Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 2/22/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Red Hat, Inc. (NYSE:RHT) Has-Been Selected by SSM to Support the Development
Feb 22, 2017 | Benchmark Monitor
By Myatt David
Red Hat, Inc. (NYSE:RHT) announced that it has been selected by Suruhanjaya Syarikat Malaysia (SSM) to support the development of a new and advanced gateway for the registration of companies and businesses in Malaysia. -
(ACC Mentioned) UPDATE: Connecticut Launches WRAP Program to Increase Flexible Film Recycling
Feb 22, 2017 | Waste Dive
By Cole Rosengren
Connecticut officials, in partnership with the American Chemistry Council's Flexible Film Recycling Group (FFRG), launched a new collection campaign this week to improve plastic film recycling rates. -
(ACC Mentioned) DEEP Kicks Off New Plastic Bag Recycling Program
Feb 22, 2017 | News 8
By Kent Pierce
The Department Of Energy And Environmental Protection is trying to get people to recycle plastic bags and wrap. Starting Tuesday you can expect to see new recycling bins at grocery stores and various other shops. -
Staff Wary But Ready to Work With Pruitt Amid New Email Dump
Feb 22, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden, Niina Heikkinen and Hannah Hess
Newly appointed U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt yesterday tried to extend an olive branch to worried staffers hours before consenting to a judge's order and releasing more than 7,000 pages of emails with energy firms. -
New EPA Administrator Seeks 'Objectivity' in Rulemaking
Feb 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Newly confirmed EPA administrator Scott Pruitt has called on agency staff to be transparent and objective in completing rulemakings, and to avoid "abuses" that have taken place in the past. -
Emails Show Pruitt's Ties to Fossil Fuel Industry
Feb 22, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus
Emails released today from U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's time as Oklahoma attorney general show he and his office had a familiar if not symbiotic relationship with fossil fuel companies. -
TSCA Reform Implementation Update
Feb 22, 2017 | National Law Review
By Mark N. Duvall, Ryan J. Carra, and Timothy M. Serie
Eight months have now passed since President Obama signed into law the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (LCSA), Pub. Law 114-182, on June 22, 2016. -
Nonstick Chemicals: A Hydra-Headed Family of Toxic Compounds
Feb 22, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By David Andrews
Banning or restricting toxic chemicals one at a time is like fighting the mythical hydra: For each head cut off, multiple replacements appear that may be just as hazardous. -
Euratex Calls for Improvements to REACH Restriction Process
Feb 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
The REACH restriction process should be improved to help companies avoid regrettable substitutions, according to textiles and apparel trade association, Euratex. -
Morrisey Hopes Trump Seeks Broad Rollback of EPA Power Plant GHG Rules
Feb 22, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Abby Smith
West Virginia Attorney General (AG) Patrick Morrisey (R), one of the most ardent critics of EPA's power plant greenhouse gas rules, hopes that an executive order President Donald Trump is slated to sign will seek a broad rollback of the agency's rules for both new and existing sources, suggesting some uncertainty about the scope of the order. -
Oil Could Flow Through Pipeline in 2 Weeks
Feb 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Dakota Access pipeline could see its first drops of oil in less than two weeks, company lawyers told a federal court yesterday. -
The U.S. is Transitioning into a Natural Gas Exporter
Feb 22, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Jordan Blum
The United States is on track to become a net exporter of gas next year, driven largely by the growth of liquefied natural gas exports, according to the U.S. Energy Department. -
California NatGas Utilities Continue Pouring Billions into Pipeline Upgrades
Feb 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
California's extensive utility-operated natural gas transmission/distribution pipeline network will continue to receive billion of dollars in enhancements this year, according to the state's two main operators -- Sempra Energy's Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas) and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E). -
Report: Rail Industry Optimistic About Trump's Pro-Business Stance
Feb 22, 2017 | Progressive Railroading
Rail-industry association representatives say they're optimistic about federal transportation policy under President Donald Trump's administration, according to a report in the February issue of Progressive Railroading. -
The Green Movement is Our Planet’s Last Best Hope
Feb 22, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Justin McCarthy
Earlier this month, former head of President Donald Trump’s EPA transition team Myron Ebell made the bold claim that the environmental movement is "the greatest threat to freedom and prosperity in the modern world.” -
Climate Change Tied to Nation's Infrastructure Needs
Feb 22, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Rep. Raul M. Grijalva
In what’s become a troublingly common occurrence, the combination of extreme weather and crumbling infrastructure threatened the residents of another American community in California not long ago.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Red Hat, Inc. (NYSE:RHT) Has-Been Selected by SSM to Support the Development
Feb 22, 2017 | Benchmark Monitor
By Myatt David
Red Hat, Inc. (NYSE:RHT) announced that it has been selected by Suruhanjaya Syarikat Malaysia (SSM) to support the development of a new and advanced gateway for the registration of companies and businesses in Malaysia. “Red Hat is pleased to help SSM build a more robust and reliable IT architecture. By deploying Red Hat JBoss Fuse, SSM is better positioned to meet current and future integration needs, and reduce manual touch points, automate processes, and connect assets for improved efficiency,” said Red Hat Asean vice president and general manager Damien Wong (pic). SSM is Malaysia’s statutory body that incorporates companies and registers businesses. As Malaysia’s leading authority for the improvement of corporate governance, SSM helps promote compliance with business registration and corporate legislation through enforcement and monitoring activities. The new gateway is expected to simplify and speed up the registration process by reducing manual registration handling with an automated online system. Implementing the new automated process involved replacing SSM’s existing Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) solution with Red Hat JBoss Fuse, Red Hat’s lightweight, flexible integration platform for connecting applications, data, and devices across the extended enterprise. JBoss Fuse is well suited to help SSM ease the burden and complexity of managing point-to-point integration. The platform is also expected to help SSM reduce its time-to-market for new services, which can be reused and offered to other customers, reducing the need for SSM to develop additional services for the same requirements.
At the movement Red Hat, Inc. (NYSE:RHT) is under coverage by number of analysts. Buy rating has been given by 11 analysts to the company stock whereas 1 analyst given UNDERPERFORM rating to stock and 6 analysts given HOLD rating. The consensus recommendation by Thomson Reuters analysts is Outperform and their mean rating for the stock is 1.90 on scale of 1-5. Analysts mean target price for Red Hat, Inc. (NYSE:RHT) is $86.20 while their mean recommendation is 2.00 (1=Buy, 5=sell).
If we look at stock performance in last active day trading, we see that stock has moved up 1.39% to end the day at $83.75. Company price to earnings (P/E) ratio, which measures the relationship between the earnings of a company and its stock price, is calculated as 63.88. The current share price indicate that stock is 1.23% away from its one year high and is moving 31.56% ahead of its 52-week low.
AdvanSix Inc. (NYSE:ASIX) has joined the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the company announced, becoming a full member of the industry group and taking a seat on its Board of Directors. “AdvanSix is honored to join with other industry leaders to help tell the story of how chemistry and chemical manufacturing can deliver value and innovation to customers and the economy,” said Erin Kane, president and CEO of AdvanSix. “Everyone at AdvanSix has a relentless focus on safety. Being a member of the ACC reinforces our ongoing commitment to excellence in health, safety and environmental performance and sustaining safe operations for our employees, our customers and the communities in which we operate.” Cal Dooley, president and CEO of ACC added, “Having AdvanSix, a leading producer of nylon, plant nutrients, and chemical intermediates, helps make ACC a stronger, more effective organization. Our diverse and ever-growing membership represents today’s innovators who play such a vital role in the creation of the ground-breaking products that make our lives and world healthier, safer, more sustainable, and more productive.”
On 21 February 2017, AdvanSix Inc. (NYSE:ASIX) shares moved to $29.62 after starting the day at $29.25. Number of analysts are covering this stock and currently stock has got OUTPERFORM rating from 5 analyst of Thomson Reuters, 7 analyst given HOLD rating to the stock and 0 given UNDERPERFORM rating. Analyst’s mean target price for ASIX is $45.00 while analysts mean recommendation is 1.00.
http://www.benchmarkmonitor.com/2017/02/22/red-hat-inc-nyserht-has-been-selected-by-ssm-to-support-the-development/
-
(ACC Mentioned) UPDATE: Connecticut Launches WRAP Program to Increase Flexible Film Recycling
Feb 22, 2017 | Waste Dive
By Cole Rosengren
Connecticut officials, in partnership with the American Chemistry Council's Flexible Film Recycling Group (FFRG), launched a new collection campaign this week to improve plastic film recycling rates. Residents are encouraged to recycle a range of products such as shopping bags and plastic wrap at 175 participating stores within the state.
About half of Connecticut residents don't know about drop-off options for plastic recycling and many don't know the fulllist of accepted materials, according to a recent survey. According to the American Chemistry Council, more than 18,000 stores now offer drop-off options for plastic film recycling nationwide.
Dive Brief:
The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) has announced a public-private partnership with the American Chemistry Council's Flexible Film Recycling Group (FFRG) to boost plastic film recycling.
This marks the third state after Wisconsin and North Carolina to partner with the FFRG's Wrap Action Recycling Program (WRAP). The FFRG's goal is to double recycling of post-use polyethylene film by 2020.
The goal is to increase education and opportunities for the recycling of a range of plastic bags, wraps, films, and some shipping material.
Dive Insight:
According to the FFRG, collection of plastic film has grown 79% since 2005 and 1.17 billion pounds were recovered in 2014. A study in Vancouver, WA — where WRAP conducted a campaign last year — found a 125% increase in the amount of material dropped off in stores and a 75% reduction in contamination at local material recovery facilities.
Connecticut aims to double its recycling diversion rate to 60% by 2024 and has been looking for new ways to get there as food waste diversion initiatives have lagged. Contamination in single-stream recycling has also been an issue and the state's DEEP Commissioner Robert Klee cited it as a factor in joining WRAP.
"Cleaning up our single stream recycling and making our recyclables more marketable is a very high priority," said DEEP Commissioner Robert Klee. "Plastic bags and other film packaging are recyclable and have real value — just not in our curbside bins."
Figuring out how to manage waste from polyethylene products is a growing area of interest. Though an estimated 18,000 drop-off locations are available for consumers throughout the country, much of the material is still not being captured. Some would rather ban certain categories such as plastic bags entirely, while others are researching new potential uses for it and initiatives like WRAP are trying to encourage more participation in existing programs.
http://www.wastedive.com/news/update-connecticut-launches-wrap-program-to-increase-flexible-film-recycli/421396/
-
(ACC Mentioned) DEEP Kicks Off New Plastic Bag Recycling Program
Feb 22, 2017 | News 8
By Kent Pierce
The Department Of Energy And Environmental Protection is trying to get people to recycle plastic bags and wrap. Starting Tuesday you can expect to see new recycling bins at grocery stores and various other shops.
This program will help save the planet and make things safer for workers in recycling plants, too, because it turns out plastic bags are downright dangerous.
From bubble wrap dry cleaning bags to the ziplock that held your sandwich (just make sure you clean out the peanut butter and jelly first), DEEP announced today you can now recycle all those things. It’s part of a push to reduce the state’s trash.
“And building public awareness that these items can be recycled and returned to over 200 locations in grocery stores and retail outlets throughout our state,” said DEEP Commissioner Robert Klee at a press conference at a Price Chopper in Middletown.
For a while now, many grocery stores have allowed you to recycle the plastic shopping bags. The trouble is, folks were putting other stuff in the grocery bag container.
“If you took that containers and you opened it up and you did like a little mini audit, 25 percent is grocery bags. 75 percent is everything else,” explained Sherill Baldwin, DEEP Environmental Analyst.
It turns out that “everything else” causes real problems at the facilities that sort the recycling.
“So when we have mixed recycling and you put in plastic film, it causes safety concerns for the employees that have to pick out and separate the materials. It also jams up the equipment,” said Baldwin.
But in a facility designed for thin plastic bags and wrap, it’s not a problem.
“Grocery and retail bags, dry cleaning bags, bread bags, produce bags, newspaper bags, overwrap to wrap paper towels, bathroom tissues,” listed Shari Jackson of the American Chemistry Council.
Just bring it all to one of a couple hundred stores with designated recycling containers, and they can be turned into hard plastic products like Trex decking material.
“When you bring these materials back to retailers, we actually get a lot more value so that they can be made into plastic lumber and other products,” Baldwin said.
For a complete list of drop-off locations near you, click here and enter your zip code.
http://wtnh.com/2017/02/21/deep-kicks-off-new-plastic-bag-recycling-program/
-
Staff Wary But Ready to Work With Pruitt Amid New Email Dump
Feb 22, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden, Niina Heikkinen and Hannah Hess
Newly appointed U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt yesterday tried to extend an olive branch to worried staffers hours before consenting to a judge's order and releasing more than 7,000 pages of emails with energy firms.
By late yesterday evening, advocates with the Wisconsin-based Center for Media and Democracy were combing through the email correspondence between Pruitt and his top staff in the Oklahoma attorney general's office and coal, oil and natural gas companies. The group intends to publish the emails online by 9:30 am today.
In an emailed statement, a spokesman for the Oklahoma attorney general's office said the office had gone "above and beyond" the requirements of Oklahoma's open records law.
"This broad disclosure should provide affirmation that, despite politically motivated allegations, the Office of Attorney General remains fully committed to the letter and spirit of the Open Records Act," spokesman Lincoln Ferguson said.
The Center for Media and Democracy had pursued the documents for two years. Last week, Oklahoma County District Judge Aletia Haynes Timmons ruled that Pruitt had failed to follow the state's open records laws, and required him to produce emails relating to one of the outstanding requests by close of business yesterday.
Senate Democrats and environmental groups had demanded the emails' release prior to Pruitt's confirmation last week but failed to convince Republicans. Yet any hint of an email scandal was absent from Pruitt's first public address yesterday to employees at EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Holding up an EPA cap, Pruitt told employees he wants to help them do their work and argued for "civility" in a "toxic" political environment.
"I seek to be a good listener," Pruitt said, commending career staffers for their dedication and contending that media reports about him might not paint a fair picture.
But Pruitt's tone pivoted sharply from EPA's core message in recent years. Where former EPA chief Gina McCarthy focused most of her speeches on the agency's work to improve public health, Pruitt instead highlighted the importance of abiding by congressional intent and providing regulatory certainty to businesses.
"Regulations ought to make things regular," Pruitt said. "Regulators exist to give certainty to those that they regulate. Those that we regulate ought to know what's expected of them so they can plan and allocate resources to comply."
Pruitt said EPA should avoid "abuses that occur sometimes" in the regulatory process. He called out the agency practices of regulating through guidance rather than an official rulemaking, or writing rules in response to litigation from environmental groups.
"We need to be open and transparent and objective in how we do rulemaking and make sure we follow the letter of the law as we do so," he said.
Employees taking a wait-and-see approach
Pruitt plans to work to roll back many of the Obama administration's signature environmental achievements, including a rule to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. An executive order on that rule, called the Clean Power Plan, could come as early as this week, although more binding efforts to undo it will take longer and face lawsuits (Climatewire, Feb. 21).
The new administrator wants to narrow the scope of EPA's work, and employees have voiced concerns about staffing and budget cuts and reorganizations that might prevent them from fulfilling their obligation to protect the environment.
EPA staffers filing out of their Washington headquarters yesterday said they were still concerned but would wait to see how their new boss worked.
One EPA employee said he would "give him a chance."
"I don't like to prejudge anybody," he said.
That employee added that he thought Pruitt's speech was "kind of vanilla." He said that while it makes sense that Pruitt would emphasize a need to adhere to the law, he added, "Let's hope we stick to that."
Another employee said he saw the potential for a positive working relationship with the new administrator.
"He thinks that you can still save the environment yet have economic growth, which sounds good. I think he's a personable guy; I kind of like him. I look forward to working with him," said one EPA employee in the Office of Water.
Jeff Holmstead, a former assistant administrator at EPA under George W. Bush, said Pruitt "certainly understands he's coming in with some controversy."
"I think this is the first step of his effort to reach out and make sure people understand who he is and know he's open to addressing their concerns," Holmstead said, adding Pruitt "didn't pull any punches" or make promises that he couldn't keep about EPA's budget, which the president and Congress will ultimately decide. Many agency staffers will be waiting to see the budget, Holmstead said.
Greens blast speech
Bill Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, said Pruitt's case for ensuring that the agency abides by the law, adheres to process and works closely with states "sounds awfully similar to previous administrations — and I say that really as a compliment."
But a national environmental program for cutting pollution won't succeed at the state and local level without a strong and effective EPA, he warned. The possibility of significant cuts to EPA's budget or slashing the agency's 15,000-person staff to about 5,000 employees, as transition team chief Myron Ebell has suggested, threatens that (Greenwire, Jan. 26).
If Pruitt's first acts are to rescind regulatory programs on which many states relied without seeking a substitute, Becker said, it might cause a rocky start.
"We welcome delegation of authority, but not without financial and regulatory help, and not without the important backstop of EPA," Becker said.
Becker concluded, "These are laudable principles. No one can argue about any of those principles. No one should argue about any of those principles. But it's how they are carried out that matters."
Environmentalists quickly condemned Pruitt for not focusing his speech more on environmental and public health issues.
"My immediate reaction was that in his first address to EPA, he didn't talk about environmental protection at all. It was completely absent of any mention of protecting clean water, air and land. No mention of climate change, which is obviously a critical challenge of our time," said Nick Conger, press secretary for the Natural Resources Defense Fund and former communications adviser to the EPA administrator's office during the Obama administration.
Conger noted that Pruitt also did not focus on regional engagement and did not take questions from staff members, something his former boss, McCarthy, used to do during each of her all-hands meetings as EPA administrator.
"I'm just very struck that it seems his focus is on protecting industry and economic impacts, market impacts, at the exclusion, almost, if not entirely at the exclusion, of public health protection. That's what EPA is there to do, protect public health," he said.
'Hell to pay' if climate regs repealed?
Catherine McCabe, who was acting administrator until Pruitt's confirmation, touted her new boss's work to achieve a water rights settlement among the state of Oklahoma, cities and tribal nations.
Pruitt instead spoke about his vision for making regulations simpler for industry.
While he didn't mention the Clean Power Plan directly, he said he believes the agency can be "both pro-energy and jobs and pro-environment."
"We don't have to choose between the two," he said.
Industry groups challenging EPA's regulation of carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act seem wary of going too far in contesting climate rules.
A senior official at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for 21st Century Energy recently said there would be "hell to pay" if the Trump administration tries to repeal EPA's 2009 endangerment finding.
"And if you are going to go out there and say, 'We're going to pull this back,' I mean there is going to be hell to pay, not just from those people out there who are protesting those plants," Senior Vice President for Policy Christopher Guith said last month at an event in Kentucky, according to a transcript published by the Energy and Policy Institute, a watchdog organization backing renewables.
"There's going to be hell to pay from, you know, soccer moms and soccer dads all throughout the country. People who probably voted for Donald Trump," Guith said.
Matt Letourneau, a spokesman for the institute, said Guith's answer "was based on a political analysis of the situation," not an official policy position.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/02/22/stories/1060050392
-
New EPA Administrator Seeks 'Objectivity' in Rulemaking
Feb 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Newly confirmed EPA administrator Scott Pruitt has called on agency staff to be transparent and objective in completing rulemakings, and to avoid "abuses" that have taken place in the past.
"Process matters", said Mr Pruitt in his first address to US EPA employees following his confirmation in the post by the Senate last week. "Regulators exist to give certainty to those that they regulate."
"And the process that we engage in in documenting regulations is very, very important, because it sends a message ... that we take seriously our role of taking comment and offering response, and then making informed decisions on how it's going to impact those in the marketplace to achieve the end that we have in statute," said Mr Pruitt.
The former Oklahoma attorney general said the EPA needs to be "open and transparent and objective in how we do rulemaking and make sure that we follow the letter of the law as we do so."
The agency, he said, must also avoid "abuses that occur sometimes". He cited the agency's use of the guidance process to conduct rulemaking, or its engaging in "regulation through litigation" that effectively bypasses the administrative procedures act.
During his controversial confirmation process, Mr Pruitt testified that he would seek to rein in the EPA's regulatory authorities. His expressed views are largely consistent with that of the Trump administration and the Republican-controlled Congress, which have taken actions to strike regulations and put the EPA ‘back on track’.
In his remarks, the new administrator placed an emphasis on rule of law. EPA processes must be "tethered to the statute", he said. The only authority any agency has is given to it by Congress, and the EPA needs to respect those boundaries.
He further noted the importance of federalism, and ensuring that the agency "engender[s] the trust of those at the state level".
More broadly, the new administrator called for adherence to guiding principles of civility, finding answers, and listening to one another when working to solve problems.
Mr Pruitt's confirmation created political waves and drew harsh criticism from an array of consumer advocacy groups. An NGO-sponsored petition calling for his appointment to be rejected in the Senate also drew the support of nearly 800 former EPA staff members.
https://chemicalwatch.com/53732/new-epa-administrator-seeks-objectivity-in-rulemaking
-
Emails Show Pruitt's Ties to Fossil Fuel Industry
Feb 22, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus
Emails released today from U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's time as Oklahoma attorney general show he and his office had a familiar if not symbiotic relationship with fossil fuel companies.
Under a court order, the Oklahoma attorney general's office began turning over 7,564 pages of emails and other records last night to the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD). The liberal-leaning watchdog group had sued Pruitt for failing to respond to its open records requests, including one ignored for more than two years.
The Senate confirmed Pruitt as EPA chief in a contentious 52-46 vote Friday. He addressed agency staffers for the first time as EPA chief yesterday.
Senate Democrats pushed to extend debate on his nomination until the emails were released, to no avail. CMD filed its open records lawsuit in part so senators could have reviewed the records before voting on Pruitt's nomination to lead EPA.
"There are hundreds of emails between the AG's office, Devon Energy Corp., and other polluters that senators should have been permitted to review prior to their vote to assess Pruitt's ties to the fossil fuel industry," Arn Pearson, CMD's general counsel, said in a statement.
Yesterday, a spokesman for the Oklahoma attorney general's office said it went "above and beyond" what is required under the law, providing thousands of additional documents in response to the litigation.
"This broad disclosure should provide affirmation that, despite politically motivated allegations, the Office of Attorney General remains fully committed to the letter and spirit of the Open Records Act," said Lincoln Ferguson, the Oklahoma attorney general spokesman.
Pruitt's record as a vocal EPA critic that sued the agency over several of its regulations has long been under scrutiny, including in a December 2014 New York Timesstory that used several documents from Pruitt's office. Many of the same companies that were shown to have been in touch with Pruitt as Oklahoma attorney general will now be regulated by EPA with Pruitt as the agency's chief.
At his confirmation hearing last month, Pruitt said he was representing his constituents when his office took action against EPA at the urging of fossil fuel companies.
"The efforts that I took as attorney general were representing the interests of the state of Oklahoma," Pruitt said.
Emails released today show Pruitt and his staff at the attorney general's office were in close contact with energy interests.
In 2013, Pruitt's office worked with Devon Energy, an Oklahoma-based oil and gas producer, to rally other attorneys general against the Bureau of Land Management's proposed rules on hydraulic fracturing.
Devon executives reviewed a draft of an unsigned letter from the Oklahoma attorney general's office, which was intended for other states' lawyers to sign. The letter included similar arguments to Devon's written comments and included some passages that were identical.
"I think that this letter will make a strong statement and a real difference," wrote Brent Rockwood, Devon public policy director, in an email to Deputy Solicitor General Clayton Eubanks. "Do you think that we will get any Democrats to sign the letter? Also, when you finalize the document and send it out, can I please get a copy for my records?"
EPA was also targeted by Pruitt's office.
In September 2013, mining industry lawyer Peter Glaser reached out to the Oklahoma deputy solicitor general about the state's lawsuit against regional haze requirements. At the time, Glaser was representing Arizona in a challenge to EPA's authority to impose federal implementation plans to reduce regional haze pollution.
Two months earlier, in a blow to Pruitt, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that EPA acted reasonably when it disapproved a state haze plan on the grounds that it did not do enough to cut sulfur dioxide emissions. That dispute started in March 2011, two months into Pruitt's tenure as Oklahoma's attorney general (Greenwire, Feb. 14).
Glaser suggested a brief he had filed on Arizona's behalf "could be a fruitful argument to make" in Oklahoma's effort to appeal the ruling.
Eubanks commended the brief, saying he had received a copy "from someone recently."
"Very well written, we definitely used it to try and focus our arguments on the standard of review issue in our Petition for Rehearing En Banc," Eubanks wrote.
He added, "Amicus support is welcomed and we appreciate the support, especially given the broad impact the panels incorrect decision will have nationwide."
The litigation sputtered to an end in 2014 when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take Pruitt's appeal.
Pruitt also worked closely with the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers to oppose an EPA proposal to increase the renewable fuel standard.
The Oklahoma attorney general filed an amicus brief with the high court opposing the proposal in March 2013.
But over the summer months of 2013, his office continued to coordinate with AFPM. The group's lobbyists frequently offered legal strategy to the Oklahoma attorney general's office.
In a July 12, 2013, email, AFPM general counsel Richard Moskowitz informed Eubanks that his group and the American Petroleum Institute planned to file a waiver later that month.
"We think it would be most effective for Oklahoma to file a separate waiver petition that emphasizes 'severe environmental harm,' as this argument is more credible coming from a State with primary responsibility for achieving and maintaining attainment with the NAAQS [National Ambient Air Quality Standards]," Moskowitz said.
A couple of months later, an AFPM vice president, Sarah Magruder Lyle, reached out to Melissa Houston, Pruitt's chief of staff.
"Hey lady," she wrote, before continuing, "I have some language for you on the RFS waiver letter, but was hoping we could chat before I sent it to you so I can give you a little context."
In November 2013, EPA announced it was lowering the RFS standard for the first time in its history.
Pruitt's office put out a press release praising the decision.
"The evidence is clear that the current ethanol fuel mandate is unworkable," Pruitt said. "The decision by the EPA to lower that standard is good news for Oklahoma consumers."
Obama admin's 'nasty tactics'
Pruitt's office also sought to build relationships with conservative-leaning think tanks and activist groups.
In July 2013, Aaron Cooper moved from the office of Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) to the attorney general's office. He told colleagues that in addition to press-related duties, he would work on "public affairs outreach and strategic communications strategy."
Soon after joining, Cooper reached out to Matt Ball of Americans for Prosperity to "talk about how the AG's office and AFP can work together." And in August, he inquired with Ball about a speaking slot at AFP's national convention.
Cooper worked closely with Ball. The two traded articles to post on social media and made plans to meet for coffee. In planning for the national meeting, Cooper and Ball worked out what Pruitt would discuss in a panel discussion with Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.).
Ball said he would look to Pruitt to focus on the "heavy hand of federal govt infringing on states rights by mandating how much Oklahomans pay for electricity."
Ball added that an official from the Competitive Enterprise Institute would talk about costs of federal regional haze regulations, so Pruitt could highlight his opposition to EPA's "sue-and-settle" practices with environmental groups.
"That way you guys don't have to deliver those messages and can focus on what the AG does best, opposing the Obama administration and its nasty tactics on the environment," Ball said.
In a follow-up email about the event in August, Ball said "this is an excellent opportunity for the AG to discuss the role of attorneys general as a last line of defense for states rights against overly intrusive federal regulation of which EPA environmental is only one example."
Cooper also worked with the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, which bills itself as a local version of the Heritage Foundation.
In August 2013, Cooper asked staff there for "some contacts at Heritage to whom I can send updates like this?" Attached was a press release about Pruitt's efforts to fight President Obama's national health care law.
Today's email release may be the first of many for Pruitt. Because of CMD's lawsuit, more records should be forthcoming from his time as Oklahoma attorney general.
On Feb. 27, the attorney general's office has been ordered to deliver records in response to five open records requests by CMD, according to the group. Further, CMD will ask the court to review records that have been redacted while the judge is also reviewing an unknown number of documents that could be released as well.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/02/22/stories/1060050420
-
TSCA Reform Implementation Update
Feb 22, 2017 | National Law Review
By Mark N. Duvall, Ryan J. Carra, and Timothy M. Serie
Eight months have now passed since President Obama signed into law the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (LCSA), Pub. Law 114-182, on June 22, 2016.[1] This historic legislation overhauled the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for the first time in 40 years.[2] Attention has now switched to EPA implementation of the new TSCA. This alert summarizes EPA’s implementation activities and challenges since June 2016 and highlights upcoming milestones.
Early Developments
On June 29, 2016, EPA released its First Year Implementation Plan for complying with its initial round of TSCA obligations.[3] EPA announced that it would meet its statutory obligations to continue reviewing premanufacture notices (PMNs) and significant new use notices (SNUNs), but, for previously submitted PMNs, the new law would effectively reset the 90-day review period. EPA also announced it would comply with its statutory deadline to make determinations within 90 days on all confidential business information (CBI) claims. In addition, the Agency announced that, for existing chemicals with risk assessments completed before the date of enactment, it would continue to publish proposed and final rules consistent with the scope of those assessments.[4] Specifically, EPA announced that it planned to finalize rules for trichloroethylene (TCE), methylene chloride, and N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) by late 2017. EPA’s announcements about framework actions under the new law included:
A plan to meet its statutory obligation to announce the first ten Work Plan chemicals to undergo risk evaluation by December 2016, with scoping complete by June 2017.[5]
A plan to propose rules on the prioritization process, risk evaluation process, and inventory reset process by December 2016, in order to meet the statutory deadlines to finalize the rule by June 2017.[6]
A plan to finalize a rule for the implementation of fee collection provisions under the statute by June 2017, with a proposed rule by December 2016. EPA noted there was no deadline to promulgate such a rule under the LCSA.[7]
A plan to establish a Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals by December 2016 – six months before the statutory deadline.[8]
EPA also held two public meetings, on August 9 and 10, 2016, regarding its upcoming proposals to establish procedures to prioritize chemicals and conduct risk assessments under section 6.[9] As discussed below, these rules were proposed in January 2017.[10] At each of the public meetings, EPA made a presentation and solicited oral comments. Following the meetings, EPA accepted written comments.
On October 24, 2016, EPA issued a FAQ document regarding the LCSA and its implementation.[11] The document announced, among other things, the five chemicals, regarded by EPA as persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) that will receive expedited action under TSCA section 6(h). The chemicals are:
Decabromodiphenyl ethers (decaBDE), used as a flame retardant in textiles, plastics, wiring insulation, and building and construction materials;
Hexachlorobutadiene (HCBD), used as a solvent in the manufacture of rubber compounds and as hydraulic, heat transfer or transformer fluid;
Pentachlorothiophenol (PCTP), used as a mercaptan (sulfur) cross-linking agent to make rubber more pliable in industrial uses;
Tris(4-isopropylphenyl) phosphate, used as a flame retardant in consumer products and as lubricant, hydraulic fluid, and other industrial uses; and
2,4,6-Tris(tert-butyl) phenol, an antioxidant that can be used as a fuel, oil, gasoline or lubricant additive.
Section 6(h) requires EPA to propose rules within three years to reduce risks and exposures to PBT chemicals to the extent practicable. Prior to proposing the rule, section 6(h)(1)(B) requires EPA to conduct an exposure and use assessment. TSCA does not prescribe a timetable or procedure for such an assessment, nor has EPA announced one.
On December 19, 2016, EPA published in the Federal Register a list of the first ten Work Plan chemicals that would undergo a risk evaluation under the updated statute.[12] The chemicals selected by EPA are:
1,4-Dioxane;
1-Bromopropane;
Asbestos;
Carbon tetrachloride;
Cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster (HBCD);
Methylene chloride;
N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP);
Pigment Violet 29 (Anthra[2,1,9-def:6,5,10-d'e'f']diisoquinoline-1,3,8,10(2H,9H)-tetrone);
Trichloroethylene (TCE); and
Tetrachloroethylene (also known as perchloroethylene).
This publication triggered a statutory deadline to complete risk evaluations for the chemicals by December 19, 2019 and for a scoping document for each chemical to be published by June 19, 2017.[13] EPA has established dockets and announced agency contacts for each of the ten chemicals.[14] Each of the dockets contain a document containing EPA’s preliminary evaluation about the domestic manufacturing, processing, distribution, use, and disposal of the chemical. EPA also held a public meeting on scoping efforts for these first ten risk evaluations on February 14, 2017.[15] EPA will accept written public comments on the scope of these risk evaluations until March 15, 2017.
Significant New Use Rules
EPA has continued to issue significant new use rules (SNURs) under TSCA since the passage of the LCSA in 2016, and has proposed updates to the SNUR framework. On July 28, 2016, EPA proposed changes to the existing regulations governing significant new uses of chemical substances to align these regulations under TSCA with revisions to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s hazard communication standard, and with changes to the OSHA respiratory protection standard and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health respirator certification requirements.[16] EPA has also continued to move forward with a series of proposed and final SNURs, which include the following:
August 24, 2016 – EPA issued a proposed SNUR for two intermediate chemical substances, hydrochlorofluoropropane and hydrochlorofluoropropene, that were the subject of PMNs.[17]
October 27, 2016 – EPA issued proposed SNURs for three chemical substances – two isocyanates and one for functionalized carbon nanotubes.[18] On January 3, 2017, EPA reopened the comment period on the proposed SNUR for 60 days, and is accepting additional comments until March 6, 2017.[19]
November 17, 2016 – EPA issued direct final SNURs for 57 chemical substances.[20]
November 28, 2016 – EPA issued a proposed SNUR for two alkylpyrrolidones: n-ethylpyrrolidone (NEP) and n-isopropylpyrrolidone (NiPP).[21]
As EPA reviews and approves new chemicals under the PMN process, it will likely continue to rely on SNURs as a powerful tool to restrict the use of chemicals to those uses specified by the PMN submitter.
PMN Review Since Enactment of the LCSA
Amended TSCA section 5 largely retains the structure of the original section. For instance, the revised provision retains the requirement that manufacturers submit a PMN prior to manufacturing a chemical that is not on the TSCA Inventory. However, new section 5(a)(3)(C) now requires EPA to make an affirmative finding that a PMN substance “is not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment” before the manufacture may commence. Following enactment of the LCSA, EPA announced that any pending PMNs would be considered under the new section 5 and that EPA’s 90-day clock to review PMNs would be reset to the date of enactment.[22]
EPA’s website shows that, since enactment of the LCSA, the Agency has made final determinations for 39 PMNs that the subject chemicals did not present an unreasonable risk.[23] Other PMN submissions are pending.[24] Industry has raised concerns that, under amended TSCA, EPA review of PMNs is falling behind submissions. EPA held a public meeting on December 14, 2016 to address those concerns and to receive public comments.[25]
Negotiated Rulemaking for Inorganic Byproducts
On December 15, 2016, EPA issued a notice of intent to establish a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee to negotiate a proposed rule that would limit chemical data reporting requirements under section 8(a) for manufacturers of inorganic byproduct chemical substances when the byproducts are ultimately recycled, reused, or reprocessed.[26] EPA accepted public comments on the notice until January 17, 2017, and is now proceeding to convene the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee, which will be comprised of approximately 10-25 stakeholders representing significantly affected interests. EPA intends to hold the Committee’s first meeting in March 2017, and expects the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee to conclude its work by September 2017. Section 8(a)(6) requires EPA to publish a proposed rule that limits the reporting requirements for inorganic byproducts that are recycled, reused, or reprocessed that is based on the outcome of the negotiated rulemaking, by June 22, 2019, and issue a final rule by December 23, 2019.
Risk Management Rulemaking for TCE, NMP, and Methylene Chloride
Since enactment of the LCSA, EPA has published proposed section 6 rules seeking to restrict and prohibit certain uses of TCE, NMP, and methylene chloride based on the Agency’s prior risk assessments for these chemicals. A proposed rule to prohibit the manufacture, processing, distribution, and use of TCE for aerosol degreasing and in spot cleaning in dry cleaning facilities was published on December 16, 2016,[27] and a companion proposed rule to prohibit the manufacture, import, processing, distribution, and use of TCE in vapor degreasing was published on January 19, 2017.[28] Both proposed rules would require manufacturers, processors, and distributors, except for retailers, of TCE to provide downstream notification of these prohibitions throughout the supply chain, and keep records. EPA recently extended the deadlines for commenting on these proposed rules by 30 days. It is accepting comments on the TCE aerosol degreasing and spot cleaning proposed rule until March 16, 2017, and the TCE vapor degreasing proposed rule until April 19, 2017.[29]
On January 17, 2017, EPA issued a proposed section 6 rule seeking to regulate certain uses of NMP and methylene chloride in paint and coatings removers based on a proposed determination that such uses pose an unreasonable risk.[30] The proposal would prohibit the manufacture, import, processing, and distribution of methylene chloride and NMP for all consumer uses and most types of commercial paint and coating removal (e.g., paint stripping). It would also require manufacturers, importers, processors, and distributors, except for retailers, of methylene chloride and NMP to provide downstream notification of these prohibitions throughout the supply chain. With respect to NMP, EPA is proposing an alternative option that would impose worker health and safety requirements on commercial users of NMP, and institute a 35 percent by weight limit on NMP in products. EPA is accepting comments on the proposed methylene chloride and NMP restrictions until April 19, 2017.
TSCA Inventory Reset
On January 13, 2017, EPA published a proposed rule to establish a process to designate substances on the TSCA Inventory as “active” or “inactive” (known as the TSCA Inventory Reset).[31] There are currently approximately 85,000 chemicals on the TSCA Inventory, many of which are no longer in use. EPA is required by section 8(b)(4) to determine which chemicals substances on the Inventory are still in commerce today. To achieve this end, EPA is proposing to require manufacturers (including importers) to notify EPA regarding the manufacture or import of chemical substances for non-exempt commercial purposes during the 10 years prior to enactment of the LCSA (from June 21, 2006 to June 21, 2016) within 180 days of the final rule. EPA is proposing to allow, but not require, processors to notify EPA regarding chemical substances that were processed for non-exempt commercial purposes during this 10-year period as well. Processors would have 360 days to report, meaning that they may decide whether or not to report after reviewing an interim list of active substances. The proposed rule would require information regarding “the chemical identity, type of commercial activity (i.e., whether it is domestic manufacture and/or import), date range of manufacture for nonexempt commercial purpose during the 10-year reporting period ending on June 21, 2016, and whether they seek to maintain an existing claim for protection against disclosure of a confidential chemical identity.”[32] The proposed rule includes exemptions from the notification requirements, including a specific exemption for importers of articles containing chemical substances.
After the initial reporting period, EPA would designate all chemicals on the TSCA Inventory as either active or inactive based on the notifications it receives from manufacturers and processors. Once the TSCA Inventory has been “reset,” no one would be permitted to manufacture or process an inactive chemical substance without first submitting a notification to EPA within 30 days of manufacturing or processing the substance. Upon notice, EPA would change the designation of the chemical substance from inactive to active, and manufacturing and processing could commence. Comments on the proposed TSCA Inventory notification proposed rule are due by March 14, 2017.
Prioritization
On January 17, 2017, EPA published a proposed rule under section 6 to establish “a risk-based screening process and criteria that EPA will use to identify chemical substances as either high-priority substances for risk evaluation, or low-priority Substances for which risk evaluations are not warranted at the time.”[33] EPA is accepting comments on the proposed process until March 20, 2017.
The proposed rule outlines a prioritization process with four phases: (1) pre-prioritization/screening, (2) initiation, (3) proposed designation, and (4) final designation. EPA is proposing to identify[34] and screen candidates chemicals against the criteria in the statute during the pre-prioritization phase. Those criteria include considerations regarding “the hazard and exposure potential of the chemical substance (e.g., persistence and bioaccumulation, potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations, and storage near significant sources of drinking water), the conditions of use or significant changes in the conditions of use of the chemical substance, and the volume or significant changes in the volume of the chemical substance manufactured or processed.”[35] After the initial screening, EPA would select substances from the pool of candidates, and initiate the prioritization process. EPA must complete the prioritization process for a chemical substance within nine months to one year following initiation of the prioritization process, with two 90-day public comment periods built into the process (after the initiation and after the proposed designation).[36] A high-priority substance designation at the conclusion of the process would immediately lead to a risk evaluation for the substance. A low-priority substance designation would not lead to any further action.
Risk Evaluation
On January 19, 2017, EPA published a proposed rule for establishing a procedure for risk evaluations under section 6.[37] EPA is accepting written comments on the proposed rule until March 20, 2017. Under EPA’s proposal, the first step of a risk evaluation would be a scoping analysis regarding conditions of use. This would involve publication of a draft analysis, with public comment. EPA announced in the proposed rule preamble that “a risk evaluation must encompass all known, intended, and reasonably foreseen activities associated with the subject chemical substance.” This interpretation is at odds with industry’s position that EPA should use its discretion to only consider uses that would present the highest risks. EPA also announced that any objections to the draft scope document would be waived if not raised during the scoping portion of the analysis. The subsequent steps of a risk evaluation, under EPA’s proposal, would be a hazard assessment, exposure assessment, risk characterization and a risk determination.
What’s in Store for TSCA Under the Trump Administration
President Trump’s nominee to serve as EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, was confirmed by the Senate on February 17, 2017. With the change of administrations, Jim Jones, who had served as Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP), has stepped down. The new Acting Assistant Administrator is Wendy Cleland-Hamnett, who had previously reported to Jones.[38] A new Assistant Administrator of OCSPP is expected to be nominated by President Trump in the coming months.
The new Administration’s policies could have an impact on TSCA reform implementation and the TSCA program in general. The Trump Administration’s Regulatory Freeze Pending Review Memorandum issued on January 20, 2017[39]may not have a direct effect on TSCA reform implementation since there is a specific carve-out for regulations subject to statutory deadlines (of which TSCA has many under the LCSA). However, resource and budgetary constraints under the new Administration could have an impact on EPA’s ability to effectuate the significant changes to TSCA called for by the LCSA. For example, the Trump Administration’s blanket hiring freeze[40] on federal civilian employees across the executive branch could limit EPA’s ability to allocate sufficient staff resources to meet its obligations under revised TSCA. Furthermore, the Trump Administration has signaled that it may cut EPA’s budget, which would hinder the Agency’s ability to implement TSCA reform and efficiently and effectively operate the TSCA program.
On the other hand, new Administrator Scott Pruitt could ensure continuation of EPA’s implementation of the amended TSCA. During his confirmation process, he declared that “I am committed to implementing the Lautenberg Act as required by law including meeting the statutory deadlines enumerated in the law including the required rulemakings, risk evaluations, and future chemical prioritizations.”[41]
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/tsca-reform-implementation-update
-
Nonstick Chemicals: A Hydra-Headed Family of Toxic Compounds
Feb 22, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By David Andrews
Banning or restricting toxic chemicals one at a time is like fighting the mythical hydra: For each head cut off, multiple replacements appear that may be just as hazardous. There's no better example than PFCs, the nonstick chemicals used in DuPont's Teflon and many other consumer products.
The most notorious member of this chemical family is PFOA, a powerful carcinogen that polluted the drinking water of communities near a DuPont facility in Parkersburg, W.Va. Last week, DuPont and its spinoff company agreed to pay $671 million to settle claims from residents made sick by the contaminated water. Although PFOA has been phased out, thousands of similar chemicals are still on the market, and they have not been tested for safety.
In a new paper released today, an international group of scientists called for global action to study and regulate the entire class of PFCs, scientifically known as per- and polyfluorinated substances, or PFAS. The scientists describe the proliferation of PFCs, which are extraordinarily persistent in the environment, “as an intractable, potentially never-ending chemicals management issue that challenges the conventional chemical assessment and management paradigm adopted by society since the 1970s.”
Decades of research have linked PFOA – and its cousin, PFOS, formerly used to make Scotchgard, but phased out by 3M – to an array of health hazards including cancer, developmental toxicity and reduced effectiveness of vaccines. Releases of PFOA from manufacturing, disposal, firefighting foam and product breakdown over the past decades has contaminated the drinking water of at least 7 million Americans.
But as the evidence of harm caused by PFOA has mounted, its use around the globe has largely been replaced by a flood of other compounds with similar chemical structures. The authors of the new paper say there are now more than 3,000 unique PFC chemicals found in products, coatings and the environment worldwide.
For nearly all of these PFCs, scientists do not even know which are intentionally added to products such as carpets or microwave popcorn bags, and which are intermediates, byproducts or breakdown products. There's very little information on the production, use and toxicity of these chemicals in isolation or as mixtures.
EWG recently worked with scientists from academia, the government and other nonprofit research organizations on a study showing that these chemicals are still commonly used in food wrappers of fast food chains across the nation. Our findings suggest that even chains that stopped using wrappers coated with PFOS more than a decade ago don't realize the wrappers they now use are coated with next-generation PFCs. It's just one example of why these compounds, as well as many other families of chemicals, should be regulated as a class, rather than in isolation.
http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2017/02/nonstick-chemicals-hydra-headed-family-toxic-compounds
-
Euratex Calls for Improvements to REACH Restriction Process
Feb 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
The REACH restriction process should be improved to help companies avoid regrettable substitutions, according to textiles and apparel trade association, Euratex.
The organisation is one of several industry groups, NGOs and public sector bodies, to submit comments to the European Commission's consultation on the second review of REACH. The review's findings are due to be completed later this year.
It says REACH can drive the replacement of hazardous chemicals, through restrictions, provided enough time is available to develop and apply scientifically validated and technically feasible alternatives.
It urges that restrictions on certain chemicals are carefully assessed to avoid regrettable substitution. These are cases where a dangerous chemical falling under a ban is replaced with a structurally similar substance with similar properties not covered by the ban. These include, it says, substances that are not as functionally effective.
"Substitution, and especially potential regrettable substitution, pose a great risk to SMEs as many of them do not have the capacity to invest in a long-lasting search for safer alternatives and ensure that these alternatives are technically feasible," Euratex says.
It uses the Commission's proposed ban on PFOA as an example of a welcomed transition period. The restriction, which also covers PFOA's salts and related substances, will come into force three years after the Regulation is published. However, the Commission has proposed a six-year transition period for its application to textiles for the protection of workers and membranes intended for use in medical textiles.
"This decision has averted the serious risk of hindering the production of high performance technical textiles crucial for workers’ protection and the capacity of such textiles to meet high EU safety standards," the association says.Enforcement
Better surveillance of imported products is also needed in order to safeguard the health of EU citizens, says Euratex. This would help to "set a level playing field" between EU and non-EU manufacturing.
The European industry is at a "competitive disadvantage," because REACH authorisation requirements do not apply to non-EU producers, allowing products manufactured using substances subject to authorisation to be imported to the EU, it adds.
The lack of market surveillance, it says, fails to "prevent the inflow of unsafe goods". The shift of production and use of restricted chemicals towards non-EU countries was "an unintended consequence of legislation".
Communication
Another challenge, particularly for SMEs, is providing complete and correct safety data sheets (SDS), it says, with some speciality chemicals unregistered by SMEs due to high costs. For example, the expense of registering dye precursors has led to most of the dyestuff industry, which used to exist in Germany and Switzerland, being relocated to Asia.
Euratex also says that all related means for testing should be made available to companies before entry into force of legislation or the publication of guidelines.
For example, the Echa guidelines for lead and its compounds in articles, which can be mouthed by children, do not give a standardised test method for the release rate of lead to meet the required limit. As a result, companies do not know how to test the migration limits to comply with the restriction, Euratex says. It recommends consulting industry on "appropriate and validated testing methods".
It also calls for the relationship between REACH and occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation to be further clarified in order to avoid legal uncertainty for companies and incoherence in chemical legislation.
The European Commission has said provisions could be added to REACH and other legislation – such as the carcinogens and mutagens Directive – to ensure greater consistency when assessing the risks of workplace exposure to chemicals.
https://chemicalwatch.com/53700/euratex-calls-for-improvements-to-reach-restriction-process
-
Morrisey Hopes Trump Seeks Broad Rollback of EPA Power Plant GHG Rules
Feb 22, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Abby Smith
West Virginia Attorney General (AG) Patrick Morrisey (R), one of the most ardent critics of EPA's power plant greenhouse gas rules, hopes that an executive order President Donald Trump is slated to sign will seek a broad rollback of the agency's rules for both new and existing sources, suggesting some uncertainty about the scope of the order.
In an exclusive interview with Inside EPA Feb. 21, Morrisey expressed hopes that the order is broad in scope to end litigation over both the existing source rule, also known as the Clean Power Plan (CPP), as well as the new source rule.
“It's so critical that we turn the Clean Power Plan litigation around and that we reverse course. We're very hopeful that this administration will deem the Clean Power Plan unenforceable and that we're in a position to move in a much different direction,” Morrisey told Inside EPA, adding that he and other states opposing the rule want to “remove the threat of the Clean Power Plan from the books.”
Morrisey also urged a rollback of the power plant new source performance standards (NSPS) rule, the legal prerequisite to the CPP. He told Inside EPA that he wants the Trump administration to signal that it does not support the CPP or the NSPS.
Trump is expected to sign as soon as this week several executive orders aimed at scaling back EPA's climate and environmental regulations. One order could direct EPA to reexamine the CPP, as well as order the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management to lift a moratorium on coal leasing on federal lands.
A second order is expected to direct EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to reexamine another significant Obama EPA rule, the Clean Water Act jurisdiction rule.
But it is unclear what other Obama-era regulations an executive order could address. The Trump administration has not been as vocal about its plans for the NSPS and has not yet indicated it would change course in the pending litigation over that rule, which is slated to go to oral argument in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in April.
Though it is widely expected that the forthcoming Trump executive order will address the CPP, the scope of the directive is unclear -- whether it will simply direct EPA to broadly reexamine the regulation or whether it will be more specific about next steps.
Observers say administration officials could still be debating how they may want to proceed in rolling back the rules. For example, they could be considering whether to bar the use of section 111 -- the section of the Clean Air Act EPA used to write the rules -- as a means of addressing GHGs, or they could be considering whether to try to narrow the CPP's scope to actions inside the fenceline of coal-fired power plants rather than including electricity system-wide options like generation shifting to gas and renewables as the Obama EPA did.
But Bloomberg Government notes that if the administration decides not to regulate GHGs, it could create tort liability for power plant operators given Supreme Court precedent in American Electric Power (AEP) v. Connecticut that held there is a private right of action over GHG emissions absent EPA regulation.
“If EPA decides it 'can’t' regulate under Sec. 111, then that could undercut the court’s rationale in the AEP case. And so, nervous coal plant owners may wonder, could they then face private lawsuits because EPA action is foreclosed?” the article says.
Moreover, Scott Pruitt, newly sworn in as EPA's administrator, may want some time to consider his options before the president signs any order.
'An Important Role'
Morrisey, who has led the coalition of states opposing the CPP and the related GHG rule for new power plants, is eying a broad rollback of these rules -- both of which are the subject of pending lawsuits -- in favor of a regulatory regime that better reflects that coal will continue to play “an important role” in the country's energy future.
He hopes the Trump EPA will adopt the principles and position of CPP critics that the power plant rule is unlawful and that the agency lacks legal authority “to engage in generation-shifting or to double regulate coal-fired power plants or to commandeer the states to effectuate the agency's top policy goals.”
“President Trump has indicated that he understands the challenges of the massive regulatory state, and we're very hopeful that turning these regulations around is going to begin to occur in the very near future,” he added.
In terms of the future of pending litigation over the CPP, Morrisey said he and other opponents of the rule are “waiting for the Trump administration to take the lead through its executive order and to begin signaling its position on these issues, and then the states and others will be in a position to follow up.”
The D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments in the case, West Virginia, et al. v. EPA, et al., Sept. 27 but has yet to issue a ruling, and observers on both sides of the litigation have said a ruling could impact how the Trump administration proceeds with any rulemaking to roll back the CPP.
Morrisey said that the position of West Virginia and other opponents on the CPP “remains the same, and we're going to pursue every avenue to ensure that the CPP never sees the light of day, whether that's action in the courts, through the administrative avenues or through the legislative process.” He added that his coalition's position has a strong legal basis and is rooted in “compelling” policy arguments that they are “hopeful” the Trump EPA will adopt.
He also said West Virginia and the state coalition are “ready to fight” attempts from environmentalists, states and other groups that support the rules to slow or oppose Trump administration efforts to roll them back. Morrisey suggested that such groups “should refocus their efforts on the agency's core mission and not stray so far afield from the EPA's core statutory authority,” adding that “we're going to ensure that West Virginia and the coalition [of states] will continue to have a voice on these issues.”
Morrisey also urged EPA to include the NSPS in the “package of issues that gets a close look and real scrutiny under the Trump administration's review.” And on pending litigation over that rule, he said, “We believe that that regulation should fall if it proceeds in the courts. But we're always open-minded as to how we can resolve issues without resorting to further litigation.”
Morrisey noted his current focus is the rollback of the power plant and other Obama EPA rules, and he did not comment on other potential Trump administration moves that could inhibit the ability of the agency to regulate GHGs. For example, some Trump advisers have suggested the administration try to repeal EPA's 2009 GHG endangerment finding, which underpins the agency's power plant and other climate rules.
Pruitt, during his confirmation process, did not say he intends to target the GHG risk finding, but his vague responses to written questions left the door open that the Trump EPA could review the finding.
And in a Feb. 18 interview with the Wall Street Journal, his first since being nominated and confirmed as EPA administrator, Pruitt said he would not prejudge the question of whether EPA will regulate GHGs. “There will be a rulemaking process to withdraw” the CPP, “and that will kick off a process. And part of that process is a very careful review of a fundamental question: Does EPA even possess the tools, under the Clean Air Act, to address this?”
Pruitt added: “It's a fair question to ask if we do, or whether there in fact needs to be a congressional response to the climate issue.”
Morrisey did not say whether he would support a review of the GHG risk finding, suggesting instead that he and others are waiting to see what approach the Trump EPA will take.
“We're going to evaluate how the EPA will want to proceed on that issue and then we can make a determination thereafter as to how we move forward in court,” Morrisey said about the finding. He added that the current focus of the state coalition is “pending litigation” over the CPP and NSPS, and “it would be premature to talk about other issues that may arise in the future.”
'Taming the Bureaucracy'
Broadly, Morrisey is optimistic that the Trump administration and Pruitt will lead EPA in his preferred direction and correct what he identified as overreach from the Obama agency. He noted that one of the challenges Pruitt will face as administrator is “taming the bureaucracy of EPA.”
“My sincere hope is that the EPA is going to change its culture through the positive influence of Scott Pruitt,” Morrisey said.
In addition, the West Virginia AG was encouraged that Pruitt, as administrator, would help right the balance of authority of the states and of the agency in environmental regulation.
Pruitt “understands the importance that states play in the enforcement regime of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and I think he's going to be more sensitive to the needs of the states,” Morrisey said. “Every state is different, and Scott Pruitt is going to at a minimum listen to all those concerns and then make a decision that's in accordance with the law.”
Morrisey also suggested that Pruitt intends to do “a lot of outreach” to states, both those like West Virginia that support the “new direction of the agency” and those that disagree with the Trump administration's goals.
“We believe that Scott Pruitt is going to refocus the EPA on its core mission, and that's going to include refocusing on enforcement and hewing closely to the statute,” Morrisey said. “If he does that, and he sticks to that approach, he's going to be very successful” and “we're going to see a lot of improvement.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/morrisey-hopes-trump-seeks-broad-rollback-epa-power-plant-ghg-rules
-
Oil Could Flow Through Pipeline in 2 Weeks
Feb 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Dakota Access pipeline could see its first drops of oil in less than two weeks, company lawyers told a federal court yesterday.
In a weekly status report ordered by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, lawyers said workers have completed a "pilot hole" for construction of the project beneath Lake Oahe and are preparing to place pipe in it.
"As of now, Dakota Access estimates and targets that the pipeline will be complete and ready to flow oil anywhere between the week of March 6, 2017 and April 1, 2017," the filing said.
The timeline complicates a legal effort from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. The tribe, whose reservation sits just south of the Lake Oahe crossing, last week filed a motion seeking a final decision on the key issues in the case (Energywire, Feb. 14).
Tribal lawyers had hoped to get the fundamental legal questions handled before the pipeline began accepting oil. Dakota Access lawyers previously estimated that it would take 60 days after an easement was granted for oil to start flowing. Yesterday's status report indicates oil could flow in half that time.
District Judge James Boasberg noted last week that he could order the company to stop the flow of oil if necessary.
The accelerated construction timetable comes as tensions are rising again in North Dakota, where law enforcement officials are working to remove demonstrators from a large protest camp that is beginning to flood.
Pushback on religious claims
Meanwhile, Dakota Access and the Army Corps of Engineers were playing defense in legal briefs yesterday, fending off another attempt to halt construction.
The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe is pushing for a preliminary injunction to stop the project on religious grounds. It says the presence of the pipeline beneath Lake Oahe would desecrate the water, which is used for traditional Lakota ceremonies (Greenwire, Feb. 9).
The tribe's earlier request for a restraining order on similar grounds failed, but the district court is set to hear arguments for and against an injunction next week.
In a brief last night, Dakota Access lawyers argued that the court should not even consider the Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim because the tribe has never mentioned it before.
"Yet in an administrative process that has spanned more than two years, and litigation that has spanned some six months (and two different complaints by the Tribe), this motion is literally the Tribe's first mention of RFRA or the supposed burden underlying its RFRA claim," company lawyers told the court.
They then delved into the merits of the claim, arguing that the tribe was unlikely to succeed because the government's approval of the Lake Oahe crossing did not amount to a "substantial burden" under the legal test used to weigh RFRA arguments.
Government lawyers made similar arguments, telling the court the tribe's position was far-fetched.
"Simply put, the Corps is not prohibiting the Tribe from accessing or using the waters of Lake Oahe," they wrote in a brief. "Nor has the Corps diminished the Tribe's right to use Lake Oahe water by issuing an easement. At worst, the Corps has arguably allowed a minimal risk that the water's purity may be temporarily diminished at some future time by a third party grantee's use of the easement."
Cheyenne River has until Friday to respond to the briefs, and a hearing on the preliminary injunction request is set for Tuesday.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/02/22/stories/1060050388
-
The U.S. is Transitioning into a Natural Gas Exporter
Feb 22, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Jordan Blum
The United States is on track to become a net exporter of gas next year, driven largely by the growth of liquefied natural gas exports, according to the U.S. Energy Department.
The U.S. started exporting LNG last year, courtesy of Houston-based Cheniere Energy, and the country is increasingly piping more natural gas to Mexico while, simultaneously, importing less gas via pipeline from Canada. The U.S. was still an overall net importer last year.
The nation is projected to become a net exporter of total energy products shortly after 2020, the Energy Department said, which was a virtually unheard of proposition just a decade ago.
Cheniere’s first LNG export facility at Louisiana’s Sabine Pass near the Texas border came online a year ago. Houston-based Freeport LNG Development’s export terminal is slated to start shipping LNG in 2018. Three other LNG export projects will be completed or under construction by 2021, including Cheniere’s other facility near Corpus Christi.
Because of the U.S. projects and a glut of new LNG exports from Australia, the world is projected to remain oversupplied with LNG beyond 2020, according to a new Moody’s Investors Service report. Likewise, the two largest LNG customers, Japan and South Korea, are expected to either have their demand decrease or remain flat.
China, India and other emerging markets will require more LNG in the future, but global demand won’t catch up with production until after 2020, Moody’s projects. After all, total new LNG global supplies will surge 44 percent from 2015 to 2020.
However, the U.S. will keep exporting more natural gas by pipeline to Mexico to feed power plants for electricity generation. U.S. natural gas exports to Mexico have doubled since 2009 and will continue growing through 2020. Several pipeline projects are currently under construction.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/02/22/the-u-s-is-transitioning-as-a-natural-gas-exporter/
-
California NatGas Utilities Continue Pouring Billions into Pipeline Upgrades
Feb 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
California's extensive utility-operated natural gas transmission/distribution pipeline network will continue to receive billion of dollars in enhancements this year, according to the state's two main operators -- Sempra Energy's Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas) and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E).
SoCalGas and PG&E have had pipeline safety enhancement programs on a multi-billion-dollar scale since the rupture and explosion of the PG&E transmission pipeline in San Bruno, CA, more than six years ago. State regulators and stepped-up federal pipeline requirements are both in play in the ongoing annual programs.
With the added safety focus on its closed Aliso Canyon underground gas storage facility near Los Angeles, SoCalGas plans to spend about $1.2 billion for improvements to its distribution, transmission and storage systems along with various pipeline safety programs. SoCalGas operates 101,000 miles of gas pipelines.
California regulators last year approved nearly $950 million in increased rates to support PG&E gas storage and transmission pipeline operations. The approval, however, did not include a pending $850 million disallowance associated with the combination utility's identified shortcomings in handling the San Bruno pipeline failure.
SoCalGas plans to upgrade or replace up to 60 pipeline valves this year to further modernize its pipeline system using remote control valves (RCV) and/or automatic shutoff valves (ASV).
The new valves would allow gas control operators at the Los Angeles-based Sempra Energy gas-only utility to "respond more quickly if gas flow needs to be shut off in an emergency," a spokesperson said. "The effort is part of the pipeline safety enhancement plan. SoCalGas has replaced or retrofitted more than 100 valve locations since the stepped up pipeline safety effort was launched five years ago.”
SoCalGas deploys five pipeline safety enhancement teams for valve upgrade and retrofit work on an ongoing basis, and is continuing this program through 2022. The teams completed 56 valve upgrade projects last year, the spokesperson said.
The RCVs and ASVs represent the latest technology in the industry, and getting them deployed throughout the utility systems in California has been a big push since the San Bruno incident.
"SoCalGas uses both of these technologies throughout its pipeline system at strategic locations," the spokesperson said. "As the company continues to upgrade and retrofit valves with RCV and ASV technology, operators will have more flexibility and can respond more quickly if a valve suddenly needs to be closed."
Last year in granting PG&E rate coverage for its pipeline system safety upgrades, California Public Utilities Commission’s lead member for the case, Carla Peterman, called the utility's gas operations "a massive aging system" whose total transmission pipelines laid end-to-end would stretch from San Francisco to New York City and back, with pipe left over.
"It carries high volumes of gas near population centers, and the tragic San Bruno explosion is a constant reminder of the need for safe operation of the system," Peterman said at the time.
The state regulator acknowledged that dozens of stakeholders and consumer advocates involved in PG&E's rate case argued that its request was too high. "But there was also a broad consensus that the work needs to be completed to improve the overall safety of the PG&E system," Peterman said.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109496-california-natgas-utilities-continue-pouring-billions-into-pipeline-upgrades
-
Report: Rail Industry Optimistic About Trump's Pro-Business Stance
Feb 22, 2017 | Progressive Railroading
Rail-industry association representatives say they're optimistic about federal transportation policy under President Donald Trump's administration, according to a report in the February issue of Progressive Railroading.
In interviews last month, rail-industry advocates said that although details on Trump's transportation policies remain few and far between, they're encouraged by his promise to produce a pro-business regulatory environment as well as a massive — if not rail-specific — plan to beef up the nation's ailing transportation infrastructure. Both are concepts that the rail advocates say they can get behind.
For example, the Association of American Railroads (AAR) is hopeful that Trump and the new Congress will rescind proposed rulemakings on "reciprocal" or "competitive switching," which the association believes would undermine the freight-rail industry if approved. The rulemakings were proposed by the Surface Transportation Board (STB) under the leadership of Chairman Daniel Elliott III, a Democrat appointed by President Barack Obama.
Earlier this month, Trump tapped STB board member and Republican Ann Begeman to chair the board. AAR and other rail groups that view the proposed rules as "re-regulation" of the industry are hopeful that Trump's pro-business agenda will mean the end of the competitive switching proposal.
On the regulatory reform front, the new administration appears to concur with the freight-rail industry's viewpoint. During his first week in office, Trump told chief executives gathered at the White House that his administration planned to cut regulations "massively."
More examples of the rail industry's transportation policy expectations and hopes under the new administration and 115th Congress can be found in this month's cover story.
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/rail_industry_trends/news/Report-Rail-industry-optimistic-about-Trumps-pro-business-stance--50908
-
The Green Movement is Our Planet’s Last Best Hope
Feb 22, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Justin McCarthy
Earlier this month, former head of President Donald Trump’s EPA transition team Myron Ebell made the bold claim that the environmental movement is "the greatest threat to freedom and prosperity in the modern world.”
We’ll call that “alternative fact number one.”
The truth? Generously funded by the likes of Exxon-Mobil and other dark-money donors, Myron Ebell has a decades-long history of pushing climate denial, trumpeting dirty fossil fuels and flat out lying.
Of the 17 hottest years on record, 16have occurred in the 21st century and projections by dozens of government agencies, including NASA, say that annual median temperatures could rise by as much as 5.3 degrees by the end of the century if countries across the world don't take action.
Exxon knew in the 1980s and President Trump and Myron Ebell know today: climate change is real, it’s happening and there is no “Planet B.” Those are not alternative facts but sobering truths.
In the 30 years Gallup Poll has asked the question, Americans have almost always chosen the environment over economic growth as a priority by a 50 percent-to-41 percent margin.
President Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Republicans (and even some Democrats) have called for a need to carefully balance environmental regulation with the precepts of economic growth (“alternative fact number two”).
The economic benefits derived from tackling climate change strongly justify early action. A “Green New Deal” is the future of economic and job growth in this country and around the world, not dirty fossil fuels. In 2015, one out of every 78 new jobs created in the U.S. was in the solar industry. That is a staggering number. SolarCity, one of the largest installer of residential solar systems in the U.S., nearly doubled its own workforce alone last year, hiring over 4,000 workers in fields from system design and site surveys to engineering and traditional installation.
With the foresight to recognize that we live on a finite planet with finite resources, the 21st century economy can be one driven by green technologies. Revenue-neutral carbon taxes could kick start investment in such initiatives as geo-engineering and reforestation. But time is running out.
Donald Trump campaigned on one of the most reactionary and anti-environmental platforms in history and has already made clear of his intent to eliminate the Clean Power Plan, which uses the Clean Air Act to regulate power plants. Trump has also indicated his plans to push forward with hydraulic fracking across vast swaths of the country, and, perhaps most dishearteningly, to withdraw from the landmark Paris climate change deal to which 196 nations agreed in 2015.
“I expect President Trump to be very assiduous in keeping his promises,” Ebell said in December 2015, in reference to the Paris Agreement.
Although the Paris Agreement dictates that any member country wishing to withdraw must wait four years from the date of ratification, the speed and blatant, unconstitutional disregard of legal proceedings that characterized President Trump’s first week in office give us no reason not to take Ebell and President Trump at their word.
Unfortunately, the disaster does not stop there. Lying in wait is Trump’s pick for EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, whose track record on climate change would make even Myron Ebell blush with envy. As Oklahoma Attorney General, Pruitt had a habit of taking press releases from local oil and gas companies, stamping his letterhead across the top and passing them on to the EPA verbatim as the official position of Oklahoma.
The American public cannot and will not stand idly by and watch a Trump administration packed with fossil fuel lobbyists and billionaires like Rex Tillerson, Scott Pruitt and Rick Perry systematically demolish every environmental regulation since World War II in the span of fewer than four years.
In order to resist, we have to recognize how we got here in the first place. The election of Donald Trump was not a Republican victory; rather, it was a failure of our broken bipartisan system. Our bipartisan system is the very reason why so many people in this country feel so justifiably left behind – black and white, young and old, urban and rural alike.
Step two is to organize. Call your local, state and congressional representatives early and often.
Occupy Inauguration and the Women’s Marches that took place across the country and across the world were nearly unprecedented in scale, but we cannot risk losing that momentum. For many people, it may have been their first ever protest. In these challenging times, participation at the local and state level is more important than ever. We must work to turn this momentum into real action and build alternative structures of power.
Last but not least, if you think you could do a better job, run for office. Any official who still denies the very real dangers of climate change lacks the requisite intelligence to hold public office or is actively involved in a scheme to defraud the American public.
Justin McCarthy is Spokesperson and Communications Director for the DC Statehood Green Party.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/320543-the-green-movement-is-our-planets-last-best-hope
-
Climate Change Tied to Nation's Infrastructure Needs
Feb 22, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Rep. Raul M. Grijalva
In what’s become a troublingly common occurrence, the combination of extreme weather and crumbling infrastructure threatened the residents of another American community in California not long ago. Extensive rainfall in Northern California damaged the spillway of the Oroville Dam – the nation’s tallest – and threatened numerous communities below the dam with massive flooding.
As The Atlantic reported on Feb. 13, “drought, climate change, and aging infrastructure combined to create a looming catastrophe.” Nearly 200,000 residents were forced to flee their homes. Families scrambled to find shelter, gas stations were gridlocked, and stores ran low on supplies. Residents, given mere minutes to evacuate, worried whether their homes would be standing by week’s end.
It now appears this crisis was averted, but these kinds of weather extremes and their impacts on our aging infrastructure are becoming more and more common, and the causes are not mysterious. Scientists are documenting a rise in extreme weather events across the United States in response to a warming climate, and Congress has failed to make needed investments in our infrastructure for decades.
What we saw in Oroville should push Congress to understand not just why our infrastructure – the humble roads, dams and bridges we keep hearing about – needs a massive upgrade, but why the risks to that infrastructure are getting worse. Building taller dams or replacing washed-out roads without acknowledging why they keep failing is a recipe for very expensive disasters.
In 1980, when the federal government began collecting data on the number of billion-dollar climate disasters every year, there were only three with losses exceeding $1 billion. In 2016, there were 15 climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion across the United States.
Climate change does not just mean more days with record high temperatures. It means all kinds of extreme weather events will become more frequent and more severe as the planet continues to warm. Floods will become more devastating. Wildfires will burn hotter. Droughts will last longer and affect new areas.
Those fleeing the possible flooding in California were by no means the first climate refugees. Over the past 10 years, the Isle de Jean Charles community in Louisiana has lost two-thirds of its residents to dislocation because of rising sea levels. On Washington's Olympic Peninsula, the Quinault Indian Nation must rely on a 2,000-foot-long sea wall for protection until it can complete its move uphill. In Alaska, climate change flooding and shoreline erosion already affect more than 180 villages, 31 of which are in “imminent” danger of becoming uninhabitable.
If we continue with business as usual, roughly 13 million Americans could become climate refugees by the end of the century. Avoiding this future for our kids and grandkids will require the United States to take decisive action now. Unfortunately, standing in the way is a fact-averse President Trump who calls climate change a Chinese hoax and a Republican Party addicted to campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry.
Just this month, Republicans on the House Natural Resources Committee voted against even acknowledging that human activity is a major contributor to climate change. As long as Republicans in Washington decide they would rather do the bidding of the same old corporate interests and big oil lobbyists than work with Democrats to reduce carbon pollution, climate change will continue to get worse.
More than 70 percent of Americans acknowledge that global warming is happening and more than 90 percent of published climate scientists believe human activity is the primary cause. Scientists tell us that carbon pollution is causing the climate to change 170 times faster than natural forces. Yet President Trump and Republicans in Congress continue to ignore the problem and push an extreme agenda that tips the scales on behalf of the fossil fuel industry and special interests.
It’s long past time to get past phony debates about the existence of climate change and get to work on serious climate solutions. This will mean establishing pollution limits and moving away from dirty energy sources that pollute our climate, air, and water.
And if the Trump administration is serious about a bipartisan infrastructure package, they and Congressional leaders must be willing to invest real money and admit that our changing climate is one of the most serious challenges we face. The longer we wait, the more we can get used to seeing the sights we witnessed in California.
Grijalva is ranking member of House Natural Resources Committee and represents Arizona's 3rd District.
http://www.thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/320630-climate-change-tied-to-nations-infrastructure-needs
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested