Preview Newsletter
ACC PM test 21/6/17
-
(ACC Mentioned) Scott Pruitt Dismisses Dozens More EPA Science Advisers
Jun 21, 2017 | ThinkProgress
By Natasha Geiling
Dozens of Environmental Protection Agency scientists were recently informed that their contracts would not be renewed this August, leaving a key EPA office without important scientific guidance. -
(ACC Mentioned) Want to Squash Science? Follow Pruitt’s Lead at the EPA
Jun 21, 2017 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Genna Reed
The Trump Administration doubled down on its overhaul of the EPA’s Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) this week, notifying members whose terms would be ending in 2017 and early 2018 that their terms will not be renewed and cancelling subcommittee meetings for the rest of the year. -
Canada, US Seek Feedback on Managing Chemicals of Concern
Jun 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The governments of Canada and the US are soliciting feedback to inform the ongoing development of binational strategies for managing identified chemicals of mutual concern (CMC), including PCBs and HBCD. -
Group's Classification of Roundup as Carcinogen Tainted
Jun 21, 2017 | North State Journal
By Cory Lavalette
Nothing gets rid of that stubborn patch of grass in the crack in your driveway easier than a squirt or two of Roundup, but the active chemical that does the heavy lifting has far-ranging uses and has faced its share of criticism. -
Interior Pushes to Freeze Appeal as Plans to Nix Rule Advance
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
As the White House reviews the Interior Department's plans to roll back an Obama-era hydraulic fracturing rule, government lawyers are again urging a court to pause related litigation. -
Small Producers Complain of 'Frack Hits'
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
In Oklahoma, small oil and gas producers say more than 100 of their wells have been damaged by hydraulic fracturing jobs done for large companies. -
Industry Finds Fracking Poses Little Threat to Drinking Water
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
A new study conducted by top scientists in Texas has found that the shale oil boom there has caused earthquakes, degraded natural resources, overwhelmed some communities, and even boosted the frequency and severity of traffic collisions, while enriching companies, residents and the state itself. -
Tropical Storm Cindy to Hit U.S. Gulf Coast Late Wednesday
Jun 21, 2017 | Reuters (in The New York Times)
Tropical Storm Cindy is expected to make landfall on the Gulf Coast near the Texas-Louisiana border on Wednesday, threatening to bring flash floods from Texas to Florida, according to the National Hurricane Center. -
Appalachian NGL Storage Study Nearing Completion
Jun 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
An extensive study that began last year with the backing of a Pittsburgh-based charitable organization and some of the region's major producers to determine the potential of underground natural gas liquids (NGL) storage in the Appalachian Basin is almost finished. -
2nd W.Va. Gas-Processing Plant Explosion kills 1
Jun 21, 2017 | AP (in West Virginia Public Broadcasting)
Another person has been killed in an explosion at a West Virginia industrial plant where two people were killed last month, authorities said Tuesday. -
EPA Faces Ongoing Cleanup Burdens in midst of Budget Cuts
Jun 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
Even as EPA faces the threat of significant budget cuts in fiscal year 2018, two reports highlight both new and ongoing cleanup burdens the agency faces. -
Safer Oil Transport Options Ignored Politically
Jun 21, 2017 | The Chronicle Journal
By Paul Filteau
Further to the letter by Tom Cook (Oil Diluent a Problem Too - CJ, June 16), the big problem with diluent is the flashpoint or when it catches fire and/or explodes. -
PHMSA Set to Fill Vacancies on Its Gas and Liquid Pipeline Advisory Committees
Jun 21, 2017 | World Pipelines
By Stephanie Roker
The US Department of Transportation's (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has announced that it is seeking nominations for personnel, preferably executive-level leadership, from the federal government and industry to fill vacancies on its gas and liquid pipeline advisory committees. -
Industry Risks Losing Trillions from Climate Rules — Report
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Benjamin Hulac
The global oil industry has trillions of dollars at risk from climate regulation, money that could be lost if governments clamp down on emissions, according to a report released today. -
Zinke's Answer about Temperature Is Called 'Stupid'
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E ClimatewireB
By Brittany Patterson
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke evaded questions yesterday about the extent of rising temperatures during a Senate budget hearing for an agency that oversees fossil fuel development on a fifth of the nation's land. -
Environmentalists Say EPA 'Conflates' Separate Powers to Stay Methane NSPS
Jun 21, 2017 | InsideEPA
By Abby Smith
Environmentalists in a new court filing argue EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt unlawfully paused several portions of Obama-era methane oil and gas standards by conflating the agency's narrow power to “reconsider” aspects of a rule and pause those provisions with its broader authority to revise rules that remain in effect. -
Democratic Lawmakers Raise Pressure on EPA Over Icahn's Biofuels Role
Jun 21, 2017 | Reuters (in The New York Times
U.S. Democratic lawmakers asked Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt on Wednesday to disclose procedures to prevent billionaire Carl Icahn from influencing U.S. biofuels policy for personal gain. The letter is the latest in a string of missives from Democrats concerned about Icahn's dual role as a special adviser to President Donald Trump on regulation and as a major investor in heavily regulated industries. Icahn has an 82 percent stake in oil refiner CVR Energy Inc. He has also recommended the White House change the biofuels program that would reduce costs to CVR and other refining companies. "Recent reports about Mr. Icahn’s actions with respect to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program have raised significant ethical and legal concerns given his oil refinery business interests,” the letter read. Continue reading the main story Advertisement Continue reading the main story Signing the letter were Reps. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee; Bobby Rush of Illinois; Diana DeGette of Colorado; Paul Tonko of New York; and John Sarbanes of Maryland. They called on Pruitt to respond by the end of the month with details about procedures in place at EPA to prevent Icahn from influencing policy for personal gain. The agency runs the Renewable Fuel Standard program, a regulation requiring increasing amounts of biofuels in the nation's gasoline. Earlier this month, five Democratic senators had also asked the EPA to hand over documents relating to Icahn's role in shaping biofuels policy at the agency.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Scott Pruitt Dismisses Dozens More EPA Science Advisers
Jun 21, 2017 | ThinkProgress
By Natasha Geiling
Dozens of Environmental Protection Agency scientists were recently informed that their contracts would not be renewed this August, leaving a key EPA office without important scientific guidance.
According to an email sent to EPA scientists and obtained by the Washington Post, the EPA has decided not to renew the posts of any scientists working for the EPA’s Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC). The BOSC functions as an advisory board for the EPA’s Office of Research and Development, and helps the office make sure that it is using sufficiently rigorous science in its research and development programs.
“The Board of Scientific Counselors was formed to make sure the EPA does the best possible scientific work with limited taxpayer dollars,” Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement. “This independent advice is needed now more than ever. By sacking dozens of scientific counselors, Pruitt is showing that he doesn’t value scientific input and the benefits it offers the public.”
Board members are chosen by the EPA administrator, and serve three-year terms. It is customary for first-term members to receive a second three-year appointment, though reappointment is granted at the discretion of the administrator.
In May, Pruitt notified nine BOSC members to tell them that they would not be receiving a second-term when their tenure ended in August. At the time, the New York Times reported that Pruitt wanted to make space for representatives from industries — like the chemical industry, or oil and gas industry — which the EPA is charged with regulating. In an email to the Washington Post, Scott Openshaw, a spokesman for the American Chemistry Council, said that the dismissals would help address industry concerns that “EPA advisory boards did not include a diversity of views and therefore frequently presented a biased perspective on issues before them.”
The new wave of dismissals brings the total number of BOSC members who will be out of a job in August to 47, which will leave just 11 members serving on the BOSC and its five subcommittees. None of the subcommittees will have a chair or vice chair, and all committee meetings scheduled for late summer and fall have been cancelled.
“Pruitt has pulled off a devious process here: he’s signaled that he intends to dismiss experienced advisors whose terms are expiring over the next year — and he’s using the fact that he’s dismissing them to immediately block them from doing any more work,” UCS’s Kimmell said.
The Trump administration has a notably antagonistic relationship with science, from top administration officials blatantly contradicting the scientific consensus on human-caused climate change on national television to deep proposed cuts to science programs across the federal government. Under Pruitt’s leadership, the EPA has scrubbed climate science from the agency’s website, and has rejected scientific advice from its own agency scientists while issuing regulatory decisions. Pruitt is also currently being reviewed by the EPA’s Scientific Integrity Officer for his false comments about climate change made on CNBC in March.
“The decision to suspend the EPA’s Board of Scientific Counselors and dismiss numerous scientists from its ranks is another brazen act of disregard for science by Scott Pruitt. I’m concerned that he may continue to replace scientists with industry insiders or simply leave the Board in limbo,” Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), told ThinkProgress via email. “Pruitt’s longstanding antipathy to the agency he leads, and its mission of protecting clean air and water, will become a greater menace to public health as he cedes more and more influence to industry at the expense of sound scientific advice.”
According to an administration official, who spoke anonymously with the Washington Post, the dismissal of BOSC scientists could just be the beginning of a larger scientific shakeup within the agency. According to the official, the administration is also looking into replacing members of the EPA’s Scientific Advisory Board, a body of scientific counselors meant to provide scientific advice to the administrator.
The news of the most recent round of dismissals broke the same day as news that the EPA is planning whittle its overall workforce by more than 1,000 employees, through buyouts and early retirement.
https://thinkprogress.org/epa-dismisses-more-scientists-pruitt-trump-7530dc37dcf
-
(ACC Mentioned) Want to Squash Science? Follow Pruitt’s Lead at the EPA
Jun 21, 2017 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Genna Reed
The Trump Administration doubled down on its overhaul of the EPA’s Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) this week, notifying members whose terms would be ending in 2017 and early 2018 that their terms will not be renewed and cancelling subcommittee meetings for the rest of the year. This means that just 3 out of 18 executive committee members and 11 out of 49 subcommittee members will remain, with just 10 days to reapply to their positions.
This will stall the work of the committee, which was set to begin looking at the EPA’s Office of Research and Development’s (ORD) plans for the next five years. According to the Board’s chair, Deborah Swackhamer, it’s an inauspicious sign of what’s to come for other advisory committees with members whose terms are coming to an end, like many members of EPA’s Science Advisory Board.
Scientific advisory committees, like BOSC, provide independent advice to the federal government, allowing agencies to seek outside expertise on critical issues. The EPA has seven advisory committees that are scientific or technical in nature, including the Science Advisory Board (SAB), the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP), the Board of Scientific Counselors, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), the Chemical Safety Advisory Committee, the Environmental Laboratory Advisory Board, and the Human Studies Review Board.
Most recent membership includes a wide range of expertise, of scientists from a variety of backgrounds whose affiliations range from an academic setting to the private sector.
As appropriate, a diversity of expertise is represented on these advisory committees, the work of which ranges from reviewing epidemiological studies on a particular pesticide to advising the EPA on a contentious scientific review, like fracking impacts on drinking water.
Advisory committees should be made up of a balance of expertise, not just because it’s required under the Federal Advisory Committee Act but because it promotes a breadth of opinions, an opportunity for creative solutions to complex problems, and challenges members to come to a consensus on certain charge questions.
The EPA’s advisory committees are also very transparent. All members serving on these committees must sign ethics forms, disclose funding from the past two years, and be prepared to submit a waiver to the administrator if there is a clear conflict of interest explaining how it will be mitigated.
A representative from the American Chemistry Council told the Washington Post that the emptying out of BOSC was welcome and would address their “concerns in the past that EPA advisory boards did not include a diversity of views and therefore frequently presented a biased perspective on issues before them.” But this criticism doesn’t make sense for the BOSC. Its executive committee is composed of scientists with diverse research expertise, equipped to give advice on ORD’s research agenda without making policy prescriptions where a bias would come into play.
I want to reiterate something that the BOSC’s chair repeated several times in a hearing before the House Science Committee in May. She told members of congress that “robust science, not politics, should form the bedrock” of environmental policies and that all of the members who could have been renewed for a second term had been fully qualified, vetted, and ORD-recommended.
There was no justification for their dismissal. Swackhamer was rightfully offended by the implication that BOSC members would display allegiance to the administration under which they are appointed, telling the Star Tribune that, “I resent the fact that we are considered biased because were appointed during [President Barack] Obama’s tenure,” she said. “I would behave the same way if I were appointed by Pruitt.”
Independent science advisors should be judged based on their qualifications to make scientific recommendations, which don’t change just because there’s a new EPA administrator. Now instead of working to help ORD decide how in the world they will deal with likely cuts to several of its research programs, BOSC will be incapacitated for at least the next year, which according to one of the subcommittee members who resigned last month, Peter B. Meyer, will mean that “guidance to shape the coming agenda will be lost so cost-effectiveness of research will suffer, as will science.”
Of all of the EPA’s advisory committees, BOSC is the last one I would expect to be caught up in a political fight. And I’m still worried about the future of EPA’s other important science advisory committees. Let’s remember that the SAB often works on policy-relevant issues, and its current nomination process is already stalled this year.
Every year since 2007, the EPA has put out a call for nominations around the same time in April. Except this year, that call never came, despite there being 15 slots opening up this September that need to be filled. Likewise, CASAC’s chair’s term is ending in September and the EPA has so far done nothing to recruit for her replacement, even though without her the committee will be unable to function. EPA staff has reported that Pruitt has a draft notice for nominations on his desk, but he hasn’t issued it yet. Without CASAC’s chair, the committee will be unable to issue recommendations on soot and sulfur oxides that the EPA relies on for further air quality rulemaking.
Delaying the work of these advisory committees is another example of this administration’s apparent philosophy of death by delay. The inability of CASAC to continue advising the EPA on its National Ambient Air Quality Standards means that the EPA will go without independent scientific advice on the six criteria pollutants of ozone, particulates, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and lead. Changes to BOSC means that ORD will have less input on how to make cost-effective changes to its research programs while encouraging important scientific development. And if the SAB gets treatment similar to BOSC, SAB’s ongoing work to review EPA’s water quality criteria to protect aquatic life and to peer review EPA’s toxicological assessments of several chemicals, including ethyl tert-butyl ether will languish.
We must protect federal advisory committees, for they are the objective body that every agency needs in order to take on some of the most difficult questions facing our country today. The work that these advisory committees do feeds into the crucial research conducted by and the safeguards issued by the EPA. Advisory committee members volunteering their valuable time to public service to advise agencies on how best to protect us and the environment are unsung heroes. We should acknowledge and praise them more often.
It’s a shame that Administrator Pruitt is doing the opposite: actively working to offend committee members by questioning their objectivity under a new administration and devaluing their work by shifting committee composition and cancelling committee meetings. Gutting our government’s capacity for independent science advice is an attack on science. We will be keeping a watchful eye on the appointment of new BOSC committee members to make sure that scientific expertise and research experience, not political views, are the basis for qualification.
http://blog.ucsusa.org/genna-reed/pruitt-epa-scientific-advisory
-
Canada, US Seek Feedback on Managing Chemicals of Concern
Jun 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The governments of Canada and the US are soliciting feedback to inform the ongoing development of binational strategies for managing identified chemicals of mutual concern (CMC), including PCBs and HBCD.
The work comes under the CMC annex of the 2012 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, which outlines the countries' commitments to protecting human health and the environment "through cooperative and coordinated measures to reduce the anthropogenic release of chemicals of mutual concern into the waters of the Great Lakes".
Last year, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) and the US EPA agreed the following list of CMCs:hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD);polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs);polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs);perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA);perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS);long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids (LC-PFCAs);mercury; andshort-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs).
Agencies, organisations and individuals have an opportunity to provide "any relevant information" for possible inclusion in the work.HBCD, PCB risk management strategies
The governments have also issued two draft risk management strategies, covering PCBs and HBCD, as a pilot.
Each of these lays out risk mitigation options for achieving human health or environmental benefits, or for improving the understanding of the substance’s sources, environmental fate and effects.
One approach outlined for HBCD, for example, calls for evaluating alternatives substances for use in XPS and EPS foams and in specialty fabrics, and for ensuring that the environmental impacts of these alternatives are well understood.
And in the case of PCBs, the draft strategy proposes revisiting existing risk management measures to ensure they reflect the most current scientific knowledge. This includes determining whether levels of PCBs in consumer products "can and should be regulated".
Additional strategies cover compliance enforcement, pollution prevention and monitoring and surveillance, among others.
The two nations will host webinars on 28 June and 13 July to answer questions and receive comments on the PCB and HBCD draft strategies.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57061/canada-us-seek-feedback-on-managing-chemicals-of-concern
-
Group's Classification of Roundup as Carcinogen Tainted
Jun 21, 2017 | North State Journal
By Cory Lavalette
Nothing gets rid of that stubborn patch of grass in the crack in your driveway easier than a squirt or two of Roundup, but the active chemical that does the heavy lifting has far-ranging uses and has faced its share of criticism.
Glyphosate, discovered in 1970, has evolved into much more than a weekend weedkiller. Missouri-based Monsanto, along with other companies that utilize the world’s most-used pesticide, has developed genetically engineered seed that is resistant to the chemical, meaning farmers can spray fields with glyphosate, wiping out unwanted plants without harming their crops.
“It’s certainly a popular product,” said Mitch Peele, senior director of public policy at North Carolina Farm Bureau.
But in 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer — known as IARC and part of the World Health Organization — determined glyphosate was a “probable human carcinogen” that could cause blood cancers. However, those findings are now in question.
The rise in genetically modified seeds, called GMOs, has led to skepticism over their safety, helping usher in the billion-dollar organic food era that has often been marketed as Big Ag vs. small family farmers.
The classification by the IARC two years ago was a blow to Monsanto’s stance that glyphosate is safe, even though several other groups, including the U.S.’s Environmental Protection Agency, deemed it so.
Lawsuits like a 184-plaintiff case in California claim the product causes cancer, and the IARC’s labeling of glyphosate as a carcinogen gave footing to critics.
However, last week Reuters published a story revealing an epidemiologist from the National Cancer Institute knew years-old research determined glyphosate showed no evidence of causing cancer, but the results were not published and therefore not considered when he met with the IARC about the chemical.
That research came from the Agricultural Health Study, which has followed more than 89,000 farmers and their spouses in North Carolina and Iowa who have participated in the research since 1993. It has found links to non-Hodgkin lymphoma in farmers who used certain chemicals, but not when using glyphosate, according to a March deposition by Aaron Blair, the scientist who met with the IARC without presenting the findings.
A 2006 update from the study found spouses of farmers had slightly less incidence of breast cancer compared to other women in North Carolina and Iowa, and the chemical most used by them was glyphosate. A 2009 update did show women have a higher risk of asthma with allergies if they used several pesticides, including glyphosate.
“It’s a long-term study where they’ve looked at people, actual farmers,” Peele said. “So it’s real-world data, so that’s always good when you have real-world data that you can cite in those type of studies.”
Peele was also quick to point out the IARC’s classification of glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen” — even before the revelations about Blair’s deposition — represented just one opinion of many, with most determining the chemical was safe.
“When you’ve got EPA and several other regulatory bodies here in the U.S. that are doing that sort of thing already, if they had come out in addition to this international body under the World Health Organization, then I think that’s something entirely different,” he said. “But this is just one out of several that are looking at that and I think you have to look at things in totality.”
At this juncture, that totality points to glyphosate as safe and the IARC’s determination as an outlier, especially after the recent revelations about the Agricultural Health Study’s unpublished findings.
“I don’t know what the policy is for the IARC going back and reviewing data based on new information,” Peele said. “So maybe that will take place and maybe they will come to the findings of so many other regulatory bodies like the EPA, the European Food Safety Authority and this European Chemicals Agency and others and agree that it should not be classified as a probable carcinogen.”
Glyphosate’s use — in your driveway and in farms across the world — has more than doubled in the last decade compared to the previous decade, so research like the ongoing Agricultural Health Study will continue to look at how the chemical impacts the health of now older farmers.
“Farmers need critical crop-protection tools, so we’ve been supportive of those efforts,” Peele said. “But we have also said all along we want to make sure the products they’re using are safe and have gone through all the regulatory checks and balances and all.”
http://www.nsjonline.com/article/2017/06/international-groups-classification-of-roundup-tainted
-
Interior Pushes to Freeze Appeal as Plans to Nix Rule Advance
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
As the White House reviews the Interior Department's plans to roll back an Obama-era hydraulic fracturing rule, government lawyers are again urging a court to pause related litigation.
In a brief to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday, Interior urged a panel of judges to reject environmental groups' request to push forward in a legal battle over whether the federal government has authority to regulate fracking on public and tribal lands.
According to the Trump administration, it would be inappropriate to move ahead with the case while Interior is rethinking the fracking rule. Just last week, the agency sent the White House Office of Management and Budget a proposal to rescind the regulation.
"BLM's progress toward the publication of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking strengthens the arguments that BLM made in favor of abeyance in its supplemental brief," yesterday's filing said. "The Court need not make an immediate decision about the 2015 Hydraulic Fracturing Rule now because the ongoing administrative process could rescind the Rule and moot the present appeal."
The brief also sheds some light on the ongoing review of the fracking rule, which has fallen behind schedule (Energywire, June 15). The document says Interior's Bureau of Land Management will soon publish a Federal Register proposal to rescind the rule and reinstate previous regulations on oil and gas development on public lands, which did not specifically address fracking.
The proposal will be subject to 60 days of public comment.
Industry opponents of the fracking rule celebrated the administration's move yesterday, calling the proposed rulemaking's arrival at OMB "an important step" in the process. Environmental attorneys, meanwhile, slammed Interior for attempting to roll back what they see as common-sense standards (Greenwire, June 20).
The rule, which has been stalled by litigation and has never taken effect, would set new requirements for well construction, wastewater management and chemical disclosure for fracked wells on public and tribal lands.
Environmental groups, law professors and former Interior officials have pushed the court to issue a decision in the case, arguing that the core legal question — the government's authority over fracking — does not depend on the status of the fracking rule.
The Trump administration itself has defended its authority over fracking but has maintained that continued litigation is unnecessary in light of the regulatory review (Energywire, May 8).
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/06/21/stories/1060056338
-
Small Producers Complain of 'Frack Hits'
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
In Oklahoma, small oil and gas producers say more than 100 of their wells have been damaged by hydraulic fracturing jobs done for large companies.
The producers have even coined a new term for the emerging problem: a "frack hit."
Joe Warren, a partner with small oil and gas producer Brown & Borelli Inc., said he thinks the problem is particularly acute in Oklahoma's Stack, one of the hottest oil regions in the country.
"Most of the large players in the Stack have hit one or more of our wells," Warren said (Erin Ailworth, Wall Street Journal, June 20).
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/06/21/stories/1060056311
-
Industry Finds Fracking Poses Little Threat to Drinking Water
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
A new study conducted by top scientists in Texas has found that the shale oil boom there has caused earthquakes, degraded natural resources, overwhelmed some communities, and even boosted the frequency and severity of traffic collisions, while enriching companies, residents and the state itself.
Scientists, regulators and industry leaders need to identify and understand the risks of drilling, said the study's leader, Christine Ehlig-Economides.
But industry representatives saw the report a different way, pointing to sections that said there was little evidence to tie hydraulic fracturing to drinking water pollution or an exponential rise in Texas earthquakes.
"This study is yet another indication that the campaign to shut down fracking is based on politics, not science," said Steve Everley, a spokesman for Texans for Natural Gas. "If fracking were a credible risk to groundwater, we would know about it in Texas, which produces more oil and natural gas than any other state."
The study found that clearing new well pads caused soil erosion and the loss of wildlife habitat. It also found that notable earthquakes have increased from two a year before 2008 to 12 to 15 a year now. Additionally, trucks used by the industry cause $1.5 billion to $2 billion per year in damage to highways and roads, as well as a sharp increase in fatal collisions.
Industry leaders emphasized the economic benefits noted in the study, including an annual gross product of $473 billion and 3.8 million jobs (David Hunn, San Antonio Express-News, June 20.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/06/21/stories/1060056353
-
Tropical Storm Cindy to Hit U.S. Gulf Coast Late Wednesday
Jun 21, 2017 | Reuters (in The New York Times)
Tropical Storm Cindy is expected to make landfall on the Gulf Coast near the Texas-Louisiana border on Wednesday, threatening to bring flash floods from Texas to Florida, according to the National Hurricane Center.
Cindy's wind speed weakened on Wednesday and the storm center was located about 170 miles (270 km) south of Morgan City, Louisiana, with maximum sustained winds of 50 miles (85 km) per hour, the NHC said.
The storm was moving northwest at nearly 10 miles (17 km) per hour, and forecasters said they expect this motion to continue and landfall to be made along the Texas-Louisiana border, home to some of the nation's largest refineries.
Heavy rains and wind could disrupt oil supplies at the refineries and energy ports in Port Arthur, Texas and Lake Charles, Louisiana where large oil refining and chemical export operations are located, which could drive up gasoline prices.
Sabine Pilots, which guides ships in and out of the ports of Beaumont, Port Arthur, and Orange, Texas, suspended some operations on Wednesday, a spokesperson said. Cheniere Energy Inc declined to comment whether the storm was affecting loading of liquefied natural gas at its operations in the Sabine Pass.
Cindy was projected to drop between 6 and 9 inches (15-23 cm) of rain that could reach up to 12 inches in parts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida, and cause "life-threatening flash flooding," the NHC said.
"It's a little stronger than it was yesterday, but the overall track is looking to be the same," said Stephen Strum, vice president of extended forecast services at Weather Decision Technologies in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Rain will cause the biggest impact and fall most heavily from New Orleans to the Florida Panhandle, Strum added.
After the storm moves inland, rain will spread north-eastward across Arkansas and into portions of the Tennessee and Ohio Valley so that flooding concerns will continue through the weekend.
The Gulf of Mexico is home to about 17 percent of U.S. crude and 5 percent of dry natural gas output, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. More than 45 percent of the nation's refining capacity is along that coast, also home to 51 percent of total U.S. gas processing capability.
The Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, the largest privately owned crude storage terminal in the United States, suspended vessel offloading operations ahead of the storm but said Tuesday it expected no interruptions to deliveries from its hub in Clovelly, Louisiana.
Royal Dutch Shell said it suspended some offshore well operations, but production was so far unaffected. Anadarko Petroleum Corp said it had evacuated non-essential staff from its Gulf of Mexico facilities.
Governors in Louisiana and Alabama declared a state of emergency, while Texas increased its state of preparedness and Florida's governor warned residents in the northwest part of his state to stay alert for flooding and heavy rain.
There were also reports of voluntary evacuations from some coastal communities in Texas, including the Bolivar Peninsula in Galveston County, which is close to where the storm is expected to hit land.
The storm could cause a surge of up to 4 feet (1.2 meters) in isolated areas and possibly spawn tornados from southern Louisiana to the Florida Panhandle, the NHC said.
The Atlantic hurricane season runs from June 1 through Nov. 30. Most meteorologists forecast this year will be more active than normal.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/06/21/world/americas/21reuters-storm-cindy-nhc.html
-
Appalachian NGL Storage Study Nearing Completion
Jun 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
An extensive study that began last year with the backing of a Pittsburgh-based charitable organization and some of the region's major producers to determine the potential of underground natural gas liquids (NGL) storage in the Appalachian Basin is almost finished.
The Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation awarded a $100,000 grant early last year to study if the region could support the kind of underground storage necessary for petrochemical industry growth. The grant was matched by Chevron Corp., EQT Corp., XTO Energy Inc. and several other companies with a stake in shale-related development. Director of the West Virginia University Energy Institute Brian Anderson, who's played an integral role in the study, said it should be complete by the end of the summer.
"There is a lot of opportunity not just for ethylene and polyethylene, but other specialty chemicals that really -- once we start building infrastructure -- comes naturally in that ecosystem," Anderson said last week during a presentation at the Appalachian Storage Hub conference in Canonsburg, PA. Propane and butane derivatives, he added, could also be manufactured in the region if liquids storage was available. A unit of Royal Dutch Shell plc plans to move forward later this year with construction of a multi-billion dollar ethane cracker in Western Pennsylvania.
Support has been growing in the private and public sectors for a network of pipelines, equipment and underground storage to ease supply and demand imbalances if other crackers like Shell's are built.
Anderson said the findings of the Benedum study are expected n September. The goal is to pass along the findings to private industry for a costlier engineering study and ultimately to construct a storage hub somewhere in the basin.
The study has closely examined land along the Ohio River in a corridor that spans Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Researchers believe a number of formations could provide ideal conditions for underground storage. They have examined mined-rock, such as the Greenbrier Limestone formation, which at about 2,000 feet underground is shallower than other possible targets that are under study like the Salina salt formation, which is roughly 6,000 feet underground.
The region also has an abundance of depleted gas reservoirs that could be ideal as well. Researchers have ranked 113 of them by the most favorable characteristics. The basin has significant underground gas storage capacity, and it’s long been a staging area to move gas to the Northeast. But its NGL storage and pipeline options are inadequate.
Pennsylvania commissioned a study that found the Marcellus and Utica shales could accommodate up to four additional ethylene crackers. Mountaineer NGL Storage LLC is trying to secure customers for a 3.25 million bbl storage facility targeting the Salina in Ohio, but the state study also estimated that the region needs roughly 4-7 million bbl of liquids storage for more petrochemical development.
Researchers believe the region is right for a storage hub, but Anderson added that the geology there is not as conducive as it is in Mont Belvieu, TX, the North American NGL hub that sits on a shallower salt dome on the Gulf Coast. It would take more work and collaboration among the states to get such a project jump-started, he said.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/110853-appalachian-ngl-storage-study-nearing-completion
-
2nd W.Va. Gas-Processing Plant Explosion kills 1
Jun 21, 2017 | AP (in West Virginia Public Broadcasting)
Another person has been killed in an explosion at a West Virginia industrial plant where two people were killed last month, authorities said Tuesday.
Officials said the explosion Tuesday morning was at Midland Resource Recovery, a company based in Ontario, Canada, that odorizes natural gas.
In a preliminary report, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection said contractors at the facility outside Philippi were disassembling a 30-gallon tank, trying to render tanks safe from the previous explosion May 24 that killed two and injured one.
The agency says a preliminary report shows one other person was injured and an unknown quantity of Mercaptan, the chemical used to give natural gas an odor, was spilled.
A woman who answered the telephone at the company’s headquarters in Ontario declined to comment.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has begun an investigation. OSHA spokeswoman Lenore Uddyback-Fortson said the victim was an employee of Specialized Professional Services Inc. The company based in Washington, Pennsylvania, handles hazardous material. Calls to the company were not immediately returned Tuesday.
-
EPA Faces Ongoing Cleanup Burdens in midst of Budget Cuts
Jun 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
Even as EPA faces the threat of significant budget cuts in fiscal year 2018, two reports highlight both new and ongoing cleanup burdens the agency faces.
In the Great Lakes, a joint report released by EPA and its Canadian counterpart finds that “toxic chemicals in the Great Lakes have dropped but invasive species and algal blooms threaten the lakes' ecosystems and keep them from being truly great,” according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
Reporting on the agencies' new study, "State of the Great Lakes 2017 Highlights Report" finds that of the lakes, “Lake Erie is in the worst condition.” describing it as "deteriorating," with algal blooms caused by agricultural runoff contaminating drinking water in its western end, and beach fouling and habitat loss plaguing its eastern end.
While the report finds some positive trends in Lake Erie, such as increased fish and native plant stocks, its findings are nevertheless raising concerns from environmentalists, who point to Trump administration plans to eliminate EPA's Great Lakes cleanup program.
"As the report makes clear, progress is being made--but serious threats remain, " said a statement from National Wildlife Federation scientist Michael Murray. "Lake Erie's deteriorating health serves as a warning that public officials on both sides of the border cannot let their guards down. The millions of people who rely on the Great Lakes for their drinking water, health, jobs and way of life are counting on public officials to continue to make Great Lakes restoration and protection a top priority."
Meanwhile in North Carolina, Chemours, the DuPont spinoff, announced that it will stop discharging GenX, an alternative to some perfluorinated chemicals, into the Cape Fear River, though EPA officials say the agency plans to investigate the releases to determine if they were lawful, according to the Wilmington Star-News.
The paper reports that the company announced June 20 that it will begin taking steps to capture all wastewater containing the GenX chemical, remove the substance and dispose of it.
“We are capturing the byproduct GenX from the waste streams of the fluoromonomer production and disposing of it,” Gary Cambre, a Chemours spokesman, wrote in an email.
But the paper reports those steps may not be enough to stave off an EPA investigation into Chemours’ activities at the Fayetteville Works site about 100 miles up the Cape Fear River from Wilmington.
“This investigation will allow EPA to determine whether Chemours is in compliance with requirements of the order to control releases to the environment at the Fayetteville, N.C., facility,” an EPA spokeswoman said in an email.
These cases come as Congress has begun to consider the Trump administration's budget request for FY18, which proposes to slash EPA's budget by $2.4 billion or 31 percent, including eliminating the Great Lakes cleanup program and others.
Many, including Republican appropriators, have raised concerns that such deep cuts will make it impossible for EPA to carry out its most basic functions, such as cleanup and enforcement actions.
But at a House panel hearing last week, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt offered only a muted defense of the request, leaving it up to lawmakers to rewrite the plan.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-faces-ongoing-cleanup-burdens-midst-budget-cuts
-
Safer Oil Transport Options Ignored Politically
Jun 21, 2017 | The Chronicle Journal
By Paul Filteau
Further to the letter by Tom Cook (Oil Diluent a Problem Too - CJ, June 16), the big problem with diluent is the flashpoint or when it catches fire and/or explodes. Also, there is the outward flow from a leak, even if it doesn’t catch fire, or explode. The cumulative effects over time of these leaking carcinogens are also the worry. Apparently, there are safer technologies out there that don’t require diluent and if a rail car does derail or is punctured then contained crude doesn’t explode or leak.
In an article that appeared recently in the Walrus Magazine entitled Pressure Test (Feb. 21), “a number of options, then, offer the possibility of safer oil transport - there’s just one problem, the energy sector just doesn’t seem interested in deploying new technologies.”
I sent this information previously to the attention of mayor and council. Noting that Mayor Hobbs and Councillors Andrew Foulds and Shelby Ch’ng voted against Energy East, maybe the rest of council is like Energy East - they don’t really care about safe transportation of crude. They only repeat what Energy East tells them.
With all the leaks and spills that occur regularly, one wonders why the federal government rejects an inquiry into the safe transportation of hazardous materials. Like our council, they just keep repeating, “we have to get our resources to market” (while bypassing domestic markets, such as natural gas for Sioux Lookout and other Northern Ontario communities). Bugger the odd leak or explosion in between. I guess when a political consultant to TransCanada was a member of Justin Trudeau’s election campaign, what else can we expect. Anyway, watch it taxpayers, or we’ll likely end up financing this multi-billion dollar boondoggle, Energy East.
-
PHMSA Set to Fill Vacancies on Its Gas and Liquid Pipeline Advisory Committees
Jun 21, 2017 | World Pipelines
By Stephanie Roker
The US Department of Transportation's (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has announced that it is seeking nominations for personnel, preferably executive-level leadership, from the federal government and industry to fill vacancies on its gas and liquid pipeline advisory committees.
Each committee reviews PHMSA's gas or liquid pipeline regulatory initiatives to determine their technical feasibility, reasonableness, cost-effectiveness, and practicability. Each has 15 members, with equal representation from the government, industry, and public. Members are appointed by and report to the Secretary of Transportation for three-year terms, but may be reappointed as necessary to provide continuity in the review of technical proposals. Members are not compensated, and generally meet in-person in the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area.
The gas advisory committee (GPAC), also known as the technical pipeline safety standards committee, has one federal government vacancy and one industry vacancy. The liquid pipeline advisory committee (LPAC), also known as the technical hazardous liquid pipeline safety standards committee, has one federal government vacancy and three industry vacancies.
Nominees must have experience in safety regulations applicable to pipeline transportation or pipeline facility operations, or be technically qualified by training, experience, or knowledge in at least one applicable field of engineering to evaluate pipeline safety standards or risk management principles.
Individuals may self-nominate and/or nominate multiple qualified professionals. Nominations must be received by 5 July 2017, and submitted as directed in the federal register. See the federal register notice for additional eligibility requirements and nomination instructions.
PHMSA may consider nominees for additional vacancies that occur while processing these vacancies.
https://www.worldpipelines.com/business-news/21062017/phmsa-set-to-fill-vacancies-on-its-gas-and-liquid-pipeline-advisory-committees/
-
Industry Risks Losing Trillions from Climate Rules — Report
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Benjamin Hulac
The global oil industry has trillions of dollars at risk from climate regulation, money that could be lost if governments clamp down on emissions, according to a report released today.
The London think tank Carbon Tracker says its analysis marks the first time that oil industry assets have been ranked by the amount of their exposure to loss from public climate policies. The group studied 69 publicly traded oil and gas companies.
The report found that $2.3 trillion in investments planned through 2025 "should not be deployed" if the world is to meet the goal of preventing more than 2 degrees Celsius of warming.
"There are clear signs that oil demand could peak in the early 2020s," James Leaton, research director at Carbon Tracker, said in a statement. He added that companies should consider shelving projects, in part to protect their investors.
The report is part of a growing chorus from financial analysts who warn of economic risks from climate change and regulations to address it.
The Group of 20 nations has commissioned a panel to study how climate change could fuel financial crisis. Central banks in China and in the United Kingdom are also studying the topic, and bank regulators in Canada and Australia are paying attention, too (E&E News PM, Feb. 17).
The Carbon Tracker report identifies six supermajors — BP PLC, Chevron Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., Total SA, Eni SpA and Royal Dutch Shell PLC — that have at least 20 percent of their planning exposed to a 2 C scenario. That level of risk translates to billions of dollars in possible loss, the group says.
The report's authors say that some drilling projects don't make sense economically when climate regulations are considered. They point to the Bonga North and the Bonga Southwest projects in Nigeria. Oil prices would have to reach $90 a barrel or more for those projects to break even, according to the authors.
"Sticking with the growth-at-all-costs scenario just doesn't add up for shareholder value when the policy and technology momentum is heading in the opposite direction," Leaton said.
The Paris climate agreement encourages nations to ratchet down emissions to meet the 2 C goal.
The Principles for Responsible Investment, a U.N. group, and a handful of European investment companies also worked on the report.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/stories/1060056325
-
Zinke's Answer about Temperature Is Called 'Stupid'
Jun 21, 2017 | E&E ClimatewireB
By Brittany Patterson
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke evaded questions yesterday about the extent of rising temperatures during a Senate budget hearing for an agency that oversees fossil fuel development on a fifth of the nation's land.
During a heated exchange with Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), Zinke punted on basic questions about climate science. The secretary declined to engage in a line of inquiry that focused on government predictions of rising temperatures over the next 80 years. He claimed instead that climate models are inaccurate, a frequent talking point among climate skeptics.
"I'm concerned about whether you are clear about the magnitude of warming that is occurring," Franken said at the Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing.
Franken repeatedly asked Zinke, a former congressman from Montana, if he could "tell me how much warming government scientists predict for the end of this century under a business-as-usual scenario?"
Zinke parried.
"I don't think government scientists can predict with certainty," he said. "There isn't a model that exists today that can predict today's weather given all the data."
Over the last few decades, scientists have come to use more than 30 climate models to project how climate could change in the future. The models often combine decades of weather, physics and the forcing effects of large-scale climate drivers, such as the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, in order to predict future climate.
The Earth is expected to warm between 8 and 11 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100 if emissions continue to rise unfettered, according to the 2014 National Climate Assessment.
Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, said Zinke's explanation was "a stupid and ignorant answer."
Climate models, he said, are getting better. The simulations increasingly line up with observed changes. By using temperature records and atmospheric measurements of carbon dioxide, scientists know that in the past 200 years the planet has warmed about 1.4 F and CO2 has risen 40 percent. The present level of atmospheric CO2 is higher than it has been in the past million years.
"Well, all models are wrong, but some are useful," Trenberth said. "Weather models aren't able to accurately predict if it'll be sunny or rainy two weeks from now because they are sensitive to small disruptions.
"But the patterns of weather may still be predictable in the same sense that summer is different than winter," he added. "And that is what climate is all about: determining the effects of the sun, the atmospheric composition, the oceans, the ice and ... looking for systematic influences."
While climate modeling and weather forecasting are similar, they rely on different sets of data and measure vastly different time scales, said Gavin Schmidt, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
"Weather forecasting is based on our ability to track weather systems (fronts, storms, wave patterns etc.) and is excellent at the 1 to 5 day range," he said in an email. "Climate forecasts by contrast predict statistics of weather as opposed to specific events."
When looking over long periods of time, the external drivers of climate — things like how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere trapping heat, and how many trees have been cut down and are no longer sequestering greenhouse gases — can be used to make statistical predictions about the climate, Schmidt said.
In a statement to E&E News, Franken said he wanted Zinke to recognize the real threat of climate change and the role his agency plays in setting policy that can affect it.
"I wanted Secretary Zinke to acknowledge that climate change is real, that without action the increase in temperatures will be large, that he listens to the climate scientists in his agency, and that he grasps that climate change will affect our public lands," Franken said. "I find it troubling, to say the least, that he failed to address any of those very important issues."
During the hearing, Zinke also seized on the Trump administration's decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement. He characterized the move as not being about climate change, but about the agreement's being a "bad deal." President Trump has repeatedly used the same language.
He then cited a White House talking point that if the agreement were implemented, it would only produce a 0.2-degree-Celsius reduction in global temperatures. Zinke called that "insignificant."
Zinke said his data point came from a report by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. But researchers from the Climate Interactive project, which collaborates with MIT, have refuted that point.
In fact, the study shows that the Paris Agreement could lower the expected temperature increase by 0.6 to 1.1 C (Climatewire, June 2).
An exasperated Franken again pressed the Cabinet secretary to answer his question about the science.
"I just want you to answer the question that I asked you. That's all I want you to do," Franken said. "Can you tell me how much warming government scientists ... predict for the end of the century under a business-as-usual scenario?"
Zinke didn't bite. Instead, he began questioning Franken.
"Can you tell me, sir, whether or not China increased its CO2 between now and 2030 under the agreement, and by what?" Zinke asked. "I will be glad to give you that answer."
The two agreed to finish the discussion in written comments submitted for the record.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/06/21/stories/1060056340
-
Environmentalists Say EPA 'Conflates' Separate Powers to Stay Methane NSPS
Jun 21, 2017 | InsideEPA
By Abby Smith
Environmentalists in a new court filing argue EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt unlawfully paused several portions of Obama-era methane oil and gas standards by conflating the agency's narrow power to “reconsider” aspects of a rule and pause those provisions with its broader authority to revise rules that remain in effect.
Their latest filing in their suit over the methane new source performance standards (NSPS) suggests that the litigation could have a broader impact by testing how much leeway courts give EPA to reconsider its rules.
“Flouting clear textual limits on his authority, Administrator Pruitt's principal argument is that he can grant reconsideration, and corresponding stays, whenever he chooses. That is not what the statute says,” a coalition of environmental groups writes in a June 20 reply brief defending their call for an appellate court to block EPA's move.
They add that the Clean Air Act “prescribes a carefully circumscribed scope for a narrow proceeding for 'reconsideration' (with authority to impose a limited stay), which the Administrator conflates with EPA's broad rule 'revision' authority (without authority to impose a stay).”
At issue in the litigation -- Clean Air Council, et al. v. EPA, et al., pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit -- is Pruitt's 90-day stay of several requirements of the NSPS. Issued by EPA in June 2016, the rule sets first-time limits on emissions of the potent greenhouse gas methane from new oil and gas facilities.
Pruitt initiated reconsideration proceedings of the methane NSPS' fugitive emissions monitoring requirements in an April letter to several industry groups. In a subsequent June 5 Federal Register notice, Pruitt announced reconsideration of additional provisions and stayed all provisions under reconsideration for 90 days.
Environmentalists argue, however, that EPA's stay is unlawful because the provisions Pruitt has chosen for reconsideration proceedings do not meet a two-part test under Clean Air Act section 307(d)(7)(B) -- a test they argue the agency must meet to formally “reconsider” rules.
That test requires EPA to prove: that objections to the provision were “impracticable” to raise during the comment period, and the provision is of “central relevance to the outcome of the rule.” They argue the methane NSPS provisions at issue fail both parts of the test.
Environmentalists have asked the D.C. Circuit to put a judicial stay on EPA's administrative pause of the methane NSPS provisions, or in the alternative, “grant the motion for summary disposition on the merits, and vacate EPA's unlawful administrative stay.”
Court Deference
EPA, however, argues in its June 15 brief that the statute only outlines the requirements for when it is obligated to begin reconsideration proceedings, and that the law does not limit its authority to begin such proceedings “regardless of whether the statutory criteria for when EPA is mandated to reconsider its rules are met.”
The agency argues it should receive deference from the courts regarding its reconsideration of the methane NSPS.
But environmentalists in their recent reply brief say EPA's authority to reconsider rules under air act section 307(d)(7)(B) is narrower than the agency purports. Citing prior case law, the environmental groups argue deference to EPA in this area is “limited.”
For example, environmentalists note a 2011 D.C. Circuit case Portland Cement Association v. EPA, where “after extensively examining the facts relevant to notice without a hint of deference to EPA, and despite finding it 'a very close question,' this Court rejected EPA's conclusion that the party could have reasonably anticipated the final rule.” They also cite a 1983 D.C. Circuit case, Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. EPA, also focused on whether EPA gave proper notice of a provision in a final rule, where they say the court made its decision “without any indication” that EPA's position was “an important factor.”
“Limited deference on these notice questions makes sense. EPA has no greater expertise than this Court in determining whether a certain issue was 'impracticable to raise' during the comment period,” environmentalists write. “To the contrary, this Court has a fully-developed body of case law for determining when a final rule is a 'logical outgrowth' of the proposal, and thus whether a party had a practicable opportunity to raise concerns.”
The filing comes as a coalition of 13 states and local governments asked to intervene on behalf of environmental groups in the case. The group includes Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia and Chicago.
'Bootstrap His Way'
More broadly, the groups claim Pruitt “conflates” his narrower reconsideration authority with the agency's broader power to “revise” a regulation.
“'Reconsideration,' as used in section 307(d)(7)(B), is a much narrower term. It is the term for the exhaustion procedure Congress made available when -- and only when -- a party demonstrates that it was unable to comment on an issue of central relevance during the normal comment period,” environmentalists write.
They say Pruitt is “mischaracterizing a revision as a reconsideration” to “bootstrap his way to stay authority.” Because EPA's ability to issue a 90-day administrative stay of rule requirements is limited to reconsideration proceedings, the agency cannot issue one in this case, the environmentalists add.
The environmentalists in their initial brief in the case argued Pruitt is trying to use the reconsideration process to dismantle the entire methane NSPS. The rule is targeted for review under President Donald Trump's energy executive order, and EPA initiated a review of the rule consistent with that directive April 3.
And EPA, since issuing the 90-day pause, has unveiled a proposal seeking to extend the stay of the NSPS requirements. In a June 16 Register notice, EPA proposed to further stay the provisions by two years, a move it says will ensure portions of the rule “do not take effect while the agency works through the reconsideration process.”
EPA is also proposing in a separate June 16 Register notice a three-month stay of the requirements, which it says will “ensure there is no gap in the stay between the 90-day stay and the proposed two-year stay if finalized.” The agency will take comment on both of those proposed stays for 30 days.
Other Arguments
Environmentalists in their June 20 brief dispute several other arguments from EPA and several oil and gas industry groups that intervened to support the agency. Industry argued in its June 15 brief that the D.C. Circuit does not have jurisdiction to review EPA's pause of the methane NSPS requirements because EPA's initiation of reconsideration -- which resulted in the stay -- is not a final action.
But the environmental groups argue the stay “marks the consummation of EPA's decision-making process and has immediate legal consequences.” And they argue that neither industry nor EPA cite a case where the court found a final agency action is “unreviewable because it was taken in the course of an ongoing proceeding.”
Environmentalists also dismiss arguments from EPA and industry that the administrative pause would not cause “irreparable” harm. EPA and industry critiques “do not withstand even minimal scrutiny,” in part because “EPA itself has conceded that delaying these provisions disproportionately harms children,” environmentalists write, citing a sentence from EPA's Register notice proposing the two-year delay.
In addition, environmentalists charge Pruitt and industry, in arguing oil and gas firms would face “millions of dollars in compliance costs” without the stay, omit that those costs would represent “just a fraction of a percent of industry revenues and do not outweigh the severe health harms to Petitioners' members and other Americans.
-
Democratic Lawmakers Raise Pressure on EPA Over Icahn's Biofuels Role
Jun 21, 2017 | Reuters (in The New York Times
The letter is the latest in a string of missives from Democrats concerned about Icahn's dual role as a special adviser to President Donald Trump on regulation and as a major investor in heavily regulated industries.
Icahn has an 82 percent stake in oil refiner CVR Energy Inc. He has also recommended the White House change the biofuels program that would reduce costs to CVR and other refining companies.
"Recent reports about Mr. Icahn’s actions with respect to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program have raised significant ethical and legal concerns given his oil refinery business interests,” the letter read.
Signing the letter were Reps. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee; Bobby Rush of Illinois; Diana DeGette of Colorado; Paul Tonko of New York; and John Sarbanes of Maryland.
They called on Pruitt to respond by the end of the month with details about procedures in place at EPA to prevent Icahn from influencing policy for personal gain. The agency runs the Renewable Fuel Standard program, a regulation requiring increasing amounts of biofuels in the nation's gasoline.
Earlier this month, five Democratic senators had also asked the EPA to hand over documents relating to Icahn's role in shaping biofuels policy at the agency.
And in May, eight Democratic senators asked U.S. regulators to investigate Icahn’s biofuels activities. The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission responded that it was not investigating but would help the EPA with any probe that it was conducting. [L1N1J21PC]
An official at the EPA Office of Inspector General declined to comment on whether an inquiry was under way.
Icahn was named as an unpaid special adviser to Trump in December. In February, he proposed shifting the responsibility for blending biofuels to fuel dealers from refiners.
Icahn has said the proposal is not self-dealing because it would benefit many refining companies, not just CVR.
White House officials have said the EPA is considering the proposal.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/06/21/business/21reuters-usa-biofuels-icahn.html?_r=0
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested