Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 1/13/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Report: US Plastics Industry Seeing Growth in Employment, Plant Expansions
Jan 12, 2017 | Plastics News
By Steve Toloken
A new report from the Plastics Industry Association offers a generally positive economic outlook for the industry, noting that employment is growing after some steep declines, and that shale gas-related investments should help plastics fare better than other manufacturing sectors. -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC's Global CPRI Remains Flat in Q4
Jan 13, 2017 | Gas World
By Jemima Owen-Jones
The American Chemistry Council’s Global Chemical Production Regional Index (Global CPRI) shows that headline global production was flat during November on a three-month moving average (3MMA) basis. This follows two months of decline and fairly good gains last year. -
(ACC Mentioned) How Plastics are Driving Game-Changing Technologies in Consumer Products
Jan 12, 2017 | Plastics Today
By Clare Goldsberry
The American Chemistry Council (Washington, DC) uses a tag line to promote the value and benefits of plastics: Plastics Make it Possible. -
Chemical Heritage Foundation Names Robert G. W. Anderson as President and CEO
Jan 13, 2017 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Sarah Everts
Robert G. W. Anderson is the new president and CEO of the Chemical Heritage Foundation (CHF), the Philadelphia-based nonprofit organization devoted to research and preservation of chemical history. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Proposes Steps for Industry to Keep Chemicals in Commerce
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical manufacturers and processors would have to follow steps described in a rule the Environmental Protection Agency proposed Jan. 12 to keep making or using chemicals in commerce. -
EPA Floats Second Novel TSCA TCE Ban But Rules' Fate Remains Unclear
Jan 12, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA has proposed a second novel Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) rule to ban certain uses of the industrial solvent trichloroethylene (TCE), finding “unreasonable risk” to human health or the environment, but the fate of both TCE regulations remains unclear... -
U.S. EPA Finalizes Reporting and Record Keeping Requirements on Nanoscale Materials
Jan 13, 2017 | Nanowerk News
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is requiring one-time reporting and recordkeeping requirements on nanoscale chemical substances in the marketplace. These substances are nano-sized versions of chemicals that are already in the marketplace. -
Guidelines Seek to Harmonize U.S., International Chemical Testing
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
New guidelines for assessing the impacts of chemicals and pesticides on aquatic and sediment-dwelling fauna will harmonize the various testing protocols found in three U.S. laws with those set by the international Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development... -
Energy Shift Prompts Decline in Air Pollution: EPA Toxics Chief
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Industrial facilities overall are releasing fewer toxic chemicals into the environment than they were a decade ago, the Environmental Protection Agency said. -
Methylene Chloride in Coating Strippers Banned: EPA Proposal
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency proposed Jan. 12 to ban the solvent methylene chloride in most types of paint and other coating strippers. -
EPA Wants to Restrict Sometimes-Deadly Paint Stripper Chemical
Jan 13, 2017 | Center for Public Integrity (In Yahoo News)
By Jamie Smith Hopkins
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants to largely ban the use of a chemical in paint strippers that has killed dozens of people, asphyxiating some and triggering heart attacks in others. -
EU Chemicals Agency Adds Four Substances to ‘High Concern’ List
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The widely used chemical bisphenol A was one of four substances added to the European Chemicals Agency's list of “substances of very high concern” Jan. 12, a designation that could lead to the use of the substance being prohibited in the European Union under the bloc's REACH law. -
EU Panel Unanimously Approves Tightening Mercury Rule
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
A draft European Union regulation that would tighten the bloc's rules on mercury moved a step closer to completion Jan. 12, with a favorable vote in the European Parliament's environment committee. -
NGOs Slam Environment Committee Vote on EU-Canada Deal
Jan 13, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Parliament's Environment Committee (Envi) has voted in support of the EU-Canada comprehensive economic and trade agreement (Ceta) – a move NGOs say will undermine chemical safety. -
Teflon Chemical Cases Face Uncertain Fate If Dow, DuPont Merge
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Uncertainty cloaks DuPont Co.'s liability for 3,500 toxic tort lawsuits over a Teflon-related chemical as the company proceeds toward a merger with Dow Chemical Co. -
EPA Rejects Most Requests to Reconsider Clean Power Plan
Jan 12, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA has rejected most of the 38 petitions it received to reconsider all or parts of its Clean Power Plan, just days before President-elect Donald Trump takes office and sets his sights on repealing the rule altogether. -
Litigation: D.C. Circuit Orders Argument Plans for Power Plant NSPS Case
Jan 12, 2017 | Inside EPA
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is asking parties to the legal challenge over EPA's greenhouse gas (GHG) rule for new power plants to submit proposals for structuring the oral argument in the case. -
Global E&Ps, Led by U.S. Brethren, Locked And Loaded For New Investments
Jan 12, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The global oil and gas industry, already expected to boost exploration spend during 2017, is poised to more than double final project approvals as optimism spreads across the energy sector. -
Bill Exempts Some Fracking Chemicals from Records Requests
Jan 12, 2017 | AP (In the Washington Post)
By Sarah Rankin
Certain chemicals pumped underground during hydraulic fracturing would be exempt from public records requests under a bill advancing in the Virginia Legislature. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA to Publish Facility Rule, Leaving Implementation Up to Trump
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
A final rule requiring high-risk chemical facilities to tighten safety requirements and share more information with local responders will not take effect until weeks into the incoming Trump administration, giving Congress what seems like a clear path to block the plan. -
Momentive Chemical Faces State Environmental Violations, Seeks Striker Limits
Jan 12, 2017 | Albany Times Union
By Brian Nearing
Concerned with chemical spills and hazardous waste handling at the Momentive chemical plant in Waterford, state environmental officials expect to cite violations against the company, a day after it was stymied in a legal bid to get most striking workers away from the plant. -
Potential Safety Standard May Dampen Crude Oil Volatility
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
A federal agency is considering setting new standards to address the volatility of crude oil transported by rail. -
EPA is Urged to Freeze Enforcement of 2015 Smog Standard
Jan 12, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
States shouldn't have to simultaneously implement two separate ozone air quality standards, business groups said today in again urging U.S. EPA to effectively freeze enforcement of the benchmark adopted in 2015. -
Dems May Hold Own Hearing on Pruitt as Partisanship Takes Hold
Jan 13, 2017 | E&E Daily
By George Cahlink and Geof Koss
Partisan tensions are escalating over the nomination of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) to lead U.S. EPA, with Democrats likely to hold their own additional hearing to press their concerns over his record. -
Greens, Industry Send Dueling Letters to Senators on Pruitt
Jan 12, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Letters from both supporters and opponents of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) nominee Scott Pruitt landed in senators’ inboxes on Thursday. -
Ready to Defend Obama's Environmental Legacy? Top 10 Accomplishments to Focus On
Jan 12, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Keith Gaby
If you ever wonder whether the political process can yield real results for the environment, President Barack Obama has your answer. Having a leader committed to clean energy, climate progress, and protecting our natural heritage in the White House for the past eight years... -
California Considers Guaranteeing Carbon Prices in Trump Era
Jan 13, 2017 | Bloomberg
By Matthew Carr
California is considering a system to protect projects that cut global-warming emissions from a market downturn that may worsen under a Trump administration.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Report: US Plastics Industry Seeing Growth in Employment, Plant Expansions
Jan 12, 2017 | Plastics News
By Steve Toloken
A new report from the Plastics Industry Association offers a generally positive economic outlook for the industry, noting that employment is growing after some steep declines, and that shale gas-related investments should help plastics fare better than other manufacturing sectors.
The association’s 2016 Size & Impact Report, released Jan. 11, said that employment rose 1.4 percent to 954,000 in 2015, the last year for which figures are available, and it said that U.S. demand for plastics hit a record $295.4 billion that year.
“On the heels of the arrival of a new Congress and, soon, a new administration, the Size & Impact Report shows why the plastics industry will be such an important part of the effort to support job growth in manufacturing,” said Bill Carteaux, president and CEO of the Washington-based association.
The report said plastics industry shipments overall were $418.4 billion in 2015, and it kept its place as the third-largest manufacturing sector, behind oil and gas extraction and automobiles.
It said those $418.4 billion in shipments were down 2 percent from 2014, measured by dollar value, but it noted the volumes of shipments were up. Value went down because the price of plastic dropped on lower oil and gas prices but Carteaux said that’s not a significant issue because volumes continued to grow.
“Things have been on the increase the last few years,” Carteaux said in a webinar releasing the report, which the group prepares annually. “There’s lots of reasons for optimism in manufacturing right now.”
Carteaux noted positive reports on manufacturing in general from the Federal Reserve banks in New York and Philadelphia, and said a key purchasing managers index for manufacturing hit a 21-month record in December.
The association’s presentation included an analysis from the American Chemistry Council tracking plastics processor investment, noting 560 investments in expansion or new construction, with the most coming in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin and Texas.
The report said Texas employed the most people in the plastics industry, ahead of California and Ohio, while Indiana remained the state with the highest concentration of plastics industry workers among non-agricultural employees.
The report gave three reasons why the plastics sector is doing better than manufacturing overall: it’s a relatively young industry with polymers continuing to replace other materials; productivity growth is faster than manufacturing overall, although just barely; and the development of shale gas feedstocks in the United States.
It suggested that shale gas would be very important: “The likelihood that the continued, responsible and sustainable development of these resources will help keep plastics companies ahead of their peers in other manufacturing sectors is very high.”
The report recommended policy makers focus on tax reform and workforce development, in addition to shale gas.
Association officials also noted employment remains way down from the peak in 1999, when more than 1.3 million people worked in the plastics sector.
Plastics industry employment hit a low point of 870,000 immediately after the 2008 recession but it has been climbing since, Carteaux said.
Long term, the report said the plastics industry has fared better than other manufacturing industries.
From 1980 to 2015, employment in plastics grew an average of 0.3 percent a year while manufacturing overall fell 1.2 percent a year.
In the same period, plastics saw growth in real shipments and real value added of more than 2 percent a year, compared with less than 1 percent for manufacturing overall.
Carteaux said the industry plans to emphasize that longer-term picture and its current growth prospects with policy makers, including incoming Trump Administration officials.
“Plastics has kept employment growing on an average basis much more strongly than manufacturing as a whole, making it an ideal match for helping fulfill the President-elect and the new Congress’s job growth priorities,” he said. “We will make sure they understand how large and important we are.”
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170112/NEWS/170119952/report-us-plastics-industry-seeing-growth-in-employment-plant
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC's Global CPRI Remains Flat in Q4
Jan 13, 2017 | Gas World
By Jemima Owen-Jones
The American Chemistry Council’s Global Chemical Production Regional Index (Global CPRI) shows that headline global production was flat during November on a three-month moving average (3MMA) basis. This follows two months of decline and fairly good gains last year.
During November, chemical production increased in North America, Latin America, and Central and Eastern Europe but fell in Western Europe and the Asia-Pacific regions.
Chemical production was flat in Africa and the Middle East. The Global CPRI was up only 0.4% year-over-year (Y/Y) on a 3MMA basis and stood at 108.1% of its average 2012 levels in September.
During November, capacity utilisation in the global business of chemistry declined 0.1 percentage points to 78.3%. This is off from 80.5% last November and is below the long-term (1987-2015) average of 89.1%.
Results were mixed on a product basis during November, with gains in consumer products, inorganic chemicals, plastic resins, synthetic rubber, coatings, and other specialties.
Considering year-over-year comparisons, growth was strongest in coatings followed by plastic resins, and other specialty chemicals.
ACC’s Global CPRI measures the production volume of the business of chemistry for 33 key nations, sub-regions, and regions, all aggregated to the world total.
This index is developed from government industrial production indices for chemicals from over 65 nations accounting for about 98% of the total global business of chemistry.
https://www.gasworld.com/acaccs-global-cpri-remains-flat-in-q4/2012090.article
-
(ACC Mentioned) How Plastics are Driving Game-Changing Technologies in Consumer Products
Jan 12, 2017 | Plastics Today
By Clare Goldsberry
The American Chemistry Council (Washington, DC) uses a tag line to promote the value and benefits of plastics: Plastics Make it Possible. The consumer electronics (CE) market has proven that tag line over the past 30 years in many ways as the technology for CE products has evolved and expanded. Nowhere is that more evident than at the annual Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas.
Hot on the heels of this year’s CES, the Plastics Industry Association (PLASTICS; Washington, DC) issued its latest "Plastics Market Watch" report, Watching Consumer Technology: Plastics’ Innovative Chapter in the Consumer Technology Story. With nearly 4,000 exhibitors and almost 200,000 attendees, CES is not only a showcase for electronic products and gadgets of all types, but also a close-up look at the influence plastics have had on the development of consumer electronics technology. Truly, plastics have made it possible.
he new "Market Watch" report notes that plastics have played a “power role” in making interconnectivity possible in emerging consumer electronics categories and in more widely adopted, but increasingly digitally integrated, technologies such as televisions, smartphones, laptops and tablets. In partnership with the Consumer Technology Association, the report also includes consumer electronics trends and economic predictions.
“People don’t see plastics in consumer electronics initially, but once they recognize that there are items in their life that would be impossible without plastics, their opinions change and they realize how critical plastics are to their everyday items,” said Terry Peters, PLASTICS’ Vice President of Technical and Industry Affairs.
Across the 20 product categories and 26 marketplaces at CES, attendees found notable players in the plastics value chain. They attend CES to highlight their role in manufacturing the products featured on the covers ofWIRED and Technology Review. "Walking the show floor and looking at the myriad products, attendees start to see plastics and polymers everywhere,” notes the PLASTICS report. In fact, plastic is essential to the engineering, design, function, features and performance of cutting-edge technologies, said the report.
“Plastics have been integral to the success of many consumer tech manufacturers,” said Shawn DuBravac, PhD, chief economist for CTA . “Many of our favorite technologies, such as smartphones, wearables and televisions, are made possible in large part due to the dynamic nature of plastics. The benefits that plastics provide to the industry are essential to product development.”
Technology companies turn to plastics for durable, lightweight and affordable properties. According to the American Chemistry Council, “plastics deliver an incredible range of performance benefits. Their unique combination of performance properties inspires innovation on two fronts: The development of new and better products and the more efficient use of resources.”
The PLASTICS report notes that the kinds of plastics and polymers
being used with consumer technology continues to diversify as the plastics industry responds to manufacturers’ needs. Wearable fitness and activity trackers that measure heart rate, sleep habits, number of steps and distance traveled have transitioned from a first-adopter technology just a few years ago to a new mandatory accessory for many consumers. According to a 2014 report by Citigroup, the market for wearable technology could grow to $30 billion in the coming years, meaning more smartwatches and activity trackers will need to be designed, made and sold as demand increases.
Consumer technology (and business technology) is a major economic force around the world, with innovation in this category outpacing nearly every other sector. Plastics have a seat at this dynamic table. “No other sector relies so much on innovation as consumer electronics. Innovation is the life blood of this industry, as innovation cycles get shorter and shorter to avoid the setting in of buyer fatigue,” said Kendra Martin, PLASTICS’ Senior Director of Industry Affairs. “
According to the CTA forecast for 2017, the largest revenue products are those already in the hands of most American consumers and households: Smartphones, tablets, LCD televisions, laptop computers and desktop computers, the PLASTICS report noted. “Interestingly, of these major consumer technology products, only LCD televisions are projected to increase sales revenue in 2017, as 4K Ultra HD TVs continue to attract consumers. For the other leading revenue products, particularly laptop and desktop computers, there is a relatively flat line in terms of revenue in recent years and looking ahead.”
But while established, mass-market products are looking at stagnant or declining revenues for 2017, new technology and systems are continuing to lift the consumer electronics industry. More consumers are looking toward 360 cameras, 3D printers, 4K Ultra HD televisions, connected home technologies, drones, wearable health and fitness technology and other consumer-focused technologies that didn’t exist just five years ago.
The entire report can be downloaded at www.plasticsindustry.org.
http://www.plasticstoday.com/consumer-products/how-plastics-are-driving-game-changing-technologies-consumer-products/92898048047279
-
Chemical Heritage Foundation Names Robert G. W. Anderson as President and CEO
Jan 13, 2017 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Sarah Everts
Robert G. W. Anderson is the new president and CEO of the Chemical Heritage Foundation (CHF), the Philadelphia-based nonprofit organization devoted to research and preservation of chemical history.
Anderson, 72, is a former director of the British Museum and a historian of science who has studied the work of chemists Joseph Priestley and Joseph Black, in addition to the history of scientific instrumentation.
A longtime board member of the CHF, Anderson stepped in as interim president of the foundation in July 2016, when the previous president Carsten Reinhardt left after a three-year tenure.
“The process of searching for a new president and CEO took us far afield, but in the end we found the perfect person close to home,” said Laurie Landeau, chair of CHF’s board of directors, in a Jan. 11 statement. “We are truly fortunate to have someone with peerless credentials and a deep love of the organization at the helm,” Landeau added in an e-mail to those on a CHF mailing list.
http://cen.acs.org/articles/95/i3/Healthcare-conference-brings-deal-deluge.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Proposes Steps for Industry to Keep Chemicals in Commerce
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical manufacturers and processors would have to follow steps described in a rule the Environmental Protection Agency proposed Jan. 12 to keep making or using chemicals in commerce.
The proposed rule (RIN:2070-AK24) would establish a one-time process chemical manufacturers would have to follow to ensure that chemicals they have made during the last 10 years are on an updated, active inventory required by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) amendments of 2016.
Companies that mix, or “process” chemicals into products such as paints, detergents and waxes could notify the EPA about chemicals they have used over the past 10 years to make sure those chemicals also are on the updated, active inventory, the proposed rule said. It does not require processors to notify the EPA.
The proposed rule would implement a central goal of the TSCA amendments of 2016. The amendments required the EPA to update, also called “reset,” the TSCA inventory that lists tens of thousands of chemicals, which have been made in or imported into the U.S. since 1975.
The updated inventory will consist of two parts: an active inventory that lists chemicals in commerce, and an inactive inventory that lists chemicals that were in commerce but are no longer being sold or used.
The rule also proposes an ongoing procedure that chemical manufacturers and processors would use to ask the EPA to move a chemical from the inactive inventory to the active one.
Commercial, Regulatory Goals
The updated inventory serves important commercial and regulatory goals.
First, only chemicals on the active TSCA inventory may be made, imported, distributed, sold and used.
Second, the EPA will review the chemicals on the active inventory; determine which are high or low priorities for risk assessment; and evaluate the risks of high priority chemicals. The risk evaluations could trigger regulations to control chemical uses that pose an unreasonable risk to people or the environment
The Inventory Reset is a foundational-sorting step required by the TSCA amendments, Karyn Schmidt, senior director of Regulatory and Technical Affairs at the American Chemistry Council told Bloomberg BNA.
ACC Welcomes Efficiencies
“EPA's proposal offers some welcomed efficiencies by avoiding the need for industry to duplicate notifications that have been made in recent Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) cycles, using a simple notification form, and using EPA's existing Central Data Exchange (CDX) reporting infrastructure,” Schmidt said in an e-mail. The CDX is an electronic system the EPA already requires companies to use when submitting a wide variety of information to the agency.
The efficiences Schmidt mentioned referred to an exemption in the proposed rule.
Under the proposal, manufacturers and processors of chemical substances listed on the non-confidential portion of the TSCA inventory would not have to tell the agency they made a particular chemical if they or another manufacturer had already done so by providing the EPA information required under the 2012 or 2016 Chemical Data Reporting rules. The Chemical Data Reporting rules required companies that produced certain volumes of a chemical—generally 25,000 pounds or more—submitted to the EPA information such as the identity of the chemical they make, the volume made or imported, how the chemical was used and the extent to which workers were exposed to it.
Schmidt praised another part of EPA's rule.
“We are also pleased that processors will have an opportunity to participate in the reset on a voluntary basis,” she said. “We look forward to constructive discussion of other ways the agency might further reduce the notification burden on affected stakeholders during the development of this rule.”
Enough Time?
Charles Franklin, an attorney with Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP in Washington, is concerned companies may not have enough time to notify the EPA when they want to make or process a chemical on the inactive inventory.
The proposed rule gives companies 30 days to notify it.
The agency's decision to impose a 30-day window “to flick the switch on” for inactive chemicals “doesn't make sense given the limited scope and purpose of the reporting requirement,” Franklin said in an e-mail.
The requirement also would be very burdensome to importers and processors who will be forced to deal with substances missing from the active inventory one at a time, he said.
Caught Unaware?
Companies that make or use a chemical that has been on the inventory for many years may not realize the important role the chemicals inventory status plays in their day-to-day operations, Franklin said.
“Companies should not downplay the implications of failing to include a chemical on the active inventory—particularly where such an omission could waive important confidential business protections that cannot be reclaimed later,” he said.
First of Three Rules
The proposed inventory update rule is the first of three core regulations the agency must propose to implement the TSCA amendments.
The other two rules will propose procedures the agency would use to prioritize chemicals for risk evaluation and to conduct risk evaluations. Jim Jones, the EPA's outgoing assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention under Obama, said the agency will release all three rules before this administration ends. The EPA set this self-imposed deadline to be sure it complies with the TSCA amendments’ requirement that all three core implementation rules be issued by June 22 as final regulations.
“We are pleased that EPA has released its inventory reset proposal first—in advance of its prioritization and risk evaluation proposals—to help review and consider these important framework rules together,” Schmidt said.
Proposal Consistent With Other Rules
Judah Prero, an attorney with Sidley Austin LLP in Washington, commended the EPA for using definitions and forms in this proposed rule that are consistent with ones it uses for already-issued chemical regulations.
“EPA is trying to make things consistent. It is not trying reinvent the wheel,” Prero said. For example, the notification that companies would submit to the EPA letting it know that they have made or processed a chemical over the last 10 years is similar to the pre-manufacturing notice that companies already submit for new chemicals.
Using familiar forms and definitions will help companies comply with the proposed requirements, Prero said.
180-Day Deadline; 1000s of Companies
Prero urged the EPA to learn from problems companies have previously experienced in submitting information to it via its Central Data Exchange system.
The EPA's proposed rule estimated that 4,692 chemical manufacturers and 100 chemical processors would submit chemical identity, production volume and other information required under the proposed inventory update rule.
Manufacturers will have only 180 days after the EPA issues its final inventory update rule to notify the EPA about chemicals they have made over the last 10 years, Prero said. He referred to a deadline the TSCA amendments imposed, which is reflected in the EPA's proposed rule.
The Central Data Exchange, like any electronic system, has bugs that have caused problems when previous chemical reports were due, Prero said. The agency needs to prepare its system to accommodate the many notifications its final rule would trigger, he said.
Effects on Processors Underestimated?
Irene A. Hantman, an attorney with Verdant Law PLLC in Washington, said the EPA likely underestimated the number of notifications it will get from processors.
The agency also underestimated the amount of work those processors would face, she said. The agency's burden estimates fail to recognize that processors frequently do not know the identities of all the chemicals with which they work, Hantman said.
It's common for a processor to purchase a solvent or surfactant, each of which would consist of a mixture of chemicals, she said. The processor then uses the chemical mixture it purchased to make whatever product it sells.
Yet the safety data sheets the supplier would provide for those chemical mixtures are not required to list every chemical in the mixture, meaning the processor may not know the identify of every chemical it uses, Hantman said.
It could take processors a lot of time to figure out every chemical they need and verify that each is on the updated inventory, she said.
Franklin said the EPA's proposed rule underestimates the likely burden many companies would face in implementing these provisions—especially smaller companies that do not have established internal or external resources to handle these matters.
Less Information Than Useful?
Hantman agreed with other attorneys that the EPA proposed a fairly simple one-time process that companies would use to let the agency know which chemicals they have made or processed over the last 10 years.
The ongoing process companies would use to ask the EPA to move a chemical from the inactive to the active inventory also is quite simple, she said.
She wondered whether in a desire to keep the process simple, the EPA neglected an opportunity to get more information it may need to prioritize chemicals.
Cynthia Taub, a partner with Steptoe & Johnson LLP in Washington, urged companies to pay particular attention to the parts of the EPA's proposal that affect confidential business information.
Companies should be sure the requirements are workable and not overly burdensome.
EPA's Own Deadlines Not Clear
Franklin said the EPA's proposal is relatively clear on the steps manufacturers, importers and processors must take.
The agency did not say when it will publish its updated inventory or provide the timeline for future updates, he said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316081&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316081&jd=103316081
-
EPA Floats Second Novel TSCA TCE Ban But Rules' Fate Remains Unclear
Jan 12, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA has proposed a second novel Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) rule to ban certain uses of the industrial solvent trichloroethylene (TCE), finding “unreasonable risk” to human health or the environment, but the fate of both TCE regulations remains unclear as some critics are calling on the incoming Trump administration to scrap them.
The agency released the second proposed rule on Jan. 11 under the revised TSCA enacted last June to prohibit, including import, processing, and distribution in commerce of TCE for vapor degreasing, including commercial use, and to require manufacturers, processors and distributors to provide downstream notification of the restrictions throughout the supply chain, according to a pre-publication Federal Register notice of the rule.
The proposed rule closely follows a Dec. 7 proposed rule to prohibit TCE use as an aerosol degreaser and for spot cleaning in dry cleaning facilities, which marked the first proposed risk management action of an existing chemical since enactment of the updated TSCA law in June and the first proposed section 6(a) rule in decades.
In addition, EPA on Jan. 12 released a proposed section 6(a) rule for two paint-stripping chemicals, methylene chloride (MC) and n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) ahead of its publication in the Register.
The TCE proposed rules fall under a special provision of the new TSCA law, section 26(l)(4), which says that for those chemicals included in EPA's 2014 TSCA work plan with completed assessments -- as with NMP, TCE and MC -- EPA may publish proposed and final rules under Section 6(a) that are "consistent with the scope of the completed risk assessment for the chemical substance and consistent with other applicable requirements of section 6.”
The TCE rulemaking falls under that provision, rather than EPA conducting risk evaluations under the new section 6 provisions. Nevertheless, the rules are still expected to serve as a key test for the new section 6(a) language, which sought to remove some of the legal barriers that hindered EPA's efforts to ban asbestos.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in a 1991 ruling in Corrosion Proof Fittings v. EPA struck down the agency's 1989 regulation banning asbestos as unreasonable. The court said the agency had not met its burden of proof to establish the chemical's risk could not be reduced by any other regulatory means. Since that ruling, the agency has never proposed a similar limit on a chemical already in commerce.
Proposed Rules
The new law overhauls the old TSCA and takes many steps to address the legal hurdles that hindered EPA's asbestos ban, including removing language that required the agency to promulgate the "least burdensome" alternative and clarifying that EPA should not consider costs when determining whether a chemical is safe, though the agency can still consider costs when issuing section 6 risk management actions.
But the TCE rules are expected to face industry challenges, and manufacturers are expected to lobby the incoming Trump administration against finalizing the proposals.
Officials from the Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance and the National Cleaners Association Inc. in meetings last year with the White House Office of Management & Budget outlined concerns that the ban on aerosol degreaser and for spot cleaning in dry cleaning facilities would have a significant impact on small businesses and raised concerns with the quality of EPA's underlying risk assessment.
In its Jan. 11 press release accompanying the proposed rule, EPA says the proposal along with the Dec. 7 TCE proposal for aerosol degreasers and spot removers in dry cleaning will help protect workers and consumers from cancer and other serious health risks that can result from exposure to TCE.
The agency is also including TCE in its Dec. 19 list of the first 10 high-priority chemicals it will review under the revised TSCA section 6, which governs chemicals already in the marketplace.
EPA plans to more broadly review risks associated with other uses of the 10 designated substances and issue broader section 6(a) rules if necessary.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-floats-second-novel-tsca-tce-ban-rules-fate-remains-unclear
-
U.S. EPA Finalizes Reporting and Record Keeping Requirements on Nanoscale Materials
Jan 13, 2017 | Nanowerk News
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is requiring one-time reporting and recordkeeping requirements on nanoscale chemical substances in the marketplace. These substances are nano-sized versions of chemicals that are already in the marketplace.
EPA seeks to facilitate innovation while ensuring safety of the substances. EPA currently reviews new chemical substances manufactured or processed as nanomaterials prior to introduction into the marketplace to ensure that they are safe.
For the first time, EPA is using TSCA to collect existing exposure and health and safety information on chemicals currently in the marketplace when manufactured or processed as nanoscale materials.
The companies will notify EPA of certain information:
· – specific chemical identity;
· – production volume; · – methods of manufacture; processing, use, exposure, and release information; and,available health and safety data.
Nanoscale materials have special properties related to their small size such as greater strength and lighter weight, however, they may take on different properties than their conventionally-sized counterpart.
The information collection is not intended to conclude that nanoscale materials will cause harm to human health or the environment. Rather, EPA will use the information gathered to determine if any further action under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), including additional information collection, is needed.
The reporting requirements are being issued under the authority of section 8(a) under TSCA.
EPA proposed and took comment on this rule.
Persons who manufacture or process a reportable chemical substance during the three years prior to the final effective date of this rule must report to EPA within a year of the rule’s publication.
For additional information: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/nano
http://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology-news/newsid=45589.php
-
Guidelines Seek to Harmonize U.S., International Chemical Testing
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
New guidelines for assessing the impacts of chemicals and pesticides on aquatic and sediment-dwelling fauna will harmonize the various testing protocols found in three U.S. laws with those set by the international Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Environmental Protection Agency announced Jan. 12.
The 14 new EPA guidelines address the test protocols in the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
Included are descriptions for developing data for submission to the EPA under the statutes that regulate pesticides and chemicals, which in turn, serve to create the scientific basis for the EPA's regulatory decisions. Some have been in development for the last 20 years. The guidelines set research parameters on the duration of experiments, the quality of the water used and feeding schedule of testing subjects, among other things.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316056&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316056&jd=103316056
-
Energy Shift Prompts Decline in Air Pollution: EPA Toxics Chief
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Industrial facilities overall are releasing fewer toxic chemicals into the environment than they were a decade ago, the Environmental Protection Agency said.
Mercury, hydrochloric acid, sulphuric acid and other toxic air pollution has come down 56 percent in the last decade mostly due to changing dynamics in energy markets, investments in pollution controls, and state and federal oversight. These factors have contributed to the downward trend in air toxics, EPA Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Jim Jones said during a Jan. 12 webinar.
“The shift from coal to other fuel sources, installation of control technologies, and implementation of environmental regulations are reasons for decreased releases,” said Jones.
Chemical, energy, manufacturing, and other industries released, recycled or treated about 27.2 billion pounds of toxic waste in production-related wastes in 2015, a 3 percent decrease from the previous year, according to the EPA's annual Toxics Release Inventory report published on Jan. 12. The majority—87 percent—was recycled, burned for energy recovery, or treated so that it would not pollute water, air or soil.
The amount of chemicals that do enter the environment decreased 24 percent between 2005 and 2015, mostly due to a steady decrease in toxic air emissions.
National Association of Clean Air Agencies Executive Director Bill Becker pointed to implementation of the Clean Air Act as a reason for the drop.
“These improvements in air quality don't happen by chance,” he told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail. “There are important and necessary rules and regulations affecting manufacturing facilities, electric generating units, and vehicles that are reducing our nation's exposure to toxic air pollutants and improving the health and welfare of our citizens.”
Mining Waste Down in Yo-Yo Trend
TRI is a publicly available database created to inform communities of toxic and hazardous chemicals released in their area. Certain industrial facilities are required to disclose chemicals listed under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). The EPA recently proposed to add a new industrial sector—natural gas processing facilities—to the TRI .
Almost 22,000 facilities reported emissions to the TRI in 2015. The metal mining industry's release of pollutants have fluctuated over the 10-year period, dropping 30 percent after an uptick in 2013 and 2014.
The decrease is attributed to the year-to-year changes in composition of the extracted ore and waste rock, according to the report. In some cases, small changes in the composition can affect whether a facility is eligible for a concentration-based exemption from TRI reporting.
The majority of metal mining waste is disposed of, not recycled or treated.
The report highlighted releases from the food processing industry, an area where production of toxic chemicals rose 105 percent in 10 years, due primarily to a single soybean facility in Illinois.
The facility is owned by the Incobrasa Industries, a Brazilian-owned biodiesel manufacturer. The facility produces and recycles about 800 million pounds annually of n-hexane, a chemical used in manufacturing.
Even if that facility is not taken into account, waste production increased 31 percent in food processing. However, the amount of food processing waste that is recycled or treated has also gone up from 78 percent to 91 percent over the last decade.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316074&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316074&jd=103316074
-
Methylene Chloride in Coating Strippers Banned: EPA Proposal
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency proposed Jan. 12 to ban the solvent methylene chloride in most types of paint and other coating strippers.
The agency's proposed rule offers two options to control another solvent called n-methylpyrrolidone, or NMP. The agency could also ban use of that solvent in stripping agents or require companies to take specific steps to protect their workers.
The solvent-restriction rules would protect the public and workers, the EPA said in an e-mailed announcement.
Methylene chloride can cause a range of adverse health effects, including harm to the central nervous system, liver toxicity and cancer, the agency said. NMP can also harm children born to pregnant women who were exposed for short periods to high concentrations of the solvent, or to children born to women chronically exposed, the agency said in a March 2015 risk assessment.
The Department of Defense's uses of paint and coating strippers would be somewhat protected under the EPA's proposed rule.
Companies could continue for 10 years to use coating strippers containing methylene chloride for national-security purposes.
The Defense Department and its contractors’ uses of n-methylpyrrolidone-based strippers could continue under one of the optional controls the EPA proposed for that solvent.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316080&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316080&jd=103316080
-
EPA Wants to Restrict Sometimes-Deadly Paint Stripper Chemical
Jan 13, 2017 | Center for Public Integrity (In Yahoo News)
By Jamie Smith Hopkins
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants to largely ban the use of a chemical in paint strippers that has killed dozens of people, asphyxiating some and triggering heart attacks in others.
The agency announced the proposed rule today, a move that followed pleas from public-health officials to do something about methylene chloride, the chemical in many of the paint removers on home improvement store shelves. Until last year, the cans didn’t include warnings about the risk of death from use in enclosed spaces, which is where people have typically died amid its fumes — in bathrooms, basements, tanks and even a squash court.
A 2015 Center for Public Integrity investigation uncovered more than 50 accidental exposure deaths linked to the chemical since 1980 in the U.S. — a likely undercount, given its ability to bring on a heart attack — and showed that federal agencies had opportunities to act decades ago but did not. Deaths blamed on methylene chloride have been documented since at least the 1940s, and in 1976 two academics wrote a piece in which they detailed a consumer death and criticized the lack of federal action.
The EPA said it determined that methylene chloride in paint strippers poses “unreasonable risks” to workers and consumers, not only because it can kill rapidly as its fumes build up but also because it increases the odds of developing cancer and can harm organs such as the lungs and kidneys. The only exceptions the agency proposed to its prohibition are for certain national security uses, which it wants to exempt for 10 years, and for furniture stripping, because the agency said it needs more time to determine how best to regulate the use of the chemical in that industry.
The EPA would require paint strippers with methylene chloride be distributed in 55-gallon drums to make sure they don’t end up on shelves in cans that consumers and businesses might unwittingly buy. About 1.3 million consumers use these products every year, in addition to roughly 30,000 people at work, the agency estimates.
“There are many cases of people who have become ill or even died as a result of exposure to methylene chloride-containing paint removers,” the EPA said in its announcement of the proposal. “Today’s action, when finalized, will save lives and protect people from other serious health risks.”
he proposal — opposed by businesses that make and use the solvent — comes eight years after the European Union approved a ban on sales of methylene chloride paint strippers to consumers and companies, with the exception of businesses using it in industrial sites with protective equipment and other cautionary measures. The chemical is also known as dichloromethane.
The would-be rule is the third the EPA has proposed since December that would restrict chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act, reformed last year by Congress to give EPA the power to more effectively protect Americans from dangerous exposures at work and at home.
“For the first time in a generation, we are able to restrict chemicals already in commerce that pose risks to public health and the environment,” Jim Jones, assistant administrator of the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, said in a statement last month.
But for the proposals to become rules, they will need the support of the incoming, regulation-adverse Trump administration. The president-elect has said that for every new rule his agencies enact, he wants to eliminate two. Billionaire investor Carl Icahn, tapped as a Trump adviser, said his role will be “rallying against this overregulation that we have.”
Trade groups and businesses, meanwhile, tried to kill the paint-stripper proposal before it could be unveiled for public comment. Meeting with the White House regulatory-review arm that is the gatekeeper for rules, the Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance argued in December that the EPA action overstates the risks — though the group agrees that the chemical can be deadly in enclosed areas — and would leave people without a good paint-stripping alternative, according to the group’s presentation. As the EPA was working to finish its proposal last year, the trade group petitioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission to require stronger warnings on cans, then told the White House’s Office of Management and Budget that the EPA shouldn’t be “usurping” the CPSC’s authority.
W.M. Barr & Co., an employee-owned company that makes several methylene chloride paint stripper brands, including ones linked to worker deaths in recent years, said in its presentation to the Office of Management and Budget that the solvent “offers a truly unique set of benefits and can be safely used as millions of uses each year shows.” In an earlier interview with the Center, the company’s vice president of risk management pointed out that methylene chloride — unlike alternative chemicals for stripping — is nonflammable.
But the solvent is often paired with other, flammable chemicals in paint strippers, the EPA noted in its proposal. And chemical-safety advocates contend that there are safer, effective alternatives. Benzyl alcohol, which some state agencies have recommended, is less toxic and poses what the National Fire Protection Association describes as a “fairly insignificant” fire hazard. The Institute for Research and Technical Assistance, which tests safer substitutes for popular solvents, said it found benzyl alcohol to be a reasonably good replacement for furniture stripping — an industry exempted in the proposed rule — because it loosens the same coatings for roughly the same cost overall.
The EPA said methylene chloride does cause unreasonable risks in furniture stripping and wrote in its proposal that it intends to propose regulation for that use later, “after seeking additional information to further characterize the impacts of potential regulatory action.” It wants to enact both rules at the same time.
Furniture strippers who died from exposure to the chemical include 18-year-old Johnathan Welch. In 1999, the week before he would have started college, he was stripping paint over a tank in a business near Chattanooga, Tennessee, when co-workers left the room to eat lunch. When they returned 35 minutes later, he was collapsed over the tank, a burned, swelling arm in the liquid. Doctors tried in vain to revive him.
His mother, Rita Welch, said neither she nor her son had any idea the job he started at age 16 — after school at first, then full time — was putting him in contact with something that could kill him. “In his second year, he started having some dizzy spells and having problems with his sinuses, but I didn’t link it to the chemicals,” she said in 2015 interview, choked up with regrets over the still-keen loss.
The deaths in recent years have typically involved bathtub refinishing, with workers leaning over tubs to remove the finish, not realizing that that the fumes were building up to dangerous levels. The solvents industry agrees that methylene chloride is unsafe for bathtub work but wants warnings on labels rather than a ban.
Because methylene chloride is an anesthetic, it can knock victims out and shut down their ability to breathe. Gary de la Peña, who survived a near-death experience with the chemical at a California paint company five years ago, was overcome seconds after he rushed into a nine-foot-deep tank to rescue a collapsed co-worker who’d been using paint stripper inside it. His co-worker died. De la Peña was hospitalized for four days and told the Center in 2015 that his health had never been the same.
Methylene chloride transforms in the body to carbon monoxide, giving it another way to kill — by triggering a heart attack from lack of oxygen. And while methylene chloride isn’t flammable, an open flame can convert it to phosgene, the poisonous gas that killed tens of thousands in World War I.
Some paint-stripping alternatives carry their own health risks. Studies have linked N-methylpyrrolidone, or NMP, to miscarriages and other effects on unborn children, and EPA’s paint-stripper proposal covers that chemical as well. But the agency offered two possibilities it asked for comment on: Whether to ban NMP outright in paint strippers, with a temporary exemption for national-security uses, or to require more dilution of the chemical in paint strippers along with better warnings on labels and more worker protections.
This story is part of Unequal Risk. Workers in America face risks from toxic exposures that would be considered unacceptable outside the job. Click here to read more stories in this series.
Copyright 2017 The Center for Public Integrity. This story was published by The Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative news organization in Washington, D.C.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/epa-wants-restrict-sometimes-deadly-223135412.html
-
EU Chemicals Agency Adds Four Substances to ‘High Concern’ List
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The widely used chemical bisphenol A was one of four substances added to the European Chemicals Agency's list of “substances of very high concern” Jan. 12, a designation that could lead to the use of the substance being prohibited in the European Union under the bloc's REACH law.
The addition of the four chemicals brings the agency's list total to 173. So far, 31 of the substances have been added to Annex XIV of REACH (Regulation No. 1907/2006 on the registration, evaluation and authorization of chemicals), meaning their use must be phased out in the EU unless specific continued-use authorizations are granted.
Along with bisphenol A, used to make polycarbonate plastics and found in tin can linings, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) added to the list nonadecafluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) and its sodium and ammonium salts; p-(1,1-dimethylpropyl)phenol; and 4-heptylphenol. These three substances have a variety of uses in industry and in the manufacture of plastics.
Listing Expected
The addition of bisphenol A to the substances of very high concern list was expected after an ECHA committee of representatives from the EU's 28 countries agreed in December to the designation. Bisphenol A and PFDA landed on the list because they are considered to have toxic effects on reproduction.
The two other substances were listed because they are suspected of having endocrine disrupting properties.
The list designation means that companies that supply the substances must provide safety data sheets to their customers. Manufacturers or importers of products containing the substances must notify ECHA if a substance of very high concern is present in the product in a concentration above 0.1 percent by weight.
Search for Alternatives
Bisphenol A is increasingly subject to a number of limitations in the EU. The substance is banned from polycarbonate infant feeding bottles and, under a restriction published in December, is prohibited from thermal paper above a concentration of 0.02 percent by weight.
The designation of bisphenol A as a substance of very high concern would have little impact on its use in polycarbonate plastics because it is used as an intermediate substance to produce the polymers, which retain only trace amounts of bisphenol A once manufactured.
Frida Hök, chemicals policy adviser in Sweden with ChemSec, the International Chemical Secretariat, which campaigns for the phaseout of toxic substances, said that the addition of bisphenol A to the list was nevertheless welcome.
“Many companies have worked hard for years in order to substitute bisphenol A and we hope that by now identifying it as an SVHC, even more alternatives will be available in the marketplace,” Hök said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316054&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316054&jd=103316054
-
EU Panel Unanimously Approves Tightening Mercury Rule
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
A draft European Union regulation that would tighten the bloc's rules on mercury moved a step closer to completion Jan. 12, with a favorable vote in the European Parliament's environment committee.
Committee lawmakers voted unanimously, 66–0, to back the draft regulation that representatives from the European Parliament and the Council of the EU, which represents the governments of EU countries, have agreed to informally.
The draft regulation would repeal and replace a 2008 EU law on mercury (Regulation (EC) No 1102/2008) that bans exports of mercury from the EU.
Minamata Ratification
The new regulation also would ban the use of mercury in the EU unless there are no alternatives, and prohibit imports of the substance in most cases. In dental amalgam, mercury would be permitted only if it is encapsulated and dentists would be required to separate waste containing mercury from other waste, similarly U.S. rules. The regulation would set a goal of a phaseout of mercury in dental amalgam by 2030.
In addition, the regulation would ratify in the European Union the United Nations 2013 Minamata Convention on Mercury, under which mercury in products should be phased out by 2020, and plans should be drawn up to restrict its use in other contexts, such as in gold mining.
Stefan Eck, a German left-wing member of the European Parliament who is the institution's lead lawmaker on the draft mercury regulation, said EU governments should have agreed to faster phaseout of mercury in some applications. But the new law marked “a small step in the right direction; one step for an environment with less mercury,” he said.
The law still requires the formal approval of the full European Parliament and the Council of the EU. The full Parliament will vote on the draft regulation during a March 13–16 session.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316058&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316058&jd=103316058
-
NGOs Slam Environment Committee Vote on EU-Canada Deal
Jan 13, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Parliament's Environment Committee (Envi) has voted in support of the EU-Canada comprehensive economic and trade agreement (Ceta) – a move NGOs say will undermine chemical safety.
Of particular concern, they say, is the risk to the regulation of exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs).
The NGOS say the European Commission is "already lowering EU standards of protection" against EDCs. And, they say, it has "acknowledged that its decision-making on this issue has been influenced by mounting pressure from EU trade partners [such as Canada]".
"Ceta threatens to halt, delay, or even reverse EU efforts to protect us from pesticides and chemicals that disrupt our hormone systems,” says Layla Hughes, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (Ciel)
"To do so contradicts the recommendations and requests of the European Parliament, independent scientific opinion, and the public."
And Génon K Jensen, executive director at the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL), says: "it is very disappointing that politicians are not waking up to people's real concerns about these trade and investment agreements."
Meanwhile, Cefic has joined other sector associations as part of the Alliance for a Competitive European Industry (ACEI) in welcoming Envi’s vote.
“The positive signal from the Parliament this week in the Envi committee gives us hope that the common understanding about Ceta being a high standard agreement, that will only bring benefits and safeguard health and the environment, has been well heard," Marco Mensink, Cefic director General and chairman of ACEI, said.
According to a Cefic release, chemicals trade with Canada amounted to 2.5 billion euros, with an annual trade surplus of almost 1 billion euros, for the EU in 2015.
This article has been updated to include a comment from Cefic.
https://chemicalwatch.com/52122/ngos-slam-environment-committee-vote-on-eu-canada-deal
-
Teflon Chemical Cases Face Uncertain Fate If Dow, DuPont Merge
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Uncertainty cloaks DuPont Co.'s liability for 3,500 toxic tort lawsuits over a Teflon-related chemical as the company proceeds toward a merger with Dow Chemical Co.
DuPont, formally E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Co., is facing more than 3,500 lawsuits in various federal and state courts related to exposure to the chemical PFOA, also known as perfluorooctanoic acid or C-8. DuPont manufactured the chemical, intended for use in nonstick coatings, stain-resistant carpets and firefighting foam, at a plant in Parkersburg, W. Va.
PFOA has been found in drinking water in West Virginia and Ohio, near the Parkersburg plant. In the first three of those 3,500-plus cases, DuPont lost to residents of that area who claimed DuPont's PFOA was responsible for their cancer.
‘Murky’ Situation
DuPont's spinoff, Chemours Co., will defend the PFOA cases although DuPont has been the named defendant.
Tom Claps, litigation analyst at Susquehanna Financial Group LLLP, said his company estimates DuPont will be liable for about $550 million for settlement of the current 3,500-plus PFOA cases. Chemours is required to reimburse DuPont for that amount, as the companies agreed in 2015.
“However, DuPont must write the initial PFOA checks to plaintiffs in these cases, and will then go after Chemours for reimbursement,” Claps said.
DuPont spokesman Dan Turner said even after the merger, Chemours will continue to indemnify DuPont against those liabilities.
After the merger, Dow and DuPont's plan is to divide the merged company into three separate, publicly traded entities.
Plaintiffs are still waiting to hear from DuPont about which post-merger entity will be adequately funded to cover those liabilities, Claps said.
Jeffrey Dugas manages the “Keep Your Promises” DuPont campaign, an organization of local activists and stakeholders fighting on behalf of residents affected by PFOA contamination.
Dugas said it's still unclear what would happen to the 3,500 cases should the Dow-DuPont merger advance, especially if Chemours is unable or unwilling to bear additional financial burden.
“The true story here is that it appears pretty murky,” he said.
According to Dugas, the merger is the newest way for DuPont to delay justice for those affected by the chemical.
“This merger, this split just continues that pattern,” he said.
Post-Merger Possibilities
Claps said that as long as the assigned entity has the funds to cover the liabilities, “we do not believe that the PFOA issue should have an impact on the merger.”
But Dugas worries which entity, of three anticipated to come from the merger, would bear those liabilities.
“Not all three are going to be extremely competitive right out of the gate,” he said.
Dugas believes there may be more PFOA lawsuits to come, in addition to the approximately 3,500 already filed.
Turner declined to comment on the effect the cases may have on the merger, citing the pending nature of the litigation.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, PFOA was found in blood serum in 99 percent of the U.S. general population between 1999 and 2012, but that percentage has been decreasing as domestic companies phase out production of the chemical.
The agency issued a health advisory in 2016 limiting PFOA exposure to 0.07 parts per billion after studies in test animals showed the chemical has adverse health effects, including cancers and impacts on development and the immune system.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316052&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316052&jd=103316052
-
EPA Rejects Most Requests to Reconsider Clean Power Plan
Jan 12, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA has rejected most of the 38 petitions it received to reconsider all or parts of its Clean Power Plan, just days before President-elect Donald Trump takes office and sets his sights on repealing the rule altogether.
Most of the issues raised in the petitions were previously addressed during the rulemaking process, EPA concluded. Those range from the core legal objections, for which the agency says challengers had no new information to alter its decision, to more technical issues with aspects like the reliability safety valve of EPA's use of uniform subcategorized emission rates. EPA laid out its responses in a 266-page document.
The only issues EPA agreed to take a closer look at are related to how the rule treats biomass and waste-to-energy power generation.
The agency also rejected 22 petitions to stay the rule administratively, although the move was only symbolic since it's been on hold for almost a year because of a Supreme Court order.
The rejections themselves can be challenged in court, and some may well make their way to the D.C. Circuit’s docket, if only as a way to keep legal options open amid the Trump administration’s expected efforts to withdraw the rule.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Litigation: D.C. Circuit Orders Argument Plans for Power Plant NSPS Case
Jan 12, 2017 | Inside EPA
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is asking parties to the legal challenge over EPA's greenhouse gas (GHG) rule for new power plants to submit proposals for structuring the oral argument in the case.
The court made the request in a Jan. 12 letter, setting a March 6 deadline for the argument proposals, more than a month ahead of the April 17 arguments in North Dakota, et al. v. EPA, et al.
The letter is yet another signal from the court that it is not planning to slow or halt the case due to the pending change to the Trump administration.
The outgoing Obama administration issued the new source performance standards (NSPS) rule, which has a GHG limit for new coal plants based on installing partial carbon capture and sequestration. The rule's GHG standard for gas plants is based on using efficient combined-cycle technology.
But the new administration is not expected to support the regulation, possibly leaving its defense to states and environmental groups that intervened on EPA's behalf.
The court already rejected a request from opponents to delay the rest of the briefing in the case. A Dec. 16 motion from a host of state and industry groups challenging the rule asked the court to delay a Jan. 19 reply brief deadline until Feb. 24, writing that the “new administration is likely to consider adopting policy changes that could significantly alter the scope of this litigation and potentially even affect whether further proceedings are warranted.”
But the D.C. Circuit rejected the request without comment in a Jan. 4 per curiam order. Observers say the incoming Trump Justice Department could seek voluntary remand of this rule and others in litigation, though in opposing the industry request, the Obama EPA and its supporters called that scenario “speculative.”
The court also set April 17 as the oral argument date in a surprising order issued after the election and before briefing was complete.
The new letter on the format for the arguments says the court wants to ensure an organized presentation of the argument issues and that the proposed format should address which issues in the briefs warrant discussion at the argument, what order those issues should be heard, how much total time the court should allow for argument and how much time each issue should be given.
The court also requests the names of the attorneys arguing the issues and the parties they represent. If there are plans to cede time to intervenors, the court also wants the names of those attorneys, their parties and the issues they will address.
“Counsel are encouraged to meet prior to March 6, 2017, to prepare and present a unified format for oral argument,” the letter says.
Whether a joint proposal is possible remains to be seen.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/litigation-dc-circuit-orders-argument-plans-power-plant-nsps-case
-
Global E&Ps, Led by U.S. Brethren, Locked And Loaded For New Investments
Jan 12, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The global oil and gas industry, already expected to boost exploration spend during 2017, is poised to more than double final project approvals as optimism spreads across the energy sector.
According to an analysis by Wood Mackenzie Ltd., operators should greenlight more than 20 oil and gas developments this year, compared with nine in 2016. Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. (TPH) sees even more final investment decisions (FID) worldwide, estimating there could be about 40 in the upstream sector, mostly bent to natural gas.
"A leaner industry will emerge from the gloom," Wood Mackenzie researchers said. "Costs have already come down by 20% on average, and a further 3-7% reduction is expected in 2017. This will pave the way for a doubling in FIDs compared to last year."
Wood Mackenzie last month predicted that 2017 would be a much better year for the energy industry, now a consensus among the industry prognosticators.
Capex/boe for the potential FIDs "averages just $7/bbl, down from $17/bbl for the 2014 project sanctions, according to Wood Mackenzie. “The projects also give more bang for their buck -- with an internal rate of return (IRR) increase from 9% to 16%."
More Gassy FIDs?
TPH is estimating as many as 60 projects, mostly overseas, could be sanctioned this year, and roughly two-thirds (around 40) likely will take FID. On a risked basis, the 40 projects could develop 21 billion boe and create 3.7 million boe/d of production at plateau, 60% weighted to natural gas. The overall cost of the combined pre-FID portfolio is estimated at $130 billion using a cost of $6.00/boe. That production level would require around 450 wells. The average start date for the projects, "without factoring in any delays, is 2020, with a contribution of just 900,000 boe/d that year."
During 2016, TPH estimated that 18 projects were sanctioned (pre-FID) that could create around 7.5 billion boe. About half of the output would be from the Zohr gas field offshore Egypt and the Tengiz field in Kazakhstan. Combined, the 18 projects may produce 1.6 million boe/d at plateau, 66% gas-weighted, at a cost of $60 billion ($8.00/boe), using an average time to first production from FID of three years.
Norway's Statoil ASA and BP plc "both sanctioned three operated projects" last year, and Norway was the most active region with five projects. However, BP in December pulled the trigger for the $9 billion Mad Dog Phase 2 project for the Gulf of Mexico (GOM).
In its outlook, Wood Mackenzie also outlined projections for exploration and production (E&P) spending, some of which mirror other analyst forecasts. Capital expenditures (capex) for new developments and existing project spend is seen rising worldwide by 3% to $450 billion. U.S. unconventionals spend alone is expected to be around 25% higher than in 2016.
Evercore ISI also predicted U.S. E&P capex could increase by as much as 24.5%. Raymond James & Associates Inc. is predicting a "massive" capex surge for U.S. E&Ps, and other analysts are forecasting rising enthusiasm.
However, Wood Mackenzie sees capital outlays by the oil majors still trending lower, with combined development investments forecast to decline by around 8% as spend in recent capital-intensive projects, particularly in deepwater and liquefied natural gas, winds down.
This year "will demonstrate how efficient the industry has become, showing projects in better shape all around," said Wood Mackenzie's Malcolm Dickson, principal upstream analyst.
Capex in 2017 still is expected to be 40% lower than during the champagne days of 2014, as E&Ps retreated to smaller, incremental projects and slashed spending. Today, however, the mood is "cautiously optimistic."
Less Costs, Higher Output
Production is forecast to grow by an average 2% across Wood Mackenzie's corporate service universe, " impressive given development spend was slashed by over 40% between 2014 and 2016. All eyes will be on how quickly the U.S. tight oil sector responds to rising prices."
U.S. tight oil production declines are seen bottoming in 1Q2017, with output growing by 300,000 b/d over the course of the year.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration, in its latest Short-Term Energy Outlook issued Tuesday, said Lower 48 natural gas and crude oil production should trend higher in 2017, with crude output averaging 6.8 million b/d, up slightly from 2016.
Mirroring myriad forecasts, Wood Mackenzie said the recovery in U.S. oil volumes this year will be led by the Permian Basin.
U.S. independents overall are expected to respond first to rising commodity prices, leveraging their "advantaged assets and access to capital," researchers said.
"The U.S. unconventional sector exemplifies how operational efficiencies can offset low capex and potentially even cost inflation. There has been a dramatic increase in efficiency in the sector, exemplified by the drillers, who are managing to complete wells up to 30% quicker."
There's "potential for a further improvement in drilling speed of 20-30%" for early-life plays that include the Permian Basin's Wolfcamp formation and Oklahoma's myriad stacked reservoirs.
Uncertainties are built into the 2017 forecast, as the incoming Trump administration's policy plans and potential actions by a GOP-led Congress remain unclear. Operators face more scrutiny under low-carbon protocols agreed to in the United Nations climate change accord. And global oil production totals for 2017 are uncertain following an agreement to reduce output through May by members and allies of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).
Discipline, Deleveraging Dominate
In any case, the industry should “turn cash flow positive for the first time since the downturn if the implementation of OPEC production cuts drives oil prices above $55/bbl," said Wood Mackenzie’s Tom Ellacott, senior vice president of corporate analysis.
"Capital discipline and deleveraging will remain dominant themes, but companies will increasingly look for opportunities to adapt and grow, spurred on by OPEC's move to boost prices," said researchers. "The industry will continue to reposition portfolios lower down the cost curve and, at a more cautious pace, into new energy."
The Permian will be at the fore for tight oil, while Brazil's pre-salt offshore discoveries should lead to higher output, as "both...have materiality and among the lowest development breakevens globally. Some of the larger players may instead choose to focus on low cost opportunities in resource-rich regions such as Russia and the Middle East."
Deepwater projects, typically the most expensive because of the infrastructure impediments, remain challenged. However, there is a bit of optimism for the sector.
About one-third of the predicted FIDs to be made this year are expected to be deepwater projects as costs also have declined. Even some massive GOM projects are profitable with oil prices above $40/bbl.
Many of the projects slated for FID in 2017 are competitive with tight oil, but many longer-term deepwater pre-FID developments are still out of the money, according to researchers. Of the 40 larger pre-FID deepwater projects, around half fail to hit a 15% IRR at $60/bbl," Wood Mackenzie said. However, "likely" candidates for FIDs this year include Royal Dutch Shell plc's Kaikias in the deepwater GOM; ExxonMobil Corp.'s Liza project offshore Guyana and Petroleos Brasileiro SA's Sepia in Brazil's deepwater.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109030-global-eps-led-by-us-brethren-locked-and-loaded-for-new-investments
-
Bill Exempts Some Fracking Chemicals from Records Requests
Jan 12, 2017 | AP (In the Washington Post)
By Sarah Rankin
Certain chemicals pumped underground during hydraulic fracturing would be exempt from public records requests under a bill advancing in the Virginia Legislature.
A measure from Del. Roxann Robinson would allow the denial of requests under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act for information about chemicals that has been deemed a trade secret. A House subcommittee advanced the measure Thursday.
Robinson, a Republican from Chesterfield County, introduced a similar measure last year. She said Thursday it’s necessary to protect the oil and gas industry and its closely held proprietary information.
But opponents said the bill could hinder first responders in an emergency and keep landowners in the dark about pollutants that might be affecting their groundwater.
Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves pumping water, sand and chemicals underground to split open rock formations and allow oil and gas to flow. The practice has opened up deposits that were previously unreachable but also raised concerns about pollution, contamination and earthquakes.
Under recently implemented state fracking regulations, well operators would be required to submit to the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy a disclosure form that includes information about the chemicals and additives used in the process. The department would determine what qualifies as a trade secret and post all other information online.
David Clarke, a lobbyist for the Virginia Oil and Gas Association who spoke on behalf of Robinson’s measure, said the proposed FOIA exemption shouldn’t cause safety concerns. If someone were exposed to a chemical or a well failed, details would be made available to emergency officials, even if it involved a trade secret, he said.
But others said waiting until an emergency to release that information would be too late to prepare an adequate response.
Megan Rhyne of the nonprofit Virginia Coalition for Open Government opposed the bill, saying public health oversight requires access to public information.
She pointed to the case of Flint, Michigan, where independent researchers helped expose the public health crisis over lead-tainted water, which led to criminal charges against a number of public officials.
The committee’s vote on the measure was 4-3. It now advances to the full House General Laws committee.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/bill-exempts-some-fracking-chemicals-from-records-requests/2017/01/12/852a18a2-d910-11e6-a0e6-d502d6751bc8_story.html?utm_term=.50bc6ab7ee7e
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA to Publish Facility Rule, Leaving Implementation Up to Trump
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
A final rule requiring high-risk chemical facilities to tighten safety requirements and share more information with local responders will not take effect until weeks into the incoming Trump administration, giving Congress what seems like a clear path to block the plan.
The Environmental Protection Agency announced the final rule (RIN:2050-AG82) Dec. 21, 2016. The agency said that the regulation is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register Jan. 13. Because the rule takes effect 60 days after publication, companies will not have to comply until March 14, more than seven weeks into the new administration.
The rule stemmed from an interagency effort prompted after President Barack Obama issued an executive order in 2013 calling for officials to work together to identify gaps in chemical safety rules and propose fixes. The order came after a fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas, killed 15 people April 17, 2013.
Rule's Prospects Dim
In an e-mail to Bloomberg BNA Jan. 12, Daisy Letendre, a spokeswoman for Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), said the lawmaker expects to block the rule before companies have to comply.
President-elect Donald Trump's nominee for EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, also strongly opposes the rule and has called for its withdrawal. Last year, House lawmakers blocked funding for the rule in the Interior-Environment Appropriations bill (H.R. 5538), which did not become law.
Mathy Stanislaus, EPA's assistant administrator for land and emergency management, has defended the rule as a sound balance of industry and public safety interests. EPA also scaled back costs in the final rule—the agency predicted a cost of $131.8 million per year for companies, a decline from $161 million per year in the proposed rule.
New EPA Leaders Could Play Role
Industry groups, though, say the agency's regulatory path strayed beyond what was necessary to protect chemical plants to include burdensome requirements for outside auditors and other oversight rules.
Judah Prero, an attorney at Sidley Austin LLP and former American Chemistry Council official, told Bloomberg BNA Jan. 12 the rule relied on unproven policies, though he acknowledged much of the plan focused on sharing information with local responders.
“They don't know how much safety is going to be increased; they just think it is,” Prero said.
Prero said it was possible the EPA could revise the rule but the path forward is unclear until Pruitt and new assistant administrators are in place.
Industry Groups Targeting Rule
In a statement to Bloomberg BNA Jan. 12, the American Chemistry Council said it opposes the rule and will pursue “all options, including working with Congress and the new administration, to ensure that the rule does not hinder the Risk Management Program's ability to deliver safety benefits or compromise the security of chemical facilities.”
Ben Traynham, senior director for legislative affairs at the National Association of Chemical Distributors, said in a statement to Bloomberg BNA Jan. 12 that the EPA's rule was poorly written. Traynham said the rule, which EPA had worked on since 2014, “was rushed through and hastily finalized in the waning days of the Obama administration.”
NACD faulted EPA for sending the proposed rule to the White House Office of Management and Budget before a Small Business Advocacy Review panel filed its final report, among other procedural concerns.
Rick Hind, who advocated on the rule for Greenpeace but left the organization last month, told Bloomberg BNA Jan. 12 the rule's possible demise was “an insult” to Trump's voters and emergency workers killed in the West Fertilizer Co. explosion.
Hind said he hopes Inhofe will back off if repealing other regulations is more pressing to the new Congress.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316072&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316072&jd=103316072
-
Momentive Chemical Faces State Environmental Violations, Seeks Striker Limits
Jan 12, 2017 | Albany Times Union
By Brian Nearing
Concerned with chemical spills and hazardous waste handling at the Momentive chemical plant in Waterford, state environmental officials expect to cite violations against the company, a day after it was stymied in a legal bid to get most striking workers away from the plant.
On Thursday, Environmental Conservation Commissioner Basil Seggos warned Momentive Performance Materials CEO Jack Boss the state is "concerned with recent violations at the facility and (the company's) reluctance to address them."
Since 700 unionized workers walked out of the plant Nov. 2, company managers and newly hired replacement workers have been operating the facility where industrial adhesives and sealants are made. During that time, there have been three wastewater spills and 35 other spills, including 12 attributed to contractors, according to DEC. Seggos wrote that the company also faces violations under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Seggos said his office will pursue an unspecified "enforcement action" against the company, adding that despite the strike, Momentive must have "a sufficient amount of trained workers to ensure all of its environmental and safety obligations are met, especially if the company is planning to continue production ... A chemical plant operated without regard for safety presents an inherent danger to the public and the environment."
Seggos marks the first entry by the administration of Gov. Andrew Cuomo into the two-month-old strike. This week, state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli called on Momentive, which is part of investments in the state pension fund, to reach a settlement.
On Wednesday, a state supreme court judge denied Momentive's request for a temporary restraining order to immediately keep striking workers away from the nine plant entrances on routes 4 and 32. The company claimed that workers, who run picket lines 24 hours a day, are blocking access to the facility and intimidating those trying to enter and leave.
Since the strike began, Momentive has been hiring nonunion workers and continues to advertise for such workers. Legal documents also show that Momentive has fired more than two dozen strikers, claiming violations of company policy against harassment while on the picket line, or of involvement in vandalism inside the plant before the strike started.
Supreme Court Justice Thomas Nolan will consider a union motion to dismiss the Momentive request by Jan. 27. If he allows the request to stand, Nolan will conduct a hearing Feb. 3. Workers are represented by IUE-CWA locals 81359 and 81380.
Last week, Momentive filed its lawsuit seeking that Nolan order various limits on the strikers, including:
Barring any strikers within 30 feet of an entrance.
Limiting the number of picketers at any location to five.
Requiring strikers to wear "authorized picket" tags.
Banning the use of bullhorns, megaphones and loudspeakers.
Barring union members from following anyone leaving the plant.
Barring union members from making "false statements" about plant safety to the media that "improperly scare, mislead and incite the public."
Momentive also wants Nolan to order strikers to douse their burn barrels, where workers have been getting warm. The company said the fires are a safety hazard given the flammability of chemicals at the facility.
On Wednesday, after Nolan's rulings, settlement talks begun the day before between Momentive and union officials collapsed. The talks were the first since the strike.
Bob Master, assistant to the vice president for Communication Workers of America District One, accused the company of seeking "a secret, emergency injunction during the time of a bargaining session. That injunction was denied by the judge who advocated for the company to renew bargaining with its workers in earnest."
Master said the unions "offered major concessions by increasing health care contributions and reducing health and welfare benefits coverage for our retirees in an earnest attempt to help the company cut costs. Momentive continued its attacks on workers and ultimately the community at large in Waterford by being unwilling to negotiate any terms whatsoever."
Momentive spokeswoman Tina Reiber declined comment Thursday on the company's lawsuit. She also had no comment on Seggos' letter.
Reiber said while the company remained "focused on reaching an agreement," it had "no immediate plans to return to the table. At this time, we are focused on continuing the safe operations of our plant."
Momentive's lawsuit claims that Saratoga County is "unable to furnish adequate protection" to ensure sufficient access to the facility.
Half of the trucking companies that once serviced the plant are now refusing to do so, according to an affidavit from Edward J. Spain, senior director of global engineering for Momentive. Freight companies willing to deliver are now charging Momentive "hazard pay," he said.
http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-business/article/Momentive-chemical-faces-state-environmental-10854647.php
-
Potential Safety Standard May Dampen Crude Oil Volatility
Jan 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
A federal agency is considering setting new standards to address the volatility of crude oil transported by rail.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration announced Jan. 12 that it would collect information from governments, industries and the public to potentially develop a vapor pressure threshold to make crude oil safer to transport.
The potential rule comes after a series of fiery accidents with oil tank rail cars in the U.S. and Canada.
“The volatility of crude oil blends can present public safety problems,” said Tyson Slocum, energy program director for advocacy group Public Citizen.
The possible rule may also affect the transportation standards for all Class 3 flammable liquid hazardous materials, such as gasoline.
Moving Bakken Oil
Kari Cutting, vice president of the North Dakota Petroleum Council, said such a rule is unnecessary.
Cutting said PHMSA's notice is also ill-timed. The notice states the agency is currently reviewing a petition from New York State's attorney general that was sent to the agency in 2015.
The petition calls for a vapor pressure limit less than 9 pounds per square inch for crude oil transported by rail.
Cutting said the petition has factual inaccuracies, and PHMSA should not act based solely on it.
“It wasn't following the science, or even being factual at this point, to put out a potential notice,” she said.
According to Cutting, North Dakota implemented a conditioning rule in 2015 that sets a specific vapor pressure standard for crude oil produced in the state. North Dakota's rule calls for vapor pressure at 13.7 pounds per square inch or less.
In a 2015 presentation, DOE division director Rick Elliott said Bakken crude shows “statistically higher vapor pressure” than typical oils, and that there is no single parameter that defines an oil's degree of flammability.
With the majority of the nation's crude coming from Bakken shale, Cutting said a federal rule isn't needed.
Slocum disagrees.
“We need to have more uniform standards,” Slocum said.
According to PHMSA, the Department of Transportation and the Department of Energy continue to study Bakken shale oil to understand how vapor pressure affects transportation safety.
Cutting said it is “irresponsible” for PHMSA not to wait for the conclusion of that study to issue a rule notice.
Congressional Concern
In a Jan. 12 news release, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) applauded the PHMSA news, insisting that the federal government and not private companies regulate crude oil volatility.
During a Jan. 11 hearing for Department of Transportation secretary nominee Elaine Chao, Cantwell raised the volatility issue.
“Extraordinary growth rates of trains ... have every city in my state concerned about the volatility of this product,” she said.
Chao said it was “premature” for her to comment on crude oil volatility before her confirmation.
PHMSA's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is expected to be published in the Federal Register Jan. 18. A 60-day public comment period will open that day and close March 20.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=103316076&vname=dennotallissues&fn=103316076&jd=103316076
-
EPA is Urged to Freeze Enforcement of 2015 Smog Standard
Jan 12, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
States shouldn't have to simultaneously implement two separate ozone air quality standards, business groups said today in again urging U.S. EPA to effectively freeze enforcement of the benchmark adopted in 2015.
That two-track approach "is a waste of resources and overly burdensome," Mary Martin, who serves as energy, clean air and natural resources counsel for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said in prepared testimony at a public hearing on EPA's proposed strategy for implementation of the 2015 threshold of 70 parts per billion.
EPA is already proceeding with the first steps toward enforcement of that standard, with the agency scheduled to make nonattainment designations by this fall. At the same time, however, close to 120 million people still live in areas out of compliance with the 2008 standard of 75 ppb. As a remedy, EPA should extend the deadline for finalizing attainment designations for the 2015 standard until 2025, Martin said.
"States would have time to implement the 2008 zone standards, while still improving air quality," she said.
Also calling on EPA to address the overlap were representatives of the American Petroleum Institute; National Association of Manufacturers; and NAAQS Implementation Coalition, which is made up of trade groups and companies affected by what are technically known as national ambient air quality standards.
Ozone is created by the reaction of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in sunlight, the main ingredient in smog. It has been linked to asthma attacks and worsened emphysema symptoms.
In the proposal rolled out two months ago, EPA is seeking feedback on two approaches for implementation of the 2015 standard.
One would revoke the 2008 standard in all areas one year after the effective date of the designations for the 2015 benchmark with anti-backsliding requirements put in place for all areas that still don't meet the previous standard by that point.
The other would leave the 2008 standard in place in all areas designated as being in nonattainment for that threshold until they are reclassified as in attainment.
Industry critics, however, have meanwhile been looking to Capitol Hill for help.
While the House last year approved H.R. 4775, by Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas), to delay implementation of the 2015 standard until well into the next decade, the measure went nowhere in the Senate and died when the 114th Congress went out of business. This week, the Senate failed to give a vote to a similar proposal by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who had hoped to add it to a budget resolution (E&E Daily, Jan. 12).
Also testifying at the hearing were Earthjustice attorney Seth Johnson, who urged EPA to keep the 2008 standard in place, and Mary Uhl, executive director of the Western States Air Resources Council, who noted the "magnitude" of international contributions to ozone formation in large parts of the West, according to their prepared testimony.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2017/01/12/stories/1060048321
-
Dems May Hold Own Hearing on Pruitt as Partisanship Takes Hold
Jan 13, 2017 | E&E Daily
By George Cahlink and Geof Koss
Partisan tensions are escalating over the nomination of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) to lead U.S. EPA, with Democrats likely to hold their own additional hearing to press their concerns over his record.
Delware Sen. Tom Carper, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said members of his party wanted more information about Pruitt's record than what's likely to emerge at his confirmation hearing next week.
Carper said he had proposed having outside witnesses testify at the hearing, but after being rebuffed by Republicans, he will likely go it alone and hold a separate session on Pruitt.
Carper noted that the Senate Judiciary Committee had recently brought in outside witnesses to testify on Donald Trump's attorney general nominee, Jeff Sessions, a Republican senator from Alabama.
"I am not going to call it a shadow hearing, I am going to call it a sunshine hearing," said Carper, who did not name specific witnesses he would call.
He said the hearing, which would not be a formal EPW Committee event, could include people who have worked with Pruitt in the past as well as independent experts on EPA and state relationships.
Carper said he hopes Republicans will attend, although he said he has yet to announce the forum or invite members of the majority. Carper said his goal was to use the hearing to educate senators on Pruitt's true record as AG on environmental issues.
Like many Democrats and those in the green community, Carper said he was most worried about Pruitt's tenure in Oklahoma, where he led a lawsuit filed by several states challenging EPA's Clean Power Plan.
"Right now we are an in information-gathering mode, I have grave concerns about this man and grave concerns about his track record, his disinterest in relying on science, we don't even know where he gets his input on science," Carper explained.
Carper said he is usually inclined to let presidents pick their Cabinet, but Pruitt's record seems far out of the mainstream.
Carper said he has a "gentlemen's agreement" with EPW Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) to hold off on voting on the nomination in committee until Pruitt provides answers to more than 50 questions raised by Democrats and his FBI background report is complete.
In brief comments yesterday, Barrasso seemed unfazed by Democratic concerns. "I expect there to be some very forceful questioning and a good give and take. People will have an opportunity to express their views and then we'll figure it out and see how they go," he said.
Late yesterday evening, Carper and other EPW Democrats reiterated their call for information about Pruitt's potential ties to "dark money" political and pro-fossil fuel groups.
The lawmakers sent a letter to the Office of Government Ethics and another to EPA's ethics official raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.
"All Americans should have confidence that EPA's decisions are made transparently, without favor to political donors, and by an Administrator who is committed to protecting the prerogatives and mission of the agency, not those suing it," they wrote.
Conservative, free-market group America Rising Squared called the Democratic lawmakers hypocrites. "This group of Democratic senators are puppets of the environmentalist left, and their strings have been activated to oppose Scott Pruitt's EPA reform efforts," said Jeremy Adler, communications director at America Rising.
"Instead of doing the bidding of these out-of-touch, extreme groups, Senate Democrats on the EPW Committee should return the combined $4.7 million that has been dumped into their campaign accounts or recuse themselves from next week's hearing in the interest of fairness and accountability," he said.
Heitkamp undecided
One moderate Democratic senator facing a tough re-election fight in 2018, North Dakota's Heidi Heitkamp, said yesterday that she was undecided on whether she will support Pruitt.
"I don't know yet, but we certainly had a very candid and very direct and nerdy conversation about energy," she said of her meeting with Pruitt earlier this week. She noted they discussed their shared background as AGs in executing state law.
As he has with other Midwestern senators who are wary of his opposition to the federal renewable fuels standard (RFS), Pruitt told Heitkamp he would stick with it.
"I've spent enough time with folks from Oklahoma to know they don't like the RFS, but I will tell you this: I explained to him the shortages and the challenges that we have right now with low commodity prices and how this disruption in the RFS market has driven prices in a direction that we don't want to see," said Heitkamp, who noted Pruitt nodded his head when she asked if he understood the need to follow the RFS.
Heitkamp said they both also had a good, lengthy discussion about the need for a long-term energy development and environmental protection strategy rather than one that changes with each election.
While Heitkamp was noncommittal about her support for Pruitt, at least one other moderate Democrat from an energy-producing state, Sen. Joe Manchin, is backing him.
"I believe the attorney general has the right experience for the position and look forward to his confirmation process," the West Virginia senator said in a statement.
'Radical record'
Carper said one of his reasons for pressing for a more detailed review of Pruitt is to let moderates in both parties know what's at stake if they approve him.
With Democrats holding a two-seat deficit in the Senate, Carper would need to pick off at least four Republicans to oppose Pruitt if Manchin backs him.
More liberal Democrats and those in the green community don't need convincing and have been quick to pounce. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), an EPW Committee member, said he was doubtful Pruitt would be able to rein in his antipathy for the agency he hopes to lead at next week's hearing.
"He has made it his primary professional mission to undermine the authorities the EPA operates under, and so I can't imagine that he's going to try to hide that," Schatz said.
Meanwhile, in a departure from its normal practice of sending a letter to the full Senate immediately before a floor vote, the League of Conservation Voters yesterday urged senators to oppose Pruitt.
"Given Scott Pruitt's radical record and the far-reaching damage he could do at the helm of the EPA, this is not the time for standard protocol," the group said in a letter, warning that the confirmation vote will count in how it scores lawmakers.
"The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency is to protect human health and the environment — our air, water, and land. Unfortunately, Scott Pruitt's record is completely antithetical to this vitally important mission," LCV wrote.
Reporter Hannah Hess contributed.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/01/13/stories/1060048335
-
Greens, Industry Send Dueling Letters to Senators on Pruitt
Jan 12, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Letters from both supporters and opponents of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) nominee Scott Pruitt landed in senators’ inboxes on Thursday.
In a note to senators on Thursday morning, industry groups backing Pruitt’s nomination called the Oklahoma attorney general “a stalwart defender against federal intrusion into state and individual rights” noting his opposition the EPA’s landmark climate rule for power plants.
“Mr. Pruitt has demonstrated his commitment to upholding the Constitution and ensuring the EPA works for American families and consumers,” the groups — conservative and fossil fuel-funded organizations like the American Energy Alliance, Heritage Action, Club for Growth and others — wrote.
“Under Mr. Pruitt, we hope the EPA will follow the laws set forth by Congress and cooperate with states to advance its mission of keeping our air clean and our water pure. We fully support Mr. Pruitt for the position of EPA administrator and encourage the Senate to swiftly approve his nomination.”
In a separate letter, the League of Conservation Voters urged senators to vote against Pruitt and his “radical record and the far-reaching damage he could do at the helm of the EPA.”
“Pruitt fails the basic test of basing decisions on sound science and upholding our nation’s bedrock environmental and public health laws,” LCV president Gene Karpinski wrote, adding that the group would score senators’ vote on Pruitt’s nomination.
The letters come days before Pruitt faces senators publicly for the first time. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will hold a confirmation hearing on his nomination on Wednesday. Democrats are expected to dissect Pruitt’s opinion on the causes of climate change while Republicans defend Pruitt’s legal battles against the agency he’s set to lead.
The Sierra Club on Friday launched a series of digital ads against Pruitt, who has met with a handful of moderate Senate Democrats since Trump nominated him to head the EPA in December.
http://www.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/314063-greens-industry-send-dueling-letters-to-senators-on-pruitt
-
Ready to Defend Obama's Environmental Legacy? Top 10 Accomplishments to Focus On
Jan 12, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Keith Gaby
If you ever wonder whether the political process can yield real results for the environment, President Barack Obama has your answer. Having a leader committed to clean energy, climate progress, and protecting our natural heritage in the White House for the past eight years has resulted in major achievements.
While advocates always want more, President Obama’s environmental legacy is impressive. It is, along with the accomplishments of the Nixon Administration, the most consequential of any president in our history. Obama leaves a better, cleaner, more sustainable world for all of our kids.
Here’s one advocate’s view of the president’s top 10 environmental accomplishments (in no particular order):
1. National climate progress
His Clean Power Plan was the first ever national limit on carbon pollution from its largest source. It sent a signal to states and utilities, which is now transforming the way we produce energy. The president also used his office to educate Americans about the dangers of climate change with major speeches and TV appearances. He leaned in.
2. An international climate agreement
President Obama’s diplomatic leadership, and work with China, led to a long-sought global agreement among 195 nations to reduce climate pollution.
3. Pollution limits for power plants
The Obama Administration put in place overdue pollution limits for power plant smokestacks. These are major sources of air toxics like mercury, as well sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, which lead to smog, soot, and acid rain pollution.
4. Reducing air pollution from oil and gas operations
We now have common sense protections for oil and gas development that avoid waste and protect public health and the environment by reducing emissions of smog-forming pollution while conserving a valuable domestic energy resource. These safeguards reduce methane, which drives one-quarter of current global warming, and save almost $2 billion worth of American energy.
5. Cleaner cars and trucks
The Obama EPA enhanced fuel efficiency and sensible pollution standards for vehicles. Consumers are saving money at the same time that we’re reducing greenhouse gas emissions, our communities are breathing cleaner air, and auto manufacturing in America is resurgent. Cars are now on a path to average over 50 miles per gallon.
6. Clean energy investment
Way back in 2009, the “stimulus” package not only helped us out of the Great Recession, it invested billions in clean energy technology. These programs have paid for themselves and made the American government $1 billion in interest payments, while also helping to make wind and solar energy more affordable in the last eight years, as deployment has soared.
7. Chemical safety
The president signed the first major environmental law in two decades, passed with bipartisan support, fixing our broken chemical safety system.
8. Sustainable agriculture, western water, and endangered species
The President established regional Climate Hubs and several initiatives to help farmers, ranchers and rural communities combat climate change and adapt to extreme weather. He signed a landmark agreement with Mexico providing greater flexibility in the management and restoration of the Colorado River, which allowed the river to reach the sea for the first time in decades. And he brought industry, environmentalists and private landowners together across 11 states to voluntarily protect the greater sage grouse and avoid a listing.
9. Fisheries rebound
Through strong implementation of revisions to the national fisheries law, under President Obama the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reduced overfishing and recovered a record number of fisheries in US waters. Catch shares now govern more than half the volume of fish landed in the United States and have prompted the dramatic recovery of previously overfished species such as Gulf of Mexico red snapper and several Pacific rockfishes.
10. Protecting our natural heritage
The president has preserved 260 million acres for future generations, more than any of his predecessors, by designating 19 national monuments. He signed into law and began implementing the RESTORE Act, the nation’s largest-ever commitment to protect and restore the Gulf Coast.
The best way to honor these accomplishments is to protect and defend them. Can we do so in a Trump Administration? If we are relentless in our activism, yes we can.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/01/12/ready-defend-obamas-environmental-legacy-top-10-accomplishments-focus
-
California Considers Guaranteeing Carbon Prices in Trump Era
Jan 13, 2017 | Bloomberg
By Matthew Carr
California is considering a system to protect projects that cut global-warming emissions from a market downturn that may worsen under a Trump administration.
The state may guarantee the money these project developers get for emission-reduction credits by auctioning options that oblige California to pay a minimum price for them, based on measures the state’s considering. Having a buyer of last resort encourages private finance.
California’s moving forward with aggressive programs to curb global warming, even as President-elect Donald Trump and his nominee for the Environmental Protection Agency have questioned the science around climate change. The auctions could underpin emissions-cutting projects in an era of volatile carbon prices and regulatory uncertainty.
Cost effectiveness is a key attraction of the auctions, said Ryan McCarthy, science and technology policy adviser to Mary Nichols, chair of the California Air Resources Board.
The World Bank pioneered the auctions of credit price guarantees in 2015. The Climate Trust, a non-profit organization based in Portland, Oregon, plans a similar mechanism called the Environmental Price Assurance Facility that it expects to start by next year. EPAF will act as a “buyer of last resort,” said Peter Weisberg, the senior investment manager at the trust.
Put Option
Under Climate Trust’s facility, private developers of low-carbon projects bid in a reverse auction for an option to sell their credits to the facility, known as EPAF, at a set price. If carbon market prices rise, auction winners don’t have to use their option and EPAF keeps the premium. If markets fall, the developer receives the fixed price.
California, which already has a cap-and-trade market and low-carbon fuel standard, is seeking to accelerate emission cuts in areas it doesn’t already regulate.
Under a draft California plan to deal with dairy industry emissions, one option would be to install equipment at hundreds of farms to capture methane from cow manure for transport fuel. Auctions could help attract the finance -- potentially about $500 million by 2020 and $1.7 billion by 2030 -- because the price of the low-carbon fuel credits would be guaranteed.
Nations are gearing up to comply with emission-reduction targets under the Paris climate deal starting in 2020.
“If you’re a country wanting to get the most bang for your taxpayer money to achieve your climate goals, the auction is a really good and effective tool to do that,” Scott Cantor, senior carbon finance specialist at the World Bank in Washington, said by phone.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-13/california-considers-guaranteeing-carbon-prices-in-trump-era
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested