Preview Newsletter

ACC AM 10/13/17

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) 5 Chemical Stocks to Enrich Your Portfolio Before Q3 Earnings
Oct 12, 2017 | Zacks (In Nasdaq)

The chemical industry has so far enjoyed a positive run this year, helped by an upswing in the world economy and continued strength across major end-use markets such as construction, electronics and automotive.

LCSA News

Toxics Chief Seeks Input From OPPT Staff On Reorganization Proposals
Oct 12, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad

EPA's career toxics chief is requesting input from staff within the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) regarding a trio of proposals he has floated for reorganizing the office, options under consideration as part of the office's ongoing efforts to implement the one-year-old statute reforming the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

Chemical Management News

(ACC Mentioned) New York Poised to Require Ingredient Disclosure for Cleaners
Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald Silverman

New York could become one of the first states to force manufacturers to disclose a broad range of chemical ingredients included in household cleaning products and identified as unsafe by state, national, and international scientific authorities.
House Panel Sees Fatal Flaws in EPA's Chemical Toxicity Reviews
Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan

The EPA should reconsider Obama-era decisions on chemical toxicity and keep “low-quality science” out of new toxicity assessments, according to Republicans on the House Science Committee.
Rep. Smith Seeks Mechanism To Correct IRIS Assessments
Oct 12, 2017 | Inside EPA

House science committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) is urging EPA to create a mechanism by which the agency can “correct” chemical risk analyses conducted by its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program, saying that without such a mechanism, the program lacks scientific integrity.
Key GOP Lawmakers Air Concerns About EPA Risk Program
Oct 13, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Corbin Hiar

House Science, Space and Technology Committee leaders yesterday raised concerns about the scientific integrity of U.S. EPA's program for reviewing the dangers posed by chemicals.
EPA Extends Deadline For Perchlorate Review, Forcing Request To Court
Oct 12, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad

In response to industry requests, EPA is extending the public comment period on a report that will form the basis for a landmark drinking water standard it is required to set to regulate perchlorate, the widespread rocket fuel ingredient, though the extension will force the agency to miss a looming deadline and seek additional time from the court that is overseeing the long-delayed rulemaking.
Groups Urge Retraction Of Monsanto-Backed Glyphosate Study
Oct 12, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Corbin Hiar

Scientists at four environmental groups urged the editors and publisher of a Monsanto Co.-funded study of glyphosate to retract that paper and reconsider four others that ran alongside it.
Asbestos Tile Maker Wins Dismissal of Installer's Claims
Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes

Conwed Corp. won dismissal of a Kansas man's asbestos exposure claims in federal district court in Minnesota (McGill v. Conwed Corp., 2017 BL 362766, D. Minn., No. 17-01047, 10/10/17).

Energy News

Dakota Access Boosts Drillers but Won't Be a Bakken Game-Changer
Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Meenal Vamburkar

Once hailed as the spur for a North American “energy renaissance,” the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline has limited driller costs in its first four months in operation.
House Republicans Push Bills to Promote Oil and Gas
Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski

Republicans in the House are lining up more oil and gas legislation, including a bill on offshore drilling, and a rewrite of the law on national monuments, all with solid opposition from Democrats.
Local Drilling Rules Draw Industry Lawsuit in Colorado
Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz

A Colorado city's new drilling rules impede the state's interest in uniformly regulating oil and gas operations and should be tossed out, oil industry groups argue in a lawsuit.
Hot Topics From Perry Hearing, From 'Poo-Poo' To Drudge
Oct 13, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Christa Marshall and Sam Mintz

Rick Perry's three-hour appearance on Capitol Hill yesterday was filled with testy exchanges, gaffes and comments about everything from "poo-poo" to the Drudge Report.

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation and Infrastructure News

Problems With Rail Transport of Energy Supplies; Pipelines, Barges More Prepared
Oct 12, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut

Although most domestically produced oil, natural gas, ethanol and natural gas liquids (NGL) are transported without incident, concerns remain over the safety of transporting energy supplies via rail, according to a report by the nonprofit National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM).
Technology To Prevent Rail Disasters Is In Our Hands
Oct 13, 2017 | The Conversation
By Chris Bachmann

As the trial of the 2013 Lac-Mégantic rail disaster begins, new policies and practices that aim to employ better technology could help avoid similar disasters in the future.
Ethanol Has Replaced Oil Trains As Hidden Safety Risk In NJ
Oct 12, 2017 | NorthJersey.com
By Curtis Tate

The volume of crude oil shipped by rail may have declined in recent months, but communities in New Jersey and other states face another hazard: ethanol.

Environment News

Industry Groups Call On EPA To Reform NO2 Air Permitting, Relax NAAQS
Oct 13, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker

Groups representing utilities, the petroleum sector and other industries are calling on EPA to reform its Clean Air Act permitting process to ease compliance with the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), and to consider softening the one-hour NAAQS from the current 100 parts per billion (ppb) limit.
70% of Americans Say Weather Growing More Severe
Oct 13, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Daniel Cusick

A poll commissioned by the Associated Press found nearly 70 percent of Americans believe that weather-related disasters are becoming more severe, and nearly half those respondents said climate change is the primary driver of rising weather severity.

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) 5 Chemical Stocks to Enrich Your Portfolio Before Q3 Earnings

Oct 12, 2017 | Zacks (In Nasdaq)

The chemical industry has so far enjoyed a positive run this year, helped by an upswing in the world economy and continued strength across major end-use markets such as construction, electronics and automotive.
The Zacks Chemicals Diversified industryhas outperformed the broader market year to date. The industry has gained around 22.6% over this period, higher than S&P 500's corresponding return of roughly 14%.
Notwithstanding a few headwinds including the impact of the devastating Hurricane Harvey, chemical companies are expected to continue the earnings momentum witnessed in the second quarter into the September quarter as the fundamental driving factors remain firmly in place.
Strategic Actions to Reap Margin Benefits

Strategic measures including productivity improvement, pricing actions, portfolio restructuring and earnings-accretive acquisitions are expected to drive the performance of chemical makers in the third quarter. Cost-cutting measures and productivity improvement actions by chemical companies should continue to yield industry-wide margin improvements in the September quarter.

Chemical companies also continue to shift their focus on attractive, growth markets in an effort to whittle down their exposure on other businesses that are grappling with weak demand. Moreover, they remain actively focused on mergers and acquisitions to diversify and shore up growth. Synergies from acquisitions should lend support to earnings in the third quarter.

Moreover, a number of chemical makers are taking appropriate pricing actions (reflected by hikes in chemical prices in the recent past) in the wake of a sharp rise in raw materials costs. This is also expected to support their margins in the third quarter.

Strength Across Key End-Markets

Chemical makers continue to see strong demand from construction and automotive sectors - major chemical end-use markets. The automotive sector continues its good run, supported by an improving job market, rising personal income, improved consumer confidence, low fuel prices and attractive financing options.

A recovery across housing and commercial construction markets has been another tailwind for the chemical industry. The underlying trends in the housing space remain healthy, backed by steady buyer demand, low mortgage rates, rising rent costs and easy loan availability.

Harvey-Stoked Disruptions Pose a Concern

Hurricane Harvey weighed on U.S. chemical production during the third quarter, knocking off a sizable chunk of production capacity. The U.S. chemical industry saw flat production in August as activities in the Gulf Coast were interrupted by Harvey, according to a recent report from the American Chemistry Council (ACC), a chemical industry trade group.
The Gulf Coast is the epicenter of the U.S. specialty chemicals and petrochemicals industry. Harvey led to the shutdown of several chemical plants along the Gulf Coast.

In particular, the storm ravaged Texas that accounts for nearly three-quarters of the U.S. production of ethylene, which is among the world's most important petrochemicals and a basic ingredient for final products ranging from plastic bottles to tires to polyester fabric. Many chemical plants producing ethylene are located near the Gulf Coast's concentration of petroleum facilities.

According to IHS Markit, 54% of total U.S. ethylene production capacity was hit by Harvey. A number of major chemical producers had to shutter or cut back ethylene production, leading to reduced supply of this major chemical. As such, the impacts of disruptions caused by Harvey may pose some earnings headwinds for U.S. chemical makers in the September quarter.

Picking the Winning Stocks

While the chemical industry still remains saddled by a few challenges, the industry's momentum is expected to continue in the third quarter on continued strength across major end-markets. Amid such a backdrop, a sneak peek at the space for some potential winners backed by a solid Zacks Rank could be a great idea for investors looking to gain from the third-quarter earnings season.

With the help of the Zacks Stock Screener , we have shortlisted chemical stocks that have an estimated year over year EPS growth of 5% or more for the to-be-reported quarter. Further, these stocks carry a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) or #2 (Buy). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

5 Stocks to Scoop Up

Below we discuss five chemical stocks that are worth investing in before the third-quarter earnings season hits full throttle.

The Chemours Company CC

Delaware-based Chemours sports a Zacks Rank #1. The stock has an estimated EPS growth of 65.6% for the third quarter. Moreover, it delivered average positive earnings surprise of 12.1% over the trailing four quarters. The stock has also gained a staggering 149.5% year to date.

The company should gain from its transformation initiatives, cost reduction actions, strength across its portfolio, improving end market conditions and increased customer adoption of both Ti-Pure titanium dioxide and Opteon refrigerants.

Kraton Corporation KRA

Our next pick in the space is Texas-based Kraton, armed with a Zacks Rank #1. The company has an expected EPS growth of 60.3% for the third quarter. It also delivered average positive earnings surprise of 16.5% over the trailing four quarters. Moreover, the stock has gained around 44.1% so far this year.

Kraton should benefit from a favorable raw material pricing environment, positive underlying business momentum and its actions to steer organic growth in key markets through state-of-the-art innovation and infrastructure.

Kronos Worldwide, Inc. KRO

Headquartered in Dallas, TX, Kronos is another attractive choice with a Zacks Rank #2. The company has an expected EPS growth of 121.1% for the third quarter. It delivered average positive earnings surprise of 76.1% over the trailing four quarters. The stock has also gained 108.5% year to date.

Kronos should gain from higher demand for titanium dioxide, improved selling prices, higher production volumes and implementation of certain productivity-enhancing projects at some facilities.

Huntsman Corporation HUN

Texas-based Huntsman sports a Zacks Rank #2. The company has an expected EPS growth of 32.2% for the third quarter. It also delivered positive earnings surprise in each of the trailing four quarters with an average beat of 26.4%. The stock has also gained 43.5% so far this year.

Huntsman should continue to gain from strong underlying fundamentals and its downstream strategy. Moreover, strength of the company's global polyurethanes business and sustained recovery of the performance products unit are expected to lend support to its third-quarter earnings.

Innospec Inc. IOSP

Headquartered in Englewood, CO, Innospec carries a Zacks Rank #2. The company has an expected EPS growth of 9% for the third quarter. It delivered positive earnings surprise in three of the trailing four quarters with an average beat of 7.8%. The company should continue to gain from its well-balanced portfolio, margin contributions from new technologies and strength across its Performance Chemicals and Oilfield Services units.
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/5-chemical-stocks-to-enrich-your-portfolio-before-q3-earnings-cm859131

Return to headline | Return to top

LCSA News

Toxics Chief Seeks Input From OPPT Staff On Reorganization Proposals

Oct 12, 2017 | Inside EPA

By Maria Hegstad

EPA's career toxics chief is requesting input from staff within the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) regarding a trio of proposals he has floated for reorganizing the office, options under consideration as part of the office's ongoing efforts to implement the one-year-old statute reforming the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
In a Sept. 22 memo obtained by Inside EPA, OPPT Director Jeff Morris explains the rationale behind the contemplated office reorganization and seeks staff input on the different proposals by Dec. 1.
The memo does not indicate a time line for implementing a reorganization, and it acknowledges that “OPPT management will work with the unions to run a process that fosters office-wide engagement in this effort; we will also look at opportunities to involve the Transition Monitoring Team as the process advances.”
Morris notes that he and division leaders came up with “key elements” for the reorganization, and have briefed Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Deputy Assistant Administrator Louise Wise and Nancy Beck, the top political appointee in OCSPP, “and they are supportive of our proposal.”
An EPA spokesman did not respond by press time to a request for comment.
But as first reported by Inside EPA, key among the major changes to the existing organizational structure is a plan to consolidate OPPT's seven current divisions into five, according to diagrams circulated within the agency.
Morris' memo states the June 2016 enactment of the TSCA reform law, and its many new requirements of EPA, is the driver for making major changes to OPPT, the EPA office responsible for implementing TSCA.
Morris says senior OPPT leaders have been contemplating an office reorganization “[o]ver the past few months,” noting that “meeting the requirements under amended TSCA has been a major driver for these discussions.”
He says the June 2016 amendments to TSCA, “with their establishment of an OPPT mandate to prioritize and review existing chemicals as well as to make affirmative determinations for all new chemical notices, require a strong emphasis on the prioritization, evaluation, and management of chemicals.”
As previously reported, EPA is planning to expand OPPT's Risk Assessment Division (RAD) to address this new emphasis.
The TSCA reform law has extensive new risk assessment requirements for EPA, particularly regarding the assessment and management of “existing” chemicals -- those that were on the market when the original TSCA took effect in 1976. These chemicals were essentially grandfathered under the original law, and became even more difficult for EPA to regulate following the 1991 federal appeals court ruling in the Corrosion Proof Fittings case, which remanded EPA's attempt to ban most uses of asbestos.
As an example of the expanded authorities, the new law requires EPA to have a minimum of 20 existing chemicals undergoing assessment each year after the first three years -- some of which can be requested by industry. EPA must prioritize existing chemicals for assessment and can only select those deemed high priority for assessment.
TSCA Driver
Morris' memo cites the new law's requirements as a driver for the reorganization of OPPT, saying it will advance EPA’s implementation of TSCA in several ways, including acknowledging “the heightened responsibilities of the new chemicals management program by giving that function its own, dedicated [senior executive service (SES)] leadership.”
“It also recognizes our increased existing chemicals management responsibilities by putting all existing chemicals management, including legacy chemicals, within a single regulatory division under its own SES leadership,” Morris writes.
He says that the planned creation of a new Data, Analysis and Strategic Engagement Division will “enhance our ability to process, analyze, and disseminate information by bringing together the complementary capabilities” of several programs, including economic analysis, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), chemical data reporting (CDR), the Safer Choice labeling program, pollution prevention and others.
Morris presents three different reorganization options for staff to consider. In each, the RAD is the only division with little change, and only an expansion considered, presumably to address the increased need for risk assessment heralded by TSCA reform. Different options propose adding one to three more branches to RAD's existing five branches.
EPA last reorganized OPPT just three years ago. Morris references the 2014 reorganization in his memo, noting that at that time, “the office’s exposure, hazard, and engineering functions were integrated into the [RAD], and the senior leadership does not believe that additional major organizational changes to RAD are needed.”
According to the documents, OPPT's existing Chemical Control Division, which currently has separate branches for existing and new chemicals as well as chemical information and testing, are proposed to be split between two new divisions: New Chemicals Management and Existing Chemicals Management.
The Existing Chemicals Division also appears poised to subsume an existing division, the National Program Chemicals Division, which included programs on the handful of existing chemicals that the original TSCA specifically directed EPA to address, such as lead, mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
The Existing Chemicals Division is proposed to contain a half-dozen “risk management” and support branches, with responsibilities for the program chemicals, new TSCA section 4 test orders that require companies to provide EPA with data on their chemicals, new TSCA section 6 risk management actions, and regulatory tracking divvied among them.
Similarly, the planned New Chemicals Management division is proposed to contain a half-dozen branches responsible for the various steps within the pre-manufacture notice process, which new chemicals must undergo before they can enter the market.
There are few differences between the three proposals, with the chief difference being how to downgrade the TRI Program Division into one or more branches. The division currently collects data regarding releases of listed chemicals into the environment that is required by the Emergency Planning & Community Right to Know Act. EPA collates and analyzes this data, and releases it to the public, providing a significant resource for regulators and the public about facilities' releases.
One EPA proposal indicates the TRI program would become a branch within the new Existing Chemicals Division, while the other two options suggest adding TRI as a branch to another new division, the Data, Analytics & Strategic Engagement Division, or splitting TRI between two branches within that data division. This division appears to be an enlarged version of the existing Chemistry, Economics & Sustainable Strategies Division.
The fifth proposed division would be called Mission Support, and appears to be a consolidation of responsibilities currently held by the Information Management and Environmental Assistance Divisions.
“Between today and December 1, I invite you to engage with us on how, using the attached three straw proposals for branches as a starting point, OPPT should be organized within these five divisions to carry out the identified core functions,” Morris writes.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/toxics-chief-seeks-input-oppt-staff-reorganization-proposals

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Management News

(ACC Mentioned) New York Poised to Require Ingredient Disclosure for Cleaners

Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Gerald Silverman

New York could become one of the first states to force manufacturers to disclose a broad range of chemical ingredients included in household cleaning products and identified as unsafe by state, national, and international scientific authorities.
Combined with a California measure awaiting Gov. Jerry Brown's signature, the New York plan—a draft copy of which Bloomberg BNA obtained—would affect the labeling of products sold nationwide by manufacturers such as SC Johnson & Son, Procter & Gamble Co., and Unilever.
But New York's program, expected to be formally released within days, would require the disclosure of more chemicals than would be mandated under California's bill. And that could make it unviable, said Peter Vujovich, state government relations and public policy director for the Consumer Specialty Products Association.
“New York will be a much bigger jump,” Vujovich said.
The universe of chemicals that New York would require to be disclosed is much bigger, and the thresholds for disclosure are so small as to be effectively nonexistent, he said.
Both states’ measures aim to require manufacturers identify chemicals used in general cleaning products, floor waxes and polishes, air fresheners, and car-wash products, and polishes used in homes, commercial establishments, and institutions.
Trigger Alert
New York's guidance would require disclosure of about 3,700 byproduct chemicals when present at 50 parts per billion (ppb) or higher, although a lower threshold would apply to some chemicals such as 1,4 dioxane; perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA); and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS). The guidance, when released by the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, will have the same impact as regulation, according to Erica Ringewald, department spokeswoman.
By contrast, California's bill (S.B. 258), passed by the legislature Sept. 13, would require disclosure of up to 34 byproduct chemicals of concern if they are present at a concentration of 100 parts per million (ppm) or higher, Vujovich said. California's governor has until Oct. 15 to act on the measure, but Brown has not indicated whether he will sign it.
Vujovich's group is concerned that the New York program could be overly burdensome in comparison with California's measure, which was developed in collaboration with the three major consumer product companies.
New York and California are moving to be the first states to require the disclosure of chemical ingredients in cleaning products, according to industry trade groups. Federal laws do not require the disclosure of most ingredients in cleaning products.
Manufacturers selling in the New York market would be required to post ingredient information online beginning Jan. 1, 2019, according to the draft copy of the guidance. California's measure, if it becomes law, would require ingredients first to be listed online by Jan. 1, 2020. New labels listing intentionally added chemicals would be required a year later.
New York vs. California
Under New York's plan manufacturers would have to disclose the names of ingredients above certain levels, their content by weight, functional use, effects on human health and the environment, and whether they appear on lists of “chemicals of concern” as determined by appropriate scientific organizations. The lists are maintained by California, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, European Union, and International Agency for Research on Cancer, among others.
New York's guidance provides a limited exception for confidential business information such as exact formulation data, but the exception doesn't apply if an ingredient appears on one of the lists of chemicals of concern.

The Consumer Specialty Products Association worked with the sponsor of the California bill and its supporters to come up with a measure that would allow for meaningful disclosure, Vujovich said. The approach that New York has been pursuing, by contrast, could be unworkable because of the low triggers for listing ingredients, he said.
Procter & Gamble Co. said it's well-positioned to comply with both state requirements.
“We recently announced our plan to share fragrance ingredients down to 0.01 percent for our entire product portfolio in the U.S. and Canada by the end of 2019,” said P&G spokeswoman Tracey Long.
“We want our consumers to feel great about putting our products in their shopping baskets. Therefore, we are supportive of the CA Cleaning Products Right-to-Know Act and contributed to the development of the content of the bill,” Long said.
New York's requirements have not been issued as final, so Long said P&G couldn't comment except to say the company would comply.
More than 100 environmental, public health, and worker groups, the Consumer Specialty Products Association, and leading cleaning product makers like SC Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Unilever, and Reckitt Benckiser Group support the California bill.
Industry Opposition
The American Chemistry Council , Grocery Manufacturers Association, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, California Manufacturers & Technology Association, CropLife America, Pacific Association of Building Service Contractors, Western Plant Health Association, and National Federation of Independent Business have all signaled they oppose California's bill.
The bill's definition of general cleaning products is too vague, opponents said in a joint letter to state lawmakers Aug. 31.
They also said the measure delegates state authority to international bodies to determine which ingredients should be disclosed, lacks implementing rules to offer the regulated community guidance, and could trigger lawsuits under California's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act known as Proposition 65.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=122077103&vname=dennotallissues&wsn=499687500&searchid=30647942&doctypeid=1&type=date&mode=doc&split=0&scm=DELNWB&pg=0

Return to headline | Return to top
House Panel Sees Fatal Flaws in EPA's Chemical Toxicity Reviews

Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Sylvia Carignan

The EPA should reconsider Obama-era decisions on chemical toxicity and keep “low-quality science” out of new toxicity assessments, according to Republicans on the House Science Committee.
Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) sent the EPA an Oct. 12 letter detailing their concerns with the Integrated Risk Information System program. The lawmakers highlighted two decisions as illustrating their problems with the program: an assessment that caused a synthetic rubber manufacturer to spend $18 million on pollution controls and a decision to not revisit a finding that a solvent used to degrease machine and aircraft parts is carcinogenic.
The IRIS program, housed within the EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment, analyzes the human health harms that chemicals may cause and the doses at which those harms could manifest. Its data is used in setting exposure limits, cleanup targets, and other health protections across a broad range of environmental sites, problems, and challenges.
Smith has been a vocal critic of Obama-era EPA decisions and Biggs attempted to defund the IRIS program with an amendment to a House bill, which was not adopted. In the letter, the lawmakers said that EPA's failure to review completed IRIS assessments that “clearly rely upon low-quality data” shows that the agency is ignoring “the best available science.”
Specifically, the chairmen are concerned that IRIS reviews “failed to consider all scientific research” related to the chemicals they assess, Thea McDonald, a spokesperson for the committee, told Bloomberg BNA.
In their letter, Smith and Biggs requested that EPA staff show committee staff all communications and documents related to corrections requested for IRIS assessments since the beginning of Obama's first term.
A spokesperson for the EPA said the agency will respond to the committee's letter “through the proper channels.”
‘Extremely Slow’ Reviews
Another concern highlighted by panel Republicans is the time it takes EPA to conduct the assessments.
Companies spend a lot of time waiting for the EPA to release its toxicity assessments, Ed Krenik, senior principal for government affairs at Bracewell, told Bloomberg BNA.
“From an industry perspective, it's been extremely slow,” Krenik said.
According to the committee's letter, some companies also spend too much time waiting for EPA to consider what they say are “corrections” of existing IRIS assessments.
Smith and Biggs highlighted one such company, Denka Performance Elastomer, which spent millions on pollution controls tied to the IRIS value of chloroprene, which is used in synthetic rubber and neoprene. The company wants the EPA to change its IRIS review of chloroprene, which identifies the chemical as a “likely” carcinogen, to instead say there is “evidence only suggestive of human carcinogenicity.”
Jim Harris, a spokesman for Denka, told Bloomberg BNA in an email that the EPA has not yet responded to the correction request. He said the $18 million the company spent on pollution controls were part of a voluntary agreement with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality.
The Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance, also highlighted in the lawmakers’ letter, asked EPA in 2013 to correct the IRIS assessment for trichloroethylene, a request the agency denied in 2016. The company disagreed with EPA's determination that the chemical is carcinogenic for humans.
Faye Graul, the alliance's executive director, said it supports the comments in the committee's letter.
Program Changes Planned
EPA program leaders in August detailed extensive reforms to IRIS planned in response to recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences and the Government Accountability Office. The reviewers generally did not assign deadlines for adopting the recommendations.
Thomas Burke, director of Johns Hopkins University's Risk Sciences and Public Policy Institute and a former EPA science adviser, said at a Sept. 6 hearing that the program is “on a wonderful, positive trajectory.”
“IRIS has a daunting task, and there are many members of the scientific community ... that have been key to making sure IRIS documents may be the most scrutinized documents the agency has ever produced,” he said.
Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Environment, supported those planned reforms.
“This committee needs to allow the EPA to fulfill its mission,” she said.
But Biggs said the EPA has had enough time to enact reforms.
“These reports by GAO and others have been out since 2009,” Biggs said at the hearing . “They've had plenty of time to enact meaningful reform.”

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=122077107&vname=dennotallissues&fn=122077107&jd=122077107

Return to headline | Return to top
Rep. Smith Seeks Mechanism To Correct IRIS Assessments

Oct 12, 2017 | Inside EPA

House science committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) is urging EPA to create a mechanism by which the agency can “correct” chemical risk analyses conducted by its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program, saying that without such a mechanism, the program lacks scientific integrity.
“Given that the IRIS program appears to continually reject requests for correction based on credible scientific data, there appears to be no means of establishing the scientific integrity of the program as a whole,” Smith and Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), chair of the committee's environment panel, said in an Oct. 12 letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.
How or whether the agency could grant such a request is uncertain given the significant resource issues facing the program. For example, early drafts of the Trump administration's budget request for fiscal year 2018 proposed to eliminate the program but the final request suggested the administration would preserve a smaller version of the program that will be devoted in part to assessing substances under the revised toxics law and other mandatory regulatory programs.
The lawmakers' request follows a Sept. 7 hearing the committee held where they criticized the program -- and its assessment of chloroprene -- which EPA and state enforcement officials used to drive a novel enforcement action at a Louisiana chemical plant.
At the hearing, lawmakers and supporters of the Denka Performance Elastomer Company highlighted the company's recent formal Data Quality Act request for correction (RFC), which urged the agency to overhaul its IRIS assessment for chloroprene. The RFC charged that the assessment was driving an enforcement action that threatened the company's economic viability, even though the company had developed scientific data that claimed to undercut the assessment's risk values.
Smith and Biggs reiterated concerns over EPA's approach to chloroprene, as well as similar concerns over EPA's failure to correct its assessment of trichloroethylene (TCE) -- despite concerns from the halogenated solvents industry with the program's assessment.
They also noted that EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) had recently sent a letter to Pruitt praising the program and highlighting a “paradigm” shift being undertaken by its leaders.
But they noted that SAB failed to address a series of recent concerns that have been raised by government watchdogs and others over the IRIS program prior to the latest program reforms, including its failure to account for “how EPA plans to address and correct past assessments performed while the program was deficient, including potentially faulty assessments like the ones performed for chloroprene and TCE.”
The letter seeks a staff briefing and documents from EPA no later than Oct. 26 “to better assist the Committee in understanding how EPA intends to uphold scientific integrity and how it undertakes decisions to grant scientific and informational quality requests with regard to IRIS assessments.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/rep-smith-seeks-mechanism-correct-iris-assessments

Return to headline | Return to top
Key GOP Lawmakers Air Concerns About EPA Risk Program

Oct 13, 2017 | E&E Daily

By Corbin Hiar

House Science, Space and Technology Committee leaders yesterday raised concerns about the scientific integrity of U.S. EPA's program for reviewing the dangers posed by chemicals.
Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Arizona Republican Rep. Andy Biggs, the Environment Subcommittee chairman, cited a pair of instances in which the Integrated Risk Information System hasn't agreed to reconsider assessments opposed by industry.
One formal "request for correction," or RFC, was submitted in June by Denka Performance Elastomer, a chloroprene manufacturer that "has spent more than $18 million on pollution control and been subject to reputational damage" due to EPA enforcement actions, the GOP lawmakers said in a letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.
IRIS concluded in 2010 that the rubber-making chemical is "likely to be carcinogenic." Chloroprene has also been found to cause chest pains, temporary hair loss, dizziness, insomnia, headaches and fatigue as well as respiratory, eye and skin irritation in workers exposed to it on a regular basis.
But Denka argued that people could inhale chloroprene vapors at levels more than 150 times above the level IRIS recommended. Its request to update that 2010 assessment is still pending with the agency.
The lawmakers also took issue with EPA's decision to reject a 2013 correction request from the Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance. The trade group argued that IRIS "chose to rely upon an inaccurate study as the primary basis for its conclusion" that the solvent trichloroethylene (TCE) is a highly dangerous chemical, the Science Committee leaders said.
After considering that request, EPA told the alliance in February 2016 that its analysis of TCE was actually "based on the review and evaluation of dozens of studies, including 21 studies focused on cardiac developmental toxicity, and integrated all the available human, animal, and mechanistic information."
Later that year, it moved to prohibit the manufacture, import, processing and distribution of TCE in degreasing and dry cleaning operations — the chemical's two primary uses in the United States (Greenwire, Dec. 7, 2016).
Smith and Biggs described those assessments as "some of the more well-documented cases of the failure of the IRIS program to take additional scientific information into account."
They went on to ask Pruitt for a staff briefing on the program from EPA officials before Oct. 19. The lawmakers also requested "all documents and communications referring or relating to RFCs of IRIS assessments submitted, considered, rejected, or accepted" since the beginning of the Obama administration.
Last month, Biggs led a subcommittee hearing on "the scientific and operational integrity" of IRIS, which included no witnesses from the program or EPA (E&E Daily, Sept. 7).
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/10/13/stories/1060063547

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Extends Deadline For Perchlorate Review, Forcing Request To Court

Oct 12, 2017 | Inside EPA

By Maria Hegstad

In response to industry requests, EPA is extending the public comment period on a report that will form the basis for a landmark drinking water standard it is required to set to regulate perchlorate, the widespread rocket fuel ingredient, though the extension will force the agency to miss a looming deadline and seek additional time from the court that is overseeing the long-delayed rulemaking.
According to an Oct. 12 Federal Register notice, EPA says it is extending by 21 days the looming public comment deadline on the report that it has prepared for peer review at the request of various companies and drinking water utilities.
“In response to stakeholder requests, EPA is extending the comment period for the 'Draft Report: Proposed Approaches to Inform the Derivation of a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal for Perchlorate in Drinking Water' ... by an additional 21 days, from October 30, 2017, to November 20, 2017,” the notice states.
Under the terms of an October 2016 consent order with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), EPA faces a series of deadlines intended to ensure that it completes the perchlorate drinking water standard, a measure that would mark the first new drinking water standard that EPA crafts under the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
The first of those deadlines is Oct. 18, by which date EPA is to have “complete[d] the external peer review process,” according to the order.
The order also requires EPA to file a status report with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by Oct. 30 if it will miss the Oct. 18 deadline.
But according to the Perchlorate Study Group (PSG), which represents perchlorate manufacturers and users including Lockheed Martin and Aerojet Rocketdyne, the court order also allows the agency to seek additional time from the court if it misses the deadline for completing the peer review.
In its Sept. 26 request for a deadline extension, PSG said that it is “well aware of the court ordered deadline of October 18, 2017 for completion of the peer review process for the perchlorate rulemaking. However, that order expressly allows for EPA to seek additional time to complete the peer review process. EPA should not limit a robust public comment period to meet a deadline that is subject to modification.”
Perchlorate is one of several chemicals known to be inhibitors of iodine uptake, which helps to regulate thyroid hormones. If the thyroid is sufficiently altered for too long during sensitive developmental stages, this can lead to neurodevelopmental and other effects, such as goiter.
Former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson formally determined in 2011 that perchlorate met statutory conditions and should be regulated. But the agency missed a two-year statutory deadline for issuing a standard.
NRDC eventually sued EPA over the missed deadline in February 2016, a suit that ultimately resulted in a settlement that set the series of deadlines for the agency to complete the process.
The settlement spells out additional court-ordered deadlines for EPA to propose a drinking water goal for perchlorate by Oct. 31, 2018, and finalize it by December 2019.
Modeling Challenge
But challenges in developing a model to underpin the standard, as recommended by agency science advisors, kept EPA from acting within the two-year time-frame required by SDWA.
Perchlorate is a rare chemical with a generally well-understood mode of action (MOA). As a result, the 2013 Science Advisory Board panel that reviewed an Obama EPA analysis of perchlorate data recommended that EPA use a novel modeling approach to propose a drinking water standard for the chemical, rather than the traditional algebraic approach to setting drinking water goals.
It is this model that EPA is seeking to peer review after making some tweaks to the model following an earlier, critical peer review last January. This second peer review is intended to address how the model will be used to inform the drinking water standard.
EPA last month published notices requesting comments on a list of candidate peer reviewers and its draft report.
But in their recent comments to the agency seeking an extension, water utilities, perchlorate manufacturers and users and other industry groups argue that the report and underlying model are too complicated to review by EPA's original deadline of Oct. 30.
Perhaps hinting at a second suit, the PSG reminds EPA that SDWA “requires EPA to use 'the best available science' when establishing” drinking water goals and standards.
However, the 21-day extension EPA granted is much shorter than what was requested by the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, which sought a 45-day extension or PSG and the Chlorine Institute, which sought a 75-day extension to January 2018.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-extends-deadline-perchlorate-review-forcing-request-court

Return to headline | Return to top
Groups Urge Retraction Of Monsanto-Backed Glyphosate Study

Oct 12, 2017 | E&E News PM

By Corbin Hiar

Scientists at four environmental groups urged the editors and publisher of a Monsanto Co.-funded study of glyphosate to retract that paper and reconsider four others that ran alongside it.
At issue is a review of the cancer-causing potential of glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto's popular Roundup weedkiller, in the wake of a determination by the International Agency for Research on Cancer that the herbicide is "probably carcinogenic to humans."
That review of the IARC's study, which claimed to be independent of Monsanto, ran in a supplemental issue of Critical Reviews in Toxicology.
But the review was edited by at least one employee of the company and co-authored by at least two scientists on the company's payroll, according to emails obtained in a class-action lawsuit and the focus of a report by Bloomberg Businessweek.
"We ask the publisher to issue a retraction for the summary review in this supplemental issue and to issue a public statement outlining the reasons for this action," wrote scientists from the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Pesticide Action Network and Center for Environmental Health.
Their letter, addressed to the journal's editors, notes that its publisher, Taylor & Francis Group, warns authors that papers may be rejected or retracted "if a conflict of interest is not declared to the journal upon submission, or during review, and it affects the actual or potential interpretation of the results."
The scientists also asked "for an in-depth investigation into the other four review articles published in this supplemental issue." They pointed to previously unreported emails that suggest Monsanto employees may have helped ghostwrite additional papers for the issue.
"If the journal fails to retract this study, it will be publicly condoning this unethical behavior," the Center for Biological Diversity's Nathan Donley, who led the letter, said in a news release. "To understand pesticides' threats to people and the environment, we've got to know if research is truly independent from industry influence."
The letter was also sent to Taylor & Francis Group's managing editor and the Committee on Publication Ethics, a watchdog group that includes both Critical Reviews in Toxicology and Taylor & Francis, according to the release.
Monsanto told Bloomberg Businessweek in August that it did nothing "substantive" to alter the scientists' conclusions, but the editor and publisher of the journal said they were reviewing the paper.
Meanwhile, House Republicans are investigating the IARC, and European regulators are raising concerns about Monsanto's planned $66 billion merger with German chemical giant Bayer AG (Greenwire, Aug. 23).
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2017/10/12/stories/1060063487

Return to headline | Return to top
Asbestos Tile Maker Wins Dismissal of Installer's Claims

Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Peter Hayes

Conwed Corp. won dismissal of a Kansas man's asbestos exposure claims in federal district court in Minnesota (McGill v. Conwed Corp., 2017 BL 362766, D. Minn., No. 17-01047, 10/10/17).
The ceiling tile manufacturer lacks sufficient contacts with the state for the case to proceed in federal court in Minnesota, the court said.
Plaintiff Michael McGill alleged that during his work installing ceiling tile in Kansas during the 1960s and 70s, he was exposed to asbestos-containing products and raw materials manufactured, sold, and/or distributed by Conwed, causing him to develop mesothelioma.
Conwed moved to dismiss the case, arguing that it is now a dormant corporation and that its principal place of business is New York.
Granting Conwed's motion, the court said the company's Minnesota contacts ended in 1985, when it sold its ceiling tile business and ceased manufacturing, selling, and distributing ceiling tile or any other product.
McGill's cause of action “arose” in 2015 when he was diagnosed with mesothelioma, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota said.
The relevant question, therefore, is what Conwed's contacts with the state were in 2015, the court said.
Conwed had “no contemporary contacts that could subject it to personal jurisdiction in Minnesota for the claims asserted here,” the court said.
Judge Susan Richard Nelson issued the opinion.
Sieben Polk, P.A., represented McGill.
Briggs & Morgan, P.A., and Brownson & Linnihan, PPLP represented Conwed.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=122077121&vname=dennotallissues&fn=122077121&jd=122077121

Return to headline | Return to top

Energy News

Dakota Access Boosts Drillers but Won't Be a Bakken Game-Changer

Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Meenal Vamburkar

Once hailed as the spur for a North American “energy renaissance,” the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline has limited driller costs in its first four months in operation.
Just don't expect it to live up to its pre-approval hype.
That's the conclusion of analysts who say North Dakota's Bakken shale play will continue to lag the drilling surge in Texas and Oklahoma, pipeline or no pipeline. The conduit's use has dropped the break-even cost of drilling in the Bakken to around $52 a barrel from $55, as drillers abandon costlier rail shipments, said Erika Coombs, an analyst at BTU Analytics LLC. But that compares with about $46 on average in Texas's Permian play and $41 in Colorado's DJ basin, she said.
Is the Dakota Access “a game-changer?” Coombs said in a telephone interview. “The short answer: For the basin as a whole, not really.” It helps, she said, “but it's not enough to attract capital away from the Permian or Scoop/Stack.“
First proposed in 2014, the 1,172-mile (1,886-kilometer) pipeline is designed to ship as much as 570,000 barrels of crude. However, its construction has faced major opposition from Native American tribes and environmental activists over the last year, including a legal suit that's ongoing in federal court.
A judge ruled Oct. 11 that use of the conduit, in operation since June 1, could continue while its environmental impact is reviewed as a result of that suit.
Lawyers for Energy Transfer Partners LP, which operates the line, had argued it would be expensive to purge or plug the conduit while the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducted a supplemental review into aspects of the project, including its impact on the hunting and fishing rights of Native American tribes.
There's a “serious possibility” that the corps will be able to back its prior conclusions for approving the pipeline's route, U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg ruled Oct. 11. But he urged the Corps not to treat his decision “as an exercise in filing out the proper paperwork” but to give serious considerations to errors that were made and identified. A follow-up court conference has been set by Boasberg for Oct. 18.
U.S. Justice Department spokesman Mark Abueg declined to comment on the court's decision. Vicki Granado, a spokeswoman for Energy Transfer, didn't immediately respond to request for comment.
The ruling is a win “for all major interstate infrastructure projects currently under construction or consideration,” said Craig Stevens, a spokesman for the GAIN Coalition, a group that promotes more infrastructure development.
When newly inaugurated President Donald Trump advocated green-lighting the Dakota Access in January, it was hailed as “a new beginning” for North America's “energy renaissance,” in a statement by Ron Ness, president of the North Dakota Petroleum Council. “As Bakken crude is finally compensated for its true value, state tax coffers, mineral owners and workers will reap the rewards,” he said at the time.
And it has helped. In July, just a month after the conduit began operating, rail transported just 10 percent of Williston Basin output, down from 32 percent a year ago, according to the North Dakota Pipeline Authority. The pipeline runs from North Dakota to Illinois, where flows can be diverted to the Midwest and, eventually, make their way to the heart of the U.S. energy market, the U.S. Gulf Coast.
But even with cheaper transport, and smoother access to major markets, the Bakken remains disadvantaged, both in terms of location and overall cost.
Named for Henry Bakken, a North Dakota farmer whose land hosted the first well in the region in the early 1950s, the Bakken is expected to produce an average of 1.1 million barrels a day of oil this year and next, a figure lower than the 1.2 million barrels produced in 2015, according to the Energy Information Administration. At the same time, Permian production is expected to reach 2.9 million barrels a day by the end of next year, the EIA said in July.
The Bakken's lack of growth “really is from the competition with the Permian basin and the Oklahoma Anadarko basin,” said Lynn Helms, director of the North Dakota's Department of Mineral Resources, in a September webcast. One big problem, according to Helms, is that skilled, experienced workers left for other plays when the oil rout hit.
“It's been difficult if not impossible to get them to move back to North Dakota,” he said.
The pipeline has opened new markets for Bakken drillers, which offers new promise for their product, said Ryan Saxton, manager of oil transportation in North America at Genscape Inc., an energy data provider. But, he added,“that's not going to get you back to the hey-day of the Bakken.“

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=122077109&vname=dennotallissues&fn=122077109&jd=122077109

Return to headline | Return to top
House Republicans Push Bills to Promote Oil and Gas

Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Alan Kovski

Republicans in the House are lining up more oil and gas legislation, including a bill on offshore drilling, and a rewrite of the law on national monuments, all with solid opposition from Democrats.
The survival of some of the measures may hinge on whether they can be added to must-pass legislation such as an omnibus appropriations bill or tagged onto budget measures needing only simple majority votes in the Senate for passage.
Two draft bills under discussion in the House Natural Resources Committee would encourage a broadening and acceleration of offshore oil and gas drilling and a shift of more authority to states for the permitting of onshore drilling on federal lands. Spokesmen for Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Democrats suggested there would be no support among Democrats for either one.
Another bill would establish restrictions and public input requirements for presidential use of the Antiquities Act to create national monuments.
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, is lining the bills up for action by the full House. The first step is to go beyond the discussion-draft stage by introducing formal versions, which Bishop hopes to do within a month, committee spokeswoman Molly Block said.
Looking for Offshore Energy
Bishop's committee Oct. 11 debated a discussion draft, the Accessing Strategic Resources Offshore Act, that would establish a sharing of government revenues with Southeastern coastal states and Alaska from offshore oil and gas development. It also would allow the Interior secretary to add lease sales in areas excluded from the existing five-year leasing plan.
“Lease sales would be entirely at the discretion of the secretary, who would be free to ignore the five-year plan altogether,” Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.), said. “This would never be acceptable to the people of California and many other states.”
The bill also would limit a president's ability to put areas off limits to leasing and block use of the Obama administration's Arctic Rule, which added extra layers of regulatory protections for the difficult operating environment amid the icebergs and short drilling season off the Arctic coasts of Alaska.
Democrats have been defending the Arctic Rule since it was published in July 2016. The rigors of the Arctic environment, where an oil leak beneath sea ice might be unreachable for months, require extra protections, the Democrats have said.
Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) suggested the revenue sharing could boost support for Atlantic offshore drilling, where many people worry about the risks to the environment and tourism. A South Carolina Republican state senator from a coastal district, Stephen Goldfinch, testified that new revenues especially would be appreciated in South Carolina towns like Conway and Andrews, where the poverty rate is 50 percent.
But Goldfinch avoided endorsing or opposing the bill and said his constituents seemed evenly divided on the idea of offshore drilling.
Eric Milito, the director of Upstream and Industry Operations for the American Petroleum Institute, expressed support for the bill during the hearing, but his industry association did not offer any opinion on whether it could get through Congress. The National Ocean Industries Association did not respond to a request for comment.
Bigger State Roles in Onshore
The House Natural Resources Committee will debate a discussion draft focused on onshore oil and gas Oct. 13. That draft bill, Opportunities for the Nation and States to Harness Onshore Resources Act, would allow states to take over permitting and permit enforcement for oil and gas on federal lands.
The legislation also would eliminate the need for a Bureau of Land Management permit or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews on non-federal land where the federal government has an ownership stake in the subsurface mineral rights. It also would bar federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing where states regulate fracking, and it would bar federal regulation of fracking on tribal lands without a tribe's consent.
Shifting permitting to states might void the application of NEPA and the Endangered Species Act, which impose requirements on federal rather than state agencies. Such a maneuver would have trouble finding support among House or Senate Democrats.
If either bill were to go to the Senate as stand-alone legislation it would have an uncertain future. A cloture vote to end debate would require 60 votes. Republicans have 52 senators, and not all of them are sure to support the bills.
Both bills can contribute to federal revenues, however, making it possible for them to be included in budget reconciliation legislation requiring only a simple majority. The House passed a fiscal year 2018 budget resolution Oct. 5 that reserved for the House Natural Resources Committee a provision for finding $5 billion in savings. Oil and gas leasing revenues are possible candidates for such savings.
Antiquities Act Rewrite
The Natural Resources Committee also has been an arena for argument over the Antiquities Act, used by presidents to declare national monuments, as President Barack Obama did in December with the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah.
The National Monument Creation and Protection Act (H.R. 3990), written to heavily amend the antiquities law, was approved by the committee Oct. 11 on a 23-17 vote. No Democrat supported the bill.
Proposed by Bishop, the measure would add stricter language in the act by specifying its purpose is to protect an “object or objects of antiquity.” The existing act uses somewhat looser language, which the last three presidents before Donald Trump have used to protect millions of acres of onshore or offshore terrain.
The bill also would require more public engagement, including county and state approvals for monuments of 10,000 acres or more. Environmental activists have opposed such ideas as state legislative approval, saying it would prevent new monuments from being created.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=122077106&vname=dennotallissues&fn=122077106&jd=122077106

Return to headline | Return to top
Local Drilling Rules Draw Industry Lawsuit in Colorado

Oct 13, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Tripp Baltz

A Colorado city's new drilling rules impede the state's interest in uniformly regulating oil and gas operations and should be tossed out, oil industry groups argue in a lawsuit.
The city of Thornton's regulations pertaining to setbacks, pipelines, surface disturbance and other operations conflict with the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Act and should be declared invalid, the American Petroleum Institute and Colorado Oil and Gas Association said in an Oct. 10 lawsuit in Adams County, Colo. district court (Colo. Oil and Gas Ass'n v. City of Thornton, Colo. Dist. Ct., No. 17-CV-31640, 10/10/17).
The Colorado Oil and Gas Association will contest any local government regulations that operationally conflict with state rules or impede operators’ ability to develop oil and gas, Dan Haley, its president and CEO, told Bloomberg BNA. Efforts to enact local drilling rules are underway in Erie, Longmont, and other municipalities in Colorado's urban Front Range area, where oil and gas production has surged in recent years.
COGA's board includes representatives of several energy industry companies, including Anadarko Petroleum Corp., BP America Inc., ConocoPhillips Co., Baker Hughes Inc., Noble Energy Inc., and QEP Resources Inc.
The Thornton rules are “illegal energy regulations” approved after an “extremely limited” stakeholder process, Haley said in a statement.
“COGA and other willing contributors were given little to no opportunity to offer feedback on the proposed rules,” Haley said, adding that the association submitted multiple letters articulating serious concerns about the rules in an effort to avoid litigation. “Those concerns were ignored, making it necessary to challenge Thornton's regulations in court.”
Thornton's City Council approved the rules Aug. 22. Thornton spokesman Todd Barnes told Bloomberg BNA the city was served with the lawsuit Oct. 11 and wouldn't comment until it reviewed it.
City Authority
Thornton has the ability to regulate some aspects of oil and gas development, the city said on its website. Case law allows cities to use their land use authority so long as it doesn't create an operational conflict with the state oil and gas regulations, the city said.
Land use authority in Colorado in general “pertains to activities that occur within city boundaries such as, visual impacts, noise, site plans, verification of permits, emergency plans, drilling schedule, drainage, access plans, security, and traffic and streets, as long as those rules do not hinder oil and gas extraction,” the city said.
However, the lawsuit said the city's rules do “operationally conflict” with state regulations. For example, the city's new setback requirement—which prohibits oil and gas operations within 750 feet of occupied buildings such as homes, schools and hospitals—conflicts with a Colorado Oil and Gas Commission rule imposing a setback of 500 feet, the suit said.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=122077108&vname=dennotallissues&fn=122077108&jd=122077108

Return to headline | Return to top
Hot Topics From Perry Hearing, From 'Poo-Poo' To Drudge

Oct 13, 2017 | E&E Daily

By Christa Marshall and Sam Mintz

Rick Perry's three-hour appearance on Capitol Hill yesterday was filled with testy exchanges, gaffes and comments about everything from "poo-poo" to the Drudge Report.
One congressman made reference to a Texas-sized pile of cow dung in attacking Perry's critics. And Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) kept inviting the secretary to come eat barbecue in his office.
Perry also addressed concerns about his plane travel, after the Department of Energy released details last week of four noncommercial flights (Greenwire, Oct. 6).
Perry said his job requires significant movement to visit DOE sites around the country, considering the distance of some national laboratories and invitations from lawmakers to visit their districts (Greenwire, Oct. 12).
He said there has been no legal violations and flights were disclosed properly. To Barton, he asked for permission to direct the agency to look back at former Secretary Ernest Moniz's travel to see if current flights are "in line."
Barton defended Perry's frequent use of Southwest Airlines on weekend trips to Texas, prompting Perry to joke about pictures of him reading the Drudge Report waiting for a flight.
In between the colorful rhetoric were policy discussions that could have long-lasting effects on the energy sector, including ideas for altering the government's efficiency and technology programs.Grid, FERC
Much of the talk centered around DOE's proposal to boost coal and nuclear by altering energy market rules. A central question was whether there is or could be such a thing as a "free market" in energy regulation.
Perry has said past federal and some state regulations have unfairly put a finger on the scales of the energy market and that his plan, which would change market rules to compensate nuclear and coal plants, is simply an act of tipping those scales back.
"The idea that there is a free market in electrical generation is not a bit of a fallacy, it is a fallacy," Perry said yesterday. "Every state regulates the energy industry, it's the reason we have a [public utility commission]. There are different phases, there are different states of regulation. Each state has to decide what is the best one."
Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) backed up Perry's free-market credentials. "Attacks are coming that said you prefer government control over the free markets. We both know that's a pile of Bevo longhorn poo-poo," said Olson, referring to the bovine mascot of the University of Texas, Austin.
"We both know, familiar with each other for 30 years in Austin, Texas, there's been no bigger proponent of the free market for energy than Governor Rick Perry," Olson said.
But Perry's take on the free market came up again in another quotable moment in which the secretary himself questioned the efficacy of a free market for energy.
Perry was asked by Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) if DOE's plan takes into account the costs for consumers, which some analysts have said could increase by billions of dollars per year if the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission were to follow DOE's direction.
"I think you take cost into account, but what's the cost of freedom?" Perry said. "What does it cost to build a system to keep America free? I'm not sure I want to just put that straight out on the free market and say 'OK, whoever can build the cheapest delivery system here to keep America free.'"
Democrats on the committee were not buying it.
"I think they're going to do great damage to America's leadership on energy and really sock it to consumers and businesses on cost," Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) told E&E News after the hearing.Restructuring
Barton, the panel's former chairman and current vice chairman, told reporters after the hearing that work is continuing slowly on the first reauthorization of DOE. Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) asked Barton to lead the review.
"The Republicans are ready to go. [Energy Subcommittee ranking member Bobby Rush (D-Ill.)] just asked for another member meeting, which we'll do. So I can't really get into details until we get a framework," Barton said.
Barton has said he wants to consider broad ideas for how DOE is organized but also that he wants reauthorization to be a bipartisan effort (E&E Daily, Sept. 28).
"I have a real good idea, and staff has a real good idea. When I say I want it to be bipartisan, I want it to be bipartisan," he said. "And that means members at the table, making decisions about what's going to be in the bill and what's not going to be in the bill."
While the timeline for introducing his bill has been continually pushed back, Barton said he is aiming to get it done sooner rather than later.
"I want to get it on the president's desk, which means we got to go subcommittee, full committee, and get the Senate to agree or do their own bill," he said.
At the hearing, Perry said he was in discussions with Barton about the future of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), which the administration called for eliminating in its budget request.
Perry distanced himself from Trump's views on the subject, telling Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.): "I didn't write the budget. My job is to defend it, which from time to time is counter to what I think is good public policy."
Perry said, "This happens to be one of those." Innovation is the "real lifeblood of the country," and government does have a role for moving technology to commercialization, he said.
At the same time, he said there are discussions with Barton about changing the structure of ARPA-E.
"I think the ARPA-E program has its place. Does it need to be restructured? Chairman Barton and I [are] in a conversation about that at this particular point in time. ... Is it called ARPA-E, or is it called something else?" Perry said.Renewable tax credits
Lawmakers asked Perry whether he agrees with U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt that current wind and solar tax credits should be eliminated. Pruitt called for ending the production tax credit for wind this week in Kentucky (Greenwire, Oct. 10).
Perry hedged on the issue, saying, "I can't give you a yes or no."
"I can refer you back to what I said about my children. ... At some point, you say you are on your own, you can stand or fall on the market. I would suggest to you that both the solar and wind industry is approaching that very mature stage," he said to Rep. Dave Loebsack (D-Iowa), whose state ranks second in the country for installed wind capacity.
Perry added that an industry can't say it delivers baseload energy and yet needs to be treated as though it's immature. It's a "balancing act" to determine where subsidies should end, he said.
At another point, Tonko quizzed Perry about comments last week at the group Veterans in Energy that the Obama administration had "its thumb on the scale" favoring renewables.
Are you "upset" about the tax credits, Tonko asked?
Perry said no but added, "That doesn't mean that everything Congress does I agree with."
The renewable issue is in the forefront because of ongoing discussions about tax reform in Congress, which would have to approve any changes to tax incentives.
Some conservatives are supporting rollbacks in the ITC and PTC, although other Republicans from wind- and solar-rich states support them.Energy efficiency
Members also asked Perry several times about the federal Energy Star program, which is targeted for elimination by the White Hose and is jointly overseen by DOE and EPA.
The voluntary program aims to help consumers buy more efficient products by slapping qualified products like televisions with labels.
Perry suggested he could support moving many of the program's responsibilities out of EPA.
Under questioning from Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio) about whether he would support legislation doing that, Perry said, "That's going to be your call," but added, "It makes abundant sense to me that [DOE] would be a good slot for it to reside in."
The national labs have the scientific ability to look at efficiency programs and can analyze them in a scientific way, the secretary said.
Earlier this year, Latta introduced a bill that would protect manufacturers from private lawsuits filed after an Energy Star product is disqualified because of DOE tests. Latta is working on legislation to move Energy Star to DOE, an aide said.
Perry has said he supports energy efficiency broadly, but many of his views remain unclear. In documents submitted to the Senate earlier this year, he pledged that in fiscal 2018, DOE would fund all necessary steps to finalize legally required efficiency standards and test procedures.Climate
The hearing was the latest in a series where Democrats have pressed Perry on his views of climate change. This time the questioner was Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.), who framed the issue in terms of recent hurricanes.
"Do you think climate change is any way a threat to our nation?" McNerney asked.
Perry said, "Yes I do, sir."
McNerney followed, "Do you see a relation between the weather events we've had and climate change?"
Perry said, "Most likely."
He then told McNerney that the two men are likely to agree that climate change is happening and that it is having an effect on the globe.
"Where we may or may not agree is just how much of this is man's fault and our decisions that we're going to make here," Perry said. "I don't believe climate change is 100 percent man's fault."
Americans shouldn't be making decisions based on climate assumptions that could put the country at a disadvantage, he added.
Perry has made similar comments about climate before, telling lawmakers in June there should be a "red team" review of climate science (E&E Daily, July 22).
But the exchange highlighted ongoing concerns among Democrats about the Trump administration's moves on climate, including DOE's shuttering earlier this year of its international climate office and the effect of DOE grid proposals on greenhouse gas emissions.
"It seems to me that the risk of climate change is bigger than the risk of reducing carbon emissions," McNerney said.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/10/13/stories/1060063545

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation and Infrastructure News

Problems With Rail Transport of Energy Supplies; Pipelines, Barges More Prepared

Oct 12, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence

By Charlie Passut

Although most domestically produced oil, natural gas, ethanol and natural gas liquids (NGL) are transported without incident, concerns remain over the safety of transporting energy supplies via rail, according to a report by the nonprofit National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM). Meanwhile, pipelines and barges appear to have more comprehensive safety systems in place.
In the new report, "Safely Transporting Hazardous Liquids and Gasses in a Changing U.S. Energy Landscape," researchers from NASEM's Committee for Study of Domestic Transportation of Petroleum, Natural Gas, and Ethanol said federal regulators should also take steps to prevent future accidents involving railroads, pipelines and barges.
"Pipelines and barges have accommodated major portions of the growth in domestic energy liquids and gases, and they have done so without major new safety problems and within the basic framework of their longstanding regulatory and safety assurance systems," NASEM said Wednesday.
"To the credit of transportation service providers from all of the modes as well as their safety regulators, the vast majority of these energy supplies have been transported without incident, enabling the country to capitalize on its new energy resources and manage the safety risks associated with its transportation."
However, there have been problems, which the committee took notice of shortly after it began studying transport issues in late 2015. That year, federal regulators blamed a broken rail for a fiery oil train derailment in West Virginia in February, while a federal bankruptcy court judge in Maine approved a C$445 million ($344 million) settlement to compensate the victims of a derailment and explosion in Quebec in July 2013. The committee broke down its findings for each of the three transport modes.
According to the committee, railroads had little experience with transporting crude oil and ethanol in large quantities before 2005. In response to a surge in domestic production, the railroads began transporting hazardous energy liquids "in tank cars that had not previously carried these flammable materials in bulk and with shippers that lacked experience transporting them.”
Safer Tank Car Development
After a series of derailments, regulators and the railroad industry began to focus on reducing the severity of such incidents by developing safer tank cars.
"Railroads have an opportunity to create a more robust safety assurance system for moving crude oil and ethanol, one that resembles those of the maritime and pipeline carriers," the committee said, adding that it had found an "incomplete understanding of the dynamics of tank-car unit train derailments and a lack of clear guidelines and resources for state and local emergency responders continues to present safety risks.
"As the tank cars that are compliant with new design specifications are being phased in, tank cars built to older specifications that are less crashworthy and less resistant to thermal failures may continue to be used for flammable liquids traffic for several years. Preventing the derailment of these cars is imperative."
The committee also reported that while first responders are more prepared for rail incidents, there is room for improvement. "Because trains moving crude oil and ethanol remain a relatively a new phenomenon, many of the communities traversed by this traffic lack familiarity with responding to large-scale incidents involving trainloads of flammable liquids.
“Industry and government authorities face a continuing challenge in ensuring that appropriate response procedures are widely known and that existing training opportunities are exploited, especially among rural communities that are served by volunteer fire departments."
Major Incidents Rare
According to NASEM, oil transmission pipeline mileage grew by more than 40% between 2010 and 2016. During that timeframe, the rate of major incidents involving pipelines remained generally stable, although "periodic high-consequence events" have caused some year-to-year fluctuations. That said, the committee found such incidents to be so rare that it was difficult to come to any conclusions about underlying risk.
"Although the committee found no new safety problems have emerged from the increased use of pipelines transporting larger amounts of domestic oil and gas, substantially more pipeline mileage and higher traffic volumes may result in more pipeline releases over time, simply because of the increase in exposure," the committee said. "The safety impact, however, is likely to depend on the extent to which new pipeline technologies, leak monitoring systems, and more vigilant and capable integrity management programs are effective in protecting the newer pipelines and the older ones that connect to them."
Incidents involving the transport of energy supplies via barge were even rarer. The committee said it found no reports of ethanol or NGL spills over the past 10 years, and only rare reports of crude oil spills.
"A series of incidents 30 years ago led to statutory and regulatory safety reforms that produced a robust and anticipatory safety culture that has dealt well with fluctuations in the demand for oil and other energy liquids and can serve as a model for other energy transport modes," the committee said.
Among its recommendations to federal regulators, the committee said the Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) should conduct a comprehensive review of responses to transportation safety challenges since 2005, taking note of successes and failures. That review would help PHMSA develop a more robust safety assurance system, as well as a better system for anticipating problems beforehand.
"PHMSA should also ensure federal emergency preparedness grant allocations are responsive to the needs of communities that face new and unfamiliar risks as a result of changes in energy liquids and gas shipments, review the extent that emergency responders are taking advantage of training opportunities, and tailor programs to enable and incentivize higher levels of participation," the committee said.
The committee also recommended that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) "enable and incentivize more frequent and comprehensive inspections of rail routes with regular energy liquids traffic as well as enable the use of new capabilities in sensor, high-resolution imaging, and autonomous systems technologies." Another suggestion was for PHMSA and FRA to study tank car design and other factors that could play a role in the severity of multi-car derailments.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112070-problems-with-rail-transport-of-energy-supplies-pipelines-barges-more-prepared

Return to headline | Return to top
Technology To Prevent Rail Disasters Is In Our Hands

Oct 13, 2017 | The Conversation

By Chris Bachmann

As the trial of the 2013 Lac-Mégantic rail disaster begins, new policies and practices that aim to employ better technology could help avoid similar disasters in the future.
The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) found more than 18 distinct causes and contributing factors in the Lac-Mégantic derailment investigation, which makes the likelihood of this type of accident seem nearly impossible.
Yet other derailments in Canada involving dangerous goods would soon follow in 2014 in Plaster Rock, N.B. and Clair, Sask., and two incidents in 2015 in Gogama, Ont.
This suggests that we must be mindful of the connection between human interactions and technology and how each will continue to underlie many causes and contributing factors of future incidents.
As a civil engineering professor who researches transportation infrastructure, dangerous goods and risk, I see several new developments and changes to technology and policy that can help to reduce future accidents.Safer tank car standards
The type of tank cars involved in the Lac-Mégantic accident (“Class 111”) were known to be vulnerable to failure, even in low-speed accidents (e.g., Cornwall, Ont. in 1999).
After Lac-Mégantic, Canada and the United States developed a more robust tank car standard, Class 117. This new standard features improved puncture resistance, structural strength and fractural resistance.
Despite these improvements, Canadian and U.S. regulations will still allow Class 111 tank cars to be used for the transport of certain dangerous goods until mid-2025.
Even so, Canada accelerated the phase-out of the older Class 111 tank cars from being used for crude oil service in Canada as of Nov. 1, 2016, under Protective Direction 38.Enhanced braking
In addition to new tank car standards, the U.S. is requiring enhanced braking standards on trains carrying flammable goods.
Any train with a continuous block of 20 tank cars loaded with a flammable liquid, or 35 or more tank cars loaded with a flammable liquid dispersed throughout a train, must have a functioning two-way end-of-train (EOT) device — an electronic unit that can be mounted on the end of a freight train instead of a caboose — or a distributed power (DP) braking system, which spreads braking across different points throughout a train.
Furthermore, any train with 70 or more loaded tank cars containing flammable liquids travelling at speeds greater than 48 km/h must be operated with an electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) braking system by May 1, 2023.
In short, these technologies enable more controlled braking behaviour through a more responsive and uniform application of brake pressure. Benefits would include shorter stopping distances, lower risks of derailment and lower pile-up effects in the event of a derailment.More information sharing
Technology also allows more information sharing for better decision-making. For example, Protective Direction No. 36 in Canada requires railways to provide municipalities with dangerous goods reports, including information on the number of unit trains, percentage of railway cars transporting dangerous goods, information on their nature and volume and number of trains.
This information is intended to inform emergency planning and responses.
The U.S. is also requiring more accurate classification of unrefined petroleum-based products to ensure proper classification, packaging and record-keeping through a documented sampling and testing process. This information is to be made available to the Department of Transportation upon request.Human factors
The technology to prevent rail disasters is in our hands — just as it was in 2013. While these and future technologies are likely to reduce the risks of transporting dangerous goods across Canada and the United States, the interactions between humans and other elements of the system — the “human factors” — will remain predominant.
As we now know in the Lac-Mégantic accident, the train carrying 7.7 million litres of crude oil sped toward the small Quebec town at 104 km/h before derailing, killing 47 people in the resulting fire and explosions on July 6, 2013.
Hours before derailing, the train was parked and left running on the main track in Nantes, Que., awaiting departure. But shortly after the engineer parked the train, a locomotive engine caught fire and was turned off by the Nantes fire department.
Without power from the running locomotive engine, air slowly leaked from the air brake system. An insufficient number of handbrakes were applied and the train eventually began rolling downhill on its final journey toward Lac-Mégantic.
Some of the causes and contributing factors in the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster were not technical failures so much as they were failures of humans to properly interact with technology: To properly maintain a locomotive engine, to have knowledge of interactions between locomotive engines and air brake systems and to properly set and test the effectiveness of handbrakes.
Although technical standards were less stringent in 2013, technology did not fail us. In many of the causes and contributing factors of Lac-Mégantic, it is evident that we failed to understand and interact with our technology.
https://theconversation.com/technology-to-prevent-rail-disasters-is-in-our-hands-85509

Return to headline | Return to top
Ethanol Has Replaced Oil Trains As Hidden Safety Risk In NJ

Oct 12, 2017 | NorthJersey.com

By Curtis Tate

The volume of crude oil shipped by rail may have declined in recent months, but communities in New Jersey and other states face another hazard: ethanol.
The flammable biofuel is transported in trains that look virtually identical to the oil trains that have attracted so much attention, and controversy, in the country's energy boom of the past decade.
But according to federal data, 1 million gallons more ethanol spilled from derailed trains than crude oil from 2005 to 2015.
A report this week released by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine warns that the shipment of large quantities of flammable liquids will continue, presenting risks to communities along rail lines that transport them.
The report concludes that defective track, inadequate training for first responders and older tank cars more likely to fail in derailments could pose problems for years to come.
New Jersey is the third-leading destination for ethanol, behind Texas and California, and more than 60 percent of U.S. ethanol production moves by rail.
"I wouldn’t predict any large change in that," said Navy Vice Admiral Paul Gaffney, chairman of the committee that produced the report and president emeritus of Monmouth University. "It’s been that way for several years now."Steady Pace
U.S. ethanol production, which is concentrated in the Midwest, averaged more than 1 million barrels in the first half of this year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
In July the agency forecast that this year could set a record for the corn-based renewable fuel, which is blended into domestic gasoline stocks to help reduce carbon emissions.
Because production is so dispersed, and the distances to refineries so great, rail has become the preferred mode of transportation for ethanol.
While fiery accidents involving ethanol trains never gained as much public attention as those involving crude oil, some have been quite severe.
In June 2009, an ethanol train derailment and fire in Cherry Valley, Illinois, killed a woman waiting in her car at a railroad crossing.
In response to that incident, the rail industry adopted a stronger standard for the tank cars carrying the cargo, known as DOT-111. But those improvements came under scrutiny once more a few years later.
The car's design again was looked at after a crude oil train lost its brakes and rolled downhill into the lakeside town of Lac-Megantic, Quebec, in July 2013. The catastrophe left 47 people dead and leveled the town's core.
Lac-Megantic prompted a safety review on both sides of the border by government agencies and industry groups that encompassed track and equipment inspections, train operating procedures, the design of the tank cars and training for first responders.Big Spills
According to data from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, more than 1.6 million gallons of crude spilled in 21 oil train derailments from 2005 to 2015, most of it in 2013, 2014 and 2015.
Agency data also show that more than 2.6 million gallons of ethanol spilled in 58 derailments during the same 10 years, with eight derailments in 2011 accounting for more than 1 million of those gallons.
Though none of these crude oil or ethanol derailments took place in New Jersey and most occurred in sparsely populated areas, they did in some cases ignite large fires and led to evacuations.
The Federal Railroad Administration concluded in 2014 that ethanol posed an equal or greater risk of exploding in a derailment as crude oil.
In a February 2011 derailment in Ohio, tank cars carrying ethanol ruptured violently, scattering large pieces of the steel tank in multiple directions. The event took place in a rural area at night, and no one was injured or killed.
Whereas a 40 percent increase in pipeline capacity from 2010 to 2016 enabled a reduction in crude oil shipments by rail, particularly to Gulf Coast refineries, ethanol continues to roll across the country in mile-long trains.
While DOT-111 tank cars must be phased out of crude oil transportation by March 1, they can continue to transport ethanol for another five years, until May 2023.Missing Info
In response to a series of oil train derailments, the U.S. Department of Transportation required the disclosure of large crude oil shipments by rail to state and local officials. The department has yet to complete a requirement for ethanol and other flammable liquids.
The persistence of news organizations, using open-records laws, enabled the public disclosure of oil train volumes in numerous states, but the public remains in the dark on how much ethanol is moving by rail.
Railroads have fought public disclosures of information about shipments of flammable liquids by train, citing security concerns. Yet none of the derailments involving crude oil or ethanol from 2005 to 2015 was the result of a security failure. Virtually all were caused by defective track or equipment.
The National Academies of Sciences says that preventing derailments is imperative.
"Track conditions are something to pay attention to," Gaffney said.
It also calls for an improvement in how states share information they receive from railroads with local emergency officials.
"There needs to be better dissemination of that information," said Ed Chapman, a retired director of hazardous materials for BNSF Railway and a consultant for the report. "It’s being provided, but it’s not always being disseminated."
The report concludes that in spite of a vast improvement in training opportunities for first responders, and the sharing of information about hazardous material shipments by rail, gaps remain.
Rural communities and volunteer fire departments lack still access to training opportunities that may be available to career firefighters or departments in more populated areas.
Chapman said that railroads continue to support training for first responders and that the participation rate remains high.
"The opportunities are certainly there," he said. "The classes are pretty full."
http://www.northjersey.com/story/news/transportation/2017/10/13/ethanol-has-replaced-oil-trains-hidden-safety-risk-nj/758520001/

Return to headline | Return to top

Environment News

Industry Groups Call On EPA To Reform NO2 Air Permitting, Relax NAAQS

Oct 13, 2017 | Inside EPA

By Stuart Parker

Groups representing utilities, the petroleum sector and other industries are calling on EPA to reform its Clean Air Act permitting process to ease compliance with the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), and to consider softening the one-hour NAAQS from the current 100 parts per billion (ppb) limit.
EPA in 2010 introduced the 100 ppb limit averaged over one hour, and also retained an older annual NAAQS limit of 53 ppb.
However, public health groups say there is no justification for weakening the existing standard, which is averaged over one hour, and they want EPA to tighten the standard to no more than 50 ppb averaged over one hour.
The competing positions are outlined in comments filed recently on EPA's July 14 proposal to retain the existing NO2 standards. The agency found no new science collected since the last review of the standards that would support strengthening them, with NO2 levels generally falling and lower levels than expected at the roadside, where concentrations were thought to be highest.
Although EPA is not by law supposed to consider implementation costs when setting NAAQS, several industry groups want the agency to assess the air permitting implications of its standards, amid a broader industry push for reform of new source review (NSR) and related air permitting programs. NSR permits apply in areas violating a NAAQS while prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permits apply in attainment areas.
In Sept. 25 comments on the NO2 proposal, the power sector group Edison Electric Institute (EEI) claims ongoing problems in the PSD program. EEI says, “retention of the current standards will avoid exacerbating current implementation challenges” associated with the existing NO2 NAAQS. PSD permitting “has presented many technical and policy challenges, primarily related to difficulties with air quality models applied to short-term NAAQS and has caused significant delays and resulted in additional costs for many facilities.”
Specifically, air quality modeling of natural gas pipelines and new natural gas-based plants is holding up expansion of natural gas-based generation, EEI says.
The group notes EPA has updated its “Appendix W” air quality modeling guidance due to these problems. EEI further urges EPA to finalize proposed guidance on significant impact levels and Modeled Emissions Rates for Precursors, which are screening tools designed to ease the permitting process.
EEI says EPA's proposal to retain the NAAQS is “reasonable” and “justified,” and “should be finalized as proposed.”
Permitting Reform
The NAAQS Implementation Coalition, which says it represents undisclosed industries, in Sept. 25 commentssupports EPA's proposal to leave the NAAQS unchanged -- but the coalition echoes the EEI comments by suggesting the agency pursue Clean Air Act permitting reform.
“However, a cohesive NAAQS strategy pairs standards development with commensurate attention to implementation,” particularly for PSD permitting.
The group says, “we note that EPA already faces significant implementation challenges with regard to the current NO2 NAAQS that would be further exacerbated if a lower standard were adopted.”
EPA's current modeling methods often result in over-prediction of emissions, the coalition says, adding, “our members have increasingly found that over-prediction resulting from these conservative tools and policies can be a significant, even determining factor, in project permitting demonstrations.” Although EPA has made efforts to address this issue, “we remain concerned that these biases have not been adequately addressed. We urge EPA to continue to work on improving its models,” the group says.
In separate Sept. 25 comments, the Interstate Natural Gas Association Of America (INGAA), representing the gas pipeline industry, says that EPA should shift its focus from NO2 emitted by vehicles to solve the remaining problems with modeling emissions by stationary sources such as pipeline equipment.
Modeling is necessary to show projects will not result in NAAQS violations under Clean Air Act permitting requirements, for PSD, NSR and overarching Title V operating permits.
“The 2010 one-hour NO2 NAAQS introduced technical complications and associated costs when modeling near-field impacts for new or existing sources (e.g., for Title V permits) using AERMOD, EPA’s preferred dispersion model. EPA should improve AERMOD through updates to address short-term averaging times and near-field impacts,” INGAA writes. “Until AERMOD updates are completed, EPA should identify alternatives to performing one-hour dispersion modeling and encourage the acceptance of these alternatives throughout the regulatory community.”
Weaker NAAQS
Meanwhile, the Utility Air Regulatory Group, representing power plants, also backs EPA's proposed decision, but notes that in fact, “the present standards are even more protective than the Administrator recognizes.”
This is a similar position to that taken by the American Petroleum Institute, which says in its comments that the agency could at least consider the case for weakening the NAAQS.
The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), representing the refining sector, goes further in its comments, issuing a legal threat that could foreshadow a lawsuit over the final rule. EPA's “failure to identify alternative, less stringent standards is arbitrary and capricious,” AFPM says, referring to the air law's legal standard for courts to vacate or remand agency rules.
“EPA must not only decide whether more stringent standards are or are not needed, but the Agency must also undertake a fulsome examination whether the opposite is true,” AFPM says.
Public Health Advocates' Comments
However, in Sept. 25 comments on the proposal, the American Lung Association calls on EPA to adopt a NAAQS of not more than 50 ppb over one hour, with a more stringent 99th percentile “form.”
Such a standard would allow far fewer than the 21 exceedances that the 98th percentile form currently allows over three years before the NAAQS is deemed violated, ALA says. The group further calls for EPA to tighten the existing annual NO2 NAAQS of 53 ppb down to 30 ppb.
“EPA cites uncertainty due to lack of evidence of exposures below 100 ppb as the rationale for retaining that level for the standard,” ALA says.
However, there will always be some level of uncertainty inherent in setting NAAQS, and the Clean Air Act requires EPA to set them adequate to protect public health with an "adequate margin of safety."
ALA says, "once again, EPA has failed to incorporate such a margin placing most adults with asthma at risk in areas that meet the current standard. This is not an option."
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/industry-groups-call-epa-reform-no2-air-permitting-relax-naaqs

Return to headline | Return to top
70% of Americans Say Weather Growing More Severe

Oct 13, 2017 | E&E News PM

By Daniel Cusick

A poll commissioned by the Associated Press found nearly 70 percent of Americans believe that weather-related disasters are becoming more severe, and nearly half those respondents said climate change is the primary driver of rising weather severity.
The responses to questions from 1,150 adults — compiled in the wake of three major hurricanes striking the U.S. mainland, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands — suggest public opinion is solidifying around the relationship between weather and climate, even as the Trump administration works to downplay such connections.
The poll was conducted jointly by the AP and the NORC Center for Public Affairs Research at the University of Chicago. Its margin of error was 4.1 percentage points, with a 95 percent confidence interval.
Among the 68 percent of respondents who believe weather events are becoming more severe, 48 percent believe climate change is a major or primary cause of increased severity, while 39 percent believe it's a combination of climate change and natural variability.
By comparison, 28 percent of respondents said weather severity had not significantly changed, while 4 percent said they believed weather was becoming less severe, according to the poll results.
"The public sees the connection because they see it happening to their neighbors, themselves. They see it on television. And they're not responding to a particular political constituency," Susan Cutter, director of the Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute at the University of South Carolina, said of the study's findings, according to the AP.
According to the poll, which drew internet and telephone responses from residents of the 50 states and District of Columbia, only 8 percent of respondents said they were personally affected by recent hurricanes, while 34 percent said they had family or friends who were seriously affected.
Among the 71 percent of respondents who believe climate change is happening or who expressed uncertainty about the phenomenon, 82 percent said they believe the federal government should be addressing climate change, regardless of its causes.
Forty-six percent of those polled self-identified as Democrats, while 37 percent identified as Republicans, and 18 percent were independents or claimed no party affiliation.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2017/10/12/stories/1060063491

Return to headline | Return to top

Add recipients

Suggested