Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 2/27/18
-
American CEOs Say They’re Ready to Bring Jobs Home If Nafta Dies
Feb 26, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Andrew Mayeda and Josh Wingrove
In describing what life would be like without Nafta, some business groups have stopped just short of predicting a plague of locusts. -
Agency Moves to Disband Environmental Research Operation
Feb 27, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
U.S. EPA is planning to shut down a grant-making center that supports leading-edge research on human exposure to pollution and its effects. -
(ACC Mentioned) Court Grants Intervenors' Requests to Join TSCA Suit
Feb 27, 2018 | Inside EPA
A federal appeals court has granted separate requests from environmentalists and industry groups to intervene in a suit that seeks to block EPA from continuing to implement its draft framework for reviewing new chemicals under the revised toxics law. -
EPA's FY19 Budget Continues IRIS Review But Slashes Assessment Funds
Feb 27, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA's fiscal year 2019 budget proposal continues the Trump administration's review of the agency's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), preserving for now a program that some Republicans are seeking to eliminate, but the plan seeks an almost 50 percent cut to the larger human health risk assessment research program that houses IRIS, which would significantly undermine key assessment efforts. -
Cleaning Products May Harm Female Workers’ Lungs as Much as Smoking a Pack a Day
Feb 27, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Samara Geller
Using chemical cleaning products could harm female workers’ lungs as much as smoking a pack of cigarettes every day for 10 to 20 years, according to a new study by a team of European researchers. -
EU notifes WTO of two new authorisations for plastic FCMs
Feb 27, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The EU has notified the WTO of an amending Regulation on plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with food. -
Ireland Plans over 1,000 Chemical Legislation Inspections in 2018
Feb 27, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Ireland is planning to carry out a total of 1,285 inspections and audits in relation to chemicals legislation this year, including 200 on REACH and CLP. -
Judge Halts California Plan to Require Glyphosate Cancer Warnings
Feb 27, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Tom Polansek
A U.S. judge has temporarily blocked California's plans to require cancer warnings on products containing the popular weed killer glyphosate, in a win for manufacturer Monsanto Co. -
US Forecast to Be World's Top Oil Producer by Next Year
Feb 27, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The United States will eclipse Russia to become the world’s top oil producer by 2019 at the latest, the head of the International Energy Agency (IEA) forecast Tuesday. -
LNG: The Glut That Was and May Never Be
Feb 27, 2018 | Platts
By Ross McCracken
There was a certain air of triumphalism surrounding Anglo-Dutch major Shell’s statement in February that the world’s growing supply of LNG would be “comfortably” absorbed by rising demand in 2018, and that the much anticipated glut would never materialize. -
ETP Pushes Court to Let Work Continue on Oil Pipeline
Feb 27, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Backers of Louisiana's Bayou Bridge oil pipeline are heading to an appeals court to challenge a judge's recent decision to freeze their project. -
Group Gives Trump, Congress Lowest Grades in Annual Environment Scorecard
Feb 27, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
President Trump and congressional Republicans scored record lows on an annual analysis of pro-environment voting records, released Tuesday. -
EPA Rejects Calls to Extend CPP Replacement Plan Deadline
Feb 26, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA has rejected calls from a wide variety of states and other groups to extend the deadline for comments on its advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) outlining possible approaches to replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP) to limit utility greenhouse gas emissions.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
American CEOs Say They’re Ready to Bring Jobs Home If Nafta Dies
Feb 26, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Andrew Mayeda and Josh Wingrove
In describing what life would be like without Nafta, some business groups have stopped just short of predicting a plague of locusts.
Listen to American CEOs, though, and the potential collapse of the continent’s trade framework doesn’t sound quite so scary.
As talks on reshaping the pact drag into a seventh month, executives are getting asked -- on earnings calls and at conferences -- how their businesses would fare in the event of a breakdown. Words like “well-positioned” and “manageable” keep cropping up in their answers.
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV has already said it’s moving production of Ram heavy-duty pickup trucks from Mexico -- and not to a low-cost Asian nation, but to Michigan. The move has been interpreted as a hedge against U.S. withdrawal from Nafta. It’s also the kind of outcome President Donald Trump’s administration been calling for, as it seeks to bring manufacturing home.U.S. ‘Footprint’
Companies from off-road vehicle-maker Polaris Industries Inc. to auto-parts supplier Lear Corp. have suggested they could follow suit -- often citing Trump’s tax cuts as a further incentive. “A lot of the business that exists in Mexico today existed a lifetime before it in the U.S.,” Lear Chief Executive Officer Matthew Simoncini said Jan. 26. “We have a footprint in the U.S. that could absorb business back if it made sense.”
To be sure, executives could be downplaying risks -- to soothe investors, or to get on the right side of Trump: the president has a track record of berating bosses over offshore jobs.
And economists warn that in the longer-run, U.S. business could still choose lower-cost countries for post-Nafta production, thwarting the president’s goal of rebalancing trade. “We will have to source some of these goods from Asia, which merely shifts around the trade deficit,” said Benn Steil, director of international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Still, some little-known data from the depths of the Nafta ledger helps explain why the CEOs sound sanguine. A growing number of exporters in Canada and Mexico don’t even bother to fill out the paperwork that would entitle them to use Nafta’s preferential tariffs.
Last year, only 43 percent of imports from Canada came into the U.S. under Nafta rules. The figure for Mexico was higher, at 58 percent, but still short of an overwhelming majority. (Take-up varies sharply across industries: About 95 percent for vehicles and parts, less than 1 percent for pharmaceuticals. Comparable data for U.S. exports aren’t available.)
When firms circumvent the deal, they have to pay rates ranging from about 2.5 percent for cars to 12 percent for clothes. But in the case of cars, for example, there are offsetting advantages. Skip the paperwork, pay a bit extra, and you don’t have to meet Nafta’s regional-content rules.
Those rules are central to the ongoing talks, the latest round of which gets under way next week in Mexico City. Tightening the local-content requirement is among Trump’s demands, and he’s repeatedly threatened to pull the U.S. out of the accord if they’re not met. Mexico and Canada say U.S. proposals are unworkable.
If the impasse ends up collapsing Nafta, corporate lobby groups have warned that the U.S. economic recovery could be at risk. In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue described the prospect as a “calamity” that would kill jobs, ramp up prices and leave “crops in the heartland” rotting in their fields.‘Around a While’
The view from recent earnings calls is less apocalyptic. “If there were to be any significant impact from Nafta, we feel like we would be well positioned with our three strong plants in the U.S.,” Ginger Jones, chief financial officer of Cooper Tire and Rubber Co., told analysts on Jan. 17. Polaris CEO Scott Wine raised the possibility of expanding capacity at the company’s plant in Huntsville, Alabama, though he said no contingency plans are in place.
Greg Husisian, a lawyer at Foley & Lardner LLP who advises companies on how to hedge against Nafta risk, says some may be more worried than they let on.
Businesses with major fixed investments in Mexico, such as large plants, tend to be most concerned, he said, while firms with more “mobile” assets such as tool and dye presses are happy to wait and see.
But in general, said Husisian, companies aren’t actively hedging much yet because “it looks like Nafta will be around for a while.”
Renegotiating the pact has already taken longer than it was initially supposed to. And with Mexico heading into elections in July -- and then into a five-month interregnum under a lame-duck president before the winner takes office -- there are plenty more speed bumps ahead.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-26/made-again-in-usa-ceos-ready-to-bring-jobs-home-if-nafta-dies
-
Agency Moves to Disband Environmental Research Operation
Feb 27, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
U.S. EPA is planning to shut down a grant-making center that supports leading-edge research on human exposure to pollution and its effects.
Under the proposed consolidation, the grants, contracts and administrative functions of the National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) — a component of EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) — would be combined with two other offices focused on administering grants.
A new Office of Resource Management would then be responsible for some NCER functions, as well as the work of the offices of Administration and Research Support and of Program Accountability and Resource Management. Freedom of Information Act requests, records management and budget formulation functions from other organizations would also be moved into the planned resource management shop.
Liz Bowman, EPA's associate administrator for public affairs, described the prospective shake-up as an efficiency move.
The change would shift "staff to the labs and offices where their expertise is most effective," she said in a statement. "This potential reorganization would not affect anyone's employment or status, and the management of research grants will continue."
Contrary to an initial report in The Hill that described the consolidation as a done deal, Bowman said the plan is still in its preliminary phase.
"ORD leadership is currently holding listening sessions with staff across the country to discuss this proposal, so everyone can work together to develop the best organization possible," she said.
The consolidation under consideration has been in the works for many months, according to Robert Kavlock, the former acting head of ORD who retired last November after 40 years at EPA.
"Its functions would still be in the organization but redeployed to make it more efficient, given the resource constraints and the hiring freeze," Kavlock told E&E News.
After years of falling support for NCER science grants such as the Science to Achieve Results, or STAR, program, the question became whether the agency needed a separate center to administer the grants, or whether it should just shift that support function back into other parts of ORD, Kavlock said.
"This is not a [Scott] Pruitt doing," he said, referring to the EPA administrator. "There has been a continual loss of funding for the STAR grants program."
Funding for the STAR program peaked in 2002 at around $138 million, when controlled for inflation, a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine review found last year. In 2016, the funding for the program had fallen to $36 million.
The National Academies recommended "that EPA continue to use STAR to respond to the nation's emerging environmental challenges," but the Trump administration's budget requests have twice called for its elimination.
Chris Zarba, a former acting head of NCER who left the center in 2012, also wasn't taken aback by the news that Pruitt is now looking to fold the program into another office.
"This is not a surprise," he said in an email. Zarba, who recently retired from the director role at EPA's Science Advisory Board Staff Office, noted funding for the STAR program had been dwindling "for quite some time," mainly because it was the easiest way to cut ORD's budget.
"Rent, salaries are fixed cost so when reductions came in recent years there was [nowhere] else to go for the money," he wrote.
Other former EPA leaders are taking a wait-and-see approach to the proposed consolidation.
"The organization is less relevant than making sure that really important function of support for science continues," Thomas Burke, the Obama-era head of ORD, told E&E News.
But Burke, who now teaches at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, remains concerned about the move, in light of previous actions by Pruitt that he thinks have weakened EPA's Scientific Advisory Board and put the independence of the agency's chemical assessment program at risk.
"Is this another assault on the scientific capacity of the nation to address emerging environmental problems, or is this truly a step forward in organization and accountability and independence of science?" Burke asked. "That's the important question, and that I don't know."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/02/27/stories/1060074913
-
(ACC Mentioned) Court Grants Intervenors' Requests to Join TSCA Suit
Feb 27, 2018 | Inside EPA
A federal appeals court has granted separate requests from environmentalists and industry groups to intervene in a suit that seeks to block EPA from continuing to implement its draft framework for reviewing new chemicals under the revised toxics law.
In a Feb. 26 order, in Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit grants requests to intervene filed early this month from the Safer Chemicals Healthy Families coalition, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and the National Association of Manufacturers.
The suit could be a legal test on whether the Trump administration can proceed with its draft framework for reviewing new chemicals, in which EPA dropped plans to use enforcement orders as an interim step in regulating new substances.
Under the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), new chemicals are those that are not on the TSCA inventory, and so undergo EPA scrutiny before they are allowed to enter the market.
Some industry attorneys have questioned whether the lawsuit can proceed on procedural grounds, since it challenges a framework that is not a final action.
NRDC filed the suit in January seeking to block the administration's draft framework for reviewing new chemicals under the revised TSCA, making good on the group's threat of such a lawsuit if the agency did not delay implementing the framework until after it had reviewed comments.
While the petition did not detail legal arguments, NRDC and other groups previewed their arguments in comments filed ahead of a Jan. 20 deadline that claim EPA's process for reviewing the chemicals violates the new law and the Administrative Procedure Act.
In their comments, NRDC and other environmentalists reiterated long-standing charges that EPA's proposed framework is unlawful in large part because it limits the use of section 5(e) enforcement orders that advocates say are needed as an interim step the agency had previously used for regulating and approving the substances.
They said, among other things, that TSCA mandates use of enforceable orders to ensure that premanufacture notices that EPA issues to allow new chemical uses do not pose unreasonable risks or inadvertently allow other uses that may pose risks.
Industry groups, including ACC, have backed EPA's authority to drop the use of enforceable orders as an interim step in its framework for regulating new chemicals, arguing the agency has used the approach in the past, but have also urged EPA to take further steps to speed its new chemical review process.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/court-grants-intervenors-requests-join-tsca-suit
-
EPA's FY19 Budget Continues IRIS Review But Slashes Assessment Funds
Feb 27, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA's fiscal year 2019 budget proposal continues the Trump administration's review of the agency's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), preserving for now a program that some Republicans are seeking to eliminate, but the plan seeks an almost 50 percent cut to the larger human health risk assessment research program that houses IRIS, which would significantly undermine key assessment efforts.
The congressional justification accompanying the Trump administration's FY19 budget proposal for EPA slashes the agency's human health risk assessment program from $40.5 million that was appropriated in FY17 -- the last year for which Congress approved a full appropriation bill -- to $22.3 million.
The document indicates that includes a $13.9 million and 65.5 full-time employee equivalent (FTE) cut, though it is unclear how that cut would be distributed across the various programs within the Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) program, which include the IRIS program; the Integrated Science Assessments program, which supports the National Ambient Air Quality Standards; the Provisionally Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values program for Superfund remediation and research intended to support the other programs.
The National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), which operates the programs in the HHRA budget documents, includes 180 people, NCEA Director Tina Bahadori told members of a new National Academy of Sciences committee reviewing the IRIS program earlier this month.
The rest of the $15.2 million cut to the program is explained by a budgeting slight of hand, wherein $2.3 million and 15.2 FTE are proposed for "rebalanc[ing] to the Superfund appropriation within this program for IRIS." Those same amounts of money and FTEs, however, appear to merely shift to a different account that the HHRA program receives funding from, the "hazardous substance Superfund" funding account.
While HHRA is cut, the proposal does not eliminate the IRIS program, or transfer it to EPA's toxics office, as many had worried would occur in the face of proposals from congressional Republicans. Report language attached to a proposed Senate spending bill for EPA would end IRIS, which is now housed in EPA's research office. By contrast, the House directed EPA in its spending bill to consolidate its risk assessment programs, presumably within the nascent toxics office, which is standing up a new, far more active program in response to Congress' 2016 reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The budget justification appears to leave the door open to acting on lawmakers' calls. "The Agency is currently reviewing IRIS to ensure it supports the Agency's highest public health decision-making, and its role in supporting the TSCA program, while continuing to support all of EPA's programs," the document says.
The description explains that in 2019, HHRA's activities will support EPA's implementation of the reformed TSCA, which greatly expanded EPA's responsibilities regarding industrial chemicals; "supporting the Agency's implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act"; "supporting the Agency's implementation of the Clean Air Act"; "targeted support for program and regional offices, states and tribes"; and supporting Superfund.
The major cuts the Trump EPA proposes to the HHRA program from the FY18 annualized continuing resolution -- because Congress has yet to finalize EPA's FY18 spending bill -- are expected to impact the program's ability to perform the activities described in its FY19 performance plan.
Risk Assessment
But the agency acknowledges the cuts would have a significant adverse effect on EPA's risk assessment efforts. The program description explains that if finalized, the large cut "[s]ignificantly reduces the HHRA research program's ability to develop assessments to support Agency decisions, which will not only impact the number of FTEs, but also the composition of the multidisciplinary teams assembled to address the needs of complex Agency decisions."
The cut would also reduce "the HHRA research program's ability to provide daily technical support to program and regional offices and states and tribes, including during emergencies and urgent circumstances."
The justification document also includes a series of tables referred to as "performance measures and data," which are intended to record the achievements of the various EPA programs.
The IRIS program has long struggled with output -- and as a result has remained on the Government Accountability Office's (GAO) High Risk list of programs at risk of waste, fraud and abuse since 2009, though the justification says IRIS has worked with GAO to address its recommendations and made progress on them in FY17.
"In FY 2017, ORD's HHRA Research Program completed 100% (2 of 2) of its research outputs as planned," the performance measure states. "The outputs included release of two final IRIS assessments, IRIS Evaluation of the Inhalation Carcinogenicity of Ethylene Oxide and the IRIS Assessment of Benzo[a]pyrene."
The justification also includes a performance measure called an annual performance milestone for the release of draft IRIS assessments and one for publishing final assessments. The scores are weighted based on the importance of the assessment. IRIS scored 11 out of 40 in FY17 for completing draft assessments, an improvement over its FY15 and FY16 scores. For completed assessments, the program scored 4 out of 15, a slight decrease from its FY15 and FY16 scores in this category.
"Though the target was not met, key assessment products completed for HHRA include three IRIS Assessment Plans (nitrate/nitrite, chloroform, and ethylbenzene) and two external review drafts for IRIS assessments (ethyl tert-butyl ether, tert-butanol)," the document explains.
"In FY 2017, the IRIS pipeline was placed on hold while new EPA and ORD leadership was being appointed. In addition to this, the implementation of NAS and [GAO] recommendations, notably development and application of systematic review methodologies, introduced competing priorities that contributed to the challenges in meeting this goal. The scoring method used for this measure was developed many years ago and does not reflect significant IRIS programmatic changes that began in 2011."
The performance measures also describe IRIS' leaders focus on better supporting "policy and regulatory decisions for EPA's programs and regions, as well as state agencies, IRIS is reconfirming their priority chemicals and product needs, and aligning those with appropriate allocation of resources. In addition to Superfund, water, air, and children's health drivers, IRIS has sharpened its focus on the new [TSCA] law, and has been providing the needed scientific support to meet its expedited timelines."
As part of its review of chemicals prioritized for the pipeline, the pipeline itself, and risk managers' needs, "a decision was made to sunset two products. As an alternative, new, more relevant and responsive replacement products were proposed," the document adds. It does not say which assessments were sunsetted.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epas-fy19-budget-continues-iris-review-slashes-assessment-funds
-
Cleaning Products May Harm Female Workers’ Lungs as Much as Smoking a Pack a Day
Feb 27, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Samara Geller
Using chemical cleaning products could harm female workers’ lungs as much as smoking a pack of cigarettes every day for 10 to 20 years, according to a new study by a team of European researchers. Women who use sprays and other cleaning products at home as little as once a week may also harm their lungs, although the study did not quantify the impact by comparison with smoking.
The study looked not at lung cancer, but lung function – how well you’re moving air in and out of your lungs. Efficient lung function is necessary to pump oxygen into the blood and carbon monoxide out. Diminished lung function is a sign of lung disease or possible future development of the disease, which can be fatal.
The study, published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, is thought to be the first to assess occupational or domestic cleaning product exposure as it relates to the decline of lung function.
According to the American Thoracic Society, lung function naturally declines slightly every year, starting in a person’s mid-20s. An accelerated dip in lung function could mean that a person’s health will decline sooner than expected. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or COPD, was the third leading cause of death in the U.S. in 2014. COPD encompasses a number of diseases, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema.
The researchers, led by Øistein Svanes from the University of Bergen in Norway, assessed data on more than 6,000 participants in the European Community Respiratory Health Survey for more than 20 years. The researchers theorize that irritating cleaning agents, causing immunological changes and or inflammation of sensitive mucous membranes, could cause structural, cell or tissue damage in the airways when exposures persist over time.
Links to new-onset asthma and aggravated asthma, wheezing, respiratory infections and irritation from exposure to chemical cleaners are well documented in the scientific literature. Less is known about the long-term consequences of cleaning chemicals on respiratory health.
Women face disproportionate exposures to the hazardous agents in cleaning products because – as this study and data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, among others, supports – they are responsible for the majority of cleaning chores at home. Women also represent the majority of the domestic cleaning workforce.
Because federal regulation of chemicals in cleaning products is poor, consumers should choose cleaning products carefully. Consult EWG’s Guide to Healthy Cleaning, which provides safety ratings for more than 2,500 products, to find cleaners that are safer for respiratory health. And follow these tips to reduce your exposure to harmful chemicals:
Avoid spray cleaners. If you do use them, spray into a cloth rather than directly on a surface, which helps reduce your inhalation of tiny cleaning solution droplets.
Cleaning products are often unnecessary. Regular cleaning with simple soap and water or baking soda and water will remove usual household grime and keep mold levels in check.
Abrasive sponges and microfiber tools are also effective alternatives to harsh chemicals.
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2018/02/cleaning-products-may-harm-female-workers-lungs-much-smoking-pack-day#.WpWQzWpua6I
-
EU notifes WTO of two new authorisations for plastic FCMs
Feb 27, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The EU has notified the WTO of an amending Regulation on plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with food. This authorises the use of two new substances and and changes the specific migration limits of two others.
They are in light of further Opinions from the European Food Safety Authority on permitted FCM substances.
The amendments are:perchlorate: the specific migration limit (SML) is lowered from 0.05mg/kg to 0.002mg/kg to protect younger population groups;phosphorous acid, mixed 2,4-bis(1,1-dimethylpropyl)phenyl and 4-(1,1- dimethylpropyl)phenyl triesters: the SML increases from 5 to 10mg/kg on the basis of new scientific evidence that this substance is not of a safety concern for the consumer;carboxylic acid, dimethyl ester: a new authorisation, the migration of the sum of the substance and its dimers (cyclic and open chain) should not exceed 0.05mg/kg food; and[3- (2,3-epoxypropoxy)propyl]trimethoxy silane: a new authorisation, residues of the substance and of each of the reaction products in the treated glass fibres should not be detectable at 10µg/kg for the substance and 60µg/kg for each of the reaction products (hydrolysed monomers and epoxycontaining cyclic dimer, trimer and tetramer).
Plastic materials and articles complying with the Regulation before the changes, may be placed on the market during the next 12 months and can be sold until exhaustion of stocks.
This Regulation enters into force 20 days following publication in the Official Journal of the EU.
In January MEPs voted against a motion for a total ban of BPA in FCMs. Meanwhile, a draft EU Regulation that lowers migration limits could be adopted by April.
https://chemicalwatch.com/64399/eu-notifes-wto-of-two-new-authorisations-for-plastic-fcms
-
Ireland Plans over 1,000 Chemical Legislation Inspections in 2018
Feb 27, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Ireland is planning to carry out a total of 1,285 inspections and audits in relation to chemicals legislation this year, including 200 on REACH and CLP.
Outlining its work programme for 2018, the Irish Health and Safety Authority (HSA) says it will determine compliance with regulations through onsite visits and desk-based assessments.
It will conduct REACH and CLP inspections as part of the occupational hygiene and control of major accident hazards (Comah) programmes, the Irish competent authority says. It will give particular emphasis to registration duties and to compliance with safety data sheets, authorisation and restriction requirements.
Other highlighted enforcement activities include a follow up on Echa's communications to Irish companies, regarding decisions on:REACH Article 36 – obligation to keep information for ten years;Article 40(3) – examination of testing proposals; andArticle 41(3) – compliance check of registrations.
Inspections will also focus on the classification and labelling of chemicals in accordance with CLP, the HSA says.
It aims to complete five REACH registration audits and ten REACH/CLP audits, as well as 15 assessments of substances subject to authorisation.
On CLP, planned actions include the preparation of the harmonised classification dossier on tetrafluoroethylene, which will be submitted to Echa for a decision. Ireland is proposing a harmonised classification as a carcinogen (category 1B).REACH activities
The Irish authority plans to complete an awareness-raising campaign in the run up to the May 2018 REACH registration deadline, with SMEs the main focus. It says it will provide support to individual companies through the helpdesk.
Other REACH-related work includes a follow up on Echa's decision on substances evaluated from the 2015 Community Rolling Action Plan (Corap), the HSA says.
For market surveillance, it will check 150 products "to ensure chemicals classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic (CMR) are not available for sale to the general public".
Within this group, 20 detergent products will be assessed for compliance with the EU detergents Regulation. And with regard to the Rotterdam Convention on the trade of dangerous substances, it will complete "information-gathering" on companies which may have duties under the regulations for follow-up assessment, it says.
Its activities will include screening of 20 articles for compliance with REACH restrictions. Non-compliant products are to be notified to the European Commission's market surveillance database.
In addition, the HSA will monitor the EU rapid alert system for dangerous products (Rapex) and assess 10% of relevant alerts for availability on the Irish market.Brexit support
Addressing Brexit, the HSA will "support and assist companies to review their chemical supply chains and identify how best they can address changing regulatory roles". Plans include a workshop to help companies tackle the challenges.
An Irish government report this month said regulatory divergence between EU and UK chemical laws after Brexit could have a "significant" impact on the Irish sector and reduce export volumes.
https://chemicalwatch.com/64402/ireland-plans-over-1000-chemical-legislation-inspections-in-2018
-
Judge Halts California Plan to Require Glyphosate Cancer Warnings
Feb 27, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Tom Polansek
A U.S. judge has temporarily blocked California's plans to require cancer warnings on products containing the popular weed killer glyphosate, in a win for manufacturer Monsanto Co.
Federal District Judge William Shubb said the warnings would be misleading because glyphosate is not known to cause cancer, according to court documents filed on Monday in California.
The state's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), which planned to require the warnings, could not immediately be reached for comment on Tuesday. The office previously stood by its decision to include glyphosate on the state's list of products known to cause cancer.
"Given the heavy weight of evidence in the record that glyphosate is not in fact known to cause cancer, the required warning is factually inaccurate and controversial," Shubb wrote.
The judge's decision is important for Monsanto because glyphosate is widely used by farmers, who apply it to genetically engineered crops, and consumers, who spray it on their lawns. The company's agricultural productivity segment, which includes glyphosate, had net sales of $3.7 billion in fiscal year 2017.
Monsanto, which is being acquired by Bayer AG, along with U.S. farm groups sued California in November to stop the warnings.
California added glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto's herbicide Roundup, to its list of cancer-causing chemicals in July 2017 and had planned to require that products containing the chemical carry warnings by July 2018.
The government of the most populous U.S. state acted after the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in 2015 that glyphosate was "probably carcinogenic."
Other studies have found the opposite, including one released by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in December.
A large, long-term study on glyphosate use by U.S. agricultural workers, published in November as part of a project known as the Agricultural Health Study, or AHS, also found no firm link between exposure to glyphosate and cancer.
Reuters reported in June that an influential scientist was aware of new AHS research data while he was chairing a panel of experts reviewing evidence on glyphosate for IARC in 2015. He did not tell the panel about it.
"Glyphosate is a vital tool that growers have trusted to provide safe, affordable food," said Chandler Goule, chief executive officer for the National Association of Wheat Growers.
The case is National Association of Wheat Growers et al v. Lauren Zeise, director of OEHHA, et al, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, No. 17-cv-02401.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/02/27/world/europe/27reuters-usa-pesticides-monsanto.html
-
US Forecast to Be World's Top Oil Producer by Next Year
Feb 27, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The United States will eclipse Russia to become the world’s top oil producer by 2019 at the latest, the head of the International Energy Agency (IEA) forecast Tuesday.
IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said at a Japan event that the long-awaited milestone will come “definitely next year,” if not this year, Reuters reported.
“U.S. shale growth is very strong, the pace is very strong ... the United States will become the No.1 oil producer sometime very soon,” he told the news service.
The explosive growth is fueled by hydraulic fracturing, horizontal drilling and other non-traditional drilling techniques.
Last year, the United States exceeded 10 million barrels per day of production for the first time since the 1970s. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects it to surpass 11 million barrels by the end of the year, which would overtake Russia.
The United States is still a net importer of crude oil, however. Last week, net imports fell to 4.98 million barrels per day, the lowest since the EIA started recording the figure in 2001.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/375767-us-forecast-to-be-worlds-top-oil-producer-by-next-year
-
LNG: The Glut That Was and May Never Be
Feb 27, 2018 | Platts
By Ross McCracken
There was a certain air of triumphalism surrounding Anglo-Dutch major Shell’s statement in February that the world’s growing supply of LNG would be “comfortably” absorbed by rising demand in 2018, and that the much anticipated glut would never materialize.
This glut has been much predicted, predicated on the apparent surplus of new LNG capacity coming on stream versus predictions of demand rising, but at a slower rate than supply.
If Shell’s position holds, it is an important development because it could launch a new round of multi-billion dollar investments in LNG capacity, targeting an increasingly tight market between 2022-25.
This would have profound effects on the fortunes of many countries, not least those on LNG standby such as Mozambique and Tanzania, not to mention Qatar’s expansion plans for the giant North Field, Russia’s Arctic LNG 2, and the raft of developers waiting to export the growing volumes of “free” associated gas emanating from the latest shale boom in Texas’s Permian basin.
Of equal importance is that Shell’s statement justifies past spending because higher LNG prices mean that overspent LNG projects in Australia may be back in
the money, while US LNG gets a wide open arbitrage to Asia.As US LNG production ramps up, producers there will be heavily dependent on this opportunity, which they hope will exist not as a function of below cost-recovery, must-run LNG production in the US — the glut scenario — but high prices in Asia as a result of strong demand growth.
It is arguable that the glut hasn’t arrived because most promised US LNG capacity is not yet up and running, and because there is perhaps more flexibility, or less reliability, on the supply-side of an increasingly diverse set of LNG producers around the world.
Certainly, the boom in Northeast Asian LNG demand this winter supports the more buoyant market view.
There is also the fact that demand can move faster than supply because of the relatively short time it takes to get floating LNG regas terminals in place. These are rapidly opening up new LNG markets in the populous countries of South Asia.
But it is worth asking what a glut actually looks like. So far it has lacked definition, leaving a latent impression that it would consist of dozens of loaded LNG tankers floating around the world’s oceans willing to accept rock-bottom prices just to unload.
In reality, a glut should be defined by price — in essence the closure of the US-Asian arbitrage — and the case is not so much that it hasn’t arrived but
that it has already happened.Spot LNG prices, represented by the Platts JKM, fell to $4.00/MMBtu in April 2016 and were skimming along below $5.50/MMBtu just six months ago.
Moreover, the current surge in demand, which saw the JKM hit $11.70/MMBtu on January 15, reflects both structural and seasonal factors.
Both are important, particularly China’s northern coal-to-gas switching, which represents a permanent upward step-change in Chinese gas demand, but also one which will itself exacerbate the increasingly seasonal nature of LNG consumption.
Some 61% of global LNG demand was accounted for in 2017 by China, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, and a hugely disproportionate amount in the winter months.
So it is safe to say that whether an LNG glut appears or not depends heavily on how cold the winter is in Northeast Asia.
At the same time, the rate of new LNG capacity additions is still strong. This is likely to result in glut conditions — a closed US-Asian arbitrage — during the northern hemisphere’s summer (which coincides with South Asia’s monsoon season) and boom time again next winter.
But with more LNG capacity coming online in the second half of 2018, woe betide LNG producers if the next Northeast Asian winter is a warm one.
http://blogs.platts.com/2018/02/27/lng-glut-that-was-and-may-never-be/
-
ETP Pushes Court to Let Work Continue on Oil Pipeline
Feb 27, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Backers of Louisiana's Bayou Bridge oil pipeline are heading to an appeals court to challenge a judge's recent decision to freeze their project.
Lawyers for Energy Transfer Partners LP yesterday went to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to oppose a lower court's preliminary injunction that suspends construction on the 162-mile route across southern Louisiana.
The company is also asking the lower court that issued the injunction last week to pause its order while the 5th Circuit appeal moves forward.
"A stay pending appeal is warranted because the Court's order is contrary to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and has already caused and will continue to cause irreparable harm to Bayou Bridge," ETP lawyers told the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana.
They're expected to make a similar request directly to the 5th Circuit.
The lower court decided to halt the project Friday, barring further work on Bayou Bridge while Judge Shelly Dick weighs a challenge to the Army Corps of Engineers' approval of the proposal. The decision was a rare example of a federal court blocking a major oil pipeline — a critical victory for environmentalists and fishermen concerned about the project's impacts on wild crawfish habitat and forested swamps in the Atchafalaya Basin (Energywire, Feb. 26).
Dick issued the injunction in a short order without an opinion explaining her decision.
"For written reasons to be assigned at a later date, the Court hereby GRANTS the preliminary injunction, and Defendant and Intervenors are hereby ENJOINED from taking any further action on this project in order to prevent further irreparable harm until this matter can be tried on the merits," she wrote, noting separately that she would issue the opinion supporting the decision "as soon as possible."
But ETP says the order is invalid without an opinion, as court rules require an injunction order to clearly state why it was issued and what actions it covers. Plus, the company argues, the order's prohibition of "any further action on this project" may be overly broad because the plaintiffs had asked the court to enjoin the Army Corps' Clean Water Act permit for the project, only to the extent that it authorizes pipeline activities affecting the Atchafalaya Basin.
The agency has estimated it would affect nearly 250 acres of wetlands in the basin, and Earthjustice attorneys representing a coalition of environmentalists and crawfishermen requested "a limited injunction preventing construction in the Atchafalaya Basin."
ETP is asking the district court to suspend its preliminary injunction order by the end of the day. If its request is denied, the company will likely make a similar bid at the 5th Circuit.
If the appeals court agrees to let construction proceed during the appeal, ETP could finish Bayou Bridge before the legal questions are resolved. The company is aiming to complete the pipeline in the second half of this year.
The project is an extension of a broader network that connects Bakken oil to refineries and export terminals in the Gulf region via the Dakota Access pipeline and a 700-mile converted gas pipeline that runs from Illinois to Texas.
The coalition challenging the project includes the Atchafalaya Basinkeeper, Gulf Restoration Network, Waterkeeper Alliance, Sierra Club and western division of the Louisiana Crawfish Producers Association.
Activists opposed to Bayou Bridge are seeking to establish the type of anti-pipeline presence Dakota Access faced. A group of protesters entered the pipeline right of way yesterday to demonstrate against the project.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/02/27/stories/1060074817
-
Group Gives Trump, Congress Lowest Grades in Annual Environment Scorecard
Feb 27, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
President Trump and congressional Republicans scored record lows on an annual analysis of pro-environment voting records, released Tuesday.
The 2017 League for Conservation Voters (LCV) Scorecard dealt Trump a failing grade and handed GOP Senators a 1 percent average score for positions they've taken on energy and the environment in the past year, the lowest scores in the history of the organization's rankings.
"There’s no getting around it: at the federal level, 2017 was an unmitigated disaster for the environment and public health with President Trump and his Cabinet quickly becoming the most anti-environmental administration in our nation’s history," read the report.
The findings compiled by LCV, an environmental activist and lobbying group, also highlighted increased differences on environmental policies in Congress.
The highest rankings went to members from mostly blue states, with the lowest rankings handed largely to Republicans in red districts.
The results come at a time when science policy changes are increasingly under the microscope.
As the Trump administration makes moves to consolidate Environmental Protection Agency offices, remove environmental regulations and bring more industry voices into fact-finding processes, environmentalists are accusing the government of putting science on the back burner.
LCV says its scores were determined by looking at the voting records of members of Congress during the 115th voting session. With the help of various environmental and conservation groups, the scorecard measures how members supported various environmental legislation ranging from topics on energy, climate change, public health, public lands, wildlife conservation and spending for environmental programs.
A total of 46 Republican senators were given a score of 0 percent last year — indicating that LCV says they voted for or against legislation in a way to hinder public health on every occasion. By contrast, 27 Democratic senators received a perfect, 100 percent score.
Democrats in the House and Senate overall were given a 94 and 93 percent pro-environment voting record respectively. Republicans in the House and Senate received just 5 percent and 1 percent marks, respectively.
The report also highlighted what it called somewhat unexpected voting results from House members of the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, a group self-described as working to achieve policy options to address climate change.
Caucus membership, which is half Republican, hasn't necessarily affected the GOP members' voting scores. LCV gave Republican members on the Caucus an average of a 16 percent voting score.
"Joining the caucus can be an important step, but it’s simply not enough; we need these Republican members to vote for climate action, to lead on real solutions, and to push their colleagues and party leadership to do better," read the report.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/375782-president-congress-get-lowest-grades-in-annual-environment
-
EPA Rejects Calls to Extend CPP Replacement Plan Deadline
Feb 26, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA has rejected calls from a wide variety of states and other groups to extend the deadline for comments on its advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) outlining possible approaches to replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP) to limit utility greenhouse gas emissions.
The agency has not updated its website to reflect any extension of the Feb. 26 deadline, nor has it included any response to the requests in the regulatory docket for the measure.
In a statement, EPA says it is not extending the deadline “because we are committed to expeditiously moving forward with the forthcoming proposed rule. When the proposed rule is published, all stakeholders will have the opportunity to submit additional comments.”
Multiple interested parties had sought a deadline extension of at least another two months, in part because EPA is accepting comment through April 26 on its separate proposal to rescind the CPP and many of the issues in the two rulemakings are related.
Extension requests have been filed by a group of state air regulators known as the Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies, as well as Texas and North Carolina.
More recently, the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Georgetown Climate Center asked for similar extensions.
“The subjects of these two regulatory actions are very tied together, and comments on the ANPR could affect the oral testimony given at the listening sessions for the proposed repeal that are scheduled to occur after the current comment deadline for the ANPR,” the Georgetown center writes in a Feb. 14 letter. “In order to foster deep engagement with the notice and ensure thoughtful, constructive comments, we urge EPA to provide more time for these stakeholders -- including states we serve -- and the rest of the public to comment on the ANPR.”
EPA's reluctance to allow more time could stem from reports that it hopes to complete a replacement for the CPP by the end of 2018, in order to give the Trump administration time to defend the rule in court during the current presidential term.
The power sector and other major business groups have broadly called for a replacement rule to provide them with legal and regulatory certainty regarding GHG standards, even though a significant portion of industry thought the Obama-era CPP was too stringent and exceeded EPA's Clean Air Act authority.
The Trump administration's proposed CPP repeal says the Obama-era rule was unlawful because its GHG targets were based on actions taken “beyond the fence” of regulated plants, such as switching from coal to natural gas or renewables.
The ANPR floats several strategies for a replacement rule based on “inside the fence” actions, including significant discussion about basing the regulation on increasing plants' efficiency, or heat rate. It also seeks input on several other topics, including how prescriptive any EPA standards should be for states.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-rejects-calls-extend-cpp-replacement-plan-deadline
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested