Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 8/31/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Chemical Analysis Program's Science Focus of Sept. 6 Hearing
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
EPA's chemical toxicity program will be at the forefront of a House Science Committee hearing Sept. 6. -
(ACC Mentioned) FOIA Suit Targets Industry Role In EPA's TSCA Rules
Aug 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists and a government watchdog group are investigating what role industry may have played in the Trump administration's changes to the framework rules for implementing revisions to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) -- which contained noticeable changes from drafts released by the Obama EPA. -
US CPSC Exempts Seven Plastics From Phthalates Testing
Aug 31, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has voted unanimously to exempt seven plastics from the requirement to conduct independent testing to demonstrate compliance with phthalates prohibitions in children's products. -
EPA Rapidly Revamping Chemical Risk Reviews to Dodge Cuts
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
The EPA's chemical toxicity assessment program is sprinting toward innovation to avoid the administrator's chopping block. -
Flame Retardants Linked To Infertility In Women
Aug 31, 2017 | Reuters
By Lisa Rapaport
Women with high concentrations of common flame retardants in their urine may have a hard time getting pregnant and carrying a baby to term, a recent study suggests. -
As Dicamba Dust Settles, Scientists and Industry Spar
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Arkansan soybean farmers are wrapping up a summer of harvesting bumper crops alongside the crippling devastation of their neighbors’ fields. The same herbicide is causing both optimism and bitterness in the region, and discussions over its future use is dividing farmers, scientists, and industry. -
A Win For Trump's Gas Diplomacy
Aug 31, 2017 | Reuters
By Agnia Grigas
Last week, American liquefied natural gas (LNG) made its way to the somewhat unlikely market of Lithuania. The former Soviet republic traditionally bought its gas from Russian state company Gazprom; this was its first shipment from the United States. -
Harvey Flooding Sparks Explosions at Texas Chemical Plant
Aug 31, 2017 | The Wall Street Journal
By Dan Molinski and Erin Ailworth
Two explosions rocked a Texas chemical plant early Thursday, hours after the facility’s owner urged residents and others to stay away. -
Court Rejects Environmentalists' Call To Stay RMP Delay Pending Review
Aug 31, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Federal appellate judges have denied environmental and labor groups' request to stay or vacate the Trump EPA's final rule delaying an Obama-era overhaul of the agency's facility accident prevention program, saying groups have failed to meet “stringent standards” for a stay, though the court also rejected EPA's request to slow briefing. -
Flooded Houston Facing Threat From Air, Too, With Toxic Gas Releases
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
Houston residents face a less obvious threat from the air as they deal with historic flooding: The Hurricane Harvey-caused shutdown of the region's massive petrochemical industry released more than 2 million pounds of harmful pollutants into the air as of Aug. 29, according to initial reports to Texas regulators. -
Chemical Company Warns: ‘No Way To Prevent’ Explosion At Houston Plant
Aug 31, 2017 | The Hill E2 Wire
By Josh Delk
The CEO of an industrial chemical company is warning that there is “no way to prevent” a large explosion and fire at their Houston plant which was flooded after Hurricane Harvey. -
EPA Fights 'Speculative' Bid To Vacate Ozone NAAQS Designations Delay
Aug 31, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA is fighting several states' request for a federal appeals court to vacate the agency's since-withdrawn notice delaying by one year designations for which areas are attaining the 2015 ozone air standard, saying it is “speculative” for the states to say the delay was unlawful and that EPA should be prevented from trying it again. -
Shell Reaches Settlement To Better Monitor Air Quality at Pennsylvania Cracker
Aug 30, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Shell Chemical Appalachia LLC has reached a settlement with environmental groups, agreeing to implement more safeguards to monitor air quality at the site of its multi-billion dollar ethane cracker that is under construction in western Pennsylvania.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
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
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Chemical Analysis Program's Science Focus of Sept. 6 Hearing
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
EPA's chemical toxicity program will be at the forefront of a House Science Committee hearing Sept. 6.
Two subcommittees of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, one on environment and another on oversight, will hold the hearing. It will focus on the Environmental Protection Agency's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), which analyzes the human health harms that chemicals may cause and the doses at which those harms could manifest.
The National Academies, Government Accountability Office, American Chemistry Council , and others have criticized the IRIS program for years. They have said it takes too long to evaluate chemicals and that the program's rationale for many decisions isn't clear.
The academies, however, praised recent improvements the EPA has made to the IRIS program. The EPA's Science Advisory Board, which met Aug. 30, decided it will send a letter soon to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to show its support for the renewed IRIS program.
Kenneth Mundt, director of applied epidemiology for the consulting group Ramboll Environ, and former Dow Chemical Co. toxicologist James Bus, now a senior managing scientist at Exponent, will testify. Both scientists and those consulting firms have long worked for or on behalf of various chemical and tobacco companies as well as for trade associations. Bus also has directed four toxicological associations, including the Society of Toxicology.
Thomas Burke, who served as EPA's science advisor and deputy assistant administrator for research and development under former President Obama, will testify at the invitation of committee Democrats. Burke is an environmental and public health professor at Johns Hopkins University.
Formaldehyde Likely Issue
Questions about the IRIS program's formaldehyde assessment are likely to arise at the hearing.
In May, Mundt published a critique of a study on occupational exposure to formaldehyde. That study was critical in the EPA's IRIS program, National Toxicology Program, and International Agency for Research on Cancer's analyses of formaldehyde's cancer-causing potential and link to leukemia and related cancers. Mundt's analysis concluded the workers study did not support a link between formaldehyde exposure and leukemia.
The IRIS program's formaldehyde assessment, launched more than a decade ago, has not been completed. A 2011 critique that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine issued about the EPA's draft formaldehyde assessment was one of the central motivations for the agency to revamp IRIS.
The academies did not oppose the EPA's proposed conclusion that formaldehyde could cause leukemia and other cancers, but it urged the agency to better support that conclusion as well as other key conclusions.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=119848397&vname=dennotallissues&wsn=500046000&searchid=30432346&doctypeid=1&type=date&mode=doc&split=0&scm=DELNWB&pg=0
-
(ACC Mentioned) FOIA Suit Targets Industry Role In EPA's TSCA Rules
Aug 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists and a government watchdog group are investigating what role industry may have played in the Trump administration's changes to the framework rules for implementing revisions to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) -- which contained noticeable changes from drafts released by the Obama EPA.
American Oversight and Environmental Working Group (EWG) kicked off their project with an Aug. 30 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to EPA.
“In January, at the end of the Obama administration, the EPA proposed a set of rules relating to chemical safety. Comments on those rules were accepted through March. When the final rules were issued in July, they were significantly changed, largely by weakening safety standards in ways that were supported by the chemical industry,” the groups' FOIA request states.
“American Oversight and EWG are seeking information to determine the extent to which industry and trade groups, and others with a stake in these rules, may have engaged with [Administrator Scott] Pruitt and the EPA prior to this decision,” the FOIA request adds.
The FOIA request follows an Aug. 4 FOIA lawsuit from the Natural Resources Defense Council, which sued EPA over what that environmental group alleges is the agency's failure to turn over documents showing whether and how Beck is influencing TSCA rulemakings.
In the new request, the two groups are asking EPA to produce a copy of a May 23 memo from career agency staff to acting toxics chief Wendy Cleland-Hamnett outlining concerns with the changes made between the draft and final versions of the TSCA framework rules. According to Politico, staff were concerned that the changes had been “steered by” Deputy Assistant Administrator for EPA's toxics office Nancy Beck, the former chemical industry official who is currently leading the office.
Environmental groups and others have raised concerns about Beck's role at EPA. Until nominee Michael Dourson is confirmed by the Senate, Beck remains the top political appointee in EPA's toxics office. Before joining the agency last spring, Beck was senior director of regulatory science policy for the American Chemistry Council (ACC), a chemical industry trade group. Environmental groups have urged Beck to recuse herself from any decisions that she advocated on while with ACC, and have sought access to her ethics disclosures.
But Beck disclosed in a June letter the relatively limited set of recusals she agreed to in order to limit any conflict of interest with her prior work for ACC. In the letter, Beck affirms that she cannot current participate in any “specific matter” involving ACC, though she says she is allowed to participate in particular matters of general applicability, such as a rulemaking, even if ACC is participating.
Democratic senators have also urged the Government Accountability Office to investigate Pruitt's use of special legal authority that has allowed him to hire political appointees like Beck who are exempt from some ethics requirements.
American Oversight and EWG are also requesting records of all correspondence between various political appointees, senior executive service staff and administration transition team members and some 12 trade group and companies -- among them ACC, the American Petroleum Institute, Dow Chemical Company and others -- and correspondence on chemical safety issues between the same agency officials and four think tanks: Cato Institute, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Heritage Action and Heritage Foundation.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/foia-suit-targets-industry-role-epas-tsca-rules
-
US CPSC Exempts Seven Plastics From Phthalates Testing
Aug 31, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has voted unanimously to exempt seven plastics from the requirement to conduct independent testing to demonstrate compliance with phthalates prohibitions in children's products.
This rule will go into effect on 29 September.
In August 2016, the CPSC proposed eliminating testing requirements under the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) for the following four common plastics where phthalates restricted for use in children’s products are unlikely to occur:polypropylene;polyethylene;high impact polystyrene; andacrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS).
The proposal was based on a study by a CPSC contractor, which found the banned phthalates are not used above the allowable limit of 0.1% in these plastics, their raw materials, or in the types of additives they might contain.
In response to comments, the Commission asked for research on additional types of plastic, and added to the list:crystal and general-purpose polystyrene (GPPS, or GPS);medium-impact polystyrene (MIPS), andsuper-high-impact polystyrene (SHIPS).
The final rule exempts all seven materials from mandatory third-party testing.
Another change in the final rule specifies that the testing requirement applies only to "component parts that have had a plasticiser added to it, or to component parts that could contain phthalates". The change clarifies that non-plastic components do not have to be tested.
The exemptions relieve manufacturers from the obligation to have the specified plastics tested by a CPSC-accepted third party, the Commission noted, but do not change restrictions on phthalates imposed by the CPSIA.
The Commission may ban the use of five additional phthalates in children's products under a proposed rule the agency has agreed to finalise by 18 October. If the Commission finalises restrictions on additional substances, the testing rule will be amended to include them.
"On behalf of our members we salute the agency's thoughtful work on the final rule and openness to our perspectives as we look to reduce testing burdens – while still demonstrating compliance and safety – for toy companies," said Steve Pasierb, president and CEO of The Toy Industry Association (TIA).
https://chemicalwatch.com/58424/us-cpsc-exempts-seven-plastics-from-phthalates-testing
-
EPA Rapidly Revamping Chemical Risk Reviews to Dodge Cuts
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
The EPA's chemical toxicity assessment program is sprinting toward innovation to avoid the administrator's chopping block.
After years of criticism and attempted reforms, the Environmental Protection Agency is overhauling the Integrated Risk Information System with a raft of behind-the-scenes changes. Though the agency's scientific advisers like what they see, it's unclear whether those changes can satisfy the program's critics and help regulators by speeding up risk assessments and increasing transparency.
The EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessments houses the Integrated Risk Information System, also known as the IRIS program, which analyzes the human health harms that chemicals may cause and the doses at which those harms could manifest. The analyses are used in setting exposure limits and other health protections.
“We're trying to shape the future of risk assessment, whether it's in the human health arena or the environmental health arena,” Tina Bahadori, who leads the center, which synthesizes new scientific information about chemicals into reports that help the agency set regulations and limits, said at a Science Advisory Board meeting Aug. 30.
The board intends to send a letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to show its support for the renewed IRIS program.
In response to a board member who asked how the center will accomplish its goals so quickly, Bahadori said she and her colleagues are motivated by the fact that their center's “mere existence is at risk.” In March, the president's fiscal year 2018 budget request proposed to eliminate IRIS, although the final budget request included it.
The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will meet Sept. 6 to discuss the IRIS program.
“This is extraordinary, and we would not want to see this effort stopped or hindered,” said board member Gina Solomon, a deputy secretary at the California Environmental Protection Agency. “Coming from a state perspective, I know the value of the IRIS numbers. We rely on them quite often and there's not another entity that provides that function.”
Accelerating Reviews
The proposed changes to the program include:
• emphasizing systematic reviews;
• creating “interim deliverables” to finalize and publish parts of an assessment instead of delaying publication for a single controversial section;
• training select employees on new tools and farming out their expertise to the rest of the center and the agency;
• determining which chemicals may be future risks and preparing resources accordingly; and
• working with risk assessors internationally to identify opportunities for innovation.
Hurdles to Clear
Bahadori said that the IRIS program's challenges are not unique.
“Assessments are complicated to do,” she said. “Risk assessments are becoming very nuanced, very expert-driven and very controversial.”
Kenneth Ramos, a member of the Science Advisory Board and associate vice president for Precision Health Sciences at the University of Arizona, said the center is moving “at the speed of light,” but the rest of the field may not catch up.
“Risk assessment, like medicine, is slow and cranking, and so it takes time for change to be adopted,” he said at the board meeting. By moving too quickly, Ramos said, the center may risk leaving its audience, including the chemical industry and policymakers, in the dust.
Bahadori said the center plans to “bring the real live risk assessors along with us and make sure we have buy-in and support.”
Members of the chartered Science Advisory Board include consultants, researchers and analysts at U.S. universities, environmental advocacy groups, Dow Chemical, Procter & Gamble, and Exxon Mobil Corp.
—With assistance from Pat Rizzuto.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=119848395&vname=dennotallissues&fn=119848395&jd=119848395
-
Flame Retardants Linked To Infertility In Women
Aug 31, 2017 | Reuters
By Lisa Rapaport
(Reuters Health) - Women with high concentrations of common flame retardants in their urine may have a hard time getting pregnant and carrying a baby to term, a recent study suggests.
The chemicals - known as PFRs, or organophosphate flame retardants - can be used to make clothing or upholstery fire-resistant and may also be found in nail polish, yoga mats and car seats.
For the study, researchers examined data on 211 women who went to a fertility clinic in Massachusetts to be evaluated for in vitro fertilization. Lab tests showed high urinary levels of metabolites, or byproducts, of three flame retardants: diphenyl phosphate (DPHP), bis(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (BDCIPP) and isopropylphenyl phenyl phosphate (ip-PPP).
Compared to women with the lowest levels of two of these chemicals - DPHP and ip-PPP - in their urine, women with the highest levels were 10 percent less likely to have a successful fertilization, 31 percent less likely to have an embryo implant in the uterus, 41 percent less likely to have a viable pregnancy, and 38 percent less likely to have a live birth.
“These findings suggest that exposure to PFRs may be one of many risk factors for lower reproductive success,” said lead study author Courtney Carignan, who did the research at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston.
“They also add to the body of evidence indicating a need to reduce the use of these flame retardants and identify safer alternatives,” Carignan, now at the Center for Research on Ingredient Safety at Michigan State University in East Lansing, said by email.
Flame retardants added to a wide range of products aren’t chemically bound, which means they’re continuously released into the air and dust, Carignan said.
“We all ingest a little bit of dust every day because small amounts easily stick to our hands,” Carignan added. “Couples wishing to reduce their exposure to flame retardants may benefit from washing their hands several times throughout the day, particularly before eating, as previous studies have shown that people who wash their hands more frequently have lower levels of these chemicals in their bodies.”
One in six couples struggles with infertility - a proportion likely to rise as increasing numbers of people in developed countries delay childbearing, researchers note in Environmental Health Perspectives.
Previous studies have linked exposure to products containing hormone-disrupting chemicals, such as pesticides and phthalates, to infertility and poorer reproductive success. PFRs have been found to cause hormone disruption in animal studies.
In the current study, 87 percent of the women had BDCIPP in their urine, 94 percent had DPHP and 80 percent had ip-PPP. Just 14 percent had the flame retardant tert-butylphenyl phenyl phosphate (tp-PPP), and none had bis(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (BCIPP).
The study wasn’t a controlled experiment designed to prove whether or how flame retardants might impact women’s fertility.
Another limitation of the study is that researchers didn’t consider male partners’ exposure to flame retardants, the authors note. Because the study participants were 35 years old on average and seeking care at a fertility clinic, it’s possible the results might not reflect what would happen for younger women or all women trying to conceive.
“Since this is the first study to examine the effects of organophosphate flame retardants on female reproduction, it is unclear how these findings would apply to the general population of reproductive-aged women,” said Ami Zota, an environmental and occupational health researcher at the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University.
While more research is needed to confirm the study findings in a larger population, women may still take precautions, Zota, who wasn’t involved in the study, said by email.
“Women may be able to reduce their chemical exposures in the indoor environment by washing their hands frequently, especially prior to eating, as well as buying flame-retardant-free furniture,” Zota advised.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-fertility-flame-retardants-idUSKCN1BA2OQ
-
As Dicamba Dust Settles, Scientists and Industry Spar
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Arkansan soybean farmers are wrapping up a summer of harvesting bumper crops alongside the crippling devastation of their neighbors’ fields. The same herbicide is causing both optimism and bitterness in the region, and discussions over its future use is dividing farmers, scientists, and industry.
Dicamba, a weedkiller first registered in 1967, has undergone a makeover to fight weeds immune to most herbicides. BASF Corp., Monsanto Co., and DuPont this year stocked new versions of dicamba, designed for use with Monsanto's soybeans and cotton that are genetically-engineered to withstand the new herbicides. But the herbicide spread easily to neighboring farms, falling on vulnerable crops.
This summer was one the best growing seasons in years for Arkansans in terms of controlling insidious weeds that creep into fields. It also was a year of unusual harm to nearly a third of the state's soybean crops, marked by curled leaves, stunted growth, poor yields, and J-shaped pods that have been tied to new formulations of the herbicide.
What was a blockbuster year for many growers cost others millions of dollars, pitting farmer against farmer and scientists against the herbicide's manufacturers.
State university scientists believe the new formulations can't be managed to control the damage. They easily evaporate, or “volatilize,” and can spread potentially thousands of feet over a couple of days into a neighbor's field.
“As a weed scientist, I can't tell you how to fix this problem,” Jason Norsworthy, an extension scientist with the University of Arkansas told a group of farmers and industry representatives Aug. 17.
The manufacturers are loathe to blame volatility, saying the herbicides were studied extensively before their launch earlier this year. The damage, they say, could be due to errors in applying the herbicide, poorly written instructions, and generally weak control of physical drift—the travel of liquid droplets of dicamba via wind or weather patterns.
To avoid a repeat of the disaster next year, Arkansas’ Plant Board convened a task force of growers and trade association representatives to craft recommendations on the spraying of dicamba.
On Aug. 24, the task force agreed to develop preliminary recommendations for the Plant Board to send to the governor. The panel suggested that the Plant Board impose an April 15 cut-off date for spraying the chemical and thereby prevent spraying in the hot summer months. The cut-off date also effectively would bar use of the herbicide for many farmers, given that most of the soybean planting happens in May.
The task force will incorporate the recommendations in a formal report due in the next three weeks. If implemented by the Arkansas Plant Board, the recommendations will drive hundreds of farmers’ decisions next year. A compromise between those who have gained from the new dicamba and those who have suffered won't be easy. Farmers in Arkansas have been clamoring for solutions to their weed problems for years, and are feeling the pressure of declining grain prices that can threaten the viability of their farm operations in just one season.
Grasping for Solutions
“It's something that we desperately need to control the weeds,” Justin Blackburn, a 33-year old, eighth generation soybean and corn grower in Northeastern Arkansas, told Bloomberg BNA. “We're grasping for anything that works.”
Hundreds of thousands of soybean acres, plus trees, vegetables crops, and flowering plants that feed honeybees, have shriveled this year as the new product for killing weeds came on the market. Soybeans are particularly sensitive to dicamba. The only crops that are safe are Monsanto Xtend seeds that are genetically engineered to withstand the herbicide. About 35 percent of the soybeans planted this year in the state are Xtend crops.
“We've got some serious issues we've got to address,” Wes Ward, the state's Agriculture Secretary, told Bloomberg BNA. “We're hoping that this task force…can try to nail this down a little better.”
In preparing its recommendations, the 19-person panel must consider conflicting information from university researchers and the manufacturers of the new herbicide.
Manufacturers hailed new formulations as a cure for stubborn weeds that suffocate crop yields. The aptly-named pigweed—also called palmer amaranth—began to resist applications of the widely-used weedkiller glyphosate after the turn of the 21st century. Weeds also have developed resistance to another class of herbicides called protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitors. Resistant weeds can cut yields by up to 91 percent in corn and up to 79 percent in soybean, according to Purdue University Extension.
The new products were made to be less prone to evaporate and spread to neighboring fields than the dicamba of the past. But starting in late May, complaints began to mount. Dozens of calls to the Plant Board turned to hundreds. To date, 950 complaints have been filed.
The State Plant Board voted to ban spraying of dicamba in crops on June 23. As of Aug. 10, an estimated 900,000 acres of Arkansas soybean fields have been allegedly damaged by dicamba, according to state extension scientists, about one-third of the total soybean damage for the nation as a whole.
Ground Zero
Dicamba works by mimicking plant hormones that make weeds grow abnormally and eventually die.
More than 2,200 reports of dicama injury, affecting more than 3 million acres of soybeans, are being investigated nationwide, according to the University of Missouri's Integrated Pest Management program. Northeastern Arkansas is ground zero for the damage.
In Mississippi County, a sprawling horizon of soybean and cotton fields one hour northwest of Memphis, Tenn., 240 dicamba misuse complaints were filed this year—one quarter of all of the complaints in the state.
David Wildy, a task force member who pushed for an April 15 cutoff date for spraying the chemical, is one of the most vocal critics of the new formulations. A silver-haired grower of soybeans, corn, and other crops from Manila, in the northeastern part of Arkansas, he's earned awards for his high production, management style, and outreach to the agricultural community.
Earlier this season, Wildy estimated his loss from soybean damage to be a little shy of $1 million, injury that is not covered by federal crop insurance or private insurance unless a neighbor admits to spraying dicamba and agrees to cover the loss with liability insurance.
“This technology is driving a wedge between farmers,” he told Bloomberg BNA.
Arkansas was the only state of 34 not to approve XtendiMax for use, despite allowing farmers to plant Extend seeds that can withstand applications of dicamba. The Plant Board denied XtendiMax's approval because university scientists were not able to do independent tests, particularly under local conditions, Arkansas Agriculture Department spokeswoman Adriane Barnes told Bloomberg BNA in an email. This dampened their confidence in the product.
In A Pickle
Monsanto's vice president of global strategy Scott Partridge said the refusal to approve the use of Xtendimax drove farmers to use older versions of dicamba not suitable for use with the company's genetically-modified seeds. It's no surprise that Arkansas has fared the worst in the dicamba crisis, Partridge told Bloomberg BNA.
“I can understand why Arkansas is scrambling,” he said. “I think they got themselves into a bit of a pickle.”
Some states that have seen little to no problems with dicamba, a pattern BASF attributes to more in-person training. Arkansas Agriculture Secretary Ward told Bloomberg BNA that his state relied on the protocol for Mississippi, which did not require face-to-face training.
On a press call Aug. 17, BASF pointed to the in-person training in states like Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia as a likely reason for fewer complaints in those states.
“We do recognize differences in agriculture around the country, but we shouldn't be quick to discount the value of in-person and face-to-face training,” Scott Kay, vice president of U.S. Crops forBASF, said. “We do believe that's an important contributor to their reduced numbers of alleged complaints coming from those states.”
But Norsworthy said those differences could be attributed to different agricultural systems, like smaller fields and forests interspersed with farmland.
In that county, a farmer was shot and killed after a dispute with a dicamba-spraying neighbor last year. At the time, Xtend seeds were legal, but the Environmental Protection Agency had not yet approved the new versions of dicamba, leading to widespread “off-label” use. It is illegal to use older versions of dicamba on the genetically-engineered plants.
This year was supposed to be different. The EPA approved the new formulations last November, more than a year after the Agriculture Department allowed for Monsanto's Xtend seeds to go on the market. But this year's calls to the Arkansas Plant Board have far outpaced last year's 33 complaints, 23 of which were confirmed to be dicamba injury.
Record Soybean Crop
The crisis won't lead to a national soybean shortage. On the contrary, the U.S. is set to break its soybean record this year, and Arkansas is expected to produce 400,000 more acres than in 2016, with a slight increase in yields per acre, according to USDA. Monsanto Chief Technology Officer Robb Fraley said Aug. 29 that the company is planning to supply enough Xtend seeds for up to half of the U.S. soybean acreage for next year's growing season.
But that gain comes at a significant cost, Wildy said. Sycamore trees are wilting. Tomato plants are wiped out. Wildy needs and wants the technology. But if this is the price of progress, he says, it's not worth it. Non-agricultural plants—from ornamental trees to flowers that feed honeybees—have been affected too.
“When the general public gets involved, to me that's very serious,” he said, referring to the broader number of groups affected.
Wildy planted about 300 of his 3,300 soybean acres with Xtend seeds this year. He said he will plant more next year as a protective measure if the state Plant Board allows continued use. Farmers pay about $8 more per acre for dicamba-resistant beans than for LibertyLink seeds, Bayer AG's technology that matches glufosinate-tolerant crops to a new version of the herbicide glufosinate—another result of farmers’ clamor for tools to beat weeds.
Arkansas farmer Blackburn tends to 1,700 acres with his brother in Greene County. Last year, he was hit with a wave of dicamba that damaged his soybeans. This year, he went on the defense. The brothers planted every acre of their soybeans to be dicamba-resistant. It was an extra expense, he said, but worth it. It worked wonderfully until late June, when the state imposed its ban.
That bothers Blackburn. This new technology has brought benefits to farmers, and smearing the formulations with a broad brush means a step backwards.
“We followed all of the regulations, all of the guidelines,” he said. “They're sort of making it out to be that everybody who sprays this stuff is an outlaw, is a criminal.”
Still, Blackburn thinks the product is “flawed” because it's been so easy for farmers to misuse.
An April 15 cutoff wouldn't work for Blackburn, who spends that month planting corn and begins sowing soybeans in May.
‘This Is A Product That Is Broken’
The task force meetings on Aug. 17 and Aug. 24 were held at the Winthrop Rockefeller Institute, atop the fog-covered Petit Jean Mountain north of Little Rock. Named after the state's Republican governor who pushed for civil rights and prison reform in his state, the resort-like stone lodge serves as a neutral outpost to discuss the region's most pressing matters, from rural healthcare to agricultural trade with Cuba.
The dicamba matter may be the most contentious issue addressed there yet. Norsworthy gave an hour-long presentation to the audience of about 50 at the Aug. 17 meeting, summarizing a number of his field studies on the new dicamba formulations.
In one experiment that was replicated by scientists at the University of Tennessee, Norsworthy covered certain soybeans with buckets in a field where he sprayed XtendiMax (Monsanto's dicamba herbicide) and Engenia (BASF's new formulation). He removed the buckets 30 minutes after spraying, and soon after, the plants exhibited the telltale signs of dicamba damage. Had it been drift, the weedkiller would have moved away from the areas in minutes, Norsworthy said.
In another trial, Norsworthy sprayed two 3.5 acre plots with Engenia and XtendiMax each, with wind traveling 2.9 miles per hour. Though applied well below the label instruction limit of 15 miles per hour, the herbicide traveled more than 300 feet. With field sizes in the thousands of acres, a real life situation could see dicamba travel well beyond the state's quarter-mile buffer zone, he said.
His conclusion: When it comes to volatility, there's no buffer big enough, no nozzle spray fine enough, no wait period long enough, to control the movement. Drift can be controlled by the type of nozzle, by the boom height, and by refraining from spraying at times of high wind speed and at certain times of the day.
The distinction between drift and volatility is important. Regulations and label instructions on its use can control physical drift. Volatility is uncontrollable, Norsworthy said.
“This is a product that is broken,” he told the task force Aug. 17.
Those findings bristled the handful of manufacturer representatives present, who had just a few minutes to defend their new herbicides. The presentation, they said, would taint farmers’ opinions of the product and bring on hasty recommendations to restrict a necessary tool for clearing weeds.
“I wasn't happy with the process,” Dan Westburg, a BASF technical services manager with a doctorate in weed science, told Bloomberg BNA at the meeting.
Companies worked hard to suppress this in their new formulations. Monsanto's proprietary VaporGrip technology was developed specifically to reduce volatility by preventing the formation of dicamba acid in a solution.
Perry Galloway, a farmer in Northeastern Arkansas and proponent of the technology, agreed that a presentation from only the extension scientists was “biased.”
‘Dicamba Is Heavier Than Air’
The companies brought their concerns to the Arkansas Plant Board. A week later at the second task force meeting, Monsanto deployed three scientists to defend their data. BASF had one presentation.
Monsanto has conducted extensive volatility studies since 2009, company scientists said at the Aug. 24 meeting. Those studies, mostly done in closed enclosures called humidomes, show that dicamba concentration in the air drops dramatically in the first day, meaning it can't volatilize and travel far.
“Volatility does occur, it absolutely occurs, but the amount that occurs will happen very quickly in 24 hours,” Ty Witten, North America Crop Protection Systems Lead for Monsanto, told the participants. “Dicamba is heavier than air, it's going to fall over time.”
Can dicamba drift? Yes, said Witten, maybe by 40 or 100 feet. But not by half a mile or ten miles, as some have suggested.
Tom Mueller, a professor of weed science at the University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture, challenges this 24-hour claim from Witten in recent trials. He found that dicamba concentrations in the air can shoot back up the day following an application after dipping overnight.
Mueller has repeated this trial several times. “It always follows the same pattern,” he told Bloomberg BNA.
Mueller attributes the increase in concentrations to higher temperatures the following day rather than in the evening. Heat drives volatility, and researchers link the dicamba problems to a relatively new phenomenon in its use. Older formulations were applied only on corn in the cooler temperatures of early spring, he said, whereas the new versions are being sprayed in 90-degree June weather.
The EPA ultimately will decide the herbicide's future. The agency gave companies a provisional two-year registration for the herbicides in 2016 and it is investigating the complaints and meeting weekly with Arkansas and other states affected via teleconference.
The underlying causes of the various cases of damage are not yet clear, EPA spokesman Robert Daguillard said, “but EPA is reviewing the available information carefully.”
If the EPA revokes the registration, or imposes greater restrictions, on use of the herbicides, they would not go into effect until the 2019 growing season. That leaves another year of rising tensions in the Heartland.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=119848386&vname=dennotallissues&fn=119848386&jd=119848386
-
A Win For Trump's Gas Diplomacy
Aug 31, 2017 | Reuters
By Agnia Grigas
(Reuters) - Last week, American liquefied natural gas (LNG) made its way to the somewhat unlikely market of Lithuania. The former Soviet republic traditionally bought its gas from Russian state company Gazprom; this was its first shipment from the United States. For President Donald Trump, that must have been a gratifying sign of the success of his administration’s nascent energy diplomacy.
The U.S. became the world’s largest producer of natural gas around 2011, overtaking its long-time competitor Russia and starting to rival Saudi Arabia in oil production. This was made possible by the shale revolution – the breakthrough of hydraulic fracturing, better known as “fracking,” that could split rock formations below ground and boost the extraction of oil and gas resources from shale rock formations. Environmentalists oppose LNG exports on the grounds that methane leakage from fracking can make natural gas as harmful to the climate as coal and that the LNG trade involves the energy-intensive measures of freezing gas, shipping it across oceans, and then regassifying – a process that further increases the carbon footprint.
It was the Obama administration that lifted longstanding U.S. restrictions on oil exports and started exporting LNG, but it is Trump who has been able to claim political capital out of the boost in trade. The sector offers the U.S. president bragging rights at home by providing jobs and rising export revenues. With Exxon Mobil’s former CEO, Rex Tillerson, as secretary of state, it is also no surprise that LNG exports are emerging as Trump’s preferred strategy for strengthening relations with Europe and Asia.
In June, Energy Secretary Rick Perry articulated a strategy of “energy dominance” that takes advantage of America’s energy production not only to improve national energy security but also to expand the country’s influence abroad. As Perry explained: “An energy-dominant America will export to markets around the world, increasing our global leadership and our influence.”
The United States is expected to emerge as the world’s third-leading LNG exporter by 2020, behind Australia and Qatar. That will cement its status as a new energy superpower, a position that can help Washington support its allies – many of whom are dependent on energy imports – and win over new friends, like rising energy consumers in Asia, while reining in foes such as energy-exporter Russia.
Energy-hungry China is emerging as possibly the most important market for the United States. U.S. energy company and leading LNG exporter Cheniere has been selling to China since 2016 and in May Trump struck a deal with China that made it easier for Chinese companies to buy LNG directly from U.S. suppliers. Trump administration officials like Perry and Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, have both claimed that LNG exports to China and Japan can narrow America’s trade deficit with each country. Indeed LNG trade was on the agenda of discussions in the first meeting of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Trump early this year.
Trump similarly praised the delivery of American LNG to South Korea during the visit of South Korean President Moon Jae-in to the White House this June. A close ally of the United States, energy-poor South Korea has long depended on LNG imports from Qatar and Indonesia to meet its energy needs.
Trump also raised U.S. LNG exports as a potential means to reduce America’s trade deficit with India during his first meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in June. India is the fourth largest importer of LNG in the world and one whose gas demand is only expected to rise. Until recently it largely relied on imports from Qatar, though U.S. LNG started making its way to India last year.
The Asian markets hold promise for the U.S. overall, but could also foster competition with Moscow, which has been planning to build gas pipelines and/or boost LNG deliveries to China, Japan, Korea, and India.
In Europe, Washington’s ability to offer an alternative supply has finally provided its allies with a substitute to Russian gas. American LNG started going to Spain, Portugal, and the United Kingdom in 2016, but few expected this gas to enter the Central and Eastern European markets dominated by Gazprom.
Nonetheless, Cheniere launched its inaugural delivery of LNG to Poland in June. During his visit to Poland the following month, Trump reiterated the implications of this delivery: “We are committed to securing your access to alternate sources of energy, so Poland and its neighbors are never held hostage to a single supplier of energy,” he said.
While reducing Gazprom’s dominance is part of Washington’s long-standing agenda, the Trump administration is the first to explicitly link the trinity of diplomacy, LNG trade, and national economic interests in Europe, Asia, and beyond. However, U.S. officials should be wary of implying that Washington’s LNG diplomacy is centered on making America’s friends buy gas to prove their loyalty. It’s already in Washington’s economic interests to support its allies’ energy security. There is no need for the White House to belabor the point.
(Agnia Grigas is a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council in Washington DC and author of “The New Geopolitics of Natural Gas.” The opinions expressed here are her own.)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-grigas-lng-idUSKCN1BB01K
-
Harvey Flooding Sparks Explosions at Texas Chemical Plant
Aug 31, 2017 | The Wall Street Journal
By Dan Molinski and Erin Ailworth
Two explosions rocked a Texas chemical plant early Thursday, hours after the facility’s owner urged residents and others to stay away.
Industrial chemicals manufacturer Arkema SA had said that heavy flooding and the loss of power in the wake of Tropical Storm Harvey had hobbled critical refrigeration at the plant, making an explosion likely. The area around the plant was cleared Wednesday after the company warned it had no way to prevent such an emergency.
Arkema said early Thursday it had been notified of two explosions, and said black smoke was coming from the plant in Crosby, Texas, some 25 miles northeast of Houston. The Harris County Sheriff’s office said on its verified Twitter account that one deputy had been taken to the hospital after inhaling fumes from the plant and nine others drove themselves to the hospital as a precaution.
The France-based company said it was working closely with federal, state and local authorities to manage the situation. It said it had set up a call center for affected residents, and a center that will process property claims.
The explosions come as the Houston area reels from widespread, catastrophic flooding. The largest tropical rainstorm to hit the continental U.S. has forced tens of thousands of Texans from their homes, scattering them across the state and into overflowing evacuation centers as the mounting crisis strains resources and weary residents.
Harris County, which includes Houston, has confirmed 18 deaths linked to Hurricane Harvey, the medical examiner’s office announced Wednesday night, bringing the tally across the state to at least 29. That number is expected to rise. An exact death toll has been difficult to discern because state officials haven’t been releasing a state-wide tally.
While the storm is now a tropical depression, Hurricane Harvey dumped more than 50 inches of rain on parts of the state in a new record for the contiguous U.S. More than 725,000 people were under a mandatory evacuation.
The plant, which was in 6 feet of water, lost primary power and two emergency backup power sources, which led to a shutdown of “critical refrigeration,” North American operations Chief Executive Rich Rowe said.
Local authorities informed the company that the high waters made it too dangerous to get back inside the plant, making it impossible to stabilize the chemical compounds, a spokeswoman for the company said Thursday.
The plant makes organic peroxides, which are used in things like acrylic paint, pharmaceuticals and construction materials.
The company, which was spun out of French oil major Total SA in 2006, had urged everyone within a mile and a half of the plant to evacuate, and shut down a stretch of Highway 90 that runs alongside the plant.
Jason Spencer, a spokesman for the Harris County Sheriff’s Office, confirmed that 10 deputies were being evaluated at a nearby hospital after being exposed to fumes related to the explosion.
“We had 10 deputies who inhaled fumes from the plant, one of them has been taken to a nearby hospital for evaluation. He was transported by EMS. The other nine drove themselves.”
Mr. Spencer, who hasn’t been to the scene, said the fumes aren’t considered life threatening.
Latanya Robinson, 47 years old, and her husband, who live within the evacuation zone, left Wednesday. But she said no authorities had asked her to evacuate, and that she only left after seeing the warnings on the local TV news and hearing about it from relatives.
“I’m not waiting for death to find me,” Ms. Robinson said by telephone. “Me and my husband are at my son’s house now, about 10 miles away.”
Ms. Robinson said a neighbor who didn’t leave sent her a text message to inform her that the plant had just exploded. “Two blasts in a row at around 2 a.m.,” she said the neighbor told her. “Now that it’s over, the lady said she’s turning the air off and closing the windows so the smoke doesn’t enter the house, and she’s going to go back to bed.”
The organic peroxide business, of which this factory is just one outlet, accounted for only 0.4% of Arkema’s €7.5 billion ($8.91 billion) global revenue for 2016. Arkema has 19,700 employees globally, of which 3,100 are in the U.S., according to the company’s annual report. The Crosby plant has 57 employees, according to the company’s website.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/explosions-reported-at-arkema-chemical-plant-1504173125
-
Court Rejects Environmentalists' Call To Stay RMP Delay Pending Review
Aug 31, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Federal appellate judges have denied environmental and labor groups' request to stay or vacate the Trump EPA's final rule delaying an Obama-era overhaul of the agency's facility accident prevention program, saying groups have failed to meet “stringent standards” for a stay, though the court also rejected EPA's request to slow briefing.
But in an Aug. 30 order Air Alliance Houston, et al., v. EPA and E. Scott Pruitt, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted environmentalists' request for expedited briefing and ordered the parties to submit a briefing schedule within 14 days.
Oral argument will be scheduled for the first appropriate date after briefing is complete, the court said.
The suit is one of several where environmental and other groups are challenging efforts by the Trump EPA to delay implementation of Obama-era rules.
So far, the D.C. Circuit has backed one of their claims, finding in Clean Air Council v. EPA that an agency rule to delay implementation of methane emissions standards for the oil and gas sector was unlawful. Since then, the agency has backed away from a plan to delay implementing new ozone air quality standards after environmentalists and states sued.
But the agency is still fighting similar suits by environmentalists that challenge measures that seek to delay effluent limits for power plants, methane standards for landfills and worker protection standards for pesticides.
In this case, Sierra Club, Earthjustice and the United Steelworkers are challenging Pruitt's June 14 final rule delaying the Obama EPA's update to the agency's Risk Management Plan (RMP) facility accident prevention rule.
The Obama-era rule would impose new auditing and hazard analysis requirements, as well as for disclosure of facility data to first responders.
The Trump EPA's June 14 delay rule postpones the RMP update rule's effective date 20 months from June 19 to Feb. 19, 2019 to allow time to revise the measure.
In a June 22 motion, petitioners requested a stay, pending review, or vacatur of the delay rule, arguing that the nearly two-year delay violates a Clean Air Act limit of three months for postponing effective dates to revise regulations, and that the RMP update is needed to prevent facility accidents that continue to harm workers and the environment.
But in recent filings, EPA has claimed broad authority under Clean Air Act section 112(r) to set effective dates through notice-and-comment rulemaking. And in a July 17 filing, the agency sought to delay briefing by 60 days.
But in its order, the court rejected the petitioners' requests for a stay pending litigation or vacatur of the Trump administration delay. “The movants have not satisfied the stringent standards for a stay pending court review,” the order says.
The court similarly rejected the groups' companion request for summary disposition or vacatur, saying, “The merits of the parties' positions are not so clear as to warrant summary action.”
The Obama EPA's Jan. 13 final RMP update includes new auditing and hazard analysis requirements, as well as provisions bolstering release of facility data to emergency planners and the public, which have drawn strong opposition from industry groups as well as GOP state attorneys general, including Pruitt prior to his selection to lead EPA.
EPA June 14 issued a final rule delaying the RMP update and claiming broad authority for setting effective dates, and the need to review complex issues businesses have raised. The agency suggested significant changes are possible, saying the RMP rule is based on “policy preferences” that could vary between administrations, and that the agency intends to raise concerns with the rule not cited in industry petitions.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/court-rejects-environmentalists-call-stay-rmp-delay-pending-review
-
Flooded Houston Facing Threat From Air, Too, With Toxic Gas Releases
Aug 31, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
Houston residents face a less obvious threat from the air as they deal with historic flooding: The Hurricane Harvey-caused shutdown of the region's massive petrochemical industry released more than 2 million pounds of harmful pollutants into the air as of Aug. 29, according to initial reports to Texas regulators.
“I think it's one of those unseen events that perhaps doesn't get recognized in all of the chaos and devastation of the storm,” said Elena Craft, a senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund in Austin. “Two million pounds is roughly 40 percent of what the entire Houston region released in 2016. A lot of the concern stems from not knowing what you're breathing.”
With 4.5 million residents, Houston is the fourth most-populated U.S. city. Over the weekend and on Monday, residents of industrial fence-line communities were reporting strong gas and chemical-like smells coming from the nearby plants and refineries.
Harvey prompted emergency shutdown of Houston-area refineries include Exxon-Mobil's sprawling Baytown complex, as well as refineries with Chevron-Phillips, Petrobas, Royal Dutch Shell, and Motiva Enterprises’ Port Arthur facility—the nation's largest crude oil refinery.
While necessary from a safety perspective, the process of shutting down the plants produced significant amounts of air pollution.
Sudden shutdowns and startups can release chemical plumes including carbon monoxide, benzene and sulfur dioxide, because the filtration systems are not calibrated to run at lower temperatures. It's analogous to the initial puff of exhaust from a car tailpipe when the engine is first started.
In a mandatory filling with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Chevron Phillips reported that it expects to exceed permitted limits for several hazardous pollutants, such as 1,3-butadiene, benzene and ethylene, during shutdown procedures.
Enforcement During Natural Disasters
Houston has been the site of several major flood events in recent years and chemical companies are still on the hook to minimize emissions, even during emergency shutdowns. If they don't they are subject to penalties and corrective action.
“They [fines] do have teeth,” said Matt Kuryla, an environmental lawyer at Baker Botts LLP focusing on air quality.
Kuryla said the TCEQ holds a meeting every two weeks in which it has the power to assess fairly heavy fines for emissions events, up to $1 million.
“Under the rules that govern episodic emissions, companies are required to keep detailed records of the amount of chemicals released, and the steps taken to mitigate and correct the unauthorized emission,” said Kuryla.
Kuryla noted that startups and shutdowns can be done under ideal circumstances without causing significant pollution. In those cases, excess hydrocarbons are usually taken care of through burning, or “flaring.” It may smell to people living downwind, but it's not toxic, he said.
Questions of Policing Permits
According to the TCEQ's 2016 enforcement report, regulatory efforts in the state resulted in 1,404 administrative orders issued with over $8.9 million to be paid as penalties.
But Craft said those TCEQ penalties accounted for less than 3 percent of illegal air pollution released last year during industrial malfunctions in Texas.
The Environmental Integrity Project, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group made up of former EPA officials, recently took the EPA to court, alleging the federal agency isn't properly policing Texas air pollution permits, which they argue are too lax and complicated.
Hurricane Waivers?
The EPA has discretion to grant waivers during a natural disaster, but even for something as extreme as Hurricane Harvey, air pollution waivers might be more difficult to come by.
“This is an area of air pollution that is well known and heavily regulated,” said Richard Alonso, a parnter in the environmental group at Sidley Austin LLP based in Washington D.C.
Alsonso said EPA learned a lot from Hurricane Katrina in 2005. No one questions whether refineries and chemical plants need to be shut down during natural disasters, but the question regulators will be increasingly faced with going forward is—how much do they need to pollute the environment to do so?
“The shutdown and restart emissions are regulated by the state and these should be minimized as much as possible,” said Alonso. “It is not the Wild Wild West.”
Looming Landfill Issues
More likely, he said, are waivers for specific environmental rules that would slow the cleanup and recovery process.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt already exercised his authority under the Clean Air Act last week to waive certain fuel requirements to address shortages resulting from Hurricane Harvey.
The next looming environmental issue could be four to five weeks down the road, said Alonso.
“They're going to have landfill issues,” he said. “Once the cleanup starts, they will fill up quickly, and a lot of this is really nasty construction debris, things like asbestos, insulation, et cetera— the kind of stuff that normally wouldn't be simply tossed away.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=119848380&vname=dennotallissues&fn=119848380&jd=119848380
-
Chemical Company Warns: ‘No Way To Prevent’ Explosion At Houston Plant
Aug 31, 2017 | The Hill E2 Wire
By Josh Delk
The CEO of an industrial chemical company is warning that there is “no way to prevent” a large explosion and fire at their Houston plant which was flooded after Hurricane Harvey.
The Arkema plant, which produces chemicals used in making acrylic-based paints, is currently submerged under floodwaters from Tropical Storm Harvey which have knocked out its primary and its two backup power generators.
"And as a result, critical refrigeration needed for our materials on site is lost," said Rich Rowe, Arkema's North American operations on Wednesday, according to the Houston Chronicle.
"Materials could now explode and cause subsequent and intense fire. The high water that exists on site, and the lack of power, leave us with no way to prevent it."
The Harris County Fire Marshal's Office, which has jurisdiction over Crosby, Texas, where the plant is located, said Wednesday it is monitoring the situation.
All residents within a 1.5-mile radius of the plant have been evacuated.
Rowe told the Chronicle that the chemicals in the plant would "certainly" begin to degrade without refrigeration over the six days local officials say it could take for the floodwaters to recede.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/348623-ceo-houston-chemical-plant-explosion-inevitable-due-to-storm
-
EPA Fights 'Speculative' Bid To Vacate Ozone NAAQS Designations Delay
Aug 31, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA is fighting several states' request for a federal appeals court to vacate the agency's since-withdrawn notice delaying by one year designations for which areas are attaining the 2015 ozone air standard, saying it is “speculative” for the states to say the delay was unlawful and that EPA should be prevented from trying it again.
“Petitioners’ concern that the withdrawal could be reversed by the Court in some future action is highly speculative, and could be adequately addressed by the Court in its review of any such future action. Accordingly, that speculation provides no basis for the Court to reach out and vacate an action that the Agency has already withdrawn,” EPA says in an Aug. 29 filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
EPA is responding to separate filings from environmentalists and a coalition of Democratic-led states about how to proceed in consolidated litigation over agency Administrator Scott Pruitt's now-scrapped notice saying emissions data gaps justified delaying the ozone designations from October this year until October 2018.
Pruitt issued the one-year delay on June 6, saying it was vital to allow more time to assess the data that the Obama administration used to justify tightening the ozone limit from the 75 ppb level set in 2008 down to 70 ppb. But on Aug. 2, after environmentalists and states sued to overturn that delay and reinstate the original deadline for the designations, Pruitt withdrew his letter through a Federal Register notice and said the review could instead be completed this year. EPA asked the court to then dismiss the case, which environmentalists and the states are opposing.
Environmentalists want to continue the case to challenge the delay on its merits, while the states say that if the D.C. Circuit dismisses the case then it should vacate the delay as unlawful to prevent EPA reviving it.
EPA's new filing reiterates the agency's arguments that the case is moot because the agency has withdrawn the notice, and says the suit must be dismissed. The case “is a petition for judicial review of a discrete agency action that the Agency has now formally withdrawn. There is no ongoing course of action for the Agency to resume,” EPA says, downplaying environmentalists' fears that EPA could reinstate the delay.
If “EPA decides at a future time that a new extension of the designation deadline is appropriate for one or more areas, it will have to take a new discrete action to promulgate such an extension, which will be based on the particular record for that extension,” EPA says. Environmentalists would have to challenge that specific action, EPA says, and it is “speculative” to assume that the D.C. Circuit would rule against the delay.
“Furthermore, because the extension was withdrawn prior to the pre-existing deadline for extensions, which is now back in effect, it did not cause any harm to Petitioners and cannot cause any harm to Petitioners in the future. Thus, there is no harm or effect of the challenged action for the Court to remedy."
Observers say EPA will likely miss its reinstated Oct. 1 deadline for designations, as it has not taken necessary administrative steps to achieve it, such as informing states of which areas it thinks should be in nonattainment. Nonetheless, the agency in the new filing says “the original deadline for designations is currently in effect.”
Should the agency miss this deadline, environmentalists have already indicated they will likely file a fresh lawsuit to force release of the area designations as soon as possible.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-fights-speculative-bid-vacate-ozone-naaqs-designations-delay
-
Shell Reaches Settlement To Better Monitor Air Quality at Pennsylvania Cracker
Aug 30, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Shell Chemical Appalachia LLC has reached a settlement with environmental groups, agreeing to implement more safeguards to monitor air quality at the site of its multi-billion dollar ethane cracker that is under construction in western Pennsylvania.
The company signed a settlement with the Clean Air Council and the Environmental Integrity Project to operate a fenceline monitoring program in addition to the facility’s other plans for air monitoring. It would also conduct flare testing to ensure that equipment is destroying nearly all pollutants emitted.
“Fenceline monitoring is a critical tool that allows nearby community members and the plant’s workers to feel confident that the plant is operating pursuant to its permit terms,” CAC Executive Director Joseph Otis Minott. “Residents being asked to host large industrial facilities have a right to be assured that the plant is meeting its legal requirements.”
After more than a year of review, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection issued Shell an air permit for the facility in June 2015. Two months later, the environmental groups filed an appeal of that permit with the state Environmental Hearing Board. The groups pushed for the fenceline monitoring program and stronger permit requirements for flare control efficiency.
Under the settlement, fenceline monitoring would detect fugitive emissions and implement repairs as needed. If the monitors detect emissions above certain levels, site workers would conduct a field investigation and develop a response if the facility is responsible. Shell would also monitor and maintain the heating value of flares to track their efficiency. The company would monitor the flares more frequently than its air permit requires.
Vice President of Appalachia Petrochemicals Ate Visser said that with the settlement behind it, Shell can now focus on delivering the facility with state-of-the-art technology to better protect the environment. The cracker is being built on a 400-acre site in Beaver County. It’s designed to consume more than 100,000 b/d of ethane to produce ethylene and polyethylene, which are key building blocks for plastics. Production is expected to begin sometime in the early 2020s.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/111565-shell-reaches-settlement-to-better-monitor-air-quality-at-pennsylvania-cracker
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
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