Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 17/8
-
(ACC Mentioned) Weekly Resin Report: PP, PE Prices Steady To Higher Across Most Commodity Grades
Aug 16, 2016 | PlasticsToday
By PlasticsToday Staff
Spot resin trading continued to hum along at a nice pace the week of August 8, with a smattering of transactions across most commodity polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) classes that, together, reached slightly better than average volumes. -
Washington State Consults On Chemicals Of High Concern List
Aug 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Washington state’s Department of Ecology is soliciting stakeholder feedback for substances to be added to, or removed from, the state’s chemicals of concern list. -
CPSC Plans to Reduce Phthalate Tests
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Martina Barash
Four plastics wouldn't have to be analyzed for prohibited phthalates under a rule proposed by the Consumer Product Safety Commission to reduce testing burdens for children's products. -
Dogs Show Sperm Quality Decline Linked To PCBs, Phthalates
Aug 16, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Veterinary scientists have detected wide exposure to environmental chemicals, in dogs bred for guiding the blind. The researchers found a decline in sperm counts and increase in cryptorchidism, over the last 26 years, in this population, which mirror trends in the human population. -
EPA Closes Loophole in California Rules for Formaldehyde in Wood Products
Aug 16, 2016 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Tom Neltner
On July 27, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a long-overdue final rule to protect people from formaldehyde off-gassing from composite wood products such as hardwood plywood, medium-density fiberboard, and particleboard. -
EPA OK’s Three More Chemicals Under New Law
Aug 16, 2016 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently cleared three more chemicals under the nation's new chemical oversight law. -
What’s There To Debate? Renewable Energy Sources Are Our Future.
Aug 16, 2016 | The Washington Post
By Robert Keller
The Aug. 13 news article “Scientists fault EPA report on fracking pollution” continued a debate that doesn’t need to take place. We continue to argue about energy policies in the United States that may damage the environment instead of committing to renewable energy. -
More NatGas-Fired Power Plants Planned For Michigan, West Virginia
Aug 16, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
More natural gas-fired power plants are planned for the Appalachian and Great Lakes regions, adding to a growing list of new electricity sources that would utilize Marcellus and Utica shale supplies. -
Major Refining Groups Clash Over Merits Of Shifting EPA RFS 'Obligation'
Aug 16, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
The American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) are clashing over AFPM's request for EPA to shift the “point of obligation” compliance mandate under the renewable fuel standard (RFS) from refiners to fuel blenders, with API warning it would exacerbate problems with the RFS. -
Industry Advocate Downplays Report That Reignited Fracking Debate
Aug 16, 2016 | Platts
By Jim Magill
A drilling industry advocacy group on Monday downplayed a report released last week by a scientific panel that called into question a major finding that the Environmental Protection Agency had published more than a year ago concerning the lack of evidence that hydraulic fracturing has had any negative impact on drinking water supplies. -
EPA Gets High-Profile Backers in Methane Legal Battle
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
States and environmental groups separately sought to intervene Aug. 15 on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency in a federal appeals court battle over the agency's first-ever methane emissions standards for new oil and gas infrastructure (North Dakota v. EPA, D.C. Cir. , No. 16-1242, motions filed8/15/16). -
Nine States, Chicago, Environmental Groups Join EPA's Side in Methane Rules Fight
Aug 16, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
The battle lines over proposed rules governing new sources of methane emissions from the oil and natural gas industry continued to form, with nine states, the city of Chicago and a half-dozen environmental groups lining up to support the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). -
Greens Move To Defend Methane Rules
Aug 16, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Six environmental groups are looking to defend new federal curbs or methane pollution at oil and natural gas sites. -
EPA Officials To Address Concerns Related To Oil Trains
Aug 16, 2016 | AP (In The Wall Street Journal)
The regional head of the Environmental Protection Agency will discuss crude oil trains during a visit to Albany. -
PHMSA Reminds Pipelines of Abandonment Safety Requirements
Aug 16, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Natural gas and other pipeline operators are being reminded by federal regulators of their safety obligations and how those obligations are affected by the operational status of pipeline assets. -
(ACC Mentioned) Litigation Tracker: EPA Defends Climate, Ozone Rules
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
It will be a busy fall for the Environmental Protection Agency's attorneys, who will be tasked with defending the major environmental regulations issued during the Obama administration. -
No Out-Of-State Emissions ‘Leakage' in Northeast: Report
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald B. Silverman
A Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative report suggests that the cap-and-trade program hasn't led to emissions “leakage” from electricity generators outside the region. -
AM Alert: Cap-And-Trade’s Last Auction Fell Flat. Will It Happen Again?
Aug 16, 2016 | The Sacramento Bee
By Jeremy B. White
Not that long ago, few politicians would have paid close attention to California’s auctions of permits to emit carbon. Those sales, the fulcrum of the state’s cap-and-trade system, were proceeding smoothly and reaping billions of dollars.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Weekly Resin Report: PP, PE Prices Steady To Higher Across Most Commodity Grades
Aug 16, 2016 | PlasticsToday
By PlasticsToday Staff
Spot resin trading continued to hum along at a nice pace the week of August 8, with a smattering of transactions across most commodity polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) classes that, together, reached slightly better than average volumes. Material availability tightened and prices were at a minimum steady and otherwise higher across most commodity grades. There is a $0.05/lb price increase nominated for September PE contracts and $0.04/lb on the table for PP, reports the PlasticsExchange (Chicago) in its weekly Market Update.
Spot demand was good for PE, and as long as the price was right, processors were buying, notes the resin clearinghouse. As suppliers’ inventories sell, offers have generally been replaced with limited quantities of higher priced material. Prices for most PE grades moved up, particularly HDPE, which has gone from loose to snug over the past few weeks. LLDPE and LDPE film grades have again become difficult to source at reasonable market levels, reports the PlasticsExhange.
Analysts expect August PE contracts to hold steady. All PE producers have nominated a $0.05/lb price increase for September, and while it is still early to gauge the level of success, the spot market has been inching higher the past few weeks. Supply and demand figures released by the American Chemistry Council do not indicate that the market should be as tight as it is, which is interesting, notes the PlasticsExchange in its update.
According to the ACC preliminary results, domestic PE demand in July was only 2.54 billion pounds, which was 115 million below June, and export sales were 771 million pounds, which was also 42 million below the 12-month average. Production ratcheted back up to 95% of operating capacity, leaving 171 million pounds of excess supply, so August began with 3.67 billion pounds of collective upstream inventory, nearly 50 million pounds above the 12-month average.
The spot PP market maintained a healthy level of activity and prices gained about a half-cent on average. While a few spot prime railcars have been seen this month, fresh wide-spec offers continue to make their way into the secondary market. Well-priced trader inventories have been thinning out with new asking prices ticking gently higher. Processor demand has improved and resellers have been seen replenishing their uncommitted inventories. There seems to be some positioning ahead of the $0.04/lb cost-push price increase nominated for September.
According to the ACC preliminary results, domestic PP demand was a scant 1.33 billion pounds, the lowest since February 2015 and nearly 70 million below the trailing 12-month average. Although production remained strong at 94.6% of capacity, export sales were a huge 135 million pounds, the most since October 2010. So, even with poor domestic buying in July, there was a small inventory draw-down. Producers entered August with just less than 1.6 billion pounds on hand, the lowest level since March.
http://www.plasticstoday.com/resin-pricing/weekly-resin-report-pp-pe-prices-steady-higher-across-most-commodity-grades/167782636125048
-
Washington State Consults On Chemicals Of High Concern List
Aug 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Washington state’s Department of Ecology is soliciting stakeholder feedback for substances to be added to, or removed from, the state’s chemicals of concern list. This follows the state’s recent announcement ofplans to update its Children’s Safe Products Act (CSPA) reporting rule.
During this process, it will be considering modifications to its chemicals of high concern to children (CHCC) list of reportable substances. It is bound by a law (HB 2545), passed earlier this year, to consider six flame retardants for inclusion on the list, among possible others.
The department will accept public comments until 16 September, to be considered for the preliminary first draft of the rule update.
It says that suggestions to add or remove chemicals from the CHCC list must include peer-reviewed scientific information to support the request. Edits to the existing report rule language will also be considered by the department.
A preliminary first draft rule – which will include proposed list additions and deletions – is expected by 30 September.
The department plans to host a stakeholder workshop, in late October, on the proposal.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49156/washington-state-consults-on-chemicals-of-high-concern-list
-
CPSC Plans to Reduce Phthalate Tests
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Martina Barash
Four plastics wouldn't have to be analyzed for prohibited phthalates under a rule proposed by the Consumer Product Safety Commission to reduce testing burdens for children's products.
There's no evidence that the plastics contain phthalates above 0.1 percent, the statutory limit, in consumer-product uses, according to the Federal Register notice scheduled for publication Aug. 17. That's particularly the case for children's products, which require testing for phthalates—unless the CPSC determines that testing isn't needed.
Businesses and trade associations have been critical of the CPSC for not doing more to reduce testing burdens, and congressional committees have questioned commissioners on the issue.
But some commissioners, particularly Robert Adler, have said it's hard to find areas in which to cut tests without compromising safety.
Plastics Research
The CPSC commissioned toxicologists and risk assessors to conduct a literature search on the production and use of 11 phthalates in consumer products. It also asked for a literature search on whether the four plastics contained phthalates above the limit specified in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.
The four plastics are polypropylene, polyethylene, high-impact polystyrene and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene, according to the notice.
The commissioners voted 5–0 to approve publication of the proposed rule in a ballot vote completed Aug. 9, according to the CPSC.
In 2015, the agency issued, and then withdrew, a rule exempting unfinished wood toys from heavy-metal testing amid criticism that the rule didn't go far enough.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95881032&vname=dennotallissues&fn=95881032&jd=95881032
-
Dogs Show Sperm Quality Decline Linked To PCBs, Phthalates
Aug 16, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Veterinary scientists have detected wide exposure to environmental chemicals, in dogs bred for guiding the blind. The researchers found a decline in sperm counts and increase in cryptorchidism, over the last 26 years, in this population, which mirror trends in the human population.
Dog semen and testis tissue from sterilisation operations were tested for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) flame retardants and diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP). Seven PCB congeners, four PBDE congeners and DEHP were widely detected. These compounds were also found in both wet and dry dog foods.
The researchers also incubated fresh semen and testicular tissue with PCB153 and DEHP, to find that there was a substantial decrease in sperm vitality.
“Since testicular concentrations of these chemicals directly perturbed sperm motility and viability, this may be a mechanism by which environmental chemicals directly affect male fertility,” say the scientists.
They found that, over the 26 years, there was a decline in sperm motility and normal sperm levels and an increase in the number of pups with cryptorchidism – undescended testes. All are trends which have been widely reported in human populations in Europe and elsewhere, and are considered to be manifestations oftesticular dysgenesis syndrome.
Researchers from the school of veterinary medicine at the University of Nottingham in the UK studied sperm counts of a population of about 50-100 dogs a year, between 1988 and 2014. The dogs were mainly golden retrievers, Labradors and German shepherd dogs.
The scientists conclude that because dogs often share the same habitat as humans, they are therefore "likely to be exposed to similar environmental conditions including environmental chemicals”.
They say the study may be “a useful sentinel for the study of environmental influences on human male fertility”.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49130/dogs-show-sperm-quality-decline-linked-to-pcbs-phthalates
-
EPA Closes Loophole in California Rules for Formaldehyde in Wood Products
Aug 16, 2016 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Tom Neltner
On July 27, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a long-overdue final rule to protect people from formaldehyde off-gassing from composite wood products such as hardwood plywood, medium-density fiberboard, and particleboard. These products are commonly used to make furniture, cabinets, and flooring.Title VI of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) directed EPA to issue the rule and base it on the 2007 standards set by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) with a significant exception; EPA closed a loophole in CARB’s standards by extending them to cover laminated hardwood products. Such laminated products were the focus of the Lumber Liquidators controversy in 2014.
EPA effectively threaded a needle between the legitimate interests of small furniture and cabinet manufacturersand the need to protect people from the risks posed by formaldehyde. The final rule includes changes from the proposed rule to address concerns that compliance would have been difficult for small businesses that glue a thin layer of wood veneer (a process called lamination) to composite boards that themselves comply with the rule.
EPA concluded it needed to close CARB’s loophole when studies showed that laminating operations (which CARB had exempted) release formaldehyde in excess of the CARB emission standards. EPA’s rule gives laminators using most formaldehyde adhesives seven years to get into compliance.
Laminators can choose to use a glue demonstrated to meet the standards or conduct site-specific, third-party testing and certification to demonstrate that their products meets the standards. The rule exempts two types of glues, ones with no-added formaldehyde and ones made of phenol-formaldehyde. EPA provided a petition process for makers of other glues to secure an exemption and have the agency update the rule.
Hopefully, the resin/glue makers will rise to the challenge and provide additional options for laminators. Given the hazards posed by formaldehyde (it has been linked quantitatively to health concerns such as cancer and eye irritation and qualitatively to asthma and reduced fertility), getting this rule in place was essential to public health protection.
The final rule also has two provisions that set helpful precedents for other chemical safety regulation.
1. Transparency and Confidential Business Information (CBI). Consistent with long-standing practice, EPA determined that information about the compliance status of a particular lot, batch or shipment of wood products meets the statutory definition of a health and safety study and, therefore, is not eligible for CBI protection under exemption in TSCA. As a result, upon request, EPA must disclose compliance test results, the panel producer or product tested, and the test method used that are submitted to the agency. The agency also mandated disclosure of test results to companies that purchase directly from a certified manufacturer.
In addition, CBI claims for other types of information must be substantiated pursuant to new provisions in theTSCA reform law enacted in June 2016. The person claiming CBI must generally provide substantiation and certification of confidentiality claims. This claim expires after ten years unless renewed.
These provisions are critical since accreditation bodies and third party certifiers (TPC) must submit annual reports to EPA that provide this testing information. In addition, TPCs must notify EPA when they identify compliance failures based on required quarterly testing. EDF urges EPA to proactively make these annual reports publicly available on its website.
2. Impartiality of Third-Party Certifiers (TPCs). From children’s products to food to energy efficiency, there is a trend for regulatory agencies to rely on third parties to certify compliance with standards, especially where the activities occur in other countries. The problem is that the manufacturer being certified often gets to pick the firm to do the certifying, and it pays for the service. This situation presents a conflict of interest.
Under the final rule, EPA took steps to minimize the conflict by setting standards for “impartiality” that go beyond the narrow focus of financial transactions used by other agencies. The TPC must ensure that its personnel that are involved in certification decisions are not also engaged in any advocacy or consulting activities that may compromise the impartiality of the decision-making process. This prohibition extends to activities undertaken for other organizations that are legally separate from the TPC.
Organizations that accredit TPCs, known as accreditation bodies, must also ensure that persons making decisions are not also assessing the TPC. And people conducting the assessment must receive no financial benefit from the outcome.
When Congress enacted Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act in 2010, it added a newTitle VI to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and directed EPA to issue the final rules by January 1, 2013 – a deadline EPA obviously missed. Congress acted in response to an agreement reached between industry led by the Composite Panel Association and environmental groups represented by the Sierra Club. EPA missed the deadline by 3.5 years for four reasons:The Agency was given no additional resources to develop the resource-intensive rule.The Agency needed to wait to obtain results from a study of the formaldehyde emissions from laminated products that CARB requested.The Office of Management and Budget took a full year to review the proposed rule, instead of the 90 days allowed.EPA needed to provide for a second round of public comments, to seek additional information on approaches to ensure laminated hardwood products met the CARB emission standards.
What is next? The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) now has 180 days to update itregulations for manufactured housing.
Though it took much longer than we would have preferred, EDF congratulates EPA on a job well done!
http://blogs.edf.org/health/2016/08/16/epa-formaldehyde-rule/#more-5586
-
EPA OK’s Three More Chemicals Under New Law
Aug 16, 2016 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently cleared three more chemicals under the nation's new chemical oversight law.
The agency authorized two glycerides made by Solazyme Inc. and another chemical from a company that chose to remain anonymous, according to Chemical Regulation Reporter.
Solazyme's chemicals, which are labeled as P-16-0340 and P-16-0351, are slated to serve as lubricants or to make other chemicals. The California company originated as an algae-based biofuel firm but recently shifted its focus to food ingredients and consumer products while rechristening itself TerraVia.
The third chemical, P-16-0392, is generated by modifying vegetable oil and can be used as a fuel or lubricant.
The EPA reportedly determined that all three were unlikely to present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment.
The findings were the second round of approvals under the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, which requires the EPA to make affirmative safety decisions for new chemicals.
The first four chemicals were approved last month. Although advocates largely praised the new law's improvements over the previous system, some argued that the agency should be more transparent about the reasons behind its determinations.
https://www.chem.info/news/2016/08/epa-oks-three-more-chemicals-under-new-law
-
What’s There To Debate? Renewable Energy Sources Are Our Future.
Aug 16, 2016 | The Washington Post
By Robert Keller
The Aug. 13 news article “Scientists fault EPA report on fracking pollution” continued a debate that doesn’t need to take place. We continue to argue about energy policies in the United States that may damage the environment instead of committing to renewable energy. The debate should be about the total impact of manufacturing the energy source and any pollutants that result from its energy production, not one or the other.
Fracking discussions should include the impact of methane leaks from wells and emissions from the plants that use natural gas. We should compare those elements with any pollutants from the manufacturing of solar panels and wind turbines and the pollutants those energy sources do not produce when used.
We still need some energy from fossil fuels, but cities across the United States are committing to deriving 100 percent of their energy from renewable sources no later than 2050. Some already have done it. Do we really need to debate the possibility of polluting our potable water sources when our road map to the future of energy is clear?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-there-to-debate-renewable-energy-sources-are-our-future/2016/08/16/9c796262-631b-11e6-b4d8-33e931b5a26d_story.html?utm_term=.5e69c9fb9aa4
-
More NatGas-Fired Power Plants Planned For Michigan, West Virginia
Aug 16, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
More natural gas-fired power plants are planned for the Appalachian and Great Lakes regions, adding to a growing list of new electricity sources that would utilize Marcellus and Utica shale supplies.
The Milwaukee-based utility WEC Energy Group Inc. said Monday that it would construct new natural gas plants on Michigan's Upper Peninsula as part of a deal to supply electricity to an iron-ore mine in the area. Cliffs Natural Resources Inc., which operates the Tilden mine near Marquette, MI, signed a 20-year agreement with WEC to supply the electricity for its operations there.
The facilities would use internal combustion engines to generate 170 MW of power. The $255 million project would also allow a coal plant on Lake Superior to be retired by 2020. If the project is approved by state regulators, WEC aims to have the plants constructed by 2019. It isn't clear, however, who would supply the facilities with natural gas.
In West Virginia, though, Energy Solutions Consortium LLC, which announced plans to build a 565 MW natural gas-fired plant in Marshall County in 2014, is planning to construct another two in a state that has been slow to adopt natural gas-fired power, despite its role as a shale gas producer (see Daily GPI, April 22, 2014).
The company plans to construct a 580 MW natural gas plant in Harrison County and another 750 MW facility in Brooke County. Both of those plants would be close to Marcellus and Utica shale production and utilize gas from those wells. Construction is expected to start in the coming months on the Moundsville Power plant in Marshall County, with service scheduled for 2019. Both the Harrison and Brooke counties projects are expected to break ground by 2018, but they must be approved by the state first.
Dozens of natural gas-fired power plants have been approved in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia since 2012 as shale production has increased across the region (see Daily GPI, May 13). Most of those facilities have been approved in Ohio and Pennsylvania, while the Moundsville facility has been the only plant approved in West Virginia, according to state officials.
Increasing natural gas production, particularly from shale plays in the Northeast and Southwest, is expected to boost gas-fired power capacity across the country in the coming years, especially in some Mid-Atlantic states, Texas and Florida, according to the Energy Information Administration (see Daily GPI, May 19). News of more plants in Appalachia and the Great Lakes region comes after the EIA said last month that natural gas-fired power generation is expected to set a record this year by providing 3.8 million megawatt hours per day, or 4% more than last year (see Daily GPI, July 14). Power demand records have already been set across parts of the country this summer due to high temperatures, with more expected this month (see Daily GPI,Aug. 11).
-
Major Refining Groups Clash Over Merits Of Shifting EPA RFS 'Obligation'
Aug 16, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
The American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) are clashing over AFPM's request for EPA to shift the “point of obligation” compliance mandate under the renewable fuel standard (RFS) from refiners to fuel blenders, with API warning it would exacerbate problems with the RFS.
API -- representing all aspects of the oil and gas sector including refiners and marketers -- sent an Aug. 15 letter to the agency urging it to reject AFPM's request. API says the change would do nothing to address the group's long-running concerns that the RFS fails to adequately acknowledge the “blend wall” -- the point at which no more biofuel can be blended into the fuel supply because of fuel and infrastructure constraints.
However, AFPM President Chet Thompson in an Aug. 16 statement countered that API “clearly misunderstand[s] the specifics of our administrative petition to move the point of obligation. . . . Where we propose moving the point of obligation would not increase the burden on any small entities nor the number of obligated parties. To the contrary, our proposal would reduce the number of obligated parties and make the program far more equitable.”
Although API and AFPM -- which represents manufacturers of U.S. gasoline and other fuels -- are at odds over the RFS obligation, they still agree with broader calls to repeal the controversial program.
EPA's RFS sets targets for blending renewable and alternative fuels like ethanol into the fuel supply, but the program has faced increasing attacks. Refiners say that by ignoring the blend wall, the RFS sets unachievable goals, forcing them to purchase expensive renewable identification number (RIN) compliance credits. Ethanol and other alternative fuel proponents counter that the fuel targets are too low to promote their fuels.
The current point of obligation was established in a 2010 EPA regulation and requires that refiners and importers of renewable fuels surrender RINs sufficient to cover their blending obligations.
Critics of the RFS have for years complained that the program's design leaves it vulnerable to manipulation by speculators or large, integrated refiners that blend their own biofuels and own fuel retail infrastructure, resulting in artificially high RIN prices that hurt smaller refiners. Those concerns prompted AFPM's Aug. 4 petition asking the agency to shift the point of obligation to companies that blend fuels.
Supporting this effort, billionaire investor Carl Icahn wrote to EPA Aug. 9, warning that the RIN market is “rigged” against small merchant refiners and risks driving them out of business.
Several merchant refiners are also suing the agency in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit case Alon Refining Krotz Springs, Inc, et al. v . EPA, which aims to change the 2010 regulation. The case is now in abeyance, pending EPA's response to petitions seeking reconsideration of the point of obligation issue.
An EPA spokeswoman told Inside EPA Aug. 16 that, “The agency will review and respond to both AFPM’s petition and Carl Icahn’s letter.”
Industry Split
However, the drive for changing the point of obligation has spurred the disagreement between AFPM and API, leading to API's letter to the agency urging it to reject AFPM's petition.
In the letter, API Chairman and CEO Jack Gerard reiterated the association's view -- expressed in earlier comments to EPA -- that moving the point of obligation would be unhelpful. Instead, he argued, the RFS should be repealed outright because of ongoing problems with the blend wall.
Gerard writes, “Changing the point of obligation under the RFS will not fix the blend wall problem or meaningfully impact the overall volume of renewable fuels. Any adjustment to the point of obligation 9 years into the program would create uncertainty in the administration of the RFS and, potentially, in the RIN market.”
Further, “Moving the point of obligation would increase complexity for our members, and for EPA to administer and enforce the program. The increased complexity affects the fuel distribution industry as the identification of obligated fuels becomes more difficult. While we believe that the number of obligated parties would increase significantly should the point of obligation be moved, regardless, the number of reporting instances would rise dramatically as RFS reporting would move from larger bulk production and import points to smaller terminal distribution points.
“Burdens to certain small businesses would also surge through a change to the point of obligation. These newly obligated parties, particularly small businesses, would be forced to acquire the necessary personnel, expertise, and materials needed to navigate the complexities of compliance reporting under EPA fuels programs.”
However, AFPM's Thompson in his statement countered that API misunderstands the petition and that he believes that in the interim, moving the point of obligation would alleviate upward pressure on RIN prices. But he stressed that AFPM still supports full repeal of the RFS, which would address the blend wall issue.A refining industry source says that the number of obligated parties, and consequently the complexity of the program, depends on what point in the refining, blending and fuel distribution process the point of obligation is moved to. Under AFPM's petition, the obligation would apply to the title holder of fuel when it is at the refinery “rack” where fuel is blended, which is also the point at which excise taxes are collected.
If EPA were to grant the petition with a rulemaking to shift the compliance duty, it would lead to fewer obligated parties, the source says, but the type of entity involved would change. It would shift the compliance burden from smaller independent refiners to large blending facilities “primarily on the terminal level,” the source says.
RIN Prices
Focus is increasing on the obligation mandate due to rising RIN prices and EPA's final RFS volumes rule for 2014 to 2016 that is pressing the market toward the blend wall, the source says, given that the rule intentionally breaches the blend wall.
RFS advocates argue that this was the whole purpose of the program, to force more renewable fuel onto the market as an alternative to straight gasoline.
But API and AFPM have argued that this risks forcing up consumer prices dramatically. EPA's proposed RFS volumes rule for 2017, which the agency must by law finalize by Nov. 30, also breaches the blend wall, oil sector critics note.
But without a fix to the volumes issue, the existing point of obligation “really does threaten the viability of some independent refiners,” says the refining industry source.
Icahn makes this point in his Aug. 9 letter to EPA, saying speculators and large investment banks “have now entered the picture and are competing with refineries to purchase RINs from the blenders at the rack. They are also making secret deals with the blenders to entice them not to sell to the refineries but rather to sell to them,” he writes.
“These speculators are 'hoarding' the RINs hoping to get much higher prices as the time nears when refineries are obligated to deliver RINs to the EPA,” he adds. “As RINs are 'hoarded' their price will move up exponentially and bankruptcies will take place which causes a debilitating domino effect.”
Icahn calls the current RFS a “wealth transfer program” that works against both renewable fuels and national security, by limiting fuel blending potential through the dysfunctional RIN market.
“Blenders are using their windfall profits to invest in their own companies -- buying back stock and paying dividends -- rather than investing in renewable fuel blending, which is the purpose of the rule. The RINs market is arguably one of the largest unregulated commodities markets in the world. It is a black pool, completely secretive and designed to allow speculation and fraud,” Icahn writes, urging EPA to change the point of obligation of the rule.
EPA officials have indicated that although they are considering the issue, they would deal with it in a separate rulemaking from the pending final 2017 RFS volumes rule.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/major-refining-groups-clash-over-merits-shifting-epa-rfs-obligation
-
Industry Advocate Downplays Report That Reignited Fracking Debate
Aug 16, 2016 | Platts
By Jim Magill
A drilling industry advocacy group on Monday downplayed a report released last week by a scientific panel that called into question a major finding that the Environmental Protection Agency had published more than a year ago concerning the lack of evidence that hydraulic fracturing has had any negative impact on drinking water supplies.
On Thursday, the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) said the EPA had failed to provide sufficient documentation to back up its assertion that the agency had found no evidence that fracking had led to "widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States."
The conclusion came in a 180-page report on the EPA's June 2015 draft assessment on the potential impacts of fracking on drinking water.
In an email Monday, Katie Brown, a spokeswoman for pro-drilling industry group Energy In Depth, said the SAB report does not refute the EPA's original finding."The panel does not ask EPA to modify or eliminate its topline finding of 'no widespread, systemic impacts' to groundwater from fracking -- it asks EPA to provide more details or a 'quantitative analysis' of how the agency came to that conclusion," she said.
Oil and gas industry advocates had seized the EPA's initial finding as proof of the industry's long-held contention that there have been no documented cases connecting underground drinking water sources to nearby fracking operations.
Brown said numerous other studies on the subject support EPA's year-old conclusion.
"For instance, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection just released its 2015 Oil and Gas Annual Report, which found zero confirmed cases of stray gas migration into water resources in 2015, clearly showing that impacts are neither widespread nor systemic," Brown said.
However, in a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, prefacing the SAB report, the scientists found the EPA's research, although in general comprehensive, was "lacking in several critical areas."
"The SAB is concerned that these major findings as presented within the Executive Summary are ambiguous and appear inconsistent with the observations, data, and levels of uncertainty presented and discussed in the body of the draft Assessment Report," the letter states.
Twenty-six of the 30 members of the review panel found that the EPA statement regarding the impacts of fracking "requires clarification and additional explanation," while four SAB members "concluded that this statement is clear, concise and accurate."
Specifically, the scientists said the EPA should clarify and describe the different databases used to reach its conclusion.
The SAB also said the EPA should include data from and its own and state investigations conducted in Dimock, Pennsylvania; Pavillion, Wyoming; and Parker County, Texas, "where many members of the public have stated that hydraulic fracturing activities have caused local impacts to drinking water resources."
In a statement, EPA spokeswoman Julia Valentine said the agency would "use the SAB's final comments and suggestions, along with relevant literature published since the release of the draft assessment, and public comments received by the agency, to revise and finalize the assessment."
EPA "hopes to finalize the assessment in the coming months," Valentine said.
For their part, environmental groups contended that the SAB report supported their own long-held views.
The SAB report "confirms what so many communities living with oil and gas have known for a long time: Fracking pollutes drinking water," Earthworks Policy Director Lauren Pagel said in an email statement.
"The science is in," she said. "Now is the time for us to move away from this dirty fossil fuel and replace it with clean energy that does not harm public health."
Lena Moffitt, director of the Sierra Club's Dirty Fuels Initiative, said the SAB report "called out the agency's conclusion that there is no 'widespread, systemic' evidence that fracking contaminates drinking water for what it is: not supported by scientific facts."
The SAB report also criticized the EPA for backing off from doing some of the research it had promised would be part of its fracking assessment and recommended "that the EPA delineate these planned activities within the final Assessment Report and discuss why they were not conducted or completed."
The scientists also called on the EPA to lay out the potential paths by which fracking fluids could enter the drinking water systems and to "clearly describe the probability, risk and relative significance of potential hydraulic fracturing-related failure mechanisms."
Other recommendations in the report advised the EPA to examine the "background and pre-existing chemistry of surface and groundwater," to better understand the potential impact of fracking; and to "provide clearer information on the fundamentals of certain hydraulic fracturing wastewater treatment processes."
The EPA launched its lengthy study of the impacts of fracking on drinking water at the urging of Congress, which authorized the research in 2009.http://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/houston/industry-advocate-downplays-report-that-reignited-26522874
-
EPA Gets High-Profile Backers in Methane Legal Battle
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
States and environmental groups separately sought to intervene Aug. 15 on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency in a federal appeals court battle over the agency's first-ever methane emissions standards for new oil and gas infrastructure (North Dakota v. EPA, D.C. Cir. , No. 16-1242, motions filed8/15/16).
More than a dozen states, as well as oil and gas industry groups, have previously challenged the EPA's new source performance standards (RIN:2060-AS30) for new and modified oil and gas wells in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Now, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and the city of Chicago are backing the agency's rules as lawfully issued under Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act.
“The regulations adopted by EPA in May reflect the ready-availability of proven, effective, and affordable measures for reducing methane emissions from new and modified sources in the oil and gas industry,” New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) said in a statement. “My office is proud to stand with our fellow coalition members in aggressively defending these important controls on climate change pollution.”
Six environmental advocacy groups—Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club, Clean Air Council, Earthworks, and Environmental Integrity Project—filed their own motion to intervene in the case.
Under the new and modified source regulations, formally published by the EPA June 3, owners and operators of new and modified oil and gas wells would be required to develop leak monitoring plans and an initial leak survey within a year or within 60 days of startup and twice annually after that (81 Fed. Reg. 35,824).
Moving forward with the rules for new sources also triggers a requirement for the agency to begin the process of regulating existing ones. The EPA has begun to collect the information needed to do that.
Timothy Ballo represented Earthjustice, Meleah Geertsma represented NRDC, Peter Zalzal and Tomás Carbonell represented the Environmental Defense Fund, Joanne Spalding and Andres Restrepo represented the Sierra Club, and Darin Schroeder and Ann Weeks of the Clean Air Task Force represented Earthworks in the litigation.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95881008&vname=dennotallissues&fn=95881008&jd=95881008
-
Nine States, Chicago, Environmental Groups Join EPA's Side in Methane Rules Fight
Aug 16, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
The battle lines over proposed rules governing new sources of methane emissions from the oil and natural gas industry continued to form, with nine states, the city of Chicago and a half-dozen environmental groups lining up to support the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
On Monday, the nine states -- California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont -- and the City of Chicago filed an unopposed motion to intervene as respondents in the case State of North Dakota et al v. EPA et al [16-1242] in U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Meanwhile, six environmental groups -- the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Sierra Club, the Clean Air Council, Earthworks and the Environmental Integrity Project -- filed a separate motion to intervene on behalf of the EPA on Monday.
At issue are three final rules governing methane emissions that the EPA unveiled in May (see Shale Daily, May 12). The rules, collectively updates to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), are designed to reduce methane, volatile organic compounds (VOC) and toxic air pollutants. The agency said its actions would help the Obama administration meet its goal of slashing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40-45% from 2012 levels by the year 2025.
"By providing a national minimum standard for new and modified oil and gas sources, the final rule represents an important step toward addressing a significant nationwide source of potent greenhouse gas emissions, forms a strong foundation for further EPA efforts to limit methane emissions, and helps supplement and strengthen state efforts," the states wrote in their petition. "Because the final rule would further the state and municipal intervenors' goals and efforts, and would do so on a nationwide basis, [they] have a strong interest in defending it."
Texas joined North Dakota in opposition to the new rules earlier this month (see Daily GPI, Aug. 2). Court records show 11 other states -- Alabama, Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, West Virginia and Wisconsin -- plus the attorney general for Michigan are also petitioners opposed to the new rules.
Court records also show at eight other cases have so far been consolidated with State of North Dakota et al v. EPA et al. Oral arguments have not yet been scheduled.
Other petitioners include various state oil and gas industry groups, plus the Independent Petroleum Association of America, the Western Energy Alliance, the GPA Midstream Association, the American Petroleum Institute and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.
According to EPA, the NSPS will build upon VOC emission reduction requirements for new oil and gas wells that the agency first unveiled in April 2012 (see Daily GPI, April 19, 2012). Those requirements called for a two-phase process to reduce VOCs: requiring flaring followed by "green completions," a term that means deploying equipment to capture and sell natural gas emissions that are otherwise lost.
EPA said it expects the NSPS will reduce 510,000 short tons of methane in 2025, which is the equivalent of reducing 11 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. The rules are also expected to reduce other pollutants, including 210,000 tons of VOCs and 3,900 tons of air toxics, in the year 2025.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107426-nine-states-chicago-environmental-groups-join-epas-side-in-methane-rules-fight
-
Greens Move To Defend Methane Rules
Aug 16, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Six environmental groups are looking to defend new federal curbs or methane pollution at oil and natural gas sites.
The groups filed a court motion late Monday to protect the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) methane rule from lawsuits brought by more than a dozen states and several oil and gas industry groups.
In a statement, the greens called the methane rules “vital, common-sense clean air standards” and said the lawsuits against it are “misguided legal attacks.”
"These lawsuits seek to dismantle common-sense requirements that EPA has developed based on other federal clean air standards and highly cost-effective state programs in leading oil and gas-producing states like Colorado and Wyoming,” the groups said in a statement.
“We look forward to vigorously defending the legal merits of these vital safeguards for our public health and climate.”
The Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club, Clean Air Council, Earthworks and Environmental Integrity Project signed on to the court filing.
The EPA in May released new limits on methane pollution from new natural gas and oil sites. The rule is part of an Obama administration effort to cut emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, by up to 45 percent by 2025.
In July and August, conservative attorneys general and the oil and gas industry sued over the rule. They argue it threatens drilling jobs and is unnecessary, given industry efforts to reduce methane emissions without federal regulation.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/291560-greens-move-to-defend-methane-rules
-
EPA Officials To Address Concerns Related To Oil Trains
Aug 16, 2016 | AP (In The Wall Street Journal)
ALBANY, N.Y. — The regional head of the Environmental Protection Agency will discuss crude oil trains during a visit to Albany.
EPA regional administrator Judith Enck is scheduled to meet Wednesday night with residents of Albany's South End, where there has been controversy over oil trains going through the nearby Port of Albany.
Enck is set to talk about the EPA's role in addressing environmental and health concerns related to the rail transportation.
She also will talk about other environmental justice issues.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/APc7376dbf87c64dd180d11d0d850f3924
-
PHMSA Reminds Pipelines of Abandonment Safety Requirements
Aug 16, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Natural gas and other pipeline operators are being reminded by federal regulators of their safety obligations and how those obligations are affected by the operational status of pipeline assets.
The clarification from the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is in response to the Protecting our Infrastructure of Pipelines and Enhancing Safety Act of 2016.
PHMSA regulations don't recognize an "idle" status for hazardous liquid or gas pipelines, the agency reminded operators in a bulletin. Pipelines are either "active" and subject to all relevant safety regulations, or they are "abandoned." Pipelines that are abandoned are to be purged of all combustibles, and any facilities left in place are to be sealed.
The last owner/operator of abandoned offshore facilities or abandoned onshore facilities that cross commercially navigable waterways must file a report with PHMSA. According to the regulations, "abandoned" means "permanently removed from service," PHMSA said.
"The physical asset is abandoned in the truest sense of the word; no future use or value is attributed to it, and no attempts are made to maintain serviceability," PHMSA said. "Pipeline systems or segments that are not abandoned, but only idled, decommissioned, or mothballed, are considered to have the potential for reuse at some point in the future.
"The maintenance and inspection to be performed in these cases is a function of the probability of reuse, the cost and difficulty of remediation which may be required, and the potential impact of the in-place and idled facility on human safety and the environment."
The agency said it is aware that some operators might properly purge a pipeline with the expectation of using it later. "A purged pipeline presents different risks, and therefore different regulatory treatment may be appropriate," PHMSA said. "Degradation of such a pipeline can occur but is not likely to result in significant safety impacts to people, property, or the environment. PHMSA will accept deferral of certain activities for purged but active pipelines. These deferred activities might include actions impractical on most purged pipelines, such as in-line inspection."
The agency said it is considering proposing procedures in a future rulemaking that would address notification requirements relating to purged but active pipelines. "In the interim, owners or operators planning to defer certain activities for purged pipelines should coordinate the deferral in advance with regulators. All deferred activities must be completed prior to, or as part of, any later return- to-service. Pipeline owners and operators are fully responsible for the safety of their pipeline facilities at all times and during all operational statuses."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107424-phmsa-reminds-pipelines-of-abandonment-safety-requirements
-
(ACC Mentioned) Litigation Tracker: EPA Defends Climate, Ozone Rules
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
It will be a busy fall for the Environmental Protection Agency's attorneys, who will be tasked with defending the major environmental regulations issued during the Obama administration.
Opponents of the Clean Power Plan, the administration's carbon dioxide standards for existing power plants, will get their day in court on Sept. 27, with arguments scheduled before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. A three-judge panel was originally scheduled to hear arguments in June, but in May the D.C. Circuit announced it would bypass panel consideration in favor of an en banc review by the entire court (West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1363, 5/16/16).
Earlier this year Assistant Attorney General John Cruden told Bloomberg BNA that he describes the Clean Power Plan case as the “Super Bowl of litigation” because of the number of parties involved and the quality of their counsel. The regulation, which is key to the Obama administration's Climate Action Plan, is being challenged by 27 states and a number of utilities and industry associations. On the other side, a number of environmental advocates, former lawmakers and major corporations, like Apple Inc. and Microsoft Corp., filed briefs in support of the rule (RIN:2060-AR33).
A number of attorneys who follow environmental litigation told Bloomberg BNA this summer that the Clean Power Plan is the most significant ongoing issue under the Clean Air Act (see related story).
The Clean Power Plan isn't the only major rule being litigated, as briefing is under way on the 2015 ozone standards (RIN:2060-AP38) and could soon begin on carbon standards for new and modified power plants.
The 70 parts per billion ozone standards are being challenged by industry associations and states that are arguing the standards are too stringent, as well as environmental advocates that claim the standards aren't adequately protective. Final briefs in the ozone litigation are due Sept. 19.
Briefing on the EPA's 2015 new source power plant standards would begin Oct. 13, under a proposed briefing schedule being considered by the D.C. Circuit (North Dakota v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1381, motion filed 8/4/16).
While that litigation is proceeding more slowly than the Clean Power Plan case, attorneys highlighted the new source standards as significant for the administration's efforts to combat climate change. That's because the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to regulate new sources in a sector before moving on to existing sources, which means a court ruling that invalidated the standards for new power plants (RIN:2060-AQ91) also would affect the legal status of the Clean Power Plan.
LITIGATION TRACKER
Topic
Citation
Description
Status
Latest Story
Climate Rules
West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1363, 10/23/15
States and industry groups are challenging the EPA's carbon dioxide standards for existing power plants, known as the Clean Power Plan.
The U.S. Supreme Court has stayed the rule's implementation pending judicial review. En banc arguments before the D.C. Circuit are scheduled for Sept. 27.
Texas Haze Decision Bolsters Critics' Clean Power Plan Arguments
North Dakota v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1381, 10/23/15
States and industry groups are challenging the EPA's carbon dioxide standards for new and modified power plants.
The court is considering a proposed briefing schedule that would begin Oct. 13.
Parties Agree to Briefing Schedule in Power Plant Lawsuit
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. EPA, D.D.C., No. 16-cv-681, 4/12/16
The Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of the Earth asked a federal district court in April to impose a strict deadline on EPA to take action on greenhouse gas emissions standards for aircraft.
A briefing schedule has not yet been set.
Narrowed Aircraft Emissions Case Can Proceed: Court
North Dakota v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1242, 7/15/16
States and industry groups are challenging the EPA's first-ever methane standards for new and modified oil and gas wells.
A briefing schedule has not yet been set.
Additional Lawsuits Challenge EPA's Methane Rule
Mexichem Fluor, Inc. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1328, 5/27/16
Manufacturers are challenging EPA's decision to update its list of acceptable alternatives for ozone-depleting substances in order to phase out some uses of hydrofluorocarbons with significant global warming potentials in favor of less-damaging substances.
All briefs have been filed, but the court has not yet scheduled oral arguments.
HFC Phaseout Consistent with Congress's Intent, EPA Says
Ozone Standards
Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1385, 10/26/15
Industry and state petitioners are challenging the EPA's October 2015 final rule that set the national ambient air quality standards for ozone at 70 parts per billion.
Briefing in the ozone litigation will continue through Sept. 19.
Ozone Implementation Fears Overstated, EPA Tells Court
South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1115, 4/24/15
The South Coast Air Quality Management District and several environmental organizations are challenging the EPA's implementation rule for the 2008 ozone standards.
The court is considering a request by the EPA to vacate and remand portions of the implementation rule setting “anti-backsliding” requirements for the 1979 one-hour ozone standard.
EPA Wants to Fix Flawed Ozone Implementation Rule
Delaware v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1230, 7/5/16
Delaware is challenging an April EPA rule that updated the status of 36 areas that had been designated as marginal nonattainment areas under the 2008 ozone standards.
A briefing schedule has not yet been set.
Delaware Sues EPA Over Ozone Designations
Other National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Sierra Club v. McCarthy, 9thCir., No. 15-15894, 5/1/15
Six states are challenging a federal district court's approval of a consent decree between the EPA and environmental groups that calls for the agency to take a phased approach to completing the attainment designations process under the 2010 sulfur dioxide standards.
Briefing in the litigation is complete, but the court has not yet scheduled oral arguments.
Six States Want Appeals Court to Review EPA Schedule for Sulfur Dioxide Designations
Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1097, 3/15/16
Environmental and public health organizations are challenging updated EPA guidance on conducting quantitative “hot-spot” analyses for highway and transit projects in nonattainment and maintenance areas for particulate matter.
The court is considering an EPA motion to dismiss the litigation for lack of jurisdiction.
Court Can't Review Conformity Guidance, EPA Says
Startup, Shutdown, Malfunction ‘SIP Call’
Se. Legal Found. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1166, 6/12/15
Various states and industry organizations are challenging an EPA rule that requires 36 states to alter their implementation plans for startup, shutdown and malfunction to remove “affirmative defense” language that shielded industrial facilities from civil penalties related to unavoidable equipment malfunctions.
Environmental groups who are intervening in the litigation on behalf of the EPA must file a brief by Aug. 29.
Boiler Ruling Supports Malfunction Position, EPA Says
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1127, 4/25/16
Utility industry organizations and a coalition of 15 states are challenging EPA's April supplemental finding that it is “appropriate and necessary” to regulate power plant emissions under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. That finding was issued in response to the Supreme Court's 2015 decision in Michigan v. EPA.
A briefing schedule has not yet been set.
Murray Energy Plans Array of Challenges to EPA Mercury Rule
Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1013, 1/20/15
Environmental and power industry organizations are challenging an EPA reconsideration rule that established an alternative method for compliance with the mercury and air toxics standards during startup and shutdown.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since Aug. 18, 2015. The court is weighing a request by environmental petitioners that the litigation continue to be held in abeyance until at least Oct. 28.
D.C. Circuit Halts Power Plant Startup Lawsuits
ARIPPA v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1168, 6/3/16
Industry and environmental organizations are challenging an April EPA rule that made “technical corrections” to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since July 18, with motions to govern future proceedings due Sept. 30.
EPA Removal of Civil Penalty Shield Triggers Utility Lawsuit
ARIPPA v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1180, 6/23/15
Utility industry and environmental groups are challenging the EPA's denial of all remaining reconsideration requests on the mercury and air toxics standards.
The court is considering a request by the industry trade groups ARIPPA and the Utility Air Regulatory Group, which want their challenges consolidated with their challenges to the supplemental MATS finding (Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1127, 4/25/16).
Mercury Rule Reconsideration Back on Court's Active Docket
Chesapeake Bay Found. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 13-1200, motion filed 6/24/13
Environmental groups are challenging a reconsidered rule that set mercury and air toxics standards for new and modified power plants, known as the New Source MATS Reconsideration Rule.
Litigation has been held in abeyance since June 17, 2014, to allow for EPA reevaluation of numeric emissions standards promulgated under the rule.
Methodology Doubts Lead EPA to Seek Remand of Reconsidered Power Plant Rule
Boiler, Refinery Standards
Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1021, 1/19/16
Four environmental organizations, led by the Sierra Club, are challenging the EPA's reconsideration rule that altered provisions of the boiler MACT standards, including boiler startup requirements.
EPA's response brief is due Sept. 20.
Boiler Emissions Limits Called Unlawful by Advocacy Groups
Am. Fuel & Petrochemical Mfrs. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1033, 1/29/16
Industry and environmental organizations are suing over EPA's 2015 update to its national hazardous air pollutant standards for refineries, which established new flaring and fenceline monitoring requirements.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since March 7 to allow for EPA to complete its administrative reconsideration process.
Refinery Emissions Litigation Halted by Court
Other Air Toxics Standards
Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1246, 7/31/15
Environmental groups are challenging the EPA's determination that it met a legal obligation to regulate sources responsible for at least 90 percent of the emissions of seven hazardous air pollutants.
Briefing is complete, but the court has not yet scheduled oral arguments.
Industry Sides With EPA on Activists' Air Toxics Challenge
Am. Chemistry Council v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1146, 5/18/15
The American Chemistry Council and Eastman Chemical Co. are challenging the EPA's national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants for off-site waste and recovery operations.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since July 20, 2015, pending completion of EPA administrative reconsideration proceedings and settlement negotiations.
Pressure Relief Valve Provisions Focus of Industry Lawsuit on Off-Site Waste Rule
Felman Prod. LLC v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1296, 8/28/15
The two companies that operate manganese ferroalloy production facilities in the U.S. are challenging the EPA's June 2015 revised air toxics standards for the source category.
Litigation has been held in abeyance since Nov. 30, 2015, pending completion of EPA administrative reconsideration proceedings and settlement negotiations.
Ferroalloy Air Standards Under Reconsideration by EPA
Am. Forest & Paper Ass'n v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 09-1312, 12/15/09
The American Forest and Paper Association is challenging the EPA's handling of emissions during periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction under both the 1998 air toxics standards for pulp and paper facilities and the EPA's 2012 revised standards for that source category.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since Feb. 11, 2013, pending completion of EPA administrative reconsideration proceedings.
Paper Trade Association Challenges EPA Air Toxics Rule for Pulp, Paper Industry
Georgia-Pacific v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 14-1267, 12/5/14
Georgia-Pacific LLC and the American Chemistry Council are challenging the EPA's 2014 revised air toxics standards for facilities that produce amino and phenolic resins.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since May 21, 2015, pending completion of EPA administrative reconsideration proceedings.
Georgia-Pacific Petitions EPA for Review of New Amino, Phenolic Resin Standards
Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1487, 12/22/15
Environmental and industry petitioners are challenging the EPA's 2015 hazardous air pollutant emissions standards for brick and structural clay production facilities, commonly known as Brick MACT.
The EPA recently rejected industry requests to reconsider the Brick MACT standards. Motions to govern future proceedings in the litigation are due Sept. 1.
EPA Denies Reconsideration of Brick Industry Air Standards
Aero MACT Grp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1040, 2/8/16
The aerospace industry is challenging the EPA's updated hazardous air pollutant rule for that sector, which for the first time set a limit on toxic emissions from specialty coating application operations.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since March 3.
Challenge to Toxics Rule for Aerospace Industry Halted
Kaiser Aluminum Corp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1423, 11/17/15
Kaiser Aluminum Corp. is challenging the EPA's 2015 update to hazardous air pollutant standards for secondary aluminum production facilities, which manufacture aluminum from scrap metal.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since March 21 to allow for settlement negotiations.
Court Halts Aluminum Facility Emissions Litigation
Volkswagen Diesel Emissions Scandal
In re Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” Mktg., Sales Practices and Prod. Liab., N.D. Cal., No. 3:15-md-2672, 12/8/15
Consumers and the federal government sued Volkswagen of America Inc. for alleged violations of consumer protection law and the Clean Air Act related to the use of illegal emissions cheating software in the company's diesel engine vehicle fleet.
A final approval hearing on a proposed $14.7 billion settlement is scheduled for Oct. 18 in San Francisco.
Attorneys Want Up to $332.5 Million From Volkswagen
Regional Haze
Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 12-1342, 8/6/12
Environmental and industry petitioners are challenging an EPA rule that allowed states to use emissions trading under the cross-state air pollution rule to reduce regional haze as an alternative to requiring existing power plants to install best available retrofit technology.
Opening briefs are due Aug. 30.
Regional Haze Lawsuit Briefing to Stretch Into 2017
Texas v. EPA, 5th Cir., No. 16-60118, 2/29/16
Texas and a coalition of industry groups are challenging the EPA's decision to disapprove of Texas's proposed revision to its state implementation plan for reducing haze in favor of a federal implementation plan.
The Fifth Circuit July 15 rejected a motion by the EPA to transfer the litigation to the D.C. Circuit and issued a stay of the rule pending resolution of the case.
Court Stays EPA Haze Rule in Win for Texas Coal Plants
Yazzie v. EPA, 9th Cir., No. 14-73100, 10/7/14
Petitioners are challenging the EPAs' source-specific federal implementation plan to reduce nitrogen oxides emissions from the Navajo Generating Station to reduce regional haze at 11 national parks and wilderness areas.
The litigation has been fully briefed, but oral arguments have not yet been scheduled.
Briefs Challenge EPA Emissions Plan for Power Plant Near Grand Canyon
Cross-State Air Pollution
Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 12-1346, 8/9/12
Various power industry groups are challenging an EPA rule that revised emissions budgets for 13 states under the cross-state air pollution rule.
The litigation being held in abeyance pending EPA's response to the D.C. Circuit's remand of certain cross-state rule emissions budgets (EPA v. EME Homer City Generation LP, 134 S. Ct. 1584, 78 ERC 1225, 2014 BL 118432 (2014)).
Cross-State Emissions Budgets Case Put on Hold
Van der Vaart v. McCarthy, E.D.N.C., No. 5:16-cv-138, 3/30/16
North Carolina is seeking a court order that would compel the EPA to respond to a 2013 petition filed by several Northeastern states that argued pollution transported from North Carolina interferes with their ability to meet federal air quality standards for ozone.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since July 19. A joint status report is due to the court by Sept. 12.
North Carolina's Ozone Lawsuit Halted Until September
Other Emissions Standards
Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Ass'n v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1056, 3/16/15
Industry groups, including the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association and the Pellet Fuels Institute, are challenging the EPA's revised new source performance standards for wood-burning heaters, which were updated in 2015 for the first time since 1988.
Procedural motions are due Aug. 31. That deadline has previously been extended five times to allow for ongoing discussions between the EPA and the Pellet Fuels Institute.
Pellet Fuel, Masonry Heater Provisions Highlighted in Lawsuits Over Wood Stove Rule
Conservation Law Found. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 13-1233, 8/2/13
Various petitioners are challenging a regulatory exemption that allowed stationary backup engines to operate for up to 50 hours per year without emissions controls to provide non-emergency electricity to power providers.
The court remanded the engine exemption back to the EPA, which requested the litigation be halted in light of a May D.C. Circuit decision that overturned a similar engine exemption (Del. Dep't of Natural Res. and Envtl. Control v. EPA, 785 F.3d 1, 80 ERC 1393, 2015 BL 127032 (D.C. Cir. 2015)).
Court Remands 50-Hour Engine Exemption to EPA
Air Alliance Houston v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1210, 7/10/15
Air Alliance Houston and three other environmental groups are challenging the EPA's updated emissions factors for refineries and chemical manufacturing plants, which set a new value for estimated volatile organic compound emissions from flaring.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since Sept. 28, 2015, to allow for settlement discussions.
EPA Sued Over Refinery, Chemical Site Emissions
Am. Forest & Paper Ass'n v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 14-1097, 6/3/14
The American Forest & Paper Association is challenging the EPA's performance standards for particulate emissions from new and modified kraft pulp mills.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since July 25, 2014, pending completion of EPA administrative reconsideration proceedings.
Trade Group Seeks Appeals Court Review of EPA's Kraft Pulp Mill Emission Standards
Portland Cement Ass'n v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1310, 9/4/15
The Portland Cement Association is challenging the EPA's performance specification 18, which set requirements for assessing continuous monitoring systems for emissions of hydrogen chloride at cement kilns and power plants.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since Oct. 19, 2015, pending completion of EPA administrative reconsideration proceedings.
Court Asked to Halt Monitoring Specification Lawsuit
Permitting
United States v. DTE Energy, 6th Cir., No. 14-2274, 10/6/14
The EPA is appealing a 2011 district court ruling that found DTE Energy Co. did not violate the Clean Air Act by renovating a Michigan power plant without first obtaining a new source review permit.
Argued Dec. 10, 2015.
Pre-Construction Emissions Estimates at Issue in DTE New Source Review Case
Am. Petroleum Inst. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 15-1197, 6/30/15
The American Petroleum Institute is challenging an EPA rule that established general permits and permits by rule for use on tribal lands in permitting minor sources under the new source review program.
The litigation has been held in abeyance since Aug. 13, 2015.
Court Asked to Stay Tribal Permitting Litigation
Monitoring
Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1158, 5/27/16
Sierra Club is challenging a March 2016 final rule that made the first substantive changes to the EPA's ambient air pollution monitoring requirements in a decade.
Initial submissions are due Oct. 7. The court extended that deadline three times to allow for settlement negotiations to proceed.
Sierra Club Challenges EPA's Air Monitoring Rule
Deadline Lawsuits
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. McCarthy, N.D. Cal., No. 3:16-cv-3796, 7/7/16
The Center for Biological Diversity and the Center for Environmental Health want a federal district court to set firm deadlines for the EPA to complete mandatory reviews of national standards for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide.
The court issued a summons to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy on July 8.
Late Air Standards Reviews Trigger Lawsuit
Cal. Cmtys. Against Toxics v. McCarthy, D.D.C., No. 1:15-cv-512, 4/8/15
Environmental groups are seeking a court order that would compel the EPA to review air toxics standards for various industries, including semiconductor manufacturing and municipal solid waste landfills.
The court is considering competing motions for summary judgment filed by the environmental plaintiffs and the EPA.
EPA Overdue on Air Toxics Reviews, Complaint Says in Seeking Court Deadlines
Blue Ridge Envtl. Def. League v. McCarthy, D.D.C., No. 1:16-cv-364, 2/24/16
A coalition of environmental organizations led by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League are seeking a court order that would compel the EPA to complete reviews of air toxics standards covering 13 industrial sectors.
The court is considering a motion for summary judgment filed by the plaintiffs.
EPA Sued Over Missed Air Toxics Review Deadlines
Humane Soc'y of the U.S. v. McCarthy, D.D.C., No. 1:15-cv-141, 1/28/15
Environmental groups are seeking a court order that would require the EPA to respond to a 2009 petition requesting the regulation of concentrated animal feeding operations as a stationary source of air pollution.
The court is weighing a motion by the EPA to dismiss the litigation for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Lawsuits Seek Court Order Requiring EPA Response on Livestock Emissions
Cmty. In-Power and Dev. Ass'n Inc. v. McCarthy, D.D.C., No. 1:16-cv-1074, 6/8/16
A coalition of environmental organizations want a federal district court to set deadlines for the EPA to complete overdue reviews of national hazardous air pollution standards covering nine industrial sectors.
The court has not yet set a briefing schedule.
EPA Sued Over Delayed Air Toxics Reviews
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. McCarthy, N.D. Cal., No. 4:16-cv-4092, 7/21/16
A coalition of environmental organizations sued the EPA over an alleged failure to take action to address missing pollution reduction plans for ozone nonattainment areas in 16 states and the District of Columbia.
A summons was issued to EPA Administrator McCarthy on July 22.
EPA Failure to Act on State Ozone Plans Prompts Lawsuit
‘Jobs' Lawsuit
Murray Energy Corp. v. McCarthy, N.D. W.Va., No. 14-cv-39, 3/24/14
An industry coalition led by Murray Energy Corp. is seeking a court order requiring the EPA to evaluate the impact its air pollution rules have on employment.
The court is considering an EPA motion for summary judgment.
Certain Documents Ordered Released in EPA Jobs Case
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95881017&vname=dennotallissues&wsn=499803500&searchid=28218124&doctypeid=1&type=date&mode=doc&split=0&scm=DELNWB&pg=0
-
No Out-Of-State Emissions ‘Leakage' in Northeast: Report
Aug 17, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald B. Silverman
A Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiativereport suggests that the cap-and-trade program hasn't led to emissions “leakage” from electricity generators outside the region.
The report, which was released by RGGI Aug. 12, said carbon dioxide emissions from non-RGGI sources that provided electric power to the region declined by 0.5 percent during the three-year period ending in 2014, when compared to the base period of 2006-2008. Similarly, the carbon dioxide emissions rate from those sources declined by 10.8 percent during that period.
The report said electricity generation from non-RGGI sources over the three-year period increased by 11.6 percent or 24.2 million megawatt hours.
The leakage data are significant because RGGI critics have long contended that the added cost of RGGI carbon allowances could lead to the import of electricity from generators outside the region that aren't required to purchase the allowances.
While the data suggest that no leakage has occurred, the report itself doesn't draw any definitive conclusions because it said a number of factors are at play, including electricity demand, fossil fuel prices and wholesale electricity prices.
The term leakage refers to a shift from electricity generating sources that must comply with the RGGI cap-and-trade program to those that don't—power plants in non-RGGI states and smaller units within RGGI that generate less than 25 megawatts of electricity.
Program Review
The nine RGGI states are expected to finish their program review sometime in the fall and propose changes to the program in the form of a model rule that will adjust the RGGI emissions cap and allow the states to comply with the Clean Power Plan.
The Boston-based Acadia Center is urging RGGI to make four key changes in the model rule, according to a report released Aug. 11. The report says RGGI should reduce its emissions cap by 5 percent per year from 2020 to 2030; extend the cap to 2031 to comply with the Clean Power Plan; make an adjustment for unused, so-called banked allowances; and change the current cost containment reserve mechanism.
The report was released on the same day that the Sierra Club released the results of a poll which found that 77 percent of those surveyed support RGGI and 79 percent support a proposal to lower the RGGI cap by 5 percent per year.
The poll was conducted by Hart Research Associates and Chesapeake Beach Consulting and included 1,209 registered voters in the nine RGGI states.
The Sierra Club has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg, the majority owner of Bloomberg L.P., parent of Bloomberg BNA.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=95881020&vname=dennotallissues&fn=95881020&jd=95881020
-
AM Alert: Cap-And-Trade’s Last Auction Fell Flat. Will It Happen Again?
Aug 16, 2016 | The Sacramento Bee
By Jeremy B. White
Not that long ago, few politicians would have paid close attention to California’s auctions of permits to emit carbon. Those sales, the fulcrum of the state’s cap-and-trade system, were proceeding smoothly and reaping billions of dollars.
But uncertainty has since cloaked the landmark climate-change program. The last auction brought in about $10 million, far short of projections. That boded ill for an environmental tool already beset by legal skepticism and facing a political battle over its future. If the businesses who are compelled to buy permits perceive the program is flailing, that could affect how the politics play out. And beyond reducing emissions, cap-and-trade’s health directly affects how much revenue is available for programs like the high-speed railchampioned by Gov. Jerry Brown.
So today’s auction could carry some serious political consequences. About 86.2 million permits are on offer, for a minimum price of $12.73 per. Another skimpy sale could send a signal to business interests about the program’s lack of stability and ratchet up the pressure to get something done in the Legislature. We won’t know the results for another week, but rest assured we’ll be paying attention.
NUMBER NUGGET: The Legislature's final weeks of session are a busy time for the hundreds of lobbyists who ply their trade within the Capitol and state bureaucracy. State filings due earlier this month show that the state had 1,810 registered lobbyists as of June 30. That compares to 1,822 at the same point in the 2013-2014 session.
VIDEO OF THE DAY: Get to know Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.
HUNGRY FOR CHANGE: Cap-and-trade is one of the paramount issues that has lobbyists sweating and lawmakers counting votes in the session’s home stretch. Another is a revived measure seeking additional overtime pay for farmworkers. After the first iteration faltered on the Assembly floor, the second draft has passed a key hurdle in the Senate Appropriations Committee and now awaits a Senate floor vote. The true heavy lift will likely once again be passing the Assembly floor, not the more liberal Senate, but Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, is leading other lawmakers in a 24-hour hunger strike agitating for the bill starting at 8 am Assembly members Joaquin Arambula, Nora Campos, David Chiu, Kansen Chu, Cristina Garcia, Jose Medina, Miguel Santiago, and Tony Thurmond plan to join Gonzalez in forgoing food. They’ll break their fast during a mass tomorrow morning at the Cathedral of Blessed Sacrament.
MODEL LEGISLATOR: For those of you hoping to see Assemblyman Jim Frazier, D-Oakley, in a bikini, sorry: during his stint as a fashion model tonight he’ll be merely wearing a tuxedo. His moment on the catwalk comes during a fashion-show themed scholarship fundraiser for the organization Advancing Women in Transportation. Frazier chairs the Assembly Transportation Committee, making him a central figure in the perennial effort to get a transportation funding deal. He’ll be strutting his stuff during a fundraiser that starts at 5:30 pm at the Sacramento State Alumni Center.
RAISE THEM UP: Continuing a fair-minded tradition for a foul-mouthed former legislator, tonight is the latest fundraiser for the John Burton Foundation. The former lawmaker and current California Democratic Party head will once again be working to equip foster kids with the supplies they need to succeed in school. Donations will be accepted in the Esquire Building lobby from 5:30 pm to 7 pm.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article95853487.html#storylink=cpy
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested