Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 3/22/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) TerraCycle Pushes for More Beach Plastic Collection
Mar 22, 2017 | Plastics News
By Jim Johnson
Organizers of a beach plastics recovery campaign expect to greatly expand collection efforts in the coming months to locations around the world. -
(ACC Mentioned) Committed Industry Effort Seeking Single Partner for Flexible Film Recycling
Mar 22, 2017 | Plastics Recycling Update
By Jared Paben
A group that includes major consumer brands wants to connect with a sorting facility to help advance the recovery of a material that is often sent to disposal. -
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Groups Find Statutory Shortcomings in TSCA Ban Proposal
Mar 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The American Chemistry Council and other industry groups have concerns that the US EPA’s first proposal to ban a substance under the revised TSCA fails to meet the requirements of the new law. -
(ACC Mentioned) NGOs Advocate Wide Scope in TSCA Risk Assessments
Mar 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
NGOs have called on the US EPA to include all uses of a substance when determining the scope of risk evaluations under the recently reformed TSCA. -
Senate Bill 578 Would Amend APA to Include TSCA Scientific Standards
Mar 22, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham
On March 8, 2017, Senator James Lankford (R-OK) introduced S. 578, the “Better Evaluation of Science and Technology Act” or “BEST Act,” a bill that would amend title 5 of the United States Code, commonly referred to as the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), to “provide requirements for agency decision making based on science.” -
Report on Danish Conference Points to Non Toxic Future
Mar 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
A Danish environment ministry conference on chemical risks and how to handle them across consumer products, the environment and food has produced a raft of recommendations. -
Texas Joins Battle Over BLM Rule
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
A high-stakes legal fight over an Obama-era rule for methane emissions from oil and gas development on public lands may have a new player: Texas. -
Why Rust Belt States are Tackling Methane When Trump Won't
Mar 22, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Dan Grossman
Nobody raises an eyebrow when California takes steps to rein in air pollution – but what’s going on when conservative-leaning rust belt states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania are doing the same? -
Most Methane in Groundwater is Not a Result of Fracking — Study
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
A broad review of Texas water data has found that oil and gas drilling is not the source of most methane found in Texas aquifers. -
‘Plastics,’ Pennsylvania Governor Says, And Petchems, Too
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Pennsylvania has a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to snare between $2.7 billion and $3.7 billion in natural gas liquid (NGL) investment, sparking a “manufacturing renaissance” that includes more ethane cracking plants, petrochemical and plastics facilities, Gov. Tom Wolf said Tuesday. -
Pa. Governor Hunts for Texas Investors in Petrochemical Plants
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
Pennsylvania state government officials visited Texas yesterday in a bid to attract more petrochemical manufacturing investment to the Northeast. -
Texas-to-Mexico Trans-Pecos Pipeline Nearing In-Service
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Trans-Pecos Pipeline LLC on Wednesday asked FERC for permission to place into service the pipeline project’s Presidio Crossing. -
Cheniere Ready to Flip Switch on Sabine Pass Third Train
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
The third train of Cheniere Energy Inc.’s Sabine Pass liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in Louisiana is ready to enter service, Cheniere told FERC in a letter Monday, and the Commission on Tuesday approved commencement of operations. -
VA Conservation Agency Details More Conditions for Atlantic Coast Pipeline
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
A Virginia conservation agency is proposing a set of conditions for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) as the project looks to cross several easements under the agency’s watch. -
(ACC Mentioned) GOP Senators Hedge on Prospects for CRA Repeal of EPA RMP Rule
Mar 22, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Top Senate environment committee Republicans are hedging on whether a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to rescind EPA's chemical facility safety rule will reach the Senate floor, raising fresh doubts about the measure's prospects even as EPA is said to be concerned about its administrative reconsideration of the regulation. -
Senators Push Public-Private Partnerships for Infrastructure
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Kellie Lunney
Congressional funding alone will not be enough to upgrade aging infrastructure or tackle a massive maintenance backlog on the nation's federal lands, a top Senate Republican said yesterday. -
'Noah's Ark' Caucus Up to 30 Members
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Hess
With the addition of three congressmen from New York and one from Illinois, the Climate Solutions Caucus has grown to 30 members. -
States Cannot Regulate Environment Without EPA Support
Mar 21, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By James Rubin
Under the Trump administration’s recently proposed budget, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to play a supporting role to states and Native American tribes in their efforts to protect health and the environment. -
White House Slams Door on Carbon Tax
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
The Trump administration is not considering a carbon tax, an official said after a White House press briefing yesterday in which press secretary Sean Spicer declined to rule it out.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) TerraCycle Pushes for More Beach Plastic Collection
Mar 22, 2017 | Plastics News
By Jim Johnson
Organizers of a beach plastics recovery campaign expect to greatly expand collection efforts in the coming months to locations around the world.
Recycling company TerraCycle Inc. and Procter & Gamble Co. grabbed headlines earlier this year with a program that captured ocean-destined plastic for use in shampoo bottles being sold in France this year.
Now comes word from TerraCycle that this is only the beginning.
"This has become a long-term plan for TerraCycle and our partners, even though it's relatively new," said Brett Stevens, vice president of material sales and procurement at the recycling company.
The initial project collected about 15 tons of material in Europe, and Stevens said plans are to expand collection efforts to locations such as North America and Asia and significantly increase the amount of plastics captured from the environment.
"The collection goals we've set forth in total approach I would say probably 500 to 1,000 tons coming off beaches over the next 12 months. It is very much not a fad. I think that we're investing the staff and resources and building our programs with our partners, making this a long-lasting impact," he said.
TerraCycle will work with existing beach cleanup programs to divert collected plastics away from landfill disposal, Stevens said during the Plastics Recycling 2017 conference in New Orleans.
"What we have to do is layer our collection efforts today on top of everyone who is already doing beach cleanups. If you are any organization of any size that's doing beach cleanup, we want the plastic from your beach cleanup. We're already engaging them. We have a team that's reaching out in every market," Stevens said.
Ted Siegler, a partner with DSM Environmental Services Inc., looks at the ocean plastics issue from an economics perspective.
He said current estimates indicated that some 8 million tons of plastics enter the world's oceans every year. That's the equivalent of a garbage truck full of plastic dumping its load into the ocean every minute of every day throughout the year.
Siegler indicated that there's basically not enough money available in developing countries to deal with the waste management issues that lead to litter that ultimately ends up in the oceans.
So he's calling for the plastics industry to develop a funding mechanism on its own to help pay for proper management of the material.
"The problem is the collection infrastructure simply doesn't exist in most of those developing countries. And that's a real problem. Because if the collection infrastructure doesn't exist for solid waste, then we're not going to be able to solve the problem," he said.
He suggests a fee of 1 cent per pound of resin produced to help fund management of the issue.
"You would begin to stem the discharge of plastic to the environment," he said. "I think it's a lot less costly to do that than to assume someone else is going to solve the problem."
Siegler pointed to a program developed by the Ag Container Recycling Council to voluntarily fund recycling of crop protection, animal health and pest control product containers as an example of how a larger ocean plastics initiative could work.
"I'm suggesting that it's something we ought to be looking at on a broader scale to solve this problem," he said.
Stevens said there is no shortage of consumer packaged goods companies looking to use beach plastics.
"I don't see any issue at all on the demand side. We've gotten a lot of inquiries. Not just from CPG companies, but also from packaging companies for those CPG companies," he said. "Everybody loves the story. They'd love to be able to help and use this material in their finished products."
Make no mistake, however, that using beach plastics is much more expensive than virgin resin or even traditional recycled resin.
That's why a company has to leverage the story behind use of beach plastics to gain interest to help drive sales.
"In order for it to make sense economically, you as a brand need to be able to cover that expenditure somewhere else. So if you are getting incremental shelf space, it makes it easier to cover that. If you are just some generic company that's not going to leverage that it's beach plastic, it makes it hard to swallow when it's more expensive than virgin plastic," Stevens said.
TerraCycle, he said, is working to expand the program as quickly as possible.
"Our goal is to try to get this to critical mass as soon as we can and then keep it there. Some people will say there's only so much plastic out there. I say there's too much plastic out there," Stevens said.
"We will find those hotspots around the globe aside from developed areas like the U.S. and Western Europe. There will be areas that are collecting a hundred or two hundred or five hundred times as much plastic as we're seeing in developed markets. And it's just a matter of putting our finger on it and drawing that volume into our possession," he said.
The American Chemistry Council has been involved in a variety of efforts to bring attention to the issue over time, said Stewart Harris, director of marine and environmental stewardship at the trade group.
"In our view, plastics and other litter in the environment is unacceptable," he said.
While the use of plastics creates "significant benefits to society," he said, "the benefits are lost if the plastics end up in our natural environment.
"Waste management," Harris said, "is the key to preventing marine debris."
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170322/NEWS/170329956/terracycle-pushes-for-more-beach-plastic-collection
-
(ACC Mentioned) Committed Industry Effort Seeking Single Partner for Flexible Film Recycling
Mar 22, 2017 | Plastics Recycling Update
By Jared Paben
A group that includes major consumer brands wants to connect with a sorting facility to help advance the recovery of a material that is often sent to disposal.
The Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF) project is seeking to partner with a U.S. materials recovery facility (MRF) and the community it serves to pilot the curbside recycling of flexible packaging. The project is offering technical and financial assistance to help upgrade the participating MRF.
Flexible film packaging is a category that includes pouches and bags. While growing in popularity on store shelves, flexible film packaging is rarely recycled. That’s because most MRF sorting lines weren’t set up to sort lightweight flexible packaging. Additionally, most plastics reclaimers are unable to separate layers or otherwise process multi-material flexible packages into high-quality plastics.
At the same time, flexible film packaging ends up at MRFs, regardless of whether it’s accepted in the local recycling programs. It’s usually landfilled as residue.
Project aims
The MRFF project is working to overcome challenges to developing recovery systems and markets for flexible films.
“With this pilot, we aim to demonstrate the potential to capture flexible film packaging and use the material as a feedstock for U.S. manufacturing while improving the quality of other recycling streams processed at MRFs,” Stephen Sikra, head of Global Research and Development at Procter and Gamble, stated in a press release.
P&G is one of 15 members of MRFF, which is an initiative of the Foundation for Chemistry Research and Initiatives, a nonprofit group established by the American Chemistry Council. The MRFF members include Amcor, The Dow Chemical Company, LyondellBasell Industries, Nestle Purina PetCare and Nestle USA, PepsiCo, Plum Organics, Procter & Gamble, SC Johnson, Sealed Air and Target, as well as the Association of Plastic Recyclers, Flexible Packaging Association, The Plastics Industry Association and the American Chemistry Council.
Earlier experiments
In late 2015 and early 2016, MRFF tested the potential for using existing optical sorters at MRFs to separate flexible films. The challenge is the materials tend to follow fibers through facilities, often ending up in paper bales.
The trials were conducted by Ann Arbor, Mich.-based consulting firm Resource Recycling Systems (RRS), which found that existing single-stream sortation lines utilizing screens and optical sorters could be optimized to create flexible film bales.
“Our MRF tests last year indicated optical sorters can efficiently sort flexible packaging, and improvements in disc screen technologies have reduced the problem of bags and films wrapping on shafts,” said Susan Graff, RRS principal and director of the MRFF project. “The facility that enters this program will receive co-financing to help reduce their waste residues and develop new plastic product bales. This is the circular economy in action.”
Partner criteria
With its pilot project, MRFF is now seeking to partner with a single-stream MRF that processes at least 20 tons per hour and meets other criteria. For example, it must serve a community program that is driven to add more materials and is near potential end markets. The deadline for MRFs to throw their hat in the ring is April 7.
RRS developed an economic feasibility model looking at the potential financial impacts of adding flexibles. The results of the analysis will be used to help determine co-financing arrangements for the necessary equipment upgrades at the selected MRF.
The partner MRF is expected to be selected during the second quarter of this year, according to RRS.
https://resource-recycling.com/plastics/2017/03/22/committed-industry-effort-seeking-single-partner-flexible-film-recycling/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Groups Find Statutory Shortcomings in TSCA Ban Proposal
Mar 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The American Chemistry Council and other industry groups have concerns that the US EPA’s first proposal to ban a substance under the revised TSCA fails to meet the requirements of the new law.
Their comments came in response to the agency’s proposal, under TSCA section 6, to ban trichloroethylene (TCE) as an aerosol degreaser and for spot cleaning in dry cleaning facilities – its first effort to ban a substance under this mechanism in nearly three decades.
But addressing the proposal’s “precedential nature”, the ACC said these rules “must clearly comport with TSCA sections 6 and 26 requirements, which include a risk management decision, consistent with the scope of the prior completed risk assessment, and a requirement that all decisions be based on the best available science, among others.”
Instead, it said, the proposed requirements “extend beyond the limited scope of the risk assessment” conducted on TCE prior to TSCA reform.
And with regard to ‘best available science’ obligations, as outlined in TSCA section 26, it said the agency makes assumptions without adequate justification, and it is “thus unclear whether EPA relied upon relevant science to inform its judgment; whether that science was reliable, or the best quality available”.
Economic analysis
The ACC said the agency’s economic analysis also falls short. Risk management actions under TSCA must take costs and benefits into account, but the trade group says the EPA’s analysis “has significant inaccuracies and shortcomings”, including:
an assumption of “virtually no switching costs” for manufacturers and consumers, a deficiency it says that could “easily be improved through reasonably ascertainable information”;
underestimates of compliance and enforcement costs;
a lack of specificity in analysing the “discrete benefits” of TCE;
the absence of a quantified welfare loss to consumers; and
a failure to fully consider the costs and benefits of alternative regulatory approaches.
Indeed, with regard to these regulatory alternatives, the ACC said it “strongly believes EPA should perform a more thorough investigation and seek a greater understanding of risk management options before proposing any particular course of action.”
This should include deeper exploration of labelling, personal protective equipment (PPE) and substitution risk considerations, with the agency backing with scientific studies any conclusions it reaches on the merits and drawbacks of these approaches, it said.
Section 9 concerns
The Chemical User Coalition – a cross-industry group of nine major companies, including Intel, Boeing, Honda and Procter & Gamble – criticised the EPA’s interpretation of section 9(a), which requires it to engage other agencies which have overlapping jurisdiction over chemical substances – namely, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Osha).
The EPA said, in its proposal, that the CPSC and Osha lack the authority to bar the manufacture, processing and distribution for the uses it has proposed to ban, and therefore neither can sufficiently address the identified unreasonable risk, as a matter of law.
But the coalition said the EPA’s arguments “logically apply to virtually any other section 6 rule under consideration”. And it says it is “concerned that the agency is essentially creating a general policy aimed at avoiding section 9(a) referrals for all of its section 6 rules”.
NGOs back agency approach
In contrast, several NGOs say the agency's approach is warranted and supported by the law.
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families – in comments backed by more than 30 NGOs – said the EPA has correctly applied the risk management frameworks required by section 6 in a manner that will “set an important precedent” for future rulemakings.
And it said the agency’s “transparent and fully documented risk assessment, based on peer-reviewed data, methods and findings, easily meets section 26(h)’s ‘good science’ benchmarks”.
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) agreed that the proposed actions are “appropriate and necessary to address unreasonable risks identified”.
It also provides evidence for why alternative control methods, like PPE or labelling, would be insufficient.
“If the new TSCA law cannot be used to address such compelling and clear risks, it will be a dead letter before it is implemented,” added SCHF.
It urged prompt finalising of the rule.
https://chemicalwatch.com/54604/industry-groups-find-statutory-shortcomings-in-tsca-ban-proposal
-
(ACC Mentioned) NGOs Advocate Wide Scope in TSCA Risk Assessments
Mar 22, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
NGOs have called on the US EPA to include all uses of a substance when determining the scope of risk evaluations under the recently reformed TSCA. “Picking and choosing” among a chemical’s conditions of use due to resource constraints, political pressures or lack of information, they say, could result in overlooking risk scenarios, to the potential detriment of public health and the environment.
In comments endorsed by 35 NGOs, Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families (SCHF) said if the EPA could meet the statutory obligations for completing risk evaluations on the basis of a partial characterisation of use, then it would have no obligation under the law to address remaining risk scenarios. The resulting gap, the NGOs said, would weaken protection.
“In some cases, focusing on a subset of uses could even lead to a determination that the chemical does not present an unreasonable risk, although a comprehensive evaluation would support a different conclusion,” SCHF said.
The comments came in response to the EPA’s consultation on determining the scope of the first ten risk evaluations it is conducting under the new TSCA. Evaluations will determine if a substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment under its conditions of use, which includes “reasonably foreseeable uses” as well as those that are known or intended.
In separate comments, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) urged regulators to “cast a broad net” and recommended the EPA consider past uses as well, something it says the agency did include in some, but not all, of the preliminary use dossiers for the first ten chemicals.
It also recommended the agency:
consider the commercial and consumer product applications for both imported and domestically made products, including those no longer domestically produced;
develop risk assessment scopes that include relevant subpopulations that could be affected, based on the substance's identified uses;
not assume that chemicals used as intermediates result in a low exposure; and
factor in that chemicals may appear in products or materials that they are not intentionally added to.
Industry counters
Stakeholders have been divided on the issue of defining a substance’s conditions of use through the implementation process.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) stood by its position that the revised TSCA does not require the EPA to include all conditions of use in a risk evaluation. Instead, the agency has the discretion to scope it to include, or exclude, certain uses, it said.
“EPA cannot apply this discretion in such a manner as to undermine the operation of the entire statute or to make it impossible for it to meet its statutory objectives of timeliness and quality,” the ACC said. “Unquestionably, including all conditions of use in its risk evaluations would have a significant impact on EPA’s ability to meet the statutory mandate.”
The ACC added that Congress included the scoping phase to provide an opportunity to focus the risk evaluation.
“Congress would have stated clearly and unequivocally that the EPA must conduct a full risk evaluation on ALL conditions of use identified by the agency, without a scoping or focusing phase, if that is what it intended,” it said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/54593/ngos-advocate-wide-scope-in-tsca-risk-assessments
-
Senate Bill 578 Would Amend APA to Include TSCA Scientific Standards
Mar 22, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham
On March 8, 2017, Senator James Lankford (R-OK) introduced S. 578, the “Better Evaluation of Science and Technology Act” or “BEST Act,” a bill that would amend title 5 of the United States Code, commonly referred to as the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), to “provide requirements for agency decision making based on science.” Although the BEST Act does not refer to the recently amended Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), it is apparent that it plans to implement the same science standards stipulated in amended TSCA, for all federal agencies that use “scientific information” (which the bill does not define) in their rulemakings, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Section 2 of the BEST Act uses language quoted verbatim from TSCA Section 26, subsections (h) Scientific Standards, (i) Weight of Scientific Evidence, and (j) Availability of Information.
S. 578 was one in a package of regulatory improvement bills that Lankford introduced on March 8, 2017, which his press release stated were “aimed at improving the federal rulemaking process so the final regulations work better for the American people.” Lankford is a vocal critic of some agencies’ practices regarding scientific integrity, stating that “agencies occasionally use hidden science to support their regulatory decisions instead of transparent conclusions, data, and methods,” and that, instead, “Agencies should use the best available science that has been peer-reviewed by an independent third-party, make sure conclusions are verifiable and reproducible, and assure the data is transparent and publically available.”
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/senate-bill-578-would-amend-apa-to-include-tsca-scientific-standards
-
Report on Danish Conference Points to Non Toxic Future
Mar 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
A Danish environment ministry conference on chemical risks and how to handle them across consumer products, the environment and food has produced a raft of recommendations.
The take home messages from the 24 November conference have been compiled in the recently published report Towards a non toxic future. They are:
better communication with consumers, and up and down the supply chain is needed;
existing EU chemicals legislation gives a baseline protection. Their implementation and enforcement must be a priority;
a shift in risk paradigm is needed from single to combined exposure and to an expanded notion of harm;
the magnitude of the risk to human health and the environment must be recognised;
there is no one consumer but a diverse, fragmented, elusive community of consumers that is becoming more sensitive to toxic chemicals; and
the circular economy agenda provides an opportunity for chemicals.
One hundred and thirty experts and stakeholders attended the conference. Esben Lunde Larsen, Denmark's environment minister hosted the event in Ringsted.
Representatives from the European Commission, EU institutions, national research institutions, competent authorities, industries and NGOs discussed presentations on endocrine disruptors (EDCs); chemical mixtures; substances in articles and imported products; and processing contaminants in the food industry.
The goal was to get feedback to help develop Denmark’s input to a “non-toxic environment strategy” being prepared by the European Commission. This is scheduled for release this year. It will effectively set the post-2020 chemicals agenda as part of the EU’s 7th Environment Action Programme.
Endocrine disruptors
The conference agreed several key messages on EDCs, including:
substitute, but be wary of substituting one problematic substance with another;
finalise scientifically reliable EDC criteria now;set a long-term target on EDC exposure to work towards;
prepare clear guidelines for business on how to implement the precautionary principle with respect to EDCs;
consider reviewing the endocrine disruptor strategy, including improved test guidelines for EDCs; and
obtaining more data and guidance on using it to identify and assess EDCs is essential.
https://chemicalwatch.com/54589/report-on-danish-conference-points-to-non-toxic-future
-
Texas Joins Battle Over BLM Rule
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
A high-stakes legal fight over an Obama-era rule for methane emissions from oil and gas development on public lands may have a new player: Texas.
State Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) yesterday asked a federal court for permission to join a lawsuit over the Bureau of Land Management's Methane Waste Prevention Rule. Paxton says the rule duplicates state standards and creates expensive burdens for oil and gas operators.
"This is yet another case of gross federal overreach in which the Bureau of Land Management exceeded its legal authority, bypassing Congress to implement an unlawful rule on methane gas," he said in a statement. "The regulation has negligible environmental benefit and adds additional cost to both Texas and the oil and gas industry by creating more red tape."
Three other states — Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota — are challenging the regulation alongside the Independent Petroleum Association of America and Western Energy Alliance. Finalized in November 2016, the rule sets limits on venting and flaring of methane, the primary component of natural gas, from wells on public and tribal lands.
The rule is also in the crosshairs of many Republicans in Congress. The House of Representatives last month greenlighted an effort to roll back the rule via the Congressional Review Act, but that effort has hit some roadblocks in the Senate (E&E Daily, March 16; E&E Daily, March 22).
Though Texas is not a traditional public lands state, state lawyers noted in a brief to the court that the state has 3 million acres of federal lands that overlay oil and gas fields where mineral rights are often owned by the state or private parties.
"Even where the federal mineral ownership is small relative to other mineral ownership interests, now all the oil and gas operators with interests are subject to the Rule," the brief said. "The Rule significantly and adversely impacts Texas because it displaces Texas's sovereign authority and improperly asserts BLM authority over vast stretches of Texas — and privately-owned minerals — solely via interspersion with a small number of federal tracts."
Texas and the other challengers say the rule is beyond BLM's authority. The agency crafted the regulation under its authority to prevent waste of oil and natural gas resources, but critics say it is effectively an air quality regulation — treading on the turf of U.S. EPA, states and tribes.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming in January rejected the challengers' request to freeze the rule during the course of the litigation, noting its very gradual phase-in of new standards. Still, the court raised concerns about the rule's potential overlap with state and EPA air quality regulations (Energywire, Jan. 17).
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/03/22/stories/1060051865
-
Why Rust Belt States are Tackling Methane When Trump Won't
Mar 22, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Dan Grossman
Nobody raises an eyebrow when California takes steps to rein in air pollution – but what’s going on when conservative-leaning rust belt states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania are doing the same?
At a time when the Trump administration and Congress seek to scale back federal rules targeting methane emissions from energy production, a growing number of states that swung in favor of Trump in 2016 are heading in the opposite direction.
It reminds us that states that recognize good policy still have the power to act, regardless of who controls Washington. Ohio and Pennsylvania, now following in the footsteps of Colorado, Wyoming and California, are the latest examples of this.
Ohio: Pragmatic governor had a smart idea
States have different reasons for targeting methane leaks, even if they tend to draw the same conclusion at the end of the day: Methane mitigation is good for the environment and for companies on which tens of thousands of American jobs depend.
This was Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s pitch when he proposed common-sense steps the Buckeye State could take to rein in oil and gas pollution.
Kasich was able to avoid major opposition to the measure by pointing to environmental and political problems other states were experiencing as a result of their inaction, and by showing that it was in Ohio’s and its industry’s best interest to get ahead of the curve.
“We’re going to have to have some additional regulation to make sure that industry stays safe,” he told the Ohio Chamber of Commerce in 2014.
That year, the state required companies to reduce leaks at well sites. In February 2017, Ohio expanded these requirements to also cover compressor and transmission stations – the facilities that help push gas through the pipeline, and that account for about one-third of the industry’s total methane leakage.
The results of Ohio’s policies so far?
Companies, which must now check their equipment for gas leaks at new or modified equipment once a quarter, have complied and gone about their business. At the same time, new jobs are cropping up in a whole new industry focused on detecting and capping methane leaks.
Pennsylvania: Public outcry prompted action
Across the state border in the Keystone State, public concern over hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” has already been growing for several years due to insufficient oversight.
Environmental violations at drill sites have been well-documented by the state; Pennsylvanians have been shocked by images of oil spills, leaking tanks and dead vegetation.
Not surprisingly, Pennsylvania is next in line to tackle methane waste. In January 2016, Gov. Tom Wolf announced his intent to adopt the toughest methane pollution rules in the nation.
While welcomed by many, the governor’s approach to reducing methane emissions has run into resistance in the state legislature as of late. Some politicians have apparently been swayed by misleading rhetoric about the costs of reducing gas leaks, and threats that environmental protections “kill jobs.”
All these lawmakers need to do, of course, is to peek across the border to Ohio, or call states out West that can attest that methane policies won’t hurt operators’ bottom line. They even spawn new job growth.
In fact, Pennsylvania and Ohio already count more than 40 companies that specialize in emission reduction and that provide high-paying service and manufacturing jobs to thousands of rust belt residents.
Americans don’t like waste
It’s estimated that oil and gas companies lose some $2 billion a year in product. Such waste doesn’t sit well with hardworking Americans trying to make ends meet, especially when it only costs companies about a penny per unit of produced gas to reduce such pollution.
The 2015 Aliso Canyon disaster grew public awareness of methane leaks. And lately, opposition has been growing out West against Trump’s move to abandon an Obama-era rule aimed at reducing such leaks from drill sites on federal lands.
It raises the question of how far Trump’s policies will reach before they run into resistance – even in states that delivered him the presidency.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/03/22/why-rust-belt-states-are-tackling-methane-when-trump-wont
-
Most Methane in Groundwater is Not a Result of Fracking — Study
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
A broad review of Texas water data has found that oil and gas drilling is not the source of most methane found in Texas aquifers.
But the lead researcher says the findings don't mean that production wells can't leak stray gas into drinking water.
"Most of the methane is natural, or at least can be explained through natural processes," said J.P. Nicot, a research scientist at Texas' Bureau of Economic Geology who led the research. But, he added, "I have no doubt that some wells have leaked."
The findings square with the findings of U.S. EPA's yearslong study of hydraulic fracturing and drinking water. That study found that shale drilling doesn't cause contamination everywhere it's done, but there are instances where contamination has occurred.
The study, published recently in the journal Groundwater, has its roots in a yearslong controversy about methane contamination of water wells in two neighborhoods in Parker County in the exurbs of Dallas-Fort Worth. In 2010, EPA accused a gas company of contaminating drinking water near one of its drilling operations. But state officials disagreed, and EPA dropped the case (Energywire, May 29, 2014).
Nicot said he proposed a federal research program called the Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America to take a broader look at the question of methane contamination.
"The idea was to broaden the scope, take samples all over the state," Nicot said.
But Nicot said the study doesn't have answers about the source of methane in the water well at the center of that controversy, owned by a man named Steve Lipsky.
"I'm not sure what's going on in that situation, we were not trying to resolve that legal situation," Nicot said. "We aren't particularly interested in solving the issue for a particular landowner or a particular well."
The study also notes that its findings can't account for a water well in the area contaminated with methane that wasn't present when the well was drilled.
The study recommends a more extensive sampling campaign for the Parker County wells that are "still the object of discussion at the national level."
Researchers at the Bureau of Economic Geology, which is part of the University of Texas, Austin, worked on the study with colleagues from the University of Michigan.
The study looked at water and gas wells in the Barnett Shale, the Dallas-Fort Worth area and well into its exurbs. But Nicot's team studied the Haynesville Shale play, the Eagle Ford Shale play and the Permian Basin, and found similar results.
For the Barnett study, researchers analyzed samples from more than 450 wells across 12 counties in the western Barnett Shale drilling area — basically the western side of the Greater Dallas-Fort Worth area.
The researchers found there was no correlation between the density of Barnett Shale gas drilling and the amount of methane found in groundwater. For example, some of the highest readings of dissolved methane were found in the Parker County area, on the western edge of the drilling area. But that area has some of the lowest density of drilling.
Instead, the study said the methane found in the water was likely from shallow natural gas deposits.
The study found a cluster of high readings around the southern border of Parker County, around Lipsky's neighborhood. But Nicot said the team's research showed that most well water in the area had not been exposed to a "gas phase," or potential leakage event.
Nicot said his team was not able to do extensive testing on Lipsky's well. But the study criticizes some of the sampling done by the gas drilling company, Range Resources Corp., in the early days of the controversy.
Range's results showed very low amounts of methane in drinking water in Lipsky's well and those of his neighbors. But there have been several other rounds of testing, including the testing for the BEG study, that found higher amounts. The study said it's "puzzling" how some readings could be so low when the water had been described as "bubbling." The study suggested that proper sampling procedures were not followed.
"That cannot be correct," Nicot said. "They did something wrong."
A spokesman for Range Resources did not respond to a request for comment on the assertion that the company's testing was erroneous.
Many of the samples used in the study were gathered by a Texas environmental firm Inform Environmental LLC, a Texas scientific firm. The firm's chief scientific officer, Zac Hildenbrand, led a study published in 2015 that found more groundwater abnormalities in the counties where there is more drilling activity.
Hildenbrand said he found it puzzling that Nicot's study didn't look more closely at the prospects that leaking wells contaminated groundwater.
"To say all of them are contaminated by oil and gas is incorrect," Hildenbrand said. "To say all of the contamination is naturally occurring is also incorrect."
Hildenbrand says his research has been looking at stray methane conducted upward toward groundwater through the open space between drill pipe and the well bore. He expects the research to be published soon. Nicot said Hildenbrand's theory "makes sense" but wasn't borne in the samples his team examined.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/03/22/stories/1060051844
-
‘Plastics,’ Pennsylvania Governor Says, And Petchems, Too
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Pennsylvania has a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to snare between $2.7 billion and $3.7 billion in natural gas liquid (NGL) investment, sparking a “manufacturing renaissance” that includes more ethane cracking plants, petrochemical and plastics facilities, Gov. Tom Wolf said Tuesday.
Wolf and the Team Pennsylvania Foundation cited a newly released study by IHS Markit titled Prospects to Enhance Pennsylvania’s Opportunities in Petrochemical Manufacturing. The Keystone State is seen by many as having the makings for the next hub of the petrochemical industry. Shell Chemical Appalachia’s recent decision to construct an ethane cracker in western Pennsylvania is largely to thank for this.
The IHS Markit study was commissioned by the state and teased earlier this year with the assertion that the Marcellus and Utica shales could support up to four more ethane crackers in addition to the one Shell is building. Other facilities have been proposed throughout the region, but some of those projects remain on hold. PTT Global Chemical pcl is expected to make a final investment decision later this year about a large ethane cracker that would be located in Belmont County, OH.
“The foundation for building a diverse and robust petrochemical and plastics industry was initiated with the decision by Shell Chemicals to invest in Pennsylvania -- and we must ensure that we make the most of this chance to create good paying jobs for Pennsylvanians,” Wolf said Tuesday in announcing the study’s release.
According to the study, natural gas from the Marcellus and Utica shales accounted for one-quarter of all natural gas produced in the United States in 2015 and is expected to account for more than 40% by 2030, the governor’s office said. Additionally, 40% of the natural gas produced is rich in natural gas liquids (NGL), more than 70% of which is ethane and propane.
Pennsylvania has a base of existing plastics manufacturers as potential customers, which IHS said will benefit from significant reductions in feedstock costs because of their close proximity to these resources.
“The prospect that the Marcellus and Utica Shale plays can support up to four additional ethane crackers beyond Shell Pennsylvania Chemicals is an exciting opportunity for the commonwealth, as is the IHS forecast that a coordinated strategy has the potential to leverage up to $3.7 billion in investment into NGL assets alone for gas processing facilities, NGL pipelines and storage facilities,” said Dennis Davin, secretary of the state’s Department of Community and Economic Development. “The study is a roadmap that will help us jump start our strategy to attract that investment.”
Davin said the state will need to attract additional infrastructure investment, as well as retain and grow Pennsylvania’s existing industry; develop pad-ready sites throughout the state to encourage investment; and address potential infrastructure bottlenecks as well as train a workforce for the industry.
Shell’s facility is being built on 400 acres in Beaver County. The cracker would have the capacity to consume about 100,000 b/d of ethane. The company has said it would be operational sometime in the early 2020s.
IHS Markit predicts continued upward production trends for both natural gas and NGLs through at least 2030, with the Marcellus and Utica shales acting as a key contributor. “Between 2026 and 2030, NGL production to meet U.S. demand is expected to reach nearly 6.3 million b/d, of which more than 1 million b/d of NGLs is expected to be produced in the Marcellus and Utica Shale plays,” the consultancy said. “The high value of the NGL contained in the natural gas stream -- specifically ethane and propane -- is responsible for driving ongoing production increases.
“There is an abundance of ethane available in the Marcellus and Utica Shale plays...As of the end of 2016, 100% of the ethane produced in Pennsylvania and recovered as a petrochemical feedstock is being shipped out of the state to other end-use markets for petrochemical processing. This is largely because of the low cost of ethane produced in the Marcellus and Utica Shale plays compared to ethane produced from the US Gulf Coast (USGC) and other global locations,” IHS Markit said.
Between 2026 and 2030, the expected ethane production from the Marcellus and Utica will be enough to support up to four additional world-scale ethane steam crackers in the region, the consultancy said.
“As with ethane, propane production is expected to increase in the Marcellus and Utica Shale plays through at least 2030 and is expected to be priced lower than propane from the USGC…[P]ropane has multiple competing end uses that may result in NGL being used for other purposes.”
Propane can be used as a heating fuel or as a petrochemical feedstock to produce propylene through propane dehydrogenation or by steam cracking a mixture of ethane and propane. Propylene can be converted into polypropylene, a high-growth plastic resin.
“IHS Markit predicts propane will continue to be used primarily in residential, commercial, industrial, and utility sectors as a fuel because of strong demand in both domestic and international markets.”
The consultancy said that despite higher development costs compared with the USGC -- where there is a mature petrochemical industry -- southwestern Pennsylvania’s polyethylene and polypropylene production is expected to be “highly competitive” on a cash cost basis relative to existing production centers.
“This includes not only the USGC, but also Alberta, Canada; Sarnia, Canada; and the Middle East,” IHS Markit said. “The cost advantages over these global existing industry hubs are driven by low-priced ethane and propane (the main feedstocks for production), proximity to major North American demand centers (resulting in reduced freight and transportation costs), and a significant base of plastics manufacturers in Pennsylvania and the northeastern United States.”
Marcellus Shale Coalition President David Spigelmyer said, “Pennsylvania’s world-class natural gas resource base has the potential, as this report outlines, to fundamentally reshape our near- and long-term manufacturing potential. To fully realize these generational opportunities, however, as the authors point out, Pennsylvania must put in place policies that streamline permitting delays and address other regulatory challenges that we continue to face.”
For more on Pennsylvania’s NGL-driven future, check out NGI’s special report on the Shell cracker and what it means for the region, as well as the recent webinar on Appalachia ethane.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109837-plastics-pennsylvania-governor-says-and-petchems-too
-
Pa. Governor Hunts for Texas Investors in Petrochemical Plants
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
Pennsylvania state government officials visited Texas yesterday in a bid to attract more petrochemical manufacturing investment to the Northeast.
Gov. Tom Wolf (D) led a delegation to sell his state's abundant reserves of natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs) to a large audience of global petrochemical executives. The industry is in town for the World Petrochemical Conference 2017 by IHS Markit, which continues this week.
To help his sales pitch, Wolf came armed with a study by IHS Markit predicting that the Marcellus and Utica shale fields will continue to expand their dominance in the North American natural gas market. About a quarter of the United States' natural gas supplies came from the Northeast's giant gas fields last year, and analysts see that expanding to 40 percent by 2030.
Despite being the center of the U.S. gas and gas liquids universe, several billion dollars' worth of new petrochemical manufacturing capacity expansion is being built along the Gulf of Mexico coastline, mainly at existing industrial sites southeast and east of Houston. Royal Dutch Shell PLC is also investing $6 billion to build an ethane cracker in western Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania is building a strategy to attract much more. Wolf told the gathering here that his state is rolling out the welcome mat.
"The foundation for building a diverse and robust petrochemical and plastics industry was initiated with the decision by Shell Pennsylvania Chemicals to invest in Pennsylvania," Wolf said, "and we must ensure that we make the most of this chance to create good-paying jobs for Pennsylvania."
Wolf and the IHS Markit report touted Pennsylvania's stores of ethane and propane. Ethane is valued by the petrochemical sector because it is the feedstock for the manufacturing of polyethylene and other plastics precursors.
Shell's facility will tap into the Northeast's gas stream once it is operational. There is plenty to go around for other interested investors, Pennsylvania state officials stressed. Dennis Davin, secretary of Pennsylvania's Department of Community and Economic Development, told attendees that resource and production volumes are sufficient to supply four more ethane crackers on top of Shell's forthcoming plant. The Shell ethane cracker should be operational by 2022.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/03/22/stories/1060051866
-
Texas-to-Mexico Trans-Pecos Pipeline Nearing In-Service
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Trans-Pecos Pipeline LLC on Wednesday asked FERC for permission to place into service the pipeline project’s Presidio Crossing.
Presidio Crossing [CP15-500] represents the Commission-jurisdictional Texas-Mexico border-crossing facilities of the Texas intrastate Trans-Pecos pipeline, which is expected to enter service by the end of this month, according to the project’s website.
Trans-Pecos will have capacity to transport 1.4 Bcf/d as part of an agreement with Mexico’s Comisión Federal de Electricidad. Energy Transfer Partners LP will operate the 148-mile, 42-inch diameter pipeline. The gas transported would predominantly fuel power plants in Mexico.
The pipeline originates at the Waha Hub outside Fort Stockton, TX, in northern Pecos County and includes delivery locations in Central West Texas. The pipeline terminates at the U.S.-Mexico boundary near Presidio, TX. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a presidential permit for Presidio Crossing in May and authorized construction start in July.
Related facilities on the Mexican side of the border include 907 feet of a 42-inch diameter pipeline from the international boundary in the middle of the Rio Grande to a point southwest in Mexico. All non-jurisdictional pipeline facilities built by Trans-Pecos on the Mexico side of the border, and in the State of Chihuahua are to be initially owned by an affiliate of Trans-Pecos.
The pipeline is expected to transport predominantly Texas-sourced gas under the jurisdiction of the Railroad Commission of Texas, but it may also transport gas sourced outside Texas as interstate service under the Natural Gas Policy Act Section 311(a)(2) to the Presidio Crossing and to other future in-state delivery options, Trans Pecos has said.
Environmentalists -- led by the Sierra Club with support from landowners and residents in Texas along the pipeline route -- challenged the non-jurisdictional status of the Trans-Pecos pipeline. While the border crossing is governed by FERC, the pipeline is considered an intrastate and not subject to FERC jurisdiction.
In January FERC approved a request from Comanche Trail Pipeline LLC to begin service of its San Elizario Crossing project in El Paso County, TX [CP15-503]. The 1.1 Bcf/d Comanche Trail, also an Energy Transfer, carries natural gas to Mexico.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109845-texas-to-mexico-trans-pecos-pipeline-nearing-in-service
-
Cheniere Ready to Flip Switch on Sabine Pass Third Train
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
The third train of Cheniere Energy Inc.’s Sabine Pass liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in Louisiana is ready to enter service, Cheniere told FERC in a letter Monday, and the Commission on Tuesday approved commencement of operations.
“With this submittal, Sabine Pass has filed all documentation required by FERC [Federal Energy Regulatory Commission] staff demonstrating readiness for Train 3 to be placed into service,” Cheniere told the Commission [CP11-72; CP13-2]. “Sabine Pass is herein requesting immediate authorization to place Train 3 facilities in service…”
Genscape Inc. analysts said the train would be entering “pre-commercial operations” as of Tuesday. “Even though the train is in commercial operations, Genscape still considers this to be ‘pre-commercial’ at the time of this approval,” the firm said in a note Tuesday.
“The capacity holders [KOGAS 3.5 mtpa (million tonnes per annum) and Shell 0.7 mtpa] at Train 3 have 180 days before they need to begin the terms of their 20 year free on board (FOB) contract.
“During this time KOGAS and Shell have first right of refusal. Genscape expects more consistent operations (feed gas deliveries) with the end of the commissioning period. During commissioning and testing, ramping up and down of the train is a common procedure that would not be expected as much during commercial operations.”
The first two trains at Sabine Pass went online last year, and since then, exports have been ramping up, making Cheniere a leading buyer of physical gas in the United States as well as a major pipeline capacity holder.
The Sabine Pass site can accommodate up to six liquefaction trains capable of processing more than 3.5 Bcf/d of natural gas. The production capacity of each LNG train is being designed for approximately 4.5 mtpa.
Construction began on Trains 3 and 4 in May 2013, and on Train 5 in June 2015. Train 4 is expected to begin operation during the second half of this year. Train 5 is expected to be online during the second half of 2019, according to Cheniere’s website.
Cheniere is also developing a liquefaction and export terminal in Corpus Christi, TX. Trains 1 and 2 are under construction, and the third train is fully permitted.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109838-cheniere-ready-to-flip-switch-on-sabine-pass-third-train
-
VA Conservation Agency Details More Conditions for Atlantic Coast Pipeline
Mar 22, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
A Virginia conservation agency is proposing a set of conditions for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) as the project looks to cross several easements under the agency’s watch.
In a filing to FERC posted to the project docket, the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF), an entity formed under state law in 1966, requested that several requirements be included in the final environmental impact statement (EIS) and possible certificate order for ACP as conditions for VOF to grant ACP's applications to cross 10 conservation easements [CP15-554].
The VOF’s conditions represent the latest snag in ACP’s efforts to secure regulatory approval to build through sensitive terrain along the Virginia/West Virginia border.
After the U.S. Forest Service last year rejected ACP's plans to cross the Monongahela and George Washington national forests, the pipeline developed a substantial reroute through the area. The adjusted route requires ACP to convert portions of 10 VOF conservation easements in Highland, Bath, Augusta and Nelson counties, VA, in order to build the pipeline, according to VOF.
At a Feb. 9 meeting, VOF's board of trustees voted to defer action on ACP's applications.
The conditions VOF provided to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission include, among other things, the transfer of a roughly 1,000-acre farm property nearby to offset the lost conservation land, an offer ACP made as part of its applications in order satisfy requirements under Virginia law.
VOF is also proposing that ACP provide financial compensation "to serve as a Stewardship Fund to support VOF with the operation and management of the substitute properties and partially offset VOF's unreimbursed costs associated with the ACP."
"The VOF has consistently taken the position that construction, maintenance and operation of the interstate gas transmission line is inconsistent with the open space protections afforded by the subject easements," VOF told the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The group added that it considers the potential impact of the pipeline on the conservation lands to be "very significant."
ACP received its draft EIS in December. FERC is accepting comments on the document through April 6.
The 600-mile, 1.5 Bcf/d ACP is a joint venture of Dominion Resources, Duke Energy and Southern Company Gas. The pipeline is 96% subscribed and would transport Marcellus and Utica shale natural gas to satisfy heating and electric generation demand in the Southeast. ACP is targeting a 2019 in-service date.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109846-va-conservation-agency-details-more-conditions-for-atlantic-coast-pipeline
-
(ACC Mentioned) GOP Senators Hedge on Prospects for CRA Repeal of EPA RMP Rule
Mar 22, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Top Senate environment committee Republicans are hedging on whether a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to rescind EPA's chemical facility safety rule will reach the Senate floor, raising fresh doubts about the measure's prospects even as EPA is said to be concerned about its administrative reconsideration of the regulation.
In separate March 21 interviews with Inside EPA, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY) and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), the resolution's sponsor, were uncertain if or when the measure would be considered on the Senate floor and where it fits among Republican priorities.
“Where this one fits, I don't know,” Inhofe said, noting competing priorities for CRA resolutions targeting Obama-era regulations.
While sources have said Senate Republicans are hoping to bring a handful of CRA resolutions to the floor this week, Inhofe said the resolution targeting EPA's risk management plan (RMP) overhaul would not be among them.
Barrasso also declined to specify where RMP ranks among the competing priorities for CRA action. “We still have a number of CRA's we're going to try to get to the floor and voted on,” he said, noting lawmakers have until early May, given a 60-legislative day deadline for CRA actions. “It's on the list,” he said.
The chemical sector and other industries are pursuing multiple avenues of pushback against EPA's Jan. 13 final rule overhauling the agency's RMP facility accident prevention rule, and favor a CRA resolution of a disapproval that would quickly repeal the rule, while other steps would take longer and are less certain.
EPA's RMP rule, issued in the waning days of the Obama Administration, includes new auditing and hazard analysis requirements, as well as provisions requiring release of facility data. It also requires certain facilities to consider safer substances for their production processes but does not mandate their use.
Former President Barack Obama ordered EPA to issue the rule in response to an explosion at a fertilizer plant in West, TX, that killed 15 people, including first responders. While the explosion and Obama's order triggered EPA's overhaul of its RMP accident prevention program, investigators later blamed arson for the fire that led to the explosion.
But industry groups and their GOP supporters say the rule's requirements are costly and unnecessary, and that disclosure provisions could worsen terror threats.
They are pushing hard to have Congress repeal the rule using the CRA's expedited procedures, which allow lawmakers to revoke rules within the prior 60 legislative days.
But S.J. Res. 28, the CRA disapproval resolution Inhofe, Barrasso and other senators introduced March 2 to repeal the rule, appears to have stalled as Senate Republicans consider a host of measures and weigh their priorities.
Meanwhile, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt agreed to a request from an industry coalition to reconsider the rule. In a March 13 letter to the coalition's lawyers, Pruitt agreed with industry assertions that the arson finding justified a reconsideration and he extended the rule's effective date -- for an additional 90 days -- to reconsider it.
While industry has welcomed EPA's actions, there is also some uncertainty about how far the agency can go in scaling back the rule. A source who attended a closed March 13 Energy Bar Association meeting says there appears to be some uncertainty at EPA about how far the agency can go in blocking the rule. There is “a lot of discussion at the agency to figure out what is legally defensible” for pushing back against the rule that was issued in the waning days of the Obama administration, the source says.
APA Violation
Even as industry groups ramp up efforts to kill the rule, House Democrats and other administration critics are warning that Pruitt's action to delay the rule may be unlawful.
In a March 20 letter to White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Mick Mulvaney, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and three other Democaritc members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee argue Pruitt failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when he extended the rule's effective date without notice and comment.
The lawmakers say that the APA generally requires officials to allow for 30 days before taking such action but Pruitt's decision extending the effective date for the RMP rule was effective within seven days.
“Rushing the rules . . . will cause clear and serious harm by delaying needed safeguards. You remember, we are sure, the West Fertilizer explosions that claimed the lives of fifteen people and led to the development of the RMP amendments,” the letter says.
The letter urged OMB to immediately withdraw the rule extending the RMP's effective date and also requested copies of records supporting that decision. The House Democrats also requested copies of all emails and communications between Pruitt and other Trump EPA officials with the American Chemistry Council and a host of other industry groups that petitioned the Trump administration to stay the RMP rule.
“Judicial precedent makes clear that changing the effective date of a rule is a substantive amendment of that rule, and is therefore subject to all of the requirements for rulemaking -- including publication thirty days before the effective date and notice and comment,” the letter says. Reps. Bobby Rush (D-IL), Doris Matsui (D-CA) and Paul Tonko (D-NY) also signed the letter.
While Pallone and other House Democrats are targeting Pruitt's stay of the rule, facility advocates are meeting with House and Senate lawmakers in an effort to drum up opposition to the pending CRA measures.
“We need to make sure that folks are aware of how bad [a CRA] is for workers and communities and first responders, so those meetings will be ongoing,” a source with a public interest group says. The source argues that backing repeal of facility safety rule is tough proposition for lawmakers given they could face blow-back should another major industrial facility disaster occur.
The source says environmental and other groups, in meetings with lawmakers, are touting the RMP rule as modest improvements to EPA's facility safety rules to protect first responders and communities from disasters, such as the West explosion.
While Pruitt and industry officials have argued that the West arson should not drive changes to an accident prevention rule, facility safety advocates contend that use of safer chemicals in processes would reduce the consequences of an arson or a terrorist attack at a facility.
The advocacy groups are also arguing that the Obama EPA coordinated with the Department of Homeland Security during the rulemaking process, which included numerous opportunities for public input. “The RMP amendments were developed through an extremely thorough process spanning over three years,” according to a public interest group source. “The modest amendments have overwhelming public and expert support from at risk communities, worker, and health, environmental, and other organizations.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/gop-senators-hedge-prospects-cra-repeal-epa-rmp-rule
-
Senators Push Public-Private Partnerships for Infrastructure
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Kellie Lunney
Congressional funding alone will not be enough to upgrade aging infrastructure or tackle a massive maintenance backlog on the nation's federal lands, a top Senate Republican said yesterday.
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said leveraging private money through public-private partnerships "is absolutely necessary in these tough budget times. I think it can be a win-win for both the federal government and our rural, regional economies."
Murkowski also leads the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee.
Murkowski's comments came during the Energy panel's second meeting in less than a month on infrastructure, one of the hottest topics of debate on Capitol Hill this year (E&E Daily, March 20).
The Alaskan intends for Energy and Natural Resources to play a major role in helping to craft a large-scale legislative package — a White House priority — on projects to improve the country's roads, bridges, airports, water and transit systems.
"Everyone else is talking about infrastructure and what they can contribute to the package," she said. "I think within this committee we have the most exciting part of that portfolio."
Panel ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) criticized the White House's fiscal 2018 blueprint, which calls for a 12 percent cut to the Interior Department's budget, saying that it undercuts the administration's push to boost investment in infrastructure and create more jobs.
"Investing in infrastructure is key to maintaining and growing our economy," said the Democrat, who along with 11 other senators sent Trump a letter yesterday decrying the proposed Interior budget cuts (Greenwire, March 21).
"I thought President Trump, Republicans and Democrats all agree on that. But we need a budget proposal that can help us do that," Cantwell said. "It is ironic that we are gathered to discuss infrastructure funding after having just received a budget that essentially abandons that entire concept."
The multibillion-dollar deferred maintenance backlogs at several lands agencies (nearly $12 billion at the National Park Service; $3 billion at the Bureau of Reclamation; and more than $5 billion at the Agriculture Department's Forest Service) is a concern for both Republicans and Democrats.
"This is significant, and I don't think that any of us should kid ourselves that the backlog, in order to truly and meaningfully address it, is going to take real dollars to resolve," Murkowski said.
It's an area that could particularly benefit from public-private partnerships, lawmakers and witnesses said.
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) said he'd like to "explore some creative ways we can facilitate new investments in our maintenance backlog ... whether it's more public-private partnerships or the use of innovation and technology."
Daines, who also sits on the Interior Appropriations subcommittee, said he was "committed" to fighting for as much funding as possible for the agencies that fall under the panel's jurisdiction.
Marcia Argust, director of the Pew Charitable Trusts' campaign to restore America's parks, provided examples of successful existing corporate partnerships with the federal government, including one with Musco Lighting. The company has worked with NPS to light some of the country's best-known landmarks, including the Washington Monument and Mount Rushmore.
"The updated lighting systems enhance visitor experience, improve resource protection, preserve the dark sky environment and reduce costs," Argust testified.
Senators from both sides of the aisle and witnesses also expressed concern during the hearing over the nation's water infrastructure needs — an area that could be ripe for bipartisan cooperation.
Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) pointed out that Colorado alone is facing roughly $15 billion in water infrastructure needs over the next several years.
Cantwell plans to reintroduce legislation she shepherded last year to improve water security, fisheries and water conservation.
"Water infrastructure is perhaps the most important, yet overlooked, form of infrastructure in our nation," testified Chris Treese, manager of external affairs at the Colorado River Water Conservation District. "Access to a sustainable supply of water is a fundamental necessity for all economic development. Conversely, adverse economic consequences are certain if we do not invest and reinvest in our water infrastructure."
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/03/22/stories/1060051857
-
'Noah's Ark' Caucus Up to 30 Members
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Hannah Hess
With the addition of three congressmen from New York and one from Illinois, the Climate Solutions Caucus has grown to 30 members.
Veteran Reps. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) are the latest additions to what's been dubbed a "Noah's Ark" group because it adds members in bipartisan pairs.
E&E News reported earlier this month that freshman Rep. John Faso of New York — the Republican who succeeded retired Rep. Chris Gibson (R), a leader on climate — would join the caucus (E&E Daily, March 10). Faso brought along fellow Empire State freshman Rep. Tom Suozzi, the Democrat who replaced retired Rep. Steve Israel (D).
King, Faso and Suozzi all represent districts along the Atlantic Coast. Their approaches to climate, however, are varied.
"I'm not a person that thinks global warming is the end of the world, it's going to happen tomorrow," King said yesterday in a brief interview outside the House chamber.
First elected to Congress in 1992, King has voted to open the Outer Continental Shelf to oil drilling, moved to bar U.S. EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions and opposed tax incentives for renewable energy. The former chairman of the powerful Homeland Security Committee is best known as a counterterrorism advocate.
King believes reducing carbon dioxide emissions is important from a public health perspective but said yesterday he does not know whether CO2 is "as deadly as some say it is."
"I think there's a lot of things we should do for the environment. On the other hand, I don't see this dread, urgency that some see. To me, this seems like a rational middle course," King said.
Faso is among the 17 co-sponsors of the Republican climate resolution that members introduced last week (Greenwire, March 15). The measure assigns human emissions some responsibility for driving global warming and states that the House should take action.
"I'm very much open to economically viable solutions that help us reduce CO2," Faso said a recent interview, stressing that anti-warming policies would have to take into account agricultural and industrial interests.
Faso hinted earlier this year that he intends to be a moderate voice in the GOP, much like Gibson (E&E Daily, Feb. 14). Suozzi won awards for his environmental work in politics before Capitol Hill (E&E Daily, March 3). The former mayor and county executive did not respond to requests for comment yesterday.
Lipinski, who has represented southwest Chicago and its suburbs since 2005, is known as a conservative Democrat. He told constituents last summer at a town hall that climate change is important and should be addressed, "but we have to be careful not to affect manufacturing," according to local news reports.
"As an engineer and senior member of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, I have always been a strong advocate of finding innovative ways to address the problems facing our nation and the world, including climate change," Lipinski, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Research and Technology, said in a statement to E&E News.
Lipinski noted he supported the "Raise Wages, Cut Carbon Act" introduced in 2009 by former Republican Rep. Bob Inglis of South Carolina. The measure would have imposed a revenue-neutral carbon tax.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/03/22/stories/1060051859
-
States Cannot Regulate Environment Without EPA Support
Mar 21, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By James Rubin
Under the Trump administration’s recently proposed budget, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to play a supporting role to states and Native American tribes in their efforts to protect health and the environment.
The primacy of states and the secondary role of the EPA would mark a fundamental shift in environmental regulation. The EPA has developed deep and critical partnerships with states to allow those states to enforce delegated federal laws as well as their own.
At the same time, the EPA provides key oversight to ensures that high standards are met across the country. The proposed budget, if enacted, would upend those roles.
There are many important reasons for the EPA to play a strong federal role. In a time of increasing costs and shrinking state coffers, the EPA provides a backstop for environmental protection as well as critical financial and technical support. Indeed, states often lack the resources to handle large-scale environmental emergencies on their own (e.g., Macondo Spill, Flint drinking water).
Regional programs frequently require federal leadership and support to bridge differing state interests. Implementation and enforcement of federal laws can be uneven among states. The EPA can provide consistency and predictability, important for business operations and economic development.
However, in a response to alleged regulatory overreach by the Obama EPA, the Trump budget would shrink the EPA down significantly, cutting the Agency by over 30 percent and eliminating 3,200 jobs. In so doing, the proposal undercuts its stated goal of state/tribal primacy.
With the exception of a modest 2 percent increase in state revolving funds for drinking and wastewater infrastructure, the budget significantly reduces the EPA’s ability to assist and enhance state implementation and enforcement. The EPA supports state and tribal efforts through categorical grants, Superfund cleanup monies, research and development and regional programs.
All of these face steep cuts — or more — in the proposed budget. For example, categorical grants, which allow states to implement vital air, water, waste and chemical programs, including permitting, are cut nearly 45 percent. State environmental officials estimate these grants alone support on average 27 percent of state environmental budgets.
The Superfund program is reduced 30 percent. Regional programs, which benefit local economic development, like the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the Chesapeake Bay recovery, are slated for closure. Infrastructure projects for Alaska Natives and at the Mexican border (to prevent sewage from reaching U.S. shores) are zeroed out.
The proposed budget also shrinks the EPA’s enforcement program by 23 percent, significantly hampering federal efforts, but also state enforcement programs supported by the EPA.
The EPA enforcement provides valuable resources to states in terms of shared penalties and projects. The proposal asserts that states should be the primary enforcers of federal delegated authority while the EPA focuses on other laws. But the delegations are comprehensive, including air and water pollution, drinking water protection and hazardous wastes.
Without the EPA’s technical and financial support, states will be hard pressed to play a leadership role, raising the risk of inconsistent state enforcement. This only hurts the business environment. There is a fundamental inconsistency in the budget. One cannot expect states to take on a primary role if key funding is cut, and the EPA cannot be a supporting partner if its role is so diminished.
Leading congressional figures have pushed back, saying the proposal is only that — just a proposal. Congress sets the final budget and can ensure funding for important programs. But the proposal is likely a starting place for negotiations, and the EPA’s funding — and its support of the states — is still likely to be dramatically reduced.
While the proposal may be more about messaging than reality, it is hard to see in this message a White House commitment to consistent, high levels of protection for the environment and public health.
James Rubin is a partner at the international law firm Dorsey & Whitney. Before going into private practice, Rubin served for 15 years in the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/325056-states-cannot-regulate-environment-without-epa-support
-
White House Slams Door on Carbon Tax
Mar 22, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
The Trump administration is not considering a carbon tax, an official said after a White House press briefing yesterday in which press secretary Sean Spicer declined to rule it out.
Interest in the administration's stance on the issue has persisted while a lively debate is reportedly taking place within the West Wing over President Trump's economic agenda and various parties aim to influence the result.
Six weeks ago, Gary Cohn, director of the National Economic Council, and four of his colleagues sat down in the Roosevelt Room with former Secretary of State James Baker and other distinguished Republicans who want to reshape the party's policies on climate change.
Their proposal would tax carbon dioxide, then return the revenue to Americans via dividend checks — an ambitious plan that could cut greenhouse gases drastically while maintaining Trump's promise to repeal Obama-era regulations (Greenwire, Feb. 8).
Spicer was asked during yesterday's daily briefing whether Trump is considering a carbon tax and which opinions on the matter the White House might be weighing.
"I think there's a robust debate going on with respect to comprehensive tax reform," Spicer said, explaining that health care legislation is the top priority, with tax reform, trade reviews and immigration next in line.
"There's a lot of things on the agenda. But I'm not going to comment on specific prongs of that," Spicer said.
A White House official later followed up, saying part of the National Economic Council's responsibility in coordinating economic policy for the president "is to listen to a range of viewpoints on various issues."
"In early February a group of Republican leaders visited the White House to discuss their proposal for a carbon tax. The Trump Administration is not considering a carbon tax," the official said in an email.
Last month, Spicer downplayed the significance of meetings with the elder GOP statesmen on the Climate Leadership Council (CLC) plan, but declined to comment on the outcome (E&E News PM, Feb. 8).
A band of conservative critics including Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, the Heritage Foundation and fossil fuel industry allies requested their own meeting with Cohn in an effort to quash the carbon tax and dividend proposal (Greenwire, Feb. 16).
"We have not set up a meeting, but we were reassured by people in the administration that they aren't considering a carbon tax," American Energy Alliance spokesman Chris Warren told E&E News today.
The CLC declined to comment for this story.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/03/22/stories/1060051882
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested