Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 2/16/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) How Industry Has Taken Over Scott Pruitt’s EPA
Feb 16, 2018 | Mother Jones
By Rachel Leven
First came the smoke. The explosion hit 20 minutes later—so massive it killed 15, injured 260, damaged or destroyed 150 buildings, shattered glass a mile out and set trees ablaze. -
(ACC Mentioned) Labor Groups Meet with Hill on Infrastructure
Feb 16, 2018 | Politico - Influence
By Theodoric Meyer and Marianne LeVine
...Wanhua Chemical, a chemical company owned by the Chinese government, joined the American Chemistry Council this week... -
EPA ‘Reform Plan’ Heavy on Rhetoric But Light on Specifics (Corrected)
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Abby Smith
The EPA offered a glimpse of a plan to “reform” the agency—but it's only broad strokes, prompting questions from Administrator Scott Pruitt's critics and supporters alike about what the results will be. -
Senate Confirms EPA, DOE Nominees
Feb 15, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Adragna
The Senate confirmed the nominations today of Holly Greaves to be EPA's chief financial officer and Melissa Burnison to be DOE's assistant secretary for congressional and intergovernmental affairs. -
Paint Companies Take California Lead Spat to Supreme Court
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc., and ConAgra Grocery Products Co. want the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a California court decision requiring them to clean up lead paint in homes built prior to 1950. -
Congressional Oversight Weeds out Corrupt International Junk Science
Feb 16, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By Julie Kelly and Jeff Stier
This may be the year when Congress finally cracks down on the corrupt World Health Organization. The last straw may be not what WHO did, but what it didn’t do. -
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Congress Weighs Changes to Clean Air Act
Feb 15, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jeff Johnson
Chemical companies, other manufacturers, and their Republican allies in the U.S. Congress are seeking an overhaul of a federal program requiring air pollution permits before industrial facilities are built or expanded. -
(ACC Mentioned) The LyondellBassell/A. Schulman Merger Illustrates America's Shale Gas-Driven Chemicals Boom
Feb 16, 2018 | Forbes
By David Blackmon
The announcement by LyondellBasell Industries that it is acquiring rival A. Schulman Inc. for $2.25 billion is another in a long line of positive indicators on how affordable prices for natural gas are helping to grow the U.S. economy. -
BLM Methane Rollback Plan Cites NSPS Duplication but Ignores EPA Review
Feb 16, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
A long-awaited Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposed rule to scrap several provisions of an Obama-era methane rule for oil and gas facilities on federal lands relies heavily on claims that the provisions duplicate EPA requirements for all new oil and gas activity... -
Trump Offshore Drilling Push Gets N.J. Lawmakers’ Thumbs-Down
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
New Jersey would ban offshore drilling for oil or natural gas under a bill that the General Assembly passed 71-2 Feb. 15. -
Democrats Request Info on 'Repeated Environmental Concerns' at Ohio Pipeline
Feb 16, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Ranking members on the House and Senate energy committees sent a joint letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) this week asking to be updated on the potential environmental safety risks related to construction of the Rover Pipeline in Ohio. -
North Dakota Oil Output Fell to 1.18 Million B/D in December: State
Feb 15, 2018 | Platts
By Brian Scheid
North Dakota oil output fell to 1.18 million b/d in December, down nearly 15,700 b/d from December and the first production decrease from the previous month since June, according to the state's Department of Mineral Resources. -
Industry Urges Congress to Extend Anti-Terror Plans for Chemical Sites
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
Congress should continue a federal chemical security program without adding provisions that could burden companies, industry representatives said Feb. 15. -
Industry Against 'Extraneous Provisions' in Safety Law Redo
Feb 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
A House panel yesterday heard from the chemicals industry amid efforts in Congress to reauthorize the Department of Homeland Security's decade-old chemical plant safety program. -
Railroad Officials Tell Congress Many Won’t Meet Deadline for Lifesaving Automatic Braking Systems
Feb 15, 2018 | Washington Post
By Ashley Halsey III
A decade after Congress ordered the nation’s railroads to install an automatic braking system that could have prevented more than 130 train wrecks, industry officials said Thursday most lines will need two more years to finish the job. -
EPA Withdraws Ozone NAAQS 'Classifications' Rule
Feb 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA has withdrawn from White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review its proposed “classifications” rule defining the severity of areas' “nonattainment” with the 2015 federal ozone standard, suggesting the agency could fall further behind... -
National Academies Launches Effort on Emerging Toxics, Climate (1)
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven Gibb
A new environmental health initiative launched by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will tap private and public-sector experts to tackle emerging crises related to toxics, climate change, and other human health risks. -
Judge Says U.S. Must Use Energy Standards in Loss to Trump
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Erik Larson
The Trump administration was ordered to begin using new national energy efficiency standards that the federal government had refused to implement, the attorneys general of New York and California said in a statement. -
Focus Turns from Cars to Everyday Product Emissions — Study
Feb 15, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
Regulators' success in curbing vehicle-related emissions carries a surprising flip side: Products like perfumes, paints and pesticides now rival cars and trucks as a source of volatile organic compounds in urban areas, researchers conclude in a study released today. -
Environmental Taxes Are an Underused Tool, OECD Says
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rick Mitchell
Environmental taxes are a tool that governments need to better use to change consumers’ energy consumption and address climate change and air pollution, the OECD said.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) How Industry Has Taken Over Scott Pruitt’s EPA
Feb 16, 2018 | Mother Jones
By Rachel Leven
irst came the smoke. The explosion hit 20 minutes later—so massive it killed 15, injured 260, damaged or destroyed 150 buildings, shattered glass a mile out and set trees ablaze. Under stadium lights, the West, Texas, high school football field, home of the Trojans, was transformed into a makeshift triage center.
The 2013 disaster in West, a town of just 2,800, began with a fire at the local fertilizer plant, highlighting safety gaps at thousands of facilities nationwide that use or store high-risk chemicals. It took the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency nearly four years after that to issue a rule intended to prevent such accidents—a move strenuously opposed by industry groups such as the American Petroleum Institute.
Just a week after the rule was issued, Donald Trump was sworn in as president. Businesses tried again, asking for a delay of the requirements. This time, they got what they asked for.
The EPA has granted more than a few private-sector wishes lately under the guise of regulatory reform. Roughly 62 percent of the agency’s “deregulatory” actions completed in Administrator Scott Pruitt’s first year and 85 percent of its planned initiatives match up with specific industry requests, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis. These changes targeted requirements ranging from air-pollution limits for oil and gas operations to water-pollution restrictions on coal-fired power plants.
Many of these steps followed entreaties from a small number of powerful lobbying groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Chemistry Council and the National Association of Manufacturers.
The EPA, which ignored a half-dozen requests for comment, has said officials are merely reigning in an agency that they assert routinely overstepped its authority. But there is another interpretation. The analysis shows the EPA has been captured by industry, said Alexandra Teitz, a former agency attorney.
“The idea that ‘We are for environmental protection, too, we just choose to do it a different way’ might be plausible if we’d seen anything to support that,” said Teitz, now a senior policy adviser for the Sierra Club. “But we haven’t seen them do anything positive. So, that claim is just a joke.”
Alex Howard, deputy director of the Sunlight Foundation, an open-government group, said the industry successes have come while the EPA is “operating under a veil of secrecy.” The agency has failed to routinely disclose day-to-day activities it previously made public, he said.
While Oklahoma attorney general, Pruitt sued over 14 major EPA regulations and opposed others, including the chemical-safety rule. His legal interpretations tend to align with industry desires: a 2017 New York Times investigation revealed his deep ties to companies and propensity to use their arguments as his own.
In his first six months on the job, Pruitt was scheduled to meet 31 times more often with industry than with environmental or public-health groups, according to a Center analysis last year. The EPA’s internal watchdog is investigating his official travel, including a Morocco trip during which Pruitt promoted natural-gas exports. Asked in a January CBS News interview whether the EPA’s mission is to protect the environment or business, he responded, “It’s neither.”
“Our focus here should be on stewardship,” Pruitt said, adding that “to achieve what we want to achieve in environmental protection, environmental stewardship, we need the partnership of industry.”Industry’s EPA scorecard
When Trump directed all federal agencies to reconsider existing rules a month into his term, Pruitt seized the opportunity. Regulatory reform would mean “listening to those directly impacted by regulations,” in contrast to the ways the Obama administration “abused the regulatory process,” he said in an EPA news release.
To see who has benefited so far, the Center examined the EPA’s list of completed deregulatory actions and its October agenda for future reform, comparing them to requests made by the private sector in comments to the agency in previous months.
The analysis focuses only on the agency’s stated deregulatory actions. It doesn’t capture other steps taken by the EPA that also went industry’s way, such as the March decision not to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos, suspected of harming children’s brains. Agency scientists previously recommended prohibiting its use.
In April, the EPA asked the public what rules it ought to roll back. Americans flooded the agency with comments that urged officials to keep environmental-health safeguards intact, while numerous businesses pointed to rules they considered burdensome. The EPA said it drew from those comments to craft its regulatory reform agenda, released in October. But at least three of the four broad initiatives announced by the agency and all nine of the rules identified for reconsideration stemmed from industry requests—85 percent of the EPA’s reform plans.
Reopening a rule allows industry to make the case again that the regulations should be less stringent. Southern Co., for example, previously opposed regulations intended to limit water pollution from coal-fired power plants, asserting the agency relied on “faulty cost-benefit analyses.” Prior to Pruitt, the EPA disputed these claims. Now, it’s taking another look. Southern Co. declined to comment.
The broader EPA initiatives give industry a chance to fundamentally alter the way the nation fights pollution. The agency committed, for example, to evaluating the cumulative employment impacts of its environmental regulations, in response to business requests. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which didn’t reply to emails asking for comment, wrote last May that failing to properly analyze job impacts “stacks the deck against the possibility of producing a good regulation.”
Corporate influence is also apparent in at least 13 of the 21 actions the EPA has taken since Pruitt became administrator on Feb. 17 of last year. Six of these actions delayed, rescinded or reopened for consideration major regulations—wins for business interests. For instance, the agency delayed through May 2018 stricter requirements to protect people applying certain toxic pesticides, a move supported by companies such as Bayer Corp. Another seven industry victories came on narrower issues; manufacturers of wood products, for example, won a deadline extension to meet emission standards.
Industries didn’t always get what they wanted, of course. In part that’s because not all companies are on the same side of every issue. For example, the National Association of Manufacturers and other business groups that oppose the Clean Power Plan, the Obama-era rule aimed at limiting planet-warming pollution from the U.S. power sector, were pleased when the EPA said it would consider a repeal. Microsoft and Apple, on the other hand, supported the regulation in federal court.Deregulation’s impact
Many companies and trade organizations say their outreach to the EPA is no different than in previous administrations. Some are employing the same arguments they used during the Obama era, including assertions that small environmental gains are coming at an outsize cost to business.
“We have lost the critical balance in our federal environmental policies between furthering progress and limiting unnecessary economic impacts,” the National Association of Manufacturers wrote to the EPA last year. The group didn’t respond to the Center’s requests for comment.
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers’ members supported the EPA taking a second look at limits set for greenhouse-gas emissions from light-duty vehicles “to let the facts dictate the outcome,” wrote spokeswoman Gloria Bergquist. She added, “We are not prejudging the results.”
These reviews will aid the public, companies said. “A vibrant U.S. manufacturing base that helps American companies compete globally and keeps jobs here at home is what we all want,” wrote Laura Toole, a spokeswoman for General Motors.
But Teitz, the former EPA lawyer, said Pruitt is pushing agency norms. It’s not unheard of for new administrations to take another look at regulations that aren’t yet in effect, or even those that are, she said. But this EPA is reversing rules companies already must follow at an unprecedented rate, she said, causing confusion for officials in the field and leaving the public under-protected.
That, public advocacy groups and states such as New York and Massachusetts say, is exactly what has happened with the chemical-safety rule, delayed through February 2019. Since the rule was finalized in the waning days of the Obama administration, more than a dozen accidents, leaks, explosions and fires occurred at facilities that would have been covered by these new requirements, according to the Sierra Club. At least eight people died. More than 40 were injured.
A federal court will hear arguments about the delay in March. Industry opponents of the rule say in filings that it would cost companies money without providing benefits to the public. A Louisiana security official, in a court document filed by Oklahoma and 11 other states that support the rule delay, said that allowing it to take effect could expose chemical facilities to terrorism threats because of new disclosure requirements. (Military experts opposing the delay have said the rule would improve national security by better informing first responders.)
Whichever way the court rules, it likely won’t affect West, Texas. The town hasn’t replaced its fertilizer plant and has no intention of doing so, said John Crowder, a local pastor.
“The community would just not welcome that kind of business,” he said. It took nearly five years for West to rebuild, he noted, work that was just completed last month “to a collective sigh of relief.”
Crowder is no great fan of regulation. Now, though, he sees a need for more oversight.
He doesn’t know much about the requirements the EPA enacted and then put on ice, so he can’t say whether they would avert tragedies like the one in West.
“But if there were a rule that could prevent it,” he said, “I can’t imagine a valid reason for delay.”
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/02/how-industry-has-taken-over-scott-pruitts-epa/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Labor Groups Meet with Hill on Infrastructure
Feb 16, 2018 | Politico - Influence
By Theodoric Meyer and Marianne LeVine
LABOR GROUPS MEET WITH HILL ON INFRASTRUCTURE: The American Federation of Government Employees and the Teamsters went to the Hill this week to talk infrastructure, according to a House staffer who met with the groups. The unions, the staffer said, are calling on lawmakers to ensure that any infrastructure plan would protect labor laws, including so-called project labor agreements. (Project labor agreements are pre-hire collective bargaining agreements on public projects.) In addition, they requested that the bill have sufficient financial investment, the staffer said. AFGE did not immediately respond to a request for comment and the Teamsters declined to comment.
— Speaking of infrastructure, S&P Global Ratings issued a report this week that raised the key question on the Trump administration infrastructure plan: how to pay for it. The report questions whether Americans will “accept paying more to use the nation’s infrastructure.” The report also says the plan’s emphasis on private-sector funding “could propel innovation.” “We expect the early adopter states and local governments will fall into two buckets — those that have capacity and willingness to issue additional debt to capture the federal grants and those that are looking for creative solutions to specific projects,” the report says. “This could include collaborating with the private sector, for example, by tapping user charges such as tolling as a way to support investment and insure funding for ongoing upkeep.”
Good afternoon, and welcome to PI. Tips always welcome: mlevine@politico.com and tmeyer@politico.com. You can also follow us on Twitter: @theodoricmeyer and @marianne_levine.
** A message from the National Confectioners Association – #AlwaysATreat:Leading global chocolate and candy companies are coming together to provide more information, options, and support as consumers enjoy their favorite treats. It’s the first step on our journey to help people manage their sugar intake and ensure that they feel empowered to make informed choices. Learn more at AlwaysATreat.com. **
VELOCITY GOVERNMENT RELATIONS LAUNCHES: Erin Neal, an aerospace and defense specialist, is launching her own firm: Velocity Government Relations. In an interview with PI, Neal said she has one client she registered to lobby for, Planet Labs, Inc., a San Francisco-based satellite company. She will focus on regulations that affect product sales. In addition, she will consult for Ligado Network, a company that builds custom private networks. Prior to launching her firm, Neal worked for SIGNAL Group and Orbital ATK. She said her decision to start her own firm was motivated by a desire to learn more about the business side of lobbying and to have more independence. “I wanted to … be able to call my own shots and serve my clients better in the process,” she said. Neal added that she sees her launch of Velocity Government Relations as part of a broader and more recent trend of female lobbyists and consultants deciding to start their own businesses in order to have more workplace flexibility.
BUSINESS COALITION URGES SENATE LEADERSHIP TO TAKE UP ‘JOINT EMPLOYER’ BILL: The Coalition to Save Local Businesses, which includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the International Franchise Association, the National Retail Federation and others, urged Senate leadership today to take up the House’s “joint employer bill.” The bill, which cleared the House in November, would narrow the legal definition of joint employment under which a business could be held jointly liable for labor-law violations committed by a contractor or franchisee. In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnelland Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the coalition wrote that “only Congress can enact a permanent solution that locks in [a] sensible definition of joint employer.” The letter notes that “there are currently as many as eight different federal circuit court definitions of joint employment” and that enacting the House bill “would provide certainty for small business owners and other employers in all industries.” Full letter.
VOGEL GROUP ADDS CLIENTS: The Vogel Group has signed Liberty Energy Trust, lobbying on port development issues. It’s the eighth client the firm has brought on this year since Alex Vogel and his former partner in the VogelHood Group, Jeffrey Hood, parted ways. Three are former VogelHood lobbying clients, and five are new to the firm.
MONUMENT POLICY SIGNS PEPSICO: Pepsico has hired Monument Policy Group to lobby on “issues related to trade, NAFTA, and commerce,” according to a recent filing. The filing lists Stewart Verdery, former assistant secretary and consultant at the DHS; T.A. Hawks, former minority staff director for the Senate Agriculture Committee; Rich Thomas, former legislative director for Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) and Kimberly Ellis, former legislative director for Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas.) In addition to PepsiCo, Monument Policy will lobby for the SAS Institute Inc on issues “related to judiciary, homeland security, immigration and agriculture” and for Akamai Technologies on “telecommunications, cybersecurity, trade and government,” according to new filings.
FLYING IN: The Institute for Integrative Nutrition, which represents health and wellness coaches, is in town this week for its first fly-in. They’ve met with Reps. John Larson (D-Conn.), Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), Grace Napolitano (D-Calif.), and Jason Smith (R-Mo.) , as well as staffers for other members. The trade group is pushing for Congress to expand “Americans’ ability to use pre-tax dollars to access transformative wellness and preventative care services offered by” health coaches, Darrell Rogers, the group’s advocacy director, said in a statement.
TRUMP INAUGURAL COMMITTEE PAID MILLIONS TO FIRST LADY’S ADVISER’S FIRM: “President Trump’s inaugural committee paid nearly $26 million to an event planning firm started by an adviser to the first lady, Melania Trump, while donating $5 million — less than expected — to charity, according to tax filings released on Thursday,” The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman and Kenneth Vogel report. According to the tax filing, “the overwhelming majority of the funds went toward expenses related to the inauguration, with the biggest share — nearly $51 million — split roughly evenly between two companies. One of the companies, WIS Media Partners of Marina del Rey, California, was created by a longtime friend of Mrs. Trump, Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, according to a person familiar with the firm. Records show that the firm was created in December 2016, but otherwise there is very little information available about it.
— “Stephanie Grisham, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Trump, said that the first lady ‘had no involvement’ with the inaugural committee, ‘and had no knowledge of how funds were spent.’ Ms. Winston Wolkoff is not paid for her work in the first lady’s office, according to Ms. Grisham, who said Ms. Winston Wolkoff is classified as ‘a special government employee.’ Much of the money paid to Ms. Winston Wolkoff’s firm and other event production companies likely was passed through to other vendors who provided goods or services on a subcontractor basis.” Full story.
WANHUA CHEMICAL JOINS AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL:Wanhua Chemical, a chemical company owned by the Chinese government, joined the American Chemistry Council this week. That means the company could have influence over U.S. elections, Lee Fang reports in The Intercept. “The ACC is a prominent recipient of so-called dark money — that is, unlimited amounts of cash from corporations or individuals whose origin is only disclosed to the Internal Revenue Service, not the public. During the 2012, 2014 and 2016 election cycles the ACC took this dark money and spent over $40 million of it on contributions to Super PACs, lobbying, and direct expenditures. (Additional money flowed directly to candidates via the ACC’s political action committee.)
— “It is formally illegal for foreign nationals — which includes foreign individuals, corporations and governments — to spend any money attempting to influence U.S. elections. Therefore, any contributions the ACC accepts from a foreign corporation like Wanhua must theoretically go to an account separate from that which the ACC uses for political spending. But whether this actually happens is extremely difficult for the public to find out, and even if the ACC is following the law it would be essentially irrelevant.” Full story.
JOBS REPORT
— Craig Mueller is now vice president of federal sales at FireEye. He was previously sales director.
— Maury Baskin will now co-chair the Workplace Policy Institute at Littler Mendelson. He is a shareholder at the firm.
NEW JOINT FUNDRAISERS:
Hawley Win Fund (Josh Hawley for Senate, NRSC, RNC)NEW PACs:
American Nationalist (PAC)
Common Good PAC (PAC)NEW LOBBYING REGISTRATIONS:
Alpine Group, Inc.: Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, LLC
Cogent Strategies LLC: Alliance for Shared Values
Cogent Strategies LLC: Global Strategy Group (on behalf of Navigate Affordable Housing Partners)
Cogent Strategies LLC: Refugee Council USA
Cogent Strategies LLC: The Buoniconti Fund to Cure Paralysis
Envision Strategy: The Achievable Foundation
Forbes-Tate: A Place for Mom
Forbes-Tate: The Science Coalition
Kyle House Group: The Gavi Alliance
NEW LOBBYING TERMINATIONS:
Bethany Christian Services: Bethany Christian Services
Dentons US LLP: Haskell Indian Nations University Board of Regents
Dentons US LLP: Makah Nation
Dentons US LLP: Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation
Whitmer & Worrall, LLC: American Sort Line and Regional Railroad Association** A message from the National Confectioners Association – #AlwaysATreat: We’ve always created transparent, fun, and great-tasting treats. By 2022, Mars Wrigley Confectionery, Nestlé USA, Ferrero, Lindt, Ghirardelli, Russell Stover, and Ferrara Candy Company will work together to make half of their individually wrapped products available in sizes that contain 200 calories or less per pack. And, 90 percent of the best-selling treats made by these companies will have calorie information printed right on the front of the pack. During the same time period, the newly established AlwaysATreat.com will evolve into a digital resource full of easy-to-use information for consumers to better understand the unique role that chocolate and candy can play in a happy, balanced lifestyle. Learn more at AlwaysATreat.com. **
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/politico-influence/2018/02/15/labor-groups-meet-with-hill-on-infrastructure-108568
-
EPA ‘Reform Plan’ Heavy on Rhetoric But Light on Specifics (Corrected)
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Abby Smith
The EPA offered a glimpse of a plan to “reform” the agency—but it's only broad strokes, prompting questions from Administrator Scott Pruitt's critics and supporters alike about what the results will be.
The reform plan is tucked into the Environmental Protection Agency's fiscal year 2019 budget justification, which delineates program-level impacts of the Trump administration's Feb. 12 proposal to cut nearly a quarter from the agency's funding levels.
The plan sketches out the EPA's efforts to implement President Donald Trump's March 2017 executive order calling for a reorganization of the executive branch.
But Pruitt's critics and supporters say it's difficult to tell what specific actions will stem from the reform plan, of which elements are not complete. The plan centers on the use of “lean management,” which seeks to eliminate wastes of time and resources and to boost the value organizations get out of their operations.
“A cynical person can say, ‘This is what reorganization efforts always look like—a lot of impressive rhetoric and claims,’” Myron Ebell, energy and environment director at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told Bloomberg Environment.
“This sounds like a lot of the typical verbiage about how to do a better job,” said Ebell, who headed the Trump EPA transition team. He added some is “undoubtedly real,” but some is “window dressing.”
And those concerned about Pruitt's leadership question the true intentions of his “reform” push.
“There's always things in government that can be done better,” Eric Schaeffer, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, told Bloomberg Environment. “There's probably a thoughtful way” for the agency to get the work done and be a little leaner.
But “it's what they mean to do with it, and what their objectives really are in terms of shrinking EPA's mission and cutting it way back” that causes concern, said Schaeffer, who served as EPA's civil enforcement director until 2002.
Lean Management
The lean management approach is spearheaded by EPA Chief of Operations Henry Darwin. He helped implement the management approach at Arizona's Department of Environmental Quality, where he served as director from 2011 to 2015.
The EPA intends to incorporate lean management into several initiatives it outlines in its plan, including speeding up permitting and reducing reporting obligations for industry. In addition, the EPA says it is reviewing its “field presence,” including regional offices and laboratories.
But the strategy doesn't mention any plans to shutter regional facilities—a concern of environmental groups and EPA career employees. For example, Pruitt has been exploring a plan to move the work of the EPA's 10 regional offices and create smaller offices in each of the 50 states, according to sources and news reports.
Ebell, who advocates for slimmed-down EPA regional offices, said he's not yet sold on that approach.
“No one centralized office can deal with 50 sub-offices. There's going to have to be some intermediate structure that probably looks a lot like the regional offices,” he said.
“The fact that it's not in this plan means that [the White House budget office] hasn't been sold on it either is my guess,” Ebell added.
Pruitt, during a Jan. 30 Senate environment committee hearing, said agency officials have just begun an internal discussion about a 50-state office approach.
“One of the things that we ought to engage in as far as a collaborative discussion is whether it makes sense to locate operational units in each of the state capitals across this country to ensure that there is a focus on issues that are specific to that state,” Pruitt said in response to questions from Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa).
He added he would “welcome the input” of lawmakers “on what makes sense there as it relates to better delivering services across the states and the country.”
Offices Consolidating
The agency's plan does list several “reorganizations” that are underway or were proposed in fiscal year 2018. For example, the EPA is consolidating both its environmental justice work and its National Environmental Policy Act work into the agency's policy office.
But it's unclear how Pruitt and his team are making decisions to consolidate agency work or change office structure, John O'Grady, president of the American Federation of Government Employees division that represents EPA employees, told Bloomberg Environment.
The EPA should perform a “workload, workforce analysis” when considering a reorganization, to look at the function of the office or division, examine how many staff are needed, and identify whether there are opportunities to reduce workforce, he said.
“It would be nice if they would be more transparent and they would show us a study...instead of just somebody's brainchild,” O'Grady said. “These might be good ideas, but they're not showing us anything and they certainly don't share anything with the staff.”
Cooperative Federalism
Communication with state groups has been inconsistent, but steadily improving, say agency observers.
“There is now a door of communication open,” Miles Keogh, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, told Bloomberg Environment. He said the EPA recently asked the group—which represents air agencies from 40 states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and 116 metropolitan areas—to participate in a lean management event in the coming weeks.
Keogh sees value in implementing lean management techniques where inefficiencies are evident, but he stressed such efforts need to support the mission of protecting the environment—not cutting staff and resources for the sake of shrinking the agency.
Lean management has enabled several state agencies, including Arizona's environment department, to “do a lot more, frankly, with a lot less,” Keogh said. But Trump's Feb. 12 budget request proposes a more than 30 percent cut to state grants that would make it difficult for state agencies already strapped for resources, he said.
“We endorse cooperative federalism. But the implication in that is greater responsibility accrued to state and local agencies,” Keogh said. “That's not consistent with fewer resources, no matter how much you ‘lean’ this thing.”
The Environmental Council of States, which represents all 50 state environment agencies, declined to comment.
The Association for Air Pollution Control Agencies, which represents 20 state air agencies pointed to the group's comments on the EPA's draft strategic plan for fiscal years 2018-2022.
Those comments call for “stable, adequate resources” and a “strengthening of partnerships” with states and local communities.
Minimal State Oversight Feared
The EPA, in its plan, also says it is working with interested parties to “develop a comprehensive system” to “evaluate state and local implementation of federal environmental programs.” But the agency didn't yet provide details on what a revised oversight approach would look like.
Schaeffer said he's concerned Pruitt's approach would mean minimal oversight, and he'd like to see the EPA do a review of what the statutes say about the agency's oversight responsibilities.
“EPA has a really tough job under the statute. They are supposed to second-guess states,” he said, adding that the EPA's oversight presence is already lacking in many states. “We'd like to see more.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=128309437&vname=dennotallissues&fn=128309437&jd=128309437
-
Senate Confirms EPA, DOE Nominees
Feb 15, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Adragna
The Senate confirmed the nominations today of Holly Greaves to be EPA's chief financial officer and Melissa Burnison to be DOE's assistant secretary for congressional and intergovernmental affairs.
Both won Senate approval by voice vote.
Greaves, originally a member of the EPA's beachhead team more than a year ago, stayed on as a budget adviser to Administrator Scott Pruitt after previously working as an accountant at KPMG. Burnison joined DOE after working as the Nuclear Energy Institute's director of federal affairs.
WHAT'S NEXT: Both Geaves and Burnison will be officially sworn into their roles.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Paint Companies Take California Lead Spat to Supreme Court
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc., and ConAgra Grocery Products Co. want the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a California court decision requiring them to clean up lead paint in homes built prior to 1950.
The companies are taking their fight to the federal judiciary after the California Supreme Court on Feb. 14 denied without comment their petitions asking it to review a state appellate panel's order finding them liable for cleaning up lead paint in seven counties and three cities.
“It is bad law and bad policy,” the companies said in a Feb. 15 joint statement announcing that they would seek further review. “Californians deserved to hear from the state's highest court on the important and novel issues raised in the case.”
Santa Clara, Alameda, Los Angeles, Monterey, San Mateo, Solano, and Ventura counties and the cities of Oakland, San Diego, and San Francisco had sued the companies in 2013, calling the lead paint a public nuisance. In November 2017, a state appellate court had ordered the companies to clean up houses built prior to 1950.
A trial court had previously ordered the companies to clean up homes built prior to 1980, an effort estimated to cost $1.15 billion. The trial court will now need to calculate cleanup costs for the homes built before 1950.
The appeals court's “decision conflicts with prior decisions of the courts of California, the United States Supreme Court and numerous other state Supreme Courts and intermediate courts,” the companies said. Public nuisance cases filed in other jurisdictions “have all been either rejected by courts, or by a jury or voluntarily dismissed,” they said.
Meanwhile, the companies are supporting a $2 billion California bond measure, The Healthy Homes and Schools Act, which would preempt the court order. The statewide ballot measure, which state officials estimate would cost taxpayers $3.9 billion over 35 years, would authorize funds to clean up lead and other hazards in homes, schools, and senior housing.
The case is People v. ConAgra, Cal., No. S246102, 2/14/18.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=128309426&vname=dennotallissues&fn=128309426&jd=128309426
-
Congressional Oversight Weeds out Corrupt International Junk Science
Feb 16, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By Julie Kelly and Jeff Stier
This may be the year when Congress finally cracks down on the corrupt World Health Organization. The last straw may be not what WHO did, but what it didn’t do.
The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology has been investigating the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a unit of the WHO, amid accusations that IARC holds secret proceedings and conducts shoddy research to reach politically-motivated conclusions. Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who has been threatening to withhold federal funding for IARC, twice asked IARC to testify at a hearing to explain itself. IARC refused to send an official to answer questions at a February 6 hearing. The agency has received more than $48 million in U.S. tax dollars via the National Institutes of Health, and the U.S. is the WHO’s largest donor.
Smith’s request wasn’t just refused, it was dismissed with bureaucratic diplo-speak that could put its author in the running to be the next U.N. secretary general. IARC spokeswoman Véronique Terrasse told POLITICO Europe in November that IARC “will respond when we receive an official request through the proper channel.” IARC believes it is only accountable, if at all, to the U.S. State Department, and that any request must be directed at American representatives on IARC's governing council.
Congress is asking questions because IARC’s findings on the carcinogenicity of certain chemicals, personal behaviors, and environmental factors often diverge from mainstream science. And its junk-science conclusions cannot just be ignored, because they go on to heavily influence policy, public opinion, and even legal actions.
For example, California might soon require coffee shops to post cancer warnings based on two IARC reports that concluded the acrylamide found in roasted coffee beans and the act of drinking very hot beverages can cause cancer. The agency’s widely-criticized 2015 allegation that red and processed meats are human carcinogens have been used to justify sin taxes.
Chairman Smith warned at the hearing that the “selective use of data and the lack of public disclosure raise questions about why IARC should receive any government funding in the future.” The committee heard testimony from experts at the EPA and U.S. National Cancer Institute about IARCs widely discredited “hazard-based” approach, focused only on the chemical’s dose, rather than a “risk-based” approach which takes into account actual exposure.
One of IARCs most disputed reports is highly suspect; its 2015 assessment declared glyphosate, the world’s most widely-used herbicide, is a “probable human carcinogen.” It’s the only major scientific organization to reach that conclusion. Subsequent studies, including a major review issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in December, found no link between glyphosate and cancer. Glyphosate is controversial because it’s the main herbicide used on several genetically engineered crops — called Roundup Ready — that have been developed to withstand the chemical without harming the plant. It was developed by Monsanto, the bête noire of the global environmental movement.
How did IARC reach such a different conclusion from so many leading institutions? In October, a Reuters investigation found that unknown officials at IARC made “significant changes and deletions” to a draft of the report. IARC deleted language from a draft report citing an EPA-ordered study which “firmly” and “unanimously” concluded that glyphosate did not cause abnormal growths in mice.
This deletion, and nine similar to it, were crucial because, as Reuters put it, IARC’s “conclusion was based on its experts’ view that there was “sufficient evidence" glyphosate causes cancer in animals. There was only "limited evidence" it could do so in humans.
Committee members also expressed unease over IARCs secret proceedings and lack of standard scientific protocols, such as peer review. “IARC monographs do not employ any independent outside peer reviews,” said Texas Republican Brian Babin. “Instead an IARC working group collaborates behind closed-doors to select data, analyze data, and reach conclusions. So, without any public engagement or independent scientific peer review, the working group acts as hand-in-hand with IARC staff as judges, juries, and executioners.”
Insularity can be a breeding ground for corruption. The committee is looking into the role of Christopher Portier who recommended that IARC evaluate glyphosate. He was chosen to serve as an “invited specialist” to the glyphosate working group. Now, court documents have revealed that Portier was hired by a law firm suing on behalf of glyphosate “victims” several days after the glyphosate monograph was issued.
According to news reports and Portier’s own admission, over the past two years Portier has earned more than $160,000 for his “expert testimony” on several glyphosate lawsuits. At the same time, he was active in trying to pressure the European Parliament and U.S. agencies not to publish favorable findings about glyphosate without disclosing this obvious conflict.
Let’s be clear about what’s happening here: a public charity is refusing to answer questions by the charity’s largest donor about an unfolding scandal.
Global public health is too important to cede to a scandal-ridden organization behaving as if it is beyond not only reproach, but oversight. Congress should cut IARC funding to let the beneficiaries of our generosity across the world know that they are answerable to taxpayers through our representatives in Congress.
Julie Kelly is a senior contributor to American Greatness. Jeff Stier is a senior fellow at the Consumer Choice Center.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/congressional-oversight-weeds-out-corrupt-international-junk-science/article/2649238
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Congress Weighs Changes to Clean Air Act
Feb 15, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jeff Johnson
Chemical companies, other manufacturers, and their Republican allies in the U.S. Congress are seeking an overhaul of a federal program requiring air pollution permits before industrial facilities are built or expanded.
These permits are mandatory for new construction or significant modifications at existing facilities to ensure companies reduce air emissions.
This Clean Air Act requirement, which dates to 1977, is complex and drags out the permitting process, particularly for existing facilities, companies say. However, it has made older facilities, such as aging coal-fired power plants, upgrade to modern air pollution equipment when companies significantly modify them.
While it has had support from community and environmental groups because it has cut air pollution, the requirement has been a bane of industry for decades. It is the subject of several long-running industry challenges to EPA enforcement actions.
Congressional efforts to limit the regulation through new legislation or EPA guidance have heated up in recent months. At a Feb. 14 hearing on this issue before the House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Environment, Republicans said they want to relax permit requirements, while Democrats endorsed retaining them as is.
The Republican push for change comes at a key time for the chemical industry.
The American Chemistry Council, a chemical industry trade association, estimates that some 317 projects worth $185 billion in new U.S. investment are in planning because of the recent flood of natural gas and natural gas liquids. Some are expansions and others are new projects, and both face a host of local, state, and national permit requirements, ACC says. If a project suffers too many roadblocks or is substantially delayed, the company may look to relocate the facility—along with the related jobs and growth—elsewhere, ACC warns.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/96/i8/US-Congress-weighs-changes-Clean.html
-
Feb 16, 2018 | Forbes
By David Blackmon
The announcement by LyondellBasell Industries that it is acquiring rival A. Schulman Inc. for $2.25 billion is another in a long line of positive indicators on how affordable prices for natural gas are helping to grow the U.S. economy.
LyondellBasell has focused its business on the manufacture of polymers targeting the automotive industry, and now believes the acquisition of A. Schulman will allow it to diversify its business into what it calls "high-growth end markets" like agriculture, electronics and appliances and building and construction. As the U.S. economy continues to grow at an increasingly rapid pace, LyondellBasell hopes to take advantage as a supplier to these high-growth sectors.
Few sectors of the U.S. economy have been on a more high-growth trajectory than the chemicals and plastics industry has been over the last half-decade. This is an industry that saw a very high degree of flight capital investment overseas during the 1990s and 2000s, as tight supplies and high prices for natural gas - the industry's major feed stock - made it far cheaper to invest in new plant and equipment in other countries. But with the discovery of massive natural gas shale plays like the Haynesville in Louisiana and the gigantic Marcellus in Pennsylvania/Ohio/West Virginia, the concerns about high prices or lack of adequate domestic supplies have dissipated.
In a December 2017 report titled "U.S. Chemical Investment Linked to Shale Gas: $185 Billion and Counting", the American Chemistry Council (ACC) reports that, as of December, it has identified 317 new projects that will either expand existing chemical plants or build new ones in the United States. Of those, 48 percent have been completed or are currently under construction, 44 percent are in the planning phase, and the status for the remaining 8 percent is currently unknown.
One of the most compelling findings in the ACC report is that "Fully 63 percent of the announced investment is by firms based outside the U.S." Thus, the sea change in U.S. natural gas supply and prices during this decade has completely transformed this major industry from one where U.S.-based companies were fleeing to invest billions in capital dollars overseas to one in which companies based overseas are competing with U.S.-based firms to invest in new plant and equipment in the United States.
The ACC makes clear that domestic public policy will play a major role in determining whether this rush to invest in the U.S. will become a sustaining feature of the American economy. It lists the following factors as being critical:
· Access to oil and natural gas reserves on federal, state, and private lands;
· Continuing state-based regulation of unconventional oil and gas production;
· Ensuring a timely, transparent, and efficient regulatory permitting process for manufacturing projects and investments, such as new plants and expansions;
· Expediting the building of infrastructure, such as pipelines, that links energy production to chemical facilities;
· Maintaining accelerated depreciation schedules for chemical industry investments in new plants/equipment;
· Expanding access to foreign markets for U.S. goods.
It is probably not coincidence that all of the factors listed above are featured objectives laid out in the Trump Administration's plans for energy policy and U.S. "Energy Dominance." It seems likely that the synergy between the needs of the chemical industry and the goals of the Trump Administration played a significant role in LyondellBasell's decision to expand its stake in the U.S. economy with its major acquisition, which basically doubles the company's revenues an asset base.
The merger is just one more example of how the abundance and affordability of U.S. shale natural gas, combined with pro-growth public policies, is making a real difference in the growth of America's economy.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2018/02/16/the-lyondellbassella-schulman-merger-illustrates-americas-shale-gas-driven-chemicals-boom/#51ca3afa26fb
-
BLM Methane Rollback Plan Cites NSPS Duplication but Ignores EPA Review
Feb 16, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
A long-awaited Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposed rule to scrap several provisions of an Obama-era methane rule for oil and gas facilities on federal lands relies heavily on claims that the provisions duplicate EPA requirements for all new oil and gas activity, but fails to address an EPA effort to review and possibly repeal that rule.
The Feb. 12 proposal seeks to scrap requirements for operators to develop leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs; waste minimization plans; well drilling requirements; well completion and operations requirements; pneumatic controllers equipment requirements; pneumatic pump requirements; and storage vessel equipment requirements -- all intended to prevent leaks the potent greenhouse gas methane.
The proposal is the latest effort by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to block the rule. Critics won a prior court challenge of BLM's earlier move to pause the regulation by citing the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Senate last year failed to pass a Congressional Review Act measure that would have immediately rescinded the rule.
After the initial court loss, Zinke in December finalized a measure to delay key parts of the BLM rule for a year, though that effort is also the subject of court challenges still in the procedural stages and focused on fights over the proper venue.
Another justification BLM uses to seek to rescind the methane control provisions in the rule is arguing that the cost to prevent the waste is higher than the value of the waste, because the agency also drops the use of the Obama-era social cost of carbon (SCC) and replaces it with a calculation method that places far less value on preventing release of GHGs.
The proposal notes that many provisions of the 2016 BLM methane rule proposed to be rescinded here are “focused on emissions from sources and operations, which are more appropriately regulated by EPA under its Clean Air Act authority, and for which there are analogous EPA regulations.”
BLM says because EPA has developed new source performance standards (NSPS) to limit methane at new sources, its own provisions “create unnecessarily regulatory overlap.” But it also acknowledges that the BLM rule was created “so that compliance with similar provisions within EPA's regulations would constitute compliance with the BLM's regulations.”
It adds: “By removing these duplicative provisions, the proposed rule would fall squarely within the scope of the BLM's authority to prevent waste and would leave the regulation of air emissions to the EPA.”
BLM also acknowledges in a footnote that EPA “has proposed a temporary stay of some of the requirements” in the NSPS and that agency is “undertaking a reconsideration of these requirements. The BLM has coordinated with the EPA during the development of this proposed rule and is committed to continued coordination with the EPA throughout the process of revising the 2016 final rule.”
'Overestimated' Benefits
The proposal also notes that BLM has revised the 2016 regulatory impact analysis (RIA) and will release the new analysis when the proposal is published in the Federal Register for 60 days of public comment. The RIA reconsidered “whether the substantial compliance costs associated with the emissions-targeting provisions are justified by the value of the gas that is expected to be conserved as a result of compliance.”
While the 2016 RIA found that total benefits outweighed costs, “this finding depended on benefits that were likely overestimated and compliance costs that were likely underestimated,” the proposal says.
BLM attributes the overestimation of benefits to the use of the SCC. It now uses a new estimated carbon cost, that includes a much higher 7 percent discount rate, while also limiting analysis to domestic benefits rather than global ones -- changes that both result in lower benefits. That means “the benefits of many of the emissions-targeting provisions do not outweigh their costs. And, because the value of the conserved gas would not outweigh the costs, the BLM is not confident that its legal authority to prescribe rules 'for the prevention of undue waste' would cover many of the emissions targeting provisions in the 2016 final rule,” BLM says.
Under the new RIA, the LDAR requirements alone would cost $550 million to $688 million over 10 years, compared to a cost savings from product recovery of $116 million to $148 million over the same time frame.
The proposal also finds that the provisions targeted for rescission would have little impact on employment or change production forecasts for oil or natural gas.
“The proposed rule is expected to influence the production of” oil and natural gas from federal lands. “However, since the relative changes in production are expected to be small, we do not expect that the proposed rule would significantly impact the price, supply, or distribution of energy,” the proposal says.
It also finds little impact on jobs, despite President Donald Trump's vow to bring energy jobs roaring back.
BLM says, “We do not believe that the proposed rule would substantially alter the investment or employment decisions of firms.” The requirements to be removed would alleviate compliance burdens on operators, so “[t]he investment and labor necessary to comply with the 2016 rule would not be needed. We do not believe that the cost savings in themselves would be substantial enough to substantially alter the investment or employment decisions of firms. . . . In sum, the effect on investment and employment of this rule remains unknown.”
The firm ClearView Energy Partners says in a Feb. 13 analysis of the proposal that in addition to duplicating some provisions of the NSPS, the 2016 BLM rule could also force operators to install equipment that makes them subject to the NSPS because they would be “modified” sources.
“Thus the 2016 final rule could compel facilities not intended to fall under the purviews of [the] NSPS . . . to become regulated facilities,” the new proposal says.
ClearView says that BLM's proposal to scrap much of the prior rule “would seem to depend, to some degree, on whether those [EPA] rules remain intact.” While “rescission” of the NSPS remains an option, it “could become less of an option if [NSPS] overlap ends up as a key rationale for the new BLM rule.”
Methane Emissions
Meanwhile, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), citing data from EPA's recently released draft GHG inventory, warns that U.S. oil and gas methane emissions remain a major problem.
EDF says in a Feb. 12 blog post that oil and gas operators released 8.1 million metric tones of methane in 2016 through leaks, venting and incomplete production -- a 1 percent drop from 2015 despite EPA's rules and industry-touted voluntary efforts.
The group notes that the technologies and operational best practices to control these leaks are available now and that “the environmental case for natural gas hinges on getting emissions down as low as possible.”
EDF in a statement on the BLM proposal says it would “only serve to reward the least responsible actors in industry at a time when other companies are moving forward to tackle methane waste. Gutting the rule would allow unchecked waste of natural gas, unnecessary pollution, and the loss of revenue to communities and tribes.”
And the Western Environmental Law Center says the proposal “capitulates to the worst oil and gas industry operators, undoing all meaningful provisions to reduce the waste of publicly owned resources.” It adds that low-cost technology is readily available “and represents a growing industry creating new jobs. To justify the rollback, BLM fudged the numbers to show net costs when last year it would the rule would find annual benefits of up to $200 million.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/blm-methane-rollback-plan-cites-nsps-duplication-ignores-epa-review
-
Trump Offshore Drilling Push Gets N.J. Lawmakers’ Thumbs-Down
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
New Jersey would ban offshore drilling for oil or natural gas under a bill that the General Assembly passed 71-2 Feb. 15.
The bill (A-839) now heads to the Senate, whose Energy and Environment Committee approved a resolution opposing expanded drilling (SR 29) earlier this month.
The measure comes in response to the Trump administration's proposal to open more than 90 percent of the U.S. coast to new oil and gas exploration. New Jersey is one of many East Coast states that opposes drilling off its shores.
“This is a clear message to those who want to do offshore drilling,” Assemblyman Jon M. Bramnick (R) said before voting in favor of the bill. “Our voice is unified and strong. We stand together as one body today.”
Sponsored by Assemblyman R. Bruce Land (D), the bill would prohibit any oil and gas exploration, development, and production in state waters.
The state's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) would be barred from issuing permits or approvals for infrastructure associated with offshore drilling, according to a statement from the Assembly's Environment and Solid Waste Committee filed with the bill.
The bill would also require the department to review any proposed lease, license, permit, or plan for oil and gas activity in the Mid-Atlantic or South Atlantic regions to determine whether the project would have an impact on state waters.
Current New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) and former Gov. Chris Christie (R) have both voiced strong opposition to drilling off the coast of New Jersey. After the Trump administration announced its plans to open up protected U.S. waters to oil and gas exploration, Murphy called the idea “nothing less than dropping a ticking time bomb off our coast.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=128309434&vname=dennotallissues&fn=128309434&jd=128309434
-
Democrats Request Info on 'Repeated Environmental Concerns' at Ohio Pipeline
Feb 16, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Ranking members on the House and Senate energy committees sent a joint letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) this week asking to be updated on the potential environmental safety risks related to construction of the Rover Pipeline in Ohio.
It is the second time that the commission has raised concerns about the pipeline's construction techniques, according to a Senate energy committee press release.
The letter, dated Wednesday, was sent in response to news that in January, FERC put a halt to the use of horizontal directional drilling techniques near the Tuscarawas River by the pipeline's parent company Energy Transfer Partners.
Ohio officials had previously raised concerns that drilling from the project was spilling waste — including diesel fuel — at the pipeline site.
FERC on January 24 issued the pipeline company a notice to cease its horizontal drilling technique, saying in their memorandum that no "approach to date" had been successful at keeping drilling fluid from leaking. FERC then authorized the company to recommence drilling on Feb. 6.
"We remain concerned with Rover's apparent lack of urgency in addressing repeated environmental concerns during the construction of the pipeline," wrote Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), the ranking member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the ranking member on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
Both members had previously sent a letter to FERC in July expressing concerns over the pipeline's management as well as the parent company's environmental record. The record included seven industrial spills including one along the same river near the pipeline, which resulted in two million gallons of drilling fluid leaking into wetlands, according to the letter.
"Our committees have a longstanding interest in ensuring that drilling activities minimize environmental risk and that regulated entities are operating in full compliance with all applicable statutes, regulations, and permits,” Cantwell and Pallone wrote. “In order to more fully understand these issues, we request a briefing from FERC staff on any environmental risks associated with this project as referenced in FERC’s January 24 memorandum and the other information requested above.”
FERC's order to temporarily cease drilling was just the latest problem for Rover, whose developer also built and operates the controversial Dakota Access pipeline.
In July, FERC started an investigation into the developer building the controversial natural gas pipeline over alleged “misstatements” regarding its construction.
FERC staff said in a notice that they preliminarily determined that ETP “did not fully and forthrightly disclose all relevant information to the commission” in paperwork filed for a federal permit.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/374094-congress-members-request-meeting-over-rover-pipeline-environmental
-
North Dakota Oil Output Fell to 1.18 Million B/D in December: State
Feb 15, 2018 | Platts
By Brian Scheid
North Dakota oil output fell to 1.18 million b/d in December, down nearly 15,700 b/d from December and the first production decrease from the previous month since June, according to the state's Department of Mineral Resources.
December's output was nearly 46,200 b/d below the all-time North Dakota output high of 1.23 million b/d, set in December 2014.
North Dakota's daily natural gas output averaged over 2.08 Bcf/d in December, down from nearly 2.10 Bcf/d in November, which was an all-time record, according to the state agency.
There were 14,293 producing wells in North Dakota in December, down 45 wells from November, which was also an all-time high. The state issued 86 drilling permits in December, down from 119 in November.
But statistics appear to point to higher production in 2018.
The state issued 106 drilling permits in January when the rig count averaged 56 rigs, up from 52 in January. The rig count Thursday was 57, the agency said.
"Operators have shifted from running the minimum number of rigs to incremental increases and decreases as WTI oil price moves between $45 and $60/barrel," Lynn Helms, North Dakota's top oil and gas regulator, said in a statement.
Bakken operators plan to add between five to 10 rigs in Q3 and Q4 of this year, "depending on workforce and infrastructure constraints," Helms said.
The state estimates that were 877 wells waiting on completion at the end of December, down 6 from the end of November while the estimated inactive well count fell by 23 to 1,469 wells over that one-month time frame.https://www.platts.com/latest-news/oil/washington/north-dakota-oil-output-fell-to-118-million-bd-21344296
-
Industry Urges Congress to Extend Anti-Terror Plans for Chemical Sites
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
Congress should continue a federal chemical security program without adding provisions that could burden companies, industry representatives said Feb. 15.
Lawmakers are examining whether the Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program, which must be reauthorized by Dec. 18, is working. But how they proceed may have implications for thousands of chemical facilities subject to DHS oversight.
The security program, first launched in 2007, is performance based and requires operators of facilities handling specified quantities of hazardous chemicals to analyze their risks, develop security plans, submit information to the department, and install security measures as appropriate.
Since its last four-year reauthorization in 2014, the department has “significantly improved its administration of the CFATS program, which has had a positive effect on enhancing security at chemical facilities,” Kirsten Meskill, director of corporate security at BASF Corp., said at the hearing of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection Feb. 15.
DHS didn't send a witness to the hearing, and the agency didn't respond to a request for comment from Bloomberg Environment Feb. 15.
Bringing Program to New Level
Industry officials have offered policy proposals in what Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.), the ranking member of the subcommittee, said was a “series of candid, closed-door roundtables” that began in 2017.
But after years of treading water, by now the DHS “is very comfortable with the program, where they are, and what they've accomplished,” Judah Prero, counsel at Sidley Austin LLP in Washington, told Bloomberg Environment.
Prero said the question now is how “to try to beef up the program and bring it to a different level.”
Legislative changes, Prero said, could include modifying the process for DHS to adjust the list of 322 chemicals of interest and their quantities that trigger a facility's inclusion in CFATS, relying more closely on industry safety programs, and providing risk incentives to companies to deploy anti-terrorism technologies.
Clouded Transparency
In 2014, lawmakers passed a four-year reauthorization of the CFATS program, which attempted to fix problems that had made it difficult for the DHS to approve site security plans.
The 2014 law also added an expedited approval program, which lets lower-tier facilities develop plans that take less time to complete, though the Government Accountability Office has found few facilities have used the new process.
“Any lapse in the program would be a serious concern to us,” Pete Mutschler, environment, health and safety director at CHS Inc., told the subcommittee. “It would be highly disruptive to the industry and to the regulatory community.”
The program has drawn criticism for its lack of transparency and exemptions for public drinking water facilities, among other issues. Public interest groups say that due to DHS secrecy, local communities don't get enough information to protect against chemical risks, while companies sometimes note they don't understand the basis for how their plants’ security risks are evaluated.
Safety advocates, meanwhile, said the program continued to defer too much to industry wishes.
Companies spend billions protecting high-risk targets instead of modifying processes in a way that would not require such heavy protection, Paul Orum, chemical safety advocate at the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters, said at the hearing.
Orum said the program must “generate solutions, not just control problems.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=128309440&vname=dennotallissues&fn=128309440&jd=128309440
-
Industry Against 'Extraneous Provisions' in Safety Law Redo
Feb 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
A House panel yesterday heard from the chemicals industry amid efforts in Congress to reauthorize the Department of Homeland Security's decade-old chemical plant safety program.
Lawmakers created the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program, or CFATS, in 2007 and require certain chemical facilities to file security plans with DHS. Congress overhauled the law in 2014, but the authorization is set to expire at the end of this year.
Industry groups told the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection not to add too much to the law in the reauthorization process.
"We caution against adding new and extraneous provisions that will slow or diminish the progress to date," said Chet Thompson, president of American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers.
Thompson during the hearing also praised previous efforts to expedite security planning and streamline the vetting process for personnel.
Subcommittee ranking member Cedric Richmond (D-La.), meanwhile, said he wants to look into covering more facilities under CFATS.
As things stand, certain facilities that store chemicals — such as public water utilities and power plants — are exempt from the law.
"Every head of DHS, from [former] Secretary [Michael] Chertoff to [former] Secretary [Jeh] Johnson, has said those exemptions should be eliminated," Richmond said.
Paul Orum, a chemical safety advocate with the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters, agreed.
"Drinking water and wastewater facilities just should definitely be included in th
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/02/16/stories/1060074087
-
Railroad Officials Tell Congress Many Won’t Meet Deadline for Lifesaving Automatic Braking Systems
Feb 15, 2018 | Washington Post
By Ashley Halsey III
A decade after Congress ordered the nation’s railroads to install an automatic braking system that could have prevented more than 130 train wrecks, industry officials said Thursday most lines will need two more years to finish the job.
In the 10 years since the installation was mandated, there have been 47 people killed, 648 people injured and more than $150 million in damage done in 22 train crashes that could have been prevented had the system been in place, according to data compiled by the National Transportation Safety Board.
“For 50 years now — half a century — NTSB has issued one recommendation after another on [automatic braking],” Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.) said Thursday at a hearing before the House subcommittee on railroads. “I hear a lot about the cost and the complexity. Let’s talk about the lives that have been lost.”
Speaking directly to the officials, DeFazio said: “We’re going to kill more people because you are not doing your job.”
Edward R. Hamberger, president of the Association of American Railroads, a trade group for the freight railroads, responded that the railroads have made substantial progress to install a complex system he said will cost them $10 billion.
Not only do you have to install it, you have to make sure it works,” Hamberger said. “All class 1 railroads will be fully implemented by 2020.”
Hamberger said the system would be operative on 80 percent of the required route miles by year’s end.
Though the NTSB had long recommended the system known as positive train control (PTC), Congress began to debate the need for it in 2008. In the midst of that debate, a head-on collision between a Metrolink commuter train and a Union Pacific freight in Chatsworth, Calif., killed 25 people and injured more than 100. When the NTSB said automatic braking would have prevented the crash, Congress passed legislation setting a Dec. 31, 2015, deadline for railroads to have the system up and running.
“The NTSB is extremely concerned about any further delay to this lifesaving technology,” testified NTSB Chairman Robert Sumwalt, who has been an active participant in several major train crash investigations. “From a safety perspective, that delay is unacceptable.”
Thursday’s hearing came after four train wrecks in the past two months, two of which could have been prevented if PTC had been operative, investigators say. It also would have prevented the two deadliest crashes since Chatsworth: the 2013 crash of a Metro-North commuter train in the Bronx that killed four and injured 61 and the 2015 derailment of an Amtrak train in Philadelphia that killed eight and injured 185.
The railroad industry has been generous with campaign contributions to members of Congress, giving them almost $64 million since 1990. More than $2.3 million of that has gone to current members of the House subcommittee on railroads.
The industry was able to exert pressure when the original deadline neared in 2015, and the head of the Federal Railroad Administration, Sarah Feinberg, refused to grant an extension unless Congress acquiesced.
Congress did, voting to extend the deadline to 2018. It also said if railroads had the required hardware installed, had trained workers and acquired radio spectrum and had the system ready on 50 percent of the required lines, they could wait until the end of 2020 to flip the switch.
The most recent FRA report, released in September, showed some major railroads — notably BNSF Railway — were well down the road to completion, while other major railroads, and some transit systems, were well behind. Union Pacific has equipped a fraction of its trains, the FRA report said.
Overall, the FRA said, eight of the 37 railroads required to install the systems had fully complied with the congressional mandate.
“There are some that have put PTC in place,” the railroad subcommittee’s chairman, Jeff Denham (R-Calif.), said. “There are others who haven’t started. This has gone on for 10 years. Ignoring a congressional mandate will not be tolerated. I think the American public is sick of excuses.”
Some transit agencies, which count on passenger fares and government subsidies, are among those furthest behind in meeting the deadline, the FRA report said. While a number of them, including the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) and Denver’s regional transit system are in full compliance, others, such as Maryland’s MARC line, the Long Island Rail Road and New Jersey Transit, appear well short of meeting the deadline.
Paul P. Skoutelas, president of the American Public Transportation Association, told the subcommittee commuter rail lines must make a $4 billion investment in PTC, and that it will cost between $80 million and $130 million for transit systems to operate the system. “This is a staggering number,” Skoutelas said, asking that Congress provide additional funding for transit.
The railroads have invested billions in the complex PTC system, which requires equipment for more than 20,000 locomotives and installation of 24,000 interface units beside the rail bed to communicate with the train’s engineers.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/railroads-tell-congress-many-wont-meet-deadline-for-lifesaving-automatic-braking-systems/2018/02/15/9b3b0474-11d3-11e8-9570-29c9830535e5_story.html?utm_term=.9a359a7f8d37
-
EPA Withdraws Ozone NAAQS 'Classifications' Rule
Feb 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA has withdrawn from White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review its proposed “classifications” rule defining the severity of areas' “nonattainment” with the 2015 federal ozone standard, suggesting the agency could fall further behind in its already delayed efforts to implement the standard.
The ozone classifications rule, which EPA sent to OMB Sept. 21, is part of the package of measures EPA must publish to enable states to plan their implementation of its 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). OMB's website lists the proposal as “withdrawn” on Feb. 13, without further explanation.
EPA is reviewing and possibly reconsidering the Obama administration's 2015 decision to tighten the ozone NAAQS from the 2008 standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) down to 70 ppb. In the meantime, the agency and states must proceed with implementation of the 70 ppb standard, but EPA has yet to issue key implementation rules.
Further, EPA is also behind schedule in designating areas of the country as “attainment,” “nonattainment” or “unclassifiable” for the 2015 NAAQS, a process that should have been complete by Oct. 1. EPA has issued some designations and now plans to complete the process by Aug. 10, but faces litigation from states and environmentalists over the delay.
The classifications rule would set thresholds of ozone that determine how severe an area's ozone problem is. EPA classifies nonattainment areas on a scale of increasing severity from “marginal” to “extreme.” Areas with worse nonattainment status must impose tougher pollution controls on industry, but also have longer to attain the NAAQS. OMB's website says the withdrawn rule would have also set attainment deadlines associated with each level of nonattainment.
EPA has further not finalized a proposed ozone NAAQS implementation rule initially issued by the Obama administration, that would set other criteria for states to consider when crafting their state implementation plans to meet the NAAQS, such as compliance deadlines and provisions to rescind the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-withdraws-ozone-naaqs-classifications-rule
-
National Academies Launches Effort on Emerging Toxics, Climate (1)
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven Gibb
A new environmental health initiative launched by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will tap private and public-sector experts to tackle emerging crises related to toxics, climate change, and other human health risks.
The initiative will bring experts together across the spectrum of the National Academies—environmental, medical, social science, energy and engineering—the institutions said in a news release. It also will involve government, corporate and academic leaders coming together “in recognition of the importance of bringing more disciplines and sectors to the table to tackle big challenges.”
The advisory board will be chaired by Tom Burke, a Johns Hopkins University professor of public health and former EPA science adviser.
Burke will head a multidisciplinary steering committee to launch the Environmental Health Matters Initiative to advise the nation on environmental health topics and create ways to enable a broader range of groups to engage and use the breadth of work undertaken by the National Academies.
“These are challenging times for environmental health, and the issues are very complex ‘wicked problems.’ From energy to water quality, climate to chemical safety, solutions will require inclusive cross-cutting science,” Burke told Bloomberg Environment.
The effort will build on past work the academies have done on toxicity testing, risk assessment, sustainability, and the future of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Volunteer scientists, members, and sponsors created the seed that grew into the initiative when they asked the Academies to consider new ideas back in early 2016.
Asked why this initiative is important at this time, National Academies’ spokeswoman Riya V. Anandwala said, “The decision-making is becoming more complex, scientific advances are needed, and it is important to have a place to take a leadership role.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=128309438&vname=dennotallissues&fn=128309438&jd=128309438
-
Judge Says U.S. Must Use Energy Standards in Loss to Trump
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Erik Larson
The Trump administration was ordered to begin using new national energy efficiency standards that the federal government had refused to implement, the attorneys general of New York and California said in a statement.
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco ordered the Department of Energy Feb. 15 to publish the standards within 28 days. New York Attorneys General Eric Schneiderman and his California counterpart, Xavier Becerra, led a coalition of states that sued the agency in June for allegedly violating federal law by refusing to use the new standards.
The new standards relate to portable air conditioners, air compressors and commercial packaged boilers, as well as “uninterruptible power supplies,” according to the ruling.
“The Department is reviewing the Court's ruling and has no further comment at this time,” Shaylyn Hynes, a Department of Energy spokeswoman, said.
“The Trump administration has made a point of rolling back basic, common sense energy efficiency standards—putting polluters before everyday New Yorkers and Americans,” Schneiderman said in a statement about the ruling.
Becerra said that this is a “tremendous victory for the American people and for our planet.”
The state coalition contends the new efficiency standards—approved by the Obama administration in December 2016—are estimated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 98.8 million tons over three decades. That compares to taking more than 21 million cars off the road for a year, according to the statement.
The case is Nat. Res. Defense Council v. Perry, N.D. Cal., No. 3:17-cv-03404, 2/15/18.
—With assistance from Rebecca Kern (Bloomberg Environment)
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=128309419&vname=dennotallissues&fn=128309419&jd=128309419
-
Focus Turns from Cars to Everyday Product Emissions — Study
Feb 15, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
Regulators' success in curbing vehicle-related emissions carries a surprising flip side: Products like perfumes, paints and pesticides now rival cars and trucks as a source of volatile organic compounds in urban areas, researchers conclude in a study released today.
The study, published online in the journal Science, also finds that releases from such petroleum-based "volatile chemical products" are a much bigger contributor to air pollution than previously estimated.
"As transportation gets cleaner, those other sources become more and more important," Brian McDonald, the article's lead author, said in a news release. "The stuff we use in our everyday lives can impact air pollution."
In sunlight, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react with nitrogen oxides to form ground-level ozone, a lung irritant and health hazard that is the prime ingredient in smog. Using Los Angeles as a test case, McDonald and other scientists used atmospheric chemistry measurements and other steps to conclude that 40 percent or more of VOC releases are attributable to volatile chemical products. That's considerably higher than the 25 percent share allotted by U.S. EPA.
The results pose potentially significant challenges for regulators, given that the Clean Air Act is mainly designed to tackle pollution from cars, trucks and industrial plants. In light of the study's findings, "the focus of efforts to mitigate ozone formation and toxic chemical burdens need to be adjusted," researchers wrote.
McDonald is a scientist based at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), a partnership between the University of Colorado, Boulder, and NOAA. Twenty researchers from CIRES, Virginia Tech and other institutions were involved in the study.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/02/15/stories/1060074059
-
Environmental Taxes Are an Underused Tool, OECD Says
Feb 16, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rick Mitchell
Environmental taxes are a tool that governments need to better use to change consumers’ energy consumption and address climate change and air pollution, the OECD said.
“This is very important if you have ambitious policy goals for environment and climate,” said Kurt Van Dender, head of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's tax and environment unit, said during a Feb. 14 presentation on the report in Paris.
Wealthy countries’ taxes on coal are often minimal or zero, despite the fuel's high carbon content and air pollution impacts, while some countries are beginning to raise taxes on diesel, another highly dirty fuel, the OECD said in its latest report on taxing energy.
The report examines specific taxes on energy use from 2012–2015 across 42 countries for on- and off-road transportation, industry, agriculture and fishing, residential and commercial buildings, and electricity across five main fuel types, including oil and oil products, coal, biofuels and waste, and natural gas.
The 42 countries, which include OECD member countries and Group of 20 country emerging economies, account for 80 percent of global energy use and energy-related carbon emissions. Energy consumption is responsible for about two-thirds of climate-warming carbon dioxide emissions, according to the International Energy Agency, which the organization cited in its report.
Limited Progress
Nonroad energy uses such as heating and electricity production collectively accounted for the majority of energy-related emissions and largely go untaxed.
When emissions from nonroad energy uses were taxed, the rates for 97 percent of them were below the IEA's low-end estimate of 30 euros ($37.50) per ton of carbon dioxide. For example, emissions from coal, which accounts for almost half of carbon emissions in the 42 countries, go untaxed in many countries and is taxed above 5 euros ($6.25) per ton of carbon in just five countries.
Fuel tax rates remain well below the levels needed to cover nonclimate external costs in nearly all countries. Some governments have made efforts to apply the “polluter-pays” principle through energy taxes, but overall progress has been slow, the report said.
Emissions Trading Systems
Emissions trading systems, an important tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions cost effectively, are having little effect on the overall picture, according to Van Dender. “We can't say that emissions trading systems take up the job where carbon taxes leave off. It's not like they're going to give us a structural change in the periods we've been looking at,” he said.
A formidable obstacle to more energy taxes is the perception that they hurt companies’ competitiveness, the 56-page report said.
Governments have to do more to raise public awareness about the high health and environment costs of energy-related emissions and pollution, Van Dender said.
“And there's really no harm in making people aware that if you are going to introduce environmental taxes, energy taxes, there will be quite a bit of revenue that will be raised,” Van Dender said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=128309444&vname=dennotallissues&fn=128309444&jd=128309444
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested