Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 10/13/16
-
(ACC Mentioned) An October Tradition: Teaching Kids About Manufacturing
Oct 12, 2016 | Bureau County Republican
Manufacturing supports more than 18.5 million U.S. jobs, and hundreds of those jobs exist in the Illinois Valley area. This month, Carus Corporation is joining manufacturers across the country in helping kids explore a wide array of career opportunities. -
(ACC Mentioned) Jackson Announced As New President & CEO Of Tennessee Chamber Of Commerce & Industry
Oct 12, 2016 | Chattanoogan
The Tennessee Chamber of Commerce has announced the hiring of Bradley Jackson, a well-known business insider on Capitol Hill, as the new President & CEO of the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce & Industry. -
(ACC Mentioned) Green Chemistry Missing From Amended Toxics Law
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Stinson
An absence of green chemistry language and lack of cleaner ingredient disclosures in the recently amended Toxic Substances Control Act had some panelists at an Oct. 11 conference concerned while others lauded the amended chemical statute. -
(ACC Mentioned) States Call On EPA To Ensure Broad Data Sharing In TSCA CBI Regulation
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
States are calling on EPA to ensure it will broadly share with them data on chemicals it will gather as part of a confidential business information (CBI) rule required by the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), while also suggesting states and local authorities could similarly have useful data for EPA. -
EPA Expedites Action On Five Chemicals
Oct 12, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
EPA is taking quick action to reduce exposure to five persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals. -
NRDC Presses For Final EPA Perchlorate SDWA Rule Deadline
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists are urging a federal district court to declare that EPA has violated its statutory duty to finalize a Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) standard for perchlorate, after the court in September found the agency had missed a statutory deadline to issue a proposed version of a SDWA perchlorate rule. -
Maine Looks To Designate decaBDE, HBCD As Priority Chemicals
Oct 13, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Maine's environmental protection department (DEP) has proposed a rule to designate decaBDE and HBCD as priority chemicals under the Toxic Chemicals in Children's Products law. -
SC Johnson Considers 'Rethink' On Galaxolide
Oct 13, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
American multinational SC Johnson has agreed to "carefully review" scientific data on the synthetic musk galaxolide. The move comes amid concerns from NGOs and scientists that it is persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT). -
U.S. Is About to Double the Shale Gas It Sends Overseas
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Naureen S. Malik
The U.S. is set to double the volume of shale natural gas it's sending abroad. -
Bolt Cutters Expose Vulnerability of North America's Oil Pipeline Grid
Oct 12, 2016 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
All it took was a pair of bolt cutters and the elbow grease of a few climate activists to carry out an audacious act of sabotage on North America's massive oil and gas pipeline system. -
National Trust for Historic Preservation Warns Of 'Intentional' Destruction By Dakota Access
Oct 12, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
The National Trust for Historic Preservation has warned the Obama administration that a crucial permit for the Dakota Access pipeline may be imperiled by the "intentional" destruction of tribal resources last month. -
Gas Line Has Two U.S. Agencies Clashing Over Climate Change
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jonathan N. Crawford
A $1.4 billion natural gas line proposed by TransCanada Corp. is pitting two U.S. government agencies against each other and drawing attention to how major energy projects are reviewed. -
Environmentalists Seek Additional Oil & Gas Air Rules Ahead Of Next EPA
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Environmentalists are pushing EPA to pursue several additional emissions rules for the oil and gas sector beyond methane limits the agency has already said it is considering, hoping to “set the stage” before President Obama leaves office in January for an aggressive series of rules that could potentially bind the next EPA to some extent. -
Clinton's Wall Street Speeches Show Support For Natural Gas
Oct 12, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Elana Schor
Hillary Clinton repeatedly praised the economic and geopolitical benefits of U.S. natural gas production in paid Wall Street speeches after leaving the State Department, according to apparent excerpts made public by WikiLeaks as part of a hacked email release this week. -
Clean Power Plan And American Global Leadership
Oct 12, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Ambassador William J. Burns
With the EU’s ratification, the Paris Climate Agreement is set to enter into force. This is a historic turning point in the fight against one of the most consequential global threats of our time. -
Ruling Vacating OSHA's PSM Policy Could Force EPA To Ease RMP Rule
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
A recent federal appeals court ruling striking down an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) policy broadening the reach of its process safety management (PSM) rule to retailers will likely force EPA to ease its proposed facility safety rule update for facilities in the sector because it relies in part on the OSHA policy. -
Four Texas Companies to Pay $3.3M for Clean Air Act Crimes
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Four Texas oil and chemical companies will pay $3.3 million in penalties after pleading guilty to criminal violations of the Clean Air Act, including an incident leading to a fatal tank explosion in 2011, the Justice Department announced Oct. 12. -
(ACC Mentioned) Exxon Mobil: Global Energy And Plastics Demand Will Push Emissions Up
Oct 12, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
The rapidly increasing demand for energy and plastics in the developing world will continue to increase global carbon emissions until about 2030, even though pollution levels are falling in the United States, a top Exxon Mobil executive said Wednesday. -
Industry Coalition Rejects Claim Of Ozone Implementation Rule 'Backsliding'
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A major coalition of industries in a new legal filing is defending EPA's rule for implementing the 2008 ozone air standard from environmentalists' claims that it unlawfully allows “backsliding,” or removal of existing ozone pollution controls, while also offering a defense of various other provisions of the implementation rule. -
U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Hit New 25-Year Low
Oct 12, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By Rebecca Smith
U.S. carbon dioxide emissions fell to a new 25-year low during the first six months of 2016, helped in large part by power plants switching from coal to natural gas and renewable sources of electricity, according to a Wednesday report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. -
D.C. Circuit Urged To Uphold Bar On Credit For 'Out Of Area' Ozone Cuts
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Environmentalists are urging a federal appeals court to uphold EPA's policy of not allowing areas exceeding its ozone ambient air standard to rely on emissions cuts outside those areas to count toward “reasonable progress” in attaining the ozone limit, fighting a bid by a California air district to have the court scrap the policy. -
EPA Nears Agreement On N.C. Ozone Reduction Suit
Oct 12, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA may be close to resolving a lawsuit that seeks to force a decision on adding North Carolina to a regional ozone reduction program, according to a court filing today. -
L.A.’s Quest to Cut Fossil Fuels
Oct 12, 2016 | The New York Times
By The Editorial Board
Los Angeles has suffered the worst ozone pollution of any American city for three years running.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) An October Tradition: Teaching Kids About Manufacturing
Oct 12, 2016 | Bureau County Republican
Manufacturing supports more than 18.5 million U.S. jobs, and hundreds of those jobs exist in the Illinois Valley area. This month, Carus Corporation is joining manufacturers across the country in helping kids explore a wide array of career opportunities.
The first Friday of each October is Manufacturing Day, the kick-off to a month of outreach activities involving companies across the country aimed at introducing young people to the many jobs associated with manufacturing.
“Every year, students are fascinated to learn about all the ways people make a living in manufacturing, at Carus and at other local businesses. We employ chemists and engineers, mechanics and electricians, as well as professionals in finance, sales, marketing, safety, information technology,” said Ralph Moshage, engineering manager for Carus.
Moshage also serves as co-chair of the North Central Regional Betterment Coalition’s Manufacturing Career Expo. The event, which takes place at Illinois Valley Community College Oct. 27, brings together 300 local high school students to tour local manufacturing facilities, meet industry professionals, and learn what they need to study now to pursue rewarding careers in the future. Carus has been a sponsor and participant since the Expo’s first year in 2013.
But before opening their plant to students for the Expo, Carus volunteers brought hands-on science mini-lessons to Chicago’s Museum of Science and Industry on Oct. 13-14. A long-time member of the Chemical Industry Council of Illinois (CICI), Carus participates annually in the CICI Careers Conference, which introduces thousands of Chicago-area students to careers in chemistry.
“This is an opportunity for us to promote the science behind manufacturing, and to attract young talent to the Illinois Valley. Every product we make for water treatment or air purification begins in our lab, and for a young person interested in chemistry, a career with Carus may be a perfect fit,” said human resources generalist Phil Taylor.
In the October outreach activity at Carus, you could consider National Chemistry Week the grand finale. Carus volunteers take their show on the road, visiting middle schools throughout the area with demonstrations, and getting young people excited to learn.
“That’s really what all of this is about,” said Taylor. “ (It's about) building a young person’s enthusiasm for their future, for learning, and for the great job opportunities that exist all around them.”
About Carus: Founded in LaSalle in 1915, Carus produces and supplies specialty chemistries, technologies and services for water treatment, soil remediation and air purification. Carus is a member of the American Chemistry Council and actively participates in the industry’s award-winning Responsible Care initiative, sharing a common commitment to improve environmental, health, safety and security performance.
http://www.bcrnews.com/2016/10/10/an-october-tradition-teaching-kids-about-manufacturing/ab1pnv/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Jackson Announced As New President & CEO Of Tennessee Chamber Of Commerce & Industry
Oct 12, 2016 | Chattanoogan
The Tennessee Chamber of Commerce has announced the hiring of Bradley Jackson, a well-known business insider on Capitol Hill, as the new President & CEO of the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce & Industry.
“We are excited to name Bradley as President of the Tennessee Chamber,” Greg Martz, Chairman of the Tennessee Chamber Board of Directors, said. “He has demonstrated beyond any doubt his ability to effectively run a complex organization, and we are excited about his vision for the Chamber.”
Established in 1912, the Tennessee Chamber also serves as the Tennessee Manufacturers Association and counts Tennessee’s most prominent businesses as members.
The Tennessee Chamber also maintains a statewide grassroots organization that includes local Chambers of Commerce and economic development professionals. The Chamber is the official state affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the American Chemistry Council.
Mr. Martz further noted, “After a number of conversations with elected officials and business leaders across Tennessee, we came to the unanimous conclusion that, based on Bradley’s vision and the respect that he carries with legislative and business leaders, he is the right choice to lead the Chamber long term.”
Mr. Jackson has more than a decade of experience in leading some of the business community’s most successful initiatives. In his prior role with the Chamber, Mr. Jackson served as the Vice President for Government Affairs, heading up the implementation of the Chamber’s annual legislative agenda. During his tenure, the Chamber achieved a number of successes in the areas of workers’ comp reform, business taxes, and workforce initiatives. The Chamber succeeded in accomplishing more than 90% of its legislative goals during the time that Jackson steered Government Affairs.
Prior to joining the Chamber, Mr. Jackson worked in a variety of roles in Tennessee state government. He was on the research staff of the powerful Senate and House Finance Ways & Means Committees, headed up lobbying for the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions, and played a strategic role on behalf of the Governor’s office in a number of operational and strategic initiatives.
“The Tennessee Chamber has a bright future, and I am honored to be selected to this position,” Jackson said. “I will work to continue our tradition of strong legislative advocacy and government affairs, and growing relationships with business leaders. I look forward to focusing on the needs of our member companies as we work to develop programs that benefit them and continue to make Tennessee a great state for business.”
A native of Lawrenceburg, TN, Jackson is a graduate of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Mr. Jackson and his wife, Hope, have three children and live in Nashville.
http://www.chattanoogan.com/2016/10/12/333837/Jackson-Announced-As-New-President-.aspx
-
(ACC Mentioned) Green Chemistry Missing From Amended Toxics Law
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Stinson
An absence of green chemistry language and lack of cleaner ingredient disclosures in the recently amended Toxic Substances Control Act had some panelists at an Oct. 11 conference concerned while others lauded the amended chemical statute.
“It's a big paradigm shift,” said Joanna Slaney, a consultant at Environmental Defense Fund.
“Instead of going from a system where unless you could show there was a problem, a chemical got to be out there; now you actually have to show that there's not likely to be a problem or that there isn't a problem before the chemical can stay on the market,” she said.
“That's pretty revolutionary from our perspective.”
Slaney offered the comments at SXSW Eco, a conference in Austin, Texas, during a policy panel examining the impact of the Lautenberg Act on the Toxic Substances Control Act or TSCA.
Passed in June by Congress, the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. No. 114-182), amended TSCA June 22.
Lack of Green Chemistry Language
The absence of green chemistry language in the final bill remained a sore spot, said David Levine, chief executive officer for the American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC), which represents 200,000 businesses nationwide and more than 325,000 entrepreneurs, executives, managers and investors.
Speaking to Bloomberg BNA from the sidelines of the conference, Levine said “one of the big disappointments” in the bill was the failure to include a research and development component of the bill geared toward supporting innovation and safer chemicals, language which was “completely gutted.”
“There was an attempt by Sen. [Chris] Coons (D-Del.) to take his bill around sustainable chemistry and integrate that into the final language of the bill,” said Levine. “That was not included.”
Approved by the Senate in December 2015, the section cut from the bill passed by the House would have established an interagency sustainable chemistry committee and program.
“The idea that if we're really serious about trying to move toward safer chemicals, one part of it is being able to regulate the hazardous chemicals and get them off the market, but the other part has got to be to recognize that there are truly safer alternatives that are out there,” said Levine.
“We need to invest a lot more and government has done this tremendously throughout the years investing in new technologies that will drive the innovation in the sector,” he said.
Ingredient Disclosure Legislation Needed
Levine identified the need for regulation in the arena of ingredient disclosure, saying the bill doesn't go far enough in making clear to the public the contents and potential impact of ingredients on consumers.
“The new sets of laws we're going to be looking for are ingredient disclosure in cleaning products,” said Levine.
“Transparency is the key frame that needs to be addressed, and it's only partially covered by what we see presently in the Lautenberg bill to reform TSCA.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98777518&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98777518&jd=98777518
-
(ACC Mentioned) States Call On EPA To Ensure Broad Data Sharing In TSCA CBI Regulation
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
WHEELING, WV -- States are calling on EPA to ensure it will broadly share with them data on chemicals it will gather as part of a confidential business information (CBI) rule required by the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), while also suggesting states and local authorities could similarly have useful data for EPA.
Speaking to Inside EPA on Sept. 27 during the Environmental Council of the States' (ECOS) fall meeting here, Washington Department of Ecology toxics chief Ken Zarker said the states are hoping the revised toxics law will lead to a more robust "give and take" between federal and state chemical regulators on CBI.
"In the past, EPA was restricted -- they couldn't share data with the states under TSCA. They changed it so now we can share the data . . . we want to have a conversation about what we can have access to," Zarker said. He has spearheaded TSCA efforts for ECOS, which represents many state environment agencies.
EPA has already pledged to involve states when it develops rules implementing the new TSCA statute's CBI provisions. Agency toxics chief Jim Jones said during a Sept. 27 TSCA panel at the conference here that his office will seek input from ECOS on a CBI rule.
"I think that is a topic that deserves an ECOS dialogue. . . . We're hoping in December, after we get some of these requirements a little more down the road, that we'll be able to put more energy into a state-federal dialogue," he said.
Zarker told Inside EPA that Jones' promise is encouraging but added that he and other state regulators are hoping the dialogue develops into a broad information-sharing rule that would allow states access to federal CBI databases moving forward, and could also let EPA draw on data states have gathered through their own toxics programs.
He continued that states have long sought more effective ways to build databases of hazardous chemicals that could be released to the environment in an accident or spill, citing the 2014 Elk River chemical spill in West Virginia as an example of when such information would have been useful.
"It was very difficult for emergency responders to get information on what was in that chemical that got into the river. . . . they didn't know what they were dealing with for quite a few hours," he said.
Zarker added that data sharing could also benefit EPA because it would gain access to information states have gathered through their own chemicals programs during the years when TSCA was weaker and state regulators were thus encouraged to pursue their own regulations of hazardous substances, such as California's "green chemistry" program.
It would also allow regulators to share data gathered if states deliberately pursue regulating chemicals EPA has not scrutinized, in order to avoid the new law's complex regime for preempting states' existing rules for a chemical that the agency targets for review.
"We'd be more than happy to share information on what kind of chemicals are involved in products or uses we've looked at, or what kinds of products a certain chemical is used in. That might be especially helpful if they're looking at a particular use of a chemical," Zarker said.
Data on individual uses of chemicals could be particularly important if EPA sides with industry groups such as the American Chemistry Council and implements "fit for purpose" reviews of substances' environmental and health risks, which would be targeted to inform specific regulatory decisions rather than covering a broader general assessment.
EPA's Tala Henry, director of the agency's risk assessment division within its Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics may have signaled that TSCA implementation will go in that direction during an Aug. 9 presentation to a Washington, D.C., meeting. There, according to comments, Henry indicated that the agency intends to conduct "fit for purpose" risk evaluations.
But environmentalists have cautioned that risk reviews tailored to inform potential regulation of chemicals, rather than a general review of a substance's risks, would violate the reformed TSCA.
http://insideepa.com/inside-epa/states-call-epa-ensure-broad-data-sharing-tsca-cbi-regulation
-
EPA Expedites Action On Five Chemicals
Oct 12, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
Agency moves to reduce exposure to persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic substances under new law
EPA is taking quick action to reduce exposure to five persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals. Rather than conducting a full risk evaluation for the chemicals, the agency will immediately work to identify where they are used and how to limit the public’s exposure. The move marks the agency’s first major step to control such chemicals as required under the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The new TSCA, the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, was signed into law in June. It gave EPA sweeping new authorities to control chemicals that people are exposed to everyday. PBT chemicals are known to be some of the worst for the environment and public health.
“The threats from persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals are well documented,” says Jim Jones, assistant administrator in EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety & Pollution Prevention. “The new law directs us to expedite action to reduce risks for these chemicals, rather than spending more time evaluating them.”
The following five chemicals will get swift action:
• Decabromodiphenyl ethers (DecaBDE), a flame retardant
• Hexachlorobutadiene (HCBD), found in rubber and lubricants and used as a solvent
• Pentachlorothio-phenol (PCTP), a chemical that softens rubber
• Tris(4-isopropylphenyl) phosphate, a flame retardant
• 2,4,6-Tris(tert-butyl)phenol, a fuel or lubricant additive
Under the new law, EPA is required to take expedited action to reduce exposure to all PBT chemicals that are part of the agency’s 2014 work plan of chemicals for further assessment under TSCA. Alternatively, the agency can conduct full risk evaluations for those chemicals.
Two PBT chemicals used in fragrances—ethanone, 1-(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-octahydro-2,3,5,5-tetramethyl-2-naphthalenyl) and ethanone, 1-(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-octahydro-2,3,8,8-tetramethyl-2-naphthalenyl)—were not expedited because of industry pushback. Chemical manufacturers asked EPA last month to instead conduct full evaluations for the two substances.
Environmental groups are welcoming EPA’s move, but they are urging the agency to increase the number of PBT chemicals subject to such action. “We fought to have this provision applied to a broader group of chemicals, but the chemical industry resisted,” says Andy Igrejas, director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, a coalition of health, environmental, labor, and business organizations. “Nevertheless, expedited action even against these five chemicals will be a win for public health.”
https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i41/EPA-expedites-action-five-chemicals.html
-
NRDC Presses For Final EPA Perchlorate SDWA Rule Deadline
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists are urging a federal district court to declare that EPA has violated its statutory duty to finalize a Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) standard for perchlorate, after the court in September found the agency had missed a statutory deadline to issue a proposed version of a SDWA perchlorate rule.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), in new filings with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, reiterates its arguments that EPA has violated SDWA by failing to finalize a perchlorate standard by May 2015 and asks the court to enter summary judgment in favor of NRDC on the issue of liability.
EPA has not disputed that it missed the deadline to propose the maximum contaminant level (MCL), and the district court last month found in favor of NRDC on the issue. While EPA initially agreed it had missed both the deadline to propose and to finalize the rule, the agency later argued that the clock to finalize the rule had not yet started because it had not yet proposed the MCL.
Following the court's Sept. 19 ruling, EPA and NRDC informed the court they had reached a tentative settlement. But the latest filings from NRDC indicate potential uncertainty over that agreement.
“The sole question currently before the Court is whether the agency has also missed Congress’s deadline for issuing final regulations; that is, whether the agency has failed to regulate perchlorate according to the timeline set forth in the Safe Drinking Water Act,” NRDC says in an Oct. 12 memorandum supporting its motion for summary judgment. “As described more fully below, the answer is plainly yes.”
NRDC says SDWA's timeline echoes the language of the Endangered Species Act, which “courts interpret as establishing binding final deadlines.” And the legislative history of SDWA “further confirms Congress’s intent that the agency rapidly regulate new contaminants found to pose a risk to human health. By contrast, the agency’s interpretation is illogical, would reward agency delay, and would undercut the public’s ability to enforce the Safe Drinking Water Act’s requirements,” NRDC says.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/nrdc-presses-final-epa-perchlorate-sdwa-rule-deadline
-
Maine Looks To Designate decaBDE, HBCD As Priority Chemicals
Oct 13, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Maine's environmental protection department (DEP) has proposed a rule to designate decaBDE and HBCD as priority chemicals under the Toxic Chemicals in Children's Products law.
It would apply to manufacturers of a range of products that intentionally contain the flame retardants when used in a non-polymeric, additive form.
The rule proposes covering:childcare articles, sleepwear, toys, clothing and footwear;electronic devices; andhousehold furniture and furnishings, including mattresses and mattress pads.
DecaBDE and HBCD are both listed as Chemicals of High Concern to Children (CHCC) in Washington state. It passed a law earlier this year that banning the sale of residential furniture or children's products containing either substance above de minimis levels. This came into effect in July.
Earlier this week, the US EPA named decaBDE a persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) substance. As such it is subject to expedited risk management under TSCA.
And consumer advocates have called for HBCD to be among the first ten substances the agency selects for TSCA risk evaluation.
Under Maine's proposed rule, manufacturers of the affected products would need to report to the state within 180 days of the rule's effective date. Reports would have to include:a description of the product, including whether it is mouthable;the amount and function of the regulated flame retardants;product sales data; andany other information the manufacturer deems relevant to the reporting of the regulated flame retardant. This would include scientific studies or evaluation of alternatives.
A one-time reporting fee would also apply.
Maine selects priority chemicals from a list it keeps of 49 chemicals of high concern. The state also lists approximately 1,400 substances as chemicals of concern.
Last year, the DEP designated formaldehyde and four phthalates as priority chemicals, bringing the list to nine substances. BPA, NP/NPE, cadmium, mercury and arsenic were already included.
The public comment period for the two flame retardants will end on 14 November. The DEP will convene a hearing on 1 November.
https://chemicalwatch.com/50266/maine-looks-to-designate-decabde-hbcd-as-priority-chemicals
-
SC Johnson Considers 'Rethink' On Galaxolide
Oct 13, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
American multinational SC Johnson has agreed to "carefully review" scientific data on the synthetic musk galaxolide. The move comes amid concerns from NGOs and scientists that it is persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT).
The manufacturer of household cleaning supplies outlined its commitment in a letter to Women's Voices for the Earth (WVE), seen by Chemical Watch. It was responding to the NGO's most recent call for it to phase out use of the substance.
In an open letter, signed by 20 scientists, WVE claimed galaxolide is found "ubiquitously" throughout the environment due to its use in household products.
SC Johnson director of reputation management, Ania Waszkiewicz, responded that the company would look at research highlighted by WVE to see if it "brings new information to light and causes us to rethink our position."
Up until now, the company has strongly defended its use of the chemical in more than 80 of its household products, including the Glade, Windex and Pledge lines.
Earlier this year, SC Johnson's senior vice president of global corporate affairs, communication and sustainability, Kelly Semrau, said the company "vehemently disagrees with WVE's assertion that SC Johnson products contribute to high levels of galaxolide in aquatic life and waterways".
But in last week's response, Ms Waszkiewicz said the company is very concerned about water, and will take time to give the scientific studies provided by the NGO "a very deliberate view." Included in this data is a GreenScreen assessment of the substance, indicating galaxolide is a 'benchmark 1' substance of highest concern.
SC Johnson's response cited EU and US EPA studies that found the chemical did not fulfil PBT criteria. But WVE has argued that EU and EPA research was based on unpublished data from the fragrance industry. And, it says, this was not peer-reviewed or publicly available. WVE 'pleased' with progress
WVE's director of science and research, Alexandra Scranton, told Chemical Watch she was pleased that SCJ "is changing from flat-out defending galaxolide, to instead taking a closer look into this chemical."
SC Johnson is one of six companies using galaxolide in the US, according to EPA Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) data. Manufacturers must report to the agency substances used at more than 25,000lbs a year.
SC Johnson has claimed it is only responsible for 1% of the 3.7m lbs of the chemical used annually in the US. But Ms Scranton said that 37,000lbs a year is "not an inconsequential amount of a PBT chemical."
She added that if SC Johnson eliminated use of galaxolide, it would "make a tremendous statement". This could impact the other five companies using the chemical in their products.
Companies which have reported using galaxolide to the EPA are:Berje Inc.;Firmenich;Symrise; andInternational Flavors and Fragrances.
There is one other company that has declared its identity to be confidential business information.
Several household product manufacturers, including Johnson & Johnson, Clorox and RB, have stopped using the chemical.
https://chemicalwatch.com/50262/sc-johnson-considers-rethink-on-galaxolide
-
U.S. Is About to Double the Shale Gas It Sends Overseas
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Naureen S. Malik
The U.S. is set to double the volume of shale natural gas it's sending abroad.
Cheniere Energy Inc., which became the nation's first and only exporter of shale gas in February, was cleared by U.S. regulators on Oct. 12 to double shipments from its landmark terminal in Louisiana. Its second plant at the Sabine Pass site can now fill tankers with liquefied natural gas, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said in a notice.
The additional volumes of U.S. LNG will come at a testing time for the global market, which is reeling from a worldwide glut that's set to worsen through 2020 as demand from key Asian customers slows. Still, the first exports from the lower 48 states have helped whittle down a U.S. supply glut and put Cheniere on the road to posting its debut profit.
“There will be big questions about where all of this gas is going to go and what it's going to do to European gas prices and power prices, in Asia as well,” Ted Michael, an LNG analyst with Genscape Inc., said by phone from Auburn, Calif. “All of this will be driven by this flood of LNG coming out of Australia and the U.S. primarily.”
Train 2, as the plant is known, began producing LNG on July 28 during the commissioning process. Trains 1 and 2 were shut in late September for planned work, which was expected to last about four weeks. Each has the capacity to produce the equivalent of about 650 million cubic feet a day.
Next year, the company plans to bring online a third plant and start the commissioning of a fourth.
Sabine Pass took in 119 billion cubic feet of gas from April 1, which marked the start of the U.S. gas stockpiling season, through Sept. 9, ABB Inc. data show. During the same period, the country's supply glut versus the five-year average fell to 299 billion cubic feet from 874 billion.
Fix Payments
By starting up two liquefaction plants, Cheniere will be able to start taking in fixed payments for 20 years from customers whether or not they decide to actually take any LNG from Sabine Pass. A contract with Royal Dutch Shell Plc goes into effect this December for Train 1, while one with Spain's Gas Natural Fenosa starts in September 2017, according to a company presentation earlier this year.
Sabine Pass has demonstrated that the plant has “been constructed in accordance with commission approval and applicable standards and can be expected to operate safely as designed,” the commission said in the notice.
With assistance from Jonathan N. Crawford.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98777515&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98777515&jd=98777515
-
Bolt Cutters Expose Vulnerability of North America's Oil Pipeline Grid
Oct 12, 2016 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
HOUSTON/NEW YORK — All it took was a pair of bolt cutters and the elbow grease of a few climate activists to carry out an audacious act of sabotage on North America's massive oil and gas pipeline system.
For an industry increasingly reliant on gadgets such as digital sensors, infrared cameras and drones to monitor security and check for leaks, the sabotage illustrated how vulnerable pipelines are to low-tech attacks.
On Tuesday, climate activists broke through fences and cut locks and chains simultaneously in several states and simply turned the pipelines off.
All they had to do was twist shut giant valves on five cross-border pipelines that together can send 2.8 million barrels a day of crude to the United States from Canada - equal to about 15 percent of daily U.S. consumption.
The activists did no damage to the pipelines, which operating companies shut down as a precaution for checks before restarting.
The United States is the world's largest energy market, and the infrastructure to drill, refine, store and deliver that energy to consumers is connected by millions of miles of pipeline that are impossible to protect entirely from attack.
"You're not manning these things on a permanent basis. It's not viable," said Stewart Dewar, a project manager at Senstar, an Ottawa-based company that authored a 2012 white paper on pipeline security. "It's too expensive."
There are more than 200,000 miles (322,000 km) of oil lines and many times that of natural gas lines across the United States. Thousands of rural and often remote pumping and valve stations dot the country.
The cost of posting armed guards at valve stations, usually found every 20 miles along the underground pipelines, would be prohibitive, said Dewar.
For companies, there are few options to police the parts of their pipeline networks that sit above ground, such as the valve stations.
The stations are usually protected by nothing more than the same flimsy chain link fence and padlocks elementary schools use to protect their playgrounds.
GLOBAL PROBLEM
The same vulnerabilities are present worldwide. In Nigeria and conflict zones such as Iraq, pipelines have been targeted by militants. In Mexico, thieves target the fuel arteries to siphon off fuel.
But until Tuesday, environmental activists had never carried out a simultaneous, coordinated attack of this magnitude.
Tuesday's action, supported by the Vermont-based Climate Disobedience Action Fund, was held to draw attention to climate change and to support opponents of the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline, which critics say could rupture and sour drinking water for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in North Dakota.
Several pipeline operators and safety experts said shutting off valves was extremely dangerous and that activists underestimated the risks.
Pipelines can be heavily pressurized depending on length and altitude variation, and shutting off a valve could cause ruptures that are "catastrophic" for the environment, Paul Tullis of Tullis Engineering Consultants said.
"It's like a freight train," he said of the momentum with which the oil moves. "If these people are hydraulic engineers, they might be able to do this safely."
Activists often do not fully know what they are doing, even if they think they do, Tullis said.
Protesters said they spent months studying how to safely shut the valves. The ability for them to access the proprietary information necessary to shut a line safely was questioned by experts.
Either way, pipeline specialists said it was lucky there were no leaks on Tuesday. Once the valves are shut, pressure can quickly build up inside pipelines that operate under as much as 1,000 pounds (450 kg) per square inch.
Protesters were taking a chance that a weak spot in a line would not explode, and that employees in operations hubs would spring into action after hearing alarms.
"On the wrong pipeline, in the wrong place (actions like this) could kill people. This is hazardous hot liquid. It's not something to be terrified of, but it must be respected," said Richard Kuprewicz, president of Accufacts Inc, a pipeline advisory firm.
SECURITY RAMP-UP AFTER 9/11
After the tampering, owners Enbridge Inc, TransCanada Corp, Spectra Energy and Kinder Morgan shut their lines as a precaution.
They did not immediately respond to questions about their broader security precautions, though some of them emphasized having multiple safety systems in place.
The general vulnerability of U.S. infrastructure - from bridges to power plants and ports - became more apparent after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Since then, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration, part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has asked pipeline companies to carry out a “security vulnerability assessment” for their assets and to conduct risk assessments that include the “likelihood of a success of an attack,” and to take steps to mitigate those risks.
A review published by the DHS in 2015 identified physical and cyber security as a risk to energy infrastructure systems, including the threat of multiple, coordinated attacks and electromagnetic pulse events, but focused primarily on threats to the electrical grid.
Security experts said they have tried to strike a balance between protecting facilities, ensuring freedom of movement and keeping costs in check.
The Association of Oil Pipe Lines, an industry group, said it recognized disagreements exist about energy policy, but that the protest went too far.
Previous valve closures have caused spills, including one of nearly 4,000 barrels of oil, the group said.
"We don't want anyone to get hurt or cause a release into the environment," said Andrew Black, the group's president.
(Reporting by Liz Hampton in Houston and Ethan Lou in New York; Additional reporting by Devika Krishna Kumar and Jessica Resnick-Ault; Writing by Terry Wade; Editing by Simon Webb and Bill Rigby)
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2016/10/12/business/12reuters-usa-canada-pipelines-vulnerabilities.html?mtrref=query.nytimes.com&gwh=F2DC4C1794B02520365FEBE59A25E0BC&gwt=pay&_r=0
-
National Trust for Historic Preservation Warns Of 'Intentional' Destruction By Dakota Access
Oct 12, 2016 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Elana Schor
The National Trust for Historic Preservation has warned the Obama administration that a crucial permit for the Dakota Access pipeline may be imperiled by the "intentional" destruction of tribal resources last month.
In an Oct. 4 letter obtained by POLITICO, the Trust urged the administration to "conduct a thorough investigation," and said it had concluded — based on court filings by the tribe's longtime historic preservation officer — "that intentional actions may have been taken by the applicant to destroy cultural resources within the pipeline corridor."
The historic preservation officer, Tim Mentz, filed a statement in court last month alleging that Dakota Access construction workers bulldozed over cultural artifacts he uncovered on the previous day. The pipeline company has denied any destruction of historic resources and points to a survey by the chief archaeologist of North Dakota's state historic society, conducted after the bulldozing episode Mentz alleges, that found no cultural artifacts at risk.
The Army Corps of Engineers is required to consider the pipeline's effect on cultural sites outside of its jurisdiction as part of a "cumulative" assessment, the Trust asserted in its letter to the Corps and Department of Justice, and is barred under law from granting a permit to an entity engaged in "anticipatory demolition" of a culturally significant resource.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Gas Line Has Two U.S. Agencies Clashing Over Climate Change
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jonathan N. Crawford
A $1.4 billion natural gas line proposed by TransCanada Corp. is pitting two U.S. government agencies against each other and drawing attention to how major energy projects are reviewed.
The Environmental Protection Agency said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission failed to undertake a “proper” analysis of climate change in its final environmental impact statement for the 160-mile (257-kilometer) Leach Xpress pipeline, according to a filing on Oct. 11. Its input was at odds with the commission's finding in April that the link would have limited effect on the environment that could be addressed.
“It's been FERC's decision to do a more limited scope of review” for these projects than the EPA has called for, Tyson Slocum, Washington-based director of energy at consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said by phone.
The rift exposes divisions at the federal level over the approval process for pipelines when climate change is taken into account at a time when the U.S. gas network is undergoing a massive expansion driven by booming production. The filing comes on the heels of a call by the Obama administration in August for federal agencies to step up their assessment of global warming impacts in their review of projects.
“We view FERC's response to our comments as very concerning in light of” the Obama administration's new guidelines on greenhouse gas impacts, the EPA said in its letter to the commission. The agency seeks “a definitive resolution to this matter before you publish a record of decision.”
The Leach Xpress project, which would allow for the shipment of 1.5 million dekatherms per day of natural gas from the Appalachian supply basin, is scheduled to start in the second half of 2017, according to the project website.
The commission declined to comment by phone. TransCanada, which bought Columbia Pipeline Group Inc.—the company behind the project—earlier this year, wasn't immediately available for comment.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98777506&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98777506&jd=98777506
-
Environmentalists Seek Additional Oil & Gas Air Rules Ahead Of Next EPA
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Environmentalists are pushing EPA to pursue several additional emissions rules for the oil and gas sector beyond methane limits the agency has already said it is considering, hoping to “set the stage” before President Obama leaves office in January for an aggressive series of rules that could potentially bind the next EPA to some extent.
Among the policies that advocates plan to pitch for the agency to start work on in the last few months of the Obama administration are potential offsets and efficiency measures for equipment on drill sites.
For example, one environmentalist says, “it would be nice to see” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy in an exit memo detail some possible Clean Air Act approaches for curbing ozone and other pollution from drilling sites that this administration has not yet addressed.
Those could include the possible use of emissions offset programs, for which the environmentalist says the air law provide precedent, and ways to “spur more efficient practices” not only for natural gas pipelines, the focus of much discussion this administration, but also for drill rigs, trucks and compressor engines used on drill sites.
Environmentalists praise EPA's efforts to curb methane from the sector through a methane limit on new oil and gas operations and data collection to inform potential limits on methane from existing sources.
However, the environmentalist says the agency must in the future -- ideally before Obama leaves office -- commit to other steps necessary to aid states struggling with attaining the ozone ambient air quality standards and other issues related to increased natural gas development.
“Better emissions controls just aren't going to cut it, we need less development or some kind of offset program,” that source adds, noting that offsets have been introduced in other types of nonattainment areas, and with respect to larger sectors, they say.
Environmentalists will be closely watching EPA’s planned federal implementation plan (FIP) for oil and gas production on the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation in Utah, that source says, noting it will be the “first out of the gate” FIP for those types of facilities.
EPA says in its Spring 2016 Unified Agenda that the FIP is an “important initial step to fill the 'regulatory gap'” in addressing volatile organic compound emissions, which are a precursor for ozone, from oil and natural gas production operations within the exterior boundaries of the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation. “This rule is intended to formally 'level the playing field,'" EPA says.
NSPS Reconsideration
Meanwhile, one industry source says that they would like to see the Obama administration before leaving office address issues related to reconsideration for implementation of its first time new source performance standards(NSPS) for methane from new oil and gas drilling operations.
Additionally, that source says, the administration -- particularly the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) -- should seek to ensure that forthcoming venting and flaring rules issued by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) do not overlap with the issues EPA is looking at in its information collection request (ICR) for data on the sector's existing sources of methane. The ICR is expected to help lay the groundwork for the next administration to pursue first-time methane limits on existing oil and gas operations.
“We would expect that all overlap in the BLM rules be removed” before the final rule is issued, given that “EPA is at least taking the time to understand” the costs and issues associated with controls for existing sources through the ICR process, the source says. “That's certainly the message we're carrying to OMB and Office of Regulatory Affairs” within OMB, the source adds.
The ICR is part of the agency's ongoing efforts to address air pollution concerns from the industry. EPA in June finalized the NSPS, which for the first time set controls for new and modified sources of methane within the sector, updating an earlier NSPS the administration issued in 2012 targeting volatile organic compounds.
But the agency opted against such a rule for existing sources. Instead, the data collected by the ICR is expected to help a future administration craft that regulation.
Industry's Concerns
Industry groups, including the American Petroleum Institute (API), Independent Petroleum Association of America, American Exploration and Production Council, and others have previously outlined a host of concerns about the ICR's timing and scope, such as whether it will yield a "targeted collection" of data that will inform a "remaining useful life" determination, according to API.
The industry source says that while they are not opposed to the ICR process as an “appropriate interim step” to an existing source rule despite costs associated with complying with the data collection effort, “at the same time we want to get it right, we want a clear ICR with an adequate time frame and accurate picture of costs, emissions and operations.”
The source also says of EPA's final NSPS, issued June 3, that the agency should address certain implementation issues with the regulation. For example, the API in an Aug. 2 petition for reconsideration is asking EPA to clarify a host of issues, including the definition of “on-site” as it applies to the location of separators for well completion operations; the definition of “control device” and language saying it should not apply to boilers and processors subject to control design requirements, and other issues the group says will make implementation difficult.
These issues are important for industry even “setting aside the threshold legal question” of whether EPA must first issue an endangerment finding for methane from the sector's sources before issuing an NSPS, the source says. Industry and states are arguing in pending U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit litigation are testing the question of whether the agency should have first issued a finding ahead of the NSPS.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/environmentalists-seek-additional-oil-gas-air-rules-ahead-next-epa
-
Clinton's Wall Street Speeches Show Support For Natural Gas
Oct 12, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Elana Schor
Hillary Clinton repeatedly praised the economic and geopolitical benefits of U.S. natural gas production in paid Wall Street speeches after leaving the State Department, according to apparent excerpts made public by WikiLeaks as part of a hacked email release this week.
Clinton's closed-door celebration of domestic natural gas production undercuts Republican arguments that she would shut down U.S. energy production, but it also underscores the challenge she faces in maintaining support among environmental activists who have been skeptical of her centrist approach to energy and climate change.
Story Continued Below
Praising fracking as an "enormous opportunity,” as Clinton put it in a speech to Citibank in 2014, suggests her presidency may not be the golden environmental opportunity that anti-gas activists perceive. Green groups have poured millions of dollars into her White House bid, and some already are planning longer-term campaigns against natural gas, with the Sierra Club setting aside at least $5 million aimed at pushing Clinton to oppose new gas pipelines and power plants.
The former secretary of state's embrace of oil and gas during her paid speeches takes up six pages of an 80-page roundup of potentially controversial speech excerpts flagged by her speaker's bureau. The document, apparently obtained by a hacker accessing Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s personal email account, was released by WikiLeaks.
The speech excerpts have come to light as Clinton is increasingly using climate change as a wedge issue to increase her appeal to women and young voters. She has portrayed Donald Trump as unfit for office on account of his past dismissal of climate change as a hoax and appeared alongside Al Gore for a policy-heavy rally in Florida on Tuesday. She did not mention natural gas at that rally, but she has praised it as a bridge to renewable energy in speeches to other audiences, most recently at Sunday’s debate.
Clinton’s behind-closed-doors remarks drew quick praise from the oil industry. The Independent Petroleum Association of America's Energy in Depth project rejoiced on Tuesday that the emails showed Clinton's positive remarks about gas during the second presidential debate were "just the beginning" of bad news for activists.
But Clinton’s continued embrace of stronger regulations on fracking may provide fodder for continued attacks from Trump, who has previously accused her and President Barack Obama of trying to put energy producers out of business.
“We’re going to not let the EPA destroy our companies for natural gas, and shale and all other things, not going to let it happen,” Trump said at a campaign stop in Pennsylvania this week.
Clinton told Goldman Sachs in 2013 that the domestic fracking boom was "mostly a positive," adding: "Obviously it’s imperative that we exploit the oil and gas in the most environmentally careful way."
Pivoting off her State Department's work to promote fracking overseas, Clinton used several speeches to tout the ability of U.S. gas exports to counter Russian influence in Europe, echoing a talking point popular among gas companies and pro-export politicians from both parties.
"I want to be able to export gas, especially to our friends, in order to undercut in Europe's case the pressure from Russia," Clinton said during a 2014 speech to Deutsche Bank.
During an address for Canadian promotional company tinePublic in 2014, Clinton warned that her team came "up against phony environmental groups" supported by the Russian government to deter other nations from building fossil-fuel infrastructure.
"I'm a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort — oh, that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia," Clinton said, according to the excerpts WikiLeaks released.
Clinton's campaign has declined to confirm that the released excerpts are authentic and charged Russia with supporting the hack of campaign chairman John Podesta's emails.
"By dribbling these out every day WikiLeaks is proving they are nothing but a propaganda arm of the Kremlin with a political agenda doing [Vladimir] Putin's dirty work to help elect Donald Trump," Clinton spokesman Glen Caplin said in a statement. “The FBI is now investigating this crime, the unanswered questions are why Donald Trump strangely won’t condemn it and whether any of his associates are involved.”
Even as Clinton praised the environmental and economic upside of shifting the nation's power sector from reliance on coal to natural gas, she acknowledged the need to go beyond current fracking safety regulations in several speeches.
"I'm not crazy about the consequences of natural gas with the release of methane, but it is replacing coal," she said during 2014 remarks at the University of Miami. "We have to be smarter about the technology and about the control of how we extract oil and gas in the United States and elsewhere to try to get as close to a clean bridge as possible."
In another private 2014 speech, Clinton seemed to embrace banning fracking in certain locations.
"[T]here will be some places, frankly, where we will have to decide we can't do it there," Clinton said of fracking, during remarks at a San Diego law firm known for representing shareholders in class-action lawsuits. "But, many places we'll be able to, as long as we have the appropriate precautions undertaken."
Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh hit Clinton's pro-fracking speeches on Tuesday as hypocritical, suggesting that Republicans are already preparing attacks in a similar vein should she beat Donald Trump next month. Clinton's speeches assured oil and gas companies that their work could continue under her presidency, Limbaugh said, while Clinton's Democratic "voters think the exact opposite."
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2016/10/clintons-wall-street-speeches-show-support-for-natural-gas-133466
-
Clean Power Plan And American Global Leadership
Oct 12, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Ambassador William J. Burns
With the EU’s ratification, the Paris Climate Agreement is set to enter into force. This is a historic turning point in the fight against one of the most consequential global threats of our time. Here at home, we face another turning point with the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s hearing of a case that will determine the future of the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan.
The Paris Agreement created a framework in which all nations knew that their efforts would be matched by others. This unprecedented global commitment only happened because the United States showed that it was willing to take the first step – and convinced China to come along. Well in advance of the Paris meetings, the two countries jointly announced transformative climate goals. China – which currently pumps out a quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions – agreed to halt its emissions growth by 2030, including by generating hundreds of gigawatts of solar and wind power. The United States pledged to promote renewable energy, to modernize the electric grid, to promote energy efficiency and fuel economy, and to make other changes that will help usher in the clean-energy future. A centerpiece of the United States’ commitments was the Clean Power Plan, which will reduce emissions from power plants by nearly a third below 2005 levels by 2030.
Research released this summer suggests China may meet its goals well ahead of schedule. The United States is off to a strong start as well, and the Clean Power Plan promises to accelerate further the transition to cleaner energy generation. Unfortunately, as soon as the EPA released the Clean Power Plan in August 2015, opponents filed suit, arguing that the Obama Administration’s authority under the Clean Air Act did not extend to regulating carbon emissions from power plants – or at least not in the way that the Clean Power Plan did. The D.C. Circuit – often called the “second highest court in the land” – is considering the merits of their arguments.
The stakes could hardly be higher. By taking the first step, the United States was able to generate a planet’s worth of ambitious commitments – such as India’s goal to generate 40% of its energy from non-fossil-fuel sources, Mexico’s commitment to cut carbon emissions in half by 2050, and comparable commitments from the European Union and Brazil. We need to keep moving forward to ensure countries meet their commitments and sustain momentum for further global action on climate change.
If the present opportunity is missed, we – and future generations – will look back with regret as the effects of climate change take a greater and greater toll. It has become impossible to ignore the effect of climate change on the environment – rising sea levels threaten coastal communities and island nations; storms of unprecedented frequency and severity cause billions in losses; droughts turn once-fertile regions into deserts; and irreplaceable habitats and species are lost. It is equally impossible to ignore the effect of climate change on global order. The Department of Defense has concluded that climate change “poses immediate risks to U.S. national security.” In addition to the danger it poses to our coastlines, cities, and environment, the report argues that climate change is a “threat multiplier” that makes nearly all other global challenges – from poverty to pandemics – more severe and intractable.
Even though the Clean Power Plan’s opponents will present the battle against climate change as one we cannot afford to fight, in reality it is one we cannot afford to lose. That’s why all eyes were on the United States when it took the first step, and led the world in making a historic commitment to change. The world will be watching again.
Ambassador Burns is President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and former Deputy Secretary of State
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/300589-clean-power-plan-and-american-global-leadership
-
Ruling Vacating OSHA's PSM Policy Could Force EPA To Ease RMP Rule
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
A recent federal appeals court ruling striking down an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) policy broadening the reach of its process safety management (PSM) rule to retailers will likely force EPA to ease its proposed facility safety rule update for facilities in the sector because it relies in part on the OSHA policy.
The ruling will likely also force the agency to conduct additional economic and other analysis of its own proposed facility accident prevention rule, possibly further delaying the rule that EPA hopes to issue by year-end. EPA in its proposed risk management plan (RMP) update rule relied on the vacated OSHA policy for upgrading the retail facilities' regulatory classification.
“All their economic costs and projections were based on OSHA's illegal retail exemption enforcement guidance,” a source with the Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) tells sister publication Inside OSHA Online.
EPA did not answer by press time an email asking how the court's ruling might prompt agency staff to reassess aspects of its March proposed rule, but agency documents supporting the RMP rulemaking show EPA leans heavily on OSHA's PSM rule in classifying facilities for RMP regulation.
In a Nov. 19 presentation on the RMP proposed rule, EPA says whether a facility is regulated under PSM is one of three factors the agency weighs in classifying facilities. The others are potential for off-site consequences and accident history.
OSHA and EPA are each in the process of updating their closely intertwined rules that seek to protect workers and prevent accidents at industrial facilities as part of a broad Obama administration effort to implement a 2013 executive order on strengthening facility safety.
President Obama in 2013 issued Executive Order (EO) 13650 on improving the safety and security of industrial plants in response to an explosion at a fertilizer facility in West, TX, that killed 15 people. The West facility was exempt from PSM rules as a retail facility.
EPA in March proposed a rule revising its RMP facility accident prevention program, seeking public input on new requirements for hazard analysis and facility audits, among others.
In the proposed regulation EPA notes that OSHA's June 2015 memo narrowing the PSM retail exemption would change how many facilities are classified under RMP.
“As a result of this change, many agricultural chemical distributors who sell bulk anhydrous ammonia and some chemical warehouses, are no longer exempt from the PSM standard,” EPA says in the proposed rule. “This makes them subject to RMP Program 3 requirements, whereas before most were covered under Program 2.”
Under EPA's proposed rule, Program 3 facilities face stricter requirements than Program 2 facilities, including for conducting mechanical integrity testing, process hazard analysis, and for including employees in accident prevention activities, among others.
PSM Rule
In its response to Obama's order, OSHA in July 2015 issued an enforcement memo, “Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals and Application of the Retail Exemption (29 CFR 1910.119(a)(2)(i)),” that narrowed the definition of retail facilities that are subject to an exclusion from the PSM rule.
OSHA officials have said that in analyzing the PSM rule under the EO, staff found that it had been wrongly interpreting the exemption by using a so-called 50 percent test, which classified establishments as “retail” if at least half their income came from end users. The agency changed the policy so the exemption only covered sites that fall under the North American Industrial Classification System codes for retail employers.
While OSHA is weighing a rule overhauling PSM, its efforts to strengthen its facility worker protection rule in the near-term have faced pushback from industry and in the courts.
But in a unanimous Sept. 23 ruling in ARA et al. v. U.S. Department of Labor et al., a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated OSHA's July 2015 memo seeking to narrow an exemption from PSM rules for agricultural retail facilities. The court ruled that OSHA violated the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act, its authorizing statute, in seeking to amend the PSM standard without seeking public input.
The panel argues that policy changes that seek to correct a particular risk, rather than merely identify problems for enforcement purposes, are “standards” under the OSH Act, requiring notice and comment procedures.
The court's ruling does not preclude OSHA from again narrowing the retail exemption as part of its planned effort to overhaul its PSM program, as part of a rulemaking effort that is underway but may take years. That effort would include taking public input.
Industry sources have said OSHA will likely appeal the ruling, which will have far-reaching impacts on that agency's ability to interpret its rules for enforcement, but the source with ARA, which brought the lawsuit against OSHA, says the court's ruling will also affect EPA's ongoing effort to update its RMP program.
EPA is “going to have to revise the final RMP rule based on the court's decision, because our members are [now] not covered under PSM,” the ARA source says.
Specifically, the source says that the ruling striking down OSHA's expansion of PSM to cover roughly 4,800 retail facilities means those facilities will no longer be subject to RMP's strictest level of requirements as EPA said they would in the agency's March proposed rule. Instead, those facilities will revert to a weaker category of oversight as they have historically been regulated under RMP.
EPA's effort to overhaul RMP under EO has already faced significant delays, spurring advocates' long-standing fears that the agency will fail to issue a final rule before the end of the year, putting an eventual RMP final regulation at risk from further review from Congress or a future administration.
A coalition of environmental and labor advocates have said that they are planning to seek meetings with White House Office & Management Budget (OMB) officials during an upcoming review a final version of EPA's rule, though the agency has yet to send a final version of the RMP rule for the required OMB review, which generally takes 90 days.
A source with the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters, which in 2012 petitioned EPA to use Clean Air Act authority to require facilities to use alternative chemicals or processes to reduce risk of accidents, said advocates will seek meetings with OMB officials to again press for EPA to require that facilities use safer technologies.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/ruling-vacating-oshas-psm-policy-could-force-epa-ease-rmp-rule
-
Four Texas Companies to Pay $3.3M for Clean Air Act Crimes
Oct 13, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Four Texas oil and chemical companies will pay $3.3 million in penalties after pleading guilty to criminal violations of the Clean Air Act, including an incident leading to a fatal tank explosion in 2011, the Justice Department announced Oct. 12.
The agreement filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas also requires the companies to pay $200,000 to the Southern Environmental Enforcement Network for improved hazardous air pollutant and emergency response training for first responders.
KTX Limited and KTX Properties Inc. were charged with negligently releasing hazardous air pollutants following a 2011 tank explosion at a facility in Port Arthur, Texas. According to the Justice Department, the companies forged a permit to perform welding on a storage tank at the facility. The companies also failed to properly drain and isolate the tank before welding began, causing an explosion that killed one worker and injured two others.
“The dishonest and outright failure to adhere to workplace standards and practices can lead to death and injury to American workers who deserve better, as this case tragically shows,” John Cruden, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division, said in a statement.
Court documents in the case were not immediately available, and the companies could not be reached for comment.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration initially opened the investigation into the fatal explosion, Kelly Knighton, administrator for OSHA Region 6, said in a statement.
“Employee safety is of paramount importance as there is no excuse for workers not returning to their families at the end of the day,” Knighton said in a statement.
Pollution Records Falsified
Additionally, the Justice Department charged Crosby LP and Ramsey Properties LP with falsifying air pollution monitoring records at their chemical processing facility in Crosby, Texas. According to the Justice Department, the companies failed to monitor emissions of pollutants that contribute to ozone formation and falsified those records when demonstrating compliance with their operating permit to the Environmental Protection Agency and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
The companies could not be reached for comment.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=98777521&vname=dennotallissues&fn=98777521&jd=98777521
-
(ACC Mentioned) Exxon Mobil: Global Energy And Plastics Demand Will Push Emissions Up
Oct 12, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
THE WOODLANDS - The rapidly increasing demand for energy and plastics in the developing world will continue to increase global carbon emissions until about 2030, even though pollution levels are falling in the United States, a top Exxon Mobil executive said Wednesday.
The world's expanding middle class, particularly in China and India, is creating demand for plastics and other chemicals that will grow more than 4 percent a year, double the demand growth for energy, Neil Chapman, president of Exxon Mobil Chemical, said at a luncheon of National Association of Manufacturing held at Exxon's campus here. A large chunk of the chemicals and plastics consumed in Asia will be exported from the Texas Gulf Coast, he said.
Although carbon emissions are declining in the developing world due to increased energy efficiency and renewable power, the rapid growth of the developing world will mean global emissions ticking upward until about 2030 before slowly beginning to fall, he said.
"Climate change is an issue we have to address as a society," Chapman said. "But, at the same time, there's 1 billion people without electricity in the world."
Exxon is investing several billion dollars to increase the production of ethylene and polyethylene - the world's most common plastic - at its Baytown and Mont Belvieu plants. The project represents Exxon Mobil's first major U.S. chemical expansion in more than 15 years with completion slated for the second half of 2017.
xxon also has a joint venture with the Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., known as SABIC. The companies will soon decide whether to build another massive chemical plant in southeastern Texas or Louisiana.
The demand for plastics is largely driven by rising incomes in China and other developing countries, where people are spending more of their money on consumer products, many of them made of or packaged in plastic.
When disposable incomes increase, Chapman said, people buy cars or shop at fancier grocery stores instead of outdoor neighborhood markets. "Everything is covered in plastic [in grocery stores]. In my business, we love that," he said.
Much of the plastics production needed to supply the developing word will come from the Gulf Coast, where access to cheap and ample natural gas has fueled a petrochemical boom. A component of natural gas, ethane, is the primary building block of most plastics.
The American Chemistry Council, a chemical industry trade group, estimates that about 275 petrochemical projects are under construction or planned across the country through 2023, and they will create about 75,000 jobs. The combined cost is $170 billion, including almost $55 billion in Texas.
The chemical sector now accounts for 51 percent of all U.S. manufacturing spending in 2016, according to the National Association of Manufacturing.
"Houston is at the absolute epicenter of this revolution," Chapman said, noting that more than 40 percent of the nation's base chemicals are produced in the Houston area.
The United States had little petrochemical growth in the last 15 years. As recently as a decade ago, it was, the most expensive place in the world to produce chemicals, Chapman said. The shale drilling boom, which unlocked vast reserves of oil and natural gas, changed that.
"That's an astonishing transformation from just a few years ago," Chapman said.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Exxon-Mobil-Global-energy-and-plastics-demand-9967737.php
-
Industry Coalition Rejects Claim Of Ozone Implementation Rule 'Backsliding'
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A major coalition of industries in a new legal filing is defending EPA's rule for implementing the 2008 ozone air standard from environmentalists' claims that it unlawfully allows “backsliding,” or removal of existing ozone pollution controls, while also offering a defense of various other provisions of the implementation rule.
The National Environmental Development Association's Clean Air Project (NEDA/CAP), a broad group that includes the Boeing Company, BP America, ExxonMobil Corporation and others, filed an Oct. 11 brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that offers a defense of many parts of the implementation rule. NEDA/CAP is also challenging other provisions as unlawful, and filing separate briefs on those.
Environmentalists in an Oct. 11 brief also defended the rule for not allowing states to claim credit in their ozone reduction plans for pollution cuts that occur outside the area subject to the plan. But advocates oppose language in the rule that they believe will allow backsliding that could worsen air quality.
EPA in the consolidated litigation, South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, et al., has defended its decision to scale back “anti-backsliding” provisions designed to prevent the removal of air pollution controls imposed on industry to help states attain the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) of 75 parts per billion, rejecting advocates' claims that the Clean Air Act requires more such rules to be left in place.
The rule being contested in the pending suit outlines steps states should take as they craft air pollution reduction state implementation plans (SIPs) for attaining the NAAQS. The agency subsequently tightened the ozone standard to 70 ppb last October, but is yet to issue implementation guidelines for the stricter limit.
In the implementation rule, EPA revoked the 1997 ozone limit expressed as 84 ppb, endorsed emissions trading as a local compliance option, and allowed area-wide averaging of emissions to establish compliance. It also lifted pollution control requirements related to an even older, already-revoked “one-hour” ozone standard of 120 ppb, set in 1979.
Environmentalists in their briefs say these steps will permit backsliding that allows areas and industrial facilities to remove pollution controls. EPA denies this, pointing to areas' compliance with the tougher 2008 NAAQS as evidence that they also comply with the revoked 1997 standard, and denying that backsliding can occur. The Clean Air Act's anti-backsliding provisions were crafted to cope with a situation where NAAQS standards are weakened, but the courts have found them to also be applicable in situations where the standards become tougher.
In its new brief, NEDA/CAP says, “The 2008 Implementation Rule’s revocation of the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS does not allow States to backslide by removing or relaxing 1997 NAAQS or one-hour Ozone NAAQS controls in 2008 nonattainment” SIPs. Fundamentally, “It is impossible mathematically to attain the 2008 NAAQS without first attaining the 1997 NAAQS,” the group says.
Potential Backsliding
Environmentalists in the case claim that EPA's rule weakens requirements that nonattainment areas impose reasonably available control technology (RACT) on industrial sources of emissions, weakens reasonable further progress (RFP) requirements that mandate progressive reductions in air emissions, and weakens the application of Clean Air Act new source review (NSR) permit rules.
However, NEDA/CAP argues that advocates are wrong, saying in its brief that “EPA's rule does not suggest that EPA believed that attainment of the 1997 NAAQS was unnecessary. Instead it reflects EPA’s determination that implementation of the more stringent 2008 Ozone NAAQS made continued implementation of the 1997 standard 'largely superfluous from a public health standpoint.'”
As a result, it was reasonable for EPA to revoke the 1997 ozone standard, and indeed the agency has revoked ozone standards on two prior occasions, NEDA/CAP argues. Nor does the rule condone lifting pollution control requirements introduced to meet the 1997 standard, the group argues.
However, environmentalists argue that the rule in effect gives states more time than the air law allows to attain the 1997 NAAQS, by reclassifying their attainment status.
“The nub of [environmental] Petitioners’ challenge . . . is that by revoking the 1997 Ozone NAAQS, the Implementation Rule gives States more time to attain the former 1997 NAAQS by reclassifying all areas across the country for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. Under those 2008 NAAQS classifications, they assert, many nonattainment areas were reclassified into 'cleaner' nonattainment categories that that carried less stringent (i.e., larger) definitions of a 'major source' -- crucial to applying RACT and NSR in that area,” NEDA/CAP says.
The group says that environmentalists argue “that relaxation of these requirements also occurred when the Implementation Rule reclassified 1997-NAAQS nonattainment areas as meeting the 2008 Ozone NAAQS because the States were no longer required to implement nonattainment RFP, RACT, NSR or future requirements such as ozone penalty fees, which would have applied but for the Standard’s revocation.”
NEDA/CAP's Arguments
But the industry coalition says that advocates' arguments are false. Attainment dates, in themselves, are not “controls” subject to anti-backsliding prohibitions, the group says, and it is also reasonable to give areas longer to comply with the tougher 2008 ozone standard. Also, “removing the formerly applicable attainment deadlines for areas re-classified as attainment for a more stringent NAAQS is not backsliding.”
NEDA/CAP rejects the premise that EPA's rule created “orphan” areas where NSR requirements were wrongly lifted because of a reclassification of attainment status, arguing that no such permitting “gaps” can result because EPA has put in place mechanisms to fill them.
The groups also say that there is nothing unlawful in the shift of “major source” obligations that stems from areas being reclassified as cleaner, which in effect shrinks the number of sources subject to NSR's strict air pollution control requirements.
NEDA/CAP further defends EPA's decision to allow emissions trading to qualify as RACT, rather than site-specific controls as environmentalists insist, and also to condone area-wide averaging by local air regulators when applying required controls. Environmentalists say trading is unlawful and allows individual emissions sources to increase their pollution by buying emissions credits instead of running controls.
However, NEDA/CAP says, “Because RACT is not plainly defined in the [air law], this Court must defer to EPA’s reasonable interpretations of the [air law] based on the agency’s technical expertise,” citing the Chevron doctrine that holds the courts should defer to federal agencies' reasonable interpretations of statutes where the law is ambiguous.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/industry-coalition-rejects-claim-ozone-implementation-rule-backsliding
-
U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Hit New 25-Year Low
Oct 12, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By Rebecca Smith
U.S. carbon dioxide emissions fell to a new 25-year low during the first six months of 2016, helped in large part by power plants switching from coal to natural gas and renewable sources of electricity, according to a Wednesday report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Mild weather also played a role. Many regions across the country experienced higher-than-normal temperatures last winter, which reduced demand for heating fuels, the agency said.
Energy-related carbon emissions in the first half of the year were 2.53 billion metric tons, the lowest since the same period in 1991. Full-year emissions for 2016 are on pace to be 5.18 billion metric tons, which would be the lowest on record since 1992, according to the latest federal projection.
The numbers mean the U.S. is on track to reduce energy-associated carbon emissions by at least 1.5% this year compared with a 3% drop last year.
“They’re not huge decreases, but our carbon intensity is going down as a nation,” said Allen McFarland, an analyst with the U.S. Energy Department. “Carbon intensity has been generally falling since 2005.”
Natural gas and coal are burned to generate electricity, but gas produces roughly half the carbon emissions of coal. Advanced production techniques applied to wells from Texas to Pennsylvania have unleashed abundant gas reserves, pushing down the cost of the fuel.
During the first half of the year, total U.S. energy consumption fell 2% compared with the same period in 2015. The decrease was especially notable among residential power users, with consumption falling 9%.
One big driver is the nation’s steady march toward greater energy efficiency. Revamped federal standards have reduced energy consumption for everything from lightbulbs and refrigerators to industrial motors. State-level carbon-reduction goals are also pushing companies to make products that consume less energy, especially when in standby mode.
California, for example, recently proposed the nation’s first energy-efficiency standards for computers and monitors after finding they are responsible for 7% of commercial electricity use and 3% of home power use. The new requirements, expected to be adopted by year’s end, would go into effect in 2019.
A shift toward renewable energy also helped reduce carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas linked to climate change. Wind, solar and hydroelectric power sources generated 9% more electricity in the first half of the year than in the first half of 2015, the Energy Department said.
The U.S. Congress recently extended federal tax incentives that encourage the development of wind and solar power, so experts predict continued gains in renewable output for the next few years.
Utilities and big companies continue to buy more renewable power, partly because prices have been dropping. Duke Energy Corp., which provides power to homes and businesses in southeastern states and across the Midwest, raised its renewable-energy targets by 33%. The company now expects to control 8,000 megawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2020, up from a goal of 6,000 megawatts set in 2013.
Duke’s changing generation mix “has lowered our overall carbon dioxide emissions by 28% since 2005,” said Randy Wheeless, a spokesman for the company.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-carbon-dioxide-emissions-hit-new-25-year-low-1476298479
-
D.C. Circuit Urged To Uphold Bar On Credit For 'Out Of Area' Ozone Cuts
Oct 12, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Environmentalists are urging a federal appeals court to uphold EPA's policy of not allowing areas exceeding its ozone ambient air standard to rely on emissions cuts outside those areas to count toward “reasonable progress” in attaining the ozone limit, fighting a bid by a California air district to have the court scrap the policy.
The dispute is outlined in new legal filings this week in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, with advocates, the air district and industry groups challenging or defending various aspects of EPA's March 2015 rule for implementing its 2008 ozone air standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb). Industry groups also filed a brief this week defending part of the rule from advocates' criticisms.
The rule details how states should craft state implementation plans (SIPs) detailing the strategies they will adopt to reduce ozone-forming pollutants and come into attainment with the ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), which the agency tightened to 70 ppb in a rulemaking last October.
Environmentalists in the suit are attacking some of the rule's provisions that they say will allow unlawful “backsliding” on air quality by allowing removal of some existing pollution controls.
But they are also defending EPA's policy in the rule of disallowing emissions reductions from outside areas in nonattainment of the NAAQS from counting toward reasonable progress requirements.
In the case, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) v. EPA, et al., California's SCAQMD claims this prohibition is problematic for some states that are struggling to attain the NAAQS.
Environmentalists counter in an Oct. 11 brief that the Clean Air Act requires areas in nonattainment with a NAAQS to implement pollution controls within that area and demonstrate “reasonable progress” toward meeting the standard, rather than relying on ozone cuts elsewhere that might help reduce ozone in the area.
“The plain meaning of the statutory term 'in the area' is the nonattainment area that is subject to the progress requirements, not some unspecified other area,” says the filing by the Sierra Club, Conservation Law Foundation, Downwinders at Risk and Physicians for Social Responsibility -- Los Angeles.
SCAQMD has argued that out-of-area emissions reductions should count, but environmentalists say the Clean Air Act “leaves no room for South Coast’s misguided policy proposal.”
Nonattainment Requirements
Under the air law, areas in nonattainment of the ozone NAAQS are classified according to an escalating scale of seriousness, ranging from “marginal” to “extreme,” with more pollution control measures required for more serious attainment status, but also more time allowed for compliance.
Areas classified “moderate” nonattainment or worse must achieve a 15 percent reduction in volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions -- which can lead to ozone formation -- “from baseline emissions” within a fixed period, in the first step of reasonable further progress (RFP) requirements.
Areas classified as “serious” or worse must satisfy a second progress requirement that begins on the deadline for completing the first, and requires the equivalent of three percent annual VOC reductions averaged over every consecutive three-year period, until attainment.
The act defines baseline emissions as “the total amount of actual VOC or NOx emissions from all anthropogenic sources in the area” in a particular year. After the air law amendments of 1990, EPA initially interpreted this to require that all VOC emissions reductions under RFP must come from within the nonattainment area in question, then changed course to allow out-of-area emissions cuts to count -- only to reverse itself again in response to unrelated litigation over a similarly-worded air law provision in the 2009 D.C. Circuit case Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA.
The advocates' brief says “when EPA previously claimed discretion to authorize out-of-area emission reductions to satisfy the statutory progress requirements, states seized the opportunity to allow more air pollution, and the air remained dirty. South Coast’s attempt to re-inject such discretion into the Act cannot be squared with Congress’s intent.”
The groups reject South Coast's assertion that the term “area” is ambiguous, and insist it can only refer to a nonattainment area. They further assert the potential for mischief if their strict reading is not followed.
“If out-of-area reductions could again satisfy progress requirements, the issues of which areas would qualify, how to count reductions that could theoretically affect multiple areas, and more would again arise. Opportunities would spring back for gerrymandered boundaries, questionable modeling assumptions, and other ways in which areas could seek flexibility to do less to clean up the air their residents breathe,” the groups write.
Oral arguments have not yet been scheduled in the case.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/dc-circuit-urged-uphold-bar-credit-out-area-ozone-cuts
-
EPA Nears Agreement On N.C. Ozone Reduction Suit
Oct 12, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA may be close to resolving a lawsuit that seeks to force a decision on adding North Carolina to a regional ozone reduction program, according to a court filing today.
The state and EPA have reached "an agreement in principle," attorneys for the two sides wrote in the joint filing, which asks a judge to give them until Nov. 16 "to finalize the terms of the proposed consent decree and to obtain final organizational approval."
A deal had been expected after EPA opted last month against including North Carolina among the states covered by its updated Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (Greenwire, Sept. 12).
Today's filing offers no details of the tentative agreement. A spokesman for the Justice Department, which is representing EPA, did not reply to an email this afternoon; North Carolina officials expect EPA's approach "to be consistent" with its finding on the cross-state rule, said Stephanie Hawco, a spokeswoman for the state's Department of Environmental Quality.
The state had brought the suit in March to compel EPA officials to respond to the 2013 petition to add North Carolina and eight other states to the Ozone Transport Region. The petition was filed by eight Northeastern governors on the grounds that emissions from those states were hurting their efforts to meet the 2008 air quality standard for ozone.
The Ozone Transport Region, created by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, currently encompasses the District of Columbia and all or part of a dozen states, including Maine, New York and Maryland. As members of the Ozone Transport Commission, based in Washington, D.C., they are supposed to work on reducing the movement of ozone and the chemicals that create it across state lines.
If made part of the program, North Carolina and the other eight states would have to come up with plans for further cutting emissions of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds, the two classes of chemical that react in sunshine to form ozone, the main ingredient in smog.
The state's suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, alleged that EPA was legally supposed to have made a decision on the petition by the middle of last year. Before the two sides began talking about a settlement this summer, EPA's attorneys had sought to end the litigation on the grounds that the state had failed to show any harm as a result of the delay.
Last week, New York and five of the other Northeastern states that brought the petition also sued EPA to get a decision (E&ENews PM, Oct. 6). As of this afternoon, the agency's lawyers had not yet responded in court, according to the judiciary's online records system.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/10/12/stories/1060044179
-
L.A.’s Quest to Cut Fossil Fuels
Oct 12, 2016 | The New York Times
By The Editorial Board
Los Angeles has suffered the worst ozone pollution of any American city for three years running.
Coastal areas of the city could be swallowed by the Pacific by the end of the century as a warming climate causes sea levels to rise. A natural gas leak in northwestern Los Angeles, finally plugged in February, was the most disastrous in American history.
Small wonder that Los Angeles is joining a growing movement to confront environmental challenges at the local level. As the former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg realized early in his tenure, cities, with their concentrated populations, can play an important role in addressing local air pollution as well as global climate change. (Mr. Bloomberg helped to lead a delegation of mayors from various countries at last December’s global climate summit meetings in Paris, and their presence had much to do with pushing a final agreement over the finish line.)
Moreover, it has proved easier to act locally than to push legislation through Congress, many of whose members publicly question the existence of human-caused climate change, and whose recalcitrance has forced President Obama to use his executive powers to get anything done on climate change or, for that matter, any environmental issue.
Last month, the Los Angeles City Council took an important step toward getting 100 percent of the city’s energy from renewable sources. It is only at the beginning of the process. There is no timeline, but the Department of Water and Power has been ordered to study how the city could reach that goal.
The obstacles are formidable. The city now gets only about a quarter of its energy from renewables, mainly wind. To get to 100 percent, it would need to convert a power grid that relies on coal and gas power plants that can adjust their supply to meet demand into one that can handle the vagaries of solar and wind power.
The city has a helpful partner in the state of California, which has long set aggressive emission-reduction targets. In 2006, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Last month, Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation — the strongest in the country — that would have California cut emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. While critics worried that emissions regulations would drive businesses out of state, California’s economy is healthy. From 2014 to 2015, California had the highest growth in gross domestic product of any state.
Eighteen cities around the country have committed to the 100 percent goal.San Francisco has pledged to reach it by 2020; Boulder, Colo., by 2030; and Salt Lake City by 2032. Other cities, like Chicago and Denver, are considering making similar commitments.
Los Angeles, the nation’s second-most-populous city, has the potential to serve as an especially powerful role model for other cities, just as California has served as a model for other states and, indeed, the nation as a whole. It has taken a crucial first step by committing to study the issue. The next step will be to develop a realistic but ambitious timeline for the city to end its dependence on fossil fuels.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/opinion/las-quest-to-cut-fossil-fuels.html?_r=2&mtrref=www.realclearenergy.org&gwh=6CAB04D1160D3C96FB440DB1FDB9B355&gwt=pay&assetType=opinion
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested