Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 1/5/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) PP, PE Prices Down, PET Bottle Resin Up
Jan 5, 2017 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
North American polyethylene and polypropylene resin prices dropped once again in December, while regional prices for PET bottle resin continued their surprising upward trend. -
Tillerson Makes Rounds on Capitol Hill, Seeks Support for Confirmation as Secretary of State
Jan 5, 2017 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Rex Tillerson, President-elect Donald Trump's pick for Secretary of State, attempted to deflate concerns around his activities abroad as CEO of Exxon Mobil during a series of meetings with congressional leaders Wednesday. -
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Predictions for 2017
Jan 5, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson, Charles M. Auer, Kathleen M. Roberts, Richard E. Engler, Ph.D., & Carla N. Hutton
One of the big questions posed in our 2016 Predictions memo was resoundingly answered when Congress passed, by large bipartisan majorities, and President Obama signed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act on June 22, 2016. -
NAS Report Finds New Methods Will Advance, Challenge EPA Risk Analyses
Jan 5, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in a just-released report says new toxicology and exposure technologies have the potential to advance more complex regulatory risk assessment, including evaluation of the effects of multiple and non-chemical stressors, but also outline a series of challenges these new methods will pose for EPA and other agencies. -
US EPA Round-Up
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has issued a technical correction for two chemicals, subject to significant new use rules (Snurs). -
Use Emerging Science to Assess Risk, NAS Panel Tells Agencies
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
Regulators should apply emerging scientific techniques to assessments of chemical risk, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine say in a report released today. -
US Electronics Coalition Launches Responsible Sourcing Initiative
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
US trade body, the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), has launched an initiative aimed at ensuring the responsible sourcing of minerals and metals - beyond the commonly targeted tin, tungsten, tantalum and gold (3TG). -
UK MPs Launch Inquiry into REACH and Brexit
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee’s second inquiry into the future of environmental law and policy, following the EU Referendum, will focus on the scope of REACH in the country. -
Echa Committee Compromises on Tox Test for Vinyl Acetate
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Philip Lightowlers
Echa’s Member State Committee (MSC) agreed a REACH dossier evaluation for the polymer intermediate, vinyl acetate, at its meeting last month. -
GOP Tax Overhaul Grabs Industry Attention
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
The oil and gas industry is working behind the scenes to shape Republican plans for a broad tax overhaul, concerned that a move to tax imports at the U.S. border could cut into the margins of refiners that buy crude on world markets and that the industry's high capital costs merit special tax treatment. -
Exxon Mobil, SABIC Prefer Site Near Corpus Christi for Massive Plant
Jan 5, 2017 | Fuel Fix Blog
By Jordan Blum
Exxon Mobil and Saudi Arabia’s top chemical company confirmed they are advancing plans to build a massive new petrochemical plant north of Corpus Christi in San Patricio County. -
Corps Rejects Calls for Individual Pipeline Reviews
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
The Army Corps of Engineers today rejected calls from tribal leaders to remove oil and gas pipelines from a complex permitting system under which the controversial Dakota Access oil pipeline in North Dakota was approved. -
Army Corps Rebuffs Enviro Calls to Boost Scrutiny of Pipelines
Jan 5, 2017 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
The Army Corps of Engineers has rebuffed environmental groups' calls to tighten regulation of oil pipelines through its wetlands permitting process. -
Fracking Rule Debate Kicked to March
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Obama administration's hydraulic fracturing rule will have to wait a little longer for its day in appellate court. -
Lawmakers Freeze Md. Fracking Rules to Weigh Ban
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
A group of lawmakers in Maryland have barred the state Department of the Environment from carrying out new guidelines for hydraulic fracturing. -
U.S. to Become Net Exporter of Energy
Jan 5, 2017 | Fuel Fix Blog
By David Hunn
The United States will become a net exporter of energy within the next 15 years under most scenarios examined by the U.S. Department of Energy, according to a report released Thursday. -
Utility at Center of Hacking Hype Won't 'Pull Back' from Government
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
A small Vermont utility will keep working with federal officials to counter hackers, despite a recent government leak that set off a cascade of flawed reporting on the company's cyber defenses. -
Feds Slam Medical Clinic for Asbestos Exposure
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
A medical facility in Wisconsin failed to inform workers after exposing them to asbestos, federal regulators said this week. -
Dems: Tillerson's Climate Support 'Encouraging,' but Not Enough
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick and Evan Lehmann
Former Exxon Mobil Corp. CEO Rex Tillerson found common ground with Democrats on climate change yesterday as he met with lawmakers he hopes will confirm him as Donald Trump's secretary of 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
-
(ACC Mentioned) PP, PE Prices Down, PET Bottle Resin Up
Jan 5, 2017 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
North American polyethylene and polypropylene resin prices dropped once again in December, while regional prices for PET bottle resin continued their surprising upward trend.
Regional prices for all grades of high, low and linear low density PE fell an average of 2 cents per pound in December. Softer demand played a role in the decline, as did momentum from a 3-cent drop that hit the market in November.
Prior to the two year-end price declines, regional PE prices had been flat in five of the previous six months. The only price movement for the market came in September, when prices jumped 5 cents per pound on short-term inventory tightness.
The 2016 North American PE market “was very well supplied … with production outstripping domestic demand,” said market analyst Alkarim Shamsy of materials supplier CANEI Corp. in Toronto. He added that large amounts of new PE capacity scheduled for 2017 “would put downward pressure on PE prices.”
U.S./Canadian PE demand growth was mixed in the first 11 months of 2016, according to the American Chemistry Council. Regional sales of HDPE were up more than 2 percent, while sales of LLDPE essentially were flat and those of LDPE declined more than 2 percent.
Domestic HDPE sales growth of more than 1 percent was boosted by a gain of more than 5 percent in export sales for the 11-month period. The LDPE market saw domestic sales growth of almost 2 percent wiped out by a plunge of more than 14 percent in export sales. In LLDPE, Domestic sales growth of almost 1 percent was balanced out by an export sales drop of more than 1 percent.
PP prices slumped an average of 4 cents per pound for the month, as a result of lower demand, lower feedstock costs and ample supplies of propylene monomer. It was the third consecutive month that PP prices fell in the region, following drops totaling 7.5 cents in October-November.
The 11.5 cents in combined PP price declines for the final three months of 2016 followed total increases of 9.5 cents per pound in August-September. PP pricing was the most volatile of any North American commodity resin once again in 2016.
“PP prices were on the downturn for the last couple of months,” Shamsy said. “However, it seems that at the end of December, market sentiment shifted upward, at least on the spot market.”
“As domestic [PP] producers reduced operating rates and intensified exports, supply started to decrease,” he added. “Now, the market is much closer to balanced.”
Through November, North American PP sales essentially were flat vs. the same period in 2015, according to the American Chemistry Council in Washington. A drop of almost 2 percent in domestic sales was negated by a jump of almost 74 percent for sales into the export market.
Regional sales of PP into the sheet market grew more than 3 percent in the first 11 months of 2016, but sales of the material into injection molded housewares slumped more than 8 percent and fell almost 11 percent into oriented film.
PET continued its surprising pricing run in late 2016, with prices moving up an average of 2 cents per pound in December. That marked the fourth consecutive monthly price hike for the material, following identical increases of 1 cent per pound in the previous three months.
The moves were tied into higher feedstock costs. Late-year price movement in PET is uncommon, since demand for the material is tied into carbonated soft drinks and bottled water, which post higher sales in warm summer months.
For the year, North American PE prices finished up a net of 4 cents per pound, with regional PET prices up a net of 5 cents. Regional PP prices went in the other direction, finishing the year down a net of 8 cents per pound.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170105/NEWS/170109951/pp-pe-prices-down-pet-bottle-resin-up
-
Tillerson Makes Rounds on Capitol Hill, Seeks Support for Confirmation as Secretary of State
Jan 5, 2017 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Rex Tillerson, President-elect Donald Trump's pick for Secretary of State, attempted to deflate concerns around his activities abroad as CEO of Exxon Mobil during a series of meetings with congressional leaders Wednesday.
Over a more than 35-year career at the Irving-based oil giant, Tillerson has established relationships with world leaders in Russia and the Middle East, at times criticizing U.S. foreign policy and questioning the rationale, including the decision to impose sanctions against Russia over its annexation of Crimea, a former province of Ukraine, and support for pro-Russian separatists fighting against the Ukraine government.
Leaders from both parties are eager to hear whether Tillerson still holds those positions now that he is slated to become the nation's top diplomat, ahead of an expected confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee next week.
Following a more than hour-long meeting with Tillerson Wednesday, Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., the ranking Democrat of the Foreign Relations committee, told reporters the two had a "very candid" discussion" that touched on subjects including Russia and climate change.
"Obviously he did business with Russia and was able to get things done there," Cardin said. "That's going to get a great deal of attention during the confirmation process. Russia is not a friend of the United States."
In a much anticipated meeting, Tillerson was also sat down Wednesday with Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. Along with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., McCain has raised questions around Tillerson's relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom McCain has described as a "thug."
Asked Wednesday whether he could support Tillerson's nomination, McCain told reporters, "Sure. There's also a realistic scenario that pigs fly."
An aide to McCain said later the McCain was joking and had not yet made a decision on how he would vote.
Tillerson did not take questions as he moved around the Capital building in Washington Wednesday, escorted by security personnel provided by the U.S. Department of State.
Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, once a contender for Secretary of State himself, has worked to convince Senate Democrats of Tillerson's credentials.
"People understand he's a distinguished individual, he really is," Corker told Politico Tuesday. "If people can get comfortable with where he is, he could in fact have an overwhelming vote."
While most observers see it as a long shot, even a small amount of Republican opposition could conceivably scuttle Tillerson's nomination. Republicans only have a 52 -48 advantage in the Senate. Were Democrats to unify against the nomination, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would need near unanimity from Republicans to get Tillerson approved.
Beyond Russia, Tillerson's decision five years ago to cut a deal for oil rights with the Kurdish regional government in Iraq defied U.S policy at the time and angered the Iraqi government in Baghdad.
Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., a member of the Foreign Relations committee, who also met with Tillerson Wednesday, said he had not yet decided on whether to support Tillerson's nomination. Coons has critcized Trump's statements questioning reports from U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia attempted to undermine the presidential election through hacking the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee and other political committees.
"We all have to recognize a secretary of state is principally charged with carrying out the vision and priorities and values of the administration," Coons said. "But one area where I was somewhat encouraged is (Tillerson's) clarity that he views part of his role as stepping up and speaking to those values, helping to shape policy."
Another issue likely to play a prominent role in the confirmation hearings, for which no date has yet been set, is climate change. As CEO of Exxon, Tillerson led the company away from its long-standing skepticism of climate science and opposition to regulation designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Exxon came out in support of the 2015 Paris climate agreement and has called for a so-called carbon tax as a way to provide incentives to select cleaner burning fuels and lower carbon dioxide emissions.
On Wednesday Cardin struck an optimistic note that Tillerson could work with Democrats on climate change.
"He stressed to me his background in science and he is a believer in science," Cardin said. "We had a long conversation on what we need to do in countries where extreme poverty has denied many people access to energy."
Questions around Tillerson's finances continue to circulate. Senate Democrats have asked Tillerson to 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 afternoon, staff had not received the returns, a senior aide on the committee said.
Cardin and Corker remain at odds over the need to review the tax returns. Cardin will continue to push for the returns' release, the aide said.
Tillerson is already moving ahead in trying to clear up concern around his considerable wealth. Exxon Mobil announced Tuesday Tillerson would sever ties with Exxon and cash out about $240 million in Exxon stock from his retirement package and other holdings, placing the proceeds in an independently managed trust to comply with conflict of interest regulations.
On Wednesday afternoon, Tillerson also met with McConnell and was expected to meet with more members of Congress Thursday.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/article/Tillerson-makes-rounds-on-Captiol-Hill-seeks-10835339.php
-
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Predictions for 2017
Jan 5, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson, Charles M. Auer, Kathleen M. Roberts, Richard E. Engler, Ph.D., & Carla N. Hutton
One of the big questions posed in our 2016 Predictions memo was resoundingly answered when Congress passed, by large bipartisan majorities, and President Obama signed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act on June 22, 2016. The past six months have been a whirlwind of activity for EPA and, given our expectation that the Trump Administration will work to implement new TSCA, 2017 promises to be busier still. The early implementation of such a complex, nuanced statute, presents difficult challenges under the best of circumstances and, there are numerous rules and actions that are required to be completed by June 2017. These and other likely actions for 2017 are summarized and briefly commented upon below. Add to this the challenges presented by a new Administration of a different party and things truly could get interesting.
At the same time, as strong believers in our small “r” republican model of governance, we recognize that there can be benefits when legislation is passed under one party but initially administered by the other party. This was the case when old TSCA was enacted under President Ford and first implemented under a different Administration (President Carter) and party. Now, given the surprising electoral outcome, the same type of opportunity for realizing bipartisan progress in dealing with chemical issues is presented in the case of new TSCA.
As faithful readers will know, we have raised concerns with some of the new TSCA interpretations and approaches that have or seem to be coming forward from EPA over the past six months. A new Administration will, at a minimum, allow for a reconsideration of early policies and initial interpretations of new TSCA. We can hope for a carefully considered, measured, and balanced approach to come forward under the new Administration, an approach that can properly address old TSCA’s deficiencies and impediments, and serve to realize the potential that we saw when the bipartisan TSCA Amendments were first unveiled by Congress in the Spring of 2016.
Actions Expected to be Taken/Completed in 2017
The items listed below are, with one exception, measures required under new TSCA. Since promulgation will occur during the new Administration, the final rules are likely to differ, to a greater or lesser extent, from the proposals. It is also possible that rules could be re-proposed or the comment period re-opened to allow the Trump Administration to get its ideas into play; this, however, could cause such actions to miss their statutory deadlines.
April 2017
Publication of inventory of mercury supply, use, and trade in the United States (Section 8(b)(10)(B)).
June 2017
Promulgate procedural rules establishing prioritization and risk evaluations processes and criteria. The proposed rules are expected to issue in early 2017. (Section 6(b)(1)(A)).
Promulgate Inventory reset reporting rule. The proposal is expected to issue in early 2017. (Section 8(b)(4)).
Establish the Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (Section 26(o)). EPA published a notice requesting comment on a set of 29 candidates for the SACC by January 9, 2017, a date that ensures that the final selection will fall to the Trump Administration.
Issue guidance document for interested persons to use in preparing draft risk evaluations (Section 26(l)(5)).
Issue scope documents for the ten risk evaluation chemicals announced by EPA on November 29, 2016. 81 Fed. Reg. 91927 (Dec. 19, 2016). This step is required to be completed within six months of the announcement (Section 6(b)(4)(D)). The chemicals include 1,4-dioxane, 1-bromopropane, asbestos, carbon tetrachloride, cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster, methylene chloride, N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP), Pigment Violet 29, tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene), and trichloroethylene (TCE).
Complete EPA consultation with the Small Business Administration, review adequacy of the definition of a small manufacturer, and determine, after notice and comment, whether revision of the standard is necessary (Section 8(a)(3)(C)).
We also expect EPA to propose and promulgate, perhaps by June 2017, the fees rule at Section 26(b). Although this timeline is not required by new TSCA, EPA has expressed its desire to issue a final rule within one year of new TSCA enactment and we think timely completion of this action in 2017 is likely.
Actions that May Come Forward in Early 2017
These items are discretionary and if proposed by the Obama Administration, could be allowed to continue or may be withdrawn by the Trump Administration. In addition, the Congressional Review Act (CRA) allows Congress to review, via an expedited legislative process, promulgated federal regulations within 60 legislative days of their issuance and, by passage of a joint resolution, to overrule a regulation. If signed by the President, the action invalidates the regulation. The best known example of the use of this procedure is invalidation of the ergonomics rule issued by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration in 2001.
Promulgation of a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) on long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate and sulfonate chemical substances. The rule could be promulgated in part in 2017, although it appears that under new TSCA, EPA would need to re-propose the rule if it wishes to make imported articles containing such chemicals subject to the SNUR. The issue concerns the requirement at Section 5(a)(5) that EPA make an affirmative finding that the reasonable potential for exposure to the chemical from the article(s) justifies notification.
Proposed SNUR on use of TCE in non-aerosol spray degreasers. We expect this rule to be proposed sometime in 2017.
Two proposed Section 6(a) TCE rules. The first rule concerns use as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in consumer aerosol spray degreasers. The second rule, which is identified as an economically significant rule, concerns use as a vapor degreasing agent. The first rule, published in the Federal Register on December 16, 2016, has some likelihood of proceeding while we believe there is significant potential for the second TCE rule to be withdrawn or be re-proposed.
In addition, we note EPA’s decision to conduct a risk evaluation focused on other uses of TCE and observe that this decision could have ripple effects. While the savings provision at Section 26(p)(2) enables EPA to rely on final risk assessments in taking the Section 6 actions discussed in the preceding paragraph, we observe that TCE’s risk assessment is quite controversial, particularly regarding the interpretation of certain key adverse effects, and that issues encountered in preparing the new risk evaluation seem likely to “bleed through” and affect at least the vapor degreasing action.
Proposed Section 6(a) rule on use of methylene chloride and NMP in paint strippers. We believe this rule, if issued in final as written is likely to be affected by the new Administration. We believe that EPA’s decision to undertake new risk evaluations for these chemicals increases the likelihood that the rule will be withdrawn or at least be re-proposed once the new risk evaluation has been issued in final (2019 timeframe).
Promulgation of Section 8(a) reporting and recordkeeping rule on existing chemical nanoscale materials. We believe that if EPA promulgates a narrow rule that, for example, does not require advance notification of manufacture of such nanoscale materials, such a rule could enter into force under the new Administration, depending on the specifics of what is required. If, on the other hand, the rule includes the proposed notification requirement, we believe it could become the target of consideration under the CRA or an announcement by the Trump Administration that EPA will not enforce this requirement, pending amendment or withdrawal of the action. While the Section 8(a) rule does not meet the $100 million economic impact criterion to be considered a “major rule” under the CRA, we believe it could be identified by Congress as presenting “significant adverse effects” on competition and innovation and, if so, would be subject to CRA review.
Expected Fate of Other Rules and Actions
Several other proposed rules seem unlikely to get much traction in the Trump Administration. These include the 2012 proposed SNUR and test rule on certain polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE), the 2014 proposed SNUR on nonylphenol and nonylphenol ethoxylates (NP/NPE), and the 2016 proposed amendments to the SNUR procedural rule to update the hazard communication requirements and other aspects. The PBDEs rules are unlikely to proceed due to the issues presented by the proposals and the requirement under new TSCA for EPA to justify notification for PBDEs in imported articles. The proposed NP/NPEs SNUR also presented a number of issues and we believe it is unlikely that the proposed regulation will be pursued. The SNUR procedural rule could be withdrawn or might eventually be promulgated as a narrow rule that avoids some of the issues encountered in the proposal.
One of the open actions concerns follow-up by EPA on an expected proposed rule for Section 8(a) and 8(d) reporting on oil and gas production (i.e., fracking) chemicals that was occasioned by a Section 21 petition filed in 2011. We do not expect to see this rule pursued in the new Administration.
Our 2016 Predictions memo also noted and discussed several enforcement actions as well as “clarifications” premised on chemical identity issues as a way to challenge the presence of existing chemicals listed on the Inventory. Examples discussed included attempts to clarify EPA’s existing guidance on statutory mixtures and enforcement actions targeting “fractions” such as chlorinated paraffins; the NP/NPE SNUR discussed also presented a number of nomenclature issues. New TSCA Section 8(b) provisions concerning the legal status of Class 2 nomenclatures and the treatment of the individual members of statutory mixture categories as being “included” on the Inventory have clarified some of these issues, although exactly how things get sorted out is yet to be discerned. At any event, we think that the new Administration is not likely to continue the enforcement approach that previously caused us such heartburn.
New Chemicals
Notifying new chemical substances and new uses of chemical substances subject to significant new use rules will be challenging in the New Year. New TSCA Section 5 requires EPA OPPT to review and make a determination for all Premanufacture Notification (PMN) new chemicals, and the process OPPT is developing has unduly slowed the review process and raised many questions. EPA wisely convened a stakeholder meeting December 14, 2016, and stakeholders expressed broad discontent with the lack of transparency as well as frustration with the lengthy delays they are experiencing. That said, little was learned on how OPPT intends to address the problems that OPPT’s implementation of new TSCA has created, and OPPT remains consumed by new chemical notifications -- the review of which will continue to bring uncertain results and invite costly delays. This is an area which should get the close attention of the incoming Administration, given the need for the ongoing innovation potential provided by new chemical introductions in ensuring the continued competitiveness of the domestic chemical sector.
Other New TSCA Actions that Could Occur in 2017
We expect EPA to use its new TSCA Section 4 order authority in the coming year. The limitations in data sets available for most TSCA chemicals are relatively significant and we believe that EPA, perhaps starting with chemicals in the 2014 update to the Work Plan, will take steps to require additional testing. While this could include both hazard and exposure information, we think that 2017 actions will most likely focus on the former and possibly on targeted exposure information. We are hopeful that EPA, at the same time, will begin in 2017 to sort out its thinking regarding its approach to tiered exposure testing, a new element under new TSCA.
Nanomaterials Forecast
The big news for 2017 will be whether and, if so, in what form the TSCA Section 8(a) reporting rule for existing nanoscale materials will be issued in final. The rule cleared the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review on December 28, 2016, strongly suggesting it will be issued in final before the end of the Obama Administration. We expect OPPT will continue its review of new chemical notifications for nanoscale chemicals and materials in much the same way as before new TSCA was signed into law. There are a number of new TSCA provisions that could be applied in ways that could challenge nano innovators.
In other nanoscale material developments, EPA’s OPP May 2015 announcement that it conditionally registered a second nanosilver pesticide product, NSPW-L30SS, previously known as Nanosilva, was immediately the subject of a federal lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On November 17, 2016, the court heard oral argument in the suit consolidating the petitions filed NRDC, the Center for Food Safety, and the International Center for Technology Assessment. During oral argument, the court questioned whether EPA could provide data proving that the conditional registration would not increase the amount of silver in the environment and that the registration was in the public interest. The court sought information on the cost to industry to replace silver with a nanosilver product such as NSPW-L30SS. The court commented that EPA appears to lack data on whether manufacturers would substitute existing uses of silver with NSPW-L30SS, or if they would create new uses of silver. How the court will rule in 2017 is, of course, still unclear.
Biotech Forecast
The September 16, 2016, release of the proposed update to the 1986 Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology (Coordinated Framework) marked a major achievement of the Obama Administration. It provides a comprehensive summary of the roles and responsibilities of EPA, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) with respect to the regulation of biotechnology products. The companion document that was released on the same day, the National Strategy for Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products (National Strategy), sets forth a long-term strategy intended to ensure that the federal regulatory system is equipped to assess efficiently the risks, if any, of the future products of biotechnology. The reports reflect the efforts of many in response to the July 2015 directive from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), OMB, the U.S. Trade Representative, and the Council on Environmental Quality directing EPA, FDA, and USDA to update the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology. Public comment on the proposed update was accepted until November 1, 2016.
The National Strategy sets forth a vision for ensuring that the federal regulatory system is equipped to assess efficiently the risks, if any, associated with future products of biotechnology while supporting innovation, protecting health and the environment, maintaining public confidence in the regulatory process, increasing transparency and predictability, and reducing unnecessary costs and burdens. In the National Strategy, the federal agencies demonstrate their sustained commitment to ensuring the safety of future biotechnology products, increasing public confidence in the regulatory system, and preventing unnecessary barriers to future innovation and competitiveness.
The update to the Coordinated Framework represents a useful first step in a process that urgently needs to continue into the next Administration. The work to date nicely lays out a blueprint for action that stakeholders can only hope will be a priority for the next Administration. The White House seeks continued engagement from key stakeholders, including public and private organizations such as companies, universities and research institutes, trade associations, scientific societies, foundations, consumer organizations, non-profits, and individual citizens.
What remains to be seen is how the Trump Administration addresses both documents, or even if it will. We would expect a natural delay occasioned by the transition to the new Administration. Whether incoming leadership in the White House OSTP and in the federal agencies charged with regulating products of biotechnology pick up where the Obama Administration left off is entirely unclear. We note that the update to the Coordinated Framework was largely driven by the need for clarity by the regulated community. Continued activity to implement the update may resonate with the incoming Administration.
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/office-pollution-prevention-and-toxics-predictions-2017
-
NAS Report Finds New Methods Will Advance, Challenge EPA Risk Analyses
Jan 5, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in a just-released report says new toxicology and exposure technologies have the potential to advance more complex regulatory risk assessment, including evaluation of the effects of multiple and non-chemical stressors, but also outline a series of challenges these new methods will pose for EPA and other agencies.
The new report, “Using 21st Century Science in Risk-Based Evaluations,” released Jan. 5, concludes that newer “21st century science” approaches to toxicology and exposure assessment “offer opportunities to improve the assessment or characterization of risk for the purpose of environmental and public health decision-making,” particularly in four realms that have long been central to EPA's regulatory activities: “priority-setting, chemical assessment, site-specific assessment and assessments of new chemistries.”
Three of these activities have been directly impacted by Congress' overhaul last summer of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which governs the manufacture and use of industrial chemicals in the U.S. The new statute now tasks EPA with prioritizing for assessment the thousands of industrial chemicals on the market -- chemistries whose regulation was limited by the original TSCA, enacted in 1976. The statute also has new, more stringent requirements for EPA's pre-market assessment of new chemicals, which have led to extended delays in these reviews, requests for more data from companies, and industry complaints.
The report explains how various new techniques can improve EPA and other agencies' abilities to perform these tasks. “Priority-setting has been seen as a principal initial application for 21st century science,” as has been EPA's experience to date. The report states that “[s]everal methods have been proposed for priority-setting, including risk-based approaches that use a combination of the high-throughput exposure and hazard information to calculate margins of exposure (differences between toxicity and exposure metrics). For that approach, chemicals that have a small margin of exposure would be seen as having high priority for further testing and assessment.”
Categorizing Chemicals
Section 6 of the new TSCA law directs EPA to categorize existing chemicals -- those already on the market -- as high or low priority, and then sets a schedule for EPA to perform risk evaluations of the high-priority chemicals. It is unclear exactly how EPA will prioritize the chemicals. The agency in November sent for White House Office of Management & Budget pre-publication review its proposed rule to implement the mandate in the revised TSCA to develop a formal process for prioritizing chemicals for risk evaluation, where it remains under review.
The report says that for chemicals “on which there are few data to use in decision-making,” the new techniques are particularly promising. For example, toxicity data on well tested chemicals that are similar to the chemicals of interest in their structure, metabolism, or biological activity can be used to evaluate data-poor chemicals -- a process known as read-across,” the report says.
“The assumption is that a chemical of interest and its analogues are metabolized to common or biologically similar metabolites or that they are sufficiently similar in structure to have the same or similar biological activity,” the report says. The report adds that the approach “can be combined with high-throughput in vitro assays, such as gene-expression analysis, or possibly with a targeted in vivo study to allow better selection of the analogues to ensure that the biological activities of a chemical of interest and its analogues are comparable.”
New Chemicals
For new chemicals that have no toxicity data and no analogues for read across, “modern in vitro toxicology methods could have great utility by providing guidance on which molecular features are associated with greater or less toxicity and by identifying chemicals that do not affect biological pathways that are known to be relevant for toxicity,” the report says. “Modern exposure-science methods might also help to identify chemicals that have the highest potential for widespread environmental or human exposure and for bioaccumulation.”
Such advice may help EPA address issues that have recently arisen with its new chemicals program, where the new TSCA now requires agency staff to make an affirmative decision on a chemical's safety before allowing it on the market. The program has for years used read across and other modeling techniques to inform its analysis of pre-manufacture notices, but concerns with some of the modeling for certain lung toxicity endpoints have led to EPA's requesting more data from companies.
The report's advice, which EPA and other agencies requested from NAS in 2014, comes as EPA is poised to greatly expand its use of various new approaches in order to address the thousands of industrial chemicals that the agency has new abilities and responsibilities to regulate as part of the TSCA overhaul. The sheer volume of chemicals that EPA is now tasked with reviewing makes use of these newer, faster and potentially cheaper testing methods necessitous, EPA officials have said.
As one example, Tina Bahadori, national program director of EPA's Chemical Safety for Sustainability research program, outlined for another NAS committee last September various drivers for increasing EPA's use of non-animal toxicity testing methods, pointing to both the TSCA language and language included in European cosmetics law several years ago as a "little nudge." The sheer number of chemicals that EPA has been asked to address is also a driver, she said. "The bottom line is that in the space of 100,000 chemicals, is it not possible to address chemicals" with animal tests, she said.
Risk Assessments
EPA recently announced Bahadori as the agency's pick to become the next director of the agency's National Center for Environmental Assessment, which operates some of EPA's most influential risk analysis programs. Her new role puts her in a position to implement the new report's advice in these assessments, particularly its advice on synthesizing data from diverse evidence streams.
More broadly, the report envisions the new technologies supporting “a new direction for risk assessment, one based on biological pathways and processes rather than on observations of apical responses and one incorporating the more comprehensive exposure information emerging from new tools and approaches in exposure science. . . . The toxicology and epidemiology elements of the new direction focus on the multifactoral and nonspecific nature of disease causation; that is, stressors from multiple sources can contribute to a single disease, and a single stressor can lead to multiple adverse outcomes.”
Such conclusions provide hope that in time regulatory risk assessments will be able to address more complex aspects of human health risks from multiple stressors, including non-chemical agents like background health status or poverty which have long eluded risk assessors. Proponents have argued that such approaches will present a more accurate picture of risk, while opponents have questioned whether it will ever be possible or reasonable to conduct such complicated analyses. EPA's efforts to update its cumulative risk assessment guidance, underway for more than a decade, have long stalled, in part because of contentions of whether to include non-chemical stressors in the analyses.
Data Challenges
The report also acknowledges challenges to use of these newer technologies, which often result in large and complex datasets. The report highlights as a major hurdle “challenges related to the analysis, interpretation, and integration of data and evidence for risk assessment. . . . The committee emphasizes that insufficient attention has been given to analysis, interpretation, and integration of various data streams from exposure science, toxicology, and epidemiology. It proposes a research agenda” to address this shortcoming.
The report also focuses on the challenge of validating newer approaches for use in regulatory risk assessment, another major hurdle in their use by EPA and other agencies that top EPA research official Bob Kavlock highlighted when he asked the committee at its first meeting in January 2015 to recommend how to validate these new technologies for regulatory use more efficiently.
The report offers a series of recommendations to address various aspects of validation. The basis for its discussion is concern that ring-testing replication approaches traditionally used for toxicity testing approaches are too lengthy and cumbersome, and urges that “a clear definition of the purpose of the new test should be considered before a specific validation process is defined.”
EPA sponsored the NAS project along with the U.S. Food And Drug Administration, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. NAS' latest report follows a pair of earlier publications on 21st century science: the 2007 publication “Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy” and a 2012 companion report, “Exposure Science in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy.”
The NAS panel that developed the latest report was asked to review the earlier reports' recommendations and “then propose how best to integrate and use the emerging results in evaluating chemical risk and identify how traditional human-health risk assessment can incorporate the new science,” according to a 2014 proposal outlining the project.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/nas-report-finds-new-methods-will-advance-challenge-epa-risk-analyses
-
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Snur technical correction
The US EPA has issued a technical correction for two chemicals, subject to significant new use rules (Snurs).
In a notice published on 23 December, the EPA corrected the Chemical Abstracts Services (CAS) registry number for neodymium sulfur yttrium oxide. It also amended the name of dialkylol amine, polymer with succinic anhydride and aromatic carboxylic acid (generic).
These corrections make each notification final and are not subject to public comment. The correction is effective from 17 January.
TSCA programme comment period extension
The EPA has extended the comment period for providing input on the new chemicals review programme as amended by the reformed TSCA law. Comments will be accepted until 17 January.
The notice follows a public meeting on the programme, held on 14 December.
Receipt of information under TSCA
The agency has announced receipt of test data for 2-oxiranemethanamine, N-[4-(2-oxiranylmethoxy)phenyl]-N-(2-oxiranylmethyl)-. The substance, used in resin and synthetic rubber manufacturing and aerospace and parts manufacturing, is subject to testing requirements for a group of high production volume (HPV) substances.
The agency received an oral (gavage) pre-natal developmental toxicity study.
Comment period for three Snurs reopened
The US EPA has reopened the comment period for proposed significant new use rules (Snurs) for three substances.
It will be extended 60 days; now closing on 6 March, following a stakeholder request for additional time to submit written comments.
The three substances under consideration for the proposed Snurs are:
functionalised carbon nanotubes (generic);
diisocyanato hexane, homopolymer, alkanoic acid-polyalkylene glycol ether with substituted alkane (3:1) reaction products-blocked (generic); and
modified diphenylmethane diisocyanate prepolymer with polyol (generic).
Information collection request
The agency is soliciting comments on an information collection request (ICR), “Reporting and Recordkeeping for Asbestos Abatement Worker Protection”, prior to its submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.
Among feedback, it is interested in the burden and necessity of the ICR and the quality and clarity of information collected.
The current ICR is set to expire on 31 August. The agency estimates the total number of potential respondents at 23,437.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51879/us-epa-round-up
-
Use Emerging Science to Assess Risk, NAS Panel Tells Agencies
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
Regulators should apply emerging scientific techniques to assessments of chemical risk, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine say in a report released today.
The NAS panel examined novel sampling, assaying and genomics methodologies and found they provide "unparalleled opportunities" to assess risk, the report says.
Acknowledging "the complexity of disease causation" is vital to chemical testing, the report says, and new techniques should protect vulnerable communities.
The report builds on two prior studies from the academies that encouraged computer modeling rather than animal testing as well as enhanced exposure assessment. But the new report praises the use of transgenic animals to answer questions "related to susceptibility or gene-environment interactions."
It also calls for broad collaboration among scientists.
"This report builds on the conceptual foundation established by the two earlier reports and indicates ways that findings from these new reports can be used in practice," University of Southern California medical professor Jonathan Samet said in a statement. "It also identifies critical challenges to be addressed in using 21st century science to better characterize the risks of chemicals for human health."
The report encourages the medical and scientific communities to incorporate chemicals, other environmental stressors, genetic makeup and age into a nuanced understanding of disease causation.
The report is the result of a study request from U.S. EPA, the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
The agencies will be able to apply the findings to their own risk assessments of chemicals as well as hazardous waste sites, the researchers said.
But without an integrated approach, the report says, innovations in technology could fall through the cracks.
"[T]echnological growth is outpacing the development of approaches to analyze, interpret and integrate the diverse, complex and large datasets in these fields," the report says. "[C]ommunicating the strengths and limitations of the approaches ... will be necessary if the results are to be applied appropriately."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047904
-
US Electronics Coalition Launches Responsible Sourcing Initiative
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
US trade body, the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC), has launched an initiative aimed at ensuring the responsible sourcing of minerals and metals - beyond the commonly targeted tin, tungsten, tantalum and gold (3TG).
A total of 19 companies have signed a declaration of support for the EEIC's Responsible Raw Materials Initiative (RRMI), which is run in partnership with the Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative (CFSI).
As well as electronics giants, including Apple, Accer, Cisco, Dell, Google, Microsoft, Sony and Samsung - it has also been signed by Ford Motor Company.
EEIC vice president of social and environmental responsibility, Bob Mitchell, told Chemical Watch that the intention of the RRMI is to take a “holistic and thoughtful” approach to understanding the risks associated with the mining of metals and minerals that may end up in the products of its members.
“We need to consider more broadly where the most salient risks exist in our supply chain and address those first,” he added.
"There’s a long list of potential areas to consider - not only the metal and minerals, but also the geographic context and the type of risk - all types of environmental and human risks. From copper, aluminium, expanded areas and risks related to 3TG, to taking another look at the type of shared components in the industries we represent."
The RRMI, he said, looks at responsible sourcing in a “variety of different ways” including investing on the ground, in data solutions and also partnering with other organisations, such as the World Bank.
The initiative has recently become involved in a World Bank project - which is looking to create a global database of small-scale artisanal mines.
Mr Mitchell said he hopes the RRMI will be able to reach beyond electronics and become a cross-industry coalition, including sectors such as jewellery, toys and aerospace, which share materials in their supply chains.
The scheme's first work group meeting will take place in January. It will use the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises as well the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights, to guide its work.
Mr Mitchell said the initiative was going through a “prioritisation process” to decide which metals, minerals, geographic areas, and issues to focus on.
Cobalt
High on the agenda is cobalt. Earlier this year, Amnesty International released a report which said that electronic companies and electric car makers could be using components made by cobalt mined by children.
It is a key component in lithium-ion batteries which power mobile phones, laptop computers, and other portable electronic devices and electric vehicles. More than half the world’s cobalt comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Lucy Graham from Amnesty International said: “The US Department of Labour had specifically listed child labour in the cobalt supply chain as a risk, but, despite this, not one of the companies named in our report, which includes some big brands, was doing even basic checks for human rights risks within their supply chain.”
She added that, in response to the report, Amnesty had been “approached by various legislators in the US asking if there’s something they can do to address the issues that we’ve raised.”
In November, the China Chamber of Commerce for Metals, Minerals and Chemicals (CCCMC) announced its Responsible Cobalt Initiative (RCI).
https://chemicalwatch.com/51876/us-electronics-coalition-launches-responsible-sourcing-initiative
-
UK MPs Launch Inquiry into REACH and Brexit
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee’s second inquiry into the future of environmental law and policy, following the EU Referendum, will focus on the scope of REACH in the country.
The inquiry comes as the UK’s Supreme Court prepares to give its verdict this month on the government’s appeal against a High Court ruling that MPs must be consulted before triggering Brexit.
“We are keen to inform the government’s thinking on this issue as soon as possible,” the committee said.
The future of the REACH Regulation in the UK was identified as a "challenging area" in the evidence to the committee’s first inquiry on 21 July, it said.
Prime Minister Theresa May has said that leaving the EU will involve converting the body of EU law into UK law, under an act referred to as the Great Repeal Bill. But the committee notes that the UK government "has said that up to a third of EU environmental law cannot simply be ‘copy-pasted’ into UK law. [It] will require additional work to ensure that the UK maintains the current level of environmental protection.”
REACH is constantly evolving and has been amended 38 times since it was enacted in 2006, the committee said. However, “relatively little” of the Regulation has been transposed into UK law.
The new inquiry, which has a submissions deadline of 20 January, has invited responses on questions including:
what scope is there for the UK to pursue a divergent approach to chemicals regulation from the EU, once Brexit is complete?
what principles should a UK chemicals regulation regime follow? and
what are the likely practical implications of having a UK-only chemicals regulatory policy for the environment, public safety and UK industry?
UK-based Chemical Industries Association (CIA) said it is preparing a comment, while the Chemical Business Association (CBA) is considering submitting a response, they told Chemical Watch.
‘Increasing divergence’
A survey in November of UK trade bodies, representing downstream industrial sectors, showed a range of attitudes on whether the UK should continue to implement REACH and other EU chemical legislation post Brexit, or adopt its own national policy.
In the same month, consultancy REACHLaw said that a "hard" Brexit could signal the end of REACH in the UK.
While during a recent Chemical Watch webinar on Brexit, Marcus Navin-Jones, partner at law firm Keller and Heckman, said it is unlikely chemical legislation will change, particularly in the short term. “In my mind, there will not be a very significant amount of chemical legislation repealed. Having said that I do think, particularly in the UK, there may be an increasing divergence between, on the one hand how the UK - and on the other hand how the Commission or Echa - interpret and apply EU law.”
Mr Navin-Jones suggested that Brexit could result in some relaxation of enforcement in the UK of certain requirements, such as the reporting and notification of SVHCs in articles. “The UK was one of those member states that supported the Commission, which was initially against the position of ‘once an article always an article’,” he said. “Since the September 2015 court judgment, there is a question as to how closely that will be followed in the UK.”
https://chemicalwatch.com/51943/uk-mps-launch-inquiry-into-reach-and-brexit
-
Echa Committee Compromises on Tox Test for Vinyl Acetate
Jan 5, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Philip Lightowlers
Echa’s Member State Committee (MSC) agreed a REACH dossier evaluation for the polymer intermediate, vinyl acetate, at its meeting last month.
Vinyl acetate is a high-volume chemical classified as a skin sensitiser, an eye irritant, a respiratory tract and liver toxin and a suspected carcinogen. The compliance check on the substance dossier, considered by the MSC, initially included a request for an in vivocomet assay through the inhalation route. Members states suggested changing the route to oral exposure and including additional measurements to detect DNA damage.
The MSC heard a challenge from the registrant on the basis of the difficulty of the test as initially proposed by Echa. This would involve the extraction of nasal tissue because vinyl acetate is so reactive it is unlikely to reach the lung. Furthermore, the substance would likely cross-link with DNA and consequently more sophisticated techniques would be required for the analysis.
Committee chair Watze de Wolf said that the MSC had contacted several contract research organisations and understood that many laboratories were able to detect cross-linked DNA products by, for example, preparing extra slides and increasing the gel electrophoresis time. But the discussions indicated there was a shortage of skills in laboratories for extracting rodent nasal tissue.
Mr de Wolf said that the committee felt carcinogenicity was likely to be most apparent in nasal tissues and that the comet assay through the inhalation route would be the most appropriate test. But because of the technical difficulties, it decided to ask the registrant for a comet assay by oral gavage. This would require analysis of stomach, liver and duodenum tissues for DNA damage and inclusion of a design to detect DNA cross-linking.
The MSC also discussed the stability of vinyl acetate in the dosing solution as a question remains over literature results and the possible effect of compound degradation. The committee considered that, using "refreshing methods", it would be possible to ensure the concentration of the registered substance in the solution.
Mr de Wolf concluded: “For this particular case, we decided on this route. The cross-linking made it additionally challenging. But I would say that, in future, we may well ask for a comet assay through the inhalation route. That is definitely a possibility.”
https://chemicalwatch.com/51931/echa-committee-compromises-on-tox-test-for-vinyl-acetate
-
GOP Tax Overhaul Grabs Industry Attention
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
The oil and gas industry is working behind the scenes to shape Republican plans for a broad tax overhaul, concerned that a move to tax imports at the U.S. border could cut into the margins of refiners that buy crude on world markets and that the industry's high capital costs merit special tax treatment.
In a wide-ranging talk yesterday on the state of the U.S. energy industry, Jack Gerard, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, said the group is concerned about GOP tax plans but that API's early engagement around a House proposal to revise the tax code has borne fruit.
Gerard was speaking of the "blueprint for tax reform" proposed by Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, in June that has received new attention since Republicans swept into power in November.
Brady's proposal would reduce U.S. corporate tax rates overall from a nominal 35 percent to 20 percent, but it includes a "border adjustment fee" that would mean companies could no longer deduct for tax purposes the cost of raw materials imported into the United States.
In his speech yesterday, Gerard called out tax reform as a "pressing matter" of special concern for API. "As the incoming administration and new Congress look to work together to reform the nation's tax code, we'd hope that any changes will make America more globally competitive, are evenly applied and mindful of the important role the oil and natural gas industry plays in job creation and economic growth," he said.
In a later session with reporters, Gerard expanded on his concerns, arguing that the oil and gas industry is highly capital-intensive compared with service industries and other segments of the economy and that taxation on industry inputs should reflect that.
"When you look at imports, especially as relates to energy, we add value to those," Gerard said, pointing to crude oil imports bound for U.S. refineries and then for domestic and foreign fuel markets.
"We're doing some analysis of it, to really see what it would do, or what impact it might have," Gerard said of the border adjustment fee provision. "We've been talking to many on a bipartisan basis — many on Capitol Hill — expressing concern and letting them know we will be back to them with further analysis."
Gerard hinted at some success in API's lobbying on the issue to date. Saying past tax approaches have unfairly targeted the oil and gas industry, Gerard said that "the approach currently in the House has leveled that playing field, but more importantly, it recognizes the capital-intensive nature of the oil and gas industry."
Refiners and many others
Outside of API, others are also closely scrutinizing the proposed border adjustment fee.
Stephen Brown, chief lobbyist for refining company Tesoro Corp., a refiner that does not belong to API, said his team is "waist-deep" in analysis of the Brady blueprint.
"Most refiners have serious concerns about what Mr. Brady will include in his reform package," Brown said. "We're talking to him; we're talking to his staff; we will continue to. These guys are our friends, so no one likes to oppose him, but this is a pretty big deal."
The issue is not limited to the oil and gas industry but would also affect major retailers, clothing stores and other companies that are net importers of goods. In December, a group of industry associations including the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers as well as others representing auto manufacturers, retailers, apparel and footwear companies, and grocers, wrote a letter to Brady challenging the border adjustment fee.
"Companies that rely on global supply chains would face huge business challenges caused by increased taxes and increased cost of goods, which would in turn likely result in reductions in employment, reduced capital investments and higher prices for consumers," the groups wrote, calling for tax reform along similar lines but without the import charge.
Brown said the border tax adjustment question became central in November when President-elect Donald Trump and newly empowered Republican majorities in the two houses of Congress started to consider their tax overhaul plans, and he predicted that the issue will continue to loom large for refiners at least until tax reform legislation is presented that clarifies how lawmakers might address the issue.
"We're all dealing with a concept here; until we see actual text, we're kind of stuck waiting to respond," Brown said.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047874
-
Exxon Mobil, SABIC Prefer Site Near Corpus Christi for Massive Plant
Jan 5, 2017 | Fuel Fix Blog
By Jordan Blum
Exxon Mobil and Saudi Arabia’s top chemical company confirmed they are advancing plans to build a massive new petrochemical plant north of Corpus Christi in San Patricio County.
Plans for the multibillion-dollar project at the preferred site, which is being opposed by some local communities, are moving forward for the joint venture between Exxon and the Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., known as SABIC.
If the plans fall through, Exxon and SABIC could still select from three other sites they were considering — one near Victoria and two in Louisiana.
“San Patricio County is the preferred site,” said SABIC spokeswoman Susan LeBourdais. “However, the three other potential locations are still under consideration.” The companies also added, “The project is advancing study of the San Patricio site.” They have filed applications to proceed with the county and the Gregory-Portland Independent School District.
Portland’s City Council voted in December to encourage Exxon and SABIC to build elsewhere, but the site is just outside of the city limits so the vote wasn’t binding. The 1,400-acre site is in an open area, but it’s still less than two miles from the public high school.
The plant would include the world’s largest ethane cracker, which turns a component of natural gas into ethylene, the primary building block of most plastics. The project also would include plastics manufacturing.
The project would create about 11,000 construction jobs and at least 600 permanent positions. The effort is another part of Saudi Arabia’s ambition to diversify more globally, including growing along the Texas Gulf Coast.
The chemical and plastics plant is the first U.S. joint venture for SABIC and Exxon Mobil, two of the world’s biggest energy companies. The plant could come online as early as 2020 if construction begins this year. The plan is to take advantage of cheap and ample shale natural gas available here to make chemicals and plastics.
The companies in the joint venture, which is dubbed Gulf Coast Growth Ventures, are proposing to build new roads and upgrade others near the site to accommodate the increased traffic. They also are saying the site will include “buffer zones” to keep the actual plant as far away from homes and road as possible to lessen any environmental and aesthetic harm.
The plant would receive its industrial water from Corpus Christi and its drinking water from the small cities of Portland and Gregory.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/01/05/exxon-mobil-sabic-prefer-site-near-corpus-christi-for-massive-plant/
-
Corps Rejects Calls for Individual Pipeline Reviews
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
The Army Corps of Engineers today rejected calls from tribal leaders to remove oil and gas pipelines from a complex permitting system under which the controversial Dakota Access oil pipeline in North Dakota was approved.
At issue is the Army Corps' Nationwide Permit 12, a type of general permit that allows developers of utility lines to dig near rivers, streams, wetlands and other water bodies in compliance with the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and environmental groups this summer asked the agency to remove oil and gas projects, arguing that pipelines transporting fossil fuels that could leak or exacerbate climate change should undergo individual — not programmatic — reviews. The Army Corps, they said, is the only agency overseeing oil pipelines.
But the Army Corps in a draft rule today said its hands are tied. The draft rule, which reissues 50 existing nationwide permits through 2022, is slated to take effect in mid-March. The rule also issues two new permits and proposes changes so others are neutral to an Obama administration Clean Water Act rule currently tied up in court.
While acknowledging that many commenters requested oil and gas pipelines be handled under the agency's individual permit process, the Army Corps said tackling climate change, oil spills or leaks falls outside its jurisdiction, and subjecting individual projects to public comment would take away from the program's aim of streamlining pipeline permitting.
"We do not have the authority to regulate the operation of oil and gas pipelines, and we do not have the authority to address spills or leaks from oil and gas pipelines," the agency wrote. "General condition 14, proper maintenance, requires that [Nationwide Permit] activities, including NWP 12 activities, be properly maintained to ensure public safety."
The Army Corps also noted that district engineers can establish procedures to identify activities that require government-to-government consultation to protect tribal trust resources and tribal treaty rights.
The permitting procedures, normally low profile, were thrown under the microscope last year when controversy erupted around the 1,172-mile-long, $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline (Greenwire, Nov. 3, 2016).
Nationwide Permit 12 was used to approve the Dakota Access pipeline's crossing through Lake Oahe, a dammed lake on the Missouri River in North Dakota near areas culturally significant to the Standing Rock Sioux.
Christine Tezak, an analyst at ClearView Energy Partners LLC, told clients in a note today that formal government-to-government consultations held this fall by the Interior Department's Bureau of Indian Affairs and Native American tribes reinforced expectations the Obama administration was willing to exclude oil pipelines from the program altogether.
"We saw the extensive consultations — where the request to exclude oil pipelines was reiterated multiple times — as strong pressure on the outgoing Obama administration to make a substantive change to the NWP among potential 'midnight' regulations," she wrote. "However, the Corps of Engineers did not adopt the change sought by the Standing Rock and other tribes after all."
Tezak noted that Dakota Access was approved under the 2012 nationwide program, so the draft decision does not affect it. The Standing Rock Sioux and environmental groups can challenge the Army Corp's decision in court, she added.
But Maranda Compton, an of-counsel attorney at Van Ness Feldman, noted that the Army Corps in the draft rule did include language that could potentially broaden the scope of tribal related review. Specifically, the agency said it revised a general condition in permits so no activity "may cause more than minimal adverse effects on tribal rights (including treaty rights), protected tribal resources, or tribal lands."
But Compton said questions linger about how tribal concerns will be addressed under the Trump administration, pointing out that tribal leaders voiced specific concerns about the oil and gas permitting process.
"If nothing happens, it'll be a slap in the face to tribes," Compton said.
Compton agreed, however, that today's draft rule doesn't alter the Army Corps' announcement in December that it would pursue an environmental impact statement for the Dakota Access project, nor does it preclude the agency's ability to take a deeper look at the pipeline.
"Nationwide permit in no way limits the corps' ability to conduct addition review if the district engineer or district colonel feel it's appropriate," she said. "Those are all within the agency's discretionary authority."
But the draft doesn't alter the Dakota Access review currently ongoing, she said.
"I don't think it alters the course that was initially set up by the corps on the announcement about a month ago, the Dec. 4 announcement," she said. "I don't think it alters the corps' plan to pursue an EIS. Nationwide permit in no way limits the corps' ability to conduct addition review if the district engineer or district colonel feel it's appropriate, those are all within the agency's discretionary authority."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047912
-
Army Corps Rebuffs Enviro Calls to Boost Scrutiny of Pipelines
Jan 5, 2017 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
The Army Corps of Engineers has rebuffed environmental groups' calls to tighten regulation of oil pipelines through its wetlands permitting process.
The Army Corps' final regulation reissuing 50 nationwide permits and two new ones will be published in tomorrow's Federal Register, and it includes only modest changes to Nationwide 12, the permit that authorizes stream and wetland crossings by oil and gas pipelines. Nationwide permits offer a streamlined regulatory process for a range of activities, from dredging to renewable energy projects, that have a minimal impact on streams and wetlands protected under the Clean Water Act.
The Corps is the only federal agency with regulatory authority over oil pipeline construction, and environmental groups and activists have pressured the agency as part of their effort to block infrastructure projects in their campaign to reduce fossil fuel use.
Environmentalists, who filed more than 54,000 comments on the Corps regulation, urged it to require that pipelines undergo a more thorough review through the agency's individual permitting process for wetlands impacts. They also urged the Corps to count the cumulative impacts a pipeline has on water bodies, rather than counting and authorizing each water crossing separately.
In the final rule, the Corps declined these requests, and underscored that its authority over pipelines is limited to dredging and filling in protected waterways — not policing pipeline operations or spills.
The primary change to Nationwide 12 is new language allowing activities related to cleaning up spilled drilling fluids from fracking activity to be covered by the permit.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Fracking Rule Debate Kicked to March
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Obama administration's hydraulic fracturing rule will have to wait a little longer for its day in appellate court.
In an unexpected move yesterday, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rescheduled oral arguments that had been set for Jan. 17. Arguments will now take place in March. The court also allotted more time for the high-stakes debate.
At issue is the Interior Department's landmark hydraulic fracturing rule, which set new standards for fracked wells on public and tribal lands. The rule was struck down by a district court in Wyoming last summer and is now under review at the 10th Circuit.
Through the course of the litigation, the debate over the rule's legality has evolved into a debate over whether Interior's Bureau of Land Management has authority to regulate fracking at all. The district court ruled that it does not, making the appeal a broader battle over the agency's power.
The original court date would have made defending the fracking rule one of the Obama administration's final actions in court. The new date means the Trump administration will be underway when oral arguments take place.
In an extreme scenario, Trump could withdraw the fracking rule before oral arguments. However, experts have deemed it unlikely the administration would prioritize the rule enough to expend that kind of political capital (Energywire, Nov. 8, 2016).
In any case, environmentalists involved in the litigation would likely push forward with their appeal, as the question of Interior authority over fracking could be considered a live issue whether or not the rule exists.
The change in administration could also open up the possibility of settlement negotiations. Some opponents of the rule have expressed an openness to discussions with Interior. Environmental intervenors would oppose weakening the rule or leaving the district court's ruling on authority unchallenged.
Arguments
Though opponents of the regulation had asked for extra time to make their case, no party requested that the court date be pushed back.
BakerHostetler attorney Mark Barron, who is representing industry groups against the rule, said his side was fully prepared to present arguments Jan. 17 but would not be affected by the delayed schedule.
"That said, the 10th Circuit's ruling can be interpreted as recognizing the important separation of powers arguments at stake in the appeal and the need to ensure that enough time is provided so that all parties' perspectives are fully and fairly considered," he said in an email. "We appreciate the court's consideration and welcome that approach."
Interior does not comment on pending litigation, and Earthjustice attorney Mike Freeman, who is representing environmental groups that support the rule, declined to comment.
For now, all sides are preparing for an hourlong court session in March. The exact date has not been set, but the court is in session March 20-24.
States — Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota and Utah — and industry opponents of the rule — the Western Energy Alliance and the Independent Petroleum Association of America — will have 24 minutes to make their arguments. The Ute Indian Tribe, which has raised legal questions unique to Indian Country, will have six minutes.
Government lawyers and environmental lawyers will have 30 minutes to split among themselves.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047846
-
Lawmakers Freeze Md. Fracking Rules to Weigh Ban
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
A group of lawmakers in Maryland have barred the state Department of the Environment from carrying out new guidelines for hydraulic fracturing.
The two Democratic leaders of the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive and Legislative Review said they issued the temporary restriction "to ensure that concerns raised by stakeholders about the regulations are addressed."
Under the hold, state regulators will not be able to act on the new fracking regulations until Feb. 27. Maryland's moratorium on the controversial oil and gas extraction technique is set to expire in October, and lawmakers may move to impose a new ban before then.
Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) has supported fracking so long as the state places safety and environmental restrictions on the practice, which involves pumping millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals underground to break apart rock and free trapped fossil fuels.
While the Department of the Environment has defended its fracking guidelines as "the most protective and comprehensive in the country," Maryland Sen. Roger Manno (D) said "there was absolutely no consensus that these regulations were ready for prime time."
The rules would require any company drilling for gas in Western Maryland to install four layers of steel casing around each well to prevent any toxic byproducts from leaking into the surrounding environment, among other safety measures.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047848
-
U.S. to Become Net Exporter of Energy
Jan 5, 2017 | Fuel Fix Blog
By David Hunn
The United States will become a net exporter of energy within the next 15 years under most scenarios examined by the U.S. Department of Energy, according to a report released Thursday.
The department’s Annual Energy Outlook 2017 presents updated projections for U.S. energy markets through 2050 based on eight scenarios. It is the first time that the department has published projections through 2050.
Petroleum liquid imports will likely fall, the department anticipates, and natural gas exports should rise. The country’s rich shale fields and technological advances will combine to produce oil and gas at lower prices.
If oil prices also rise, oil companies will boost production even as the high prices tamp down domestic consumption, “enabling the most rapid transition to net exporter status,” the report says.
In most of the scenarios, however, U.S. production declines in the 2030s, which slows or reverses projected growth in net energy exports.
Adam Sieminski, chief of the department’s Energy Information Administration, said the projections show how advances in technology are “reshaping the energy future.”
Other key findings:
• Total energy consumption increases 5 percent between 2016 and 2040 in the agency’s baseline scenario. The electric power sector is the largest consumer of energy, in all scenarios.
• Energy production ranges widely between scenarios, from nearly flat to 50 percent growth through 2040. Total energy production increases by more than 20 percent in the baseline case, led by increases in crude oil and natural gas production.
• Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions decline in most of the report’s scenarios. All of the scenarios except for one include the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan in estimates
The Energy Information Administration releases complete Annual Energy Outlooks every other year. This year’s version is a shorter edition.
Cases are available at the administration website.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/01/05/u-s-to-become-net-exporter-of-energy/
-
Utility at Center of Hacking Hype Won't 'Pull Back' from Government
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
A small Vermont utility will keep working with federal officials to counter hackers, despite a recent government leak that set off a cascade of flawed reporting on the company's cyber defenses.
"As utilities, we have to work with our federal partners; they have the intelligence that we need," said Neale Lunderville, general manager at Burlington Electric, a municipally owned power utility situated along Lake Champlain. "99.99 percent of federal government officials have good intentions, and they want to do the right thing. [But] there are always some people who want to use information for their own intentions or for some bigger political game."
On Friday, an erroneous report in The Washington Post claimed Russian hackers had infiltrated the U.S. power grid through an unnamed Vermont utility (Energywire, Jan. 4). The report cited anonymous senior Obama administration officials, who on the previous day had released a report detailing internet protocol addresses and malware signatures associated with a Russian state-sponsored hacking campaign known as "Grizzly Steppe."
The evidence of a significant Russian cyber intrusion at the utility in question, later revealed to be Burlington Electric, soon foundered, and the Post retracted parts of its story.
In reality, according to Lunderville, Burlington used the government's Grizzly Steppe indicators to comb through its own networks on Friday morning. The search turned up one item of interest — suspicious web traffic on a laptop disconnected from any grid operations. The company quickly isolated the computer and pulled it off the business network.
Next, Lunderville said, the utility alerted federal authorities, because the IP address visited by the laptop had been flagged by the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI as part of the Grizzly Steppe campaign. But when the utility reported the potential intrusion to federal officials Friday, it was still too early to say whether the IP address was a "false positive" or part of some malicious, targeted effort to break into the grid.
"Had somebody, anybody, infiltrated our electric grid, that is an extraordinarily significant matter and one that needs to be treated very carefully, not leaked out on a Friday night," Lunderville said.
He said that although an investigation is ongoing, so far there has been no evidence that Burlington Electric was of special interest to any Russian hackers. Lunderville added that he has no special knowledge of how the indicators and IP addresses shared by DHS last Thursday tie back to Moscow, if at all.
"The fact is, they [federal officials] haven't told us anything about it, and I'm not sure they ever will," he said. "Our job is to detect the threats, report them and then work with our federal partners to continue to mitigate them. We're not in the intelligence business."
Adding to the confusion about the security of the North American power grid, one of the IP addresses singled out by U.S. authorities in its Russian hacking report bore historic links to Ontario's main electricity distributor, Hydro One Ltd. But a representative at that company told E&E News that the address in question existed online prior to the formation of Hydro One and was not connected in any way to the operation of the power grid.
Despite the unsubstantiated fears swirling around the Grizzly Steppe indicators and the reliability of the electric grid, Lunderville said that "we as an industry are going to continue to take cybersecurity very seriously."
"Even though the story around this incident was overblown, we can't think that all threats are overblown," he said, adding that "you're not going to see the industry pull back" from exchanging information with the government in the face of leaks.
While he said he hoped the episode would ultimately "strengthen" relations with key federal agencies, Lunderville let slip a hint of frustration during a brief phone interview with E&E News.
"Certainly, our federal partners need to appreciate the confidentiality of the information we're sharing with them," he said.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047871
-
Feds Slam Medical Clinic for Asbestos Exposure
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
A medical facility in Wisconsin failed to inform workers after exposing them to asbestos, federal regulators said this week.
Asbestos is a carcinogenic mineral and a once-common building material.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, run by the Department of Labor, said on Tuesday that the Monroe Clinic Inc. also failed to provide workers with protective gear. It slapped the clinic — based in the town of Monroe on the state's southern border — with one willful violation and 11 other serious health and safety infringements.
"Monroe Clinic knew its employees were working amid materials known to contain asbestos, and failed to inform them of the location of hazards and to protect them from exposure to a known carcinogen that can cause life-long health issues and possibly death," Ann Grevenkamp, OSHA's regional director, said in a statement.
"It is imperative that employers take all known precautions to protect workers from potential exposure to any material that may contain asbestos," she added.
OSHA proposed a $261,890 fine.
The Monroe Clinic had been aware of asbestos in its facilities since 2008, government investigators found. Workers in the boiler room and crawl spaces came into contact with the substance, which can cause mesothelioma and other health problems.
OSHA also said that Monroe failed to create a decontamination area for workers, conduct exposure assessments, provide medical checkups or post warning signage.
Linda Reinstein, president of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, slammed the clinic's managers.
"This is an egregious OSHA and human rights violation that will impact the workers and their families for decades," she said. "With every cough, they will be reminded of their exposure. ... Until there is a fine coupled with prison time, violations will continue."
The Monroe Clinic did not respond to a request for comment.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047893
-
Dems: Tillerson's Climate Support 'Encouraging,' but Not Enough
Jan 5, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick and Evan Lehmann
Former Exxon Mobil Corp. CEO Rex Tillerson found common ground with Democrats on climate change yesterday as he met with lawmakers he hopes will confirm him as Donald Trump's secretary of State.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking member Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) each held prolonged meetings yesterday with the veteran oilman in which climate change was raised. Cardin said his hour-plus meeting with Tillerson included "a rather lengthy discussion" of both climate and conservation.
"He explained to me that at Exxon Mobil, he supported the Paris accords. That was encouraging to hear," said Cardin, who, with nine of his Senate Democratic colleagues, visited the landmark climate summit outside the French capital to support the Obama administration's efforts there. "He stressed for me his background in science, and that he is a believer in science."
Tillerson differs from most other members of Trump's would-be Cabinet and Trump himself in affirming man-made climate change. As Exxon's CEO, Tillerson lauded the agreement reached by nearly 200 countries in December 2015 as "an important step forward" in the fight against warming. And he reversed the company's previous policy of denying the science despite its having supported research stretching back to the 1970s that showed fossil fuels are driving warming.
Yet it remains unclear what bearing Tillerson's views of climate science or the Paris Agreement will have on the Trump administration, should he be confirmed. Trump, who has called climate change a "hoax," has vowed to cancel the Paris deal.
Coons, who serves on both the Foreign Relations Committee and the Appropriations panel that funds the State Department, said he told Tillerson that the accord is important to him.
"What I told him was that I was at Paris, I support the agreement, and that I think it is an appropriate role for the State Department as part of an administration to continue to sustain and move forward the implementation of the Paris Agreement," Coons said.
But Coons said he did not ask whether the nominee would attempt to convince Trump not to abandon the agreement. And while he discussed the State Department's commitment to developing-country aid, Coons also did not ask Tillerson's stance on the United Nations' Green Climate Fund, which helps poor countries cope with warming.
Cardin said his discussion with Tillerson touched on "what we need to do in countries around the world where extreme poverty has denied people access to reasonable energy accessibility."
Tillerson has spoken of the need to combat energy poverty in developing countries, but observers say those views run counter to his professed concern about climate change. The solution he offers is usually more access to fossil fuels in places like Africa that lack reliable energy supply, but where renewable energy is making inroads.
Trump, meanwhile, has left little room to maneuver on Paris. His advisers are said to be weighing a variety of options for leaving the agreement, including the drastic option of withdrawing from the U.N. negotiating framework the deal is based on.
Praise for Tillerson's Exxon divestment
Tillerson is set to meet in the coming days with all 21 members of the Foreign Relations Committee and with several other key senators and members of leadership on both sides of the aisle. The committee is tentatively set to hold his confirmation hearing Jan. 11 and 12, though Democrats have pushed for more time to review his disclosures. The hearings might also come after the Senate holds an all-day "vote-a-rama" the night before on budget reconciliation legislation.
"We will be significantly distracted," said Coons. "We may well have been up all night and be in the middle of voting on dozens and dozens of amendments. That's really not the appropriate time to also be trying to conduct thoughtful, serious, thorough discussions."
Tillerson's whirlwind Capitol tour this week coincides with fresh efforts to appease senators' concerns about his ties with Exxon Mobil.
The company announced an agreement with Tillerson on Tuesday that would sever all financial ties between Exxon and its former CEO, who retired five days ago. If Tillerson is confirmed, the value of 2 million Exxon shares he was due to receive through 2026 would be put into a trust managed by an independent overseer.
The move is legally required under federal law, and it received an important endorsement yesterday by Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
"It appears to me based on what I've read that it's a responsible — very responsible — step," Corker said yesterday.
The move also stands to sap some of the potency from Democratic criticisms about potential conflicts of interest. Some lawmakers claim Tillerson could use his post as the nation's top diplomat to benefit the oil giant.
Corker said those arguments may have lost some of their teeth.
"Well, it certainly takes away an issue that we knew had to be taken away," Corker said. "He knew that; Exxon knew that. I mean, they knew that he had to be separated and have no economic relationship with them whatsoever. It's what needed to happen."
But Coons said Tillerson's move to divest from Exxon throws into sharp relief the fact that Trump has failed to do as much with his own businesses. The president-elect has said he will announce plans next week for how he plans to disentangle himself from his business interests, but Democrats yesterday seemed unimpressed.
"I hope that the president-elect makes an announcement soon where he follows through with the complete severing of ties that Mr. Tillerson is planning or is in the process of carrying out with Exxon Mobil," said Coons.
Dems in search of a GOP ally
Both Cardin and Coons characterized their meetings with Tillerson as generally positive, though both said they would wait until after the hearing to decide whether or not they would support his nomination.
Still, they and other Democrats argued that Tillerson's four-decade tenure at Exxon calls into question whether he can pivot from representing a company or industry to advancing U.S. interests.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who sharply criticized Exxon's past statements on climate science, said Tillerson's oil industry pedigree is a concern.
"I can't speak for everybody, but the obvious concern is that his lifelong loyalty to Exxon and putting its interests ahead of the interests of the United States of America will continue in the new position that he holds, and that he'll be really burdened by that conflict of interest," he said.
Tillerson isn't winning himself points from environmental organizations.
"We oppose him," Rhea Suh, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, told reporters yesterday.
"Handing over U.S. global policy to a Big Oil chief is, we think, an epic mistake," she said. "He's a walking conflict of interest, from his relationships with Russia to his vested business interests. And the oil industry, particularly his company, has been at the center of more conflict and injustice than any other in modern time."
Democrats and their allies are hoping that at least one committee Republican opposes Tillerson after the hearing next week. That could prevent him from reaching the Senate floor for a confirmation vote.
One moderate Republican on the panel, Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, said he agrees with Tillerson on the existence of climate change. But he suggested Tillerson's views on that subject aren't factoring into his decision to support or oppose him.
"I share those views," Flake said of climate change. "I don't think it's that relevant, frankly."
Conservative climate policy experts were similarly unconcerned. Nick Loris of the Heritage Foundation noted that Trump's U.S. EPA pick, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R), has "committed to dismantling the domestic global warming regulations that are the meat" of the U.S. commitment to Paris.
"Even if Tillerson supports the Paris deal, it's not going to mean much if the U.S. dismantles the climate regulations and refrains from making any contributions to the Green Climate Fund," he said. "In that regard, Paris will be much like all of the other climate deals: a lot of celebratory pats on the back without any real policy implications."
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/01/05/stories/1060047873
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