Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 11/17/16
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Research Managers Narrow NCEA Director Candidates List to Three
Nov 17, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA research managers have narrowed to three the list of candidates to fill the open slot of director of the agency's National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), a key position within the agency's research office responsible for some of its most influential risk analyses of air and other environmental pollutants. -
'Swamp' May Say 'No Thanks' to Trump Administration
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus
In targeting the influence industry, President-elect Donald Trump may have hindered the recruitment process for who will serve in his administration. -
TSCA Risk Evaluation Proposed Rule Submitted to OMB
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has submitted its proposed rule on risk evaluation under the new TSCA for review. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) received it three days after another proposal on prioritisation. -
US EPA to Hold Meeting on Chemicals Process Under TSCA
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
The US EPA plans to hold a meeting on 14 December, to solicit input on the chemicals review programme under the new TSCA. -
US EPA Round-Up
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has issued "not likely to present an unreasonable risk" findings, made during the period from 20 September to 24 October, for new chemical substances or significant new uses, submitted under TSCA section 5(a). -
Thirty Years of California’s Prop. 65 Scam, and It Will Get Worse
Nov 17, 2016 | The Fresno Bee
By Joseph Perrone
This month marks the 30th anniversary of Proposition 65, the notorious warning law responsible for California’s oft-seen cautionary labels and signs bearing an unsettling “WARNING: This product may contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.” -
EPA Proposes Adding Category to Toxics Catalog
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
U.S. EPA yesterday proposed adding a class of toxins to its Toxics Release Inventory, a database that provides information on pollution discharges for the general public. -
EPA Proposes Adding NPEs to Community List of Toxic Chemicals
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has proposed adding nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs) to its list of toxic chemicals, subject to reporting requirements under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). -
NGOs Pose Questions to Echa on Ten Years of REACH
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
A group of NGOs has written to Echa head, Geert Dancet, ahead of the tenth anniversary of REACH in 2017, to ask if the Regulation is achieving its objectives of helping to protect people and the environment from harmful chemicals. -
Sixth Echa Enforcement Forum Project to Focus on C&L
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Echa’s Forum for Exchange of Information on Enforcement will focus on the hazard classification and labelling of mixtures, during its sixth REACH En-Force project (REF-6). -
Echa Round-Up
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Echa has received seven testing proposals for three substances. -
North Dakota Crude-Oil Output Drops to Low of More Than Two Years
Nov 17, 2016 | Wall Street Journal
By Chester Dawson
North Dakota’s crude-oil production in September dropped to the lowest level in more than two years on depressed prices, staying below one million barrels a day for the second month in a row, the state’s Department of Mineral Resources said Wednesday. -
Author Challenges BLM Rejection of Lease Purchases
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Scott Streater
A well-known author and conservationist is appealing the Bureau of Land Management's decision last month to reject her purchase of two oil and natural gas leases in Utah on the grounds that she had no intention of developing them. -
Dakota Access CEO: ‘We’re Building the Pipeline’
Nov 17, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The CEO of the company developing the Dakota Access pipeline said his firm intends to finish the controversial project, regardless of protests against it in North Dakota. -
Plant Timeline Unclear, Adding to South Texas Reliability Worries
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Edward Klump
An affiliate of Tenaska Inc. is uncertain when it may develop an 800-megawatt power plant in South Texas, stoking reliability concerns near the border with Mexico. -
Creating a Path for Renewable Energy on Public Lands
Nov 17, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Greg Block
Particularly during these contentious political times, Sustainable Northwest is pleased to work at the radical middle of economy, environment, and community to pioneer natural resource solutions that work for people and nature. -
Getting West Virginia’s Economy Back on Track (Daily Mail)
Nov 17, 2016 | Charleston Gazette-Mail
By Rebecca McPhail
During this election cycle, we heard from pundits, candidates, and our neighbors that Washington, D.C., is not getting enough done. -
EPA Publishes Proposed Ozone Implementation Strategy
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA is setting a Jan. 17 deadline for public comment on a proposed strategy for implementing the more stringent 70-parts-per-billion ozone standard put in place late last year. -
Trump, Congress Face Choice Between Pragmatic, Hard-Line Climate Stance
Nov 17, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan and Doug Obey
President-elect Donald Trump and Republican leaders in Congress are promising to roll back the Obama administration's climate policies, but observers say they will have to weigh how aggressively they will pursue those efforts, with some sources warning a hard-line push on the issue could alienate Democrats and risk a sharp blow back. -
Hundreds of U.S. Firms Tell Trump Not to Tear Up Paris Deal
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Benjamin Hulac
Hundreds of U.S. companies, including household names General Mills, Starbucks, Hilton, DuPont and Levi Strauss, urged President-elect Donald Trump yesterday not to exit the Paris climate accord. -
White House Presses Ahead with Plans for Deeper GHG Cuts
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
The Obama administration fulfilled what is probably its final major contribution to the Paris Agreement yesterday, releasing an outline for how the United States can act in the long term to help the world keep warming to a safe level.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Research Managers Narrow NCEA Director Candidates List to Three
Nov 17, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA research managers have narrowed to three the list of candidates to fill the open slot of director of the agency's National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), a key position within the agency's research office responsible for some of its most influential risk analyses of air and other environmental pollutants.
Sources say the three finalists include: Tina Bahadori, who is currently director of EPA's Chemical Safety for Sustainability research program; Gary Ginsberg, a senior toxicologist with the Connecticut Department of Health; and Kristina Thayer, director of the National Toxicology Program's (NTP) Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT).
The three finalists are expected to make presentations to NCEA staff later this week, a source tells Risk Policy Report. An agency source says that managers leading the search hope to have a new director installed by the end of 2016.
Agency spokespersons declined to comment. They issued a statement, saying, "EPA does not comment on hiring processes or pending personnel actions. EPA recognizes the critical role played by the director of NCEA and is moving forward to identify the next center director."
Long-time agency scientist and manager Michael Slimak has been serving as the acting NCEA director after Ken Olden retired July 31.
Bahadori, who has been with EPA since 2012, directs one of six cross-cutting research programs created by the last appointed agency science advisor, Paul Anastas. Bahadori's portfolio as director of the Chemical Safety for Sustainability research program includes overseeing EPA's National Center for Computational Toxicology, an area of heavy investment for the agency. The technologies that it is developing and validating are seen as key to implementing EPA's new authorities under the overhauled Toxic Substances Control Act.
Bahadori, an exposure scientist, is past president of the International Society of Exposure Science and is an associate editor of the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, according to the agency's website. She has served on several National Academy of Sciences (NAS) committees, as well as advisory committees to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the ill-fated National Children's Study. Prior to joining EPA in 2012, she was managing director for the chemical industry association American Chemistry Council's Long Range Research Initiative for nearly a dozen years.
Ginsberg has been with Connecticut Department of Health for more than 20 years, and is also an assistant clinical professor at the University of Connecticut School of Community Medicine and an adjunct faculty member at Yale University, according to a press release from the Constitution State last March. He has served on EPA's Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee and on several National Academy of Sciences committees, including the committee that wrote the influential 2009 report "Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment." Ginsberg, who has appeared on television and has his own radio show discussing various environmental issues, last spring won the Society of Toxicology's public communications award.
Thayer has played a key role in responding to calls from NAS and others for EPA and other agencies assessing environmental health risks to adopt systematic review methodologies to improve the transparency and logic of their analyses. Thayer and her staff were involved in crafting the systematic review approach the office now uses in its monographs, and have assisted EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program in its efforts to craft a systematic review approach for that program as part of its reform efforts.
Prior to her current role, Thayer held positions in the NTP Office of Liaison, Policy, and Review and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Office of Risk Assessment Research. Before joining the NTP/NIEHS, she was a senior scientist at the World Wildlife Fund and the Environmental Working Group, according to NIEHS' website.
Olden, who led NCEA for four years, was brought to the agency with a mission to reform the influential but controversial Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program. Agency leaders selected Olden, a former NIEHS director, to reform the program after a damning review of a draft assessment of formaldehyde's human health risks by NAS.
Meanwhile, NCEA Deputy Director Mary Ross announced to staff in a Nov. 10 email a new assistant center director for scientific support. It is unclear if the position is new.
The role was filled by Emma Lavoie, who was previously alternatives assessment senior specialist at EPA's Design for Environment Program, now known as Safer Choice. Lavoie had been with that program for nine years, the email says.
In her new role, Lavoie will coordinate "reviews or responses to scientific questions raised by Programs or Regions, and providing advice or recommendations to NCEA management on science policy and Programmic support issues," according to the email.
http://insideepa.com/inside-epa/epa-research-managers-narrow-ncea-director-candidates-list-three
-
'Swamp' May Say 'No Thanks' to Trump Administration
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus
In targeting the influence industry, President-elect Donald Trump may have hindered the recruitment process for who will serve in his administration.
Yesterday evening, officials with Trump's transition team announced that members of his administration will be banned from lobbying for five years after leaving government service (E&E Daily, Nov. 17). The move by Trump, who has filled his transition effort with lobbyists overseeing agencies of great import to their clients, sent shock waves through K Street.
One Republican lobbyist said the ban was "shortsighted."
"Once you leave, you can't lobby for five years? Are you kidding me?" said the GOP lobbyist.
People on K Street noted that those in the influence industry wishing to join the Trump administration will have to mull over their decision. Not being allowed to lobby the executive branch for five years would hurt their future earning potential as paid advocates.
"I think it would discourage people doing good work with good knowledge, with good institutional experience, from serving their country. It assumes that only people with bad motives are lobbyists," said the lobbyist.
Another Republican on K Street said the ban would certainly give influencers pause before joining Trump's team.
"It may with some people. It depends on who is looking to go in, and they will have to weigh the decision with this ban," the lobbyist said.
Others were more optimistic about Trump's lobbying ban, noting there is always Capitol Hill to lobby.
"If it's only a ban on lobbying the administration, it's not that significant a consequence," said Ken Kies, managing director of Federal Policy Group. "People can make a pretty good living just lobbying the Congress."
Trump's restrictions on lobbyists will go even further. In a conference call with reporters today, Sean Spicer, the Republican National Committee's chief strategist and communications director, said the president-elect will also block officials in his administration from lobbying for foreign governments once they leave government service.
"There will be a lifetime ban on representing any foreign government," Spicer said.
Since Trump's election, lobbyists have celebrated the coming return of all-GOP control of Washington, D.C. Often blocked by a Democratic White House under President Obama, business interests on energy, taxes and regulations are expected to move swiftly next year.
And like other Republicans in elected office and elsewhere, GOP lobbyists have been wary of Trump, but many have since come to his aid. Several hold important roles on his transition team, such as Mike Catanzaro of CGCN Group and Mike McKenna of MWR Strategies, which led to criticism of Trump for failing to "drain the swamp."
Trump has said that while he has depended on lobbyists' expertise in the past, he plans to tamp down on the influence industry.
"I'm saying that they know the system right now, but we're going to phase that out. You have to phase it out," Trump said about lobbyists on "60 Minutes" earlier this week.
Signing a pledge
Now Trump's transition team members will have to cancel their lobbying registration to continue to serve.
Spicer read out the text of the ethics agreement on the call, saying each transition official will have to sign it to move forward.
"By signing below, I certify that I am not currently registered and reporting as a federal lobbyist as defined by the Lobbying Disclosure Act as amended, or a compensated lobbyist at the state level in any state," the agreement reads, according to Spicer. "If I was listed as a lobbyist on the most recent lobbying disclosure form, or a report required to be filed by federal or state law, I hereby notify the president-elect transition team that I have filed the necessary form or forms with the appropriate government agencies to terminate my status as a registered lobbyist. I will provide the presidential-elect transition team with written evidence of my federal and state lobbying determination as soon as possible."
Other presidents have tried to crack down on K Street with limited success.
Obama issued an executive order banning lobbyists from serving in his administration as well as lobbying their former colleagues for two years after leaving government service. That order was centered on the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and in turn, several lobbyists just didn't register under the law, thus not disclosing their clients or what issues they were working on.
Lobbyists could take the same route and just not register once out of government to avoid Trump's K Street ban.
One Republican in the influence industry said Trump was repeating Obama's error.
"It's a continuation of the same bogus definition of 'lobbyist,'" said the lobbyist. "He [Obama] drove it underground. There is just no visibility. And Trump is following that mistake."
However limited Trump's ban is, ethics watchdogs were encouraged by it.
"I'm taking it as a little ray of hope," said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen. "He is talking about some sort of ethics policy. I wasn't even expecting him to do an ethics policy."
Holman said Trump needs to go further and urged him to readopt Obama's ethics executive order, considering how Trump's and other potential appointees' corporate holdings could be impacted by the government policies they craft in office.
"He [Trump] needs to address the incoming problem," Holman said. "Trump just has these phenomenal conflicts of interest, just not with his own business but with these titans of industry he wants to bring into his administration."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/17/stories/1060045953
-
TSCA Risk Evaluation Proposed Rule Submitted to OMB
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has submitted its proposed rule on risk evaluation under the new TSCA for review. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) received it three days after another proposal on prioritisation.
Both are among the proposed rules the EPA has said it plans to issue in December. The OMB has yet to receive proposals for the two remaining rules – addressing fees and the "inventory reset".
Stakeholders have said that, in light of the changing administration, it is essential the EPA sticks with this implementation plan to meet the 22 June 2017 statutory deadlines on all four rules.
The OMB reviews drafts of proposed and final regulations under several statutory and executive order authorities. It is currently considering several section 6(a) TSCA rules, as well as a final rule for nanomaterials reporting.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51084/tsca-risk-evaluation-proposed-rule-submitted-to-omb
-
US EPA to Hold Meeting on Chemicals Process Under TSCA
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
The US EPA plans to hold a meeting on 14 December, to solicit input on the chemicals review programme under the new TSCA.
The agency will discuss its review process, along with issues, challenges and opportunities it has encountered during first months of implementing changes to the programme as a result of the passage of the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act.
Stakeholders will have the opportunity to contribute their recent experiences, including with submission of pre-manufacture (PMNs), microbial commercial activity (MCANs) and significant new use (Snuns) notices, under section 5 of the law.
The EPA says it will use information gathered from the meeting, along with any submitted written comments, as it continues implementing the law. They will inform its effort to “improve efficiency” in its review process.
The process of bringing a new chemical to the market has changed significantly under the amended act. TSCA now requires an “affirmative finding” of safety for PMNs. If the agency determines a substance poses an unreasonable risk, it must issue an order to prohibit or restrict it.
Even though the amended law is still in its infancy, these orders have already been on the rise.
Jeffrey Morris, deputy director for programmes at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), said, last month, that the new chemicals process under TSCA is “very different” than the previous iteration of the law, but it will continue to evolve and develop over time.
The meeting is open to the public, but attendees must register in advance. It will be held at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington DC. A webcast of the event will also be provided.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51108/us-epa-to-hold-meeting-on-chemicals-process-under-tsca
-
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
TSCA section 5(a)(C)(3) findings
The US EPA has issued "not likely to present an unreasonable risk" findings, made during the period from 20 September to 24 October, for new chemical substances or significant new uses, submitted under TSCA section 5(a).
The agency issued one "not likely" finding for a pre-manufacture notice (PMN) during that timeframe. It was for carbomonocyclic dicarboxylic acid, polymer with alkanedioic acid, substituted heteropolycycle, substituted carbomonocycle, alkyl alkenoate, alkanedioic acid, alkoxylated substituted dicarbomonocycle, alkoxylated substituted dicarbomonocycle, alkenoic acid, oxo alkyl initiated (generic name).
In its section 5(a)(3)(C) determination, it said that, although it estimated that the new substance would be very persistent, this did not indicate a likelihood that the chemical would present an unreasonable risk, given that it has low potential for bioaccumulation, low human health and low environmental hazards.
The agency also made "not likely" determinations for five microbial commercial activity notice (MCANs).
As amended by the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, TSCA now requires the agency to make "an affirmative finding of safety" before a new substance can be placed on the market.
Receipt of information under TSCA
The agency has announced receipt of test data, submitted pursuant to a rule, order or consent order under TSCA, for the following substances:
octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4);
ethanedioic acid; and
phenol, 2,4-bis(1-methyl-1-phenylethyl)-6-[2-(2-nitrophenyl)diazenyl]-.
The data for D4 was submitted in response to an enforceable consent agreement for environmental testing. The latter two came under testing requirements for high production volume (HPV) substances.
Access to CBI
The EPA has given notice that it has authorised three contractors to access information submitted under TSCA, including some information that has been claimed as confidential business information (CBI).
Eastern Research Group, Inc (ERG) of Lexington, Massachusetts, has been authorised to access information submitted under all sections of TSCA. The contractor is assisting the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) in preparing engineering reports for the pre-manufacture notice (PMN) review programme, performing analyses of chemical data reporting (CDR) data and reviewing CBI data for existing chemical engineering reports.
The EPA has also authorised Battelle Memorial Institute (BMI) of Columbus, Ohio, and Avanti Corporation of Alexandria, Virginia, to access information submitted under sections four, five, six, eight (a), 11 and 21. Among others, the contractors are providing statistical and technical support for the assessment of toxic substances.
Information collection request
The EPA has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Notification of Chemical Exports – TSCA Section 12(b), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.
Section 12(b) of TSCA requires any person who exports, or intends to export, a chemical substance or mixture that is regulated under TSCA sections four, five, six and/or seven to notify the EPA of such.
OMB approval for this ICR expired on 1 September "due to administrative error". The agency is seeking to reinstate it through its submitted request.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51087/us-epa-round-up
-
Thirty Years of California’s Prop. 65 Scam, and It Will Get Worse
Nov 17, 2016 | The Fresno Bee
By Joseph Perrone
This month marks the 30th anniversary of Proposition 65, the notorious warning law responsible for California’s oft-seen cautionary labels and signs bearing an unsettling “WARNING: This product may contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.”
But how did we reach the point where plastic toothbrushes, children’s toys, and the neighborhood Starbucks require the same type of warning as a pack of cigarettes?
In California, the years immediately prior to the 1986 election which ratified Proposition 65 were marred by highly publicized chemical accidents. Deformed waterfowl collected at the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge. Farther south, communities were alarmed by rumblings of a 20-year coverup of a partial nuclear meltdown at the Rocketdyne-owned Santa Susana Field Laboratory.
Consequently, the toxics issue ranked among the greatest concerns during California’s 1986 election.
Proposition 65 was pushed largely as a measure to reign in industrial pollution of drinking water. The “Get Tough on Toxics Initiative,” as it was christened, was even summarized on the official ballots as a proposition to “prohibit discharge of toxics into drinking water and require warnings of toxic chemical exposure.” Who could disagree with that?
Unfortunately, as a citizen-originated ballot initiative, Proposition 65 was an exercise in unchecked legislation. The absence of meaningful review via legislative hearings or any opportunity to consider the interests of all affected parties left Californians with a law which today quashes businesses and lines the pockets of predatory litigants – all without meaningfully communicating chemical risk.
Contrary to the law’s intent that only known, not suspected, carcinogens would be regulated, the initiative was written in such a way that chemicals could land on Proposition 65’s blacklist without scientists ever demonstrating that they cause adverse health effects in humans. Even the American Cancer Society cautions “not every compound labeled as a possible cancer-causing substance has been proven to the worldwide scientific community to actually cause cancer.”
The bar is so low because the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment which oversees Proposition 65 evaluates substances on the basis of hazard – can a substance in some massive, unrealistic quantity feasibly cause harm? A better standard would be to adopt a sensible evaluation of risk – does a substance in the course of human interaction cause harm? Thus, Proposition 65’s list has ballooned to include over 900 materials, most of which aren’t recognized by the Food and Drug Administration nor the Environmental Protection Agency as dangerous at everyday exposure levels.
As the list grows, more and more local businesses are affected – and not because they’re polluting California’s waterways.
Proposition 65 is enforced through litigation rather than government regulation. A “bounty hunter” provision permits predatory plaintiffs to scour the shelves for unlabeled products which could theoretically contain any one of the substances on Proposition 65’s list. With the law’s burden of proof so low, and the cost of laboratory testing and court hearings so high, most businesses elect to settle out of court when confronted with an accusation. Since 2000, California businesses have paid over $276 million in settlements with about two-thirds of that money going to attorneys – some of whom earn six-figure salaries filing Proposition 65 lawsuits alone.
As business owners become wary of the shakedowns, many elect to post warnings ubiquitously, even when their products may not be hazardous at all. The law intended to protect California’s citizens has become the real-world equivalent of email spam.
With 30 years of hindsight, action must be taken to protect local businesses while advancing the ability of Proposition 65 to communicate risk.
And in fact, Proposition 65 has been successfully amended twice in its history. After catching wind that the measure was used more as an income generator than a tool for societal and environmental protection, legislators approved a 14-day grace period for certain establishments, like bars and restaurants, to comply after accusations of “toxic exposure.” That’s a step in the right direction – it incentivizes compliance as intended under the law.
But for every step forward, California seems to take two steps back. Just this September, OEHHA adopted regulations making it easier to target local businesses with frivolous lawsuits.
Rather than continuing to post generic warnings intended to diminish liability, businesses must now name the suspected carcinogens and reproductive toxicants which could feasibly be present at some level in their products. Every business which thinks it is currently in compliance with Proposition 65 will no longer be covered come Aug. 30, 2018.
Although the basis for adding chemicals to Proposition 65 in the first place remains deeply flawed, local businesses have no choice but to humor the law’s boy-who-cried-wolf mandate until it can be amended to require a meaningful evaluation of risk.
http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article114970193.html
-
EPA Proposes Adding Category to Toxics Catalog
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
U.S. EPA yesterday proposed adding a class of toxins to its Toxics Release Inventory, a database that provides information on pollution discharges for the general public.
EPA's proposed rule would require industrial facilities to report releases of nonylphenol ethoxylates, or NPEs. Such compounds are "nonionic surfactants," according to the agency, and are used in emulsifiers, stabilizers, adhesives, dispersants, wetting agents, defoamers, coatings, cleaners and paints.
"EPA proposed this rule because we believe that longer-chain NPEs can break down in the environment to short-chain NPEs and nonylphenol, both of which are highly toxic to aquatic organisms," the agency said in a statement.
The proposed rule, published in the Federal Register, is several months tardy — EPA initially planned to release the rule in August (Greenwire, May 19).
Advocacy group Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families notes on its website that the breakdown product nonylphenol, or NP, is "one of the most notorious examples of persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals."
The nonprofit claims that NP is linked to impaired fetal development in the womb as well as health problems in children.
NPEs are suspected endocrine disruptors.
EPA's comment period for the proposed rule ends on Jan. 17, just three days before President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration. The fate of the rule may rest in the hands of the next EPA chief.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/17/stories/1060045933
-
EPA Proposes Adding NPEs to Community List of Toxic Chemicals
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has proposed adding nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs) to its list of toxic chemicals, subject to reporting requirements under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).
If added to the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), facilities that manufacture, process or use the short- and long-chain NPEs, covered by the proposal, would be required to report environmental releases and other waste management measurements.
The goal of the inventory is to provide communities with more complete information on toxic chemical releases.
NPEs are nonionic surfactants used in adhesives, wetting agents, emulsifiers, stabilisers, dispersants, defoamers, cleaners, paints and coatings.
According to the Federal Register, the EPA believes NPEs meet the EPCRA section 313 listing criterion for environmental effects, due to their toxicity to aquatic organisms.
It estimates that this proposed ruling would affect 178 facilities.
Comments will be accepted until 17 January 2017.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51098/epa-proposes-adding-npes-to-community-list-of-toxic-chemicals
-
NGOs Pose Questions to Echa on Ten Years of REACH
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
A group of NGOs has written to Echa head, Geert Dancet, ahead of the tenth anniversary of REACH in 2017, to ask if the Regulation is achieving its objectives of helping to protect people and the environment from harmful chemicals.
Responses from the agency, it said, "will help us in developing our positions in support of more effective protection".
Bjørn Hansen, head of DG Environment’s chemicals unit, and Klaus Berend, head of the REACH unit for DG Grow, were also copied into the letter.
The 14 co-signing organisations – which include the Center for International Environmental Law (Ciel), CHEM Trust, ClientEarth, European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) – asked about the state of play in seven areas under REACH.
Precautionary principle: the group asked how the Member States Committee, Risk Assessment (Rac) and Socio-Economic Analysis (Seac) Committees systematically consider the application of the precautionary principle and communicate their findings to the European Commission;
Closing the information gap: it asked for the percentage of chemicals, per tonnage band, for which safety data is sufficiently available to allow for reliable risk assessments, and requested Echa provide feedback on how it intends to handle incomplete/outdated registration dossiers;
Adequate control of risks: the NGOs asked how many registration dossiers show risks that are inadequately controlled, and what Echa’s binding obligations are, when it finds that a dossier shows a risk to society from the use of the substance;
Reversal of burden of proof: the group also asked about the extent to which the burden of proof is put on companies. What are the main incentives for registrants and applicants for authorisations when embracing the burden of proof, it asked, and how does the agency and committees ensure those incentives are reinforced;
Inclusive governance: it wondered how Echa is encouraging involvement of third parties - thus promoting the "inclusive governance" elements of REACH - and also enquired about how socio-economic opinions are taken into account and weighted;
Authorisation: the NGOs asked how Echa, when authorising SVHCs, gauges the two criteria - the benefits outweighing the risks, and that no suitable alternative should exist for the uses applied for - are separately and cumulatively met; and
Use of information generated by REACH, in applying and implementing community legislation: the NGOs wanted to know the relevance of REACH-generated information, regarding the substitution of SVHCs in other EU policy initiatives.
The group asked for a reply by the first week of December. It said it will make all correspondence public.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51083/ngos-pose-questions-to-echa-on-ten-years-of-reach
-
Sixth Echa Enforcement Forum Project to Focus on C&L
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Echa’s Forum for Exchange of Information on Enforcement will focus on the hazard classification and labelling of mixtures, during its sixth REACH En-Force project (REF-6).
It will also focus on compliance of safety data sheet (SDS) sections, related to C&L.
The topic was selected because, to date, there has been no full REF enforcement project on compliance with hazard C&L duties, forum vice chair Eugen Anwander said. This is despite labelling being the most widely used risk communication tool, stipulated in chemical safety legislation.
The project will be prepared in 2017 and inspections take place in 2018. Publication of the report is expected around the end of 2019.
A major transitional period in C&L requirements, due to the replacement of previous EU dangerous substance legislation by the new CLP legislation, will come to an end in mid-2017, Mr Anwander toldChemical Watch. In 2018, at the time of the REF-6 inspections, all hazardous chemicals placed on the market will require C&L according to CLP.
REF-6 will also focus on the related sections in SDSs. This is because C&L according to CLP does not only affect the label but also the information in the SDS, Mr Anwander said. The most relevant sections include two, three, 9, 11 and 12.
Enforcement of C&L and SDSs is a routine inspection task of each member state’s enforcement authorities. Yet early experiences have given a "clear indication that joint enforcement action of all member states will be very important for a harmonised implementation of CLP by duty holders," Mr Anwander said.
The project will also have optional modules, allowing national enforcement authorities to check a number of other CLP obligations. These include:
notifications to the C&L inventory;
application of harmonised C&L for the relevant substances listed in CLP; and
labelling and packaging of products with small packaging.
During 2017, a working group will prepare a project manual, with an inspection questionnaire for field inspectors. This will be endorsed in November 2017 and translated into different member state languages - then the operational phase will begin, Mr Anwander said.
The forum selected the project from a shortlist of four, at its plenary meeting from 8-10 November. The others were:
provisions applicable to intermediates, including strictly controlled conditions (SCCs);
registration obligations and last-registration deadline; and
entries in REACH Annex XIV with sunset dates in 2017 or before.
Additional project areas
A separate pilot project is looking at online sales of hazardous chemicals, with some member states already embarking on field inspections. While preliminary results are not yet available, they are likely to underline low awareness of CLP requirements among online sellers, Mr Anwander said.
Past enforcement campaigns focusing on this have shown many non-compliance cases, investigated for the information requirements of Article 48 of CLP, Mr Anwander said. The scope of the article includes sales through websites.
The forum has also started preparations for a pilot project on SVHCs in articles and intends to begin inspections in 2017. It had agreed another, focusing on prior informed consent (Pic) obligations, related to import and export of certain hazardous chemicals. Inspections would begin in 2018.
The forum is a network of authorities responsible for the enforcement of the REACH, CLP and Pic Regulations in the EU, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51102/sixth-echa-enforcement-forum-project-to-focus-on-cl
-
Nov 17, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Testing proposals
Echa has received seven testing proposals for three substances. They are:
fatty acids, C14-18 and C16-18-unsaturated, maleated with hazard endpoints of long-term toxicity to fish, reproductive toxicity (prenatal developmental toxicity) and sub-chronic toxicity (90-day): oral;
reaction products of a polyol of pentaerythritol and propylene oxide, epichlorohydrin and hydrogen sulfide with hazard endpoints of reproductive toxicity (i) extended one-generation and (ii) prenatal developmental toxicity studies; and
trinonyl benzene-1,2,4-tricarboxylate with hazard endpoints of reproductive toxicity (prenatal developmental toxicity) and sub-chronic toxicity (90-day): oral.
The deadline for submitting information is 3 January 2017.
Chesar update problem
Echa says a critical issue has been found in the bulk editing of its recently released Chesar 3.1.
It says it is fixing the problem and expects to release a new version of the tool in mid-December.
Last call on low volume chemical registration
The agency has issued a last call to companies needing to pre-register low volume chemicals.
It points out the third and last registration deadline for existing chemicals manufactured, or imported, in the EU/EEA from 1 to 100 tonnes a year is 31 May 2018.
Any company, that has recently begun manufacturing or importing a non-CMR phase-in substance in these amounts, can pre-register within six months of starting the activity. However, the last date for doing this is 31 May 2017.
Pre-registration enables companies to continue supplying low-volume chemicals on the EU/EEA market until the registration deadline.
Without it, they will have to submit an inquiry to Echa and register the substance.
List of lead registrants updated
The agency has updated the list of substances for which a lead registrant has been declared in REACH-IT. It now includes 7,996 substances.
Interactive guide of SDSs and exposure scenarios update
The agency has updated its interactive guide of safety data sheets (SDSs) and exposure scenarios. There are now useful tips for suppliers on issues to watch out for within each section, it says. It has also been converted into an interactive pdf, to satisfy the demand to make it available in all EU languages. The inbuilt navigation elements enable users to move around and easily find the information they need.
Echa says it welcomes feedback on the guide, which should be emailed to them by the end of November.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51021/echa-round-up
-
North Dakota Crude-Oil Output Drops to Low of More Than Two Years
Nov 17, 2016 | Wall Street Journal
By Chester Dawson
North Dakota’s crude-oil production in September dropped to the lowest level in more than two years on depressed prices, staying below one million barrels a day for the second month in a row, the state’s Department of Mineral Resources said Wednesday.
Crude production fell 1.1% on the month to 971,658 barrels a day in September, the most recent month for which data is available. That is the lowest level since February 2014, when output was 952,055 barrels a day, and follows a 4.7% drop in August.
Lynn Helms, director of the department, said depressed prices will likely weigh on North Dakota’s production volumes next year. “The lower-for-longer oil price pushes that million-barrel-a-day [recovery] number out into 2018,” he said at a news conference in Bismarck.
North Dakota’s production is centered on the Bakken Shale formation, one of the world’s highest-cost oil fields. Prices below $50 a barrel—half the level two years ago—have forced shale-oil producers in plays like the Bakken to slow drilling activity and curb output.
Total production in North Dakota was 29.2 million barrels of oil in September, down from 30.4 million barrels in August, the state said.
A slight uptick in the number of drilling rigs deployed and wells completed were not enough to halt the slide in output, a result of production rate declines from older wells.
North Dakota’s active rig count currently stands at 38 rigs, up from 33 in October, the state said. The all-time high for the state was 218 rigs in May 2012. The number of wells completed, or brought into production, rose to 71 in September from 63 in August, according to provisional state figures.
Natural-gas production in North Dakota fell 1.7% in September to 1.61 billion cubic feet a day, state figures showed. Energy producers burned off, or flared, 11.9% of gas output, up from 11.4% in August. Gas is a byproduct of oil production.
Most oil in North Dakota is extracted by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, where a mixture of water, sand and chemicals is pumped into rock formations to push oil out. Such wells are first drilled and then put into production after being fracked, or completed.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/north-dakota-crude-oil-output-drops-to-more-than-two-year-low-1479324497
-
Author Challenges BLM Rejection of Lease Purchases
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Scott Streater
A well-known author and conservationist is appealing the Bureau of Land Management's decision last month to reject her purchase of two oil and natural gas leases in Utah on the grounds that she had no intention of developing them.
Terry Tempest Williams — a supporter of the "keep it in the ground" campaign that is working to end oil, gas and coal leasing on federal lands — bought the leases covering three parcels, one of which was 800 acres and located 14 miles from Arches National Park, at a February BLM lease sale in Salt Lake City (E&ENews PM, Feb. 16).
She and her husband, Brooke Williams, paid $2,500 for the leases covering 1,200 acres as an act of protest against drilling on public lands.
But the agency notified her last month that BLM Utah State Director Edwin Roberson rejected the purchase, apparently because she and her husband "did not commit to developing" the leases, Tempest Williams said (Greenwire, Oct. 20).
The couple announced today they have filed a formal appeal of that decision with the Interior Board of Land Appeals. It was filed yesterday on their behalf by the Western Environmental Law Center.
"The BLM's decision to reject our lease bids highlights the agency's misdirected and antiquated approach to fossil fuels," Tempest Williams said today in a statement. "This case shines a light on BLM's fidelity to the oil and gas industry while willfully ignoring the urgency — in an era of climate change — of more enlightened management of the public lands that belong to the American people."
A BLM spokeswoman said the agency does not publicly comment on matters related to legal or administrative proceedings.
BLM last month said the Mineral Leasing Act requires that an oil and gas lessee "be reasonably diligent in developing its lease."
BLM said Tempest Williams had no intention of developing the leases, and it pointed to a March 29 New York Times op-ed in which Tempest Williams wrote: "We will pay the annual rent for the duration of the 10-year lease and keep whatever oil and gas lies beneath these lands in the ground."
But Tempest Williams, who formed Tempest Exploration Co. LLC to purchase the leases, accused BLM of holding her to a different standard than other companies and individuals who purchase federal oil and gas leases.
According to a Western Environmental Law Center press release announcing the appeal, Tempest Exploration "met all the legal requirements of the leasing process and bid on two leases for which there was no other interested party. They were forthright about their intent to consider developing the leases when science supports sustainable use of the oil and gas, accounting for the costs of climate change to future generations."
The press statement said oil and gas companies "routinely base their exploration and development decisions on the price of oil and other market factors and often hold their leases for years or decades without drilling."
They noted that about 20 million acres of public land under lease for oil and gas development is not being developed.
"The BLM has 'suspended' many of these leases, meaning that the lessees no longer pay rent on them, although lessees continue to control the land," the statement said. "The BLM has extended these undeveloped leases essentially in perpetuity, yet the agency rejected the Tempest Exploration Co.'s bids made under the same economic principles."
That's not legally defensible, said Laura King, a Western Environmental Law Center attorney representing Tempest Williams and her husband in the matter.
"Under the Mineral Leasing Act, Terry Tempest and Brooke Williams have a legal right to have their lease bids considered on an even basis with other bidders," King said. "It is arbitrary and capricious for BLM to issue leases to oil and gas speculators for the control of millions of acres of our public lands, while rejecting bids from those who would hold these lands in the name of a sustainable future."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/17/stories/1060045945
-
Dakota Access CEO: ‘We’re Building the Pipeline’
Nov 17, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The CEO of the company developing the Dakota Access pipeline said his firm intends to finish the controversial project, regardless of protests against it in North Dakota.
Construction on a small segment of the 1,170-mile project is on hold until Energy Transfer Partners receives a federal easement to build under the Missouri River in North Dakota.
The federal government this week approved of its previous permitting decision on the project but said it won’t issue the easement until it consults with a local tribe that objects to the pipeline.
Asked about the ultimate fate of the project on "PBS Newshour" Wednesday night, Energy Transfer Partners CEO Kelcy Warren said the project will ultimately move forward, even if it means waiting for the Trump administration to grant the easement next year.
"The people of the state of North Dakota are generally, generally wonderful people, law-abiding, nonviolent people, and they’re trying to go about their lives,” Warren said, noting protests against the pipeline in the region.
“This has been such a disruption to that state. This is not a peaceful protest. So, if they want to stick around and continue to do what they’re doing, great, but we’re building the pipeline.”
The Standing Rock Sioux tribe in North Dakota opposes Dakota Access, warning that it threatens drinking water and cultural sites in the region. The tribe has sued against the project, and its opposition has spurred protests against the pipeline in North Dakota and around the country.
Energy Transfer Partners on Tuesday asked a federal court to grant it the permits necessary to complete the project, a $3.8 billion pipeline to carry oil from North Dakota to Illinois.
http://www.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/306531-dakota-access-ceo-were-building-the-pipeline
-
Plant Timeline Unclear, Adding to South Texas Reliability Worries
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Edward Klump
An affiliate of Tenaska Inc. is uncertain when it may develop an 800-megawatt power plant in South Texas, stoking reliability concerns near the border with Mexico.
Tenaska Brownsville Partners LLC issued a letter to Cameron County, Texas, this week asking to terminate a tax abatement agreement tied to its project, which is slated to use natural gas. The company said it was making the request "reluctantly" even though it's "absolutely clear" the region needs more capacity.
"But it is also clear that the state's market structure for electricity has not evolved as necessary to accommodate the significant growth of renewables entering the electricity grid and still provide appropriate support for needed base load generation such as new natural gas plants," the company said in the letter.
The Tenaska affiliate expressed hope that changes by the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) or the state's Legislature "might enable projects like this one to become a reality at some point in the future." The tax agreement became effective more than two years ago, the company said.
The project, which would be in the Brownsville area, affects what's known as the Lower Rio Grande Valley. The region has been a flashpoint for reliability issues in light of its relative lack of generation and location on the edge of the market operated by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).
In October, as warm weather persisted, ERCOT issued five news releases asking residents in the valley region to limit or reduce power use on certain days. ERCOT said unplanned generation outages contributed to the tight situation.
The Brownsville project hasn't progressed far enough to be included in ERCOT's long-term resource adequacy outlook, according to Robbie Searcy, a spokeswoman for the grid operator. But she said ERCOT will continue to watch the proposal and the valley region.
"Right now, the system in that area is sufficient to serve the needs for valley area consumers during most operating days," Searcy said.
Still, if high demand were combined with multiple generation or transmission outages, she said, "there remains a possibility of requesting conservation to maintain stability." Searcy noted that some generation in the valley area has been added recently, and ERCOT also has been examining transmission needs.
ERCOT is designed to have a competitive wholesale market, and the grid operator and state regulators don't direct generation investments. It's unclear what reforms might appeal to Tenaska, but the generation community has discussed changing how the region approaches scarcity pricing.
State Rep. René Oliveira (D), who represents part of the valley, previously raised the idea of looking at statutory changes to help with solutions.
Yesterday, Oliveira said continuing issues mean the valley area "remains susceptible to tight electric supplies." It takes years to get a new power plant or transmission in place, he said, and the valley could see "very serious" generation and capacity issues in about four years.
"If ERCOT does not make some decisions very quickly, they won't be able to get ahead of those problems," Oliveira said in a statement. "The delay of the Tenaska plan, unfortunately, complicates that process."
Low wholesale prices in ERCOT's region can make it hard to justify new generation, said Ed Hirs, an energy economist at the University of Houston.
Unless there's "an appropriate incentive for folks to build new plants to maintain reliability, Texans are going to learn the cost of reliability," Hirs said, suggesting power outages could occur.
He said changes in how consumers interact with providers might help: "I think we're getting to a point where we're going to have to allow much more deregulation than ERCOT or the Public Utility Commission have contemplated."
In the letter to Cameron County, the Tenaska affiliate said it hadn't moved to a financial closing on the project. But the company said it would pay property taxes related to the value of the site, and it suggested it might seek another tax abatement deal in the future.
The company said the Brownsville Public Utilities Board has been "thoroughly professional" in working to move the project forward. In a statement, Mike Roth, who works in strategic development and acquisitions at Tenaska, said there was "no change in plans" for the Brownsville project.
"We have asked Cameron County to put the tax abatement for the project on hold until the timeline for construction commencement is more certain," Roth said. "We continue to be optimistic about the project and stand ready to begin construction when market conditions warrant."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/11/17/stories/1060045902
-
Creating a Path for Renewable Energy on Public Lands
Nov 17, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Greg Block
Particularly during these contentious political times, Sustainable Northwest is pleased to work at the radical middle of economy, environment, and community to pioneer natural resource solutions that work for people and nature. We believe a healthy economy, environment, and community are indivisible, and all can be strengthened by wise partnerships, policies, and investments.
Creating a sustainable energy future is one of the most pressing issues of the 21st century. It is imperative to the health of our land, air, water, and communities that we move beyond fossil fuels to sustainable energy use and generation.
Less than a month ago, Sustainable Northwest gathered over 60 community leaders, businesses, elected officials, and state and federal agency partners in Roseburg, Ore., to share practical tools for growing local clean energy programs. Through building connections with other like-minded communities around the state, we learned what strategies work and what barriers exist in energy planning, programming and development.
Investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency present an extraordinary opportunity to support a clean energy economy. Benefits from these investments retain energy dollars within a community, foster energy independence, create jobs, improve the health of our environment, and respond to the challenges of climate change.
Rural communities in Oregon are adjacent to some of the best renewable energy resources in the state, but are also particularly susceptible to the effects of climate change, such as declining forest health, increased drought, and resulting water shortages. Investments in clean energy not only create a platform for economic growth; they create compelling opportunities for a prosperous regional future.
Siting renewable energy has not always been a smooth process in the Pacific Northwest. In 2010, in Union County, Oregon, a non-binding resolution in support of the proposed Antelope Ridge wind farm was defeated 52% to 48%. Also in 2010, wildlife and outdoor recreation interests were starting to challenge wind energy proposals on Steens Mountain, a unique area in the southeastern part of the state. Despite these contentious processes, in January 2011, a poll was conducted of 1200 Oregon, Washington and Idaho residents. It revealed that 8 in 10 rural respondents would support wind farms being developed within sight of their homes. Finding a middle ground on this issue is challenging, but more necessary than ever.
Sustainable Northwest recognizes that there are many important uses of our rural lands. In the Pacific Northwest, a significant portion of our rural lands are publicly managed by the federal government, including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
BLM recently released a program for smartly siting renewable energy on the lands they manage. The BLM Wind and Solar Leasing Rule strikes the right balance between encouraging renewable energy development, while protecting wildlife and other public lands values. The agency is taking a sensible approach by streamlining the process for developers and steering construction toward areas with fewer conflicts and hurdles.
Sustainable Northwest has a proven track record of bringing together environmentalists, scientists, natural resource industries, community members -- and federal agency personnel -- to do what many think is impossible: talk to each other and find a solution that works for all involved.
We applaud the BLM for taking a similar approach, by listening to the concerns of both wildlife advocates and the energy industry. They have created a pathway for siting renewable energy on federal lands, one that takes into consideration the needs of a range of stakeholders.
We look forward to working with the agency and diverse stakeholders to implement the rule and continue the conversation about policies that will support a robust renewable energy future for our country.
Greg Block is Executive Director of Sustainable Northwest, a non-profit organization that brings people, ideas, and innovation together so nature, local economies, and rural communities can thrive.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/306509-creating-a-path-for-renewable-energy-on-public-lands
-
Getting West Virginia’s Economy Back on Track (Daily Mail)
Nov 17, 2016 | Charleston Gazette-Mail
By Rebecca McPhail
During this election cycle, we heard from pundits, candidates, and our neighbors that Washington, D.C., is not getting enough done.
While it’s not yet clear what the election results mean to our state or Washington, a little-known federal transportation agency is already taking action on freight-rail issues that will mean a lot to the more than 48,000 men and women who work in West Virginia’s manufacturing sector.
These improvements to freight rail policy are important to our state because West Virginia manufacturers and energy producers send and receive more than 106 million tons of products a year by rail, according to the most recent data available from the Association of American Railroads.
And, while our state ships quite a bit by rail, there are fewer rail options out there. Over time, the freight rail industry has consolidated to where just four railroads dominate 90 percent of the market.
Government policies have failed to keep pace with these drastic changes, leaving many rail customers without access to competitive service or an effective way to resolve problems with rates and service.
Unchecked by market forces and propped up by protectionist policies, freight rail rates have doubled — more than three times the rate of inflation over the past decade.
But that’s now changing. The Surface Transportation Board, which has been tasked by Congress to resolve freight rail problems, recently announced reforms that would open up access to more rail-to-rail competition.
Called “competitive switching,” this reform would simply allow rail customers with access to only a single rail carrier to request to move their freight to another major railroad at a nearby interchange for an appropriate fee.
This is not only common sense, it has also been common practice in Canada for more than a century, where railroads have thrived.
The STB is also trying to cut red tape out of its procedures for resolving rate issues in markets lacking competitive transportation options.
The current system is a nightmare for rail customers. For example, imagine if the government forced you to create a hypothetical cable company to demonstrate your bill is too high instead of simply comparing your rates to what others are paying. This is the regulatory hurdle that currently faces any rail customer that tries to challenge an unreasonable rate.
Like so many other rail customers, businesses in West Virginia operate in a highly competitive environment.
Competition is the foundation of the free enterprise system and it is what helps drive innovation and cost-savings throughout our economy.
That is why the West Virginia Manufacturer’s Association has joined with the Rail Customer Coalition, which represents a broad spectrum of farmers, energy producers and manufacturers to show our support for free-market freight rail reforms like competitive switching and streamlining the rate review process.
We call on West Virginia’s federal delegation to support the Surface Transportation Board in updating our nation’s outdated rail regulation and help keep West Virginia’s economy moving forward.
Rebecca McPhail is the president of the West Virginia Manufacturers Association.
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20161117/DM0403/161119635#sthash.0uSVUS8V.dpuf
-
EPA Publishes Proposed Ozone Implementation Strategy
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA is setting a Jan. 17 deadline for public comment on a proposed strategy for implementing the more stringent 70-parts-per-billion ozone standard put in place late last year.
The agency will also hold a public hearing if requested by Dec. 2, according to a Federal Registernotice published today.
The draft regulations, which EPA released about two weeks ago, are designed to let state and local air quality regulators know what requirements apply to nonattainment areas when developing state implementation plans for the new limits (E&ENews PM, Nov. 2).
The proposal offers two options for revoking the previous 75 ppb ambient air quality ozone benchmark set in 2008 but otherwise largely keeps the same implementation framework, the notice said.
States were supposed to turn in their nonattainment recommendations for the 2015 standard last month. EPA tentatively plans to make the final designations by next October.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/17/stories/1060045922
-
Trump, Congress Face Choice Between Pragmatic, Hard-Line Climate Stance
Nov 17, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan and Doug Obey
President-elect Donald Trump and Republican leaders in Congress are promising to roll back the Obama administration's climate policies, but observers say they will have to weigh how aggressively they will pursue those efforts, with some sources warning a hard-line push on the issue could alienate Democrats and risk a sharp blow back.
Trump has generally lampooned climate mitigation policies as harming the economy and rejected the scientific consensus on man-made climate change. He has also specifically pledged to reverse high-profile Obama administration rules such as its greenhouse gas (GHG) standards for new and existing power plants.
But there are a host of more aggressive steps that Trump and a friendly Congress could attempt, including amending the Clean Air Act to prohibit carbon dioxide regulation entirely or reversing EPA's landmark risk finding that paved the way for such rules.
Officials planning for the next administration are also said to be weighing whether to pull the United States out of the Paris climate agreement or its parent United Nations treaty, soften vehicle GHG standards that have to date enjoyed fairly wide industry support or scrap a separate global deal to limit refrigerants that act as potent GHGs.
In the coming weeks, Trump's nominee to head EPA will provide an important clue about whether he plans to take a pragmatic or aggressive stance on climate policies, possibly in his or her stance on the science underlying climate change.
One industry attorney recently said the “biggest post-election question” is whether Congress will remove CO2 regulation from the air act -- effectively overturning the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA that said the agency could regulate GHGs.
While such a move traditionally would be subject to a 60-vote threshold in the Senate, it is possible that Republicans could try to attach such a policy as a rider to a must-pass spending bill that would be politically difficult to filibuster or to budget reconciliation legislation that can be passed with a simple majority.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) appeared to cast doubt on such aggressive legislative actions, saying at a Nov. 9 press conference that he is urging the incoming Trump team to take administrative steps to roll back Obama's environmental rules and executive orders, rather than leaving such efforts up to Congress.
“We'll be working with the administration to make suggestions about what kind of unilateral action he can take to undo some of this regulatory overreach which has slowed the economy so much. And coal is a good example of that,” he said.
McConnell also cautioned against legislative overreach. “We've been given a temporary lease on power, if you will. And I think we need to use it responsibly. I think what the American people are looking for is results. And to get results in the Senate, as all of you know, it requires some Democratic participation and cooperation,” he said, adding, “We are going to be looking for bipartisan support. And I think overreaching after an election is, generally speaking, a mistake."
Temper Ambition
The GOP may nevertheless be aggressive in advancing its agenda. For example, some believe that GOP Senate leaders might scrap the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees, which would allow Republicans to get around any Democratic opposition on a Trump pick to replace the current vacancy on the court.
That could be crucial as the high court is currently expected to review any ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Obama's GHG rules for power plants and possibly other rules.
But one former Capitol Hill staffer warns that such aggressive maneuvers could cause a backlash. “If the Rs want to have policies that are lasting, they're going to want to temper their ambition,” the source says. “With a [slim] majority in the Senate, you aren't going to get anything done unless you can get [several] Democrats to vote for something.”
The source adds: “If they pull that trigger . . . then they've kind of set the tone for the Dems to fight and filibuster everything, which doesn't really help anybody.”
During a Nov. 9 press conference, Kevin Curtis of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) warned that extreme measures to roll back climate and clean air rules could risk a public backlash.
“I have seen this show before,” he said, referencing setbacks in 1980, 1994 and 2000. In “every single instance,” Republicans “claimed a mandate” for environmental rollbacks, and in every case the public resisted such efforts.
NRDC's David Doniger added in a Nov. 14 blog post. “One hopes there’s someone in his inner circle and new appointees with the courage and pragmatism to tell Trump this history. He has the opportunity to govern differently than he campaigned. He still has a chance to take a fresh look at climate.”
One conservative source says not to rule out Trump taking a transactional approach to climate chance policy, potentially as part of a broader deal on other topics he finds more important. “Trump fancies himself a dealmaker.”
Paris Withdrawal
In addition to efforts in Congress, one source on the Trump transition team recently told Reuters that the team is mulling ways to quickly remove the United States from the Paris Agreement, including by withdrawing from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change -- the parent treaty of the Paris deal.
Such a step would be highly controversial, and some are already speculating that it would spark retaliatory trade measures from other countries, including tariffs on American exports to reflect the fact that the country does not impose a price on carbon or is not participating in the Paris deal.
The former Hill source points to a dramatic moment during U.N. climate talks in Bali during the last years of the George W. Bush administration. During those talks, an official from Papua New Guinea told U.S. negotiators to either “lead or get out of the way.”
That option might still remain for the incoming Trump administration on Paris, the source says. “That's really going to be interesting to watch. Does the U.S. just get out of the way? If the U.S., Trump doesn't want to engage and participate, that's one thing. . . . But throwing sand in the gears, that's another.”
Another key climate policy question for Trump and Congress in the coming months is whether to join the recently negotiated deal to curb high global warming potential refrigerants known as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).
The pact, known as the Kigali Amendment, received broad environmentalist and industry support, though it likely must be submitted to the Senate for ratification.
But one commercial refrigeration industry source is already concerned the incoming Trump team may not support the amendment and is urging the new administration and Congress to embrace the deal because it provides the sector “predictability” on a long-term path to reduce HFCs and produce alternative refrigerants.
Not ratifying the deal could also carry significant commercial risks for domestic producers because the pact, which would amend the Montreal Protocol, includes strict trade sanction provisions banning the import of chemicals from countries that are not members of the deal and do not follow its phasedown requirements. Exporting chemicals to such countries would also be prohibited.
That means that if the United States does not join the Kigali pact and does not follow its HFC restrictions, domestic chemical producers could not export HFCs to developing countries such as India that are poised to be significant customers because the Kigali Amendment allows them to continue using the substances through 2028.
The next administration will also have to conclude an ongoing “mid-term review” of current GHG and fuel economy rules for light-duty vehicles. Environmentalists are suggesting the Obama administration may be able to take some late actionto safeguard the measures, while industry is urging the Trump transition team to weaken them.
One wild card in the process is the participation of California regulators, however, who are likely to push to retain or even strengthen the standards.
California is participating because the Obama EPA granted the state a special Clean Air Act waiver to enact vehicle rules that go beyond federal standards. The Trump administration could seek to go around California by either revoking its current waiver or denying a new one -- but any such move is almost sure to spark an intense legal fight with the Golden State and its supporters.
One informed source says the coming showdown over the vehicle rules could be a “holy war.”
EPA Chief
One signal about the Trump's plan on climate policy will be his nominee to lead EPA. Several sources recently speculated that one person floated for the job -- former George H.W. Bush adviser Robert Grady -- might be too moderate.
Other names being floated include Myron Ebell, a climate skeptic affiliated with the Competitive Enterprise Institute who is also heading Trump's EPA transition team; energy lobbyist and former Republican Hill staffer Mike Catanzero, who also serves on the Trump transition team; and Jeff Holmstead, who served as EPA air chief under the second Bush administration.
Even if the new EPA chief takes a hard line against climate regulation, it might be difficult for the agency to avoid GHG regulation entirely -- a move that could require it to scrap or substantially amend the 2009 “endangerment” finding that said CO2 and several other GHGs harm public health and welfare.
One industry source recently said such a move is fraught with legal risks, and another knowledgeable source also downplayed the notion. “I think if you try to do that, first of all, you would completely lose control of the agency” because career staff would make “life impossible” by reaching out to the media, the Hill and the environmental community. “I think it would be like going back to the beginning of the Reagan administration . . . a disaster. But if they push forward with that, then it will occupy all their time and attention.”
More broadly, the former Hill staffer says that hard-line steps on climate policy could impede efforts for more bipartisan efforts to improve the economy, such as Trump's pledge to boost infrastructure spending.
“If folks want to have anything other than another [wave election] in 2018 and definitely 2020, you can't sit there and say, 'We have the House, Senate and White House, but it's still the Dems' fault that nothing is happening. It's still the Dems' fault that you don't have a job.'”
If the economy looks worse in two years, “you're not going to be able to say, 'It's because [incoming Senate Minority Leader] Chuck Schumer filibustered this.'”
The source says there are “plenty of people who still think things didn't happen because of Obama. . . . That's the biggest risk in terms of overplaying their hand, not coming up with any type of results.”
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/trump-congress-face-choice-between-pragmatic-hard-line-climate-stance
-
Hundreds of U.S. Firms Tell Trump Not to Tear Up Paris Deal
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Benjamin Hulac
Hundreds of U.S. companies, including household names General Mills, Starbucks, Hilton, DuPont and Levi Strauss, urged President-elect Donald Trump yesterday not to exit the Paris climate accord.
In a statement to Trump, President Obama and Congress, more than 360 businesses and investors urged U.S. and foreign officials to maintain the commitments they made in Paris last year and encourage investment in clean energy projects. Withdrawal from the deal, they warned, would harm the U.S. economy.
"Failure to build a low-carbon economy puts American prosperity at risk," they wrote.
Under the Paris Agreement, nearly 200 nations pledged emissions cuts, vowing to peak emissions "as soon as possible" then swiftly rein them in. But the election of Trump last week sent a seismic shock through the environmental community. Many leaders now view the private sector as one of the remaining lines of defense against Trump, who has said he wants to gut, or at least defang, Obama's domestic and international climate policies.
Speaking at the U.N. climate talks underway in Morocco, Sue Reid, vice president of Ceres' climate and energy programs, said despite the "monumental U.S. election," firms have long seen climate change as a red flag to their operations.
"They see the Paris climate agreement as the world's best chance by far to limit the worst effects of climate change," Reid said. "They don't want to see it undermined in any way."
Gilles Vermot Desroches of French utility Schneider Electric said corporations function best when government policies are clear. He added that while the goal of the Paris climate talks was to plan and organize, companies attending the Morocco summit should set goals to solve global warming problems.
"In the end, in order to change, it's a question of solutions," he said.
The companies behind the letter took out an advertisement with a comparable message in The Wall Street Journal before the Paris deal last year, trying to appeal to the business world.
Ceres, the World Wildlife Fund, the Environmental Defense Fund, We Mean Business, the B Team and other climate advocacy groups spearheaded yesterday's message.
Asked how Mars Inc. would be affected if the United States reneged on its Paris pledge, Kevin Rabinovitch said it likely wouldn't matter. Mars is trying to emit zero greenhouse gases by 2040.
"For us as a business, it wouldn't really change our commitments and targets," said Rabinovitch, global sustainability director for Mars. The sweets manufacturer is known for its candy bars and Wrigley's gum, but it also sells pet food. The cat food brands Whiskas and Cesar are subsidiaries, as are the dog food companies Iams, Eukanuba and Pedigree.
Rabinovitch said changing temperatures and shifts in the global climate threaten farms, potentially driving up food prices, transportation costs and availability.
"We see a real business risk," he said. "And that is not the result of who happens to be in political leadership in any particular country in any moment in time."
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/11/17/stories/1060045916
-
White House Presses Ahead with Plans for Deeper GHG Cuts
Nov 17, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
The Obama administration fulfilled what is probably its final major contribution to the Paris Agreement yesterday, releasing an outline for how the United States can act in the long term to help the world keep warming to a safe level.
The midcentury deep decarbonization strategy, developed in collaboration with Canada and Mexico, envisions a future where the world's largest economy transitions almost entirely to non-fossil-fuel energy sources for transportation and electricity, expands forests and continues to phase down non-carbon-dioxide greenhouse gases.
"This midcentury strategy is a demonstration of the United States' commitment to the long-term goals and the long-term ambition embodied in the Paris Agreement," said White House climate adviser Brian Deese.
The deal nearly 200 countries agreed to outside the French capital last year set a long-term goal of keeping warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius, with efforts toward a 1.5 C limit — targets that require the world's emissions to reach net zero in the second half of this century. The agreement also mandated that by 2020 countries produce a vision for how they intend to get there.
The Obama administration has said it accelerated that process to provide other countries with a template for how to craft their own long-term pathways.
But another driver was almost certainly the possibility — and now the certainty — that Republican Donald Trump would succeed President Obama in the Oval Office. The president-elect has promised to cancel the Paris deal and would be unlikely to spend resources complying with it.
With Trump now headed for the White House, the sketch Deese introduced at a well-attended gathering at the U.S. Center in Marrakech appears fanciful. It imagines how the United States can make good on Obama's pledge at the climate talks in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2009 to slash U.S. emissions by more than 80 percent by midcentury through a suite of actions that would rely, at least in part, on policy signals the new administration seems very unlikely to support.
"By 2050, nearly all fossil fuel electricity production can be replaced by low carbon technologies, including renewables, nuclear, and fossil fuels or bioenergy combined with carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS)," the blueprint boldly states.
It also assumes advances in energy efficiency, a shift to non-fossil-fuel transportation technologies through policy and "rapidly scaling investment in low-carbon innovation," the development of decarbonization technologies like carbon capture and storage that would depend upon public-sector support both in funding and regulation, and other measures. The document also suggests that the United States could roll back a third of the deforestation that has occurred in the last 160 years, though Deese said that trend is already in progress.
U.S. team won't 'speculate' on Trump
The document does not name specific policies like the U.S. EPA Clean Power Plan that would be likely to deliver these objectives. But while it isn't "prescriptive," as Deese put it, the long-term strategy states throughout that policy will be required to help the United States decarbonize.
And those policies are likely to be in short supply in the Trump administration.
The president-elect has vowed to restore coal, oil and gas as the dominant sources of U.S. energy supply. A president who was elected after telling coal miners in Kentucky and West Virginia he would put them back to work would be unlikely to facilitate a shift toward overwhelming renewable power use.
Deese told his audience he was aware of the "uncertainty" that Trump's election has brought to the process but added that market forces will continue to deliver progress through the mid-2020s regardless of who is in the White House.
"There's a question about how we increase our ambition in the medium to long term, which is where the rest of the midcentury strategy comes in," he said.
Pressed about what Trump might do to Obama's Climate Action Plan in the next few years, Deese declined to "speculate."
But it is clear that Trump will soon have the authority to determine if the United States will participate in Paris or not. And while Deese said the United States is "well on its way" to achieving its 2020 emissions reduction target, most analyses show that additional policies and incentives would be needed for it to meet its "nationally determined contribution" to Paris of a 26 to 28 percent reduction in CO2 by 2025. And that target would be due for revision by 2020, when Trump will still be president.
Mexico the star at the U.S. show
Deese released the paper at an event that also featured Stephen Lucas, Canada's senior associate deputy minister for environment and climate change, and Rodolfo Lacy Tamayo, Mexico's undersecretary for environmental policy and planning.
The three North American countries pledged to collaborate on their long-term strategies during the "Three Amigos" summit in Ottawa in June. While yesterday's event still echoed the spirit of camaraderie that pervaded that meeting of the three heads of state, it was clear that the U.S. election result has had an impact.
Tamayo received some of the biggest applause reactions, as when he noted that Mexico's legislature approved both Paris and its domestic climate legislation along broad bipartisan lines — a clear contrast to the situation in Washington, D.C.
And he took aim at Trump's statements against his own country, especially Trump's continued support for a barrier along the Mexican border. He noted that North America's subnational governments can continue to make progress toward a continental carbon market in the coming years even though the United States will continue to lack a federal carbon price.
"It is feasible to build bridges and not walls, so let's do it," Tamayo told an appreciative audience.
The United States received kudos from advocates and delegates here for releasing its strategy despite the changing political landscape. But diplomats and activists alike emphasized that more action will be needed from the world's second-largest emitter.
"The U.S. is showing important leadership by putting its midcentury deep decarbonization strategy on the table now," said Rachel Cleetus of the Union of Concerned Scientists. But she said that "policies and actions" would be needed immediately to place the United States on a low-carbon trajectory toward 2050 and ensure that a costly course correction isn't required in later years.
"For example, an overreliance on natural gas could leave us at risk of constructing expensive infrastructure that will quickly become obsolete," she said.
The Sierra Club's Steve Herz said environmentalists could make progress during the Trump years by pressing state and local governments to block fossil fuel projects that would lock in high-carbon infrastructure for decades to come. But he said market forces will help tilt the playing field toward renewables and efficiency over gas.
But Thoriq Ibrahim, environment minister for the Maldives and chairman of the Alliance of Small Island States negotiating group, said that while the document is appreciated, "what we need immediately are concrete actions."
"Without them, some of us may be underwater by midcentury," he added.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/11/17/stories/1060045919
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested