Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 14/02/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Industry Applauds Trump’s Plan to Upgrade Infrastructure
Feb 14, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Glenn Hess
Chemical companies are welcoming President Donald J. Trump’s long-awaited $1.5 trillion plan to rebuild aging U.S. infrastructure systems. -
EPA Data: Tap Water in More Than 1,000 Communities Tainted With Lead Above Action Level
Feb 14, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Olga Naldenko and Sonya Lunder
Tests by drinking water utilities serving 1.8 million Americans in 45 states detected lead above the Environmental Protection Agency’s action level, according to EWG’s analysis of the latest available federal data. -
Gulf Coast LNG Exports Soon Expected to Dominate Global Market
Feb 14, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
The U.S. is soon expected to become a dominant player in the global market for liquefied natural gas as Gulf Coast companies build massive terminals to serve overseas markets and the federal government considers looser regulations for small-scale exports closer to home. -
U.S. LNG Shipments Are Changing How Markets Act
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas are bringing the world closer to a truly global LNG pricing structure that could topple traditional market dynamics. -
BLM Rule Revisions Gut Obama-Era Guidance
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Proposed changes to Obama-era restrictions on gas venting, flaring and leakage from energy operations on public lands have been touted as revisions, but for some rule-watchers, the modifications look a lot more like rescissions. -
Constitution Tells FERC Not to 'Tolerate' New York Regulatory 'Tactics'
Feb 14, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Constitution Pipeline Co. LLC on Monday asked FERC to reconsider its decision upholding the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) authority to deny a water quality certification (WQC) for the long-delayed natural gas project. -
U.S. Energy Department Forming Cyber Protection Unit for Power Grids
Feb 14, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) said on Wednesday it is establishing an office to protect the nation's power grid and other infrastructure against cyber attacks and natural disasters. -
Colo. Regulators Pass New Rules After Catastrophe
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Colorado regulators will provide a better picture of the oil and gas pipelines that snake through the state's communities under a package of regulations approved yesterday. -
Intel Chiefs Warn of Surprise Cyberattacks on Infrastructure
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
The U.S. should brace for "localized and temporary disruptions of critical infrastructure" this year as foreign hackers hone their abilities, top intelligence officials warned yesterday. -
Trump Can Cut More Red Tape by Handing Out Scissors
Feb 13, 2018 | Newsmax
By Robert McClure
During its two terms in the White House, the Obama administration enacted an exorbitant number of new rules and regulations on American businesses, and the related red tape has cost more than $100 billion annually. -
Greens See Trump Infrastructure Plan as Ruse to Gut Environmental Rules
Feb 14, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Annie Snider and Anthony Adragna
President Donald Trump's infrastructure proposal would deliver a long-running Republican goal of shrinking the country’s foremost environmental laws, reaching far beyond just roads, bridges and ports.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Industry Applauds Trump’s Plan to Upgrade Infrastructure
Feb 14, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Glenn Hess
Chemical companies are welcoming President Donald J. Trump’s long-awaited $1.5 trillion plan to rebuild aging U.S. infrastructure systems.
“Building and repairing the nation’s network of roads, rails, and waterways will create jobs and strengthen America’s efficiency and, by extension, our economy for generations,” Dow Chemicalsays in a statement. “Dow and the chemical industry, as well as countless U.S. workers and citizens, will benefit from the President’s proposal to invest in our infrastructure.”
The framework, released on Feb. 12, seeks congressional approval for $200 billion in direct federal funding. The Administration expects the federal allocation will draw matching funds from cities, states, and the private sector, resulting in a $1.5 trillion total investment in repairs and new construction.
In recent years, states have assumed a greater share of public infrastructure spending, and the White House wants to accelerate that trend.
Modernizing and repairing the nation’s transportation infrastructure is critical for U.S. chemical companies, which rely on highways, railroads, and ports to deliver their products to customers.
“This issue is a priority since a highly functioning transportation network and robust energy infrastructure are vital to keeping the business of chemistry moving,” says the American Chemistry Council, the industry’s main trade association. “If left unaddressed, infrastructure challenges could prevent our nation from fully realizing the benefits of increased production.”
To speed up the construction of infrastructure projects, the plan would streamline the federal permitting and approval process to no more than two years. The current process, which involves a gauntlet of federal, state, and local regulatory hurdles, can take five to 10 years.
Under the administration’s plan, environmental review would take no more than 21 months. After a favorable decision, a permit would have to be issued within the next three months.
Democrats agree that U.S. infrastructure needs upgrading, but they say the White House proposal is short on federal funding. And activists oppose Trump’s plan to accelerate the permitting process.
Faster environmental reviews “would leave local residents all but voiceless when it comes to the massive projects that will reshape their communities,” says the Natural Resources Defense Council.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/96/i8/US-chemical-industry-applauds-Trump-s-plan-to-upgrade-infrastructure.html
-
EPA Data: Tap Water in More Than 1,000 Communities Tainted With Lead Above Action Level
Feb 14, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Olga Naldenko and Sonya Lunder
Tests by drinking water utilities serving 1.8 million Americans in 45 states detected lead above the Environmental Protection Agency’s action level, according to EWG’s analysis of the latest available federal data.
The analysis was released before EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt hosts a lead summit at the EPA headquarters tomorrow. In testimony to a Senate Committee last month, Pruitt declared a “war on lead,” but the Trump administration’s proposed 2019 budget cuts the EPA’s programs for lead abatement.
In the most recent tests of tap water conducted by utilities through the end of 2017, 1,124 community water systems exceeded the action level, according to the EPA’s Envirofactsdatabase. Under the 1991 Lead and Copper Rule, the action level is the amount of lead that, if exceeded in more than 10 percent of samples of tap water, requires utilities to take further steps to reduce pipe corrosion and warn their customers.
A Natural Resources Defense Council analysis of lead testing data for 2015 reported that 1,110 community water systems showed lead levels in excess of the action level in at least 10 percent of the homes tested. EWG’s analysis finds that two years later, the number of systems exceeding the action level is essentially unchanged. While the majority of systems that detected lead above the EPA’s action level serve small populations, there are some that provide water for large service areas and populations, including Newark, N.J.; Quincy, Mass.; and Pennsylvania State University.
Although the action level for lead is defined at 15 parts per billion, or ppb, there is strong scientific consensus that any amount of lead exposure during childhood is harmful. Lead is a potent neurotoxin that impairs children’s intellectual development, and alters their behavior and ability to concentrate. The impacts of lead exposure during childhood are permanent.
Because any level of lead in drinking water is dangerous for children, simply complying with the EPA's lead rules doesn't mean that water is safe for children to drink. To address this problem, in 2009 the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, or OEHHA, set a public health goal of 0.2 ppb for lead in drinking water to protect against IQ loss for children. OEHHA said the goal was set “on the basis of new studies relating neurobehavioral deficits to lower lead concentrations in the blood than previously reported.” Public health goals are not legal limits, but represent the levels OEHHA scientists say do not pose a significant health risk.
“I am delighted that a few large drinking water systems across the country and a few states are moving forward aggressively to protect children against lead in drinking water, but I am very distressed that hundreds of community water systems across the country are still delivering water with elevated levels of lead,” said Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, dean for global health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai in New York. Landrigan, whose early research in the 1970s helped eliminate the use of lead in paint and gasoline, is one of the foremost authorities on children’s environmental health.
“This widespread exposure to lead in drinking water poses a clear and present danger to the health of America’s children,” Landrigan said. “It will reduce children’s IQs, shorten their attention spans and disrupt their behavior, and it is ultimately a threat to America’s future. It is an exposure that needs urgently to be ended.”
The administration’s proposed budget would eliminate funding for a program to reduce risks from lead in paint, dust and soil, and eliminate some grants provided to states to carry out lead reduction activities. Although the proposed budget would increase funding for some infrastructure projects like lead pipe replacement, overall it slashes the EPA’s funding for clean and safe water by one-fifth and eliminates some water quality programs. It would also reduce the EPA’s funding for outreach to children and other sensitive populations by almost $4.5 million, or 69 percent.
What You Can Do
EWG recommends that parents take measures to reduce children’s exposure to lead from all sources, paying special attention to old lead paint and lead pipes in their water supply systems.
Public drinking water utilities are required to disclose their water quality testing results to customers. But lead tests performed in your city might not reflect specific lead risks in an individual home.
Consider testing your own tap water if you are pregnant or have young children. You should definitely test your drinking water if your water company says your house or community is served by lead-based water lines, or if lead has already been detected in the tap water in your neighborhood.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends these steps for decreasing lead ingestion from tap water:Run your faucet in the mornings to flush out all the water has accumulated lead overnight.Use only cold water for cooking.Use a water filter that is certified to remove lead.
Ultimately, replacing lead pipes is the only permanent way to remove lead from drinking water. Children’s health advocates, such as the Lead Service Line Replacement Collaborative, are pushing for the federal government to more vigorously address the lead problem in drinking water. This means speeding up the replacement of aging lead water pipes, paying for the replacement of pipes that run from the street to the home entrances, and requiring water companies to provide local health departments and the general public with more detail about lead problems in their neighborhoods.
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2018/02/epa-data-tap-water-more-1000-communities-tainted-lead-above-action-level#.WoRmLSVubIU
-
Gulf Coast LNG Exports Soon Expected to Dominate Global Market
Feb 14, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
The U.S. is soon expected to become a dominant player in the global market for liquefied natural gas as Gulf Coast companies build massive terminals to serve overseas markets and the federal government considers looser regulations for small-scale exports closer to home.
Officials, executives and consultants at the S&P Global Platts annual LNG conference in Houston agreed that the ongoing production boom in West Texas and other shale basins across throughout the country has already begun to transform LNG into a global commodity by shifting trade patterns and longstanding business models elsewhere in the world. They said the U.S. will need to ramp up exports in the coming years as increasingly efficient drilling methods create a domestic supply glut.
"We're going to have too much gas with nowhere to go," said Renato Pereira, vice president of business development and marketing for Houston's Tellurian Inc., an LNG upstart.
The interest in LNG exports, pioneered by Houston's Cheniere Energy in 2016, has intensified amid an ongoing renaissance in U.S. energy production. In West Texas, energy companies have found cheap and effective ways to tap the rich Permian Basin, creating a steady supply of affordable oil and gas for Gulf Coast refiners and exporters.
Steven Winberg, the U.S. Energy Department's assistant secretary for fossil fuels, said the nation has six projects underway in Texas, Louisiana, Georgia and Maryland that will support LNG exports in excess of 10 billion cubic feet per day. Already, the U.S. exports LNG to at least 20 global markets, primarily in Asia.
Winberg said U.S. LNG exports are also ramping up in Europe, notably in Lithuania and Poland. Those countries have historically relied on natural gas from nearby Russia.
"U.S. LNG exports are expanding and reshaping the international gas markets," Winberg said.
Last fall, Winberg's office proposed a rule that would soften regulations for small-scale LNG exporters, potentially expanding U.S. LNG shipments to smaller markets in the Caribbean, Central America and South America. The proposal would expedite applications to export small volumes subject to exclusion from National Environmental Policy Act regulations.
"This administration is committed to expanding the reach and the markets for American energy," Winberg said.
Cheniere's Sabine Pass facility in Louisiana, now the nation's only LNG terminal in operation, has already shipped more than 800 billion cubic feet of natural gas since it began exports in 2016, according to the Energy Department. The company last week announced two long-term agreements to export LNG to China's state-owned oil company through 2043.
Other companies have invested millions of dollars in large-scale LNG processing and export terminals on both the Gulf Coast and the East Coast. Houston companies Freeport LNG and Kinder Morgan are expected to begin exports this year, the former out of its Quintana Island terminal and the latter out of its Elba Island project in Georgia.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration anticipates that the nation will become a net exporter of natural gas this year for the first time since 1957 as production outpaces domestic demand. By the end of next year, it anticipates U.S. companies will have the capacity to process 9.5 billion cubic feet of LNG per day.
Tellurian, which is working to develop a Louisiana export terminal, is banking on an uptick in global gas demand as markets in Asia and elsewhere accelerate a shift from coal to cleaner-burning natural gas. Pereira said the company anticipates demand could jump to 408 billion cubic feet per day in 2025, up from 353 billion cubic feet per day last year.
"LNG has the potential to serve part of that demand," he said.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Gulf-Coast-LNG-exports-soon-expected-to-dominate-12611461.php
-
U.S. LNG Shipments Are Changing How Markets Act
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas are bringing the world closer to a truly global LNG pricing structure that could topple traditional market dynamics.
As volumes of U.S. LNG exports rise, major customers are enjoying a greater diversity of suppliers. Australia's rise as one of the world's largest LNG exporters further bolsters a slight trend toward supply diversity.
But the real game-changer is the diversity of contracting options and new hedging instruments that the U.S. is delivering to the LNG market.
Long-standing practice saw LNG trade move regionally and in a near-pipeline fashion. Contracts often specified what ports could accept LNG shipments, often banning resales. Buyers were compelled to sign commitments to purchases for 20 years, usually on a take-or-pay basis, meaning they were forced to pay for the fuel regardless of whether they needed it.
But analysts say that's all changing fast. Buyers are now demanding, and getting, shorter-term contracts and agreements for lighter volumes of LNG. The terms are becoming more flexible — re-exports are allowed in many cases, and take-or-pay is off the table. And hedging is quickly becoming the norm, as trading in LNG derivatives has exploded in recent months.
LNG buyers are pleased with all of these developments and didn't hide their satisfaction at talks on LNG and natural gas held here this week. Osamu Nagatomo, general manager for Tokyo Gas Co. Ltd., pressed for even further contract liberalization and trade diversification as Japan moves to deregulate its electricity and gas markets.
"It's important for both LNG suppliers and buyers to think outside the stereotype," Nagatomo said at an LNG conference hosted by S&P Global Platts.
Japan, South Korea and China have been pressing to see LNG traded more like shipborne crude oil, with more spot pricing and maximum flexibility in terms of where cargoes can come from and what the purchasers can do with them. Those nation's governments would like to see the emergence of a global LNG pricing hub with full price transparency. They've got a ways to go, cautioned S&P Global Platts analyst Desmond Wong, but rising U.S. LNG export volumes will get them a little bit closer.
"We're certainly not there yet, but we're on the way to something that would talk about pure gas to gas sort of contract, similar to European hubs," said Wong. "LNG is not quite there yet, but you are seeing flexibility come in different forms."
Last year, the market witnessed supply contract term lengths fall to their lowest levels ever, to an average of 6.7 years compared with average contract lengths of 11 ½ years in 2016, according to an assessment by Poten & Partners Inc. In January, the volume of LNG derivatives trading expanded by 50 percent over December 2017 figures, experts say. All told, the use of LNG derivatives for hedging at the Intercontinental Exchange has quadrupled since the launching of U.S. LNG exports.
LNG market observers expect the trend to continue. "They're looking for more flexibility," Wong said of major customers for new LNG shipments.
The longer-term contracting model hasn't gone away for good.
Last week, Cheniere Energy Inc. announced a long-term supply contract with China National Petroleum Corp. to supply China with about 1.2 million tons of LNG per year out to 2043. Oliver Tuckerman, vice president at Cheniere, told an audience at the S&P LNG conference that the agreement makes it more likely that his company will build a third liquefaction train at Sabine Pass in Louisiana. Cheniere can also supply China with LNG out of Corpus Christi, Texas, once that under-construction facility is completed and commissioned.
But Nagatomo predicted that the trend will be for shorter contracts on terms more favorable to the buyers. His company, Tokyo Gas, is one of the largest purchasers of LNG in the world and is poised to further spread its sourcing once Cove Point LNG in Maryland comes online this year. Tokyo Gas is also poised to purchase from the Cameron LNG project, which should be online at a later date.
"We expect the current supply-demand balance to continue to 2020," he said. Beyond then, there may be more LNG supply than available ready consumers, suggesting a need for "more diversified contracts," he added.Too far?
Analysts at Poten & Partners Inc. fear the trend could go too far.
Their recently published white paper on shorter LNG sales contracting and flexibility is meant as a warning. They argue that the situation may be sustainable in the near term, but if the global LNG market leans too heavily in the direction of what the buyers want, then would-be sellers may opt to not invest in further LNG production capacity, potentially crimping future supplies.
"With just two new LNG projects greenlighted over the past two years, concern is growing that the market may be undersupplied in the medium-term," says the analysts there. "Specifically, without long-term contracts that will enable more projects to be financed, the construction of new capacity may lag demand growth and set the stage for tighter markets and higher prices in the future."
Demand for LNG is poised to grow strongest in Asia, mainly in China as that nation pushes to replace coal-based heating with natural gas instead. Demand from Japan could remain strong if authorities in Tokyo keep postponing the restart of several nuclear reactors throughout that country. India and Pakistan are rising as South Asian LNG demand centers.
But U.S. LNG is landing at a wide variety of foreign ports of call. Last year, the largest customer for U.S. LNG was Mexico, which narrowly beat out South Korea in export earnings for U.S. LNG shippers, according to Census Bureau data. China was the third- and Japan the fourth-largest purchasers of U.S.-produced LNG in 2017.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/02/14/stories/1060073817
-
BLM Rule Revisions Gut Obama-Era Guidance
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Proposed changes to Obama-era restrictions on gas venting, flaring and leakage from energy operations on public lands have been touted as revisions, but for some rule-watchers, the modifications look a lot more like rescissions.
The Bureau of Land Management has shared the language of a proposed rule scheduled to appear in the Federal Register this week (Energywire, Feb. 13).
BLM's move was expected. The Obama rule, which was finalized in November 2016, survived a lengthy battle in Congress early last year. After the Congressional Review Act push failed, the Trump administration swiftly began a multistep effort to suspend most of the regulation's provisions.
Republicans in Congress and some members of the oil and gas industry fought the Obama rule, on the grounds that its costs outweigh the benefits. That's true, even according to the previous administration's own analyses — unless the climate impacts of releasing methane into the atmosphere are taken into consideration.
BLM has not released a climate analysis for its latest proposed rule, but a report published alongside its proposal to suspend the 2016 rule severely discounted the social costs of emitting a potent greenhouse gas (Energywire, Oct. 5, 2017).
"We're just very glad that this proposed rule has come out right before the hearing for the preliminary injunction," said Western Energy Alliance President Kathleen Sgamma, referring to the next round of litigation on the rulemaking (Energywire, Dec. 20, 2017).
This week's announcement marks a new phase in the Trump administration's process of dismantling the rule, ClearView Energy Partners LLC wrote in a research note yesterday. The group has largely placed the administration's deregulatory endeavors in two buckets: "rip-it-up" and "write-it-again."
BLM's rules on hydraulic fracturing and methane emissions have typified that divide. While the bureau put its methane emissions rule on ice, it has altogether rescinded its fracking guidance. If the fracking rule repeal survives legal scrutiny, that could signal a new era for the administration's rule-busting campaign, ClearView has said.
But the proposed rule appears to be a "rip-it-up" attempt disguised as a "write-it-again" approach, the group's analysts wrote.
"The proposal takes the form of a 'new' rule, but it would erase significant provisions," the ClearView note says.
BLM would remove at least seven elements introduced under the Obama rule. Gone would be requirements for companies to create waste minimization plans. Constraints on well completion and pneumatic controller replacements would disappear.
Alexandra Teitz, a former BLM official who helped write the 2016 rule, said flexibility for operators was built into many of those requirements.
"For example, before drilling, a producer had to come up with a plan to minimize waste, but the plan wouldn't be enforceable," she said. "Most of the rule's requirements would not apply if an operator showed that compliance would cause them to cease production on the lease."
In the eyes of the Obama rule's supporters, industry benefits are coming at the expense of taxpayers, who own the resource that is being lost on public lands.
"By derailing the implementation of the 2016 methane waste rule, [Interior Secretary Ryan] Zinke chose to dismiss the very real issue of natural gas waste from oil and gas operations on federal lands, perpetuating the problem and the loss of federal royalty revenue," Ryan Alexander, president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, said in a statement yesterday. "This is a far cry from the administration's purported goal to provide taxpayers with a fair return for public resources."
Obama's BLM introduced its rule partly in response to feedback from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) that the Interior Department's safeguards against fraud, waste and abuse were deficient (Energywire, Feb. 27, 2017).
"This rule could make sense only if you think there's no waste problem," Teitz said. "But BLM estimated that producers flared, vented and leaked over 460 billion cubic feet of gas from 2009 to 2015 — enough to supply 6 million households for a year. The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office called out the waste problem and urged BLM to act. And the proposal doesn't claim these quantities of gas aren't being lost."
GAO has previously told E&E News that it is holding off on examinations of Trump-era regulatory changes until their final versions take shape.
ClearView analysts predict a final rule will be published in the second or third quarter of the year, well before the January 2019 deadline BLM set for itself in its proposed suspension of the Obama rule.
Final revisions could come before expected changes to separate U.S. EPA methane standards — the existence of which provides part of BLM's basis for largely suppressing the 2016 rule.
Rescissions at EPA could become "less of an option" if BLM retains that rationale, according to ClearView.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/02/14/stories/1060073843
-
Constitution Tells FERC Not to 'Tolerate' New York Regulatory 'Tactics'
Feb 14, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Constitution Pipeline Co. LLC on Monday asked FERC to reconsider its decision upholding the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) authority to deny a water quality certification (WQC) for the long-delayed natural gas project.
In yet another move to exhaust all available options in their quest to get the 124-mile pipeline built, Constitution’s sponsors again argued in a request for rehearing that the DEC took far too long to make a decision about the WQC application, which the state ultimately denied after about three years of review.
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) stipulates that a state waives its right to issue a WQC if it fails to act within a “a reasonable period of time,” or one year, Constitution argued in the latest filing. “The test for waiver is unambiguous and prescriptive, and must be applied by the Commission as the lead federal agency,” the company wrote in its request.
Last month, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission denied Constitution’s petition asking it to waive DEC’s authority under the CWA. The project received a FERC certificate in December 2014. It initially filed for a WQC in August 2013, but withdrew and resubmitted its application twice, which DEC argued reset the one-year deadline it had to make a decision each time. FERC agreed.
Saying the pipeline is “critical” to markets in the Northeast and adding that its need is “painfully apparent” in the region, where natural gas prices recently spiked with cold temperatures, Constitution said FERC “should not tolerate” New York’s “dilatory tactics.” If it stands, Constitution said, the Commission’s decision would enable DEC to “extend the jurisdictional deadline in Section 401’s waiver provision beyond a reasonable period and well beyond the one-year outer limit for state action.”
New York has battled other pipeline projects as well, denying WQC’s for Millennium Pipeline Co. LLC’s Valley Lateral project and National Fuel Gas Co.’s Northern Access expansion.
Constitution filed its petition for waiver last year after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied its challenge to the DEC decision. It later filed a petition for a rehearing of the case en banc, which was denied as well. Shortly after FERC refused to waive New York’s authority, Constitution also petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the lower court’s ruling.
The pipeline would provide 650,000 Dth/d of takeaway capacity in northeast Pennsylvania. About 100 miles would cross New York. Constitution is backed by Williams, Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., Piedmont Natural Gas Co. Inc. and WGL Holding Inc.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/113377-constitution-tells-ferc-not-to-tolerate-new-york-regulatory-tactics
-
U.S. Energy Department Forming Cyber Protection Unit for Power Grids
Feb 14, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) said on Wednesday it is establishing an office to protect the nation's power grid and other infrastructure against cyber attacks and natural disasters.
President Donald Trump's budget proposal unveiled this week included $96 million in funding for the Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response.
Energy Secretary Rick Perry said the DOE "plays a vital role in protecting our nation's energy infrastructure from cyber threats, physical attack and natural disaster, and as secretary, I have no higher priority."
Last July, the DOE helped U.S. firms defend against a hacking campaign that targeted power companies including at least one nuclear plant. The agency said that the attacks did not have an impact on electricity generation or the grid, and that any impact appeared to be limited to administrative and business networks.
The previous month, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation had issued an alert to industrial companies, warning that for months hackers had targeted nuclear reactors and other power industry infrastructure, using tainted emails to harvest credentials and gain access to networks.
In some cases hackers succeeded in compromising the networks of their targets, but the report did not identify specific victims.
Nuclear power experts, such as Dave Lochbaum at the Union of Concerned Scientists nonprofit group, have said reactors have a certain amount of immunity from cyber attacks because their operation systems are separate from digital business networks. But over time it would not be impossible for hackers to potentially do harm, he said.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/02/14/technology/14reuters-usa-energy-cyber.html
-
Colo. Regulators Pass New Rules After Catastrophe
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Colorado regulators will provide a better picture of the oil and gas pipelines that snake through the state's communities under a package of regulations approved yesterday.
The move by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) was a win for neighborhood groups and local governments in eastern Colorado, who have been pushing for more disclosure about pipelines since a deadly explosion last April. Oil companies had opposed a mapping requirement, saying that it would be burdensome to provide their lines' exact locations and could lead to vandalism.
The mapping provision was part of a package of regulations that will require more testing of flow lines, which are low pressure pipelines used to connect oil and gas wells with storage tanks and other equipment. The rules will also require oil and gas companies to notify state regulators about explosions, fires and other incidents.
"I'm confident these are the most comprehensive rules addressing flow lines anywhere in the country," Commissioner Howard Boigon said, according to a webcast of the commission meeting.
Colorado was one of the few states to regulate flow lines, but until the explosion in Firestone, state authorities didn't have accurate information about their locations.
Companies that build flow lines after May 1 will have to provide the COGCC with a geospacial data file showing the line's route. Companies that have similar information about older pipelines will be required to provide the data to the commission.
The COGCC will add the route information to an existing online map that shows the location of well sites. However, the map will be configured so that it'll only show a general route for the pipelines, similar to pipeline maps maintained by federal regulators.
Local governments would have access to the map data for planning purposes, but it wouldn't be subject to disclosure under the state open records law, according to testimony at a hearing that was broadcast on the web.
Companies would also have to register their pipelines with the state's 811 system, which provides the location of power lines and other utilities for builders.
Separately, the COGCC will form a study group to investigate new technology for detecting leaks and finding the location of existing pipelines.
"Without question these tough, new regulations will further enhance the safety and integrity of our pipeline infrastructure," said Dan Haley, president of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association. "The formation of this new regulatory oversight was a significant undertaking, and we hope communities note the additional requirements that will strengthen the safety practices of our daily operations."
The COGCC began working on the rules shortly after an explosion in April that killed two people in Firestone, Colo., about 35 miles north of Denver.
Like many of Denver's northern suburbs, Firestone is dotted with aging oil and gas wells, and it is being rapidly developed with new homes. Weld County, which includes Firestone, is both the biggest oil and gas producer in Colorado and one of the state's fastest-growing counties.
Investigators linked the explosion to a small plastic pipeline serving a 25-year-old well owned by Anadarko Petroleum Corp. that was severed and left uncapped, possibly when crews were relocating oil field storage tanks to make way for a new subdivision.
In 2015, a home was built a few feet from the end of the uncapped pipeline, allowing gas to seep into the home's basement through a French drain. The gas ignited in the middle of the afternoon on April 17, destroying the home (Energywire, May 3, 2017).
One of the home's owners, Mark Martinez, was killed in the explosion along with his brother-in-law Joey Irwin. Martinez's wife, Erin, was severely injured and one of the family's children was blown through an upstairs window.
Anadarko, which is the biggest oil producer in Colorado, temporarily shut down production from 3,000 wells that were drilled around the same time as the one near the Martinez home and later announced it would remove plastic pipelines like the one involved in the explosion from all its well pads.
The explosion heightened the tension between the oil industry, Gov. John Hickenlooper's administration and many local governments. Residents have been pushing their city and county representatives to block drilling near homes, but Hickenlooper (D) has argued that the state should control most aspects of drilling.
After the explosion's cause was determined, Hickenlooper ordered oil companies to test their pipelines for leaks and ensure that abandoned lines had been properly capped and sealed. He also ordered companies to provide the COGCC with an inventory of flow lines, which turned up 120,000 pipeline segments within 1,000 feet of homes and other buildings.
Hickenlooper originally supported the idea of mapping but later sided with the oil industry after meeting with Anadarko executives over the summer. The COGCC didn't include a mapping requirement in its original draft of the regulations (Energywire, Oct. 19, 2017).
Landowners, environmentalists and local governments pressed the commission to add the mapping requirement during an earlier hearing in January, and the commission staff included it in a series of changes to the rules before yesterday's final vote.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/02/14/stories/1060073841
-
Intel Chiefs Warn of Surprise Cyberattacks on Infrastructure
Feb 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
The U.S. should brace for "localized and temporary disruptions of critical infrastructure" this year as foreign hackers hone their abilities, top intelligence officials warned yesterday.
"The potential for surprise in the cyber realm will increase in the next year and beyond," Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats said in the annual Worldwide Threat Assessment released yesterday, citing the proliferation of digital devices and newly "emboldened and better equipped" adversaries.
The assessment singled out Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as posing the biggest cyberthreats to the U.S., noting that these countries may resort to damaging cyber operations in geopolitical crises that fall short of war.
The report forecasted that Russia would "conduct bolder and more disruptive cyber operations," including strikes on energy networks in Ukraine. In 2015 and again in 2016, hackers suspected to have ties to the Russian government briefly knocked out power in and around Kiev.
The unprecedented 2015 grid attack, and other invasive Russia-linked intrusions, prompted Coats' predecessor, James Clapper, to warn of Russia's "willingness to target critical infrastructure systems" in early 2016 (Energywire, Feb. 10, 2016).
Despite that escalation, the intelligence community's latest threat assessment noted that a truly disastrous cyberattack is still unlikely. Coats said U.S. foes would likely stop short of disrupting key infrastructure systems due to concerns about America's retaliation.
"But we remain concerned by the increasingly damaging effects of cyber operations and the apparent acceptance by adversaries of collateral damage," the Worldwide Threat Assessment concluded.
Coats posted the unclassified threat assessment yesterday before a U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing that also included testimony from the heads of four other intelligence agencies.
Coats told lawmakers the growing cyberthreat to the U.S. is "one of my greatest concerns," warning that U.S. adversaries are "using cyber to penetrate virtually every major action that takes place in the United States," including democratic elections.New NSA chief
Navy Adm. Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency and head of U.S. Cyber Command, warned of growing threats posed by the ongoing spread of internet-connected devices, from webcams to grid sensors.
In late 2016, an army of hacked "internet of things" devices was used in a powerful "distributed denial of service" attack that brought down core internet infrastructure provider Dyn. That incident elicited a rare alert from the U.S. grid overseer, the North American Electric Reliability Corp.
"I wonder how bad does this have to get before we realize we have to do some things fundamentally differently?" said Rogers. "If you look at the internet of things, if you look at the security levels within those components ... if we think the problem is a challenge now; just wait. It's going to get much, much worse."
Rogers announced in January that he would step down from his dual-hat post leading NSA and the Cyber Command this spring.
Yesterday, President Trump nominated Army Lt. Gen. Paul Nakasone, 54, to take Rogers' place.
Nakasone, a Minnesota native and father of four, is currently head of U.S. Army Cyber Command. His decorated military career has taken to him to South Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan, among other assignments, according to his official biography.
Top White House cybersecurity adviser Rob Joyce, who formerly led NSA's offensive hacking unit, said Nakasone would bring "great experience and strong cyber background" to his new posts, if he wins Senate confirmation.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/02/14/stories/1060073839
-
Trump Can Cut More Red Tape by Handing Out Scissors
Feb 13, 2018 | Newsmax
By Robert McClure
During its two terms in the White House, the Obama administration enacted an exorbitant number of new rules and regulations on American businesses, and the related red tape has cost more than $100 billion annually. And while President Trump’s first year in office showed promise, he has a monumental challenge ahead if he wants to shrink the bloated regulatory system left to him by his predecessor.
Some of Trump’s strongest early successes came through his deregulation victories at the Environmental Protection Agency. But he didn’t do it all on his own. He smartly appointed Scott Pruitt to lead the Agency’s wave of change.
But Mr. Pruitt and other agency heads can’t continue draining the swamp all by themselves. There remain vast numbers of positions left unfilled across dozens of federal regulatory agencies. If the president can promptly fill these vacancies with the right reform-minded people and empower them to slash and modernize the federal regulatory system — similar to what Pruitt has done at the EPA — then we could see the greatest shrinking of bureaucracy in our nation’s history.
Case in point: the freight rail system so many American businesses depend on to transport their goods to market.
America’s Industrial Revolution occurred on the back of its railroads, but as time went on the freight rail industry was crushed by burdensome regulations. Thankfully, the Staggers Rail Act was passed in 1980 to replace an outmoded regulatory structure that had stood for nearly a century.
Today, Staggers still stands as one of the best examples of federal legislation passed with the intent of deregulating an industry and enabling free-market activity.
But it also opened a new era of railroad mergers and acquisitions, with dramatic consolation reducing the number of major railroads from 27 in 1980 to seven in 2001 — and today, just four companies control 90 percent of all freight rail transportation nationwide.
That’s when freight rail went off the tracks.
The rules worked as long as free-market competition was present in the industry. But once the invisible hand disappeared, rail transportation rates skyrocketed (a 98 percent increase since 2001). Today, three-fourths of freight rail stations are served by just a single railroad, giving them complete power to set rates as they please.
Certainly, the federal government should not set the price of doing business for any industry. That’s the responsibility of the free market. But when free-market conditions don’t exist, I see a place for the feds to step in and say enough is enough — especially in industries so vital to the American economy as freight rail.
The 1980 Congress saw this coming and tried to plan accordingly. The Surface Transportation Board (STB) was given authority to oversee implementation of the Staggers Rail Act, including providing “fair and expeditious regulatory decisions when regulation is required.”
But even the best-intended legislation can become bogged down by outdated rules and regulations.
When a shipper with no alternative transportation options believes that a railroad is charging an unreasonably high rate, it can send the question to the STB for review. If the STB rules the rate is unreasonable, the railroad must pay back what it overcharged.
Seems simple, right?
Here’s the problem: Bureaucratic rules can bog the process down for years. Due to endless red tape that only our federal government could create, only one shipper has dared to file a rate case with the STB since 2013, and it was only resolved last week. The methodology used by the board to review cases, known as the “stand-alone cost” standard, is clunky at best. A better option exists today, called rate benchmarking, which would streamline government and cut costs. It would reflect today’s realities of 21st century innovation, technology, and free-market competition.
But the STB is handcuffed. Like many other regulatory bodies, it cannot modernize its portion of the federal regulatory rulebook until several board seats, vacant for most of President Trump’s first year in office, are filled.
If we’re going to have regulatory bodies that oversee specific areas of our economy — the STB is just one example — common sense dictates that they have the members they need to carry out that mission.
In the business world, a smart CEO must delegate some decision-making to subordinates. Likewise, the president must swiftly appoint reform-minded members to various regulatory boards if he wants to achieve his goal of cutting and modernizing burdensome rules and regulations on a huge scale. That’s just common sense for most of America, but not, apparently, in Washington.
Dr. Robert McClure provides expert perspective on current issues facing our nation and his home state of Florida, the third-largest state in the nation and a policy bellwether for the country. Recently named one of the Most Influential People in Florida Politics, Dr. McClure serves as the President and CEO of The James Madison Institute, Florida’s premier free-market think tank. He is a frequent commentator on television and talk radio programs and has lectured nationally on diverse policy issues. Dr. McClure has been published numerous times at both the state and national level on topics including property rights, tax policy, health care, and education reform. To read more of his reports — Click Here Now.
https://www.newsmax.com/robertmcclure/scott-pruitt-trump-regulation-rail/2018/02/13/id/843150/
-
Greens See Trump Infrastructure Plan as Ruse to Gut Environmental Rules
Feb 14, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Annie Snider and Anthony Adragna
President Donald Trump's infrastructure proposal would deliver a long-running Republican goal of shrinking the country’s foremost environmental laws, reaching far beyond just roads, bridges and ports.
The proposal unveiled by the White House on Monday offers few details and little federal funding, even as it calls for several changes to push control — and the tab — to local and state entities and the private sector. But the most robust proposals are the ones that would narrow environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act and other conservation laws.
“This isn’t an infrastructure package, this is an all-out attack on long-standing environmental protections that have done a lot of good for this country,” said Melissa Samet, an attorney with the National Wildlife Federation.
Republicans and business groups have long complained the current permitting process creates unnecessary delays for projects since agencies don't usually conduct their separate reviews concurrently, the lead agency isn't put in charge of the review process and laws allow for yearslong legal challenges. And they’re happythe White House is trying to shorten the process, though any major changes will have to go through Congress.
“We’re very pleased with the permitting provisions. Even some of them being signed law would be a major improvement,” said Ross Eisenberg, vice president of energy and resources policy at the National Association of Manufacturers. “We don’t want to blow up the process. We just want it to go faster.”
But greens and their Democratic allies say the real infrastructure problem is money — and the Trump proposal is offering very little of that. The new plan calls for just $200 billion in federal investment over a decade, with the goal of attracting an additional $1.5 trillion in state, local and private funding.
Senate Democrats are already up in arms about the modest federal funding behind the infrastructure push, and they worry its biggest impact could be in short-circuiting bedrock environmental protections.
“The president’s contentions are not to streamline a process, but to compromise needed environmental and public health issues,” Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) told reporters. “We’ve already done this [streamlining]. I think this is part of his overall strategy for big business [rather than] protecting the public. “
But, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said he is hopeful Democrats will come around — despite their rejection of setting support strict deadlines in the permitting process.
“You’re never going to win over every obstructing Democrat, but they’ve got to realize that projects have been slowed down in their states,” Barrasso said. “So, I think they’re going to be on our side on this.”
Indeed, environmental “streamlining” has been a part of most major infrastructure measures to pass in recent years. Provisions in the 2012 highway bill and the 2014 WRDA bill aimed to coordinate different agencies’ reviews and impose consequences for delays. Those changes were staunchly supported by former Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), an environmental stalwart, who argued such steamlining was common sense despite the opposition of some green advocates. Many of those provisions have yet to go into effect.
But the Trump infrastructure proposal would go far further, setting strict deadlines for review and curtailing EPA’s say over projects.
For instance, Trump himself has touted the proposal’s two-year limit for issuing final permitting decisions, with National Environmental Policy Act reviews required to be completed in no more than 21 months. The deadline for legal challenges to permits would be slashed from six years to 150 days.
Industry argues the long statute of limitations for permit challenges leaves a cloud of uncertainty over projects. But Samet, the NWF attorney, said that while 150 days may sound like plenty of time, it runs by quickly when challengers have to track down the relevant documents that regularly run hundreds of pages, decipher them, find experts to analyze the data, hire lawyers and scrounge up the money to cover legal costs.
The result, she said: “Bad projects will move forward; there’ll be nothing to stop them.”
The Trump plan would also deliver on a long-sought Republican goal of curbing EPA’s authority under the Clean Water Act’s wetlands program — a change that would have sweeping effects not just for infrastructure projects but for nearly any kind of development across the landscape.
The blueprint would remove EPA’s authority to oversee determinations made by the Army Corps of Engineers about which streams and wetlands are subject to Clean Water Act protections. And it would take away the agency’s ability to veto dredge and fill permits that the agency decides would cause undue harm to the environment — an authority EPA has used only 13 times since the Clean Water Act was enacted, including its controversial reversal of a Army Corps permit for the Mingo Logan mountaintop coal mine in West Virginia in 2012.
Meanwhile, the proposal would extend pollution discharge permits under the Clean Water Act from five years to 15, and allow them to be automatically renewed as long as “water quality needs do not require more stringent permit limits” — changes that would apply not only to municipal wastewater treatment plants, but also to industrial facilities like coal plants and steel factories.
But, while the proposal may allow construction on projects to get started faster, it might end up creating bigger problems in the end, argued Kym Hunter, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center.
A narrower NEPA review wouldn’t just keep potential environmental problems from coming to light, but would also keep the public in the dark about whether a project would live up to what it is promising, she said. That was the case with a proposed toll road near Charlotte, N.C. that the NEPA process revealed would not actually relieve traffic congestion on key suburban roads, and was ultimately dropped in favor of a different solution, she said.
“NEPA is about taking that hard look,” Hunter argued. “When it was promulgated in 1970, the idea was if you think about what you are doing you’re likely to make a better decision. This [proposal] would just encourage agencies to rush forward without being thoughtful, without being careful.”
And the infrastructure plan's move to limit court’s ability to halt work on projects while lawsuits proceed is another one that could backfire, she argued. If a government entity has already issued bonds to help cover its costs and a court halts construction, taxpayers could be left on the hook.
To be sure, making major changes to the country’s bedrock environmental laws is a long shot, given past congressional gridlock on the issue, even though many lawmakers agree they need updates. Still, Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee, didn't dismiss the idea out of hand, though he stressed to POLITICO if there was an effort to weaken environmental regulations, “we’re not going to get very far.”
"We are still trying to digest it,” Carper said of the White House infrastructure proposal. “It’s like if you have a reptile or large snake, it’s like when they have a pig halfway down. That's about where we are."
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/article/2018/02/greens-see-trump-infrastructure-plan-as-ruse-to-gut-environmental-rules-346787
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested