Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 21/7/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Women Breaking The Mold: Allyson Wilson
Jul 21, 2017 | Plastics News
By Kerri Jansen
If you spend any time at all in plastics circles on the internet, you've probably encountered Allyson Wilson's work. -
AHFA Adds Conference Session on Formaldehyde Rules
Jul 21, 2017 | Home Furnishings Business
By Larry Thomas
The American Home Furnishings Alliance has revised the agenda for its 2017 Regulatory Summit, adding a session about the new federal formaldehyde emission standard to the Oct. 25 meeting. -
Federal Watchdog to Investigate US EPA Advisory Board Selection Process
Jul 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) will review the US EPA’s process for selecting advisory committee members, amid concerns that industry influence on the boards could grow. -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Calls for Inclusion of Industry Analysis in Formaldehyde Assessment
Jul 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has called on the US EPA to include recent industry analysis in its ongoing IRIS assessment of formaldehyde. -
(ACC Mentioned) Global Movement on Endocrine Disruptors
Jul 21, 2017 | Chemical World
By Rebecca Trager
A new report from the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine warns that some endocrine disrupting chemicals could affect human health at lower doses than those used in traditional toxicity testing by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which means that some effects of these substances may be missed. -
Trump's "America First" Energy Plan Is a Losing Proposition for Industry. Here's Why.
Jul 21, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Ben N. Ratner and Sean Wright
The same week in June that Apple raised $1 billion through green bonds to invest in clean energy, and Amazon put solar panels on a 1 million-square-foot processing facility, the Trump administration – at the urging of some oil and natural gas producers – proposed a two-year delay of rules limiting emissions of methane and other air pollutants. -
Industrial Consumers Group Voices Opposition to LNG Fast-tracking Bill
Jul 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
The Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA) on Wednesday said it opposes a Senate bill aimed at expanding liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, calling the measure bad for domestic manufacturers and the economy. -
PHMSA Delays Storage Deadline, Waiting on OMB
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Federal pipeline regulators have pushed back the deadline for natural gas storage facilities to submit annual reports because they're waiting on White House approval. -
Susan Combs Promises Senators a More "Collaborative" Interior Department
Jul 21, 2017 | Fuel Fix
Former Texas comptroller Susan Combs, who has been nominated for a top position at the Department of Interior, assured senators Thursday she would work closely with states on conservation policies that can impact oil and gas drilling and other development on federal lands. -
Sanders Comes out against Senate Bill
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sam Mintz
Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders came out against a bipartisan, comprehensive Senate energy policy reform bill yesterday, saying that it would boost fossil fuels by streamlining the permitting processes for pipelines and natural gas exports. -
Grid Threats Require 'Imagining the Unimaginable' — Report
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
The U.S. electric power network is poorly equipped to restore electricity service to large areas blacked out by natural disasters or hostile attacks, a National Academy of Sciences panel warned yesterday in a report that looks into dark future scenarios that it says the nation and the public have not fully faced up to. -
Regulators Grant Sunsetting Nuclear Sites Cybersecurity Leeway
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
As the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ramps up cybersecurity inspections at nuclear sites this year, some facilities are catching a break from the regulator's most stringent set of cyber standards. -
Here's Why Republicans Broke Ranks to Back Cap and Trade
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Anne C. Mulkern
Republicans helped push California's cap-and-trade extension across the finish line, even though it riled their colleagues and conservative groups. -
Environmentalists Sue EPA over Texas Air Permits
Jul 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists are suing EPA over the agency's failure to respond to their petitions to object to the Clean Air Act permits of five large industrial facilities in Texas, saying the agency must force state regulators to revise the permits for being unenforceable and too weak. -
State Walks Back Toxic Emissions Rules
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
Oregon's polluters have successfully pushed back on efforts to strengthen toxic air rules in the state.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Women Breaking The Mold: Allyson Wilson
Jul 21, 2017 | Plastics News
By Kerri Jansen
If you spend any time at all in plastics circles on the internet, you've probably encountered Allyson Wilson's work.
As the strategist behind the American Chemistry Council's Plastics Make it Possible campaign, social media outreach and other digital initiatives, Wilson has led the creation of popular videos and other content made for sharing within the industry and beyond. She also helps guide how industry communicates on critical topics like marine litter, industry innovation and sustainability.
"When I saw the job description, it looked really exciting because one thing I think I've always been really good at is taking technical information and translating it for audiences," Wilson said.
The role was a professional reinvention for Wilson, a former TV news reporter who found herself looking for other opportunities amid challenges to the journalism job market. Before joining the ACC team, she worked in communications for a couple of political campaigns in Virginia, during which time she received some memorable advice. When it became clear the candidate was not going to win, a colleague urged her to "always figure out how to run the metrics on your impact."
Wilson explained: "Even if you're linked to something that is not considered successful, you can show how your contributions moved the needle."
The advice stuck with her as she moved forward in her career, joining ACC in January 2010.
In her role at ACC, Wilson said she focuses first on understanding the audience and the goal for the communication.
"For consumers, it's more about getting them to understand all of the good that plastics is doing in the world," she said. "And for that to happen, you really have to help them connect emotionally with the story."
Under Wilson's leadership, Plastics Make it Possible emphasizes personal storytelling to show consumers the benefits of plastics, from energy-saving construction materials to food storage at a holiday feast. Consumers, she said, connect well to real-life examples of how plastics help you do more with less — "tangibles," as she calls them.
Even her kids — 12, 10 and 3 — have absorbed how plastics can make it possible, calling out examples that they see, like a foam pool noodle.
"My 12- and 10-year-old know everything about plastics," Wilson said, adding that she hopes to bring them to a future NPE.
For people interested in getting into plastics — or any industry — she suggests interning at an industry association, a more comprehensive education than working at a company focused on a particular area. "There's an industry association for everything," she notes.
"When you work at an industry association, you are learning about everything that has anything to do with that industry, and that to me was sort of mind-boggling," she said. "There's no way to overstate the value of understanding an industry."
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170721/NEWS/170729969/women-breaking-the-mold-allyson-wilson
-
AHFA Adds Conference Session on Formaldehyde Rules
Jul 21, 2017 | Home Furnishings Business
By Larry Thomas
The American Home Furnishings Alliance has revised the agenda for its 2017 Regulatory Summit, adding a session about the new federal formaldehyde emission standard to the Oct. 25 meeting.
The organization also removed a session covering California’s Proposition 65 labeling requirements, but has scheduled a series of three webinars in August to tackle the complex requirements in more detail.
The webinars will take place Aug. 16, 23 and 30, and registration information is available on the AHFA website, www.ahfa.us.
The session covering the formaldehyde emission standard for composite wood products will feature Eric Winchester, branch chief for the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention – the arm of the agency that is responsible for implementing the formaldehyde regulation.
Winchester headlined a day-long workshop on the regulation sponsored by AHFA in January.
AHFA officials said the EPA has begun addressing several problematic provisions in the federal formaldehyde standard that was finalized in December 2016, noting that the formal process for amending the final regulation to address these issues has caused confusion and raised new questions.
“Although we just covered the formaldehyde regulation in great detail in January, it has become apparent that an update is necessary this fall,” says Bill Perdue, AHFA vice president of regulatory affairs. “We are fortunate to have gained a second audience for the residential furniture industry with Mr. Winchester.”
The Regulatory Summit will be held from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Oct. 25 at The Conference Center at Guilford Technical Community College near Greensboro, N.C. Special guest speakers include Ann Marie Buerkle, acting chair of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, and Joseph Mohorovic, CPSC commissioner.
In addition to Winchester, Buerkle and Mohorovic, confirmed presenters for the 2017 Summit include:
§ Chris Andresen, vice president in the Washington, D.C. office of Grayling, a global communications firm and AHFA’s government relations partner. He will present an overview of the legislative and regulatory climate in Washington.
§ William Guerry, partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Kelley Drye, chair of the firm’s environmental practice, and a nationally recognized legal expert on Clean Air Act issues. He will review the Trump Administration’s impact on environmental regulations.
§ Allyson Azar, manager of state affairs and political mobilization for the American Chemistry Council. She will address the unpredictable landscape of state regulation, focusing on the growing patchwork of state efforts to regulate chemical use in consumer products.
§ Mark Fellin, worldwide regulatory intelligence manager for Amazon, responsible for leading the development, promotion and implementation of regulatory policies for Amazon Direct Imports. He will address compliance and risk management from an e-commerce perspective.
§ Michael Sullivan, managing partner in Womble Carlyle’s Winston-Salem, N.C. office and an expert on product liability matters. He will cover risk mitigation, specifically regarding furniture tip-over.
§ Christine Zanella, compliance manager in the legal department at Wayfair. She will address how the online furniture giant is tackling compliance issues today.
Registration for the meeting is $99 for AHFA members and $299 for non-members. Included in the registration are a light breakfast and lunch.
The Conference Center at GTCC is located on N.C. Highway 68, less than seven miles from Piedmont Triad International Airport and minutes off Interstate 40. Complete program details are available at http://www.ahfa.us/events.
http://hfbusiness.com/hfbnow/ArticleId/16032/ahfa-adds-conference-session-on-formaldehyde-rules
-
Federal Watchdog to Investigate US EPA Advisory Board Selection Process
Jul 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) will review the US EPA’s process for selecting advisory committee members, amid concerns that industry influence on the boards could grow.
The federal watchdog’s review comes at the request of Senate democrats, led by Sheldon Whitehouse (D–Rhode Island) and Tom Carper (D-Delaware). They joined NGOs in expressing concerns following the agency’s dismissal of 12 scientists from its Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) earlier this year, and questioned whether the move was intended to clear space for more industry members.
Mr Whitehouse said he expects the GAO will closely examine whether the EPA is "doing enough to protect the scientific integrity of its advisory committees".
Given the EPA administrator’s "long-standing, cosy ties to industry, the public has a right to ask just who [Scott] Pruitt is clearing these seats for."
And Mr Carper added that he fears "the dismissal of non-partisan scientific advisers … represents a broader approach of denying the science that forms the basis of sound environmental policy."
The agency has opened nominations to the BOSC and the Science Advisory Board (SAB), two of more than a dozen EPA advisory bodies.
The EPA has said that it wants to "ensure fair consideration of all the nominees – including those nominated who may have previously served on the panel – and carry out a competitive nomination process."
https://chemicalwatch.com/57804/federal-watchdog-to-investigate-us-epa-advisory-board-selection-process
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Calls for Inclusion of Industry Analysis in Formaldehyde Assessment
Jul 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has called on the US EPA to include recent industry analysis in its ongoing IRIS assessment of formaldehyde.
The new analysis concludes that there is "no association between individual formaldehyde exposure estimates and frequency of aneuploidy among those exposed". Aneuploidy is the presence of an abnormal number of chromosomes in a cell and is indicative of leukemia.
This contradicts the EPA’s 2010 draft assessment, generated under the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), which concluded that formaldehyde was carcinogenic when inhaled.
The analysis submitted by the ACC was conducted by a group led by Kenneth Mundt at consultancy Ramboll Environ and including researchers at Houston Methodist Hospital and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. It was funded by the Foundation for Chemistry Research and Initiatives (FCRI) – formerly the Research Foundation for Health and Environmental Effects (RFHEE) – a non-profit organisation established by the ACC.
The group re-analysed data from a 2010 government-funded study, which served as a basis for the draft assessment’s conclusion. It involved scientists at universities, hospitals and government research centres in the US, the Netherlands and China.
The original study examined data from 94 workers in China, 43 of whom were exposed to formaldehyde through their work. The resulting analysis supported a mechanism by which the substance could cause leukemia.
But the 2017 analysis of the same data, published in Critical Reviews in Toxicology, calls into question these findings.
And in a letter to the EPA, Kimberly Wise White from the ACC says it is imperative that they be fully evaluated and included in the weight-of-evidence framework and the causality assessment.
The 2010 IRIS draft assessment attracted strong criticism from the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), as well as industry. In response, the EPA announced plans to improve the clarity and transparency of the IRIS programme.
In 2014, the agency held a public workshop to discuss the scientific issues related to the draft assessment.
According to the EPA website, formaldehyde is still under evaluation and the release date for the final assessment has yet to be determined.Formaldehyde uses
Formaldehyde is used in adhesives for a wide range of wood products including furniture, flooring, cabinets, bookcases and building materials, such as plywood and wood panels.
Last year, the EPA issued a final rule to limit emissions from composite wood products, although its enforcement has been delayed under the Trump administration.
The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) lists the substance as a known human carcinogen. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) says it is "carcinogenic to humans".
https://chemicalwatch.com/57802/acc-calls-for-inclusion-of-industry-analysis-in-formaldehyde-assessment
-
(ACC Mentioned) Global Movement on Endocrine Disruptors
Jul 21, 2017 | Chemical World
By Rebecca Trager
A new report from the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine warns that some endocrine disrupting chemicals could affect human health at lower doses than those used in traditional toxicity testing by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which means that some effects of these substances may be missed.
The report proposes a three-part strategy for the EPA to evaluate any human health effects from low dose exposure to endocrine active chemicals. This includes actively monitoring new data and non-traditional information sources to ensure health effects are being identified and analysed on a regular basis.
The second component of the proposed plan involves further efforts by the EPA to analyse existing data, generate new data to fill gaps and conduct a systematic review of evidence from human and animal studies. The third aspect of the strategy includes potential EPA actions such as updating chemical assessments, requiring new data or models to reduce uncertainties, and updating toxicity testing designs and practices.
‘If the results of an investigation suggest that adverse outcomes in humans are expected or might be occurring at low doses, the conclusions of previous toxicity testing or toxicity assessments for the chemicals that are under investigation might need to be updated to reflect the new evidence,’ the report reads. In addition, its authors say that such evidence might support updates to specific toxicity testing or assessment practices in order to reduce false negatives in future.
The National Academies review focused on how the exposure to various endocrine disruptors impacted anogenital distance (AGD) – the space between the anus and genitalia – as well as foetal testosterone levels and penis malformation, known as hypospadias. The report authors highlight that foetal exposure to diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) is presumed to be a reproductive hazard to humans because it is associated with decreased AGD and testosterone levels in males, but the evidence of an association between DEHP and hypospadias was not as strong. The National Academies committee also examined the effects of the flame retardants polybrominated diphenyl ethers or PBDEs and concluded that there was sufficient evidence to link them with impaired intelligence.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC), a chemical industry trade group, said it agrees with a number of the report’s recommendations related to systematic review. However, the organisation noted that the report’s statements about individual chemicals only refer to potential hazard, not actual risk. ‘The report makes clear that the committee did not consider exposure to a given population nor did it perform a risk assessment on the substances,’ the ACC stated. ‘Therefore, the report does not speak to the level of risk, if any, arising from a particular exposure to these chemical substances nor any potential for them to cause health effects in humans.’
Meanwhile, the EU released guidance earlier this month to help identify endocrine disruptors among pesticides. This is expected to have ramifications beyond biocides, setting the stage for regulating these substances in products like toys, cosmetics and food packaging.
In response, the Endocrine Society said it is ‘extremely concerned’ that the criteria will fail to identify EDCs that are currently causing human harm and will not secure a high level of health and environmental protection. Therefore, the organisation has urged the European parliament, which is expected to vote on the criteria in the coming months, to improve transparency for implementing the criteria and to engage endocrine scientists in further decision-making steps.
Meanwhile, the European commission plans to allocate a budget of approximately €50 million (£45 million) for about 10 ‘substantive new research’ projects on endocrine disruptors in Europe in 2018, as part of the next Horizon 2020 work programme.
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/global-movement-on-endocrine-disruptors/3007742.article
-
Trump's "America First" Energy Plan Is a Losing Proposition for Industry. Here's Why.
Jul 21, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Ben N. Ratner and Sean Wright
The same week in June that Apple raised $1 billion through green bonds to invest in clean energy, and Amazon put solar panels on a 1 million-square-foot processing facility, the Trump administration – at the urging of some oil and natural gas producers – proposed a two-year delay of rules limiting emissions of methane and other air pollutants.
It showed how out of step the administration is with leading American brands and global shifts in energy technology – but also that it lacks the leadership that businesses, the engine of our economy, need and deserve.
Pro-business politicians with a long-term vision help industry adapt and adjust to a changing world. They propose policies with an eye toward the future, and consult with the brightest minds to better understand global market trends.
Today, energy trends point away from policies that give polluters free rein and instead toward management that reduces waste, slows climate change and brings us cleaner air. A single presidency doesn’t change this trajectory, or that of a global economy.
But President Trump and the man he picked to lead the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, are not asking how America’s natural gas industry will operate 5-10-20 years down the line in an increasingly carbon-constrained world.
Instead, they listened to a few industry players eager to cut costs and to maximize profits in the short-term, while shirking their responsibility to help America’s booming natural gas industry stay competitive for decades to come.
Investors: We can’t afford climate risks
More than ever before, environmental concerns are factoring into investment decisions, and sometimes even steering them.
Investors with $10 trillion in assets under management have already committed to the Montreal Carbon Pledge, which requires them to reduce the carbon footprint of their portfolios, with an eye toward full decarbonization over time.
As part of the shift to assets in lower-emitting companies and industries, investors are also demanding better carbon and methane disclosure along with proactive environmental management.
The recent watershed Exxon vote, for example – in which 62 percent of investors demanded better climate-risk disclosure from Exxon management – showed that carbon risk considerations have hit the mainstream.
Which brings us back to methane emissions and the continuing waste of a natural resource from our oil and natural gas operations.
Trump’s policies could bring everybody down
States such as Colorado show that methane leaks can, in fact, be managed cost-effectively and without harming production – just as investors demand. And yet, politicians in Washington are trying to stymie federal policies that help secure industry’s social license to operate.
It will set up laggards for failure as investors and citizens continue to scrutinize the environmental record of oil and natural gas companies, while ultimately dragging all companies down.
Natural gas has been branded as a cleaner transition fuel to a low-carbon economy, and now the Trump administration’s agenda could be ruining that brand. We think American businesses deserve better.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/07/20/trumps-america-first-energy-plan-losing-proposition-industry-heres-why
-
Industrial Consumers Group Voices Opposition to LNG Fast-tracking Bill
Jul 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
The Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA) on Wednesday said it opposes a Senate bill aimed at expanding liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, calling the measure bad for domestic manufacturers and the economy.
S 1415, introduced by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), seeks, among other things, to "terminate the prohibitions on the exportation and importation of natural gas" by amending existing federal laws.
IECA said the legislation, dubbed the "License Natural Gas Now Act of 2017" or the "LNG Now Act of 2017," would harm Louisiana's economy, arguing that exporting natural gas would negatively impact the competitiveness of domestic job creators.
IECA is a nonpartisan, cross-industry trade association representing companies with more than 2,600 facilities nationwide and $1 trillion in annual sales.
"The Energy Information Administration is forecasting Henry Hub Nymex natural gas prices to rise 87% by 2020. The price rise is in large part due to several LNG export terminals becoming operational," IECA wrote in a letter to Cassidy. "Every LNG study conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) confirms that LNG exports increase domestic natural gas prices and decrease prices for our global competitors offshore, thereby directly and negatively impacting our relative competitiveness and jobs."
IECA argued that increasing LNG exports reduces domestic wages and investment, "and shows only a small net economic benefit, which peaks in 2020 and rapidly declines."
Oil and gas production and LNG exports "are not large job creators when compared to manufacturing," IECA told Cassidy. "...Even if LNG exports double it would create few jobs. However, if natural gas prices rise, the manufacturing sector will be damaged, which would threaten millions of good-paying jobs and trillions in capital assets nationally. The same holds true for Louisiana."
The LNG Now Act was introduced in the Senate last month and has been referred to the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee, according to Congressional records.
"The previous administration created hurdles that stalled LNG projects that benefit the economy, environment and Louisiana workers," Cassidy said after he introduced the bill. "This legislation adds certainty to the approval process and brings investment, and better-paying jobs, to Louisiana."
The bill has received support from the American Petroleum Institute, the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas, G2 LNG, LNG Allies and the Natural Gas Supply Association.
S 1415 comes as the Senate considers a $38.4 billion measure to fund the DOE and the Army Corps of Engineers.
Meanwhile, the House on Thursday passed two bills that would streamline the permitting process for energy infrastructure, including oil and natural gas pipelines, with some measure of bipartisan support.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/111166-industrial-consumers-group-voices-opposition-to-lng-fast-tracking-bill
-
PHMSA Delays Storage Deadline, Waiting on OMB
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Federal pipeline regulators have pushed back the deadline for natural gas storage facilities to submit annual reports because they're waiting on White House approval.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) hasn't gotten approval from the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to collect the information in the reports.
The deadline was Tuesday. PHMSA officials said they plan to set a new deadline once they get approval from OMB.
PHMSA established the reporting requirement in its interim final rule adopting safety regulations for such storage facilities.
Other parts of the rule were already on hold. The agency announced in June that it won't enforce parts of the newly written regulations while officials consider a petition to change the rules (Energywire, June 20).
Companies that operate storage facilities will have to comply with reporting requirements and other parts of the rules, but PHMSA won't enforce certain other aspects.
PHMSA has been working since early 2016 to write the regulations in response to a massive gas leak at the Aliso Canyon storage facility in Southern California. The agency adopted a set of interim final rules in January and planned to revise them within a year (Energywire, July 15, 2016).
The American Gas Association and other trade groups filed a petition asking the agency to reconsider the rules, saying some of the provisions created an "unnecessary burden" on the industry.
Congress ordered PHMSA to write regulations for the nation's roughly 400 natural gas storage facilities when it reauthorized the agency last year.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/07/21/stories/1060057701
-
Susan Combs Promises Senators a More "Collaborative" Interior Department
Jul 21, 2017 | Fuel Fix
Former Texas comptroller Susan Combs, who has been nominated for a top position at the Department of Interior, assured senators Thursday she would work closely with states on conservation policies that can impact oil and gas drilling and other development on federal lands.
During a hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Combs promised a "collaborative" approach during questioning from western states including Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
"Secretary [Ryan] Zinke did discuss trust a number of times," she said. "He wants to be sure sure field offices are out there working in an open collaborative way."
State officials in western states were frequently at odds with the Obama administration over tougher regulations on developing federal lands, which in some states constitute more than 60 percent of the total lands mass.
Combs, who served in Texas state government for two decades and was the state's first female agriculture commissioner, has been nominated by President Donald Trump to Assistant Secretary of the Interior overseeing policy, management and budget.
On Thursday she took tough questions from Sen. Diane Cantwell, ranking member on the committee, for a report in the Washington Post last month that Zinke had reassigned up to 50 senior officials with the Interior Department's Senior Executive Service, including the department's top climate policy official, Joel Clement.
"I'm asking the inspector general to look into what the department is doing," Cantwell said.
Combs responded that while she didn't "have any particular information on the reassignments" she understood such moves were part of a career building protocol.
"[Senior Executive Service officials] are supposed to be mobile to add to their resumes," she said.
http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Combs-get-confirmation-hearing-in-Senate-11302549.php
-
Sanders Comes out against Senate Bill
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sam Mintz
Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders came out against a bipartisan, comprehensive Senate energy policy reform bill yesterday, saying that it would boost fossil fuels by streamlining the permitting processes for pipelines and natural gas exports.
S. 1460 is backed by Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.). Murkowski said this week she hopes the Senate will debate the bill on the floor by mid-August (E&E News PM, July 18).
But the legislation has taken criticism from environmental groups, and Sanders joined with them yesterday. "In its current form, I cannot vote for the Energy and Natural Resources Act," he said in a statement.
Sanders praised provisions in the bill to permanently reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund, as well as the Weatherization Assistance and State Energy programs, but said he could not support other aspects of the measure.
"As a nation, our job is to move away from fossil fuels toward sustainable energy and energy efficiency. This bill does the opposite," he said.
"It would make us more reliant on fracking for natural gas for decades to come by expediting the review process for natural gas pipelines and liquefied natural gas," he said. "It would also provide millions of taxpayer dollars to research new offshore natural gas extraction techniques."
The bill includes language that would reinforce the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's role as the lead agency in permitting natural gas pipelines and set a deadline for FERC to give final approval to projects.
Similar language passed the House this week, in a vote that was hotly contested by Democrats and environmentalists (E&E Daily, July 20).
The Senate legislation would also impose a 45-day "shot clock" for the Department of Energy to make final decisions on liquefied natural gas exports.
Sanders' opposition to the energy reform bill comes days after two noted environmental activists railed against the legislation in an op-ed in The Hill, calling it a "shameless giveaway" to the oil and gas industry (E&E News PM, July 17).
But the 2016 presidential candidate did not rule out eventually supporting the effort, which is similar to legislation that passed the Senate 85-12 in April of last year. Sanders missed that vote while campaigning in the Democratic presidential primary.
"I look forward to being able to offer amendments to this bill to effectively combat climate change and ensure our planet remains healthy and habitable for our children and grandchildren," he said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/07/21/stories/1060057739
-
Grid Threats Require 'Imagining the Unimaginable' — Report
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
The U.S. electric power network is poorly equipped to restore electricity service to large areas blacked out by natural disasters or hostile attacks, a National Academy of Sciences panel warned yesterday in a report that looks into dark future scenarios that it says the nation and the public have not fully faced up to.
"The electricity system, and associated supporting infrastructure, is susceptible to widespread uncontrolled cascading failure, based on the interconnected and interdependent nature of the networks," the panel concluded in a 297-page report ordered by Congress and funded by the Department of Energy. "Despite all best efforts, it is impossible to avoid occasional, potentially large outages caused by natural disasters or pernicious physical or cyber attacks."
The panel, headed by M. Granger Morgan, an engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon University, proposed a long list of actions needed to create a "resilient" power grid that could recover from an unprecedented blow.
Morgan said the challenge should be a top priority, not in the sense of "do it tomorrow, or we're toast. But in the time scale of months, it's quite urgent."
"At present, planning for all types of hazards to public infrastructure is a disorganized and decentralized activity," the report said. "Too often in the past, the United States has made progress on the issue of resilience by 'muddling through,'" but that response is no longer tolerable, the report said. Multiple threats to the grid require authorities and industry to start "imagining the unimaginable" and planning for lower-probability but potentially catastrophic events.
The report comes as Energy Secretary Rick Perry's leadership team is completing a high-level review of power grid reliability and is working on a report on cybersecurity threats called for by President Trump. Both reports will set policy benchmarks for how the Trump administration will prioritize and fund federal responses to grid threats.
Travis Fisher, the DOE political appointee heading the reliability study, minimized the risk of a state-sponsored, large-scale cyber outage in a 2015 paper issued by the Institute for Energy Research, a pro-fossil-fuels advocacy organization. "Even though cyber threats do exist and are concerning, fears of catastrophic damage from a cyber attack are likely overblown," Fisher wrote then, saying that would-be attackers are deterred by the certainty of a U.S. in-kind response.
Some grid executives and federal security officials have said the same, but most cyber professionals conclude that the grid's exposure to potential attack is expanding constantly. Responding to a question yesterday, DOE spokeswoman Shaylyn Hynes said the IER paper "is not relevant to the grid study or cyber study."
The panel, whose members included academics, DOE laboratory scientists and a former regional grid chief executive, said the responsibility for recovery from a widespread power outage starts at the top.Fragmented responsibility
"No single entity is responsible for, or has the authority to implement a comprehensive approach to assure the resilience of the nation's electricity system," the report said. "Even in federal programs focused explicitly on increasing grid resilience, planning and implementation of research and policy responses are fragmented across federal agencies. It is impossible to describe all of the relevant efforts succinctly."
The panel challenged DOE to fill that gap, leading longer-term federal, state and community actions to increase the grid's recovery capability. "No other entity in the United States has the mission to support such work," it said.
While many recommendations centered on the federal government, others pointed at the power industry.
"There has been a tendency among utilities and other commercial entities not to share information about cyber breaches and to look inward rather than seeking help, which limits potential for collaboration across organizations. Most utilities are not likely to have adequate internal staff directly experienced in large-scale cyber restoration," the report said.
It also urged more research on how electric vehicles, customer-owned solar power and microgrids could help the grid recover. In worst-case scenarios, customers might have to endure lengthy recoveries in which power is rationed, the study said. Families that have home systems able to use limited power supplies to run refrigerators and furnaces might avoid evacuation after a disaster, the authors said.
The report urged more financial support for DOE offices that fund research, development and demonstration programs on cybersecurity defenses and power grid monitoring and control systems. Trump's fiscal 2018 budget request proposed 41 percent spending cuts for both DOE's Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability and its Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, two centers of that research.
"If funding is not provided by the federal government, the committee is concerned that this gap would not be filled either by states or by the private sector," the panel said.
It called on DOE to lead in the stockpiling of crucial grid power transformers, to complement industry programs.
Much more technology is needed to deal with wide-area outages, the panel said, including control room software to help grid operators recognize and respond to fast-moving outages. "During a major event such as Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy, thousands of alarms can overwhelm the system operator" in control rooms, it said. "Artificial intelligence could help quickly prioritize these alarms."
Several recommendations addressed what the panel saw as a lack of understanding among government officials and the public about the consequences of a widespread emergency — including deliberate, targeted blackouts of some areas to protect vital equipment that would be needed to bring the grid back up.
In an uncontrolled, cascading grid collapse, parts of the interstate grid would automatically break into smaller subdivisions called "islands," resulting in significant outages, the panel said. Planned "islanding" in an emergency could limit the damage and speed recovery, the report said.
DOE and DHS should create a "visioning" process to portray and assess plausible large-area, long-duration grid disruptions that could have major impacts on the public, to help hospitals, communications providers, first responders and other critical resources prepare, the report said.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the North American Energy Standards Board should do more to coordinate operations of natural gas pipelines and the power companies that depend on gas to run generators, it said.
The recovery challenge must be recognized at the state level, too, the panel said.
In one case in point, a new cybersecurity strategy issued last week by Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy (D) describes critical infrastructure as the state's "Achilles' heel," noting that "experts have called our electric grid the glass jaw of American industry." The document concludes, "There are potential attackers, vulnerable places they could attack and many ways to amplify the effects of a cyber attack by combining it with other emergencies."
"I can't give you concrete, specific, best solutions for all these problems," said Art House, Connecticut's chief cybersecurity risk officer and a former utility regulator there. "But I think that what we have to do is recognize the vulnerability, recognize that there has to be a culture of cybersecurity, and then go about finding the answers to it."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/07/21/stories/1060057718
-
Regulators Grant Sunsetting Nuclear Sites Cybersecurity Leeway
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
As the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ramps up cybersecurity inspections at nuclear sites this year, some facilities are catching a break from the regulator's most stringent set of cyber standards.
The nuclear power industry, led by the Nuclear Energy Institute, has made the case that a shuttered nuclear reactor should not be held to the same digital security rules as active sites (Energywire, July 17).
The bulk of the cybersecurity exemptions to a 2009 NRC "Cyber Security Rule" apply to plants undergoing "decommissioning" — a yearslong process that involves shutting down an active nuclear power reactor and removing, cooling and storing spent nuclear fuel. Experts say the potential consequences of a successful cyberattack decrease dramatically at each step in the decommissioning process.
"The threat from cyber for decommissioned plants relative to operating ones is appreciably less; in fact, it is virtually non-existent," Nuclear Energy Institute spokesman John Keeley noted in an email yesterday. "With decommissioned plants, the fuel is out of the reactor core, and shielded under either more than 20 feet of water in pools or in dry casks."
The worst-case scenario from a cyberattack on nuclear safety systems at a nonoperating plant wouldn't extend much beyond the boundaries of the facility, according to utility regulatory filings.
The NRC has so far been sympathetic to that case, though a rule addressing the subject, and potential tweaks to other requirements for decommissioning reactors, is in its early stages and may not be finished until 2019.
"When compared to potential accidents at an operating reactor, the risk of an offsite radiological release is significantly lower, and the types of possible accidents are significantly fewer, at a nuclear power reactor that has permanently ceased operations and removed fuel from the reactor vessel than at an operating reactor," the NRC said in a recent update on the regulations.
NRC oversight has come under scrutiny from lawmakers and cybersecurity experts recently following news that hackers targeted several U.S. nuclear plants in a sophisticated campaign (Energywire, July 7).
While that cyberthreat never apparently breached the closely held nuclear safety systems that fall under the NRC's regulatory authority, the case represented one of the only publicly known times hackers have placed nuclear sites in their crosshairs.
Joe Weiss, managing partner of the industrial cybersecurity consultancy Applied Control Solutions LLC, said in an interview yesterday that he agrees with the industry's and NRC's assessment that the cyber risk to decommissioning plants is low — "however, the cyber risk to safety is not zero."
He pointed out that attackers could, in theory, target the power supply to the pools protecting spent nuclear fuel. He noted that a loss of power, and thus cooling ability, contributed to the devastation during the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan.
"Fukushima has shown that even if you're not operating, you can have catastrophic risk," Weiss said.
"If you're talking about facilities that are not operating, they still need to have cybersecurity — and they still do," he added. "But the level of cybersecurity [necessary] is not near the same as if you were an operating plant."Case-by-case exceptions
Last month, Duke Energy Florida became the latest firm to win an exemption to NRC requirements for a comprehensive cybersecurity plan. The regulator concluded that the Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant — a site that has been shut down since September 2009 and has had no fuel in its reactor since February 2013 — would not pose a significant threat to public safety if it came under a sustained cyberattack.
"The spent fuel has been in the spent fuel pool for longer than 3 years, which is a sufficient cooling period to mitigate the risk of heat-up to clad ignition temperature," the NRC found, adding that operators would have "significant time" available to respond to a cyber emergency.
"The consequences of a cyber attack on those systems are much lower than while the plant was operating or the fuel in the spent fuel pool was not as cool," the regulator said in a June 22 filing approving Duke's request to remove cybersecurity conditions from its license for the site.
On May 9, the NRC OK'd removing requirements for the Kewaunee Power Station's cybersecurity plan, which had been prepared by the decommissioning site's owner, Dominion Energy Inc. That nuclear generation site in Wisconsin was brought offline in 2013.
Other operators have made the case that decommissioned sites have fewer computer systems to attack.
"The spectrum of possible accidents are significantly fewer and the risk of an offsite radiological release is significantly lower for a permanently defueled reactor," Mary Fisher, senior director for decommissioning at the Omaha Public Power District's Fort Calhoun Station nuclear site in Nebraska, wrote in a June 16 request for the site to be exempted from NRC cybersecurity requirements. The Fort Calhoun generating plant permanently shut down last year. "The reduced cyber security risk is due, in part, to the fact that there are fewer critical digital assets at a decommissioning reactor in comparison to the number of [assets] at an operating reactor."
The NRC is still evaluating Fisher's request alongside similar petitions from more recently closed sites. The less time spent fuel has had to cool, the current thinking goes, the riskier any exceptions to cybersecurity requirements could be.
"Licensees that are decommissioning, but still have fresh fuel in their [spent fuel pools], will remain subject to their [cybersecurity plan] license conditions," the NRC noted in a memo dated Dec. 5, 2016.
The fresher the fuel, the less time it would take to heat up in an attack, making a radioactive release from a fire more likely.
That memo noted that NRC staff would evaluate requests to remove those conditions "on a case-by-case basis."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/07/21/stories/1060057717
-
Here's Why Republicans Broke Ranks to Back Cap and Trade
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Anne C. Mulkern
Republicans helped push California's cap-and-trade extension across the finish line, even though it riled their colleagues and conservative groups.
So why did they do it? They say it's good for their districts, offers assurances to businesses and the agricultural community, and has the support of coastal constituents worried about sea-level rise.
The eight Republicans in California's Legislature who voted to extend cap and trade through 2030 represent diverse districts. They're from farmlands in the state's Central Valley, east San Francisco Bay Area communities, a north San Diego County coastal area, and suburban Riverside County and San Bernardino County cities.
Three Assembly Democrats voted against the measure, A.B. 398, a priority of Gov. Jerry Brown (D).
That made the GOP votes necessary to get passage with the two-thirds majority the governor wanted as protection from lawsuits. The program caps greenhouse gas emissions and requires that certain business submit allowances for emissions. Some argue that the auction of those allowances constitutes a tax. State law requires a two-thirds vote for any new tax.
In the state Assembly, Republican Leader Chad Mayes, and Assemblymembers Catharine Baker, Rocky Chávez, Jordan Cunningham, Heath Flora, Devon Mathis and Marc Steinorth voted for the measure. State Sen. Tom Berryhill was the sole GOP member in his chamber to give support.
"The design was right to me. It was always about, how do you do this in way that could link to other countries or states," on carbon reduction, Chávez said in an interview. "California's only 1 percent of the carbon output, but if you can do a market-based system, show how you can do this and still make economies vibrant, it will be easier to adapt in other states or countries."
Chávez said he spoke to Brown at an event last month and asked him "how critical is the Republican vote" on cap and trade. The governor said GOP help was essential, and Chávez said there probably were two to three GOP members who could support it.
"He said, 'We need more,'" Chávez said of the California governor. "I said, 'Then I need a good deal."
Chávez said he liked elements in the measure that include the ability for companies to invest in carbon-reducing projects or offsets for part of their emissions compliance, and a price ceiling on allowances. There also are two allowance price containment points, or "speed bumps," triggers where the state Air Resources Board (ARB) will offer businesses under the system allowances at the price containment points.
"So that there was some assurance to the businesses they wouldn't be wiped out," he said.
Chávez represents a swath of coastal land in north San Diego County. It includes Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton and a suburban coastal town with a largely progressive voting base. It's some of the same area that narrowly re-elected Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) last year. Residents enjoy surfing, biking and other outdoor activities, he said, and "80 percent of my people are on board" with extending the cap-and-trade plan.
He said he's concerned about sea-level rise because "when you live in a coastal community, it's a real issue." As a retired Marine, he said, he's also thinking about the international security problems that could occur if people are displaced because their homes are flooded out or they can't grow crops because of droughts.
Chávez said he prefers cap and trade because it's a market mechanism rather than direct regulations on businesses.
Chávez before the vote attended a community meeting and announced his plan to support the cap-and-trade extension. "They all started cheering," he said.Beats 'unaccountable bureaucrats'
Other GOP members who voted for A.B. 398 were tougher to win over.
Berryhill, from Stanislaus, in the state's Central Valley, criticized the cap-and-trade extension legislation as "the unfortunate result of years of aggressive climate-change policies forced on us by the coastal elites who run Sacramento."
But "instead of sitting on the sideline and watching everything go off a cliff, I was able to ensure farmers, small-business owners and rural Californians were well-represented and protected in the negotiation," Berryhill said in a statement.
Berryhill's office couldn't say exactly what provisions the senator felt protected his constituents but said that support from farmers and farm groups played a big part.
A coalition of farm and agriculture groups in a letter to Assemblyman Eduardo Garcia (D), the lead sponsor of A.B. 398, said the measure "allows food processors regulated under SB 32 to meet their compliance obligations for reducing GHGs in a cost effective manner." S.B. 32, passed last year, was the successor bill to A.B. 32, which set out California's climate goals.
The agriculture groups said they liked that the measure develops a mechanism to establish a price ceiling on allowances. It has language ranking how the revenues from the program will get spent, the letter said, with a "specific order of projects to prioritize, starting with reducing air pollutants from stationary and mobile sources, sustainable agriculture and short lived climate pollutants."
The bill also sets up a path to creating new offsets in California, including in the agricultural industry. That could help dairies trying to develop digesters that burn methane.
Berryhill said he also believed cap and trade was preferable to direct regulations "written by out-of-touch, unaccountable bureaucrats — the exact people I came to Sacramento to rein in." He added that "this bill is not perfect, but it is more reasonable after a bipartisan negotiation. I am very pleased to have given farmers, small-business owners and rural Californians a voice in the negotiation of a measure that would have been passed one way or another."
Steinorth and Mathis during the floor debate said that business and agriculture-friendly elements swayed their votes for the legislation (Climatewire, July 18).
Republican Leader Mayes represents Hemet, Indian Wells, Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage and other cities in Riverside County and some in San Bernardino County. He said after the vote that A.B. 398 showed the state could act in a bipartisan way.
"This plan cleans up the environment for future generations and cuts the cost of taxes, fees and regulations by $16 billion a year for ordinary Californians," he said in a statement. "Protecting the earth and protecting your paycheck is no longer an either-or decision."
He referred to part of the legislation that extended a sales tax exemption for purchases of some equipment used in manufacturing. Due to sunset, it was extended and expanded, in part to include manufacturing linked to some types of renewable power generation. Mayes also liked the suspension until 2031 of a fee applied to homes in areas where the state is responsible for fighting fires.
"We gained a victory for rural Californians with the repeal of the fire tax and funding to help farmers and food producers cover the costs of reducing emissions," Mayes said. "Meanwhile, we cut taxes for manufacturers to ensure their ability to continue providing good-paying, middle-class jobs for Californians."
Some conservative groups castigated the eight GOP members who voted for the measure. Tim Donnelly, a former California assemblyman who writes a blog called Patriot Not Politician, called the lawmakers "feckless."
"Thanks to GOP leadership, 'California style,' this diabolical scheme — to confiscate capital from businesses in the name of ending 'Global Warming' and redistributing the money to secret slush funds and politician's pet projects like affordable housing and the High Speed Rail Project — has a decade-long renewal," he said in an email to supporters.Democratic opponents: Too much 'given away'
Three Democrats voted against A.B. 398: Assemblymembers Adam Gray, Monique Limón and Mark Stone. Two said they found that the measure gave too much to regulated businesses.
Limón, who represents parts of Santa Barbara and Ventura, said in an interview that she supports the state's climate goals.
"The concerns that I had were about supporting a policy that would allow some of the industries that are most responsible for greenhouse gas emissions to continue to pollute for free while at the same time taking away the local control of the air districts to set air quality standards for their community," she said.
The measure has a provision stating that only ARB can regulate carbon emissions at oil and gas facilities, and solely through cap and trade. That means the state's 35 local air districts cannot directly regulate carbon dioxide. Many familiar with bill negotiations say it was inserted at the behest of the Western States Petroleum Association, or WSPA, the trade group for several major oil companies.
Environmental justice groups, those supporting action for communities who live near pollution sources, have been pushing for action by local air boards. Those agencies were starting to police emissions from local facilities, and "now this regulation is taking away our ability to do that," she said.
Limón said she also disliked the number of free allowances that will be given to businesses and access to offsets. She said she also isn't certain that the measure will achieve the state's desired emissions cut. California under S.B. 32 — passed last year — must cut greenhouse gas pollution 40 percent below 1990's level by 2030.
Stone, of the greater Santa Cruz area, also found A.B. 398 too lenient.
"While the bill does continue the market mechanism intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it provides too much in the way of allowances to those most responsible for generating greenhouse gas emissions," he said. "I'm especially disappointed that the agreement failed to hold polluters accountable for their businesses' detrimental impacts on climate and air quality.
"Whether or not this program will work as promised remains to be seen, but with too much being given away to the worst-polluting industries, I could not see this passing with my name on it," Stone added.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/07/21/stories/1060057726
-
Environmentalists Sue EPA over Texas Air Permits
Jul 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists are suing EPA over the agency's failure to respond to their petitions to object to the Clean Air Act permits of five large industrial facilities in Texas, saying the agency must force state regulators to revise the permits for being unenforceable and too weak.
In five lawsuits filed July 20 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP), representing Air Alliance Houston, Sierra Club and Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services, asks the court to force an EPA response to their petitions.
EIP on behalf of these groups petitioned EPA last year to object to the air permits issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for ExxonMobil’s Baytown Olefins Plant and Refinery outside Houston; Petrobras’ Pasadena Refinery east of the city; Motiva’s Port Arthur Refinery; and Southwestern Electric Power Company's (SWEPCO) Welsh Power Plant east of Dallas. EPA has missed 60-day deadlines to respond to all five petitions, EIP says.
“EPA knows that Texas issues unenforceable permits with illegal loopholes that render useless some of the most basic pollution control requirements of federal and state law,” said Gabriel Clark-Leach, attorney for EIP, in a July 20 statement. “EPA’s unwillingness to object to faulty state permits deprives the public of health protections guaranteed by the law."
Lack of enforceable emissions limits is a common theme across the petitions, which otherwise vary widely according to the specific circumstances of each facility. For example, in some instances, environmentalists claim that provisions on “plantwide applicability limits,” which are overarching pollution caps on pollution, are flawed.
In others, they claim provisions exempting some emissions during periods of startup, shutdown and maintenance (but not malfunction) are impermissible.
“Some of the permits do not require monitoring or modern air pollution control equipment and are so inscrutable it makes it hard for TCEQ’s own employees to know when a plant is in violation,” EIP says.
EIP in the statement depicts the effort as part of its broader push to improve enforcement of state and federal air laws in Texas. The group together with Environment Texas on July 7 issued a report, “Breakdowns in Enforcement,” alleging that TCEQ “imposed penalties on less than 3 percent of 24,839 illegal air pollution incidents from 2011 through 2016. These self-reported incidents released more than 500 million pounds of air pollution during industrial malfunctions and maintenance.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/environmentalists-sue-epa-over-texas-air-permits
-
State Walks Back Toxic Emissions Rules
Jul 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
Oregon's polluters have successfully pushed back on efforts to strengthen toxic air rules in the state.
Industry lobbyists have convinced lawmakers to withhold money for promulgation of rules crafted by Gov. Kate Brown (D).
Citing industry feedback, the state Department of Environmental Quality has relaxed the rules.
The newly revised rules allow polluters to create a higher cancer risk across the state than the original rules would have allowed.
Under the revisions, the state could exempt the biggest polluters from requirements to nearly eliminate the cancer risk from their toxic emissions. With agency approval, existing polluters would be allowed to increase the cancer risk by over 100 cancers for every million people. There is no cap set under the revised rules.
Additionally, a loophole in the rules would give local politicians a say on whether some of the biggest polluters in the state should be subject to the limits on chemicals coming from their smokestacks (Rob Davis, Portland Oregonian, July 21). — CS
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/07/21/stories/1060057734
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
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