Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 9/9
-
(ACC Mentioned) LyondellBasell Plans to Build $700M Plastics Plant in Houston Area
Sep 9, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
Chemical maker LyondellBasell said it will build a $700 million plastics plant in the Houston area, creating nearly 1,000 construction jobs and providing another boost to the region's booming petrochemical industry. -
European Chemical Association Supports Conclusion of TTIP Agreement
Sep 8, 2016 | Business Standard
Cefic, the European Chemical Industry Council, has joined a coalition of business stakeholders to underline its support for the Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership (TTIP) in the face of recent allegations that an ambitious agreement would in any way undermine transparency, health or safety -
Climate Change Offers Europe a Chance to Revive Chems - Cefic DG
Sep 8, 2016 | ICIS
By Jonathan Lopez
The industrial base in Europe will look completely different by 2050 if the EU is to meet the Paris climate change targets and the chemical industry, together with public investment, will be a key sector to fulfil those targets, the director general (DG) at the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) said this week. -
Companies Will Need to Prove Trade Secrets to EPA Under New Chemical Law
Sep 8, 2016 | Chem.Info
By Andy Szal
Companies that hope to keep their proprietary chemical information a secret will soon need to show their work to the Environmental Protection Agency. -
TCE Risk Assessment Critics Fault Use Of Analysis For Draft EPA TSCA Rule
Sep 8, 2016 | InsideEPA
Halogenated solvents and dry cleaning industry representatives are reiterating concerns with EPA's risk assessment underpinning the agency's upcoming proposed rule on using the solvent trichloroethylene (TCE) as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in consumer aerosol spray degreasers, highlighting alleged flaws in the review. -
OMB Urged To Question Lack Of Small Business Review For EPA TCE Rule
Sep 8, 2016 | Inside EPA
Representatives from the halogenated solvents and dry cleaning industries are urging the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) to question EPA's lack of a small business impacts review for its pending proposal to regulate the solvent trichloroethylene (TCE), saying a completed review is vital before EPA can issue any rule. -
Flame Retardant Use, Other Data Sought for Carcinogen Review
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Antimony trioxide use, exposure and toxicity data is sought by the National Toxicology Program as it prepares to evaluate the carcinogenicity of the mineral. -
EU Should Do More to Replace Hazardous Substances: Report
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Union's REACH and other regulations on the use of chemicals are effective in promoting replacing the most hazardous substances with safe alternatives, but the EU and national authorities do little else to encourage substitution or to support industry efforts to find alternatives to dangerous chemicals, according to a report prepared for the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). -
Senator Gillibrand Requires EPA to Test All Public Water Systems in U.S. for Unregulated Contaminants
Sep 8, 2016 | News 10
By Clarissa Schmidt
On Thursday, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand introduced an amendment to the Water Resources Development Act that requires the Environmental Protection Agency to expand water testing for unregulated contaminants to all public water systems. -
FDA Bans Antibacterials in Consumer Soaps
Sep 8, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
As of next year, companies will no longer be allowed to sell hand and body soaps in the U.S. that contain certain antibacterial ingredients, including triclosan and triclocarban. -
Efficiency, Other Battles Emerge at First Energy Conference
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Energy efficiency emerged as one of the battle lines as House and Senate negotiators convened their first formal conference on what could be the broadest energy measure in 10 years. -
Energy Bill Conference Opens with Pledges to Compromise
Sep 9, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Annie Snider
Lawmakers kicked off their long-shot effort Thursday to craft the first energy bill in nine years that could win White House approval, pressing the case for their priorities while avoiding drawing lines in the sand on the most contentious issues. -
Energy Members Begin Hunt for Compromise Reform Bill
Sep 8, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Congressional leaders struck a conciliatory tone on Thursday, promising to work together to pass an energy reform bill by the end of the year. -
House Democrats Demand Infrastructure Funding in Reform Bill
Sep 9, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) is linking his support for any compromise energy bill to the inclusion of appropriated dollars for energy infrastructure improvements, a politically steep demand in the current spending environment. -
Price Power Plant Pollution, Congress Told
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrea Vittorio
Royal Dutch Shell's chairman has joined some of the nation's top scientists in calling on Congress to put a price on carbon and other forms of pollution from power plants. -
States Seek EPA Data on Clean Air Act Rules’ Job Losses
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
The Environmental Protection Agency's own projections of the cumulative job losses its Clean Air Act rules might cause are valuable for states as they plan their budgets and grow their economies, 13 states said in support of a lawsuit seeking to force the agency to review its regulations (Murray Energy Corp. v. McCarthy, N.D. W.Va., No. 5:14-cv-00039-JPB,amicus brief filed 9/7/16). -
California Governor Signs Law to Reduce Greenhouse-Gas Emissions
Sep 8, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By John R. Emshwiller and Alejandro Lazo
After more than a year of political battling, Gov. Jerry Brown signed two bills into law Thursday dramatically expanding California’s plans to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions while also providing increased oversight of that effort by elected officials. -
Dakota Pipeline Becomes New Flashpoint
Sep 9, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A conflict over tribal rights in rural North Dakota has exploded into a new flashpoint for the anti-fossil fuel movement. -
Activists Eye Massive Effort to Press Obama on Dakota Access
Sep 9, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Northey
Activists aiming to torpedo the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline are planning a widespread political campaign in the coming weeks aimed at pushing President Obama to take a stand against the Bakken oil project. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Ozone Standards Could Be Issue in Funding Negotiations
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency's revised ozone air quality standards could be the target of a rider on whatever spending package Congress will attempt to move later this year, advocates on both sides predicted. -
Lawmakers, Advocates Call for Greater Congressional Role
Sep 9, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Kevin Bogardus
Several Republican and Democratic lawmakers said Congress needed to rein in a growing regulatory state and give bureaucrats more clarity. -
House GOP Advances Bills To Limit EPA's Settlement, Rulemaking Powers
Sep 8, 2016 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
House Republicans are advancing legislation that would limit EPA's ability to require payments to conservation groups in legal settlements and a separate bill that would delay implementation of the agency's “major” regulations while they are being litigated, although the settlements bill has drawn a veto threat from President Obama.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) LyondellBasell Plans to Build $700M Plastics Plant in Houston Area
Sep 9, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
Chemical maker LyondellBasell said it will build a $700 million plastics plant in the Houston area, creating nearly 1,000 construction jobs and providing another boost to the region's booming petrochemical industry.
LyondellBasell, based in Houston, said construction of the plant, to be located at the company's La Porte complex, will begin early next year as part of a $4 billion expansion in Texas.
The plant, scheduled to be completed in 2019, will produce 1.1 billion pounds a year of polyethylene, a high-density resin used to make stronger and lighter plastics.
"It's a flagship site," said LyondellBasell Chief Executive Bob Patel."We're starting with the idea that these (plastics) will serve global markets."
RELATED: Cheap crude impacts Dow, LyondellBasell differently
LyondellBasell is among several petrochemical companies growing quickly in the Houston area to take advantage of cheap and abundant feedstock for their products — natural gas from Texas shale. In less than a decade, more than 100 petrochemical projects worth $50 billion are expected to be completed in Texas, according to the American Chemistry Council, a trade group.
This dramatic growth has helped offset the effects of the energy bust, which has led to widespread layoffs and spending cuts in oil and gas operations. At the same time, companies like Exxon Mobil, Dow Chemical and Chevron Phillips have all launched ambitious and costly petrochemical expansions in Greater Houston.
LyondellBasell operates chemicals and plastics plants throughout the region in Alvin, Pasadena, Bay City, Mont Belvieu, Channelview and La Porte, as well as its Houston Refinery. The company recently completed expansions of plants in La Porte and Channelview, which produce ethylene, a primarily building block of plastics derived from natural gas. That ethylene, in turn will be fed to Lyondell's new plant to make polyethylene.
Some analysts have raised concerns that the petrochemical industry is making the same mistakes as the oil and gas industry, ramping up production so fast that it produces a glut. But Patel said that global demand, particularly among growing middle classes in India and China, will absorb the burgeoning supplies.
The Houston area is a good fit for continued plastics growth because of abundant supplies of ethylene and the easy access to a major port for exporting products, said Hassan Ahmed, a chemical industry analyst of New York-based Alembic Global Advisors. Even though profit margins have come down in 2015 and 2016, he said, petrochemical companies like LyondellBasell are still raking in money.
"These guys are generating oodles of cash," Ahmed said of LyondellBasell ."They have a lot going on, but they could do even more,"
Despite recent successes, Patel is moving ahead cautiously, Ahmed said. He wants to keep saving money though by expanding in areas where the company already has footprints and pipeline networks in place, like La Porte. He added that LyondellBasell could build more Texas polyethylene plants down the road using its new "Hyperzone" polyethylene technology.
The technology isn't as environmentally harmful as older processes, Patel said. The thinner and lighter — but stronger — plastics use less material so there's less pollution during manufacturing and shipping. The plastic pipes are more resistant to stress fractures, and the lightweight packaging can hold toxic products like bleach or pesticides safely for years while sitting in people's garages.
LyondellBasell also is moving ahead with plans to build its biggest project ever, a plant in Channelview to produce 900 million pounds of propylene oxide,as well as 2 billion pounds of tertiary butyl alcohol and its derivatives annually. Propylene oxide is a chemical used to make everything from antifreeze to cosmetics. The tertiary butyl alcohol is a byproduct used as a solvent to make chemicals and gasoline additives.
A final decision on whether to move ahead with that plant won't come until next year, Patel said.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/article/LyondellBasell-plans-to-build-700M-plastics-9211726.php
-
European Chemical Association Supports Conclusion of TTIP Agreement
Sep 8, 2016 | Business Standard
Cefic, the European Chemical Industry Council, has joined a coalition of business stakeholders to underline its support for the Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership (TTIP) in the face of recent allegations that an ambitious agreement would in any way undermine transparency, health or safety. Regardless of whether TTIP will be concluded before the end of the Obama administration, negotiations can and should continue for an ambitious outcome.
Rene van Sloten, executive director for industrial policy, Cefic, said, “When Cefic answered the Commission’s public consultation on TTIP, we insisted that chemicals management legislation on both sides should remain unchanged - harmonisation or mutual recognition are out of the question because the two chemical management systems in the USA and the EU are too different. What we saw instead were opportunities to cut red tape for companies and avoid duplication, open the way to global standards for classification and labelling and help regulators on both sides to work better together.”
He added, “Not only will TTIP promote greater choice for consumers, answering citizens’ demand for ever higher standards, but it can do so while respecting the different approaches on both sides. Claiming thatTTIP would lower EU standards of chemical protection is a myth.”
The EU and the US currently make up around 40 percent of global economic output and their bilateral economic relationship is already the world’s largest. The two also make up 60 percent of global GDP amounting to over Euro 700 billion per year of goods and services traded. Chemicals are one of the top of all traded commodities.
Cefic and other business stakeholders see many efficiency gains that could boost the potential of these trade relations, especially given that the EU faces growth challenges with an aging population and increasing competition from Asia. TTIP would be particularly beneficial because 90 percent of EU and US companies implicated are small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs). The agreement would see greater access for such companies to new markets, which will be key for the EU to continue as a main player on the world stage.
http://www.business-standard.com/content/b2b-chemicals/european-chemical-association-supports-conclusion-of-ttip-agreement-116090800797_1.html
-
Climate Change Offers Europe a Chance to Revive Chems - Cefic DG
Sep 8, 2016 | ICIS
By Jonathan Lopez
The industrial base in Europe will look completely different by 2050 if the EU is to meet the Paris climate change targets and the chemical industry, together with public investment, will be a key sector to fulfil those targets, the director general (DG) at the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) said this week.
Marco Mensink (pictured), just four months into his tenure, said however European chemicals are not currently as competitive as they could be due to energy and regulatory costs and growth has proved elusive in the last years, but he remains “optimistic about the overall prospects” for the sector.
“Europe has a stable population and stable GDP growth and the only answer [for chemicals to grow] is increasing consumption. How can government programmes help us innovate and how can they help us create those markets?” said Mensink.
“Our real worry is that Europe needs to get the innovations potentially coming out from Europe invested here. We need investments in the region, not only maintenance investments but real new technologies in order for those investments to come to Europe. That should be the number one political challenge.”
The EU set in 2014 a target for manufacturing of 20% as of total GDP by 2030. However, most major countries (France, the UK, Italy or Spain) lag behind and their industrial bases only account between 10% and 12% of GDP, while Germany fares better with around 19% of its national output coming from manufacturing.
Cefic’s DG said the manufacturing targets are welcome but conceded however there has not been enough practical measures for them to become reality.
Moreover, he passionately defended the role of the state and its funding to develop breakthrough technologies. The role of the state funding innovation has largely diminished in the west over the last decades, and many experts even claim the big advances in technology all came from military research in the US.
Mensink agrees: “Governments used to take risks when investing in new technologies, but in the last decades that has not been the case anymore. If we were to get a major breakthrough technology in Europe, which I hope will happen, I hope governments facilitate the conditions to keep that technology investments in Europe.
“They [governments] are turning slightly on that one [lack of public innovation investment]. We are in a different era and public investment will play a big role, like it always did in breakthrough technologies.”
However, to the voices who claim the main technologic advances have been developed, and the pace could only slow down now, Mensink claims the opposite might be just round the corner with the right incentives, all as a result of the climate change targets.
“Containing the earth’s temperature rise to well below 2 degrees Celsius [by 2100, as per the Paris agreement, compared to pre-industrial levels] will mean large investments around the world. Although we have taken the first step, we haven’t realised how big the changes will be - every industrial base in Europe will look very different in 2050,” said Mensink.
“We need to focus and put the money in key innovations which will create the markets. And keeping the key innovations here in in Europe, helping renew and modernise the industrial base, is what politicians need to realise.
“The €100bn climate change investment fund set up by the UN will look like peanuts by 2050. We are talking about rebuilding completely the industrial base in Europe. It is a big challenge to go, and the only answer is breakthrough technology, not only making plants more efficient alone.”
Mensink’s optimism comes from the fact the two largest polluting economies, the US and China, both have ratified the Paris agreements, with the EU expected to follow suit soon.
Cefic’s DG went on to say the research funding from governments in the EU should be directed towards key, large projects like energy storage, hydrogen or carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies so the region can focus “on the big things” to bring the European economy to the next step.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) petrochemical analyst, Fabien Kesicki,said to ICIS in July that as long as China and other countries in Asia continue devouring coal for energy and chemicals production without applying CCS technologies, the ambitious targets set in the Paris’ climate change agreement may be difficult to achieve.
Mensink conceded “some of the bigger commodity chemicals investments” might not take place in Europe due to higher costs but in places like the US or the Middle East, but he said specialty chemicals have a key role to play for the sector to develop further.
“And we are seeing it happening already – the investments of [German chemical major] BASF in Ludwigshafen or the expansions in [Dutch and Belgium chemical hubs of] Rotterdam and Antwerp are examples of this. These clusters will be state-of-the-art chemical parks and will compete globally,” said Mensink.
Areas in which innovations towards a more efficient economy could play a vital role are the creation of new markets, effectively creating demand, said Cefic’s DG, and that only can be achieved with policy makers’ rulings on greener policies.
However, the legislation should be enforced, and not just set targets, he added. For instance, the EU could create demand for markets like designing new electricity conductors or batteries or from residential and office refurbishment programmes to insulate and save energy, as well as creating more renewable energies to make them self-sufficient.
“We have had EU set targets for a number of years but not measures have been applied in practice,” said Mensink.
Cefic’s new DG was appointed in order to give the trade group a “better voice” in Brussels, according to its president Jean-Pierre Clamadieu (also CEO of Belgium major Solvay), so the industry could bring its concerns to the EU policy makers by improving its lobbying.
Although only in his position since 1 May, Mensink said in its first public event as DG the current European Commission’s stance towards the chemical industry was more receptive, arguing the publication of a cumulative cost assessment (CCA) analysing the burden the EU strict chemical regulation Reach places on the sector would be a first good step showing a better understanding of the industry’s problems.
However, the EU is facing daunting tasks and Mensink recognised industrial policy might struggle to make top of the agenda. The refugee crisis, the crisis with Russia after the country annexed Crimea in 2014 or the UK’s vote to leave the EU in June (Brexit) are putting pressure on politicians, impeding a central focus on industrial policy.
Brexit will surely take a lot of time in the months and years to come. Mensink said the vote will not mean "the beginning of the end of the EU [but] the start of new model for Europe” but insisted the UK needs to make its negotiating position to leave the 28-country bloc clear.
“We have had big statements but all the work still needs to be done. The European chemical industry wants as much as free trade as we can get [between UK and the EU]. It may not be completely possible, but the discussions to solve the UK’s exit from the EU should go towards keeping the current market as much as we can,” he said.
“Looking at the newspapers, I don’t think it would be possible for the UK to keep access to the single market but restrict free movement of people. Equally, could UK chemical products be traded in the European single market without complying with Reach? I don’t think so.”
The UK’s Chemical Industry Association (CIA) said in July keeping access to the EU’s single market was key for the country’s industry, as around 60% of its output is sold to the other 27 countries within the bloc.
However, the UK’s vote to leave the EU was widely understood as a call of attention to London leaders about one of the fundamental rights within the bloc – free movement of people. Keeping access to the single market but trying to restrict free movement will be the main Gordian knot to resolve in the negotiations.
Another key issue the EU has been working on for more than three years but seems set to fail is a free trade agreement with the US, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
While Cefic and its peer in Germany VCI have been strong supporters of the deal, the chief economist at the German trade group recognised in July the window of opportunity to approve TTIP was “closing”.
Mensink remains more upbeat, although recognises emotions about free trade are changing as western working and middle classes feel they have not been the main winners from the last decades of globalisation, which on the other hand have lifted millions in emerging markets out of poverty.
“The public opinion's emotions about free trade agreements are different from before, although I don’t think the EU is turning against free trade as such. We believe both TTIP and CETA [Canada/EU free trade deal] will bring the chemical industry reduced costs, helping keep jobs in Europe,” said Mensink.
“TTIP is not dead but there is a big question mark of when it could be concluded if negotiations are not finalised before the US elections [in November]. Optimism wouldn’t be the right word to use here.”
http://www.icis.com/resources/news/2016/09/08/10032515/climate-change-offers-europe-a-chance-to-revive-chems-cefic-dg/
-
Companies Will Need to Prove Trade Secrets to EPA Under New Chemical Law
Sep 8, 2016 | Chem.Info
By Andy Szal
Companies that hope to keep their proprietary chemical information a secret will soon need to show their work to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Washington, D.C., attorney Martha Marrapese recently told Bloomberg that new EPA documents indicate that the agency will be much more aggressive in evaluating protected trade secrets under recently signed chemical oversight legislation.
The law, in part, outlines processes for the EPA to evaluate new and existing chemicals used in commerce. A handful of substances were already cleared under the new law, but critics noted that the EPA kept important information — from applicants to chemical information — under wraps.
Marrapese, who represents clients in the chemicals, energy, plastics and food sectors, said that the law is nonetheless much stricter than the 1970s-era Toxic Substances Control Act.
Under previous regulations, the EPA largely agreed to keep trade secrets hidden without demanding much in the way of justification. Marrapese told the publication that applicant companies will need to maintain documentation about their proprietary information.
In particular, they will need to demonstrate their previous efforts to protect that information and provide evidence that its disclosure would hurt their competitiveness.
And in cases where a chemical name is kept hidden, companies will need to provide a generic description of the chemical's structures.
Even skeptics of the EPA's initial findings previously conceded that they represented"an unprecedented level of transparency" in chemical regulations.
https://www.chem.info/news/2016/09/companies-will-need-prove-trade-secrets-epa-under-new-chemical-law
-
TCE Risk Assessment Critics Fault Use Of Analysis For Draft EPA TSCA Rule
Sep 8, 2016 | InsideEPA
Halogenated solvents and dry cleaning industry representatives are reiterating concerns with EPA's risk assessment underpinning the agency's upcoming proposed rule on using the solvent trichloroethylene (TCE) as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in consumer aerosol spray degreasers, highlighting alleged flaws in the review.
The industry representatives met Aug. 29 with officials from the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) to outline their concerns with the risk assessment and proposed rule, which the agency sent for mandatory OMB pre-publication review on July 27. At the same meeting, industry officials faulted EPA for not convening a panel to review the rule's potential impacts on small businesses.
The criticisms of the risk assessment renew long-running concerns about EPA's analysis of TCE's risks. A source who attended the meeting says the original draft assessment for the rule did not include spot cleaning, only the consumer aerosol degreasing uses, which are limited to two products on the market, the source says.
The TCE assessment was one of the first completed by EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics as part of its Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) work plan program, started in 2012 to more rigorously enforce EPA's TSCA authority on existing chemicals, those that were already on the market when the original TSCA took effect in 1976.
Industry representatives questioned why spot cleaning uses were included in the final assessment, noting that this part of the risk analyses did not undergo peer review and was not available for public comment, the source says.
A second source who attended the meeting raises concerns that EPA's TCE spot cleaning risk assessment is outdated. Since the study that EPA relied on was published in 2007, “overall use of [TCE] has declined . . . and the use patterns have changed.” The study, the source adds, “was flawed, and did not properly represent safe and effective stain removal practices or production conditions.”
EPA in a response to peer reviewers included with the final assessment in June 2014 said it added the spot cleaning scenario to the risk assessment at the recommendation of at least one of the peer reviewers.
Reviewer's Concerns
One of the reviewing experts questioned why EPA limited the scope of its analysis to hobbyists using TCE as an aerosol degreaser, and excluded occupational exposure to textile spot cleaning.
Kathleen Gilbert, a professor with the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences' microbiology and immunology department, wrote in the September 2013 peer review report that "focusing on hobbyists instead of another population at risk from occupational exposure seemed odd. It is true that in the dry cleaning industry use of TCE as a bulk textile cleaner has largely been replaced by [perchloroethylene] or more recently by hydrocarbon or silicone-based cleaners. However, as pointed out in a 2007 document prepared for the California EPA's Department of Toxic Substances Control and the US EPA TCE-containing spot/stain removers … are still used as paint, oil and grease spotting agents in the textile cleaning industry."
Gilbert said material data sheets on these spotting products "list TCE as the main ingredient for all of these spotters. There are currently in the U.S. about 41,500 dry cleaning facilities employing approximately 4 people/facility . . . That represents a substantial number of people who could presumably be exposed to TCE on a routine basis. It would be useful for the EPA to clarify why personnel in the dry cleaning industry were omitted from this assessment."
In response, EPA added occupational exposure to TCE as a textile spot cleaner to its risk analysis, and this exposure became the focus of the assessment. In the response to the peer review report EPA says it "has revised its original assessment to include the use of TCE as a spotting agent at dry cleaning facilities."
The first source from the OMB meeting says concerns were also raised that the TCE risk assessment was of screening level quality, rather than a final assessment that would form the basis for regulation. Some of the peer review panel members also voiced this concern during the July 2013 peer review meeting.
Penelope Fenner-Crisp, the panel chairwoman, criticized the draft and urged EPA to "acknowledge this as a screening level assessment." She said EPA "acted prematurely in offering this for public comment and peer review," adding that EPA should tailor it with more refined data. "I'd suggest the agency not bother to review this assessment but fold it into the introduction of the next level of the assessment," said Fenner-Crisp, now a private consultant, who previously retired from EPA and the International Life Sciences Institute.
TCE Assessment
Reviewer Jeffrey Driver said he viewed the TCE assessment as a screening level assessment. Driver, a principal with risk analysis consulting firm risksciences.net, LLC, said the analysis "really requires additional discussion of sensitive populations and refinement opportunities, both [on the] exposure and hazard [sides of the analysis]."
Chemical industry representatives at the peer review panel meeting argued that if EPA intended to use the assessment as the basis for decision-making, it needed to elevate the peer review to meet the highly influential scientific assessment standard set by OMB. As a result, they argued that EPA should have the assessment reviewed by its Science Advisory Board or the National Academy of Sciences, not a contractor-managed panel of peer reviewers.
EPA's response says the "exposure assessment is not a theoretical bounding assessment or a worst case assessment. Collection of new data or measurements is outside the scope of the workplan assessment process."
The agency added that assessment "did not use the screening level parameters that are set as the defaults" in modeling software used to create exposure scenarios -- instead, risk analysts crafted a scenario based on professional judgment because the agency could not find data to use. "The values chosen for the hypothetical consumer use behavior patterns were meant to be high end, but the household parameters used in the modeling were set to mean or median values e.g. air exchange rate," according to the agency.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/tce-risk-assessment-critics-fault-use-analysis-draft-epa-tsca-rule
-
OMB Urged To Question Lack Of Small Business Review For EPA TCE Rule
Sep 8, 2016 | Inside EPA
Representatives from the halogenated solvents and dry cleaning industries are urging the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) to question EPA's lack of a small business impacts review for its pending proposal to regulate the solvent trichloroethylene (TCE), saying a completed review is vital before EPA can issue any rule.
At a recent meeting with OMB officials, the representatives also reiterated concerns about what they see as flaws in the risk assessment underlying the draft Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) rule for TCE.
The industries' push-back is an attempt to influence OMB's oversight of the proposed rule, which EPA submitted to the White House for mandatory pre-publication review on July 27. The rule marks the agency's first bid to regulate an existing chemical under section 6 authority of the 1976 TSCA since its failed attempt to restrict asbestos in 1985 -- a rule that a federal appeals court struck down, hampering attempts to limit other substances with the Section 6 authority.
The rule targets risks of TCE when used as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in consumer aerosol spray degreasers, and is separate from a still-pending rule on TCE when used for vapor degreasing.
OMB's website says EPA intends to issue the spotting agent proposal this month, but it is unclear whether the agency will propose an outright ban on TCE as an agent in the dry cleaning industry -- including many small, family-owned businesses -- and in aerosol degreasing products sold to consumers, or a less restrictive approach.
Representatives from the Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance, which represents producers of solvents that contain a halogen such as chlorine, and the National Cleaners Association Inc. that represents the dry cleaning sector, met with EPA and OMB officials at an Aug. 29 meeting to express concerns about the regulation.
"The point was made that it would seem to have a significant impact on a significant number of small entities," says a source who attended the meeting, adding that industry representatives argued EPA should have first reviewed such impacts before sending the rule to OMB. "EPA cannot certify a rule if it [would affect a] . . . substantial number of small entities. It seems like by definition it would."
OMB's website says that the regulation would not be "economically significant," meaning it will have an economic impact of less than $100 million. The rule would affect a host of sectors including textile product mills, printing, petroleum refineries, furniture manufacturing, chemical manufacturing, and several more.
Regulatory Review
The source says that one of industry's major criticisms of the draft rule is the agency's decision against holding a Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) review.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by SBREFA, requires EPA to convene a panel of representatives from small businesses that would be affected by a future rulemaking and seek their input on ways to reduce adverse impacts of the regulation. The agency does not need to convene a panel if it "certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities," EPA's website says.
According to EPA's website, "The analytical requirements call for EPA to carefully consider the economic impacts rules will have on small entities. The procedural requirements are intended to ensure that small entities have a voice when EPA makes policy determinations in shaping its rules." But the agency also notes, "These analytical and procedural requirements do not require EPA to reach any particular result regarding small entities."
The source from the OMB meeting says EPA "apparently . . . concluded that [SBREFA review] was not necessary because they already sent it to OMB. . . Maybe they concluded that it's not used in those [applications] anymore."
But the source faults "a lot of misinformation floating around" about the status of TCE use as a spot cleaner. A second source who attended the meeting and said a drycleaning sector official at the meeting "made clear spot cleaning of TCE is still in widespread use."
A second source who attended the meeting explains that while there are alternatives to TCE for spot cleaning, they are not as effective and present their own risks. Dry cleaners use TCE to spot clean oil, wax and grease stains, the source explains. TCE alternatives are not as good at removing these stains, so “a garment may have to be processed repeatedly in order to achieve complete stain removal.”
The drycleaning representative told OMB staff that banning TCE for spot cleaning “will result in higher labor costs to the drycleaner,” an impact on small businesses, the source says. Another concern he addressed is the fact that the TCE alternatives are potentially more combustible than TCE, which “has no flashpoint” -- introducing a different risk into their use.
Pending Regulations
EPA has two more proposed TSCA section 6 rules in development -- one on other uses of TCE and one on certain uses of another halogenated solvent, methylene chloride -- undergoing SBREFA reviews. But the agency did not convene a SBREFA panel for the spotting agency rule that OMB is currently reviewing.
An EPA spokeswoman did not respond by press time to a question about the lack of a SBREFA review, but OMB's website says that it is "undetermined" whether the TCE rule requires such an assessment.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/omb-urged-question-lack-small-business-review-epa-tce-rule
-
Flame Retardant Use, Other Data Sought for Carcinogen Review
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Antimony trioxide use, exposure and toxicity data is sought by the National Toxicology Program as it prepares to evaluate the carcinogenicity of the mineral.
In a Federal Register notice set for publication Sept. 9, the toxicology program will invite the submission of such data as it prepares to review antimony trioxide (CAS No. 1309-64-4) for possible inclusion in the Report on Carcinogens. That report lists chemicals, viruses and other substances that are known or reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in people. Inclusion in the report is not a regulatory action, but it can trigger hazard warnings or other regulatory requirements.
Antimony trioxide's primary use is in flame retardants used in textiles and plastics. BASF SE, DuPont and Sabic Innovative Plastics U.S. LLC, were among the companies that produced or imported more than 5 million pounds of the mineral in 2011, the most recent year for which the Environmental Protection Agency received production data.
Data should be submitted to the National Toxicology Program by Oct. 11 athttp://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/778417.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=96862117&vname=dennotallissues&fn=96862117&jd=96862117
-
EU Should Do More to Replace Hazardous Substances: Report
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Union's REACH and other regulations on the use of chemicals are effective in promoting replacing the most hazardous substances with safe alternatives, but the EU and national authorities do little else to encourage substitution or to support industry efforts to find alternatives to dangerous chemicals, according to a report prepared for the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).
Although REACH (Regulation No. 1907/2006 on the registration, evaluation and authorization of chemicals) has listed a number of chemicals as substances of very high concern, and has implemented bans for some of those substances, few EU countries have any capacity to research or evaluate alternatives and the public sector substitution initiatives that do exist are “largely disconnected,” said the report.
Public authorities could do more to support substitutions by industry of dangerous chemicals by coordinating their financing of research, by establishing “technical assistance structures for companies, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises,” and by offering more guidance and expertise, the report said.
The report was prepared for ECHA by the University of Massachusetts Lowell Centre for Sustainable Production and published Sept. 5.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=96862110&vname=dennotallissues&fn=96862110&jd=96862110
-
Sep 8, 2016 | News 10
By Clarissa Schmidt
On Thursday, U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand introduced an amendment to the Water Resources Development Act that requires the Environmental Protection Agency to expand water testing for unregulated contaminants to all public water systems.
Under the current law, the EPA is only required to test for unregulated contaminants in water systems serving over 10,000 people.
“With one-third of all New Yorkers and millions of Americans nationwide getting their drinking water from water sources not subject to testing by the EPA, the Senate must take action immediately to close the loophole that exempts smaller public water systems from inspection,” said U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. “My amendment would do that by requiring the EPA to test for all potential contaminants in all public water supplies. As we have seen from the devastating situation in the Hoosick Falls area, having a smaller population doesn’t mean a community is immune from a dangerous water contamination crisis. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, so that the EPA can better protect our small towns and villages from disasters like the one that took place in Hoosick Falls.”
Senator Gillibrand has made persistent efforts to urge the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, EPA, Centers for Disease Control and the National Institute of Health to address the issues in Hoosick Falls and Petersburgh.
This past May, she urged the EPA to quicken the clean-up of Hoosick Falls by designating it as a federal Superfund site.
She also sent a letter to Senator and Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, James Inhofe, in February 2016 requesting a hearing on PFOA effects in drinking water.
During this past June, Senator Gillibrand also asked the EPA to use new authority provided by the Toxic Substances Control Act to decide if PFOA should be restricted or banned at the federal level.
Most recently, Senator Gillibrand wrote to the Directors of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences at NIH and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry at CDC in July, urging them to prioritize research into the health effects of PFOA.
She also asked the two agencies to outline the resources and authority they need in order to conduct research and clarify gaps in understanding the health effects of PFOA.
http://news10.com/2016/09/08/senator-gillibrand-requires-epa-to-test-all-public-water-systems-in-u-s-for-unregulated-contaminants/
-
FDA Bans Antibacterials in Consumer Soaps
Sep 8, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
As of next year, companies will no longer be allowed to sell hand and body soaps in the U.S. that contain certain antibacterial ingredients, including triclosan and triclocarban.
In a final rule issued on Sept. 2, the Food & Drug Administration says that manufacturers have not shown that the chemicals are safe for long-term daily use. Companies also haven’t shown that the chemicals are more effective than washing with regular soap and water to prevent the spread of germs, FDA says.
“Some data suggest that antibacterial ingredients may do more harm than good over the long term,” says Janet Woodcock, director of FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation & Research. FDA proposed the rule in late 2013, citing concerns about potential hormonal effects and antibiotic resistance associated with the chemicals.
The rule goes into effect on Sept. 6, 2017, but many manufacturers have already stopped using the ingredients. As alternatives, most have switched to one of three other antibacterial chemicals: benzalkonium chloride, benzethonium chloride, and chloroxylenol. At the request of manufacturers, FDA deferred from including these three compounds in the new rule.
The American Cleaning Institute and its member companies plan to submit to FDA safety and effectiveness data for these three ingredients in the coming year, says Brian Sansoni, a vice president of the trade group. In the meantime, manufacturers can continue to market products that contain the three substances.
FDA’s action is part of a settlement made with the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council. The group sued FDA in 2010 for not finalizing a 1978 rule that would have banned triclosan in consumer soaps.
NRDC is now raising concerns about benzalkonium chloride and benzethonium chloride, which belong to a group of chemicals called quaternary ammoniums. “There is some burgeoning science showing there might be health concerns associated with these chemicals,” says Mae Wu, a senior attorney at NRDC.
http://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i36/FDA-bans-antibacterials-consumer-soaps.html
-
Efficiency, Other Battles Emerge at First Energy Conference
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Energy efficiency emerged as one of the battle lines as House and Senate negotiators convened their first formal conference on what could be the broadest energy measure in 10 years.
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), the Energy and Commerce Committee's top Democrat, hinted he may not support the final conference report if it retains House language that would hinder the department's role in developing building codes related to energy efficiency.
“Any final conference report should accelerate efficiency gains, not undermine them,” Pallone said during the conference committee, adding his other priorities included energy infrastructure spending and climate change.
Democrats also are opposed to a provision by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), and backed by groups such as the National Association of Home Builders and the American Gas Association, that would limit the federal government's role in setting energy building codes.
The measure would “eviscerate DOE's historic role” in developing building codes by barring it from participating in steps related to their development, evaluation and adoption, Kateri Callahan, president of the Alliance to Save Energy, a Washington-based nonprofit, testified last year.
Land, Water Conservation Fund Permanent?
Another sticky issue negotiators will have to hammer out is whether the Land and Water Conservation Fund should be reauthorized permanently, a move opposed by House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and other members.
In addition, conferees differed over whether House-passed drought legislation (H.R. 2898) should be included in the bill. The measure, opposed by Democrats because of environmental concerns, addresses drought in the West by implementing changes in federal water management and planning for more water storage, and is a priority for members such as House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).
That provision was one of several opposed by Democrats and the Obama administration that the House added to their bill shortly before sending it over to the Senate.
“We all know the only way to get a bill of this magnitude and of this kind is to take the poison pills off the table and work in areas where there is agreement,” Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho) said during the meeting, which featured opening remarks, but no amendments or bill text.
Still, Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and other architects of the bill expressed optimism consensus could be reached.
“I think there is a sweet spot we can rally around,” he said.
The underlying legislation would expedite the Energy Department's approval process for export liquified natural gas, increase grid security, and quicken the hydropower license renewable process, among other provisions.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=96862145&vname=dennotallissues&fn=96862145&jd=96862145
-
Energy Bill Conference Opens with Pledges to Compromise
Sep 9, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Annie Snider
Lawmakers kicked off their long-shot effort Thursday to craft the first energy bill in nine years that could win White House approval, pressing the case for their priorities while avoiding drawing lines in the sand on the most contentious issues.
In their opening statements, the top negotiators on the congressional conference committee stressed they were intent on delivering a measure that could become law — rather than a partisan, red meat election-year message that President Barack Obama would reject.
Story Continued Below
"I am here to listen and to work and not take the avenue of sending a bill to the president that he would veto. That is not on my list of things to get done; it’s not going to happen," House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said, adding that he was aiming for a "sweet spot that we can rally around."
Still, conferees touted their top priorities, including some items that the White House has already threatened to veto or said it strongly opposes, such as wildfire provisions toute by Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and limits on the Department of Energy’s applied research capabilities sought by Science Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas). But the lead Democratic negotiator said she was encouraged by lawmakers indications that they were open to compromise.
“Who said they had to have a provision just like it was written?” Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, told POLITICO after the meeting. "I didn’t hear anybody say that.”
California drought language remains among the trickiest issues in the bill. Despite more than two years of negotiations, a compromise has eluded Golden State House Republicans and Senate Democrats who have sought to deliver more water to central and southern California farms and communities now suffering from their fifth year of drought. After the Senate included water provisions relating to Washington and Oregon in its measure, the House dropped its contentious California drought measure into its negotiating package.
That issue will need to be addressed in the final energy bill package, said a senior GOP aide, who stopped short of specifying terms relating to the most controversial issue: how much water can or must be pumped out of the delicate Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta and how that is restricted by environmental protections.
“House Republicans have made it clear with legislative action that solutions to West-wide drought, especially in California, are of premier importance. Some Senate Democrats have been quite vocal in their desire to address specific water issues in this energy conference. Our demonstrated commitment welcomes this debate, but it should be clear that for these proposals to get across the finish line, hard solutions to deliver water to the Central Valley and Southern California must be included," the aide said.
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) told negotiators that they had already defied the odds by getting the legislation this far, and urged them to maintain the effort.
"They doubted whether we would be able to write a bill, much less pass it, let alone make it to conference. I think we’ve been written off by every trade journal at least three or four times throughout the way. But that’s behind us now," Murkowski said as she opened the meeting.
Afterwards, Murkowski told reporters that she and her staff are working aggressively, particularly given the modest number of days Congress will be in session before the recess for October campaigning. The next meeting of conferees has not yet been set, she added.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2016/09/energy-bill-conference-opens-with-pledges-to-compromise-128771
-
Energy Members Begin Hunt for Compromise Reform Bill
Sep 8, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Congressional leaders struck a conciliatory tone on Thursday, promising to work together to pass an energy reform bill by the end of the year.
But members of a House and Senate conference committee nonetheless exposed the differences lawmakers have to overcome if they want to write that bill.
During the first formal meeting of a House and Senate energy bill conference committee, members on both sides of the aisle said they wanted to “prove the skeptics wrong,” as Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said, and write a compromise bill that can pass this session.
“I think there are some who would admit readily that they never thought we would get this far, that they doubted whether we would be able to write this bill, much less pass it, let alone get to conference,” Murkowski, the committee chairman, said, noting the difficulties with which the House and Senate passed their energy bills.
“Our task now is to develop a final bill that can be signed into law.”
Democrats agreed with the goal, with Sen. Maria Cantwell (Wash.) saying, “I am optimistic that the conference committee can resolve the differences between the House and the Senate and produce a bill that the president can sign.”
Members have tried for nearly two years to craft the first federal energy reform bill since 2007.
The House and Senate bills right now aim to clean up federal energy laws, expand liquefied natural gas exports, encourage energy efficiency provisions and provide new cybersecurity measures for the electric grid. The goals, industry supporters say, are less lofty than those from past energy overhaul efforts.
Even so, the two parties are likely to run into problems on the way to a final bill.
Those differences were already on display during Thursday’s hearing. Cantwell and other Democrats said they want to expand the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a measure some Republicans, including House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah), are likely to oppose.
Bishop also noted conservative provisions in the House bill related to drought relief, forestry management, Native American energy production and energy transmission on public lands, issues that have rankled some Democrats.
Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), the ranking member of the House Energy Committee, said he wants a final package to expand energy infrastructure spending, and he and several Democrats said the final bill should address climate change, matters Republicans haven’t addressed in their bills.
Amid other members’ talk of compromise, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) warned that “if some of the Democrats do not want to reach an agreement, I would just tell them, 'Do not assume that this opportunity or that this offer will be available in the next Congress.'”
Despite the differences, leaders of both chambers’ energy panels have long pledged to write a bill that can gain congressional support and win President Obama’s signature, even if it means stripping partisan provisions out of the final package.
They repeated that pledge on Thursday.
“I think that there is a sweet spot that we can rally around,” House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said.
“I’m here to listen and work ... and not take the avenue of sending a bill to the president that he would veto. That is not on my list of things to get done. It’s not going to happen.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/294977-energy-members-begin-hunt-for-compromise-reform-bill
-
House Democrats Demand Infrastructure Funding in Reform Bill
Sep 9, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) is linking his support for any compromise energy bill to the inclusion of appropriated dollars for energy infrastructure improvements, a politically steep demand in the current spending environment.
Pallone outlined the request yesterday during his opening statement at the first meeting of the House-Senate conference committee working to reconcile the competing energy bills.
He listed "infrastructure investment and modernization" as one of three "essential components" a final bill must contain (Greenwire, Sept. 8).
"Today, much of our energy infrastructure is aging, rooted in the past, and doesn't really serve our current and future energy needs," he told colleagues.
"A final product should focus on modernizing our infrastructure and reducing its vulnerabilities to extreme weather and attacks from those seeking to do us harm," he said. "It should also facilitate the deployment of smarter electric grids that support more distributed and renewable energy generation."
Advertisement
It's not a new position for Pallone, whose home state was slammed by Superstorm Sandy in 2012, necessitating what eventually became a $50 billion recovery package to help repair damaged infrastructure throughout the Northeast.
During the committee markup of the House bill, H.R. 8, last fall, Pallone denounced Republicans for walking away from a proposal to include $5 billion to modernize the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and upgrade the electric grid and pipeline networks (E&E Daily, Oct. 1, 2015).
At the time, Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), who retired from the House this week, said there was $5 billion "set aside" for infrastructure but that Democrats had refused to compromise on other outstanding issues. The bill eventually passed the House with the support of just a handful of Democrats.
A committee Democratic aide yesterday said Pallone will make a "strong push" for "guaranteed" infrastructure funding in the final energy bill, but was unclear if there was a specific dollar amount under discussion.
It's also unclear where the money would come from. While Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) last year included about $9 billion in mandatory funding for a medical innovation bill,H.R. 6, paid for by tapping the SPR, a subsequent rush to sell the reserve's oil to pay for other federal programs has stretched its limits.
Last year's budget deal created a $2 billion Energy Security and Infrastructure Modernization Fund for the SPR, which the White House is now seeking permission from Congress to actually fund (Greenwire, Sept. 7).
Pressed on Pallone's demand, Upton yesterday was at a loss for what a potential compromise could look like, given the budget constraints.
"I don't think we're going mandatory spending," he told E&E Daily. "There's no room within the caps to do that." But he added that direct discussions among members will begin in earnest next week.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) acknowledged that infrastructure spending was a "priority" for House Democrats during debate on the chamber's bill, but was "not reflected in the final product."
"We will work through that as an issue just as we move through the other issues," she told E&E Dailyyesterday.
Other House Democrats on the conference committee yesterday similarly linked support for a possible compromise to infrastructure spending, including Democratic Reps. John Sarbanes of Maryland and Bobby Rush of Illinois, the ranking member on the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Rush told E&E Daily that he won't be satisfied with authorized funds for workforce development, a priority that he helped craft in the House bill.
"I want to see appropriations," he said. "That would make me really happy. We're looking for a minimum of $20 million for workforce development."Pointing fingers
While members of both parties yesterday expressed a willingness to work toward agreement, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) suggested that Democrats would be to blame if the effort collapses.
"It is widely believed that there are some Democrats in the Senate, as well as the House, that are going to try to delay reaching an agreement until after the election or perhaps until the next Congress," he said during his opening statement.
"So members have to decide: Do we want to reach an agreement or not? If you do, we can get it done. We can get a conference report to the president's desk in short order."
Barrasso also warned Democrats that if a deal isn't reached, "do not assume that this opportunity or this offer will be available in the next Congress."
Pressed on Barrasso's comments after the conference, Murkowski said "he was speaking the obvious." She told reporters, "Everybody knows that if you have legislation that is in process in one legislative Congress when that Congress comes to an end ... that the work begins anew."
She said, "A new energy bill needs to be laid down. It's not just like we can just pick up the conversation where we leave it when we adjourn sine die. You will basically be starting over."
Noting that she and Cantwell have been working for more than 18 months to get to the current point, she added: "If we don't finish it this year we start over, and it will be two years before we have another opportunity to have an energy bill in conference."
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/09/09/stories/1060042558
-
Price Power Plant Pollution, Congress Told
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrea Vittorio
Royal Dutch Shell's chairman has joined some of the nation's top scientists in calling on Congress to put a price on carbon and other forms of pollution from power plants.
“We do not make a recommendation as to how to go about that,” whether by tax or cap-and-trade, said Chad Holliday, who led a National Academies panel in a Sept. 8 report looking at market barriers to wider adoption of renewables, nuclear power and carbon capture and storage.
The group, which also included the former head of Duke Energy and a managing director at Barclays, said part of the problem is market prices for electricity do not reflect fossil fuels’ “hidden” costs to society. Shell is no stranger to carbon pricing, nor is Congress, which tried and failed to pass cap-and-trade at the start of the Obama administration.
Holliday said he has presented the report's findings to the House and Senate. While there is some talk among legislators of trying a carbon tax, it's considered a long-shot.
Technological Leaps
Even with a price on pollution, the researchers said large leaps in performance and cost declines are needed for clean power technologies to compete with the two-thirds of U.S. electricity that was produced from coal and natural gas in 2015.
“We really do need to take this technology to the next level,” Holliday told Bloomberg BNA.
Among the report's marching orders to policy makers: the Environmental Protection Agency should develop a set of long-term performance standards for the transport and storage of captured carbon dioxide. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which has focused on the licensing and regulation of light water reactors, will likely need to come up with new approaches for licensing other types of advanced reactors.
And states should encourage competitive solicitations for renewables to win power purchase contracts and enable low-cost financing for their construction, the report said. It was commissioned by the Energy Department.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=96862129&vname=dennotallissues&fn=96862129&jd=96862129
-
States Seek EPA Data on Clean Air Act Rules’ Job Losses
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
The Environmental Protection Agency's own projections of the cumulative job losses its Clean Air Act rules might cause are valuable for states as they plan their budgets and grow their economies, 13 states said in support of a lawsuit seeking to force the agency to review its regulations (Murray Energy Corp. v. McCarthy, N.D. W.Va., No. 5:14-cv-00039-JPB,amicus brief filed 9/7/16).
“There is value to obtaining the data and analysis from the same entity that is responsible for the activity that is causing the job losses and economic dislocation,” the states, led by West Virginia, said in a Sept. 7 amicus brieffiled in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia. “Recognizing that the agency has an incentive to under-estimate any negative jobs impact from its own policies, EPA's own analysis provides a minimum baseline to understanding the economic effects of any [Clean Air Act] regulation.”
The states—West Virginia, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Nebraska, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, Wisconsin, Wyoming and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality—are supporting a lawsuit brought by Murray Energy Corp. that seeks to compel the EPA to review the impact is Clean Air Act regulations have on employment, as required by Section 321 of the Clean Air Act. The states specifically pointed to the EPA's carbon dioxide emissions standards for new and existing power plants and its Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, which set limits on toxic pollutant emissions from the power sector, as examples of regulations that have adversely affected employment in states such as West Virginia that rely heavily on the coal industry. Most of those same states have also joined the lawsuits challenging the EPA's carbon dioxide standards for power plants.
“Such regulations affect not only the coal miners, but also the jobs and communities that rely on the coal mining business, including the doctors, educators and retail establishments in and around those businesses,” the states said.
The states’ amicus brief opposes the EPA's motion for summary judgment in the lawsuit. The EPA has argued summary judgment is warranted because it already has spent millions of dollars and produced hundreds of documents as part of the lawsuit's discovery process.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=96862124&vname=dennotallissues&fn=96862124&jd=96862124
-
California Governor Signs Law to Reduce Greenhouse-Gas Emissions
Sep 8, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By John R. Emshwiller and Alejandro Lazo
After more than a year of political battling, Gov. Jerry Brown signed two bills into law Thursday dramatically expanding California’s plans to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions while also providing increased oversight of that effort by elected officials.
The legislation makes California a large and powerful testing ground for such initiatives, which are generally hailed by environmentalists and derided by some industry leaders.
The signing ceremony, in a public park here built atop an old oil field, marks a belated victory for the governor and his allies after a similar effort failed to get out of the California Legislature last year in the face of opposition from industry groups and others who argued that the tightening restrictions would harm the economy.
“What we are doing is farsighted and far-reaching,” Gov. Brown said Thursday. “I hope it sends a message across the country.”
The new laws could further burnish Mr. Brown’s reputation as one of the most aggressive elected officials in the nation when it comes to pushing for climate-change actions.
One of the laws the governor signed sets a new target to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, usually carbon-based products, in the state to 40% below the 1990 levels by 2030.
“It is the most ambitious emission-reduction target in the nation and one of the most ambitious in the world…and sets an important example for other states and nations,” said Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental lobbying group that backed the legislation.
The measure expands upon a previous law, enacted in 2006, which required greenhouse-gas emissions to be cut to 1990 levels by 2020. Officials have said the state is expected to meet that 2020 target.
State Sen. Fran Pavley, a Democrat behind the bill to further reduce emissions, called the 2006 legislation a “turning point in environmental law.” She said the past 10 years have shown that legislation to be a success story. “Emissions have gone down, and the economy has gone up,” she added.
State Senate Republican Leader Jean Fuller, from Bakersfield in oil-rich Kern County, said the original 2006 climate legislation had proved to be a job killer in her home district, leading her to oppose its expansion.
“Climate-change policies already passed by the majority party have had a drastic and negative impact on Kern County, costing us hundreds of energy jobs and causing our local economy to suffer,” Ms. Fuller said Thursday.
The original bill was signed by then Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican. Mr. Brown is a Democrat.
The bill expanding the emission-reduction goals again met resistance in the Legislature, which is controlled by Democrats.
One Republican legislator called the bill the “Energy Poverty Act of 2016,” saying it would increase energy prices to consumers and discourage manufacturing in California.
Mr. Brown and other backers of the bill disputed those claims.
The second measure signed Thursday by the governor increases legislative oversight of the California Air Resources Board, an appointed body that is charged with carrying out the state’s climate programs.
The board has been the target of criticism from various parties, including business interests and legislators, regarding where it focuses its efforts and where it spends money on the climate-change issue.
Some critics of the bill that was passed said it didn’t go far enough to regulate the board.
Backers of the legislation said it would help create cleaner environments for the state’s poor, who tend to live in neighborhoods with heavy industry.
Gov. Brown said people in poor communities often have to breath “the dirtiest air.”
He signed the legislation on a 10-acre hilltop park just west of downtown Los Angeles—the first public park built in the area in a century—with the city’s skyline serving as a backdrop.
Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia, a Democrat behind the bill increasing legislative oversight of the board, said “it’s extremely important that we focus on people of color” in setting climate and other environmental priorities. “We have to address disparities that exist in these communities.”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/california-governor-signs-law-to-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions-1473366285
-
Dakota Pipeline Becomes New Flashpoint
Sep 9, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A conflict over tribal rights in rural North Dakota has exploded into a new flashpoint for the anti-fossil fuel movement.
Environmentalists, tribal rights groups and anti-pipeline activists have taken up the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's objections to the Dakota Access Pipeline, creating a new front in the national battle over fossil fuel projects.
Tribal heritage issues are still at the heart of the fight. But with a federal judge due to rule by Friday on a lawsuit against permits for the pipeline, the tribe and its supporters say they're ready to wage a broader battle, reminiscent of the Keystone XL campaign that green advocates won last year.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe sued in late July after federal regulators approved most of the final permits necessary for the 1,170-mile, $3.8 billion pipeline to move forward.
The tribe said the pipeline, which would carry Bakken crude oil to Illinois, threatens its sacred sites in North Dakota and poses a threat to drinking water supplies.
It asked a federal judge to block construction of the pipeline until officials can conduct a more thorough assessment of its route. Federal judge James Boasberg has said he will rule on the question by Friday.
The pipeline’s supporters reject the tribe’s concerns. They say the Army Corps of Engineers, which issued the permits now at issue in the court fight, did so according to the law, and that they gave tribal leaders the chance to engage in the process, but the tribe declined.
“This is not a cowboy process,” Dakota Access lawyer William Leone said at an August court hearing on the pipeline.
The tribe, meanwhile, has called the pipeline the latest slight against Native American communities in favor of expanded energy production, an argument around which supporters have rallied.
“Our Native brothers and sisters understand that as sovereign Tribal nations, we have the right to protect our sacred grounds and waters,” David Archambault II, the chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, wrote in an op-ed this week. “That right is recognized in the treaties we signed with the United States, and is codified in federal laws.”
The fight over the pipeline has grown into a national controversy attracting many of the same activists who fight expanded fossil fuel drilling and other pipeline projects, including Keystone XL.
“I think it’s a natural evolution of the climate movement,” said Tom Goldtooth, a campaign organizer from the Indigenous Environmental Network, a group that has helped fund and organize protest activities in North Dakota.
“We came off of an amazing win — for not just climate activists but for tribes, for landowners, for landowner rights — in the Keystone XL fight. This is the next step for us to demonstrate that folks are committed to stopping these fossil fuel projects.”
The movement has high-profile allies, from activist celebrities like Susan Sarandon and Shailene Woodley to supportive members of Congress like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Often, their arguments are premised on concerns over the expansion of fossil fuel production.
Opponents of the pipeline are also turning their focus from the courtroom and protest marches to the political area.
A coalition of 31 green groups wrote to President Obama in August asking him to step in and block construction of the pipeline. Environmental activist Bill McKibben penned a Wednesday op-ed in the Los Angeles Times asking Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton to oppose the project, saying she is “[staying] silent about the drama unfolding on the high prairie, where native Americans are bravely resisting the further destruction of their water and land.”
Asked about the pipeline in India on Wednesday, Obama declined to take a position, citing the legal fight. Clinton’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday, and her running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine (R-Va.), said he needed to study the issue more when asked about it by an activist last week.
“The epicenter of this fight is native organizing on the ground,” 350.org Policy Director Jason Kowalski said. “As allies, it’s up to us to connect that resistance on the ground to the halls of power in Washington, DC, and to the elections.”
The project has the support of lawmakers in North Dakota, where the governor on Thursday asked the National Guard to help police anti-pipeline protests. Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) called Dakota Access a “legally permitted, fully-vetted pipeline” in an interview this week, and he slammed green activsists who have taken up the cause as their own.
“They’ve been used,” he said of the tribe.
“I feel like the legitimate questions that were and are being raised by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe are being diminished by this other movement that cares little to nothing about the North Dakotans living on the Indian reservation, and cares more about their anti-fossil fuel agenda.”
Anti-pipeline forces, including indigenous rights groups, say fossil fuels are a central component of their complaints about the project.
“This is yet another example of a mega-project that is not needed, given the president’s commitment to transition to renewable energy,” Goldtooth said. “This fits into the ongoing ‘keep it in the ground’ narrative of the climate justice movement.”
Dakota Access opponents are preparing for a long fight against the pipeline. Construction along other stretches of the line is ongoing, and protests over it are flaring up in places like Iowa. 350.org has organized an anti-pipeline march outside the White House for Tuesday. And Boasberg, the judge, has already scheduled a hearing for appeals to his ruling.
“We have learned that the only way you can stop these pipelines is if people stand up and they stand up very loud, and that’s exactly what’s happening in North Dakota,” Jane Kleeb, an anti-pipeline activist and founder of the group Bold Alliance, said in an August interview.
“It’s the perfect example. This pipeline would have been under the Missouri River yesterday, if it wasn’t for the people.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/295094-dakota-pipeline-becomes-new-flashpoint
-
Activists Eye Massive Effort to Press Obama on Dakota Access
Sep 9, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Northey
Activists aiming to torpedo the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline are planning a widespread political campaign in the coming weeks aimed at pushing President Obama to take a stand against the Bakken oil project.
Jane Kleeb, founder of Bold Nebraska who successfully worked to block the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, said the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recently confirmed lawmakers will have 14 days to comment on an easement that Energy Transfer Partners needs to build the 1,134-mile Dakota Access pipeline near federal land.
During that two-week window, Kleeb said, environmental groups, landowners and tribal activists across the nation will take "massive actions" on Congress' front steps with the hope of prompting Obama to weigh in.
"There's no way we can stop this pipeline unless the president weighs in," Kleeb said. "It is squarely on his shoulders."
Proponents of the Dakota Access pipeline have touted the project as critical infrastructure in the Bakken that would reduce the need to move oil by train and truck. They have fought to differentiate the pipeline from Keystone XL.
But the pipeline is facing nationwide backlash and multiple legal challenges. A federal judge is expected to issue a decision today on whether to grant the Standing Rock Sioux’s request for an injunction. The tribe filed a lawsuit challenging federal permits for the project, alleging that the project, less than a mile upstream from their reservation, could endanger drinking water and threaten ancestral land. The tribe maintains the Army Corps did not do enough to consult with them, an accusation the agency disputes.
While Obama has not weighed in on the project, the president this week defended his record on environmental justice and protecting ancestral lands.
While former Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont has taken the most public stand against the pipeline, which would snake through the Dakotas, Iowa and Illinois, Kleeb said activists will also look to Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) for leadership.
"Sanders continues to set a progressive tone for politicians, and when you're in the middle of a fight, you need leaders standing with you, he's shown that," she said. "I think we'll [also] be looking to Whitehouse, Ellison, two key leaders on Keystone."
Momentum against the pipeline has grown quickly, Kleeb said, noting that a national day of action has been planned for next week when thousands of groups across the country will demonstrate in opposition to Dakota Access.
As part of the event, Sanders is scheduled to address protesters on the steps of the Capitol alongside Tara Houska of Honor the Earth and other tribal leaders. The senator yesterday also floated an amendment to the Water Resources Development Act that would require a wider review of the pipeline's environmental effects.
Indeed, protests and mounting reports of violence along the pipeline route are already stirring calls on Capitol Hill for Obama to intervene.
Members of the New Mexico delegation yesterday in a letter called on Obama to intervene in the recent escalation by private security personnel against Native protesters over construction of the Dakota Access project.
"We oppose and condemn unjustified violence against protestors in the strongest possible terms," wrote Democratic Sens. Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich, and Reps. Ben Ray Luján and Michelle Lujan Grisham.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/09/09/stories/1060042561
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Ozone Standards Could Be Issue in Funding Negotiations
Sep 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency's revised ozone air quality standards could be the target of a rider on whatever spending package Congress will attempt to move later this year, advocates on both sides predicted.
While a coalition of states and industry organizations are challenging the 70 parts per billion ozone standards in federal appeals court, many industry advocates are looking to Congress to step in and provide more immediate relief. The EPA isn't scheduled to determine what areas don't meet the more stringent ozone standards until Oct. 1, 2017, but state and local permitting authorities are already required to consider the 2015 standards in reviewing preconstruction permits required for new and modified industrial facilities.
The House in June passed a bill (H.R. 4775) introduced by Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) that would delay implementation of the 2015 ozone standards by eight years and make a number of changes to the EPA's process for reviewing and revising national ambient air quality standards for ozone and other pollutants. While industry advocates support Olson's bill, with a limited amount of time left on the Senate's calendar for the year, they are looking for other avenues for Congress to potentially act on ozone.
“There's no secret that the congressional calendar is tight for the remainder of the year,” Greg Bertelsen, senior director for energy and resources policy at the National Association of Manufacturers, told Bloomberg BNA. “We know that things will have to pass before the 114th Congress is over: with those bills are opportunities to include priority issues like ozone relief.”
Meanwhile, a number of environmental advocacy organizations that wanted the EPA to set even more protective standards are prepared to defend against any language that would delay or weaken the 70 ppb ozone standards.
Chief complaints of industry groups and states that oppose the standards are that they will be more expensive and more difficult to implement than the EPA expects. The agency projected that the 2015 ozone standards will cost as much as $1.4 billion in 2025 and that only a limited number of counties outside of California, which will have longer to meet the standards, will fail to comply within 10 years.
‘Unprecedented Engagement’ on Ozone
Bertelsen said manufacturers are “squarely focused” on addressing the ozone standards this year, citing unprecedented engagement with lawmakers from industry, as well as state and local regulators who are tasked with implementation of the more stringent ozone standards.
Lobbyists have been active on the ozone standards this year, based on a Bloomberg BNA review of the U.S. Senate's Lobbying Disclosure Act Database. More than 100 organizations, including major corporations like Exxon Mobil Corp., the Dow Chemical Co. and BP America Inc., reported lobbying on ozone during the second quarter of 2016. That number also includes public health organizations like the American Lung Association and the American Heart Association, which have voiced opposition to any bill that would delay implementation of more protective ozone standards.
Anna Burhop, director of regulatory and technical affairs at the American Chemistry Council , told Bloomberg BNA that there has been a lot of momentum building behind the ozone issue reaching back to the Obama administration's decision to launch an “out-of-cycle” reconsideration of the 2008 ozone standards, which the administration eventually abandoned. Industry advocates have been educating lawmakers about the effects of a more stringent regulation, including what it would mean at a local level for the permitting of new facilities and job creation.
“I do think that Congressional action is absolutely necessary, and I think Congress does realize this,” Burhop said.
While industry advocates will “pursue every possible avenue” to address concerns with the new ozone standards, given the compressed Congressional schedule for the rest of the year, a lot of people are looking at an end-of the year funding package, Burhop said.
Environmental Advocates Playing Defense
Environmental and health advocacy organizations also anticipate a late-year push on ozone, and they're looking for Senate Democrats and the White House to prevent any sort of ozone delay provision from becoming law.
Staffers with the American Lung Association and Sierra Club both told Bloomberg BNA that they expect opponents of the ozone bill to try and attach a rider to Congress's end-of-the-year funding package. 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.
Paul Billings, national senior vice president for advocacy at the American Lung Association, said public health advocates will be closely watching “any moving legislative vehicle” to ensure that language isn't added on ozone or other public health issues. With Congress needing to pass something by Sept. 30 to continue funding the federal government, and the possibility of a longer-term omnibus package moving during a post-election lame duck session, health advocates “see the threat” of an ozone rider on appropriations bills, Billings said.
The American Lung Association Sept. 7 organized a call-in campaign urging members of Congress to pass a funding package free of riders, including any riders that would delay public health protections under the new ozone standards. Billings said the association would “keep the pressure on” throughout the month of September and “probably be back at it” if Congress returns after the election.
Melinda Pierce, legislative director at Sierra Club, agreed that funding bills are the most likely vehicle for opponents of the ozone standards to try and attach a rider. While she noted that public health advocates are “certainly not out of the woods yet” for whatever continuing resolution Congress negotiates in advance of Sept. 30, the ozone issue is more likely to pop up during a potential lame duck session later in 2016.
Pierce said the White House, which earlier this year threatened to veto Olson's bill delaying the revised ozone standards, and Senate Democrats have previously been successful in blocking House Republican-backed proposals to roll back or delay EPA regulations. The hope for environmental advocates is that negotiations over the fiscal 2017 funding package follow in the steps of the fiscal 2016 omnibus, which was “entirely clean” of environmental riders, Pierce said.
Lawmakers Look for Opportunities
Pierce and Billings were less concerned about the possibility of any stand-alone legislation, including Olson's ozone bill, becoming law. They both described standalone bills targeting EPA as “dead on arrival” in the Senate.
However, congressional staffers in both chambers told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 8 that they will continue to work on the ozone issue this fall. A majority aide with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee said the committee will push for an opportunity to work on S. 2882, a companion version of Olson's ozone bill introduced in the Senate by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.).
“Obviously opportunities will be limited the rest of the year,” the committee aide said. “Whatever opportunities present themselves, we'd be willing to consider.”
The aide added that there have been some conversations on possible bipartisan efforts to provide some sort of relief from the ozone standards. During a June EPW subcommittee hearing, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) indicated he would be open to “commonsense” efforts to help states that would have trouble meeting the more stringent 2015 ozone standards.
A spokeswoman for Olson said that while state regulators that support H.R. 4775 would like to see action on the bill soon, there is a “limited amount of time” for the end of this Congress.
Currently “the ball is in the Senate's court,” the spokeswoman said. If the ozone issue is not dealt with this Congress, Olson plans to launch another push on the issue at the beginning of the 115th Congress, the spokeswoman said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=96862132&vname=dennotallissues&wsn=499318500&searchid=28371201&doctypeid=1&type=date&mode=doc&split=0&scm=DELNWB&pg=0
-
Lawmakers, Advocates Call for Greater Congressional Role
Sep 9, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Kevin Bogardus
Several Republican and Democratic lawmakers said Congress needed to rein in a growing regulatory state and give bureaucrats more clarity.
Speaking at a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) said Capitol Hill had forsaken its obligation to provide tough oversight and strict guidance to agencies writing and implementing rules.
"In some cases, though, excessive delegation to agencies, I think, Congress has ceded their responsibility. I don't think there is any doubt about it," said Heitkamp, the subcommittee's ranking member.
She said U.S. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers' Clean Water Act jurisdiction rule, also known as Waters of the U.S., was one example of Congress failing to clarify the law and give agencies better guidance.
"The clearest example that I can provide is Waters of the United States, where clearly over decades of litigation and decades of rulemaking there is not a clear answer," Heitkamp said.
Advertisement
"One would imagine in that factual situation, Congress would see the important role of stepping in and providing the guidelines that need to be provided, the laws that need to be provided. But yet we don't do it because we'd rather pound the table and complain about regulatory agencies."
Heitkamp has voiced opposition to the water rule in the past. She has drafted legislation with GOP colleagues to send the measure back to the drawing board.
Yesterday's hearing focused on independent agencies — like the Federal Communications Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — and how their rulemaking doesn't face the same scrutiny compared with executive branch departments.
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said, "Independent agencies should not be exempt from oversight," noting that while they may be independent within the executive branch, that "does not require that they are also independent of Congress and the American people."
Lankford, the subcommittee's chairman, cited an Office of Management and Budget report that found that between 2005 to 2014, independent agencies were responsible for 141, or roughly 25 percent, of the 549 major rules issued by the executive branch.'Get back in the game'
Witnesses at the hearing agreed with the senators and said they should become more involved in the rulemaking process. "Congress does have to get back into the game," said Robert Gasaway, an attorney at Kirkland & Ellis LLP.
Adam White, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, said independent agencies' actions aren't subject to the same cost-benefit analysis from the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs — essentially the federal government's clearinghouse for regulations.
"This week, my wife and I are sending our kids back to school, and just as our schools don't trust students to grade their own homework, we shouldn't leave the independent agencies free to grade their own homework," White said.
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) said there needs to be stricter requirements on those agencies.
"I mean, the American people are shocked to learn that independent agencies who play a bigger, bigger role in all of our lives don't have to go through a basic cost-benefit analysis. I mean, they're shocked by that," Portman said.
Portman has offered legislation, S. 1607, to require independent agencies to stick to tougher cost-benefit analysis standards for their major rules. The full committee approved the legislation 9-4 in October, but it has failed to advance any further (E&E Daily, Oct. 8, 2015).
Portman said he appreciated his fellow senators holding the hearing and said he hoped they could move his bill in the next Congress.
Several senators noted that while independent agencies were designed to be free of political influence, many of their rules fall in line with the agenda of whoever is running the White House at the time. Heitkamp said tougher guidelines are needed to keep those regulations free of politics.
"Well, there's nothing in this town that's independent from politics. Get in the real world," Heitkamp said. "We have to have rules that prevent over-broad political opinions from basically being invented in so many of these rules."
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/09/09/stories/1060042557
-
House GOP Advances Bills To Limit EPA's Settlement, Rulemaking Powers
Sep 8, 2016 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
House Republicans are advancing legislation that would limit EPA's ability to require payments to conservation groups in legal settlements and a separate bill that would delay implementation of the agency's “major” regulations while they are being litigated, although the settlements bill has drawn a veto threat from President Obama.
In a Sept. 7 floor vote, the House by 241-174 approved H.R. 5063, which would prohibit EPA and other federal agencies from entering settlement agreements that include payments to “unrelated” third parties. Supporters of the measure have characterized it as a way to block the use of enforcement settlements as “slush funds” that mandate payments to the administration's political allies, including environmentalist groups.
The bill, whose Senate companion is S. 3050, says agencies may not enter settlements “directing or providing for a payment to any person or entity other than the United States, other than a payment that provides restitution for or otherwise directly remedies actual harm (including to the environment) directly and proximately caused by the party making the payment, or constitutes payment for services rendered in connection with the case.”
If enacted, the bill could limit EPA's use of supplemental environmental projects (SEPs). With SEPs, companies facing enforcement action agree to fund environmental improvement efforts in the affected area, including activity by third parties. But the pending legislation -- if it became law -- could prevent such projects if the SEPs are found to not be remedying harm “directly and proximately caused” by the violator.
State officials have previously raised concerns over the propriety of such SEPs in remarks at the Environmental Council of the States' (ECOS) spring meeting April 12 in Nashville, TN.
At the meeting, New Mexico Environmental Department Cabinet Secretary Ryan Flynn -- who is also ECOS' compliance committee chair -- said that there has in the past been a "lack of confidence" in some SEPs in his state as they were used for "political purposes" rather than advancing environmental protection.
Although H.R. 5063 might address those concerns, it is unlikely to become law this year as the White House is already threatening to veto the bill if it clears the Senate.
“This legislation seeks to address a problem that does not exist -- the Federal Government does not create or use 'slush funds.' When the Federal Government settles a case with those who violate the law, it seeks to hold the defendants accountable and appropriately remedy the harms they have caused and to prevent the recurrence of those harms,” says a Sept. 6 White House Statement of Administration Policy.
Litigated Rules
Meanwhile, the House Judiciary Committee in a Sept. 8 markup advanced a separate regulatory reform bill, H.R. 3438 to the House floor, by an 18-13 vote. The legislation -- whose Senate companion is S. 1927 -- would block implementation of any “major rule,” defined as a rule carrying more than $1 billion in annual compliance costs, until any court challenges against the policy are resolved.
Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA), the bill's sponsor and chair of the judiciary panel's regulatory reform subcommittee, has said his legislation specifically targets major EPA rules issued under the Obama administration. These regulations include the agency's mercury and air toxics standards (MATS) for power plants and its greenhouse gas standards for existing power plants, known as the Clean Power Plan (CPP).
“As a starting point, the American people need to look no further than the EPA’s MATS rule to see one example of the negative impact overly broad and misguided rules have on our economy. If there is one more compelling reason to change, this is it,” Marino said in a statement after proposing the bill Aug. 4, 2015.
“The MATS rule created a large degree of uncertainty within our economy. Now, the CPP presents another front for heavy-handed and costly regulations with a thin legal basis. . . . [H.R. 3438] provides a clear and certain path to ensure a proper and thorough examination of any federal agency’s most egregious rules,” he said.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refused to block implementation of the MATS rule while it was originally litigated, but the Supreme Court has stayed EPA from implementing the CPP pending the outcome of suits over the regulation.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/house-gop-advances-bills-limit-epas-settlement-rulemaking-powers
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested