Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 8/31/16
-
(ACC Mentioned) Polyurethanes Technical Conference to be Held in Baltimore This Month
Aug 31, 2016 | Bed Times
The Center for the Polyurethanes Industry of the American Chemistry Council is hosting the 59th annual Polyurethanes Technical Conference at the Hilton Baltimore Sept. 26-28. -
Congressman to Propose Expanded FDA Authority Over Cosmetics
Aug 31, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr (D–New Jersey) intends to introduce a bill that would provide the FDA with additional authority to regulate cosmetic products. -
California Considers Prioritisation of Vinyl Acetate, Other Substances
Aug 31, 2016 | Chemical Watch
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) is consulting on the prioritisation of five chemicals or chemical groups, to be considered for preparation of hazard identification materials. -
State Lambastes EPA Over Shifting Chemical Stance
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
State lawmakers in New York assailed U.S. EPA at a hearing yesterday, accusing the federal agency of changing its guidance on perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, in water. -
You Can Find Hundreds (!) of Couches Without Toxic Flame Retardants
Aug 31, 2016 | Environmental Working Group
By Delaney King
Many companies across the nation have complied with California’s 2014 flammability standard that allows furniture manufacturers not to use flame retardant chemicals in polyurethane foam. -
LNG Legislative Endgame Nears
Aug 31, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Fred H. Hutchison
Congress is currently on an extended summer break, which lasts through Labor Day, Sept. 5. This hiatus provides an opportune opportunity to reflect upon where the LNG exports legislation stands before the 114th Congress enters the legislative “homestretch.” -
Ozone from Oil and Gas Drilling May Harm Kids with Asthma
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Oil and gas production may be concentrated in a relatively small number of states, but its ozone-related health effects spread far and wide, according to a new analysis by two environmental groups. -
Texas Faults Cost-Benefit Review, Lack Of Risk Finding In Methane NSPS
Aug 31, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan
Texas says its upcoming suit challenging EPA's rule curbing methane from the oil and gas sector will target the agency's underlying cost-benefit review, underscoring that the suit could provide the first test for the agency's novel social cost of methane (SCM) metric that quantifies the benefits of reducing the potent greenhouse gas. -
Advocates Say California's Refinery Safety Rule Supports EPA IST Mandate
Aug 31, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Advocates say California's proposal to mandate that petroleum refineries use strict inherently safer technology (IST) to improve facility safety in order to protect workers and prevent accidents supports their request for EPA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to mandate IST in future facility safety rules. -
Federal Investigators Deploy to Fla. Plant Explosion
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Colby Bermel
The federal Chemical Safety Board has deployed investigators to the site of a Florida chemical plant explosion that killed one worker and shook area homes over the weekend. -
Blue State Democrats Charge Ahead On Climate Policy Despite ESPS Stay
Aug 31, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Abby Smith
Despite continued uncertainty surrounding federal regulations to curb greenhouse gases, several energy-producing states with Democratic governors in recent days are moving forward with state-level emissions targets and wide-ranging plans to address climate change. -
Eastern U.S. Can Handle 30% Clean Power — Report
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Christa Marshall
Wind and solar can supply 30 percent of the annual power for the nation's Eastern grid without reliability concerns, new research from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory said.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Polyurethanes Technical Conference to be Held in Baltimore This Month
Aug 31, 2016 | Bed Times
The Center for the Polyurethanes Industry of the American Chemistry Council is hosting the 59th annual Polyurethanes Technical Conference at the Hilton Baltimore Sept. 26-28.
Attendees will experience an expanded slate of technical sessions featuring the latest polyurethane innovations presented by industry experts. New educational sessions will address opportunities within automotive manufacturing, construction, coatings, adhesives, sealants and elastomers, and production sustainability.
The sustainability session will provide an update on state mattress-recycling activity followed by information on industry recycling goals, current laws, outreach to consumers and stakeholders, and long-term challenges.
“Attendees should come with plenty of business cards,” said Lee Salamone, CPI senior director. “The Polyurethanes Technical Conference is the highlight of the year for more than 1,000 industry professionals. As the longest-running polyurethanes conference in North America, this event is absolutely the pre-eminent forum for industry expertise, professional networking and regulatory insight.”
The conference also includes courses sponsored by CPI’s Polyurethane Professional Development program, the Polyurethane Innovation Award and a table-top exhibition.
http://bedtimesmagazine.com/2016/08/polyurethanes-technical-conference/
-
Congressman to Propose Expanded FDA Authority Over Cosmetics
Aug 31, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr (D–New Jersey) intends to introduce a bill that would provide the FDA with additional authority to regulate cosmetic products.
Ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr Pallone has also requested a full committee hearing on the current regulatory framework for cosmetics.
In a letter to Chairman Fred Upton (R–Michigan), he flagged up several concerns with the FDA’s current authorities under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act . These include that:
the agency does not verify the safety of cosmetics before they are offered for sale;
individual companies are responsible for testing the safety of their products and are not required to share these findings with the FDA;
cosmetics manufacturers have no obligation to inform the agency of adverse effects reported by consumers either; and
the agency is not able to issue a mandatory recall.
The congressman intends to introduce a bill this autumn that will build on his 2012 Cosmetics Safety Enhancement Act (HR 4262) to address these concerns.
The Personal Care Products Safety Act (S 1014) was introduced in the Senate, last year, with similar aims. But the measure has remained stalled in committee.
A coalition of nearly 30 companies and organisations – including Unilever, Johnson & Johnson and the Environmental Working Group – recently urged leaders of the Senate committee of jurisdiction to move the bill forward.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49343/congressman-to-propose-expanded-fda-authority-over-cosmetics
-
California Considers Prioritisation of Vinyl Acetate, Other Substances
Aug 31, 2016 | Chemical Watch
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) is consulting on the prioritisation of five chemicals or chemical groups, to be considered for preparation of hazard identification materials.
The substances are:
vinyl acetate;
methyl chloride;
asphalt and asphalt emissions, associated with road paving and roofing;
type I pyrethroids; and
aspartame.
The prioritisation of the substances will be discussed at a 15 November meeting of the Proposition 65 Carcinogen Identification Committee (CIC).
Oehha will use the committee's findings to select chemicals for preparation of hazard identification materials. Such documents can serve as a precursor to a substance being listed on Prop 65 as a carcinogen.
Comments on scientific evidence pertaining to these substances’ selection will be accepted until 24 October.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49341/california-considers-prioritisation-of-vinyl-acetate-other-substances
-
State Lambastes EPA Over Shifting Chemical Stance
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
State lawmakers in New York assailed U.S. EPA at a hearing yesterday, accusing the federal agency of changing its guidance on perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, in water.
At issue is a pollution case at Hoosick Falls, N.Y., where municipal water and private well water tested above 400 parts per trillion of PFOA.
In 2009, EPA ruled water off-limits if levels of PFOA exceeded 400 ppt.
The agency, however, maintained that Hoosick Falls water was safe until an about-face in December 2015, in which it recommended that residents not use municipal water.
PFOA is linked to kidney cancer and other ailments.
Lawmakers expressed frustration and confusion at EPA's recommendations.
"They come from basically left field in December of 2015 ... and they say, 'Don't drink the water,'" said Howard Zucker, New York state health commissioner. "They then in May of 2016 put out their new health advisory of 70 ppt. But even in that advisory, they don't say, 'If you're above 70 [ppt], don't drink the water.' ... So what confused us is they didn't mention, 'Don't drink the water ... above a certain level,' and do now."
For years, Saint-Gobain SA, a French construction and chemicals firm, manufactured PFOA at a plant in Hoosick Falls. In January 2016, New York placed the factory on its state Superfund list.
Honeywell International Inc. is also implicated in the pollution.
Some residents have alleged that the water pollution has led to cancers in the area.
"When I first learned of the exceedance, we had multiple conversations [in 2015] with the state Health Department where they made a judgment not to follow the existing number of 400 ppt," said EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck. "They said [at the hearing] there was a built-in margin of safety and they didn't need to follow it. ... The health department wasn't confused, they just simply disagreed".
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/08/31/stories/1060042223
-
You Can Find Hundreds (!) of Couches Without Toxic Flame Retardants
Aug 31, 2016 | Environmental Working Group
By Delaney King
Many companies across the nation have complied with California’s 2014 flammability standard that allows furniture manufacturers not to use flame retardant chemicals in polyurethane foam.
That means that consumers can now choose from hundreds of flame retardant-free sofas.
A new survey by the Center for Environmental Health, conducted in collaboration with the American Home Furnishings Alliance and the Sustainable Furnishing Council, determined that 43 companies representing 65 brands are now making fire retardant-free furniture.
If you’re buying a sofa, look at the label, often located under cushions or on the bottom of the piece, to make sure it was made without flame retardants. California law doesn’t ban the chemicals but it requires that their presence be disclosed on the labels of any furniture made in or after 2015.
If you don’t see a label, you need to ask the manufacturer whether flame retardant chemicals are in the upholstered product.
Here are seven companies that produce flame retardant-free furniture:
1. Ashley Furniture
Example: Brace Sofa in Granite, $799.99 (price varies by location)
One of the nation’s largest furniture retailers, Ashley Furniture announced that it would stop adding fire retardant chemicals to products made in 2015 or after. All products are labeled according to California’s flame retardant law.
2. City Furniture
Example: Grant Sofa in light green microfiber, $599.95
In Florida, City Furniture provides information about fire retardant chemicals under the features section on each product’s webpage.
3. Endicott Home
Example: Oscar Longer Condo Sofa, $1,884.00
The company’s website says that it stopped using chemical flame retardants in its furniture.
4. Ethan Allen
Example: Conway Sofa, $2,299.00
Ethan Allen is one of a growing number of furniture companies whose websites state that their products are made without added flame retardant chemicals.
5. IKEA
Example: Stockholm Sofa in Röstånga beige, $899.00
A public relations representative in IKEA’s U.S. corporate office said that the company complies with the California law and has been manufacturing products under the new requirements since December 2014. More information on its chemical policies can be found on page 35 of the IKEA Group FY15 Sustainability Report.
6. Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams
Example: Alex Sofa, $2,860
In its online Eco Statement, Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams commit to “[cushions] free of fire-retardant chemicals,” plus other environmentally friendly measures. Its couches are available at its signature stores and some third-party vendors.
7. Roger + Chris
Example: Basel Sofa, $1,499
The furniture is available exclusively through the company’s online store. Its website claims that its products were manufactured without toxic byproducts, including flame retardants, PBDEs, plasticizers, phthalates, persistant organic pollutants and polyvinyl chloride.
If you purchased your sofa before 2015, there’s a good chance the manufacturer treated the cushion foam with toxic flame retardant chemicals linked to cancer and hormone disruption.
As evidence of the dangers of flame retardants mount, we hope that even more flame retardant-free couches will be available soon.
http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2016/08/you-can-find-hundreds-couches-without-toxic-flame-retardants
-
Aug 31, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Fred H. Hutchison
Congress is currently on an extended summer break, which lasts through Labor Day, Sept. 5. This hiatus provides an opportune opportunity to reflect upon where the LNG exports legislation stands before the 114th Congress enters the legislative “homestretch.”
As readers of Congress Blog are well aware, bills have been pending for several years to bring greater certainty to the process by which the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) reviews applications to export U. S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) to nations that do not have a free trade agreement with the United States. (LNG exports to free trade agreement nations are automatically deemed in the “public interest,” but exports to non-FTA nations must undergo a formal public interest review.)
In recent months, the House of Representatives and the Senate have both passed LNG exports language as part of broader energy bills. If enacted the LNG provisions would set a new statutory deadline on DOE’s non-FTA licensing process.
The principal (small) variant in the bills is when such a deadline would be set… the House favors a 60-day deadline after the requisite final environmental documentation is complete and the Senate a 45-day deadline. If such a deadline had been in place, the most recent major non-FTA application (the one for Lake Charles LNG) might have been accelerated by eight or nine months.
A joint House-Senate conference committee is expected to meet this Fall to reconcile the differences in the energy bills. In addition, the House included the LNG exports language in its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2017, which opens a path for possible consideration of the LNG issue by the NDAA House-Senate conference committee as well.
This being an election year, the House will return on Sept. 6 and work until Sept. 30. The Senate has the same return date, but remains in session for a week longer, until Oct. 7. Both chambers will then recess until after the Nov. 8 elections, returning for a post-election (colorfully—and somewhat inexplicably—called the “lame duck”) session that will likely stretch from mid-November into December.
Some observers are saying that there may not be sufficient time to complete work on the energy bill or the NDAA during the abbreviated legislative window in September. Nonetheless, an effort must be made to do just that.
After all, the LNG language has gathered increasing bipartisan momentum at each stage of the legislative process and the Obama administration has said that it could and would comply with a new statutory deadline (aka an accelerated non-FTA decision-making timeline) should Congress pass one.
The legislative endgame is near, and all who want to see the U. S. LNG licensing process improved must work towards final resolution this year. Otherwise, Congress must start over from scratch in 2017, since all bills not enacted into law expire when the 114th Congress adjourns sine die.
Let’s not lose any more time. American LNG export projects compete in an increasingly fierce global natural gas market and our regulatory regime should—as much as possible—support and enhance the competitive position of U. S. LNG export companies and the thousands of jobs they create/support.
Fred H. Hutchison is Executive Director of LNG Allies and Our Energy Moment.
http://www.thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/293930-lng-legislative-endgame-nears
-
Ozone from Oil and Gas Drilling May Harm Kids with Asthma
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Oil and gas production may be concentrated in a relatively small number of states, but its ozone-related health effects spread far and wide, according to a new analysis by two environmental groups.
The report, released this morning by the Clean Air Task Force and Earthworks, attributes more than 750,000 summertime asthma attacks in children to air pollution stemming from oil and gas drilling that contributes to ozone formation. While the hardest-hit area is Dallas-Fort Worth, with almost 45,900 estimated attacks, the runner-up is the New York City region, followed by Washington, D.C., and Baltimore; Houston; Denver; and Atlanta.
The reason for the sprawling footprint is ozone's tendency to travel to areas "that we usually don't think of as being influenced by oil and gas emissions," Conrad Schneider, advocacy director for the task force, said in an interview.
"We were surprised at how big [the footprint] is," Schneider said. The report, titled "Gasping for Breath" and billed as the first to examine the national health effects of ozone stemming from the oil and gas sector, relied on 2011 U.S. EPA National Emissions Inventory data projected out to 2025. It also blames industry-related ozone for more than 500,000 missed school days each year and almost 2,000 asthma-related emergency room visits.
Ozone, the main ingredient in smog, is created by the reaction of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in sunshine. Such compounds are a common class of pollutants stemming from oil and gas operations; overall, the industry is responsible for about one-quarter of all VOC emissions that help form ozone, according to the task force.
The report calls it "critical" for EPA to wrap up work on "control technique guidelines" aimed at helping state regulators curb VOC emissions from existing sources in areas with high ozone levels.
The agency had released an initial draft of the proposed guidelines in September; as of this morning, the final version remained under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget, according to the website Reginfo.gov.
The report is the second in recent months from the task force and Earthworks that attempts to gauge the health effects of air pollution from the oil and gas sector on a local basis; the first examined the potential cancer risks (ClimateWire, June 15).
Release of today's report was accompanied by an expanded version of an online mapintended to allow people to track the potential impact of emissions on their communities.
The report's findings, however, quickly came under fire from the oil and gas industry and its allies.
"The United States is leading the world in oil and natural gas production and reducing emissions which are at near 20-year lows while saving consumers in energy costs," an American Petroleum Institute spokesman said in an email this morning.
In a separate message, Matt Dempsey, a spokesman for the Center for Regulatory Solutions, wrote that the analysis relies on outdated and incomplete data, fails to account for the most recent federal and state regulatory actions, and is not peer-reviewed.
Schneider acknowledged that the report does not take into account the possible effect of the control guidelines or a separate Bureau of Land Management proposal to curb the loss of natural gas from wells on federal and tribal lands, a step that would also reduce VOC releases.
Otherwise, Schneider called the groups' approach "conservative." It does not, for example, take into account the likelihood that 2025 will generally be hotter than today, with more ozone formed as a result, he said. The EPA data also do not factor in steadily increasing estimates for the volume of leaks from oil and gas operations. While the report itself has not been peer-reviewed, "every single part of it" — including the emissions inventory and the air models used in calculating the impacts — has undergone such scrutiny, he said.
"I understand the rhetoric here," he said of the criticism, "but there's really no substance to what they're saying."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/08/31/stories/1060042235
-
Texas Faults Cost-Benefit Review, Lack Of Risk Finding In Methane NSPS
Aug 31, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan
Texas says its upcoming suit challenging EPA's rule curbing methane from the oil and gas sector will target the agency's underlying cost-benefit review, underscoring that the suit could provide the first test for the agency's novel social cost of methane (SCM) metric that quantifies the benefits of reducing the potent greenhouse gas.
In an Aug. 29 statement of issues, Texas says the agency's cost-benefit analysis was not “reasoned,” arguing that is one of several reasons why an appeals court should overturn the rule.
The state also echoes claims from North Dakota and industry officials that EPA improperly did not issue an oil and gas-specific finding that the sector's methane emissions endanger public health and welfare.
The recent filing outlines claims that the Lone Star State plans to raise in litigation over the new source performance standards (NSPS) methane rule pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Other parties to the litigation are poised to file similar issues statements in the coming days.
A total of 15 states, as well as several industry groups, have challenged the NSPS, which is aimed at curbing emissions of methane from new and modified oil and gas facilities, and is one of several EPA measures to reduce the industry's emissions. For example, EPA alongside the NSPS issued a draft information collection request seeking data on methane emissions from existing oil and gas operations that could inform a methane rule for those sources.
Texas' recent statement underscores that the litigation, North Dakota, et al. v. EPA, et al., could provide the first test for the agency's novel SCM metric.
The tool is analogous to the Obama administration's social cost of carbon (SCC) values that seek to calculate the cost to society from an incremental ton of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere. Avoiding such costs can be considered benefits in rules that limit emissions.
The SCM uses a similar approach but seeks to account for the fact that methane is a much more potent GHG, even though it does not last in the atmosphere as long as CO2.
Any successful challenge to that tool could make it difficult for EPA to show that the rule's benefits exceed its costs, a key criteria in rulemakings.
While Texas does not specifically mention the SCM in its recent filing, it says that the rule is unlawful “because the EPA did not base its cost/benefit estimates on reasoned bases and analyses, and, therefore, the EPA failed to properly consider the complete regulatory burden of the Final Rule on Texas’ regulatory agencies and the oil and gas industry in Texas.”
That echoes comments on a proposed version of the rule, where several industry groups faulted the SCM, which is used to calculate all of the rule's quantified benefits. In December comments from the Independent Petroleum Association of America and American Exploration & Production Council -- both of which have sued over the rule -- seek to distinguish between the SCC and the SCM.
Unlike the SCC, “which has undergone formal public comment and review, EPA's selected value for [SCM] in this proposed rulemaking is arbitrarily taken from one scientific report . . . for which EPA only requested a 'peer review' and not formal public review and comment.”
The oil groups add that the metric has not been reviewed by the White House budget office, unlike the SCC.
Risk Finding
The remainder of Texas' recent filing appears focused on the endangerment finding issue, with the state arguing that EPA should have first issued such a finding to regulate the sector's GHGs under Clean Air Act section 111(b).
Under the Clean Air Act, an affirmative endangerment finding is considered a prerequisite before the agency can list a source category for regulation.
But Texas faults EPA's inclusion of “facility source categories not originally included or contemplated in the listing of source categories as previously determined by the EPA.” It also faults the final rule's use of methane “as an improper surrogate for all other 'greenhouse gases.'”
In not preparing a sector-specific endangerment finding, EPA “failed to properly evaluate the scientific evidence concerning the effect of greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas source category, in particular methane, and otherwise disregarded data and analyses that conflicts with its decision to create standards for emissions of greenhouse gases from oil and gas facilities.”
EPA and environmentalists have argued that EPA's earlier endangerment finding for its rule governing vehicle GHG emissions, including methane, is adequate to justify the NSPS rules.
Similarly, the agency in its June 3 response to public comments on the NSPS cited the 2009 endangerment finding -- which included methane -- saying, “Given the strong body of science that demonstrates the impacts on human health and the environment, EPA must act expeditiously to ensure that major sources of greenhouse gases -- such as the oil and gas industry -- promptly and aggressively limit their emissions.”
The agency also noted that it listed the oil and gas sector as a regulated category in 1979, and that it must only provide a “rational basis” for expanding regulation of the sector to a new pollutant, in this case methane. It cites the 2009 vehicle finding and subsequent scientific research that underscores that GHGs cause global warming.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/texas-faults-cost-benefit-review-lack-risk-finding-methane-nsps
-
Advocates Say California's Refinery Safety Rule Supports EPA IST Mandate
Aug 31, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Advocates say California's proposal to mandate that petroleum refineries use strict inherently safer technology (IST) to improve facility safety in order to protect workers and prevent accidents supports their request for EPA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to mandate IST in future facility safety rules.
An advocate for stricter federal regulation says the state adopting a potentially precedent-setting IST mandate, “really has the potential to influence the future of national approaches to chemical facility safety more broadly.”
Industry officials have long opposed any federal mandates for IST -- which usually means alternative chemicals or processes that advocates say reduce the risk or consequences of an accident -- and said it would mean government officials dictating business decisions. Industry sources acknowledge that the California rule could be important for some future regulations, but doubt EPA or OSHA will adopt it in their planned safety rule updates.
California's Office of Emergency Services and the state's Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) is convening an Aug. 31 public hearing on aspects of the state's proposal to bolster refinery safety through new requirements, including that facilities “adopt inherently safer designs and systems, to the greatest extent feasible.”
The July 14 package of proposed state rules backs an IST mandate, echoing advocates' long-standing calls for EPA and OSHA to require facilities to use IST.
EPA and OSHA are currently weighing tightening their facility safety rules as part of their implementation of President Obama's Executive Order 13650 on improving the safety and security of industrial plants. The August 2013 order calls for improved communication and coordination, and for modernizing policies, rules, and standards.
EPA is seeking to finalize by year-end its March proposed rule revising its Risk Management Plan (RMP) facility accident prevention rule, which calls for facilities to analyze whether safer processes would improve safety, but declines advocates' long-standing calls to require their use.
OSHA, meanwhile, has floated potential updates to its process safety management (PSM) worker safety rule, but is still far from issuing a proposed rule. A federal panel advising OSHA's potential PSM overhaul has opposed requiring facilities to use IST, and supported allowing companies flexibility in meeting potential future requirements.
Potential Precedent
While EPA and OSHA appear to have rebuffed long-standing calls for an imminent IST mandate, advocates argue that if California finalizes its requirement for oil refineries to implement IST, that could prove that such a regulation is feasible and should serve as model for future federal rules.
Industry officials also acknowledge that the California rule could potentially influence future federal requirements. However, industry continues to believe that the federal agencies' current thinking -- at least as evidenced by EPA's proposed RMP rule -- is for regulators to require companies to consider IST, but allow facilities to decide what processes are most appropriate.
Additionally, one industry source says with EPA slated to forward a final version of its RMP rule for White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review in the coming weeks, a reversal on such a contentious issue is unlikely regardless of whether California implements an IST mandate successfully.
Still, the source acknowledges the California proposal adds to mounting pressure for a future federal regulation to include an IST requirement. “Certainly, it's all inter-related in that California in some ways can foreshadow federal policy,” the source says. State rules sometimes pressure federal regulators to issue national standards to avoid a patchwork of different rules across the country, the source adds.
A chemical sector source calls it “conceivable” that the California proposal could press OSHA to issue stricter rules. But the source argued that OSHA would struggle to meet an Occupational Safety and Health Act requirement to show that any strengthened regulation would actually reduce risks to worker safety.
The source says that new requirements in California's package of updated refinery rules strengthens the state's rules to mirror those of Contra Costa County, which has the most stringent refinery safety rules in the country, though they have failed to prevent accidents in the past. To improve safety, the source says, California should increase enforcement of existing rules rather than imposing new requirements on all facilities.
Refinery Safety
California's proposal to overhaul its refinery accident prevention and worker safety rules results from a multiyear effort to bolster refinery safety prompted by an August 2012 fire at a Chevron's refinery in Richmond, that prompted thousands of nearby residents to seek medical attention. Richmond is in Contra Costa County.
Numerous California agencies, along with EPA Region 9 officials, participated in the effort that eventually informed the state's July 14 two-part proposal. The plan consists of complimentary regulations -- one proposal overhauling Cal/OSHA's worker safety regulations as they apply to refineries, and a second strengthening California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) program rules.
In a July 15 notice of proposed rulemaking amending the CalARP requirements, the state says the change includes requirements that facilities follow programs “that drive refiners to analyze and implement processes and select materials that offer the highest levels of risk reduction."
In addition to the IST requirements, the package of proposed changes call for increased worker involvement in safety and accident prevention planning, periodic workplace safety culture assessments to ensure management emphasizes safety over production pressures, and public reporting of refinery safety metrics, among other changes.
While advocates say EPA and OSHA should consider California's proposed IST requirement as those agencies seek to strengthen their RMP and PSM rules, CalEPA has also pressed EPA to mandate that facilities use safer process where feasible in the final RMP rule.
In May 13 comments on EPA's March proposed rule, CalEPA said EPA's final version “should require facility owners or operators to implement any of the feasible options identified” in the analysis of safer alternatives that EPA's proposed revisions would require.
CalEPA also backed revisions EPA did propose to bolster RMP, such as requiring root cause analysis and third party audits after a reportable releases, and for improved coordination between facilities and local communities.
EPA Rulemaking
Despite calls from California and advocates to require facilities to use IST where feasible, EPA officials have said they conducted extensive outreach in advance of the March RMP proposal and so significant changes -- such as reversing the position on IST -- are unlikely in a final rule.
EPA waste chief Mathy Stanislaus told Inside EPA March 29, that the agency “struck a very good balance” on the contentious issue of IST. The balance requires that companies analyze whether IST would improve safety at their facility, while allowing companies to decide for themselves what processes are most appropriate.
A source with the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters, which in 2012 petitioned EPA to use Clean Air Act authority to require IST said advocates will seek meetings with OMB officials during the upcoming review and point to the California rule as an indication that requiring facilities use IST is the best alternative.
“EPA should be looking to [the California proposal] to inform their final rule, which is due out” this year, the source says. “EPA hasn't sent it to OMB yet, and even there they could fix it.”
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/advocates-say-californias-refinery-safety-rule-supports-epa-ist-mandate
-
Federal Investigators Deploy to Fla. Plant Explosion
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Colby Bermel
The federal Chemical Safety Board has deployed investigators to the site of a Florida chemical plant explosion that killed one worker and shook area homes over the weekend.
Tanks containing nitrous oxide were involved in the blast at the Airgas Inc. facility in Cantonment, a town 30 minutes north of Pensacola. Rescuers found the worker's remains dozens of feet from the tanks.
"We have learned that one associate has died as a result of the incident," the company said in a statement. "We are deeply saddened by the loss of a member of our Airgas family. Our sincere condolences and thoughts are with the family, friends and colleagues of this associate."
The state fire marshal's office conducted an initial investigation of the incident, and a spokesman said the early assessment shows the explosion happened at a loading dock with two trucks that were holding nitrous oxide. He couldn't confirm whether the blast occurred during the moving process.
"There is nothing to lead us to believe it was caused by any vindictive action or any type of foul play," said Jon Moore, communications coordinator for the state's chief financial officer. The Florida fire marshal's office is a division of the Department of Financial Services.
Plumes of yellow gas were visible above the plant, local media reported, but Escambia County officials said it was not a health hazard.
The Pensacola News Journal reported that Monday saw the return to business as usual at the facility, with employees and drivers heading in and out of the premises.
Moore said Airgas was leading the rest of the investigation and that the fire marshal's office will still support efforts.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Florida Highway Patro; Trauma Intervention Program of Northwest Florida; and Century Correctional Institution also responded to the explosion, according to WKRG-TV. Residents told local media that their houses shook during the blast.
"I was in my room, and I heard this crazy loud booming noise, and the windows were rattling and the door was shaking," Tamiya Jefferson told the News Journal. "I thought it might have been a transformer that blew, but when I came outside I saw police and ambulances pulling up."
Dan Wagner lives more than 2 miles from the site and told the paper that he "could feel the explosion all the way over there."
He said, "It shook the glasses and the plates on the kitchen table. I had no idea what was happening and I could barely see the smoke but drove over here to find out."
CSB Chairwoman Vanessa Allen Sutherland said in a statement: "Our condolences to the family suffering this tragic loss. The CSB's accident investigation will determine the root cause of this fatal incident."
Dan Tillema is leading the federal crew. He was the lead investigator for the agency's two-year probe into multiple sulfuric acid releases in 2014 at a California refinery operated by Tesoro Corp. CSB criticized the company for a lax safety culture (Greenwire, Aug. 3).
Earlier this month, CSB sent another investigative team to a Texas oil storage facility, where a flash fire injured seven workers, four critically (E&ENews PM, Aug. 15).
The Florida deployment comes as Sutherland has called for more congressional funding to close an "investigative gap" identified in a report released in June by U.S. EPA's Office of Inspector General.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/08/31/stories/1060042228
-
Blue State Democrats Charge Ahead On Climate Policy Despite ESPS Stay
Aug 31, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Abby Smith
Despite continued uncertainty surrounding federal regulations to curb greenhouse gases, several energy-producing states with Democratic governors in recent days are moving forward with state-level emissions targets and wide-ranging plans to address climate change.
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper on Aug. 23 floated a proposed executive order that would set ambitious power sector GHG goals for the state, beyond what would be required by EPA under its existing power plant GHG rule.
Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection, under Gov. Tom Wolf, on Aug. 19 detailed a basket of proposed measures across a number of sectors to cut GHGs.
Local environmentalists Aug. 23 are also urging Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe to conduct continued and ambitious planning for EPA's power sector GHG rule after he announced he would side-step a GOP effort to block such planning.
And California lawmakers on Aug. 24 sent Gov. Jerry Brown two major bills to shape the state's post-2020 climate policy, including one that codifies his 2030 GHG target of 40 percent below 1990 levels.
These recent moves, however, represent politically safe space for the governors, as their blue state voters are largely demanding continued efforts to cut GHGs and address climate change, despite the level of coal- and gas-fired power in the states.
By contrast, Democratic gubernatorial candidates in Republican-leaning, coal-producing states like West Virginia are leaning away from the Obama administration and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, in part due to their climate agendas.
“The reason I can't be [a Clinton supporter] is her position on coal is diametrically, completely wrong in many, many different ways,” West Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jim Justice told the local radio station MetroNewson Aug. 22.
Justice added that he was not yet willing to “give up” on the coal industry. “I'm the one that said, 'Really and truly, I believe there's good days in front of us as far as the metallurgical market.'”
But the political atmosphere is different in states like Colorado and Virginia, which in the past have been presidential swing states but do not appear to be so this year as Clinton gains traction over Republican nominee Donald Trump there.
In addition, voters in those states are more likely to continue to press for action on climate even as EPA's power plant rule is stayed by the Supreme Court.
Republican Legislatures
Nonetheless, those Democratic governors, with the exception of California, must also maneuver around Republican-controlled legislatures seeking to block GHG reduction efforts, including planning for EPA's power plant existing source performance standards (ESPS).
Following the Supreme Court's February stay of the rule, it seemed as though some Democratic governors were struggling to keep their planning processes alive. Both Hickenlooper and McAuliffe faced budget battles, with Republican lawmakers attempting to restrict their administrations' ability to use state funds to plan for ESPS compliance.
Virginia Republicans succeeded, inserting language into the state's 2016 budget bill blocking the state's Department of Environmental Quality from using any money “to prepare or submit to the . . . EPA . . . a state implementation plan, or other document with respect to” the ESPS unless the high court stay is lifted.
Republican lawmakers in Colorado attempted to block Hickenlooper, as well, amid threats to strip funds for the state environment department's air program. Hickenlooper in April indicated he would be willing to suspend ESPS planning if Republicans would allow that funding to go ahead.
Executive orders from these two governors, however, represent ways to bypass their legislatures and move forward with GHG cuts.
For example, McAuliffe in June issued an executive order requiring the state's Department of Natural Resources to examine and recommend methods to reduce GHGs from the power sector. The move essentially shifts the ESPS planning work to a different state agency, thus respecting the budget provision while allowing planning to continue.
Hickenlooper's draft executive order would push his state even further than what the ESPS requires, calling for a 35 percent GHG cut from 2012 levels from the power sector by 2030, with an interim goal of a 25 percent cut by 2025.
Also, the executive order would encourage adaptation efforts and “direct state agencies to work collaboratively to advance the strategies and policy recommendations set forth in the Colorado Climate Plan, and explore additional goals and implementation efforts that advance priorities established in the Plan.”
While Pennsylvania lawmakers did not explicitly halt the state's ESPS planning, the state's environment department did bow to Republican and industry pressure following the stay and slowed its ESPS compliance planning.
But the department's Aug. 19 release of the second update to its Climate Change Action Plan -- which covers legislative and regulatory recommendations in areas such as energy efficiency, combined heat and power and building code updates -- shows that the Wolf administration is not backing down on climate policy.
California Goals
While he does not face a Republican-controlled legislature, California's Brown has experienced some recent legislative pushback from moderate Democrats on his 2030 GHG target, throwing the future of the state's climate policy into limbo.
But the picture is becoming less hazy following the legislature's recent passage of the GHG target bill, SB 32, and a related measure, AB 197, that seeks to increase legislative oversight of the California Air Resources Board's (CARB) GHG policies. Both bills have been sent to Brown for his expected signature.
The second bill was crafted in a way to encourage wavering Democrats to support the ambitious 2030 target, which had failed to clear the Assembly in a vote last year.
Despite Brown's legislative victories, the bills are unlikely to fully address ongoing doubts about the future of the state's cap-and-trade program given Brown's failure to win an explicit authorization for the policy.
Earlier in the month, sources said Brown was hoping to persuade lawmakers to pass legislation authorizing CARB to continue operating the cap-and-trade program beyond 2020 by a two-thirds super-majority vote to overcome any legal challenges.
Brown abandoned that effort once it became obvious a two-thirds vote would not be possible to secure, and he also failed to amend SB 32 to include language stating air officials may continue cap-and-trade to achieve the 2030 GHG target.
Even so, environmental groups praised the legislative climate change package saying it extends the Golden State's climate leadership.
“After ten years of groundbreaking climate action, California is ahead of schedule in meeting its ambitious 2020 reduction targets and has been rewarded with a robust economy that is not dependent on increasing pollution to grow or to add jobs. The deeper 2030 reduction targets that the Legislature passed today will ensure the state's economy and the environment continue to thrive,” Environmental Defense Fund's Diane Regas said in an Aug. 24 statement.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/blue-state-democrats-charge-ahead-climate-policy-despite-esps-stay
-
Eastern U.S. Can Handle 30% Clean Power — Report
Aug 31, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Christa Marshall
Wind and solar can supply 30 percent of the annual power for the nation's Eastern grid without reliability concerns, new research from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory said.
The Eastern Interconnection, which stretches from Maine to New Mexico, currently gets less than 7 percent of its annual power from the two renewable sources.
Prior to the study, there was an assumption that 30 percent wind and solar penetration wasn't possible in the region, said NREL researcher Aaron Bloom. Nobody had conducted a review like NREL's, which modeled the year 2026 as a test.
"A lot of people thought we weren't going to be able to serve the load," Bloom said. Many analysts assumed, he added, that thermal generators like coal and gas wouldn't be able "to move around fast enough" to accommodate the intermittent nature of wind and solar.
The lab set out to answer whether a 30 percent renewable scenario was technically feasible and how it would affect grid operators. Researchers did not look into whether such an amount of renewable power was desirable.
Under a model scenario, coal and gas plants would have to stop and start much more often, even though their overall generation would decline.
Bloom compared it to moving from highway to "city traffic" for fossil fuel plants. Coal units, for example, had start about 20 percent more often under the model.
The study also documented major shifts in peak demand mode for generators not using wind and solar, which is typically between about 1 p.m. and 5 p.m. With higher power production from those renewables during the day, demand shifts.
"After sunset, when there is no solar on the grid, the net load rises substantially as people turn on lights," Bloom said. "So the result is that, instead of having to dispatch thermals and hydro units to meet the peak load in the afternoon, they are dispatched to meet the net load, which is highest after sunset. "
That kind of shift could have dramatic implications for power production factors like managing a workforce, which currently ties it hours to high power demand for non-wind and non-solar generators in the middle of the day.'System still worked'
NREL modeled what the power grid would look like on a daily basis in five-minute intervals over a year with 30 percent annual renewable power.
It considered unusual conditions, such as a six-hour hypothetical event in November when there was suddenly a major change in the wind forecast, a setting sun and high energy demand.
"The system still worked," Bloom said.
Under the modeled scenarios, renewables provided closer to 50 percent during some periods and less than 30 percent at other times, depending on conditions.
The lab didn't consider all the required capital costs of building new renewable energy infrastructure and transmission lines. It also didn't consider policy incentives.
"The ability of the real system to realize these futures may depend more on regulatory policy and market design to incentivize the needed operating procedures," said the report.
For example, NREL said it assumed hydroelectric energy, pumped storage and fossil fuel plants are willing to offer their generation at any time.
"If adequate short term opportunities and regulatory structures are not in place to incentivize this flexibility, resources may exit the market or prefer not to make their full flexibility available to the system operator," said the document.
More coordination among regions, so that more renewable power could be bought and sold, would make higher levels of renewables easier, Bloom explained.
The study also signaled opportunities for technologies such as energy storage and demand response that can streamline the flow of power on the grid, according to NREL.
While the research did not consider many capital and construction costs, it did find that operating costs for the grid would decline about 30 percent once needed infrastructure was built.
The researchers analyzed much of the Canadian grid stretching east of Saskatchewan. They did not factor in other renewables such as geothermal.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/08/31/stories/1060042231
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested