Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 9/7/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Global CPRI Starts Q3 on Strong Note, ACC Says
Sep 6, 2017 | Chemical Engineering Online
By Scott Jenkins
The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC; Washington, D.C.; www.americanchemistry.com) Global Chemical Production Regional Index (Global CPRI) shows that global chemicals production rose 0.6 percent in July, a quicker pace than June and May... -
(ACC Mentioned) Manufacturers Share Chemical Data With EPA to Make Safety Case
Sep 7, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The BASF Corp., the Dow Chemical Co. and Honeywell International Inc. are sharing chemical data with the EPA in a bid to persuade agency scientists that the compounds they make or use are safe and should stay on the market. -
EPA Extends Period for Comments on SACC Candidates
Sep 7, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham
On September 6, 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a notice in the Federal Register extending the period for public comments on the candidates for consideration for the Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals from September 5, 2017, to September 17, 2017. -
(ACC Mentioned) Dermal BPA Exposure Levels May Have Been Underestimated
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Risk assessors may need to revisit how they combine dermal and oral BPA exposure estimates, following a human study led by Jonathan Martin, professor of toxicological environmental chemistry at Stockholm University. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Risk Database Targeted by Congress
Sep 7, 2017 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
When floodwaters come up, seeping into industrial areas that turn out fuel or chemicals, public health officials look to a federal database known simply as IRIS. -
Dems Blast EPA Absence at Hearing on Risk Program
Sep 7, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Corbin Hiar
In recent years, U.S. EPA's controversial program for assessing chemical risks has been closely scrutinized by an agency-affiliated board, the Government Accountability Office and the National Academies of Science. -
Report: Widespread Exposure to a Risky Chemical “Blessed” by the Trump Administration’s Nominee to Head EPA’s Toxics Office
Sep 6, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Richard Denison
A report issued today by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) documents that the industrial chemical 1,4-dioxane, a likely human carcinogen, is present in tap water used by nearly 90 million Americans living in 45 states. -
CIA Urges UK Government Not to Diverge from REACH
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Geraint Roberts
In its clearest statement yet on its attitude to REACH, the UK Chemical Industries Association says it wants the UK to remain in all of the REACH processes, "warts and all". -
Echa Records Surge in Pic Regulation Notifications
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Notifications from EU companies to export certain hazardous chemicals outside the Union under the Pic Regulation, have grown by almost three quarters in the past three years, Echa's first report on the Regulation shows. -
Echa Consults on Proposals to Identify Nine SVHCs
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Echa is consulting on proposals to identify nine new substances of very high concern (SVHCs). The chemicals and examples of their uses are: -
Is Your Shampoo Poisoning Your Drinking Water?
Sep 7, 2017 | Mother Jones
By Amy Thomson
It’s long been known that the toxic chemical 1,4-dioxane seeps into groundwater after being used as a solvent in industrial manufacturing or in consumer hygiene products, like sudsy shampoos and body washes. -
Petrochemicals Factbox: Harvey May Delay New CP Chem Cracker Startup
Sep 6, 2017 | Platts
Chevron Phillips Chemical may delay startup of its new 1.5 million mt/year cracker near Baytown, Texas, after Harvey swamped the company's Cedar Bayou complex with five to eight feet of water in different areas, Phillips 66 CEO Greg Garland told investors on Wednesday. -
TransCanada Extends Open Season Because of Harvey
Sep 6, 2017 | Reuters/Toronto Globe and Mail (In E&E PM)
By Nia Williams
TransCanada Corp. announced today that it will extend the Keystone pipeline open season by one month because of the massive damage caused by Hurricane Harvey. -
Illinois Approves First Fracking Permit for New Albany Shale
Sep 7, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Regulators in Illinois have approved the first permit to allow high-volume hydraulic fracturing (fracking) within the Illinois Basin. -
Carper Scrutinizes EPA's RMP Program, Rule Delay After Texas Facility Fire
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), the ranking Democrat on the Senate environment committee, is stepping up his oversight of Trump administration plans to cut funding for inspectors in EPA's facility safety program and its plans to delay strict new program rules... -
More on Arkema's RMP Plans
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
Combustion of organic peroxide at a Houston-area Arkema plant last week as a result of flooding caused by Hurricane Harvey drew attention to Trump administration plans to delay an Obama-era rule strengthening EPA's risk management plan (RMP) facility safety program. -
In Harvey’s Wake, Energy Security Legislation Needed Now More Than Ever
Sep 7, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Valerie Brader
Bipartisanship has been rare in Congress lately, but one shining example of it has been on increasing our efforts on energy security issues. That needs to continue. -
EPA Last Inspected Flooded Arkema Plant in 2003
Sep 7, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
It's been 14 years since EPA inspectors last visited an Arkema Corp. facility in Crosby, Texas, that saw chemical explosions caused by flooding from Hurricane Harvey, a company official told Bloomberg BNA. -
In Harvey's Wake, Critics See Big Money Behind Lax Petrochemical Reporting
Sep 7, 2017 | Texas Tribune
By Jay Root
Unlike any past storm — natural or man-made — Hurricane Harvey has exposed the fault lines between the politically powerful Texas petrochemical industry and the public’s right to know what dangers lie within their facilities. -
(ACC Mentioned) CSX Says Its Rail Service Is Improving After Major Delays
Sep 6, 2017 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Josh Funk
CSX railroad said Wednesday that its service is improving after a summer marked by delays as it overhauled its operations. -
Amtrak’s Diesel Fleet to Meet PTC Deadline
Sep 7, 2017 | International Railway Journal
By William Vantuono
AMTRAK has confirmed that it will equip approximately 310 diesel-electric locomotives with Positive Train Control (PTC) technology by the December 31 2018 federal deadline. -
(ACC Mentioned) Texas' Rule Suspension Intensifies Doubts on Air Law Regulatory Waivers
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) has suspended a host of state environmental rules due to Hurricane Harvey, though the indefinite suspension has intensified uncertainty over the future of the states' pre-existing regulatory exemptions for periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM)... -
Environmentalists Again Press Court to Scrap Ozone Delay
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists are again pressing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to scrap EPA's one-year delay implementing the agency's 2015 federal ozone standard, despite EPA's insistence that it has withdrawn the delay decision...
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Global CPRI Starts Q3 on Strong Note, ACC Says
Sep 6, 2017 | Chemical Engineering Online
By Scott Jenkins
The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC; Washington, D.C.; www.americanchemistry.com) Global Chemical Production Regional Index (Global CPRI) shows that global chemicals production rose 0.6 percent in July, a quicker pace than June and May, as measured on a three-month moving average (3MMA) basis. During July, production increased in North America, Western Europe, Central & Eastern Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region but declined in Latin America and Africa & the Middle East. The Global CPRI was up 2.6 percent year-over-year (Y/Y) on a 3MMA basis and stood at 111.1 percent of its average 2012 levels in June, ACC says.
During July, capacity utilization in the global business of chemistry rose 0.4 percentage points to 80.6 percent. This is up from 80.4 percent last July and is below the long-term (1987-2016) average of 88.8 percent.
Results were generally positive on a product basis during July, with gains in pharmaceuticals, agricultural chemicals, consumer products, synthetic rubber, manufactured fibers, coatings, and other specialty chemicals. Considering year-over-year comparisons, growth was strongest in coatings followed by organic chemicals, plastic resins, and agricultural chemicals.
ACC’s Global CPRI measures the production volume of the business of chemistry for 33 key nations, sub-regions, and regions, all aggregated to the world total. The index is comparable to the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) production indices and features a similar base year where 2012=100. This index is developed from government industrial production indices for chemicals from over 65 nations accounting for about 98 percent of the total global business of chemistry. This data are the only timely source of market trends for the global chemical industry and are comparable to the US CPRI data, a timely source of U.S. regional chemical production.
http://www.chemengonline.com/global-cpri-starts-q3-on-strong-note-acc-says/?printmode=1
-
(ACC Mentioned) Manufacturers Share Chemical Data With EPA to Make Safety Case
Sep 7, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The BASF Corp., the Dow Chemical Co. and Honeywell International Inc. are sharing chemical data with the EPA in a bid to persuade agency scientists that the compounds they make or use are safe and should stay on the market.
During the next few years, the Environmental Protection Agency will study and consider regulations for the 10 compounds that are under review if the agency determines they are unsafe—part of the agency's implementation of last year's amended toxics law. At stake are hundreds of uses of chemicals in factories, households, and construction sites that hinge on EPA's upcoming reviews.
Faye Graul, executive director of the Halogenated Solvents Industry Association (HSIA), said industry's goal for providing information about the 10 chemicals to the EPA is to “to make our case that they should stay on the market.”
Sept. 19 Deadline
In meeting with the EPA, some companies are making the case that certain chemicals are small impurities in the manufacturing process and thus can be safely ignored. Others are providing use and exposure information on major industrial products such as solvents used in manufacturing. Still others are opting not to share data with the EPA, instead waiting to learn more about the process based on this first group of 10 reviews. All have an EPA deadline of Sept. 19 to submit information for this first round of chemical risk reviews.
By the end of the year, the EPA will craft blueprints for studying the health and ecological risks of 10 chemicals that will rely in part on the companies’ use, exposure, and toxicity data they share with the agency. The EPA will augment this data with studies in its own databases, the scientific literature, and other sources. Those 10 blueprints also will include the relevant exposure scenarios, human populations, and environmental conditions of interest.
“While some stakeholders have indicated they may or plan to submit to the docket, they have not necessarily indicated what they would submit,” the EPA told Bloomberg BNA by email. “At this time, EPA has no basis to characterize how much information may be submitted.”
Firms Reach Out
The BASF Corp. is offering hazard and exposure information to support the n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) and 1,4-dioxane risk evaluations, company spokeswoman Donna Jakubowski told Bloomberg BNA. NMP is a commonly used solvent in industrial and some consumer chemical formulations.
1,4-dioxane is primarily an impurity that occurs during chemical manufacturing, but the chemical also is a processing aid used for wood pulping, pharmaceutical manufacture, and other purposes, the EPA said in a preliminary risk evaluation plan for the chemical.
BASF is submitting some information directly to the EPA and providing data through trade associations, including the American Chemistry Council and the NMP Producers Group, Jakubowski said.
The members of the NMP Producers Group—Ashland Inc., BASF, and Lyondell Chemical Co.—have worked to encourage their customers and other trade associations that represent companies using the solvent to provide the EPA chemical use, exposure, and other data, Kathleen Roberts, manager of the NMP group, told Bloomberg BNA.
HSIA members make solvents that are used by manufacturers large and small to strip paint, degrease machine parts, and clean factory surfaces.
The group also explained how the agency's risk evaluation differs from a rule the agency proposed to limit NMP's use in paint strippers, and how these actions differ from some possible EU solvent regulations, Roberts said.
In addition to HSIA, the Consumer Specialty Products Association—which represents the makers of chemical-intensive home care and other consumer products—also provided solvent data to the agency.
Member companies Ecolab, the Sherwin Williams Co., and W.M. Barr & Co. met with the EPA to discuss 1-bromopropane, methylene chloride, NMP, perchloroethylene and trichloroethylene, Steven Bennett, vice president of scientific affairs at the association, told Bloomberg BNA. They offered data on what markets and for what types of customers—consumer, institutional or industrial—the solvents are used by, he said.
Honeywell, a diversified technology and manufacturing company, was among the downstream companies that met with EPA staff to discuss its use of perchloroethylene during the hydrofluorocarbon manufacturing process, a company spokeswoman told Bloomberg BNA.“The Honeywell staff explained that all Honeywell hydrofluorocarbon manufacturing processes take place in a closed system with full pollution control devices. This approach minimizes any emissions of perchloroethylene, with low potential for human exposure,” she said. The EPA previously has concluded similar chemicals manufactured in sufficiently closed systems do not pose unreasonable risk, she said.
Dow Chemical Co. provided use information to the EPA before it issued its preliminary risk evaluation plans in June, Johnathan DiMuro, regulatory services leader, told Bloomberg BNA. The company does not plan to provide more information, he said.
Firemen, Labs and Legacy Carve-Outs
The International Association of Fire Fighters, state officials, the AFL-CIO, environmental groups, and the American Public Health Laboratories association also have provided the EPA chemical toxicity, use and exposure information.
Firefighters, for example, have a higher risk of getting various cancers than does the general population, Larry Petrick, director of health and safety for the International Association of Fire Fighters, told Bloomberg BNA. Firefighters are exposed to building materials such as old ceiling tiles, insulation, asbestos, and furniture sprayed with flame retardants, Petrick said.
Firefighters hope to persuade the EPA to reconsider its June decision to exclude legacy uses from its 10 risk reviews, he said. Petrick referred to decisions the EPA announced in 10 documents it released June 22 describing its preliminary plans to assess hazards, uses of, and exposures to each chemical.
“In the case of asbestos, legacy uses and associated legacy disposals will be excluded from the scope of the risk evaluation. These include asbestos-containing materials that remain in older buildings or are part of older products but for which manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce are not currently intended, known, or reasonably foreseen,” the agency wrote in a preliminary evaluation plan for that mineral.
The agency made a similar conclusion for carbon tetrachloride, which the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission banned in 1970, but which the EPA said may still be used in some paints, coatings, rubber, cement, and asphalt formulations. “Legacy uses and associated legacy disposals will be excluded from the scope of the risk evaluation,” EPA said in its preliminary risk evaluation plan.
Firefighters want the EPA to consider their current legacy-use-based occupational exposures to hazardous chemicals, Petrick said.
The American Public Health Laboratories—which represents a network of state health and environmental labs—wants to share its measurements of the 10 chemicals in air, water, people's bodies, and other places the chemicals reside, Julianne Nassif, director of environmental health, told Bloomberg BNA.
Shying Away
Asked why more companies didn't chime in when asked about the information they may plan to give the EPA, several reasons, including lack of familiarity and a desire to stay off the radar, were given.
Especially for manufactured goods producers, it is a new idea to give the EPA information about the chemicals they use, Mark Duvall, a principal in the Washington office of Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. told Bloomberg BNA.
“Companies and trade associations may be looking for experience and guidance to gauge what information EPA actually needs and in what level of detail,” he said. “In addition, EPA's information requests, where made, tend to be fairly general, which may lead to fairly general responses.”
Companies also may be reluctant to give data that may restrict their products by providing information that EPA might use to decide a chemical should be scrutinized, Duvall said.
Chemical manufacturers can ask their customers to send EPA information, but they're usually not in a position to insist on it, the NMP group's Roberts said. Companies that buy chemicals to make consumer and industrial goods may not see a reason to provide the EPA information at this early stage, she said. They may not feel compelled to until the agency proposes to restrict their particular use of chemical, Roberts added.
Beyond the First 10 Chemicals
The American Chemistry Council's Center for Chemical Safety Act Implementation is working with chemical and product manufacturers to discuss ways companies may contribute to future risk evaluations the EPA will undertake, David Fischer, who helps manage that center told Bloomberg BNA.
Even if EPA isn't evaluating a chemical a company currently makes or uses, the agency may do so down the road. Chemicals already listed on an EPA “work plan” list of about 90 chemicals are potential candidates for future risk evaluations as are chemicals of concern identified in other parts of the world, such as the European Union's Substances of Very High Concern list.
If a company is aware of data gaps for such chemicals, “it may be good to start talking to EPA now,” Fischer said. “There's an opportunity now, to start filling data gaps.” he said.
Companies also can nominate a chemical for the agency to evaluate or choose to submit their own risk evaluation for it, Fischer said. The company's risk evaluation would have to meet guidance the EPA published June 22.
Deadlines, State Preemption
The EPA plans to release draft risk evaluations for public comment and peer review as early as 2018. It aims to publish final risk evaluations by the end of 2019, although the amended TSCA law gives the agency until mid-2020 to complete them.
Those risk evaluations could find that some of the 10 chemicals pose no risks. That finding largely would preempt states from regulating the same chemical or chemical use under the amended TSCA law.
The EPA's risk evaluations also could affect markets even before the reviews are finished. If the science appears to show a chemical or certain uses of it may raise health or ecological concerns, chemical makers could voluntarily drop those uses. Sales of those chemicals also could drop ahead of the completion of a risk review if the market responds to feedback from consumers or watchdog groups.
The EPA's evaluation would trigger a regulation if the agency concluded one or more uses of any of the 10 chemicals poses an unreasonable risk to people or the environment. Such regulations would be intended to benefit human or environmental health by reducing disease, lost productivity, and other costs.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=120141078&vname=dennotallissues&fn=120141078&jd=120141078
-
EPA Extends Period for Comments on SACC Candidates
Sep 7, 2017 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham
On September 6, 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a notice in the Federal Register extending the period for public comments on the candidates for consideration for the Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals from September 5, 2017, to September 17, 2017. Comments can be submitted online in Docket Identification Number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0713.
EPA is considering candidates for SACC membership listed in the August 26, 2016, Federal Register notice pool of requested nominees; the 29 candidates for membership identified in the December 9, 2016, Federal Register notice; and the additional candidates provided in the August 3, 2017, Federal Register notice. More information on the background, qualification of members, and the process of obtaining nominees is available in our memorandum EPA Seeks Comment on Nominations to “Augmented” Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/epa-extends-period-comments-sacc-candidates
-
(ACC Mentioned) Dermal BPA Exposure Levels May Have Been Underestimated
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Risk assessors may need to revisit how they combine dermal and oral BPA exposure estimates, following a human study led by Jonathan Martin, professor of toxicological environmental chemistry at Stockholm University.
"Some agencies consider both dermal and oral absorption together in risk assessments, by simply summing the estimated daily dose by each route. However, the data in our study raise potential deficiencies in that approach," says Professor Martin.
BPA absorbed through the skin takes far longer to show up in blood and urine than dietary BPA, the study suggests.
Diet is the main human exposure route, but dermal exposure is also important. It is still not understood exactly how the body deals with BPA from this route.
Professor Martin, and his colleague Jiaying Liu from the University of Alberta, Canada, asked six volunteers to handle thermal paper receipts containing BPA labelled with deuterium. The volunteers later returned to eat a biscuit laced with BPA, at a level around ten times below that of the European Food Safety Authority's (Efsa's) temporary tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 4 micrograms/kg body weight/day.
Urinary BPA levels peaked within five hours after eating the biscuit and had completely cleared within 24 hours, while total BPA in the blood peaked within four hours. Following dermal exposure, however, total BPA was not detectable in blood until 22 hours later and could still be detected in urine after nine days.
Professor Martin suggests that the time lag between dermal exposure and BPA detection may mean that levels are commonly underestimated, using current techniques. The differences in the way the body deals with dietary and dermal exposure also raise problems with summing exposures.
"The study appears to be well done, and provides useful data on a topic that has not been exhaustively studied," says Steve Hentges, senior director of the American Chemistry Council's polycarbonate/BPA global group.
"BPA from dermal exposure is detoxified in essentially the same way as from oral exposure," he adds. "What’s different is the pharmacokinetics that result from each route ... The differences are important for an in-depth understanding of risk, but the differences by themselves are not an indication of risk. This also depends on exposure and, as indicated by this study, blood levels of BPA are very low."
In January, BPA was added to the REACH candidate list on the grounds that it has properties that are toxic to reproduction.
In June, Echa's Member State Committee agreed with a French proposal that BPA is also a substance of very high concern due to its endocrine disrupting properties.
Last year, the EU banned BPA in thermal paper. At the European Commission's request, Echa is carrying out a survey on an alternative bisphenol, BPS, in thermal paper.
The BPA study is published in Environmental Science and Technology.
https://chemicalwatch.com/58486/dermal-bpa-exposure-levels-may-have-been-underestimated
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Risk Database Targeted by Congress
Sep 7, 2017 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
When floodwaters come up, seeping into industrial areas that turn out fuel or chemicals, public health officials look to a federal database known simply as IRIS.
Short for Integrated Risk Information System, the EPA maintains the program both to assess the health risks of various chemical compounds and as a go-to encyclopedia for state agencies of their impacts on human populations.
"These are the folks that are there when Corpus Christi, Texas has a question about an inadvertent contamination of their water supply," Thomas Burke, a public health professor at Johns Hopkins University, testified to Congress Wednesday. "IRIS is an importation database that doesn't just look at cancer and rats."
Now in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey's flooding of the Texas Gulf Coast, the future of that program is falling into question as Congress looks to cut EPA's budget.
Under President Donald Trump's original budget released earlier this year the agency would have seen its budget slashed more than 30 percent and IRIS eliminated all together. But under a House appropriations bill released this summer the EPA's budget saw a far smaller cut of $528 million - about 6 percent of its 2017 budget - leaving IRIS intact but financially weakened.
The program has long been controversial within the chemical industry, which has criticized the EPA's scientific methods and questioned IRIS's priorities.
"Everybody has a difference of opinion of what degree it needs to change," said Ed Krenik, a Washington attorney, who represents a chemical company.
At a hearing before the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, Republicans echoed those concerns, calling for an overhaul in how IRIS goes about assessing the risk of chemicals that support an industry worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
"IRIS assessments are not based on sound science. There are multiple instances of the IRIS program relying on outdated or flawed studies," said Rep. Darin LaHood, R-Ill..
Republicans pointed to a series of reports by both the Government Accountability Office and the National Academy of Sciences that recommended changes in IRIS's scientific method, following a controversial 2010 assessment that the chemical formaldehyde caused cancer when inhaled.
Advocates for the program, like Burke, maintain that IRIS is addressing those areas of concern and improving its methods.
But James Bus, a toxicologist with the consulting firm Exponent, whose work is supported by the American Chemistry Council, a trade group representing the chemical industry, testified the EPA had a history of reliance of health findings that could not be reproduced and rushing peer reviews of its scientific work.
"IRIS might be going to down the right road but they still have a lot of work ahead of them," Bus said.
http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Chemical-risk-database-targeted-by-Congress-12178073.php
-
Dems Blast EPA Absence at Hearing on Risk Program
Sep 7, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Corbin Hiar
In recent years, U.S. EPA's controversial program for assessing chemical risks has been closely scrutinized by an agency-affiliated board, the Government Accountability Office and the National Academies of Science.
But yesterday at a combative House Science, Space and Technology subcommittee hearing on "the scientific and operational integrity" of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), there wasn't anyone from EPA or those groups to be found — much to the dismay of Democratic lawmakers.
"How can we have an honest discussion about this program while ignoring the key entities that have reviewed it and studied its recent improvements?" said Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, the top Democrat on the full committee. "We simply can't."
Rep. Suzanne Bonamici of Oregon, the ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee on Environment, echoed Johnson's concerns about the lack of EPA representation and then put her Republican counterpart on the spot.
"Mr. Chairman, will you commit to holding a full committee hearing on a legislative day this year with EPA Administrator [Scott] Pruitt?" she said, turning to Arizona Republican Rep. Andy Biggs, the leader of the Environment Subcommittee.
"Is the gentlewoman done?" Biggs responded after a long pause.
"No," she said and repeated her question.
Biggs was clearly taken aback by the very public request, which he said hadn't been brought to his attention before the hearing. He went on to call it "highly improper and highly unsual, frankly," and then said he would be "happy" to talk more in private.
The subcommittee chairman argued that the witnesses he'd invited — two industry-funded scientists who have consistently found that chemicals pose less risk than IRIS studies conclude — could provide Congress with information to ensure that IRIS is "properly organized and makes informed decisions."
Biggs has sought to strip funding from IRIS, which he argued provides the public with conflicting or duplicative information on chemical risks.
While the program's management and work has been criticized by independent auditors in the past, EPA's Science Advisory Board told Pruitt in a letter last week that it was "impressed and pleased with the rapid progress that the Agency has made in responding to recommendations from the National Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences (NAS) and the SAB, with particularly notable improvements in the program over the past year."
The board — which includes representatives from DowDuPont, Proctor & Gamble, and Exxon Mobil Corp. — added that "the changes are so extensive and positive that they constitute a virtual reinvention of IRIS."
The majority's witnesses — James Bus, a senior managing scientist at the consulting firm Exponent, and Kenneth Mundt, a principal at the consulting firm Ramboll Environ — were both critical of IRIS as duplicative and argued that it's in need of reform.
But Mundt didn't support suggestions by some Republican lawmakers that it no longer serves a purpose.
"I don't think that all of the functions of IRIS currently could be absorbed by other organizations," he said.
The lone IRIS advocate at the witness table — Thomas Burke, the former deputy assistant administrator of EPA's Office of Research and Development, which includes the risk assessment program — told E&E News after the hearing that he is "very concerned" about its fate.
But he was heartened to see the other witnesses stand up for the program.
"You saw a general agreement to work together, on the part of the panel, and you saw an agreement on the importance of IRIS and chemical assessments" said Burke, who now teaches at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/09/07/stories/1060059927
-
Sep 6, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Richard Denison
A report issued today by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) documents that the industrial chemical 1,4-dioxane, a likely human carcinogen, is present in tap water used by nearly 90 million Americans living in 45 states. For more than 7 million of those people (living in 27 states), the average level of the chemical exceeds the level set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as presenting an increased risk of cancer, which is one among a number of health effects tied to the chemical.
The solvent 1,4-dioxane is manufactured in large amounts in the U.S., with EPA reporting a total volume in 2015 between 1 and 10 million pounds. It is intentionally used or present in products like paints and coatings, greases, waxes, varnishes and dyes. It is also found as an impurity in many household cleaning and personal care products.
Among the other reasons this chemical is currently notable:
· It is one of the first 10 chemicals being evaluated by EPA under the recently reformed Toxic Substances Control Act to determine whether it presents an unreasonable risk and warrants regulation. Currently there is no legal enforceable limit on the amount of the chemical allowed in drinking water.
· It is one of a number of chemicals that Michael Dourson, the Trump Administration’s nominee to lead the EPA toxics office, was paid to work on by the chemical industry. EDF has blogged extensively about Dourson’s close ties to the chemical industry as well as earlier work he did for the tobacco industry. In the case of 1,4-dioxane, Dourson was hired by PPG Industries, a paints and coatings manufacturer that has released the chemical into the environment, leading to contamination of a public water supply in Ohio.
In a 2014 paper, published in the industry’s go-to journal, Dourson argued for an acceptable level of 1,4-dioxane in water that was 1,000 times higher than EPA’s drinking water guideline reflecting elevated risk of cancer. The accompanying chart from the EWG report helpfully illustrates the selective information and analysis Dourson used to derive his weaker standard. EWG’s report notes that a review of Dourson’s work by the State of Michigan rejected his work as flawed and embraced EPA’s more comprehensive methodology.
A Pattern of Downplaying Concerns
The case of 1,4-dioxane is hardly unique: Dourson’s paid work for industry dates back decades, including work he did for the tobacco industry in the late 1990s and early 2000s. As reported in The Intercept, internal industry emails reveal that Dourson’s firm had “a very good reputation among the folks that are still in the business of blessing criteria.” In that case, the company in question hoped Dourson’s firm could argue for a looser threshold for the chemical PFOA—a toxic chemical that has polluted water supplies in West Virginia, Ohio and New York. (EWG has mapped contamination from PFOA and related chemicals as well.)
In fact, Dourson or TERA were paid for their work by more than three dozen companies or trade associations, involving at least three dozen different chemicals.
Several of these chemicals, including 1,4-dioxane, are under active review by the very EPA office Dourson has been nominated to head, including trichloroethylene (TCE) and the pesticide chlorpyrifos—itself, the subject of a highly controversial decision by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to reject a ban of the pesticide backed by agency scientists.
Dourson’s track record of downplaying risks posed by toxic chemicals makes it obvious why his firm was sought after by chemical makers. What is of far greater concern is the notion that he should be entrusted with ensuring chemical safety at EPA.
Senators representing states whose water supplies have been impacted by 1,4-dioxane, PFOA and other Dourson-endorsed chemicals should ask tough questions of this nominee. And residents of those states should urge their Senators to oppose the nomination of Michael Dourson to lead the toxics office at EPA.
http://blogs.edf.org/health/2017/09/06/report-widespread-exposure-to-a-risky-chemical-blessed-by-the-trump-administrations-nominee-to-head-epas-toxics-office/
-
CIA Urges UK Government Not to Diverge from REACH
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Geraint Roberts
In its clearest statement yet on its attitude to REACH, the UK Chemical Industries Association says it wants the UK to remain in all of the REACH processes, "warts and all".
The association's support for every part of the Regulation, including authorisation and restriction, has not been spelled out until now. But speaking to Chemical Watch, CIA executive director Stephen Elliott said: "On regulatory consistency, wherever we end up there's no value in it resulting in what people perceive to be lower safety, health or environmental standards.
"We need to be as close as possible to REACH for our very strong commercial interests here. Around 75% of CIA member companies are also headquartered somewhere outside the UK, with many of these based in Europe."
Parliamentary evidence
In evidence earlier this year to a UK parliamentary committee inquiry on chemicals policy, the association suggested that some form of 'mutual recognition' between a UK-REACH and the EU REACH regime could be established covering existing and future registrations. But when it came to the authorisation and restriction processes, the UK could be free to choose whether to implement new measures.
And in its written evidence to the committee, responding to a question on the scope for the UK to pursue a divergent approach, it said this could be possible in areas where the country had taken a different stance to the majority of member states. One example would be the interpretation of the 0.1% threshold for reporting SVHCs in articles. It also said any future UK chemicals regime should be be based on "a more risk-basedevaluation of chemicals".
The CIA's position paper on Brexit, issued over the summer, said the UK should secure access to the EU marketplace "by remaining as close as possible to the existing REACH regime" but did not go into any more detail.
These statements left some wondering whether the CIA's backing for REACH was limited to ensuring that registrations would not have to be repeated; or whether it would want the UK to remain bound by all decisions under REACH, including things like the addition of substances to the candidate list or authorisation list, substance evaluation decisions and restrictions.
'Immediate realism'
"Maybe immediately after the Brexit vote, there may have been some CIA members that saw it as a chance to break away from the commercial stranglehold that REACH can bring," said Mr Elliott, "but that's changed quite significantly since then, given understanding of the importance of the EU 27, the importance of the UK market to the 27 ... and the time that's going to be taken before we're in a position to strike free trade agreements, including regulatory cooperation with other parts of the world. A dose of immediate realism has kicked in.
"That isn't to say that some SMEs might still lambast REACH, but the statement on it – in our July position statement on Brexit priorities – holds true for most of our membership."
Asked if the CIA wants the UK to remain as close as possible to REACH in its entirety, "warts and all", including candidate list and authorisation additions, a spokesman for the association said it did.
Parallel UK institutions?
The CIA's earlier statements had also left the question hanging on whether it would prefer the creation of a UK chemicals agency, or for UK companies, scientists and regulators to remain part of the processes overseen by the European Commission and Echa.
But Mr Elliott said the best option would be "to continue to use the services provided by both the European Commission and Echa". The alternative scenario of setting up parallel institutions in the UK, "would likely be very costly with costs probably being passed on to industry and lead to an increased level of uncertainty, while the time required to set up such institutions would be lengthy".
Furthermore, he said, this could be seen as a divergence from the current version of REACH and may compromise the acceptability of mutual recognitions between the UK and the EU27. "Such divergence could cause complexity for several REACH processes including evaluation, authorisations and restrictions, and new and updated registrations."
However, if the UK were to end up pulling out of EU REACH and establishing its own legislative framework, the CIA says it would expect alignment on substance-specific decisions would be required, should regulatory equivalence or mutual recognition between the UK and EU REACH laws – which its members would hope to see – be in place.
Mr Elliott said he hoped UK representatives would be able to continue to serve on Echa’s committees. However, under current rules, this would require the UK to join the European Economic Area. This would mean accepting all the requirements of belonging to the single market, including free movement of people, which looks politically unlikely at the moment. And even if the UK did join the EEA and remain on the committees, like other EEA member representatives it would not have a vote, he said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/58480/cia-urges-uk-government-not-to-diverge-from-reach
-
Echa Records Surge in Pic Regulation Notifications
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Notifications from EU companies to export certain hazardous chemicals outside the Union under the Pic Regulation, have grown by almost three quarters in the past three years, Echa's first report on the Regulation shows.
The prior informed consent (Pic) Regulation implements the requirements of the Rotterdam Convention and governs the import and export of very hazardous chemicals between the EU and other countries.
It took effect from August 2012 and was administered by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC). Echa took responsibility in March 2014 when the revised Regulation entered into force.
The agency says it had estimated the number of export notifications would increase by 10% each year, but recorded a jump of 74% between 2014 and 2016, from 4,500 to nearly 8,000 of them.
The large number implies that the EU "gives an increasing amount of useful" information to authorities in importing countries, which they can use for regulatory purposes and to identify the companies using these chemicals in their country, Echa says.
In addition, the number of companies involved in Pic activities has grown from 390 to 1,177. This is partly due to new chemicals added to the list subject to an export notification, as well as Echa’s activity in raising awareness of the regulation.
Requests for Echa's help have also risen, the most common issues being that:
· exporters are uncertain about whether their substance is subject to Pic; and
· exporters do not always understand why they have not been given permission to export.
The most common reasons for Echa requesting re-submission of an export notification are that safety data sheets are incorrect or there are discrepancies or problems with the language in them, the report says.
While none were rejected in 2014, the most frequent reason for doing so in 2015 was that a large number for didecyldimethylammonium chloride were for the substance in a mixture, at a concentration level which did not trigger labelling, irrespective of the presence of any other substance.
Meanwhile, in 2016 most notifications were rejected because: the mixture was not classified as hazardous, based on the information provided in the safety data sheet; and the importing country waived the requirement to receive notifications for exports of certain chemicals from the EU.Inadequate resources
Echa head Geert Dancet says the agency is on the "right track" towards achieving the key aims of Pic – to make the international trade of hazardous chemicals transparent for the protection of human health and the environment worldwide.
He has, however, expressed concern about the "higher than planned workload", which he says continues to rise. "Without adequate resources, the agency cannot guarantee the same level of quality we have achieved so far," he says.
According to the report, Echa had seven full-time employees working on Pic in each of the three years. During this time, in addition to rising notifications, the number of technical or regulatory support requests from national authorities in the EU and in non-EU countries almost doubled from 1,000 in 2014 to 1,800 in 2016.
The report says a "number of issues" should be addressed to correct errors and improve "workability". These include
· the need for a clear definition of "legal entities";
· clarification of the obligation to notify the export of an article as set out in Article 15 and 3(4); and
· a better definition of "exporter" (Article 3(18)), as it not easily applicable to cases where the holder of the contract is in a non-EU country, but the export is physically being shipped from the EU.
https://chemicalwatch.com/58515/echa-records-surge-in-pic-regulation-notifications
-
Echa Consults on Proposals to Identify Nine SVHCs
Sep 7, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Echa is consulting on proposals to identify nine new substances of very high concern (SVHCs). The chemicals and examples of their uses are:
· 4,4'-isopropylidenediphenol (bisphenol A): used in the manufacture of polycarbonate, as a hardener for epoxy resins, as an anti-oxidant for processing PVC and in the production of thermal paper;
· chrysene, which usually occurs as a constituent or impurity in other substances;
· benz[a]anthracene: as above;
· cadmium nitrate: used in laboratory chemicals and for the manufacture of glass, porcelain and ceramic products;
· cadmium hydroxide: used in laboratory chemicals and for the manufacture of electrical, electronic and optical equipment;
· cadmium carbonate: used as a pH regulator and in water treatment products, laboratory chemicals, cosmetics and personal care products;
· tricobalt tetraoxide containing ≥ 0.1% w/w nickel oxides: used in laboratory chemicals, pH regulators and in water treatment products, semiconductors, polymers and coating products;
· dechlorane plus (including any of its individual anti and syn-isomers or any combination thereof): used as a non-plasticising flame retardant, in adhesives and sealants, and in binding agents; and
· reaction products of 1,3,4-thiadiazolidine-2,5-dithione, formaldehyde and 4-heptylphenol, branched and linear (RP-HP) (with ≥0.1% w/w 4-heptylphenol, branched and linear): used as a lubricant additive in lubricants and greases.
The deadline for comments is 20 October.
https://chemicalwatch.com/58481/echa-consults-on-proposals-to-identify-nine-svhcs
-
Is Your Shampoo Poisoning Your Drinking Water?
Sep 7, 2017 | Mother Jones
By Amy Thomson
It’s long been known that the toxic chemical 1,4-dioxane seeps into groundwater after being used as a solvent in industrial manufacturing or in consumer hygiene products, like sudsy shampoos and body washes. But it wasn’t until last year, when the chemical was detected in more than half of Long Island’s water supply, that New York state officials started sounding the alarm bells about this invisible contaminant.
This isn’t just a problem in Long Island, or New York; dioxane has been found in drinking water across the country. And that’s not good, considering that the chemical has been classified as a “likely human carcinogen” by the Environmental Protection Agency. The Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit focused on health and environmental research, analyzed drinking-water samples taken from local utilities across the United States and found dioxane in 45 states’ water—affecting 90 million Americans.
The EWG released a database this week with its research on dioxane levels in each state, revealing that California, New York, and North Carolina had the highestnumbers of people exposed to water that is contaminated above the EPA’s suggested standard. Here’s what you need to know about this chemical:
What is dioxane?
Dioxane is a synthetic, clear, liquid solvent that mixes easily with water and is used frequently in paint strippers, dyes, and varnishes. It’s also found in many common shampoos and body washes, usually the ones that are sudsy. And it’s a byproduct of plastic production.
harmful substance being monitored by the Food and Drug Administration. The FDA, however, does not require companies to list contaminants in products’ ingredients, so it’s difficult to tell if your shampoo contains the solvent. (You can search to see if it’s in the products you use here.) The bigger concern, according to the EWG, is the dioxane discharged from industrial plants that seeps into our water supply. “It’s really difficult to treat and you can’t filter it out with a home filter,” Tasha Stoiber, a senior scientist with EWG, says.
Is any amount of dioxane safe?
The chemical was deemed “likely to be carcinogenic to humans” by the EPA in 2013 when the agency conducted a risk assessment that revealed sufficient evidence of dioxane exposure causing tumors in animal testing. That same year, the EPA established that a level of 0.35 parts per billion (ppb) of dioxane in public water systems would protect against cancer risk—but the agency never set a legal limit. It’s been on California’s official list of cancer-causing chemicals since 1988. And short-term exposure to dioxane vapors can cause nose, eye, and throat irritation, and long-term exposure could cause liver and kidney damage, the EPA reported back in 2014.
In November of last year, the Environmental Protection Agency listed dioxane as one of the 10 initial chemicals to review under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). When a new TSCA risk assessment review was released in June, the EPA pointed back to the 2013 report data maintaining that the toxin could be cancerous, but again did not set a legal limit for how much can appear in public water systems. “For a chemical to rise to the top of this [TSCA] list really raises alarm bells about the potential environmental contamination, as well as the residual health effects,” EWG senior scientist David Andrews says. When I reached out to the EPA, the agency said it was still evaluating the data and had not made a decision to regulate dioxane under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the national standard for potable water.
The EWG supports the EPA’s determination for 0.35 ppb of dioxane in public water to mitigate cancer risk and is pushing for the agency to set this level as the legal limit. The new database reveals that more than 7 million people in 27 states are exposed to water with levels of dioxane exceeding that limit.
What does “likely carcinogenic” mean?
To be a known carcinogen, there needs to be clear documentation of human deaths, Andrews explains. However, the majority of studies conducted on dioxane involved animals—and when evidence for human risk is linked to animal studies, the EPA classifies the results under “likely.” Andrews and other public health advocates still say we should limit the concentration of the chemical in our water systems.
What are legislators doing about this chemical?
Various state officials have taken action against dioxane, notably in New York. In February, Gov. Andrew Cuomo sent a letter to the EPA urging it to set a maximum contaminant level for dioxane. The next month, New York Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer, both Democrats, introduced a bill to the Senate urging the EPA to set maximum levels for a list of contaminants, including dioxane, under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The bill is still lingering in the Senate. Those same senators have since filed a petition to the FDA asking that it ban dioxane in cosmetic products, which would require companies to utilize a technology called vacuum stripping that would remove the chemical.
“This likely cancer-causing toxin serves no purpose in these products and is not even identified on packaging, so it’s time we drain it from everyday products to make Long Island’s water safer,” Schumer said in a statement.
A handful of states have set their own limits on dioxane, in the absence of federal regulation. In California, where 2.5 million people are exposed to dioxane above the EPA’s suggested limit, water utilities must report levels above 1 ppb to the state government. Colorado, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and New Jersey have also set guidelines that are all below 1 ppb of dioxane.
My city’s water is contaminated—what can I do?
According to the EWG, to limit exposure in your home, you can avoid products with the ingredients PEG, polyethylene, polyethylene glycol, polyoxyethylene, and polyoxynolethylene—because these likely have dioxane in them. EWG’s Skin Deep database lists more than 8,000 products that contain the toxin.
Calling your water utilities and state officials to push for contamination prevention efforts is the next step. Considering the EPA has yet to take action, it appears that state governments will have to lead by example to push the federal agency to set a legal limit in accordance with cancer prevention and healthy drinking water.
Read EWG’s full report here.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/09/is-your-shampoo-poisoning-your-drinking-water/
-
Petrochemicals Factbox: Harvey May Delay New CP Chem Cracker Startup
Sep 6, 2017 | Platts
Chevron Phillips Chemical may delay startup of its new 1.5 million mt/year cracker near Baytown, Texas, after Harvey swamped the company's Cedar Bayou complex with five to eight feet of water in different areas, Phillips 66 CEO Greg Garland told investors on Wednesday.
He said during a presentation at the Barclays CEO Energy-Power Conference that the new cracker did not get as much water as other areas and had limited damage, but contractors had been off for two weeks and the company needed them back to resume construction.
He said CP Chem, a joint venture of Phillips 66 and Chevron Corp, still hoped to finish construction by the end of the year, but Harvey's aftermath could push that milestone into the first quarter of 2018, when the company had aimed to ramp up production.
"We're just now getting back into the facility to evaluate the recovery efforts there, and I don't have a forecast yet on Cedar Bayou for you," Garland said. The company shut its existing 835,000 mt/year cracker at the Cedar Bayou complex on August 26, hours after Harvey came ashore at the middle of the Texas coast late August 25 as a Category 4 hurricane.
The storm then moved to the Houston area and parked, dumping more than 51 inches of rain in places, before moving farther east to swamp far southeast Texas. At its peak, more than half of US ethylene capacity and roughly a third of US polyethylene capacity was offline because of Harvey.
Producers increasingly took steps toward restarting facilities as water receded and logistics to receive raw materials and move products to markets resumed operation.
Harvey was not the first storm to drench CP Chem's new cracker project. Last year a major rainstorm in April flooded low-lying areas, including the CP Chem construction site, and the company pushed its target to finish construction and begin startup to late 2017 from the middle of this year.
The cracker is the centerpiece of CP Chem's $6 billion project, which includes two polyethylene plants 86 miles southwest in Sweeny, Texas, with combined capacity of 1 million mt/year.
Garland said in October 2016 that delays stemming from the April 2016 storm would increase the cracker's cost 5% to 10%.
Garland said on Wednesday that CP Chem was "very close" to feeding hydrocarbons in the new PE plants when Harvey arrived, but "by the middle of this month they should be up with the rest of the Sweeny complex."
PRODUCTION
* Occidental Chemical was preparing to restart its 550,000 mt/year joint-venture cracker near Corpus Christi, Texas, nearly two weeks after shutting it ahead of Hurricane Harvey's landfall, Occidental Petroleum Corp CEO Vicki Hollub told analysts on Wednesday. "The cracker was not damaged," she said during a presentation at the Barclays CEO Energy-Power Conference. "Now we're in the process of doing the things we need to do to bring that plant back up."
OxyChem shut its complex in Ingleside, Texas, before Harvey came ashore late August 25 as a Category 4 hurricane about 15 miles away in Rockport. The company also shut its four OxyVinyls plants along the Houston Ship Channel. Hollub said the cracker was not damaged, but an associated vinyl chloride monomer plant received some wind damage. The four Houston-area plants were flooded, but water was receding and all four were operating at reduced rates on Wednesday as the company works to ensure access to raw materials and logistics to move output.
OxyChem's Houston-area plants and the products they make are: Battleground, EDC; Deer Park, PVC, VCM; La Porte, VCM; and Pasadena, PVC.
* Ineos was restarting one of two steam crackers in Brazoria County, Texas, that were shut as Harvey pounded the Houston area more than a week ago, the company said in a regulatory filing.
The filing with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality said the UK-based producer was restarting its 875,000 mt/year Olefins No. 1 unit and expected flaring from early Tuesday to early Wednesday. Ineos shut that unit and a second one with the same capacity on August 27. A company spokesman was not available for comment.
* Formosa Plastics on Thursday expected to restart the remaining shuttered steam cracker -- Olefins Unit No. 1 -- at its Point Comfort, Texas, complex, a source with knowledge of the company's operations said on Wednesday.
The first of the two steam crackers at the site -- Olefins Unit No. 2 -- started up on Tuesday, the company said, after both were shut as Hurricane Harvey approached the state. Olefins Unit No. 1 has an ethylene production capacity of 681,000 mt/year and Olefins Unit No. 2 a production capacity of 818,000 mt/year. Four of six polypropylene lines were operational following Harvey. Three out of six polyethylene lines have also been restarted, a source said.
Formosa last week issued force majeure declarations on polyethylene, polypropylene, PVC and chlor-alkali supplies from Point Comfort, citing the shutdown plus logistics issues as force majeure declarations by several raw material suppliers prevented the delivery of propylene, ethane and propane, 1-butene and 1-hexene.PRICING
* Spot polymer-grade propylene remained at a 4 1/2-month high at 43.50 cents/lb ($959/mt) FD USG for September deliveries, while October deliveries shed 0.625 cent to 42.875 cents/lb FD USG.
Spot refinery-grade propylene also remained at a 4 1/2-month high at 31.25-31.75 cents/lb FD USG.
US spot ethylene was talked in the 29-30 cents/lb ($639.33-$661.38/mt) delivered basis range, remaining near four-month highs.
In polymers, spot polyethylene export assessments were mostly stable week on week amid limited activity.
High-density blowmolding was at $1,212/mt (55 cents/lb), up $11/mt week on week and $121/mt since August 23, as PE pricing was the highest since late Q1-early Q2 2017.
Spot polypropylene for export was stable at $1,234/mt (56 cents/lb) FAS Houston, stable day on day and week on week at near five-month highs.
In aromatics, US spot methanol fell 2.5 cents/gal for prompt pricing to 96 cents/gal ($319.68/mt) FOB USG. US toluene and mixed xylene rose 5 cents/gal to 250 cents/gal ($760/mt) FOB USG and 252 cents/gal ($763.56/mt) FOB USG for prompt-month pricing because of firm blending values and higher bids. Both have retreated from 25-month highs since Friday.
LOGISTICS
* Ports in Beaumont, Port Arthur and Orange opened late Tuesday to vessel traffic for the first time since closing August 28 to all inbound and outbound traffic because of Harvey. However, the ports had a draft limit of 34 feet, effectively holding traffic to barges and tug boats, according to Sabine Pilots.
* The Houston Ship Channel maintained its 40-foot draft limit for ships, but could increase it to 42 feet from the mouth of the channel to Baytown -- just three feet less than normal -- as Army Corps of Engineers investigations of obstructions continue, according to the US Coast Guard. Draft limits for ports in Galveston and Texas City had been lifted, while the Port of Freeport remained open with a 38-foot draft limit.
* Union Pacific and BNSF have largely restored rail service in the Houston area, and both remain focused on doing the same in far southeast Texas, including Beaumont, Port Arthur and Orange, which also sustained catastrophic flooding from Harvey.
* Companies that package plastic pellets for transport to ports for export or to domestic customers are operating, but have concerns about volumes as producers slowly restart plants that shut for Harvey. Katoen Natie and Plantgistix, companies among many in the Houston area that package polyethylene and polypropylene pellets, said their operations were not damaged and they were receiving volumes as railroads made needed repairs and restored service.https://www.platts.com/latest-news/petrochemicals/houston/petrochemicals-factbox-harvey-may-delay-new-cp-27869664
-
TransCanada Extends Open Season Because of Harvey
Sep 6, 2017 | Reuters/Toronto Globe and Mail (In E&E PM)
By Nia Williams
TransCanada Corp. announced today that it will extend the Keystone pipeline open season by one month because of the massive damage caused by Hurricane Harvey.
The open season, launched July 27, was originally scheduled to go until the end of September. Now shippers have until Oct. 26 to sign on for committed capacity to ship crude from Alberta to the Gulf Coast on the Keystone pipeline and the proposed Keystone XL.
Harvey affected about 25 percent of U.S. refining capacity, shutting down pipelines and refineries across regions of southern Texas near Houston.
The open season will be extended as a result of "historic flooding and catastrophic impacts to Houston and parts of the U.S. Gulf Coast," TransCanada said in a statement.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2017/09/06/stories/1060059875
-
Illinois Approves First Fracking Permit for New Albany Shale
Sep 7, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Regulators in Illinois have approved the first permit to allow high-volume hydraulic fracturing (fracking) within the Illinois Basin.
Last Thursday, the Illinois Department of Natural Resources' (DNR) Office of Oil and Gas Resource Management (OOGRM) awarded a permit to Woolsey Operating Co. LLC to conduct fracking operations at the Woodrow 1H-310408-193 well in White County.
According to the permit, the well is targeting the Grassy Creek Shale, a member formation of the New Albany Shale in the Illinois Basin.
Woolsey’s Mark Sooter, vice president for business development, told NGI's Shale Daily that the Wichita, KS-based company began working in the Illinois Basin in early 2012.
"We have been working on trying to go through the process of getting a permit approved," Sooter said Tuesday. "We finally did get it accomplished. It's been a tough task and taken a lot of time, and been a lot more expensive than what you have to do in other states in order to get a permit. But it's a positive time for us because we were successful in getting the permit."
Illinois enacted the Hydraulic Fracturing Regulatory Act (HFRA) in 2013, and DNR oversees the fracking rules.
"After its review, OOGRM determined that the application meets all of the requirements of the Hydraulic Fracturing Regulatory Act and the DNR's rules," the DNR said. OOGRM is working to compile its record of decision and plans to post it online.
Sooter said Woolsey had a horizontal well in Posey County, IN, also targeting the New Albany Shale, but the company does not currently have any other horizontal wells in Illinois. He said the company drilled 10 vertical wells in the Woodrow well's vicinity in order to collect core samples from the New Albany Shale.
"This is mainly an evaluation well," Sooter said. The company wants to drill the Woodrow well before the end of the year and complete it early in 2018. "We like where our location is in the basin, but time will tell on what our plans might be afterwards and what production might be.
"There are a lot of things we still have to learn about [the basin]. We feel like it's got a tremendous amount of possibilities. The Illinois Basin has produced more than 4.2 billion bbl of oil, and most of it was sourced from the New Albany Shale."
Sooter said the Woodrow well is expected to produce both oil and natural gas, but gas would be flared until appropriate infrastructure can be built. "There are some major pipelines that go through the area, but there will have to be some work on developing infrastructure there for the gas pipelines.”
Lawmakers in Illinois began considering ways to regulate fracking five years ago, with the state Senatepassing a law in April 2012. To avoid a drilling moratorium, environmental groups and representatives of the oil and gas industry backed a bipartisan bill establishing the HFRA in February 2013. The bill, at the time dubbed the nation's most stringent on fracking, was signed by then-Gov. Pat Quinn. The DNR then published an initial version of proposed rules on fracking and scheduled a series of public hearings on the matter.
But in August 2014, supporters and opponents of shale gas development in Illinois were unhappy with DNR's proposed 150 pages of revised rules to the HFRA. Two months later, a legislative panel delayed a vote on the revised rules until after that year's election. The rules were unanimously approved by the panel two days after Bruce Rauner, a Republican, was elected governor.
In 2012, the Illinois Chamber of Commerce reported that shale formations in the southern part of the state could potentially create $9.5 billion of investment and 45,000 jobs. The New Albany Shale formation underlies a substantial portion of southern Illinois.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/111643-illinois-approves-first-fracking-permit-for-grassy-creek-shale
-
Carper Scrutinizes EPA's RMP Program, Rule Delay After Texas Facility Fire
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), the ranking Democrat on the Senate environment committee, is stepping up his oversight of Trump administration plans to cut funding for inspectors in EPA's facility safety program and its plans to delay strict new program rules after recent explosions at a Texas chemical facility that flooded as a result of Hurricane Harvey.
In a Sept. 1 letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, Carper says the failure of facility safeguards raised the prospect of a release of more harmful substances stored at the facility, and cast doubt on EPA's delay and plan to revise the Obama administration's update to the agency's Risk Management Plan (RMP) facility safety rule.
The senator's letter came shortly after organic peroxides ignited Aug. 31 at an Arkema Inc. facility after flood waters overwhelmed backup power systems needed to safely store the substances that are used to make pharmaceuticals and construction materials.
With approval from safety officials, the company later ignited additional containers of the substances on site to mitigate the ongoing risk and allow residents who had been evacuated to return to communities near the facility, according to published reports.
While EPA and company officials sought to downplay the risks of releases, Carper notes that the Arkema facility stores enough toxic sulfur gas to affect people living in a 23 mile radius, and argues that “multiple layers of preventive and mitigation measures” described in the facility's RMP compliance documents failed, suggesting existing protections may be insufficient.
“I am concerned that the loss of offsite and emergency power combined with the evacuation of the facility has also reduced the facility’s ability to protect against a worst-case release of toxic sulfur dioxide gas, which the facility also contains,” Carper says. “The failure of both Arkema's emergency backup power supply measures and subsequent evacuation of on-site personnel clearly raise questions related to the sufficiency of Arkema's [RMP] Plan and its implementation.”
Carper backs environmentalists' arguments that the Arkema incident caused by flooding from Hurricane Harvey shows the need for stronger EPA oversight of industrial facilities, including preserving the Obama EPA's Jan. 13 rule updating RMP with new requirements for independent audits, hazard analysis and streamlined release of facility data.
“I am concerned that the President’s FY 2018 budget request proposed to cut the EPA program responsible for inspecting chemical facilities to ensure they are safe by almost 35 percent,” Carper says. “I am also concerned that you recently decided to delay the implementation of a rule to improve the safety and emergency preparedness of chemical facilities by two years.”
RMP Rule
Former President Barack Obama issued an August 2013 Executive Order on improving the safety and security of industrial plants in the wake of an explosion in April of that year that killed 15 people including first responders.
While EPA issued a final rule updating RMP early this year, Pruitt delayed the regulation claiming broad Clean Air Act authority over implementation dates and has signaled significant revisions to the regulation.
Additionally, President Donald Trump has proposed cutting EPA's budget 31 percent in fiscal year 2018, a move that would further weaken EPA's RMP oversight.
Environmental and other groups, including the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Environmental Justice Health Alliance, have said that the Arkema chemical fire shows the need for the Obama EPA's RMP update rule. The failure of the facility safeguards and the need for first responders to seek medical attention backed the rule's new requirements for facilities to consider safer processes and streamline information sharing with first responders and the public.
But an industry attorney has argued that the Obama update rule would not significantly improve safety, and that facilities that follow existing RMP and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act requirements already take adequate steps to reduce risks and inform first responders of their chemical hazards.
The Carper letter continues a line of attack from former EPA officials against the Trump administration's massive budget cuts floated for EPA in fiscal year 2018. Former EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck, a leader in the agency's response to Superstorm Sandy in 2012 and 2013, has criticized ongoing agency efforts to speed early departures of senior personnel under early retirement and buyout programs, and argued that proposed budget cuts would cripple the agency.
Carper says the Trump FY18 budget request would cut EPA's RMP inspection resources by almost 35 percent, noting that the agency has only 30 inspectors to review 12,500 RMP-covered facilities. Staff currently conducts roughly 300-350 inspections annually.
Carper suggests stronger requirements to bolster emergency planning may be necessary in an era of increased flooding and other risks that are often attributed to climate change, and asks whether the Arkema incident has led Pruitt to rethink his support for the administration's plan to slash EPA's budget and delay the Obama-era RMP update rule.
“Does EPA plan to require Risk Management Plan facility owners to update their Plans (and implementation thereof) to account for the increase in frequency and intensity of extreme weather events such as hurricanes, floods, and wildfires that may be attributable to climate change?”
Carper also asks that EPA provide specifics on its oversight of Arkema facilities in Crosby and around the United States, including documentation of any adverse findings from the agency's most recent inspections. He requests that EPA respond to his questions by Sept. 29.
CSB Investigation
Carper's concern has not been limited to EPA's oversight of facility safety. In an Aug. 31 letter to the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB), an agency the Trump administration is seeking to eliminate, Carper and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) successfully asked CSB Chair Vanessa Allen Sutherland to investigate the Arkema fire and issue recommendations to harden industrial facilities against future storms.
In a statement issued the same day, Sutherland said CSB has started investigating the incident and plans to request company documents on chemicals stored and processes used at the Crosby facility, as well as other materials that could inform emergency preparedness and response efforts.
“The full scope of our investigation will be determined as more information becomes available from the company,” according to the CSB statement.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/carper-scrutinizes-epas-rmp-program-rule-delay-after-texas-facility-fire
-
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
Combustion of organic peroxide at a Houston-area Arkema plant last week as a result of flooding caused by Hurricane Harvey drew attention to Trump administration plans to delay an Obama-era rule strengthening EPA's risk management plan (RMP) facility safety program.
While EPA and industry officials downplayed any potential benefits that may have resulted had the Obama-era rule remained in effect, a new press report appears to underscore the inadequacy of the current rule.
In a Sept. 5 article The New York Times examines the safety preparations of Arkema's Crosby, TX, facility that suffered chemical fires triggered when safeguards failed amid rising flood waters, finding that the plant identified flooding as a risk after past storms but failed to adequately address the risk.
“[I]n 2008, Hurricane Ike made landfall over Galveston, killing 103 people and causing more than $50 billion in damage. The following year, Arkema identified floods and hurricanes -- as well as power failure and loss of cooling -- as threats to its Crosby site,” The Times says. “Still, Arkema did little to update its contingency plans.”
“They identify new hazards but don’t change anything in their plans,” Tom Neltner, chemicals policy director at the Environmental Defense Fund, told the paper. “What should have happened in their revision is that when they considered floods and hurricanes, they should have considered would they have to evacuate because of flooding, for example.”
We'll have more on EPA's response to Hurricane Harvey and its policy implications.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/more-arkemas-rmp-plans
-
In Harvey’s Wake, Energy Security Legislation Needed Now More Than Ever
Sep 7, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Valerie Brader
Bipartisanship has been rare in Congress lately, but one shining example of it has been on increasing our efforts on energy security issues. That needs to continue.
In July, the U.S. House passed with overwhelming Republican and Democratic support H.R. 3050, the Enhancing State Energy Security Planning and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2017.
As the Senate returns from its summer recess, we are hopeful the bill will see similar success on the other side of the Capitol. As Hurricane Harvey has taught us, making sure our energy resources are safe, secure and plentiful should not be a partisan issue. It’s an issue we can’t afford to wait on.
If passed by the Senate, the Enhancing State Energy Security Planning and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2017 will provide federal financial help to states such as Michigan to implement, review, and revise their energy security plans, including a greater emphasis on cybersecurity.
The bill would allow states to leverage federal resources, knowledge, and expertise to build stronger partnerships with public and private stakeholders to guarantee a better energy future for all.
What are we talking about when we say energy security?
Part of it is being able to respond well on a larger (and multi-state) scale to threats states experience on a smaller scale: ensuring we are ready to respond to physical and cyberattacks on our energy infrastructure, being able to respond to and recover from large-scale storm impacts, and a long-term plan to deal with aging infrastructure.
Now is the time to focus on these issues, especially cybersecurity. The federal Department of Homeland Security’s Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team recorded nearly double the number of cybersecurity attacks that allowed hackers to access critical power and communications systems (290) compared to what we saw just six years ago. And just recently, a former grid operator CEO reported that there were as many as 4,000 cyberattacks on our grid each month.
There’s no reason to think that the pace of attacks won’t continue to accelerate.
Infrastructure failures or successful cyberattacks could mean a devastating interruption of energy services that could cripple our economy. A grid disruption could mean gas stations with no power to fuel our vehicles, factories with no electricity to run machinery, or families with no way to charge cell phones so they can check on loved ones.
Michigan has an energy security plan in place, and is working to improve it to respond to current and emerging threats. However, energy threats don’t stop at a state’s borders. Officials need to be confident that their neighbors are in a strong position to react to storms, infrastructure malfunctions, and other threats to avoid problems that can cascade throughout a region.
That’s why it’s imperative we all work together -- in Congress and at the state level -- to make sure our energy infrastructure is reliable and resilient. We can start to assure the American people that this is a top priority of state and federal officials by passing the energy preparedness legislation that already has overwhelming support in the U.S. House.
Upton represents Michigan's 6th District and is chairman of the Energy and Commerce's Energy Subcommittee. Valerie Brader is Executive Director, Michigan Agency for Energy.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/349421-in-harveys-wake-energy-security-legislation-needed-now
-
EPA Last Inspected Flooded Arkema Plant in 2003
Sep 7, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
It's been 14 years since EPA inspectors last visited an Arkema Corp. facility in Crosby, Texas, that saw chemical explosions caused by flooding from Hurricane Harvey, a company official told Bloomberg BNA.
Arkema spokesman Stan Howard, and David Gray, a spokesman for the Environmental Protection Agency's Region 6 office in Dallas, both said the plant was last inspected under the agency's risk management program in 2003. The EPA is more likely to inspect high-risk facilities under the program “where offsite consequences impact a large number of people or they have had an accident,” Gray said in an email Sept. 6.
Arkema's Crosby facility came under scrutiny after power failures due to an estimated 40 inches of rain at the plant during Harvey caused electricity and multiple backup generators to fail and volatile chemicals to overheat and catch fire.
The lack of inspections at the Crosby plant doesn't surprise many. According to a Sept. 1 letter Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) sent to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, the agency has “about 30 inspectors” who can complete between 300 and 350 inspections per year of around 12,500 facilities in the program—information the senator's spokeswoman told Bloomberg BNA came from a telephone briefing with EPA staff last week.
That means it would take at least 35 years to check all of the sites once.
Carper told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 6 the inspection gaps are “way too long.”
Jim Frederick, assistant health and safety director at the United Steelworkers union, said the long timeframe between checks at the Crosby site wasn't surprising.
“Both EPA and OSHA are certainly not staffed to a level to have the reach to be able to inspect facilities on a very frequent basis,” Frederick said.
Several other Arkema facilities had more recent EPA inspections. The agency inspected Arkema's Axis, Ala., plant in 2015, 2009, and 2004; a plant in Beaumont, Texas, in 2008 and 2003; the Alsip, Ill., plant in 2007; and facilities in Piffard, N.Y. and Calvert City, Ky., in 2010, according to EPA data obtained by Bloomberg BNA.
Lawmakers Interested
How often the inspections occur is a focus for lawmakers interested in learning more about Arkema's problems.
The letter from Carper, the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, asked Pruitt provide inspection data for the Crosby plant and other Arkema facilities. Carper said the plant's risk management plan seemed insufficient given the hurricane's impact on the plant.
“The failure of both of Arkema's emergency backup power supply measures and subsequent evacuation of on-site personnel clearly raise questions related to the sufficiency of Arkema's plan and its implementation,” Carper wrote.
Under the EPA's program, Arkema is required to submit a risk management plan every five years. The company filed its most recent plan for the Crosby facility in 2014, which didn't mention the organic peroxides that exploded since those chemicals are not covered under the risk management program. But the company's plan did identify the risk of hurricanes, power failures and power surges, and flagged the 66,260 pounds of anhydrous sulfur dioxide that, if released, could threaten more than 1 million residents within 23 miles of the plant.
Mark Farley, a partner at the law firm Katten Muchin Rosenmann LLP in Houston, told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 6 he didn't think including organic peroxides in the risk management plan would have made a difference at Arkema's plant.
“The company and the government knew that these chemicals were highly hazardous and the employer had redundant systems in place to try to mitigate that risk,” Farley said. “What should they have done? Had a fourth backup system?”
OSHA, Contractors Help Too
EPA regional offices may also use consultants to check plants, and OSHA process safety management inspectors are on the lookout for many similar types of violations, Stephen Richmond, a principal at the law firm Beveridge and Diamond PC, told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 6.
A typical inspection involves as many as five inspectors, who scour the plant over several days, Richmond said.
“They're pretty intensive,” Richmond said. “The inspection, if you have five inspectors on site for as much as a week, they can cover a lot of ground.”
Other agencies that made it to the Crosby plant sometimes found violations.
OSHA inspectors that visited the site in 2016 issued 10 citations for serious violations, nine of which involved management of highly hazardous chemicals, records show. The U.S. Chemical Safety Board, which is investigating the incident, may also make recommendations to EPA if it finds the agency could better enforce existing regulations.
Given the magnitude of what happened, Carper wrote, reducing EPA inspections further through budget cuts “seems shortsighted at best.”
—With assistance from Dean Scott and Madi Alexander
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=120141082&vname=dennotallissues&fn=120141082&jd=120141082
-
In Harvey's Wake, Critics See Big Money Behind Lax Petrochemical Reporting
Sep 7, 2017 | Texas Tribune
By Jay Root
Unlike any past storm — natural or man-made — Hurricane Harvey has exposed the fault lines between the politically powerful Texas petrochemical industry and the public’s right to know what dangers lie within their facilities.
In Crosby, on the outskirts of Houston, French-owned Arkema refused to providethe public an inventory of the substances inside its chemical plant even as they were burning and causing mandatory evacuations. Along flood-stricken petrochemical row near the Houston ship channel, meanwhile, city officials detected a huge spike in cancer-causing benzene outside a refinery this week — while the state’s environmental protection agency temporarily suspended certain spill and emission reporting rules in Harvey’s wake.
Critics point to a common thread in the light-handed regulations from state government: campaign money from oil and chemical companies flowing like floodwaters into the coffers of top Texas leaders. Those leaders have said in the past that campaign money has no role in their decision-making process.
The top recipient of industry money in Texas is Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, who in 2014 ruled that Texas health officials no longer have to provide citizens with plants’ chemical inventories under state transparency laws. It was also Abbott who granted the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s request to temporarily suspend certain emission reporting requirements for permitted facilities.
According to a May report by Texans for Public Justice, a liberal watchdog group, more than one of every five campaign dollars Abbott received from 2013 through 2016 — over $16 million, or 21 percent — came from the oil and gas industry. The report also showed that a significant slice of political contributions to the leader of the Texas Senate, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (16 percent) and House Speaker Joe Straus, R-San Antonio, (14 percent), came from oil and gas interests.
At the request of The Texas Tribune, TPJ also ran the numbers on the chemical industry. The records again showed a lopsided amount going to the governor — more than $700,000 since 2013. That included more than $600,000 from a single chemical company CEO — S. Reed Morian of DX Service Company Inc., whom Abbott appointed to the Texas Parks & Wildlife Commission in 2015.
Since 2013, Patrick has received about $300,000 from chemical interests while Straus received a little more than $30,000, according to TPJ figures. Besides Morian, other major donors to the top leaders from chemical interests include Lyondell Chemical Co. PAC, Walter White, the CEO of Economy Polymers & Chemicals and the Dow Chemical Company PAC.
Spokesmen for Patrick and Straus did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Abbott spokesman John Wittman said: “The health and safety of Texans during this time of crisis is the Governor's top concern. It's disappointing, but not surprising, that Democrats would use this opportunity to politicize a disaster.”
In 2014, Abbott, then the attorney general, said "ongoing terroristic activity" prompted his ruling to block release of the chemical inventory reports he feared could fall into the hands of evildoers. Abbott also said at the time that Texans could “drive around” and ask chemical plants directly for the information — but officials say the state has no authority to make them comply.
Jim Marston, the Texas regional director of the Environmental Defense Fund, noted that Texas is among a small minority of states that won’t release “Tier II inventory” reports showing which dangerous substances — and how much of those substances — are stored at chemical plants. Officials said more than a dozen first responders sought medical attention after breathing some of the fumes from the Arkema plant in Crosby.
“Literally policemen are being sent to the hospital because they ... do not know what’s in these dangerous plants,” Marston said. “Does the fact that our governor gets large sums of money from the oil and chemical interest affect his actions? It sure as hell does. Nobody believes they’re giving the money to Abbott because they think he’s a swell guy.”
As for Abbott’s more recent decision to order a temporary suspension of rules requiring immediate reporting of certain chemical emissions, Wittman noted that the rules apply “only to situations in which compliance with these requirements would actually prevent, hinder or delay necessary action in coping with the disaster.
“Environmental reporting obligations that can be met without negatively impacting disaster response remain in place,” he added.
Bay Scoggin, director of the environmental group TexPIRG, said the big money coming from oil and chemical interests doesn’t look good in the wake of Harvey.
“These contributions smell as bad as the chemicals Texans are breathing right now,” he said. “Money influences who gets elected and money can open doors, giving donors access to lawmakers.”
Disclosure: Dow Chemical has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune. A complete list of Tribune donors and sponsors is available here.
https://www.texastribune.org/2017/09/07/harveys-wake-critics-see-big-money-behind-lax-petrochemical-reporting/
-
(ACC Mentioned) CSX Says Its Rail Service Is Improving After Major Delays
Sep 6, 2017 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Josh Funk
CSX railroad said Wednesday that its service is improving after a summer marked by delays as it overhauled its operations.
But despite the reported improvements, the Jacksonville, Florida-based railroad trimmed its profit outlook. It now expects profit to improve between 20 and 25 percent over last year’s earnings per share of $1.81. Previously, CSX had predicted 25 percent profit growth.
New CEO Hunter Harrison said in a statement that the railroad has made good progress implementing his operating model, but the extensive changes involved did delay some deliveries over the summer.
“The railroad is now returning to a normal operating rhythm, and our performance metrics are improving,” Harrison said.
The average speed of CSX’s trains improved 2 percent last week to 13.6 mph, and the average length of time trains remained in terminals, known as “dwell time,” decreased 2.5 percent to 11.5 hours. But in some locations, the dwell time remains much higher, such as at CSX’s Indianapolis railyard where trains lingered 28.6 hours on average last week.
Investors appeared to welcome the news of improved service. CSX’s stock was up almost 3 percent in Wednesday afternoon trading.
The federal Surface Transportation Board has scheduled a hearing for next Tuesday on CSX’s service problems to give customers a chance to hear more from the railroad. Several groups of rail customers have spoken out about CSX.
“Significant concerns about CSX’s service remain, and there is a long way to go before service levels return to acceptable levels,” said Scott Jenson, spokesman for the American Chemistry Council.
Agricultural groups and other manufacturers that rely on CSX to deliver raw materials and carry their products away to sell have also spoken out about the railroad’s problems.
The changes CSX is making include changing the way trains are assembled at seven of its 12 railyards. The railroad is reducing its number of internal divisions to five from nine and consolidating all nine of its dispatching offices into one.
As part of the changes, CSX has eliminated 3,700 jobs this year.
The moves are all part of the operating plan Harrison brought with him when he was hired in March. The 72-year-old previously used tighter train schedules and lean expenses to generate significant profits at Canadian Pacific and Canadian National railroads.
CSX operates more than 21,000 miles of track in 23 Eastern states and two Canadian provinces.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/csx-says-its-rail-service-is-improving-after-major-delays/2017/09/06/3fe4bf7a-931b-11e7-8482-8dc9a7af29f9_story.html?utm_term=.161e4be8587f
-
Amtrak’s Diesel Fleet to Meet PTC Deadline
Sep 7, 2017 | International Railway Journal
By William Vantuono
AMTRAK has confirmed that it will equip approximately 310 diesel-electric locomotives with Positive Train Control (PTC) technology by the December 31 2018 federal deadline.
To achieve this objective, Amtrak has signed an agreement with Rockwell Collins to implement the company's ARINC RailwayNet service, a hosted network, messaging and application platform designed to meet PTC requirements.
RailwayNet will allow Amtrak's national diesel-electric locomotive fleet to interface with the PTC systems of host railways, and under the agreement, Rockwell Collins will initialise the fleet to operate on 19 railways. This encompasses both commuter and freight lines which host Amtrak services, including state-sponsored routes in the east and midwest.
Amtrak is progressing well with PTC implementation. In December 2015, Amtrak activated Advanced Civil Speed Enforcement System (ACSES), its version of PTC for the Northeast Corridor (NEC) between New York and Washington, DC. ACSES has been operational on the NEC's northern-most section, between Boston and New Haven, Connecticut, since 2000.
Incremental Train Control System (ITCS), another version of PTC, has been operational since 2002 along 156km of Amtrak-owned right-of-way in Michigan and Indiana on the Chicago - Detroit corridor. In early 2016, Amtrak activated ACSES on the 167km Philadelphia - Harrisburg line, an extension of the NEC.
“PTC is a set of highly advanced technologies designed to enhance rail transportation safety by automatically stopping a train before certain types of incidents occur,” says Amtrak senior manager of PTC, Mr George Hartman. “We are dedicated to ensuring our locomotives are enabled with this important safety technology.”
http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/signalling/amtraks-diesel-fleet-to-meet-ptc-deadline.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) Texas' Rule Suspension Intensifies Doubts on Air Law Regulatory Waivers
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) has suspended a host of state environmental rules due to Hurricane Harvey, though the indefinite suspension has intensified uncertainty over the future of the states' pre-existing regulatory exemptions for periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM), which the Obama EPA sought to remove but which the Trump administration is reconsidering.
In view of the hurricane emergency, Abbott Aug. 28 approved a wide-ranging request from Richard Hyde, executive director of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the state's environmental regulator, to suspend a host of air and other rules for the duration of the crisis.
But once the emergency is declared over, controversy will remain over the SSM exemptions, which can also shield refineries or chemical plants from liability or enforcement action for events resulting in emissions breaching regulatory limits.
And as the state exempts industry from compliance obligations, environmentalists a
While their focus in Houston and other hurricane-hit areas is still on saving lives, some are already suggesting that some facilities waited too long to begin shutting down their operations in the face of an impending disaster, forcing emergency shutdowns that result in more pollution as emissions were either vented directly to the air or flared, sources say.
Shutdowns have to occur, "however, plants can take precautionary measures," says a source with Air Alliance Houston. "They have a tendency to wait until the last minute."
Complicating the issue is that Texas' pre-existing regulatory exemptions for periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM) are still intact, despite the Obama EPA's attempt to dismantle them using a "SIP Call" rule to strip the exemptions of 36 states including the Lone Star State.
Hence many excess emissions during the emergency might have been exempted from compliance anyway, even without Abbott's emergency declaration.
Although a November 2016 deadline for states to remove offending provisions has passed, Texas outlined to the Obama administration its intent to keep some exemptions, such as its "affirmative defense," pending the outcome of D.C. Circuit litigation on the issue.
Such defenses shield industry from civil liability in the event of malfunctions deemed "unavoidable" by regulators, but environmentalists charge that they can exempt emissions from avoidable episodes resulting from poor maintenance.
The state proposed to add language to its state implementation plan (SIP) for air law compliance stressing that the defense does not interfere with federal courts' abilities to determine penalties for air law violations, the key complaint of the D.C. Circuit when it earlier ruled against affirmative defenses in federal regulations.
At the request of the Trump EPA, litigation over the SSM SIP Call, now known as Environmental Committee of the Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group, Inc. v. EPA, et al., is now in abeyance in the D.C. Circuit. EPA says it is considering whether to revise the rule.
Despite the pending litigation, industry groups note the current framework allows for regulatory exemptions during SSM periods and pushed back against the need for any new requirements.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC), in an Aug. 31 statement on the fire at an Arkema chemical plant, noted that in cases of major storms, "plants may reduce operations, shutdown a facility, evacuate personnel, and physically secure equipment. Special regulations and emissions limits apply to periods of start-up, shut-down, and malfunction."
The group added that a facility that shuts down "may employ flaring of excess gasses that cannot be processed. Flaring is an approved way to safely relieve pressure during a unit shutdown and is considered an industry 'best practice.' These controlled releases are done with the permission of state and federal regulatory authorities."
One environmentalist says the ACC statement is generally correct but that the issue is whether releases were not "reasonably foreseeable and avoidable," as defined in regulation. If they are not, the releases qualify for Texas' SSM exemption.
In the case of the Arkema facility, the source says it is too early to say, but emphasizes that facilities may still face liability if they violate the Texas standard.
But one industry attorney says that strong language in the Texas Clean Air Act on force majeure events, such as natural disasters, will likely exempt such emissions from regulatory enforcement or civil liability.
And further complicating the issue, the Air Alliance Houston source says, is that it will be difficult to monitor compliance with federal air standards in some areas because monitors were either turned off deliberately by regulators seeking to save them from flood damage, or became inoperable.
The source tells Inside EPA that TCEQ switched off monitors in the city to save them from water damage.
"All the air monitors are shut down, and we are really relying on industry to tell the t
But determining the extent of any exemption may be difficult given provisions approved by Abbott and TCEQ.
TCEQ's Hyde in an Aug. 24 guidance document reiterated the state's force majeure provisions, noting "Texas law provides for a defense against an enforcement action where the regulated entity can establish that the violation was caused solely by an act of God, war, strike, riot, or other catastrophe."
He says, "No additional approval from TCEQ is necessary for activities directly related to disaster prevention or response. Response actions pursuant to the guidance should include all reasonable actions necessary and prudent to facilitate, maintain, or restore fuel production and/or distribution, within the State of Texas, directly related to Hurricane Harvey."
There are conditions, however. "Regulated entities should keep records of all activities that they believe are covered by this defense. However, such entities must take all necessary steps to prevent or minimize any increased risk to human health and safety and to the environment. In addition, they must at all times apply best engineering and pollution control practices as required by applicable standards. Regulated entities should follow their standard operating procedures as well as startup, shutdown, and maintenance activities, requirements and plans, to the extent feasible, even during emergency events."
TCEQ has further issued a list of activities that will benefit from regulatory exemptions for the duration of the emergency, which is yet to be determined. Abbott Aug. 28 authorized Hyde's request to suspend the application of numerous Texas environmental laws "until terminated by the Office of the Governor or until the Tropical Depression Harvey disaster declaration is lifted or expires."
The order covers a wide range of air rules, including those requiring reporting of emissions "events," rules governing startup, shutdown and maintenance of facilities, ozone limiting rules, refinery emissions controls, "visible" emissions, and many others, including several relating to water quality.
For example, Hyde says on emissions events and recordkeeping, "Unauthorized emissions as a result of hurricane effects, such as lightning, floods, fires, wind or windblown damage, and power outages would meet the definition of an emissions event, therefore, suspending the reporting and recordkeeping requirements would remove a potential impediment to disaster response."
Similarly, on visible emissions limits for particulate matter, Hyde says, "Compliance with the specified source visible emissions requirements, or alternate opacity limits, for particulate matter may not be possible as a result of hurricane effects."
https://insideepa.com/inside-epa/texas-rule-suspension-intensifies-doubts-air-law-regulatory-waivers
-
Environmentalists Again Press Court to Scrap Ozone Delay
Sep 6, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmentalists are again pressing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to scrap EPA's one-year delay implementing the agency's 2015 federal ozone standard, despite EPA's insistence that it has withdrawn the delay decision and the case is therefore moot.
In a Sept. 5 filing in American Lung Association, et al. v. EPA, et al., environmental and public health groups say their case is not moot, and they have no guarantee that EPA will not again reverse course and seek to unlawfully delay implementation of the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
“The agency incorrectly claims there is nothing left to vacate. But EPA has merely withdrawn the Designations Delay, not eradicated it in the way that vacatur and a declaration of voidness ab initio would,” environmentalists say.
The Obama EPA set the standard at 70 parts per billion (ppb), tougher than the prior limit of 75 ppb. Shortly after he was confirmed, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt claimed that EPA lacked the data necessary to designate areas' attainment with the new standard and delayed the decisions by one year, from Oct. 1 to Oct. 1, 2018, though criticssaid this was not credible.
Weeks later, Pruitt suddenly withdrew his delay plan, though he left the door open to delaying some regions' designations.
Following the withdrawal of his earlier plan, EPA sought dismissal of environmentalists' lawsuit.
But environmentalists are opposed to dropping the case, fearing that the agency may still seek to reinstate its delay plan. “EPA principally and wrongly argues that the well-established case law calling for vacatur of moot agency actions does not apply because it purportedly only applies to 'adjudicative orders,'” they say.
At most, EPA's opposition supports a brief abeyance, until after the now-reinstated Oct. 1 deadline for area designations has passed, environmentalists argue. EPA is widely expected to miss that deadline, as it is behind schedule in the process, sources say. This will likely spur fresh legal action to compel issuance of the designations, environmentalists have warned.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/environmentalists-again-press-court-scrap-ozone-delay
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested