Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 20/7/17
-
Trump Outlines Deregulation Agenda
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Arianna Skibell
The White House this morning released the new administration's first regulatory plan, a sweeping survey for all federal agency actions. -
(ACC Mentioned) Health Advocates Sound Alarm over Trump EPA, Rule Delays
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hier
Public health advocates are warning that the Trump administration may effectively renege on a landmark chemical safety compromise signed into law last year by President Obama. -
TSCA Prioritisation, Risk Evaluation Rules Published
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA’s final rules for prioritisation and risk evaluation have been published in the Federal Register. Both rules will take effect on 18 September. -
House Committee Calls for EPA to Delay TSCA Section 6 Rules
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
A US House of Representatives committee has urged the EPA to halt TSCA section 6 rulemakings to ban or restrict the use of three solvents. -
House Bill Proposes to Maintain Funding for EPA Toxics Programme
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A US House of Representatives draft bill is pushing back on cuts to the EPA’s toxics programme proposed by the White House and has questioned the extent to which the agency plans to rely on new TSCA fees for the coming fiscal year. -
EPA Amends Labeling Rules for National Formaldehyde Emissions Standard
Jul 20, 2017 | Furniture Today
By Thomas Russell
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued an amended rule that will allow wood furniture producers meeting national formaldehyde emissions standards to label product as compliant sooner versus later. -
(ACC Mentioned) Campaign Launched for Flame Retardant-Free Car Seats
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
A coalition of US NGOs is calling on children’s car seat manufacturers to phase out the use of flame retardant chemicals. -
UK Minister Wants REACH 'Mutual Recognition' Accord
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK intends to secure an early ‘mutual recognition’ agreement on chemicals policy with the EU before it exits the Union, the country’s lead minister on chemicals policy has said. -
EU Commission Notifies WTO of Proposed NMP Ban
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has notified the WTO of a draft Regulation banning the placing of the solvent 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP) on the market. -
Information Requests Dismissed in REACH Nano Case
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
The Echa Board of Appeal (BoA) has dismissed a set of substance identity information requests from the agency in a case concerning forms of nano silicon dioxide. -
Tesco Joins Greenpeace Detox Campaign
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
UK supermarket giant Tesco is the latest retailer to join the Greenpeace Detox campaign, which aims to eliminate the use of harmful chemicals in textiles. -
Echa Round-Up
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The Netherlands has notified its intention to prepare a restriction proposal on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in granules used as infill material in synthetic turf. -
EURL Ecvam Begins Large-Scale Thyroid Validation Study
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The EU Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing ( EURL Ecvam) is running a validation study of 17 in vitro tests for thyroid-disrupting chemicals. -
U.S. Gas Supplies up 10 Percent in 2 Years — Assessment
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
A steady clip of shale gas discoveries is behind a new estimate that the country has 3,141 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of future natural gas supplies, 10 percent more than analysts knew of just two years ago. -
In the Push to Deliver on Campaign Promises, Interior's Energy Drive Looms Large
Jul 20, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin
With control over more than 500 million acres of public land and hundreds of millions of acres offshore, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is moving rapidly to promote American production of coal, oil and gas — a critical piece of President Trump’s vision for “making America great again.” -
Natural Gas Industry Lobbies Trump
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Energywire
The U.S. natural gas industry is worried about President Trump's pledge to boost coal. -
DOE Looking at New Process for 'Small-Scale' LNG Exports
Jul 20, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darius Dixon
The Energy Department has kicked off a rulemaking to determine whether it can or should establish a special application process for the export of “small” quantities of natural gas to countries the U.S. doesn’t have free trade agreements with. -
EPA Faces Uncertain Prospects in Any Appeal of Methane NSPS Stay Ruling
Jul 20, 2017 | Inside EPA
By David Ross and Abby Smith
A potential EPA appeal of the ruling striking down its 90-day stay of Obama-era methane standards for new oil and gas operations could focus on a novel argument supported by a dissenting judge that courts lack authority to review such stays, but observers say... -
Trump Cyber Adviser Faces 'Biggest Strategic Challenge ... Since 9/11'
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
America's reliance on digital connectivity poses "the biggest strategic challenge we've had since 9/11," White House cybersecurity coordinator Rob Joyce said yesterday. -
GOP Lawmakers Take Heat for Backing Cap and Trade
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
The eight Republicans who bucked their party to sign onto California's cap-and-trade program are now facing political backlash.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Trump Outlines Deregulation Agenda
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Arianna Skibell
The White House this morning released the new administration's first regulatory plan, a sweeping survey for all federal agency actions.
The latest issue of the biannual so-called Unified Agenda includes mostly notices to withdraw or revise regulations, a sharp contrast to the Obama years. Plans for dozens of rules have disappeared.
The agenda details how U.S. EPA intends to withdraw the Clean Power Plan and Clean Water Rule. The Department of Energy is considering modifying its energy efficiency standard program. And the Department of Transportation will likely not issue an Obama-era regulation to require highway planners to account for greenhouse gas emissions.
President Trump has made rolling back federal regulations a top priority of his administration. In March, he issued a memo specifically directing agencies to prioritize deregulatory actions in the agenda (E&E News PM, March 6).
Strangely, scholars note, the agenda appears to deviate from Trump's Jan. 30 executive order that requires agencies to identify two rules for repeal for every new rule they plan to issue.
"It's pretty interesting that I'm not seeing rules identified as offsets to new rules that would impose costs," said Amit Narang, regulatory policy advocate for Public Citizen's Congress Watch.
"For example," he said, "they are listing the updates to the lead in drinking water rule with a timeline but no mention of how they will offset the costs."
The only proposed significant rules that are not deregulatory appear to be in response to litigation, according to James Goodwin, senior policy analyst for the Center for Progressive Reform.
He said the remaining Obama-era actions are routine, noncontroversial ones. Rules that have been withdrawn or relegated to "long-term" actions are the more significant ones.
Goodwin noted that, traditionally, the agenda has specified whether it's the fall or spring edition, while this year is simply called "Update 2017."
"Does this imply that they're not doing a Fall 2017 agenda?" he said.Climate
EPA listed President Obama's signature climate rule, the Clean Power Plan, as a long-term action with no end. The agency simply states the regulation exceeds statutory authority under the Clean Air Act.
The administration has said it plans to roll back the rule, which required states to craft plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants.
The Obama EPA estimated that, by 2030, the plan would bring up to $45 billion annually in net public health and climate-related benefits.
Also moved to long-term actions is a rule that would address emissions from new and modified plants. Here, too, EPA states it plans to withdraw the standards on the grounds they exceed statutory authority.
EPA is moving to extend the stay of Obama-era methane standards for the oil and gas industry until August. A federal court last week granted EPA a two-week reprieve from complying with its recent ruling that the agency lacked authority to delay the rule (E&E News PM, July 13).Air quality
The agenda includes no major short-term initiatives on air pollution. Instead, EPA will focus on tending to statutorily required responsibilities, albeit sometimes with the prodding of deadlines set by settlements.
Near the top of the list of proposed rules, for example, is the agency's review of the primary air quality standards for nitrogen oxides.
Only last week, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt signed a draft rule leaving the current thresholds in place; the final rule is due by next April, under a consent decree made final this spring in response to a suit by two environmental groups.
Similarly, EPA will be moving forward with the third of four rounds of attainment designations for the 2010 sulfur dioxide standard that is also required by a court order.
The agency said it was looking into numerous "risk and technology reviews" intended to revisit guidelines for hazardous air pollutants from various industrial emissions sources.
Those reviews are supposed to be carried out every eight years, but because EPA is chronically behind, environmental groups have repeatedly sued to set legally binding timetables for their completion.
The agency also plans to continue with a rulemaking launched under the Obama administration to spell out the requirements for state cleanup plans needed to meet its 2015 ozone standard, with the final rule scheduled to be made final next March.
The agenda notes that the final attainment designations for the ozone standard are now due by October 2018, after Pruitt recently delayed them, saying the agency needs more information. Environmental and public health groups filed suit last week to reverse that decision.
Noticeably absent from the agenda are some Obama administration rulemakings that were withdrawn soon after Trump took office and have apparently not been revived.
Those include proposed new pollution controls on existing oil and gas operations on the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation in Utah and a final rule to tighten emission standards on grain elevators.Energy efficiency
The agenda states that DOE is examining whether to modify its energy efficiency standard program into "a market-based approach."
The effect of such a proposal is unclear. The notice states that DOE is "evaluating the potential use of some form of a market-based approach such as an averaging, trading, fee-based or other type of market-based policy mechanism."
The agency added it was planning a proposed rule in December that would ease the application process for small-scale natural gas exports, including liquefied natural gas.
Also, several rules facing a lawsuit by multiple states are slated for final action in September. Three of those are for portable air conditioners, commercial boilers and uninterruptible power supplies. DOE originally issued standards in December but never published them in the Federal Register (E&E News PM, June 13).
Several efficiency rules on appliances are planned this year, including a standard for room air conditioners in September, according to the agenda.
DOE said at that time it would either propose and adopt more stringent guidelines or issue a determination that no amendments to current standards are required.
A final rule on gas furnaces — long a source of contention between environmentalists and industry — is scheduled for November.
DOE's efficiency program is viewed by many clean energy advocates as critical for cutting emissions and lowering costs. The Obama administration made it a central plank of a broader Climate Action Plan.
The Trump administration proposed a 70 percent funding cut to DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, which oversees the rulemaking.Transportation
The Department of Transportation does not appear to be planning on reissuing a final Obama-era rule that would have required highway planners to measure and take into account the anticipated greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles traveling on their roads.
The controversial metric was part of a package of performance standards the Federal Highway Administration completed in the final days of the Obama administration.
The highway agency decided to indefinitely delay the metric in May, vowing to start an entirely new rulemaking process to take comments on a possible revision or elimination within weeks (Climatewire, May 19). Democrats accused it of eschewing normal procedure in an attempt to kill the rule.
The measure does not appear on the Transportation Department's agenda, and aides for the agency did not respond to a request for comment by press time.Drilling, land management
The Interior Department's regulatory plans for the rest of the year largely focus on rule rollbacks that are already in motion.
Top on the agency's list is rescission of the Obama-era hydraulic fracturing rule. The agency has been engaged in a legal battle over the action since its release more than two years ago, and the measure has never taken effect.
Interior's rollback of the rule may be instrumental in persuading a federal court to pause related litigation. According to the Unified Agenda, the Obama-era safety and environmental standards for fracking do not reflect the policies and priorities of the new administration.
The Bureau of Land Management also wants to delay until July 17, 2019, the Obama-era rule restricting methane flaring from oil and gas operations on federal lands.
The issue has been controversial, with Democrats questioning whether the department has the authority to keep the November 2016 rule on ice after the Senate this spring voted against overturning it through the Congressional Review Act.
A proposed rule effectively suspends implementation of the methane regulation for the next 18 months. A separate proposed rule listed seeks to "revise or rescind" it.Water
The agenda indicates that the administration intends to move quickly in its efforts to repeal and replace the 2015 Clean Water Rule, which clarifies which waters are covered by the Clean Water Act.
While it does not set a timeline for a final regulation repealing the controversial regulation, also known as the Waters of the U.S. or WOTUS rule, the agenda shows the administration plans to propose a replacement regulation by December.
This year's agenda moves back the timeline for revising the Lead and Copper Rule, which regulates those metals in drinking water.
The Trump administration has delayed the timeline for promulgating the rule by about six months, with a notice of proposed rulemaking expected in January 2018 and a final rule expected in July 2019.
The delay comes despite mounting pressure from Congress to upgrade standards in the wake of the Flint, Mich., drinking water crisis.
The agenda no longer includes a rulemaking to set new levels of coliform bacteria in water. The Obama administration had expected to release a notice of proposed rulemaking by January 2018 for the bacteria, which can contaminate water supplies through fecal matter and cause digestive problems in humans.Coal and mining
Except for declaring the Stream Protection Rule dead, the agenda makes no mention of any regulations at Interior's Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
Gone are the Obama-era proposal to reform self-bonding — a practice unique to coal mining that allows a company to promise to clean up mines without collateral if it meets certain financial criteria — and new standards for coal dam impoundments and disposal of coal ash in mine reclamation.
The Office of Natural Resources Revenue plans to take final action on its repeal of new fossil fuel valuation standards for royalty purposes. Environmentalists have sued to block the change (Greenwire, April 27).
For hardrock mining, EPA is working toward meeting a court-ordered deadline of Dec. 1 for publishing a final rule for new financial assurance requirements under the Superfund law. The industry and its Republican allies have been lobbying for the Trump administration to rewrite the proposed rule or take no action.
The agenda also established no date for a final rule on new underground water protections for in-situ uranium mining, which EPA delayed in January (Greenwire, Jan. 6).
At the Department of Labor, the Mine Safety and Health Administration will see new pre-emptive workplace examination requirements for non-coal mines, which the Trump administration delayed this year, go into effect Oct. 2 (Greenwire, March 24).
The agency will also continue gathering public input until Jan. 9, 2018, on addressing concerns about miners' exposure underground to diesel exhaust linked to lung cancer (E&E News PM, Jan. 11).
The Trump administration does not specify when it will act on a proposed crystalline silica dust rule despite acknowledging current standards dating back to 1985 may not protect workers from developing respiratory disease.Agriculture
For the Department of Agriculture, the administration said it would publish next April a final rule on the import, movement and environmental release of genetically engineered organisms. That proposed regulation falls under USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
The Forest Service said it would have ready in December a procedural final rule intended to expand public participation in the agency's formulation of standards and guidelines on programs.
EPA has several regulations in play regarding agricultural pesticides. The agency plans a notice of proposed rulemaking in January revising procedural rules for hearings on cancellations and denials of pesticide registrations.
Another proposed rulemaking for next April is meant to allow certain notices about new uses of pesticides to be posted on a new EPA webpage, rather than in the Federal Register.
EPA said it doesn't have timelines in place for other proposals, including updated rules on certification of restricted-use pesticide applicators and changes in the grouping of crops for use of certain substances.
EPA said it will propose next June an update to pesticide data requirements regarding possible threats to insect pollinators.
EPA also remains on target for a December 2017 publication of final renewable fuel volumes for 2018, according to the agenda.Chemicals
The regulatory agenda included updates on several significant chemicals rules, some of which the administration is currently preventing from taking effect.
The final rules in limbo would update decades-old certification and training standards for pesticide applicators, reduce the public's exposure to formaldehyde vapors from wood products, and create landmark disclosure requirements for companies that use nanoscale materials (Greenwire, Jan. 12).
All three looming regulations were finalized in the last two months of the Obama administration. Trump's regulatory agenda says the effective date for them is now "to be determined."
Also uncertain is the fate of other rules — opposed by Congress and the chemical industry — that would ban certain uses of three deadly industrial solvents (Greenwire, July 18).
After twice extending the comment period on actions to prohibit the manufacture, import, processing and distribution of the carcinogenic trichloroethylene in degreasing and dry cleaning operations, the Trump administration hasn't set a date for issuing the final rule.
Meanwhile, a similarly delayed rule restricting the use of methylene chloride and n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) in paint stripping is poised for a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking at some undetermined date. Methylene chloride is a suspected carcinogen, and NMP has been linked to dozens of deaths from acute exposure.
And the Trump administration has signaled its intent to revisit reporting guidelines that forced manufacturers to provide justification when they request that information on certain compounds be kept secret (Greenwire, Jan. 20).Endangered species, parks, oceans
The Fish and Wildlife Service included several proposed rules that would affect the listing and critical habitat determinations for several animals, including the Sierra Nevada red fox, the white-tailed prairie dog and the Pacific walrus.
Another proposed rule seeks to revise and streamline the 1992 Wild Bird Conservation Act "in light of our experiences in implementing the legislation and regulations over the past 15 years," the Unified Agenda said.
The department by September plans to finalize a rule that would authorize and allow bicycling on a 2-mile segment of the East Shore trail within Rocky Mountain National Park.
As a long-term action, the Commerce Department wants to amend its fishery management plan for the red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico, allowing more "regional management."
Last month, the department extended the 2017 fishing season by 39 days, siding with sports fishermen who complained the season was too short.
The department said regional management "would enable regions and their associated communities to specify the optimal management parameters that best meet the needs of their local constituents."
Commerce also plans to finalize a rule by December that would put caps on the number of permits and lobster traps that can be actively fished in an attempt to rebuild the southern New England lobster stock.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/07/20/stories/1060057684
-
(ACC Mentioned) Health Advocates Sound Alarm over Trump EPA, Rule Delays
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hier
Public health advocates are warning that the Trump administration may effectively renege on a landmark chemical safety compromise signed into law last year by President Obama.
The law, which updated the Toxic Substances Control Act for the first time since its enactment in 1980, sought to increase U.S. EPA scrutiny of new and existing chemicals in return for easing chemical regulations at the state level. But some fear President Trump's EPA won't uphold its end of the deal.
"We are moving toward a bad point in the implementation of this law, where many of the things that we hoped would be accomplished under the law are biting the dust and show no sign of getting done," Robert Sussman, a top EPA official in the Obama and Clinton administrations, said yesterday at a forum organized by the nonprofit BlueGreen Alliance.
"There is a very real risk that three or four years down the line, we're going to take a look at this program and we're going to say that it's a failure," he said of EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. "I don't want to say it's a lost cause, but I do want to say that I am personally very concerned about what lies ahead with the chemical safety program."
Now working with the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition, Sussman said "the issue is leadership and impartiality and integrity of decisionmaking" at EPA.
In particular, he pointed to the appointment of Nancy Beck as deputy assistant administrator of the chemical safety office. Prior to joining the administration, Beck was the senior director of regulatory science policy at the American Chemistry Council, the industry's top trade group, which generally opposes stricter regulations on its member companies.
"She is, for now, essentially running the toxics program at EPA," Sussman said. "She's the highest-ranking political appointee at the agency, and we see her imprint in everything that the agency does [on chemicals]."
Beck, however, has downplayed concerns that she would be deferential to industry. Understanding the perspective and constraints of stakeholders and "what they're trying to achieve — how could that possibly create a conflict or bias?" she told E&E News earlier this month (Greenwire, July 17).
Other speakers raised concerns about the nomination of EPA veteran Michael Dourson to be the agency's assistant administrator for toxic substances.
Dourson, who currently teaches at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, left the agency to found Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA), a nonprofit consulting firm with close ties to chemical manufacturers, tobacco companies and other industry interests (E&E Daily, July 18).
"The fact that he started a group, TERA, that is dedicated to undercutting chemical regulations, it's just so profoundly shocking," said Nneka Leiba, the director of healthy living science at Environmental Working Group.
In an interview with the Center for Public Integrity and InsideClimate News, Dourson, who has also written books that seek to integrate scientific concepts with biblical text, defended his work with industry clients.
"Jesus hung out with prostitutes and tax collectors. He had dinner with them," he said in 2014. TERA "is an independent group that does the best science for all these things. Why should we exclude anyone that needs help?"
An early test case for the chemicals compromise, advocates said, will be proposed restrictions on three industrial solvents. Rules that would largely prohibit the use of trichloroethylene in degreasing and dry cleaning operations and the application of methylene chloride and n-methylpyrrolidone in paint stripping have been repeatedly delayed by the agency (Greenwire, April 19).
Now House appropriators are quietly urging EPA to drop the regulations — just as industry has requested (Greenwire, July 18).
"If these rules are killed, that will speak volumes about the Trump administration and their true approach to implementing this new law," Sussman said.
Such a move, which he thinks is increasingly likely, "is going to affect real people," Sussman added. "There are workers that are dying right now from using methylene chloride-containing paint removers. And that's going to continue."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/07/20/stories/1060057671
-
TSCA Prioritisation, Risk Evaluation Rules Published
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA’s final rules for prioritisation and risk evaluation have been published in the Federal Register. Both rules will take effect on 18 September.
The agency released pre-publication versions on its statutory deadline for finalising them – 22 June – but official versions were not published then.
Today’s Federal Register also includes notice of the guidance document on manufacturer-requested risk evaluations, also released in June: 'Guidance to assist interested persons in developing and submitting draft risk evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act.'
Absent is the third framework rule, covering the process for notifying substances as inactive or active on the TSCA inventory. It is only when this final rule is published that the 180-day clock will begin on the requirement for manufacturers and processors to report the substances active in commerce during the ten-year ‘lookback period’.
The EPA did not have an update on the inventory rule’s timing at press time.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57774/tsca-prioritisation-risk-evaluation-rules-published
-
House Committee Calls for EPA to Delay TSCA Section 6 Rules
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
A US House of Representatives committee has urged the EPA to halt TSCA section 6 rulemakings to ban or restrict the use of three solvents.
The recommendation came in a report accompanying the appropriations committee’s interior bill for fiscal year 2018, which sets out next year’s funding for the EPA, the Department of the Interior and several other federal agencies.
The report says that the rulemakings – which address the use of trichloroethylene in dry cleaning and invapour degreasing, as well as methylene chloride and n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) in paint stripping – may not comply with provisions in section 26 of TSCA regarding risk management activities, based on previously completed risk assessments.
In public comments, a coalition of domestic NMP producers has raised similar concerns.
The committee asked the EPA to halt the work, and instead consider the uses in the ongoing risk assessments of the solvents. Each is being reviewed as one of the first ten priority substances subject to risk evaluation under the new law.
Melanie Benesh, legislative attorney at the NGO Environmental Working Group (EWG), called it an "outrageous demand". It "reaffirms the hostility" toward environmental protections being seen from both Congress and the White House, "in the name of protecting the profits of the chemicals industry", she added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57788/house-committee-calls-for-epa-to-delay-tsca-section-6-rules
-
House Bill Proposes to Maintain Funding for EPA Toxics Programme
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A US House of Representatives draft bill is pushing back on cuts to the EPA’s toxics programme proposed by the White House and has questioned the extent to which the agency plans to rely on new TSCA fees for the coming fiscal year.
The House appropriations committee’s draft fiscal year 2018 interior appropriations bill – which sets out next year’s funding for the EPA, the Department of the Interior and several other federal agencies – has recommended $92.5m for the toxics risk review and prevention programme, in line with 2017 funding levels. This is in contrast to the $65m proposed by the Trump administration.
According to the committee report, the administration’s budget proposed "an aggressive schedule for developing the new TSCA fee rule, and for the transition of FTE [full-time equivalent] to be covered by new fee collections."
But it expressed concerns that it "may be too aggressive". The committee’s recommended funding level for the toxics programme "provides for a more gradual transition to fee-funded FTE for fiscal year 2018 so as to avoid a funding lapse that could impact implementation."
The EPA has not yet proposed a rule for collection of new fees under TSCA.
The maintenance of 2017 spending levels for the toxics programme is generally in line with the committee’s broader plans for the agency, which would see it funded at $7.5bn next year. While this would reduce EPA funding by $528m below the fiscal year 2017 enacted level, it is close to $1.9bn above the 30% cut called for in the Trump administration’s requested budget.
Research spending
The committee has recommended continuing to fund the computational toxicology and endocrine disruptor programmes at the fiscal year 2017 enacted levels, within a $108m chemical safety and sustainability research programme.
The report says the committee supports EPA’s computational toxicology research activities "to advance the next generation of risk assessment methods to enable integration of tiered toxicity evaluation strategies, advanced high throughput molecular biological assays and computational methods with exposure information to support risk-based decisions for prioritisation and screening."
With regard to alternatives testing, it commends the agency for "developing new scientific methods, removing barriers and fostering cooperation in implementing the toxicity testing agenda" outlined in a 2007 National Academy of Sciences report.
But it has asked that the agency submit a report describing its progress in:
· researching, developing, validating and translating non-animal chemical testing methods that characterise toxicity pathways;
· efforts to coordinate these activities across agencies; and
· future plans to incorporate the toxicity testing approach outlined in a January National Academies report.
The committee also encouraged the agency to present it with options for "new or expanded partnerships" with institutes, foundations and universities on such topics as filling gaps in assessing exposure and non-animal toxicity testing.
It would also "support the realignment and consolidation of risk assessment resources if proposed in future budget requests" from the agency.
Additional provisions
In line with a May spending measure that funded the government through September, the committee’s bill also calls for:
· the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to be barred from issuing more than 40 toxicological profiles during the 2018 fiscal year; and
· a prohibition on any of the funds in the budget to be used to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition components or fishing tackle under TSCA or any other law.
The bill seeks to preserve the Chemical Safety Board (CSB), an independent federal agency charged with investigating industrial chemical accidents. The Trump administration had proposed scrapping it.
It is one of several appropriations measures that could be packaged together for a House vote, ahead of budget negotiations with the Senate this autumn. The final bill agreed by both chambers will fund the government for fiscal year 2018 – from October 2017 until September 2018.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57796/house-bill-proposes-to-maintain-funding-for-epa-toxics-programme
-
EPA Amends Labeling Rules for National Formaldehyde Emissions Standard
Jul 20, 2017 | Furniture Today
By Thomas Russell
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued an amended rule that will allow wood furniture producers meeting national formaldehyde emissions standards to label product as compliant sooner versus later.
These standards, which are similar to emissions standards established by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), fall under what is called Title VI of Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA for short. The EPA has established a Dec. 12, 2017 deadline for labeling requirements, meaning that goods with composite wood products manufactured after this date and that meet the standard should be labeled as TSCA Title VI compliant.
However, to help suppliers achieve a smoother supply chain transition, the agency is allowing companies that have made compliant product before this date to voluntarily label it as TSCA Title VI compliant prior to Dec. 12.
“This would enhance regulatory flexibility and facilitate a smoother supply chain transition to compliance with the rule’s broader requirements, as well as promote lower formaldehyde emitting products entering commerce earlier than under the rule as originally published,” the EPA said in a recent Federal Register notice announcing the change.
http://www.furnituretoday.com/article/544820-epa-amends-labeling-rules-national-formaldehyde-emissions-standard/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Campaign Launched for Flame Retardant-Free Car Seats
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
A coalition of US NGOs is calling on children’s car seat manufacturers to phase out the use of flame retardant chemicals.
The Car Seat Detox Challenge campaign has been launched by the Ecology Centre in partnership with Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, Healthy Babies Bright Futures, the Getting Ready for Baby coalition and Safer States.
The centre says the flame retardants historically used in car seats to meet federal flammability standards include known carcinogens, hormone disruptors and developmental toxicants.
A study it published last December, Travelling with Toxics, said 87% of car seats tested by the group in 2016 contained brominated flame retardants (BFRs). The group analysed 15 car seats from the US and UK. All contained the chemicals and 13 contained BFRs, which it says are persistent, bioaccumulative and often toxic.
The group says halogenated compounds (including BFRs), triaryl phosphates and other added toxic flame retardant chemicals have been shown to migrate out of products to contaminate air and dust.
None of the car seats tested contained chlorinated tris, which was found in three of 15 car seats tested by the centre in 2014. Although the market has shifted from the use of chlorinated flame retardants, says the group, these have been replaced with "a number of chemicals with uncertain hazards".
The NGO coalition has written to several car seat manufacturers, asking them to commit to developing a public safer chemicals policy and action plan to address hazardous chemicals over the next year.
It says federal motor vehicle safety standards can be met without the use of flame retardants. This year, the manufacturer Uppababy released the Henry MESA car seat, which uses wool to make the fabric naturally fire resistant.
The NGO campaign recommends that car seat manufacturers’ chemical policies should:
· create a restricted substances list, or update their existing one, to address halogenated and other toxic flame retardants, heavy metals, perfluorinated chemicals, PVC plastic, ortho-phthalates, antibacterial chemicals of concern, and other chemicals "known or suspected of causing cancer, hormone disruption, neurotoxic and other serious chronic health effects";
· ensure products comply with the list through third party laboratory testing; and
· conduct alternatives assessments using a tool such as GreenScreen to ensure chemicals of concern are not substituted with other harmful chemicals.
Melissa Sargent, of the Ecology Centre, told Chemical Watch that although no companies have made the commitment yet, she hopes they will take notice of an online petition with more than 38,000 signatures calling for action.
"It’s not that these companies want to put anything out there that is toxic to children, it’s just where the technology is right now. We’re hopeful we’ll have some positive feedback from companies."
But the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA) says car seats do not expose children to hazardous chemicals.
Executive director Kelly Mariotti told Chemical Watch the NGOs "have failed time and again to produce a board-certified toxicology report to support these claims, which is misleading to parents."
She added that her members "take great care in meeting and exceeding the strict federal and state flammability requirements for juvenile products, and whenever possible, work to find ways to meet regulatory mandates and manufacture products as naturally as possible."
Bryan Goodman of the American Chemistry Council said flame retardants on the market are subject to review by the US EPA and other regulatory bodies around the world, "so consumers do not have to choose between fire safety and chemical safety".
In response, the Ecology Centre said it relies on academic and independent research for health data and a number of studies have raised concerns about the widespread use of flame retardants.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57775/campaign-launched-for-flame-retardant-free-car-seats
-
UK Minister Wants REACH 'Mutual Recognition' Accord
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK intends to secure an early ‘mutual recognition’ agreement on chemicals policy with the EU before it exits the Union, the country’s lead minister on chemicals policy has said.
In her comments to the UK Chemicals Stakeholder Forum this week, Thérèse Coffey said the chemicals sector is an "important priority" for the government, which is looking at different options with "the intention to try to get to a point where we have regulatory equivalence" with the EU.
It would be in the interests of the EU and the UK, she added, to recognise recorded REACH registrations of UK-based entities after Brexit. Describing the registration process as "complex", she said there was "no need" for companies to go through it again.
"We are fully aware of the amount of investment companies have already put into registration," she told the forum. "We are aware of the issues [and] the complex relationships within the current regulatory regime, which extends beyond REACH being [just] a database."
Ms Coffey told the forum the government is "not trying to cherry pick" elements of the EU single market, but is "trying to ensure we have an ongoing effective relationship and mutual recognition of regulations is a key part of that".Mulling over models
Since the UK’s EU referendum last June, there has been speculation about whether the country could assume a role like Norway’s in the European Economic Area (EEA) or like Switzerland’s in the European Free Trade Area.
Ms Coffey said that "perhaps the Swiss approach is one to explore", as the country is not part of the EEA but has arrangements with the trade bloc.
Asked whether the UK would look to mimic the US’ newly reformed TSCA – something EU industry has rebuffed – she said it is not in the UK’s interest "for any future agreement with the US or any other country [if it sees] a deterioration in environmental standards".
At the beginning of the discussions, it was "right to look at" the options, Ms Coffey said. But, she said "we recognise where the majority of our industry is, so going off in a completely different way would be a surprising move".
She added that the UK is "well progressed" in its thinking and the work it needs to do "in order to have that effective regulatory regime from day one".Brexit bill
Brexit negotiations began one month ago and the UK government’s European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, which will convert the body of EU law into UK law, was published last week. This bill gives the government power to create regulatory bodies that would take over duties currently performed by EU bodies under EU regulation.
In its current form, it would also allow the UK to create a national chemicals agency – something Chemical Watch understands the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) is looking into.
Aspects of the REACH Regulation are given by the government as an example of the kind of functions that may be transferred to UK bodies. Discussing powers to enable UK ministers to correct problems arising from withdrawal, the explanatory notes that accompany the bill say: "Important functions carried out at EU level, such as the evaluation and authorisation of chemicals [...] may need to be transferred to appropriate bodies in the UK for them to continue and [have] the power to deal with deficiencies".
The bill also gives the UK government powers to implement EU obligations through secondary legislation (regulations). Such statutory instruments do not require the approval of Parliament and instead are given a very brief assessment by a parliamentary committee.
Ms Coffey said REACH registration is an important legal requirement and the government "will be converting environmental law like that into UK law to ensure an effective regulatory regime".
In her evidence to the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee inquiry earlier this year, she acknowledged that the UK could not simply ‘cut and paste’ the Regulation into national law.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57790/uk-minister-wants-reach-mutual-recognition-accord
-
EU Commission Notifies WTO of Proposed NMP Ban
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has notified the WTO of a draft Regulation banning the placing of the solvent 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP) on the market. The intention is to address risks to workers caused by inhalation and dermal exposure to the substance.
The REACH restriction would be enforced unless:
· registration dossiers are updated with the new derived no-effect levels (Dnels) for inhalation and dermal exposure indicated in the proposal. This effectively sets occupational exposure limits; and
· manufacturers and downstream users comply with these values in the workplace.
The draft proposes a two-year general deferral of the restriction's application to give stakeholders time to take the necessary compliance measures.
And it makes special mention of the wire-coating industry, for which it is suggesting a longer deferral period of six years. This is because it recognises this sector will have to replace part of its older production lines prematurely to comply with the new Dnels.
The proposed date of adoption is the first half of 2018, with proposed entry into force 20 days after publication in the EU Official Journal. The WTO is accepting comments for 60 days.
NMP manufacturers in the US have recently been urging the EPA to withdraw a proposed rule to ban or restrict certain uses of the substance.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57794/eu-commission-notifies-wto-of-proposed-nmp-ban
-
Information Requests Dismissed in REACH Nano Case
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
The Echa Board of Appeal (BoA) has dismissed a set of substance identity information requests from the agency in a case concerning forms of nano silicon dioxide.
The companies that appealed against the requests will not now have to provide data on eight physio-chemical properties of the forms of synthetic amorphous silica (SAS) – silicon dioxide that has been intentionally produced and lacks consistent inter-molecular structure.
An environmental NGO that intervened on behalf of the agency said that the decision demonstrates the inadequacies of REACH in protecting against the hazards of nanomaterials.
Echa had asked for the physio-chemical data, based on evidence that pyrogenic SAS could be toxic by inhalation. The agency said it needed this because the registration dossier did not explain the differences in toxicity between the different types of SAS.
"The available inhalation studies indicate differences in toxicity and potency between different types of SAS," it told the BoA. "These ... are inextricably bound up with differences in physico-chemical characteristics."
But the BoA said Echa had not substantiated its argument that the potential concern established for pyrogenic SAS extends to the other types.
Overall, the BoA dismissed four of the five requests contested in the case. The other three covered uses of the various forms of SAS including surface-treated. It upheld the request for data from a 90-day, sub-chronic, inhalation, rat toxicity study (OECD test method 413).
SAS is used as an additive in a wide range of products. For example, it is used as a functional filler in polymers and to add strength to rubber tyres, paint and varnishes. It is also added to paper and to food as an anti-lumping agent.
Ruxandra Cana of Steptoe & Johnson, the law firm that represented the appellants, said her clients would comply with the remaining request. But they would "check all opportunities to limit any animal testing to what is necessary".
She added that they welcomed the BoA decision, particularly its statements on whether nanomaterials should be considered potentially hazardous under REACH based purely on their size.
The decision explicitly says that "being a nanomaterial is insufficient on its own. No consistent causal link has yet been established between size and hazardous properties."
But David Azoulay, a lawyer at the Center for International Environmental Law (Ciel), which intervened in the case in favour of Echa, described the outcome as a disappointment.
The agency had made it clear that it could not relate any of the information in the registration dossier to any specific form of SAS, he said. "How is Echa supposed to do its job if it cannot associate toxicity data points with any specific forms of a chemical – when it cannot, in fact, even identify the specific form of the chemical on the market?"
Mr Azoulay said the regulatory framework urgently needs changing and the case demonstrates that Echa will find it difficult to enforce the much delayed nano-specific changes to the REACH annexes when they arrive. The changes are no substitute for a comprehensive nano regulation, he added.
Jodie Melbourne, a nanotechnology specialist at animal rights NGO the Peta International Science Consortium (PISC), was also disappointed, albeit for different reasons. The PISC intervened in the case in favour of the appellants and is critical of the BoA’s decision to uphold the request for study data.
"As a result of this, hundreds of animals will be used in experiments, in which they are forced to inhale nanomaterials for up to six hours a day, and then killed," Dr Melbourne said. SAS has a long history of safe use and the scientific dispute may never be resolved, she added.
In March, a group of titanium dioxide producers won a similar appeal. The BoA dismissed Echa’s requestfor more substance identity information about the nanoforms of the substance. But the agency’s nanomaterials expert group (NMEG) subsequently said that the decision did not rule out future requests for information on nanoform properties.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57787/information-requests-dismissed-in-reach-nano-case
-
Tesco Joins Greenpeace Detox Campaign
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
UK supermarket giant Tesco is the latest retailer to join the Greenpeace Detox campaign, which aims to eliminate the use of harmful chemicals in textiles.
The chainstore, which has shops in 12 countries across Asia and Europe, has committed to the Detox goal of phasing out 11 groups of substances of concern in its F&F clothing line by 2020.
It joins 79 other international fashion brands and suppliers, which have signed up for the campaign since it launched in 2011. Other retailers to do so include Aldi, Lidl, Coop, Primark and Marks & Spencer.
Alan Wragg, technical director for clothing at Tesco, said: "Our responsible sourcing team has been working with Greenpeace to align all our textile products with the Detox commitment, starting with clothing and footwear, and we’ve compiled a list of restricted substances to help guide our suppliers."
Increased transparency
Tesco’s Detox action plan includes increased transparency about which suppliers the store uses and their performance in phasing out the use of hazardous chemicals.
It has published its list of restricted substances in textiles, leather and footwear (RSiT) online. This includes its manufacturing restricted substances list (MRSL).
Tesco will initially enforce a ban on nine of the 11 priority hazardous chemical groups. These are:
· phthalates;
· brominated and chlorinated flame retardants;
· azo dyes;
· organotin compounds;
· chlorobenzenes;
· chlorinated solvents;
· chlorophenols;
· heavy metals; and
· short-chain chlorinated paraffins
It has also committed to eliminate alkylphenols and their ethoxylates (APEOs) and perfluorocarbon/polyfluorinated compounds (PFCs), used in any own-brand clothing and footwear products it sells. It has pledged to eliminate PFCs by summer 2018.
Tesco has also agreed to publicly disclose the use and discharges of hazardous chemicals from facilities it uses each year, via a searchable online database.
Within the next six months, it plans to have the full testing evidence published by at least 50% of all its global wet process suppliers’ facilities or affiliates where hazardous chemicals are used globally. This will rise to 80% of facilities/ affiliates within 12 months.
'Industry baseline'
Greenpeace says that companies committed to the Detox campaign now represent 15% of the worldwide textile production.
Kirsten Brodde, project lead of the Detox campaign, said the standard is "the new industry baseline" because in the six years since it launched, "forerunners of the textile sector went from total denial and opacity of their supply chain to transparency and the banning of all hazardous chemicals."
She added that Tesco’s commitment showed "the rest of the industry that using hazardous chemicals is not an option anymore".
Meanwhile, Greenpeace launched its report 'How seriously are retailers taking responsible fashion?', which assesses how far the sector have implemented tools and actions to eliminate the chemicals.
The report also evaluates whether companies are using measures to reduce overall production and consumption of clothing, which Greenpeace says would "save precious natural resources and thus exceed singular measures such a chemical management or recycling ".
Ms Brodde said: "Companies should take measures to slow down their production and achieve full recyclability of their products equally seriously to their chemical management."
https://chemicalwatch.com/57684/tesco-joins-greenpeace-detox-campaign
-
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Restriction intention on PAHs in synthetic turf granules
The Netherlands has notified its intention to prepare a restriction proposal on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in granules used as infill material in synthetic turf. Echa is cooperating with the work, which aims to establish a lower concentration limit.
Granulates as infill material are characterised as mixtures and the reason for the restriction is if the "concentrations of carcinogenic PAHs are as high as the generic limit for mixtures supplied to the general public defined in REACH, there is concern. To ensure that no plastic and rubber granulate is placed on the market with such high PAH concentrations, a lower limit needs to be set."
There will be a call for evidence later this summer with a stakeholder workshop to follow in the autumn. The submission of the restriction proposal is planned for April 2018.
Echa releases updated stats on 2018 registrations
Latest agency figures show that 10,031 registrations have been submitted so far, for the May 2018 REACH deadline. They cover 4,860 substances. The top three submitting countries are Germany, the UK and the Netherlands.
Revamp of CLP webpages
Echa's webpages on the CLP Regulation, and in particular those on the harmonised classification and labelling (CLH) process, have been revamped to include a more detailed description of the process and updated information.
The revised sections are:
· understanding CLP;
· classification of substances and mixtures;
· labelling and packaging;
· harmonised classification and labelling (CLH);
· CLH public consultations; and
· CLH dossier submission.
A new page on the role of testing has been created.
The pages are available in 23 EU languages.
Updated REACH guidance on repeated dose toxicity
The agency has published an update of section R.7.5 on repeated dose toxicity in Chapter R.7a of the Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment.
This expands on the most appropriate route of administration for such a study. It also takes into account recent developments in the field, such as revised OECD test guidelines and updated recommendations on the use of non-testing methods. Echa says it also reflects its current approach to dossier evaluation by indicating, for instance, which additional specific investigations might be required. The recommended testing and assessment strategy has been refined accordingly.
Section R.7.3 addresses the recent change in REACH Annex VII for skin sensitisation regarding the appropriateness of in vivo studies carried out or begun before the date of entry into force of this revised annex.
Draft guidance for identifying EDCs in pesticides and biocides
The expert consultation on draft guidance on how to identify pesticides and biocides with endocrine disrupting properties has been extended. This comes as a result of the volume and complexity of comments received, Echa says. The second consultation of the group was delayed until 17 July. The deadline for comments is 31 August.
A joint drafting team is consulting with the expert group, which is assisting in drafting the document for public consultation. The latter includes members of Echa's Endocrine Disruptors Expert Group and pesticide experts from EU member states and other stakeholder groups.
The drafting team will take comments from them into account in its revised draft version of the guidance, which will then go to public consultation.
This will take place once the final endocrine disruptor criteria are adopted by the European Parliament and EU Council of ministers.
The joint drafting group with scientific staff from the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) and Echa, with support from the Joint Research Centre, began working on the guidance in January.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57776/echa-round-up
-
EURL Ecvam Begins Large-Scale Thyroid Validation Study
Jul 20, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The EU Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing ( EURL Ecvam) is running a validation study of 17 in vitro tests for thyroid-disrupting chemicals.
The thyroid gland is a key part of the endocrine system, secreting iodine-containing hormones (T3 and T4) and the peptide hormone calcitonin. These hormones affect metabolism, cardiovascular health and development. Some manmade chemicals are known to interfere with thyroid function.
With no available validated thyroid in vitro methods, the OECD conceptual framework for the testing and assessment of endocrine disruptors focuses only on oestrogenic and androgenic effects.
Only a limited number of in vitro methods are ready to begin the validation process and further development and optimisation of assays and protocols are very much needed, say Maurice Whelan, head of EURL Ecvam, and Elise Grignard of the European Commission's Joint Research Centre.
The JRC decided to focus on thyroid tests following a number of recent initiatives.
For example, a recent JRC survey highlighted an urgent need to improve assessment of chemicals with potential thyroid disrupting properties.
Meanwhile, an OECD advisory group on endocrine disruptors' testing and assessment has asked member countries to request proposals for development of alternative thyroid tests.
EURL Ecvam used a 2014 OECD scoping document on in vitro and ex vivo assays for identifying modulators of thyroid signalling to help pick the 17 methods.
"The thyroid system is very complex and thus no doubt a suite of in vitro tests will be necessary to cover the most important mechanisms," Professor Whelan and Dr Grignard told Chemical Watch.
"We believe this validation study is somewhat unprecedented, considering how many complementary methods are being evaluated together," they add.
The second part will use each established method to generate data on a set of reference chemicals. This should indicate how the methods complement each other and how they could be combined in a test battery or testing strategy.
The study will be carried out with the EU Network of Laboratories for the Validation of Alternative Methods (EU-Netval).
https://chemicalwatch.com/57795/eurl-ecvam-begins-large-scale-thyroid-validation-study
-
U.S. Gas Supplies up 10 Percent in 2 Years — Assessment
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
A steady clip of shale gas discoveries is behind a new estimate that the country has 3,141 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of future natural gas supplies, 10 percent more than analysts knew of just two years ago.
"New exploration, more well drilling and continuous improvements in completion and stimulation technologies lead to better delineation and characterization of U.S. gas resources, especially in shale and tight reservoirs," said Alexei Milkov, a professor of geology and geological engineering and director of the Colorado School of Mines' Potential Gas Agency, which led the assessment.
"The latest assessment by [the Potential Gas Agency] confirms that the U.S. has abundant resources of natural gas" in both onshore and offshore reservoirs, Milkov said.
The "future gas supply" figure includes proven reserves tracked by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, as well as resources that have been discovered but not confirmed or that are undiscovered but generally viewed by experts as either "possible" or "speculative." The figures can go down from one study to the next if resources are found not to exist or are tapped out, but engineering advances have pushed them ever-upward over the course of the assessment's history, with this latest study reflecting the largest resource evaluation yet.
EIA's count of proven reserves in its most recent year-end 2015 assessment was 324 Tcf. The Potential Gas Committee, a group of volunteer geologists and other scientists who contribute to the biennial study, added to that an unconfirmed and undiscovered resource base of 2,817 Tcf of natural gas, 12 percent higher than their estimate two years ago, to reach the new 3,141 Tcf total figure.
Of the PGC-assessed resources in the study, some two-thirds are found in shale plays, the main driver of natural gas production growth in the U.S.
About 40 percent of the resource base lies in the Atlantic coast region, according to the assessment, and was identified through new drilling and production in the Marcellus, Utica and Rogersville shale plays. The Gulf Coast and Gulf of Mexico accounted for 20 percent, the Rocky Mountain area 17 percent, and the midcontinent region that covers Texas 14 percent.
The natural gas industry yesterday hailed the study data as just the latest evidence of the fuel's dominance on the U.S. energy scene.
"With this abundant resource as a foundation, our nation will continue to be a recognized leader in clean energy and can rely on domestic natural gas for our energy needs for decades to come," Chris McGill, vice president for energy analysis and standards at the American Gas Association, said in a statement.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/07/20/stories/1060057628
-
In the Push to Deliver on Campaign Promises, Interior's Energy Drive Looms Large
Jul 20, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin
With control over more than 500 million acres of public land and hundreds of millions of acres offshore, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is moving rapidly to promote American production of coal, oil and gas — a critical piece of President Trump’s vision for “making America great again.”
In the past few weeks alone, Zinke has lowered the price companies must pay the government for offshore drilling; acted to accelerate approval for onshore drilling permits; approved exploratory drilling in the Arctic’s Beaufort Sea; and scheduled lease sales on Western lands the Obama administration had deemed off limits.
And Zinke’s moves have immediate impact. While Trump’s ambitious plans to overhaul the tax code and renegotiate international trade pacts remain far off, and his campaign to roll back environmental regulations will take months to produce results for industry, Zinke is taking concrete action to deliver on one of Trump’s most important campaign promises.
As a candidate, Trump pledged that within his first 100 days he would “lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.” While federal rules prevent him from wiping out these curbs overnight, Trump has taken what he describes as “historic steps to lift the restrictions on American energy, to reverse government intrusion, and to cancel job-killing regulations.”
At this task, Trump remarked during an event at Interior in late April, Zinke “is doing an incredible job.”
Elizabeth Gore, chair of the government relations practice at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, said Trump’s clear vision on the subject has allowed Zinke to move ahead more quickly than some other appointees.
“They had very defined policy objectives from the get go — as opposed to some areas where we’re still struggling to get meat on the bones, beyond the bullet points,” Gore said.
Since taking office, Trump has issued two major executive orders on energy development, ordering the reversal of several of President Barack Obama’s signature climate rules, as well as limits Obama imposed on drilling in the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Interior officials have moved rapidly to implement those orders, citing them in multiple federal notices seeking big shifts in policy.
On July 6, for example, as he outlined a new secretarial order aimed at speeding the oil and gas permitting process within the department’s Bureau of Land Management, Zinke said: “This is just good government, and will further support the president’s goal of American energy dominance.”
The department has repeatedly upended Obama-era rules that sought to extract higher royalty payments from the energy industry or set new limits on where and how companies can develop publicly owned resources.
The same day Zinke moved to expedite permits, Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management announced it would lower the rate companies must pay the government for shallow-water offshore drilling projects from a planned 18.75 percent to 12.5 percent. Months earlier, Interior’s Office of Natural Resources Revenue suspended a new accounting system that would have compelled coal firms and other companies to pay millions of dollars in additional royalties on minerals on federal land.
Critics say these moves will imperil fragile habitats and the species that depend on them, while also depriving taxpayers of the returns they deserve on public resources. The moves could also slow the development of renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, critics say.
In an interview, acting BLM director Michael Nedd said his agency strives to balance the need for energy with the need to safeguard the environment.
“One could argue — I don’t know, but one could argue — that under the previous administration that scale could have been tipped too far on the environmental side and energy wasn’t developed,” Nedd said. “So right now, what we’re looking at is, how can we have that balance?”
Nedd said the administration is allowing firms to develop all forms of energy, including renewables, “and then let the market choose.”
Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western Energy Alliance, a consortium of independent energy producers, met with Zinke in April to discuss federal energy policy. She and five top oil and gas officials from the group made the case to Zinke and his deputies that less restrictive federal rules would free their industry to create more high-paying jobs.
“We can help put working-class people back to work, the main constituency of President Trump, back to work,” Sgamma said, adding that the new “mind-set” at Interior “is very helpful.”
Environmentalists and some state officials are protesting the moves. Last month, the attorneys general for California and New Mexico filed suit in federal court challenging Interior’s about-face on royalty payments for federal minerals, saying it “nullifies much-needed, common-sense regulations that were formulated through a time-intensive rulemaking process.”
California and New Mexico also filed suit July 5 charging that the department’s decision to delay implementation of a rule limiting methane emissions from oil and gas operations on federal land deprives them of millions of dollars in payments needed to support education.
Kate Kelly, who served as a senior adviser to former interior secretary Sally Jewell and now directs the public lands program at the liberal Center for American Progress, said in an email that Zinke’s
“singular focus” on energy development “is starting to shift how the department operates,” particularly regarding the collection of royalties.
One area of clear friction is Obama’s identification of priority habitat for the dwindling numbers of greater sage grouse in 11 Western states. The plan took years to develop and received the approval of both Republican and Democratic governors.
Under Zinke, BLM has already scheduled lease sales in at least two areas in Wyoming and Utah identified as priority habitat for the birds. The agency is also moving ahead with a lease sale near Utah’s Dinosaur National Monument, though the National Park Service had in the past objected the project.
“Leasing these lands, most of which do not even have high potential for development according to the BLM’s own analyses, has a lot of risk and not a lot of benefit — except, presumably, to show that more leasing can be considered anywhere at any time,” said Nada Culver, senior counsel at the Wilderness Society.
Recent developments in the energy market have made the federal government a less central player over the past decade, in part because of new oil and gas finds and easier leasing practices on private lands. The federal share of crude oil production dropped from nearly 36 percent in fiscal year 2010 to 21 percent in FY 2015, according to the Congressional Research Service, while its share of natural gas production dropped from nearly 33 percent in FY 2006 to just 16 percent in FY 2015.
Federal lands remain more central to coal production, accounting for roughly 40 percent of the coal that’s burned in American power plants each year. Zinke lifted a year-long moratorium the department had imposed on federal coal leasing, but it is unclear how many buyers there will be: Several companies privately informed department officials last year that they had sufficient supplies for the near term.
Given the continuing retirement of coal-fired power plants, fresh interest in federal coal leases may reflect “a new period of speculation” rather than a rise in demand, said Tom Sanzillo, director of finance for the Institute for Energy Economics & Financial Analysis, in an email.
And Mike Cantrell, co-chairman of the Oklahoma Energy Producers Alliance, noted that public equity offerings in the shale oil industry dropped dramatically this year. Opening up more federal areas to drilling could depress current prices even further.
Still, Erik Milito, who directs the American Petroleum Institute’s upstream and industry operations, said Interior is establishing the kind of “stable regulatory regime” that allows firms to make long-term plans.
“It will take some time,” he said, “but the signals are very positive.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-the-push-to-deliver-on-campaign-promises-interiors-energy-drive-looms-large/2017/07/19/63e6503c-6319-11e7-84a1-a26b75ad39fe_story.html
-
Natural Gas Industry Lobbies Trump
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Energywire
The U.S. natural gas industry is worried about President Trump's pledge to boost coal.
Trump's "America First Energy Plan" vows to revive "America's coal industry, which has been hurting for too long" (Greenwire, Jan. 20).
But lobbyists for the natural gas industry, including those at the American Petroleum Institute, are pushing for the Trump administration to recognize the benefits of their own fossil fuel.
The lobbying push emphasizes that natural gas is just as reliable as coal or nuclear, and that gas-fueled plants can ramp up quickly in response to price spikes or drops in wind speeds.
"We're not taking shots at coal and nuclear," but it's important to "tell the whole story," said Marty Durbin, executive vice president and chief strategy officer at API. "We want to make sure if they go down this road, they understand" that reliability is about more than the fuel itself, he said (Dlouhy/Natter/Polson, Bloomberg, July 19). — MJ
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/07/20/stories/1060057619
-
DOE Looking at New Process for 'Small-Scale' LNG Exports
Jul 20, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Darius Dixon
The Energy Department has kicked off a rulemaking to determine whether it can or should establish a special application process for the export of “small” quantities of natural gas to countries the U.S. doesn’t have free trade agreements with.
According to an updated list of federal rules posted this morning, the agency has opened a new docket aimed at improving “application procedures related to natural gas exports, reduce the administrative burdens associated with the small-scale natural gas export market, and result in more efficient processing of applications for small-scale natural gas exports.”
Finalizing the rulemaking, which seeks to “clarify” DOE’s interpretation of its public interest responsibilities, would allow the agency to “issue an order upon receipt of any application that seeks to export natural gas to non-FTA countries, provided the application meets the criteria for small-scale exports.”
The listing indicates that DOE has launched the review under so-called Section 610, which requires federal agencies to review a rule’s economic impact on small entities.
WHAT’S NEXT: The listing on OMB’s website indicates that DOE intends to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking by the end of the year.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
EPA Faces Uncertain Prospects in Any Appeal of Methane NSPS Stay Ruling
Jul 20, 2017 | Inside EPA
By David Ross and Abby Smith
A potential EPA appeal of the ruling striking down its 90-day stay of Obama-era methane standards for new oil and gas operations could focus on a novel argument supported by a dissenting judge that courts lack authority to review such stays, but observers say that even if courts back that claim it might not impact related suits over other paused rules.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a split July 3 ruling vacated EPA's 90-day administrative stay of the methane new source performance standards (NSPS). In a subsequent July 13 order, the court granted EPA's motion to recall the court's immediate mandate -- though only for a “limited period,” giving EPA until July 27 before it must implement the rule.
EPA had requested a 52-day delay of the mandate, suggesting such time would let it decide whether to seek panel reconsideration, en banc review, petition for a writ of certiorari at the Supreme Court or drop its bid. The agency must decide on its next steps by Aug. 17.
If the agency does continue contesting the case, Clean Air Council (CAC), et al., v. EPA, it could rely heavily on Judge Janice Rodgers Brown’s dissenting opinion arguing the court lacked authority to hear the case at all because the 90-day stay -- which is tied to reconsideration of the methane NSPS -- is the beginning of a new rulemaking process rather than a separate “final action.”
Some observers say that is because the agency realizes the jurisdiction argument is its strongest, and thus its best chance to win a different outcome. “When you get to the merits of the case and evaluate based on the record what EPA is saying, it's a pretty easy call,” says one environmental attorney.
The source says if EPA were to petition for rehearing en banc or for cert with the Supreme Court, it “may well try and use that jurisdiction argument again. I think that is a thin reed to stand on, but I suppose more convincing than their argument on the merits.”
Clean Air Act section 307(d)(7)(B) allows EPA to stay implementation of a rule for 90 days when the agency has initiated reconsideration proceedings that meet the statute's test for mandatory reconsideration. In CAC, the panel majority held that even though EPA's reconsideration of the methane NSPS is not a “final action,” the stay meets that test for review in court, partly because it carries immediate legal consequences by delaying the rule's effective date.
“[T]his court has held that such orders are tantamount to amending or revoking a rule,” the panel majority held. It later added Brown's dissent espouses a “one-sided view of final agency action” that is “akin to saying that incurring a debt has legal consequences, but forgiving one does not. A debtor would beg to differ.”
A second environmental attorney says the majority’s decision to reject Brown’s opinion and hold the stay is reviewable “resonates loudly.” The source says it signals that environmentalists will be able to challenge the Trump administration’s moves to put Obama-era rules on hold, much as industry could sue over any agency action that imposes new requirements, even for a short period like the 90-day stay at issue in CAC.
“That seems to be the logic -- that putting a rule on hold is not too different from imposing a new regulatory requirement, even if temporary. Everybody agrees that's a final action,” the second attorney adds.
But if the full D.C. Circuit or the Supreme Court were to reverse the decision in CAC and adopt Brown’s reasoning, it could undercut environmentalists’ and Democratic states’ bids to block the administration’s deregulatory agenda in court, especially their bids to reinstate other stayed rules like EPA's methane standards for landfills, updated facility safety requirements and a Clean Water Act effluent rule for power plants.
'Wouldn't Go Too Far'
Nonetheless, Ethan Shenkman, who served as the Obama EPA's deputy general counsel, tells Inside EPA that even if Brown's position does prevail in any appeal of the CAC ruling, the precedent would likely be contained to the air law’s 90-day stay provision. As a result, he said, it would do little to undercut suits over other holds on existing rules -- particularly if the delay at issue is longer than 90 days or involves a separate provision under the Administrative Procedure Act.
“I wouldn't go too far in reading into this decision because it is focused on this particular provision,” Shenkman says, noting that Brown's dissent emphasized the “interlocutory” nature of the 90-day stay and the opportunities for environmentalists to challenge the outcome of a reconsideration.
“The Environmental Petitioners will be able to raise their arguments regarding the alleged harms of revisiting EPA’s rule during the reconsideration process, and once again during the litigation that will surely follow EPA’s reconsideration. With these available avenues, it belies the virtue of ‘final agency action’ to include an agency’s intermediate stay within the standard’s ambit,” Brown wrote.
Another attorney notes that while “the issue of whether and under what circumstances stays can be immediately reviewable is a bigger question than” a fact-specific inquiry into whether a particular stay is justified, a finding that shorter stays are not reviewable may not definitively answer the broader administrative law question at hand.
Compared to the 20-month stay on EPA’s facility safety plan or the indefinite stay on the power plant effluent rule, the source says a judge could find that the brief stay under the air act's reconsideration provision “may be less of a big deal, because it's a short period and there may or may not be any important deadlines within that 90-day period.”
But Shenkman says EPA is likely weighing Brown’s dissent heavily as it considers next steps in CAC because it signals that a different panel could have backed that logic outright and rejected the case.
“Any time there's a 2-1 split on an administrative law issue in the D.C. Circuit it's significant. It shows that if there were a different panel it could possibly have come out a different way,” he says. “I'm sure the government is taking that into account as they consider their options for further review.”
Fact-Specific Inquiry
Aside from the arguments regarding the court's jurisdiction to review the methane NSPS stay, the panel majority ultimately vacated the move because it sided with environmentalists' claim that EPA improperly used its authority under air act section 307(d)(7)(B) to stay the rule.
Shenkman says the ruling suggests the court will take a “hard look” at Trump administration reasons for reversing Obama-era rules but signals little about whether any particular claims will pass muster. “We should be careful not to overstate the significance of this particular opinion, because each situation will be judged on [its] own merits,” he said.
Some observers suggest EPA could have a difficult time persuading the full D.C. Circuit or Supreme Court to take up any appeal in CAC. That means those courts would not address the broader administrative law questions, including courts' jurisdiction over these types of suits or EPA's statutory authority on this issue. However, the D.C. Circuit panel's ruling would remain a binding precedent in the circuit in that scenario.
The methane NSPS case involves “very detailed, fact-specific questions that aren't interesting for the whole court” or potentially for the high court, says an attorney with an academic institution. The source adds that the core of the case -- that agencies' actions must be rooted in statutory authority and that a stay of a rule is a final agency action subject to judicial review -- is “really settled law.”
For example, the source points to a 1984 case, Public Citizen v. Steed, in which the D.C. Circuit struck down the Reagan administration's attempt to indefinitely delay a tire treadwear grading program while citing its intent to rewrite the policy. The court found the move “arbitrary and capricious,” because the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) did not explain why it needed to pause the existing program while seeking to implement its new policy.
“Without showing that the old policy is unreasonable, for NHTSA to say that no policy is better than the old policy solely because a new policy might be put into place in the indefinite future is as silly as it sounds,” the court wrote.
Regarding the methane NSPS case, the attorney with the academic institution adds the D.C. Circuit panel “found it easy to find evidence EPA was wrong,” suggesting that the whole D.C. Circuit or the Supreme Court “may not find it interesting or necessary to weigh in on such a nitty gritty factual question.”
Even so, other observers suggest the full appellate court could be interested in taking this case and other similar suits because the Trump administration appears to be using these statutory tools in “unprecedented” ways.
The first environmental attorney calls the times “rather unusual.” The administration is “attempting to use authority granted under the Clean Air Act with an expressed and limited purpose and stretching the purpose so broadly that it has the potential to create good case law going forward.”
The source, echoing the attorney with the academic institution, adds that the statute's language is “not new,” but now an EPA administrator is attempting to use these statutory provisions in “rather novel ways.”
Such a dynamic “has given the courts an opportunity to remind or in some cases for the first instance explain what these statutory limitations are,” the first environmental attorney says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-faces-uncertain-prospects-any-appeal-methane-nsps-stay-ruling
-
Trump Cyber Adviser Faces 'Biggest Strategic Challenge ... Since 9/11'
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
America's reliance on digital connectivity poses "the biggest strategic challenge we've had since 9/11," White House cybersecurity coordinator Rob Joyce said yesterday.
"Cyber offense is too easy today — it's too inexpensive for those who would push those activities," said Joyce, a former National Security Agency official who now serves as President Trump's top cybersecurity adviser. "And because of that, what we need to do is increase our resilience: We have to be responsive."
Joyce told a gathering of telecommunications professionals yesterday that administration officials have made headway on a May 11 cybersecurity executive order aimed at boosting online defenses for U.S. critical infrastructure.
He called the executive order a starting point for future work to disrupt malicious online "botnets" of hacked devices, build out a cyber-savvy workforce and deter hackers from worming their way into the most sensitive American computer systems, among other goals.
"There's work [that's] been done on deterrence and thinking about those big areas of: How do we impose those costs? How do we drive down the opportunity to come at us, our critical infrastructure and our people?" Joyce said at the U.S. Telecom Association Cybersecurity Policy Forum.
He added that an internal report from agencies on international priorities is now in the hands of the State Department, which is separately undergoing its own cyber shakeup under Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
Christopher Painter, who for the past 6 ½ years trotted the globe building up internet security relationships as the State Department's coordinator for cyber issues, is stepping down from his post at the end of the month, an official confirmed yesterday. (Politico first reported Monday that he would be leaving the agency.)
Reports have also suggested that the State Department will merge Painter's office into the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs. A State Department official said yesterday that the agency "is currently undergoing an employee-led redesign initiative, and there are no predetermined outcomes."
State's cyber shuffle arrives as global cyberthreats continue to spread. Cybersecurity experts have warned that a recent spear-phishing campaign directed at U.S. energy companies and nuclear power operators has also cropped up in other countries. A spokesman for the United Kingdom's National Cyber Security Centre said in a statement yesterday that the agency is "aware of reports of malicious cyber activity targeting the energy sector around the globe," and that "we are liaising with our counterparts to better understand the threat and continue to manage any risks to the UK."
"This campaign is not limited to the US. I anticipate more global activity will surface," John Hultquist, director of intelligence analysis at cybersecurity giant FireEye Inc., said on Twitterearlier this week.
For his part, Joyce said that "the threat is growing."
"It's going in the wrong direction by almost any measure you want to take today," he said. "We are one of the most interconnected, digitally dependent countries in the world, and so that makes us some of the most vulnerable, and we really need to invest and turn that curve before it's an even greater problem."
He encouraged critical infrastructure operators to share input, particularly as the White House lays plans for "cross-sector exercises" drawing multiple sectors together to rehearse cyber disasters. Joyce cited the telecommunications, financial and electricity sectors as particularly beholden to one another's security — "all three legs of that stool can interplay and cause huge risk to any other element."
Joyce also indicated that the United States will seek to collaborate with other countries to solve the thorniest cybersecurity challenges, though he questioned the effectiveness of large multinational forums like the United Nations.
"Everybody agrees that this is an international problem," he said. "It's not one the U.S. can solve alone."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/07/20/stories/1060057657
-
GOP Lawmakers Take Heat for Backing Cap and Trade
Jul 20, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
The eight Republicans who bucked their party to sign onto California's cap-and-trade program are now facing political backlash.
Ahead of Monday's vote in the state Assembly, conservative pundits denounced the bill, and U.S. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R) urged legislators to vote it down (Climatewire, July 18).
Assemblyman Marc Steinorth asked constituents to call to discuss their concerns about his support for the bill. He got a few dozen calls before lunch Tuesday.
"They feel betrayed, they feel hurt, they feel angry. What they're hearing on talk radio — they believe it," Steinorth said.
Anger has been directed toward Assembly GOP leader Chad Mayes, a vocal supporter of the climate bill.
"It was poor judgment, bad leadership, to spike the ball like that in the face of widespread opposition within his party," said Harmeet Dhillon, a San Francisco lawyer and a Republican National Committee official.
Democrats who supported the bill have also gotten pushback from environmentalists who called the cap-and-trade bill insufficient (Melanie Mason, Los Angeles Times, July 19). — AAA
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/07/20/stories/1060057631
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested