Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 12/7/2016
-
(ACC Mentioned) Next Generation, API-Certified Diesel Engine Oils Officially Debut
Dec 7, 2016 | Concrete Products
Lubricant producers can begin marketing two new American Petroleum Institute-licensed categories, CK-4 and FA-4. Soon to be referenced in on- and off-road diesel engine manufacturer specifications, they exhibit improved shear stability, oxidation resistance and aeration control properties against the API CJ-4 formulations they succeed. -
(ACC Mentioned) Under New Safety Law, Epa Picks First 10 Chemicals For Review
Dec 7, 2016 | Environmental Working Group
Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency named the first 10 chemicals it will evaluate under the new Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, the first update since 1976 of the nation’s primary toxic substances law. -
OMB Completes Review On Three EPA Rules
Dec 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
As the Obama administration winds down, the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) has completed its reviews of three closely watched EPA waste and toxics measures, clearing the way for their release. -
Health Groups Petition EPA To Ban Water Fluoridation
Dec 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
Health advocacy groups are trying a new tack in their effort to ban fluoridation of drinking water, petitioning EPA to use its Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authority to ban the longstanding practice -- introduced in the 1940s to promote dental health – because it poses neurotoxicity risks. -
(ACC Mentioned) Solvent Rule Invoking Rare Chemicals Authority Advances
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A proposed rule to control trichloroethylene's (TCE) health risks when the solvent is used as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in commercial and consumer sprays has cleared the review process by the White House Office of Management and Budget—the first such rulemaking in 20 years. -
US FDA To Publish Adverse Event Reports For Cosmetics
Dec 7, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US FDA will begin to make public adverse event report data for cosmetics. -
Enforcement Of New York County Toy Law On Hold
Dec 7, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Enforcement of a New York county toy law has been put on hold, according to a press release from the Toy Industry Association (TIA). -
Fracking Rules Protective, Shouldn't Be Held Up: Pennsylvania
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
Pennsylvania's fracking regulations establish basic protections for areas affected by drilling and should not be put on hold pending resolution of legal challenges, the commonwealth told the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Dec. 6 (Marcellus Shale Coal. v. Pa. Dep't Envtl. Protection, Pa. Commw. Ct., No. 573 MD 2016, 12/6/16). -
Senate Trying To Revive Reform Bill
Dec 7, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Geof Koss
Senate energy conferees continue to try to get the House to reach a deal on the reform package, which appeared to be hanging by a thread this afternoon. -
Conservation Fund Dropped From Energy Bill Negotiations
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
A conservation program lauded by Democrats and environmental groups is now stripped from energy legislation negotiations, and the reauthorization provision will not surface in a potential compromise package, a key Democratic negotiator and a House staff member close to the talks told Bloomberg BNA. -
Dakota Access Backers Await Trump
Dec 7, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolf
Construction of the Dakota Access pipeline may have been set back by the Obama administration’s decision to withhold a key permit, but the project’s supporters say it’s only a matter of time before Donald Trump puts it back on track. -
Energy Transfer Keeps Up Legal Pressure After Pipeline Defeat
Dec 6, 2016 | Reuters
By Mica Rosenberg and Ernest Scheyder
The company building the Dakota Access Pipeline turned to a federal judge late on Monday for a permit to finish the job after the federal government ruled against the controversial pipeline. -
Pipeline Protesters In West Texas Asking For Help From Standing Rock
Dec 7, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
Protesters were arrested in West Texas on Tuesday morning near a pipeline being built from the Permian Basin to Mexico. -
Environmental Groups Seek to Defend Federal Methane Rule
Dec 6, 2016 | AP (In The New York Times)
Environmental groups are seeking to defend a new federal rule that would restrict how oil companies burn off excess natural gas extracted from public lands. -
GAO Completes Review Of Trains' Hazmat Response Documents
Dec 6, 2016 | Progressive Railroading
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has completed a review of emergency response information in selected documents carried by trains that transport hazardous materials. -
With Dakota Access In Limbo, More Bakken Crude To Move On Trains
Dec 7, 2016 | Reuters
By Liz Hampton
As oil prices recover and U.S. shale production picks up, energy companies that had planned to ship crude on the Dakota Access Pipeline will turn to rail, a transport method that poses its own risks to the environment and local communities. -
Crew Likely Asleep During Fatal Ark. Freight-Train Crash, NTSB Rules
Dec 6, 2016 | USA Today
By Bart Jansen
The fatal collision of two Union Pacific freight trains in Arkansas resulted from a fatigued engineer and conductor who were both likely asleep aboard one of the trains, federal investigators ruled Tuesday. -
Particulate Pollution Review to Go Beyond Legal Deadline, EPA Says
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
A legally required review of the 2012 national standards for particulate matter pollution isn't scheduled to be completed until 2022, more than four years after a Clean Air Act deadline, according to an Environmental Protection Agency document. -
Trump's EPA Team Has History of Targeting Climate Scientists
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Climate scientists both in and out of the government could face new harassment and scrutiny if recent additions to President-elect Donald Trump's Environmental Protection Agency transition team portend the direction the agency will take, environmental advocates said. -
Sources Debate Strength Of Trump Climate & Environmental Enforcement
Dec 7, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
Sources inside and outside EPA and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are expressing mixed views on the stringency of the incoming administration's expected approach toward enforcing climate and environmental standards, as career staff at EPA's enforcement office and DOJ's environment division are warily preparing for a major shift in strategy.
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) Next Generation, API-Certified Diesel Engine Oils Officially Debut
Dec 7, 2016 | Concrete Products
Lubricant producers can begin marketing two new American Petroleum Institute-licensed categories, CK-4 and FA-4. Soon to be referenced in on- and off-road diesel engine manufacturer specifications, they exhibit improved shear stability, oxidation resistance and aeration control properties against the API CJ-4 formulations they succeed. The API Lubricants Group developed the categories’ performance thresholds and testing guidelines to a) meet the varying needs of aging, new and in-service power packages; and, b) help on- and off-road engine manufacturers address more stringent regulations.
“December 1 is an industry milestone as it marks the first day CK-4 and FA-4 engine oils can be marketed and sold on retail shelves or in bulk,” said API Engine Oil Licensing and Certification System Senior Manager Kevin Ferrick. “The time between approval of the categories last winter and the first licensing gave large, medium, and small oil marketers the ability to test their new formulations and ready them for market. This signals the culmination of almost nine years of cross-industry collaboration in the development of the new standards.”
CK-4 oils replace API CJ-4 products and are backward compatible with most applications where engine manufacturers recommend the latter. API FA-4 oils are formulated to provide protection in some current and new on-road engines, and augment compliance with anticipated emissions control and fuel economy rules covering such power. They have limited or no backward compatibility with on- and off-road diesel engines for which manufacturers recommend CJ-4 lubricants.
Both CK-4 and FA-4 best existing standards by providing enhanced protection against oil oxidation and engine wear, particulate filter blocking, piston deposits, and degradation of low- and high-temperature properties. Technicians and consumers need to check owner’s manuals or with engine manufacturers to determine which new oil is right for their vehicle, API notes. Visually different API Service Symbol Donuts distinguish the two categories: the FA-4 Donut features a shaded section, the CK-4 Donut maintains the CJ-4 scheme. Joining the API Lubricants Group in developing the categories were the American Chemistry Council and Truck & Engine Manufacturers Association. — www.DieselOilMatters.com
http://concreteproducts.com/news/10114-next-generation-api-certified-diesel-engine-oils-officially-debut.html#.WEfDv7J96Cg
-
(ACC Mentioned) Under New Safety Law, Epa Picks First 10 Chemicals For Review
Dec 7, 2016 | Environmental Working Group
Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency named the first 10 chemicals it will evaluate under the new Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, the first update since 1976 of the nation’s primary toxic substances law.
The safety reviews could lead to bans or restrictions on a number of hazardous chemicals in consumer products and workplaces, including asbestos, paint strippers, flame retardants and solvents. EWG and other watchdogs will follow this first round closely, because legal interpretations of the new law and aggressive industry pressure could also mean little or no meaningful regulation of these substances at all.
The first 10 chemicals were chosen from the EPA’s Work Plan, based on their hazards and the public’s potential exposure, as well as other considerations such as persistence and bioaccumulation. Half of the chemicals contaminate drinking water, and setting health-based standards for them has been on the EPA’s to-do list for years.
While selection of the first 10 chemicals is an important milestone, this list contains just the first of 1,000 chemicals in need of urgent EPA review. Under the new law, for each risk evaluation EPA completes, it must start another. By 2020, the EPA must have at least 20 chemical risk evaluations ongoing at any given time.
The EPA should be commended for releasing the list ahead of schedule, but completion of the safety reviews and implementation of resulting regulations could take five years or more. Some public health and environmental groups, including EWG, are concerned that the new law will not provide the EPA with the resources it needs to quickly review and, if necessary, ban dangerous chemicals. The law also potentially grants opportunities for industry to drag out the process, and delay or undermine restrictions, as the American Chemistry Council, the industry’s powerful lobbying arm, has noted.
Consumers and workers should not have to wait five years or more to be protected from dangerous chemicals. EWG urges manufacturers to act now to replace these chemicals with safer alternatives.
Also, many of the hazardous chemicals in consumer products, including cosmetics, are not regulated by the EPA, but instead by the Food and Drug Administration. Congress should act swiftly to update the laws regulating these chemicals to ensure that everyday products are safe.
Below are the EPA’s first 10 chemicals for evaluation:
1,4-dioxane
1,4-dioxane is a industrial solvent, but also a byproduct of making compounds known as ethoxylated surfactants and emulsifiers, commonly used in cosmetics and detergents.[1] In 2008, it was found to contaminate almost half of personal care products tested. In 2009, an EWG investigation found that drinking water providers had detected 1,4-dioxane in the drinking water served to more than 1 million Americans.
As a byproduct, 1,4-dioxane can be stripped from products and some manufacturers report doing so before these products are offered for sale. But companies don’t have to report its use or presence in consumer products, so it’s hard to know whether a given product with ethoxlyated ingredients contains 1,4-dioxane.[2] To avoid purchasing personal care products and cleaners with 1,4-dioxane, consumers must read labels and avoid a long list of potentially contaminated ingredients.
In 2013, the EPA classified 1,4-dioxane as likely to be carcinogenic to humans.[3] The EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System says water contaminated with less than one-third of a part per billion could cause one additional case of cancer in every million people who drank it for a lifetime.[4] Exposure can also damage the kidneys, liver and brain, and irritate the respiratory tract.[5]
1-bromopropane
1-bromopropane is a solvent used in dry cleaning, spray adhesives, spot removers, coin cleaners, lubricants and degreasers. The National Toxicology Program classifies it as reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen. California lists it as a chemical known to cause reproductive harm and cancer. The EPA says it's particularly risky for women who are pregnant or of childbearing age, on the grounds that even short-term exposure could harm a developing fetus.
A metabolite, or a compound produced by the breakdown of a chemical in the body, of 1-bromopropane was found in more than three-fourths of Americans’ blood in a 2011 to 2012 sampling by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Asbestos
Many Americans mistakenly think asbestos was banned decades ago. Though now uncommon, U.S. industry still imports, uses and sells asbestos and asbestos products, including automobile brake pads and clutches, vinyl tile and roofing materials. In 2015, EWG tests found asbestos fibers in imported children’s toys, including crayons and crime scene fingerprint kits.[6]
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration says there is no safe level of exposure to any kind of asbestos.[7] Inhalation or ingestion of asbestos fibers can cause lung cancer, a rare and incurable cancer called mesothelioma, and asbestosis, a scarring of the lungs that often leads to heart failure. EWG Action Fund estimates that asbestos-related diseases kill 12,000 to 15,000 Americans per year.[8]
In 1989, the EPA ordered a phase out and ban of most products containing asbestos. But the asbestos industry sued, and in 1991 a federal appeals court ruled the EPA had not proven a ban was the "least burdensome alternative" for protecting public health. This not only overturned most of the ban, but set a precedent that made it almost impossible to ban any other dangerous chemical. Under the new chemicals law, the EPA must still consider costs, but no longer must prove a regulation to be the least burdensome method.
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon tetrachloride is a solvent that was widely used in home and industrial cleaning applications, fire extinguishers and as a grain fumigant. Since the 1970s, uses in consumer products have been banned because it is highly toxic. But it is still used to manufacture industrial chemicals,[9][10] and exposure may occur through air or contaminated drinking water. In 2009, EWG reported that carbon tetrachloride was detected in the drinking water served to more than 9 million Americans, at concentrations that exceeded health guidelines.
The National Toxicology Program categorizes carbon tetrachloride as reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen, and the EPA says it is likely to be a human carcinogen.[11][12] It can also damage the kidneys and liver, and in fact is regularly used in lab experiments to induce liver damage.
HBCD (cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster)
HBCD is a flame retardant used primarily in rigid polystyrene house insulation. People are exposed to HBCD from contaminated food and dust: One study found HBCD in seafood, meat and peanut butter purchased from a grocery store in Texas[13] and in 2004, EWG detected HBCD and other brominated flame retardants in dust samples from 10 American homes.[14]
The EPA says HBCD is a potential health hazard to humans based on "animal test results indicating potential reproductive, developmental and neurological effects."[15] It is highly persistent and bioaccumulative in the environment,[16] and is listed under the Stockholm Convention, an international agreement to ban Persistent Organic Pollutants, or POPS. The European Union and China have committed to phase out HBCD by 2021,[17] and major manufacturers such as Dow and BASF have initiated a phaseout of production.[18] The U.S. is the only major nation that hasn’t signed the POPs treaty.
Methylene chloride
Methylene chloride is primarily used as a paint stripper, especially for refinishing bathtubs. According to the CDC, from 2000 to 2013, at least 14 workers died while using methylene chloride during bathtub refinishing.[19] People are most likely to be exposed through its use as the primary ingredient in many paint strippers, as well as use in adhesives, aerosols, metal cleaners and pharmaceuticals.[20] EWG reported in 2009 that methylene chloride was detected in the drinking water of more than 20 million Americans, at concentrations that could pose a risk to human health.
In 2011, the EPA classified methylene chloride as “likely to be carcinogenic to humans”[21] and inhalation of this highly volatile chemical can harm central nervous system, causing headaches, dizziness, nausea, memory loss and eventual death. The EPA completed a partial risk assessment of methylene chloride in 2014 and indicated in 2016 that it was in the process of developing regulations.
NMP (n-methylpyrrolidone)
NMP is a solvent used as a paint stripper, and in petrochemical processing, engineering plastics, agricultural chemicals and other applications.[22] The EPA's 2015 risk assessment said it can cause reproductive and developmental harm, particularly during critical windows of development, from both short- and long-term exposures. The primary routes of exposure are through inhalation and absorption of the vapor through the skin. The EPA has completed a partial risk assessment of NMP and indicated in 2016 that it was in the process of developing regulations.
Pigment Violet 29
Pigment Violet 29 is an industrial colorant used in plastic and coatings. It is approved by the FDA as an indirect food additive,[23] a classification for chemicals used in food packaging (i.e., inks and glues) which might leach into food. Although the EPA categorizes it as “widely used in consumer products,” there is virtually no information available to the public about products that might contain this chemical.
Data on human health hazards are also sparse, but Pigment Violet 29 is categorized by the EPA as persistent in the environment and toxic to aquatic organisms.[24]
PERC (tetrachloroethylene)
PERC, also known as perchloroethylene and tetrachlorethylene, is a solvent used as a dry cleaning fluid by approximately 28,000 U.S. dry cleaners, according to the EPA.[25] It is also used in household products such as water repellents, spot removers, wood cleaners, adhesives and silicone lubricants. Every year, U.S. industrial facilities release more than a million pounds of tetrachloroethylene into the environment,[26] including soil, air and drinking water.[27]
The National Toxicology Program says PERC is "reasonably anticipated" to cause cancer,[28] and it's on California's official list of known carcinogens.[29] Human studies and animal experiments indicate that exposure might lead to a higher risk of bladder cancer, multiple myeloma or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.[30] The chemical has also been linked to harmful effects on the nervous and reproductive systems, and may adversely affect fetal development during pregnancy.[31]
TCE (trichloroethylene)
TCE, or trichloroethylene, is a solvent used as an industrial and a general household degreaser, as well as an ingredient in products such as paint thinners and removers, adhesives, dry cleaning agents, stain removers and carpet cleaners. Health risks from TCE exposures are highest when using airborne products such as aerosol degreasers, spray fixatives or spray cleaners.[32] EWG estimates that nearly 23 million Americans had TCE in their drinking water in 2009.
The EPA classifies TCE as "carcinogenic to humans" by all routes of exposure.[33] It is a developmental toxin, especially dangerous during pregnancy, and adult exposure has been linked to development of Parkinson’s disease.[34] Workers exposed to TCE have a higher risk of lymphatic and haematopoietic cancers, such as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.[35] The EPA has completed a partial risk assessment of TCE and regulations on two uses of TCE are in progress.
http://www.ewg.org/research/under-new-safety-law-epa-picks-first-10-chemicals-review
-
OMB Completes Review On Three EPA Rules
Dec 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
As the Obama administration winds down, the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) has completed its reviews of three closely watched EPA waste and toxics measures, clearing the way for their release.
The measures include a proposed rule restricting trichloroethylene (TCE) uses as a spotting agent and aerosol spray degreaser that industry is hoping to kill and final rules extending post-closure care requirements at hazardous waste landfills and expanding pathways for listing Superfund sites.
While the fate of the three rules is uncertain given the incoming Trump administration's deregulatory agenda, possible industry opposition and Congress' authority to block rules issued after May 30, both the proposed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) rule seeking to regulate TCE and the Superfund rule have drawn industry opposition.
As Maria Hegstad reported recently, the chemical solvents industry is “hopeful” that the incoming Trump administration will not finalize two proposed TSCA Section 6(a) rules to restrict uses of TCE – the spotting agent and aerosol spray rule and a second measure restricting uses of the solvent as a vapor degreaser – as well as a third Section 6(a) rule on paint stripping chemicals methylene chloride and N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP).
Of those, only the TCE spotting agent rule has cleared OMB.
One industry source is "hopeful we will have a more receptive audience" to industry calls to quash all three of the proposed rules.
"But," the source adds, "I am not taking anything for granted." One reason for that caution is Trump's limited discussion of environmental policy during the campaign. "They've given indications they don't believe in climate change, but I haven't seen any kind of comments around toxics," the source says.
The two final rules that cleared OMB include the long-awaited measure that adds vapor or water intrusion as a contaminant pathway for placing a site on the Superfund National Priorities List (NPL). The proposed version of the rule, released in February, drew mixed reaction, with industry parties and the Defense Department (DOD) voicing objections while some states and advocates endorsed it.
The other final rule is a measure that would extend post-closure care requirements at hazardous waste landfills beyond the 30-year time frame that EPA's rules currently impose.
As we reported earlier this year, state regulators began pushing for the rule in 2012 because current Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA) regulation require landfill owners to continue maintaining the site for 30 years after the site is closed.
-
Health Groups Petition EPA To Ban Water Fluoridation
Dec 6, 2016 | Inside EPA
Health advocacy groups are trying a new tack in their effort to ban fluoridation of drinking water, petitioning EPA to use its Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authority to ban the longstanding practice -- introduced in the 1940s to promote dental health – because it poses neurotoxicity risks.
“EPA should exercise its authority under TSCA to prohibit fluoridation additives because application of the Agency’s own Guidelines for Neurotoxicity Risk Assessment to the existing database on fluoride shows that . . . neurotoxicity is a hazard of fluoride exposure,” says the petition, filed recently by groups including the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, Food and Water Watch and the Fluoride Action Network.
It adds that TSCA allows a “more targeted” ban than under federal drinking water law.
The petition argues that “the amount of fluoride now regularly consumed by many people in fluoridated areas exceeds the doses repeatedly linked to IQ loss and other neurotoxic effects; with certain subpopulations standing at elevated risk of harm, including infants, young children, elderly populations, and those with dietary deficiencies, renal impairment, and/or genetic predispositions.”
The groups do not mention that water fluoridation is a local decision, made by individual water utilities and localities. Instead, they call on EPA to use its TSCA section 6 authority to prohibit the use of fluoride as a drinking water additive because they say doing so presents an unreasonable risk.
The groups acknowledge that TSCA section 3(2)(B)(vi) excludes food additives -- which would include fluoride -- from EPA's TSCA authorities. But they argue that “EPA has recognized that its authority to regulate chemical substances under TSCA includes the authority to prohibit drinking water additives.”
The groups cite a 1979 memorandum of understanding (MOU) between EPA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), wherein EPA “stated unequivocally that it has authority 'to regulate direct and indirect additives to drinking water as chemical substances and mixtures under TSCA.'”
In a footnote, the petitioners further explain that the MOU states “the implicit repeal by the [Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)] of FDA’s authority over drinking water enables EPA to regulate direct and indirect additives to drinking water as chemical substances and mixtures under TSCA.”
The groups also acknowledge that EPA could act under its SDWA authorities to ban fluoride, but argue that TSCA is the “more targeted, efficient, and less expensive manner than would be the case under SDWA. Namely, TSCA permits the EPA to differentiate between fluoride that is added to water versus fluoride that is naturally occurring.”
As evidence for their concerns, the groups point to a 2006 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study that EPA funded of the human health risks of ingesting fluoride. Regarding neurotoxic effects, the NAS report concludes that while available research “lacked sufficient detail for the committee to fully assess their quality and relevance to U.S. populations, the consistency of the results appears significant enough to warrant additional research on the effects of fluoride on intelligence.”
The petitioners argue that studies published in the decade since NAS' 2006 report “dwarfs the number of such studies that were available” to the NAS committee, and are “far more compelling today.”
Petitioners also point to NAS' recommendation that EPA tighten its SDWA drinking water goal for fluoride from 4 milligrams per Liter (mg/L) to 2 mg/L, based on risks of severe enamel fluorosis and bone fractures. Petitioners also raise concern that EPA's water office, in its 2010 risk analysis, ignored neurotoxic effects and based its quantitative risk estimate on severe enamel fluorosis.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/water-health-groups-petition-epa-ban-water-fluoridation
-
(ACC Mentioned) Solvent Rule Invoking Rare Chemicals Authority Advances
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A proposed rule to control trichloroethylene's (TCE) health risks when the solvent is used as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in commercial and consumer sprays has cleared the review process by the White House Office of Management and Budget—the first such rulemaking in 20 years.
OMB's Dec. 5 decision paves the way for the Environmental Protection Agency to propose the rule (RIN: 2070-AK03) before the end of the month as it said it would do. The risk assessment of trichloroethylene that the EPA completed in 2014 concluded that the solvent could harm the health of about 300,000 workers at dry-cleaning facilities and also pose risks to consumers using it as a protective coating to finish prints or artwork.
The health risks include short-term neurological responses such as light-headedness and headaches and longer-term harm to liver and kidney function as well as fetal development, according to an EPAfact sheet.
When released, the proposed rule would be the first rulemaking the EPA has pursued in more than 20 years following the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit's 991ruling that overturned the agency's 1989 effort to ban most uses of asbestos (Corrosion Proof Fittings v. EPA, 947 F.2d 1201, 33 ERC 1961 (5th Cir. 1991)).
Although the proposal has not been released, the American Chemistry Council is among the industry groups that have criticized this and other EPA rulemakings based on chemical risk assessments it has done in recent years. The risk assessments were screening level—not full—evaluations and therefore should not have been the foundation of a rulemaking, industry groups said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=101453664&vname=dennotallissues&fn=101453664&jd=101453664
-
US FDA To Publish Adverse Event Reports For Cosmetics
Dec 7, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US FDA will begin to make public adverse event report data for cosmetics.
The agency says the move is intended to increase transparency and improve access to data for consumers, health care providers, researchers and academics.
Previously, this information has only been available through Freedom of Information Act (Foia) requests.
This first posting of data from FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) Adverse Event Reporting System (CAERS) includes that from reports submitted by consumers, medical professionals and industry from 2004 to September 2016.
During this time, it received 56,574 adverse event reports.
These comprised:
26,840 adverse events for conventional food;
25,412 for dietary supplements; and
4,322 for cosmetic products.
The agency plans to update the data quarterly.
FDA uses CAERS data as a tool for identifying new safety concerns or evaluating manufacturers' compliance with existing regulations. Based on evaluation of potential concerns flagged up, it may take regulatory actions to address them or, in rare cases, remove a product from the market.
The agency says its believes posting the data may increase the number and completeness of the adverse event reports it receives. With cosmetics not subject to pre-market approval, it says “identifying, through post-market surveillance, possible risks associated with these products is critical”.
But it cautions that reports submitted to CAERS are in their original form, and that the FDA has not necessarily determined that the named product caused the reported event.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51486/us-fda-to-publish-adverse-event-reports-for-cosmetics
-
Enforcement Of New York County Toy Law On Hold
Dec 7, 2016 | Chemical Watch
Enforcement of a New York county toy law has been put on hold, according to a press release from the Toy Industry Association (TIA).
Suffolk County’s “Toxic Free Toys Act” had been slated to take effect on 1 December. A coalition of trade groups – under the banner of the Safe to Play Coalition – filed suit in September, alleging the local law is preempted by federal toy regulations.
According to the TIA, the county’s federal district court ordered a stay of enforcement of the law on 29 November, pending a decision in the lawsuit.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51487/enforcement-of-new-york-county-toy-law-on-hold
-
Fracking Rules Protective, Shouldn't Be Held Up: Pennsylvania
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
Pennsylvania's fracking regulations establish basic protections for areas affected by drilling and should not be put on hold pending resolution of legal challenges, the commonwealth told the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Dec. 6 (Marcellus Shale Coal. v. Pa. Dep't Envtl. Protection, Pa. Commw. Ct., No. 573 MD 2016, 12/6/16).
Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection and the Environmental Quality Board appealed the Nov. 8 order from Judge Kevin Brobson on Dec. 6, saying the “commonsense regulations” were the result of five years of public participation and should not be stayed.
“These regulations establish basic protections for areas that could be impacted by unconventional drilling—places like schools, playgrounds, and other public resources,” the department's Acting Secretary Patrick McDonnell said in a written statement Dec. 6.
The appeal is part of a case that began in November, when the Pittsburgh-based Marcellus Shale Coalition sued to stop seven specific provisions of the final Chapter 78a regulations—new revisions to Pennsylvania's Oil and Gas drilling rules that specifically govern unconventional gas drilling. The regulations took effect Oct. 8.
Brobson temporarily stayed four portions of the new regulations that protect public resources like parks and playgrounds; establish construction standards for fluid pond impoundments; require developers to monitor and clean up inactive and abandoned wells near drilling sites; and set new requirements for site restoration.
In a court filing Dec. 6, Pennsylvania asked the court to decide whether the Commonwealth Court erred by putting the four sections of the rules temporarily on hold, and asks whether Brobson's order “creates ambiguity and confusion” regarding implementation and enforcement of the new rules.
The parts of the rulemaking that were stayed were “at the heart” of the drilling regulations, David Hess told Bloomberg BNA in a phone call Nov. 29. Hess once served as the state's secretary of environmental protection and is now at Crisci Associates, a small government affairs lobbying firm in Harrisburg.
The Marcellus Shale Coalition did not immediately respond Dec. 6 to an e-mail seeking comment.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=101453682&vname=dennotallissues&fn=101453682&jd=101453682
-
Senate Trying To Revive Reform Bill
Dec 7, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Geof Koss
Senate energy conferees continue to try to get the House to reach a deal on the reform package, which appeared to be hanging by a thread this afternoon.
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) this morning cast doubt about the prospects for an agreement, signaling negotiations weren't going smoothly and promising a decision "very soon" (Greenwire, Dec. 6).
Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) told reporters that Senate negotiators are "still hoping for it to come back to life."
"There's been some discussion on the Senate side and some interest perhaps in finding a way to get [liquefied natural gas] export shot clock back in the bill," he said. "Now the question is will the House take it up?"
LNG exports are not among the items said to be agreed to by both sides. The issue was removed by the House last month during the back and forth.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said the energy bill and energy permitting were among the topics discussed during the Senate GOP lunch today, which included Vice President-elect Mike Pence.
"It's been slimmed down significantly and I would like to see more of a robust energy bill, but it almost seems more of a natural resources bill right now," Barrasso said.
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) said Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) updated the caucus on the state of play but acknowledged the calendar remains a challenge.
"She's trying to get it done, but you know time's getting short here," he said.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/12/06/stories/1060046754
-
Conservation Fund Dropped From Energy Bill Negotiations
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
A conservation program lauded by Democrats and environmental groups is now stripped from energy legislation negotiations, and the reauthorization provision will not surface in a potential compromise package, a key Democratic negotiator and a House staff member close to the talks told Bloomberg BNA.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund is officially jettisoned in arduous talks to strike a deal on an energy bill before the 114th Congress wraps up, House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told Bloomberg BNA late Dec. 5.
A compromise on the broad energy legislation, which may include provisions to improve electric grid security and boost energy efficiency of commercial buildings, homes and schools, is still within reach, Grijalva and House Energy and Commerce Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) told Bloomberg BNA.
‘Not Part of It Anymore’
“There have been some developments [so] that the Senators feel they can move it forward. Interestingly enough, Land and Water Conservation Fund is not part of it anymore,” Grijalva said. Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), a staunch supporter of the fund, are both committed to finalizing a package this Congress despite reluctance from House Republicans.
Proponents say the fund, which provides state assistance grants for conservation development as well as federal land acquisitions, plays an important role in preserving the environment. The fund is derived from offshore energy development revenue.
Grijalva said he doesn't think he'd be able to support any final package without the fund, which is set to expire in 2018. He said, “it's got two years left on its authorization, but with this new group coming in, who knows?”
Cantwell and House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) had debated fund reform over recent days and weeks.
Natural Gas Provisions Axed
A House staff member said Dec. 6 any final compromise will closely resemble the House proposal delivered to Senate colleagues Nov. 18. That proposal stripped provisions to expedite natural gas exports, a critical rallying point for Republicans, along with hydropower, biomass and critical minerals provisions.
The natural gas provision is also officially gone from negotiations, the staff member said. “The LWCF was the major sweetener for Democrats, and dropping that forced Republicans to drop their riders,” the staff member said, referring to the natural gas provision.. “The House can only do a a pared down version that closely models the House proposal.”
Negotiators also axed a provision that would have eliminated a federal government mandate to phase out fossil fuel use in new and renovated federal buildings, the staff member said.
Meanwhile, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told reporters Dec. 6 no decision on energy conference has yet been made. “But that has not gone as well as the other—the other things that we're looking at like [water resources legislation] and the [continuing resolution],” he said.
Congress is scheduled to leave Washington Dec. 9.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=101453661&vname=dennotallissues&fn=101453661&jd=101453661
-
Dakota Access Backers Await Trump
Dec 7, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolf
Construction of the Dakota Access pipeline may have been set back by the Obama administration’s decision to withhold a key permit, but the project’s supporters say it’s only a matter of time before Donald Trump puts it back on track.
Greens and tribal groups have hailed the move to block work on the nearly finished, 1,172-mile, $3.7 billion oil pipeline, and conducting the environmental reviews for a possible new route is likely to take about a year — provided the decision issued on Sunday by Assistant Secretary of the Army Jo-Ellen Darcy withstands legal challenges.
The project was granted an easement permit for the route across Lake Oahe by the Army Corps of Engineers in July, using a less rigorous environmental assessment than the one ordered by Darcy. Although the Standing Rock Sioux say the route would threaten the tribe’s water supplies, Republicans say the Corps followed the law in that earlier review, and point out that the existing review has been upheld in court.
Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), an energy adviser to Trump who could be tapped for a Cabinet position, said it was President Barack Obama who injected the White House into the pipeline fight, so a Trump White House should easily be able to reverse it.
“So really all the president would have to do is call the secretary of the Army or the secretary of Defense and say, 'Listen, I’m not going to impose myself on this, let the process do what the process is supposed to do by law,' and they should be able to get the easement out of the [Army Corps] immediately,” he said.
Environmental lawyers say it won’t be that simple. An Army appointee who reverses the decision on the easement could be challenged in court and would need to prove that the Army Corps, after concluding it needed more information on the environmental risks, actually did not need more information. That argument risks being shot down by a judge as arbitrary.
"A decision to go back on it will certainly meet with a lawsuit, and the incoming administration will have to prove in court that the existing analysis is adequate," said Michael Burger, executive director for the Sabin Climate Law Center at the Columbia School of Law said in an email.
And in calling for the new environmental assessment, Darcy appears to have been very aware of that process.
In the memo she sent to the commander of the Corps, Darcy said the original environmental assessment for the crossing was no longer adequate due to new information provided by the Standing Rock tribe. She detailed multiple meetings between the Corps and the tribe, including a key meeting last week in which the Standing Rock Sioux laid out 30 additional terms and conditions that would ease their concerns of a spill or rupture that would affect their drinking water.
Citing the Mineral Leasing Act, guidance from the White House Council on Environmental Quality and the National Environmental Policy Act, Darcy wrote that a more vigorous analysis was appropriate in the circumstances here. She also required the Corps to share key information with the tribe, a failing of the original analysis.
"It’s a very thorough letter," said Larry Liebesman, a former Department of Justice lawyer now at the Washington law firm of Dawson & Associates. "It lays out the chronology of recent communication, new information provided by the tribe, and it lays out factually and legally why more analysis is needed."
Still, Dakota Access supporters note the courts have repeatedly supported the Army Corps' analysis on the original route in which it issued a Finding of No Significant Impact. Energy Transfer Partners, the pipeline's developer, filed a motion for summary judgment on Monday asking the court to reinstate the Corps' original decision granting a right-of-way.
"Remember the court has now twice ruled in favor of construction proceeding," Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) told POLITICO. "Let's follow the law."
As Trump fills out his cabinet rosters, Craig Stevens, a spokesman the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now, a coalition of agriculture, business and labor interests, said his group will keep up the pressure.
"We're going to make sure we’re reminding President-elect Trump and the transition team and those folks going over to the Army in the transition that this process isn't right," he said. "We’ll continue the education process [for] these folks going into positions of authority."
Should administrative action get bogged down, Congress could pass legislation approving the project, as it tried to do with Keystone Pipeline XL. However, Hoeven and other senators it was "too early" for such an action.
"We'll see what develops," Hoeven said.
Trump spokesman Jason Miller reiterated the president-elect’s support for the pipeline project on Monday, but stopped short of pledging to overturn the Obama move, saying the incoming administration would “review the full situation when we’re in the White House to make appropriate determinations at that time.”
Trump had owned stock in both Energy Transfer Partners and Phillips 66, which owns 25 percent of the project, according to his May financial disclosure. His aides have said he liquidated those holdings.
On Tuesday, Standing Rock Sioux chairman David Archambault II declared victory and asked protesters to go home. "The camp has brought us this far," he said in a statement. "Now it is time we pivot to the next phase of this struggle. That will be led on different fronts like in court, with the new administration, with Congress, and with the investors. "
Environmental groups like 350.org, Bold Alliance, and the Sierra Club say they plan to use similar strategy to other infrastructure battles. "We’ve really learned how to take these projects on," said Jamie Henn, co-founder of 350.org. "The lessons from that will be incredibly useful in the months ahead."
"Unfortunately it’s not over," said Lena Moffitt, director of the Sierra Club's Dirty Fuels Campaign. "I think folks on the ground and the millions of Americans across the country who stood with Standing Rock are more willing than ever to fight with the Trump administration, both about this pipeline and issues of tribal sovereignty."
Annie Snider and Nick Juliano contributed to this report.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2016/12/obama-decision-on-dakota-access-puts-trump-in-a-bind-139704
-
Energy Transfer Keeps Up Legal Pressure After Pipeline Defeat
Dec 6, 2016 | Reuters
By Mica Rosenberg and Ernest Scheyder
The company building the Dakota Access Pipeline turned to a federal judge late on Monday for a permit to finish the job after the federal government ruled against the controversial pipeline.
The pipeline, which is being built by Energy Transfer Partners, has been the subject of protests from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and climate activists for months, due to its proximity to the tribe's reservation.
On Sunday, the federal government turned down ETP's request for an easement that will allow it to tunnel under the Missouri River, adjacent to the Standing Rock reservation. The tribe and others hailed the victory, even though they expected the fight with the company would continue.
In a legal filing on Monday, ETP asked a judge to grant the permit, saying that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in its decision, responded to "political pressure and an escalating campaign of violence and disorder waged by protesters" against the project.
Last month, ETP said that delays have already cost it $450 million, while it anticipates further monthly delays of about $83 million. The company did comment on the filing.
"This seems like a distraction to me from the real issues. The Army Corps knows whether or not it has granted an easement across federal property. The Army Corps has wide discretion in this issue," said Jan Hasselman, a lawyer with Earthjustice, which is representing the Standing Rock Sioux.
Protests have gathered momentum this year in both the United States and Canada, as climate activists have united with Native tribes to form a powerful coalition against pipeline development. Canada's natural resources minister was forced to apologize on Tuesday for remarks interpreted as favoring law enforcement violence against protesters.
This came after several clashes between police and activists in North Dakota, most recently a confrontation with several hundred protesters where police responded by spraying people with water and tear gas amid freezing temperatures.
That galvanized hundreds of veterans to flock to the Dakota Access protests, where they met tribal leaders to protest over the weekend, just before the Army Corps' decision.
The chief of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, Dave Archambault, asked protesters on Monday to go home, saying they should go home to spend winter with their families.
That became impossible late on Monday, as conditions turned harsh at the Oceti Sakowin camp in North Dakota, when a blizzard rolled in and raged throughout Tuesday, forcing activists to hunker down in communal tents and cars.
A state travel warning was issued on Monday, imploring people in southern North Dakota, including the area around Cannon Ball and the capital of Bismarck, to avoid travel. Snow has accumulated rapidly, with wind gusts in the area exceeding 50 miles per hour (80 kmh), according to the National Weather Service, causing drifts and blocking roads.
Linda Black Elk, 42, a leader of the Standing Rock Medic and Healer Council, said Tuesday there had been two cases of hypothermia in camp. She said volunteers walked around the camp through the evening visiting tipis and yurts to check on people.
Morton County, in a release, said it had set up shelters at several locations, where a number of protesters attempting to leave the camp had ended up due to difficult driving conditions. Blockades on Highway 1806, just north of camp, were still in place as of late Monday, as the blizzard approached.
(Reporting by Mica Rosenberg in Washington and Ernest Scheyder in Cannon Ball; additional reporting by Terray Sylvester in Bismarck and Liz Hampton in Houston; Editing by David Gaffen and Alan Crosby)
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-north-dakota-pipeline-idUSKBN13V27Q
-
Pipeline Protesters In West Texas Asking For Help From Standing Rock
Dec 7, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
Protesters were arrested in West Texas on Tuesday morning near a pipeline being built from the Permian Basin to Mexico.
Members of the Big Bend Defense Coalition were protesting Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners construction of the Trans-Pecos Pipeline in Alpine. The Brewster County Sheriff’s office arrested two: coalition founder Lori Glover and Alpine resident Roger Siglin.
“We must protect our water, challenge corporate greed, and come to our senses on the truth of fossil fuels and climate change,” said Glover, who had chained herself to the project’s gate.
Former oil field worker Arajoe Battista chained himself to a fence there but was not arrested, the sheriff’s office said.
The arrests come on the heels of a temporary victory in North Dakota, where protesters have fought for months against the completion of Energy Transfer’s Dakota Access Pipeline. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced on Sunday that they wanted to further study the impact of digging under Lake Oahe, a dammed section of the Missouri River.
The Big Bend Defense Coalition is hoping to rally troops to Alpine, in the middle of the Chihuahuan Desert, about 70 miles north of Big Bend National Park. Residents moved there to be closer to nature and escape big business, protesters said.
The coalition said it would soon gather at a winter camp in hopes protesters from North Dakota would move south.
“We want to welcome all those willing to come and help us protect our nation against corporate greed unfettered,” the coalition said in a statement.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/12/06/pipeline-protesters-in-west-texas-asking-for-help-from-standing-rock/
-
Environmental Groups Seek to Defend Federal Methane Rule
Dec 6, 2016 | AP (In The New York Times)
CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Environmental groups are seeking to defend a new federal rule that would restrict how oil companies burn off excess natural gas extracted from public lands.
Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota are pressing a federal lawsuit in Wyoming seeking to block a rule that President Barack Obama's administration issued in November requiring certain companies to capture natural gas instead of burning it off.
The states argue that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management lacks authority over air quality issues and claim the rule would reduce state revenues.
"The BLM is once again overstepping its bounds and imposing unnecessary regulations," Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead said in a statement last month. "Congress has delegated regulation of air pollution to the states and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, not BLM. Wyoming has successfully regulated air pollution emissions from oil and gas activities for over 20 years and has effective limitations on venting and flaring of natural gas."
Fifteen groups including national environmental organizations are asking U.S. District Judge Scott Skavdahl of Wyoming to allow them to intervene to support the BLM rule. He hasn't ruled yet on the request.
The following groups are petitioning to intervene in the case: Wyoming Outdoor Council; Center for Biological Diversity; Citizens for a Healthy Community; Diné Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment; Environmental Defense Fund; Environmental Law & Policy Center; Montana Environmental Information Center; National Wildlife Federation; Natural Resources Defense Council; San Juan Citizens Alliance; Sierra Club; The Wilderness Society; Western Organization of Resource Councils; Wilderness Workshop; and WildEarth Guardians.
Energy companies frequently "flare," or burn off, large volumes of natural gas at drilling sites because it makes less money than oil. The new rule requires energy companies that drill on nearly 250 million acres of federal lands to capture natural gas. Federal officials have said that between 2009 and 2014, enough natural gas was lost through venting, flaring and leaks to power more than 5 million homes for a year. Capturing the gas instead of burning it also would generate tens of millions a year in additional federal revenues, they said.
Laura King is staff attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center in Helena, Montana, which represents several of the groups.
"Currently the oil and gas industry releases methane into the sky, burns it off unused, and loses it through leaky infrastructure," King said Tuesday. "These industry norms create a public health liability, waste a public resource reduce royalty income for taxpayers and exacerbate climate change."
King said the rule would require the industry to tidy up their operations using existing affordable technology, creating jobs in the process. "The public benefits of the rule are clear," she said.
Skavdahl has set a hearing for Jan. 6 on a request from Wyoming and Montana for a court order blocking the rule. North Dakota filed another, similar request for an injunction on Monday.
Republican President-elect Donald Trump has said he will seek to sharply increase oil and gas drilling on federal lands. He said on the campaign trail that restrictions supported by Obama hurt energy-producing states. But although Trump could rescind the rule once he takes office next month, doing so would likely take months.
King said it's unclear what's going to happen with the rule once Trump takes office. "We're moving one step at a time," she said. "I'd say that our intervention is an extension of the role that we've played for years, of advocating for these readily available methane waste prevention measures that will protect public health and the environment."
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/12/06/us/ap-us-methane-gas.html
-
GAO Completes Review Of Trains' Hazmat Response Documents
Dec 6, 2016 | Progressive Railroading
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has completed a review of emergency response information in selected documents carried by trains that transport hazardous materials.
Although the GAO did not make recommendations, it performed the study to clear up potential confusion between emergency response information carried by trains transporting hazardous materials and guidance contained in the U.S. Department of Transportation's Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG).
Federal hazardous material regulations require railroads and other hazardous material transporters to carry emergency response information that describes immediate hazards to health and risks of fire or explosion. Representatives from all 18 railroads GAO interviewed told the GAO that they carry the ERG on their trains.
The GAO found that the emergency-response information in the guidebook and train documents of the selected railroads were generally similar, but differed somewhat in the level of specificity and type of information.
For example, the ERG provided more detail on evacuation distances. However, for six selected hazardous materials, the recommended evacuation distances in the ERG differed from the supplemental emergency response information which is provided by the Association of American Railroads' (AAR) Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Database.
In August, the AAR discontinued the database, which removed the potential for discrepancies between the ERG and AAR's supplemental emergency response information.
Congress called on the GAO to conduct the study after a 2012 derailment in New Jersey resulted in the release of 20,000 gallons of vinyl chloride, a hazardous material. The National Transportation Safety Board found that the train's supplemental documents on emergency response to vinyl chloride were inconsistent and less protective than the ERG.
The GAO's full report on the study can be read here.http://www.progressiverailroading.com/safety/news/GAO-completes-review-of-trains-hazmat-response-documents--50246
-
With Dakota Access In Limbo, More Bakken Crude To Move On Trains
Dec 7, 2016 | Reuters
By Liz Hampton
As oil prices recover and U.S. shale production picks up, energy companies that had planned to ship crude on the Dakota Access Pipeline will turn to rail, a transport method that poses its own risks to the environment and local communities.
Sunday's decision by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to deny Energy Transfer Partners an easement to complete the line means shippers who expected to see another 570,000 barrels of daily Bakken pipeline capacity in 2017 will have to find new ways to move supply.
Rail comprises nearly 65 percent of total crude export capacity in the Bakken, but is currently underutilized because it is more costly and less efficient. In September, only 29 percent of total Bakken oil production moved by rail, according to the latest figures from the North Dakota Pipeline Authority.
"Once the pipes are full, that means more trains. And without DAPL, the pipes get full sooner than they otherwise would have," said Rick Smead, managing director of advisory services for RBN Energy, noting that this scenario is contingent on a big rise in production.
A rise in incidents during the shale boom, and high-profile accidents, such as the explosion in 2013 that killed 47 people in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, has drawn increased scrutiny to the rail industry, prompting the U.S. government to enact more stringent regulations for rail movements.
Overall, oil spills more frequently with pipelines than rail cars, according to data from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration (PHMSA). For example, in 2015, there were 252 pipeline spills reported to PHMSA involving crude oil, versus 123 for the rail industry. The year prior, the frequency of spills at pipes was about 23 percent greater than rail, the data shows.
The 1,172 mile (1,885 km) Dakota Access Pipeline is slated to run from western North Dakota to Illinois, and has been the subject of protests for months from Native American and environmental activists concerned about leaks and contamination of water supply.
Incidents involving crude-by-rail peaked in 2014, at nearly 190, versus just one accident in 2006, the data shows.
The rise in accidents followed a surge in volumes moving by rail each day, which hit a high of 29.2 million barrels per month in October 2014. As of September 2016, that had declined to about 10.5 million barrels monthly, according to data from the EIA, as new pipelines displaced rail and production has declined.
With lower volumes, train accidents involving crude are down significantly, with only nine reported this year, according to PHMSA data.
But that could change.
"There are increased chances of accidents, leaks and greenhouse gas incidents when transporting by rail," said Afolabi Ogunnaike, a senior analyst at consultancy Wood Mackenzie.
Bakken oil production is expected at 918,000 barrels per day in December - about 70,000 bpd above current pipeline capacity, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. A recent deal by OPEC to cut production and stabilize prices could boost drilling activity.
"The Bakken is a tremendous resource. It's going to grow significantly ... There is a need for additional pipeline capacity in years to come," said Ogunnaike.
In North Dakota, there have been no accidents involving crude rail cars this year, versus six in 2015 and five in 2014, according to PHMSA data.
Four spills since 2012 have occurred in Mandan, North Dakota, a city about 40 miles (64 km) north of the proposed route of the Dakota Access pipeline that has been the site of protests.
(Reporting by Liz Hampton; Editing by Alan Crosby)
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-north-dakota-pipeline-rail-idUSKBN13V2IC
-
Crew Likely Asleep During Fatal Ark. Freight-Train Crash, NTSB Rules
Dec 6, 2016 | USA Today
By Bart Jansen
WASHINGTON – The fatal collision of two Union Pacific freight trains in Arkansas resulted from a fatigued engineer and conductor who were both likely asleep aboard one of the trains, federal investigators ruled Tuesday.
The crash Aug. 17, 2014, in Hoxie, Ark., could have been prevented by an automatic-braking system that Congress has required railroads to install by 2018, according to the National Transportation Safety Board.
"Human operators can be fatigued, impaired, distracted or medically unfit, and they can make errors even on their best days," said Christopher Hart, the board chairman. "This technological safety net is indispensable," he said of automatic braking.
The collision derailed 55 cars and a diesel-fuel spill and a tank car leaking alcohol for consumption caught fire. About 500 people were evacuated within 1.5 miles of the crash.
A southbound train collided into a northbound train that was turning onto an adjacent track. The southbound train passed two yellow warning lights and a red signal without slowing down and with no sign of activity in the train’s cab before the collision, investigators said.
The board found no fault with northbound crew members, who had no time to apply brakes before the collision. The northbound crew members were seriously injured, but survived the crash.
The southbound train had an automated alarm that could have given visual and audio warnings to the crew. But the warning didn’t sound because it interpreted the train’s automated horn signal as someone operating the controls, investigators said. The safety board previously issued warnings to the Federal Railroad Administrationand railroads about the flaw in the automated warning system.
Both crew members who died in the 2:28 a.m. accident were presumed fatigued and were likely asleep, the board agreed.
The engineer suffered moderate sleep apnea diagnosed in 2010, which can interrupt breathing during sleep, investigators said. Union Pacific didn't require the engineer to report his condition. The conductor worked irregular shifts that could have left him tired, investigators said.
The board previously noted sleep-apnea problems among train crew members in accidents in Clarkston, Mich., in 2001; Red Oak, Iowa in 2011; Chaffee, Mo., in 2013; and in a Bronx, N.Y., commuter-rail accident in 2013.
Board member Earl Weener noted airlines anticipate crew members will make mistakes and therefore have layers of safety features to prevent or mitigate problems. “In this case, we were not very many layers away from a catastrophe,” Weener said.
The other major concern in the accident dealt with automatic-braking systems, also called positive train control (PTC), that railroads are installing. The systems with communications between dispatchers, track-side monitors and locomotives are geared to reduce or stop trains automatically based on speed limits and track conditions.
Board member Bella Dinh-Zarr voted against the official probable cause of the accident as the train crew's fatigue because she argued that automatic braking should have been ruled a primary cause of the accident, not just a contributing factor.
"It's only a matter of time until the epidemic of catastrophic PTC-preventable accidents is also eradicated," she said.
After a 2008 passenger-train crash in California, Congress ordered all railroads to install an automatic-braking system by the end of 2015. But because of the cost and technological hurdles, it extended the deadline to the end of 2018, with an option for the transportation secretary to extend a railroad’s deadline through 2020.
An estimated 81% of railroads are expected to meet the 2018 deadline and the rest by 2020, investigators said. Union Pacific Railroad had installed the trackside equipment necessary for automatic braking at the accident site, and was testing software as it installed equipment on locomotives, investigators said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/12/06/ntsb-crew-fatigued-fatal-freight-train-crash/95038258/
-
Particulate Pollution Review to Go Beyond Legal Deadline, EPA Says
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
A legally required review of the 2012 national standards for particulate matter pollution isn't scheduled to be completed until 2022, more than four years after a Clean Air Act deadline, according to an Environmental Protection Agency document.
The agency, in a final plan posted online Dec. 6, outlined the anticipated schedule for determining whether the current particulate matter standards are still adequate based on available health and environmental information.
The projected time frame for the review is likely to draw lawsuits from environmental advocates, who have the ability under the Clean Air Act to file citizen suits when the agency fails to perform an act or duty required under the air act.
“Lawsuits on the #EPA #soot standard are only a matter of time,” said Frank O'Donnell, president of the nonprofit organization Clean Air Watch, in a Dec. 6 tweet.
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to review, and revise if necessary, its National Ambient Air Quality Standards every five years. For the 2012 particulate matter standards—which were published in the Federal Register in January 2013—that deadline is Jan. 15, 2018. While the EPA is already projecting that it will miss that deadline by years, litigation can't be filed until after that date.
Deadline lawsuits over EPA's air quality standard review obligations have been common: between 1994 and 2015; 15 of the 16 conducted reviews were completed under deadlines that resulted from citizen lawsuits. Pat Gallagher, director of Sierra Club's Environmental Law Program, told Bloomberg BNA in November that he would expect deadline suits from environmental advocacy organizations to grow “potentially exponentially” during the administration of President-elect Donald Trump. The Sierra Club has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg, the majority owner of Bloomberg L.P., parent of Bloomberg BNA.
While the EPA's projected schedule doesn't even call for a proposed decision to be released until 2021, the schedule does call for some actions during Trump's initial four-year term in office. Those include:
• 2017: draft science and risk assessments released
• 2018: draft policy assessment released
• 2018-2020: assessment documents reviewed by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, a panel of independent science advisers
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=101453663&vname=dennotallissues&fn=101453663&jd=101453663
-
Trump's EPA Team Has History of Targeting Climate Scientists
Dec 7, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Climate scientists both in and out of the government could face new harassment and scrutiny if recent additions to President-elect Donald Trump's Environmental Protection Agency transition team portend the direction the agency will take, environmental advocates said.
The latest additions to Trump's EPA transition team, announced late Dec. 5 after Trump met with Al Gore to discuss climate change, have a history of targeting individual climate scientists, using open records laws in an effort to discredit their work, according to environmental advocates who said the latest names offer further evidence the Obama administration's greenhouse gas regulations are in jeopardy.
New transition team additions David Schnare, general counsel of the Energy and Environment Legal Institute who once compared pollution studies using human subjects to Nazi war crimes, and David T. Stevenson, policy director at the Center for Energy Competitiveness at Delaware's Caesar Rodney Institute, have both used Freedom of Information Act requests to seek records from scientists working on climate change.
“These groups as public interest groups, they have been all about transparency or so they say. They're really about forcing government-funded scientists to open up their e-mails. It's hard to envision what they'd do inside the government,” Lauren Kurtz, executive director of the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund at Columbia Law School in New York, which helps defend climate scientists, told Bloomberg BNA.
The other additions to Trump's transition team include David Kreutzer from the Heritage Foundation, Austin Lipari from the Federalist Society and George Sugiyama of the Sugiyama Group LLC, who previously served on the Republican staff of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Trump's EPA transition team, headed by Myron Ebell, director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, already includes the self-described “Mother in Love with Fracking” Amy Oliver Cooke, executive vice president and director of the Energy Policy Center for the Independence Institute, a right-leaning think tank in Golden, Colo.
While it's unclear what direction Trump's EPA will ultimately take without a nominee for administrator, environmental advocates said the transition team is worrisome.
“Those people have been hired to do this work for a long time by very specific special interests so you'd have to assume they're carrying that ethos into the EPA,” Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Bloomberg BNA.
EPA Work Likened to Nazis
Schnare, who spent 33 years at the EPA, filed a lawsuit in 2012 challenging agency-funded studies of human exposure to airborne fine particulate matter, equating those studies with Nazi experiments on Jews during the Holocaust.
“Dr. Schnare more than abhors current governmental experimentation on humans for the purposes of determining the effect of poisons. It is not only that such activity dishonors those who should have been the last to have suffered in such a manner, it sickens and angers him. It causes him to stand up for those who could not and cannot,” Schnare wrote in the lawsuit, which was dismissed in 2013 for lack of jurisdiction.
Transition Teams Opposes Climate Action
Trump may have publicly softened his stance on climate change since calling it a Chinese hoax—he recently told the New York Times he acknowledges some “connectivity” between human actions and climate change—but members of his EPA transition team downplay the link between human activity and a warming planet or have opposed state measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or prepare for sea-level rise.
In a November 2014 guest post in Forbes, Schnare called the social cost of carbon, a tool the federal government uses to monetize the impact of climate change, “another highly discretionary government means to the end of centralized control.”
Kreutzer in The Daily Signal in 2015 had argued the EPA had failed to account for the benefits of climate change when it estimated the benefits of its methane standards for the oil and natural gas industry. He also said that California's plans to cut carbon dioxide emissions 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2030 would lead to “energy-strangling policies” without providing tangible benefits for the climate.
The Energy and Environment Legal Institute has also targeted a coalition of state attorneys general and environmental advocates known as the Green 20, which prompted investigations into fossil fuel companies such as Exxon Mobil Corp. over whether they have defrauded investors by downplaying the effects climate change will have on their businesses.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=101453673&vname=dennotallissues&fn=101453673&jd=101453673
-
Sources Debate Strength Of Trump Climate & Environmental Enforcement
Dec 7, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
Sources inside and outside EPA and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are expressing mixed views on the stringency of the incoming administration's expected approach toward enforcing climate and environmental standards, as career staff at EPA's enforcement office and DOJ's environment division are warily preparing for a major shift in strategy.
One former DOJ official predicts a “step down” in civil environmental enforcement but an uptick in citizen and criminal suits. But a former EPA enforcement official says civil enforcement is likely to continue to be aggressive unless the Trump administration takes extraordinary steps to require “pens down” in ongoing investigations.
Staff at EPA's Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assurance (OECA) and DOJ's Environment & Natural Resources Division (ENDR) are extremely wary of the future under the incoming administration, sources tell Inside EPA. One DOJ source says the two divisions feeling most threatened are ENRD and Civil Rights, while an OECA source expects an immediate hiring freeze early next year with eligible staff taking buyouts and grim recruitment opportunities after any freeze is lifted.
The new administration's enforcement stance could play a key role in shaping how facilities comply with existing climate change and other environmental rules, and is expected to significantly de-emphasize climate standards that have been a top priority under the Obama administration.
Environmentalists are already planning to vastly increase their enforcement efforts through citizen suits following expected Trump steps to weaken or repeal EPA rules, especially over climate policies.
And the president-elect has already signaled his administration will drop the legal defense of high-profile climate rules that are subject to ongoing litigation, leaving the future of such rules in doubt.
Industry attorneys say they are shifting from offense to a defensive role, preparing to help the new administration's expected efforts to streamline rules and reduce paperwork and other burdens that raise costs on the regulated community.
The former DOJ official says the first rule Trump could scale back is EPA's power plant greenhouse gas rule, known as the Clean Power Plan (CPP), which will either be completely withdrawn or revised to an extremely narrow version.
Other rules seen as ripe for scaling back include the 2015 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone, the rule for new oil and gas methane sources and the mercury & air toxics standards (MATS) for power plants. However, the source says any effort to revise the MATS may be met by significant resistance from the many utilities that have already invested in controls.
“The question is whether there will be level-playing-field concerns if the regulations are pulled back because that would have an advantage to those that haven't installed controls or don't have them operational yet,” the source notes.
Environmentalists' Activity
Meanwhile, environmental groups are openly planning to vastly expand their litigation activity if Trump follows through on pledges to roll back rules. John Walke of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) told National Public Radio Nov. 29 that the group's strategy will be: Sue, baby, sue. "We and other citizen groups will go to court, and the courts will overturn those actions."
Walke added that NRDC and former Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) examined court rulings during the George W. Bush and Obama administrations, and found that environmental groups suing the Bush EPA over efforts to relax rules were far more successful than industry groups suing the Obama EPA over claims that rules were too stringent.
Walke highlighted a blog post he wrote about the findings in 2013 but acknowledges it does not capture any rulings since then, during most of Obama's second term.
But by NRDC's count at the time, environmental groups challenging the Bush EPA won 27 cases and lost 11. The most significant is probably Massachusetts v. EPA, the landmark 2007 Supreme Court case rejecting the Bush administration's refusal to regulate GHGs under the Clean Air Act. They also blocked its power plant mercury trading rule and had mostly success in fighting efforts to scale back new source review (NSR) permit requirements for utilities and refineries.
At the same time, industry had won just five of 15 suits it brought against the Obama EPA. That excludes most of Obama's second term and also omits a key pending decision over the CPP from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Walke argues that court knows the Clean Air Act and is committing to upholding it.
CPP Ruling
Environmentalists hope the D.C. Circuit will issue a ruling in that case, West Virginia, et al. v. EPA, et al., prior to Trump's inauguration Jan. 20.
But the former DOJ official predicts that the D.C. Circuit will not rule before then and will grant an expected Trump request to hold the case in abeyance so the new administration can review the suit or seek remand to review the rule, given the court's past history in deferring to an incoming administration.
While noting there is no other case with an identical history, the source adds, “It is discretionary with the court. The D.C. Circuit is very cautious about issuing what might turn out to be an advisory opinion,” which the source defines as an opinion regarding a rule that no longer has the support of the implementing agency and is likely to be scrapped.
The source thinks conservative judges on the court are “foot dragging to ensure a ruling is not ready” by Jan. 20.
However, 10 judges on the full court heard six hours of arguments in late September -- what another industry source called “a lot of water under the bridge” -- and may be reluctant to simply decline to issue a ruling.
The DOJ source also points to unpredictable twists and turns of past transitions to warn against foretelling the future for a specific regulation.
For example, the source points to the then-incoming Obama administration's request to the D.C. Circuit to remand the Bush EPA's 2008 ozone NAAQS, a request the court granted to allow EPA to begin strengthening it. But then Obama forced the agency to abandon that effort, and EPA ended up successfully defending the Bush-era rule in court even though then-Administrator Lisa Jackson initially called it “legally indefensible.”
'Law-and-Order' Stance
Also, this source predicts the Trump administration will scale back its civil environmental work in favor of criminal prosecutions because “Republican presidents tend to be law-and-order candidates, as do their DOJ appointees.”
In that vein, the source expects Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), whom Trump has nominated for attorney general, to direct ENRD to launch “some high-profile criminal environmental cases” to address “those law-and-order constituents and also give some bona fides to their environmental credentials.”
Such high-profile cases “can make a difference even under streamlined environmental rules,” the source notes.
However, the former OECA official does not expect a decline in either civil or criminal enforcement, and expects both to “continue apace at least for some time.”
The source says there are several pending EPA cases at DOJ, “which, absent an extraordinary order that I've never seen issued, requiring 'pens down,' will continue” to move forward.
This source says that, historically, DOJ has “stayed above the political fray, and that given the individuals who are responsible for the transition effort” at ENRD -- which include Ronald Tempas and Tom Sensonetti, both former ENRD heads under Bush whom the source calls “steeped in DOJ tradition” -- active enforcement should continue.
Also, the source downplays the notion that Republican administrations are more law-and-order oriented than Democratic ones. GOP administrations generally tend to leave enforcement officials alone, while Democratic ones can be “in many ways worse than Republicans in the sense that they view enforcement as a policy tool,” the source adds.
Still, the source expects a Trump DOJ to be averse to bringing some categories of cases, such as those against the oil and gas industry over methane emissions, while sharpening a focus on enforcing traditional criteria pollutant violations.
The only time a Republican administration sought to have enforcers put pens down was a widely panned effort by then-Vice President Dick Cheney to halt NSR enforcement under the Bush EPA -- an effort this source says were largely successfully fended off not just by citizen suits by also by OECA and ENRD career staff.
'Nobody Knows'
The source describes a “pitched battle” between Cheney's office and enforcers over bringing NSR cases limited to facilities that increased capacity, and then “we found a whole bunch of those cases” and brought them anyway.
One major caveat to this source's expectations is that “nobody knows” what Trump might or might not do.
Also, the law firm Hogan Lovells released a Nov. 10 assessment of environmental policy under the Trump administration that seeks to downplay significant shifts on enforcement. “Bureaucratic inertia and pre-existing caseloads will prevent any changes in enforcement from kicking in immediately,” the analysis says. “DOJ has hundreds of pending civil and criminal cases and investigations for environmental violations. From both a political and legal perspective, it would be impracticable to dismiss all such cases.”
However, the firm notes that future enforcement priorities will be shaped by the political appointees yet to be named but that those nominees would be expected to be more sympathetic to the regulated community and may address a long-standing industry complaint over using consent decrees to set de facto regulatory standards.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/sources-debate-strength-trump-climate-environmental-enforcement
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