Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 1/4/2017
-
Tillerson Meeting with Congress Ahead of Confirmation Hearing
Jan 4, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By James Osborne
Rex Tillerson, the former Exxon Mobil CEO and President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for Secretary of State, is meeting with members of Congress Wednesday ahead of an expected nomination hearing next week. -
From 'The Possum' to EPA Boss
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
Before he was U.S. EPA administrator-in-waiting or Oklahoma's attorney general, Edward Scott Pruitt was "The Possum." -
Pruitt Begins Capitol Tour Amid Democratic Opposition
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) is making the rounds on Capitol Hill this week in preparation for his upcoming Senate confirmation hearing. -
Senate Chairman Meets Trump’s EPA Nominee
Jan 3, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The new chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee met Tuesday with President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). -
Predictions and Outlook for EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) 2017
Jan 4, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson, Lisa M. Campbell, James V. Aidala, & Charles M. Auer
2016 was full of surprises, two of which will drive much of the agenda for EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) during 2017. -
(ACC Mentioned) Following the Leader
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemistry World
By Phillip Broadwith
Who is responsible for shaping chemical markets? At a dinner with journalists, BASF chief executive Kurt Bock made a comment that caught my attention. ‘When you’re the market leader,’ he said, ‘you also have to take the lead in adjusting capacity.’ -
Target Aims to Remove 'Unwanted Chemicals' From Its Products
Jan 4, 2017 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
Target hopes to eliminate "unwanted chemicals" from Target-brand products sold in its stores in coming years, the retail giant said in its latest set of sustainability goals. -
Synthetic Turf Industry Wants Quick Findings on Crumb Rubber Safety
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US synthetic turf industry has called for swift agency action to publish findings on the safety of recycled tyre infill. -
Niosh Updates Chemical Carcinogen Policy
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Niosh) has updated its chemical carcinogen policy. The update addresses how the agency classifies chemicals as carcinogens, identifies control levels and addresses analytical feasibility. -
Iarc Says 1,2-Dichloropropane is Carcinogenic to Humans
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) has concluded that 1,2-dichloropropane is a Group 1 substance, meaning it is “carcinogenic to humans”. -
U.S. Production Ready to Grow — Analysts
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
U.S. oil and gas production may be on the cusp of an expansion, after suffering months of declines due to the oil price bust, analysts contend in a new research paper. -
US Gasoline Flows May Shift as New Environmental Rules Take Effect
Jan 4, 2017 | Platts Blog
By Keefe Borden
It’s essential for a daily fixture of life in the United States — a morning commute for many working Americans — and for transportation of basic goods in the US. -
Climate: Court Seeks Briefing Format in Suits Over Landfill Methane Rules
Jan 4, 2017 | Inside EPA
A federal appellate court is giving the incoming Trump administration and other litigants until Feb. 2 to propose briefing formats for suits challenging EPA's rules governing methane emissions from new and existing landfills. -
Court Delays Appeal Over Obama’s Fracking Rule
Jan 4, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A federal court on Wednesday delayed oral arguments in the Obama administration’s appeal to reinstate its hydraulic fracturing regulation for federal lands for two months. -
State Panel Puts Fracking Regulations on Hold in Maryland
Jan 4, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
A panel of lawmakers in Maryland has reportedly asked the state Department of the Environment (MDE) to delay implementing rules governing hydraulic fracturing (fracking). -
What We Learned from the False Russian Grid Attack Story
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
The Russian cyberattack on a Vermont power utility that wasn't, in reality, an attack is, however, a cautionary tale about the threats to U.S. infrastructure and conflicting U.S. cybersecurity policies, according to a cross-section of U.S. experts. -
Quote-Unquote: On Science and Trump’s EPA and GHG Regulation
Jan 4, 2017 | Inside EPA
Most of what we quote this week looks to the near future: Arguing the science behind EPA science: Congress readies a debate. -
Trump's EPA Pick Sided with Polluters – Who Gave Millions to His Political Agenda
Jan 4, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Keith Gaby
House Republicans just backed down after trying to curtail the power of their independent ethics office. President-elect Donald Trump’s potential financial conflicts have ethics watchdogs calling on him to divest. -
EPA Starts Comment Period on Texas Haze Plan
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA has published a fresh set of proposed regional haze regulations for Texas, opening a 60-day public comment period on a plan that would require added pollution controls on 14 power plants in the state.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Tillerson Meeting with Congress Ahead of Confirmation Hearing
Jan 4, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By James Osborne
Rex Tillerson, the former Exxon Mobil CEO and President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for Secretary of State, is meeting with members of Congress Wednesday ahead of an expected nomination hearing next week.
Among those with whom Tillerson wimeeting is Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who is leading the Democratic review of the myriad foreign ties Tillerson established over a more than 35-year career at the Irving-based oil giant.
And in a much anticipated meeting, Tillerson is expected to sit down with Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona. McCain, along with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., have raised questions around Tillerson’s relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who McCain called a “thug and a murderer,” last month.
Cardin requested last month Tillerson turn over his last three years of tax returns. In a questionnaire submitted to the Senate committee, Tillerson indicated he would comply with the request but as of Wednesday morning, staff had not received the returns, a senior aide on the committee said.
Cardin is at odds with Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, over the need to review the tax returns. But Cardin will continue to push for the returns’ release, the aide said.
“I think it is an important part of vetting this candidate because he has never made public disclosures of this type, as he has worked at ExxonMobil for his entire career and has never been in public service. Mr. Tillerson was actively engaged with many foreign governments that could become relevant if confirmed as Secretary of State. The Senate has a responsibility to review all relevant documents during the confirmation process,” Cardin said in a letter to Democrats late last month.
Tillerson is already moving ahead in trying to clear up concern around his considerable wealth. Exxon Mobil announced Tuesday Tillerson would relinquish control of $240 million in Exxon stock to comply with conflict of interest regulations.
No date has been scheduled for Tillerson’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But Corker has requested the hearing be held Wednesday, Jan. 11.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/01/04/tillerson-meeting-with-congress-ahead-of-confirmation-hearing/
-
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
Before he was U.S. EPA administrator-in-waiting or Oklahoma's attorney general, Edward Scott Pruitt was "The Possum."
Pruitt, now 48, picked up the nickname as a freshman on the University of Kentucky baseball team in 1986.
"I thought he looked like a possum, so I called him 'The Possum,'" said Billy White, a shortstop who lived down the hall from Pruitt their freshman year. "It kind of stuck. And whenever we talk about him now, somebody brings him up, especially now that he's in the news, we call him 'The Possum' still."
Sam Taylor, an outfielder who was Pruitt's freshman year roommate, recalled Pruitt had "a chiseled face and chin, and had that possum look."
Did Pruitt approve of the nickname? "I don't know whether he liked it or not," White said, laughing. "He had no choice in the matter."
Before he became a politician, Pruitt was a baseball player.
Pruitt — who goes by Scott — was born in Danville, Ky., but grew up in Lexington as the oldest of three siblings. His father, Edward, owned several steak restaurants and a convenience store, and his mother was a homemaker, he told The Oklahoman. Pruitt was a high school baseball star who went on to the University of Kentucky to play Division I baseball.
"He was very competitive, and he had good speed as a baseball player," said Keith Madison, who coached Pruitt at Kentucky. "He was a winner, so that's the kind of thing that attracts coaches to players."
Pruitt ate Little Caesars pizza in his freshman dorm with his teammates and talked constantly about baseball. He wasn't a drinker or a partier like many of his teammates. He spent most of his free time with his then-girlfriend and now wife, Marlyn. His teammates remember him as serious and extremely driven.
"He was a good roommate to me," Taylor said, adding, "We didn't see much of him."
White said Pruitt was quiet for the most part. He "definitely wasn't a guy that went out and screwed around much."
Taylor declined to detail any of Pruitt's bad habits as a roommate. "There might be one or two, but I'm not going to mention them. I think they played tricks on him here and there, but I'm not going to go there. That would be more embarrassing to Possum."
On a team trip to northern Florida during that freshman year, White remembers waking up early one morning to see Pruitt running around by himself in the hotel parking lot with his glove, pretending to field ground balls.
"I was like, 'You've got to be kidding me.' We opened the door and yelled out," White said. "We were like, 'What are you doing out here?' He goes, 'I'm just getting ready.'"
Pruitt, White said, "had a lot of energy, and he was fearless. He wasn't a big guy. I bring that up just because when you're out there playing in athletics, whether it's football, baseball, if you're a smaller guy, you have to have a little bit of an edge to what you're doing. He definitely had an edge. He was going to outwork you, outthink you. Very driven. For 18, he was wound pretty tight that way. Not in a bad way."
But the rookie had some disadvantages. In addition to being smaller than most of his teammates (White guessed he's 5 feet, 8 or 9 inches), he was playing behind All-American second baseman Terry Shumpert, who went on to a 14-year career as a utility player in Major League Baseball.
Pruitt wasn't happy with the limited playing time he got at Kentucky, Taylor said. "He played a game or two, but he wasn't an everyday player," he said.
That was a letdown for Pruitt, his former teammates said. They all wanted to get playing time and get noticed.
"I think we all kind of hoped in the back of our mind that we'd play baseball professionally," White said.
After a year, Pruitt transferred to Georgetown College, a Baptist school in Georgetown, Ky. His junior year, he was invited to tryouts for the Cincinnati Reds.
Pruitt told the Tulsa World, "I thought for sure that I would be drafted."
Life after baseball
So Pruitt's short baseball career ended, although he did have a stint in the 2000s as co-owner of Oklahoma City's minor league team.
He graduated from Georgetown College in 1990 with a degree in political science and communication arts and headed to law school at the University of Tulsa.
He's lived in the Sooner State ever since. "When he came out of school, he wanted to come back to Kentucky, but he had a path already laid out," his mother, Linda Pruitt Warner, told the Lexington Herald-Leader.
Pruitt and his wife and two kids were longtime residents of Broken Arrow, a Tulsa suburb, where they lived on a cul-de-sac in a gated housing development.
They have since moved to Tulsa, where they live in an imposing house in a neighborhood with large, manicured lawns, lofty trees and no sidewalks. There's a sign touting his son's high school football team in the front lawn that's been parched yellow by winter weather. On a recent afternoon, there was a large white pickup parked in the driveway.
David Bringaze, a neighbor of the Pruitts in Broken Arrow, remembers Scott Pruitt walking his dog around the neighborhood and throwing a baseball in the front yard with his son. He recalls Pruitt leaving early in the mornings to make the commute to Oklahoma City. He was a "good neighbor, good guy," Bringaze said.
He added that Pruitt is "more serious than, I would say, funny."
Pruitt kicked off his political career in 1998, when he was elected to the Oklahoma Senate, where he served until 2006. There, he got noticed by advancing conservative legislation on hot-button topics like abortion.
He introduced legislation in 1999 requiring a pregnant woman to notify the father before getting an abortion. He co-authored a separate law that threatened doctors with financial liability unless they notified a minor's parents before performing an abortion. A Tulsa federal judge struck down that law in 2002, the Tulsa World reported.
"Young people 17 and under should not be making these decisions on their own," Pruitt told the newspaper in 2002. "My wife is a school nurse, and she can't give a child an aspirin without a parent's consent, and yet we let them have abortions without notifying their mom or dad."
Bernest Cain, a former Democratic state senator from Oklahoma City, often clashed with Pruitt.
"I think where we got in our biggest conflict is he was always wanting to put Christian principles into the law as he saw them," Cain said. "I'm a Unitarian, and my wife — I had married a Jewish lady — so I was always very sensitive when somebody wanted to get too involved with putting their religious viewpoints into the law."
Cain said he was "completely surprised" and "disappointed" when he heard Pruitt had been selected by President-elect Donald Trump to lead EPA. "Personally, he's a nice enough guy, but he's not a friend of the environment at all," he said.
Progressives in Oklahoma, Cain said, and "there are some of us," have been "going after him" since Trump's announcement. "I think the statement that was sent time and time again was putting the fox in charge of the henhouse," he said.
"He's sure a very calculating person, and he'll do whatever he thinks the political wind is at that time," Cain added.
Pruitt failed several times to move to higher elected offices. He lost two primary battles in a 2001 bid for a U.S. House seat and a 2006 race to become Oklahoma's lieutenant governor.
Undeterred, Pruitt launched a campaign in 2010 to become Oklahoma's attorney general. He won that race and made a name for himself attacking the Obama administration's policies in courts, challenging everything from President Obama's signature health care law to major environmental rules.
His battles against Obama's policies won Republican acclaim and propelled him into the national spotlight. They also brought disdain from Democrats and environmentalists at the state and national levels.
Mark Hammons, chairman of the Oklahoma Democratic Party, called Pruitt "ruthless" and "completely partisan."
Pruitt is a "pure politician," Hammons said. "He wants to stay in politics, get whatever offices he can and, to use the Republican terminology, not really work for a living." Pruitt has often been mentioned as a possible contender when Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) steps down in 2018, but "I think he came to the conclusion that he wouldn't win the Republican primary on that," Hammons said.
The EPA nomination isn't likely to boost Pruitt's profile in Oklahoma politics, Hammons said, but it's a job that will position Pruitt "to curry favors and create a potential financial war chest for an office." He added, "He's just not going to be covered as widely as if he were on the local scene. But he certainly is going to be dealing with entities that have an awful lot of money and ... be seen as doing favors for them and being friends of theirs, and the ability to raise money is certainly a significant factor."
'Strong sense of right and wrong'
Pruitt's favorite drink is coffee, with orange juice coming in at a close second, he told the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association in a 2010 interview.
He's a "big fan of beef," he told the oil group, and he likes Brownies Hamburgers in Tulsa and Nic's Grill in Oklahoma City. For breakfast, he likes to eat raisin bread with almond butter and fruit. He named his dog, Winston, after Winston Churchill.
He grew up listening to Ronnie Milsap's country music and finds Oklahoma's brutally hot summers "pretty tough" to handle.
Apart from baseball and coffee, religion has long been central to Pruitt's life.
He and his family still attend the First Baptist Church of Broken Arrow, a sprawling campus that hosts about 3,000 worshipers on a typical Sunday. Pruitt is a deacon, and his wife, Marlyn, works in the preschool program.
On New Year's Day, the crowd was smaller than usual, said pastor Nick Garland, who's known Pruitt for nearly three decades.
People were out of town for vacation. Bibles in the gift shop were selling for 30 percent off. Elderly couples and some young families were on hand for the early service, where Garland preached from a stage decorated with large wooden Christmas trees and musicians played drums and electric guitar. Song lyrics were displayed on several large screens above the stage so the congregation could sing along.
During his sermon, Garland urged his parishioners to prepare themselves to meet Jesus.
"I don't think I'd be out of line if I were to say I believe everybody in this room would love to see Jesus this year. I think I would be telling the truth," he said. "I'm longing to see the Lord. But we don't just prance into his presence and say, 'Well, here I am.' If it was that easy, we'd see him every day from prancing in. You don't just prance into the presence of the eternal king. I can't prance into the White House to see the president. I can't prance into the governor's office to see the governor. There's clearances have to be made.
"You don't just bound in and say, 'Well, I know you're proud to see me.' Listen, you come in ill-advisedly, you're going to be consumed, because darkness perishes in the presence of light," Garland said.
Pruitt wasn't in church that day, and Garland said he's seen less of him as he's gotten busier with his career.
Still, Garland said, faith is "very much a part of who he is." Pruitt has been a Sunday school teacher and has gone on mission trips to Romania and Israel.
"He's got very clear focus, an extremely strong sense of right and wrong," Garland said. "With him, things are not gray — they're right or they're wrong, they're not in between."
Challenges don't cause Pruitt to retreat, Garland said. "The bigger the challenge, he doesn't say, 'I don't know.' He says, 'Hot dog, let me try this.'" Garland, 65, added, "He's what you'd like to have in a son."
Pruitt has become one of Trump's most controversial nominees since he was designated to become the next EPA boss. Career staffers at the agency fear he's going to unravel the work they've done in recent years, environmentalists warn that he's in the pocket of Big Oil, and Democrats have pledged to make him one of their top targets during the upcoming confirmation battles.
But Garland said Pruitt's faced unfair criticism.
"Sometimes there are people who seem to think that because Scott has stood with oil people and farmers on water issues that for some reason he wants polluted water and he's going to drill a hole everywhere there's not one, and it's just not true," he said. "What Scott hates and what he has stood against is ... the overreach of government to make it very, very crippling for the local farmer or for the person who's trying to work in the oil field, whatever level.
"I just think if they'll give this man a chance, they're going to find out he's a good, strong leader with good principles," he said. "They're going to be pleased."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/04/stories/1060047801
-
Pruitt Begins Capitol Tour Amid Democratic Opposition
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) is making the rounds on Capitol Hill this week in preparation for his upcoming Senate confirmation hearing.
Pruitt met yesterday afternoon with outgoing Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and incoming Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
The nominee and senators did not answer reporters' questions about the content of their discussion or give a date for the start of Pruitt's confirmation hearings.
"We had a good conversation, we did," said Inhofe.
In a statement, Barrasso said he enjoyed meeting with Pruitt.
"We had a good conversation focused on policy and reforms that are necessary at the agency. He has excellent insights on how to help the EPA better meet its mission of protecting the environment while growing the American economy," he said.
While a number of Republicans, including Inhofe, have embraced Pruitt's nomination, Senate Democrats are voicing concerns about how much the fossil fuel industry could influence the potential future head of U.S. EPA (Climatewire, Dec. 22, 2016).
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), along with Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.), sent a letter to Pruitt on Dec. 27, requesting more details about his connections with the oil and gas industry.
"Before the Senate votes to confirm you to run EPA, it is important you provide a full disclosure of your relationship with the energy industry so we can determine how that will influence your ability to run the agency," they wrote.
The letter points to two specific concerns with Pruitt's record. One is his relationship with the Rule of Law Defense Fund, which is a public policy organization focusing on issues important to Republican attorneys general, including "rule of law, federalism and freedom in civil society," according to its website. Pruitt is listed as a board member. Freedom Partners, which provides funding for initiatives supported by the Koch brothers, has given the group $175,000 since 2014, the senators wrote.
They're also concerned about Pruitt's collaboration with the fossil fuel industry in developing positions for the attorney general's office. They note Pruitt's nearly verbatim use of Devon Energy Corp. research in a 2011 letter to then-EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson concerning the agency's method for calculating methane emissions. The letter came to light during an investigation by The New York Times in 2014.
"What that conduct says about your ability to lead EPA in a matter that is not beholden to special or secret interests is a subject that we expect will get a full airing during your confirmation hearing," the letter read.
The senators are requesting detailed financial records related to the Rule of Law Defense Fund's donors and expenditures, the organization's positions on federal and state legislation, and Pruitt's correspondence with the group.
Pruitt has not produced any of the requested documents, according to Whitehouse's office.
It is still unclear when Pruitt will be meeting with most of the members of EPW. Arkansas Republican Sen. John Boozman's office said he would be meeting with Pruitt today, and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) will be meeting with the nominee later this week.
Rounds has said he wants to talk with Pruitt about EPA's process for considering scientific information, as well as the economic burden of EPA's regulations on communities.
"I am concerned that these flaws in the current administration's EPA regulatory process have led to overly-burdensome EPA regulations that are based on incorrect assumptions and do not adequately realize the impacts these regulations have on state and local governments, and American businesses and taxpayers," he said in a letter to Pruitt last week.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/01/04/stories/1060047780
-
Senate Chairman Meets Trump’s EPA Nominee
Jan 3, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The new chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee met Tuesday with President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), whose committee is responsible for considering the nomination, said he “enjoyed” meeting with Scott Pruitt, the current attorney general of Oklahoma who has been an outspoken opponent of numerous high-profile regulations from President Obama’s EPA.
“We had a good conversation focused on policy and reforms that are necessary at the agency,” Barrasso said in the statement. “He has excellent insights on how to help the EPA better meet its mission of protecting the environment while growing the American economy.”
The environment panel is planning to hold a hearing on Pruitt before likely sending his nomination to the full Senate for a vote.
Tuesday’s meeting is a standard step in the confirmation process; Pruitt may meet with other senators, including Democrats on the committee.
Pruitt and Barrasso have generally agreed on the major pieces of Trump’s agenda for the EPA. Both want to repeal the Clean Power Plan, the Waters of the United States rule, the most recent ground-level ozone rule and the methane rules for oil and gas drilling, and both generally want states have more power to regulate on environmental matters.
Barrasso, Pruitt and Pruitt’s home-state Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) posed together for photos in the Senate Tuesday, but did not take questions from reporters.
Inhofe, who chaired the Environment Committee until Tuesday’s handoff, called Pruitt the “ideal candidate” to lead the EPA.
“Pruitt has seen first-hand the abuses of power at the hands of this agency and has fought back to ensure environmental quality without sacrificing jobs.
“Scott is an expert in constitutional law, and understands the fundamental element of balance necessary between the states and the federal government,” Inhofe said, promising to move Pruitt’s nomination “swiftly and fairly” through the Senate with Barrasso.
Democrats and environmentalists have objected strongly to Trump’s choice of Pruitt.
They say he does not endorse the role of the EPA as a national environmental regulator, and warn his plans to roll back major Obama rules would be dangerous to the environment and the climate.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/312585-senate-chairman-meets-with-trumps-epa-nominee
-
Predictions and Outlook for EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) 2017
Jan 4, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson, Lisa M. Campbell, James V. Aidala, & Charles M. Auer
2016 was full of surprises, two of which will drive much of the agenda for EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) during 2017. First, Congress significantly amended the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The changes are intended to reform the program to address the widely recognized deficiencies in the law, especially regarding existing chemicals, chemical testing, Confidential Business Information (CBI) claims, and preemption of state actions. Although many thought the chances of successful TSCA legislation were slim, the second surprise event was even more unexpected -- the election of Donald Trump as President.
What the implementation of new TSCA will look like, along with the general environmental program and emphasis of the new Trump Administration, is very unclear this early in the New Year (the new President will not arrive until January 20). What is more predictable is that the operating environment of OCSPP will change significantly, with uncertain impacts on both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) pesticide and toxic chemical regulatory programs. EPA institutionally may never be the same, and while much of the political debate is likely to concern the climate change issue, all EPA programs will likely see new or different emphasis on how, when, or why to impose any appropriate regulatory controls.
Along with a new Republican President, both the House and Senate remained with Republican majorities. EPA will now be under great pressure to align with the party platform and long-standing calls from Congressional critics to be more flexible and business-oriented in implementing its programs. Current and past policies and interpretations will be under intense scrutiny and likely to change, while Democrats in Congress and environmental advocates who supported Obama Administration policies will resist significant changes. Specific predictions about policies and decisions are purely speculative at this point, but it likely means EPA will be operating in a volatile and often hostile environment (induced by both friends and foes alike).
What is also more predictable is that Non-government Organization (NGO) environmental advocates will need to change their approach in attempting to move their agenda and policy goals away from a now unfriendly Administration. What has happened in the past during a change in Administration like this is that there is a renewed emphasis on litigation and petition challenges to avoid the executive and legislative branches. Advocacy through the judicial branch of government may be slow and uneven, but it will be seen as more likely to be a successful forum.
Operating Environment
Few things can get the attention of federal civil servants more than a promise to eliminate their Agency by the President-elect. Mr. Trump at various times promised to eliminate EPA and change the fundamental direction of the Agency on climate change and, generally, to reduce the regulatory burdens of environmental regulations on businesses. While a new President is unlikely to eliminate EPA, simply stating threats of personnel cuts, a reduced budget, workforce “reform” of changed work conditions or retirement benefits -- initiatives which are also part of the Trump platform -- will have an immediate impact on the EPA operating environment. If budget and personnel cuts are proposed, there will not only be an immediate effect on EPA morale but more specifically could lead to a large increase of staff retirements to avoid proposed changes or even simply to not want to work under the direction of the new leadership.
New Leadership
Mr. Trump has nominated E. Scott Pruitt to be EPA’s next Administrator, who is currently the Attorney General of Oklahoma. Pruitt is on record as opposing the Obama Administration initiatives on climate change and water pollution. For OCSPP, it is not clear what direction any general “stop EPA” rhetoric might mean for the regulation of pesticides and chemicals. Regulated industries will continue to need a credible and competent EPA staff to review and approve applications for both pesticides and new chemicals. The surprise election of Mr. Trump also makes unclear what type of background the new Administration will seek in a new OCSPP Assistant Administrator. Even with an emphasis on being more business friendly, programs will still have to process applications and complete risk assessments.
The regulated community is reported to be informing the incoming leadership on the need for a functional, effective program. Administration-wide initiatives, however, might swamp any pleas for an exception to government-wide budget cuts, personnel policies such as a hiring freeze, or changes to pay or retirement policies. This could be especially impactful on the toxics program, since with the new TSCA amendments there are many new rules and related initiatives that are due to be completed in 2017 and beyond, and the program is to “ramp up” its hiring and contracting budgets to help implement the new law.
Congressional Relations
Similarly, a new Republican President will complement the Republican Congress, a Congress that has been hostile to many EPA initiatives developed under the Obama Administration. This will be more evident in the pesticide program, especially where the pesticide industry has objected to policies regarding changes to the 10x safety factor and the use of epidemiological data in risk assessments, certain changes to the Worker Protection Standard (WPS), and polices to protect pollinators. In recent years, the registrant community has raised concerns about the “science integrity” of EPA decisions, and has lodged complaints about policies that industry believes have been issued or developed without sufficient transparency or requisite notice and comment rulemaking authority. These subjects generally are certain to be the focus of Congressional oversight and policy lobbying of any new EPA leadership team.
Some of these issues will be discussed in more detail below. Taken together, EPA may face a more engaged and involved Congress since the Committee leadership of the authorizing and Congressional Oversight Committees will now assume they will get more deference to their initiatives. For the toxics program, implementation of new TSCA will be the top priority of both Congress and any constituencies.
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/predictions-and-outlook-epa-s-office-chemical-safety-and-pollution-prevention-ocspp
-
(ACC Mentioned) Following the Leader
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemistry World
By Phillip Broadwith
Who is responsible for shaping chemical markets?
At a dinner with journalists, BASF chief executive Kurt Bock made a comment that caught my attention. ‘When you’re the market leader,’ he said, ‘you also have to take the lead in adjusting capacity.’
Bock was talking about BASF’s decision to cut caprolactam production by 20% at its integrated site in Ludwigshafen, Germany. BASF’s caprolactam is predominantly aimed at export to Asia, where there is significant overcapacity owing to what Bock describes as ‘overconfidence’ – lots of new producers entering the market, on the assumption that demand will grow quickly enough for them all to profit. Demand hasn’t kept pace, which pushes down prices and hence profit margins for everyone.
BASF is fairly confident that its production costs are lower than many other producers. So competition theories would suggest that it could sit back and, as Bock puts it, ‘let the other guys bleed, and at some point they will get tired and do the right thing’. But that, he adds, can be agony.
Instead, the company has decided to shoulder the financial burden of closing or reconfiguring its plants, in an effort to ‘send a signal to the market that when times are tough you have to do something’, rather than sitting around wondering who’s going to move first. That decision, Bock says, comes from BASF’s amassed corporate experience. And since BASF will still be producing 400,000 tonnes/year of caprolactam in Ludwigshafen, sacrificing some volume to improve the profit margin on the rest is probably worthwhile.
But that idea of major producers being responsible for guiding behaviour in the wider market got me thinking. The strategy depends somewhat on other producers following BASF’s example. Surely there’s a limit to how much of that kind of responsibility companies are prepared to take on.
Figures from the American Chemistry Council (ACC) suggest that for the last few years, global production capacity across the whole industry has been growing steadily at 2.5–4% per year. But demand growth has not kept pace, so more of those plants are sitting idle (capacity use dropped a couple of percentage points from 2013–16). This trend is set to continue, according to the ACC’s forecasting – particularly in the US, with hundreds of new plants planned to capitalise on shale gas feedstocks.
Those broad-brush figures obviously hide geographical and sector-specific trends, particularly in cyclical basic chemical markets. But the indication is that oversupply is going to become a more common problem. Will this be an opportunity for existing market leaders to flex their muscles, or for new leaders to emerge?
https://www.chemistryworld.com/opinion/following-the-leader/2500155.article
-
Target Aims to Remove 'Unwanted Chemicals' From Its Products
Jan 4, 2017 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
Target hopes to eliminate "unwanted chemicals" from Target-brand products sold in its stores in coming years, the retail giant said in its latest set of sustainability goals.
Chemical Watch reports that the Minnesota-based company issued a recent sustainability update that called for the identification and elimination of hazardous chemicals from its manufacturing processes and in final products.
The company also aimed to encourage "supporting industries" to adopt "green chemistry principles," and called for an expanded list of hazardous substances and an increased focus on transparency.
“More than ever, our guests want to know where their products come from,” Target Sourcing Services president Kelly Caruso told CW.
Target and Walmart — the nation's second-largest and largest discount retailers, respectively — each received the highest grades in a recent study of retail chemical practices by Safer Chemicals Healthy Families.
The advocacy group particularly praised Target's evaluations of supplier transparency and the addition of more product categories — namely cosmetics and personal care products — to its initiative.
Although the group called for additional improvements — including incentives for its suppliers to conform to third-party standards — officials said that the new goals were a good step for the nation's retail sector.
“We look forward to seeing Target disclose additional information on this new initiative and collaborating with them to drive harmful chemicals out of global supply chains,” Mike Schade, who directs the group's Mind the Store campaign, told CW.
http://www.chem.info/news/2017/01/target-aims-remove-unwanted-chemicals-its-products
-
Synthetic Turf Industry Wants Quick Findings on Crumb Rubber Safety
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US synthetic turf industry has called for swift agency action to publish findings on the safety of recycled tyre infill.
The Safe Fields Alliance (SFA) and Synthetic Turf Council (STC) comments came in response to a 30 December status report from three US agencies on an ongoing study evaluating the safety of recycled tyre crumb used in athletic fields and playgrounds.
The industry groups said they “cannot overstate the pressing need for the [EPA] to share clear and concise findings as soon as possible in 2017 in order to provide answers and eliminate uncertainty for parents and policy makers.”
The joint research initiative from 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) was launched in response to consumer concern over the safety of “crumb rubber”, which has been shown to contain a variety of substances of concern.
But the industry groups said that more than 90 scientific studies have already looked at the safety of synthetic turf fields and surfaces with recycled rubber infill, and they pointed to the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment’s (RIVM) recent conclusion on the safety of the material.
The coalitions said they are “confident that the EPA will also ultimately reach the same conclusion: that there are no links to any negative health effects from recycled rubber.
“The science is evident, and it is time for the EPA and other regulatory agencies to bring clarity to the situation,” they added.
Last year, members of the recycled rubber and synthetic turf industries worked to develop an ASTM standard for extractable hazardous metals in infill materials. Member companies of the Recycled Rubber Council, SFA and STC say they will comply with the voluntary ASTM F3188-16 specification, in addition to industry guidelines.
But they said that after nearly a year of study at the federal level, “the cloud of uncertainty is hurting businesses as well as jobs.”
The agencies’ status update indicated that they expect to release findings before the end of 2017.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51933/synthetic-turf-industry-wants-quick-findings-on-crumb-rubber-safety
-
Niosh Updates Chemical Carcinogen Policy
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Niosh) has updated its chemical carcinogen policy. The update addresses how the agency classifies chemicals as carcinogens, identifies control levels and addresses analytical feasibility.
It says that the changes are a result of 40 years of effort, and are intended to reflect advances in science and to provide transparency regarding its assessment and handling of cancer risks.
Notably, the policy will no longer use the term “recommended exposure limit” (REL) for chemical carcinogens. Instead, it will “recommend an initial starting point for control”, called the Risk Management Limit for Carcinogens (RML-CA). This will correspond to the 95% lower confidence limit of the risk estimate of one excess cancer case in 10,000 workers in a 45-year working lifetime.
The policy also notes that – to avoid government duplication – Niosh will evaluate existing cancer hazard assessments completed by such agencies as:
the National Toxicology Program (NTP);
the EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS); and
the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc).
https://chemicalwatch.com/51941/niosh-updates-chemical-carcinogen-policy
-
Iarc Says 1,2-Dichloropropane is Carcinogenic to Humans
Jan 4, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) has concluded that 1,2-dichloropropane is a Group 1 substance, meaning it is “carcinogenic to humans”.
This represents a significant change in the status of the substance declared by the agency. Its previous assessment, published in 1999, put it in Group 3, that is “not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans”.
The substance is used as an intermediate in the production of perchloroethylene and other chlorinated chemicals.
It has a mandatory carcinogen category 1B classification under the EU CLP Regulation. During the consultation, one of the REACH registrants, Dow Deutschland, proposed a less severe category 2 classification but the Risk Assessment Committee deemed this insufficient.
Other substances
In addition to 1,2-dichloropropane, Iarc assessed the following four substances, also widely used as solvents and in polymer manufacture:
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA);
tetrafluoroethylene;dichloromethane; and
1,3-propane sultone.
Tetrafluoroethylene, dichloromethane and 1,3-propane sultone have been moved from Group 2B, “possibly carcinogenic to humans”, the 1999 assessment, to Group 2A, “probably carcinogenic to humans”. Meanwhile, PFOA has been put in Group 2B.
PFOA is on the REACH candidate list for authorisation, making it a substance of very high concern (SVHC). But as a result of being toxic for reproduction and persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) rather than carcinogenic.
In June, US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York) urged the EPA to prioritise a regulatory assessment of PFOA under the new TSCA, the country's recently reformed major chemicals law, citing cancer concerns.
Tetrafluoroethylene does not have a mandatory EU carcinogen classification but dichloromethane does as category 2. It is undergoing substance evaluation under REACH for several hazard endpoints, including carcinogenicity.
1,3-propane sultone has a mandatory carcinogen category 1B classification under EU CLP and is on the candidate list for authorisation on account of carcinogenicity.
The assessments have been published as Iarc monographs, available free online.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51934/iarc-says-12-dichloropropane-is-carcinogenic-to-humans
-
U.S. Production Ready to Grow — Analysts
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
U.S. oil and gas production may be on the cusp of an expansion, after suffering months of declines due to the oil price bust, analysts contend in a new research paper.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration has already reported increasing output from the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. But in a notice yesterday to clients, analysts at Barclays Research see signs in the latest data of renewed life in the shale fields of Oklahoma, Texas and North Dakota. The data suggest to the analysts that U.S. oil production may start to see steady increases again.
Monthly fluctuations in oil production volume data are common. But analysts Michael Cohen and Warren Russell believe EIA's Petroleum Supply Monthly report, issued Friday, shows production increases from key shale oil fields that are material enough to suggest a larger trend.
They note that U.S. oil output expanded by 230,000 barrels a day in October, "the highest level since May 2016."
Past data pointed to the Gulf's offshore production expansion as a key force behind the rising output figures. But this latest report shows upticks in crude flows from major inland shale oil operations offsetting natural declines from conventional oil sources, the report said.
"Production in major tight oil states appears to be stabilizing," the analysts wrote.
Though rigs have been flooding into the Permian Basin of West Texas, North Dakota led the pack in terms of the reported oil production increase in October, as drillers expanded that state's oil production figure by 72,000 barrels a day. Companies in Texas reportedly expanded that month's oil output by 23,000 barrels a day, and by 12,000 barrels a day in Oklahoma.
Later revisions to this data are possible.
The researchers acknowledge that the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska still accounted for half the October increase in U.S. oil output. EIA earlier projected that the addition of new barrels from Gulf offshore projects will likely continue expanding U.S. offshore oil production out to 2019.
There is growing consensus that the oil and gas industry will likely enjoy better business conditions and a modest turnaround in many facets during 2017, so long as oil prices hold above $50 a barrel or move higher.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/04/stories/1060047776
-
US Gasoline Flows May Shift as New Environmental Rules Take Effect
Jan 4, 2017 | Platts Blog
By Keefe Borden
It’s essential for a daily fixture of life in the United States — a morning commute for many working Americans — and for transportation of basic goods in the US.
The US is dependent on gasoline for nearly every aspect of transportation, but the hard reality for the country’s drivers is that its refiners don’t produce near enough to meet demand. Government data shows we now consume about 9.3 million b/d of gasoline nationwide. To offset the shortfall, the US imports about 710,000 b/d of gasoline — more than two cargo ships per day.
But new environmental rules that took effect at the beginning of the year may encourage US refiners to send additional gasoline outside the United States. In addition, many European refiners who send their excess gasoline to the US may instead be sending additional product to West Africa and Latin America.
The US government now requires finished gasoline to average 10 ppm sulfur, from the previous average of 30 ppm. Refiners, both foreign and domestic, must average 10 ppm sulfur or buy credits to offset the difference. The new rule has caused a lot of uncertainty in the gasoline market and many believe it will divert imports that normally come here while encouraging US refiners to send their product elsewhere.
At the moment, most Atlantic Coast gasoline traders consider the arbitrage from Europe closed and say it will likely stay that way until the distribution chain dips further into its stocks.
Thomas Finlon, director of Energy Analytics Group, said the new sulfur requirements for gasoline in the United States are causing uncertainty about the cost to remove sulfur to meet new environmental regulations.
“A lot of refineries are having a hard time with it,” he said. Many US refineries are running high sulfur crude slates, which makes it difficult to produce gasoline that meets the new sulfur specifications.
Although many of those refineries have hydrotreaters in place to reduce sulfur, that process can be expensive, he said. “This jump downward to 10 ppm is difficult and costly. That is the reason why gasoline inventories are not building,” he said, adding that gasoline inventories normally grow this time of year.
US Energy Information Administration data showed total gasoline stocks fell 1.6 million barrels to 227.1 million barrels for the week ending December 23.
In addition, he said the increase in gasoline exports to Mexico and other parts of Latin America stems in part from the difficulty and expense of meeting the lower sulfur requirements. Latin America currently allows higher sulfur content in its gasoline supply.
“It’s easier to send it out than to keep it in,” he said of the current gasoline production in the US. For European refiners wanting to export, it may be easier to send product to Latin America rather than to the US Atlantic Coast.
With the possibility of greater gasoline exports, the US market may become more dependent on imports to make up the shortfall. Currently, more than 88% of US imports go into the US Atlantic Coast, the largest market for fuel in the US and one which is structurally short. Atlantic Coast refiners do not produce near enough to meet the demand of the region’s drivers.
As a result, the region imports supplies from Europe and Canada. European refiners produce more gasoline than the region needs, and OCED Europe exports about 1 million b/d, or one third of its gasoline production. But long-term gasoline export markets for European refiners are shrinking.
While the flow of gasoline occurs naturally from Europe into the US Atlantic Coast, it’s not a steady stream of product. Instead, trade ebbs and flows with supply and demand on both sides of the Atlantic. The average is about 710,000 b/d, but there are wide fluctuations from week to week. The highest import mark over the last year was over a million b/d on September 30 and the low was 415,000 b/d on March 18.
A large portion of that flow of gasoline is from a European refiner directly to its retail outlets in the US. Another portion is from one European exporter to a US importer and is based on long-term supply contracts. Neither of those enter the spot market in the US.
But the third and most volatile component of US gasoline imports come through arbitrage shipments, one-off shipments that occur when the spot price of gasoline in the US is high enough to offset the cost of buying an incremental cargo of European gasoline and shipping it to the US. The difference in price on both sides of the Atlantic needs to be wide enough to pay for shipping and RINS, a second important cost for importers.
Import data released weekly from the EIA can show when an arbitrage is open and when it is closed and when there are significant infrastructure problems within the US. Gasoline imports into the US surged in the weeks after the Colonial Pipeline shut down the flow of products following a leak in late September and a fire a few weeks later. In each case, Atlantic Coast gasoline distributors were starved for supply; stocks plunged and weekly imports surged to make up for the shortfall.
However, most gasoline analysts consider that weekly report backward-looking information. “An increase in last week’s imports shows someone saw an arbitrage opportunity three weeks ago. It says nothing about what happens now,” one gasoline trader said.
http://blogs.platts.com/2017/01/04/us-gasoline-flows-environmental-rules/
-
Climate: Court Seeks Briefing Format in Suits Over Landfill Methane Rules
Jan 4, 2017 | Inside EPA
A federal appellate court is giving the incoming Trump administration and other litigants until Feb. 2 to propose briefing formats for suits challenging EPA's rules governing methane emissions from new and existing landfills.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued separate Jan. 3 orders that require EPA, the waste and utility industries and environmental intervenors to file their proposed briefing formats by Feb. 2.
The suits challenge separate standards EPA issued last July setting landfill gas emissions standards for new and modified municipal solid waste landfills under section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act, and for existing landfills under section 111(d).
Both rules update and strengthen standards for new and existing landfills issued by the Clinton administration in 1996 and serve as part of the Obama administration's agenda to reduce emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
The existing source rule, which sets emissions guidelines, faces lawsuits from several waste groups, -- National Waste & Recycling Association (NWRA), Solid Waste Association of North America, Waste Management, Inc., Waste Management Disposal Services of Pennsylvania, Inc., and Republic Services -- as well as from the Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) -- whose challenge focuses on whether EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to update an existing source standard issued under section 111(d) of the air act.
The UARG efforts serve as an attempt to block the agency from ultimately strengthening its power plant GHG standards promulgated under the same section of the air act.
The challenge from the waste groups came as somewhat of a surprise, given the industry's cautious support of the proposed version of the rule.
Nonetheless, in the case, NRWA, et al. v. EPA, et al., the waste groups fault the existing source rule for several reasons, including a stricter emissions capture threshold and EPA's use of the controversial social cost of methane to calculate the regulation's benefits.
The groups also make similar claims in a challenge to the new source performance standards, also called NRWA, et al. v. EPA, et al.
In Jan. 3 orders in both the challenge to the existing source standards and to the new source rule, the court clerk sets a Feb. 2 deadline for all parties in the cases to submit proposed briefing formats.
Several local and national environmental groups have intervened in support of EPA in the case challenging the existing source standards, including Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), Natural Resources Defense Council, Conservation Law Foundation, Clean Air Council and Clean Wisconsin.
EDF, which had petitioned and sued EPA to develop the rules, has also intervened to support the agency in the challenge against the new source rule.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/climate-court-seeks-briefing-format-suits-over-landfill-methane-rules
-
Court Delays Appeal Over Obama’s Fracking Rule
Jan 4, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A federal court on Wednesday delayed oral arguments in the Obama administration’s appeal to reinstate its hydraulic fracturing regulation for federal lands for two months.
The Denver-based Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit made its decision without a request by a party in the case. It means that attorneys working for President-elect Donald Trump will be in charge of the federal government’s appeal.
Oral arguments will now take place the week of March 20, when litigants will have an hour to present their cases to the three-judge panel. The court in November had scheduled a half-hour of arguments on Jan. 17, three days before Trump takes office.
The Justice Department filed the appeal in June on behalf of the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which wrote the fracking rule in 2015.
It challenges a decision from Judge Scott Skavdahl. The Wyoming-based federal judge ruled that the BLM is specifically prohibited under a 2005 law from regulating fracking on federal land.
Federal lawyers said in court filings that Skavdahl’s “crabbed view of BLM’s authority is wholly unprecedented and manifestly incorrect.”
A group of conservative states and oil and natural gas industry groups filed the original lawsuit and is challenging the government’s appeal.
On the campaign trail, Trump promised to roll back President Obama’s restrictions on fossil fuel development, including fracking.
The Trump administration could direct attorneys to stop pursuing the regulation’s appeal, but environmentalists and others involved in the case could keep it going.
Trump could also have his Interior Department work to repeal the rule.
The rule sets standards in three areas: well casing integrity, storage of waste fluids and public disclosure of the contents of fracking fluid used.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/312644-court-delays-appeal-case-over-obamas-fracking-rule
-
State Panel Puts Fracking Regulations on Hold in Maryland
Jan 4, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
A panel of lawmakers in Maryland has reportedly asked the state Department of the Environment (MDE) to delay implementing rules governing hydraulic fracturing (fracking).
According to reports, the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review (AELR) sent a letter to the MDE last Thursday. Lawmakers on the committee said they wanted more time to study the agency's proposed rules, which were scheduled to take effect the next day.
Only two western panhandle counties in Maryland -- Allegany and Garrett -- overlie the Marcellus Shale, a basin which the U.S. Geological Survey estimates could contain as much as 2.383 Tcf of technically recoverable natural gas.
The Maryland General Assembly, which meets for 90 days during its regular session, is scheduled to reconvene on Jan. 11 and adjourn on April 10. The session could also be extended until May 10.
The MDE submitted its proposed fracking regulations to the AELR last September. The proposed rules included a 2,000-foot setback for well pads from private drinking water wells and the surface water intake of public drinking water systems and springs; one year of baseline water monitoring; well integrity and pressure testing; and requirements covering air quality, emergency response, wastewater management, well plugging and bonding.
Fracking opponents are pushing for an outright ban. A two-year moratorium on the practice, which took effect after lawmakers passed SB 409 in 2015, is set to expire on Oct. 1.
"Our neighbors talk about putting their properties on the market if fracking is permitted," Friends of Deep Creek Lake, an environmental group opposed to fracking, told the AELR at a hearing last month. "Such actions would be devastating to the local economy and in the long term would not be offset by fracking-related revenues."
Supporters of oil and gas development in Maryland aren't thrilled with the MDE's proposed regulations, either.
"We are an industry that has a proven record of providing environmental and economic benefits," Drew Cobbs, executive director of the Maryland Petroleum Council, said last month. "As written, a number of the proposed regulations are overly restrictive and would undermine our proven track record on safety proven through the development of millions of wells.
"We need policies that protect jobs and investment in Western Maryland, and these new regulations would take us in the wrong direction."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108922-state-panel-puts-fracking-regulations-on-hold-in-maryland
-
What We Learned from the False Russian Grid Attack Story
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
The Russian cyberattack on a Vermont power utility that wasn't, in reality, an attack is, however, a cautionary tale about the threats to U.S. infrastructure and conflicting U.S. cybersecurity policies, according to a cross-section of U.S. experts.
The erroneous report published by The Washington Post on Friday night that Russian hackers had "penetrated the U.S. electricity grid" through an attack on a small utility, later identified as Burlington Electric, created a jarring coda to President Obama's escalating efforts to confront Russia's involvement in hacking the Democratic National Committee and other U.S. targets.
Last Thursday, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and FBI took the unprecedented step of publishing what they said were incriminating signatures of internet computer and server addresses and the names of malicious computer files used in Russia's cyber war. The campaign was given the name "Grizzly Steppe."
Burlington Electric ran the threat list through its network and got a hit on the laptop of an employee who had connected with one of the suspect internet addresses. The utility dutifully reported the news to Washington, and that was enough to prompt The Washington Post's unnamed government sources, including "one senior administration official," to warn that the Russians had breached the gates of the U.S. power grid, according to the newspaper's first account.
The stunning news quickly went viral.
"Vermonters and all Americans should be both alarmed and outraged that one of the world's leading thugs, Vladimir Putin, has been attempting to hack our electric grid, which we rely upon to support our quality-of-life, economy, health, and safety," Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin (D) said in a statement Friday night.
However, the Russians, as the utility hastened to point out, had not penetrated the grid's operating system. The employee, using a laptop not connected to the utility's power operation, had called up his Yahoo email account — an internet address that had somehow wound up on the DHS/FBI watch list distributed to utilities last week.
That was the "hit." The utility said its operations had never been at risk.
Good news turns bad
Robert M. Lee, founder and chief executive of the cybersecurity firm Dragos Inc., put the blame on the DHS/FBI watch list, which also included a dozen Amazon accounts, he said. "I cannot convey how astronomically bad this report was," Lee said in an interview. "Any private-sector company that released this report would have been bankrupt."
He surmises that some of these addresses may, at some time, have been infiltrated by hackers who used them in cyberattack campaigns, putting them onto a watch list. But the Grizzly Steppe list omitted crucial details such as when the sites had been affected and what malware was involved, stripping the warning of real value, he said.
Because of the omissions, "you can't go back to [computer activity] logs and see that we were communicating with this site when the adversary was using it. There is no investigation that can be done with any of this data," Lee said.
Having been in the intelligence community, he added, he believes this was an example of bureaucrats getting in the way of technical analysts.
A DHS spokesman issued this statement yesterday: "While our analysis continues, we currently have no information that indicates that the power grid was penetrated in this cyber incident."
It added, "It is particularly worth noting that it appears that indicators found on a single laptop appear to match those in the Joint Analysis Report released on the 29th of December. Additionally, the laptop was not connected to the affected organization's grid systems. In fact, the organization performed immediate action to isolate the laptop and alerted federal partner authorities."
DHS said it's continuing to analyze the information and provided no further comment.
This should have been a "good news" story about a utility responding to a high-priority threat warning. Burlington used its tools to search its systems and then reported its findings to Washington.
"Burlington got threat information and acted on the threat information in accordance with the recommended practices that we have built into our information sharing infrastructure," said Miles Keogh, research director for the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), the umbrella organization for state regulators of distribution utilities like Burlington Electric.
"That part went pretty much perfectly. They found those indicators; they reported those indicators," he said. "It demonstrates they took the threat seriously."
Brian Harrell, director of energy security and risk management for the consulting firm Navigant, agreed. "The utility identified the malware, recognized the indicators of compromise, and notified law enforcement and grid regulators, all while isolating the one laptop with malware on it," he said. "This is evidence of how timely and accurate threat information, in the hands of utility operators, can mitigate threats to the power system."
Instead, Burlington found itself at the center of a rapidly moving national story about an apparent Russian attack on the American power grid. It forced the utility to shift into overdrive and reassure customers and the community that it was secure and hadn't let its guard down.
Beyond that embarrassment, the potential damage may be much more consequential in an environment where Russia's cyber campaigns in the United States have become the subject of a political debate between President Obama and President-elect Donald Trump.
Trump has reacted sharply to Democrats' complaints that the theft of campaign emails, blamed on Russian hackers, figured in Hillary Clinton's Election Day loss. "I know a lot about hacking. And hacking is a very hard thing to prove. So it could be somebody else," Trump said on New Year's Eve — before he had received a classified U.S. intelligence briefing on Russian activities. "I know things other people don't know," Trump asserted.
Some commentators seized an opportunity to condemn anti-Russian "hysteria." The journalist Glenn Greenwald, writing for The Intercept, said The Washington Post report displayed "all the standard tactics used by the U.S. media for such stories: quoting anonymous national security officials, reviewing past acts of Russian treachery, and drawing the scariest possible conclusions."
Yes, Russia's still a cyberthreat
But cybersecurity experts say there's plenty to be scared about.
"It's not like we suddenly came to a revelation that this was Russian intelligence," Lee said. Private security firms have tracked Russian cyberattacks over a decade, he added. "Who they are, who they target, how they do it," he said. "The DNC was just another case."
"I remain concerned that there have been known and documented attempts by [Russian intelligence service] actors to access U.S. energy infrastructure over the last five years," said Michael Assante, a director of the SANS Institute cyber training organization and co-author of the official grid report on the Christmas 2015 hacking attack against Ukrainian utilities. "Many of the campaigns, described by the techniques and specific versions of malware employed like Black Energy 2 and Havex, were discovered months to years after their introduction."
What has changed is the U.S. government putting its name to the indictment of the Russian security agencies, he added.
"In this case, it has ultimately not played out that the threat was specifically damaging to that utility," NARUC's Keogh said. "But there are very serious threats, and they need be taken very seriously."
The assurance from Burlington Electric that the laptop was not connected with operating systems should not clear away all concerns, Assante added. If the laptop's owner had unwittingly tied into a malicious site and downloaded disguised surveillance and intrusion software, that attack malware would have been inside the utility's business systems, where it could seek out operators' credentials in order to pivot into the control room, Assante said.
"Again, I take little comfort when the artifacts of a potential compromise are described as only affecting corporate enterprise computers," he said. "Access usually begins with these computers and builds to the furthest corners of a connected and even protected system of networks."
The handling of the Russian cyber evidence backfired in another way, according to a number of commentators.
The U.S. government is good at holding information about Russian involvement close to the vest.
Instead of offering proof of Russian cyber aggression orchestrated by Putin, Lee noted, the administration said last week that it planned to provide U.S. infrastructure operators previously classified security data and detailed information from private firms about Russian malware and techniques. Defense, not attribution, was supposed to be the purpose, he said.
But the government didn't deliver the malware details, and at the same time, it offered no conclusive evidence of Russian government complicity in the attacks, Lee pointed out.
While the White House made no explicit promise to deliver the goods on Putin's government, it may have weakened the case against Russia in the minds of the public by failing to do so, Lee added.
"Across multiple statements from government officials and agencies it is clear that the technical data and attribution will be a report prepared for Congress and later declassified (likely prepared by the NSA)," Lee said in a blog post.
"Yet, the GRIZZLY STEPPE report reads like a poorly done vendor intelligence report stringing together various aspects of attribution without evidence," he said.
Escalating U.S. politics around Russia's involvement in cyber warfare is making everything worse, Lee said.
"The government is always concerned about releasing [security] information," he said. "I hope if they do attribution, they do all of it."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/04/stories/1060047796
-
Quote-Unquote: On Science and Trump’s EPA and GHG Regulation
Jan 4, 2017 | Inside EPA
Most of what we quote this week looks to the near future:
Arguing the science behind EPA science: Congress readies a debate.
House science committee chairman: “It is clear that the agency needs to enact reforms of its entire scientific review process. I look forward to working with the next administration to enact critical reforms to put EPA back on course in pursuing transparency and sound science." Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX),chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space & Technology, promising to renew Republican efforts to pass “secret science” and Science Advisory Board bills.
House science committee ranking member: "So-called 'secret science' legislation is an insidious attack on the EPA's ability to use the best science to protect public health. Judging from the groups that have endorsed 'secret science' legislation in the past, it might be more accurate to state that this legislation is the polluting industries' attempt to hurt the EPA's rulemaking ability.” Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), committee ranking member, on the legislative efforts.
EPA: court should reject claims about the EPA to come. Environmental groups “contend. . that they are entitled to intervene as of right at this time because they expect that their interests will not be ‘adequately represented’ by the EPA after President-elect Trump assumes office next year. There are three problems with that contention. First, any future inadequacy of representation could not justify intervention of right. . . .Second, the news clippings cited by the movants do not constitute ‘clear’ evidence that the incoming administration will not adequately represent their interests in this litigation.. . . Third, . . .The movants can offer nothing more than speculation about. . .the impact of a request by new EPA leadership to the Department of Justice to change its conduct of this litigation.” Justice Department filing on EPA’s behalf, arguing against intervention by West Virginia environmental groups in Clean Air Act “jobs” suit.
Free-market advocate urges Trump to retain some GHG rules. “By vacating the field of climate regulation, the EPA would make it much likelier for a state court to uphold a claim against a stationary source of greenhouse gases. This would be a disaster. . . .It would open up virtually the whole of the U.S. economy to climate litigation for damages or injunctive relief, in potentially a number of states.” Competitive Enterprise Institute senior fellow William Yeatman, in a December 30 post, urging the incoming administration to scale back but not totally scrap climate rules.
EPA rejects challenge to aircraft GHG finding. “In fact, this objection does not refer to any aspect of the action actually taken in the 2016 Findings, but rather challenges a hypothetical action that the petitioner is concerned that the EPA (or the [Federal Aviation Administration]) might take in future actions because of statements that the EPA made in an entirely separate action.” EPA administrator Gina McCarthy, rejecting a request by the Biogenic CO2 Coalition to reconsider the agency’s greenhouse-gas endangerment finding for aircraft.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/quote-unquote-science-and-trump%E2%80%99s-epa-and-ghg-regulation
-
Trump's EPA Pick Sided with Polluters – Who Gave Millions to His Political Agenda
Jan 4, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Keith Gaby
House Republicans just backed down after trying to curtail the power of their independent ethics office. President-elect Donald Trump’s potential financial conflicts have ethics watchdogs calling on him to divest.
And now there’s evidence that his nominee for the top job at the Environmental Protection Agency, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, took action on behalf of major polluters while they were funneling money to his political activities.
It’s created the appearance of an elected official who sees big money-polluting industries as his most important constituent.
In fact, Pruitt’s approach to policymaking looks very much like Pay-to-Play, the notorious method of operation usually associated with big city political machines – under which anyone who seeks government action must contribute cash to benefit the political career of someone in power.
Industry money for Pruitt, favors from Pruitt
While there is no proof Pruitt broke any laws, his repeated collaboration with major polluters undermines confidence in his ability to stand up for everyday Americans as the EPA administrator.
A few examples:
In 2013, employees at Oklahoma Gas and Electric held a fundraiser for Pruitt. Six days later, Pruitt filed a lawsuit against the EPA in an effort to block a rule that the company opposed.
In 2014, a natural gas company called Devon Energy gave $125,000 to the Republican Attorneys General Association, a political organization Pruitt had led and at which he remained an executive. Two days later, Pruitt wrote a letter to the EPA – the agency he’s now been chosen to lead – objecting to the agency’s proposal to study the impact of fracking on public health and air quality.
In 2016, Exxon Mobil made a donation of $50,000 to RAGA, the same political group. A month later, Pruitt wrote a newspaper op-ed publicly attacking efforts to investigate whether Exxon deliberately misled investors and the public despite internal research confirming that climate change is real.
The timing of the donations to Pruitt and actions by the state’s top legal officer creates an appearance of impropriety.
In all, his campaigns have taken about $350,000 from energy interests throughout his career. Contributions to political candidates are a regular part of politics, but they also reveal the leanings of elected officials.
Oil and gas lobby: Pruitt “exceeded expectations”
Pruitt’s fundraising went beyond his own campaigns. He was able to build his political power by raising at least $3.5 million from traditional energy interests while serving in the leadership of the Republican Attorneys General Association.
In March 2014, Pruitt joined an organization chaired by Harold Hamm, the billionaire CEO of oil and gas company Continental Resources, in suing the U.S. Department of Interior to prevent it from adding animals to the endangered species list. Just two weeks later, Continental Resources donated $25,000 to the Republican Attorneys General Association.
The president of the Domestic Energy Producers Alliance was so pleased with the lawsuit that he told a reporter that Pruitt had “exceeded our expectations.”
Pruitt admits he’s an advocate for industry
What may be most disturbing is that Pruitt has defended his efforts on behalf of these companies, saying, “That’s actually called representative government in my view of the world.”
Even if none of this is illegal, he apparently views his current office as a post from which to advocate for industry, rather than for the average citizen. It may also be why he shut down his office’s environmental enforcement unit.
If Pruitt’s world view is disturbing for a state attorney general, imagine what might happen if the Senate entrusted him with keeping our nation’s air and water clean. It’s an ethical smog that could literally make us sick.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/01/04/trumps-epa-pick-sided-polluters-who-gave-millions-his-political-agenda
-
EPA Starts Comment Period on Texas Haze Plan
Jan 4, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA has published a fresh set of proposed regional haze regulations for Texas, opening a 60-day public comment period on a plan that would require added pollution controls on 14 power plants in the state.
The draft rule, which spans 39 triple-columned pages in today's Federal Register, would require the plants to adopt best available retrofit technology (BART) to reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) and particulate emissions found to cloud visibility in national parks and wilderness areas in Arkansas, New Mexico and Texas, as well as a wildlife refuge in Oklahoma.
The EPA proposal, which would partially replace a state plan that the agency deemed inadequate, would require new or upgraded SO2 scrubbers on nine coal-fired plants; for other gas-fired facilities that occasionally burn oil, the sulfur content of that oil would be limited.
The agency had released the proposed rule last month (Greenwire, Dec. 12, 2016). The public comment period runs until March 6; EPA has also scheduled a public hearing for next Tuesday at the University of Texas, Austin, campus.
Some of the same coal-fired plants are covered by a separate set of haze reduction requirements that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed last July in response to lawsuits brought by Texas state officials and power companies. Over the opposition of those challengers, EPA is now seeking to voluntarily remand those regulations (Greenwire, Dec. 20, 2016).
The regional haze program, which dates back in its current form to 1999, seeks to restore visibility in 156 major national parks and wildernesses areas to natural conditions by 2064.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/04/stories/1060047827
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested