Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 30/11
-
Senate Panel Approves Two Top Environmental Nominees
Nov 30, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
A Senate committee approved two of President Donald Trump's nominees for top environmental posts, although the timing of their final confirmation votes is unclear. -
(ACC Mentioned) With EPA Falling Prey to Industry Influence, Congress is Rallying to Protect our Future
Nov 30, 2017 | HuffPost
By Linda Reinstein
This time last year, Obama’s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was poised to swiftly ban asbestos, having selected it as one of ten high-risk toxins for prioritized risk evaluation and regulation under the newly reformed Toxic Substances Control Act(TSCA). -
NGOs Criticise US EPA Plan For Snurs In New Chemical Decisions
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
NGOs have questioned the US EPA's plans to rely heavily on significant new use rules (Snurs) in evaluating pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) and making determinations on the safety of new chemicals. -
More Questions For EPA On Identifying Chemicals For Prioritization Under TSCA
Nov 29, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Lindsay McCormick
When EPA finalized its framework prioritization rule under TSCA last June, the agency deleted its proposed approach to identifying potential candidate chemicals for prioritization. -
US EPA May Change 'Small Manufacturer' Definition
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The US EPA has formally decided that its definition of a small manufacturer should be revised, but has not yet made the change. -
Ban on Teflon Chemical Tied to Fewer Low-Weight Babies
Nov 30, 2017 | The New York Times
By Nicholas Bakalar
Banning a chemical used to make Teflon led to a sharp decrease in pregnancy-related problems. -
Research Ties PFOA Phase-Out With Drop In Low Birth Weights
Nov 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
New York University (NYU) researchers are reporting findings that show a correlation between the voluntary phase-out that the chemical industry negotiated with EPA in 2006 for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), the chemical used to make non-stick substances, and a drop in the number of babies with low birth weights. -
Study: Phaseout of Teflon Chemical Has Likely Averted Thousands of Low-Weight Births and Saved Billions in Health Care Costs
Nov 29, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Bill Walker and David Andrews
The phaseout of a hazardous chemical formerly used to make Teflon has likely prevented thousands of low-weight births in the U.S. each year, saving billions of dollars in health care costs, says a new study from researchers at New York University. -
Glitter Is An Environmental Scourge That Is Wrecking The Oceans. Should It Be Banned?
Nov 29, 2017 | Newsweek
By Kate Sheridan
Anyone who has touched glitter knows that just a small amount can get everywhere and stay everywhere. (Glitter’s eternal permanence is why someone started a prank company to ship glitter to people you do not like.) It’s seemingly impossible to get rid of on land—and it can also cause problems in the oceans, scientists say. In fact, a group of daycare centers in the U.K. decided to ban the use of glitter for that reason earlier this month, according to The Guardian. -
Glitter Is Not Just Annoying, It Could Be Bad For The Environment
Nov 29, 2017 | CNN
By AJ Willingham
Glitter is the ultimate supervillain of the craft and makeup world: Charming, but insidious. Use it once, and you'll be vacuuming it out of the carpet and picking it from under your nails until the day you die. -
California Identifies Chlorpyrifos as Reproductive Toxicant
Nov 30, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
Scientific advisers for California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment identified the pesticide chlorpyrifos as a reproductive toxicant, triggering the need for warnings and other regulatory requirements. -
Biocides EDC Criteria To Apply From June
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has published its delegated Regulation setting out the criteria for identifying endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) under the biocidal products Regulation (BPR) in the EU Official Journal. The criteria will apply from 7 June 2018. -
ChemSec Releases Latest SVHC Producers Data
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
NGO ChemSec has updated its Substitute It Now (SIN) List with new data on the number of hazardous chemicals producers are manufacturing. -
EU Publishes Roadmap On FCM Law Evaluation
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has published a roadmap outlining how it will evaluate EU legislation on food contact materials (FCMs). -
Crestone Peak Urged to Move Fracking Wells in Colorado
Nov 30, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
Crestone Peak Resources should locate new drilling well pads along a state highway and farther from residential areas in Boulder County, local officials tell Colorado state regulators. -
Survey Finds Many Lawmakers Muted On CPP Repeal
Nov 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
A survey by the advocacy group Climate Hawks Vote finds that most members of Congress -- on both sides of the aisle -- are not being outspoken about EPA's proposed repeal of the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP) utility greenhouse gas rule. -
NextDecade Might Start Rio Grande LNG Project With Two Trains
Nov 29, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
NextDecade Corp. said it is considering a plan to use two production trains for its proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility in South Texas, but it still plans to eventually have six trains running at the facility near the Mexican border. -
U.S. Ready to Work with European Allies to Diversify NatGas, Oil Supplies, Says Tillerson
Nov 29, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The United States is “eager” to work with its European allies to develop natural gas and oil infrastructure to help diversify the continent’s energy supply, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told an audience on Tuesday. -
Key Trump Picks At Odds Over EPA's Power To Weigh Costs In Air Standards
Nov 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan
Key Trump administration environment nominees are at odds over whether EPA has sufficient legal authority to consider compliance costs when setting national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), even though a unanimous Supreme Court opinion found that the agency lacks such power under the Clean Air Act (CAA). -
EPA Says Methane ICR Withdrawal Shows 'Deregulatory' Success
Nov 29, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A top EPA official on a deregulatory “task force” says the agency has met its 2017 goals for implementing President Donald Trump's executive orders (EOs) on reducing regulatory burdens, citing the withdrawal of an Obama-era information collection request on oil and gas methane emissions as a qualifying “deregulatory action.”
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 - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Senate Panel Approves Two Top Environmental Nominees
Nov 30, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
A Senate committee approved two of President Donald Trump's nominees for top environmental posts, although the timing of their final confirmation votes is unclear.
Lawmakers on the Environment and Public Works Committee Nov. 29 approved the nominations of Kathleen Hartnett White for director of the White House Commission on Environmental Quality and Andrew Wheeler for Environmental Protection Agency deputy administrator. Both nominees were approved on a party-line vote, 11-10.
The nominees’ prospects in the full Senate are also unclear.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the committee chairman, told Bloomberg Environment that Democrats were at fault for using procedural actions to lengthen the amount of time required to confirm nominees.
“The votes are there,” Barrasso said, but many lawmakers don't “want to have to block so many activities in the Senate because of the 30 hours that are required by the rules” to debate nominees. He said he hopes to change Senate rules to reduce this behavior.
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), meanwhile, said the EPA needs to respond to outstanding document requests.
At least 95 other executive branch and judicial nominees have been voted out of committee and are awaiting final Senate confirmation.
Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), said in a Nov. 29 email to Bloomberg Environment he couldn't comment on the timing of floor action because it was not scheduled yet.
Democrats Oppose
Similar to the nominees’ confirmation hearings, Democrats assailed the candidates as compromised and unqualified.
“These nominees are the latest in a pattern by this administration to send us candidates with work experience that directly conflicts with the mission they are supposed to execute,” Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) said.
White, who served on the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality from 2001 to 2007 as a member and chairwoman, drew heavy opposition from Senate Democrats over her climate views and air regulations at her confirmation hearing Oct. 12.
Wheeler, a former chief counsel to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, more recently lobbied on behalf of energy and coal companies like Murray Energy Corp., Energy Fuels Resources Inc. and Xcel Energy as an employee of the lobbying firm Faegre Baker Daniels.
Wheeler also worked for four years in the EPA's toxics office during the George H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations.
Barrasso said it was “simply untrue” that Hartnett White opposes all EPA regulations.
Joins Other Nominees
Other environmental picks are also waiting for the full Senate to act.
Susan Bodine, nominated for EPA's assistant administrator for enforcement and compliance assistance, was approved by committee July 12. Michael Dourson, nominated to serve as EPA assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention, cleared the committee Oct. 25.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=124339117&vname=dennotallissues&fn=124339117&jd=124339117
-
Nov 30, 2017 | HuffPost
By Linda Reinstein
This time last year, Obama’s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was poised to swiftly ban asbestos, having selected it as one of ten high-risk toxins for prioritized risk evaluation and regulation under the newly reformed Toxic Substances Control Act(TSCA).
One year later and now under a Trump administration, the EPA appears focused on cutting programs and killing regulations rather than cutting killer chemicals out of our lives.
Trump has been on the warpath to destroy the EPA since the campaign trail, vowing that, under his presidency, “We will get rid of [the EPA] in almost every form.” Since assuming office in January, he has wasted no time making this promise a reality.
Congress seems to have a different view than our President, though, on how the EPA should function, and leaders from both sides of the aisle are now stepping up to intervene.
Pushback Against Pruitt
The first crippling blow to the EPA was the appointment of Scott Pruitt as the Agency’s administrator. Pruitt’s nominations raised red flags from the start, given his notable lack of scientific credentials and his long career of suing the EPA in his former role as Oklahoma attorney general.
Since being confirmed to the post, Pruitt has wasted no time systematically sabotaging the Agency’s ability to perform its intended function. Under Trump’s direction, Pruitt’s EPA has begun eliminating a startling number of existing regulations. He is slashing both the budget and the workforce, effectively hindering the Agency’s capacity to function, while at the same time using huge chunks of taxpayer-generated funding to pay for trips home to Oklahoma and for controversial equipment, including a soundproof communication booth for the EPA’s office, which alone cost taxpayers $25,000.
What is even more concerning is that Trump and Pruitt are filling the ranks of the EPA with chemical industry cronies who have spent their careers lobbying against EPA intervention, including Nancy Beck, formerly Senior Policy Director at ACC, now Deputy Assistant Administrator in the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP). Most recently, Trump has nominated Dr. Michael Dourson, who has close connections to Big Tobacco, to lead the OCSPP as EPA Assistant Administrator. In fact, on December 6, Beck will host her first public meeting on TSCA, with a “pilot panel” featuring an ACC exec and other industry representatives.
If there was ever any question where Pruitt’s loyalties lie, his schedule makes it clear. Information uncovered through the Freedom of Information Act revealed a slew of meetings with lobbyists and industry reps, and earlier this month, Pruitt gave the keynote address at the annual conference for the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the notorious Big Chem lobby shop that represents the only remaining users of asbestos, among others.
Fortunately, Pruitt’s efforts have not gone unnoticed. His spending has drawn question from Senators on both sides of the aisle, the media is repeatedly questioning his fitness for this role, and two House Republicans have called for Pruitt to appear before the House Environment Subcommittee for a hearing on Dec. 7, where he will have to answer for all of this and more.
Dourson’s Many Detractors
Trump’s most recent nominee for a high-level EPA appointment is facing unprecedented opposition.
Dr. Michael Dourson, nominated to serve as the OCSPP’s Assistant Administrator, has deep-rooted industry ties that make him a concerning and entirely unfit choice for this important post. His research firm, Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA), is known for conducting industry-backed studies that are widely questioned by the scientific community. TERA’s clients include Big Chem giants Dow, Monsanto, and many more.
The possibility of Dourson taking control of the office tasked with protecting the public from dangerous and deadly toxic chemicals has created a bipartisan chorus of opposition in the Senate. Most recently, North Carolina’s Republican Sens. Richard Burr and Thom Tillis said they would also oppose Dourson’s nomination.
Though Dourson’s nomination was voted through the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee, it hasn’t yet progressed to a floor vote — an indication that he doesn’t have the votes he needs to be confirmed.
Democratic Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware expressed hope that this may be the moment the Senate comes together to stand up for the American public: “After casting votes for one troubling nominee after the other after the other, you reach a point where some of the Republicans will say, Enough already. No more.”
Taking Matters into Their Own Hands
The questions levied against Pruitt and the pushback against confirming Dourson show us that, as the EPA grows increasingly ill-suited to protect anything other than industry profits, Congress is coming together to intervene.
Perhaps the most promising stand Congress has taken in the wake of the EPA’s increasing degradation is a bill that would legislatively enact a ban on a chemical currently under EPA evaluation.
The Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act of 2017 (ARBAN), S. 2072, would ban the import and use of asbestos within 18 months of enactment. It serves the dual purposes of expediting the EPA’s regulatory process, which could take as long as 7 years, while also preventing the EPA to write in deadly exemptions.
Scientists the world round, including those at EPA, have known for decades that asbestos causes cancer, and there is no safe or controlled use. Even the smallest fiber, if inhaled, can lodge in the lungs and ultimately trigger the disease that continues to kill so many.
Despite this, lobbyists from the ACC are pushing the EPA to allow the chloralkali industry — the only remaining users of asbestos in the U.S. — to be exempted from any asbestos ban or regulation. Of course, a ban that exempts the sole users is no ban at all, and will do nothing to mitigate the risk this continued use would pose to the chloralkali plant workers, as well as those in the surrounding communities and involved with the related mining, transport, and disposal. Based on the EPA’s preliminary updates on their ongoing asbestos evaluation, they appear poised to allow for this and other dangerous exemptions from regulation.
Last year, Congress was cheered for unanimously passing TSCA reform that required the EPA to regulate toxins based on their impact on human health, with no consideration given to economic impact on industry. Trump’s EPA, unfortunately, is looking for — and finding — ways to skirt this paramount rule.
The actions of Congress make clear they are aware of the undue industry influence gaining steam at the EPA, as well as the pitfalls of letting it continue unfettered. The scary truth is that Scott Pruitt and his underlings are poised to do damage to environmental policy that could take decades to unwind.
The ARBAN bill gives Congress the chance to prevent a small piece of this insidious sabotage — not only by banning, one and for all, a deadly carcinogen, but also by sending an unmistakable message to the EPA that if they won’t protect our future, Congress will.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/with-epa-falling-prey-to-industry-influence-congress_us_5a1f13f3e4b039242f8c815a
-
NGOs Criticise US EPA Plan For Snurs In New Chemical Decisions
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
NGOs have questioned the US EPA's plans to rely heavily on significant new use rules (Snurs) in evaluating pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) and making determinations on the safety of new chemicals.
Comments from the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and Safer Chemicals Healthy Families (SCHF) were submitted ahead of a 6 December public meeting. At the meeting the agency will discuss draft documents explaining its decision-making process and offering guidance for submitting new chemical notifications under the amended TSCA.
Many of the concerns raised relate to situations where the EPA has concerns about "reasonably foreseen conditions of use" other than those proposed by the PMN submitter. The draft says the agency's general policy will be to address such concerns through Snurs.
The NGOs asked if the agency will issue "not likely to present an unreasonable risk" findings in cases when they will be relying on the conditions set out in a Snur.'Substance as a whole'
TSCA requires the EPA to make a determination on the safety of a chemical based on "the substance as a whole" and foreseeable conditions of use, wrote Richard Denison, senior scientist at the EDF. "What legal basis does EPA have for considering the existence of a Snur in making that finding or for limiting the scope of its analysis of the new substance based on the Snur?"
The advocacy groups are concerned that the EPA plans to issue "not likely" findings, allowing manufacturing to begin before a Snur is finalised.
"Does the agency expect the Snur to be in place before the submitter begins manufacturing the new chemical? If so, how will the agency assure that it sticks to this timeframe for the numerous Snurs it intends to issue?" asked SCHF. And, it adds, if a Snur is delayed, a manufacturer could proceed even though "the controls on exposure described in the amended PMN are voluntary and unenforceable."
This is a greater concern for the NGOs in cases where the EPA issues a so-called "non-5(e) Snur" rather than one that is connected to a consent order binding the submitter of the PMN. The non-5(e) Snurs require a comment process that can take longer and be held up if they are challenged.
The EPA's framework "seems designed to evade issuing section 5(e) orders and instead to rely on non-5(e) SNURs," which has not been EPA's practice since TSCA was amended, Dr Denison wrote.
"One significant concern with that approach is that EPA can mandate testing to address insufficient information with a section 5(e) order, but Snurs do not provide this direct authority to require testing."
The NGOs also questioned how the EPA will ensure that a new chemical viewed as unlikely to pose a risk under the terms of a PMN will not become one if multiple manufacturers begin making it. They asked how the agency will ensure that downstream users implement safety restrictions.
"How can EPA make a finding that the PMN chemical is 'unlikely to present an unreasonable risk' without a high degree of certainty that controls will be implemented throughout the chain of distribution and life cycle of the chemical?" Dr Denison asked. He also said the EPA has failed to publish documentation on its review of PMNs as required by TSCA, and stopped updating its PMN status database.Industry concerns
Jared Rothstein, senior manager of regulatory affairs at the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates (Socma), also made comments ahead of the meeting. He said the EPA routinely asks submitters to waive statutory deadlines for making decisions on PMNs when the agency requests additional information.
"The existing statutory requirement does not suggest that Congress intended to create a system in which EPA needs significantly more information (from the previous incarnation of TSCA) from submitters and regularly requires submitters to suspend the deadline (which is what companies are currently experiencing)," Mr Rothstein wrote.
He also noted that TSCA requires EPA to refund submitters' fees when it misses a deadline, and asked if that will apply when the agency asks a submitter to suspend the review period.
David Wawer, executive director of the Color Pigments Manufacturers Association (CPMA), said the EPA's guidance documents do not mention low-volume exemptions and asked if that means the agency is phasing them out — as was suggested by speakers at a recent conference.
https://chemicalwatch.com/62118/ngos-criticise-us-epa-plan-for-snurs-in-new-chemical-decisions
-
More Questions For EPA On Identifying Chemicals For Prioritization Under TSCA
Nov 29, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Lindsay McCormick
When EPA finalized its framework prioritization rule under TSCA last June, the agency deleted its proposed approach to identifying potential candidate chemicals for prioritization. EDF had supported EPA’s initial proposed rule, and EPA’s decision to delay this process to allow for additional stakeholder engagement tracks closely with the comments chemical industry groups submitted on that proposed rule.
EPA is now holding a public meeting on December 11th to discuss its proposed approaches and get input from stakeholders. As with the upcoming meeting on new chemical reviews, EPA is accepting questions ahead of the meeting.
In response, EDF submitted a number of questions to the agency on Monday, relating to our concerns in the following areas:EPA’s stated intention to significantly exceed its statutory minimum of designating 20 low-priority chemicals within the law’s specified timeframe.EPA’s passive approach to utilizing its new authorities to fill data gaps on chemicals before they enter the prioritization and risk evaluation processes.The need to ensure transparency with respect to health and safety studies and underlying data used by EPA to identify candidate chemicals for prioritization.Specific concerns regarding EPA’s proposed approaches, including to utilize Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan as a model and to use EPA’s Safer Chemicals Ingredient List (SCIL) as a basis for identifying low-priority chemicals.
Read our full list of questions here for more details.
http://blogs.edf.org/health/2017/11/29/more-questions-for-epa-on-identifying-chemicals-for-prioritization-under-tsca/
-
US EPA May Change 'Small Manufacturer' Definition
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
The US EPA has formally decided that its definition of a small manufacturer should be revised, but has not yet made the change.
The definition is significant because "small manufacturers" are exempt from some TSCA reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
The 30 November notice said a change is warranted "because of the magnitude of the increase in the [Producer Price Index] ... and the current annual sales standard is comparatively low, given current revenue-based size standards developed by the Small Business Association (SBA)."
The standard, which was adopted in the 1980s, considers a manufacturer small if its total annual sales are less than $4m. A company can also qualify if these are under $40m and no site it controls produces more than 45,400 kilograms of an individual substance annually.
The new TSCA required the agency to determine whether the standard should change. In December 2016, the EPA issued a preliminary determination that it merited revision and requested further comment. The SBA encouraged the agency to discard its existing definition, rather than adjusting it for inflation.
If the EPA opts to actually change the standard, it will have to do so through an additional rulemaking process.
https://chemicalwatch.com/62119/us-epa-may-change-small-manufacturer-definition
-
Ban on Teflon Chemical Tied to Fewer Low-Weight Babies
Nov 30, 2017 | The New York Times
By Nicholas Bakalar
Banning a chemical used to make Teflon led to a sharp decrease in pregnancy-related problems.
Perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, had been used in many consumer products, including nonstick cookware, food packaging, electronics and carpets. The chemical was linked to a range of health problems, including low-weight births. Beginning in 2003, its use was gradually phased out in the United States under an agreement between government and industry, and eliminated by 2014.
Researchers used data from a larger health study to estimate levels of serum PFOA in women of childbearing age. They gathered data on birth weights from a government database. The study is in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health.
PFOA blood levels peaked in 2007-8, and then declined consistently each year through 2014. PFOA was implicated in 5 percent of low-weight births in 2007-8 and in 0.5 percent in 2013-14.
The researchers estimate that 118,009 low-weight births were prevented from 2003 to 2014, resulting in $13.7 billion in savings.
“It’s important to highlight the role of the Environmental Protection Agency in this,” said the senior author, Dr. Teresa M. Attina, a research scientist at New York University. “They sponsored a program with this goal in mind, acting in a good way by involving industry in the interest of public health.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/well/ban-on-teflon-chemical-tied-to-fewer-low-weight-babies.html
-
Research Ties PFOA Phase-Out With Drop In Low Birth Weights
Nov 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
New York University (NYU) researchers are reporting findings that show a correlation between the voluntary phase-out that the chemical industry negotiated with EPA in 2006 for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), the chemical used to make non-stick substances, and a drop in the number of babies with low birth weights.
The Washington Post reported Nov. 28 on research, published this month in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, that estimates the proportion of low birth weights attributable to PFOA and associated costs in the United States from 2003 to 2014.
Using computer modeling, the researchers estimated that the phase-out of PFOA and related chemicals avoided as many as 17,000 low-weight births in recent years, the article says.
The researchers analyzed blood samples of new mothers as part of a national study examining PFOA levels, the Postarticle says. The article notes that in 2006, EPA reached an agreement with PFOA manufacturers to phase out the chemical's production by 2015.
The study also cites costs related to low-weight births, with the study's abstract saying the costs of PFOA-attributable low birth weights from 2003 through 2014 are estimated to be $13.7 billion. It found that blood serum levels of PFOA began to drop in women of childbearing age in the years 2009-2010. "Declines were of a magnitude expected to meaningfully reduce the estimated incidence of PFOA-attributable [low birth weight] and associated costs," the abstract says.
In an interview with the Post, NYU researcher LeonardoTrasande said, "All too often we talk about the failure of EPA or other agencies to regulate chemicals." He added, "But we don't give enough credit when an agency does the right thing, and works with industry proactively" in phasing out a chemical.
PFOA, a chemical that was used in the process of making various commercial and industrial products such as Teflon, has been linked to certain cancers and other adverse health effects. But EPA currently does not regulate PFOA or other per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) -- a class of emerging contaminants to which PFOA belongs.
EPA in 2016 released drinking water health advisories for PFOA and another common PFAS known as perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), of 70 parts per trillion (ppt). While these advisories aim to guide state and local authorities, they have no regulatory effect.
Some states have recently been pushing regulatory and litigation pressures on manufacturers to address PFAS. In one such instance, Minnesota's attorney general is preparing for an upcoming trial against 3M Co., alleging $5 billion in damages to the health of residents and the environment near a 3M facility, citing low birth weights among babies as one of the outcomes of the alleged exposures.
And New Jersey regulators recently proposed an enforceable PFOA drinking water standard of 14 ppt.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/research-ties-pfoa-phase-out-drop-low-birth-weights
-
Nov 29, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Bill Walker and David Andrews
The phaseout of a hazardous chemical formerly used to make Teflon has likely prevented thousands of low-weight births in the U.S. each year, saving billions of dollars in health care costs, says a new study from researchers at New York University.
The overall number of American babies born underweight has been rising. But low-weight births the researchers specifically attributed to exposure to the Teflon chemical have declined by more than 10,000 a year since the phaseout began, according to the analysis published in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health.
The chemical, PFOA, was used for decades in DuPont’s nonstick coating and many other consumer products. PFOA and other compounds in the family of highly fluorinated chemicals contaminate the drinking water of an estimated 15 million Americans. Tests by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found them in the blood of virtually all Americans, and they can be passed from mother to fetus through the umbilical cord.
PFOA exposure has been linked to cancer and an array of other health problems, including low birth weight, harm to the reproductive system and changes in fetal development. In 2006, under pressure from the Environmental Protection Agency, DuPont, 3M and other chemical companies agreed to phase out production and use of PFOA and closely related fluorinated compounds by 2015.
The NYU study reported that soon after the phaseout began, CDC tests found that the median level of PFOA in the blood of women ages 18 to 49 started to drop. By 2014, the median level had dropped by more than half from a peak of 3.5 nanograms per milliliter of blood in 2008.
Using computer modeling, the researchers estimated how many low-weight births may have been caused by specific levels of PFOA in women’s blood. They estimated that the phaseout of PFOA and similar fluorinated chemicals has in recent years prevented 10,000 to 17,000 low-weight births annually in the U.S. They also calculated that this reduction in low-weight births likely saved more than $3 billion in health care costs in 2013 and 2014, compared to costs in 2006 and 2007.
About 7 to 8 percent of births in the U.S. are considered low weight, a ratio that has increased significantly over the past few decades. Low birth weight increases medical costs, and may lead to decreased IQ and a greater risk of chronic diseases later in life. While it is difficult to confirm a cause-and-effect relationship between specific chemical pollutants and changes in birth weight, multiple studies demonstrate that reducing exposure to toxic contaminants during pregnancy can result in big improvements in health and economic savings.
The study’s lead investigator, NYU School of Medicine associate professor Leonardo Trasande, told The Washington Post that the EPA deserves credit for working with industry “proactively to phase [out] a chemical of concern.”
The phaseout of PFOA and the resulting reduction in low-weight births is certainly good news. But the EPA should have acted much sooner and more forcefully.
The agency was first alerted in 2001 to massive PFOA contamination of drinking water near a DuPont plant in West Virginia, and a subsequent class-action lawsuit revealed that DuPont and 3M had for decades covered up evidence of the chemical’s hazards. Instead of banning the chemical, the EPA allowed chemical companies to keep using it for a decade. Today, the EPA still has not set a legal limit on PFOA in drinking water, leaving millions of women and their babies at risk of continued exposure.
How many more low-weight births, cancers and other health impacts could have been averted if the EPA hadn’t dragged its feet? How many more health impacts could be averted in years to come if the EPA would stop allowing chemical companies to introduce untested replacements for PFOA that may be just as harmful?
The study shows that phaseouts of known toxic chemicals work to reduce health impacts. But the most important message is that the unfettered use of hazardous chemicals in consumer products has enormous consequences and costs that could be avoided if we required them to be proved safe before allowing them in the marketplace.
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2017/11/study-phaseout-teflon-chemical-has-likely-averted-thousands-low-weight#.Wh_AsvmWaUk
-
Glitter Is An Environmental Scourge That Is Wrecking The Oceans. Should It Be Banned?
Nov 29, 2017 | Newsweek
By Kate Sheridan
Anyone who has touched glitter knows that just a small amount can get everywhere and stay everywhere. (Glitter’s eternal permanence is why someone started a prank company to ship glitter to people you do not like.) It’s seemingly impossible to get rid of on land—and it can also cause problems in the oceans, scientists say. In fact, a group of daycare centers in the U.K. decided to ban the use of glitter for that reason earlier this month, according to The Guardian.
Glitter is a problem because it is actually very fun and shiny plastic, according to Eric Seleky, communications director at Plastic Soup Foundation, an organization focusing on reducing plastic pollution based in the Netherlands.
“Most glitters are [microplastics],” Seleky told Newsweek. Microplastics are pieces of plastic that are less than 5 millimeters—about one-fifth of an inch. Some are specifically produced to be that small; others can become that small if they're broken down once reaching an environment. “We don’t know exactly what it’s doing to us when the plastics enter our body,” he said.
It’s hard to say exactly how much glitter is polluting our oceans—scientists who study these kinds of problems generally look at microplastics as a whole, not at specific types. And the impacts of microplastics on humans is still an area of active research, said Sherri Mason, a chemist who researches plastic pollution at the State University of New York at Fredonia.
(Mason has also had her own personal experience with glitter's longevity, incidentally. “When my daughter was eight, she had a New Year’s Eve party. I was finding glitter in our carpet three years later from that one party,” Mason said.)
Microplastics are pretty much everywhere, she noted, and though the plastics themselves may cause problems, the stuff they bring with them may also be concerning. “Plastics are really good at absorbing chemicals,” Mason noted, which can bring some potentially dangerous ones into a fish’s body as they eat other organisms that have been contaminated with microplastics. These chemicals may include endocrine disruptors linked with sperm count issues and cancer risk, she noted.
Glitter can be found on its own, of course, but is also in some makeup or lotions. Washing your hands to get it off your skin may take care of the problem temporarily, but they can wind up back in your home or your body because the particles are often so small that they aren't filtered by water treatment plants. “You could have glitter in the glass of water you’re drinking right now," Mason said.
Biodegradable glitter options, by definition, don’t have the same problems because they’re designed not to linger for quite so long in the environment. One company, called Bioglitz, markets plant-based glitter. That glitter, according to a Racked article featuring the company’s founder, has one other benefit: because it doesn’t have the same ingredients as traditional glitter, it also won’t linger in your home.
Whether the solution may be using eco-friendly glitter or cutting it out entirely, “we need to be thinking more consciously about our use of these materials,” Mason said. “You can have a very happy childhood without having glitter.”
http://www.newsweek.com/glitter-environmental-scourge-wrecking-oceans-should-it-be-banned-725826
-
Glitter Is Not Just Annoying, It Could Be Bad For The Environment
Nov 29, 2017 | CNN
By AJ Willingham
Glitter is the ultimate supervillain of the craft and makeup world: Charming, but insidious. Use it once, and you'll be vacuuming it out of the carpet and picking it from under your nails until the day you die.
On top of it all, scientists are saying it's dangerous for the environment.
Most glitters are in essence teeny tiny bits of shiny plastic, called microplastics. They are a well-known environmental hazard for the world's oceans, and they're currently a hot topic in the United Kingdom. The UK next year will implement a ban on microbeads -- a type of microplastic found in face washes, body scrubs and other products. (The US already has a partial ban on microbeads in place.)
This impending ban prompted some scientists to tell The Independent that glitters -- like loose glitter and those found in makeup and body products -- should be considered a similar hazard.
"I was quite concerned when somebody bought my daughters some shower gel that had glitter particles in it," said Richard Thompson, a professor at Plymouth University who led a study examining how plastics affected marine environments.
"That stuff is going to escape down the plughole and potentially enter the environment," he said.
Microplastics can pollute marine environments, leech chemicals into the water and pose harm to marine life if they are ingested.
Dr. Trisia Farrelly, an environmental anthropologist at Massey University in New Zealand, told The Independent "all glitter should be banned."
Luckily, there is hope for those of us who still choose to punish ourselves for a glittery fix: Some companies make environmentally friendly alternatives that are biodegradable and don't clog up waterways.
For those in the UK, the coming microbead ban will also tackle some shiny concerns: The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs told The Independent the ban will include glitter in "rinse-off" cosmetics.
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/29/health/glitter-environment-hazard-microbead-ban-trnd/index.html
-
California Identifies Chlorpyrifos as Reproductive Toxicant
Nov 30, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
Scientific advisers for California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment identified the pesticide chlorpyrifos as a reproductive toxicant, triggering the need for warnings and other regulatory requirements.
The Nov. 29 decision sets the stage for Dow AgroSciences LLC and other producers and users of the pesticide to issue the exposure warnings required under the state's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, or Proposition 65.
The hazard assessment office will determine if a safe harbor level for chlorpyrifos is feasible before the warning requirement takes effect a year from now, spokesman Sam Delson told Bloomberg Environment. If a safe level exists, then only exposures over that level would require warnings.
Dow Takes Exception
Dow AgroSciences disagrees with OEHHA's Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee's decision to list chlorpyrifos, the company told Bloomberg Environment after the 8–0 vote.
The committee declined to list chlorpyrifos under Proposition 65 in 2008. But new data—including information in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's evaluations in 2014 and 2016—provide sufficient scientific evidence linking the chemical to cognitive delays in children, the panel said.
Chlorpyrifos is neurotoxin that kills pests by overstimulating their nervous systems. More than 1 million pounds of chlorpyrifos is applied on strawberries, citrus, almonds, cotton, vegetables, alfalfa, and other crops annually in California, according to the state Department of Pesticide Regulation.
State pesticide regulators tightened requirements for applying chlorpyrifos in August, citing exposure risks. A scientific review now underway of the risks that the pesticide poses could lead to even tougher restrictions.
For example, some regulatory bodies consider California Proposition 65 lists as coming from an “authoritative body,” triggering more regulatory focus in other parts of the country and even internationally.
U.S. EPA Reversal
In March, the EPA backed away from an Obama administration decision to nearly ban use of the chemical. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt subsequently questioned the prior decision and said, “The science addressing neurodevelopmental effects remains unresolved.”
But Dow AgroSciences representatives told the panel that the science for adverse developmental effects remains uncertain.
Chlorpyrifos “has not been clearly shown by scientifically valid testing to cause reproductive toxicity,” Dow AgroScience's attorney, Stanley W. Landfair with the law firm Dentons, told the panel during the hearing. As result, the chemical doesn't meet criteria in Proposition 65 for listing, he said.
The listing should wait until the U.S. EPA completes its risk analysis, Landfair said.
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment advisory panel member Isaac Pessah—a distinguished professor at the Department of Molecular Biosciences at the University of California, Davis—objected to comments questioning the link between chlorpyrifos and developmental toxicity in animal studies.
Because of the biology of rodents, those studies likely underestimate the adverse health effects of chlorpyrifos in humans, Pessah said.
Educators, physicians, farmworkers, and citizens living and working near farms urged the panel to list the chemical under Prop. 65.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=124339121&vname=dennotallissues&fn=124339121&jd=124339121
-
Biocides EDC Criteria To Apply From June
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has published its delegated Regulation setting out the criteria for identifying endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) under the biocidal products Regulation (BPR) in the EU Official Journal. The criteria will apply from 7 June 2018.
Unlike the proposal for EDC criteria for plant protection products, the European Parliament and Council did not block the BPR proposal from entry into force. The PPP proposal was vetoed in October, sending the European Commission back to the drawing board to come up with an amended measure.
This means the BPR regime will be the first to apply the criteria. Eventually, they are expected to become applicable across other sectors of EU law such as cosmetics, toys and food contact materials.
The biocides authorities are currently finalising work on guidance papers for their implementation.
Two papers laying down how the criteria should affect active substances and biocidal products were on the agenda for last week's meeting of the biocides competent authorities (CA). They have also been on the agenda for several meetings before last week's.
The European Commission said it hopes to finalise and adopt the papers early next year. The next CA meeting will be held between 10 and 12 January.Guidance expected
Meanwhile, Echa and the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) confirmed they intend to publish draft guidance on the EDC criteria in early December.
The team responsible for the guidance is processing more than 1,800 comments received during the second consultation on the matter, which involved member state competent authorities, industry and "public interest stakeholder organisations".
Echa told the CAs last week that it expects to revise the paper by March 2018, and publish the final guidance in May 2018.
https://chemicalwatch.com/62116/biocides-edc-criteria-to-apply-from-june
-
ChemSec Releases Latest SVHC Producers Data
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
NGO ChemSec has updated its Substitute It Now (SIN) List with new data on the number of hazardous chemicals producers are manufacturing.
The SIN List contains publicly available information on substances from existing databases and scientific studies, as well as new research.
ChemSec said it has identified the manufacturers with the most hazardous chemicals on the list. They are:BASF;Dow Chemical;LyondellBasell;Glencore Xstrata; andEastman Chemical.
According to the data, some of the companies, such as LyondellBasell, now produce fewer hazardous substances when compared with data from one year ago. Meanwhile, in 2017 Eastman Chemical produced 68% more substances on the SIN List when compared with 2016 data, the NGO said.
Chemical Watch contacted the manufacturers for comment. BASF and Glencore declined to do so, while the others did not respond in time for publication.
https://chemicalwatch.com/62060/chemsec-releases-latest-svhc-producers-data
-
EU Publishes Roadmap On FCM Law Evaluation
Nov 30, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has published a roadmap outlining how it will evaluate EU legislation on food contact materials (FCMs).
DG Sante says it will to look at whether the current EU legislative framework for FCMs is fit for purpose, by assessing its "effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, and coherence including coherence with other chemicals and food legislation".
The work will also examine how materials for which there are no EU specific measures, but that are subject to national provisions in some member states, should be legislated in the future.
Last year's EU Parliament report on FCM legislation, and a study by the Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC), released earlier this year, will feed into the work. Both papers criticised severe shortcomings in how FCMs are currently regulated.
Feedback on the roadmap can be sent in until 26 December. The Commission also promises to invite comments from relevant stakeholders – including NGOs, national authorities, trade bodies and scientific experts – at several points during the evaluation.
There will be a 12-week public consultation in the second or third quarter of 2018, a set of surveys, interviews and case studies targeted at particular stakeholder groups, and a conference or workshop at some point during the process.November criticism
Earlier this month DG Sante came under fire from MEPs who said its work on FCMs was moving too slowly.
And NGO CHEM Trust criticised it for a lack of transparency in the process. Responding to the roadmap, CHEM Trust said it welcomed the upcoming review of EU FCM laws.
The NGO's executive director, Michael Warhurst, said the roadmap confirms that the Commission has done no formal evaluation work on the 2004 EU FCM Regulation.
"This lack of analysis of the effectiveness of this measure, which is supposed to protect human health, compares very badly with the way industrial chemical regulation has been reviewed and improved in the same period," he said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/62115/eu-publishes-roadmap-on-fcm-law-evaluation
-
Crestone Peak Urged to Move Fracking Wells in Colorado
Nov 30, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
Crestone Peak Resources should locate new drilling well pads along a state highway and farther from residential areas in Boulder County, local officials tell Colorado state regulators.
The second draft of Crestone Peak's Comprehensive Drilling Plan (CDP) describes the company's plans to drill 216 wells within a 12-mile area of Boulder County, including within Erie's town limits. Such placement could impact residential neighborhoods as well as wildlife and the environment, the county and town said in comments to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.
This is the first time a company has used the state's voluntary CDP process (COGCC Rule 216), implemented in 2009, and the first plan offered for hydraulic fracturing and other oil and gas activities in Boulder County since the May 1 expiration of a five-year moratorium on new drilling permits.
The plan, posted to the commission's website Nov. 27, is designed to address potential impacts of drilling operations and efforts the company will take to minimize those impacts.
More Details
Crestone submitted an initial draft plan Oct. 13. The second draft includes more details and the company's response to public comments, Todd Hartman, spokesman for the commission, told Bloomberg Environment Nov. 29. The second draft plan does not show changes to the proposed locations, but Crestone Peak says it is working on alternatives, Hartman said.
One alternative sought by Boulder County, Erie, and other stakeholders who submitted comments to the commission is to locate all the drilling well pads along the State Highway 52 corridor that runs along the northern edge of Erie. Such a move would reduce the impact on residential and other sensitive areas, they said.
The company is trying to accommodate the request to locate the wellpads along Highway 52, Jason Oates, spokesman for Crestone Peak Resources in Denver, told Bloomberg Environment Nov. 29.“We're definitely interested in doing that, but the question is, can we actually achieve it?” he said. “You can't just move wells to an arbitrary new location. It takes due diligence to do that. And we have to make sure our surface owners and our mineral owners are OK with it.”
Oates said the company appreciated getting feedback from Erie, Boulder County, and members of the public. He said the deadlines in the CDP process were so tight the company was unable to incorporate many substantive changes between the first and second draft, but is hoping to respond more fully to feedback—and perhaps incorporate suggestions for changes in the drilling proposal—in its final plan.
Some comments criticized the scope of the proposal.
“The plan proposes large-scale and intensive oil and gas development inappropriately located close to residences, valuable agricultural areas, hazard areas, sensitive wildlife and plant habitat, riparian habitat corridors, water bodies, wetlands, and recreational areas,” Boulder County said in its comments. “Such sizable industrial activity is generally not compatible with residential development and those resources.”
To further reduce impacts to residential neighborhoods, Erie in its comments asked that proposed pipelines proposed to run through two subdivisions be moved to rights-of-way outside of town. Erie also said it will seek to secure a commitment from the company to repair any town roads damaged during the drilling and hydraulic fracturing activities.
A public comment period on the second draft runs until Dec. 8. The COGCC is expected to hold a hearing on the final draft CDP in March 2018, the commission said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=124339124&vname=dennotallissues&fn=124339124&jd=124339124
-
Survey Finds Many Lawmakers Muted On CPP Repeal
Nov 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
A survey by the advocacy group Climate Hawks Vote finds that most members of Congress -- on both sides of the aisle -- are not being outspoken about EPA's proposed repeal of the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP) utility greenhouse gas rule.
The group, which promotes candidates that support policies to address climate change, says its survey is based on reactions from members of Congress since EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt announced the planned repeal Oct. 10.
The survey, released Nov. 28, finds a muted reaction, especially compared to President Donald Trump's June announcement that he intends to withdraw the United States from the United Nations Paris climate agreement.
The survey also finds that Republican members of Congress “have been substantially less vocal than they were in reaction to President Obama's 2015 announcement of the CPP,” and that the “main value” of the bipartisan House Climate Solutions Caucus “seems to be in getting Republican members of that caucus to shut up rather than actively cheer on polluters.”
The survey says the number of Democrats denouncing the repeal “is only slightly less than the number of Democrats who initially praised the CPP,” while the number of GOP lawmakers praising the proposed repeal “is much smaller than the number of Republicans who originally denounced the CPP. The Climate Solutions Caucus drafted a carefully worded letter urging new plants -- but not existing plants -- to clean up, but the vast majority of Republicans in the Climate Solutions Caucus elected to say nothing rather than sign on to that letter.”
In the House, the group did not find “any response” to the CPP withdrawal from the majority of lawmakers, with 59 percent of Democrats and 82 percent of Republicans saying nothing. Of those who spoke out, 71 Democrats unambiguously supported the CPP while all of the 42 Republicans backed its repeal.
In the Senate, 33 Democrats endorsed the CPP, three made neutral statements and two -- Sens. Joe Manchin (WV) and Heidi Heitkamp (ND) -- praised the repeal. Sixteen GOP senators issued anti-CPP statements and none defended the rule.
“Overall, reaction to the CPP repeal is substantially more muted than reaction to the June 2017 announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate agreement,” the group adds. “When Trump withdrew from Paris, 95 percent of House Democrats, 98 percent of Senate Democrats, 38 percent of House Republicans, and 67 percent of Senate Republicans spoke out.”
The group based its findings on press releases, Facebook posts and tweets by every member of Congress, as well as letters and statements from several caucuses.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/survey-finds-many-lawmakers-muted-cpp-repeal
-
NextDecade Might Start Rio Grande LNG Project With Two Trains
Nov 29, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
NextDecade Corp. said it is considering a plan to use two production trains for its proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility in South Texas, but it still plans to eventually have six trains running at the facility near the Mexican border.
The Woodlands, TX-based company said it could make a final investment decision on its Rio Grande LNG projectwith as few as two trains, which would have the capacity to export up to 9 million metric tons/year (mmty) of LNG.
NextDecade said the project, to be built on a 1,000-acre site in the Port of Brownsville, was scalable, and that a full complement of six trains would be capable of exporting 27 mmty -- roughly the equivalent of 3.6 Bcf/d -- over a 30-year period.
"NextDecade intends to develop the full six-train plant at Rio Grande LNG, but does not need to develop the full-scale facility in order to offer customers significant cost advantages, environmental benefits, and reliable LNG supply," management said Monday.
The company said the project was advancing through the regulatory process and expects to receive a notice of schedule from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission "in the near future."
The project is to be serviced by the Rio Bravo Pipeline, a dual 42-inch diameter pipeline that would run around 140 miles from the Agua Dulce market area near Corpus Christi, TX, to feed gas to the facility.
NextDecade expects to receive final authorization in the second half of 2018. It currently has authorization from the Department of Energy to export natural gas to countries that have U.S. free trade agreements.
Vast supplies of low-cost natural gas have put the United States on track to becoming the largest exporter of LNG within the decade. Nearly 20 Bcf/d of LNG export facilities have been approved and are either under construction or waiting to break ground.
The U.S. currently exports about 3 Bcf/d of LNG, but that number is expected to grow by more than 1 Bcf/d over the next year as several projects -- including a fourth train at Cheniere Energy Inc.’s Sabine Pass, Dominion Resources Inc.’s Dominion Cove Point LNG and Kinder Morgan Inc.’s (KMI) Elba Island LNG facilities -- come online.
Earlier this month, the International Energy Agency projected the U.S. would become the world's largest LNG exporter by the mid-2020s. Meanwhile, the Energy Information Administration reported last month that total LNG exports more than doubled between July 2016 (15.7 Bcf) and July 2017 (53.6 Bcf). Mexico, which imports LNG from the U.S. via vessel and truck, imported 14.4 Bcf of LNG via vessel during the latter month, making it the largest LNG importer by ship.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112575-nextdecade-might-start-rio-grande-lng-project-with-two-trains
-
U.S. Ready to Work with European Allies to Diversify NatGas, Oil Supplies, Says Tillerson
Nov 29, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The United States is “eager” to work with its European allies to develop natural gas and oil infrastructure to help diversify the continent’s energy supply, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told an audience on Tuesday.
Speaking at the Wilson Center in Washington, DC, the former ExxonMobil Corp. chief discussed the shared goals of the United States and Europe and offered recommendations on how to strengthen their alliances -- and their energy security.
Russia, which now is the biggest natural gas supplier to Europe through its pipeline system, invaded the Ukraine in 2014 and annexed Crimea, which led to sanctions on Russian companies and executives.
The incursion “made clear how energy supplies can be wielded as a political weapon,” Tillerson said. “Enhancing European energy security by ensuring access to affordable, reliable, diverse and secure supplies of energy is fundamental to national security objectives.”
The United States is “liberalizing” the rules governing liquefied natural gas (LNG) and crude oil exports, “and we’re eager to work with European allies to ensure the development of needed infrastructure like import terminals and interconnecting pipelines to promote the diversity of supply to Europe.”
At the Three Seas Summit in July, President Trump said the United States would provide technical support for Croatia’s Krk Island Project, underway by LNG Croatia LLC, Tillerson noted. The export project is designed to provide a gas supply route for central and southeastern European countries.
Expect more partnerships, Tillerson said.
“The United States will continue to support European infrastructure projects, such as LNG-receiving facilities in Poland and the Interconnector Greece Bulgaria pipeline, to ensure that no country from outside Europe’s Energy Union can use its resources or its position in the global energy market to extort other nations,” he said.
However, the United States continues “to view the development of pipelines like the Nord Stream 2 and the multi-line TurkStream as unwise, as they only increase market dominance from a single supplier to Europe.”
Nord Stream 2 would transport Russian gas to the central EU market, while TurkStream would carry Russian gas to Turkish markets.
“The United States and Europe face many challenges and threats that -- unlike in the past -- are simultaneously dispersed among many geographic frontlines and across multiple domains, whether nonstate terrorist actors, threats of a more conventional nature, cyber threats, or nuclear threats,” Tillerson said.
“Because we know we are stronger in confronting these challenges when we are working together, we will pursue even greater cooperation from and with the nations of Europe, our best partners. History has shown that when we are united, we succeed in the face of shared challenges.”
Russia is a “challenge,” he said. While Europe and the United States have sought to normalize their relationships with the country, “Russia has shown it seeks to define a new post-Soviet global balance of power, one in which Russia, by virtue of its nuclear arsenal, seeks to impose its will on others by force or by partnering with regimes who show a disregard for their own citizens, as is the case with Bashar al-Assad’s continuous use of chemical weapons against his own people” in Syria.
When the Soviet Union was dissolved, the “liberalized Russian society...created new trade opportunities that benefit Russians, Europeans and Americans.”
However, Tillerson said Russia often has used “malicious tactics” against the United States and Europe to drive the countries apart, weaken confidence and undermine the political and economic successes achieved together since the end of the Cold War.“Playing politics with energy supplies, launching cyber attacks and disinformation campaigns to undermine free elections, and serially harassing and intimidating diplomats are not the behaviors of a responsible nation,” Tillerson said of Russia. “Attacking a neighboring country and threatening others does nothing to improve the lives of Russians or enhance Russia’s standing in the world.”
While the United States wants Russia “to be a constructive neighbor of Europe and of the larger transatlantic community...that is Russia’s choice to make. Russia can continue to isolate and impoverish itself by sowing disorder abroad and impeding liberty at home, or it can become a force that will advance the freedom of Russians and the stability of Eurasia.”
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112578-us-ready-to-work-with-european-allies-to-diversify-natgas-oil-supplies-says-tillerson
-
Key Trump Picks At Odds Over EPA's Power To Weigh Costs In Air Standards
Nov 30, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan
Key Trump administration environment nominees are at odds over whether EPA has sufficient legal authority to consider compliance costs when setting national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), even though a unanimous Supreme Court opinion found that the agency lacks such power under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
The statements come in responses to questions for the record submitted by Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Environment & Public Works (EPW) Committee, to the Trump administration's picks to chair the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and to be deputy EPA administrator.
In her responses, CEQ nominee Kathleen Hartnett White, a former Texas environment regulator, suggests that EPA might have some space to consider costs when setting NAAQS, while also raising doubts about the health risks of several regulated pollutants and charging that the CAA is “outdated and inefficient.”
However, EPA deputy administrator nominee Andrew Wheeler, a former coal sector lobbyist and EPW Republican staffer, says he agrees with the unanimous 2001 high court ruling, penned by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, that held EPA lacks authority to consider costs when crafting NAAQS. He adds that the law's current requirement that EPA review such standards every five years is “important to maintain.”
The statements come as EPW advanced the nominations for both White and Wheeler on party-line votes Nov. 29, though it is unclear when they could be considered on the Senate floor for final confirmation.
The comments on EPA's authority when setting NAAQS stem from the Supreme Court's 2001 ruling in Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, in which a 9-0 court held that the air law does not permit EPA to consider implementation costs when setting air standards.
Asked if she agrees with that opinion, White says the CAA “does not explicitly tell the EPA to consider costs in setting the NAAQS.” But she said she also agrees with a concurring opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer “that 'we should read silences or ambiguities in the language of regulatory statutes as permitting, not forbidding, this type of rational regulation.'”
That statement quotes a portion of Breyer's concurrence in Whitman, though it omits his finding that statutory “silences” would allow such regulation, “other things being equal.”
However, Breyer quickly adds: “In these cases, however, other things are not equal. Here, legislative history, along with the statute's structure, indicates that [CAA section 109's] language reflects a congressional decision not to delegate to the agency the legal authority to consider economic costs of compliance.”
In his separate responses to Carper's questions, Wheeler simply says, “I agree with Justice Scalia.”
Five-Year Reviews
Asked if he would “continue to hold to” the current five-year review schedule for NAAQS as required by the CAA, Wheeler says, “I believe the five-year review is important to maintain and will seek to follow the law.”
That statement could be noteworthy given efforts by some Republican lawmakers to extend the review schedule for all six “criteria” pollutants to 10 years, with backers of the effort charging that the current schedule drives unreasonable standards.
Both nominees acknowledge that humans play some role in climate change, repeatedly offering slightly different variations of a statement intended to downplay what scientific reports have found as humans' “dominant” role through release of greenhouse gases.
In his responses, Wheeler says, “I do believe that the climate is changing and that humans have an impact on the climate.”
White has this response to the issue: “The climate is changing and human activity impacts our changing climate in some manner. The ability to measure with precision the degree and extent of that impact, and what to do about it, are subject to continuing debate and dialogue.”
On other air quality issues, White offers significant skepticism of a range of conventional pollutants that EPA has long regulated.
Asked about her 2011 statement that particulate matter (PM) is not a health hazard, White says current ambient levels of PM “are low and I do not believe that PM at these levels pose a health hazard. There is considerable uncertainty in the scientific literature about whether exposure to PM actually causes health outcomes and, if it does, at what concentration effects may occur.”
However, EPA has long considered fine PM as a no-threshold substance, meaning it is not safe at any level of exposure.
An August 2010 agency report on CAA costs and benefits, for instance, says that the “current scientific literature does not support a population-based threshold [for PM], which consistently shows effects down to the lowest measureable levels. If a threshold does exist, it is likely below the range of concentrations of regulatory interest.”
In her responses to Carper, White also embraces an industry argument that the record for EPA's power plant mercury and air toxics standards (MATS) rule “does not support EPA's findings that mercury, non-mercury [hazardous air pollutant (HAP)] metals, and acid gas HAPs pose public health hazards.”
White notes that the vast majority of quantified benefits from MATS come from the reduction of non-targeted pollutants such as PM.
“EPA estimated that mercury reductions from MATS would prevent a 0.00209 IQ point loss per child. IQ tests cannot detect such a miniscule change. The benefits from non-mercury HAP metals and acid gas HAPs were so tiny that EPA did not even attempt to quantitate them,” she wrote. “Therefore, EPA’s own analysis demonstrates that the MATS will not result in a measurable improvement in public health from reductions in the very pollutants it is intended to reduce.”
She also says she still agrees with a 2012 statement that the CAA “no longer provides an effective, scientifically credible, or economically viable means of air quality management,” noting that as applied, the CAA “has become outdated and inefficient.”
NEPA Implementation
Regarding the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), a statute that CEQ plays a direct role in administering, White says that implementation of that law is “suboptimal,” despite a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that the vast majority of federal projects are not hampered by environmental reviews under the law.
She says that NEPA implementation is less than optimal for taxpayers “especially with regard to the length of time now required” to obtain permits for projects.
However, Carper highlighted the 2014 GAO study finding that less than 1 percent of federally assisted highway projects require the most detailed NEPA reviews, and that “almost all” proceed under so-called categorical exclusions that require no new review.
The report also found that local, state and project-specific factors are the chief causes of delay.
In response to that finding, White says, “I'm certain that there are a variety of factors that complicate infrastructure development in the United States. Only one of them -- NEPA administration -- is jurisdictional to CEQ.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/key-trump-picks-odds-over-epas-power-weigh-costs-air-standards
-
EPA Says Methane ICR Withdrawal Shows 'Deregulatory' Success
Nov 29, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A top EPA official on a deregulatory “task force” says the agency has met its 2017 goals for implementing President Donald Trump's executive orders (EOs) on reducing regulatory burdens, citing the withdrawal of an Obama-era information collection request on oil and gas methane emissions as a qualifying “deregulatory action.”
Testifying Nov. 29 before a combined hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform's environment and intergovernmental affairs panels, EPA Office of Policy Deputy Associate Administrator Brittany Bolen said the agency is on track to satisfy its deregulatory goals -- including for Trump's EO 13771 that requires agencies to identify two existing rules for possible repeal for every new regulation that they issue.
Trump followed that order with EO 13777, which required, among other steps, that federal agencies establish task forces to drive the regulatory reform process.
An April 5 memo from the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on EO 13771 requires federal agencies to comply by issuing two qualifying “deregulatory actions” for each “regulatory action.”
The memo includes as “deregulatory actions” guidance documents, “informal” rulemaking, actions related to international regualtory cooperation, and also ICRs “that repeal or streamline recordkeeping, reporting, or disclosure requirements.” It further excludes from the definition of regulatory action those that are not economically “significant” under OMB rules -- those with implementation costs of less than $100 million.
Bolen, a member of EPA's deregulatory task force, claimed that in fiscal year 2017, “we finalized at least two deregulatory actions for each regulatory action.” Overall, in FY17, “EPA rules imposed no new net costs,” Bolen said. “EPA expects the same” for FY18, she said. Bolen said details of further deregulatory actions would be included in the forthcoming unified agenda that will be published by OMB.
Bolen cited as an example of a deregulatory action the agency's withdrawal in March of an ICR on emissions of the greenhouse gas methane from existing oil and gas facilities, which she said would save up to $30 million.
She also cited the agency's proposed withdrawal of the Obama-era rule defining “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act as a forthcoming action.
EPA's task force is led by attorney Samantha Dravis, a former official with the Republican Attorneys General Association. Other members include Ryan Jackson, Byron Brown, who like Bolen are former Congressional GOP staffers.
Bolen took questions from panel Democrats on possible conflicts of interest among either task force members or EPA political appointees who have previously worked for the industries they will now regulate. She stressed that all appointees receive ethics training, and downplayed any prospect of conflicts of interest.
When pressed by GOP lawmakers on whether EPA staff has resisted the deregulatory effort, Bolen said, “I have not personally received any push-back.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-says-methane-icr-withdrawal-shows-deregulatory-success
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 - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested