Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 1/10/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Plastics Industry Joins Federal Effort on Energy Efficient manufacturing
Jan 9, 2017 | Plastics News
By Steve Toloken
A plastics industry trade group is welcoming an announcement by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Rochester Institute of Technology to form a new center to develop technology in energy efficiency and for the reuse and recycling of materials in manufacturing. -
Barrasso Eyes Next Week for Pruitt Hearing
Jan 9, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Geof Koss
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman John Barrasso hopes to schedule a hearing next week for President-elect Donald Trump's nominee to head U.S. EPA, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R). -
Perry, Zinke May Get Hearings Next Week — Murkowski
Jan 10, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is looking to schedule hearings on President-elect Donald Trump's nominees to lead the departments of Energy and the Interior before the inauguration, she said yesterday. -
Ethics Officials Clear Trump EPA Nominee
Jan 9, 2017 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Michael Biesecker
Federal ethics officials have cleared President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for the Environmental Protection Agency to be confirmed by the Senate. -
Conservative Group Pushes for 'Across the Board' Rollbacks
Jan 10, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
The committee approved debate on five amendments offered by Republicans, nine by Democrats and two bipartisan amendments. Amendments made in order include...An effort by Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) to ensure that any rules made under the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act are exempted... -
How Apparel and Footwear Can Comply with Changing Chemical Regulation Under President-elect Trump
Jan 9, 2017 | Apparel Magazine
By Stephanie Warrick
The election of a new president who has vowed to roll back regulations in many areas — coupled with the majorities in the House and Senate — has many in the apparel, retail and footwear businesses wondering what chemical regulation will look like... -
California Committee Rejects Controversial Nitrite Prop 65 Listing
Jan 10, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California's Carcinogen Identification Committee (CIC) has voted unanimously not to list "nitrite in combination with amines or amides" as a substance known to the state to cause cancer under Proposition 65. -
California Agency Launches BPA Database
Jan 10, 2017 | Chemical Watch
California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has launched a new database of bisphenol A-containing products on its public Proposition 65 website. -
FDA Finds More Perchlorate in More Food, Especially Bologna, Salami and Rice Cereal
Jan 9, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Tom Neltner
Last month, the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) scientists published a study showing significant increases in perchlorate contamination in food sampled from 2008 and 2012 compared to levels sampled from 2003 to 2006. -
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families Releases New Report on Lead Screening of Children
Jan 10, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
Today, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families released a new report, “Children at Risk: Gaps in State Lead Screening Policies,” which takes a detailed look at each state’s blood lead testing policies. -
Water: EPA Amends West Virginia Plant's PFOA Order
Jan 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
EPA has amended a drinking water order for a former DuPont facility in West Virginia that released large amounts of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), lowering the trigger for when residents living near the facility must be provided with alternate sources of drinking water... -
Fragrances Blamed for Allergies Banned Under EU Proposal
Jan 10, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
World Trade Organization member countries have until March 5 to file objections to a proposed European Union ban on three substances in cosmetics, according to a draft regulation issued by the European Commission. -
Obama in Scientific Journal: ‘The Trend Toward Clean Energy is Irreversible’
Jan 9, 2017 | Washington Post
By Brady Dennis
President Obama has long made a moral case for investing in clean energy technologies such as wind and solar, saying the United States and other countries must slash their emissions of greenhouse gases to stave off the worse effects of global warming. -
U.S. Oil and Gas Drilling to Lead 2017 Global Growth
Jan 9, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
North American exploration and production companies will spend one-quarter more this year, leading global spending growth among oil and gas companies, according to a new report from Barclays. -
Wealth of Options Awaiting Oil and Gas Lobbyists
Jan 10, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
Oil and gas industry lobbyists hope to see action soon on legislation and regulatory changes to promote drilling opportunities, pipeline permits, revised air and water regulations, revamped renewable fuel requirements, lower corporate taxes and amended rules on financial hedging. -
Republican Resolution Targets EPA New-Source Rule
Jan 9, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Hannah Hess
One of U.S. EPA's chief House critics wants to use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to strike down the agency's methane standards for new and heavily modified oil and gas operations. -
Some States Eye ESPS Model Trading Rules to Aid GHG Reduction Efforts
Jan 10, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Abby Smith
States intent on moving forward with greenhouse gas (GHG) regulation despite an expected slowdown at the federal level are looking to EPA's draft model trading rules for its power plant GHG standards as a resource to develop new or expand existing state clean energy initiatives. -
Transco Tells FERC Timeline is Tight For Marcellus-Focused Atlantic Sunrise
Jan 10, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
With federal environmental review of the Atlantic Sunrise Project finished, Williams' Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. (Transco) is asking FERC to not keep Marcellus Shale gas bottled up any longer than necessary and approve the project by Feb. 16... -
America’s First ‘Clean Coal’ Plant is Now Operational — And Another is On the Way
Jan 10, 2017 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
The first large scale U.S. “clean coal” facility was declared operational Tuesday — by the large energy firm NRG Energy and JX Nippon Oil & Gas Exploration Corp. -
Texas Pipeline Companies Support Hiring of More Inspectors
Jan 10, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Nushin Huq
Texas needs more pipeline inspectors to oversee the state's more than 400,000 miles of pipelines, the state's pipeline industry group says. -
Industries Weigh Options for Reversing EPA Facility Safety Rule Revisions
Jan 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Groups representing various industries are weighing options for reversing EPA's recent revisions to its Risk Management Program (RMP) facility safety rule, including a possible push for lawmakers to undo the changes through a Congressional Review Act (CRA) disapproval... -
Kerry Presses Businesses to Take Up Climate Fight
Jan 9, 2017 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolff
Secretary of State John Kerry Monday called on the private sector to step in and speed the economic shift toward a clean energy economy in the face of an incoming Trump administration that has rejected President Barack Obama's efforts to fight climate change. -
'Day Against Denial' Rallies Target Nominees' Climate Stance
Jan 10, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Hess
From Maine to California, people rallied against President-elect Donald Trump's Cabinet picks for U.S. EPA and the departments of Energy, the Interior and State yesterday in an attempt to pressure senators against advancing the confirmations.
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) Plastics Industry Joins Federal Effort on Energy Efficient manufacturing
Jan 9, 2017 | Plastics News
By Steve Toloken
A plastics industry trade group is welcoming an announcement by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Rochester Institute of Technology to form a new center to develop technology in energy efficiency and for the reuse and recycling of materials in manufacturing.
DOE and RIT on Jan. 4 announced the $140 million initiative to form the Reducing Embodied-energy and Decreasing Emissions Institute, or Remade, at RIT’s Golisano Institute of Sustainability.
Funding will be split equally between federal and non-federal matching funds, but DOE noted that the $70 million in federal funding is dependent on future budget appropriations.
“The Remade Institute will focus on driving down the cost of technologies needed to reuse, recycle and remanufacture materials such as metals, fibers, polymers and electronic waste and aims to achieve a 50 percent improvement in overall energy efficiency by 2027,” DOE said.
In a statement, the plastics division of the Washington-based American Chemistry Council welcomed the selection of RIT, in Rochester, N.Y., to head the effort.
“We look forward to working with all consortium members to increase the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers and to strengthen remanufacturing and recycling as a means to further enhance the overall sustainability of the materials we use,” said Steve Russell, vice president of ACC’s plastics division.
ACC is an affiliate member of the Remade Institute, along with the Plastics Industry Association in Washington.
DOE said the Remade Institute would be the 13th such institute formed by the federal government as part of its Manufacturing USA initiative since 2012. It said the federal government has spent $920 million on them, with $1.87 billion in non-federal investment.
The chairman and CEO of Remade, Nabil Nasr, who is also the associate provost and director of the Golisano Institute, said more energy efficient technology in manufacturing is important to creating economic growth.
“Across the nation and around the world, cleaner production, clean tech and adoption of a circular economy are recognized as critical drivers to a prosperous future,” he said. “As resource scarcity intensifies, the thoughtful use of water, energy and raw materials is the only path forward.”
DOE said manufacturing accounts for nearly 25 percent of U.S. energy use, with the physical products created in manufacturing accounting for most of that.
It estimated that more cost-effective technology in materials production could save the equivalent of the energy consumed by New Hampshire, Hawaii, Delaware, Rhode Island, Washington, D.C. and Vermont.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170109/NEWS/170109919/plastics-industry-joins-federal-effort-on-energy-efficient
-
Barrasso Eyes Next Week for Pruitt Hearing
Jan 9, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Geof Koss
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman John Barrasso hopes to schedule a hearing next week for President-elect Donald Trump's nominee to head U.S. EPA, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R).
The Wednesday, Jan. 18, date is "tentative," the Wyoming Republican told E&E News this afternoon.
"I'm going to talk to Sen. Carper first," Barrasso said, referring to EPW ranking member Tom Carper (D-Del.). The pair plans to meet later today to discuss Pruitt's nomination, he said.
After meeting with Pruitt, Carper last week said he had "grave concerns" over his nomination but promised a fair confirmation process.
However, he said he would oppose a hearing until the nominee had submitted financial disclosure and other ethics filings, as well as the completion of an FBI background check. He also said that committee Democrats want time to review the materials before a hearing is set.
Barrasso today said he was unsure if the FBI had finished its review but indicated that Pruitt has complied with other information requests.
"Everything we've asked him to submit, he's submitted," the senator said.
Barrasso last week indicated he hoped to at least hold a hearing on Pruitt before the Jan. 20 inauguration, noting that the past three presidents' EPA chief selections had their nominations reviewed before their bosses were officially sworn in (E&E Daily, Jan. 5).
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2017/01/09/stories/1060048078
-
Perry, Zinke May Get Hearings Next Week — Murkowski
Jan 10, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is looking to schedule hearings on President-elect Donald Trump's nominees to lead the departments of Energy and the Interior before the inauguration, she said yesterday.
"We want to get to a hearing on both of them next week," Murkowski told E&E News last night, speaking of Interior nominee Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R), whom Trump has tapped to lead DOE.
he met with both of the nominees late last week, but one of them did not have his paperwork from the Office of Government Ethics ready, though she did not recall which nominee.
"Hopefully, we've got it since our meeting," she said.
Ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said yesterday she had met with Zinke but not Perry.
"We both exchanged different ideas and viewpoints, and we'll see what he says on the record," Cantwell said in a brief interview.
Asked about allegations that Zinke may have defrauded the government to pay for personal travel, she said committee Democrats are "looking at it" (Greenwire, Dec. 21, 2016).
Republicans appear to be further along in meeting with the nominees than Democrats. Energy and Natural Resources Committee member Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said yesterday he's met with Perry, whom he plans to support.
Former Energy Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said yesterday he has not yet met with Perry but wants to sit down with the former governor. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said he's spoken to Perry by phone and believed the two would meet later today.
Democrats balk
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) took to the floor yesterday to respond to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's weekend comments that Democrats need to "grow up" over their confirmation gripes (E&E Daily, Jan. 9).
"We're not doing this for sport," Schumer said. "Democrats feel very strongly that pushing for a thorough and thoughtful vetting process is the right thing to do."
He reiterated concerns from OGE Director Walter Shaub, who late last week said the rush to schedule hearings was straining the office's ability to process financial disclosure documents. Shaub said he had "great concern" that nominees for the first time in OGE's 40-year history will receive hearings before their ethics reviews are complete.
Schumer released a copy of a 2009 letter from McConnell to then-Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) detailing a list of demands for agreeing to hearings on President Obama's nominees, including the filing of financial disclosure forms, an FBI review and the OGE ethics certification.
Using a black marker, Schumer crossed out Reid's name on the letter and wrote "McConnell," substituting his own name for the Kentuckian's at the end.
McConnell, who met with Trump in New York City yesterday, said afterward the two discussed the confirmation process. "Everybody will be properly vetted as they have been in the past, and I'm hopeful that we'll get up to six or seven — particularly the national security team in place — on day one," he said, according to the media pool report.
Trump also visited the media pool a short time later with Alibaba Group Executive Chairman Jack Ma and said the confirmation process was "going great."
"I think they'll all pass. I think every nomination will be — they're all at the highest level. Jack was even saying, they are the absolute high level. I think they're going to do very well," Trump said.
Reporter George Cahlink contributed.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/01/10/stories/1060048102
-
Ethics Officials Clear Trump EPA Nominee
Jan 9, 2017 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Michael Biesecker
Federal ethics officials have cleared President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for the Environmental Protection Agency to be confirmed by the Senate.
The Office of Government Ethics on Monday released the personal financial disclosure report for Scott Pruitt, currently Oklahoma’s attorney general. The ethics office affirmed that Pruitt’s disclosures comply with applicable federal laws and rules.
No date has been set for Pruitt’s Senate confirmation hearing.
His finances are among the least complicated of Trump’s Cabinet nominees, a group that includes several billionaires. In just four pages, Pruitt disclosed an investment portfolio valued between $420,000 and $1 million, held primarily in mutual funds, bonds and a state retirement plan.
Pruitt, 48, also listed debt of between $500,000 and $1 million on a mortgage on his Oklahoma home.
Senate Democrats and environmental groups have criticized Pruitt for what they term cozy political ties with the oil and gas industry. Like Trump, Pruitt has also has also been a vocal denier of the science showing that the planet is warming and that man-made carbon emissions are to blame.
Pruitt, a Republican, has repeatedly sued the EPA since becoming attorney general in 2011. He joined with other Republican attorneys general in opposing the Clean Power Plan, which seeks to limit planet-warming carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants. Pruitt also sued over the agency’s recent expansion of water bodies regulated under the federal Clean Water Act, which has been opposed by industries that would be forced to clean up polluted wastewater.
Though Pruitt ran unopposed for a second term in 2014, campaign finance reports show he raised more than $700,000, much of it from people in the energy and utility industries. Among those who gave the maximum contribution of $5,000 to Pruitt’s campaign was Continental Resources Chairman and CEO Harold Hamm, an Oklahoma oil tycoon who has been advising Trump.
On his disclosure forms, Pruitt is also listed as chairman of the Rule of Law Defense Fund, a Washington-based tax-exempt organization founded in 2014. The group’s website describes it as a public policy organization for the study of issues relevant to the nation’s Republican attorneys general and to promote “the rule of law, federalism, and freedom in a civil society.”
In a letter sent to an EPA ethics official last week, Pruitt said he has resigned from the group effective Dec. 8.
Pruitt is also listed on his disclosure form as a member of the boards for The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, and The Windows Ministry, a small Oklahoma City non-profit organization that describes its sole mission as “promoting the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
In his letter to the EPA, Pruitt said he would also resign from those boards if he is confirmed to lead the agency.
Charlie Spies, an Oklahoma attorney for two political action committees tied to Pruitt said Monday he is in the process of filing the required paperwork with the Federal Election Commission required to dissolve them and distribute any remaining funds. Oklahoma Strong is Pruitt’s leadership PAC to raise money for like-minded conservative candidates, while Liberty 2.0 was set up by Pruitt’s supporters to support any future bids he might make for public office.
Spies said the political fundraising entities, which are likely to be criticized by Democrats for raising money from corporations and individuals who profit from fossil fuel production, have missions that are “no longer relevant.”
“We don’t want them to be a distraction during the confirmation hearings,” Spies said.
Associated Press writer Sean Murphy contributed from Oklahoma City.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/whitehouse/ethics-officials-clear-trump-epa-nominee/2017/01/09/1000e74c-d6a7-11e6-a0e6-d502d6751bc8_story.html?utm_term=.327dc0b11729
-
Conservative Group Pushes for 'Across the Board' Rollbacks
Jan 10, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell
Representatives from the conservative Freedom Partners group are meeting with House Republicans this week to push their strategy for rolling back Obama-era regulations.
The sessions come as House lawmakers continue to make good on GOP promises to reform and limit the federal government's regulatory structure.
Freedom Partners met with the Republican Study Committee yesterday and is expected to continue discussions with House leadership today. The group last week rolled out a road map for efficiently slashing rules they say have cost the economy more than $700 billion since 2009.
"We hope it's a useful tool for members to not only understand what's going to take a long time, but what can be done right now and get to it," said Andy Koenig, the group's vice president of policy.
"I'm really glad to see there's a growing recognition in Congress that we need comprehensive reform across the board," he added.
The strategy directs Congress and President-elect Donald Trump to identify all regulations that can be undone through executive order and the Congressional Review Act.
The CRA is a legislative tool designed to overturn regulations issued by federal agencies. It requires a simple majority to pass. Rules passed after June 13 of last year can be included in the review.
For more entrenched regulations, Koenig said Congress should begin the process to repeal them now because the process can be lengthy. Nixing Obama administration regulations is not going to be as easy as many think, he said.
"Something we noted in the months between the election and the new year was that when we were talking to members, staff and other people in the conservative movement, there was a general thought that because Barack Obama did so much with a pen and a phone that Donald Trump could just walk in with an eraser on day one and get rid of the whole swath of regulations," he said.
"But when you dig into the statute and actually look at what has to be done to get rid of some of these regulations, we realized that peeling back the Obama regulatory agenda was going to be harder in some respects than people had initially thought," he noted.
The group has laid out its priorities for which regulations to address with executive order, the CRA and through traditional repeal.
In the energy and environment sphere, Freedom Partners would have Trump issue executive orders to direct agencies to reverse the coal leasing moratorium, the Paris climate agreement, programs related to the Clean Power Plan, agency sustainability goals and others (see chart).
Rules Congress could reverse through the CRA include the Interior Department's Stream Protection Rule, the Bureau of Land Management's methane rule and renewable fuel standard obligations.
While Freedom Partner's how-to guide addresses rolling back current regulations, Koenig said the next step is reforming the system, a prevalent GOP battle cry so far in this session of Congress.
Senators a 'part of the solution'?
Koenig said he hopes the Senate will review as many regulations under the CRA as possible — but between budget reconciliation, repealing the Affordable Care Act and presidential nominee confirmation hearings, there will likely only be time to address five or six.
The House has already passed The "Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act" (E&E Daily, Jan. 6) and the "Midnight Rules Relief Act" (E&E Daily, Jan. 5). The "Regulatory Accountability Act of 2017" is expected on the floor tomorrow.
But bills like the "REINS Act" face more difficult odds of passage in the Senate.
Koenig said his group will be targeting Democratic senators who will need Republican support to be re-elected in 2018. Democrats are defending 10 seats in states Trump won in November (E&E Daily, Nov. 10, 2016).
"I think we can exert pressure on them to make them either switch their vote or have a lot of explaining to do in 2018 if they're not going to be a part of the solution then we need to get them out of the way," he said.
"That 60-vote threshold is always going to be difficult, but I think there's a real opportunity through this strategy to either force that change now or put us in a really good position to do the comprehensive regulatory reform we need after the 2018 election," he added, noting the 60-vote requirement to bring a bill to the Senate floor.
The Senate has introduced its own versions of the "REINS Act," the "Midnight Rules Relief Act" and a regulatory budgeting measure (E&E News PM, Jan. 6).
'Regulatory Accountability Act'
The House Rules Committee yesterday sent the "Regulatory Accountability Act," H.R. 5, to the floor with a rule that allows for an hour of general debate and additional time for 16 amendments.
The measure is expected on the floor tomorrow.
The bill, sponsored by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), combines six reform measures that passed the House in the last few sessions of Congress and aims to cut through red tape and certain regulations that some conservatives say are preventing economic growth.
Rep. Tom Marino (R-Pa.) lauded the bill, saying it would help relieve Americans from burdensome regulations that are costing the economy billions of dollars. Marino said the measure would help make America great again.
But Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said it bothers him when people say that because "American is great." He added that he worries about what the bill would mean for the future of regulation when a sizeable contingent of government leaders openly deny climate change.
The committee approved debate on five amendments offered by Republicans, nine by Democrats and two bipartisan amendments.
Amendments made in order include:
· Language from Goodlatte to restrain unwarranted interpretation of ambiguous statutes to find implied delegations of legislative rulemaking authority and of ambiguous statutes and regulations to expansively extend agency authority.
· A provision Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) to establish a timeline by which the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs must issue guidelines for rules.
· An amendment by Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) to require agencies to include an economic assessment or summary certifying that a proposed rule will not have a "significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities" under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
· Language from Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.) to reform the Regulatory Flexibility Act to reduce the burden of regulations on small businesses.
· An effort by Reps. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), Goodlatte and Chaffetz prohibiting agencies from impartially communicating with the public in order to generate support or opposition to a proposed rule.
· Language from Reps. Garret Graves (R-La.), Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) and Brian Babin (R-Texas) to provide agency accountability of major rules by requiring retrospective review and report.
· Language from Rep. David Young (R-Iowa) to allow for sufficient time (at least 90 days) for affected entities to take steps to comply with issued guidance.
· An amendment by Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) to ensure that any rule intended to protect public health and welfare is exempted from the requirements of the bill.
· A provision from Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) providing for the prevention of the transmission of foodborne illness or to meet preventive-control requirements for food safety.
· An amendment by Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) to exempt rules that significantly improve the employment, retention and wages of workforce participants, especially those with significant barriers to employment, such as persons with disabilities or limited English proficiency.
· Language from Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.) to exempt rules pertaining to the safety of children's products or toys.
· Language from Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) exempting from the bill from a rule that pertains to workplace health and safety and is necessary to prevent or reduce the incidence of traumatic injury, cancer or irreversible lung disease at mining facilities that are subject to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act.
· An effort by Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) to ensure that any rules made under the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act are exempted.
· A provision from Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) striking language that would require the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to perform regulatory flexibility analyses for forest and land management plans.
· An amendment by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) to require analyses conducted under Title III of the bill to include direct and indirect benefits as well as direct and indirect costs.
· And a provision by Rep. Bill Posey (R-Fla.) to require federal agencies to report on influential scientific information and associated peer reviews disseminated or to be disseminated in a rulemaking proceeding.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/01/10/stories/1060048096
-
How Apparel and Footwear Can Comply with Changing Chemical Regulation Under President-elect Trump
Jan 9, 2017 | Apparel Magazine
By Stephanie Warrick
The election of a new president who has vowed to roll back regulations in many areas — coupled with the majorities in the House and Senate — has many in the apparel, retail and footwear businesses wondering what chemical regulation will look like in the new administration.
The industry — which is a top user of regulated chemicals throughout the manufacturing process — thought they knew last summer, when President Obama signed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, an update to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Endorsed by the AAFA, it gives the EPA the authority to evaluate chemicals suspected of being the most dangerous to human health, and restrict, reduce or eliminate their use.
The Lautenberg Act process requires the EPA to select and evaluate the most dangerous chemicals first, which will take months or years. Businesses have time to adjust, and local jurisdictions won't be able to pass new laws regulating toxics that come under the EPA's regulatory purview, which is called "state and local preemption." Some existing state laws still stand under the Act — such as Proposition 65, California's requirement for consumer notification of possible toxic substance exposure. But overall, the Lautenberg Act created a more orderly, predictable process, so the AAFA supported it.
Enter President-elect Trump
Now, it's difficult to guess whether the Lautenberg Act will be repealed or changed in the wake of Donald Trump's ascent to the presidency. While experts say it's hard to predict with absolute certainty, the Lautenberg Act stands a good probability of surviving regime change, especially since — unlike many regulatory laws — many businesses had supported it in its final form. We caught up with the American Apparel and Footwear Association recently, and had the following discussion on the future of the Lautenberg Act.
"The Lautenberg Act had so much bipartisan support on both sides, and while it wasn't a perfect law, everybody got some of what they wanted," says Danielle Iverson, director of government relations at the AAFA. "Environmentalists and even the public supported it, too. I just don't see [repeal or crippling of Lautenberg] as being high on the priority list," she says.
"We are not advising our members to delay implementing Lautenberg," she adds.
The industry has another reason to implement the new law. Consumers want to know their clothes are safe, and they're increasingly savvy and concerned about chemicals in their everyday lives, especially when it concerns items that regularly come into contact with their bodies.
Toxic substances compliance puts a premium on transparency
In the face of so much uncertainty, perhaps the best strategy is to develop a very flexible, automated strategy for compliance so that when the dust settles and it's clear what the new rules will be, change is much easier.
A flexible, software-based approach not only helps companies comply with the Lautenberg Act revisions to TSCA — or any compliance directives, for that matter. It also helps with the heavy tracking and documentation demands that are always placed on apparel and footwear supply chains that now span more countries, suppliers, laws and trading partners than ever before.
The problem can be quite daunting. A single shoe or jacket could include materials from dozens of suppliers, from the producers of the material, to the makers of buttons, zippers, decorations, laces, ties, dyes and all the chemicals that make things water-resistant, wrinkle-resistant, spot-resistant, fire-resistant or give it special thermal properties. And each one of these items is potentially a compliance violation—or a brand-protection problem.
So even without regulation changes, the fashion industry has other good reasons to up its game in cutting back on toxics. Customers are increasingly demanding that what they wear is safe for their health — and their families'. Additionally, many consumers now want to know that their fashion choices don't pose a threat to the environment, either in their manufacture or disposal.
Supply chain transparency builds trustIn the end, the ultimate goal is transparency and the trust that goes with it—trust in one's trading partners, and ultimately, consumers trust in the brands they buy. It's hard to trust what you can't see.
But even some fairly large names in fashion are still trying to manage compliance and build networks of trusted suppliers using nothing more than spreadsheets, Iverson confirms.
"Based on AAFA's CSR benchmarking survey, an internal study of the industry, we found that the majority of companies still use spreadsheets to manage their compliance," she says.
Unfortunately, a spreadsheet can't track compliance to many different standards simultaneously. It doesn't send out alerts or show you whose test results or documents aren't done or don't comply. And with complex global supply chains, the fashion industry needs to track and manage the compliance of all of the companies, products and inputs in its supply chain.
It only takes one mistake — anywhere — to wreck a brandThe only feasible way for most big-name apparel makers and retailers to achieve that transparency reliably is to automate as much as they can, so their people can "manage by exception"—without incurring so many extra costs that compliance becomes a huge component of the cost of goods sold.
Fashion demands flexible, active transparencyUsing automated rules-based systems, it's fairly easy to reflect these updates, manage to federal and state laws, and verify that different items made by different manufacturers all meet these changing regulatory limits.
Also, when a system is flexible and automated, changes in regulatory regime — like the recent sudden shift in government — become much easier to deal with, even in times of great uncertainty. Plus, good, general-purpose systems handle far more than toxics compliance, including such things as product safety, fair labor laws and labeling requirements.
And in an industry that thrives on changes in consumer expectations —fashion, in other words— that's golden.
Stephanie Warrick is an ICIX product manager focused on business analytics, product testing and compliance. She has also managed reporting of sustainability and compliance metrics for Nike's materials supply chain, specifically focusing on chemistry and water regulations, as well as sustainable material sourcing strategies.http://apparel.edgl.com/news/How-Apparel-and-Footwear-Can-Comply-with-Changing-Chemical-Regulation-under-President-elect-Trump108443
-
California Committee Rejects Controversial Nitrite Prop 65 Listing
Jan 10, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California's Carcinogen Identification Committee (CIC) has voted unanimously not to list "nitrite in combination with amines or amides" as a substance known to the state to cause cancer under Proposition 65.
A coalition of seven industry groups had called the proposed listing 'unprecedented', as the named substance grouping could capture thousands of substances. And it is neither a chemical, a well-defined mixture, nor a product.
At a 15 November CIC meeting, the advisory group to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) agreed that the substance group has not been clearly shown through scientifically valid testing to cause cancer. As a consequence it will not be listed on Prop 65.
However, based on discussion at the meeting, nitrite in combination with specific types of amines or amides may be presented to the CIC at a later date.
Chemical prioritisation
The committee determined the prioritisation of five substances for consideration for potential Prop 65 listing in the future. These are:
· aspartame – medium/high;
· methyl chloride – medium;
· vinyl acetate – medium;
· individual type I pyrethroids – medium;
· asphalt and asphalt emissions associated with roofing – medium; and
· asphalt and asphalt emissions associated with road paving – low.
Update to section 27000 list of chemicals
The CIC also voted unanimously to update the section 27000 list of chemicals that have not been adequately tested, based on information provided by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and the US EPA.
The update included adding the following endpoints for which testing has not been satisfied:
· chromic acid – oncogenicity rat;
· mineral oil – oncogenicity mouse; and
· tetraglycine hydroperiodide – oncogenicity rat, oncogenicity mouse.
It also called for removing the following chemicals and/or endpoints, as testing has been satisfied:
· castor oil, oxidised;
· ethandioic acid; and
· 3-nitrobenzenesulfonic acid, sodium salt.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51999/california-committee-rejects-controversial-nitrite-prop-65-listing
-
California Agency Launches BPA Database
Jan 10, 2017 | Chemical Watch
California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has launched a new database of bisphenol A-containing products on its public Proposition 65 website.
The controversial development is the latest in the agency's almost year-long effort to phase in warning requirements for BPA in canned and bottled food and drink products.
Warning for exposure to BPA has been required since 11 May 2016. But using a series of emergency and temporary rules, Oehha has allowed canned and bottled food and drink products to comply through uniform point-of-sale signs, in lieu of traditional on-product labels.
The rule's latest iteration extended the compliance option to 30 December 2017. But unlike previous versions, it includes a provision requiring manufacturers using point-of-sale signs to provide Oehha with a list of products in which BPA is intentionally used in the manufacture of the can lining, jar or bottle seal. These have now been published on Oehha's lead agency website.
Industry groups and NGOs opposed this website reporting requirement during an autumn consultation.
Packaging groups like the Can Manufacturing Institute (CMI) and the North American Metal Packaging Alliance (Nampa) called the creation of an agency website redundant after industry groups developed their own. They also said it imposes unnecessary burdens.
And a coalition of NGOs said it was unreasonable for the agency to expect customers wanting to avoid BPA to have to search an online database while standing in line at a grocery store.
Despite the criticism, the agency included the website reporting provision in its final rule. The database contains nearly 20,000 entries. It includes such details as a product's brand and description, size, universal product code (UPC) and category.
It also includes a date column allowing manufacturers transitioning to BPA alternatives to indicate the 'use by' date beyond which products have been manufactured without BPA.
Oehha has said that it will drop the online list of products when the point-of-sale warning rule expires on 30 December.
Despite the new requirements, many industry groups continue to stand by the safety of BPA in food packaging. In a statement to Chemical Watch, the Grocery Manufacturers Association said: "Scientists and regulatory agencies in the US and across the world have concluded that BPA is safe for use in food packaging, including the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA), the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa), the WHO, the Japanese National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology and Health Canada."
https://chemicalwatch.com/52024/california-agency-launches-bpa-database
-
FDA Finds More Perchlorate in More Food, Especially Bologna, Salami and Rice Cereal
Jan 9, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Tom Neltner
Last month, the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) scientists published a study showing significant increases in perchlorate contamination in food sampled from 2008 and 2012 compared to levels sampled from 2003 to 2006. The amount of perchlorate in foods infants and toddlers eat went up 34% and 23% respectively. Virtually all types of food had measurable levels of perchlorate, up from 74%. These increases are important because perchlorate threatens fetal and child brain development. As we noted last month, one in five pregnant women are already at great risk from any perchlorate exposure. The FDA study doesn’t explain the increase in perchlorate contamination. Yet, it’s important to note that there is one known factor that did change in this time period: FDA allowed perchlorate to be added to plastic packaging.
Reported perchlorate levels in food varied widely, suggesting that how the food was processed may have made a significant difference. The increase in three foods jumped out to me:
· Bologna: At a shocking 1,557 micrograms of perchlorate per kilogram (µg/kg), this lunchmeat had by far the highest levels. Another sample had the fifth highest levels at 395 µg/kg. Yet a quarter of the other bologna samples had no measurable perchlorate. Previously, FDA reported levels below 10 µg/kg.
· Salami: One sample had 686 µg/kg giving it a third ranking. Other samples showed much lower levels and six of the 20 had no detectable levels of perchlorate. Previously, FDA reported levels below 7 µg/kg.
· Rice Cereal for Babies: Among baby foods, prepared dry rice cereal had the two highest levels with 173 and 98 µg/kg. Yet, 15 of the 20 samples had non-detectable levels of perchlorate. Previously, FDA reported levels less than 1 µg/kg.
The increases are disturbing in light of the threat posed by perchlorate to children’s brain development and the emerging science showing the risk at lower levels is greater than thought a decade ago. The risk is particularly significant for children in those families loyal to those brands with high levels. Unfortunately, FDA’s study does not identify the brand of food tested.
What might explain the increase in perchlorate contamination?
The only action we can document is FDA’s decision in 2005 to allow as much as 12,000 parts per million (ppm) of perchlorate to be added as an anti-static agent to plastic packaging for dry food with no free fat or oil. The packaging can be used for final products or raw materials before or during processing. Even if the final product is a liquid, raw materials such as rice, whey, sugar, starch, or spice may have contacted the perchlorate-laden plastic. The FDA decision was made in late in 2005 and sampling from the first study ended in 2006.
A Freedom of Information Act request by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) showed that FDA’s decision was based on a flawed and outdated assumption that perchlorate would not migrate into food at significant levels. Tests provided by the manufacturer late in 2015, in response to a food additive petition from NRDC and others, showed that perchlorate did indeed migrate into food, most likely from abrasion as the food flows in and out of the package. The petition asked FDA to reverse its 2005 decision and ban use of perchlorate. When FDA missed the June 2015 statutory deadline for a decision on the petition, NRDC and others sued the agency to force action. The agency told the court that it aims to make a final decision by March 2017.
What does FDA’s analysis say?
For more than 40 years, as part of its Total Diet Study, FDA has collected samples of more than 280 types of food every year from three randomly-selected cities in four regions of the country. It blends the samples from each of the three cities and analyzes the composite sample for various chemicals, such as heavy metals, nutrients, pesticides and other substances. The agency samples more than 50 types of baby food, including three types of infant formula. The agency also tests bottled water but not tap water. The agency does not report the brands sampled.
Periodically, the agency posts the results on its website and publishes studies evaluating its findings. In response to concerns with perchlorate contamination of produce and dairy, FDA published a study in 2008 summarizing the results from samples collected from 2003 to 2006. It provides updates on a webpage dedicated to the chemical.
On December 21, 2016, FDA published its latest article reporting the results for samples collected from 2008 to 2012 and compared them with those collected from 2003 to 2006 using two different statistical methods. The study provides supplementary data that includes the analytical results but does not identify the year or region from which the samples were collected. Neither the article nor the analytical results are yet available on the agency’s webpages dedicated to perchlorate or the Total Diet Study.
FDA estimated dietary intakes for 14 distinct age/sex groups. Infants and toddlers had the highest estimated consumption with 0.36 and 0.43 μg/kg-bw/day respectively. Infants had a 34% increase in perchlorate exposure compared to the foods purchased before and around the time of FDA’s approval to use perchlorate in food packaging. More than half of the infant exposure came from baby food, including infant formula. Two-year old children’s exposure increased 23%. More than half of their exposure came from dairy products.
What should FDA do?
FDA’s compelling data on the significant increase in perchlorate exposure from the food we feed our children since its approval of perchlorate added to packaging should prompt the agency to act now to ban its use in contact with food. This decision cannot come fast enough. FDA must remedy a problem of its own making, and protect what many of us value the most—our children’s health and their ability to learn and thrive to their fullest potential.
http://blogs.edf.org/health/2017/01/09/fda-finds-more-perchlorate-in-more-food/
-
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families Releases New Report on Lead Screening of Children
Jan 10, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
Today, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families released a new report, “Children at Risk: Gaps in State Lead Screening Policies,” which takes a detailed look at each state’s blood lead testing policies. While lead has been banned from household paint and gasoline for some time, there are numerous remaining sources of exposure, including paint in older housing, water service lines and plumbing, and several continuing commercial uses. Primary prevention strategies that eliminate these sources are still the best way to prevent exposure to lead. Nevertheless, regular blood lead testing is critical for identifying very young children with elevated levels early enough that intervention can prevent or mitigate long-term developmental damage.
After comparing state programs by the percentages of children tested in recent years, the report discusses why some policies have been ineffective, and focuses on key reasons for higher testing rates reported in other states. The report concludes with a critique of targeted testing strategies and calls on states to move to universal screening to better protect their children. The report comes amid the Flint water crisis, and a recent bulletin from the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which reiterated calls for states to comply with requirements to test all Medicaid-enrolled children for lead at ages one and two.
Some of the key findings from the report include:
1. Blood lead screening policies are largely inadequate and leave many children untested.
2. State policies range from requiring universal testing – adopted by 10 states plus DC – to having no requirements or recommendations on their websites (5 states).
3. No state is 100% compliant with federal Medicaid requirements or general state policies that require testing children at the critically important ages of 1 and 2.
4. Universal testing is more useful and cost effective than targeted testing. Targeted testing strategies are unlikely to successfully identify all of the children at risk for lead exposure.
Andy Igrejas, Director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, said, “The Flint water contamination crisis made clear that the U.S. has unfinished business with lead. We have to do a better job of identifying children at risk of lead poisoning, and eliminating the sources.”
The report’s author, Jen Dickman, Safer Chemicals Healthy Families program associate, continued, “We found state blood lead testing policies that are all over the map. Some are doing a better job than others of finding children who have high levels of lead in their blood and who could benefit from intervention to mitigate the impacts.”
Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) said, “The only safe level of lead in a child’s blood is zero. Maryland is leading the way with universal screening for children ages 1 and 2, and I believe that all children, no matter what state they live in, deserve to have the same protection.”
http://saferchemicals.org/newsroom/safer-chemicals-healthy-families-releases-new-report-on-lead-screening-of-children/
-
Water: EPA Amends West Virginia Plant's PFOA Order
Jan 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
EPA has amended a drinking water order for a former DuPont facility in West Virginia that released large amounts of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), lowering the trigger for when residents living near the facility must be provided with alternate sources of drinking water and expanding the area covered by the order.
It also adds The Chemours Company, a DuPont spinoff that assumed some of the the company's environmental liabilities, to the order, a move that could help secure liability given uncertainties in corporate responsibilities.
EPA Region 3 announced the change Jan. 9, referencing in part the agency's issuance last year of a first-time lifetime exposure health advisory for PFOA of 70 ppt.
The original 2009 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) consent decree between EPA and E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company for the Washington Works facility in Parkersburg, WV, set a 0.4 parts per billion provisional action level, which is equal to 400 parts per trillion (ppt). But the agreement included language saying the agency reserves the right to modify the site-specific action level if it receives information that warrants a change in the level.
The amended agreement stipulates 70 ppt as the action level that triggers the temporary provision of an alternate source of drinking water by DuPont and Chemours. “The temporary provision of drinking water will continue until a permanent alternate drinking water supply is provided,” EPA says. The amendment also expands the geographic areas to be investigated and requires appropriate action if levels of PFOA in drinking water of 70 ppt or more are discovered, the agency says.
There is no national drinking water standard for PFOA, although New Jersey is considering setting one, with an advisory board to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection urging the state to develop an enforceable level of 14 ppt.
The state's advisors are critical of the science behind EPA's 70 ppt advisory level, doubting EPA's level would achieve a 1 in 1 million lifetime cancer risk and instead suggesting risk would be 40-fold higher. But EPA in recent comments to New Jersey rebuts the criticisms by clarifying the scientific basis for its value while refraining from critiquing New Jersey's proposed value.
Adding Chemours to the order could ease questions about which company is responsible for addressing the contamination from the Washington Works facility. Dupont stopped manufacturing PFOA in 2013, and Chemours took control of the Washington Works facility after Dupont spun off part of its chemicals business into the separate company of Chemours in 2015.
Dupont has argued in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission that a separation agreement provides the company with indemnification from Chemours for DuPont's PFOA liabilities. But Chemours, which has struggled financially, has signaled it may fight against indemnifying DuPont. Adding to the uncertainty is Dupont's plan to merge with the Dow Chemical Company and then separate into three independent businesses. Sources say it is unclear which of these companies will be assigned the PFOA liability.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/water-epa-amends-west-virginia-plants-pfoa-order
-
Fragrances Blamed for Allergies Banned Under EU Proposal
Jan 10, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
World Trade Organization member countries have until March 5 to file objections to a proposed European Union ban on three substances in cosmetics, according to a draft regulation issued by the European Commission.
The regulation would add the synthetic fragrance hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (HICC) and the botanical fragrances atranol and chloroatranol to Annex II of the EU Cosmetics Regulation ((EC) No 1223/2009). The annex lists substances prohibited from cosmetics in the EU, and contains more than 1,300 entries, though many entries are for variations of the same substances.
The EU Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety concluded that the substances should be banned from cosmetics because “they are the fragrance allergens which caused the highest number of contact allergies cases in past years,” and represent “a potential risk to human health,” according to the draft regulation.
The regulation would allow a two-year transition period for cosmetics manufacturers to phase the substances out, and would impose a deadline of four years from the date of the regulation's entry into force for withdrawal of any remaining products containing the fragrances from the EU market.
The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, circulated the draft regulation Jan. 5 in line with the WTO's Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103117285&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103117285&jd=103117285
-
Obama in Scientific Journal: ‘The Trend Toward Clean Energy is Irreversible’
Jan 9, 2017 | Washington Post
By Brady Dennis
President Obama has long made a moral case for investing in clean energy technologies such as wind and solar, saying the United States and other countries must slash their emissions of greenhouse gases to stave off the worse effects of global warming.
But writing Monday in the journal Science, the president also makes an economic argument for a national policy that embraces renewable energy, rather than the renewed focus on fossil fuel production that his successor has promised.
“We have long known, on the basis of a massive scientific record, that the urgency of acting to mitigate climate change is real and cannot be ignored,” Obama wrote in an article that will be printed in the journal’s Jan. 13 edition. “In recent years, we have also seen that the economic case for action — and against inaction — is just as clear.”
The piece is at once a defense of his administration’s energy policies — from new vehicle fuel standards to subsidies for wind and solar projects to regulations on everything from methane to carbon dioxide — and an argument that the incoming administration of Donald Trump would be wise to stay the course.
Obama has been making many such closing arguments lately, in a wide range of publications. In a recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine, he warned of the risks to millions of Americans of repealing the Affordable Care Act without an adequate replacement. In the Harvard Law Review, he touted his administration’s criminal justice reforms.
As in each of those areas, when it comes to energy policy, Obama’s arguments are likely to fall on deaf ears.
Trump has vowed to “unleash” the full energy-producing power of the United States in a bid to keep electricity costs in check and to create jobs. He wants to open more federal lands to oil and gas drilling and coal mining. He has promised to scrap a slew of environmental regulations he calls unnecessary and burdensome to corporations, “cancel” U.S. participation in the global Paris climate accord and shrink the role of the Environmental Protection Agency.
In his Science article, which is dotted with photos of wind turbines and solar farms, Obama argues that would be a mistake.
He noted that many businesses themselves are concluding that reducing emissions isn’t just good for the environment, but also for the bottom line. He noted that millions of Americans already are employed in jobs related to energy-efficient technologies and that the cost of renewable energy has continued to decline, partly because of government incentives, but largely because of market forces.
Obama also insists that walking away from the international climate agreement signed in Paris would not only be a moral mistake that could risk serious environmental harm, but also an economic blunder.
“This should not be a partisan issue. It is good business and good economics to lead a technological revolution and define market trends,” he writes. “And it is smart planning to set long-term, emission-reduction targets and give American companies, entrepreneurs, and investors certainty so they can invest and manufacture the emission-reducing technologies that we can use domestically and export to the rest of the world.”
The implied message: To turn the nation’s back on such opportunities cedes leadership to other countries. Case in point: China’s recent announcement that it will pour more than $360 billion into developing renewable technologies by 2020.
Ultimately, Obama knows that the man who will occupy the Oval Office in two weeks has promised to dismantle his environmental legacy and to embolden the oil, gas and coal industries, which have heralded Trump’s arrival. Despite that, Obama argues that no matter what policies his successor might pursue, there is little he can do to halt the current transition away from fossil fuels.
“The business case for clean energy is growing, and the trend toward a cleaner power sector can be sustained regardless of near-term federal policies,” he writes, adding, “I believe the trend toward clean energy is irreversible.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/09/obama-in-scientific-journal-the-trend-toward-clean-energy-is-irreversible/?utm_term=.b00c4169bdfd#comments
-
U.S. Oil and Gas Drilling to Lead 2017 Global Growth
Jan 9, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
North American exploration and production companies will spend one-quarter more this year, leading global spending growth among oil and gas companies, according to a new report from Barclays.
Spending will increase by 7 percent worldwide, according to the investment bank’s 32nd annual survey of oil production companies, after back-to-back declines of 26 percent in 2015 and 23 percent last year.
The biggest swing comes in North America, fueled by U.S. shale drillers, where spending had dipped by 38 percent in 2016, according to Barclays. Larger companies could boost spending by as much as 58 percent this year.
International drilling budgets will only increase by 2 percent, the report says. National oil companies, like those in Russia and the Middle East, plan to spend 9 percent more, offset in part by a 7 percent dip by European companies.
The spending should fuel a long-awaited recovery in the oil field services and equipment sectors.
Only offshore drilling will continue to suffer. Budgets there are poised to fall another 20 to 25 percent, Barclays says, after tumbling by more than one-third last year.
The survey was conducted over the last four weeks, when U.S. oil prices had dipped to $50 a barrel from a recent high of $56. If oil prices rise again, Barclays expects spending will, too.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/01/09/u-s-oil-and-gas-drilling-to-lead-2017-global-growth/
-
Wealth of Options Awaiting Oil and Gas Lobbyists
Jan 10, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
The new Congress and presidency of Donald Trump have opened up a wealth of possibilities for changes that would benefit the discovery, transportation, processing and profitability of oil and natural gas.
Oil and gas industry lobbyists hope to see action soon on legislation and regulatory changes to promote drilling opportunities, pipeline permits, revised air and water regulations, revamped renewable fuel requirements, lower corporate taxes and amended rules on financial hedging.
Industry would like to see the Trump administration modify many regulations and wants Congress to go further by repealing or heavily modifying regulations that the administration cannot change on its own.
Companies Want Rules Honored
Investments in oil and gas pipelines and other energy infrastructure are high on companies’ priority lists, but the Keystone XL and the Dakota Access crude oil pipelines have generated fierce debates. President Barack Obama halted both after they had run the gauntlet of environmental reviews.
“The first thing we need to do is honor the rule of law,” Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute, told reporters Jan. 4. Once regulators have reached a decision, it should be respected, he said.
Oil pipeline companies typically have no big quarrel with the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act or the regulations of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, said John Stoody, vice president of government and public relations at the Association of Oil Pipe Lines.
“We are actually looking forward to a return to existing laws and processes,” Stoody said Jan. 6.
Process ‘Is Ripe for Reform’
The Keystone XL pipeline, which would cross the U.S.-Canada border, was required to go through a State Department review to determine whether it was in the national interest, after which a presidential approval was needed. Obama rejected it, primarily on grounds of contributing to climate change.
“I think everyone would agree the presidential approval process was broken under Obama and is ripe for reform,” Stoody said.
Geoffrey Moody, senior director of government relations of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, said his refining company members hoped Trump would reverse Obama's Dakota Access decision. That line would take crude oil from the Bakken Shale region of North Dakota to an oil pipeline hub in Illinois.
Trump similarly has been encouraged to reverse Obama's decision to block the northern segment of the Keystone XL Pipeline, from the Canadian border to Steele City, Neb. That line would be able to take Canadian and Bakken crude south to connections reaching to refiners and export points on the U.S. Gulf Coast.
Trump has said he would reverse Obama on Keystone and has said he supports Dakota Access, though he has not delved into the specific details of pipeline routing, which has been the holdup for that project.
Bills Would Rein in Regulators
Congress has started the new year with several bills to require more legal, scientific and economic justifications for regulations and congressional approval for the costlier regulations: the Regulatory Accountability Act of 2017 (H.R. 45), Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2017 (H.R. 26) and Midnight Rules Relief Act of 2017 (H.R. 21).
Moody expressed support for the bills as steps toward greater accountability and scientific integrity in regulation. Gerard said the American Petroleum Institute supported the bills as what he called a recovery of congressional authority to decide policy.
“We support those efforts to say that's where the policy should be written,” Gerard said. He described it as part of a broader debate over the role of regulatory agencies, which in his view should not be given carte blanche to write rules.
Oil and gas associations would like to see several recent regulatory initiatives rescinded. Gerard said oil and gas companies especially question federal regulations that appear to be unnecessary, such as rules that do not respond to a need or that duplicate state regulations.
He mentioned as examples the Environmental Protection Agency's rule to control methane and volatile organic compounds from oil and gas production sites and the Bureau of Land Management's rule on venting, flaring and leaking of natural gas from oil and gas exploration, production and transportation operations.
Gerard also emphasized the idea of allowing oil and gas companies more access to federal offshore acreage for exploratory drilling.
Moody said recent changes in Clean Air Act regulations, notably a recent reduction by EPA in the allowable ambient levels of ground-level ozone, are creating problems for refining and petrochemical companies.
“It is absurd that EPA has to go back and look at the science every five years,” Moody said, arguing that the science and technology of ozone emissions do not change that quickly. Something as simple as lengthening the review cycle for ozone standards would be valuable, he said, echoing the common industry concern for a stable regulatory environment.
Renewable Fuel Standard Targeted
The renewable fuel standard ranks very high on the target list for oil producers and refiners. They would like to see it repealed or significantly modified, according to Gerard and Moody.
Requirements to blend renewable fuels into gasoline and diesel have been complicating life for fuel wholesalers and retailers for decades, starting in the 1990s with “reformulated gasoline” standards to reduce ozone pollution and broadened by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
“We've been seeking reforms of the program for many years now,” Moody said. Prospects for reform now are “closer than ever” and could see some activity in the next few months, he said.
Gerard cited the example of a 2016 bill proposed by Reps. Bill Flores (R-Texas) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) that would have limited the amount of ethanol in gasoline to 9.7 percent.
“I expect that something similar to it will be introduced soon and that you'll see a broad bipartisan support for the need to fix the renewable fuel standard,” Gerard said.
The renewable fuel standard enjoys strong support from farm states, which might explain why Gerard said he anticipated a cap rather than a full repeal.
Tax Changes Supported
Congress is expected to make efforts at fundamental changes in tax law, with much support and some disagreement from Trump.
“The House blueprint that they released last summer was great,” said Moody, referring to a Republican leadership proposal for tax law changes, shaped in part by House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Texas).
“We continue to work with him and his team,” Moody said, referring to the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers working with Brady.
The House leaders and Trump both want lower corporate taxes and the elimination of some tax deductions at the same time, a balancing act that generally draws support from oil and gas companies.
Trump has spoken of wanting a “border adjustment tax” on imports, something that elicits cautious skepticism from House leaders. Oil and gas companies are concerned about the import tax idea but have not yet taken a hard position on it, Gerard said.
Hedging Rule Changes Sought
Companies wanting to foster healthy markets for natural gas hope to see amendments to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub. L. No. 111–203), enacted after the shock of the 2008 recession.
The Commodities Futures Trading Commission, implementing parts of Dodd-Frank, has not respected the intent of Congress to distinguish between commodity companies engaged in hedging and financial companies facilitating a variety of financial activities, according to Jenny Fordham, senior vice president for markets and government affairs at the Natural Gas Supply Association.
“They really departed from what we felt the statute directed them to do,” Fordham said of the CFTC.
She said the gas suppliers have been surprised at the amount of time they have had to devote to the subject over the years, and now they will give it more work.
“We will rejuvenate that effort,” Fordham said Jan. 5.
The goal of the gas suppliers is to allow companies sufficient freedom to hedge their commodity positions, both in terms of what hedging they want to do and how fast it can be done.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103117306&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103117306&jd=103117306
-
Republican Resolution Targets EPA New-Source Rule
Jan 9, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Hannah Hess
One of U.S. EPA's chief House critics wants to use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to strike down the agency's methane standards for new and heavily modified oil and gas operations.
Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) introduced H.J. Res. 22 on Friday to block Clean Air Act New Source Performance Standards, which increase how often companies must check and repair leaks at compressor stations, among other provisions.
Under the CRA, Congress has 60 workdays to overturn any regulation through a resolution not subject to filibuster.
But EPA published its final rule in the Federal Register on June 3, meaning Congress could run into a procedural obstacle if it takes up Perry's legislation. Staffers at the Congressional Research Service projected last month that agency final rules submitted to lawmakers on or after June 13 were vulnerable to disapproval under the CRA (Greenwire, Dec. 21, 2016).
Congress' parliamentarians have final say on operation of the CRA. The question of whether it can be used to kill EPA's methane rules may turn on how the nonpartisan officials define a legislative day.
The House parliamentarian did not respond to a request for comment this afternoon.
Perry has slammed the Obama administration's climate agenda and questioned whether humans are contributing to a warming world. Earlier this year, he offered a proposal to slash EPA's funding levels (E&E Daily, July 11, 2016).
Perry has also taken aim at Section 115 of the Clean Air Act, which environmental law experts say grants EPA the authority to compel states to reduce emissions (Greenwire, Feb. 12, 2016).
A spokesman for Perry did not respond to questions about the resolution.
Only a simple majority in each chamber needs to approve a so-called resolution of disapproval for it to succeed. The president also has to agree.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2017/01/09/stories/1060048074
-
Some States Eye ESPS Model Trading Rules to Aid GHG Reduction Efforts
Jan 10, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Abby Smith
States intent on moving forward with greenhouse gas (GHG) regulation despite an expected slowdown at the federal level are looking to EPA's draft model trading rules for its power plant GHG standards as a resource to develop new or expand existing state clean energy initiatives.
EPA, in an unusual move last month, withdrew the model trading rules from interagency review and publicly released the drafts and related guidance documents.
Acting agency air chief Janet McCabe in a blog post said the information “may be useful at this time to the states, stakeholders and members of the public who are considering or are already implementing policies and programs that would cut carbon pollution from the power sector.”
The drafts could be “especially helpful to states considering the use of emissions trading programs or the expansion of existing trading programs,” she said, adding that EPA's draft evaluation, measurement and verification (EM&V) guidance for energy efficiency measures could help states weigh the use or expansion of such programs.
Some states are praising the release of the information, even as the incoming Trump administration is pledging to target the existing source performance standards (ESPS) rule, also known as the Clean Power Plan.
“We still see that having information about what kinds of rules, structures, approaches and frameworks that EPA was considering for a national-scale or interconnect-scale trading [system] is helpful as we consider Minnesota's future in clean energy,” said Frank Kohlasch, environmental program manager of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, in an interview with Inside EPA.
Minnesota was one of 14 states that asked EPA last April to release more information on ESPS implementation, to aid in both compliance planning and state policies. The other states seeking the information were: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.
With the exception of Virginia, all of the states have GHG reduction targets -- either through legislation or executive order. Several are already involved in emissions trading, as California has an economy-wide cap-and-trade program and eight of the states belong to the Northeast's Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).
An official from one state not currently part of a cap-and-trade program recently told Inside EPA it could consider such trading in the future, though the source said there is no specific proposal or serious policy conversation happening yet. “There are positives out there of having a place where companies that are interested in supporting more renewable energy or greenhouse gas reductions can have an effect in that market,” that state source says, adding the concept of market mechanisms is still just an “academic discussion” in that state.
In addition, many of the states have renewable energy standards, energy efficiency programs, clean energy initiatives and other climate-related plans where the draft model rules could play a role.
Despite the “great deal of uncertainty in the next four years,” Kohlasch said Minnesota officials “do think that there is value in the country moving toward the kinds of approaches that” his state, Colorado, the RGGI states and others are pursuing to cut GHGs.
Stuart Clark, air quality program manager at Washington's Department of Ecology, told Inside EPA the draft rules help “make sure we're asking the right questions” and could “point out something we hadn't thought of.”
State Policies
EPA on Dec. 19 released several documents, including draft model trading rules for mass- and rate-based compliance, draft EM&V guidance for demand-side energy efficiency, a draft white paper on ESPS tracking systems and a draft technical support document on limiting emissions leakage.
Several states identified specific policies that could benefit from the information. Washington's Clark, for example, said the documents could inform various aspects of implementing the state's recently finalized Clean Air Rule.
That rule establishes a “cap-and-reduce” system that is expected to cover about two-thirds of the state's total GHG emissions. Under the approach, facilities must reduce emissions from a baseline year and can comply using credits from facilities that over-comply, emissions offsets from in-state projects or GHG allowances from out-of-state, multi-sector trading programs like California's.
EPA's emission leakage document, for example, offers important information as Washington considers the “border effects” of its rule, Clark said. And the tracking white paper could aid the state's efforts to count its carbon reductions, he said. “We want to do that effectively and precisely.”
Broadly, Clark said the model rules are an important resource, particularly since the Evergreen State is implementing a new market structure. “When you create a new market structure that covers most of the economy,” there are “iterations and improvements and adjustment when you see how the markets respond,” he said.
Officials in several Northeast states say they will look closely at the model rules to see how they might apply to RGGI's ongoing program review, during which the states are choosing a post-2020 emission cap and charting the program's future.
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, for example, said in a statement that EPA's documents may help RGGI states update the program.
Officials in Connecticut and New York also highlighted their involvement in RGGI. “The guidance provided in this EPA material will support our planning efforts -- ranging from continued work to support our participation in [RGGI], to finalization of our new, updated, Comprehensive Energy Strategy,” a Connecticut environment official said in a statement.
Other states, though not pointing to specific GHG policies, said the model rules could be useful as they continue to pursue clean energy and GHG reductions, even amid the ESPS uncertainty.
“We don't know what the future will be for the Clean Power Plan. Many states, including Colorado, are moving forward with plans and strategies to reduce air emissions from many sources, including from power plants,” said Martha Rudolph, director of environmental programs at Colorado's Department of Public Health & Environment, in a statement.
Continued Commitment
Overall, the state officials that spoke with or provided statements to Inside EPA had not yet reviewed the draft model rules or related documents in depth. But they all reiterated their commitment to clean energy and GHG cuts, regardless of any federal slowdown of climate policy under the Trump administration.
A Massachusetts spokesman, for example, said Gov. Charlie Baker's (R) administration remains “fully devoted to a clean energy future that reduces” the state's GHG emissions.
New York's Department of Environmental Conservation said in a statement that “now more than ever” the state is committed to “continuing its nation-leading efforts” to reduce GHGs.
Even so, Minnesota's Kohlasch doesn't believe the draft trading rules will prompt regional or interstate conversations on emissions trading in the short term. Rather, he said most states are waiting to see how the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rules on the ESPS, which he said would “eliminate some of the speculation that is happening right now about what the next administration or Congress could or would do to the rule.”
A ruling, Kohlasch said, could lead to a discussion between states and the new administration about how to address GHG emissions. And he said states like Minnesota can offer some input based on how they employed several of the tools EPA used to set the rule's targets.
“Is there common ground that could be found to continue some of those efforts and provide a framework [through which] other states would be able to follow the policies and the pathways that states like Minnesota have used?” Kohlasch said.
He and Washington's Clark both said that it is unclear if states that are not actively pursuing clean energy or GHG programs will use the ESPS trading rules. But they noted the documents could help states in efforts beyond climate mitigation.
For example, Clark said, “There are a lot of reasons to do energy efficiency programs. You don't even have to have climate change in the narrative about that.” He also noted that states looking at ozone non-attainment or other rules that affect the power sector could find “lots of overlap” with the concepts in the model rule documents.
“Whether it's for state climate plans or energy approaches or even just looking at co-benefit ways to deal with traditional air quality problems,” he said, the model rules are “useful information.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/some-states-eye-esps-model-trading-rules-aid-ghg-reduction-efforts
-
Transco Tells FERC Timeline is Tight For Marcellus-Focused Atlantic Sunrise
Jan 10, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
With federal environmental review of the Atlantic Sunrise Project finished, Williams' Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. (Transco) is asking FERC to not keep Marcellus Shale gas bottled up any longer than necessary and approve the project by Feb. 16 so other development commitments can be met.
"Transco is urging the Commission to issue a certificate for the project by that date because the company is obligated to begin preparations to finalize federal and state permits as well as plan for construction to comply with restrictive environmental windows, specifically tree clearing within key habitat areas and installation through certain water bodies," Transco told the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in a Jan. 5 letter [CP15-138].
The deadlines are with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
"Given the many complexities and sequencing of activities that go into the project's construction timeline, including environmental restrictive windows, a delay in a decision beyond Feb. 16, 2017 could jeopardize Transco's ability to place these facilities into service on a timely basis," the pipeline said.
Project capacity is 100% committed, Transco told FERC, and shippers are teed-up for previously revised in-service dates. "The customers are counting on this capacity for a variety of uses, including heating and cooling, manufacturing and power generation," Transco said.
Atlantic Sunrise received its final environmental impact statement at the end of last year.
The roughly $3 billion Atlantic Sunrise would open a path for constrained Marcellus Shale gas to reach markets in the Southeast through the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. LLC (Transco) system running along the Atlantic seaboard.
The expansion would include about 197.7 miles of pipeline composed of about 184 miles of new 30- and 42-inch diameter pipeline for the greenfield CPL North and CPL South segments in Pennsylvania; about 12 miles of new 36- and 42-inch diameter pipeline looping known as Chapman and Unity Loops in Pennsylvania; about three miles of 30-inch diameter replacements in Virginia; and associated compressor stations, equipment and facilities.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108980-transco-tells-ferc-timeline-is-tight-for-marcellus-focused-atlantic-sunrise
-
America’s First ‘Clean Coal’ Plant is Now Operational — And Another is On the Way
Jan 10, 2017 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
The first large scale U.S. “clean coal” facility was declared operational Tuesday — by the large energy firm NRG Energy and JX Nippon Oil & Gas Exploration Corp.
Their Petra Nova project, not far outside of Houston, captured carbon dioxide from the process of coal combustion for the first time in September, and has now piped 100,000 tons of it from the plant to the West Ranch oil field 80 miles away, where the carbon dioxide is used to force additional oil from the ground. The companies say that the plant can capture over 90 percent of the carbon dioxide released from the equivalent of a 240 megawatt, or million watt, coal unit, which translates into 5,000 tons of carbon dioxide per day or over 1 million tons per year. They’re calling it “the world’s largest post-combustion carbon capture system.”
“There are not many coal plants that are being built these days,” said Mauricio Gutierrez, the president and CEO of NRG. “We think that actually having an experience in installing a [carbon capture and storage] technology in existing coal plants will have a pretty significant application in the current plants that exist throughout the country, and for that matter, throughout the world.”
But there is another coal plant near completion in the United States that will also capture carbon dioxide — but using a very different approach. It’s the Kemper Plant, being operated by Mississippi Power, a subsidiary of Southern Co., and expected to be operational Jan. 31. This plant has been designed to turn lignite, a type of coal, into a gas called syngas, stripping out some carbon dioxide in the process. The syngas is burned for electricity and the CO2 is then again be shipped to an oil field to aid in additional oil recovery.
Thus, at Petra Nova the capturing of carbon occurs after the coal has been burned — or “post-combustion” — whereas at Kemper, it happens beforehand.
The arrival of Petra Nova and Kemper comes as the incoming Trump administration will have to try to deliver on sweeping promises made to the struggling coal industry. It remains unclear if that will involve any type of support for carbon capture technology or for the industry, but Trump did allude to “clean coal” while campaigning.
The two very different plants together mark the arrival of a technology, often called “CCS” for short, that has been heralded as essential to the future of coal burning in particular (though it has many other applications), but has struggled despite considerable subsidies from the U.S. Department of Energy. Several projects have seen their Energy Department funding withdrawn, but these two now stand at or near the finish line.
According to the Global CCS Institute, which tracks this fledgling industry, there are 21 carbon capture projects worldwide on a large scale that are either operating or have been built, but relatively few of these are in the power generation sector — making Petra Nova and Kemper quite novel in context of the United States. In Canada, the Boundary Dam Carbon Capture and Storage Project, also a “post-combustion” capture plant using coal, has been operational since 2014.
The Energy Department provided grants totaling $ 190 million to the Petra Nova facility, which cost $1 billion overall. Kemper is a considerably more expensive project, representing a $6.91 billion expenditure for a massive plant with a capacity of 582 megawatts. That includes $270 million in support from the Energy Department, also as part of its Clean Coal Power Initiative.
For Petra Nova, a key part of the operation of the plant involves its pairing of power generation with oil recovery. Carbon dioxide injected into the oil field will increase its production, and with oil prices at $50 a barrel or higher, the plant is economical, according to NRG spokesman David Knox. Some of the carbon dioxide then remains sequestered in the oil field after the enhanced oil recovery process.
The plant’s completion is a milestone, says its CEO Gutierrez, and a doorway into a wider world of using carbon capture and storage. “I think in the future, this is a technology that is going to be necessary for gas units, as natural gas becomes this bridge fuel,” he said.
Furthermore, Gutierrez said, while the Petra Nova plant is paired with an oil field to help make it economical, that may not always be so with future projects. “We really chose the enhanced oil recovery to improve the economics of the plant to the extent that there is not a price on carbon,” he said. “Potentially that is not necessary to make the economics work.”
The company does not have any immediate plans to adapt a second coal plant with carbon capture technology, but Gutierrez said that if it wanted to do so, the know-how gained at Petra Nova would make the second plant cheaper.
The International Energy Agency and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have both said that carbon capture and storage will be a necessary technology to curb humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions.
“Any country that is in need to increase their power generation, and that is happening through fossil fuels, they will be looking at this technology as a way to mitigate the impact of carbon,” said Gutierrez.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/10/americas-first-clean-coal-plant-is-now-operational-and-another-is-on-the-way/?utm_term=.5906c88b81eb
-
Texas Pipeline Companies Support Hiring of More Inspectors
Jan 10, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Nushin Huq
Texas needs more pipeline inspectors to oversee the state's more than 400,000 miles of pipelines, the state's pipeline industry group says.
The Texas Railroad Commission, the agency charged with regulating the state's vast pipeline system, is asking the legislature for more money and plans to use some of it to hire more pipeline inspectors. The state added more than 10,000 miles of regulated pipeline over the past four years, the commission said in its budget request.
The Texas Pipeline Association supports that request, Thure Cannon, president of the Texas Pipeline Association, told Bloomberg BNA during the group's annual meeting in Houston.
Pipelines are audited and inspected on a regular system and having enough inspectors will give pipeline companies regulatory certainty, Cannon said.
The Texas Pipeline Association held its annual meeting on Jan. 6, before the beginning of the legislative session Jan. 10. The association represents almost 50 pipeline companies that own infrastructure within Texas such as Enterprise Products Partners LP, Enbridge Energy Partners, Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, Chevron Pipe Line Co. and Anadarko Petroleum Corp.
Issues that the legislature are tackling this session that will affect the industry directly are funding for the Texas Railroad Commission and bills related to the commission and eminent domain, one of the biggest issues facing the pipeline industry because of landowner objections to the process, Cannon said. Landowners are pushing to make it more difficult to condemn land for public use.
“Our No. 1 priority is pipeline safety,” Cannon said. “After that, it's regulatory certainty from [Texas Commission on Environmental Quality] and the Texas Railroad Commission.”
Tight Budget
Increased funding for inspections and other purposes will be a challenge because state revenues are down.
The Texas budget for the upcoming two fiscal years, starting in July, and running through June 2019, will be about $8 billion less than the previous two years, Glenn Hegar, Texas comptroller of public accounts, told the legislature Jan. 9.
The state will receive about $104.87 billion both through tax and non-tax revenue, the comptroller said in his biennial revenue estimate. In 2015, the estimate was $133 billion, though the state only collected $107 billion as a slump in the oil and gas market negatively affected tax revenue.
The legislature will use the new estimate to create the state budget.
“I know money is tight, but I want to make sure that the commission is funded correctly,” Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) told the association during the luncheon keynote at the Jan. 6 meeting.
Sunset Review
In addition to budget requests, the Railroad Commission will be having its sunset review during this legislative session.
The state's sunset commission reviews each agency ahead of its sunset date and determines whether it should continue to exist and whether changes in how it functions need to be made.
After completing its review of the railroad commission, the sunset commission in November recommended that the agency continue for another 12 years. It also suggested some changes.
The Texas Pipeline Association supports all three recommendations made by the sunset commission related to improving oversight of the state's pipeline infrastructure, including authorizing the railroad commission to enforce damage prevention requirements for interstate pipelines, Cannon said.
To help pay for the hiring of more inspectors, TPA supports instituting a permit fee for pipeline development, Cannon said. The association also supports diverting a portion of the gas utility tax from the state's general fund to the Texas Railroad Commission to offset the costs of administering the pipeline safety program, he said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103117290&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103117290&jd=103117290
-
Industries Weigh Options for Reversing EPA Facility Safety Rule Revisions
Jan 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Groups representing various industries are weighing options for reversing EPA's recent revisions to its Risk Management Program (RMP) facility safety rule, including a possible push for lawmakers to undo the changes through a Congressional Review Act (CRA) disapproval resolution or through a legal challenge to the final rule.
“You're going to see some type of challenge” whether in Congress or the courts, says an industry source who participated in a Jan. 5 conference call of industry trade associations opposed to the rule. Other sources were not immediately available to confirm the call.
EPA Dec. 21 announced its final rule updating its RMP facility safety program, imposing new requirements for certain facilities to conduct hazard analysis and independent audits, plan with first responders and share data with the public. The rule is part of a broad Obama administration effort to strengthen the safety and security of industrial plants.
Industry trade groups representing the chemical and agricultural sectors and others submitted critical comments on EPA's March proposed version of the rule, arguing many provisions increased regulatory burdens without improving safety at facilities.
EPA's final rule, however, codified many of the proposed changes, though the agency did scale back some requirements for sharing data with the public after state officials raised security concerns, including Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R), President-Elect Donald Trump's planned nominee to head the agency.
The final RMP rule has not yet been published in the Federal Register, and will not take effect until 60 days after its publication. Proponents of the rule have acknowledged that because Trump will take office before the RMP rule takes effect, the new administration will have greater flexibility to not implement the rule.
Industries' Concerns
But the industry source says that trade association representatives are weighing options for fighting the rule, driven in large part by the new requirements for facilities to conduct independent audits and consider whether alternative chemicals or processes would improve safety.
Currently, the RMP program authorized under section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act requires companies to craft a plan to submit to the agency that outlines how they will reduce risks from releases.
Industry officials, even prior to the rule's release, began urging lawmakers to seek formal disapproval under the CRA, arguing EPA failed to justify the proposed rule's costly and unnecessary new requirements. A CRA action would block a future administration from developing a “substantially similar” measure.
The industry source says the CRA remains the first course industry officials will pursue in seeking to roll back the rule, given such action must be quickly invoked, and because any lawsuit challenging the rule would not be filed until after the rule takes effect, or 60 days after publication in the Register.
Under the CRA, Congress can pass disapproval resolutions on simple majority votes in the House and Senate to reverse discretionary rules promulgated within 60 legislative days of their actions. The law, which has only been used successfully once, bars agencies from pursuing rules substantially similar to regulations scrapped by the CRA.
The source says that officials on the call noted that RMP faces competing priorities for CRA review. A recently approved House bill to allow a single resolution to address multiple rules could increase the likelihood legislators would include the RMP rule in any CRA effort, though the measure is yet to clear the Senate.
Possible Litigation
Should the RMP rule survive the CRA review process -- either due to no CRA resolution on the rule being introduced or a resolution failing to clear Congress -- the source says industry would likely file a lawsuit in federal court after EPA seeks to enforce one of the new requirements, such as that a facility conduct a third-party audit. A pre-enforcement lawsuit is also possible, the source says, which would challenge the merits of the rule's requirements.
Officials on the call primarily faulted the final rule's new requirements for conducting third-party audits and weighing safer alternatives. Some officials also said that EPA's changes to the final rule's disclosure requirements failed to resolve concerns that sharing facility data with the public could raise security concerns.
The criticism is similar to concerns raised by the American Forest and Paper Association, which argued in a Dec. 22 statement that EPA finalized the rule without addressing the group's critical comments on the proposed version.
The group has argued that EPA finalized the new requirements for facilities in certain industries to assess whether alternative chemicals or processes would improve safety, and to use third-party auditors, despite industry arguments those provisions undermine facilities' safety efforts.
Meanwhile, advocates of stricter facility regulations have cautioned against any scaling back of the RMP rule, arguing that improving facility safety is widely popular across political lines.
“Despite this, industry has been calling on the incoming Trump administration and Congress to block or repeal these safety improvements,” the Environmental Justice Health Alliance said in a Dec. 22 statement. “Any action to block or repeal these improved safety rules will put Americans in more danger, and undoubtedly at some point cost innocent people their lives.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/industries-weigh-options-reversing-epa-facility-safety-rule-revisions
-
Kerry Presses Businesses to Take Up Climate Fight
Jan 9, 2017 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolff
Secretary of State John Kerry Monday called on the private sector to step in and speed the economic shift toward a clean energy economy in the face of an incoming Trump administration that has rejected President Barack Obama's efforts to fight climate change.
In his last major climate change speech as the top U.S. diplomat, Kerry, who is credited with helping push through the landmark Paris climate change agreement in 2015, said the need for renewable energy to replace fossil fuels was clear, and would yield economic benefits as it helped slow global warming.
"Very few policy choices present as much upside as this one, which is why it is astounding to me it meets as much resistance as it does," Kerry told an audience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
President-elect Donald Trump has tapped some prominent opponents of Obama's efforts to combat the greenhouse gases blamed for climate change, including Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to head the EPA and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry to lead the Energy Department.
Rex Tillerson, Trump's nominee to replace Kerry at State, has acknowledged the dangers of climate change, but he has also called for expanding fossil fuel use and his former company, oil giant Exxon Mobil, has come under fire for its support of groups that derided the science showing humans were affecting the climate.
Kerry is the second member of the administration Monday to foreshadow the dramatic shift in policy expected under Trump. In an interview on NPR earlier Monday, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro said he was concerned that his department will be “going backwards” under the leadership of his presumed successor, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson.
Still, Kerry said the transition to a clean energy economy was already underway, and only the speed of that shift could be affected.
"The question now is not whether we will transition to a low-carbon economy — we will," he said. "The question we face today is whether we can accelerate that transition, where we can excite the investments to unlock the low-carbon future to avoid the catastrophe."
His comments came shortly after NOAA declared that 2015 was the second warmest year on record in the U.S., with every state in the contiguous U.S. and Alaska experiencing above-average annual temperatures.
Kerry laid out some of his well-polished arguments for acting on climate change, including research from the South Pole on the continent's melting ice sheets and the flooding problems faced by cities from Boston to Miami. He hammered the use of coal, in particular, arguing that the pollution it creates drives up health costs.
"This shouldn’t be a tough call," he said. "We face resistance from a strange combination of doubters and people making a lot of money off today’s paradigm."
He pointed to what he called "the upside" of investing in renewables: cleaner air and new jobs from a growing segment of the economy. Renewable energy, he said, now employs more people than coal or the oil and gas sector.
"There are very, very few policy choices as clear cut as investing in climate action where the pros outweigh the cons to such a staggering degree," he said, adding that if the U.S. doesn't invest in its renewable sector, other countries will leap ahead.
In addition to touting wind and solar, Kerry offered support for nuclear power, a technology that he once opposed and still splits the green community.
"Given the challenge we face today, go for it!" he said. "There's no alternative. It's zero emissions."
He cited the global advances on reining in the greenhouse gases blamed for climate change, pointing to a trio of recent agreements, including the Paris climate agreement as well as last year's Montreal agreement on aviation and the Kigali, Rwanda, agreement on reducing refrigerants as recent successes.
"The energy curve is bending toward sustainability," he said.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2017/01/kerry-presses-businesses-to-take-up-climate-fight-143506
-
'Day Against Denial' Rallies Target Nominees' Climate Stance
Jan 10, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Hess
From Maine to California, people rallied against President-elect Donald Trump's Cabinet picks for U.S. EPA and the departments of Energy, the Interior and State yesterday in an attempt to pressure senators against advancing the confirmations.
The "Day Against Denial" protests were organized to fight back against a conservative spate of nominees seen as hostile to the missions of the agencies they are supposed to lead.
More than 70 rallies and visits to in-state Senate offices marked the first round in a series of actions green groups say they are planning this month to hold elected officials accountable on climate.
Meanwhile, in a victory for environmentalists, two federal political action committees associated with Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general who Trump picked to head EPA, announced yesterday they would shut down to avoid distracting from his upcoming hearings (Greenwire, Jan. 9).
The PAC "Protecting America Now" had been circulating a flier soliciting donations the group said would help pay for a media campaign to support Pruitt's "challenging, but achievable" confirmation.
Senate Democrats, who returned to Capitol Hill last night for a marathon week, said the grassroots pressure is working.
"The resistance to an anti-environment agenda in a Trump administration is going to be driven by what happens in cities and towns all across America," said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who sits on the Foreign Relations, and Environment and Public Works committees. "That's going to be the core strength."
Hundreds rallied yesterday in front of the State House in Boston, enacting a mock hearing where activists portrayed Markey and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) rejecting the Cabinet.
Markey said his staff has been conducting an "exhaustive review" of Pruitt's environmental record, and he intends to ask tough questions.
Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) is eyeing a "tentative" date of Jan. 18 for a hearing on the nomination (E&E News PM, Jan. 9).
Ranking member Tom Carper (D-Del.) yesterday said that he and Barrasso planned to discuss a confirmation hearing for Pruitt during last night's vote or early today.
"The date that he mentioned to me was I think was the 18th, and I asked, 'February?'" Carper said laughing.
'Not accepting climate science'?
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) told E&E News that climate would be an important topic as the Senate considered Pruitt and Trump's pick of Exxon Mobil Corp. CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of State. Kaine is a member of the Foreign Relations Committee.
"There is a theme among a number of these nominees, and the theme is not accepting climate science for some of them — I don't want to say all of them — so I think that's going to be a major issue," Kaine said.
The Environmental Defense Fund's political action arm has been circulating a letter to senators that calls attention to Pruitt's potential conflicts of interest.
"In 2013, employees at Oklahoma Gas and Electric held a fundraiser for Pruitt. Six days later, he filed a lawsuit against the EPA in an effort to block a rule that the company opposed," the letter states. It also points to two donations to the Republican Attorneys General Association as allegedly influencing Pruitt's actions.
On the Tillerson confirmation process, which begins tomorrow, the Sierra Club pointed to a report from USA Today exposing Securities and Exchange Commission filings that show that the oil and gas giant did business with Iran, Syria and Sudan through a European subsidiary while those countries were under U.S. sanctions as state sponsors of terrorism.
"It was already obvious that Rex Tillerson could not be trusted to act in the best interests of our climate and the health of our families, and now it is obvious that he cannot be trusted to act in the best interest of our country," Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said yesterday, calling on senators to reject Tillerson "without delay."'
Emotionalism masquerading as science'?
The group 350.org said protests today drew record crowds. More than 200 people showed up at Republican Sen. Susan Collins office in Portland, Maine. Scores spoke with Collins' staff, who said it was the largest gathering they had ever seen there.
In Philadelphia, 300 people marched from the office of Sen. Bob Casey (D) to the office of Sen. Pat Toomey (R), delivering stacks of letters calling for climate action.
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, also got in on the action. He joined rallies in Newark before catching his train to Washington, then urged activists to "keep up the fight" on Twitter.
Conservatives at the Heartland Institute, a free-market group that challenges the notion of man-made climate change, panned the protests.
"350.org is doing yeoman's labor to prove Paul Johnson's line that radical environmentalism is nothing more than 'emotionalism masquerading as science,'" said policy analyst Tim Benson.
Benson continued, "Frankly, I'm happy these radicals waste their time and money on playacting episodes such as these instead of actually working. Having a sit-in and serenading to the congregation is a much less dangerous way to spend their time than pushing their anti-human, anti-civilizational message in ways that may actually be destructive."
Jay Lehr, science director for Heartland, said he did not understand why environmentalists would oppose Tillerson, who has said he supports climate action.
"I hope he is Trump's sacrificial goat to the Senate committees that will be questioning his appointees," Lehr said.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/01/10/stories/1060048092
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