's very frustrating,” Udall said. “Democrats have been clear; the White House has been clear. We are not prepared to gut environmental law at the price of getting spending bills passed.”
The Friends of the Earth, the Sierra Club and other environmental groups lashed out against the riders in statements.
Funding Levels
The measure would give the EPA $8.1 billion, $31.2 million below enacted levels, the Senate Appropriations Committee said in a bill summary.
The legislation would also boost Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds by $113 million over enacted levels and $370 million over President Barack Obama's budget request. The Obama administration has come under fire in recent months for cutting the Clean Water State Revolving Fund by more than $414 million in its budget.
The Interior Department would be funded at $12.2 billion, including a $6 million increase for the Bureau of Land Management and a $11.9 million cut to the Fish and Wildlife Service.
The legislation would also decrease the budget for Interior's Office of Surface Mining by $3.7 million.
Murkowksi and Udall both praised robust wildfire suppression funding measures in the bill.
One-Year Delay for WOTUS
The legislation would slash funding to EPA programs that administer rules that have been blocked by U.S. courts, Murkowski said at the markup.
“On the regulatory side of the EPA budget, this bill makes cuts in areas where the EPA has clearly overstepped its bounds,” she said in a statement. “Several program areas that have issued controversial rules that are currently blocked in court are reduced because I believe it is more important to provide resources to programs that yield tangible results in improving the environment instead of funding more lawyers and bureaucrats to draft rules of questionable legality and dubious environmental benefit.”
Both the Clean Water Rule, also known as the waters of the U.S. rule, and the Clean Power Plan are in administrative limbo following stays by different federal courts.
One policy rider would delay implementation of the Clean Water Rule for one year, Murkowski said in the statement, and would bar Superfund financial assurance rulemaking.
While funding for EPA's air program may be affected, the Clean Power Plan itself is not addressed by any policy riders, Murkowski told Bloomberg BNA June 14.
House subcommittee appropriators advanced their own version of the EPA spending bill in late May after tacking on riders to prohibit funding for WOTUS and the Clean Power Plan, among others.
The full House Appropriations Committee will mark up that legislation June 15, and the full Senate Appropriations Committee will mark up its bill the following day.
Full Committee Showdown
Senators have an opportunity at the upcoming markup to discard the riders and move forward on a bipartisan basis, Udall said.
“There's clearly room for improvement on this bill,” he told the subcommittee. “I expect to offer amendments to strip out these troubling policy riders.”
Speaking to Bloomberg BNA, Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) deflected a question on why appropriators chose to deviate from a rider-free precedent this appropriations cycle.
“We're trying to give the Senate an opportunity to carefully review the bill; we have unlimited debate here,” he said.
Both Udall and Murkowski urged colleagues to reserve amendments for June 16.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) pointed to perennial congressional disagreement on EPA spending.
“I think we'll follow the regular order, debate the amendments and see where we go,” she told Bloomberg BNA.
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), a high-ranking Republican appropriator, echoed that assessment. The riders aren't likely to taint the appropriations process moving forward, he told Bloomberg BNA.
“This is one of the more difficult bills to put together because it has some strongly held views on it, on the environment, on clean water, all those issues,” he said. “I don't think anyone is surprised that it's hard to find agreement between Republicans and Democrats on environmental issues.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=91943698&vname=dennotallissues&fn=91943698&jd=91943698
-
U.S. Chamber and Its Board Disagree on Climate, Senators Say
Jun 15, 2016 | E&E News
By Lisa Friedman
Nearly half of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's board of directors have taken positions in favor of tackling global warming, despite helping to run a lobbying group that campaigns against climate policies, according to a new report by seven Senate Democrats and an independent.
The survey, released last night by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), found that none of the chamber's 108 board members openly support the group's positions on climate change. A number of them disassociated themselves from the chamber's lobbying on the issue, and still others said they had "no knowledge or input" into the group's climate policymaking decisions.
The survey uncovered a similar disparity between board members and the chamber on efforts to promote tobacco. In unveiling the study, lawmakers called tobacco and climate change "two of the most significant public health issues of our day." They urged companies to "stop looking the other way" on chamber positions with which they disagree, but the senators stopped short of calling on the directors to abandon the business organization.
"We found a corporate America far more concerned about public health and the environment than the Chamber's efforts would suggest," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to chamber President and CEO Tom Donohue and his board.
"We identified companies from all corners of the economy working to reduce their carbon footprints and affirmatively supporting the Obama Administration's Clean Power Plan and its international efforts at the COP21 climate negotiations in Paris," they wrote.
U.S. Chamber officials did not respond to a request for comment last night, but told The New York Times in a statement that the study is "egregiously false."
The report was also backed by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.).
The U.S. Chamber opposes U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan to reduce emissions from the power sector, arguing that the regulation will mean "economic disaster." The group also has come out strongly against the Paris climate agreement struck last year. It says the deal is economically unfair to America, and that the U.S. pledge to cut carbon 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels is not achievable without economic pain.
Yet according to the Democrats' report, 48 percent of U.S. Chamber board members have publicly supported efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The others have expressed no public position.
Eleven companies actually responded to the lawmakers' questionnaire. In cases in which a company did not respond, the report categorizes it as having supported climate efforts if it took a public pledge, joined a coalition in support of climate action, was awarded for climate efforts or provided a charitable contribution to an environmental organization.
"Many Chamber members do good work to address the risks of tobacco and climate change. But too many of these members quietly disapprove of the Chamber's positions without taking action," the report concludes. "As long as these Board members lend their tacit support to an organization that spearhead systematic efforts against policies to limit tobacco and climate change, it is difficult to accept their claims that they are anti-tobacco or good on climate."
This story also appears in ClimateWire.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/06/15/stories/1060038844
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested