Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 7/12/16
-
(ACC Blog) Warming Up For Round 2 Of #ACCaugust
Jul 11, 2016 | American Chemistry Matters
Summer may be winding down by the time August comes around, but ACC’s Political Mobilization activities will be in full swing! -
TSCA Reform: Upcoming Webinars On How It Might Affect You
Jul 11, 2016 | BNA Energy And Environment Blog
By Pat Rizzuto
Opportunities abound this week to hear attorneys, congressional staff and other experts discuss how changes to the primary U.S. chemicals law will affect industries, states and the public. -
The Toxic Substances Control Act Amendments May Do Little to Relieve California Headaches for Businesses
Jul 11, 2016 | Lexology
By Robert L. Falk and Peter Hsiao
Business groups largely supported the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Amendments―recently signed into law by President Obama—in order to address concerns about the emergence of varying state-by-state requirements that regulate the chemicals used in consumer products (see prior client alert). -
(ACC Mentioned) Your Couch May Be Harming Your Child’s Brain
Jul 11, 2016 | Takepart
By Gwendolyn Wu
A new study raises concerns about how furniture laced with flame retardants affects kids. -
N.Y. Plans Hearings on PFOA Contamination
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
Both houses of the New York State Legislature will hold hearings in the next two months on the state's response to local water contamination with perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), adding another level of scrutiny to how the administration of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) has handled the issue. -
White House Threatens To Veto EPA, Interior Spending Bill
Jul 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The Obama administration is threatening to veto a 2017 spending bill for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Interior Department. -
White House Threatens Veto of House Interior-EPA Spending Bill
Jul 11, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
The White House today threatened to veto the House's legislation that would fund the Interior Department and EPA for fiscal 2017, objecting to provisions aimed at blocking Obama administration regulations on the oil and gas industry. -
House to Debate More Than 100 Amendments to Interior-EPA Bill
Jul 12, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sean Reilly and Tiffany Stecker
The House Rules Committee last night made way for lawmakers to debate 131 proposed amendments to the fiscal 2017 Interior Department and U.S. EPA spending bill. -
Senate Support Grows For Conference Vote
Jul 12, 2016 | E&E News Daily
By George Cahlink
Bipartisan momentum is building in the Senate for going to conference with the House to reconcile competing versions of energy overhaul legislation. -
Cantwell, Murkowski Reach Deal On Conference Committee
Jul 11, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Nick Juliano
Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Maria Cantwell have set a deal to go to conference on an energy bill that will strip out some of the most controversial Republican proposals. -
Senators Strike Deal To Move Forward On Sweeping Energy Bill
Jul 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Senate will vote this week on whether to enter formal negotiations with the House toward a compromise energy policy bill. -
Groups Criticize EPA Funding Bill Ahead of Floor Vote
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
Conservation groups, environmental lobbyists and workers rights advocates pushed lawmakers in recent days to strip dozens of controversial riders from legislation (H.R. 5538) that would fund the Environmental Protection Agency and Interior Department. -
Fracking Foes Win Amendment in Democratic Party Platform
Jul 11, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Progressives in the Democratic Party, many of them supporters of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and his failed bid for the presidency, were reportedly unable to get a nationwide moratorium on hydraulic fracturing (fracking), an idea championed by Sanders, added to their party's official platform. -
Leaked Proposal Seeks End of Restrictions on LNG Exports
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rossella Brevetti and Bengt Ljung
A leaked European text in U.S.-EU trade talks calls for eliminating restrictions on natural gas exports. -
Fossil Fuel Firms Risk Losing $33 Trillion to Climate Change
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joe Ryan
The fossil fuel industry risks losing $33 trillion in revenue over the next 25 years as global warming may drive companies to leave oil, natural gas and coal in the ground, according to a Barclays Plc energy analyst. -
Federal Study Of MCHM Concludes
Jul 11, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jessica Morrison
A just-released federal study of 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol (MCHM) concluded that exposure to the chemical after it spilled into the Elk River in Charleston, W. Va., in January 2014 is “not likely to be associated with any adverse health effects.” -
Gov. Inslee Wants Increased Inspections On Oil Transport Rail Lines
Jul 11, 2016 | AP (In The Seattle Times)
Gov. Jay Inslee wants federal regulators to issue an emergency order requiring safety inspectors to physically walk the rail lines in the hours before Bakken crude oil is transported. -
California Governor, Oil/Gas Industry In Discussions on Climate Change
Jul 11, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
California Gov. Jerry Brown and oil companies are in discussions on extending the state's precedent-setting climate change-related programs, which impact the oil/natural gas industry significantly. -
EPA Seeks Data On Technologies to Reduce Oil & Gas Industry Emissions
Jul 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA is seeking a host of data from the oil and natural gas sector on emerging technologies to reduce emissions from industry operations, saying the request -- which is separate from a recent data collection effort on methane emissions from existing oil and gas operations -- might inform a future Clean Air Act rule for existing sources. -
Critics Of EPA CWA Rule Urge 6th Circuit To Weigh Corps' Internal Memos
Jul 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Critics of EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers' joint Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule are urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit to review internal memos between the two agencies on the rule's development, with industry groups, states, and advocates all arguing the memos will bolster their competing suits over the rule. -
New York Faces Tough Odds In Its Goal To Become 'Zero Waste' By 2030
Jul 11, 2016 | Crain's New York Business (In Plastics News)
By Emily Bobrow
New York City generates more than 44 million pounds of residential and commercial waste every day, almost a ton per person per year.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Blog) Warming Up For Round 2 Of #ACCaugust
Jul 11, 2016 | American Chemistry Matters
Summer may be winding down by the time August comes around, but ACC’s Political Mobilization activities will be in full swing! Taking advantage of the August recess when elected officials are back in their home districts, we hit the road to showcase the broad-reaching benefits of the business of chemistry in an effort we call #ACCaugust. Building upon the momentum and success of last year, #ACCaugust Round 2 plans to pack a punch into the seven-week summer recess with high-energy tours and roundtables with even better ways to join the conversation. We hope you’ll follow along for #ACCaugust 2.0!
In just one month last year, 38 elected officials participated in 40 events, including plant tours, industry roundtables, and town hall meetings with employees at facilities in their districts, exceeding our goal of coordinating 25 tours. Our staff of road warriors traveled thousands of miles to 20 states, including Alaska, to help build relationships between elected officials and their chemistry industry constituents back at home.
Through these tours we are able to highlight how important each facility was to the local community and how chemistry impacts the state and federal economy. The business of chemistry is a major factor in the nation’s manufacturing renaissance, providing 810,000 high-paying skilled jobs that supports over a quarter of the U.S. GDP. All who participate are able to see how chemistry is vital to everyday life and that the business of chemistry directly touches more than 96% of all manufactured goods.
But one successful #ACCaugust is not enough! This August, we will be back on the road visiting facilities and meeting with influential federal and state elected officials. Not only are we looking to make a bigger impact, but we are bringing more to the table this year, including a brand new online community highlighting the importance of chemistry, Chemistry Matters. Bringing together chemical industry friends and colleagues across the U.S., Chemistry Matters aims to connect elected officials with the business of chemistry, educate the broader community, and advocate for the advancement of policies that benefit chemistry.
During the month of August and beyond, be sure to check on our progress and see what innovative products chemistry is helping to create by following the tours and town halls here on our blog, on our new Twitter account @AmChemMatters, or our Facebook page. Participate in the experience by joining the conversation using the hashtags #ACCaugust and #ChemistryMatters.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2016/07/warming-up-for-round-2-of-accaugust/
-
TSCA Reform: Upcoming Webinars On How It Might Affect You
Jul 11, 2016 | BNA Energy And Environment Blog
By Pat Rizzuto
Opportunities abound this week to hear attorneys, congressional staff and other experts discuss how changes to the primary U.S. chemicals law will affect industries, states and the public.
There’s a forum from the Environmental Law Institute:“The Story of TSCA Reform,” July 14, 2:30-4 p.m. Speakers: Senator Tom Udall (D-N.M.), who worked with Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) to amend TSCA through the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act; Jim Jones, EPA’s assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention; and David McCarthy, chief counsel for the House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy. The cost is $50 for non-ELI participants.
And a handful of law firms are offering free webinars on the Toxic Substances Control Act amendments: Steptoe & Johnson LLP: “What Does TSCA Reform Mean to You,” July 12, 10-11 a.m. Speakers: Steptoe & Johnson attorneys Seth Goldberg, Cynthia Taub and Sara Beth Watson.Keller & Heckman LLP: “The New TSCA: What Does it Mean for Consumer Products Companies,” July 13, 3-4:30 p.m. Speakers: Keller & Heckman attorneys Sheila Millar, Martha Marrapese and Nathan Cardon.Bergeson & Campbell P.C.: “The New TSCA: Impacts on New and Existing Chemicals Programs,” July 14, 11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Speakers: Managing Partner Lynn Bergeson and Richard Denison of the Environmental Defense Fund join Charles Auer, former director of EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT); Oscar Hernandez, former director of OPPT’s Risk Management Division; and Richard Engler, former leader of EPA's Green Chemistry Program.Holland & Knight LLP: “Toxic Substances Control Act,” July 14, 2-3:30 p.m. Speakers: Dimitri Karakitsos, senior counsel Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, joined by Holland & Knight attorney Bonni Kaufman and Policy Analyst Benjamin Dunham.
http://www.bna.com/tsca-reform-upcoming-b73014444048/
-
Jul 11, 2016 | Lexology
By Robert L. Falk and Peter Hsiao
Business groups largely supported the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Amendments―recently signed into law by President Obama—in order to address concerns about the emergence of varying state-by-state requirements that regulate the chemicals used in consumer products (see prior client alert). For businesses that wish to avail themselves of California’s vast and lucrative marketplace, however, the TSCA Amendments may provide little aid in alleviating their headaches. As discussed below, while the Amendments include a number of federal preemption provisions, those are riddled with holes that may allow California’s activist requirements and plaintiff’s lawyers to proceed largely unimpeded.
Preemption under the TSCA Amendments
Subject to the exceptions discussed below, the Amendments expressly preempt the following:State statutes and actions requiring information about a chemical substance that is reasonably likely to produce the same information otherwise required by federal law.State statutes and actions prohibit or restrict the manufacture, processing, or distribution of a chemical for which the EPA has either:Made a final determination that the chemical does not present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment, orPromulgated a final rule where the EPA does find an unreasonable risk.Statutes and actions requiring companies to notify a state before beginning a particular use of a chemical (but only if the EPA already requires notification of that same use).
The Amendments also contain an additional, albeit temporary, preemption “pause”, which takes effect if and when the EPA defines the scope of its risk evaluation for a high-priority chemical. This preemption prevents states from enacting prohibitions or other restrictions on the use of that high-priority chemical substance during EPA’s review process, but it ends when the EPA publishes the risk evaluation (or when a three-and-a-half year deadline for completion of a risk evaluation by EPA passes, whichever is earlier).
Exemptions from the New TSCA Preemption Provisions
The Amendments’ new preemption provisions do not apply to:Any state action taken pursuant to a state law (including actions taken in the future) if that law was in effect on August 31, 2003.Any state action taken or requirement imposed to a subsequently enacted law that prohibits or restricts a chemical substance, if that action was taken before April 22, 2016.Any state or federal common law or statutory right that creates a remedy for civil relief (e.g., tort claims) or a penalty for a criminal conduct.
Exceptions to TSCA Preemption
State statutes and administrative actions are also not permanently or temporarily preempted if any of the following conditions are met:The purpose of the action is to address a different health or environmental risk than the risk addressed by EPA’s action pursuant to TSCA.The action implements a reporting, monitoring, or other information obligation that is not already required by EPA.The action is adopted under a state water quality, air quality, or waste treatment or disposal law.The action is identical to an EPA requirement.The action is authorized under the authority of another federal law.EPA has provided a waiver from the new TSCA preemption provisions.
Potential Impact on California’s Safer Consumer Products (“Green Chemistry”) Program
The new TSCA preemption provisions could halt or constrain the implementation of the California Safer Consumer Products (SCP) program. The statute was enacted just after August 31, 2003, and its initial requirements for Priority Product-chemical pairings were not finalized prior to April 22, 2016, so at least certain types of requirements arising from the SCP program could be subject to TSCA preemption. (For further information on this, see Morrison & Foerster’s Green Chemistry portal web page athttp://www.mofo.com/green-chemistry.)
Whether the TSCA Amendments will kill or have a meaningful chilling effect on the future of the SCP program, however, remains to be seen. For example, as long as the EPA has not taken any regulatory action on a chemical, California will retain full authority to regulate a product that contains it. Moreover, if the use of the chemical does not fall under the EPA’s TSCA jurisdiction, the SCP program’s actions concerning it will never be preempted. (For instance, TSCA does not cover personal care products or beauty products.)
Indeed, although it may be tested in the courts, California’s requirement that manufacturers of products designated as Priority Products provide the state with data and conduct an Alternatives Analysis pursuant to the SCP program appears to be left unaltered by the new TSCA preemption provisions. Likewise, certain forms of regulatory responses to an Alternatives Analysis on a Priority Product, such as mandating certain warnings and/or other information disclosure requirements, may well be found to survive TSCA preemption. Accordingly, California may be free to impose a regulatory response under the SCP program, as long as it is not an outright prohibition or per se restriction on the use of a chemical.
Potential Impact on California’s Proposition 65
Proposition 65 requires businesses to provide a “clear and reasonable” warning before knowingly and intentionally exposing a Californian to any detectable amount of a listed chemical, unless the business can prove that the exposure level does not pose a significant risk of cancer or is at least 1,000 times below the level that causes no observable reproductive effect. Public prosecutors are meant to be the primary enforcers of Proposition 65, but the statute is mostly loathed because any individual claiming to act in the public interest also has the ability to enforce it by filing “bounty hunter” lawsuits against manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of consumer products. The business is forced to choose between funding the defense of the case or agreeing to a settlement in which the bounty hunter retains a percentage of penalties and can obtain full reimbursement of their attorney’s fees and costs.
Relative to the TSCA Amendments, California’s legislators, including retiring U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, took pains to ensure that Proposition 65, a law California’s voters adopted in a 1986 ballot initiative, remained fully protected from TSCA preemption. Thus, notwithstanding the TSCA Amendments, California can continue to update its list of Proposition 65 chemicals “known” in that state to cause cancer and reproductive harm (including based just on studies of effects in laboratory animals) regardless of the outcome of EPA’s TSCA evaluation of the chemical’s risk. Proposition 65 bounty hunter lawsuits can also continue to be filed concerning de minimus exposures to chemicals that EPA considers to be safe.
That said, it still remains for the courts hearing these cases to determine if the EPA’s risk and safety determinations made pursuant to TSCA will have a significant role to play in a business’s defense of a Proposition 65 claim on grounds other than preemption. Judges may also take such EPA determinations into account when it comes to assessing (or reducing) Proposition 65 penalties. TSCA’s preemption provisions may also help convince courts that it is inappropriate to allow plaintiffs to continue to use Proposition 65 to obtain chemical “reformulation” of products, instead of just requiring the California warnings for them.
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=478d1530-e6ee-40ff-8305-42959cb95242
-
(ACC Mentioned) Your Couch May Be Harming Your Child’s Brain
Jul 11, 2016 | Takepart
By Gwendolyn Wu
A new study raises concerns about how furniture laced with flame retardants affects kids.
The sofa in your living room, your mattress, and the armchair in your den—those are just a few of the common household items to which manufacturers might add flame retardants. After all, no one wants a lit cigarette dropped on a bed to burn down an entire home. Now, a study released Monday about health concerns linked to the use of flame retardants might reignite the push to get the chemicals banned nationwide.
According to the study, published in the journal Environmental International by the Environmental Working Group and Duke University, researchers have detected abnormally high levels of flame retardant chemicals in the urine of kids in California compared with children in New Jersey.
RELATED: 7 Ways to Ditch the Sneaky Toxic Chemicals You Live With
According to the American Chemistry Council, operator of the website flameretardantfacts.com, concerned consumers should focus on how the good outweighs the bad, as the number of household fires has dropped significantly since flame retardant legislation was mandated in the 1970s. But adding the chemicals to household items may not reduce flammability.
“Adding large quantities of fire retardant chemicals doesn’t do much to improve furniture fire safety,” the study’s coauthor, Johanna Congleton, an Environmental Working Group senior scientist, told TakePart. “It depends on the barrier covering the foam.”
The addition of flame retardants to furniture is linked to the tobacco industry’s insistence that it could not create a smolder-safe cigarette. Although items treated with flame retardants can be found in homes nationwide, until 2014 California was the only state to explicitly require that foam-filled furniture and other consumer goods—such as baby strollers or changing pads—be treated with the chemicals. Sofas produced for sale in California before 2014 could carry two to three pounds of flame retardants.
As a result, the study’s researchers found that levels of the potentially carcinogenic flame retardant compound TDCIPP were 15 times higher on average in Californian toddlers than their mothers, while levels were only six times higher in New Jersey toddlers. The level of TPHP, a suspected endocrine disruptor, was nearly six times higher in Californian toddlers over their mothers, while it was only three times higher in New Jersey children.
“Children’s ages and hand-to-mouth activity were strongly associated with higher exposures to some of the flame retardant chemicals,” wrote the study’s authors. Younger kids, such as toddlers who scramble across the floor or roll around on furniture, were also more likely to have higher levels of flame retardant chemicals in their bodies than older kids. That’s “probably because they put their hands and objects in their mouths more often. Flame retardants are known to contaminate house dust, which accumulates on floors where children play,” wrote the authors.
RELATED: Environmental Toxins Are Making Us Sick, and We're to Blame?
The study is part of a growing body of evidence about the negative impact of flame retardants on the health of people and wildlife. Studies analyzing flame retardant exposure on zebrafish have found that there are behavioral effects and some physical development problems in marine life. Research has also linked the chemicals to lower IQ and hyperactivity in children and connected them to suspected endocrine disruption and cancer.
Bromated vegetable oil, a flame retardant chemical that is banned in Europe and Japan, has been found in orange soda and Powerade. In 2014, Coca-Cola, the manufacturer of Powerade, announced that it would remove the controversial chemical from the beverage after a public outcry.
Flame retardants made their way into mainstream furniture production in 1975, when California legislators issued Technical Bulletin 117, a list of requirements for testing fire safety on upholstered furniture. While the bulletin was strictly for products used in California, manufacturers across the U.S. and Canada adopted the regulations.
Fillers had to withstand ignition from an open flame (such as a lighter) for at least 12 seconds, Congleton said. But flame retardants only slow the spread of fire, rather than stop it entirely.
“The cheapest and easiest way [to follow requirements] was to add fire retardant chemicals to consumer goods,” Congleton said. “There was no actual requirement [for those specific chemicals], but it effectively led to their heavy and widespread use.” The chemicals aren’t absorbed into furniture fillers, so they become airborne, settling on other surfaces or being inhaled.
A revision of the bill by the California Bureau of Home Furnishings in 2013 set new flammability standards, including the removal of the foam flame retardant requirement. Furniture makers can pass flammability tests by using fabrics with tighter weaves and fire-resistant fibers. As of June, 14 states have banned or restricted flame retardant usage in children’s products or upholstered furniture. New Jersey is considering banning items that contain the chemicals.
Congleton and other environmental health experts advise buyers to look for furniture without the T.B. 117–approved label and ask retailers if their products contain flame retardants. The Center for Environmental Health, an Oakland,California–based nonprofit advocacy group, lists furniture brands that have formally agreed to stop using fire retardants in their products.
“You can’t reverse the damage, but what you can do is buy better going forward,” said Charles Margulis, the Center of Environmental Health’s media director. “People who have [flame retardant] furniture in their homes can take measures to minimize the damage, such as vacuuming more to keep dust away, where these chemicals are.”
http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/07/11/flame-retardant-couch-harm-children
-
N.Y. Plans Hearings on PFOA Contamination
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
Both houses of the New York State Legislature will hold hearings in the next two months on the state's response to local water contamination with perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), adding another level of scrutiny to how the administration of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) has handled the issue.
The actual hearing dates have not been set, but the Senate will hold its first hearing sometime in August in Hoosick Falls, N.Y. and the Assembly will hold two hearings in September—one in Albany, N.Y. and one in Suffolk County, according to announcements from legislative leaders.
The announcements come at the same time that the U.S. House Oversight Committee has begun investigating federal, state and county officials' responses to PFOA contamination in Hoosick Falls. House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), local residents and others have alleged that the state responded too slowly to the PFOA contamination in the village, which is located about 35 miles northeast of Albany.
PFOA has been detected in the water supply of Hoosick Falls and the nearby town of Petersburgh, N.Y. and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) has been found in the water supply in the city of Newburgh, N.Y.
“These hearings will shed light on who knew what when, and bring us closer to protecting all New Yorkers through statewide water quality testing,” Liz Moran, water and natural resources associate at Environmental Advocates of New York, said in a statement.
A spokesman for the Department of Environmental Conservation said the department “welcomes any opportunity to continue to discuss with anyone interested our experiences and the steps we've taken to address PFOA contamination in Hoosick Falls and Petersburgh, in addition to our efforts to investigate other areas of potential contamination across the state.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=93688238&vname=dennotallissues&fn=93688238&jd=93688238
-
White House Threatens To Veto EPA, Interior Spending Bill
Jul 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The Obama administration is threatening to veto a 2017 spending bill for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Interior Department.
The House is set to consider a $32.1 billion bill for the two departments and other programs this week. The legislation would cut spending for the departments by $64 million from current spending levels and is $1 billion less than what President Obama requested in his budget.
The bill also contains policy riders designed to block administration rules on water, power plant emissions and coal mining.
The White House, in a veto warning issued Monday night, said it objects to the spending levels and riders within the bill.
“The bill underfunds core Department of the Interior (DOI) programs as well as the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) operating budget, which supports nationwide protection of human health, and vital air, water and land resources,” the Office of Management and Budget said in its statement.
The riders “threaten to undermine the most basic protections for America's unique natural treasures and the people and wildlife that rely on them, as well as the ability of States and communities to address climate change and protect a resource that is essential to America's health—clean water.”
The Republicans’ bill looks to cut regulatory spending at the EPA and blocks the agency’s Clean Water and Clean Power Plan rules, both major administration and Democratic priorities. The spending cuts, though, are not as deep as those Republicans have sought in the past.
The House will consider the bill this week after years of failing to clear the legislation. The last time the House passed the EPA and Interior spending bill was 2009; last year’s didn’t even make it to a vote amid a debate over Confederate flag amendments offered to it.
-
White House Threatens Veto of House Interior-EPA Spending Bill
Jul 11, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
The White House today threatened to veto the House's legislation that would fund the Interior Department and EPA for fiscal 2017, objecting to provisions aimed at blocking Obama administration regulations on the oil and gas industry.
The Office of Management and Budget's veto recommendation focuses on nearly two dozen policy riders in the $32 billion House bill that bar funding for specific regulations, from EPA's oil and gas methane standards and marquee power-plant emissions rules to Interior's proposed limits on the venting and flaring of methane from drilling on public lands.
"These provisions threaten to undermine the most basic protections for America's unique natural treasures and the people and wildlife that rely on them, as well as the ability of States and communities to address climate change and protect a resource that is essential to America's health — clean water," OMB wrote.
Even as it strongly criticized the bulk of the bill, the White House offered praise for "the bill's investments in EPA's water infrastructure financing programs, including the State Revolving Funds for clean water and drinking water projects and the new Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loan program."
The Interior-EPA spending bill is set to come to the floor later this week, though its path to passage is complicated by the prospect of politically volatile votes that Democrats are expected to seek. Republicans pulled last year's version of the legislation amid infighting over a Democratic amendment on the Confederate flag.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
House to Debate More Than 100 Amendments to Interior-EPA Bill
Jul 12, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Sean Reilly and Tiffany Stecker
The House Rules Committee last night made way for lawmakers to debate 131 proposed amendments to the fiscal 2017 Interior Department and U.S. EPA spending bill.
While lawmakers are unlikely to push for recorded votes on the entire list, and Rules allowed for some amendments to be considered en bloc, the panel's relatively permissive approach could test the goal of House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) to pass the measure before Congress leaves later this week for a long summer recess.
The $32.1 billion bill, H.R. 5538, which drew a White House veto threat yesterday, is already laden with riders targeting Obama administration regulations on greenhouse gas emissions, federal lands management and oil and gas production (Greenwire, May 24).
\While some of the proposed floor amendments represent Democratic attempts to spike some of the most contentious riders, Republicans are advancing other provisions -- like a proposal by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) to stymie new hydraulic fracturing regulations on federal and American Indian lands -- that are likely to fuel Democrat opposition if added to the bill.
"We're bracing for a long floor battle," Cameron Witten, a Wilderness Society lobbyist, said in an email last night. The group was among 80 environmental organizations that in a letter yesterday urged House members to oppose the legislation.
Besides attacking some 30 "anti-environmental riders," they also object to proposed budget cuts for EPA, the Land and Water Conservation Fund and new endangered species listings.
But at the Rules meeting, House Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), the bill's lead architect, defended the EPA riders as needed to rein in "unnecessary and damaging overreach."
If not as frequently as Republicans, Democrats also are pursuing riders.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), for example, wants to keep the National Park Service from moving forward with a dog management plan for the Golden Gate National Recreational Area near San Francisco.
The Rules panel gave her draft amendment a green light but squelched several of the most politically charged proposals. Those included an amendment by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) to bar funding for signage or policies to designate transgender bathrooms.
Rules also blocked amendments by Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) to prohibit Confederate flag decorations on graves in federal cemeteries and sales of Confederate flag items in National Park Service facilities.
In a news release afterward, Huffman accused Republicans of "doubling down on our nation's racist past."
"Knowing that these amendments had bipartisan support and would have passed the House, they chose to kill them on trumped-up procedural grounds in the dark of night," he said.
Last summer, a floor clash over similar flag-related provisions permanently scuttled House consideration of the comparable spending measure.Natural resources, water
The fiscal 2017 bill, which covers the Interior Department, EPA, the Forest Service and several other agencies, is roughly equal in overall dollar value to this year's threshold but about $1 billion below the administration's request.
It would give EPA $7.98 billion -- down about 2 percent from this year's total of $8.1 billion and even further below the $8.3 billion sought by the White House.
The measure includes a small increase for the National Park Service but would shave the Bureau of Land Management's budget and slash the Land and Water Conservation Fund by almost 30 percent.
Some of the money would go into EPA's Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, which would get almost $1.1 billion -- up 24 percent from the current level -- to help communities pay for drinking water treatment facilities.
At the Rules meeting, Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern lamented that the bill didn't offer more money to help cities facing drinking water emergencies.
An amendment by Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.), who represents the city of Flint, which has been dealing with lead contamination in its drinking water, would allow communities with water emergencies more access to Drinking Water State Revolving Fund money. Another Kildee amendment would provide dollars for fresh water.
"I have been to Flint, Michigan, it is an emergency, and we are not doing what I think we ought to do on that," McGovern said.
Rules Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas) brought up the recent lead scare in the Cannon House Office Building, where workers detected elevated lead levels in water fountains. Democrats were not pleased.
"I am in Cannon, Mr. Chairman, but I will tell you it is nothing compared to the lead problem in Flint," said McGovern, adding that there was a "noticeable difference" between the situation in Flint and on Capitol Hill.
"It's nice to be notified," said Rules Committee ranking member Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y), adding that it's not the same as doing something to remove the lead.
Sessions defended his comments. "What I'm trying to suggest is there are people watching this and they appropriately notified everybody, as opposed to hiding the problem," Sessions said. "I'm simply saying, as opposed to hiding."
In Flint, state and federal regulators failed to treat river water with anti-corrosion chemicals. As a result, it ate away at the city's old lead pipes.
Local and state officials also manipulated lead testing results to avoid sending notifications and replacing the old lead service lines.
From the Obama administration's perspective, the proposed increases for water programs are a rare bright spot in the legislation.
In an eight-page "statement of administration policy," the White House broadly dismissed the bill's riders as "unacceptable" and said funding cuts would hamper efforts to save taxpayers money in the long run by improving cybersecurity, developing new energy sources and maintaining parks and forests.More amendments
Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, wants to strike GOP language in the underlying bill that would block President Obama's ability to designate national monuments.
The existing language would block Obama's use of one of the most powerful environmental laws on the books -- the 1906 Antiquities Act -- which allows presidents to unilaterally withdraw federal lands from mining, logging or road building.
It would bar Obama from using the act in several places seen as key candidates for national monument protections during the remainder of his term, including Bears Ears in southeast Utah, Grand Canyon Heritage in Arizona, Gold Butte in Nevada and Maine Woods.
The amendment will likely fail, but the vote could be close. The existing language restricting monument designations was championed by Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) in the Appropriations Committee. It passed on a 27-22 party-line vote.
Republicans, particularly those from the West, have long sought to curb presidents' monument powers, arguing that they circumvent Congress.
Other proposals up for debate include:An amendment by Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) to bar EPA from moving forward on the Clean Energy Incentive Program, which would award states that take early action on reducing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Republicans have complained in recent weeks that EPA is ignoring the Supreme Court's stay of the agency's Clean Power Plan by continuing work on the incentive program (E&ENews PM, June 16).An amendment by Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) to cut off funding for EPA's criminal enforcement division.An amendment by Rep. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) to free up $6 million for EPA to create a long-term water monitoring program for the Animas and San Juan rivers, both of which were tainted by last summer's Gold King mine spill in Colorado.An amendment by Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.) to strike a provision that would block controversial updates for how Interior values federal coal, oil and gas for royalty purposes.An amendment by Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) would strike another rider inserted by Golden State Republicans to address the drought. The rider would change some operations on California's major water projects. Democrats say this would threaten species like the delta smelt.An amendment by Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) would prevent EPA from placing additional oversight over states that do not meet their goals in the federal Chesapeake Bay cleanup plan.An amendment by Reps. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) and Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) would prohibit funding to carry out a draft technical EPA-U.S. Geological Survey report on the effects of water management on aquatic life.An amendment by Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) would expand the bill's pilot program to fund coal mine reclamation activities and boost economic development.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/07/12/stories/1060040099
-
Senate Support Grows For Conference Vote
Jul 12, 2016 | E&E News Daily
By George Cahlink
Bipartisan momentum is building in the Senate for going to conference with the House to reconcile competing versions of energy overhaul legislation.
The House appointed conferees weeks ago. Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said his chamber would likely vote to join the House in talks sometime this week.
"Going to conference on this measure would put us one step closer to arriving at a final bill and sending it to the president's desk," said McConnell in floor remarks.
McConnell said the bill, if successful, would be the first major piece of energy legislation to pass since the George W. Bush administration and would "bring our aging policies and infrastructure in line with current and future demands."
Senate Democrats, who have resisted going to conference over partisan provisions in the House bill, now appear on board with the formal, bicameral negotiations.
A Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee spokesman said Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) had reached an agreement on ground rules for the conference. Their goal is to bar riders that would spark a presidential veto from the final bill.
"Cantwell is recommending her colleagues agree to moving forward with a formal conversation with the House," said the spokesman, who added that Democratic leaders backed the move.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) did not address the potential conference vote directly. He will likely discuss the issue with colleagues during today's policy lunch.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said he supports going to conference, despite so-called "poison pill" measures in the House legislation. "It's only by going to conference that we will see what they are willing to do or not do," he said.Zika
While the Senate might make headway on the energy conference, a $1.1 billion Zika aid package shows no signs of advancing.
McConnell said he would try again for cloture on the aid legislation, which Democrats oppose over proposed spending offsets and several riders. One of those provisions would ease mosquito pesticide spraying requirements for up to six months.
Sixty votes would be needed to invoke cloture on the bill and move toward final passage, a threshold unlikely given Democratic resistance.
Reid yesterday called the Zika measure "a mockery of how Congress should treat an emergency" and said it would not pass the Senate without changes. Among the concerns, he cited the move to exempt some pesticide spraying from the Clean Water Act.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/07/12/stories/1060040106
-
Cantwell, Murkowski Reach Deal On Conference Committee
Jul 11, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Nick Juliano
Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Maria Cantwell have set a deal to go to conference on an energy bill that will strip out some of the most controversial Republican proposals.
“Sen. Cantwell and Murkowski have spent many hours hammering out an agreement on a process and ground rules that will generate a conference report they can both support. The House Republicans have also agreed a final conference report will not contain measures the president would veto,” a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee spokesperson tells POLITICO.
“After consulting with Sen. Reid and Democratic members of the Energy Committee, Sen. Cantwell is recommending her colleagues agree to moving forward with a formal conversation with the House.”
A vote to go to conference is expected on Tuesday. The House has already appointed conferees, but it remains to be seen if the conference committee will meet before Congress begins its summer recess on Friday.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Senators Strike Deal To Move Forward On Sweeping Energy Bill
Jul 11, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Senate will vote this week on whether to enter formal negotiations with the House toward a compromise energy policy bill.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced the plan for a conference vote Monday, after weeks of negotiations with Democrats.
The Democrats had resisted going to conference, since the House’s bill is filled with Republican priorities that they say would weaken environmental rules, boost fossil fuels and garner a veto from President Obama.
“The Senate will have an opportunity to go to conference with the House to work toward an agreement on the Energy Policy Modernization Act. This reform bill which passed the Senate in April represents the first broad energy legislation to move through the Senate since the Bush administration,” McConnell said.
“Going to conference on this measure would put us one step closer to getting a bill and sending it to the president.”
A spokeswoman for Sen. Maria Cantwell (Wash.), top Democrat on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said Senate leaders have agreed to restrict the negotiated bill and take out provisions that Obama would veto.
Thanks to that agreement, Cantwell is supporting the vote to go to conference, and will urge other Democrats to do the same, the spokeswoman said. That makes it very likely to reach the 60 votes needed to formally start the conference process.
The Senate passed its broad, bipartisan energy bill in April. The bill would modernize numerous energy policies, with an eye toward improving the electric grid, encouraging energy efficiency, easing exports of natural gas and other priorities.
The House’s bill, passed last year, was far more partisan, with few Democrats supporting it. The House then voted to go to conference on the energy bills, but it attached numerous other Republican pieces of legislation with little Democratic support, including a drought relief bill for California.
If the House and Senate negotiators reach a compromise, the final bill would still have to pass both chambers of Congress and be signed by Obama.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/287276-senate-to-vote-on-moving-toward-house-compromise-on-energy-bill
-
Groups Criticize EPA Funding Bill Ahead of Floor Vote
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
Conservation groups, environmental lobbyists and workers rights advocates pushed lawmakers in recent days to strip dozens of controversial riders from legislation (H.R. 5538) that would fund the Environmental Protection Agency and Interior Department.
Those calls surfaced as the House Rules Committee prepared to convene late July 11 to approve additional amendments for floor consideration. House Republican leaders announced plans to consider and possibly vote on the bill July 12.
House members sent the committee nearly 170 amendments before the submission window closed July 7.
Divisive Bill
House Democrats continue to cry foul over the fiscal year 2017 bill, which is weighed down by dozens of measures designed to halt critical priorities for the Environmental Protection Agency.
The legislation would prohibit funding for the Clean Power Plan, the Clean Water Rule and Superfund financial assurance regulations.
Only one committee Democrat, Sanford Bishop (Ga.), jumped on board the bill during Appropriations Committee markup.
Top Republicans praise the bill for cracking down on onerous EPA regulations, while also boosting clean water and firefighting funding.
The $32.1 billion bill falls $1 billion short of the Obama administration's budget request. The legislation would cut EPA funding by about $164 million. That agency would get nearly $8 billion.
The White House issued a statement of administration policy July 11 saying senior advisors would recommend President Barack Obama veto the bill.
‘Vote No on H.R. 5538.'
The League of Conservation Voters threatened retaliation against lawmakers that endorse the legislation on the floor.
“This partisan spending bill is an assault on the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the wild places we hold dear,” said Gene Karpinski, the LCV's president, in a July 11 letter to House members. “This spending bill ought to be about dollars and cents, and yet it contains more than 30 anti-environmental policy riders. By blocking commonsense limits on carbon pollution from power plants, the bill denies the reality that we have a moral obligation to our children and grandchildren to act on climate change.”
The legislation would slash funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund by 30 percent, said Karpinski, who said the organization will consider votes on the bill in developing its 2016 scorecard of congressional votes for causes that are important to the organization.
Likely Veto
Former House member and Energy and Commerce Chair Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), now with Waxman Strategies, echoed that criticism of the legislative riders during a July 11 conference call.
“The Congress is not the regular order of business by considering legislation from the policy committees, and therefore the appropriations bill becomes a vehicle,” he said. “It's a way to see if you can attach your special interest provision on a bill that must eventually be passed.”
Farm Worker Pesticide Protections?
The United Farm Workers assailed the legislation for including language that would bar funding for EPA to implement its 2015 pesticide worker protection rule (RIN:2070-AJ22).
That rule created the first-ever age limit of 18 for pesticide handling, with exceptions for farm owner family members. The rule increases the frequency of required pesticide training and forces farmers to keep records of pesticides they use for at least two years.
“Farm workers labor in one of the nation's most dangerous industries and suffer the highest rates of chemical injuries and skin disorders,” said the farm workers' organization in a July 8 statement. “Republicans are again doing what they can to make farm workers vulnerable again through an appropriations vote that would cut the funds to enforce.”
Flag Flap Repeat?
Reps. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) and Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) proposed amendments to the Rules Committee to ban the Confederate flag at federal cemeteries and parks.
Last year, Republican leadership nixed a vote on the Interior Department and EPA funding bill to shield their members from taking a stance on the flag amendments.
Democrats at the time denounced an amendment that would have allowed Confederate flags to be displayed on grave sites in federal cemeteries.
Thus far this year, Congress has yet to complete work on a single appropriations bill.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=93688248&vname=dennotallissues&fn=93688248&jd=93688248
-
Fracking Foes Win Amendment in Democratic Party Platform
Jul 11, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Progressives in the Democratic Party, many of them supporters of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and his failed bid for the presidency, were reportedly unable to get a nationwide moratorium on hydraulic fracturing (fracking), an idea championed by Sanders, added to their party's official platform.
But fracking opponents were able to get an amendment passed stipulating that the practice should not be performed "where states and local communities oppose it," according to the Sanders campaign. Environmentalists were also reportedly successful in getting support for the pricing of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and continued opposition to the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline.
"This is the most aggressive plan to combat climate change in the history of the Democratic Party," Warren Gunnels, policy director for the Sanders campaign, said Saturday after a two-day platform writers meeting concluded in Orlando, FL. "As a result of this plan natural gas is no longer regarded as a bridge to the future. The future of America's energy system now clearly belongs to sun and wind power.
"But we are not finished. We have got to follow through on the promise of this agreement, to put people before the profits of polluters and solve the global crisis of climate change before it's too late."
For several years, opponents of fracking have called for closing the "Halliburton loophole," a term coined during passage of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which was promoted by former Vice President and former Halliburton executive Dick Cheney (see Shale Daily, March 17, 2011). Fracking foes insist the loophole exempts the practice from the Safe Water Drinking Act (SWDA), but the oil and gas industry disagrees, arguing that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has never regulated fracking under the SWDA.
According to the Sanders campaign, a secondary amendment to Amendment No. 41 of the platform calls for "closing the Halliburton loophole that stripped the EPA of its ability to regulate fracking, and ensuring tough safeguards are in place, including SWDA provisions, to protect local water supplies."
The secondary amendment calls for reducing methane emissions "from all oil and gas production and transportation by at least 40-45% below 2005 levels by 2025 through common-sense standards for both new and existing sources and by repairing and replacing thousands of miles of leaky pipes." It also states that Democrats believe that CO2, methane and other greenhouse gases "should be priced to reflect their negative externalities, and to accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy and help meet our climate goals."
The platform will be submitted to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia for approval at the end of the month.
Last May, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump voiced strong support for the energy industry and endorsed fracking (see Shale Daily, May 26). He also took shots at Sanders and Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, for their opposition to the practice.
Also last May, the American Petroleum Institute (API) said it was keeping in regular contact with both the Clinton and Trump campaigns in order to educate them on energy issues (see Shale Daily, May 17). API did not return a call seeking comment by deadline Monday.
Environmental groups voiced strong support for the final draft of the Democrats' platform.
"This is the strongest platform in history when it comes to tackling the climate crisis, transitioning off of fossil fuels, and growing our clean energy economy," said Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune. "The positive differences between this platform and the ones unveiled four and eight years ago are astonishing, and we applaud everyone on the committee for advocating for the bold, ambitious action we need to tackle the climate crisis and protect the health of every community."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107027-fracking-foes-win-amendment-in-democratic-party-platform
-
Leaked Proposal Seeks End of Restrictions on LNG Exports
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rossella Brevetti and Bengt Ljung
A leaked European text in U.S.-EU trade talks calls for eliminating restrictions on natural gas exports.
“[T]he Parties must agree on a legally binding commitment to eliminate all existing restrictions on the export of natural gas in trade between them as of the date of entry into force of the Agreement,” thedocument said.
Energy trade is a priority for the Europeans. Oil and liquefied natural gas from the U.S. would help the European countries diversify their sourcing—mainly away from Russia.
The leaked text, published by the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth Europe July 11, is not the version the European Commission (EC) will present in Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations, a commission source said. EU and U.S. negotiators are meeting July 11-15 in Brussels for the 14th round of TTIP talks.
So far, the U.S. side has not embraced to the EU desire for TTIP energy chapter but no final decisions have been made. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative did not respond to a request for a comment.
Public Analysis
Sierra Club trade policy advisor Ben Beachy said the Energy Department is required to conduct a public analysis on whether it is in the public interest to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the EU, the world's third-largest LNG importer. Under the leaked text, the Energy Department would have to automatically approve all LNG exports to the EU, he said. “This would facilitate increased LNG exports, greater dependency on a climate-disrupting fossil fuel, more fracking, and expanded fossil fuel infrastructure,” he told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail.
The EC source, however, said the energy text that the commission is proposing in TTIP “promotes renewable energy and energy efficiency in the strongest way ever for a trade agreement.” The proposal contains rules on convergence of standards and the mutual recognition of test results, the source said.
Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program, said July 11 in a press statement that eliminating all gas export restrictions in the U.S. would be a “giant leap backward” in the effort to keep fossil fuels in the ground.
An EC fact sheet on energy provisions in the TTIP states that the U.S. shale gas revolution has only led to more coal imports into the EU. Replacing coal imports with natural gas will reduce carbon dioxide emissions instead of increasing them, the fact sheet said.
Industry Self-Regulation
Under the text, the U.S. and EU would commit to “foster industry self-regulation of energy efficiency requirements for goods where such self-regulation is likely to deliver the policy objectives faster or in a less costly manner than mandatory requirements.” This provision could threaten minimum efficiency requirements on more than 60 types of appliances and equipment, from refrigerators to furnaces, according to the Sierra Club.
The EC source said the EU's Ecodesign directive allows industry to come forward with “voluntary agreements.” Such agreements have to fulfill certain criteria and the commission has to give priority to them if they are “likely to deliver the policy objectives faster or in a less costly manner than mandatory requirements,” the source said. The text proposed is based on and compatible with EU legislation, according to the source.
Another provision in the leaked text states that operators of energy networks should grant access to gas and electricity “on commercial terms that are reasonable, transparent and non-discriminatory, including as between types of energy.”
This language could undermine U.S. and EU policies requiring utilities to favor clean energy over electricity from fossil fuels, the Sierra Club said. But the EC source said non-discrimination is meant to prevent discrimination between like users so that conditions for accessing the grid are the same. EU countries can support renewable energy development while respecting competition rules, the EC source said.
The document also states that the parties shall cooperate on energy and raw materials with a view to “reduce or eliminate trade and investment distorting measures in third countries affecting energy and raw materials.” Third countries are those outside TTIP.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=93688254&vname=dennotallissues&fn=93688254&jd=93688254
-
Fossil Fuel Firms Risk Losing $33 Trillion to Climate Change
Jul 12, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joe Ryan
The fossil fuel industry risks losing $33 trillion in revenue over the next 25 years as global warming may drive companies to leave oil, natural gas and coal in the ground, according to a Barclays Plc energy analyst.
Government regulations and other efforts to cut carbon emissions will inevitably slash demand for fossil fuels, jeopardizing traditional energy producers, Mark Lewis, Barclays's head of European utilities equity research, said July 11 during a panel discussion in New York on financial risks from climate change.
His comments are part of a growing chorus calling for more transparency from oil and gas companies about how their balance sheets may be affected by the global shift away from fossil fuels. As governments adopt stricter environmental policies, there's increasing risk that companies’ untapped deposits of oil, gas and coal may go unused, turning valuable reserves into stranded assets of questionable value.
“There will be lower demand for fossil fuels in the future, and by definition that means lower prices” Lewis said.
Stranded Assets
The July 11 meeting was organized by the Task Force on Climate Related Disclosures, a group established last year by Bank of England Governor Mark Carney. It seeks to bring transparency and consistency to how companies warn investors about dangers they face from climate change. The group, led by Bloomberg LP founder and majority owner Michael Bloomberg, is drafting voluntary guidelines for companies to disclose risks related to coastal flooding, carbon-dioxide emissions and shifting global energy policies.
A “child with an abacus” can calculate that there are tremendous amounts of gas and oil that will need to be left in the ground, said Anne Simpson, investment director of global governance at the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the largest U.S. public pension fund.
“Yet we have boards of directors who will not talk to their shareholders about this issue,” Simpson said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=93688233&vname=dennotallissues&fn=93688233&jd=93688233
-
Federal Study Of MCHM Concludes
Jul 11, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jessica Morrison
A just-released federal study of 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol (MCHM) concluded that exposure to the chemical after it spilled into the Elk River in Charleston, W. Va., in January 2014 is “not likely to be associated with any adverse health effects.”
MCHM was the largest component of a mixture of chemicals that leaked from a corroded commercial storage tank upstream of the water supply for some 300,000 people. At the time of the spill, little was known about MCHM, an alicyclic alcohol used to process coal.
City officials issued a ban on the use of tap water for drinking and washing that lasted more than a week for some of the affected residents. Some reported skin irritation and stomach upset from exposure to contaminated water.
Lack of information about MCHM and other components of the spilled liquid led the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention to request further study from the National Toxicology Program (NTP), a federal program that investigates chemicals of concern to public health.
“Alicyclic alcohols and other chemicals of this sort are likely to have similar toxicological properties,” says Scott S. Auerbach, a molecular toxicologist who worked on the study. Still, the toxicology of many chemicals in the class, including MCHM, was unknown prior to the year-long study, he says.
NTP identified MCHM as a developmental toxicant at concentrations “considerably higher” than the drinking water limit set by CDC after the spill. In its final report, NTP confirmed that the limit instituted by CDC was adequate and that exposure at or below that level is not likely to pose health effects.
A separate analysis by the West Virginia Department of Health & Human Resources found no significant change in birth weight for babies born before and after the spill.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/web/2016/07/Federal-study-MCHM-concludes.html
-
Gov. Inslee Wants Increased Inspections On Oil Transport Rail Lines
Jul 11, 2016 | AP (In The Seattle Times)
Gov. Jay Inslee wants federal regulators to issue an emergency order requiring safety inspectors to physically walk the rail lines in the hours before Bakken crude oil is transported.
Gov. Jay Inslee wants federal regulators to issue an emergency order requiring safety inspectors to physically walk the rail lines in the hours before Bakken crude oil is transported.
In a letter to the railroad administration’s chief, Inslee called current federal inspection standards “insufficient to protect our communities from the imminent threat of fires, spills, and collisions that result from oil train derailments,” The Columbian reported Sunday
Inslee wants the tracks to be inspected every day, at a minimum, and inspected at least 24-hours prior to oil transportation.
Inslee’s call comes after an oil train headed to Tacoma derailed in the Columbia River Gorge, in the town of Mosier, Ore., last month.
spokesman for BNSF Railway — which hauls the bulk of crude through the state — said BNSF inspect tracks daily and requires walking inspections of all the switches.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/inslee-wants-increased-inspections-on-oil-transport-rail-lines/
-
California Governor, Oil/Gas Industry In Discussions on Climate Change
Jul 11, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
California Gov. Jerry Brown and oil companies are in discussions on extending the state's precedent-setting climate change-related programs, which impact the oil/natural gas industry significantly.
Officials at the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) said talks have been ongoing for some time, but there are few, if any, specifics on what is being discussed and how close the parties are to agreement.
"WSPA has been engaged in ongoing talks with the [Brown] administration to improve the state's current climate change programs," said Catherine Reheis-Boyd, WSPA president, adding that the oil/gas sector has a vested interest. "We are serious and committed to improving the state's current programs and ensuring legislative oversight."
The process, Reheis-Boyd said, should help determine California's "next course of action" on combating the impacts of climate change.
A centerpiece of the discussions, according to a report in the Sunday Los Angeles Times, is the state's cap-and-trade program, which is administered by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). That program encountered a serious setback in its latest auction, drawing relatively little interest and revenues after attracting hundreds of millions of dollars in proceeds in auctions held earlier this year and in previous years.
There is also much discussion, reportedly, on California's low-carbon fuel standard (LCFS), which calls for cleaner gasoline. The LCFS is part of a state climate change push that seeks to decrease the amounts of petroleum products consumed in the nation's most populous state.
While there is a pending court challenge to the cap-and-trade program, as well as legislative proposals to extend and change the state's climate change initiative. The climate change initiative, unleashed in a now 10-year-old law (AB 32), set a statewide target of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
The California cap-trade program initially held eight state-only auctions beginning in November 2012, and in May completed a seventh joint auction with the Quebec provincial cap-and-trade system in Canada, generating more than $4 billion in proceeds overall so far for California's GHG Reduction Fund. Proceeds of the most recent sale, which was held in May, was a relatively paltry $10 million.
The February sale was the first of 15 cap-trade auctions held by CARB since 2012 that did not result in the sale of all of the offered current vintage allowances -- 71.5 million were offered and slightly more than 68 million sold. In May, only 7.2 million vintage allowances were sold from the more than 67.6 million that were offered.
Brown's office seems intent on getting the oil/gas sector under the tent by late August, when attempts to get a legislative package passed before adjournment this year will be put in high gear.
The Los Angeles Times report, however, indicated that stakeholders are still a long way from a unified strategy that everyone can agree on, particularly the environmental sector.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107023-california-governor-oilgas-industry-in-discussions-on-climate-change
-
EPA Seeks Data On Technologies to Reduce Oil & Gas Industry Emissions
Jul 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA is seeking a host of data from the oil and natural gas sector on emerging technologies to reduce emissions from industry operations, saying the request -- which is separate from a recent data collection effort on methane emissions from existing oil and gas operations -- might inform a future Clean Air Act rule for existing sources.
In a pre-publication Federal Register notice dated July 8, EPA seeks “information on innovative technologies to accurately detect, measure, and mitigate emissions from the oil and natural gas industry.”
The agency’s request for information (RFI) follows its June 3 draft information collection request (ICR) for the sector outlining a planned multi-stage process for obtaining information from the industry about existing oil and gas operations' emissions of the potent greenhouse gas methane. The data collected by the ICR is widely expected to help determine whether and how the next administration will regulate methane from existing sources.
In the RFI, EPA says it is now seeking a broader suite of data that “may be key in addressing emissions from existing oil and natural gas sources under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).”
Specifically, EPA is seeking data on efforts to foster development and use of advanced monitoring and leak detection methods similar to the optical gas imaging required in the agency’s air rules for new and modified sources, also issued June 3 that imposed first-time methane limits on those sources.
EPA in the RFI acknowledges that final results may not be available on some of those efforts, but says it “is interested in learning about works-in-progress that may lead to advanced monitoring techniques, devices or systems appropriate for the dynamic and complex oil and natural gas sector.”
The agency is also seeking information on how these monitoring technologies might be broadly applied to existing sources, including research on systems that would cover emission points or equipment in a way that was not previously available, “thus enabling a different approach to setting standards.”
Additionally, the agency is soliciting information on advancing mitigation opportunities, particularly on technologies that could allow for effective controls at well sites or other co-located facilities.
The Register notice also urges industry participation in the agency’s annual conference for Natural Gas STAR, its voluntary methane reduction program, tentatively slated for early 2017, saying the event may be used to exchange information.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-seeks-data-technologies-reduce-oil-gas-industry-emissions
-
Critics Of EPA CWA Rule Urge 6th Circuit To Weigh Corps' Internal Memos
Jul 11, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Critics of EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers' joint Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule are urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit to review internal memos between the two agencies on the rule's development, with industry groups, states, and advocates all arguing the memos will bolster their competing suits over the rule.
“For this Court to perform its judicial review function, it must have before it a complete administrative record that includes all documents considered, either directly or indirectly, by the Agencies before promulgation” of the final rule and an accompanying National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review that found no significant impact on the environment from the regulation, says a coalition of environmental groups in a July 8 motion.
Separately, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and other business groups filed a July 8 motion saying, “[W]here, as here, publicly-disclosed documents relate directly to the arbitrary and capricious nature of the challenged rule, the public’s interest in having the documents included in the record is strong, and the government’s interest in keeping them out of the record is de minimus. They accordingly should be included.”
The groups reference another motion filed July 8 by a coalition of 28 states that says the index and administrative record for the consolidated challenges to the CWA rule “are missing important documents from the Corps, which were indisputably before the Agencies” during development of the jurisdiction rule.
The memos at issue were written by senior-level Corps officials prior to issuance of the final CWA rule, and were directed to Jo-Ellen Darcy, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, but were released in 2015 by members of Congress. The memos discussed the then-draft version of the CWA rule, and highlighted legal and other concerns about the regulation that critics of the rule say back their claims in the litigation.
North Dakota and 13 other states suing over the rule in the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota previously asked that court to include the memos in the suit. The Department of Justice (DOJ) opposed the move, saying that the memos were deliberative records that the agencies can withhold from the case.
But the district court case is on hold after the 6th Circuit decided it has power to hear suits over the CWA rule, in which industry groups, advocates and states raise competing attacks on the regulation.
Internal Memos
States and industry organizations in the 6th Circuit case argue that the rule is unlawfully broad in scope and believe the memos will help make this case by citing Corps comments critical of drafts of the rule. Environmentalists however argue that the memos will help justify their claims of inadequate NEPA analysis of the final rule.
The coalition of environmentalists -- who largely support the rule but claim it does not go far enough in protecting waters under the CWA -- claims that the finding of no significant impact under NEPA was unlawful, and in their recent motion charge that the memos must be included in the court's review.
The groups highlight the NEPA issues as well as claims that the rule’s “last minute” exemptions for certain types of waters and other restrictions of the CWA’s scope were unlawful.
“These topics are discussed -- in detail, with probing analysis and comprehensive discussions of supporting evidence not found anywhere else in the record -- in eight high-level Corps memoranda that the Agencies have improperly excluded from the certified index of the administrative record in this case,” the motion says.
The groups say even if the court finds the memos were properly excluded from the record, it should grant a motion to supplement the record to include the documents as they will “facilitate the Court’s review of the underlying agency decisions and because they reveal that the Agencies failed to consider important factors relevant to their decision.”
They cite a 1971 Supreme Court ruling in Citizens to Pres. Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, arguing that judicial review under the APA is based upon a review of the “whole record” developed during the agency’s decisionmaking process.
The scope of the record, the motion says, must be broad enough to include “everything that was before the agency pertaining to the merits of its decision” citing a 1993 9th Circuit ruling in Portland Audubon Soc’y. v. Endangered Species Comm., and adds that even documents that do not support the agency’s decision must be included.
The motion to complete the administrative record was filed by Waterkeeper Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Humboldt Baykeeper, Turtle Island Restoration Network, Upper Missouri Waterkeeper, Snake River Waterkeeper, Monterey Coastkeeper and Russian Riverkeeper.
Additional Motions
Two separate but similar motions were filed the same day in the litigation by NAM and by the group of 28 states, including North Dakota, Colorado, Arizona, Missouri, Alaska, Idaho, Nebraska, Montana, Nevada, South Dakota, New Mexico, Wyoming, Arkansas, Georgia, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, Indiana, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Louisiana, Texas and Mississippi.
The states' motion says the Corps memos on the rule -- which some critics call the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule -- “contain statements critical of the Agencies’ approach in developing the WOTUS Rule, but that is no
reason to omit them from the administrative record. On the contrary, it is precisely why they must be included -- so this Court can properly review the WOTUS Rule based on the 'whole record.'”
NAM and the other business groups in their motion say that DOJ is likely to claim the memos are internal deliberative documents exempt from disclosure in the suit, and that including the memos in the suit would “chill” the rulemaking process. But the groups say the memos have already been made public, given that lawmakers on the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform released them last year.
“With respect to certain internal memoranda identified in the States’ motion, the federal respondents are likely to invoke the predecisional deliberative process privilege, without which they will say that robust internal agency discussion would be chilled. Whatever the force to that argument in other cases, it has no application here because the memoranda are already in the public record,” the motion says.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/critics-epa-cwa-rule-urge-6th-circuit-weigh-corps-internal-memos
-
New York Faces Tough Odds In Its Goal To Become 'Zero Waste' By 2030
Jul 11, 2016 | Crain's New York Business (In Plastics News)
By Emily Bobrow
New York City generates more than 44 million pounds of residential and commercial waste every day, almost a ton per person per year. Only a third of it is recycled, composted or burned to generate energy. The rest is dumped, some as far away as Kentucky. Mayor Bill de Blasio wants to radically change that equation.
Last year, he pledged that New York would send “zero waste” to landfills by 2030. “This is the way of the future if we’re going to save our Earth,” he said.
But anyone who knows anything about waste in New York seems to agree: Keeping it all out of landfills by 2030 isn’t just ambitious, it’s pretty much impossible.
“This zero-waste idea seems to be without any real plan behind it,” said Kendall Christiansen, manager of the New York City chapter of the National Waste & Recycling Association. “Other cities, like Austin and Calgary, went through a very deliberate process of developing a detailed set of goals and plans to achieve them. New York’s plan has been pretty loose, without much public discussion, just rhetoric.”
The job of coordinating this moon shot appears to fall to the city’s Department of Sanitation. Commissioner Kathryn Garcia recently sat in her wood-paneled office to talk about how she planned to eliminate the city’s residential waste.
“We’re focusing on our low-diversion areas,” she said. “Brownstone Brooklyn, there’s not much more I can get out of them. To bring the overall city rate up, you need to be in areas where the environmental message may not be resonating.”
Since Staten Island’s Fresh Kills dump was closed in 2001, fewer places want to take New York’s trash, and they are asking more money for it. In May, the Seneca Meadows landfill, 270 miles northwest of the city, backed out of a $3.3 billion, 20-year deal to take New York’s waste.
The problem for Garcia is that New Yorkers have few incentives to throw away less. At home and at work, it is often easier and cheaper to put things in black bags rather than in colored bins down the hall. “Unless it’s convenient, people won’t do it,” she said. Getting to zero, Garcia explained, will demand a complete rethink of how the city handles its trash.
Excess capacity
To understand the scale of the problem, visit the 11-acre Sunset Park Material Recovery Facility on the Brooklyn waterfront, where nearly all of the recyclables collected by Sanitation Department workers end up. In a space the size of an airplane hangar, barges and trucks dump plastic bags filled with recyclables into enormous piles. A fragrant mix of brine, rot, old milk and stale beer hangs in the air, and swallows flit around the building’s beams. The $120 million facility opened in late 2013. Most of it was paid for by taxpayers, but $55 million came from Sims Municipal Recycling, the local arm of a global scrap-metal and electronics recycling firm, which won a 20-year contract to process and market the metal, glass, plastic and some of the paper collected from homes, public schools and government buildings.
Optical sorters, drum magnets and massive machines called ballistics separators make recycling at Sunset Park a mostly automated process. “From a manpower standpoint, it’s extremely efficient,” said Tom Outerbridge, who runs the plant and joined Sims in 2003 after a decade of recycling consulting and some years with the Sanitation Department. “Most facilities have one or two optical sorters. We have 16.”
Recycling is a capital-intensive, high-volume, low-margin business. Sims’ long contract created an incentive to invest in top-of-the-line equipment. That should make recycling more cost-effective for the city. The Sanitation Department pays Sims around $75 to process a ton of recycling, but $90 to $100 to dump a ton of waste in a landfill or burn it in a waste-to-energy plant. When the market for recycled commodities is good, the city shares in the profits.
Outerbridge has a front-row perspective on just how haphazardly New Yorkers recycle. Gazing at a new hoard of dumped material, Outerbridge grimaced at an unrecyclable wicker basket. His eyes then wandered to glass jars filled with baby food. “We would’ve preferred they empty that out,” he said, “but what are you going to do?” There is no market for mixed glass — most recyclers either sell it at a loss or dump it in landfills — but clear glass, if separated out, fetches more than $30 a ton.
New York City may have the largest curbside recycling program in North America, collecting around 500,000 tons of recyclable material a year, but it should be much more, Outerbridge said. Twenty-seven years after the city required residents to sort their trash, they do so at the anemic rate of 16 percent. Half the recyclable waste is going to landfills.
Recycling rates for businesses average around 19 percent. But because private-sector haulers self-report their data, it is hard to know just how much is kept out of landfills. The lesson for Outerbridge is simple: “Without public participation, you can build the fanciest recycling plant in the world and you don’t have anything.”
High cost of collection
Many American cities treat waste as a utility and charge people for what they generate. In Los Angeles and San Antonio, residents pay based on the size of their homes. In San Francisco and Seattle they are charged for the trash they set out, while collection of recyclables is either cheaper or free. In Houston, households receive one free trash bin but must pay for any additional bins or bags.
New York is different. The city uses general tax revenue to cover residential and public waste collection, so residents have few incentives to recycle or produce less waste. New York also has the nation’s highest collection costs at $449 per ton for the Sanitation Department. In Washington, D.C., it’s $212.
Anxiety over climate change may motivate Upper East Siders, who recycle nearly a quarter of their waste. But something else is needed in poor areas such as Mott Haven and Port Morris in the Bronx, where diversion rates hover below 6 percent.
The city is considering a collection charge. “When something costs you money, you pay more attention,” Garcia said in her office. She pointed to the way water usage dropped when the city stopped charging flat rates for water and installed meters. “In the 1980s, New York City used 1.5 billion gallons of water. It’s under 1 billion gallons today and we have a million more people.”
Imposing a trash charge will be difficult. Mayor Michael Bloomberg liked the idea, but the City Council saw it as a new tax.
New York also has more apartment buildings than any other U.S. city, making it especially hard to penalize and reward individual behavior.
“Recycling is all about creating a social norm,” said Chaz Miller, director of national policy at the National Waste & Recycling Association. “This is easy to do when everyone sees what their neighbors are putting out on the curbside. In multifamily homes, it’s much harder.”
The tight spaces in which New Yorkers live make it difficult to store garbage in separate bins. The city aims to solve this problem by letting residents put all their recyclables in a single bag by 2020. Single-stream recycling would also let the Sanitation Department send out one recycling truck per route instead of two.
The city’s recycling challenges are particularly acute in public housing, where one in 10 New Yorkers lives.“When I got here, a chief said, ‘They pretend to recycle and I pretend to collect it,’ ” Garcia said of New York City Housing Authority buildings. The de Blasio administration has begun introducing recycling to these developments, but it is not easy. Most have no indoor space for bins, so the only place to toss cans and paper is outside.
At the Gowanus Houses in Brooklyn, Isabella Hernandez said the new bins in the courtyard are easy to ignore. “Who wants to go downstairs to go recycle when it’s so far away?” she said.
Hazel Duke, an 84-year-old resident of the Gowanus Houses, said she sorts her trash despite the inconvenience. “It’s a hassle for me because I can hardly walk.”
Another Gowanus Houses resident, who calls herself “Miss Dee,” is happy to recycle, just not quite in the way the city hopes. In her fifth-floor apartment she collects empty plastic bottles and soda cans on her dining table. When she has enough to fill a cart, she heads to the redemption center around the corner. “Last time I got $9,” she said.
New York’s litter-fighting bottle bill offers a nickel for each redeemed bottle or can. Private redemption centers sell the empties back to beverage distributors at a small profit. But New Yorkers who try to live off these fees often collect plastic bottles and aluminum cans from bags of already-sorted recyclables, reducing the value of what arrives at facilities like Sims’.
“Our aluminum bales in New York are worth less than in New Jersey, where there is no bottle bill,” Outerbridge said. “We’re talking roughly 12 to 15 cents a pound, which adds up when you’re selling thousands of tons.” Scavengers take about 70,000 tons of material from recycling bins a year, a city study found. That means the only real incentive many New Yorkers have to recycle comes at a cost to the city.
The city is introducing new recycling rules that could simplify things for businesses, but they will likely raise trucking costs further. Starting in August, every business must sort paper, cardboard, metal, glass and plastic into either two streams or one.
“They should’ve talked to us first,” said Tom Toscano of Mr. T Carting, a hauler that runs its own $2 million facility for recycling paper and cardboard. His customers don’t pay for cardboard pickup, but this will change if they throw all their recyclables into one bag. “I’ll have all these extra costs in breaking that bag open, putting materials through different conveyor belts,” he said. “I have to charge customers for that. I’m not making that money back.”
Don’t mention glass to him. “There’s no market for it. It gets in conveyors, it gets in sorters, it jams up materials,” said Toscano.
Carters are concerned by a proposal City Hall is reviewing to divide New York into zones and have private haulers compete for longer contracts, with clear diversion targets.
“Without certainty of business, haulers will never do the work necessary to reach zero waste,” said Greg Good, who is overseeing Los Angeles’ move to a franchise zoning system. The bids L.A. received show private haulers will adhere to higher standards and invest in equipment to keep waste out of landfills if they have the right incentives, he said.
What may be a tricky job for residents is about to become a costly undertaking for businesses. Starting this summer, the city is also requiring large food manufacturers, arenas, stadiums and restaurants in hotels with at least 150 rooms to keep their organic waste out of trash bins.
Samuel Linder, the Swiss-born chef of the Peninsula New York hotel, said he is startled by how wasteful New York is. The problem begins before the food arrives in his kitchen. “Literally two boxes of soft-shell crabs will give you half a container of waste.” In Switzerland, food is delivered in washable, reusable crates. “That doesn’t exist here.” The city’s failure to reduce troublesome materials, notably polystyrene foam and plastic bags (“The most time-consuming contaminant,” said Outerbridge), has not helped.
Linder is eager to green his kitchen, but said he was surprised by the cost. He cites the extra bins, separate pickups for organics and recyclables, and the time spent training staff. The hotel has bought a stainless steel machine called an ORCA that in one hour breaks down 25 pounds of food waste into effluent that’s flushed down the drain (creating a sewage treatment headache of its own). “It’s a lot more work for us,” he said.
When Massachusetts banned the dumping of commercial food waste in 2014, the state paid for new infrastructure, a renewable-energy tax credit and research on the technologies available to process organics on-site.
New York City will levy fines on businesses that don’t comply with its new organics policy, but offers no incentives. That may not be enough to meet de Blasio’s zero-waste goal.
“It’s unrealistic to think you’re going to have high rates by government fiat,” and New Yorkers will need incentives to make sorting their trash worth their while, said Velocci of Avid Waste.
Looking over his half-empty recycling facility, Sims’ Outerbridge agrees that big goals still have value, especially with the city’s population expected to reach 8.8 million in 2030. The mayor’s priorities are in the right place, he said, “but when you start digging into it, how do we get there?”
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20160711/NEWS/160719986/new-york-faces-tough-odds-in-its-goal-to-become-zero-waste-by-2030
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested