Preview Newsletter
AM ACC Clips Report 04/08
-
EPA Issues Final Rule on Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products
Aug 4, 2016 | Lexology
By Jacob S. Wharton
On Wednesday, July 27, 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) released a prepublication version of its final rule on Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products. The authority for the rule comes from the Toxic Substance Control Act (“TSCA”). -
EPA Announces Final Formaldehyde Rule
Aug 3, 2016 | Manufacturing.net
By Andy Szal
Federal regulators recently unveiled a final rule designed to reduce consumer exposure to formaldehyde emissions from wood products. -
Miles For Meso Registration Opens
Aug 3, 2016 | The Edwardsville Intelligencer
As the recent passage of major reform to the federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) marked a milestone for the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) in its journey to have asbestos banned in the United States, the race to the finish line continues with the 8th Annual Alton Miles for Meso 5K Race & 3K Fun Run/Walk to benefit the ADAO. -
California Unveils Clean Power Plan Compliance Strategy
Aug 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
California's draft strategy to comply with the federal carbon dioxide limits on power plants could spur other states to action despite the rule being stayed, California Air Resources Board Chairman Mary D. Nichols said. -
NYC Mayor Signs Bill to Update Energy Code
Aug 3, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By John Herzfeld
Legislation to bring the New York City energy code into conformity with the state code and add stricter provisions applicable only to the city was signed Aug. 3 by Mayor Bill de Blasio (D). -
Oil Groups Warn Against New EPA Methane Push
Aug 3, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A coalition of national and state oil groups is warning federal regulators against moving too quickly on methane leak standards for existing drilling sites. -
Court Allows 40 States, Groups To Intervene In MATS Challenge
Aug 3, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
Some 40 states, power companies, environmental groups and other parties got the go-ahead today to weigh in on U.S. EPA's behalf in legal challenges to the agency's "supplemental finding" for its power plant mercury regulations. -
Energy Groups Cite Data Collection Challenges In Call For Narrow EPA ICR
Aug 4, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Energy groups are calling on EPA to narrow the scope of its draft information collection (ICR) seeking data that could inform first-time methane emission limits on existing oil and gas operations, saying that the ICR's current scope is too broad and makes it difficult to identify cost-effective methane controls and other important information. -
The Next Shale Boom Will Be Built on Sand
Aug 4, 2016 | Bloomberg
By David Wethe
Amid the gloom and doom that’s set in all along America’s shale fields these past two years, there has been one small, but consistent, bright spot. Sand, it turns out, is a much greater tool in hydraulic fracking than drillers had understood it to be. -
U.S. Frackers Surprise Themselves As Tweaks Keep Adding Barrels
Aug 3, 2016 | Reuters
By Terry Wade And Ernest Scheyder
Nimble U.S. shale oil producers continue to show an uncanny ability to squeeze more and more crude from new wells, allowing them to do more with less as they try to weather another dip in oil prices to $40 a barrel. -
Trump Rattles Industry With Fracking Position
Aug 3, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is stirring unease in the oil and natural gas industry with his remarks about hydraulic fracturing. -
Refinery Fostered Weak Safety, Chemical Safety Board Says
Aug 3, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jeff Johnson
The Tesoro refinery in Martinez, Calif., for years ignored safety problems and fostered a weak safety culture, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board says in a report released on Aug. 2. -
Crude-Oil Train Movements Down 45% This Year
Aug 4, 2016 | Philly.com
By Andrew Maykuth
The U.S. Energy Department on Wednesday confirmed what many trainspotters have observed: Movements of crude oil by rail within the United States for the first five months this year are down 45 percent from last year. -
(ACC Mentioned) Plastics And Environment
Aug 29, 2016 | Plaseurope
The environmental cost of using plastics in consumer goods and packaging is nearly four times less than it would be if plastics were replaced with alternative materials, according to a study commissioned by the American Chemistry Council -
Ozone Implementation Proposal Sent for White House Review
Aug 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency submitted its proposed implementation rule for the 2015 ozone standards to the White House Office and Management and Budget for review, indicating the agency is on track to release the proposal this fall.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
EPA Issues Final Rule on Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products
Aug 4, 2016 | Lexology
By Jacob S. Wharton
On Wednesday, July 27, 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) released a prepublication version of its final rule on Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products. The authority for the rule comes from the Toxic Substance Control Act (“TSCA”). The EPA’s rule relies heavily on the formaldehyde emissions rules set by the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) as part of California’s Phase 2 formaldehyde emissions standards, and the EPA’s emissions standards are identical to those set by CARB.
Who will be affected by the new rule?
This rule will affect manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers of products containing composite wood, which is defined as hardwood plywood, medium-density fiberboard, and particleboard.
What is required under the new rule?
The EPA’s final rule sets out detailed record-keeping, labeling, and testing requirements for composite wood and products containing composite wood. Below are three major areas of concern that manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers of finished goods containing composite wood should be aware of as they prepare to comply with the national formaldehyde emissions standards.
Record-keeping and labeling: One year after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, manufacturers of finished goods containing composite wood (called “fabricators” under the CARB and EPA rules), importers, distributors, and retailers will have to comply with new record keeping and labeling requirements.
With regard to record keeping, manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers will be required to “take reasonable precautions” to ensure the products they sell comply with the emissions standards. As part of taking “reasonable precautions,” a company must obtain documentation, such as bills of lading or invoices, from suppliers of composite wood products that includes a written statement that the products are either compliant with formaldehyde emissions standards or were produced prior to the rule taking effect. Companies must keep this documentation for three years – a year longer than required by CARB.
Importers face an additional record keeping requirement. If requested to do so by the EPA, importers must provide records identifying either (1) the composite wood panel producer and the date the composite wood products were produced or (2) the supplier of the composite wood products (if different than the producer), component parts, or finished goods and the date of purchase. Importers will have to provide this information to the EPA within 30 days of a request, and documentation must be kept for three years.
Finally, manufacturers of finished goods containing composite wood products must label each finished good or box or bundle containing finished goods with the manufacturer’s name, the date the good was produced, and a statement that the finished goods are compliant with the TSCA. If a manufacturer chooses to label the box or bundle of goods, importers, distributors, and retailers of those goods must keep the label from the box or bundle and keep track of which products are identified with the label. Importers, distributors, and retailers must make the label information available to potential customers if requested.
Importer Certification: Two years after the final rule is published in the Federal Register, importers will be required to certify that imported composite wood or products containing composite wood comply with the TSCA.
Testing requirements: Beginning seven years after the publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, manufacturers of laminated products will have to comply with third-party testing and certification requirements that apply to manufacturers of hardwood plywood panels. The EPA defines “laminated product” to include only those products with a wood or woody grass veneer, so the testing requirements will not apply to synthetic laminates such as plastic or vinyl. The EPA’s decision to require third party testing and certification by manufacturers of laminated products is a significant departure from the CARB rules.
Fortunately, there are a number of ways companies can lessen or avoid the burdens of a costly testing program. First, the EPA exempts two types of laminated products from the definition of “hardwood plywood”: (1) Laminated products made by attaching a wood or woody grass veneer with a phenol-formaldehyde resin to a compliant platform; and (2) laminated products made by attaching a wood or woody grass veneer with a resin formulated with no-added formaldehyde (“NAF”) as part of the resin cross-linking structure to a compliant platform. Accordingly, a manufacturer using NAF or phenol-formaldehyde resins will not be subject to the testing and certification requirements. Instead, these manufacturers must keep records showing their products are made with the appropriate resins and a compliant platform. Notably, the EPA has left the door open for interested parties to petition for additional exemptions.
Second, manufacturers of laminated products can apply for an exemption from the testing and certification requirements based on use of ultra low-emitting formaldehyde (“ULEF”) resins. To qualify for a ULEF exemption from the testing and certification requirements, a company must undergo a limited (6 months) testing program to show its product complies with emissions limits. Additional limited testing is required to renew the exemption every two years.
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=87ee41eb-fe95-47be-b976-247f3115ff2e
-
EPA Announces Final Formaldehyde Rule
Aug 3, 2016 | Manufacturing.net
By Andy Szal
Federal regulators recently unveiled a final rule designed to reduce consumer exposure to formaldehyde emissions from wood products.
The Environmental Protection Agency said that the new standard will satisfy a 2010 law passed by Congress and conform to California's stricter environmental standards for the chemical.
“We are carrying out important measures laid out by Congress to protect the public from harmful exposure of this widely used chemical found in homes and workplaces," said Jim Jones, assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
Formaldehyde is commonly used as an adhesive in wood products, but it is also considered a carcinogen and can cause respiratory problems and eye, nose and throat irritation. The chemical was at the center of the 2015 scandal over Chinese-made laminate flooring sold by Lumber Liquidators.
The final EPA rule will require products containing certain wood materials — including hardwood plywood, medium-density fiberboard and particleboard — to be labeled as "TSCA Title VI compliant." It will also establish chemical testing requirements and qualifications for third-party certification.
he standard will take effect one year after its publication date, but the rule includes certain exemptions for companies that use low levels of the chemical. Industry groups, however, stressed that those caveats require their own strict testing regimen.
“It’s not a ‘get out of jail free’ pass,” Bill Perdue of the American Home Furnishings Alliance told The New York Times.
https://www.manufacturing.net/news/2016/08/epa-announces-final-formaldehyde-rule
-
Miles For Meso Registration Opens
Aug 3, 2016 | The Edwardsville Intelligencer
As the recent passage of major reform to the federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) marked a milestone for the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) in its journey to have asbestos banned in the United States, the race to the finish line continues with the 8th Annual Alton Miles for Meso 5K Race & 3K Fun Run/Walk to benefit the ADAO. Registration is now open for the event scheduled for Saturday, Sept. 24, which coincides with National Mesothelioma Awareness Day on Sept. 26.
Alton Miles for Meso is an initiative of the Simmons Mesothelioma Foundation that was established in 2009 to raise funds and awareness for mesothelioma, a rare cancer caused by asbestos exposure. Simmons Hanly Conroy, a leading national law firm that represents mesothelioma patients and their families, and Metro Tri Club of Edwardsville, Ill., host and produce the event.
In June 2016, President Obama signed into law The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act that reforms the TSCA and empowers the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate or ban substances like asbestos.
“We are heartened by this major move forward in protecting people from the negative health effects of asbestos, but there is more work to be done,” said Linda Reinstein, co-founder of ADAO along with Doug Larkin, who both have lost loved ones to mesothelioma as a result of asbestos exposure. “We look forward to another record-breaking Alton Miles for Meso in 2016 to help make sure victims of asbestos-related diseases have a united voice in continuing to raise public awareness of the dangers of asbestos, which is still prevalent and legal to use in the United States today.”
Todd Adamitis, chief operating officer of Simmons Hanly Conroy, added, “We are thrilled to once again present this wonderful event that brings our community together to support the victims of asbestos-related diseases and their families. We also are grateful to all of the participants and attendees, as well as our colleagues and friends who donate their time each year to help make this event a success.”
The Alton Miles for Meso 5K Race & 3K Fun Run will begin at 9 a.m. at the Simmons Hanly Conroy national headquarters, One Court Street, across from Marquette High School. Early registration costs $25 and ends Aug. 31. Regular registration costs $25 and will run from Sept. 1 to 19, followed by late registration up until the race day for the cost of $35. Online registration at www.milesformeso.org/register ends Sept. 22. Registration on-site the day of the race will begin at 7:30 a.m.
Registration also is now open through Sept. 2 for this year’s expanded Alton Miles for Meso Virtual Race that allows anyone in the country or the world to participate by purchasing race T-shirts, and on race day sharing photos of themselves wearing the shirts via social media and the hashtag #milesformeso. The race site will feature a jumbotron that will display the social media posts throughout the race to allow virtual participants to broadcast their support to runners, patients and their families in Alton in real time. Virtual Race registration costs $30 and includes the T-shirt and shipping fees.
Among the event’s other highlights will be a performance by Jordan Zevon, ADAO spokesman and son of Grammy-winning singer/songwriter Warren Zevon, who passed away from mesothelioma in 2003. Other planned activities and attractions include a kids’ game zone, a dog adoption event hosted by Hope Rescues, and a vendor fair with local businesses and charities.
The top five overall men and women 5K race finishers each will win trophies and cash prizes of $500, $250, $200, $100 and $50 in order of finish. In addition, the first, second and third place finishers in 5-year age groups will receive custom Miles for Meso medals, and the top fundraising team and individual will be recognized.
More than 1,000 people attended the 2015 Alton Miles for Meso 5K Race and 2K Fun Run, which raised more than $30,000. Miles for Meso races have taken place in other cities across the country from New York to Florida to Washington state and several locations in between. The Bruce A. Waite Miles for Meso 5K will take place in Ontario, Ohio, on the Sunday before the Alton race. Since 2009, the combined events have raised nearly $450,000 to benefit mesothelioma research and awareness.
http://www.theintelligencer.com/local_news/article_f0d1caf8-5997-11e6-9967-7b0a4c432c6f.html
-
California Unveils Clean Power Plan Compliance Strategy
Aug 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
California's draft strategy to comply with the federal carbon dioxide limits on power plants could spur other states to action despite the rule being stayed, California Air Resources Board Chairman Mary D. Nichols said.
California's draft strategy to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan, released Aug. 2, builds on the state's landmark greenhouse gas emissions cap-and-trade program as well as the state's mandatory greenhouse gas reporting rule, renewable portfolio standard and other climate and energy programs. California is readying its plan despite the U.S. Supreme Court's February decision to halt implementation of the EPA's carbon dioxide standards (RIN:2060-AR33) until the rule can be fully litigated.
California's decision to move forward with a compliance strategy demonstrates the state's confidence the rule will ultimately survive judicial scrutiny, Nichols said.
“The [Clean Power Plan] draft plan is intended to signal our belief that the Obama rule will ultimately be upheld and to reinforce our position in the D.C. Circuit litigation that it is achievable and to encourage other states to move forward with their own plans, either using ours as a guide or doing their own thing,” Nichols told Bloomberg BNA in an Aug. 3 e-mail.
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear argument over the Clean Power Plan beginning Sept. 27 (West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1363, letter filed 7/27/16).
First State to Issue Compliance Plan
California, the first state to release its compliance plan, is among the states that are supporting the Environmental Protection Agency rule. Releasing its plan could drive other states to continue their compliance work as well, environmental advocates said.
“California is yet again first out of the gate, this time with a pragmatic power sector emissions reduction plan that builds on proven state policies and offers key insights for other states looking to develop cost-effective solutions that fight climate change and benefit the economy and public health,” Derek Walker, the Environmental Defense Fund's associate vice president of global climate, told Bloomberg BNA Aug. 3.
The state's draft compliance plan is still months away from becoming final. Written comments are due Sept. 19. An initial public hearing is set for Sept. 22, in Sacramento, where CARB's governing body will hear again from the public. A final vote on the proposal is planned for next spring.
California Builds on Past Programs
In the works for over a year, California's strategy builds on programs already in place, particularly its greenhouse gas emissions trading program.
“The Proposed Plan is designed to comply with CPP requirements, while ensuring smooth operation of California's existing suite of climate programs, including the Cap-and-Trade Program,” the draft plan said.
The proposal relies on continuation of the California trading program past 2020. Pending litigation and the lack of legislation to extend the program, however, have created a cloud of uncertainty about the future of the program.
In a related draft rulemaking, CARB has proposed a statewide greenhouse gas emissions target to reduce emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The cap-and-trade proposal also includes new declining annual emissions caps of about 3 percent per year through 2030 for the 400 entities covered under the program and amendments to align the program with the Clean Power Plan.
Some lawmakers and industry groups question CARB's authority to extend the program.
Two-Year Compliance Strategy Outlined
Consistent with the Clean Power Plan, CARB's compliance strategy would switch to two-year compliance periods instead of the trading program's current three-year periods. Also, the proposal requires state reporting and recordkeeping requirements be aligned with the federal program.
In the plan, CARB and state energy agencies identified 249 units at 93 facilities that will be subject to the Clean Power Plan rule, once three units come online in 2016. All electrical generating units would fall under the cap-and-trade program, not just the facilities emitting more than 25,000 tons of carbon emissions currently covered under the existing program.
The draft plan also includes proposed emissions target values for the units beginning in 2021 through 2031, as required under the federal plan.
Another element of the proposed plan would change trading program rules requiring power plants covered by the Clean Power Plan to maintain compliance with terms of the federal program. The proposal includes a federally enforceable backstop program. Based on tradeable compliance instruments, the backstop would be triggered if affected electrical generating units exceed federal limits.
California is on track to achieve the EPA's emission reduction goals, based on CARB's data.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95088402&vname=dennotallissues&fn=95088402&jd=95088402
-
NYC Mayor Signs Bill to Update Energy Code
Aug 3, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By John Herzfeld
Legislation to bring the New York City energy code into conformity with the state code and add stricter provisions applicable only to the city was signed Aug. 3 by Mayor Bill de Blasio (D).
The changes are aimed at advancing the city's ambitious climate change mitigation goals. Buildings are important because they account for nearly three-quarters of its greenhouse gas emissions.
The revision is the latest bid by de Blasio to “hold buildings to the highest standards” under his “One City: Built to Last” sustainability plan, according to the city Buildings Department.
The local law (No. 2016/092), updating a city energy conservation code adopted in 2009 and last amended in 2014, modifies the city's construction codes with new performance standards. It takes effect Oct. 3.
The state code was updated in March to align it with the International Energy Conservation Code, under a federal Energy Department mandate.
It's projected to result in average annual energy savings of 8.5 percent for new commercial buildings and 18.5 percent for new one- and two-family homes and small apartment buildings, the department said.
The modifications in the city law will add another 5 percent average energy savings for some buildings, the city said.
“Buildings account for nearly three-quarters of New York's carbon emissions,” city Buildings Commissioner Rick D. Chandler said in a statement. “Green buildings will create a more sustainable city and reduce New Yorkers’ energy bills.”
Helps Meet Climate Goal
The new law “represents a significant step” toward the city's goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent from 2005 levels by 2050, said Laurie Kerr, policy director of the Urban Green Council, in a statement.
The changes were recommended by an advisory committee made up of representatives of real estate, design, construction, affordable housing and environmental groups.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95088398&vname=dennotallissues&fn=95088398&jd=95088398
-
Oil Groups Warn Against New EPA Methane Push
Aug 3, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A coalition of national and state oil groups is warning federal regulators against moving too quickly on methane leak standards for existing drilling sites.
In a filing with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the groups said the agency’s collection of data for a new methane rule “has all the signs of a rushed job,” officials with the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) said.
The coalition — along with the American Exploration and Production Council and 47 state oil and gas associations — filed comments on the EPA’s Information Collection Request (ICR) for a methane rule on Tuesday. On Wednesday, they announced they have formally requested the EPA reconsider its information request.
An ICR is the first step in the EPA’s rule-making process for methane leak rules at existing oil and gas sites. The agency this year finalized standards for new and modified drilling operations, and announced earlier this summer that regulations for existing sites would follow.
Both rules are part of an Obama administration effort to reduce American methane emissions by 40 percent to 45 percent, from 2012 levels, by 2025. Methane is the primary component of natural gas, and drillers have resisted the rules, saying they are cutting down on emissions on their own without regulations.
The IPAA was one of many trade groups to formally sue the EPA this week over the new source standards, as well.
“We found significant elements of the agency’s new regulatory scheme to be excessive, uneconomic, and threatening to the long-term production of oil and natural gas in the United States without corresponding environmental benefits,” IPAA executive vice president Lee Fuller said in a statement.
“After more than a year of trying to communicate industry’s concerns to the EPA on the economic burdens associated with this new rule, during an already economically challenging time for the industry, independent producers were compelled to pursue legal pathways since the final rule omits flexibility for smaller, independent companies.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/290322-oil-groups-warn-against-new-epa-methane-push
-
Court Allows 40 States, Groups To Intervene In MATS Challenge
Aug 3, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
Some 40 states, power companies, environmental groups and other parties got the go-ahead today to weigh in on U.S. EPA's behalf in legal challenges to the agency's "supplemental finding" for its power plant mercury regulations.
All had sought to intervene in motions filed in recent weeks; the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted their requests in a combined order issued this afternoon. The intervenors, many of whom participated in earlier litigation over the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, include the states of Washington, Iowa and Virginia; power producers Calpine Corp. and Exelon Corp.; the Environmental Defense Fund; the NAACP; and Washington, D.C.
All argue they would be hurt by any rollback of the standards, formally released in 2012. With 84 generating plants reliant on natural gas or geothermal energy, for example, Houston-based Calpine said it could be put at a disadvantage if it had to again compete with coal-fired plants operating without pollution controls required by the standards.
States and local governments have an interest in protecting their residents and fisheries from mercury emissions that often originate outside their borders, according to their motion; environmental and civil rights organizations made similar claims on behalf of their members.
EPA had published the supplemental finding in April in response to last year's Supreme Court ruling that the agency had not adequately considered compliance costs in making the original determination to regulate releases of mercury, arsenic and other hazardous pollutants from oil- and coal-fired power plants.
The finding reaffirmed that decision. Now challenging it are Murray Energy Corp., the Ohio-based coal giant; various affiliates of Southern Co., headquartered in Atlanta; and Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette (R) and 14 states (Greenwire, June 29). They plan to raise questions about the adequacy of EPA's cost-benefit analysis and other issues, according to recent filings.
In an analysis released last month, the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported that almost all coal-fired plants are now in compliance with the standards. Schuette had to bring his suit "on behalf of the people of Michigan" after Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, also a Republican, asked that the state be disassociated from the case on the grounds that more litigation served no purpose.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/08/03/stories/1060041168
-
Energy Groups Cite Data Collection Challenges In Call For Narrow EPA ICR
Aug 4, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Energy groups are calling on EPA to narrow the scope of its draft information collection (ICR) seeking data that could inform first-time methane emission limits on existing oil and gas operations, saying that the ICR's current scope is too broad and makes it difficult to identify cost-effective methane controls and other important information.
The ICR, which the agency took comment on through Aug. 2, is part of the agency's ongoing efforts to address air pollution concerns from the industry. EPA has finalized an update to its new source performance standards (NSPS) to set limits on the potent greenhouse gas methane from future industry operations but opted against such a rule for existing sources. Instead, the data collected by the ICR could help a future administration craft that regulation.
In comments, groups including the American Petroleum Institute (API), Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) and American Exploration and Production Council (AXPC) and others outline a host of concerns about the ICR's timing and scope.
Challenges with the ICR include identifying cost-effective methane controls given the diverse array of sizes and types of operations in the sector, and crafting the “remaining useful life” determination that the states will use in implementation plans should the agency craft a rulemaking under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. Section 111(d) applies to existing source of air pollution, section 111(b) applies to new sources of emissions.
In Aug. 2 comments, API says that if EPA plans to pursue a section 111(d) rule to cap methane from existing oil and gas operations, it should focus the ICR on the “targeted collection” of data that will inform a “remaining useful life” determination. The group says, “this focus will limit the resource demands of the ICR on various-sized companies and seek information from the existing source operations that are likely underrepresented.”
API recommends that the agency consider paring back and simplifying some of the data parameters and including more flexible reporting time frames for the draft ICR, saying that the “proposed scope and timelines of the draft ICR are aggressive and unrealistic for the amount of information the EPA is seeking.”
The group wants EPA to extend the time frame for reporting from 60 to 180 days for both phases of the two-part ICR process. API also says the agency should modify its approach to estimating the sample size for production facilities, which will lower the number of facilities subject to sampling; limit the scope of the request to facilities not already subject to EPA's 2012 and 2016 NSPS; allow for basin-wide reporting rather than by individual facilities; and adopt other measures aimed at reducing industry burdens and informing controls.
Potential Controls
IPAA and AXPC in their joint Aug. 2 comments urge the agency to take a host of steps to better understand the complexity and diversity of the sector, saying the agency must take into account a mixture of both regulatory and voluntary controls that will be adopted by the time EPA develops an existing source rule.
Those steps include making better use of existing agency and state resources for data, which EPA could use to compile an information grid that would identify areas showing key information on oil production and natural gas production, marginal wells and large producing wells, heavy and light oil, sour crude and sweet crude and enhanced oil recovery operations.
Additionally, the groups say EPA should ensure it collects information that captures a range of months throughout the year to account for seasonal differences in operations, and target more economic information that could be used to craft subcategories of regulated facilities under a potential existing source rule.
The groups say that sub-categorization is necessary to distinguish different types of industry operations under section 111 of the air law to account for the wide range of facilities.
They add that, “EPA needs to fully understand the economics of existing operations of the industry because -- unlike new sources -- existing sources must operate in the situations where they are.”
Yet the groups ague that the draft ICR solicits very little economic information, and that “we are certain that EPA cannot fully assess the implications of existing source regulations in the absence of any economic information.”
The comments say that EPA cannot properly consider a best system of emission reduction analysis or the requirements to determine the remaining useful life of facilities under section 111(d) without including more economic-specific questions in the draft ICR. “EPA’s information requests appear driven to ask questions only about issues that EPA has hypothesized are significant based on the regulations it produced in” the previous NSPS rules, and “anecdotally understand to be important,” the comments say. “Wholly absent from the draft ICRs are questions addressed to the operating costs of these wells.”
IPAA and AXPC say in the comments that “by the time this regulatory initiative is implemented, the universe of American oil and natural gas wells that are neither subject to [the NSPS] nor marginal wells will be small and rapidly moving to marginal well status.”
Agency's Authority
In Aug. 2 comments, the GPA Midstream Association -- formerly known as the Gas Processors Association -- is raising concerns about the agency's authority to proceed with the draft ICR, suggesting that EPA lacks the authority under section 111(d) to target methane emissions because it regulates oil and gas sources through section 112 covering national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants.
“The law is unambiguous: Congress prohibited EPA from employing Section 111(d) to regulate 'any air pollutant' that is 'emitted from a source category which is regulated under section [112],'” the comments say, citing the 2011 Supreme Court ruling in American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut.
Moreover, the group that EPA's NSPS under section 111(b) of the air law was not properly issued and therefore does not meet the “explicit statutory prerequisite” for a section 111(d) rule.
“Although EPA recently issued Section 111(b) standards for methane emitted from new oil and natural gas facilities under the June 3 NSPS, it did so without first finding source- and pollutant-specific endangerment, and so EPA has not properly issued the Section 111(b) standards that must precede Section 111(d) standards,” the comment say.
The group reiterates industry's argument that the agency must first issue a sector-specific endangerment finding for methane.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/energy-groups-cite-data-collection-challenges-call-narrow-epa-icr
-
The Next Shale Boom Will Be Built on Sand
Aug 4, 2016 | Bloomberg
By David Wethe
Amid the gloom and doom that’s set in all along America’s shale fields these past two years, there has been one small, but consistent, bright spot. Sand, it turns out, is a much greater tool in hydraulic fracking than drillers had understood it to be. Time and again, they’ve found that the more grit they pour into horizontal wells -- seemingly regardless of how extreme the amounts have become -- the more oil comes seeping out.
The message from drillers is “more, more, more sand,” said Sean Meakim, an oil-services analyst at JPMorgan Chase & Co. “All of the numbers are going up and they’re going up dramatically.”
On a per-well basis, sand use has doubled since 2011, climbing to nearly 8 million pounds, according to consulting firm IHS Inc. It’s this growth that’s sent the stock prices of the country’s four publicly traded sand miners surging more than 90 percent this year. True, overall sand usage in the fracking industry is still way down from the 2014 peak -- more than three-quarters of America’s drilling rigs, after all, have been idled since oil prices collapsed -- but the per-well increases have analysts and investors betting that the sand industry will boom again as soon as fracking activity starts to pick up even a little bit.
That moment may seem far off right now as crude prices careen again -- they’re down 20 percent since briefly touching $51 a barrel in early June -- but oil-service giants Schlumberger Ltd. and Halliburton Co. have both seen enough positive signs on the ground to declare in recent weeks that the industry has bottomed out. And if prices were to resume their rebound and just manage to climb above $60 a barrel, some 40 percent below pre-crash levels, analysts at Jefferies Group and Bloomberg Intelligence predict that total sand demand will soar past 2014’s record 64 million tons in as little as two years.
Sand is by no means new to the oil industry but it’s taken on an importance in fracking that it never had in traditional vertical-well drilling. Because shale rock is so dense, drillers rely on large quantities of both sand and water to tease the oil out. The water is blasted into the well at high pressure to create tens of thousands of tiny cracks in the rock. The sand then keeps the cracks open, elongates them and makes them more jagged. Increase the amount of sand, fracking outfits have found, and you increase the amount of fractures that stay open.
Another thing they’ve discovered during the downturn is that the extra money they had been shelling out for white sand shipped in from Wisconsin and Minnesota, instead of the brown sand found in the Southwest, may not have been worth it. While white sand is stronger, brown sand -- which can run as much as 25 percent cheaper at about $60 a ton -- has proved to be equally capable of maintaining cracks open.
Brown Sand
This is why sand mines in Texas and Arkansas have been a lot busier of late than those up north. U.S. Silica Holdings Inc., the largest publicly traded frack-sand miner in the country, estimates that brown sand now accounts for more than 40 percent of the market, up from 16 percent in 2014. Two weeks ago, the company said it was buying NBR Sand, a brown-sand miner not far from Texas’s main oilfields, for $210 million with an eye to more than double output there to 2 million tons a year.
U.S. Silica’s shares have nearly doubled this year, while Fairmount Santrol Holdings Inc. tripled. Hi-Crush Partners LP rose 105 percent and Emerge Energy Services LP climbed 92 percent. In comparison, oil exploration and production companies in the S&P 500 rose 14 percent, while those in a broad oil-services index are little changed.
“People are uber uber bullish on sand,” said Matthew Johnston, an oil-services analyst at Nomura Securities. “I get it. I understand where all the euphoria is coming from.”
-
U.S. Frackers Surprise Themselves As Tweaks Keep Adding Barrels
Aug 3, 2016 | Reuters
By Terry Wade And Ernest Scheyder
Nimble U.S. shale oil producers continue to show an uncanny ability to squeeze more and more crude from new wells, allowing them to do more with less as they try to weather another dip in oil prices to $40 a barrel.
Comments from Noble Energy, Devon Energy and Occidental Petroleum on Wednesday were significant because only six months ago many analysts were fretting that shale producers had hit a wall after slashing costs and lifting well output by as much as 50 percent since the steepest price crash in a generation started in mid-2014.
Now, while acknowledging that most oilfield services costs cannot fall further, these companies say they are still seeing output gains from improved well designs and fracking techniques.
The rising well output means they can produce more oil with each dollar spent. This could help them survive the latest slump in oil prices back to multi-year lows after a partial recovery brought crude back up to about $50 a barrel.
"It's a bit surprising to me how we continue to still see improvements," Noble Energy Chief Executive Dave Stover said of operations in Colorado, where second-quarter productivity gains were 4 percent.
"My feeling is we're not at the end of that game yet," he said on its second-quarter results call.
Initially, Noble expected to get 390,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day (boe/d) this year on spending of $1.5 billion. Now it expects to spend less and produce 415,000 boe/d.
Part of the productivity gains come with added costs. Lately the company has experimented with fracking wells using 3,000 pounds of sand per foot, several orders of magnitude greater than frack jobs a decade ago. Companies have also been fracking even more parts of rock around a wellbore, boosting output.
At Occidental, Chief Executive Vicki Hollub said 2016 production would now be at the high end of its forecast for a 4 to 6 percent increase from 2015 levels of 652,000 boe/d - without raising budgeted spending of $3 billion.
She cited technological improvements developed internally, not cheaper contracts from Halliburton Co, Schlumberger NV, and other oilfield service providers.
"It is important to note that most of our cost reductions are due to our own efficiency gains, not service company unit cost reductions," Hollub said on a conference call.
Oxy, the fourth-largest U.S.-based oil producer, has cut its cost to produce a barrel of oil in part by linking executive compensation to it, Hollub said.
A QUICKENING PACE
The pace of innovation is increasing. Pioneer Natural Resources said it was introducing its third generation of well completion techniques, called version 3.0, using even more sand and water than the super-sized volumes introduced as version 2.0 earlier in the price crash to pull more oil out of rock.
Wells fracked using version 2.0 have produced about 2,000 barrels per day in their early days, double the production of earlier wells.
Devon Energy Corp has cut costs to drill and complete new wells by 40 percent and plans to cut $1 billion in costs this year, Chief Executive Dave Hager said on Wednesday.
Roughly half the lower well costs are due to internal technology and efficiency gains, he said, with the rest due to renegotiated contracted with service providers.
"We believe a lot of the wins still left to get are just through attention to detail and through designing changes and through managing our business even better than we have in the past," Hager said. (Reporting By Terry Wade and Ernest Scheyder; Editing by David Gregorio)
http://www.reuters.com/article/usa-fracking-idUSL1N1AK14N
-
Trump Rattles Industry With Fracking Position
Aug 3, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is stirring unease in the oil and natural gas industry with his remarks about hydraulic fracturing.
Trump supports fracking but says towns and states should be allowed to ban the drilling practice. That position is at odds with industry groups and congressional Republicans, who say the practice is safe and should be permitted nationwide.
Oil industry representatives remain behind Trump, arguing he would be better for energy development than Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, but his remarks about fracking have raised eyebrows.
“It does show that although there’s all this talk about being a businessman, there is a lot of nuance when you’re talking about an industry that he’s not familiar with,” said one lobbyist who requested anonymity to speak freely about the Republican nominee.
“I think that there is an education process that the candidate still needs to understand.”
Trump’s comments on fracking came in an interview with the Denver television station KUSA.
“I’m in favor of fracking, but I think that voters should have a big say in it,” Trump said in the interview. “I mean, there’s some areas, maybe, they don’t want to have fracking. And I think if the voters are voting for it, that’s up to them.”
He said the country needs fracking, “but if a municipality or a state wants to ban fracking, I can understand that.”
An oil refining industry executive who also requested anonymity to talk about Trump said the comments were concerning.
“He said states and municipalities,” the executive noted. “That’s a big leap, and I’m sure he doesn’t appreciate the big leap he just took.”
“The hope from the industry perspective is that if [Trump] gets elected, he would surround himself with detailed-oriented folks, and we’d be able to at least work with them,” the refining official added.
Trump’s position on fracking fits in with his broader election message, where he has often advocated moving power away from Washington. In the controversy over transgender bathroom laws, for instance, he has called for letting local communities and states make the decision.
“The oil industry probably doesn’t need to be afraid that a Trump administration would tackle fracking in a way that severely restricted production,” said Kevin Book, an analyst and managing partner at ClearView Energy Partners.
“Is he pro- or anti-oil? He’s pro-oil. He’s said as much,” he said. “But he’s not clearly going to support the oil industry in all of its requests.”
Opponents of fracking say the practice — which involves using highly pressurized liquid to unlock oil and gas from rock — is dangerous and can pollute groundwater, soil and air. While those advocates have had little success outlawing the practice on the federal or state level, they have had success in passing bans on the local level. New York has even banned the practice statewide.
Industry representatives see local fracking bans, and political attempts to encourage them, as a major threat to the country’s growing energy production.
“Banning fracking means stripping American citizens of their personal property rights,” said Steve Everley, spokesman for North Texans for Natural Gas, an industry-backed group that advocates various gas-friendly policies, including fighting local fracking bans.
“There's a reason why these bans have resulted in costly lawsuits, and unfortunately it's local taxpayers who are stuck with the bill.”
Experts at the state level should be the ones to regulate the drilling practice, the industry officials say.
“Developing oil and gas resources in Colorado can be a complex issue that doesn’t lend itself well to sound bites,” Dan Haley, president of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, said in a statement after Trump’s interview aired.
“In Colorado, the state Supreme Court has declared that local governments cannot ban fracking. Instead, the industry is regulated by the state under the most rigorous rules in the country.”
Even Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D), who has endorsed Clinton, opposes local bans on fracking.
“I don’t think he understands, completely, the issue,” Hickenlooper told The Denver Post after Trump’s comments. “But that’s not unusual for him.”
Clinton also wants local communities to be able to ban fracking. But for the most part, the question of local control is handled by state governments and is not something the federal government can dictate.
Trump has expressed strong support for fossil fuels. He used a May speech in North Dakota’s oil patch to rail against the energy policies of President Obama and Clinton and promised billions of dollars of economic activity from new oil and gas production and a rollback of regulations.
But some of his statements have also confounded the oil industry. He has promised to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline only if the United States could get “a piece of the profits,” has demonized oil as a “special interest” and said he supports the federal ethanol mandate.
Overall, the industry isn’t holding its breath for a Trump or Clinton presidency.
“Nothing against either candidate, but we all wish there were better candidates,” Scott Sheffield, head of Pioneer Natural Resources Co., said at a forum last week.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/290186-trump-rattles-industry-with-fracking-position
-
Refinery Fostered Weak Safety, Chemical Safety Board Says
Aug 3, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jeff Johnson
The Tesoro refinery in Martinez, Calif., for years ignored safety problems and fostered a weak safety culture, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board says in a report released on Aug. 2.
Board officials urged Tesoro and other refiners to elevate the importance of process safety and encouraged state and local regulators to frequently conduct preventive safety inspections of the facility.
Triggering CSB’s report and investigation were incidents in February and March 2014 at the facility’s alkylation unit, which carries out a process common at U.S. refineries. Tesoro’s unit uses sulfuric acid as a catalyst to reformulate low-value hydrocarbons, such as propane and butane, to produce a premium, high-octane gasoline blend stock.
The first of the two accidents was the result of a piping failure that released some 38,000 kg of sulfuric acid over two hours and burned two employees. Tesoro initially characterized the accident as minor and refused to allow CSB to investigate. In the second incident a month later, two contract workers were sprayed and burned with sulfuric acid at the same unit.
Because of their injuries, the two employees each missed more than 150 days of work.
The two incidents followed 13 similar sulfuric acid accidents at the facility since 2010, CSB says. It suggests the company failed to learn from past mistakes and cultivated a poor safety culture that allowed accidents to continue.
The second incident, CSB notes, had similarities to a 1999 incident at the refinery in which four workers were killed.
Much of CSB’s report focuses on the February 2014 accident which occurred in piping for the plant’s sulfuric acid sampling system. Tesoro had purchased and intended to install a new, closed-loop, so-called inherently safer acid sampling system that is similar to those used at other California refineries.
However, the company claimed the system was unreliable, CSB says, and never installed it. Instead Tesoro slightly upgraded its existing sampling system, which requires workers who draw samples to wear personal protective gear to counter the expected release of sulfuric acid vapors. That system relied on a burlap sack to cover sewer drains to reduce vapor clouds, CSB says.
Tesoro officials would not comment on the specific accident or decision not to install inherently safer technology. They, however, cited their commitment to safety and unspecified “inaccuracies” in CSB’s report.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i32/Refinery-fostered-weak-safety-Chemical.html
-
Crude-Oil Train Movements Down 45% This Year
Aug 4, 2016 | Philly.com
By Andrew Maykuth
The U.S. Energy Department on Wednesday confirmed what many trainspotters have observed: Movements of crude oil by rail within the United States for the first five months this year are down 45 percent from last year.
An average of 443,000 barrels of crude moved by rail during the first five months of this year, according to the Energy Information Administration. Nearly half of the crude carried by rail in May moved from the Midwest to East Coast refineries, which have increased their reliance upon petroleum imports.
With the worlwide fall in oil prices, the price of domestic crude oil produced in the Midwest and western Texas is no longer heavily discounted relative to imported crude. The narrower the spread between domestic and imported crude, the more likely coastal refiners will choose to run imported crudes rather than domestic supplies shipped by rail, EIA said.
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/energy/20160804_Crude-oil_train_movements_down_45__this_year.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) Plastics And Environment
Aug 29, 2016 | Plaseurope
Plastics use cuts environmental costs compared with alternative materials / Manufacturers have significant opportunities to reduce environmental costs / ACC study
The environmental cost of using plastics in consumer goods and packaging is nearly four times less than it would be if plastics were replaced with alternative materials, according to a study commissioned by the American Chemistry Council (ACC, Washington DC / USA; www.americanchemistry.com). The study, conducted byTrucost (London / UK; www.trucost.com), suggests that substituting plastic in consumer products and packaging with alternatives that perform the same function would increase environmental costs from USD 139 bn (EUR 124 bn) to USD 533 bn annually.
“Strong, lightweight plastics help us do more with less material, which provides environmental benefits throughout the lifecycle of plastic products and packaging,” says the ACC. Although alternative materials such as glass, tin, aluminium and paper are viable alternatives to plastic in many consumer goods applications, they have higher environmental costs in the quantities needed to replace plastic, says the report. In most cases, the environmental cost per kilogramme of alternative material is less than that of plastic, but on average more than four times more alternative material is needed to perform the same function, it suggests. For example, a typical plastic soft drink bottle contains 30 g of plastic, but if replaced by a weighted average mix of alternative materials currently used in the market, an equivalent capacity bottle would require 141 g of alternative materials such as glass, tin or aluminium in the USA.
The ACC commissioned the study after research conducted by Trucost for UNEP in 2014 highlighted the environmental costs of plastic use in consumer products, including emissions of greenhouse gases, air, land and water pollutants, depletion of water and the production of marine debris in the global oceans. These environmental costs have prompted some to argue that plastics should be replaced with alternative materials. However, other studies that modelled the substitution of plastic with alternative materials (including an ACC study conducted by Franklin Associates – see Plasteurope.com of 31.03.2011) suggest that a move away from plastics may come at an even higher net environmental cost. The new ACC study builds on previous research by comparing the environmental costs of using plastics to alternative materials and identifying opportunities to help lower the environmental costs of using plastics in consumer goods and packaging.Operational improvements would lower environmental costsThe production of plastic materials and their transport are the largest sources of environmental costs. The total environmental cost of producing plastic materials for the consumer goods sector exceeded USD 60 bn in 2015, and the transport of these materials to market added a further USD 53 bn in environmental costs, according to the report. “This suggests that the plastics manufacturing industry has significant opportunity to reduce the environmental costs of plastics through its operations and supply chains,” it states.
Strategies for reducing the environmental costs of plastics include increasing the use of lower-carbon electricity in plastics production, adopting lower-emission transport modes and developing more efficient plastic packaging, says the report. Additional steps include increasing recycling and energy conversion of post-use plastics to help curb ocean litter and conserve resources.
“By leading in innovation and performance, the world’s plastics industry has demonstrated its ongoing commitment to help create a more sustainable future,” commented Jeff Wooster, global sustainability director for Packaging and Specialty Plastics at Dow Chemical (Midland, Michigan / USA; www.dow.com) and chair of ACC’s packaging team. “This report provides a new tool to explore opportunities to further enhance plastics’ environmental performance with brand owners, shippers, recyclers and other value chain partners.”https://www.plasteurope.com/news/PLASTICS_AND_ENVIRONMENT_t234674/
-
Ozone Implementation Proposal Sent for White House Review
Aug 4, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency submitted its proposed implementation rule for the 2015 ozone standards to the White House Office and Management and Budget for review, indicating the agency is on track to release the proposal this fall.
The proposal, which was sent to OMB Aug. 2, is expected to address a range of requirements for state agencies tasked with implementing the 70 parts per billion ozone standards, including information on the timing of plan submissions and application of the nonattainment New Source Review permitting program. The agency in 2018 is expected to determine what areas don't meet the standards, which will trigger requirements for states to formulate compliance plans for those areas.
States, along with industry and lawmakers, have criticized the EPA for delays in issuing all of the implementing rules and guidance under past national ambient air quality standards. The delay hinders the ability of state and local regulators to process permits under those standards, they said. One oft-criticized example is the final implementation rule for the 2008 ozone standards, which wasn't issued until early 2015.
Many states urged the EPA to issue its proposed implementation rule alongside its October 2015 decision to revise the ozone standards from 75 ppb to 70 ppb. While the agency didn't grant that request, Janet McCabe, the EPA's acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, promisedstates that the agency would issue implementing rules and supporting guidance in a more timely manner than it had in the past.
As part of that effort, the EPA anticipates it will issue its implementation rule (RIN:2060-AS82) for the 2015 ozone standards much quicker than it did for the previous standards. The agency projectsissuing the proposed rule in October, with a final rule anticipated one year later.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95088388&vname=dennotallissues&fn=95088388&jd=95088388
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested