Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 2/2/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) PP Jumps 9 Cents, PE Slides by 3
Feb 1, 2018 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
North American polypropylene resin buyers have been hit with a big price hike to kick off 2018, while buyers of polyethylene resin have seen a bit of pricing relief. -
(ACC Mentioned) Top 5 Coolest Plastics Packaging Developments of January
Feb 2, 2018 | Plastics News
By Rick Lingle
January has been an especially busy time on the Plastics Today packaging channel with a large number of features drawing solid interest. -
Trump Critics Say Dropped EPA Rollbacks Show Legal Strategy's Success
Feb 1, 2018 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
Trump administration critics say EPA's recent reversals on rollbacks of Obama-era actions such as an attempt to delay methane emissions rules for landfills and scrapping plans to withdraw a Clean Water Act (CWA) “veto” on mining in Alaska show that challenging the legality of the decisions... -
Houston-Area Petrochemical Producers Look Overseas to Sell Plastic
Feb 1, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
The U.S. Gulf Coast is awash in plastic. Who will buy it? -
EPA's TSCA Goals For 2018 Include Fee Rule, Advancing Chemical Reviews
Feb 2, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
EPA says its goals for implementing the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in 2018 include proposing a fee rule to cover the costs of its ongoing review of the first 10 chemicals identified for assessment under the updated law, seeking public input... -
EPA Releases Annual Plan on Chemical Risk Evaluations
Feb 1, 2018 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham
On January 31, 2018, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the release of its 2018 Annual Report on Risk Evaluations. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Floats Two IRIS Review Plans Despite Doubts Over Program's Future
Feb 1, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA is floating two new Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) plans for assessing the human health risks of exposure to the chemical chloroform and the radioactive element uranium, a sudden flurry of activity for the IRIS program despite doubts over its future... -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Toxicity Reports Hamstrung By Dwindling Staff (1)
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
A shrinking workforce of EPA scientists has been yet another blow to its chemical toxicity assessment program, which is bearing the brunt of criticism from Congress and the chemical industry. -
The Unexpected Health Risk That's Probably Hiding in Your Coat Pocket Right Now
Feb 1, 2018 | AlterNet
By Melissa Cooper Sargent
Taking a receipt from a cashier, ATM or gas station seems like a benign activity. We don't give it much thought as we tuck the receipt in a pocket or purse. -
Fluorinated Firefighting Foams Doused in South Australia
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Murray Griffin
Fluorinated foams can no longer be used for firefighting in South Australia after the state government banned their use, saying the main chemicals in them contaminate water resources. -
U.S. Refiners Talk Expansion After Reaping Billions in Tax Gains
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Laura Blewitt
The biggest independent refiners in the U.S. are lining their pockets with billions of dollars in tax reform windfalls just in time to invest in equipment that meets ever-tightening domestic and global environmental rules. -
Interior Rolls Back Oil Drilling Policies for Federal Land
Feb 1, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Interior Department implemented a new policy Thursday aimed at streamlining the oil and natural gas drilling process on federal land by cutting back on the opportunities for drilling opponents to slow down the process. -
U.S. Crude Oil Production Hit 10M b/d in November, Highest Level Since 1970, EIA Says
Feb 1, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By David Bradley
U.S. crude oil production, boosted by record high output in Texas, reached 10.038 million b/d in November, the highest level since the record 10.044 million b/d achieved in November 1970, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). -
Drilled, Baby, Drilled
Feb 1, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Editorial Board
Readers of pre-millennial vintage may recall the 2008 presidential campaign when Republicans and especially Sarah Palin picked up the chant “drill, baby, drill” as a response to soaring oil prices. -
Murphy Says NJ Joins Neighbors in Opposing ‘Fracking’
Feb 1, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
Gov. Phil Murphy said Thursday that New Jersey is joining Delaware, New York and Pennsylvania in support of a regional ban on hydraulic fracturing. -
Pennsylvania Shale Impact Fees Likely Higher for 2017
Feb 1, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Higher natural gas prices and more new wells last year are likely to help raise Pennsylvania impact fee collections from shale gas producers for the first time in three years, according to the state’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO). -
Texas Oil Companies Tell Trump to Leave NAFTA Alone
Feb 1, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
One of President Donald Trump's favorite subjects for praise - the Texas oil industry - is urging him to back off his hard-line stance on the North American Free Trade Agreement. -
Oklahoma Quakes Tied to How Deep Wastewater Is Injected
Feb 1, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Seth Borenstein
A new study finds that a major trigger of man-made earthquakes rattling Oklahoma is how deep — not just how much — fracking wastewater is injected into the ground. -
Trump Said to Again Propose Eliminating Chemical Safety Board (1)
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter and Sam Pearson
President Donald Trump's 2019 budget proposal will again call for eliminating funding for the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, an independent agency charged with investigating major industrial accidents, according to a senior government official familiar with the plan. -
Worker Protections Sought by EPA for Oilfield Chemical
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Oilfield workers who could touch or inhale a particular anti-corrosive chemical would need personal protective equipment to prevent such exposure, under a proposed rule the EPA soon will publish. -
With Amtrak Crash, Congress Faced a Deadly Rail Danger Firsthand
Feb 2, 2018 | The Hill - Opinion
By Jim Mathews
On Wednesday morning, I asked my staff to post a cautionary video of a truck driver in Florida ignoring flashing lights and lowered crossing gates to drive across the tracks, narrowly avoiding crashing into a Brightline train. -
Number Of Criminal Environmental Prosecutions Keeps Dropping
Feb 1, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Amanda Reilly
Criminal environmental prosecutions are continuing their downward trend and are on track to reach their lowest point in more than two decades. -
EPA Reverses Air Pollution Rule
Feb 1, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
As part of the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce burdensome regulations, the U.S. EPA has withdrawn a 23-year-old policy intended to reduce air emissions of hazardous substances such as arsenic, lead, mercury, and benzene. Affected facilities include coal-fired power plants and chemical facilities. -
Emails Indicate Scott Pruitt Directed Removal of Climate Info from EPA Website
Feb 2, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Ben Levitan
At EDF, we recently gained access to some newly-released emails that provide a troubling glimpse of the efforts to remove information about climate change from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) website.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) PP Jumps 9 Cents, PE Slides by 3
Feb 1, 2018 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
North American polypropylene resin buyers have been hit with a big price hike to kick off 2018, while buyers of polyethylene resin have seen a bit of pricing relief.
Average selling prices for PP in the region jumped 9 cents per pound in January, mainly resulting from tightness in propylene monomer feedstock and, in some cases, for PP resin itself. The average PE price decrease for January was 3 cents per pound, due in part to lower demand.
North American PP prices now have increased for seven consecutive months, with those increases totaling 19.5 cents per pound. Higher domestic demand combined with feedstock and resin shortages from Hurricane Harvey have played a role in these price hikes.
The January price hike was tied to unseasonably cold weather in the Houston area, where large amounts of capacity for PP resin and feedstock are located. A PP line operated by Braskem Americas in La Porte, Texas, had an unplanned shutdown on Jan. 17 because of a frozen boiler transmitter.
Another PP line operated by LyondellBasell Industries in Bayport, Texas, also was down on that same date because of a power issue. Minor production issues were reported at ethylene or propylene units operated in the region by Flint Hills Resources, Huntsman Corp., Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. and Enterprise Products.
DowDuPont Inc. also reported a process unit upset at its massive 2.3 billion pound capacity ethylene/propylene unit in Freeport, Texas. Temperatures dipped into the 20s, creating icy conditions and leading to some power outages. The cold snap marked the first time that Houston had seen temperatures in the 20s in January since 1996.
The 9-cent increase "almost entirely was cost push," according to Scott Newell, a market analyst with Resin Technology Inc. in Fort Worth, Texas. "It was all driven by polymer-grade propylene. There was no [profit] margin expansion."
Improved operating conditions could lead to some of the 9 cents coming off in February, he added.
A major PP buyer on the U.S. East Coast said that supplies were tight and that his injection molding firm was "having a hard time" in sourcing rail cars of resin. The firm has been able to meet its needs, he said, but now faces a challenge in passing the increase on to its own customers.
North American PP sales essentially were flat in 2017, with domestic growth of almost 3 percent negated by a drop of more than 50 percent in export sales, according to the American Chemistry Council.
The 3-cent PE price drop for January came after prices for those materials had been flat in November and December. Prior to that two-month period, prices had climbed a total of 7 cents per pound between May and October.
January's 3-cent decline was tied into lower demand and came after there was some confusion between actual market price declines and non-market adjustments received by some buyers, according to RTI market analyst Mike Burns.
U.S./Canadian PE sales were mixed in 2017. Sales of high density and low density PE both were down for the year. HDPE in the region saw sales slump almost 4 percent, as domestic sales growth of almost 4 percent was overcome by a drop of almost 28 percent in exports.
For LDPE, sales dipped almost 1 percent, but for opposite reasons than HDPE. Domestic sales of LDPE slipped more than 2 percent, but the overall loss was softened by a gain of more than 4 percent in export sales.
The U.S./Canadian LLDPE market fared better in 2017, with sales growth of more than 1 percent. Domestic sales growth of almost 4 percent was weakened by a drop of more than 6 percent in exports.
North American PE makers now are seeking price increases of 4 cents per pound effective Feb. 1.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20180201/NEWS/180209980/pp-jumps-9-cents-pe-slides-by-3
-
(ACC Mentioned) Top 5 Coolest Plastics Packaging Developments of January
Feb 2, 2018 | Plastics News
By Rick Lingle
January has been an especially busy time on the Plastics Today packaging channel with a large number of features drawing solid interest. We present the best of the best based on web analytics as to what articles had the highest readership (Background vector created by Starline - Freepik.com with added text by PlasticsToday).
Rather than our usual reverse order listing, we’re going to provide our own spoiler right from the top by revealing the #1 most-read article of the month, which centers on one of the more challenging undertakings of plastics recycling, that for plastic film. It’s a good news story not just because notable advancements are happening, they are relayed by the insightful, insider expertise of the American Chemistry Council’s Steve Russell, vice president of plastics.
Russell discusses the ACC’s WRAP program that aims to increase PE film recycling by raising consumer awareness that everyday used items can be recycled at more than 18,000 grocery and retail stores across the U.S. These include bags from produce, bread, and dry cleaning along with packaging from household paper products and beverage multipacks. Shipping pillows and bubble-style wraps, which we see a lot of this time of year, can also be recycled with film.
Russell also talks consumer education, challenges and dispenses advice for converters and more in Plastic film recycling making significant progress.
#2 Clare Goldsberry, PlasticsToday’s Contributing Editor/U.S, addressed activist consumer group As You Sow’s re-engaged war on polystyrene packaging at McDonald’s. In her fact-checking rebuttal to the group's claims, Goldsberry notes that its release states that expanded polystyrene (EPS) is “rarely recycled” and, thus, leads to it being discarded in marine environments.
“The group needs to bone up on the recycling information for this material,” she retorts, pointing out that, according to the 2016 EPS Recycling Rate Report produced by the EPS Industry Alliance, 63 million pounds of EPS postconsumer materials and 55.7 million pounds of post-industrial materials were recycled in 2016. That’s a total of 118.7 million pounds. EPS can be effectively recycled and reused, and the rate is increasing every year, according to the EPS Industry Alliance, which lists 87 member companies that recycle EPS foam packaging. Read more in As You Sow calls out McDonald’s on continued use of polystyrene
#3 Being a plastics engineer means you’re in select company among a larger group of plastics professionals that have their own vocabulary may have distinct character traits and certainly to a man or woman possess a keen interest in all things plastic. This was a prelude to our promoting an online, one-question poll that asks the burning question “You know you’re a plastics engineer if…”
PlasticsToday staff offered up suggestions to get things started, such as “You conduct liquid silicone rubber experiments in your kitchen oven” and “You consider MI5 is a low melt index for polypropylene and not the acronym for the British spy agency.”
Dozens of plastics professionals have already taken the poll, providing insightful if also wry definitions, for example:
· Orientation best describes the machine and transverse direction of a process and not the very first class in high school.
· You are touching, scratching and tapping plastic things whenever you see something new.
· Your spouse (who is not an engineer and has not worked in the plastic industry) can evaluate plastics parts in the store and identify and name all the molding defects.
We invite you to read the article How can you tell if someone is a plastics engineer? and/or go directly to the poll at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PTengineers
#4 California is known as a trend-setting state, credited (or blamed) as a place where cultural movements become phenomenon, so it's often true that what starts in CA doesn't stay in CA.
As with many, California has requirements for recycling plastics. One distinction, however, is the state’s requirements for new plastic packaging that fall under the state’s Rigid Plastic Packaging Container (RPPC) program, the regulations of which also impose substantial penalties for noncompliance.
Natalie Rainer, associate, Keller and Heckman LLP (Washington, D.C.), provides an overview of the regulations and the containers that are exempt and those that would be under compliance. You can read her insights in Understanding California's rigid plastic container law.
#5 The next article provides an appropriate “bookend” to the top quintet of the month published in early January 4 that helped get the new year off to a rousing, if somewhat controversial start for an issue that has considerable history behind it: EPS food containers at McDonald’s.
Turns out the controversy dates back some 25 years.
Goldsberry again tells it best: “Every time I see another press release from the advocacy group As You Sow, I’m reminded how long this debate over McDonald’s use of expanded polystyrene foam food containers has been going on. While cleaning out some files, I found Wall Street Journal clippings on this topic dating back to the early 1990s."
She tells the rest of this old, but timely tale in EPS food container controversy—a tale (almost) as old as time.
If you’re hungry for more articles that resonated with your industry peers these past weeks, you'll find below hyperlinked headlines to the next 5 most-read stories for the month to round things up to a nice even Top 10:
6. Scientific tests prove HDPE can be recycled at least 10 times
7. UK government declares war on plastics
8. PET bottle with integrated handle approved for HPP
9. All of Amcor’s packaging to be recyclable or reusable by 2025
10. Will plastics cede to paper in the sustainable packaging market?
https://www.plasticstoday.com/packaging/top-5-coolest-plastics-packaging-developments-january/92162640458199
-
Trump Critics Say Dropped EPA Rollbacks Show Legal Strategy's Success
Feb 1, 2018 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
Trump administration critics say EPA's recent reversals on rollbacks of Obama-era actions such as an attempt to delay methane emissions rules for landfills and scrapping plans to withdraw a Clean Water Act (CWA) “veto” on mining in Alaska show that challenging the legality of the decisions can lead to policy wins even without court rulings.
Environmentalists say the recent decisions from EPA, as well as other walk-backs of deregulatory actions that happened in 2017 on ozone designations and other issues, represent wins for a strategy of contesting each step of the agency's agenda in court. They say the dropped rollbacks are happening in situations where, possibly based on late input from the Department of Justice (DOJ), EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt sees little chance of success on the merits.
“Every one of those situations are examples of Scott Pruitt being dragged into court and forced to recognize that the law doesn't give him a choice on these issues,” says one environmentalist attorney of the several instances in which the Trump EPA has attempted then stepped back from an Obama-era policy rollback.
The strategy of Trump administration critics challenging the efforts in federal court is important, the source says, because an active court case triggers DOJ review of whatever EPA action is being contested. Rule proposals go through an internal review and interagency scrutiny through the White House Office of Management and Budget, but DOJ's involvement is much more in-depth when crafting a defensive litigation strategy, the source says.
“I suspect they did receive similar advice internally, but this administration has shown itself to be disdainful of advice from current EPA staff and EPA attorneys,” the source says.
“However, the Justice Department is a different matter. The Justice Department only gets a case or provides advice once a lawsuit has been filed; EPA doesn't consult with the Justice Department before breaking the law. They consult with the Justice Department when it's time for the administration to file briefs in a case, and that is usually the Justice Department's first time” dealing with a rule in depth, says the source.
Thus, once a rollback rulemaking or other action is being contested in court, the agency could face new pressure to abandon it if DOJ sees no hope of a favorable court ruling -- for example if the contested rule would break a statutory binding rulemaking deadline.
The source expects that pattern to continue even after the Senate's recent confirmation of EPA General Counsel Matt Leopold, which gives the agency a permanent appointee to offer internal legal advice on rulemakings and other actions.
“Administrator Pruitt has an agenda hostile to EPA's mission and legal responsibilities. I expect that to continue, no matter who the poor General Counsel is,” the environmentalist says.
Abandoned Rollbacks
Cases where the agency has dropped proposed or enacted rollbacks include the withdrawal of a proposal to drop Obama-era plans for a CWA “veto” of the planned Pebble Mine, where Pruitt cited potential threats to the nearby Bristol Bay, AK, salmon fisheries.
EPA also reached an agreement with environmentalists to end their litigation over the agency's delay of Obama-era landfill methane rules following new agency “representations” that regulators are reading the stay very narrowly.
Last summer, Pruitt moved to delay by a year EPA's designation of areas as in either attainment or nonattainment for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard, but he quickly withdrew that plan after opponents filed suit over the legality of the effort -- though the lawsuits are still pending.
“It really dates back to day one of this administration,” says the environmentalist, pointing to a memo that former White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus authored on Inauguration Day Jan. 20 halting implementation for an array of rules issued in the final months of President Barack Obama's second term.
The memo-affected policies included a long-delayed CWA effluent limitation guideline (ELG) for mercury from dental amalgam, drawing a lawsuit from environmentalists to try and force release of the ELG.
Rather than defending its delay of the amalgam rule before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, EPA ultimately withdrew the delay, allowing the ELG to take effect.
“On the eve of the agency's brief being due in the D.C. Circuit, the agency beat a hasty retreat and agreed to publish that rule, undoubtedly after being advised by the Justice Department that they had no legal defense,” the source says.
But a second environmentalist says that despite a limited list of reversals it would be unreasonable to expect Pruitt to back off from more than a small portion of his agenda based merely on the threat of an unfavorable court decision.
“I'm not seeing much of that. The agenda for the Pruitt EPA is overwhelmingly deregulatory, across the board,” says the second source, who has worked to block the Pebble Mine project. “We had every reason to believe that his agenda for the Pebble Mine would be similar."
Policy Priorities
Both environmentalists say there is little reason to expect EPA under Pruitt to abandon deregulatory actions being contested as wrong on the merits, rather than running afoul of clear statutory mandates like a date-certain rulemaking deadline. And high-priority actions like the pending repeal of the Obama-era CWA jurisdiction rule, also termed the Clean Water Rule, are seen as top priorities for the agency and DOJ to defend no matter what.
“They must conclude that they have better legal defenses, or they conclude that there is independent value in dragging out the litigation. The Clean Water Rule, I think, is a classic example of the latter,” the first source says.
The second source said that Pebble, which deals with a CWA mandate to block dredge-and-fill activity that EPA determines would cause "unacceptable adverse effects" on the environment, also seems to be an edge case based on “overwhelming” evidence of potential hazards. “I think it's a unique situation, because the Pebble Mine is maybe the most reckless project anywhere on the planet.”
The first source says the fact that the project pits mining interests against fishing and tourism benefits, rather than being a conflict of industry against environmentalists, seems to also have served to balance the scales there. “That seems to me to be a situation of Pruitt finding competing economic interests to be determinative."
Nonetheless, the environmentalist says, “a win's a win.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/trump-critics-say-dropped-epa-rollbacks-show-legal-strategys-success
-
Houston-Area Petrochemical Producers Look Overseas to Sell Plastic
Feb 1, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
The U.S. Gulf Coast is awash in plastic. Who will buy it?
That's the key question this year for Houston-area polyethylene producers who have capitalized on a petrochemical boom driven by the abundance of cheap natural gas flowing from West Texas. At Wednesday's ICIS Outlook Seminar in Houston, analysts said that the region's largest plastics manufacturers are searching overseas for new export markets amid a mounting domestic glut.
Polyethylene, the world's most common plastic, is used to make bottles, containers and a range of other consumer products. In the U.S., it's manufactured using ethane, a natural gas liquid often used as a feedstock for ethylene.
The ongoing shale boom in the Permian Basin and elsewhere has enabled U.S. petrochemical producers to churn out polyethylene at a steep cost advantage to Asian and European manufacturers that typically use heavier, more expensive feedstocks.
RELATED: Sand, water, and horsepower: Welcome to the year of the fracker
ICIS, a global energy and petrochemical research firm with offices in Houston, reported that U.S. producers added 3.5 million tons of polyethylene production capacity last year, and much more is on the way. Petrochemical giant LyondellBasell, for example, is adding to its La Porte complex a $700 million plastics plant expected to produce more than a billion pounds of polyethylene each year.
CIS anticipates that through 2019, the U.S. will increase its polyethlyene production by 6.5 million tons a year. Through 2022, production could balloon by 12.1 million tons a year, increasing current production levels by nearly 75 percent.
Domestic demand, meanwhile, is expected to grow far more slowly, said ICIS deputy managing editor Zachary Moore. That dynamic is driving producers to look for new, developing markets in Asia and Europe where plastics consumption is increasing.
"Exports are going to become much more important," Moore said.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Houston-area-petrochemical-producers-look-12543399.php
-
EPA's TSCA Goals For 2018 Include Fee Rule, Advancing Chemical Reviews
Feb 2, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
EPA says its goals for implementing the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in 2018 include proposing a fee rule to cover the costs of its ongoing review of the first 10 chemicals identified for assessment under the updated law, seeking public input on documents supporting the reviews, and prioritizing other chemicals for review.
“EPA continues to make steady progress in meeting our statutory requirements under amended TSCA,” EPA says in a Jan. 31 statement, announcing release of its 2018 annual plan of chemical reviews. “EPA will initiate prioritization for 40 chemicals -- at least 20 Low-Priority and 20 High-Priority candidates -- by the end of calendar year 2018,” the statement says.
Under the revised TSCA, EPA faces deadlines for reviewing existing chemicals, those that were on the market when the original TSCA took effect in 1976, and were largely grandfathered from regulation under that version of the law.
The need to evaluate risks from existing chemicals was a major driver of TSCA reform, and the June 22, 2016 law tasks EPA with prioritizing and assessing the risks of chemicals it deems a high priority.
EPA's “2018 Annual Plan for Chemical Risk Evaluations under TSCA” outlines steps the agency has already taken toward prioritizing and evaluating the risks of existing chemicals and outlines additional steps planned for this year. The revised TSCA mandated that EPA release the annual plan.
In early 2018, EPA will publish and seek public input for 45 days on problem formulation documents supporting draft risk evaluations of the first 10 chemicals prioritized for review under the new law.
The chemicals include the solvents trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylence (perc), as well as the paint-stripping chemicals methylene chloride and n-methylpyrrolidone.
EPA started reviews of the first 10 existing chemicals in 2016, and the law requires that the agency initiate risk evaluations of at least 20 more substances by December 2019, according to the report.
By year-end, EPA also anticipates starting a process to prioritize 40 chemicals for review, including identifying at least 20 high-priority and 20 low-priority chemicals to ensure that the agency will have started risk evaluations by Dec. 22, 2019 on the chemicals it deems high-priority.
To ensure it stays on schedule, EPA says that in 2018 it expects to have crafted a process for identifying chemicals for prioritization. The agency held a public meeting late last year on its effort to develop a pre-prioritization process.
Additionally, EPA plans to propose in early-mid fiscal year 2018 a rule allowing the agency to collect industry fees to support implementation of the revised law, a measure industry observers have said is necessary to ensure timely chemical reviews in the face of expected budget cuts.
A proposed version of the rule is currently undergoing inter-agency review. EPA says the proposed rule will include estimates of the resources it will require to conduct the chemical reviews.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epas-tsca-goals-2018-include-fee-rule-advancing-chemical-reviews
-
EPA Releases Annual Plan on Chemical Risk Evaluations
Feb 1, 2018 | National Law Review
By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham
On January 31, 2018, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the release of its 2018 Annual Report on Risk Evaluations. Pursuant to Section 26(n)(2) of the amended Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA is directed to publish an annual plan at the beginning of each calendar year identifying the chemical substances that will undergo risk evaluations during that year. The plan is to include both risk evaluations that will be initiated and that will be completed, the resources necessary for completion, and the status and schedule for ongoing evaluations. The 2018 annual plan identifies the next steps for the first ten chemical reviews currently underway and describes EPA’s work in 2018 to prepare for future risk evaluations.
EPA issued scoping documents on the first ten chemical reviews in June 2017. The plan states that in early calendar year 2018, EPA will be making refinements to these scope documents in the form of “problem formulation documents” that will include additional elements such as conceptual models. EPA will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the release of these problem formulation documents and will invite comments for 45 days.
The plan also states that EPA will initiate prioritization for 40 chemicals (at least 20 Low-Priority and 20 High-Priority candidates) by the end of calendar year 2018. By December 22, 2019, EPA plans to have designated 20 substances as Low-Priority and initiated risk evaluations on 20 High-Priority substances. Further, EPA will be proposing the much-anticipated TSCA Fees Rule in early-mid fiscal year (FY) 2018, and anticipates issuing a final rule in late FY2018.
Information on EPA’s 2017 Annual Report is available in our blog item EPA Publishes 2017 Annual Report on Chemical Risk Evaluations.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/epa-releases-annual-plan-chemical-risk-evaluations
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Floats Two IRIS Review Plans Despite Doubts Over Program's Future
Feb 1, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA is floating two new Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) plans for assessing the human health risks of exposure to the chemical chloroform and the radioactive element uranium, a sudden flurry of activity for the IRIS program despite doubts over its future and potential Trump administration plans to shrink or shutter it.
EPA announced the release of the “Systematic Review Protocol for the IRIS Chloroform Assessment” and the “Draft IRIS Assessment Plan for Uranium” in a pair of Jan. 31 Federal Register notices, while also opening public comment periods on both documents. The comment deadline for both is March 2.
A “message from the IRIS program” accompanying the new plans' release explains, “[w]hile the IRIS Assessment Plan describes what will be assessed, the chemical-specific protocols describe how the assessment will be conducted.”
The memo reminds readers that IRIS “assessments support policy and regulatory decisions for EPA’s programs and regions, and states, tribes, and for other Federal Agencies. To ensure this support is timely and responsive, [the National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA)] is developing a portfolio of chemical evaluation products employing the principles and state-of-the-art practices of systematic review.” The IRIS program is housed within NCEA.
The memo explains that the “portfolio approach will increase public health protection by: moving away from a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to chemical risk assessment towards a spectrum of assessment products to meet specific decision contexts; facilitating the incorporation of new science into risk assessment and decision-making; tailoring assessments to meet the many needs of decision makers; and, increasing the number of chemicals that can be evaluated for their effects on human health by utilizing constrained resources in the most efficient manner.”
The documents' release follows questions about the IRIS program's future. Budget documents for fiscal year 2018 from the Trump administration, as well as Congress, have at varying points proposed defunding, shrinking or consolidating what was once EPA's premiere risk analysis program with the risk analysis division in EPA's toxics office as it seeks to implement new responsibilities in the revised Toxic Substances Control Act.
IRIS leaders presented their plans for the chloroform IRIS assessment to the Science Advisory Board last fall, and took public comment on a draft assessment plan as well. As before, the new protocol outlines IRIS' intent to update the 1987 inhalation risk estimate for the chemical, once widely used as anesthesia. It provides a description of the “populations, comparators, exposures, outcomes criteria” to be used for the assessment, a crucial early step in the systematic review process.
Uranium Assessment
The new uranium assessment is one of a score of chemicals identified in 2015 by IRIS' past leaders, Vincent Cogliano and Ken Olden, as part of their extensive effort to craft a list of prioritized contaminants for assessment after lengthy discussions with EPA program offices. The draft plan explains IRIS' intent to update the existing 1989 uranium IRIS assessment with a non-radiological, non-cancer oral assessment.
“Oral exposure to uranium is of concern to the Superfund Program as this element has been found at approximately 60 Superfund sites, with oral intake driving site exposure assessments. EPA regulated uranium as a drinking water contaminant in 2000 based primarily on radiological exposures, but also considered kidney toxicity. The EPA’s Office of Water (OW) periodically updates drinking water regulations and needs an IRIS assessment of uranium that examines the more recent literature,” the plan explains.
The plan also references OW's 2016 analysis of regulated contaminant occurrence data in public water systems, which finds that “[a]pproximately 4% of reporting U.S. drinking water systems (serving 8 million people in total) reported some exceedance of the EPA maximum contaminant limit for uranium of 30 [micrograms per liter of water.”
The plan adds that the “reassessment focuses on nonradiological, noncancer effects associated with uranium exposure because (1) IRIS assessments historically focus on the nonradiological effects of chemicals and (2) cancer risks from uranium have generally been attributed to and assessed as the result of radiation exposures.”
The documents' release also comes as the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) kicks off its third review of the IRIS program with a Feb. 1-2 workshop. The documents are intended to give the NAS committee examples of IRIS staff's efforts over the past year to respond to previous NAS recommendation to strengthen the program by adopting systematic review approaches.
The NAS review is expected to focus on the systematic review approaches that IRIS' new staff leaders have sought to implement since taking over the program shortly before the Trump transition. The approach, adopted from evidence-based medicine practice, is intended to increase the scientific rigor and the transparency of IRIS assessments, elements that have been long criticized by Congressional Republicans and regulated entities, particularly since the NAS' 2011 release of its critical review of EPA's draft IRIS assessment of formaldehyde. As an example, an American Chemistry Council official in an exclusive interview with Inside EPA last week charges IRIS has yet to implement NAS' 2011 recommendations and questions the point of continuing the program, though he stopped short of calling for its end.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-floats-two-iris-review-plans-despite-doubts-over-programs-future
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Toxicity Reports Hamstrung By Dwindling Staff (1)
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
A shrinking workforce of EPA scientists has been yet another blow to its chemical toxicity assessment program, which is bearing the brunt of criticism from Congress and the chemical industry.
“Significant attrition” has made it difficult for the program to speed up its assessments and keep pace with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt's focus on efficiency, according to Tina Bahadori, head of the National Center for Environmental Assessment.
Bahadori spoke at a Feb. 1 workshop the National Academies of Sciences in Washington to review the program.
The center's chemical toxicity assessment program, known as the Integrated Risk Information System, or IRIS, has come under fire from House Republicans and narrowly avoided the chopping block last year.
The IRIS program analyzes the harms that chemicals could cause to human health and the doses at which those harms could manifest. The results of IRIS assessments are used in setting exposure limits, cleanup targets, and other health protections by a range of groups, including the military, states, and international bodies.
Working on Improvements
The EPA is working to improve the program by informing the public about how it will assess chemicals and by incorporating the most recent scientific research into its decisions.
Before the Trump administration, the center had fewer and fewer contractors supporting IRIS, Bahadori said.
The center had 37 full-time staff members working specifically on IRIS in 2007, according to the Government Accountability Office, but now has about 30, Bahadori said.
The program's staff are planning to prioritize their assessments next week to avoid being spread too thin.
“When there are too many live assessments, something is going to fall through the cracks,” Bahadori said.
Ongoing Criticism
The House Science Committee criticized the program last October, saying it needs to stay away from “low-quality science” and speed up its assessment process.
The program's staff are focusing on completing assessments in a shorter, three-year time frame, according to Bahadori, as opposed to the 12-year period it took to complete a draft assessment for formaldehyde.
“We expect to be continually challenged about the effectiveness and the science in our assessments,” she said.
The American Chemistry Council told Bloomberg Environment that current IRIS assessments are opaque, inconsistent, and could lead to too-tough standards that cost companies time and money,
“The potential is that the [assessment] program adopts values that are simply lower than necessary—that are more conservative than necessary,” Mike Walls, vice president of regulatory and technical affairs for the American Chemistry Council, told Bloomberg Environment. The council represents companies like Dow Chemical Co., Eastman Chemical Co., and Honeywell International Inc.
But conservative values appropriately protect human health and that's the program's objective, according to Jennifer Sass, senior scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
“They're supposed to set conservative values, they're a public health agency,” Sass told Bloomberg Environment.
The EPA said it will use the findings from the two-day workshop to help it reform the program.
Getting Answers
The IRIS program has long-standing issues with inconsistent scientific approaches to chemicals and a lack of transparency, even as the EPA makes systematic changes to the program, Walls said.
“We still have substantial questions,” he said. “If they've done it, how have they done it? Why aren't they being transparent about it, and when will we see those recommendations reflected in the assessments coming forward?”
Another frequent criticism of the IRIS program has been a lack of transparency, according to Lorenz Rhomberg, a former EPA risk assessor now with Gradient Corp., an environmental consulting firm.
The EPA is working to remedy that by explaining what will be assessed and how in documents such as systematic review protocols.
“I think everybody benefits from a fuller understanding of where the answers come from,” Rhomberg said. But, the internal approval process for releasing documents to the public takes time.
“Being transparent by itself doesn't really speed up the process. It's just one more thing that has to be put out there for everyone to see,” he said.
This year's National Academies’ review is the third such evaluation of the program's progress and reforms during the past decade. The National Academies previously reviewed IRIS assessments in 2011 and 2014.
Trump Nominee
The only Trump EPA nominee for an appointment requiring Senate confirmation to withdraw thus far is recommending that a broad federal approach to chemical toxicity be developed that combines chemical safety evaluation programs across government departments. This should include the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, which creates its own toxicological profiles of chemicals.
Toxicologist and risk assessor Michael Dourson—previously slated to head the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention—told Bloomberg Environment Jan. 25 that he thinks the agency's repository of chemical toxicity values should be broadened with values from the agency's Superfund and air offices.
“There's been a lot of improvement over the years in developing rigorous toxicity values in those departments” and they should be incorporated, Dourson said.
(Updated with reporting on program staffing.) http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=127727434&vname=dennotallissues&fn=127727434&jd=127727434
-
The Unexpected Health Risk That's Probably Hiding in Your Coat Pocket Right Now
Feb 1, 2018 | AlterNet
By Melissa Cooper Sargent
Taking a receipt from a cashier, ATM or gas station seems like a benign activity. We don't give it much thought as we tuck the receipt in a pocket or purse. But each time you touch those receipts, you may be exposed to harmful chemicals, since many receipts have a coating of Bisphenol-A (BPA) or Bisphenol S (BPS), chemicals that may be harmful to our health.
Retailers like Trader Joe’s are stepping up to phase out these unnecessary toxic chemicals in receipts, yet others like TJ Maxx and Meijer, a Midwest superstore chain, have yet to take action.
BPS is not a safer alternative
BPA is banned in baby bottles and sippy cups because it’s a known hormone disruptor. It is linked to female and male infertility, early puberty, breast and prostate cancers, as well as metabolic disorders. BPA has also been voluntarily removed from some reusable water bottles and food can linings. However, this dangerous chemical is still used as the color developer in thermal receipt printers.
As many manufacturers move away from BPA (eager to be able to label their products as “BPA-free”), some have jumped out of the chemical frying pan and into the fire. The easiest chemical with which to replace BPA is its chemical cousin, BPS. BPA and BPS are phenols. Both BPA and BPS are known endocrine disruptors. BPS may be just as bad as BPA. It's a classic case of "regrettable substitution” or the toxic whack-a-mole game.
BPA and BPS are not strongly bound to receipt paper, causing them to rub off very easily. Once on the skin they get absorbed right into the bloodstream.
A recent study found that the use of hand-sanitizers actually increases absorption, as does having lotion or grease on your hands.
BPA and BPS found in 93 percent of receipts
Healthy Stuff, a project of the environmental health advocacy organization, the Ecology Center, recently examined 207 receipts from 148 businesses to see if the makers of receipt developers have moved away from BPA. The report, released in partnership with Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families (a coalition of environmental and health groups) and titled More than you Bargained For: BPS and BPA in Receipts, found that 93 percent of analyzed receipts contained BPA or BPS.
The results did indeed display a shift away from BPA—only 18 percent of the analyzed receipts contained BPA—but unfortunately, 75 percent contained BPS. Hello, fire.
While most BPA is used in polycarbonate plastics and resin linings of food and drink containers, research shows that handling BPA-laden receipts is the number one exposure route for people. Gillian Zaharias Miller, senior scientist at the Ecology Center, explains, “It’s important to realize that BPA or BPS in polycarbonate plastic and in can linings is largely reacted into a stable polymer. Whereas in receipts BPA and BPS are present in their unreacted forms, unbound, and in high concentration.”
Laura Vandenberg studies endocrine disruptors at the University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Public Health & Health Sciences. "Work in my lab has shown that BPS alters exposed mice. Low doses disrupt maternal behaviors, the brain, and the mammary gland in nursing females. These data, and emerging work from other groups raises concern that the replacement of BPA with BPS is regrettable. Even though the number of studies on BPS remains limited, I feel there is sufficient evidence to raise concern about its safety."
How to reduce exposure
So what should consumers do? Shoppers can decline receipts or ask for electronic receipts when possible. Anyone handling thermal paper can fold the glossy side in because the back side is typically not coated with developer. This could prevent BPA and BPS from rubbing onto other items stored next to your receipts. Take it one step further by carrying a dedicated envelope for receipts.
As with most potential exposures, washing hands with soap and water can make a big difference. Also, don't let children play with receipts. And don’t recycle them: Recycling BPA- and BPS-based paper can contaminate future products made from the recycled paper.
As much as shoppers handle receipts, cashiers handle more of them—an average of 30 thermal receipts an hour. Cashiers who handle receipts show a large spike in BPA and BPS in their bodies after a work shift and have an estimated daily intake of these chemicals at least 70 times higher than the general population.
Retailers need to take action
Retailers should step up to safeguard the health of their workers and customers.
The Ecology Center has a list of suggestions for workers. But the organization is putting the onus on retailers in collaboration with the Mind the Store campaign. We are petitioning TJX Companies (TJ Maxx, Marshalls, HomeGoods, Sierra Trading Post) and Meijer to stop using these dangerous chemicals. You can sign the petition calling on these companies to switch to non-toxic receipts. We are encouraging all retailers to stop using BPA and BPS in their receipts. Other retailers whose receipts tested positive for BPA or BPS include Aldi, Barnes & Noble, Bed Bath & Beyond, Costco, CVS, The Home Depot, Kroger, Lowe’s, Rite Aid, Staples, Target, Walgreens, and Whole Foods.
"Businesses need to protect employees from occupational exposure to toxic chemicals," said Lauren Olson, science campaign director at the Ecology Center.
Trader Joe's was among the companies whose receipts were tested and were found to contain BPS. After the Ecology Center informed Trader Joe’s about the study, the discount natural grocery chain decided to make a change. As reported in Bloomberg News, Trader Joe's announced, "We are now pursuing receipt paper that is free of phenol chemicals (including BPA and BPS), which we will be rolling out to all stores as soon as possible.”
This follows Mind the Store's recent report card that gave Trader Joe’s an "F" for failing to have a comprehensive safer chemicals policy. We congratulate Trader Joe’s for taking these steps and hope the company won’t stop there. We’d like to seeTrader Joes take the next step and adopt a robust safer chemicals policy.
Receipts don’t have to be toxic
Trader Joe's and others can look to Best Buy, which received a "B" on the recent retailer report card. The electronics superstoree released a comprehensive chemicals policy in late 2017, is active on the Green Chemistry & Commerce Council’s Retailer Leadership Council, and uses phenol-free receipt paper.
Pergafast 201 is the phenol-free developer of choice for Best Buy. The Ecology Center’s testing also found no thermal coating on receipts from two independently owned hardware stores. “Phenol-free receipt paper is available. It’s just more expensive,” said Olson, who also encourages employers to offset the higher cost by offering customers electronic receipts. And if there’s still a price difference, Olson said, "Protecting workers from negative health effects is worth the price."
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families' Mind the Store campaign recently evaluated and ranked the chemical policies and practices of 30 major U.S. retailers in order to push companies for broader, longer-lasting reforms. In order to stop the cycle of frying pan to fire decision-making for harmful chemicals, we urge manufacturers and retailers to adopt comprehensive chemical policies to eliminate hazardous chemicals.
https://www.alternet.org/personal-health/unexpected-health-risk-thats-probably-hiding-your-coat-pocket-right-now
-
Fluorinated Firefighting Foams Doused in South Australia
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Murray Griffin
Fluorinated foams can no longer be used for firefighting in South Australia after the state government banned their use, saying the main chemicals in them contaminate water resources.
The amended policy prohibits the use of firefighting foams that contain fluorine and makes it illegal to fill a fire extinguisher with a foam product containing compounds of the chemical.
Of particular concern are foams containing perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), which fall into a family of chemicals known as per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). These compounds rapidly disperse into the environment through surface water runoff and can leach into groundwater.
South Australia's prohibition—the first by an Australian state—was introduced Jan. 30 through an amendment to a state environment policy that protects water quality.
“This ban on fluorinated firefighting foams will effectively negate further environmental and human health risks associated with their use and provide the community and industry with certainty around the use of these products,” Ian Hunter, minister of sustainability, environment and conservation, said in a press statement.
The state government initially considered limiting its ban to foams containing PFOS and PFOA, but decided to extend the prohibition to those containing any fluorinated organic compounds. The revised policy gives users two years to convert or replace large fire extinguishers with a capacity of 90 liters or more and to replace existing small extinguishers that contain fluorinated foams. Sites unable to meet that deadline can apply for an extension.
Groups, such as the United Firefighters Union of Australia and the state's Metropolitan Fire Service and the South Australian Country Fire Service voiced support for the broader ban.
Others, including Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd., which provides firefighting products, and safety advisory Wilson Consulting Group, questioned the effectiveness of fluorine-free foams for hydrocarbon-fueled fires. Short-chain fluorinated foams (C6), which are increasingly used in modern fluorinated foams, should be allowed for these purposes, they said.
National Management Plan
Meanwhile, a national PFAS management plan being drafted by federal, state, and territory environment ministers is expected to be released in the coming months. It will establish criteria for investigating sites contaminated with PFAS. At least 3,000 PFAS substances are identified in the draft, with about 200 to 600 estimated to occur in, or result from, firefighting foams.
The presence of PFAS compounds in the environment has been an issue of significant public concern in several states, particularly near Department of Defense bases where the substances have contaminated groundwater. Foams containing PFAS were once widely used during training exercises at these sites.
Australia's Defense Department is soliciting bids from private water treatment companies to clean up PFAS contamination at several of its sites.
Last April, a spill of more than 5,000 liters of PFAS-containing firefighting foam at a Qantas hangar at Brisbane airport in Queensland state prompted the airline to switch to non-fluorinated foams.The Queensland state government has been encouraging companies to switch to foams that don't contain PFOA or PFOS, and has urged the federal government to ban them nationally.
Australian water utilities also are becoming increasingly concerned about their capacity to treat PFAS contamination in wastewater and about the possibility of PFAS contamination in biosolids.
Fluorine-Free Not Adequate in U.S
Fluorine free foams can't be used in the U.S. because they don't meet military specifications, according to Roger Klein, a physician and physical chemist at the University of Cambridge who has spent decades advising and working with the U.K. Fire Service Resources and fire service issues internationally. “So, the alternative, no matter how good, can't be used.”
Moreover, at most U.S. airports, the Federal Aviation Administration requires Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) that meets military specifications.
“The specifications are not about the structure of the foam,” the FAA said in a statement emailed to Bloomberg Environment last November. “The specifications are for how quickly the foam can disperse, cover, and put out a fire. So there is no requirement for fluorine-carbon based foams, but those are the foams that are currently the most effective at putting out the fires in specifications required.”
Current fluorine-free foams don't meet those specifications, the FAA said.
“We welcome the industry's efforts to develop alternatives that meet the safety and performance requirements of the military and prove they are as effective as current AFFF products,” the FAA said. “Our primary concern, however, is that the firefighters have the most effective firefighting agent and tools at their disposal to protect the flying public.”
—With assistance from Pat Rizzuto
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=127727462&vname=dennotallissues&fn=127727462&jd=127727462
-
U.S. Refiners Talk Expansion After Reaping Billions in Tax Gains
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Laura Blewitt
The biggest independent refiners in the U.S. are lining their pockets with billions of dollars in tax reform windfalls just in time to invest in equipment that meets ever-tightening domestic and global environmental rules.
“The reduction in the corporate tax rate is a catalyst for incremental investment in the business,” said Gary Heminger, CEO of Marathon Petroleum Corp during the company's fourth quarter earnings call.
Marathon's 2018 capital investment plan includes $950 million in refining upgrades to make cleaner fuels and export enhancements. Its projects aim to satisfy International Maritime Organization rules that require lower sulfur in distillate by 2020, and U.S. Clean Air Act Tier-3 gasoline standards intended to reduce air pollution.
Valero Energy Corp will pour $1 billion into growth projects this year, including a $400 million refinery unit that churns out octane to make premium gasoline. It now has $1.9 billion in extra spending cash from the Republicans’ tax overhaul.
U.S. refiners exported staggering amounts of diesel and gasoline last year, hitting records in both categories while continuing to eye more opportunities to expand. But meeting the stringent rules of IMO 2020 promise double-digit returns on investment, according to Marathon's Heminger.
“And that's being very conservative on IMO,” he said early Feb. 1. “We do believe that there is significant upside opportunity with IMO.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=127727440&vname=dennotallissues&fn=127727440&jd=127727440
-
Interior Rolls Back Oil Drilling Policies for Federal Land
Feb 1, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Interior Department implemented a new policy Thursday aimed at streamlining the oil and natural gas drilling process on federal land by cutting back on the opportunities for drilling opponents to slow down the process.
A memo signed Wednesday and released Thursday by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) states that it is the agency’s policy to “simplify and streamline the leasing process to alleviate unnecessary impediments and burdens, to expedite the offering of lands for lease,” and to ensure drilling rights sales happen regularly.
The changes include setting a 60-day deadline for processing proposed lease sales, leaving public participation in certain reviews up to low-level officials, limiting protest periods for sales to 10 days and repealing an Obama administration policy that let other land users, like hunters and anglers, object.
The memo is part of a wide-ranging plan at Interior and elsewhere to tear down barriers to domestic production of oil, natural gas and other fossil fuels.
Conservationists slammed the policy change, calling it a threat to the environment and to other users of federal land.
“Not only is the administration rolling back safeguards for fish and wildlife and other natural resources, it’s also making it harder for Americans to weigh in on decisions about their own public lands by decreasing opportunities for input,” Tracy Stone-Manning, the National Wildlife Federation’s associate vice president for federal lands, said in a statement.
“The headlong rush to prioritize energy development above all other uses is nothing but a giveaway to the oil and gas industry. It’s bad for wildlife, bad for public lands and bad for future generations,” she said.
“We’re now returning to the dark days where our government gives oil companies carte blanche to drill next to national parks, around wildlife refuges, and next to neighborhoods,” said Greg Zimmerman, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities.
BLM released the memo the same day it announced that the agency’s lease sales brought in nearly $360 million to the federal government last year.
“Oil and gas lease sales on public land directly support domestic energy production and the president's energy dominance and job growth priorities for America,” Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt said. “2017 was a big year for oil and gas leasing on federal lands, and these sales provide critical revenue and job growth in rural America.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/371912-interior-roll-backs-oil-drilling-policies-for-federal-land
-
U.S. Crude Oil Production Hit 10M b/d in November, Highest Level Since 1970, EIA Says
Feb 1, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By David Bradley
U.S. crude oil production, boosted by record high output in Texas, reached 10.038 million b/d in November, the highest level since the record 10.044 million b/d achieved in November 1970, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA).
It was the first time domestic crude production has surpassed 10 million b/d since 1970, EIA said in its latest Petroleum Supply Monthly report, which was released Thursday.
Crude oil production in Texas reached a record high 3.89 million b/d in November, EIA said. Production in North Dakota was 1.18 million b/d. In the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, production was 1.67 million b/d, a 14% increase compared with October as the region continued to recover from Hurricane Nate.
"U.S. crude oil production has increased significantly over the past 10 years, driven mainly by production from tight rock formations including shale and other fine-grained rock using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing to improve efficiency," EIA said. "EIA estimates of crude oil production from tight formations in November 2017 reached 5.09 million b/d, surpassing a previous high of 4.70 million b/d in March 2015...
"Liquid production -- both crude oil and condensate -- from tight rock currently accounts for about 51% of total production. A decade ago, in November 2008, production from tight formations accounted for only 7% of total U.S. production. Non-tight oil production has been mostly constant over the previous decade."
After increasing relatively steadily since 2011, tight oil production began to decline after the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil price decreased from $105/bbl in June 2014 to a low of $30/bbl in February 2016, EIA said. WTI prices were about $60/bbl last month.
Even during those price fluctuations, production continued to increase in three Permian Basin formations -- the Spraberry, Bone Spring, and Wolfcamp -- and in the Bakken formation in the Williston Basin in North Dakota and Montana, the agency said.
In a recent report, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said it expects U.S. crude oil production to exceed 10 million b/d this year, surpassing output from Saudi Arabia and rivaling that of Russia. IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol has said he expects the United States will become the world's top producer of oil and natural gas over the next several decades.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum last week, U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry indicated that he doesn't necessarily take as gospel IEA's projections. Perry also dismissed suggestions that U.S. production would reach 14 million b/d by 2021, but begin to decline by around 2024, ostensibly because the United States wouldn't be able to maintain that level of production.
The seemingly inexorable upward trend of oil and natural gas production from the seven most prolific U.S. onshore unconventional plays is likely to continue in February compared with January, according to EIA. Total oil production in the seven plays is expected to increase to an estimated 6.55 million b/d in February, compared to 6.44 million b/d in January, an increase of about 111,000 b/d, EIA said.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/113237-us-crude-oil-production-in-november-hits-10m-bd-highest-level-since-1970-eia-says
-
Feb 1, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Editorial Board
Readers of pre-millennial vintage may recall the 2008 presidential campaign when Republicans and especially Sarah Palin picked up the chant “drill, baby, drill” as a response to soaring oil prices. The theme was much derided, not least by Barack Obama, who as late as 2012 called it “a slogan, a gimmick, and a bumper sticker” but “not a strategy.” Ten years later, who was right?
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reported Thursday that U.S. crude oil production exceeded 10 million barrels a day for the first time since 1970. That’s double the five million barrels produced in 2008, thanks to the boom in, well, drilling, baby.
The EIA summary puts it this way: “U.S. crude oil production has increased significantly over the past 10 years, driven mainly by production from tighter rock formations including shale and other fine-grained rock using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing to improve efficiency.” This is the “fracking” boom our readers know well that has been driven by innovation in the private oil and gas industry.
The magnitude of the boom is remarkable. The gusher has pushed the U.S. close to overtaking Saudi Arabia and Russia as the world’s leading oil producer. In 2006 the U.S. imported 12.9 million barrels a day of crude and petroleum products. By last October that was down to 2.5 million a day. Some gimmick.
This translates into greater energy security as the U.S. is less dependent on foreign oil sources. Donald Trump calls it “energy dominance,” which implies that the U.S. wants to husband its supplies like gold at Fort Knox. The reality is we want to produce and sell what the market will bear, including exports to willing buyers around the world.
Thanks to Congress’s deal with Mr. Obama in 2015 when Republicans extended wind and solar subsidies in return for lifting the oil export ban, the U.S. exported some 1.5 million barrels of oil a day in November. Some readers may recall that Heritage Action instructed Congress to vote no, and Breitbart called the bill “a total and complete sell-out of the American people.” Perhaps even they can now see that trading temporary subsidies for a permanent change in export law was shrewd and good for the country.
Also striking is how quickly the oil and gas industry has recovered from the oil price plunge of 2015-2016. Previous price declines led to multiple bankruptcies and bank failures. This time drillers adapted quickly, took the rig count down fast, and cut costs. America’s flexible private capital markets helped the companies ride out the price trough, and now producers, investors and lenders are reaping the benefits of the oil price rebound to $69 a barrel.
And don’t forget the fracking boom in natural gas. EIA says U.S. gas production increased by some 50% from January 2010 to November 2017, reducing carbon emissions and heating prices. Thanks to new export terminals, the U.S. is now selling liquefied natural gas around the world. This has the potential to compete with Russian gas so Western Europe doesn’t have to succumb to Vladimir Putin’s periodic energy blackmail. Unleashing U.S. energy is Donald Trump’s best Russia containment strategy.
It’s worth stressing some of the policy lessons in all this. The first is that the best response to energy shocks is to let the market adjust to the price signals. As oil prices soared in the latter half of the last decade, politicians panicked and rushed to ban certain light bulbs, and subsidize and mandate cellulosic ethanol and other energy fads. The media fed the panic and cheered the politicians on. We were back at “peak oil” and the end of fossil fuels.
Yet American ingenuity was already discovering the solution for high prices in the shale plays of North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas and elsewhere. These drillers could move fast because they had the support of private capital and could lease private land. The frackers were also largely regulated by the states, which meant even the Obama Administration couldn’t stop them.
This is a familiar American story of invention and wealth creation that benefits everyone, but it never would have happened if central planners in Washington had to approve it. That’s the most important lesson.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/drilled-baby-drilled-1517531831
-
Murphy Says NJ Joins Neighbors in Opposing ‘Fracking’
Feb 1, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
Gov. Phil Murphy said Thursday that New Jersey is joining Delaware, New York and Pennsylvania in support of a regional ban on hydraulic fracturing.
Murphy, a Democrat, announced the decision on the banks of the Delaware River in Phillipsburg.
“Fracking should not have a role in the energy future of New Jersey,” Murphy said.
The decision comes after the Delaware River Basin Commission, a regional regulatory body that also includes the federal government, voted last year to begin considering a ban on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. New Jersey under former Republican Gov. Chris Christie abstained from the vote.
The Delaware watershed supplies Philadelphia and half of New York City with drinking water.
Murphy also sent a letter to Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, also a Democrat, saying that New Jersey would not allow “dangerous exploratory activities.”
Fracking is a technique that uses huge volumes of pressurized water, along with sand and chemicals, to crack open gas-bearing shale rock deep underground. Its environmental and health impacts remain hotly disputed.
The proposed ban would apply to two counties in Pennsylvania’s northeastern tip that are part of the nation’s largest gas field, the Marcellus Shale. More than 10,000 Marcellus wells have been drilled in other parts of Pennsylvania since a natural gas boom began nearly 10 years ago, but the industry has been prevented from developing its acreage in the Delaware watershed.
Neighboring New York already has a statewide drilling ban and New Jersey does not currently have any fracking underway.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/murphy-says-nj-joins-neighbors-in-opposing-fracking/2018/02/01/a1771ed4-0780-11e8-aa61-f3391373867e_story.html?utm_term=.cd56626ae30a
-
Pennsylvania Shale Impact Fees Likely Higher for 2017
Feb 1, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Higher natural gas prices and more new wells last year are likely to help raise Pennsylvania impact fee collections from shale gas producers for the first time in three years, according to the state’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO).
The IFO expects impact fee collections for 2017 to be $219.4 million, or $46.1 million higher than the $173.3 million producers paid in 2016. Companies are required to self-report annually and submit fees by April 1 for the prior year to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission.
While the IFO’s latest estimate released on Wednesday is slightly lower than the $49 million increase it forecasted last July, more new wells came online and benchmark prices crept above $3.00/MMBtu last year, which pushed the fee schedule higher. The New York Mercantile Exchange average was $3.108/MMcf in 2017, the IFO said.
The fee is levied annually on all unconventional wells in the state during their first 15 years of operation, as long as they produce more than 90 Mcf. It is not a volumetric fee, but rather one calculated using a multi-year schedule based on the average annual price of natural gas. The fee schedule, and the amount companies must pay for each well, depends on the number of years the wells have produced. Fees are highest for wells in their first operating year.
IFO said 812 new wells came online last year, compared with 504 in 2016, which was the third straight year of impact fee declines as commodity prices and drilling activity declined. There were 8,634 unconventional wells that were subject to the impact fee in 2017.
Higher prices are likely to provide a $43.4 million boost, while more new wells should result in additional fees of $2.7 million, the IFO said.
Annual collections are announced after the April collection date. They are distributed to local governments and state agencies to provide for infrastructure, emergency services, environmental initiatives and other programs.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/113244-pennsylvania-shale-impact-fees-likely-higher-for-2017
-
Texas Oil Companies Tell Trump to Leave NAFTA Alone
Feb 1, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
One of President Donald Trump's favorite subjects for praise - the Texas oil industry - is urging him to back off his hard-line stance on the North American Free Trade Agreement.
The Texas Alliance of Energy Producers, which represents oil companies across Texas, passed a resolution this week urging Trump not to raise tariffs on Mexico and Canada, so as "to foster the expansion of unfettered energy trade and investment."
"NAFTA is important to Texas, and if renegotiated, its impact on our markets for oil and gas needs to remain positive and profitable," Bob Osborne, chairman of the energy alliance, said.
The energy alliance is also asking Trump to keep NAFTA as is should negotiations break down and not to seek a resolution putting an expiration date on the pact.
The plea comes as talks continue to renegotiate the more than two-decade old trade pact, which lifted tariffs on goods moving between the three nations. Last month, Canadian officials, along with some U.S. congressmen, expressed concern Trump would pull the United States from NAFTA.
But following talks in Montreal last week, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Tuesday he didn't believe Trump would pull out because of the potential damage to U.S. workers.
"I'm confident that the president is going to see that and choose to not terminate because it's not in his or Americans' best interests to walk away from NAFTA," he said.
The stakes are especially high for oil and gas companies operating in Texas, which have watched gas exports to Mexico increase more than five-fold since 2010, according to the energy alliance.
At the same time, refineries along the Gulf Coast rely on a steady stream of crude from Western Canada.
"The heavier grades of crude oil imported to the U.S. from Canada are a necessary part of the U.S. oil supply mix," said John Tintera, president of the energy alliance. "Many U.S. refineries were built to handle those grades, and require heavy crude to make several vital consumer products."
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Texas-oil-companies-tell-Trump-to-leave-NAFTA-12543303.php
-
Oklahoma Quakes Tied to How Deep Wastewater Is Injected
Feb 1, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Seth Borenstein
A new study finds that a major trigger of man-made earthquakes rattling Oklahoma is how deep — not just how much — fracking wastewater is injected into the ground.
Scientists analyzed more than 10,000 wastewater injection wells where 96 billion gallons of fluid — leftover from hydraulic fracturing — are pumped yearly. The amount of wastewater injected and the depth are key to understanding the quake outbreak since 2009, they reported in Thursday’s journal Science . The quakes included a damaging magnitude 5.8 in 2016, the strongest in state history.
State regulators could cut about in half the number of man-made quakes by restricting deep injections in the ground, said lead author Thea Hincks, an earth scientist at the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom. Companies drilling for oil and gas should not inject waste within 600 to 1500 feet (200 to 500 meters) of the geologic basement. That’s the stable harder rock deep underground usually made of metamorphic and igneous rocks.
That region is usually crisscrossed with earthquake faults. The closer you get to the faults, the more likely you are to trigger them, said Stanford University geophysicist Matthew Weingarten, who wasn’t part of the study.
Lab experiments show basement rocks are more susceptible to earthquakes because “having fluids in a rock is going to weaken the rock,” said co-author Thomas Gernon, a geologist at the University of Southampton.
Previous studies had pinpointed the amount of fluids injected into wells as an issue. Gernon said volume does trigger earthquakes, but when volume levels were reduced the number of quakes didn’t drop as much as had been expected. That’s because where the stuff is put matters slightly more, he said.
The findings only apply to quakes in Oklahoma, researchers said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/oklahoma-quakes-tied-to-how-deep-wastewater-is-injected/2018/02/01/667fb40a-0783-11e8-aa61-f3391373867e_story.html?utm_term=.33d71d8ad522
-
Trump Said to Again Propose Eliminating Chemical Safety Board (1)
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter and Sam Pearson
President Donald Trump's 2019 budget proposal will again call for eliminating funding for the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, an independent agency charged with investigating major industrial accidents, according to a senior government official familiar with the plan.
The agency, which has an annual budget of $11 million, was informed by the White House Office of Management and Budget in November the federal budget would propose elimination similar to the 2018 budget, the person said. Under the draft budget, the agency would receive funding to shut its operation down, said the person, who wasn't authorized to speak about the cuts and asked not to be identified.
A spokeswoman for the Chemical Safety Board referred questions to the White House budget office, which did not respond to emails seeking comment. The budget is expected to be released Feb. 12.
Frequent Accidents
“The U.S. averages more than 1,000 major industrial chemical accidents every year,” Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, said in an email. “Eliminating any federal capacity to learn the causes of potentially catastrophic industrial accidents would be unwise in the extreme.”
Michael Wright, health and safety director at the United Steelworkers union, told Bloomberg Environment the CSB saves far more money than its operating costs by preventing major chemical incidents. The union represents workers at industrial sites that have undergone CSB investigations in the past.
“It's just one more demonstration of how out of touch this administration is with the real needs of the American people,” Wright said of the White House proposal.
The safety agency was created in 1990 to find the root causes of industrial accidents and recommend ways to prevent them from reoccurring, but wasn't funded until 1998.
The CSB has investigated incidents ranging from BP Plc's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig blowout in 2010 to the chemical spill that tainted hundreds of thousands of West Virginians’ drinking water in 2014. The board also performs less high-profile tasks such as promoting educational safety programs.
On Deck
Current investigations include an explosion at a natural gas well in Oklahoma that killed five last month and a Houston-area chemical plant that partially exploded and caught fire because of flooding during Hurricane Harvey.
Congressional appropriators rejected the White House's previous request to eliminate the agency's funding, with outgoing House Appropriations Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen, a New Jersey Republican, holding up the CSB as an example of “programs that protect environmental safety.”
The small agency, which can only make safety recommendations to other departments instead of issuing rules and penalties, has been viewed skeptically by some in industry. Its findings often shed light on potentially dangerous industry practices.
“While CSB has done some outstanding work on its investigations, more often than not, its overlap with other agency investigative authorities has generated unhelpful friction,” the White House said in its previous budget proposal. “In recent years, CSB's recommendations have also been focused on the need for greater regulation of industry, which has frustrated both regulators and industry.“
White House officials never elaborated last year on specific incidents in which the CSB has been counterproductive. In the CSB's own budget request last year—which it can send Congress independently of the White House—it stated that its mission “is not duplicated by any other federal agency or entity.”
Agency's Mission Differs
Supporters of the CSB say the agency's mission is different than that of regulatory agencies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency. The CSB has a mandate to identify the root cause of an incident and issue safety recommendations, including to regulators if their programs could have been more effective, whereas regulatory agencies more narrowly determine if a facility violated existing law.
In 2014, a congressional probe said the CSB was in disarray, marred by an “abusive and hostile work environment” that had spurred several investigators to flee the agency. The CSB also was criticized for moving too slowly to complete its investigations. The chairman at the time has since resigned and new staff has arrived.
The agency has its fans in industry, including at the oil company Andeavor, formerly known as Tesoro Corp., which also sees room for improvement.
“The mission of the Chemical Safety Board is worth preserving,” Stephen H. Brown, vice president of federal government affairs for the San Antonio, Texas-based refiner said in an email. “A credible safety oversight entity that partners with stakeholders on accident investigations, conducts root cause analysis, and fosters learnings without those activities being sometimes hijacked by the political agenda of individual Board members would be the ideal.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=127727430&vname=dennotallissues&fn=127727430&jd=127727430
-
Worker Protections Sought by EPA for Oilfield Chemical
Feb 2, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Oilfield workers who could touch or inhale a particular anti-corrosive chemical would need personal protective equipment to prevent such exposure, under a proposed rule the EPA soon will publish.
The chemical is 3,3′-methylenebis[5-methyloxazolidine] (Chemical Abstracts Service No. 66204-44-2). The proposed rule, posted online Feb. 1, would apply to its use in oilfield operations and hydraulic fluids.
The proposal would modify a previous significant new use rule. The Environmental Protection Agency said the worker safety protections are warranted by new health and safety information it has received since issuing the original regulation in September 2012.
The EPA has given one manufacturer, which is not identified in the proposal, permission to use the chemical as an anti-corrosive agent in oilfield operations and hydraulic fluids. The EPA did so because the company filed a required notice and signed a consent order that requires it to provide the required protective equipment and take other actions to protect workers. That company also agreed to other restrictions detailed in the EPA's proposal.
The EPA's proposed rule would apply the same worker safety and other restrictions to any other company making or using 3,3′-methylenebis[5-methyloxazolidine]. The rule does that by saying the absence of such worker protections constitutes a “new use” of the chemical that the EPA must review.
New toxicity data the EPA received showed 3,3′-methylenebis[5-methyloxazolidine] could release formaldehyde, which is classified as a known human carcinogen by the Department of Health and Human Services. The data also raised concerns about ways the chemical could affect the neurological system and human development, the EPA said.
Schulke & Mayr GmbH was the original company that sought in 2003 to introduce 3,3′-methylenebis[5-methyloxazolidine] into U.S. commerce, according to its application that led to the 2012 regulation. The chemical, originally used as a preservative in metal working fluids, was included in a 2004 “Handbook of Green Chemicals.”
Interested parties will have 15 days to comment on the proposed rule once it is published in the Federal Register.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=127727435&vname=dennotallissues&fn=127727435&jd=127727435
-
With Amtrak Crash, Congress Faced a Deadly Rail Danger Firsthand
Feb 2, 2018 | The Hill - Opinion
By Jim Mathews
On Wednesday morning, I asked my staff to post a cautionary video of a truck driver in Florida ignoring flashing lights and lowered crossing gates to drive across the tracks, narrowly avoiding crashing into a Brightline train. Hours later, Republican members of Congress were involved in an accident when the Amtrak train they were riding hit a garbage truck at a grade crossing outside Charlottesville, Virginia. The driver appears to have ignored flashing lights and lowered crossing gates in an attempt to beat the train across the tracks.
Was this a premonition? A coincidence?
Sadly, neither.
You don’t have to be a psychic to predict these accidents. In the U.S., a person or vehicle gets hit by a train every three hours, accounting for 96 percent of rail industry fatalities. Of course, most of these incidents involve freight trains, and most casualties are not members of Congress, so they don’t get the same media attention. But the loss is real, and it begs the question: What needs to be done?
Foremost is public education. Much of this comes down to unsafe behavior by drivers and pedestrians who ignore common-sense rules. It’s why we posted the near-collision video on Wednesday morning. People need to understand the risks involved in trying to race a train.
There are also real policy prescriptions. Congress enacted Section 130, a federal program that provides states with dedicated funding to make safety upgrades to highway-rail grade crossings. This program has invested $2 billion over the past decade, and it’s produced real results: a 23 percent reduction in fatalities and a 33 percent reduction in rail trespassing fatalities.
That’s a drop in the bucket considering the number of rail crossings in the US, and there’s much more that can be done. With an absence of federal leadership, some states are leading the way.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation launched the Sealed Corridor Program along the Raleigh-Charlotte corridor to eliminate or improve rail-highway grade crossings. By using enhanced track control devices, crossing closures, and grade separations, they’ve lowered the number of unprotected crossings from more than 3,500 in 1992 to 1,640 today. A USDOT analysis found a 67 percent to 98 percent reduction in gate violations, saving an estimated 20 lives over a 10-year period. Sealed corridors work, but they require funding — something Congress has proved unable to act on.
It’s a familiar story. Congress mandated implementation of Positive Train Control safety technology following a deadly commuter rail collision in 2008. But funding never materialized, so deadlines were extended. More PTC-preventable accidents occurred, and more lives were lost — just this last December two National Association of Railroad Passengers members were killed in a derailment in Washington state.
This Congress seems to require a looming crisis to pass legislation. Even now, there are hundreds of millions of dollars in additional funding for rail safety grant programs, approved on a bipartisan basis in the summer... but currently trapped in limbo because Congress can’t pass a budget, instead limping from one short-term continuing resolution to another.
Perhaps this week’s train collision will be the crisis Congress needs to take safety seriously, and tackle the much talked about infrastructure bill. For someone who has taken this personally for a long time, I’d say it’s long overdue.
Jim Mathews is president of the National Association of Railroad Passengers, the oldest and largest national membership organization fighting for more and better trains in America.
http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/371885-with-amtrak-crash-congress-faced-a-common-and-deadly-rail-danger-firsthand
-
Number Of Criminal Environmental Prosecutions Keeps Dropping
Feb 1, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Amanda Reilly
Criminal environmental prosecutions are continuing their downward trend and are on track to reach their lowest point in more than two decades.
The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse today released data from the Justice Department showing that the federal government reported 55 prosecutions in the first three months of fiscal 2018.
If that trend continues, TRAC said, the government will prosecute 220 violators of environmental laws by the end of the year. That would be the fewest number of prosecutions since DOJ began its tracking more than 20 years ago.
TRAC obtained the data through a Freedom of Information Act request to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys. TRAC is a project of Syracuse University.
So far in fiscal 2018, six out of 10 environmental criminal prosecutions have been violations of wildlife protection laws, TRAC said. The Interior Department played the lead role in 23 of the 55 prosecutions, followed by U.S. EPA in 16 and the Agriculture Department in 11.
Almost half of all the prosecutions were litigated in three federal judicial districts: the Western District of Louisiana, the Central District of California and Montana.
The number of criminal prosecutions has dropped since the last year of the Obama administration. In fiscal 2016, the Justice Department reported 393 prosecutions. Last fiscal year, the number decreased to 338.
But the overall decline began before the Trump administration took office, according to the data. In fiscal 2007, DOJ reported more than 900 prosecutions, but by 2009 they had dropped to around 500. In both 2011 and 2012, the federal government prosecuted around 600 violators, but the numbers fell again in the following years.
The TRAC numbers, though, do not differentiate between high-profile environmental crimes resulting in multibillion-dollar settlements, such as the Volkswagen AG emissions cheating scandal and the BP PLC Deepwater Horizon disaster, and smaller violations of environmental laws.
DOJ spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle said it's difficult to draw conclusions from the data because the yearly numbers fluctuate "for a variety of reasons."
"The Justice Department continues to actively and vigorously enforce the laws enacted by Congress that protect clean air, land and water for all Americans," Hornbuckle said. "We pursue the law and facts of a case wherever they take us and, through our civil and criminal enforcement efforts, have achieved notable results for communities and the environment over the past year."
Fewer referrals by agencies could be driving some of the decline. EPA currently has around 150 criminal agents, though a 1990 federal law requires the agency to have at least 200. In a report last year, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility found that the agency had fewer than half of the special agents as it did in 2003 (Greenwire, Aug. 24, 2017).
EPA, though, recently received authorization to hire 10 more investigators, Michael Fisher, director of the legal counsel division in EPA's Office of Criminal Enforcement, said at an October gathering of environmental lawyers.
At that same conference, Deborah Harris, who has been chief of DOJ's Environmental Crimes Section since 2014, blamed budget cutting for hampering environmental enforcement.
"I think the damage was done before the Trump administration got here," she said then. "Who knows what more damage will be done?" (Greenwire, Oct. 20, 2017).
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/02/01/stories/1060072681
-
EPA Reverses Air Pollution Rule
Feb 1, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt E. Erickson
Agency heeds request of Republican senators to withdraw long-standing policy
As part of the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce burdensome regulations, the U.S. EPA has withdrawn a 23-year-old policy intended to reduce air emissions of hazardous substances such as arsenic, lead, mercury, and benzene. Affected facilities include coal-fired power plants and chemical facilities.
Under the former policy, once a facility was classified as a “major” source of hazardous air emissions, it was always considered a major source. That meant that it was required to reduce emissions down to levels based on how much is technologically possible for the lifetime of the operation.
Now, under guidelines released by EPA on Jan. 25, facilities that are classified as a major source can be reclassified as an “area” source if their emissions fall below a certain threshold. Area sources are subject to weaker standards than major sources.
Chemical manufacturers, the fossil fuel industry, and Republicans in Congress are cheering the move. In a Jan. 9 letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), leaders on the Senate Environment & Public Works committee, wrote that the policy “discourages” and “disincentivizes” air emissions reductions. The committee received such complaints from the American Coatings Association (ACA) and other industry groups as part of a Nov. 15 hearing on reducing air emissions through innovation. ACA noted that “resources spent on compliance could be used instead for [research and development], or modernization activities.”
Some Democrats argue that the decision will lead to increased air emissions of hazardous substances. Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), the top Democrat on the committee, is alarmed by the abruptness of EPA’s decision to reverse the decades-old policy. “While citing no analysis of the public health impacts of this decision, Administrator Pruitt’s EPA has proactively allowed polluters to increase output of toxic air pollution,” Carper said in a statement.
Environmentalists pledged to fight EPA’s decision. “Rolling back longstanding protections to allow the greatest increase in hazardous air pollutants in our nation’s history is unconscionable,” said John Walke, clean air director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/96/i6/EPA-reverses-air-pollution-rule.html
-
Emails Indicate Scott Pruitt Directed Removal of Climate Info from EPA Website
Feb 2, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Ben Levitan
At EDF, we recently gained access to some newly-released emails that provide a troubling glimpse of the efforts to remove information about climate change from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) website.
The emails were released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and center on EPA’s website purge of April 2017. They indicate that Administrator Scott Pruitt personally directed efforts to prevent the public from accessing many climate-related EPA web pages.
Along with webpages about climate change and climate science, the purge removed the webpage about the Clean Power Plan — the most significant action that the U.S. has ever taken to address climate change. Gone was information about the Clean Power Plan’s benefits– the lives it would save, the childhood asthma attacks it would prevent, and the way it would bolster America’s overall strategy for combating climate change. Also gone were supporting materials, including EPA’s legal memorandum accompanying the Clean Power Plan and an array of documents presenting the rule’s technical underpinnings.
Instead, the URL for the Clean Power Plan redirected visitors to a pagefeaturing President Trump’s “Energy Independence” executive order.
Emails refer to Pruitt’s personal involvement
In early April 2017, Lincoln Ferguson, a senior adviser to Pruitt, indicated that Pruitt directly ordered the website change.
Ferguson asked in an email:
“How close are we to launching this on the website? The Administrator would like it to go up ASAP. He also has several other changes that need to take place.” (File 2, p. 23)
J.P. Freire, then serving as Pruitt’s Associate Administrator for Public Affairs, responded:
“You can tell him we . . . are just finishing up.” (File 2, p. 23)
Ferguson wrote back:
“Can it happen today?” (File 2, p. 26)
Ferguson quickly followed up to emphasize Pruitt’s personal interest:
“Just asking because he is asking…” (File 2, p. 23)
Scrubbing all traces of the Clean Power Plan
J.P. Freire was emphatic that all Clean Power Plan references should link to the new page about Trump’s executive order.
In a discussion about the new page, he wrote:
“This looks great, and should be on the page for the Clean Power Plan. Any reference to the Clean Power Plan, any link to it, should redirect here.” (File 2, p. 23)
The emails also suggest EPA staff were directed to manipulate search results. Website visitors searching for information about the Clean Power Plan would be diverted to the page promoting Trump’s executive order — instead of what they were actually looking for.
In one conversation, an EPA staff member stated:
“I’ve been asked about search results for the term ‘Clean Power Plan.’”
A colleague responded:
“We can make the Energy Independence homepage a ‘Best Bet’ and thus the first result for Clean Power Plan for our EPA Search engine if you request it.” (File 1, p. 84)
A separate conversation among EPA staff demonstrated just how determined J.P. Freire was to undermine access to the Clean Power Plan page. In that discussion, an EPA staff member recounted a discussion with a colleague about Clean Power Plan search results:
“[S]he said JP wanted to know if ALL of those pages could be redirected.” (File 1, p. 298)
Keeping Americans in the dark, thwarting democratic processes
The website purge at EPA made it harder for the public to access vital information about climate change and public health. It also stymied the public’s ability to engage in democratic processes.
We are currently in the midst of the public comment period on Pruitt’s proposed repeal of the Clean Power Plan, but the website purge has obscured access to information about the rule’s purpose and its tremendous benefits for public health and climate security – possibly impeding commenters.
The Environmental Data and Governance Initiative, which tracks changes to federal websites, has written:
“Anyone valuing the idea of democratic policymaking should demand that public Web resources relevant for regulations should remain readily accessible to the public.”
The website purge reinforces serious concerns that Pruitt has predetermined that he will repeal the Clean Power Plan, and the current rulemaking process is a sham. Instead of listening to the public with an open mind, these emails suggest that Pruitt is personally and directly thwarting meaningful public participation.
The removed webpages are still accessible through various EPA archives, but the archives are a poor substitute. They don’t show up in a search of the EPA website. They’re harder to find with certain search engines, including Google. And they are no longer being updated, which is especially problematic for cutting-edge pages like EPA’s overview of climate science.
The website purge fits Pruitt’s troubling pattern of ruling EPA under a cloak of secrecy. That’s no way to run an agency entrusted with protecting the public health and environment. As part of EDF’s commitment to shining a light on EPA actions, we’ve made theserecords publicly available in their entirety. We encourage you to contact us if you would like to share observations about the records.
http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2018/02/01/emails-indicate-scott-pruitt-directed-removal-of-climate-info-from-epa-website/
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested