Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 1/3/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) These Indicators Show the Bull Market Has More Room to Run in 2017
Jan 2, 2017 | GuruFocus
By Chris Mydlo
Although the S&P 500 is overvalued by P/E (current: 25.76, average: 15.63) and Shiller P/E (current: 27.9, average 16.7) measures, the market still has more upside according to the two economic indicators that I monitor, the Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB)... -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Review of New Chemicals Slows
Jan 2, 2017 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
It’s been six months since Congress made major changes to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the law that governs the use of chemicals in industrial and household products in the U.S. -
(ACC Mentioned) California to Uphold Chloroform Prop 65 Listing
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California’s Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee (Dartic) has determined that chloroform continues to meet developmental toxicity criteria for listing under Proposition 65. -
California Agency Revises Priority Products Proposal
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
California’s Safer Consumer Products (SCP) programme has issued a revised proposal to list children’s foam-padded sleeping products containing the flame retardants TDCPP or TCEP as a priority product. -
Agencies Focus in 2017 on New Ways to Predict Chemical Harms
Jan 3, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A report advising federal agencies about ways they could use automated, computer-modeled and other new ways to predict chemical toxicity and exposure will be released by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Jan. 5, the academies announced Dec. 29. -
US Agency Announces Alternative Methods, Zebrafish Webinars
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) has announced an upcoming webinar for the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (Iccvam) and a webinar series on zebrafish. -
US Agencies Release Status Report for Crumb Rubber Study
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Three US federal agencies have released a status update on their ongoing effort to evaluate the safety of recycled tyre crumb, used in athletic fields and playgrounds. -
US EPA Received 147 PMNs in November
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA received 147 pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) in November. Of these, 47 had the manufacturer or importer withheld as confidential business information (CBI). -
NGOs File Lawsuit Against CPSC over Phthalate Rule
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
Three NGOs have filed a lawsuit to compel the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to finalise a rule banning five phthalates in children’s products. -
Battle Begins over Major GOP Reform Push
Jan 3, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
As the 115th Congress kicks off this week, Republicans plan to immediately flex their muscles by deploying a host of legislative tools aimed at attacking an array of Obama-era regulations — from the Clean Power Plan and the Clean Water Rule to elements of bedrock environmental laws... -
Cramer Pushing to Combine DOE, EPA
Jan 3, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Northey
A congressman who has advised President-elect Donald Trump wants to move U.S. EPA under the Energy Department to dilute the influence of national environmental groups. -
States Brawl over EPA Rule's Future
Jan 3, 2017 | E&E Power Plays
By Emily Holden
States divided over U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan are sparring about how easy it will be for President-elect Donald Trump to rescind the power-sector climate regulation. -
EPA Pushes Deadline for Decision on Maryland Emissions Request
Jan 3, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The EPA is using flexibility built into the Clean Air Act to delay a looming deadline for the agency to decide whether to grant a request by Maryland to further control power plant emissions. -
Outlook 2017: European Union Seeks Environmental Progress in Difficult Times
Jan 3, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Union in 2017 will seek to put in place the legislative architecture that will guide its decarbonization efforts through 2030, in a context of increasing political uncertainty caused by the Trump presidency in the U.S. and other potentially disruptive political changes.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) These Indicators Show the Bull Market Has More Room to Run in 2017
Jan 2, 2017 | GuruFocus
By Chris Mydlo
Although the S&P 500 is overvalued by P/E (current: 25.76, average: 15.63) and Shiller P/E (current: 27.9, average 16.7) measures, the market still has more upside according to the two economic indicators that I monitor, the Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB) and the Chicago Fed Financial Conditions Leverage Subindex. If overvaluation alone would cause a market crash, another crash would have happened at some point within the past three to five years. A trigger is needed to change the perception of the market participants. Two likely triggers have been shown to be economic recessions and overly tight financial conditions.
The CAB and leverage subindex were first brought to my attention by GuruFocus founder and CEO, Charlie Tian, during my time as the financial analyst. I have chosen to follow these indicators because of their reliability in predicting recessions and bear markets, and they have not triggered any false positives in the recent cycle such as many other indicators. Although there were two near bear market occurrences in 2011 and 2016, the markets quickly bounced back. Neither of these occurrences triggered any warning signs from the CAB and leverage subindex.
The latest CAB measurement was released on Dec. 20 with a reading of 115.31. The American Chemistry Council released the following statement:
“The Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB), a leading economic indicator created by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), ended the year on a strong note, posting a monthly gain of 0.3 percent and a year-over-year gain of 4.4 percent, a significant improvement over the first half of the year, and a pace not seen since September 2010. All data is measured on a three-month moving average (3MMA). On an unadjusted basis the CAB climbed 0.6 percent in December, and 4.8 percent for the year.”
The CAB is a leading economic indicator derived from a composite index of chemical industry activity. Since 1912, the indicator has given advanced notice of economic peaks with lead times of two to 14 months with a median lead time of eight months. With the reading still increasing, I do not see indications of a recession occurring within the next year. Although the American Chemistry Council does not outline conditions for when to call a recession, I have noticed that a drop of about 5% in the CAB typically precedes a recession or bear market. The 5% drop is what I will be watching for as an advanced recession or bear market warning. The CAB reading is announced monthly on the American Chemistry Council website and charts of the data can be analyzed at GuruFocus in the Economic Data section of the website.
Even with the latest rate increase by the Federal Open Market Committee on Dec. 14, financial conditions are looser according to the leverage subindex. The latest reading from Dec. 23 was -0.86 compared to -0.79 a month earlier, and -0.27 from a year earlier. The more negative the number, the looser the financial conditions are. The leverage subindex of the Chicago Fed Financial Conditions Index consists of debt and equity measures. I am watching for a reading of 1 or higher as a warning sign of a bear market in the near future. With conditions in the negative and getting looser, a bear market is not likely to be in the cards for 2017. The Chicago Fed Financial Conditions Index is updated weekly by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and just like the CAB, the leverage subindex data can be analyzed at GuruFocus in the Economic Data section of the website.
Since the markets are cyclical, the bull/bear market cycle will continue. The CAB and leverage subindex can be used to give advanced warning of the next bear market. A useful tool in determining the magnitude of the next bear market is the Shiller P/E. Nobel Laureate and Yale economics professor, Robert Shiller, created the Shiller P/E. The ratio is calculated by using the annual earnings of S&P 500 companies over the past 10 years, while adjusting past earnings for inflation. During the last market crash of 2008 to 2009, the Shiller P/E dropped from 27.4 to 13.3, a few points below its historical mean of 16.7. A drop from today’s ratio of 27.9 to its historical mean would be a 40% drop in the markets. Since markets tend to overshoot both to the upside and downside, the drop is likely to be a little more, possibly in the 50% range. The Shiller P/E is also tracked at GuruFocus.
Currently, the CAB and leverage subindex is not indicating any hint of an upcoming bear market. In the past, unless the CAB has dropped 5% and/or the leverage subindex has reached a reading of one or higher, market drops have been less than 20% generally required to be labeled a bear market and have quickly rebounded. Once these warning signs have been triggered, look to the Shiller P/E for an indication of how far the markets could drop with an expectation of it dropping below the mean of the ratio. I will be watching for these warning signs and be sure to alert everyone of them. Until then, it’s “game on” with the stock market.
http://www.gurufocus.com/news/469030/these-indicators-show-the-bull-market-has-more-room-to-run-in-2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Review of New Chemicals Slows
Jan 2, 2017 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
It’s been six months since Congress made major changes to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the law that governs the use of chemicals in industrial and household products in the U.S. One unanticipated outcome of the overhaul is a backlog of new chemicals waiting to be reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Chemical manufacturers are up in arms about the delays, claiming EPA’s slowness is impeding their innovation. Firms in some sectors, for example . . .
§ Access to full text unavailable – subscription required.
Story can be found here: http://cen.acs.org/articles/95/i1/EPA-review-new-chemicals-slows.html?type=paidArticleContent
-
(ACC Mentioned) California to Uphold Chloroform Prop 65 Listing
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California’s Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee (Dartic) has determined that chloroform continues to meet developmental toxicity criteria for listing under Proposition 65.
Dartic, which serves as a technical advisory committee to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha), had previously announced plans to reassess the substance’s status as a reproductive toxicant, due to a revision to the regulation upon which the listing was based.
But it upheld the listing status in a five to two vote at a 27 October meeting, despite comments from the American Chemistry Council (ACC) that the weight of evidence did not support its retention on the list.
Oehha accordingly issued a notice that, effective from 23 December, the basis for the listing of chloroform under Prop 65 is the state’s qualified experts mechanism.
Update to section 27000 list of chemicals
Also at the meeting, Dartic voted unanimously to update the section 27000 list of chemicals that have not been adequately tested as required. This is based on information provided by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and the US EPA.
This included adding the following endpoints, for which testing has not been satisfied:
· acid yellow 23 – teratogenicity rat, teratogenicity rabbit;
· bromodiolone – teratogenicity rat;
· chromic acid – oncogenicity rat;
· mineral oil – oncogenicity mouse, teratogenicity rat; and
· tetraglycine hydroperiodide – oncogenicity rat, oncogenicity mouse, reproduction.
And it also called for removing the following chemicals and/or endpoints, as testing has been satisfied:
· sodium fluoride – oncogenicity rat, oncogenicity mouse;
· castor oil, oxidised;
· ethandioic acid; and
· 3-nitrobenzenesulfonic acid, sodium salt.
Lead petition denial upheld
Separately, Oehha stood by its decision to deny a petition calling to list lead as a female reproductive toxicant.
Despite petitioners’ request for reconsideration in this matter, the agency said that such an exercise would be “unnecessary”, because lead is already listed as a reproductive toxicant. The more specific designation of a chemical as causing developmental, male or female reproductive toxicity is included on the list for informational purposes only, it said, and not required.
“Establishing a precedent for the reaffirmation of the listing of chemicals would divert Oehha’s time and attention from other important Proposition 65 duties, and would not further the purposes of the law,” it said in its denial.
Safe use determination for DINP occupational exposure in vinyl flooring
The agency has also issued a safe use determination (SUD) for professional flooring installer exposures to diisononyl phthalate (DINP) in vinyl flooring products.
It says such products containing 8.7% or less DINP by weight is at or below the no significant risk level (NSRL) of 146 micrograms/day. An exposure warning under Proposition 65 would not be required for workers for products meeting this concentration limit.
The SUD was developed at the request of the Resilient Floor Covering Institute (RFCI). It applies to non-textile vinyl flooring products used in residential, commercial and institutional buildings.
DINP was listed under Prop 65 as a chemical known to the state to cause cancer, effective since December 2013.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51883/california-to-uphold-chloroform-prop-65-listing
-
California Agency Revises Priority Products Proposal
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
California’s Safer Consumer Products (SCP) programme has issued a revised proposal to list children’s foam-padded sleeping products containing the flame retardants TDCPP or TCEP as a priority product.
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) says that the draft has been amended in response to stakeholder input.
The update addresses errors and omissions and clarifies:
· the description of covered products;
· the hazard traits and toxicological endpoints; and
· the designation of the candidate chemicals – tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP) and/or tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP) – as the chemicals of concern for the priority product.
Comments on the updated proposal will be accepted between 28 December and 12 January.
The consultation joins several ongoing stakeholder engagement processes under the SCP.
The DTSC is seeking feedback on its draft alternatives analysis guidance. The agency recently extended the public comment period to 3 February; it is hosting a 10 January webinar to discuss the draft.
And two workshops are scheduled in January to discuss potential future priority products. These are:
· aquatic monitoring and hazard traits of NPEs and triclosan on 11 January; and
· perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) on 31 January.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51884/california-agency-revises-priority-products-proposal
-
Agencies Focus in 2017 on New Ways to Predict Chemical Harms
Jan 3, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A report advising federal agencies about ways they could use automated, computer-modeled and other new ways to predict chemical toxicity and exposure will be released by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Jan. 5, the academies announced Dec. 29.
Chemical and other manufacturers are interested in new chemical screening approaches, because they can offer a quick way to evaluate many different chemicals prior to development . These methods also can provide a scientific justification to apply data from one chemical to another similar compound, saving money and animal lives lost from redundant tests.
Emerging chemical screening tools include computer models that predict how diverse chemical structures would move through, interact with, and move out of the body; automated cellular, genetic, metabolic and other tests; measurements of chemicals in human urine or other biological samples; and mining data about which chemicals are in different types of consumer products.
Upcoming Webinars
Jonathan Samet, a pulmonary physician and epidemiologist teaching at the University of Southern California who chaired the National Academies’ committee that prepared the forthcoming report, “Incorporating 21st Century Science Advances into Risk-Based Evaluations,” will discuss the panel's advice during a Jan. 6 webinar.
The Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and National Toxicology Program requested the report.
The agencies sought advice on how to integrate the results of new chemical screening technologies into traditional human health risk assessments.
They also asked the academies’ panel to offer advice on ways they could clearly explain the data to regulators, communities, consumers and other interested parties.
In addition to the report, the National Toxicology Program and an interagency committee announced in the Dec. 29 Federal Register webinars they'll host in the new year addressing different aspects of emerging toxicity tests.
The interagency committee's Jan. 24 webinar will discuss new sources of chemical toxicity information generally and limits to its use (81 Fed. Reg. 96,025).
The toxicology program's webinar series will focus on improving data generated using zebrafish, a rapid-growing, tiny fish that can be used to detect whether a chemical affects the fish's development (81 Fed. Reg. 96,024).
Future of Chemical Safety Analyses
The Environmental Protection Agency welcomes emerging chemical screening technologies, Jim Jones, outgoing assistant administrator of chemical safety and pollution prevention told Bloomberg BNA in a recent interview.
The approaches “aren't mature by any stretch, but that's where the future is,” said Jones, who will depart with the Obama administration.
The EPA's Pesticides Office recently illustrated the agency's interest in new chemical evaluation methods by announcing Dec. 20 a voluntary, pilot initiative aimed at eliminating experiments in which laboratory animals are exposed to high concentrations of pesticide formulations for short durations.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=102731361&vname=dennotallissues&fn=102731361&jd=102731361
-
US Agency Announces Alternative Methods, Zebrafish Webinars
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) has announced an upcoming webinar for the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (Iccvam) and a webinar series on zebrafish.
The Iccvam webinar, "Incorporating chemical information: resources, limitations and characterising the domain of applicability for 21st century toxicity testing", will take place on 24 January.
Its focus will be on the structural and functional diversity of chemicals, used in developing and validating alternative approaches to traditional in vivo toxicology test methods. It will also include discussion of next generation chemoinformatics techniques and examine case studies where these have been successfully applied.
A separate webinar series, "Using informatics to improve data analysis of chemical screening assays conducted in zebrafish", begins on 4 February. The series aims to address the lack of harmonisation in several key protocol components which has “hinder[ed] the broader adoption of the zebrafish model for toxicological screening”.
The NTP has laid out the following agenda:
· webinar 1 (2 February): introduction to zebrafish screening, including an overview of the Systematic Evaluation of the Application of Zebrafish in Toxicology (SEAZIT) programme;
· webinar 2 (16 February): ontologies 101; and
· webinar 3 (2 March): a review of relevant ontologies and application of reasoners.
All webinars are open to the public, but registration is required.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51888/us-agency-announces-alternative-methods-zebrafish-webinars
-
US Agencies Release Status Report for Crumb Rubber Study
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Three US federal agencies have released a status update on their ongoing effort to evaluate the safety of recycled tyre crumb, used in athletic fields and playgrounds.
The joint initiative by the EPA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) comes in response to growing concern over the safety of the “crumb rubber”.
The material has been found to contain heavy metals, carbon black, benzothiazole, and other substances of potential concern. And although studies to date have not shown an elevated health risk, the agencies say that these “have limitations and do not comprehensively evaluate the concerns about health risks from exposure”.
The 30 December status report includes the final appraisal of peer-reviewed literature and data gaps analysis report, covering some 90 references.
It also describes the progress to date on the agencies’ efforts on:
· the characterisation of the chemicals found in tyre crumb;
· exposure scenarios;
· research to better understand how children use playgrounds containing it; and
· stakeholder outreach.
Regarding the chemicals' characterisation, laboratory analyses are underway to measure the amounts of volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) and semi-volatile organic chemicals (SVOCs) emitted from tyre crumb rubber samples, under different temperature conditions. The study will include bioaccessibility measurements to better understand how the substances may be absorbed in the body.
Microbial pathogens are also being evaluated.
Analysis of the samples collected from fields and recycling facilities, and the exposure characterisation component of the study, will continue in the new year. Results are expected before the end of 2017.
A CPSC playground study is also ongoing.
Meanwhile, states and localities continue to adopt bans on the installation of crumb rubber-infilled fields.
The EU, too, has begun to focus on the material. Echa issued a call for evidence in November, despite a Dutch agency recently determining that the adverse health effects from its use are “negligible”.
California synthetic turf study meeting
Separately, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has tentatively scheduled the next meeting of its synthetic turf scientific advisory panel for 10 March.
The panel is providing input on the agency’s study assessing the potential health impacts associated with the use of synthetic turf and playground mats made of crumb rubber.
This will focus on identifying chemicals that may be released, and on estimating exposures to users of synthetic turf fields. The agency is also exploring the feasibility of a future biomonitoring study to measure exposures to chemicals.
The panel meeting will be open to the public and webcast.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51886/us-agencies-release-status-report-for-crumb-rubber-study
-
US EPA Received 147 PMNs in November
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA received 147 pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) in November. Of these, 47 had the manufacturer or importer withheld as confidential business information (CBI).
The number of new substance notifications represents a sharp rise compared with the 54 received during the same timeframe in 2015. However, 87 of those submitted were halogenated benzoic salts or acids from a single organisation.
The agency also received 19 notices of commencement (NOCs).
The new substances join a large number of PMNs still awaiting agency review.
In a mid-December hearing on its new substances programme, the EPA heard complaints from industry groups that it has only made final determinations on 27 substances – and interim conclusions on 172 others – out of the hundreds currently pending.
-
NGOs File Lawsuit Against CPSC over Phthalate Rule
Jan 3, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
Three NGOs have filed a lawsuit to compel the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to finalise a rule banning five phthalates in children’s products.
The Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform and the Breast Cancer Fund filed the suit on 6 December in New York City. It comes a few weeks after the NRDC wrote a letter to CPSC Chairman Eliot Kaye, requesting the agency issue a final rule by the end of the calendar year.
The commission issued a proposed rule in late 2014 to ban five phthalates in children’s toys, at levels greater than 0.1%. These were:
diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP);
di-n-pentyl phthalate (DnPP);
di-n-hexyl phthalate (DnHP);
dicyclohexyl phthalate (DCHP); and
diisononyl phthalate (DINP).The proposal was issued at the recommendation of the Chronic Hazard Advisory Panel (CHAP), following its final 2014 report on the health effects of certain phthalates, and phthalate alternatives, in children’s toys and childcare articles.
The CPSC was required to publish the final rule within 180 days of the CHAP’s report on 14 January 2015. But the lawsuit states that the agency has missed this deadline by almost two years.
The complaint alleges that the commission's delay “exposes the public to serious health risks from exposure to harmful chemicals”.
“Plaintiffs bring this case to compel the agency action required by law,” it says.
If finalised, the five phthalates would join DEHP, DBP and BBP in being banned in children's products. Interim bans are in place on DIDP, DnOP and DINP – the lattermost of which would be made final by adoption of the proposed rule.
Manufacturers of children's toys, subject to these phthalate bans, are required to complete third-party testing verifying compliance. Industry groups have long been critical of the burden that this imposes in scenarios where the chemicals are known not to be present.
Earlier this year, the CPSC proposed to eliminate phthalate testing requirements for four common plastics where restricted phthalates are unlikely to occur. But at least one NGO has expressed concern that in the absence of further testing for their presence in the plastics, third-party testing should remain in place.
The CPSC autumn semiannual regulatory agenda includes final rules for both the phthalates ban and the third-party testing revision.
While the lawsuit aims to speed up the process, US regulatory organisations often avoid making any major rules during a change of presidential administration.
And Congress has called on the CPSC not to issue any complex or controversial final rules during this timeframe.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51887/ngos-file-lawsuit-against-cpsc-over-phthalate-rule
-
Battle Begins over Major GOP Reform Push
Jan 3, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
As the 115th Congress kicks off this week, Republicans plan to immediately flex their muscles by deploying a host of legislative tools aimed at attacking an array of Obama-era regulations — from the Clean Power Plan and the Clean Water Rule to elements of bedrock environmental laws like the Endangered Species Act. Two regulatory rollback measures are already on the agenda.
"It will be some of the most sweeping regulatory reform in decades, and it can be done in a matter of a couple of months," said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), an early supporter of President-elect Donald Trump.
Conservatives argue that there has been an excessive amount of unchecked executive regulations in recent years that are costly, stymie industry initiatives and ultimately provide little benefit to the American people.
"It is our job now to determine the right balance between regulation and free market principles and make sure that our federal government no longer stands between Americans and financial success," Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) wrote in a recent letter.
Democrats and environmental advocates, who are gearing up to fight such attempts, argue that regulations are necessary to protect the environment and human health, saying it's not the number of regulations that matters, but the benefit they accrue.
"People assume that when they go into their supermarket, the food won't kill them, that the toys aren't poisoned, that their cars aren't going to explode, or their cell phones," said Scott Slesinger, legislative director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Without regulations, that's not the case."
Republicans plan to use the Congressional Review Act, budget reconciliation and a host of regulatory reform bills to get the ball rolling.
Passage of the "Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act" will be an early congressional GOP priority. The bill is set to hit the House floor by the end of this week. The Rules Committee is giving members until this morning to submit proposed amendments even though the new Congress has yet to convene.
The House is also slated to vote this week on the "Midnight Rules Relief Act of 2017," which would allow Congress to overturn regulations finalized in the last days of the Obama administration with a single vote.
The bill, to be sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), would bundle final rules under one Congressional Review Act joint resolution of disapproval.
Trump has also vowed to make an overhaul of federal regulation a top priority. Last month, he tapped billionaire businessman Carl Icahn, who is heavily invested in the oil and gas industry, to serve as his regulatory adviser (Greenwire, Dec. 21, 2016).
Trump has said that on his first day in office, he will push a measure that would eliminate two federal rules for every new one.
The controversial "one in, two out" proposal ranks third on his day one to-do list, behind a constitutional amendment to impose congressional term limits and a hiring freeze on all federal employees (Greenwire, Nov. 11, 2016).
Conservative agenda
Emboldened by the prospects of a Republican president and GOP Congress, conservative groups have been pushing an anti-regulatory agenda for months.
The free-market Freedom Partners recently released a how-to guide for rolling back Obama administration regulations, saying the president's 600 major rules have cost the economy over $700 billion in last eight years.
Andy Koenig, the group's vice president of policy, said Congress and Trump should identify all federal regulations that can be repealed during the first 100 days of his administration and subsequently undertake the legislative and administrative process of undoing more tenacious rules.
Koenig said Trump could easily overturn Obama executive orders and memoranda like the new limits on coal mining near waterways and the Paris climate agreement (Greenwire, Dec. 19, 2016).
For other regulations, Koenig recommends the Congressional Review Act, which lawmakers have been eyeing for some time (E&E News PM, Dec. 8, 2016).
The CRA is a legislative tool designed to overturn regulations issued by federal agencies. The CRA was enacted in 1996 and has only been successfully used once. Once a rule is proposed, Congress has 60 days to pass a resolution of disapproval. The resolution must also be signed by the president.
A president is unlikely to nix a rule proposed under the authority of his or her agencies, making the CRA most probable during a transfer of administrations.
Bill Kovacs, senior vice president for the environment, technology and regulatory affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a regulatory reform supporter, said the CRA is tricky because it requires a lot of floor time.
"On the CRA, each one of those is entitled to 10 hours of debate in the Senate. So if you have five of them, you've taken up a week," he said. "That's difficult because [the Obama administration was] pumping out rules like you pump gas; it's going to be very hard for many of those rules to be reviewed."
The Clean Power Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule will be more difficult to repeal than others, Koenig said. He would like to see Trump direct agencies to stop defending these rules in courts if they are challenged.
Otherwise, agencies will have to repeal such regulations by traditional means, which is a lengthy process that can take years.
"President-elect Trump and the new Congress have their work cut out for them," Koenig wrote in the Freedom Partners guide.
"But if they adopt a strategy that both halts pending regulations before they go into effect and roll back the many others that are already hampering our economy, they will be on their way to unleashing the economic, job, and wage growth that has been far too meager for the last eight years."
The conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute has also floated proposed reforms, calling on the administration to not only better determine whether a rule's benefits outweigh costs but also to downsize or eliminate whole agencies.
In its congressional agenda, the CEI argues that Congress itself has allowed the executive branch to use rulemaking to gain control over a large swath of the economy.
"Congress needs to grapple with the reality that lawmakers themselves are the source of overregulation, and that Congress has relinquished much of its legitimate authority to the executive branch," the CEI wrote.
The report urges lawmakers to hold more oversight hearings, insist that agencies follow the Administrative Procedure Act, flex their muscles in the appropriations process and take advantage of the Congressional Review Act.
Some Republicans have also recommended including environmental rollbacks in a budget reconciliation bill (E&E News PM, Dec. 15, 2016).
Created by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the measure allows Congress to fast-track certain legislation that helps balance the federal budget.
"As far as ... energy and environment, from what I can see, they're going to do whatever they can to repeal regulations," Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said during a media conference call yesterday. But he and other top Democrats said the GOP was focusing more on using reconciliation to scrap the Affordable Care Act, at least for now.
Reforming the system
Republicans not only want to get rid of Obama-era rules, they also want to transform the entire regulatory process, limiting what they see as agency overreach and imbuing Congress with more legislative authority.
"Our body of law is like the failing Articles of Confederation," Philip Wallach, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said at a recent regulatory reform roundtable hosted by Common Good.
He said Congress is being marginalized in the legislative process, emboldening agencies with the authority to interpret laws with impunity. Congress, he said, needs to reassert itself.
"Make Congress great again," he said.
To this end, the GOP has, over the years, repeatedly introduced several regulatory reform bills with little movement. Now, with a Republican White House and Congress, there is renewed hope.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said the "REINS Act" — sponsored in the previous session of Congress by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rep. Todd Young (R-Ind.), who was elected to the Senate in November — would get an early push (Greenwire, Nov. 29, 2016).
The bill, H.R. 427 in the last Congress, would require any agency rule with more than a $100 million economic impact to be approved by both chambers of Congress before taking effect.
"The primary value of this type of reform is that it increases accountability for major policy decisions and by forcing members of Congress to take responsibility for the power that agencies exercise," said Jonathan Adler, professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.
Trump has said he supports reforms like the "REINS Act," and while these kinds of measures have passed the House a number of times, the Senate has been a roadblock, and with the GOP sitting on a relatively slim 52-48 majority in the upper chamber, they may not fare much better there in the new Congress.
"All these proposals will lead to the art of no deal, because you're not going to get any Democratic support," Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute, said at the regulatory roundtable.
Still, McCarthy said a number of moderate Senate Democrats from red states who are up for re-election in 2018 may be willing to cross the aisle on these measures. In all, Democrats are defending 10 seats in states that Trump carried in November (E&E Daily, Nov. 10, 2016).
While regulatory reform advocates argue the "REINS Act" is merely a procedural change that provides additional oversight, opponents caution that procedure is substance. They argue these bills are designed to impede the regulatory state altogether, effectively preventing the implementation of any new rules.
"What it results in is basically absolute paralysis of the regulatory system of any future rulemaking in any area," David Goldston, NRDC's director of government affairs and the former chief of staff of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, said at a recent reporter roundtable.
Other regulatory reformers favor the "Regulatory Accountability Act," H.R. 185 in the last Congress, which would effectively amend the decades-old Administrative Procedure Act by requiring the most costly of rules to undergo more stringent agency analysis.
"For Congress to be a real check on agency overreach, it needs to reclaim its full legislative authority by establishing clear standards for agency rulemaking and court review of the regulations," Kovacs said.
Opponents of the bill argue it would impose complex and pointless requirements on EPA and other agencies, allowing rules to be tied up in court endlessly.
"The trick with those sorts of bills is they seem pretty innocent, just tweaking the process, but what they're intended to do is slow or stop the process altogether," said Lisa Gilbert, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch division.
Not so fast
While Republicans have talked a big game, analysts say regulatory rollbacks and reform will be an uphill battle.
The Congressional Review Act can only be applied to regulations released on or after June 13 (Greenwire, Dec. 21, 2016), the scope of what can be included in a reconciliation bill is limited (Greenwire, Dec. 13, 2016), and Republicans might lose interest as other legislative priorities emerge.
"It would not surprise me if some Republicans thought this was a great idea when there was a Democrat in the White House but are now less enthusiastic. Unfortunate, but understandable," said Adler, who has testified before Congress in support of the "REINS Act."
James Goodwin, senior policy analyst with the Center for Progressive Reform, said passage of these kinds of bills would also add considerably to Congress' workload, another possible deterrent.
"Congress doesn't have the floor time to deal with this stuff, and frankly they don't have the expertise to deal with this stuff," he said. "There's a reason agencies are charged with fleshing out the details on these things. Agencies hold the expertise."
William Buzbee, an environmental law professor at Georgetown University, pointed out that most bills proposing regulatory reform face filibuster threats under current Senate rules. Additionally, much of the work being done to combat climate change is happening on a state level.
"Climate denialists in charge of the executive branch cannot halt energy and technological transformations already underway, especially when those are a result of state policies and are linked to private innovations," he wrote in a New York Times op-ed last month.
Practical hurdles aside, environmental and regulatory advocates will be pulling out all the stops to impede the GOP agenda.
In addition to working against confirmations like Trump's pick to lead EPA, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R), NRDC's Goldston said his team plans to attempt to mobilize the American people.
"As we've been saying since the election, we're going to take this case to the public and to Congress and when needed to the courts," he said. "And there will be a public backlash that will lead Congress and hopefully the administration as well to decide to spend their political capital elsewhere."
Reporter Hannah Hess contributed.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/01/03/stories/1060047715
-
Cramer Pushing to Combine DOE, EPA
Jan 3, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Northey
A congressman who has advised President-elect Donald Trump wants to move U.S. EPA under the Energy Department to dilute the influence of national environmental groups.
Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) in a six-page policy paper shared with Trump's transition team pitched the combination of DOE and EPA to create the Department of Energy and Environment.
"Certainly, it would be more difficult for EPA to issue regulations based on energy and pollution-control technologies that are not yet commercialized," Cramer wrote. "Merged with strategic energy policy and technology considerations, U.S. environmental policy making would become more rational and less influenced by environmental special interests like the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Sierra Club."
Cramer in an email said he wasn't sure if the proposal was actively being discussed within Trump's transition team. "It's just one of many thoughts I shared regarding efficiencies in national energy policy," he said.
The two agencies currently have very different missions. DOE aims to promote new energy technologies through research and development, and it oversees the nation's nuclear stockpile and a massive cleanup effort at former weapons production sites. EPA, on the other hand, is charged with writing and enforcing critical laws to protect human health and the environment.
Combining the federal agencies, Cramer argued in the policy paper, is more realistic than trying to gut EPA, a move that Trump has publicly supported.
Most legal experts, the congressman said, reject the notion that EPA can be disbanded by the White House because presidential authority to reorganize the agency hasn't been renewed since President Nixon created the agency via executive order. Cramer added that obligations like the Clean Air Act would still require EPA action and that scrapping the agency would face intense public and political opposition.
Republicans have unsuccessfully attempted to consolidate EPA and DOE in the past. In 2012, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) introduced H.R. 4295, the "Consolidate Heavy-handed and Outdated Programs Act," to consolidate the agencies. Blackburn's bill mirrored sister legislation in the upper chamber from Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.).
Burr and Blackburn were both early Trump supporters, and Blackburn is assisting with the transition effort.
Cramer criticized DOE as a "risk-averse organization" interested in protecting its budget, the civil service system and "special interests" like the wind industry that lobby the agency.
"Instead of focusing its R&D budget on innovative, potentially breakthrough projects that are deemed too risky for the private sector, DOE often uses taxpayer dollars to subsidize industry for what it would do anyway," he wrote. "In short, U.S. R&D policy is broken."
Cramer in the policy paper called for reorganizing DOE to ensure research dollars are allotted by results, not technology type, as well as a 100-day action plan that calls for lifting all restrictions on energy exports, reducing energy monopolies like OPEC, and ensuring policies related to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve don't harm the private sector.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/01/03/stories/1060047717
-
States Brawl over EPA Rule's Future
Jan 3, 2017 | E&E Power Plays
By Emily Holden
States divided over U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan are sparring about how easy it will be for President-elect Donald Trump to rescind the power-sector climate regulation.
hirteen states and the District of Columbia wrote to Trump last week urging him not to fight the rule, saying it "builds on successful strategies that states, local governments and the power sector have used to cost effectively cut greenhouse gas emissions from power plants."
Responding to a Dec. 14, 2016, letter from 24 of the state attorneys general challenging the regulation, the EPA-supporting states said it won't be so simple to unravel the Clean Power Plan.
The suing states had asked Trump to pursue several strategies to nix the rule, including withdrawing it from court consideration and issuing an executive order prohibiting EPA from enforcing state carbon standards (E&E News PM, Dec. 15, 2016).
"To be plain, disagreements over the legality of the Clean Power Plan (or any similar rule) will have to be resolved by the judiciary one way or another," the supporting states said.
They contend that any executive order against the rule will not stand up in court.
Congress will soon begin high-profile confirmation hearings for Trump's Cabinet picks, who could have a hand in undoing regulations and determining U.S. international dealings on climate change. Democrats have promised to put up a fight against both Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson and EPA choice Scott Pruitt, according to The Washington Post. They have little hope of stopping the nominations but may be able to draw out the process and garner public attention.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold a two-part hearing with Tillerson, Exxon Mobil Corp.'s chief executive, on Jan. 11. Democrats will press him on his business dealings with Russia and demand that he release his tax returns, the Post reported.
Read more about Tillerson and Pruitt here and here.In case you missed it
· Last year's climate progress may not survive 2017 (Climatewire, Dec. 23, 2016).
· Trump could be in a position to reshape U.S. environmental law (Greenwire, Dec. 19, 2016).
· Power companies see no change in their trajectory under Trump (Energywire, Dec. 19, 2016).
· Opponents of EPA's standards for new power plants are seeking a court delay while they wait to see what Trump does (Greenwire, Dec. 19, 2016).
· Californians distressed by Trump's win want the state's climate leadership to be an avenue to assert independence from the federal government (Climatewire, Dec. 19, 2016).
· The Republican governor of Massachusetts released a proposal to curb greenhouse gases (Climatewire, Dec. 21, 2016).
· EPA stopped working on its carbon trading guidance for the Clean Power Plan but released the draft so far (Greenwire, Dec. 19, 2016).
· Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), Trump's pick for director of the Office of Management and Budget, could slash the federal workforce (Greenwire, Dec. 19, 2016).
http://www.eenews.net/interactive/clean_power_plan/column_posts/1060047716
-
EPA Pushes Deadline for Decision on Maryland Emissions Request
Jan 3, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The EPA is using flexibility built into the Clean Air Act to delay a looming deadline for the agency to decide whether to grant a request by Maryland to further control power plant emissions.
While the EPA issued a 2016 update to its Cross-State Air Pollution rule to control utility sector emissions, Maryland said in a November petition that more must be done to help the state come into compliance with the 2008 ozone standards of 75 parts per billion.
Maryland's petition, filed under Section 126 of the Clean Air Act, asked the EPA to require 36 power plants in Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia to either operate more efficiently or utilize already-installed pollution controls during the summer months, when ground-level ozone concentrations are elevated.
The Clean Air Act gives the EPA 60 days to respond to such petitions, meaning the agency faced a mid-January deadline to respond to Maryland's request. However, the EPA, in a final rule scheduled for publication Jan. 3, is extending that deadline until July 15.
The EPA said it needed more time to complete a technical review of Maryland's request and follow through with a full notice-and-comment rulemaking process. The agency used its authority under Section 307(d)(10), which allows for the EPA to extend a deadline if more time is needed to fulfill procedural rulemaking requirements, to push back its deadline for the Maryland petition.
Ben Grumbles, Maryland's Secretary of the Environment, said in a Dec. 30 statement e-mailed to Bloomberg BNA that the state looks forward to working with the incoming Trump administration, affected states and the Ozone Transport Commission on the issue. “This is a priority concern for many downwind states,” Grumbles said. “Maryland will continue to rely on science and collaboration to improve air quality for our citizens and neighbors.”
The EPA received several Section 126 petitions from states in mid-Atlantic and northeast in 2016, including three petitions from Delaware. The agency Dec. 29 opted to extend its deadline for responding to a Delaware petition seeking federal action against Pennsylvania's Homer City Generating Station, a coal-fired power plant operated by NRG Energy Services.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=102731355&vname=dennotallissues&fn=102731355&jd=102731355
-
Outlook 2017: European Union Seeks Environmental Progress in Difficult Times
Jan 3, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Union in 2017 will seek to put in place the legislative architecture that will guide its decarbonization efforts through 2030, in a context of increasing political uncertainty caused by the Trump presidency in the U.S. and other potentially disruptive political changes.
The 28-country bloc also will move forward with various waste management and circular economy initiatives, including publication of a strategy on the prevention and handling of plastic waste.
The decarbonization effort will include measures on emission reductions for all sectors of the economy, as well as measures on renewable energy and energy efficiency, which together should add up to a 40 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2030 compared to 1990.
A 40 percent reduction is the commitment the EU has made under the 2015 Paris Agreement, under which global warming should be limited to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels, and preferably should be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Trump Looms Large
The Paris Agreement could be undermined by incoming U.S. President Donald Trump, however, who has said he will take the U.S. out of the United Nations-negotiated agreement, although he has an “open mind” about the agreement.
Patrick ten Brink, director of the Brussels office of the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), said Trump is “the big joker in the pack,” but backtracking by the U.S. on the Paris Agreement could “galvanize the EU to stick to its commitments more forcefully.”
Karin Kadenbach, a center-left European Parliament lawmaker from Austria and a member of the Parliament's environment committee, said, “The EU must remain a global leader in the fight against climate change,” despite the “possible disengagement” by a U.S. Trump administration.
“The ratification of the Paris climate agreement was a turning point towards a smart and sustainable economic growth,” and the EU should “scale up our own targets and deliver a long-term strategy,” Kadenbach said.
British, French Concerns
The EU's environmental agenda in 2017 also could be disrupted by the start of talks about the U.K.'s exit from the EU and by presidential elections in France that will conclude in May.
In France, Marine Le Pen, leader of the right-wing nationalist party Front National, is a possible victor. The Front National party opposes the EU in its current form and believes environmental policies should be decided at the national level and should not result in high costs for industry.
The U.K., meanwhile, said it aims to start by the end of March formal talks on leaving the EU, following the nation's Brexit referendum in June 2016.
Ten Brink said the “Brexit issue is going to change the calculus” for EU countries on some aspects of the bloc's decarbonization strategy, in particular on renewable energy.
There is “high wind potential in the U.K. and low costs,” so other countries might have to do more to compensate for the U.K.'s departure if the EU is to meet a 2030 target for 27 percent of its final energy consumption to be met from renewable sources, ten Brink said.
Brexit could be a “hook for other countries that wish to slow things down,” although it also could give EU countries more freedom in areas that the U.K. has so far blocked, such as potential carbon taxes decided at the EU level, ten Brink said.
Claude Turmes, a Luxembourg Green member of the European Parliament, said “2017 will be a key year” in which countries would make strategic choices about moving to a “new energy world versus the old.”
Despite political uncertainties, the EU should accelerate its decarbonization efforts in 2017, in particular to take advantage of falling renewable energy costs, Turmes said.
Moving Ahead on Emissions Trading
Of the main elements of climate and energy policy to be moved forward by the EU in 2017, talks on the bloc's emissions trading system (ETS) have advanced the most.
The European Parliament should adopt in February its position on a revision of the ETS through 2030. A proposed reform of the system was published by the European Commission, the EU's executive body, in July 2015.
Under the commission's proposal, participants in the ETS, including heavy industry and power companies, would be required to cut their emissions by 43 percent on average by 2030, compared to 2005, in order to contribute to the overall EU emissions cut of 40 percent. This would mean the ETS emissions cap should reduce by 2.2 percent a year after 2020, compared to 1.74 percent at the close of 2016.
Ian Duncan, a British center-right lawmaker who is the European Parliament's lead negotiator on the ETS reform, suggested that the annual emissions cap reduction could be increased after 2023, when a review of the Paris Agreement will take place and an assessment will be made of whether the world is on track to reduce emissions sufficiently to combat dangerous global warming.
Maintaining Predictability
Other lawmakers have proposed amendments that would increase the annual reduction to as much as 4.2 percent. EU countries are likely to resist a cut beyond 2.2 percent a year, however, on the grounds that the emissions reduction should be predictable for companies.
An official from the Council of the EU, which represents the governments of member countries, speaking on condition of anonymity, said because of this, “I wouldn't expect the 2.2 percent to be changed.”
Consequently in the ETS revision, the pace of emission cuts is “not a central part of the discussion,” said Wendel Trio, director of the Climate Action Network Europe, a coalition of advocacy groups.
Instead, the main ETS issues that lawmakers will decide will be the extent to which EU companies covered by the ETS should be compensated to ensure that they are not disadvantaged when compared to non-EU competitors that do not face carbon cuts, in addition to what should be done with surplus carbon permits that have been placed in a reserve.
Trio said surplus carbon permits could end up being canceled because the EU carbon price is low and is likely to remain “extremely low at least until the late 2020s.”
Joined-Up Objectives
After the European Parliament decides its position on the ETS revision, it must start negotiations with the Council of the EU to reach an agreement acceptable to both institutions.
It is unclear if this will be completed in 2017. A final agreement on the ETS could be held up while the Parliament and EU countries discuss the other elements of the EU's 2030 climate and energy strategy, including emissions cuts for parts of the economy not covered by the ETS and a revision of the 2009 EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC).
The commission proposed cuts for non-ETS sectors in July 2016 and the update to the renewables law in November, meaning that substantive discussions on the dossiers in the European Parliament and council will start in 2017, but are unlikely to be completed.
“One of the main questions will be how much governments will want to link all these files with each other,” Trio said.
The proposals on non-ETS emissions, such as those from agriculture, construction and waste, would impose requirements on countries to reduce their emissions from these sectors by as much as 40 percent by 2030, depending on the wealth of each country and its capacity for making cuts.
Trio said countries might seek to offset their targets in different ways, including by looking for relief in other parts of the EU's climate and energy strategy in exchange for taking on higher non-ETS targets. Countries such as Italy and Poland have “voiced very strong concerns about their targets,” Trio said.
He added that “if things are getting linked, it will slow things down,” although “it makes sense” to look at the different parts of the climate and energy strategy “as a coherent proposal.”
Going Circular
The EU also will seek progress in 2017 on measures to make the bloc's economy more circular, through greater resource efficiency and more reuse and recycling of waste.
The commission proposed in December 2015 a package of directives under which EU countries should recycle 65 percent of household waste by 2030. Also under the directives, the recycling rate for packaging materials should rise by 2030 to 75 percent by weight on average, with rates ranging from 55 percent for plastic to 85 percent for glass, paper, cardboard and metals.
Pavel Poc, a Czech center-left lawmaker and vice chair of the European Parliament's environment committee, said decision-making on the proposed targets will be a priority for the environment committee, which will vote on them in early 2017. Thereafter, the committee could opt to start negotiations with the Council of the EU to finalize details of the targets.
As part of its circular economy strategy, the EU also will decide on eco-design measures for products, which are aimed at making categories of products more energy-efficient and easier to reuse or recycle.
Energy efficiency for products overlaps with the EU's climate and energy goals in terms of contributing to a target, which the European Commission proposed Nov. 30, 2016, for the EU to achieve 30 percent energy savings by 2030, measured against expected future energy demand under business-as-usual policies.
One such eco-design measure, which will be decided in 2017, will be on energy standards for heating and air cooling systems and industrial chillers. The proposed regulation also will set nitrogen oxide emission limits for the equipment.
Plastics Plan
The European Commission will add to its suite of circular economy proposals in 2017 with a strategy on plastics.
A commission official who asked not to be named said this will be published in late 2017, will look at the use, reuse and recycling of plastics, and will be a “first real attempt to look at how we use plastics.”
The strategy will overlap to some extent with revisions to recycling rates for packaging materials and seek to reduce the amount of plastic waste going into the oceans, the official said.
The commission also will publish proposals on the reuse of treated wastewater, for example for irrigation or for recharging aquifers. A commission public consultation on wastewater reuse is open through Jan. 27, and a proposal for a regulation setting criteria for wastewater reuse could be published in mid-2017.
The IEEP's ten Brink said there was “more and more debate on the circularity of water use,” and rules on wastewater reuse will have to take into account micro-plastics.
“Most wastewater isn't treated for micro- and nano-plastics,” ten Brink said, and reuse of wastewater in agriculture, for example, could “also pass on plastics to croplands.”
More research is needed to understand if the root systems of crops pick up micro-plastics, or if the plastics remain in the soil, and a lack of understanding on this could hold back the commission's wastewater reuse plans, he said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=102731354&vname=dennotallissues&fn=102731354&jd=102731354
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested