Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 8/11/17
-
(ACC Mentioned) Jerry MacCleary Named Chief Executive of Covestro's North America Operations
Nov 8, 2017 | The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
By Joyce Gannon
Jerry MacCleary, president and managing director of Covestro’s North American operations, will become chief executive officer and chairman of the plastics and materials business effective Feb. 1, 2018. -
(ACC Mentioned) Big Leadership Changes Coming at Covestro
Nov 8, 2017 | Canadian Plastics
Chemical supplier Covestro LLC has announced that, effective Feb. 1, 2018, Jerry MacCleary, currently president and managing director and head of the polyurethanes business unit in North America, will be appointed as CEO and chairman of the board. -
(ACC Mentioned) APR, ACC: Plastic Bottle Recycling Falls In 2016
Nov 8, 2017 | Waste 360
Plastic bottle recycling declined slightly in 2016, slipping 2.4 percent to just over 2.9 billion pounds, according to figures released jointly today by the Association of Plastic Recyclers (APR) and the American Chemistry Council (ACC). -
(ACC Mentioned) US Plastic Bottle Recycling Rate Drops by 2.4% in 2016
Nov 8, 2017 | Packaging BR
Plastic bottle recycling in the US had gone down by 2.4% to a little over £2.9bn in 2016, according to a new industry report. -
(ACC Mentioned) Environmentalists Urge EPA's Counsel to Bar Beck From TSCA Rules
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmental groups are calling on EPA's acting General Counsel and Ethics Officer Kevin Minoli to require Nancy Beck, the top Trump administration appointee in EPA's toxics office, to recuse herself from the ongoing rulemakings for draft bans of uses of three chemicals that were proposed by the Obama EPA but appear to have stalled. -
Trump Research Appointee Sees 'Big Data' Among Short-Term Challenges
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Interdisciplinary research, "big data," and research translation are among the biggest challenges facing EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) in the near future, Richard Yamada, President Donald Trump's top appointee to ORD, tells Inside EPA in an exclusive interview. -
Far More New Chemicals Now Being Regulated Under TSCA
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The new TSCA has resulted in far more new chemicals being regulated, according to speakers at the Product Stewardship Society's annual conference in Tampa, Florida. -
US EPA Calls Meetings on Implementation of TSCA Reform
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The US EPA has called public meetings for December, to discuss implementation of the 2016 TSCA amendments. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Committee Investigates Iarc Carcinogen Labelling Process
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
A US congressional committee has begun investigating how the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) determines whether substances are carcinogens. -
(ACC Mentioned) Would Chemical Safety Measures Under Dourson Protect Military Families? Probably Not.
Nov 8, 2017 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Charise Johnson
Dr. Michael Dourson, a toxicologist with a history of providing consultation to the chemical industry, could become the head of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). -
(ACC Mentioned) A Common Chemical May Be Unsafe for Pregnant Women and Babies. Here's What You Need to Know
Nov 8, 2017 | Time
By Jamie Ducharme
Exposure to a chemical called perchlorate may be unsafe for pregnant women and their unborn children, according to a new study. -
IARC's Game Of Chicken With Congress
Nov 8, 2017 | American Council on Science and Health
By Hank Campbell
Thanks to investigative work spearheaded by independent blogger David Zaruk, Ph.D., the ethical breaches of IARC environmental activist Chris Portier, Ph.D., who massaged Working Group criteria to exclude experts with any industry experience while exempting his paychecks from Environmental Defense Fund, have been exposed. -
New York Counties Begin Enforcing Weakened Toy Safety Laws
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
New York state counties Albany and Suffolk have begun enforcing Toxic Free Toys Acts. However, the measures, having been rewritten in response to industry lawsuits, are weaker than originally intended. The laws, which came into effect on 1 November, now largely duplicate existing federal law. -
Echa Defers Decision on EU Legislation 'Finder' to Next Year
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Echa is conducting further studies before deciding whether to commit to developing an ‘EU chemicals legislation finder’ database, the agency has said. -
Echa Clarifies Post-Brexit REACH 'Paper Registration' Rules
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Simply having an address in an EU member state will not be enough for UK companies to transfer their REACH registrations after Brexit, according to a new Q&A released by Echa. -
Trump, Still in Search of Energy Dominance
Nov 8, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr and Pamela King
In the year since President Trump's election, U.S. oil and gas production has escalated, a seeming benchmark toward his goal of "energy dominance" for the nation. -
U.S. LNG Seen Shaping World Trade Over Next Five Years, Says BV Survey
Nov 8, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Sustained low natural gas prices and evolving supply dynamics are shifting oversupply from countries led by the United States to growing demand centers worldwide, Black & Veatch (BV) said in its annual review. -
Shell Officially Starts Construction on $6 Billion Ethane Cracker Plant
Nov 8, 2017 | The Times (Beaver, PA)
By Jared Stonesifer
Shell Chemicals has officially started construction on its $6 billion ethane cracker plant, a project that will take several years to complete. -
Mariner East 2 Pipeline Completion Delayed Another Nine Months
Nov 8, 2017 | State Impact (NPR)
By Jon Hurdle
Sunoco Pipeline’s parent company, Energy Transfer Partners, said Wednesday that its Mariner East 2 pipeline will be put into service in the second quarter of 2018, some 18 months later than originally planned, because of delays caused by Pennsylvania regulators. -
EPA Defends RCRA Settlement With Enviros
Nov 8, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gillmer
Federal judges yesterday appeared skeptical of a challenge to a settlement between U.S. EPA and environmentalists that could affect oil and gas regulation. -
Spokane Voters Say No To Local Coal, Oil Train Regulation Through City
Nov 8, 2017 | Northwest Public Radio
By Emily Schwing
Railway and oil companies like Burlington Northern-Santa Fe and Tesoro, funded Better Spokane’s campaign opposing the measure. Michael Cathcart, the group’s executive director, said the vote should lay the issue to rest. -
Lawyer Calls Pruitt's Science Shake-Up Illegal
Nov 8, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
Scott Pruitt's move to bar scientists with U.S. EPA grants from its science advisory boards is illegal, according to an environmental lawyer. -
California to Collaborate With EU, China on Carbon Markets
Nov 8, 2017 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Kathleen Ronayne
Gov. Jerry Brown announced plans Tuesday to further California’s cooperation with the European Union and China on fighting climate change. -
EPA Head: Climate Report Won't Impact Obama Rule Repeal
Nov 8, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The federal government’s comprehensive Climate Science Special Report won’t change the Trump administration’s rollback of former President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, according to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) head. -
Senators Tear Into Controversial Trump Environment Nominee
Nov 8, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Senators from both parties on Wednesday criticized Kathleen Hartnett White, a key environmental nominee from President Trump, using her past statements on climate change and fuel policy to raise concerns about her nomination. -
Barrasso Touts Carper's 'Positive Comments' on Wheeler
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
Senate environment panel Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY) is touting “positive comments” that the committee's ranking member, Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), made to Inside EPA about Andrew Wheeler, President Donald Trump's nominee to be deputy EPA administrator, that the nominee may be less controversial than others.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Jerry MacCleary Named Chief Executive of Covestro's North America Operations
Nov 8, 2017 | The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
By Joyce Gannon
Jerry MacCleary, president and managing director of Covestro’s North American operations, will become chief executive officer and chairman of the plastics and materials business effective Feb. 1, 2018.
Mr. MacCleary has led the Germany-based company since it spun out of drug giant Bayer AG in 2015. Its North American headquarters is in Robinson.
Erik Haakan Jonsson, chief operating officer, will succeed Mr. MacCleary as president and managing director.
Mr. MacCleary, who is also head of Covestro’s North American polyurethanes business, will be succeeded in that role by Christine Bryant. She is currently head of coatings, adhesives and specialties.
Mr. MacCleary will also become chairman of the American Chemistry Council’s executive committee on Jan. 1.
Covestro’s materials are used in insulations, foams, automobile parts, electronics and other consumer and industrial applications.
The North American operations generated about $3.7 billion in sales last year.
http://www.post-gazette.com/business/pittsburgh-company-news/2017/11/08/Jerry-MacCleary-chief-executive-Covestro-North-America-Christine-Bryant-Erik-Jonsson-plastics-polyurethanes/stories/201711080114
-
(ACC Mentioned) Big Leadership Changes Coming at Covestro
Nov 8, 2017 | Canadian Plastics
Chemical supplier Covestro LLC has announced that, effective Feb. 1, 2018, Jerry MacCleary, currently president and managing director and head of the polyurethanes business unit in North America, will be appointed as CEO and chairman of the board.
MacCleary will be succeeded in his role as head of the polyurethanes business unit by Christine Bryant, currently head of coatings, adhesives, and specialties.
Dr. Erik Haakan Jonsson, currently chief operating officer, will succeed MacCleary as president and managing director.
MacCleary joined Pittsburgh, Pa.-based Covestro (then part of Bayer) in 1979 as an accountant, before taking positions in sales, marketing, and strategic management. In 2004, he was named head of the North American polyurethanes business unit, a role he maintained after becoming president of Covestro in 2012. He led Covestro’s North American business through its separation from Bayer AG and establishment as an independent company in 2015.
In addition to his roles at Covestro, MacCleary serves as vice chairman of the board, a member of the executive committee, and an officer at the American Chemistry Council; and also serves on the board of directors of the National Association of Manufacturers, the International Isocyanate Institute, and the Center for the Polyurethanes Industry.
https://www.canplastics.com/materials/big-leadership-changes-coming-covestro/1003447011/
-
(ACC Mentioned) APR, ACC: Plastic Bottle Recycling Falls In 2016
Nov 8, 2017 | Waste 360
Plastic bottle recycling declined slightly in 2016, slipping 2.4 percent to just over 2.9 billion pounds, according to figures released jointly today by the Association of Plastic Recyclers (APR) and the American Chemistry Council (ACC).
The 27th Annual National Postconsumer Plastic Bottle Recycling Report indicates the overall recycling rate for plastic bottles for the year was 29.7 percent, down from 31.1 percent in 2015.
The five-year compounded annual growth rate for plastic bottle recycling was 2.1 percent.
According to the groups, following more than 20 consecutive years of growth, factors which contributed to the recent decline include a slight drop in material collected for recycling, changing export markets and increased contamination of recyclables. In addition, growth in the use of plastic bottles in packaging was offset by continuing progress in lightweighting and increased use of concentrates with smaller, lighter bottles.
In 2016, polyethylene terephthalate (PET, #1) recycling decreased by 44 million pounds. The collection of high density polyethylene (HDPE, #2) bottles, which includes bottles for milk, household cleaners and detergents, fell by 31.7 million pounds (2.8 percent) to just more than 1.1 billion pounds for the year. The recycling rate for HDPE bottles slipped from 34.4 percent to 33.4 percent.
Exports of HDPE bottles rose nearly five percent from 184 million pounds in 2015 to 193 pounds (or 16.4 percent of total HDPE bottles collected) in 2016. The amount of HDPE reported processed in the U.S. fell by 37 million pounds (or nearly 4 percent) to just under 993 million pounds.
“Some U.S. recyclers are seeing these short-term challenges as opportunities to innovate and invest in our plastics recycling infrastructure,” APR President Steve Alexander said in a statement. “The key to continued growth lies in improving our sorting and collection technologies to deliver consistent, high quality yields that strengthen our global competitiveness.”
“Plastics recycling has a track record of long-term growth spanning 25 years,” Steve Russell, vice president of plastics for ACC, said in a statement. “Post-use plastics are valuable materials that have weathered many cycles and different growth factors. From resin suppliers to recyclers to brand owners, the plastics value chain is working together to continue to create new opportunities and long-term solutions.”
This year’s survey found the collection of polypropylene (PP, #5) bottles rose nearly 15.3 percent to reach 36.6 million pounds, as the PP collection rate climbed to over 20 percent. PP caps, closures and non-bottle containers are widely collected for recycling in the United States, and these data are presented in a separate report on recycling non-bottle rigid plastics, which will be released in the coming months.
Together, PET and HDPE bottles make up 97.1 percent of the U.S. market for plastic bottles with PP comprising 1.8 percent, LDPE 0.7 percent and PVC 0.3 percent.
The 2016 United States National Postconsumer Plastic Bottle Recycling Report is based on a survey of reclaimers conducted by More Recycling, formerly Moore Recycling Associates Inc.
http://www.waste360.com/plastics/apr-acc-plastic-bottle-recycling-falls-2016
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Plastic Bottle Recycling Rate Drops by 2.4% in 2016
Nov 8, 2017 | Packaging BR
Plastic bottle recycling in the US had gone down by 2.4% to a little over £2.9bn in 2016, according to a new industry report.
The figures were revealed by Association of Plastic Recyclers (APR) and the American Chemistry Council (ACC). However, plastic bottle recycling remained strong in the country as per APR.
The report, dubbed the 27th annual National Postconsumer Plastic Bottle Recycling Report, shows the overall recycling rate for plastic bottles in 2016 to be 29.7%. This marks a decrease from the 31.1% figure registered in 2015.
APR president Steve Alexander said: “Some U.S. recyclers are seeing these short-term challenges as opportunities to innovate and invest in our plastics recycling infrastructure.
“The key to continued growth lies in improving our sorting and collection technologies to deliver consistent, high quality yields that strengthen our global competitiveness.”
The report published the five-year compounded annual growth rate for plastic bottle recycling at 2.1%.
APR stated that the overall decline after 20 successive years of growth was due to a slight decrease in material collected for recycling, varying export markets, and growing contamination of recyclables.
Apart from that, increased usage of plastic bottles in packaging was balanced out by continuing advancement in lightweighting and more use of concentrates with smaller, lighter bottles.
The year 2016 saw a decrease in polyethylene terephthalate (PET, #1) recycling by £44m as per the report.
High density polyethylene (HDPE, #2) bottles like bottles for milk, household cleaners and detergents had their collection drop by 2.8% to £1.1bn in 2016.
The report says that the recycling rate for HDPE bottles had come down from 34.4% to 33.4%.
Exports of HDPE bottles surged by about 5% to £193m in 2016, as per the APR-ACC report.
ACC plastics vice president Steve Russell said: “Plastics recycling has a track record of long-term growth spanning 25 years.
“Post-use plastics are valuable materials that have weathered many cycles and different growth factors. From resin suppliers to recyclers to brand owners, the plastics value chain is working together to continue to create new opportunities and long-term solutions.”
http://packagingmaterials.packaging-business-review.com/news/us-plastic-bottle-recycling-dips-24-to-29bn-081117-5967374
-
(ACC Mentioned) Environmentalists Urge EPA's Counsel to Bar Beck From TSCA Rules
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
Environmental groups are calling on EPA's acting General Counsel and Ethics Officer Kevin Minoli to require Nancy Beck, the top Trump administration appointee in EPA's toxics office, to recuse herself from the ongoing rulemakings for draft bans of uses of three chemicals that were proposed by the Obama EPA but appear to have stalled.
In a Nov. 7 letter, they charged that Beck's involvement in the rulemakings poses a conflict of interest because of her past work for a trade group opposed to the bans.
“Participation in these rulemakings violates federal conflict of interest and impartiality requirements, as illustrated by Dr. Beck’s troubling history as an advocate for chemical companies opposed to the proposed bans and the author of industry comments criticizing the EPA risk assessments on which the bans are based,” environmental groups Safer Chemicals Healthy Families, Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice, Environmental Health Strategy Center and Toxic Free Future wrote Minoli.
The groups argue that Beck has already “misused her EPA position to advance industry interests in violation of [federal] ethics requirements” by re-writing draft “framework” rules proposed by the Obama administration to implement the reformed version of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Before joining EPA last spring, Beck was senior director for regulatory science policy for the chemical industry trade group American Chemistry Council (ACC), a position where she participated in drafting comments for ACC on TSCA reform and various chemical risk assessments, and also testified before Congress on these subjects.
Pointing to a recent New York Times article describing Beck's involvement in re-writing the TSCA framework rules, the environmentalists argue that her actions violated Minoli's advice to her upon joining the agency not to join any discussions or decisions relating to any individual ACC comments.
The groups also protest Minoli's change of perspective, outlined in his June 8 memo giving Beck a broad impartiality determination. The groups argue that Minoli's June 8 decision “is contrary to the criteria in Office of Government Ethics (OGE) regulations for authorizing such participation notwithstanding an official’s lack of impartiality. We urge you to reconsider the determination so that Dr. Beck does not further impair the integrity of EPA’s decision-making process in connection with other TSCA matters.”
The environmentalists' letter follows an Oct. 31 complaint that Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a watchdog group, filed with EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) regarding Beck's involvement in the re-drafting of the final TSCA framework rules. CREW asks the OIG to determine whether Beck violated the ethics standard she has been placed under, and also to review Minoli's determinations regarding Beck.
At minimum, environmentalists are calling on Minoli to require Beck to recuse herself from any further action in the three TSCA section 6(a) proposed bans of uses of trichloroethylene, methylene chloride and N-methylpyrrolidone.
The letter follows on the heels of a letter environmentalists sent Administrator Scott Pruitt late last month, urging him to finalize the three TSCA section 6(a) rules as quickly as possible, with the groups writing they are “deeply concerned by reports that EPA may delay final action on its proposed rules...”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/environmentalists-urge-epas-counsel-bar-beck-tsca-rules
-
Trump Research Appointee Sees 'Big Data' Among Short-Term Challenges
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Interdisciplinary research, "big data," and research translation are among the biggest challenges facing EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) in the near future, Richard Yamada, President Donald Trump's top appointee to ORD, tells Inside EPA in an exclusive interview.
Trump named Yamada as ORD deputy assistant administrator, a position that does not require Senate confirmation, but has yet to nominate the office's assistant administrator, which does require Senate confirmation. A mathematician, Yamada comes to ORD from a staff position on the House Science Committee.
"The number of environmental issues facing states is increasing and these issues are very complex to solve. These issues are challenging for a variety of reasons. For some issues [such as perfluoralkyl substances (PFAS)] we do not know the full scope of the science, nor the questions we should be asking. Moreover, states need technologies and solutions that are not only effective and reliable, but also reasonable in terms of cost," Yamada told Inside EPA in written responses to questions.
"I also need to make sure that ORD can stay nimble as a science organization. We need to have a good balance of both specialists and generalists that can respond to issues in a timely manner," Yamada said.
Asked what he sees as the most pressing scientific issues for EPA to focus on over the next several years, Yamada listed several, including "deepening interdisciplinary research -- complex environmental problems will continue needing a deep interdisciplinary approach -- whether we are working on mitigation, risk management, pollution reduction, etc. The extensive 'integration' of various scientific subject areas is accelerating."
Former Obama ORD chief Paul Anastas also saw broad, interdisciplinary issues, which he called problems of broad, national scope, as an area that ORD needed to focus on. He sought to do so by building interdisciplinary teams of ORD scientists to address these.
Yamada described "big data" -- the need to analyze and store massive amounts of information -- and its opposite, sparse data, as issues of concern. Yamada also identifies prize competitions, citizen science, scaling-up technologies and research translation as major issues for ORD in the short term.
"Prize competitions and challenges allow the general public to contribute unique solutions to complex science problems -- we can get solutions and technologies from individuals who normally wouldn't know anything about the problem, but who can think 'outside the box,'" Yamada explains.
With scaling up, Yamada describes the challenge of creating a promising technology in the lab, but needing to determine how it can be used in the broader world.
"If we want technology to lead the way in addressing our environmental issues, we need to address this. Our ORD Homeland Security group has been working in this area and I would like them to continue expanding their efforts here," Yamada adds.
EPA has long struggled to determine how best to utilize citizen science, as there are often questions about the quality of data that comes in from amateur scientists, or crowd-sourced information. Yamada says that EPA is "in the process of developing a citizen science handbook as the first step of heading in this direction -- an exciting direction."
Research Priorities
On research translation, Yamada explains that his concern is "how can we translate our science in a matter that can help our stakeholders, especially our States, and how easily understandable and practical is ORD research?"
Asked about ORD's National Center for Computational Toxicology (NCCT) and how that might advance chemicals management under the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Yamada praised the center's work, calling it "truly revolutionary . . . NCCT will be at the forefront in helping implement TSCA, as well as helping us understand emerging contaminants such as [perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)]. I see this program as being important to the future of many program offices, especially" EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
Since beginning at ORD last summer, Yamada's most high profile project has been his advisory role in Administrator Scott Pruitt's selection of new members to three of EPA's most prominent advisory committees of outside, expert science advisors -- Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC), Science Advisory Board (SAB), and Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.
Asked how he envisions engaging with the advisory committees and what projects he might like them to tackle, Yamada replied:
"Administrator Pruitt and I are committed to making sure that the BOSC will be effective and keep ORD accountable for conducting the best available research for the EPA . . . The same also goes with the SAB -- I want the SAB to give [Pruitt] the best independent scientific advice that will justify all regulatory decisions."
Asked whether EPA should adopt certain changes in practice recommended in the National Academy of Sciences' (NAS) 2009 report "Advancing Risk Assessment," such as harmonizing cancer and non-cancer risk analysis methodologies and adopting the use of risk ranges rather than single point estimates of risk, Yamada replied, "The recommendations are on issues that are very complex and require much thoughtful thinking and reflection. . . . We are committed to working on accelerating the pace of chemical risk assessments based on sound science and will thoughtfully consider recommendations from previous NAS reports."
https://insideepa.com/interview/trump-research-appointee-sees-big-data-among-short-term-challenges
-
Far More New Chemicals Now Being Regulated Under TSCA
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The new TSCA has resulted in far more new chemicals being regulated, according to speakers at the Product Stewardship Society's annual conference in Tampa, Florida.
However, the US EPA has changed its policy in recent months to require less testing, the event held on 2-4 November heard.
Before the new TSCA, the EPA placed restrictions on about 20% of new chemicals, said Adrienne M Timmel, an associate at Keller and Heckman. Now that the agency is required to make an affirmative determination on every new chemical and look at potential uses, she said, only 19% of pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) result in a company being allowed to make the new substance without restrictions, a "complete reversal".
In reviews of the 547 PMNs, submitted between 27 June 2016 and 23 October this year, she said:
· 103 chemicals received a "not likely to present unreasonable risk" finding;
· 281 (51%) were allowed to proceed to manufacturing with restrictions;
· 160 (29%) of PMNs were withdrawn; and
· three chemicals were barred from manufacture until further information was developed.
In cases where the EPA is comfortable with the proposed use of a new chemical, but has concerns about other potential circumstances, the agency can issue a consent decree limiting the use to what was proposed. This is followed by a significant new use rule (Snur), applying those provisions to other companies. Ms Timmel said this is taking three to four months. If a consent decree is not negotiated, the EPA can publish a proposed Snur for public comment. This can take more than a year if there are adverse comments, Ms Timmel said, and the company cannot manufacture the chemical until the process runs its course.
"Now EPA is saying it’s not just the uses you put in your PMN that you want, it’s other possible uses of the chemical that might occur," agreed Gavin Thompson, a principal consultant at Ramboll Environ. "You are going to see more Snurs even if your use doesn’t result in exposure."
Change in testing policy
The good news is, Ms Timmel said, "there is no upfront testing required if the EPA has no concerns about the intention of the PMN submitter, but has concerns about other possible uses."
This, she said, is a stark contrast to the "early post-Lautenberg approach ... where you were required to submit testing responsive to potential uses."
"We were getting letters requiring 90-day inhalation studies even where no inhalation would happen," Ms Timmel said. "They were interpreting the possible uses broadly."
However, Mr Thompson said, if toxicology tests raise alarms the EPA is now regulating substances that would have previously escaped scrutiny under "low volume exemptions". The trend to require PMNs for such substances "has been possibly one of the biggest changes under TSCA reform thus far", he said.
On the other end of the volume scale, he said, the agency is now required to look at all chemicals that are to be produced in large quantities. "You can have a high volume chemical with no toxicology data, indicating it presents an unreasonable risk and it can still be regulated."
Mr Thompson said there is some evidence that the EPA is using required reports on chemical emissions, entered in its Central Data Exchange (CDX), in making regulatory decisions.
"We don’t want to see EPA making rules based on the CDX," he said. "They are using the CDX system to potentially push the envelope on their authority".
This is especially concerning for raw material suppliers that may not know what its customers are doing with the product, Mr Thompson said. However, not having information on downstream use can be a problem also if the EPA applies its own modelling and default assumptions in evaluating a chemical.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60960/far-more-new-chemicals-now-being-regulated-under-tsca
-
US EPA Calls Meetings on Implementation of TSCA Reform
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The US EPA has called public meetings for December, to discuss implementation of the 2016 TSCA amendments.
The first meeting on 6 December will focus on changes to the agency's new chemicals review programme, including discussion of a draft decision-making framework.
The second, on 11 December, will cover "possible approaches for identifying potential candidate chemical substances for EPA's prioritisation process" for reviewing existing chemicals under TSCA.
Both will be streamed on the internet.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60943/us-epa-calls-meetings-on-implementation-of-tsca-reform
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Committee Investigates Iarc Carcinogen Labelling Process
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
A US congressional committee has begun investigating how the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) determines whether substances are carcinogens.
Representatives Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chair of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, and Andy Biggs (R-Arizona), chair of its Environment Subcommittee, sent letters to Iarc and the Department of Health and Human Services on 1 November, demanding information on the agency's monograph programme.
They also asked Iarc to identify officials who could testify at a possible hearing.
The representatives said they are "concerned about the scientific integrity" of the agency's determinations.Glyphosate
The letters focus specifically on Iarc's 2015 review of glyphosate, the primary ingredient of Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, noting that news media reports had raised new concerns about the controversial decision to classify it as "probably" carcinogenic to humans.
They also said Iarc does not make meetings and draft documents public. "It is an affront to scientific integrity to keep 'confidential' a scientific process that directly influences policy and individual taxpayers," the health department letter said.
The representatives justified their concern by noting that the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) has given nearly $48m to Iarc since 1985. More than $22m of this went to the monographs programme.
Another congressional committee investigated the NIH's funding of Iarc in 2016, asking the agency to detail its standards for awarding grants.Implications
Iarc's work has regulatory implications in the US. Substances it lists as carcinogens are also listed as such under California’s Proposition 65. This requires manufacturers and retailers to warn workers and consumers, exposed to listed chemicals.
Monsanto challenged the legality of that mechanism in court, but a judge ruled in January that Prop 65's use of international standards "does not constitute an unconstitutional delegation of authority to an outside agency". Monsanto brought the suit after Oehha announced its intention to list glyphosate as a carcinogen.
The American Chemistry Council launched a campaign in 2016, aimed at reforming Iarc's monographs programme. It criticised its hazard-based judgements and their impact on regulations as well as retailers' chemical policy decisions.
In October, Oehha listed the flame retardant tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) as a carcinogen under Prop 65, based on Iarc's determination. This was despite a protest from the ACC that there is no evidence that the substance is hazardous through current use and exposure levels.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60922/us-committee-investigates-iarc-carcinogen-labelling-process
-
Nov 8, 2017 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Charise Johnson
Dr. Michael Dourson, a toxicologist with a history of providing consultation to the chemical industry, could become the head of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Dourson has consistently defended the use of several chemicals found to pose major adverse health effects, manipulating his research in favor of industry interests. This could spell trouble for public health and safety, particularly in low-income communities and communities where residents are predominately people of color—which often includes military bases.
Over this past summer, ProPublica released a series of articles on the excessive toxic pollution problems at military bases. This immediately caught my attention: I work on chemical safety issues at UCS and spent my formative years living on army bases around the country. Although I had passing knowledge of the dangerous chemical agents at storage sites on a base in Aberdeen, Maryland (including nerve and blistering agents like mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and lewisite), I never once considered the impact exposure to toxics might pose to military personnel and their families, let alone the potential for exposure from burning of munitions, toxic releases, and proximity to Superfund sites. I naively assumed we were safe from harm, and didn’t give a second thought to the acrid odors wafting in the air. Who would knowingly put the people who fight for our country at risk in their own homes?Can we trust Dourson to keep military families safe?
Judging from his track record of downplaying the health risks posed by several EPA-regulated compounds, including 1,4-dioxane, 1-bromoproane, trichloroethylene (TCE), and chlorpyrifos (which are currently under review), I don’t believe Dourson has the best interests of military families in mind. I worry that exposure to toxics on military bases may only worsen under his industry-partial leadership. I am not alone in my sentiments: retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel and current U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) has been critical of Dourson, calling his work on toxic chemicals “reckless”. She is acutely aware of the contamination and associated health effects at military bases like Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, where drinking water is highly contaminated by Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Interestingly, Dourson researched PFOA—a chemical linked to prostate, kidney and testicular cancer—and came to the convenient conclusion that a weaker safety standard than what EPA recommends would be just fine.
That is why this potential appointment is personal. If past administrations have done a substandard job of handling chemical concerns, putting an industry shill in charge of limiting and preventing exposure to toxic chemicals may result in even less protection for the public.Conflict of interest is an understatement
It’s obvious Pruitt and his team intend to dismantle regulatory protections in favor of industry based on their actions to date, as well as the nominations and appointments of chemical industry advocates, including Dr. Nancy Beck (former representative of the American Chemistry Council) and Michael Dourson.
Dourson’s past work includes giving the green light on several chemicals that have been shown to have serious adverse health effects. He has even weighed in on TCE, a toxic chemical that is prominent on military bases, to ask to weaken the safety standards. See a list of locations where chemicals he has “blessed” have been found at alarming levels here. Of the states, towns, counties, and cities listed, I have lived in four at various stages of my life. Nearly two decades later, and I’m just now uncovering this. I’ll let that sink in.We must defend the defenders
Veterans Day is approaching, which means food, retail, and recreation discountsfor military veterans and active-duty personnel. This is a nice (if not cursory) gesture to show our gratitude, but it’s still superficial at best considering the challenges our veterans and military families face. Our country’s leaders profess to have the utmost respect for our military, even tearing the nation into a frenzy over a peaceful protest by claiming that kneeling for the national anthem disrespects those who have fought for our freedom. Is this the brownfield we want to die on? Our military need more than lip service and deserve better than Dourson.
http://blog.ucsusa.org/charise-johnson/would-chemical-safety-measures-under-dourson-protect-military-families-probably-not
-
Nov 8, 2017 | Time
By Jamie Ducharme
Exposure to a chemical called perchlorate may be unsafe for pregnant women and their unborn children, according to a new study.
Perchlorate, which is found in everything from fireworks to fertilizers, is a known hormone disruptor. In pregnant women, frequent exposure may decrease levels of a thyroid hormone, called T4, that’s necessary for fetal brain development, potentially leading to developmental issues after birth, according to new research presented Monday at the annual Society for Endocrinology conference in the U.K. While more research is necessary to determine the long-term effects of T4 deficiency, the study’s authors say the findings suggest that pregnant women may want to be extra cautious about perchlorate exposure.
Here’s what you need to know about the health effects of perchlorate:
What is perchlorate?
Perchlorate occurs both naturally and as a result of manufacturing, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. It’s used as a fuel starter for rockets, weapons, fireworks, airbag initiators, matches and flares, and it’s also found in some fertilizers, disinfectants, food packaging and plant killers. It’s often found in water supplies near where rocket fuel is made or used, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says, but it also appears in other locations around the country. Studies have shown that it turns up in everything from lettuceto milk to bottled water.
Is perchlorate dangerous?
Studies, including the one mentioned above, have shown that perchlorate can disrupt the endocrine system, which regulates hormone levels. At high doses, according to the EPA, the chemical impairs the thyroid’s ability to absorb iodine from the blood, in turn causing the gland to malfunction and potentially underproduce hormones involved in metabolism and infant and childhood development. Studies in fish have also linked the substance to impaired sexual development and function.Is perchlorate regulated?
Perchlorate’s road to regulation has been full of twists and turns. The EPA first raised a red flag in 1998, then collected data for years before issuing an initial risk assessment in 2002, Politico reports. That report, which suggested that perchlorate levels in drinking water should not exceed one part per billion, was met with backlash from NASA, the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy — all of which use perchlorate regularly — and after much back-and-forth, in 2008 the Bush administration decided not to formally regulate it. Shortly thereafter, an interim EPA advisory suggested that levels in drinking water should not exceed 15 parts per billion.
The Obama administration reopened the case in 2011. Though there’s been some movement since then — the EPA released a draft report on the topic in September of this year, and is currently accepting public input, here — no formal regulation for drinking water is on the books yet. (Two states, California and Massachusetts, have local regulations in place, and the FDA has limited the amount of perchlorate that can be used in food packaging.)
Dr. Nancy Beck, who is currently part of the EPA’s toxic chemical unit and had previously been an executive at the American Chemistry Council, a chemical industry trade association, has been accused of slowing the process of regulating drinking water contaminants including perchlorate, according to a recent New York Times report.
“EPA will continue to review the most up to date and best available science regarding perchlorate and drinking water,” an EPA spokesperson told TIME. “Earlier this year, EPA convened a peer review panel to provide recommendations on a biological model that predicts the relationship between perchlorate exposure and thyroid hormone levels in sensitive life stages. EPA is actively working to incorporate critical feedback and suggestions from this peer review.”
How can you minimize the risks of perchlorate?
Pregnant women and infants must get adequate iodine, the FDA says, either through dietary sources (dairy, seafood, meat, some bread, eggs and iodized table salt), fortified products or supplements, though it’s always smart to consult a doctor before beginning a new supplement regimen. If you live in an area where tap water is known to exceed the EPA’s interim advisory of 15 parts per billion, the FDA also recommends using bottled water to prepare infant formula. Not sure what’s in your water? You can consult the Environmental Working Group’s tap water database.
http://time.com/5013321/perchlorate-health-risks/
-
IARC's Game Of Chicken With Congress
Nov 8, 2017 | American Council on Science and Health
By Hank Campbell
Organisation group International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is suffereing through a period of critical upheaval. Thanks to investigative work spearheaded by independent blogger David Zaruk, Ph.D., the ethical breaches of IARC environmental activist Chris Portier, Ph.D., who massaged Working Group criteria to exclude experts with any industry experience while exempting his paychecks from Environmental Defense Fund, have been exposed. That Portier signed a lucrative contract with attorneys looking to sue Monsanto before Monograph 112, which declared the herbicide glyphosate a "probable" human carcinogen, was even released has sadly become expected for the group. It is now obvious that the attorneys knew what the result of the Monograph would be before WHO or the public did, because Portier was looking to cash in on his efforts.
It was later discovered that in making their finding about glyphosate, the IARC Working Group weirdly branded studies concluding that the compound was not a carcinogen as being evidence for carcinogenicity, they blocked other studies that would have invalidated their conclusion as being too weak to include. Scientists who were on the Working Group have overwhelmingly refused calls for transparency, the only ones who have bothered to respond cloaked themselves in United Nations immunity.
But Congress is not going to be stonewalled so easily. If IARC were an American agency, it probably would never have gotten to this point. If IARC were an American company, Portier and IARC's leader, Chris Wild, Ph.D., would be facing the prospect of jail time. Instead, Wild was seemingly removed from his position before WHO repositioned it as being a very, very, very early announcement that he would not be continuing after his term expires. The U.S. Congressional Committee On Science, Space, And Technology is still not appeased. Last week, Chairman Lamar Smith called on IARC to answer allegations about their manipulation of the Working Group findings. IARC is trying to buy time, claiming Congress did not go through their proper procedures...which means they are trying to formulate answers that won't call into question their cancer claims about bacon, hot water, diesel emissions and plenty of other findings. The group says they will only answer if the U.S. State Department goes through American representatives sitting on IARC's governing council.
That sort of posturing may play well at the U.N. but it is a sure way to get their funding pulled. And really, they don't need it. I know plenty of activists who can cherry-pick studies and make junk science claims, and they will do it for free since, like with Portier, activists and sue-and-settle attorneys are behind the scenes bankrolling their efforts.
https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/11/08/iarcs-game-chicken-congress-12107
-
New York Counties Begin Enforcing Weakened Toy Safety Laws
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
New York state counties Albany and Suffolk have begun enforcing Toxic Free Toys Acts. However, the measures, having been rewritten in response to industry lawsuits, are weaker than originally intended. The laws, which came into effect on 1 November, now largely duplicate existing federal law.
The two counties are among a group that passed similar laws between 2014 and 2016, banning the sale of toys containing certain heavy metals and other substances.
However, implementation was delayed pending the resolution of lawsuits, filed by an industry coalition against Albany and Suffolk counties. In response, Westchester County withdrew its regulations. And Rockland county amended its law in December 2015, to simply state that products sold there must comply with the federal Consumer Products Safety Act (CPSA) and the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA).
The original Albany county law barred the sale within the county of children's products or apparel, containing:
· benzene;
· lead;
· mercury;
· antimony;
· arsenic;
· cadmium; and
· cobalt.
Meanwhile, Suffolk county set specific maximum levels for those substances as well as formaldehyde.
The industry coalition argued that this action was preempted by the CPSA and FHSA, which already regulate the presence of the substances in children's products.
Earlier this year, both counties reached settlements in which the industry group agreed to amended versions of the regulations and dropped the lawsuits. Both counties dropped efforts to regulate cobalt, benzene and formaldehyde.
Final version
The final Suffolk county law sets identical maximum levels for lead, mercury, antimony, arsenic, cadmium to those in federal law. The Albany county law states that CPSA and FHSA requirements will apply to children's products they regulate.
"For children's products and children’s apparel not covered by the federal legislation", the county law sets identical limits for the same five chemicals in surface coatings.
"Are any children's products not covered by the federal laws? That's a good question," said Frederick Locker, a lawyer with Locker, Greenberg & Brainin who represented the Safe to Play Coalition in the courts. "It's unlikely there would be any."
The Rockland and Albany laws set penalties of $500 for a first violation and $1,000 for subsequent violations, while Suffolk prescribed no penalty beyond publication on a website. Suffolk and Albany counties promised inspections of at least ten retailers in a fiscal quarter. The Rockland law authorises the county's consumer protection office to promulgate enforcement rules.
All local governments "already have the ability to enforce the federal requirements", without any additional regulatory action, Mr Locker said, although the specified inspection schedules and penalties are county-specific.
Albany County is also requiring retailers to submit an "attestation of compliance", a mandate Mr Locker said is also essentially covered by certifications manufacturers submit under the CPSA.
"Retailers are going to look at suppliers’ certifications to meet the requirements of the county," he said. "As a practical matter, if you follow federal law you ask suppliers for a children’s products certificate."
https://chemicalwatch.com/60938/new-york-counties-begin-enforcing-weakened-toy-safety-laws
-
Echa Defers Decision on EU Legislation 'Finder' to Next Year
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Echa is conducting further studies before deciding whether to commit to developing an ‘EU chemicals legislation finder’ database, the agency has said.
Conclusions from its recent feasibility study found that Echa would be the "natural host" of the finder, which will provide an overview of how a substance is regulated in the EU.
However, the agency says "it became clear that some elements need to be refined before it can make a decision on whether to commit to developing such a tool". It will launch two further studies – one on IT architecture and another on business analysis – soon.
Once these are concluded, Echa will confirm next year if it will go ahead – with a 2019 start date in mind should it do so.
The finder is part of Echa's ongoing enhancements to its dissemination portal, which it uses to integrate information on substances from different legislation and regulatory processes.
Conclusions
The feasibility study identified 55 "first priority" pieces of EU legislation to be included in the tool, together with the EU directorates responsible for them. These cover chemicals, product, environment, occupational health and safety legislation.
The study also flagged the importance of companies having an overview of national occupational exposure limits (Oels) and emission values. These should be included in the tool as a second priority, the agency says.
It highlighted six key providers, which already have information available in a structured format in their databases. These, listed below, will complement Echa's own databases:
· EUR-Lex (publication of all EU regulations, directives) – EU Publications Office;
· CosIng (cosmetic ingredients database) – DG Grow;
· Pesticides database – DG Sante;
· Food contact materials database – DG Sante;
· OpenFoodTox database – European Food Safety Authority (Efsa); and
· ECICS database (European customs inventory of chemical substances) – DG Taxud, the DG for taxation and the customs union.
The agency first announced its intention to carry out the feasibility study on the finder in March last year, following proposals from Cefic and the German chemicals industry (VCI) to develop a central European substance regulation 'navigator'.
In a position paper from 2014, Cefic said Echa’s current substance database is not sufficient. This is because it does not "cover the entire regulatory framework on chemicals in the EU/member states nor the results from European research programmes".
https://chemicalwatch.com/60968/echa-defers-decision-on-eu-legislation-finder-to-next-year
-
Echa Clarifies Post-Brexit REACH 'Paper Registration' Rules
Nov 8, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Simply having an address in an EU member state will not be enough for UK companies to transfer their REACH registrations after Brexit, according to a new Q&A released by Echa.
"A mere address or letter box is not sufficient and may lead to legal consequences being taken by enforcement authorities or Echa," the agency says.
"Responsible staff and relevant documentation" must be available for inspection at the premises of every registrant, Echa adds. Every company is responsible for its registrations and the substances they cover, and only representatives (ORs) must adhere to the requirements in Article 8(2) of REACH.
The Q&A is one of two recently added about REACH registration on its webpage, dedicated to Brexit regulatory concerns. The other covers what a UK-based company should consider when appointing an OR in an EU27 country.
James Dancy, from the UK’s Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), recently said that the option of ORs registering in the UK or deciding to set up in another member state are still both possible at this stage.
And speaking in September, the Only Representative Organisation (ORO) said it is sticking to its position that a ‘defensive switch’ – where companies with an only representative (OR) based in the UK should consider moving to one based elsewhere in the EU following Brexit – is not necessary.
Echa's webpage explains what will happen to the regulatory obligations of UK entities and EU member states, as well as agency operations, following the UK’s withdrawal from the Union on 30 March 2019. It also hosts Q&As on CLP, Pic and the biocidal products (BPR) Regulations.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60962/echa-clarifies-post-brexit-reach-paper-registration-rules
-
Trump, Still in Search of Energy Dominance
Nov 8, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr and Pamela King
In the year since President Trump's election, U.S. oil and gas production has escalated, a seeming benchmark toward his goal of "energy dominance" for the nation.
U.S. crude production averaged 9.6 million barrels a day in the last week of October, 12 percent more than a year ago. Natural gas output, which stalled in 2016, has climbed 13 percent since February. Exports of liquefied natural gas began last year and are climbing, with much more to follow, and the United States has also become the world's largest exporter of refined petroleum products.
But the drivers for the current surge in U.S. fossil fuels are not Trump's "America First" policies.
Key factors are the decadelong fracking revolution; a bipartisan green light from Congress in 2015 permitting U.S. crude oil exports, ending a 40-year ban; a 2016 agreement among Russia, Saudi Arabia and other OPEC producers to push up crude oil prices with production curbs that put more U.S. production in the money; and big investments to upgrade the competitiveness of U.S. refinery exports. New liquefied natural gas terminals and pipeline infrastructure now coming online have also been years in the making.
The policies Trump has put in place or promised — to reduce regulation of energy production and infrastructure — are heartily cheered by his backers, just as environmental advocates denounce them. "President Donald Trump has made it a priority to take full advantage of America's energy abundance, and his administration continues to turn that into reality," the U.S. Chamber of Commerce pronounced last month.
Trump's goals for his current trip to Asia include a push for billion-dollar energy deals with China that could include pipeline and natural gas export facilities in the United States. A trade agreement in May between the Trump administration and China's government set the stage for expanding U.S. LNG shipments, including China on favorable terms as a buyer invited to strike gas deals with U.S. exporters (Energywire, July 6).
The Commerce Department has invited LNG exporters, like Cheniere Energy Inc., to join the China visit along with U.S. energy equipment and renewable energy producers, according to news reports (ClimateWire, Nov. 3).
Just where China ranks energy in its engagement agenda with the United States remains to be seen.
But a high-profile test of Trump's impact on the nation's energy production is coming as his administration prepares to open a record-setting lease sale in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve next month and to auction all available unleased federal areas in the Gulf of Mexico outer continental shelf (OCS) in March — an area as big as New Mexico, the administration says.
"Under the last administration, 94 percent of the OCS was off-limits to responsible development, despite interest from state and local governments and industry leaders," Katharine MacGregor, acting assistant Interior secretary, testified to Congress in July. "The Trump administration is dedicated to promoting access to our offshore energy resources in order to promote energy dominance" and create jobs.
There is plenty of skepticism among independent energy analysts about the outcome of the leasing opportunities. "You can sell a lot more leases without guaranteeing more production," said Kevin Book, managing director of ClearView Energy Partners LLC.
If the economics aren't right, opening new areas for oil and gas development won't significantly boost drilling, analysts agree. The continuation of the "bromance" between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to shore up global oil prices is pivotal to the future profitability of higher-cost U.S. oil and gas tracts. And Trump, as the elected leader of the world's biggest market economy, doesn't have a seat at their cartel table, said Edward Chow, a senior fellow with the Energy and National Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).No seat at the table
"The three largest oil producers in the world now are Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United States, and the U.S. is the one producer of the three that is not subject to government control or manipulation of supply — which traditionally the U.S. thought of as a good thing," Chow said in an interview.
"What are the policy instruments the U.S. government could pursue" in the name of energy dominance, Chow asked. "I am hard-pressed to know what those are."
The policy Trump and his administration have chosen — opening more access to drilling on federal lands and stripping back regulations — may not even spur new bidding. For all the Trump administration's moves to reinvigorate the coal industry, the number of applications to tap federal reserves is falling, Bureau of Land Management records show (Greenwire, Aug. 29).
Last year's lease sale in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska put so much land on offer that the most desirable acreage — meaning the tracts closest to existing infrastructure — may have already been gobbled up, said Alison Wolters, upstream researcher for Wood Mackenzie's Canada/Alaska group.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has touted the Gulf of Mexico offering as "the largest oil and gas lease sale in U.S. history," but it's unlikely to move the needle for the offshore industry, said William Turner, a senior research analyst at Wood Mackenzie.
"The BOEM offering made a lot of headlines, but it's really not that much more than they've offered in the past," he said. "And simply offering more acreage is not going to drive much change in the industry."
But absent a drop in deepwater royalty rates — as the Trump administration introduced in July for some shallow-water leases — the government's role in driving new buys is unclear, Turner said.
"Unfortunately, the price of oil is the main driver at the moment," he said. "Until we see some of the incentives for those higher stack fields, the market's going to remain the major driver."
The administration's red-carpet rollout for the industry comes at a time when more than 14 million acres of federal land already under lease is not producing oil or gas, said Mark Squillace, a law professor at the University of Colorado. Last year, the industry bid on less than one-third of the federal lands offered at auction, he added in congressional testimony in July.
"Are you going to be bullish on paying a significant amount of money for the right to develop an oil resource that can't be brought to market for five to 10 years? I don't know about that," Squillace said.
Indeed, the game-changing access to new hydrocarbon reserves in shale foundations, and the resulting new production, has mostly occurred on nonfederal lands, Squillace noted.
The success of the upcoming March 2018 offshore sale hinges on two factors, said Randall Luthi, president of the trade group National Ocean Industries Association. The first is market prices. The second is industry faith in the regulatory environment.
"The oil and gas industry is heavily regulated; thus, having some surety that regulations will be based upon safety and meaningful dialogue between the regulators and the regulated is paramount and gives industry managers confidence that they will indeed be able to invest in new exploration programs," Luthi said.
Removing regulatory hurdles gives the market a chance to speak, said Dan Naatz, senior vice president of government relations and political affairs for the Independent Petroleum Association of America.
"The real key is to have those areas that are designed for multiple use, to have those available," he said.
Industry isn't asking to open up national parks or monuments for drilling, Naatz said. But companies are asking to be allowed to operate in the places the federal government has deemed appropriate for development. Under the Obama administration, many of those opportunities were closed, Naatz said.
"It's a dynamic industry," he said. "The companies know whether they're going to make money. They don't need the federal government telling them."
The Trump administration's focus on high-risk, high-cost regions is a bit of a puzzle, said Pavel Molchanov, an analyst for Raymond James & Associates.
"The oil industry has limited ability to invest," he said. "Oil prices have been rebounding, but they are still at levels where companies have to be selective in how they invest their capital. That means that not everything they might want to drill is going to get drilled."
Analysts conclude that some of the most active U.S. "tight" oil and shale areas are profitable at $50 a barrel, but others need higher prices to attract sustained investment and development.
While forecasters are predicting prices in the range of $55 to $60 a barrel in the United States, there are possibilities for global crises that could tighten supplies and raise prices, CSIS notes, including Libya's civil war, conflict in Nigeria and potential social collapse in Venezuela.
Areas with the lowest barriers to entry currently include the Permian Basin and Eagle Ford Shale in Texas and the Bakken Shale in North Dakota, Molchanov said. But operations in those plays are mainly concentrated on state and private lands.
"That's where the economics of oil wells are simply the most compelling," he said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/11/08/stories/1060065955
-
U.S. LNG Seen Shaping World Trade Over Next Five Years, Says BV Survey
Nov 8, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Sustained low natural gas prices and evolving supply dynamics are shifting oversupply from countries led by the United States to growing demand centers worldwide, Black & Veatch (BV) said in its annual review.
BV’s “2017 Strategic Directions: Natural Gas Industry Report” surveyed operators about how they are configuring long-term strategies to accommodate rapidly growing natural gas supply and readying it for delivery to thirsty global markets.
Look no further than the massive build-up in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade, where the United States is seen as a key player over the next five years. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has cited the same shift, given growing gas demand from Mexico, declining pipeline imports from Canada and a mammoth jolt in worldwide LNG exports.
Roughly 80% of respondents to BV’s survey see the United States emergence as a major LNG supplier “is either ‘extremely’ or ‘somewhat likely’ to shape the global LNG market over the next half decade,” BV researchers said.
“More than 75% cited the emergence of new LNG markets in developing countries as ‘extremely’ or ‘somewhat likely’ to shape the world LNG market during that stretch.”
This year’s online survey was conducted from Aug. 8-29 and reflects the input of more than 300 utility, municipal, commercial and community stakeholders, with 338 completing a majority of the survey. Because the survey was administered online, the amount of self-selection bias was unknown; therefore, no estimates of sampling error were calculated.
Fueling optimism about U.S. emergence in the LNG space comes in part from low production costs and “a profound shift in contracting practices -- the latter amounting to a price restructuring that now challenges LNG’s long-standing overseas suppliers.”
For example, gas-hungry India in 2009 signed a 20-year LNG deal with ExxonMobil Corp., but the country has since renegotiated the terms after its rate for LNG exceeded spot market pricing. India also in recent years has reworked its gas supply contract with Qatar, still the world’s dominant LNG exporter.
“Global LNG activity is impacted by a number of factors including foreign relations, emerging production leaders and available infrastructure,” said BV’s Hoe Wai Cheong, president of the oil and gas business. “Some of these issues may be perceived as challenges, but many industry leaders are now keeping a close watch on international events to proactively map out future business opportunities.”
Higher expectations of U.S. relevance in the LNG sector is coming as global supplies surge, and Australia makes moves to overtake Qatar as the No. 1 supplier.
Qatar in July lifted a decade-long moratorium on its North Field development to potentially increase LNG output to 100 million metric tons/year (mmty) from the current 77 mmty.
“But Black & Veatch report respondents believe that glut will dwindle, making the case for new, bigger exporters such as the United States,” researchers said.
“When asked when the current LNG oversupply will abate and foster a need for a restocking in that sector, more than 60% of the respondents estimated that would come by 2025.”
Over the next five years, a big appetite for LNG is growing south of the United States, already reflected in export volumes.
Mexico will increasingly becoming the destination for U.S. LNG exports, according to 36% of the respondents. That expectation is mirrored by EIA, which said Mexico’s gas use for power generation should increase by nearly 50% between 2016 and 2020.
Gas exports to Mexico from the United States also reached near-record levels over the first five months of 2017, the EIA said.
BV’s survey also showed increased Latin American demand for LNG is expected in the next five years from Brazil, Central America, Argentina, Colombia and the Caribbean.
The energy industry is hungry to fund infrastructure investments considered pivotal to accommodating increased imports and exports, including floating LNG applications and gas-based combined-cycle plants.
“Production efficiencies made in recent years have stoked a steady increase in global supply,” said BV’s John Chevrette, president of management consulting. “However, the ability of emerging markets to absorb this supply, given the lack of terminals, pipelines and other infrastructure, will require collaboration with end users and gas-to-power integration experts.”
The industry sees building pipelines (32%) and investing in LNG (27%) as the most critical investments for growth, according to BV’s survey.
More than one-quarter of respondents (27%) are planning to balance new renewable energy with gas resources.
BV also surveyed industry players about price trends and found that expectations for global crude prices between now and 2020 is sharply lower than it was a year ago.
“Nearly half of the industry respondents now expect prices to only be between $40 and $50/bbl,” BV said. “In the 2016 report, merely 7% listed this price range as their expectation. Oil and gas prices have historically been indexed in many markets, signaling a shift in survey respondents’ outlook for the industry.”
Among the other survey findings, BV found that 32% are using data to manage risk, with other management functions like budgeting, strategic planning and daily operations less reliant on data (30%).
According to 44% of the gas storage operators surveyed, impending final rules from the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration could make business more difficult and increase costs for customers.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112375-us-lng-seen-shaping-world-trade-over-next-five-years-says-bv-survey
-
Shell Officially Starts Construction on $6 Billion Ethane Cracker Plant
Nov 8, 2017 | The Times (Beaver, PA)
By Jared Stonesifer
Shell Chemicals has officially started construction on its $6 billion ethane cracker plant, a project that will take several years to complete.
The announcement Wednesday marks the next step in a massive project that dates back to March 2012, a time when Shell announced that the Potter Township site was one of several it was considering for its new ethane cracker facility.
Shell made it official in June of last year when it announced a final investment decision on the plant. Since that time, crews have been working around the clock to prepare the site for main works construction.
That site preparation was a massive undertaking by the company, which moved 7.2 million cubic yards of dirt and completely transformed the site, which previously held the Horsehead zinc smelter.
In addition, more than 4,200 steel pilings were installed for foundations across the property, while Shell also built new bridges, rail lines and completely relocated state Route 18 in front of the plant.
Now that the site is fully prepped for construction, another massive transformation to the landscape is set to take place as the actual plant is constructed.
“Today marks an important step forward for this major growth project,” Graham van’t Hoff, executive vice president for Shell’s global chemicals business said. “The preparation phase went well and our focus is now on ensuring first-class construction. Shell’s commercial, engineering and manufacturing expertise will help make this project a great success.”
The construction will include the building of four gigantic processing units that include one ethane cracker and three polyethylene units. The ethane cracker will be the largest part of the plant with more than 200 major components and 95 miles of pipe.
In addition, the company will build a 250-megawatt natural gas-fired power plant, which will produce electricity and steam to run the cracker plant. About one-third of the electricity produced at the site will help supply the local electrical grid.
Finally, Shell will construct a 900-foot-long cooling tower, rail and truck loading facilities, a new water treatment plant, an office building and a laboratory.
The facility is expected to utilize shale gas from the Marcellus and Utica basins to produce 1.6 million metric tons of polyethylene per year. That polyethylene will be used to make a wide array of products from food packaging to furniture to sports equipment, according to Shell.
At its peak, the project will require 6,000 construction workers, while 600 permanent jobs will be created when the plant becomes operational early next decade.
http://www.timesonline.com/news/20171108/shell-officially-starts-construction-on-6-billion-ethane-cracker-plant
-
Mariner East 2 Pipeline Completion Delayed Another Nine Months
Nov 8, 2017 | State Impact (NPR)
By Jon Hurdle
Sunoco Pipeline’s parent company, Energy Transfer Partners, said Wednesday that its Mariner East 2 pipeline will be put into service in the second quarter of 2018, some 18 months later than originally planned, because of delays caused by Pennsylvania regulators.
Chief Financial Officer Tom Long said during the company’s third-quarter earnings call that the project has been held up in part by the Public Utility Commission’s recent ban on horizontal directional drilling at a location in Chester County’s West Goshen Township until the PUC hears a dispute between the township and Sunoco over the siting of a valve. The hearing is scheduled for April next year.
“We’re evaluating the relocation or elimination of this valve as well other alternatives that we believe will allow us to move forward with this portion of the project in the near future,” Long said in prepared remarks.
The controversial cross-state project has been beset with technical, environmental and regulatory challenges, and faces strong community opposition in some places from landowners and public-safety advocates.
When completed, the more than $2.5 billion pipeline is due to carry natural gas liquids from the Marcellus Shale of southwestern Pennsylvania to an export terminal at Marcus Hook near Philadelphia.
https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2017/11/08/mariner-east-2-pipeline-completion-delayed-another-nine-months/
-
EPA Defends RCRA Settlement With Enviros
Nov 8, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gillmer
Federal judges yesterday appeared skeptical of a challenge to a settlement between U.S. EPA and environmentalists that could affect oil and gas regulation.
In oral arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, a lawyer for North Dakota argued that the state was unfairly excluded in the lead-up to the deal.
In the 2016 consent decree, EPA agreed to consider revising Resource Conservation and Recovery Act standards to include oil and gas waste. EPA has until March 2019 to decide whether the program should be updated and then until July 2021 to complete any update.
But North Dakota says the agreement should be tossed because it infringes on states' rights to be consulted about revisions to RCRA, a law for which states often take the lead on implementation. The state also argues that a lower court erred when it blocked North Dakota from intervening in the litigation.
"This case is not about dates; it's about a process — and an incomplete one at that," Greenberg Traurig LLP attorney Paul Seby, representing the state, told the court.
Seby's remark was in response to EPA's repeated argument that the settlement doesn't harm North Dakota because it merely sets out a schedule for considering a regulatory change.
EPA has vigorously defended the RCRA deal, adopting a position somewhat discordant with Administrator Scott Pruitt's ongoing efforts to crack down on settlements with environmental groups. Agency lawyers noted in a recent legal filing that settlements are often necessary when groups sue EPA over missing a statutory deadline and "the agency is left with few defenses, if any" (Energywire, Oct. 27).
North Dakota sought to intervene in the original district court proceedings that led to the settlement, but the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia rejected the request. The state appealed to the D.C. Circuit after the settlement was reached last December.'You have a seat at that table'
The three-judge panel hearing the case yesterday seemed skeptical of North Dakota's claims that the settlement harms the state. Judge Nina Pillard, an Obama appointee, noted that the state would have plenty of opportunity to weigh in on any regulatory changes if EPA moves forward on an update to RCRA programs.
"You have a seat at that table," she said. "Nobody's excluding you from that."
George W. Bush appointee Judge Brett Kavanaugh made similar observations: "Just to put a date in there is not excluding you from what is going to transpire."
Judge Sri Srinivasan, an Obama appointee, zeroed in on the wording of the decree, asking Seby whether it would assuage North Dakota's concerns if the court interpreted the document to imply a requirement that EPA comply with RCRA consultation obligations.
Seby maintained that states have a right to be consulted even before EPA begins considering whether RCRA updates are needed. The consent decree short-circuited that process, he said.
Justice Department attorney Robert Lundman, representing EPA, responded that the consent decree does not change any rights states have in the process.
"There's nothing in the consent decree that rewrites those terms," he said.
Environmental Integrity Project attorney Adam Kron argued that North Dakota has not been harmed by the settlement because it is merely concerned about the possibility of adverse regulation — which courts have previously rejected as a basis for legal standing.
EIP and a coalition of environmental groups filed the original lawsuit against EPA in May 2016.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/11/08/stories/1060065891
-
Spokane Voters Say No To Local Coal, Oil Train Regulation Through City
Nov 8, 2017 | Northwest Public Radio
By Emily Schwing
Voters in Spokane are saying no to an initiative regulating coal and oil shipments through the heart of the city. The initiative would have fined companies that ship uncovered coal and certain types of oil through the city.
Railway and oil companies like Burlington Northern-Santa Fe and Tesoro, funded Better Spokane’s campaign opposing the measure. Michael Cathcart, the group’s executive director, said the vote should lay the issue to rest.
“It is not a local government issue,” he said. “It is a federal issue and that’s where it belongs.”
Opponents argued rail shipments are governed by federal law and that the initiative was unlikely to withstand a legal challenge.
But supporters say the fight is not over.
“There are possibilities such as a statewide initiative,” said Jim Lee, who led the grassroots campaign for Safer Spokane. “We’re convinced that the idea is legal and enforceable.”
Lee and others say coal and oil cars pose a safety risk to the city. For now, trains carrying both will continue to travel through Spokane daily.
http://nwpr.org/post/spokane-voters-say-no-local-coal-oil-train-regulation-through-city
-
Lawyer Calls Pruitt's Science Shake-Up Illegal
Nov 8, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
Scott Pruitt's move to bar scientists with U.S. EPA grants from its science advisory boards is illegal, according to an environmental lawyer.
Under the EPA administrator's new policy, scientists who lead or co-lead research and receive EPA grants can no longer serve on any of its 22 federal advisory committees. The policy has outraged a number of current and former board members.
Michael Burger, director of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, said Pruitt's new policy violates the Administrative Procedure Act by being both "arbitrary and capricious."
"Given the inherent contradiction in excluding scientists who receive EPA funding but including scientists who receive funding from companies subject to EPA regulations, the rule is on its face both arbitrary and capricious," Burger wrote in a blog post on Monday.
"The total reversal of longstanding policy on criteria for membership in scientific advisory committees at EPA, the new policy's inconsistency with similar criteria used by other agencies that rely on science to formulate standards and policies, and the lack of any coherent explanation will all also weigh against the directive in a court of law," he added.
Pruitt touted the change, announced last week, as a way to avoid conflicts of interest among advisory board members and promote independence. "When we have members who have received tens of millions of dollars in grants, at the same time they are advising this agency on rulemaking, that is not good and that is not right," Pruitt said.
Not only does that new directive go against the APA, it also goes against federal conflict-of-interest laws, according to Burger.
The Ethics in Government Act mandates that special government employees, including scientists serving on advisory committees, cannot participate in matters that have a "direct and predictable effect on their financial interests," meaning there's a close connection between the individual's action and their financial gain. It isn't enough to speculate that an action would lead to financial gain, and an action does not represent a conflict if its benefits extend to a large and diverse group.
Burger wrote, "It is an untenable stretch of logic to say that a scientist who receives grants from EPA to study air pollution has a financial interest in any individual air pollution standard."
He also noted that most scientists who did have some sort of conflict would generally qualify for an exemption from the rule since they are serving on scientific advisory committees.'Discouraging place to be'
Current and former Science Advisory Board members have voiced dismay about the agency's new policy.
Former SAB Chairman Peter Thorne said he was disheartened by Pruitt's decision to bar members who receive EPA grants from participating in the agency's science advisory panels.
"It will incur long-lasting damage to getting independent scientific review and denigrate science at EPA, and it will erode the trust of the public," he said in a recent phone interview with E&E News. Thorne is the head of the University of Iowa's Department of Occupational and Environmental Health. His term ended Sept. 30.
Pruitt's directive also extends to members any of EPA's nearly two dozen scientific advisory committees, including its Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee and its Board of Scientific Counselors (E&E News PM, Nov. 2).
Rosters of new advisory board members reveal a number of individuals with close ties to industries EPA is charged with regulating (Greenwire, Nov. 3).
"Pruitt seems to be on a mission to remove the academic scientists and replace them with industry people," said William Schlesinger, a member of the SAB and president emeritus of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, N.Y. His tenure is unaffected by the new policy as he does not have grant funding from EPA. His current term will expire next fall.
Schlesinger said he had been expecting the board's new members under the new administration to be more pro-deregulation.
"[Pruitt] has certainly pursuing it with almost a religious fervor. It wouldn't surprise me if he thought 'Be fruitful and multiply' out of Genesis was guiding him and not any health and safety of the people of the planet," he said.
Robert Johnston, an economics professor at Clark University and one of the board members who stepped down as a result of the new policy, scoffed at the idea the change in policy would reduce conflicts of interest. He had been serving his fifth year of membership on the board. SAB members serve a three-year term, and past administrations had typically renewed eligible members for a second term.
"The justification, it really turns conflict of interest on its head," said Johnston.
He noted that SAB already had an "iron-clad" process in place to prevent members from working on any topics they had personal or professional connections to.
EPA called Johnston shortly after its announcement of the new policy last week and gave him the choice of continuing his work or continuing on the board for the remaining months of his term. He told E&E News he was already two years into his EPA grant investigating how the public benefits from clean water.
"Simply dropping that and letting the research die is not a realistic option," he said.
Johnston explained many members of SAB did the work as a public service, and the stipends they receive from the agency are much lower than their university salaries. "We are doing it because we want to do the right thing," he said.
Ruling out members with EPA grant funding eliminates many researchers with expertise in their fields, Schlesinger added.
While he did not recognize anyone on the list of new members, Schlesinger said he was familiar with their industry connections. He noted that coming from an industry background in and of itself wasn't necessarily a negative.
"These people can be intelligent, but they also have different motivations, and they have bosses at home who are going to expect them to not say, 'We caused one of our major product lines to be shut down,'" he said.
As for how work on the board will proceed with its new members, Schlesinger wasn't optimistic. "I think it will be a very discouraging place to be," he said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/11/08/stories/1060065927
-
California to Collaborate With EU, China on Carbon Markets
Nov 8, 2017 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Kathleen Ronayne
Gov. Jerry Brown announced plans Tuesday to further California’s cooperation with the European Union and China on fighting climate change.
California and the EU will begin hosting regular meetings, also working with China, on improving carbon markets, which aim to reduce pollution by putting a price on carbon emissions.
The enhanced collaboration, announced after Brown addressed the European Parliament in Brussels, underscores Brown’s emergence as one of the United States’ leading voices on international climate policy even as the federal government recedes.
His nearly two-week trip to Europe will end at the United Nation’s climate conference in Bonn, Germany, where the international Paris accord to reduce carbon emissions will be a key topic of conversation. President Donald Trump plans to withdraw the United States from the agreement, but Brown and other governors are pledging to meet its targets anyway.
“If we come together and we see the truth of our situation we can overcome it,” Brown said in his address to the European Parliament. “In America, we don’t all agree among ourselves, but people in cities, in states, corporations, universities and nonprofit organizations are joining together. We’re not waiting.”
The enhanced collaboration with the EU and China will focus on designing and implementing better carbon markets. China is working to create its own, while the EU operates the largest carbon market in the world. California, meanwhile, operates a carbon market in partnership with the Canadian provinces of Quebec and Ontario.
The market-based system requires polluters to obtain allowances in order to emit carbon. The goal is to reduce emissions over time. Brown has long advocated for linking California’s market with other states and nations, and he said Tuesday he hopes to eventually link California’s program with the EU’s. Next week Brown will address a China-organized forum on cap-and-trade programs.
“Climate change is a threat to all of humanity, to all species and it can only be solved by a global cooperative effort. It must be far greater than it is today,” Brown said.
Brown has started a number of multi-state climate change agreements, including the Under2 Coalition, an agreement by roughly 180 subnational governments to keep global temperature rise below two degrees Celsius. At the U.N. Conference, he’s been named a special adviser for states and regions.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/energy-environment/california-to-collaborate-with-eu-china-on-carbon-markets/2017/11/07/ffcade96-c421-11e7-9922-4151f5ca6168_story.html?utm_term=.537e25f400c1
-
EPA Head: Climate Report Won't Impact Obama Rule Repeal
Nov 8, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The federal government’s comprehensive Climate Science Special Report won’t change the Trump administration’s rollback of former President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, according to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) head.
“We’re taking the very necessary step to evaluate our authority under the Clean Air Act and we’ll take steps that are required to issue a subsequent rule. That’s our focus,” Scott Pruitt told USA Today in an interview published Wednesday.
“Does this report have any bearing on that? No it doesn’t. It doesn’t impact the withdrawal and it doesn’t impact the replacement.”
It was Pruitt’s first statement on the climate report since its release onFriday.
The report’s conclusions directly contrast with Trump administration officials' comments on a number of fronts, including the degree to which human activity, via greenhouse gases, is responsible for climate change.
“This assessment concludes, based on extensive evidence, that it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century,” it found. “For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.”
Pruitt and other Trump administration officials say that climate change is happening and human activity is somewhat to blame, but no one can confidently say the degree of that contribution.
Without that confidence, Pruitt and his colleagues say it is irresponsible to implement expensive climate policies.
“Obviously the climate is changing and has always changed, [and] humans contribute to that. Measuring with exact precision is very challenging,” he told USA Today. “So I think the report [is] good to encourage an open dialogue on this.”
Pruitt formally proposed last month to repeal the Clean Power Plan, fulfilling a key campaign promise by Trump, and the agency is now taking public comments on the proposal.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/359373-epa-head-climate-report-wont-impact-obama-rule-repeal
-
Senators Tear Into Controversial Trump Environment Nominee
Nov 8, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Senators from both parties on Wednesday criticized Kathleen Hartnett White, a key environmental nominee from President Trump, using her past statements on climate change and fuel policy to raise concerns about her nomination.
Hartnett White, a think tank official and former Texas environmental regulator, is an outspoken climate change skeptic and has raised questions about the science behind not just carbon emissions but also other greenhouse gases and pollutants.
At a hearing with Harntett White, Democrats on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee cited statements she had made on science and climate regulations to make the case against her nomination to the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
The board, which Hartnett White is nominated to lead as chair, advises the president on environmental issues and coordinates federal environment reviews and initiatives.
Harntett White, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), said, “has shown that she is not only a science denier, but actively promotes misinformation on climate, ozone, mercury, particulate matter and other known health hazards that impact our air and waterways.”
Carper noted that she had equated belief in climate change to “paganism,” and highlighted her comment that ozone, a pollutant with ties to health problems, is not harmful unless “you put your mouth over the tailpipe of a car for eight hours every day.”
Other Democrats brought up her statement that renewable energy is “parasitic” and her opposition to Obama-era efforts to tackle climate change.
She defended her views on science at the hearing, even those that go against scientific observations. At one point she said carbon dioxide emissions have not gone up “drastically,” a statement at odds with the data collected by climate scientists.
“Your positions are so far out of the mainstream, they’re not just outliers they’re outrageous,” said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.). “You are a fringe voice that denies science and economics and reality.”
Hartnett White said “there may be some mistakes” in some of her past statements, but that some of the quotations used against her were “out of context.”
She said climate change is real but said more research is needed into its causes.
“It’s likely that C02 emissions from human activity have some influence on the climate but not to the extent” some scientists have said, she said.
“We need a more precise explanation of the human contribution,” she said.
Hartnett White defended her nomination by highlighting her time as chair of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (CEQ), saying she worked to enforce environmental laws in the state and help it conform with federal pollution regulations.
“Several of the extremists are driving a narrative that you hate the environment and worked to give cover to polluters when you were at the Texas Commission, CEQ,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said.
“To me it looks like the the number of enforcement orders are up … I wanted to show and demonstrate what you, as the administrator of the Texas CEQ, did in following the law, regardless of who was responsible.”
But Republicans from agriculture states also criticized Hartnett White, including her repeated opposition to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), which supports the corn industry.
“I worry about your extremist views and your role as an adviser to the president,” said Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.).
Hartnett White has called for the RFS to be repealed. But she said Wednesday she would support Trump’s proposal to expand the program in the future.
Hartnett White testified before the EPW Committee alongside Trump’s nominee to be deputy administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Andrew Wheeler.
A former EPA employee and EPW Committee staffer, Wheeler faced a friendlier audience than Hartnett White. But Democrats did dig into his time lobbying for coal and energy firms, including leading coal miner Murray Energy.
Democrats questioned whether Wheeler had seen a plan written by Murray Energy CEO Robert Murray designed to roll back federal regulations on the coal industry.
Wheeler said he had seen it, but didn’t remember its details. He also said he attended two meetings — at the Energy Department (DOE) and on Capitol Hill — on a controversial DOE plan to prop up the coal and nuclear industries.
Republicans were quick to support Wheeler’s nomination.
“We know how well-qualified Mr. Wheeler is, and if confirmed, what a wealth of experience and expertise he will bring to a critically important role in protecting America’s public health and safety,” Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/359402-senators-tear-into-controversial-trump-environment-nominee
-
Barrasso Touts Carper's 'Positive Comments' on Wheeler
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
Senate environment panel Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY) is touting “positive comments” that the committee's ranking member, Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), made to Inside EPA about Andrew Wheeler, President Donald Trump's nominee to be deputy EPA administrator, that the nominee may be less controversial than others.
At the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee's (EPW) Nov. 8 hearing for Wheeler, a former coal industry lobbyist and GOP committee staffer, Barrasso quoted from the Oct. 25 interview Carper gave Inside EPA in which he said Wheeler appears more open to responding to Democrats' questions for the record than other EPA nominees.
“I was heartened by the Ranking Member’s positive comments about Mr. Wheeler and his dedication to EPA’s mission,” Barrasso told the hearing, and then recited Carper's comments.
Carper said he told Wheeler, during their Oct. 25 meeting, “One of the keys for us moving nominations of people that we think would not be a disaster or harm the environment or take us in the wrong direction is that this administration, this EPA, has to realize that they need to respond to oversight inquiries whether Democrat or Republican. They need to do that, and they need to stop spoiling our environment and have some reverence for the planet on which we live.”
While Carper did not commit to support Wheeler, he noted his prior work in the Senate. “The fact that we've worked with him, we know him -- he used to work with George Voinovich, who was one of my closet friends and allies on the environment -- is certainly helpful,” Carper said. “And I think having worked in the agency, he actually cares about the environment; the air we breathe, the water we drink, the planet on which we live,” he said.
Wheeler served from 1991 to 1995 as a special assistant to the EPA Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics information management division director. He later served as chief counsel to then EPW Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) from 1995 to 1997. He subsequently served in several roles on EPW, including as clean air subcommittee staff director under Inhofe, from 1997 to 2001, and under the late Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) from 2001 to 2003.
He was Republican staff director for the full committee from 2003 to 2009, and currently works as a principal of the energy and climate change practice group at FaegreBD Consulting.
Other Trump nominees for top EPA slots have triggered a greater backlash, with many Democrats criticizing former George W. Bush EPA acting air chief Bill Wehrum's nomination to head the Office of Air & Radiation, with a Senate confirmation vote possible this week.
Meanwhile, former EPA toxicologist Michael Dourson's nomination to head the agency's toxics office faces an uncertain future as it is unclear whether he has enough GOP support to clear a full Senate vote.
And other administration nominees for top environment slots, such as Kathleen Hartnett White, the former Texas regulator tapped to lead the Council on Environmental Quality who is also being considered by the Senate environment committee Nov. 8, is also drawing significant concern from Democrats and environmentalists.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/barrasso-touts-carpers-positive-comments-wheeler
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested