Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 1/26/2017
-
How EPA Nominee Pruitt Could Shape The Climate And Energy Agenda
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E TV
As Congress votes to confirm President Trump's Cabinet picks, how will the new agency heads shape this administration's climate and energy agenda? -
Ebell Proposes Slashing Staff To Nixon-Era Levels
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
The leader of President Trump's U.S. EPA transition team wants to see the agency's 15,000-person staff axed to about 5,000 employees. -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Begins Campaign To Change Basis Of UN Cancer Agency Classifications
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The American Chemistry Council has launched a campaign aimed at reforming the monographs programme of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) – a specialised agency of the World Health Organization. -
US EPA Says Benzo[A]Pyrene Is Human Carcinogen
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
A toxicological review of the polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) benzo[a]pyrene by the US EPA says it is carcinogenic to humans, based on “strong and consistent” evidence in animals and people. -
PFOA And PFOS Pose Immune Hazards, Says NTP
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) are “presumed to pose immune hazards to humans and to alter immune function”, according to a US National Toxicology Program (NTP) monograph on immunotoxicity. -
Washington May Offer Reporting Extension Under CSPA
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
Manufacturers may be able to request a reporting extension, under a new proposal in the update of Washington state's Children’s Safe Products Act. -
American Cleaning Institute Launches Chemical Safety Data Website
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
The American Cleaning Institute (ACI) has launched a website listing safety data on nearly 600 chemicals in the US consumer cleaning product supply chain. -
Target Announces Chemical Phaseouts
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
Target Corp. announced yesterday that it will eradicate certain chemical toxins from its supply chain as part of a comprehensive new chemical policy. -
Echa Picks More Than 150 Substances For Manual Screening
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Echa has selected 162 substances from REACH registration dossiers for further scrutiny by the member state competent authorities. -
EU Commission Issues Plastics In Circular Economy Roadmap
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has released its strategy on plastics roadmap – one of five priority areas adopted by the EU action plan for the circular economy. -
Leaving REACH System ‘Would Reduce Level Of Protection’ For UK
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
If UK authorities decided to move post-Brexit chemical regulations away from the EU’s REACH system, national protection of public health and the environment would ‘inevitably’ be reduced, NGO CHEM Trust says. -
Trump Wants Faster Permitting For Priority Projects
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Camille von Kaenel,
President Trump is looking for "high priority" infrastructure projects to speed through environmental reviews as part of his pledge to rebuild the country's roads, bridges and energy infrastructure. -
Trump's Regulatory Edict Shifts Focus To Energy Build-Out Plan
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
President Trump has stepped into the shoes of White House predecessors who tried with limited success to speed up the construction of pipelines and power lines across America. -
Industry Hopes Trump Will Boost Marcellus Shale Lines
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
President Trump's decision to fast-track the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipeline projects could make it easier to build natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure, possibly throwing a lifeline to struggling producers in Pennsylvania and Ohio, industry leaders said. -
Oil Giants Are Adding Emissions To Their Agendas
Jan 25, 2017 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
Efforts to slow the pace of climate change are getting attention in the most unlikely places: the boardrooms and offices of Big Oil. -
Study Links Fracking Fluids To Health Problems In Trout
Jan 26, 2017 | Vancouver Sun ( In E&E Energywire)
By Juris Graney
Fluids produced by hydraulic fracturing can cause liver and gill damage in rainbow trout, according to researchers at the University of Alberta. -
States Seize On Another Angle To Challenge Rule
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
States this week opened a new front in the legal battle over the Obama administration's signature climate change rule. -
Minn. Officials To Stop Meetings
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden
Air regulators in Minnesota, one of the few states still planning for U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan, yesterday signaled a stakeholder meeting in February will likely be their last. -
Groups Urge Congress To Roll Back Accident-Prevention Regs
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A coalition of more than 20 business groups is calling on Congress to void new U.S. EPA accident prevention regulations covering thousands of refineries, chemical plants and other facilities. -
Pruitt Questions Warming, Leaves Wiggle Room On CO2 Finding
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden and Niina Heikkinen
EPA administrator nominee Scott Pruitt yesterday sent 242 pages of responses to questions from Democratic senators, doubling down on his stances that the severity of climate change is up for debate and that the agency he would run has overstepped its congressional mandate. -
Pruitt Could Complicate Climate Action In Liberal States
Jan 26, 2017 | NPR (In E&E Climatewire)
By Lauren Sommer
As California forges ahead with renewable energy, the Trump administration could hold it back — especially when it comes to low-emitting vehicles. -
EPA Transition Economist Sees No Role For Carbon Regs
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
An economist on the Trump administration's U.S. EPA team said today that he opposes using carbon taxes to curb heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News- There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
How EPA Nominee Pruitt Could Shape The Climate And Energy Agenda
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E TV
As Congress votes to confirm President Trump's Cabinet picks, how will the new agency heads shape this administration's climate and energy agenda? E&ETV recently produced a series of discussions following the confirmation hearings of U.S. EPA administrator nominee Scott Pruitt, Energy secretary nominee Rick Perry, secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson and Interior secretary nominee Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.).
E&E News reporters Robin Bravender and Kevin Bogardus join E&ETV Managing Editor Monica Trauzzi, along with Bracewell partner Scott Segal and Natural Resources Defense Council Climate and Clean Air Program Director John Walke, for analysis of the Pruitt hearing. This conversation originally aired on Facebook Live.
http://www.eenews.net/tv/2017/01/26
-
Ebell Proposes Slashing Staff To Nixon-Era Levels
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
The leader of President Trump's U.S. EPA transition team wants to see the agency's 15,000-person staff axed to about 5,000 employees.
"I think getting down to 5,000 in the first term is a goal," said Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who headed the Trump team preparing for the administration changeover at EPA.
With his transition tenure over, Ebell cautioned that he was speaking for himself, but he pointed to Trump's comments as a presidential candidate that he wanted to eliminate EPA. Trump has since said that he wants to "refocus the EPA on its core mission."
"President Trump during the campaign identified the EPA as a major obstacle to economic recovery and growth and he said that he wanted to either abolish it or leave a little bit," Ebell said today in an interview. "He's not going to abolish it in a year; he's going to take a while or leave a little bit. The first thing that's going to need to be done is to start downsizing the agency."
Ebell's comments come as workers at EPA and other agencies across government brace for major budget cuts. One of Trump's first actions as president was to freeze federal hiring, and his first budget blueprint in the coming months is likely to offer a comprehensive look at what environmental programs he wants to scale back or eliminate.
Slashing EPA's staff to 5,000 would put the agency close to the numbers it had when it was created by President Nixon. EPA started with about 4,000 employees in 1970. But in recent years, the staff has hovered between 14,000 and 18,000 employees, with an annual budget of about $8 billion.
Ebell's goal would cut EPA's staff to about a third of its current size. "I think it's a very steep goal," he said. "If you're going to get anywhere, you've got to have high aspirations."
Ebell, a vocal critic of the EPA's policies under President Obama, said he sees some obvious places for cuts.
Much of EPA's budget passes through the agency toward clean water and clean air programs that are run by the states. "That raises the question," Ebell said. "What are all these people in the EPA air and safe drinking water offices doing?"
And he said the Obama administration's move to put air staff into a climate program was an indication that they weren't needed in the air office. "It seems to me that there are real opportunities for cuts there," he said.
Ebell would also like to see EPA's regional staffs cut back. About half of EPA's staff is located in 10 regional offices throughout the country. Those offices "can be cut significantly over time," he said.
Such drastic cutbacks would be certain to spark an outcry among environmentalists, federal workers and others who are already mounting their opposition to the Trump administration (see related story).
Christine Todd Whitman, who was EPA administrator in President George W. Bush's first term, said staff cuts along those lines would mean the agency couldn't do its job "the way it should be doing it or has been doing it." In the regional offices, she said, staff are needed "to be able to try to meld the programs to work for the challenges in that individual state."
Broadly, Whitman said, she finds the Trump administration's early actions toward EPA "very troubling."
"I've been worried from the very beginning that this was the one area that the president was going to keep his campaign promises without changing them much," she said. "This is an area where I think he is absolutely focused and determined and he doesn't like regulation."
Ebell said the new administration has been unfairly criticized for scaling back social media and pausing some spending.
"The fact is that every transition involves taking control of the communications operation, the regulatory pipeline, the spending, the grants, the contracts," he said.
"I think that the environmental community is trying to find anything that they can throw against the wall if something sticks," he said.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049052
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Begins Campaign To Change Basis Of UN Cancer Agency Classifications
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The American Chemistry Council has launched a campaign aimed at reforming the monographs programme of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) – a specialised agency of the World Health Organization.
The ACC describes its "campaign for accuracy in public health research" as “an initiative to promote credible, unbiased and transparent science as the basis of public policy decisions.”
And addressing the “persistent scientific and process deficiencies that result in public confusion and misinformed policy making” that originates from Iarc is among its top priorities.
As outlined on the campaign’s website, the principles for reforming the agency are:considering a substance’s risk, not just the hazard it poses;requiring carcinogenicity determinations based on weight of evidence;establishing clear criteria for selecting scientific studies;increased transparency and opportunity for stakeholder input;disclosure of conflicts of interest; andreleasing full monographs only, rather than initially publishing shorter summaries.
“The Iarc monographs programme has been responsible for countless misleading headlines about the safety of the food we eat, the jobs we do and the products we use in our daily lives,” said Cal Dooley, ACC president and CEO. By pressing for changes, ACC hopes future monographs will include "more credible and relevant information”. Policy concerns
Among the ACC’s concerns is Iarc’s potential to impact public policy. California’s Proposition 65, for example, relies on Iarc as an authoritative source for listing substances as carcinogens. And retailers have also used the international group’s carcinogenicity designations to drive decisions on chemicals policy, added the ACC.
“Public policy must be based on a transparent, thorough assessment of the best available science,” said Mr Dooley. “Currently, Iarc’s monographs do not meet this standard, though US taxpayers foot the bill for over two thirds of the international programme’s budget.”
The constitutionality of Prop 65’s so-called ‘labour code’ listing mechanism is currently the subject of ongoing litigation with agro giant Monsanto. The firm argues that California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has ceded its regulatory authority to an “unelected, unaccountable” international body, in violation of companies’ due process.
A hearing is scheduled later this week to determine the case’s next steps.Continued criticism
ACC’s campaign continues its longstanding criticism of Iarc’s hazard-based approach. Last autumn, Mr Dooley wrote to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to criticise how the research agency’s publication of hazard information is “not meaningful” and “misleading”.
The comments came under the oversight committee’s ongoing inquiry into US government funding of the organisation, initiated amid concerns that its findings are inconsistent with other scientific research.
Earlier this month, the committee continued the investigation by issuing letters to the National Institute of Health (NIH), probing an allegation that the agency had instructed its members – including NIH employees – not to comply with the US open records’ laws.
“Iarc directed its working group members ‘to not release any documents in your, or your institute’s possession relating to your work in the capacity as a member of the working group’”, wrote the committee. And the organisation admitted that it had discussed withholding documents in previous cases, continued the letter, “which creates the appearance that it is Iarc’s practice to avoid public scrutiny”.
The committee has requested it be furnished with all NIH communications to or from Iarc employees related to its inquiry and Freedom of Information Act (Foia) requests.
Last autumn, a group of university and industry scientists published a criticism of the research agency's hazard-only carcinogen classifications, saying its system “places chemicals with widely differing potencies and very different modes of action, into the same category”.
https://chemicalwatch.com/52441/acc-begins-campaign-to-change-basis-of-un-cancer-agency-classifications
-
US EPA Says Benzo[A]Pyrene Is Human Carcinogen
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
A toxicological review of the polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) benzo[a]pyrene by the US EPA says it is carcinogenic to humans, based on “strong and consistent” evidence in animals and people.
The Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) review provides quantitative estimates of the cancer risk for oral and inhalation exposure, as well as reference levels for developmental toxicity, but the cancer risk for dermal exposure is not included from the draft.
PAHs are ubiquitous environmental pollutants, generated primarily through human activity, although some natural sources exist. They are, in particular, associated with petrochemicals, coal and related products.
According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc), occupational exposure to benzo[a]pyrene has been measured for:coal liquefaction;coal gasification;coke production and coke ovens;coal-tar distillation;roofing and paving (involving coal-tar pitch);wood impregnation or preservation with creosote;aluminium production (including anode manufacture);carbon-electrode manufacture;chimney sweeping; andpower plants.
Additionally, it is found in cigarette smoke, exhaust emissions and certain foods, either as a result of the cooking process or uptake from plants grown in contaminated soils.Consultation
The EPA consulted on a draft of the review for public consultation in 2013. This contained a quantitative estimate of the cancer risk for dermal exposure as a dermal slope factor (DSF) of 0.005µg/day.
This appears to have been dropped from the final version, following strong industry criticism during the public consultation.
A 140-page response was submitted by a group of seven organisations, including the American Petroleum Institute, the Asphalt Institute and the Association of American Railroads, as well as organisations from the pavement coating, wood treatment and chemicals sectors.
In it, the group says that “the DSF should be abandoned, because there is little evidence that humans are at increased risk of developing skin cancer following dermal exposure”. They accuse the EPA of overlooking “extensive” literature on coal tar ointments and salves FDA-approved for medical use and studies that show mouse data is not suitable in this instance because of differences between human and murine skin.
The final version of the review says that “a quantitative estimate of skin cancer risk from dermal exposure is not included in this assessment, as methodology [sic] for interspecies extrapolation of dermal toxicokinetics and carcinogenicity are still under development.”EU situation
Benzo[a]pyrene is one of eight PAHs restricted under EU REACH. The proportion of the substance should not exceed 1mg/kg in consumer products or 0.5 mg/kg in children's products. The restriction also covers the use of so-called extender oils in tyre manufacture.
In June 2016, Echa added the substance to the candidate list for REACH authorisation, designating it a substance of very high concern (SVHC).
https://chemicalwatch.com/52432/us-epa-says-benzoapyrene-is-human-carcinogen
-
PFOA And PFOS Pose Immune Hazards, Says NTP
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) are “presumed to pose immune hazards to humans and to alter immune function”, according to a US National Toxicology Program (NTP) monograph on immunotoxicity.
The two chemicals are extremely persistent and remain distributed in the environment. The interagency programme says that, although industry in the US and Europe no longer makes the chemicals, there is “continued widespread exposure” to them.
The NTP's study identified 33 human studies, 93 animal studies and 27 in vitro/mechanistic studies relating to immunotoxicity. From these, an evaluation team made their decision, based on a “high level of evidence” from animal studies and a moderate level from human studies, that PFOA and PFOS suppress antibody response.
The monograph also points to weaker evidence from epidemiological studies that PFOA reduces infectious disease resistance and increases autoimmune disease. Meanwhile, animal studies suggest that PFOS may suppress disease resistance and natural killer (NK) cell activity.
The evaluation team points out that the chemicals' immunotoxicity mechanisms are “not well understood”.
The main US PFOS manufacturer ceased production in 2002 through voluntary agreements.
Eight of the main PFOA producers signed up to a 2006 EPA stewardship programme, to eliminate the substance and its precursors from emissions and products by 2015. It is also known as C8.
During 2005-2013, a C8 science panel was established to evaluate probable links between PFOA exposure and human disease as part of the 2005 settlement of a class-action lawsuit over releases from a DuPont plant in West Virginia. It found a number of “probable links” between exposure and certain adverse health effects such as ulcerative colitis.
https://chemicalwatch.com/52434/pfoa-and-pfos-pose-immune-hazards-says-ntp
-
Washington May Offer Reporting Extension Under CSPA
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
Manufacturers may be able to request a reporting extension, under a new proposal in the update of Washington state's Children’s Safe Products Act.
The Washington Department of Ecology recently released a revised reporting timeline for manufacturers, based on comments from industry delivered at a 4 January webinar.
Under its proposal, manufacturers of a children’s product that is sold or offered for sale in the state that contains a substance listed on the state’s Chemicals of High Concern to Children (CHCC) list, above the de minimis level, must submit a report to the state on 31 January 2019. The report covers products sold or offered for sale in Washington between 1 September 2017 and 31 December 2018.
The revised proposal would allow manufacturers to request an extension if it is a first report and regarding more than one product or chemical.
In addition, the Department of Ecology added dipentyl phthalate (DPP) to the list of substances under consideration for the CHCC list. This brings the total to 19 possible additions and two possible deletions.
Minor edits were also made to the chemical evaluations for DCHP, DIBP, D4, Mo, PFOA and phthalic anhydride.
The Department of Ecology is scheduled to issue the final proposed rule in March and initiate the public comment period process in April or May.https://chemicalwatch.com/52442/washington-may-offer-reporting-extension-under-cspa
-
American Cleaning Institute Launches Chemical Safety Data Website
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
The American Cleaning Institute (ACI) has launched a website listing safety data on nearly 600 chemicals in the US consumer cleaning product supply chain.
The Cleaning Product Ingredient Safety Initiative (CPISI) aims to "illustrate how safety data and risk assessment methodology are used to demonstrate the safe use of ingredients present in our members' products".
The ACI says it conducted an exposure assessment for each of the substances on the ingredient inventory used in consumer cleaning products.
It wants the data to be used by regulators, researchers, and cleaning product industry formulators and suppliers to look for "detailed information on ingredients used in consumer cleaning products.”
Ingredients can be searched either by name or by CAS number. There's an information page for each chemical giving details of the hazard and exposure data collected and a summary of screening-level risk assessment results.
It also includes information on the:types of products in which the ingredient is used;form of those products;ingredient’s function within each of those products;typical concentration range among the products; andmost relevant routes of exposure associated with the product use.
ACI associate vice president of environmental safety, Paul DeLeo says the website represents "a significant transparency initiative for the cleaning products industry."
He added: "CPISI provides a striking counterweight to the urban myths that there are no data available on common cleaning product ingredients."
https://chemicalwatch.com/52426/american-cleaning-institute-launches-chemical-safety-data-website
-
Target Announces Chemical Phaseouts
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
Target Corp. announced yesterday that it will eradicate certain chemical toxins from its supply chain as part of a comprehensive new chemical policy.
Consumer groups have pushed the retail giant to reform its chemical standards for years. Last fall, Target finished second — behind only Wal-Mart Stores Inc. — in a chemical safety scorecard for retailers from nonprofit Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families (Greenwire, Nov. 16, 2016).
The company said it will embrace full transparency, develop a robust chemicals management program with its business partners and press for the development of safer alternatives. Target said its plan "addresses our entire value chain, operations and every product we sell," adding that no other retailers employ such a strategy.
"Our chemical strategy will be one of the most comprehensive in the U.S. retail industry, including all Target-owned and national brand products and operations, not just formulated products," said Jennifer Silberman, the company's chief sustainability officer, in a statement.
"It's ambitious, but using our size, scale and expertise, we think we'll be able to make significant progress," she continued. "And we hope our robust approach will accelerate similar efforts across the industry. Ultimately, we want to bring all stakeholders together to innovate and champion a consistent, industry-wide approach to greener chemistry."
Target plans to strike phthalates, some parabens, formaldehyde and nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs) from a slew of its products by 2020. Public health groups often target such compounds for their endocrine-disrupting or other toxic effects.
The initiative will start with cosmetics, infant care products and household cleaners. Target said it is prioritizing items "go on, in and around [the customer's] body."
A complete listing of ingredients in such products will also be made by 2020, the corporation said, including for generic compounds such as "fragrance." "Fragrance" is an umbrella term for around 3,000 ingredients.
By 2022, Target will pull all perfluorinated chemicals — a class of toxins linked to cancer, impaired fetal development and immune system harm — from its textile products. It will remove added flame retardants the same year due to concerns over carcinogenicity.Regulatory row
The retail giant's move has sparked a tussle over corporations' role in clamping down on toxins of their own volition.
Mike Schade, director of the retail campaign for Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, said the company "is showing real leadership on toxic chemicals."
"By working with suppliers to remove toxic chemicals like phthalates, perfluorinated chemicals and flame retardants from products, Target will bring safer products into the shopping carts of millions of consumers," he said in a statement. "A growing body of scientific evidence has linked even low levels of exposure to these chemicals to chronic diseases on the rise."
But the American Cleaning Institute, a trade group for cleaning product companies, criticized Target's move, asserting that the institute's member companies already "provide their retailer customers with safe, beneficial and effective cleaning and hygiene products that millions of consumers buy and use every day."
Federal decisionmaking, particularly the recently reformed Toxic Substances Control Act, "will best serve the public at-large," ACI continued.
The Personal Care Products Council, a trade group for the cosmetics industry, did not respond to requests for comment.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/stories/1060049053/search?keyword=American+Chemistry+Council%22
-
Echa Picks More Than 150 Substances For Manual Screening
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Echa has selected 162 substances from REACH registration dossiers for further scrutiny by the member state competent authorities.
The substances will be manually screened by national authorities to decide whether regulatory action is needed.
Echa does not make the list of shortlisted substances public because they are chosen purely by automated selection by IT. Manual verification is needed to confirm a potential concern.
The 2016 exercise saw 305 substances selected for screening. Of those, 184 were examined by member states and 132 required follow-up activities. They included a substance evaluation in the Community Rolling Action Plan (Corap); a compliance check; proposal for harmonised classification and labelling (CLH); and proposal for risk management option analysis (RMOA).
The selection is based on an automated IT screening of the whole REACH registration database, together with information from other REACH and CLP processes and external sources, such as published scientific data, Qsar models and databases on uses and exposure.
In the latest screening, Echa focused on substances that are potentially carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction (CMRs), persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBTs), endocrine-disrupting, sensitising or have potential specific target organ toxicity following repeated exposure (STOT Re) properties.
Substances are reintroduced to the shortlist if member states did not prioritise them for manual screening in previous rounds. But if dossiers are updated in the meantime for hazard, use or exposure information, it is possible that these substances are no longer a priority. They may also be subject to a new testing proposal examination related to the potential concern, Echa says.
The screening approach includes exclusion criteria. This means substances listed for evaluation in the Corap, on the candidate list or subject to RMOA for the same potential concern, and manually screened in the last three years, are excluded from the latest shortlist. Also excluded are substances subject to an ongoing compliance check.
Echa says companies affected will receive a letter inviting them to update their dossiers. This will ask them to address any shortcomings as soon as possible, as up to date information will help national authorities confirm the concern indicated by the screening, and if regulatory action is still needed.
Over the past year senior member state and Echa officials have been making the argument that updating dossiers is in registrants' best interests .
If a member state, or Echa, take actions on a substance, the information is published on the agency's website. This will appear, for example, in the list of substances potentially subject to compliance checks, the registry of intentions, the draft Corap and the public activities coordination tool (PACT), which lists substances under hazard assessment or RMOA. Companies can check the status of their substance through the Search for chemicals facility on Echa's homepage.500+ examined
The previous three rounds of IT screening have identified 893 substances for further scrutiny. Of those, member states have examined 581 substances. Twenty two per cent required no further action, while 78% required follow-up activities, with some substances having more than one outcome:32% required substance evaluation in Corap;28% required a compliance check;9% were proposed for CLH;7% were proposed for RMOA; and6% were proposed for other activities.
Echa is hosting a webinar on 14 February to provide more details about the screening process, and registrants will have the opportunity to pose questions to Echa staff.
https://chemicalwatch.com/52420/echa-picks-more-than-150-substances-for-manual-screening
-
EU Commission Issues Plastics In Circular Economy Roadmap
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has released its strategy on plastics roadmap – one of five priority areas adopted by the EU action plan for the circular economy.
The strategy will work on the interface between waste, chemicals and product policies. It will address incentives for a market for secondary plastic materials, as there is "no clear horizontal approach on how to deal with legacy substances in recyclates that carefully weights pros and cons of allowing recycling of certain materials versus elimination of chemicals of concern", the Commission says.
Pursuing strategy objectives should directly contribute to the implementation of the circular economy action plan, and also to the EU's jobs and growth agenda as well as its Energy Union vision for a low carbon, energy efficient economy, the Commission says.
In June last year the Council of the European Union presented its draft conclusions on taking the circular economy forward.
And earlier this week five NGOs published a position paper demanding EU action on plastic waste.
https://chemicalwatch.com/52436/eu-commission-issues-plastics-in-circular-economy-roadmap
-
Leaving REACH System ‘Would Reduce Level Of Protection’ For UK
Jan 26, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
If UK authorities decided to move post-Brexit chemical regulations away from the EU’s REACH system, national protection of public health and the environment would ‘inevitably’ be reduced, NGO CHEM Trust says.
Its comments, and those of other organisations, have been submitted to an inquiry into the future of the country's chemical regulations by the House of Commons’ Environmental Audit Committee.
The UK government has confirmed it will leave the EU single market and there has been much speculation about the future relationship between EU and UK regulations.
CHEM Trust says a UK-only chemicals regulatory policy could mean:a substantial risk of falling behind the best science from REACH, resulting in continued use of damaging chemicals;less pressure to move to safer alternatives, increasing harmful emissions and use of harmful chemicals;less protection due to lack of data;potentially less protection if there is no equivalent to REACH authorisation to encourage substitutes for SVHCs; anda potential increase in animal testing.
“REACH is not perfect,” executive director Michael Warhurst says. “However, the EU is making more progress on addressing chemical regulation than any other region of the world.”‘Divergent’ rules
In a separate submission to the inquiry, CHEM Trust trustee and honourable fellow of the Institute for European Environmental Policy, Nigel Haigh, says one possibility would be for the UK to replicate REACH and establish an agency to mimic the tasks carried out by Echa.
Such an agency could replicate Echa’s decisions, resulting in UK industry being subject to the same EU rules when selling in the UK.
“Whatever the UK now does [...] Echa will continue to loom large in the [country],” says Mr Haigh. But UK manufacturers, exporters, the public and enforcement authorities “may not welcome divergent rules”. And “environmentalists [...] will be quick to point to any UK standards, which are seen to be environmentally weaker than EU standards.”
Cruelty Free International (CFI) says it would be “a great loss for Europe and the animals used in testing as a result”, if the UK were to withdraw from the decision-making processes at Echa.
UK officials in Echa’s Member State Committee, it says, have played a “very proactive” role in trying to ensure that animal testing is a last resort in the committee’s decisions.
It is also important, says the animal welfare group, that the UK does not create REACH-like legislation that causes distortions with REACH requirements in areas such as data sharing.Timely action
Striking a more positive note, Pesticide Action Network UK says a “potential advantage” of the UK leaving the EU is that it would be able to move faster than the EU to address “problem chemicals”.
It says negotiations involving member states are “cumbersome” and it can take many years to introduce controls - as shown by the delays in identifying endocrine disruptor criteria.
“Outside this system, the UK would be free to introduce additional controls to provide greater protection. Introducing more stringent legislation would not threaten access to the EU market as [it…] could be recognised as ‘equivalent’ to REACH.”
But CHEM Trust warns that if the UK system “did not move at least as fast as EU regulations, the UK would likely be a ‘dumping ground’ for products that were being restricted or authorised within REACH”.Next steps
The deadline for written submissions to the inquiry has been extended to 30 January. Following this, the committee will host oral evidence submissions with a selection of witnesses. Details of these sessions will be announced once the committee has confirmed them.
https://chemicalwatch.com/52428/leaving-reach-system-would-reduce-level-of-protection-for-uk
-
Trump Wants Faster Permitting For Priority Projects
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Camille von Kaenel,
President Trump is looking for "high priority" infrastructure projects to speed through environmental reviews as part of his pledge to rebuild the country's roads, bridges and energy infrastructure.
States have been circulating a preliminary draft list for the past two months that includes highway, transit, pipeline and a number of high-profile pipelines and transmission projects seeking federal approval.
An administration spokesman said the document did not come from the White House. But it could give some early clues as to what local officials and the administration see as the most high-priority items.
Developers of the proposed Atlantic Coast natural gas pipeline, which appeared on the preliminary draft list, said the project will be a part of Trump’s infrastructure push. "We're very encouraged by the strong commitment the Trump administration has shown to rebuilding the nation’s energy infrastructure," said Aaron Ruby, a spokesman for Dominion Energy. "The Atlantic Coast Pipeline is definitely going to play a major role in that."
Trump has pledged to build up the country's infrastructure with a $1 trillion package, but Republicans and Democrats are fighting over how to pay for it.
He signed an executive order this week that calls on the Council on Environmental Quality to coordinate expedited permitting for infrastructure proposals from states and other government entities.
The projects could include "improving the U.S. electric grid and telecommunications systems and repairing and upgrading critical port facilities, airports, pipelines, bridges, and highways," said the executive order.
In December, the National Governors Association gave states a draft list of projects it says came from the Trump transition team.
In a letter, the states were told transition team members were looking for governors to provide three to five items for a future investment program.
The transition team has floated the idea of having a special commission oversee and choose specific projects to focus on, the letter said. Total spending could reach up to $150 billion a year for the next couple of years.
States have been providing feedback, said Elena Waskey, a spokeswoman for the NGA, but she said the updated document was not yet public.
The preliminary list includes repairs and bridges along Interstate 95 in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Florida. It identified airports in St. Louis; Kansas City, Mo.; and Seattle.
New York, New Jersey, Texas, Maryland, Michigan and Illinois mass transit upgrades are part of the document. Electricity transmission lines in Oklahoma, California, Nevada, Wyoming, New York and Arizona are on the list, as are pipelines in Alaska, Virginia and North Carolina.
Trump has been particularly adamant about speeding up delayed infrastructure projects, citing anecdotes from fellow builders. He called environmental permitting "out of control" this week in a meeting with automakers.
But the idea to focus on specific projects to shepherd through the permitting process is not new. Both Presidents George W. Bush and Obama signed similar orders, although they did not request nominations from governors.
"Permits and approvals are not the only and in many cases not the primary cause of delay in projects," said Emil Frankel, who served in the Bush administration and led Connecticut's Transportation Department.
"To keep on chasing and blaming environmentalists for delays in projects when in fact there are many other and important reasons will not be sufficient," Frankel said.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049023
-
Trump's Regulatory Edict Shifts Focus To Energy Build-Out Plan
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
President Trump has stepped into the shoes of White House predecessors who tried with limited success to speed up the construction of pipelines and power lines across America.
Trump's executive orders Tuesday advanced the Keystone XL and Dakota Access oil pipelines. But industry officials and policy experts say the Oval Office's show of force in signing orders in support of two high-profile oil pipeline projects actually provided little insight into where oil, gas or clean energy transmission sit on the administration's longer list of high-priority infrastructure projects.
One of his executive orders, which called for "expediting environmental reviews and approvals for high priority infrastructure projects," gives broad new authority to Trump's still-to-be-named head of the Council on Environmental Quality, a White House office. Governors or agency heads may nominate infrastructure projects of all types, and the head of CEQ has 30 days to determine which ones go on a high-priority list.
Projects on a high-priority list are to receive expedited reviews, the Trump order says, with deadlines set for completion of applications "and approval."
It's a fast track, not a rubber stamp, Trump said. "This is about streamlining the incredibly cumbersome, long, horrible permitting process and reducing regulatory burdens for domestic manufacturing," Trump said. "Sometimes it takes many, many years, and we don't want that to happen."
Reviews will be faster, he said. "And if it's a no, we'll give them a quick no. And if it's a yes, it's like let's start building."
The Trump administration still has to abide by the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires a thorough review of federal projects that have significant environmental impacts. To supporters of NEPA, a founding document for the environmental movement, requirements for evidence and review are hard-wired into regulatory proceedings.
Efforts to speed up interstate pipelines and high-voltage power lines are still confronted by potential state challenges to Washington priorities.Who benefits?
The campaign positions projected by Trump and the presidential nominee for the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, were starkly different. Trump pledged a new deal for the coal industry and championed oil and gas production, a vote for more pipelines. Trump said his strategy included wind energy, but producing more fossil fuels was his kicker.
Clinton, on the other hand, favored more renewable energy production and the development of more interstate transmission lines to deliver clean energy.
Industry officials and energy analysts puzzled yesterday to interpret the executive order and Trump's comments to glean what direction he might go in.
"Everybody's trying to figure out what's the impact," said Rich Hoffmann, executive director of the INGAA Foundation, part of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.
A Trump transition team has circulated a list of 50 major public- and private-sector infrastructure projects that could get special treatment. They included airports, bridges, subways, ports, pipelines and transmission lines, according to a copy of the list the Trump team delivered to the National Governors Association. The list was first reported by The Kansas City Star and the McClatchy Washington bureau.
The association is still receiving proposals from state governors, which it will pass on to the administration, said NGA spokesperson Elena Waskey.
The association's letter to governors after the election said the transition team wanted three to five proposals from each state that would be considered for the Trump infrastructure program. The selections would be done by a bipartisan commission similar to the Defense Department's military base closing commission.
"The initial spend on these projects for 2017 is expected to be $150 billion, and the transition team hopes that this type of project will be continued over the next 2 years," the NGA letter said. The source of the funding wasn't discussed.Struggling to build power lines
Lauren Azar, a special assistant to former Energy Secretary Steven Chu during former President Obama's first term, said that federal infrastructure reviews are better than they used to be, but the biggest transmission projects that cross state boundaries remain hardest to manage. "By their nature, they're the most difficult infrastructure projects to get permitted and built," Azar said.
"Regardless of your preference on fuel source, the fact is we've got pretty serious infrastructure needs in this nation," said Azar, an attorney in Madison, Wis.
"Should the new administration be looking at streamlining? Absolutely. I applaud the executive order," she said. At the same time, "the agencies have to comply with the existing law."
Rob Gramlich, the head of government and public affairs for the American Wind Energy Association, said that the wind industry is hopeful that its projects will be candidates for priority treatment.
"I think transmission companies have been pleased to see transmission right up there with pipelines and other infrastructure" on the lists of possible projects circulating now, added Gramlich, who is leaving AWEA to start his own consulting firm.
Rachel Cleetus, climate policy manager at the Union of Concerned Scientists, didn't see it that way. "These initial actions seem to be pointing in a direction of increased dependence on fossil fuels," she said. "It's troubling. What we're seeing is not really the vision we need."Sowing confusion after FAST Act
INGAA's Hoffmann said the order can make a difference.
"A president who wants to drive an issue can let the secretaries of Interior and Commerce and Agriculture know about it, and can definitely get those executives to abide by the rule [and] still make progress," he said.
Others said faster permitting has been a longtime goal, with limited success to show for it.
Alison Cassady, director of domestic energy policy at the Center for American Progress, said that on its face, the Trump proposal copies a process that Congress mandated in the 2015 Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act.
"It is completely duplicative of the work the Obama administration did to implement Title 41 of the FAST Act, which was designed to improve the timeliness and predictability of the federal infrastructure permitting process," she said.
"All the Trump order will do is sow confusion among the federal officials and industry partners who have been working together to improve coordination and get results," she said. The task Trump gives to CEQ is already assigned to a new Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, she added.
If the unstated purpose of the Trump program is to shortcut the NEPA environmental reviews, it will backfire, she predicted. "Doing a poor or roughshod review expedites nothing, because then it will be subject to legal challenge and probably lose," she said.'It is very broken'
The process has its vocal critics among political conservatives. "NEPA has been for many, many years an impediment to timely completion of projects, for a great many reasons," said Diane Katz, senior research fellow in regulatory policy at the Heritage Foundation. The law gives too much discretion to federal agencies, she said.
"It is very broken," she said. "I would certainly hope the White House would push for major reforms, if not total repeal, and replace it with a more rational process," Katz said. "At the same time there is a great deal of sentiment about NEPA because it was at the vanguard of American environmental protection. So there is strong resistance to changing it."
One congressional source close to the infrastructure debate says there is little evidence that lawmakers will choose to tackle a debate over the fundamental authority of NEPA. "There is always some heartburn when we look at the NEPA process," said the source, who was not authorized to comment. Still, the source said a number of safeguards are in place to ensure the public still has ability to step in and be heard on environmental issues. That isn't likely to change.
Trump's plan, floated during the campaign at $1 trillion in spending, is already clouded by funding issues. The administration also needs to face the realities of processing reviews, said Rick Smead, managing director for advisory services at RBN Energy LLC in Houston.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission was given authority by Congress in 2005 to coordinate federal permitting and environmental reviews for gas pipelines. "They are really good," he said. But it faces a growing backlog of project applications, "and they don't have the people to handle it."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049006
-
Industry Hopes Trump Will Boost Marcellus Shale Lines
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
PITTSBURGH — President Trump's decision to fast-track the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipeline projects could make it easier to build natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure, possibly throwing a lifeline to struggling producers in Pennsylvania and Ohio, industry leaders said.
Trump can't solve all the pipeline industry's problems, which often involve state and local resistance. But he can reassert federal authority over permits for interstate pipelines, Alan Armstrong, CEO of Williams Cos., said at the Hart Energy Marcellus-Utica Midstream conference here.
"We're going to see federal agencies trying to reduce the amount of overlapping and contradictory permitting authority that it takes to get things done," he said.
That shift could benefit Williams, which has seen one of its projects blocked by state regulators in New York.
The Constitution pipeline is designed to carry gas from Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale field to New York and New England. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's administration denied environmental permits for the pipeline to cross streams in his state, even though the line had already been approved by federal regulators.
Williams sued in federal court (Energywire, April 27, 2016; Energywire, May 17, 2016).
Pipelines became a flashpoint for environmentalists concerned with the threat of climate change during the Obama administration. Obama blocked construction of the Keystone XL pipeline in 2015 and ordered a lengthy delay to the Dakota Access pipeline shortly before leaving office. Trump, who took office less than a week ago, reversed those decisions Tuesday (Greenwire, Jan. 24).Demand, production are coming together
Gas producers and pipeline companies have been trying for years to build more pipelines out of Pennsylvania and Ohio. Pennsylvania has become the second-biggest gas-producing state after Texas since the advent of hydraulic fracturing in the Marcellus Shale, but gas often sells at a discount because it can't be transported to major markets (Energywire, Jan. 28, 2016).
Demand for gas is beginning to catch up to production as power plants, manufacturers and other local utilities switch to the fuel, Armstrong said. Williams, whose Transco system is the biggest individual interstate gas pipeline, has spent billions to expand its pipelines and reverse them to move gas to the south.
Spectra Energy Corp. is building the Nexus pipeline to move gas from Ohio through Michigan to its Dawn hub in Ontario. And Tallgrass Energy Partners LP has reversed a section of the Rockies Express pipeline, which runs from Colorado to Ohio, to carry gas back to the west and serve markets in Indiana and Illinois.
Those projects, like a lot of other pipelines, have drawn local protests from landowners concerned about the impact on their property and from environmentalists opposed to fossil fuel development.
"President Trump. Let's keep saying that. I'm excited about infrastructure development in the future," Tallgrass Vice President Doug Walker said.
At the same time, the protests are unlikely to disappear. About a dozen protesters picketed an intersection near the pipeline convention yesterday, holding signs saying, "Honk for Clean Water" and "Fossil Fuel Kills."
The nonprofit group 350.org, which has organized protests against the KXL pipeline, vowed to keep fighting the pipeline "in the courts and in the streets" (Climatewire, Jan. 25).
Contractors have been forced to plan for protests, said Harry New, president of Houston-based Willbros Oil and Gas, which builds large-scale pipelines.
"I think they're real, and I don't think it's going to end in the next month," he said. "It definitely puts a lot of contractors in a financial hardship."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049000
-
Oil Giants Are Adding Emissions To Their Agendas
Jan 25, 2017 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
Efforts to slow the pace of climate change are getting attention in the most unlikely places: the boardrooms and offices of Big Oil.
On Wednesday, the British oil major BP released an analysis that showed the rate of carbon emissions, blamed for accelerating global warming, will decline sharply over the next two decades but still fall far short of the goals set by the 2015 Paris climate agreement. Meanwhile, a top Exxon Mobil executive called the agreement - which has come under attack by President Donald Trump - a "monumental achievement" and a sign of "very meaningful" progress.
BP's 20-year outlook report projects that growth in global carbon emissions will slow to an average annual rate of 0.6 percent through 2035 from 2.1 percent today. But carbon emissions would need to fall by about 30 percent by 2035 to have a good chance of achieving the Paris goal of limiting the rise in average global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius.
More governmental intervention and policies are needed to reach - or at least come closer to - that target, BP Chief Executive Bob Dudley said.
"In BP, we continue to believe that carbon pricing has an important part to play as it provides incentives for everyone - producers and consumers alike - to play their part," Dudley said.
BP has increasingly advocated for so-called carbon taxes as way to raise the costs of dirtier fuels such as coal and provide incentives for people and companies to use cleaner energy. BP has joined Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell, France's Total, Norwegian company Statoil and other oil majors in supporting carbon taxes as a way to address climate change.
Although Trump is a climate change skeptic who's considering pulling the United States out of the Paris agreement, his nominee for secretary of state, former Exxon Mobil chief Rex Tillerson, has said the U.S. should stay "at the table." William Colton, Exxon Mobil's vice president for corporate strategic planning, said in an interview with Bloomberg the goals of Paris are achievable and compatible with Exxon Mobil's business plans.
Exxon Mobil "fully appreciates and acknowledges the risk posed by climate change," Colton said. "We really admire the Paris process, where you have all the major nations of the world coming together on a global basis - for it is a global challenge."
But critics contend the companies have done little to back up their talk. Shanna Cleveland, a director at the nonprofit advocacy group Ceres, gave Total credit for investing more in wind and solar projects and Houston-based ConocoPhillips for pulling out of deep-water drilling.
But, she added: "We're at a point where we can't applaud statements. We need to look behind the curtain and see if there's any action."
BP Chief Economist Spencer Dale said renewable energy will grow by nearly 8 percent a year, nearly quadrupling by 2035, and will by far represent the fastest-growing energy source. But natural gas, which burns cleaner than coal and oil, is likely to become the fuel of choice over the medium to long term.
Natural gas is expected to replace oil as the leading fuel in U.S. consumption in about 2023, according to the report.
Many of the oil majors, meanwhile, are increasing their investments in natural gas. Its consumption will grow much faster than oil and coal, with two-thirds of the demand growth coming from the power sector, Dale said.
Coal demand worldwide will peak in the mid-2020s as China shifts toward cleaner energy sources. Global oil demand will keep rising, but at a pace of less than 1 percent a year.
The power sector's share of the total energy market will grow from 42 percent to 47 percent as middle classes rise in developing nations, especially Asia. Natural gas will increasingly become the fuel of choice for generating electricity, as cheap and abundant supplies are produced from U.S. shale fields and exported as export liquefied natural gas.
Houston-based Cheniere Energy became the first U.S. company to export LNG last year, and a bevy of other projects are coming online within the next few years. Australia also is exporting LNG already.
U.S. energy production is expected to grow 24 percent by 2035, while domestic consumption will increase by 1 percent, according to the BP outlook. That should lead to increase energy exports, especially from the Houston region.
Natural gas is expected to replace oil as the leading fuel in U.S. consumption in about 2023, according to the report. The U.S. is expected to remain the largest producer of natural gas worldwide.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/BP-World-projected-to-fall-far-short-of-Paris-10884530.php
-
Study Links Fracking Fluids To Health Problems In Trout
Jan 26, 2017 | Vancouver Sun ( In E&E Energywire)
By Juris Graney
Fluids produced by hydraulic fracturing can cause liver and gill damage in rainbow trout, according to researchers at the University of Alberta.
The finding builds on evidence that chemicals in fluids from hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, pose serious health risks. Earlier this month, a study published in the journal Nature confirmed that chemicals in these fluids were linked to problems in humans such as infertility and birth defects.
The study found that fracking fluids can create oxidative stress in rainbow trout, which many researchers consider the "white rat" of environmental biology. Oxidative stress is linked to long-term biological damage.
This marked the first study to use samples supplied by the oil and gas industry. Encana Corp. provided the samples but had no further input in the research.
Greg Goss, a professor in the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Alberta, said the study could help improve understanding of accidental fracking fluid spills. Alberta saw more than 2,500 such spills between 2011 and 2014.
"The end goal is to understand the effects of the spills, should they occur, on native aquatic animals," Goss said. "This will help in both environmental policy, water treatment options for on-site water management, and improved mitigation policy and programs."
Environmental groups could seize on the finding as further proof that fracking should be banned or that industry may push for fewer regulations, Goss added (Juris Graney, Vancouver Sun, Jan. 24). — MJ
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/01/26/stories/1060048983
-
States Seize On Another Angle To Challenge Rule
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
States this week opened a new front in the legal battle over the Obama administration's signature climate change rule.
Led by West Virginia, 19 states on Monday filed a petition asking a federal court to review U.S. EPA's recent decision to deny several requests to administratively reconsider the Clean Power Plan. All of the states are already challenging the underlying rule.
Oklahoma, which has been a key opponent of EPA in the Clean Power Plan litigation, is notably absent from the new lawsuit. President Trump has nominated the state's Republican attorney general, Scott Pruitt, to lead EPA; the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee likely will soon vote on his confirmation.
The Clean Power Plan required states to develop and put in place plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants. In an unexpected move, the Supreme Court in February stayed the rule until litigation is resolved.
Earlier this month, EPA denied most of the 60 requests it received to reconsider the rule.
Twenty-two of the petitions from states, electric utilities and interest groups asked EPA to pause the program, while the rest of the petitions raised a variety of complaints about the rule. The petitions brought up many of the same issues that foes have raised in other court challenges, including that the Clean Power Plan was not a "best system of emission reduction" that complied with the Clean Air Act.
EPA denied all the requests except a handful of reconsideration petitions focused on waste-to-energy and biomass issues. The agency deferred those issues, noting that a separate agency scientific and technical investigation on biomass may clarify the treatment of that fuel (Energywire, Jan. 13).
The new lawsuit over the petition denials comes as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit may soon issue a ruling on the legality of the Clean Power Plan.
In September, 10 judges of the court heard nearly seven hours of oral arguments, mostly centering on whether the Clean Air Act gave EPA the authority to issue the rule.
Challengers also argued that EPA issued a final rule that was too different from its proposal, but judges then seemed skeptical of that argument since EPA had not yet responded to the petitions for reconsideration that raised the same concern.
President Trump's Justice Department has yet to formally weigh in on the Clean Power Plan in court, but the new administration has pledged to get rid of the rule.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049045
-
Minn. Officials To Stop Meetings
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden
Air regulators in Minnesota, one of the few states still planning for U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan, yesterday signaled a stakeholder meeting in February will likely be their last.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency on Monday invited advocates and companies involved in talks to a Feb. 24 meeting with an update on legal challenges to the federal climate rule.
Frank Kohlasch, manager of the Air Assessment Section, said he doesn't expect to have much clarity on the outlook for the Clean Power Plan by then.
The regulation was frozen by the Supreme Court while a lower court reviews lawsuits from more than two dozen states and numerous industry groups. President Trump has also vowed to eliminate the Clean Power Plan, although that could take time and will be vulnerable to legal attacks.
Kohlasch said over many meetings during the past few years that the group has discussed "many important issues that are relevant to clean power and reducing greenhouse gas emissions," regardless of whether the rule moves forward.
"We want to get together one final time to be sure we fully document the important things we have learned in our meetings with you," he said.
While many states continue to hash out strategies for lowering power-sector carbon emissions, most are no longer focusing on the Clean Power Plan (Climatewire, Jan. 24).
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/01/26/stories/1060048995
-
Groups Urge Congress To Roll Back Accident-Prevention Regs
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A coalition of more than 20 business groups is calling on Congress to void new U.S. EPA accident prevention regulations covering thousands of refineries, chemical plants and other facilities.
"Our associations support sensible regulations that can be shown to improve safety and security," the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other signers said in a letter to House and Senate leaders released late yesterday. "Unfortunately, the final RMP [risk management programs] rule fails this basic test.
"For this reason, we recommend that Congress disapprove the regulation under the Congressional Review Act," the letter adds.
The 1996 act allows simple majorities in the House and Senate to strike down regulations promulgated within the last 60 legislative working days. While it has been rarely employed previously, congressional Republicans have vowed to target a host of rules released in the waning days of the Obama administration.
The regulations in question here were published by EPA earlier this month, although their effective implementation date has been pushed back slightly until March 21 under a broader regulatory freeze ordered last week by the Trump administration (Greenwire, Jan. 24).
Prompted by a 2013 ammonium nitrate explosion at a Texas fertilizer facility that killed 15 people, they are intended to ramp up accident prevention efforts, better protect firefighters and other emergency responders from chemical exposure, and keep the public better informed of potential risks (E&E News PM, Dec. 21, 2016).
Industry groups, however, have charged that the rules will impose substantial new costs without delivering a measurable return on safety. Many of the same groups now pressing lawmakers to overturn the new rules also signed on to a November 2016 letter urging the Office of Management and Budget — which was then conducting a standard pre-publication review — to take the unusual step of scrapping them (Greenwire, Nov. 30, 2016).
Recently posted records on the OMB website show numerous meetings between industry organizations last fall and the agency's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs while the review was underway.
While the final version made some changes in EPA's original draft, it "fails to identify any meaningful safety benefit and may actually increase security risks given the rule's expanded public information disclosure requirements," the groups said in yesterday's letter.
Although no CRA resolution to overturn the regulations has so far been introduced, a spokeswoman for the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufactures forwarded a copy of a draft measure by Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) and said he could introduce it within the next few weeks. A Mullin spokeswoman did not immediately reply to email and phone messages this morning seeking confirmation.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049063
-
Pruitt Questions Warming, Leaves Wiggle Room On CO2 Finding
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden and Niina Heikkinen
EPA administrator nominee Scott Pruitt yesterday sent 242 pages of responses to questions from Democratic senators, doubling down on his stances that the severity of climate change is up for debate and that the agency he would run has overstepped its congressional mandate.
In response to numerous general and specific questions about climate science, the Republican Oklahoma attorney general pasted the same response:
"The climate is changing and human activity impacts our changing climate in some manner. The ability to measure with precision the degree and extent of that impact, and what to do about it, are subject to continuing debate and dialogue," he said, echoing his comments from a hearing last week with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
The EPA nominee said he would "work to ensure that any regulatory actions are based on the most up to date and objective scientific data, including the ever-evolving understanding of the impact increasing greenhouse gases have on our changing climate."
Pruitt agreed he would not retaliate against EPA employees who work on climate change issues. He said repeatedly that it would be his privilege to work with scientists and other public servants and added that he would "follow applicable laws and federal guidance on scientific integrity, information quality, and transparency."
His responses landed in inboxes last night as the Associated Press reported that the Trump administration intends to require scientific reports from EPA to get final signoff by political appointees.
Pruitt also weighed in on an international deal to curb climate change, which President Trump has said he will exit. Pruitt said that if the State Department decides to continue to participate in the Paris Agreement, he would "work with all involved agencies to ensure that commitments made on behalf of the United States are achievable and consistent with requisite legal authorities delegated by Congress."
For many questions about how he would handle certain policies and enforcement issues, he stated broadly that he would carry out authorities granted to EPA by Congress, without explaining how. Delaware Sen. Tom Carper, the ranking Democrat on the committee, called Pruitt's answers "shockingly devoid of substance." Committee leaders have not yet agreed on a date to vote on confirming the nomination.
Pruitt said that while EPA has a role in addressing interstate water and air quality, the agency must do so "within the bounds of its legal authority." He emphasized that states have the primary role in enforcing environmental regulations and said they should be given "regulatory leeway" in managing carbon dioxide emissions.
"I also believe the Administrator has an important role when it comes to the regulation of carbon dioxide," Pruitt wrote, saying he would follow the agency's endangerment finding that CO2 is a pollutant that is harmful to public health. He said he would do that "respective of the applicable statutory framework established by Congress."Pruitt: EPA lawsuits not a conflict
When Pruitt took office in Oklahoma, he instituted a Federalism Unit to sue the U.S. government over states' rights and dismantled the Environmental Protection Unit (Energywire, Dec. 16, 2016). But in his answers this week, he called it "misleading" to say the environmental wing was defunded, saying that he had determined it would be better off combined with a consumer protection unit.
Pruitt also evaded questions about whether he would recuse himself from decisions involving cases he participated personally in as attorney general of Oklahoma.
Although Pruitt listed 10 cases against EPA in which he has participated "personally and substantially," he said he does not "expect any previous lawsuits to adversely affect my performance as EPA Administrator if confirmed."
He argued that writing rules to overturn the EPA regulations he challenged in court would not be a conflict of interest. He also said he is "bound by the rules of professional conduct not to 'switch sides' in any litigation in which I represented the State of Oklahoma, unless my former client gives its informed consent."
Pruitt also provided a 53-page list of cases in which he has been involved and speeches or presentations he has given related to energy or the environment.
Opponents of Pruitt's nomination have charged that he engaged in pay-to-play politics and brought cases that the influential fossil fuel companies in his state wanted to see. He argued that he is fighting for Oklahomans by combating federal overreach into businesses that are important to the state's economy.
Democratic senators sent dozens of questions about industry campaign donations to Pruitt and groups he has been associated with, including the Republican Attorneys General Association's nonprofit Rule of Law Defense Fund, which isn't required to disclose donors.
Pruitt maintained that while he was chairman of the group, "donors did not have a say with respect to the fund's activities."
As attorney general, Pruitt accepted free outside legal counsel to assist in his challenge to EPA's Clean Power Plan. He also paid private lawyers to help with federalism cases. He denied that an Oklahoma law requiring state agencies to report their spending on outside counsel applied to his office.
Many of Pruitt's answers also demonstrated that he is not versed in the specifics of EPA's environmental justice work, including its National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, its EJ 2020 Action Agenda or a related executive order. He said if confirmed he would expect to be briefed on those issues by staff.
At the same time, he said he would commit to better oversight of drinking water rules following lead contamination in Flint, Mich. — an ongoing crisis that has crystallized many of the core concerns of environmental justice advocates.
"I agree with the assessments of others that the Flint tragedy was a failure at every level of government, but I am particularly disturbed that EPA did not take action until long after they became aware of the elevated lead levels in Flint drinking water," he said.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049016
-
Pruitt Could Complicate Climate Action In Liberal States
Jan 26, 2017 | NPR (In E&E Climatewire)
By Lauren Sommer
As California forges ahead with renewable energy, the Trump administration could hold it back — especially when it comes to low-emitting vehicles.
A new climate action plan launched by the state on President Trump's Inauguration Day calls for increasing the number of electric cars on the roads. Existing rules also place a cap on vehicle pollution. But those rules are based solely on permission from U.S. EPA, and they could be threatened.
The issue was brought up by Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) during the confirmation hearing of Scott Pruitt, Trump's nominee for EPA administrator. He responded by saying, "That's a review process."
"The first legal disputes are going to be about cars. And I'd be surprised actually if we didn't see those disputes," said Michael Wara, a professor at Stanford Law School.
He argues that Pruitt's actions will be a test of the "administration's commitment to conservative values," since Pruitt has previously sued EPA while arguing that states should have the right to frame their own environmental rules.
"So that logic would seem to imply that California should have the right to set its own agenda. But we'll see how that trades off against the desire to roll back regulations related to greenhouse gases," said Wara (Lauren Sommer, NPR, Jan. 25). — KB
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/01/26/stories/1060048997
-
EPA Transition Economist Sees No Role For Carbon Regs
Jan 26, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
An economist on the Trump administration's U.S. EPA team said today that he opposes using carbon taxes to curb heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions.
Asked whether he supports any government regulations on carbon during a discussion at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, David Kreutzer replied, "Given the inefficiency of the government imposing these regulations and the likely negative externalities of carbon, I'd say no. I think the inefficiency outweighs the likely damage that we would have."
Kreutzer offered the positives of higher carbon dioxide concentrations in Earth's atmosphere in the two-hour discussion. When the crowd laughed, he snapped, "You're laughing because you're ignorant."
Afterward, he told E&E News he regretted that comment.
And before the discussion, he cautioned, "Nothing here I say is official EPA policy."
Kreutzer was introduced to EPA staff Monday as part of President Trump's "beachhead team" working with acting Administrator Catherine McCabe and acting Deputy Administrator Mike Flynn (Greenwire, Jan. 24).
His official title, he said today, is special assistant to the administrator.
"I have been asked specifically not to talk about the Trump administration. I was here to talk about this carbon tax panel. I signed up last September," Kreutzer said. "I am not going to talk to anybody about general policies or the Trump administration or what the EPA is going to do or what I think they are going to do or not going to do."
Kreutzer deflected questions about whether he might eventually have a permanent post at the agency.
The discussion — "Carbon Taxes: Public Finance vs. Public Choice" — featured three AEI scholars; Resources for the Future's Robertson Williams; and Jeff Holmstead, President George W. Bush's EPA air chief who's now an energy industry lobbyist at Bracewell LLP.
"You have this phenomenal bias towards finding negative things with CO2," Kreutzer said, in a heated exchange with panelist Roger Sant, an environmentalist who co-founded the AES Corp.
From the outset, Kreutzer tried to set reporters straight about his views on climate change, which he said were clearly not understood by people reporting on the transition team coming to EPA.
"I believe CO2 is a greenhouse gas, OK. I believe human emissions of CO2 are ... it's a slam dunk that they are going to do something to increase warming of the atmosphere, all right," he said.
But he emphasized, "We don't know how much."
He said, "There's no 97 percent consensus on the magnitude of the warming, and that's an absolutely critical issue."
Kreutzer concluded a carbon tax is "a money grab."
He argued a revenue-neutral carbon tax would not work in the "real political world." He disputed the Obama administration's social cost of carbon calculation, a linchpin of environmental regulation that appears vulnerable under Trump.
Currently set by an interagency panel at $36 per ton of CO2, the social cost of carbon has spurred advocates to peg tax proposals to that number.
The tools people want to use to establish a carbon tax "are just not up to the task," Kreutzer said. The numbers are "so wild," he said, that they could just as likely hurt the U.S. economy as help it.
Proponents of the carbon tax say it's an idea Republicans might support as part of a broader effort to rewire the federal tax code.
What is driving the push for a carbon tax is the hundreds of billions of dollars per year in new revenue, Kreutzer said.
He added, "You can't cart $100 billion across D.C. without getting robbed."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/01/26/stories/1060049062
Industry and Association News
LCSA News- There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested