Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 3/20/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) Jack Gerard: A Career of 'Punching Above His Weight'
Mar 20, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By John Siciliano
Those who know Jack Gerard, the oil industry’s top lobbyist, credit him with nothing short of changing the face of lobbying in Washington. -
(ACC Mentioned) Capitol Hill Policy Group Signs Eight
Mar 19, 2018 | Politico - Influence
By Theodoric Meyer and Marianne LeVine
Capitol Hill Policy Group, a new lobbying shop started by two Dentons veterans, has signed eight new clients, including the American Chemistry Council. -
(ACC Mentioned) Manufacturers Want Clarity on Chemicals EPA Will Scrutinize
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical makers want the EPA to give clear signals about the types of substances it will sift through to decide which get scrutinized for possible regulation and which get off the regulatory radar—at least temporarily. -
(ACC Mentioned) States Aren't Waiting for Feds to Ban Flame Retardants From Kids' Products
Mar 20, 2018 | The Pew Charitable Trusts
By Elaine S. Povich
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission voted last fall to rid toys and furniture of a dangerous flame retardant that scientists say can cause lasting health problems in both children and firefighters. -
EPA Action on Fuel Chemical in Drinking Water One Step Closer
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
The EPA is close to finishing a report on a chemical best known as a rocket fuel ingredient, in another step toward regulating the substance's presence in drinking water sources around the country. -
Huntington Ingalls Must Defend Asbestos Suit in State Court
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
Northrop Grumman spin–off Huntington Ingalls Inc. will have to defend asbestos exposure claims stemming from shipbuilding operations for the federal government in state court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled. -
Water Utilities Urge 'Financially Prudent' Focus For SDWA Lead Rule
Mar 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Lara Beaven
Drinking water utilities are urging EPA to focus on “financially prudent” ways to reduce human health risks when the agency proposes an overhaul of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) lead and copper rule (LCR), cautioning that EPA may be unable to propose a rule that addresses all of the changes advisers have suggested by EPA's August deadline. -
Echa's Rac Adopts Lead Shot Restriction Proposal, CLP Dossiers
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Echa's Risk Assessment Committee (Rac) has adopted a restriction proposal on lead shot within a wetland, as well as 14 proposals for harmonised classification and labelling. -
Oil Lobbyist Says Industry Needs 'Flexibility' on Steel Tariffs
Mar 19, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard said Monday the U.S. oil and gas industry needs "clarity and flexibility" on steel and aluminum tariffs announced by President Donald Trump earlier this month. -
Commerce Outlines Procedure For Oil, Gas Industry to Request Tariff Exemptions
Mar 19, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
After garnering feedback from many circles, including the oil and natural gas industry, the Trump administration outlined a procedure for requesting an exemption to its recently announced tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and began accepting such requests on Monday. -
Europe's Cold Shoulder to Russian Gas Could Lift US LNG Export Goals
Mar 19, 2018 | Platts
By Harry Weber and Ross Wyeno
Europe's efforts to cut its reliance on Russian supplies of natural gas are being seen as a timely business opportunity for US LNG exporters feverishly trying to secure long-term contracts to finance terminal projects. -
Firm Agrees to Supply Ethane for American Ethane's New US Terminal
Mar 19, 2018 | ICIS
By Al Greenwood
Private-equity firm Energy & Minerals Group (EMG) will create a portfolio company to supply up to 480,000 bbl/day of ethane to a terminal project being developed by American Ethane Co (AEC), the company said on Monday. -
Safety Inspectors to Spend More Time on Offshore Drilling Platforms
Mar 19, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
The Interior Department's safety arm will soon increase its physical inspection time for offshore drilling. -
‘Netflix for Oil’ Setting Stage for $1 Trillion Battle Over Data
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Wethe
The service companies that map underground pockets of oil, drill the wells, and lift crude from miles below are generating vast new amounts of data they never before realized could be valuable. -
Chevron, Oil Giants Lose Latest Fight Over Climate Jurisdiction
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Kartikay Mehrotra
California cities and counties seeking to hold five of the largest oil companies accountable for their contribution to climate change through a trio of lawsuits will make their case in California state court, a federal district court judge decided. -
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Makers Could Face Tougher, More Costly Air Pollution Controls
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
U.S. chemical manufacturing plants with large industrial boilers may face tighter, more expensive emission control requirements for toxic air pollutants because of a recent federal appeals court decision. -
New York Petitions EPA to Cut Ozone from Plants in Nine States
Mar 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
New York State is petitioning EPA to directly regulate interstate air emissions from dozens of power plants in nine upwind states that the Empire State says are significantly contributing to its problems attaining federal ozone standards, part of a broader effort by Eastern states to press the agency to assist in curbing interstate air pollution. -
Tougher Climate Policies Could Save a Stunning 150 Million Lives, Researchers Find
Mar 20, 2018 | The Washington Post
By Darryl Fears
There is an overlooked benefit to greatly lowering carbon emissions worldwide, a new study says.
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
-
(ACC Mentioned) Jack Gerard: A Career of 'Punching Above His Weight'
Mar 20, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By John Siciliano
Those who know Jack Gerard, the oil industry’s top lobbyist, credit him with nothing short of changing the face of lobbying in Washington.
And he did it with integrity and without one scandal. A rarity in this town.
Even if one doesn’t buy the idea of one man changing the face of modern lobbying, anyone involved in the energy sector has to admit that while administrations may come and go, Jack always remains.
That is, until August. Gerard, 60, will step down from his decade-long gig as CEO of the American Petroleum Institute later this year. He is retiring from the long stint as the head of the top trade group for some of the world's largest energy companies as well as those that helped usher in the shale oil and natural gas revolution.
Gerard told the Washington Examiner in an interview on the sidelines of the CERAWeek conference in Houston this month that he hopes his legacy will be one of respect.
“I think there are two keys to being successful in Washington,” Gerard said. “One’s hard work, and the other is integrity.”
The result of those two key areas coming together is “respect,” which is the legacy, or tone, he hopes to leave behind.
“On occasion, you will disagree on issues. There are many people on Capitol Hill and the previous administration, where we didn’t agree on the issues, but we had mutual respect for each other’s position, because we operated under the principles of integrity and hard work," he said.
Gerard wants that to continue after he leaves. “I hope everybody knows that when they asked us a question … we were very straightforward, we were candid, and we were always honest.”
He said the Obama administration and some lawmakers may have disagreed with API, but they understood that “we were respectful in the process.”
Gerard said if people say he is “predictable,” he takes that as “a positive,” because it means “we aren’t ebbing and flowing with the pressures that occur.” His focus has always been the American consumer, “because ultimately you are trying to benefit our economy, our society, and people at large.”
That attitude has evolved across a number of industry groups he has led, where he changed their focus from holding conferences to becoming active and engaged advocates.
Before his long tenure in oil and gas, Gerard represented the coal and mining industries as president and CEO of the National Mining Association, where he began his legacy of changing how trade associations function in Washington.
Back then, trade associations were perhaps more bloated than nimble when it came to regulatory and legislative fights. Gerard looked to change that.
“He was very influential on focusing trade groups on advocacy,” said National Mining Association spokesman Luke Popovich, who was one of Gerard’s first hires in the late 1990s.
Before that, trade groups were more focused on publications, holding meetings, and having conferences at expensive resorts, Popovich said.
“Wherever he went, he focused on advocacy,” Popovich said. “It’s not about hosting meetings” anymore.
Gerard firmly believed that a trade association is supposed “to move the needle for industry here in Washington,” Popovich said. And because of that intense focus, “we punched above our weight when he was here.”
Tackling new energy issues
API is punching harder under Gerard. Whoever fills Gerard's shoes will take on many more issues than when he started in 2008. Back then, fracking and the shale natural gas revolution were in their infancy.
A group that represented the largest independent shale gas producers, America’s Natural Gas Alliance, was subsumed by Gerard’s group in 2016, turning API into the largest oil industry group in Washington.
More recently, API has taken on leadership for new issues such as oil and natural gas exports after the U.S. became a net natural gas exporter earlier this year.
API also has moved into electricity policy as natural gas becomes the the dominant fuel for electricity in the U.S. Natural gas use has cut greenhouse gas emissions to 25-year lows, Gerard points out.
“Our great success in lowering carbon emissions in the United States wasn’t because of regulation, but because of abundant, affordable natural gas,” Gerard said.
“We are looking at the vast supply we have, you see the market moving there, particularly with natural gas,” he said. “You see the market moving there, because it’s clean burning, abundant, [and] affordable.”
API was part of a broad coalition that opposed a Trump administration proposal to provide market incentives to coal and nuclear power through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission-overseen markets. It was the first time API waded into a major fight over electricity policy at FERC.
Nevertheless, Gerard doesn’t oppose nuclear power and coal. He says he supports an “all-of-the-above” energy policy. “What we don’t need is the government picking winners and losers one over another,” he said.
“My sense is what the president is doing is trying to fulfill a campaign promise, where he promised those out in the coal country, who are all good friends of mine, that ‘hey, the other side of this debate said we were going to put you out of work.’ He doesn’t want to put them out of work. But we also have to let the market forces bare out.”
A balance needs to be struck between coal and natural gas as part of the nation’s energy mix, he said. The goal should be to benefit American consumers with low energy prices. And that can occur only by allowing the free market to work, which favors the most competitive and least-expensive fuel, he said.
Doubling down
Gerard oversaw changes to API’s business structure and organization to consider new issues as well as the growing geopolitical reach of the industry.
“We’ve actually doubled what we call our segments,” he said. Before, API had only upstream and downstream segments, with one following production trends and the other tracking developments affecting the retail market, such as gasoline sales.
“Now, we have upstream. We have midstream, a lot of folks on the pipeline infrastructure issues today. Downstream. And we’ve added market development, which is really the marketing of, particularly, natural gas resources.” That includes the permitting of liquefied natural gas export terminals, Gerard said.
That new segment also includes infrastructure issues such as moving natural gas from Pennsylvania to the coast for export and even to plants and facilities for domestic manufacturing, Gerard said.
“Energy is a key driver behind our manufacturing renaissance. We shouldn’t forget that, either,” he said. “So, there are lots of opportunities out there."
"People tend to think of us as oil and gas association, which we are, but look at the companies we represent, they are in all spaces of the energy equation — solar, wind, renewables, they do them all,” he said. “So, we view ourselves as a true energy association.”
'Key is opportunity, not government intervention'
Gerard maintains ties with the different industry sectors he has represented, despite the increased competition between sectors, such as the the coal industry and oil and natural gas sector.
Gerard sees coal country becoming a major natural gas producer, with the development of large amounts of shale in the Appalachian states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia.
“Pennsylvania is a major natural gas producer. Ten years ago, no one would have thought that possible,” Gerard said. “West Virginia, over time, is becoming more and more a natural gas state. I think people when they hear West Virginia, they think coal country. It is coal country, but it’s also becoming natural gas country.”
Gerard said as more natural gas is produced in those states, it will fuel job growth in the communities there. “The key is opportunity, not government intervention," he said.
“We are communicating with the coal industry all the time,” he said. “I consider them friends, and we talk about the energy future of this country. We talk about the trends, what markets are doing, what various forms of fuel are doing in that marketplace."
“But as you look at it holistically, one of the great enjoyments I’ve had working in the oil and gas space is to see this American energy renaissance occur."
“In my career, I’ve seen that all come to a head now, where I’m able to work in all those spaces, but to really see America as a country prosper, and the American people as consumers reap and receive great benefit, because ultimately the price benefits go to them,” Gerard added.
He also represents an oil industry that is becoming a bigger global player. Natural gas exports are expected to soar this year, and the U.S. is expected to overtake Russia as the world's largest crude oil producer in 2023, according to the International Energy Agency.
Not only will that affect energy security, as nations look to the U.S. as an important, stable energy partner, but the environmental benefits are also huge, with more countries using clean-burning natural gas, Gerard noted.
He said he has become more attuned to the concerns of foreign countries, which are now customers, while still paying close attention to rivals such as OPEC.
Raising trade groups' stature
Like the mining group, Popovich said Gerard raised the influence of the American Chemistry Council, which recruited him from the National Mining Association in 2005.
He also simultaneously raised the stature of the trade association president.
Trade association presidents had been seen more as a senior staff position, Popovich noted. Gerard changed that by making the post equal to industry member CEOs, such as Exxon Mobil, Dow, and Peabody.
“He has done his jobs well and thoughtfully and treated people well. In D.C., both of those are rare,” said Michael McKenna, a conservative energy and environmental consultant in Washington, once considered for a post in the Trump Cabinet.
“I’m not sure what more you can ask for. I think Jack has been, over the course of his career, a champion of good policy,” McKenna added. “Moreover, he has been a very good person. Always thinking about things and people beyond himself and his problems.”
'Best' or just 'better?'
It’s “all about priorities,” Gerard told the Washington Examiner. “I operate under the motto of an old friend, who said, ‘It’s all about good, better, best.’ In life, you focus on the best things in life. You can do a lot of good things, do a lot of better things in life, but really stay focused on the best, because when you prioritize your decisions, your time allocations, the way you spend your time, you only have time for the best.”
Many of those priorities involve his family and fatherhood, and balancing that with running a successful operation in Washington.
“My family has always been a priority. My faith is a big part of who we are as a family, what we represent. And then, of course, my work,” Gerard said. “I find great satisfaction and joy, and my family does as well, but we’re all in it together.”
He has eight children, with the adoption of twin boys from Guatemala.
“We’ve got grandkids now,” he said. “We like to travel together. We enjoy each other's company. I think we have been able to find a reasonable balance.”
Last year, he took his family to Jordan and Israel, where they saw the fabled city of Petra in Jordan and journeyed to the holy cities of Nazareth and Jerusalem.
That balance in life, along with a strong sense of discipline, Gerard believes, is the key to a successful career.
He also believes in giving back by focusing on service. “I’m the chairman of the Congressional Coalition on Adoption. I spend a lot of time working on adoption issues both domestically and globally. We do a lot of service in our community, about helping the homeless, feeding the hungry and the poor,” he said. “To me, that’s what brings real fulfillment in life.”
What's next?
Gerard will use his remaining time at API to continue to expand its mission and scope, while looking for an adequate replacement to fill his shoes. He also does not plan to remove himself from the advocacy game completely when he retires and is considering new challenges.
“I’ve had a great run at the API. It’s been one of the great fulfillments of my professional career to be there 10 years,” he said.
“As I move on, I’ll look on to the next challenge. I’ll look for other opportunities that are out there," he said. "Right now, my primary focus is on making sure we have a smooth transition, assist in identifying my successor, and in that process make sure we don’t miss a beat.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/american-petroleum-institutes-jack-gerard-a-career-of-punching-above-his-weight
-
(ACC Mentioned) Capitol Hill Policy Group Signs Eight
Mar 19, 2018 | Politico - Influence
By Theodoric Meyer and Marianne LeVine
Capitol Hill Policy Group, a new lobbying shop started by two Dentons veterans, has signed eight new clients, including the American Chemistry Council. The firm, started by Todd Bertoson and Robert Odawi Porter, registered its first clients last month, bringing the total client list to nearly a dozen. All are former Dentons clients. “It’s a small lobbying shop really focusing on natural resources, transportation and tribal issues,” Bertoson told PI. Bertoson worked for the Senate Commerce Committee before joining Dentons, and Porter is a former president of the Seneca Nation of Indians. They’re looking to bring on one or two more staffers to build out the firm, Bertoson said.
TRADE GROUPS KEEP LOBBYING AGAINST TARIFFS: Retailers and trade groups are urging President Donald Trump not to impose broad tariffs on China, as the administration has hinted it will do. The background: Trump signed a executive order in August directing U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to investigate China under Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act of 1974. Retailers including Target, Walmart, Macy’s, Costco and Kohl’s Department Stores Inc. sent a letter to Trump today warning that, “were this investigation to result in a broadly applied tariff remedy on imports from China, it would hurt American households with higher prices and exacerbate a U.S. tariff system that is already stacked against working families.”
— Matthew Shay, president and chief executive of the National Retail Federation, said in a statement that “if the administration’s latest proposal goes into effect, Americans will see price increases on a wide range of basic products they purchase regularly at their local stores.” The group recently requested a meeting with the White House on the matter. In addition to the companies, 45 trade groups sent another letter to Trump protesting the tariffs. Those groups included the Information Technology Industry Council, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Internet Association.
— Speaking of tariffs: Foreign governments are lobbying the Trump administration on exemptions from forthcoming tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. Danny E. Sebright, the president of the U.S.-U.A.E. Business Counciltold The New York Times’ Ana Swanson and Kenneth P. Vogel that the United Arab Emirates’ Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan, will “visit the United States in the coming weeks, and that aluminum would be a topic of conversation.” Australia already has an exemption, which an Australian official said “was achieved as a result of ‘high level and sustained advocacy’ by some of its highest-ranking officials. The country’s interlocutors included Greg Norman, a pro golfer and friend of the president who signed a letter telling him that the tariffs could have a negative effect on the relationship between the United States and Australia.” Full story.
Good afternoon, and welcome to PI. Send us your confidential tips: mlevine@politico.com and tmeyer@politico.com. You can also follow us on Twitter: @theodoricmeyer and @marianne_levine
POLITICO Space is our new, free weekly briefing on the policies and personalities shaping the second space age in Washington and beyond. Sign-up today to start receiving the newsletter right at launch on April 6. Presented by Boeing.
TECH EXECUTIVES FACE BIPARTISAN SCRUTINY AFTER TIMES REPORT: Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and John Kennedy (R-La.) asked Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley this morning to summon tech executives to Washington for a hearing following a report that a company that worked for Trump’s campaign had “improperly accessed and held onto data from millions of Facebook users,” POLITICO’s Ashley Gold reports. “A hearing with CEOs would offer the committee an update on Silicon Valley efforts to ‘combat attempted foreign interference and what is being done to protect Americans’ data and limit abuse of the platforms, as well as to assess what measures should be taken before the next elections,’ the senators wrote.” Full story.
— The senators wrote the letter following a blockbuster report by The New York Times and The Observer this weekend revealing that Cambridge Analytica, the data firm backed by the Republican megadonor Robert Mercer “harvested private information from the Facebook profiles of more than 50 million users without their permission, according to former Cambridge employees, associates and documents, making it one of the largest data leaks in the social network’s history. The breach allowed the company to exploit the private social media activity of a huge swath of the American electorate, developing techniques that underpinned its work on President Trump’s campaign in 2016.”
— The report and the ensuing criticism of Facebook is unlikely to make life any easier for the social network’s lobbyists. Facebook spent $11.5 million on Washington lobbying last year, with eight in-house lobbyists, according to disclosure reports. Facebook also retains nearly a dozen outside lobbying firms, including BakerHostetler; Blue Mountain Strategies; GreenLight Strategies; Harbinger Strategies; Ogilvy Government Relations; Peck Madigan Jones; the Signal Group; Steptoe & Johnson; Stewart Strategies & Solutions; Subject Matter; and theGROUP.
A QATARI LOBBYING MYSTERY: Robert Worth had an absorbing piece in The New York Times Magazine this weekend detailing for the first time exactly what happened to the kidnapped members of Qatar's royal family, who were released last year. As you might expect, there's a lobbying connection. As the Qataris grew desperate, Worth reports, a member of the country's "ruling family paid $2 million to a firm called the Global Strategies Council, which is run by a Greek shoe salesman." The firm is based in the San Diego area; PI reported on the shoe salesman, Miltiades Goudamanis, last year when he registered as a foreign agent weeks before the Qataris were freed.
— It's unclear what Goudamanis did for the Qataris. Goudamanis reported in a Justice Department filing in January that his company "Raised global awareness and build [sic] political pressure regarding the plight of the hostages through an online campaign." Goudamanis indicated in his initial filing that he might lobby the State Department as part of the effort, but he never did so, according to the January filing. "It was never the intention or goal to lobby or attempt to influence US lawmakers or policy," the company reported. Goudamanis didn't respond to a request for comment.
MORE DETAILS ABOUT THE LEWANDOWSKI EMBASSY: Olivia Nuzzi has a piece in New York magazine on what finally pushed Hope Hicks to leave the White House. The story is not especially kind to Corey Lewandowski, whom Nuzzi describes as a “two-bit villain” on a campaign full of them, or Paul Manafort, whom she calls a “comically wicked creature.” Nuzzi unearthed a new detail about the “Lewandowski Embassy,” the Capitol Hill rowhouse where Lewandowski lives when he’s in Washington and that doubles as an office for Turnberry Solutions, a lobbying firm that Lewandowski has said he had nothing to do with. Lewandowski shared the house with an unnamed “former Trump-campaign operative who worked at the same government agency as” an official that former White House staff secretary Rob Porter had dated. The unnamed former campaign operative lives in the basement. Full story.
IT’S OMNIBUS WEEK (BUT ACTUALLY): Congress has until Friday to reach a spending deal to fund the federal government through fiscal year 2018. House Republicans will meet this afternoon to discuss the spending bill and text is expected to be released this evening. We’ll be watching (like everyone else) to see what riders make it in. We’re hearing that a fix to the so-called grain glitch is likely to get included. The fix would repeal the 20 percent deduction of gross sales to co-ops. POLITICO’s Catherine Boudreau explained last week that “the way the law is written, co-ops have an edge over other types of businesses: Farmers who sell their commodities to conglomerates like Cargill, independent grain operators or other companies not structured as co-ops can only deduct 20 percent of their net business income.” The National Council of Farmer Cooperatives and theNational Grain and Feed Association support the fix. A short-term funding extension for the Federal Aviation Administration is also likely to get included.
— We’re hearing that the Retirement Enhancement and Savings Act is not likely to make it in. One lobbyist said that the bill was on "life support.” The American Benefits Council’s Lynn Dudley conceded that the bill’s attachment to the omnibus is “slightly less likely than not” but said that “there’s still a chance.” The International Franchise Association is still pushing for a provision that would narrow the joint employer standard. Matt Haller, IFA’s senior vice president of government relations and public affairs, said that 15 franchisees will fly in today “for meetings to keep pressure on Democrats.” But as of now, we’re hearing that the odds of joint employer making it into the omnibus bill are slim.
THIS YEAR’S MEGADONOR: Richard Uihlein, the Illinois Republican megadonor, is filling the void created when Steve Bannon (and, by extension, his patrons Robert and Rebekah Mercer) fell out of favor with Republicans after the publication of Michael Wolff’s “Fire and Fury,” POLITICO’s Maggie Severnsreports. “While Mercer and other big donors like Sheldon Adelson have so far been circumspect with their money this year, Uihlein has begun to shape Republicans’ efforts back in the Senate. In addition to donating to tea party groups and the Club for Growth, which Uihlein has supported in the past, he’s given several million dollars to super PACs backing specific candidates in Senate races.” Full story.
ON THE AIR: “The Association of Equipment Manufacturers will run a 30-second ad featuring manufacturing employees speaking directly to Trump, warning him of potential negative consequences for their industry if tariffs take effect,” per Morning Agriculture. The trade group “said members have already seen steel prices rise over the last several months amid speculation that tariffs were coming, leading to higher costs for manufacturers. The ad will run on Fox News Channel's "Fox & Friends" and "Hannity" and MSNBC's "Morning Joe" over the coming weeks, [the trade group] said. It will target not only Trump but also Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who are both closely involved in the exemption process.”
IF YOU MISSED IT THIS WEEKEND: The Republican tax law scrapped a deduction that had allowed companies to write off part of the expense of hosting customers and clients — and that could hurt some of the firms that lobbied on the bill, The Associated Press’ Marcy Gordon reports. Washington “lobbyists often party with clients at Washington Nationals ball games or Capitals hockey games. The firms may have tough decisions to make regarding spending on future outings. … The irony of Washington lobbyists falling victim to their own successful work on the tax bill isn’t lost on some in the ‘swamp.’ Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, a member of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee and a fierce critic of the tax legislation, called the end of the deduction for lobbyists’ entertaining ‘one positive sign in an otherwise dismal bill.’” Full story.
JOBS REPORT:
— Alex Gleason has left the Hill to join the National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions as associate director of legislative affairs. He was previously a legislative assistant to Rep. Ed Royce (R-Calif.), who isn’t running for reelection in the fall.
— SevenTwenty Strategies has promoted Vlad Cartwright to president. He was previously executive vice president. Pam Fielding, the firm's president and chief executive, will remain chief executive.
IF YOU’RE HUNTING FOR A NEW GIG: We hear APCO Worldwide is looking to hire a director of government relations, an assistant director of public affairs and a senior consultant for public affairs.
NEW JOINT FUNDRAISERS:
None
NEW PACs:
Austin Asian American Coalition PAC (PAC)
Concerned Americans for Flake (PAC)
Concerned Americans for Jeff Flake (PAC)
Westside Democratic HQ (PAC)NEW LOBBYING REGISTRATIONS:
Alston & Bird LLP: DexCom, Inc.
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: Academy of Model Aeronautics
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: Alaska Bering Sea Crabbers
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: American Chemistry Council
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: American Seafoods Group
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: Groundfish Forum
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: International Association of Geophysical Contractors
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation
Capitol Hill Policy Group LLC: National Seafood Marketing Coalition
Carmen Group Incorporated: Hogan SRK, Inc.; R&C Motor Corporation; HFP, Ltd.
DS2 Group, LLC: ITC Holdings Corporation
John T. Doolittle, LLC: Resilient Agriculture Group
Madison Law & Policy, P.C.: Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
Madison Law & Policy, P.C.: Liberty Mutual Group
Maynor LLC: General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems
National Security Action: National Security Action
Native American Financial Services Association: Native American Financial Services Association
Peck Madigan Jones: Letgo USA B.V.
Polaris Government Relations, LLC: Air Line Pilots Association, International
Van Ness Feldman, LLP: Vinmar International
Van Scoyoc Associates: Quantico TacticalNEW LOBBYING TERMINATIONS:
Grindstone Consulting (formerly known as Stephen Donches II): East Penn Manufacturing
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/politico-influence/2018/03/19/capitol-hill-policy-group-signs-eight-142939
-
(ACC Mentioned) Manufacturers Want Clarity on Chemicals EPA Will Scrutinize
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical makers want the EPA to give clear signals about the types of substances it will sift through to decide which get scrutinized for possible regulation and which get off the regulatory radar—at least temporarily.
The most effective time for companies to urge the Environmental Protection Agency to investigate or not investigate a chemical is over the next few months before the agency releases its first “prioritization” list of chemicals, and before it announces future prioritization decisions in years to come, Mark Duvall, a Beveridge & Diamond PC attorney, told Bloomberg Environment.
The agency will prioritize more chemicals in future years, but it is unlikely to sift through as many at one time as the Toxic Substances Control Act amendments require it to do in 2019.
The agency must release its first prioritization list of 40 chemicals by early 2019—at the latest—to meet a statutory deadline to classify them as high or low priorities for risk evaluation, Jeffery Morris, director of the agency's chemicals office, said during a recent chemical regulations conference.
Half of those chemicals must come from the EPA's work plan that it created before Congress’ 2016 overhaul of TSCA.
The list may also include compounds that have provoked public controversy such as lead or per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) chemicals, due to alarm about their presence in water supplies, airfields, and elsewhere, according to industry consultants.
Some chemical manufacturers would like the EPA to give them a heads up by naming candidate chemicals it might prioritize before it selects the 40 TSCA requires. Once the agency releases the list, the law gives it only nine to 12 months to decide whether a chemical is a high- or low-priority for risk review.
Information by July
The agency must begin to evaluate the risks of high-priority chemicals as soon as they get that classification. If the multiyear risk evaluation shows a chemical poses an unreasonable risk of harming people or the environment, the EPA must regulate or take other steps to reduce that risk.
A low-priority designation means the agency sets the chemical aside because it has information showing the molecule does not have many hazards, exposures to it are not high, or the chemical is already well controlled, Duvall said. New information can prompt the agency to reexamine a chemical it previously classified as a low priority.
By early July, the EPA will announce details and accept comments on the procedures it will use to identify the 40 chemicals it will screen and classify, Morris said.
State Laws
Most chemical manufacturers will be less interested in the general procedures the EPA will unveil, said Duvall, who advises the American Chemistry Council and other trade associations. They want information to help them determine whether a chemical they make is likely to be included in the list of 40, he said.
For example, the EPA could identify types of chemicals or chemical properties that it plans to focus on, said Paul DeLeo, a principal with Integral Consulting Inc. It also could clearly articulate the types of information that would help it determine whether a chemical is a high- or low-priority, he said.
Chemical manufacturers may want the agency to examine their molecule as either a potential high- or low-priority substance, Duvall said.
If, for example, multiple states are considering regulating a particular chemical, it might benefit manufacturers to have the agency evaluate it. A low-priority designation would not prevent states from regulating, but could provide evidence that controls aren't needed.
In 2017, state legislatures introduced 248 bills to control the hazards of just one chemical, lead, the National Conference of State Legislatures said in a February analysis. In 2016, 33 states enacted 69 laws addressing lead and other chemicals, it said.
Benefits of Early Data
Providing the EPA disposal, recycling, or workplace control details—or offering it chemical exposure or toxicity data—could help companies support their position that a chemical warrants a certain designation, Duvall said.
Steve Owens, an attorney with Squire Patton Boggs, said it's important for the EPA to have data early in its selection process.
Having information before the prioritization process begins means the agency may not have to require new information, said Owens, who served as EPA's assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention during the Obama administration.
Having data on hand could prevent additional requests for data the agency may not need.
Regardless of whether it's a valid concern, chemical makers are worried the EPA will require a lot of testing and then stick the lab results in a drawer for a long time, Owens said.
The agency can avoid that by clearly signaling to the EPA what data it's really going to need, said Owens and DeLeo.
60 Chemicals
Liz Hitchcock, acting director of Safer Chemicals Healthy Families—a coalition of environmental, labor and other non-profit groups—said the EPA should focus on those with the greatest hazards and highest exposures.
The Safer Chemicals coalition recommends the agency identify 60 chemical candidates—instead of 40—for prioritization and systematically gather toxicity and exposure information.
The agency's data gathering should include both voluntary and mandatory efforts, she said. Since 2016, EPA has not issued testing orders requiring companies to submit new data under TSCA.
Possible Chemicals
Companies should not wait for the EPA to release its prioritization list or even candidates for such a list, DeLeo said. They should take time now to analyze their chances of being selected and start working with their suppliers and customers to gather information, he said.
The EPA already is evaluating the risks of 10 of the approximately 90 chemicals on the agency's work plan, he said. That leaves about 80 chemicals, of which about 20 could be selected as high-priority chemicals, DeLeo said.
If a company makes one of those 80 chemicals, there's a roughly one-in-four chance the EPA will select its product, DeLeo said.
That probability increases if a chemical—such as lead—is of high interest, he said.
The chances also increase if the agency has recently invested time studying the chemical, DeLeo said.
Working With the Great White North
For example, the EPA and Canadian regulators recently developed case studies evaluating the risks of five chemicals: 4-tert-octylphenol, triphenyl phosphate, phthalic anhydride, cyanide compounds, and molybdenum compounds.
The agencies’ work, carried out through the Regulatory Cooperation Council, is not designed to reach conclusions about those chemicals’ risks. Instead the agencies are identifying similarities and differences in their risk assessment strategies.
Yet, the EPA may have gathered information about or become more familiar with these chemicals, DeLeo said. Familiarity could increase the chance the agency would select one or more for prioritization.
States’ interest in the roughly 3,000 PFAS compounds—produced for the heat-, stick-, and grease-resistance properties they can impart—could prompt the agency to select some of them for prioritization even though they aren't on the work plan list, DeLeo said. Those compounds have been made by 3M, the Chemours Co., Clariant, Daikin Industries Ltd., DuPont, and other chemical manufacturers.
Increasingly states are detecting them in the environment and drinking water sources. The most well-known members of this group are perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS).
PFAS are such a “hot topic,” that “I would not be surprised to see them picked up,” DeLeo said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=130071229&vname=dennotallissues&fn=130071229&jd=130071229
-
(ACC Mentioned) States Aren't Waiting for Feds to Ban Flame Retardants From Kids' Products
Mar 20, 2018 | The Pew Charitable Trusts
By Elaine S. Povich
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission voted last fall to rid toys and furniture of a dangerous flame retardant that scientists say can cause lasting health problems in both children and firefighters. But advocates on the issue fear an internal political squabble will delay the agency from moving ahead with the ban.
Sixteen states aren’t waiting around. They have bills in the works this year to ban or tightly restrict certain fire retardants from use in toys, child car seats, strollers and other children’s and household products.
For many, the states’ legislation has taken on new urgency due to questions about what the CPSC might do if President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the commission is confirmed. Late last year, the commission voted to initiate a rule-making process that might eventually lead to a ban on the chemicals known as organohalogens, and warned the public about the dangers in the fire retardants in children’s products and household goods. But instituting a total federal ban on the products could take years.
The state bills vary in scope, but their intent is clear — to get rid of chemicals that have been found by scientists to pose more risks than rewards. States have been on track to ban certain flame retardants for some time, but some existing statutes already have become outdated, forcing the states to enact new laws to keep up. Indeed some state lawmakers, who predict that companies will evolve their chemical formulas, say they want to implement broader bans on potentially dangerous flame retardants that might not even yet be developed.
“If the federal government isn’t going to do it, we need to be the ones to do it, and we are,” said Democratic state Sen. Virginia Lyons, the lead sponsor on a piece of toxic chemicals legislation in Vermont.
Lyons’ proposal would go beyond individual chemicals and set up a mechanism to ban flame retardants from children’s products if they are deemed unhealthy by the state Department of Health following a scientific assessment.
“It’s an important and comprehensive bill for children’s products so we don’t have to pass individual laws on individual chemicals,” Lyons said. “The comprehensive program enables the Department of Health to take a lead in identifying toxic chemicals, regulating, labeling or banning.”
The issue for states is what to do about organohalogens, a group of chemicals used as flame retardants in upholstery, mattresses, electronic enclosures and some children’s products. The federal Environmental Protection Agency says the chemicals cause adverse effects such as cancer, endocrine issues and reproductive problems.
The chemical industry opposes most of the broad-based bills, saying that the chemicals should be evaluated individually, not as part of a class. “This broad class has different characteristics and profiles and different uses,” said Rob Simon, vice president for chemical products and technology for the American Chemistry Council, a trade group. “Just lumping them all together and saying they are bad isn’t accurate.”
In addition, the group testified to the CPSC that “the fire hazard of products is a real issue. … In the last few years, there have been hundreds of recalls of consumer products based on fire hazards. The reality is that the nature of today’s consumer products presents serious fire risks.”
But some scientists and firefighter groups think the chemical risk is worse. A 2010 study by the Marine Environmental Research Institute, in Blue Hill, Maine, concluded that: “Flame retardant chemicals can pose a potentially greater hazard than the risk from the fires they are supposed to prevent. Reducing the use of toxic and untested halogenated flame retardants will protect human and animal health and the global environment.” The study concluded that regulators should take this into account.
While the chemicals are designed to slow down fires in homes and other places, which would seem like a good thing for firefighters, firefighters’ associations want them banned too. In testimony to the CPSC late last year the International Association of Firefighters called for getting rid of the substances because of studies that show firefighters’ exposure contributes to increased cancer risk.
“The IAFF supports banning the use of organohalogen flame retardants because when burned they are all carcinogens that contribute to cancer and have additional negative effects on the health of our members,” said Racquel Segall, an occupational health specialist for the firefighters, in her testimony. “Given the increasing body of evidence that indicates the persistence, bio-accumulation and potential health concerns of these fire retardants, we believe the health risks associated with the use of these chemicals is greater than the fire risk without using these chemicals.”
The IAFF has delivered similar testimony in states such as Vermont, Minnesota, Washington, Maryland and Virginia, according to spokesman Tim Burn.
Some states already have begun to address the issue. California, in the wake of a prize-winning Chicago Tribune series that exposed the toxicity of the chemicals, enacted a 2013 law that requires manufacturers to attach a warning label to any furniture that has organohalogens.
Minnesota and Washington, D.C., also have approved anti-fire-retardant chemical laws. More states are looking to join them this year.
In Maryland, state Del. Angela Angel, a Democrat, is pushing a bill to add new organohalogens (an alphabet soup of chemicals known as decaBDE, HBCD, TBBPA, TCEP, or TDCPP by mass) to the list of banned fire retardants, including banning them from children’s toys, car seats and strollers. The bill would require manufacturers to get rid of the chemicals by January 2019, if they want to sell the products in the state.
In Massachusetts, a bill that would have banned 11 different flame retardants from highchairs, car seats, nursing pads, furniture, carpet pads and toys was approved last year 39-0 by the Senate, but not the House. This year, the Democratic state senator who sponsored last year’s bill, Cynthia Creem, said she has a House sponsor and is more optimistic that the bill will pass. It helps that Creem is now Senate majority leader, giving her more clout.
“This is a public health bill,” Creem said. “The truth is that we have been misled and our homes are now host to products that unnecessarily contain toxic flame retardants.”
In 2017, the Maine Legislature overrode Republican Gov. Paul LePage’s veto and enacted a law banning all flame retardants in upholstered furniture.
It’s unclear how quickly the Consumer Product Safety Commission might act on its ban.
In an op-ed for The Hill, a Capitol Hill newspaper, outgoing Democratic CPSC member Marietta Robinson said acting chairwoman Ann Marie Buerkle, who has been appointed by President Donald Trump to be permanent chairwoman, has “aligned herself with the positions of regulated industries at the expense of the safety of consumers.”
Buerkle voted against proceeding to the rule-making on the flame retardant chemicals. Robinson voted for it.
That’s cause for concern for consumer groups. While they are pleased that the process to ban the chemicals has begun, the way forward is unclear.
“We know acting chair Buerkle opposed moving forward with this rule,” said Rachel Weintraub, legislative director and general counsel of the Consumer Federation of America. “We definitely have concerns about how this will continue to be a priority at the CPSC.”
The federation is hopeful that the guidance against the chemicals will go forward, she added. “The fact that states are taking action and building on what has happened at the federal level is significant.”
Buerkle requires Senate confirmation for a permanent appointment.
“The safety commission granted the petition, but that doesn’t automatically result in a ban. That’s a multiyear process, and at this point in time, who knows what’s going to happen,” said Eve Gartner, an attorney for Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm headquartered in San Francisco.
“Many states in the legislative session we’re currently in are looking to actually put into law the policy that the CPSC has said would be the right policy but has not yet codified into law,” Gartner said.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/03/20/states-arent-waiting-for-feds-to-ban-flame-retardants-from-kids-products
-
EPA Action on Fuel Chemical in Drinking Water One Step Closer
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
The EPA is close to finishing a report on a chemical best known as a rocket fuel ingredient, in another step toward regulating the substance's presence in drinking water sources around the country.
The agency is under a consent decree to regulate perchlorate in drinking water after years of failing to do so. Perchlorate affects thyroid function and can disrupt normal development in fetuses and children, according to the EPA.
“We're close to getting a final peer review report,” Peter Grevatt, director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, told attendees at the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies’ policy conference March 19. “We're on a tight schedule and we are going to keep moving forward on that progress.”
Under the settlement between the EPA and environmental advocacy group Natural Resources Defense Council, the agency is required to adopt a regulation by Dec. 17, 2019, and propose a maximum contaminant level goal for the chemical by Oct. 31. The NRDC sued the agency in 2016 for missing deadlines to regulate perchlorate.
The NRDC didn't immediately respond to Bloomberg Environment's request for comment on the announcement.
The peer-reviewed report will analyze the EPA's model assessing how ingesting perchlorate affects human bodies, particularly children in the months before and after birth. It would allow regulators to assess how vulnerable populations respond to the chemical.
Perchlorate can occur naturally but has also been used for fuel and in food packaging to reduce static. The Food and Drug Administration denied a petition to ban the chemical in packaging, saying the justification for restricting it was based on outdated practices in the food industry.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=130071227&vname=dennotallissues&fn=130071227&jd=130071227
-
Huntington Ingalls Must Defend Asbestos Suit in State Court
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
Northrop Grumman spin–off Huntington Ingalls Inc. will have to defend asbestos exposure claims stemming from shipbuilding operations for the federal government in state court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled.
The claims don't belong in federal court because the shipbuilder failed to show the injuries were caused by actions it took at the direction of the federal government, the court said.
Although the government required Huntington Ingalls to use asbestos insulation and oversaw construction to ensure that tugs were built to federal specifications, the company could still have adopted the safety measures the plaintiffs allege would have prevented the injuries.
Percy Legendre worked with asbestos insulation in the engine rooms of tugs built for the federal government at the now defunct Avondale Shipyard in Louisiana.
After his daughter died of mesothelioma, her family filed a state court suit against Huntington Ingalls—the country's largest military shipbuilder—alleging asbestos brought home from work on her father's clothes caused her illness.
The company took the case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute, which requires proof of a “causal nexus” between its actions “under color of federal office” and the plaintiff's claims.
But Huntington Ingalls failed to make this showing, the Fifth Circuit said.
Although the government required Huntington Ingalls to use asbestos in the construction of the tugs, the government did nothing to restrict its safety practices, the court said.
Judge Stephen A. Higginson wrote the opinion, joined by Judges Patrick Higginbotham, and Edward Prado.
Roussel & Clement represents the Legendre family. Lee, Futrell & Perles, L.L.P. represents Huntington Ingalls.
The case is Legendre v. Ingalls, 2018 BL 91214, 5th Cir., No. 17-30371, 3/16/18.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=130071245&vname=dennotallissues&fn=130071245&jd=130071245
-
Water Utilities Urge 'Financially Prudent' Focus For SDWA Lead Rule
Mar 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Lara Beaven
Drinking water utilities are urging EPA to focus on “financially prudent” ways to reduce human health risks when the agency proposes an overhaul of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) lead and copper rule (LCR), cautioning that EPA may be unable to propose a rule that addresses all of the changes advisers have suggested by EPA's August deadline.
Community drinking water systems “already substantially control lead exposure through drinking water,” says March 8 comments from the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The group cites EPA's most recent data that 90 percent of systems serving more than 10,000 persons have median lead levels below 5 micrograms per liter (ug/L).
“The next step in additional risk reduction must be financially prudent and not create unintended consequences,” AWWA says, noting for example that the issue of how to control particulate lead releases remains poorly understood.
The group's comments, echoing those of state officials highlight the balance EPA must find as it works to overhaul the LCR, as Administrator Scott Pruitt has pledged a multi-media effort to reduce exposures to lead even as he seeks to curtail regulatory costs.
The LCR is a treatment technique rule that requires drinking water utilities to adjust their corrosion control treatment (CCT) when samples taken from the tap are above 15 micrograms per liter (ug/L).
EPA's National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC) provided a series of recommendations in 2015 on how to change the LCR.
EPA took comment through March 8 from state and local government officials on how the agency should update the rule following a Jan. 8 meeting with officials to discuss possible changes.
AWWA, which represents a wide range of drinking water utilities, notes that NDWAC provided “substantial” recommendations in 2015 but says “it is not clear if EPA can propose a rule that addresses all of them by August 2018, the anticipated date for a proposal.”
AWWA in 2016 fully endorsed NDWAC's recommendations and pledged to work with customers to remove all lead service lines (LSLs).
Among the recommendations AWWA says will likely take more time to address are: identifying a level of lead in drinking water of public health concern -- what NDWAC termed a household action level; substantiating the benefit of revising the rule with respect to copper; identifying corrosion control changes that will reduce lead levels further for systems already reliably below the action level while also not leading to undesirable unintended consequences; and dramatically changing the method used to collect tap samples.
AWWA says when EPA first promulgated the LCR, there was a surge in technical capacity for selecting CCT, but this expert capacity “has not been adequately developed through academia, maintained in the water system or consulting engineering community, or retained in the regulatory community,” and new capacity must be built.
Additionally, AWWA says research is needed to support major changes in corrosion control practice aimed at small incremental improvements without causing unwanted unintended consequences. The focus must be on cost-effective risk reduction with minimal risk of unintended consequences or significant misallocation of scarce resources for individual homeowners, water systems, or the communities water systems serve, the group says.
Municipal Utilities
The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA), which represents large municipally owned drinking water utilities, uses its March 8 comments to address a series of possible LCR changes that EPA discussed at the Jan. 8 meeting.
On LSL inventories and replacement, AMWA “cautions against EPA mandating that accurate LSL inventories must be completed within a relatively short timeframe,” and says the agency should consider doing a cost-benefit analysis regarding LSL inventories. “How much time and resources should be spent on inventories versus LSL removal or corrosion control?”
The group also asks for further discussion with EPA on how to deal with customers who are unwilling to replace the portion of LSLs on private property and cautions the agency against mandating a specific schedule for replacing LSLs.
Like AWWA, AMWA raises concerns about unintended consequences from CCT changes, as well as how EPA may opt to change the way compliance samples are collected.
Additionally, the group says it is concerned with how a “household action level would be received by the public considering their understanding of EPA’s stance that 'there is no safe level of lead'” and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's “stance that 'no safe blood lead level in children has been identified.'”
AMWA urges EPA not to mandate the use of pitcher filters or plumbed-in point-of-use devices to reduce lead levels in drinking water. Only two manufacturers produce pitchers that are certified to remove lead, and these “manufacturers will not be able to handle the national need if EPA mandates utilities provide pitcher filters,” AMWA says.
The National Rural Water Association (NRWA) in March 8 comments says any new LCR should be fundamentally modified to reflect the principle of shared responsibility. “Unfortunately, much of the local opposition to the current rule is based on its arbitrary and uniform mandates that result in many communities believing many of the rule’s requirements are unnecessary or diverting the community from implementing the most effective policy from preventing lead in drinking water,” NRWA says.
“To ensure the greatest possible future success and the greatest possible public health protection, any new rule should be a shared responsibility, meaning local governments and local populations should agree the resulting policies are necessary, tailored to local conditions, and result in a commensurate public health benefit,” the group continues.
EPA should decouple tap sampling requirements from utility compliance and allow drinking water utilities to demonstrate compliance with CCT requirements through water quality parameter sampling within the public water system, NRWA says.
The National League of Cities and National Association of Counties in joint March 8 comments also raise concerns that revisions to the LCR will create administrative challenges and unfunded mandates on local governments and residents.
And the local government groups say requiring full LSL replacement opens local governments up to private property challenges and worker safety issues.
“There may be Constitutional issues as it relates to private property rights and such action may trigger the Takings Clause in the 5th Amendment,” the local government groups say. “Such action could open local governments up to lawsuits regarding destruction of private property, as well as raise potential ownership questions regarding maintenance and upgrades of privately-owned pipes in the future.” Many states prevent government representatives from entering private property without the express written permission of the owner or a legal warrant, the groups say.
And even if local governments and water utilities were granted permission to enter private property, some homes are not safe to enter due to structural issues or potential criminal elements that utility staff would not be trained to spot or cite, the comments say, adding that municipal workers could be held legally responsible or personally liable for any illegal activities that are seen in or around the property and in private residences and buildings.
“Given current state laws, mandating full lead pipe replacement would not only be a costly burden on local governments, but would also be an extremely onerous and potentially impossible task to implement,” the groups say.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/water-utilities-urge-financially-prudent-focus-sdwa-lead-rule
-
Echa's Rac Adopts Lead Shot Restriction Proposal, CLP Dossiers
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Echa's Risk Assessment Committee (Rac) has adopted a restriction proposal on lead shot within a wetland, as well as 14 proposals for harmonised classification and labelling.
The agency’s Socio-economic Analysis Committee (Seac) has agreed on the draft opinion on lead shot. A public consultation on the socio-economic aspects will be open from 21 March until 20 May.
At its meeting from 27 February to 9 March, Rac discussed 16 CLP dossiers and adopted 14 of them. These include two triazole fungicides: ipconazole and mefentrifluconazole. On these, the Rac agreed on reprotoxic 1B for development, and no classification, respectively.
Rac also adopted its opinions on the evaluations of three dossiers, prepared by Echa, on occupational exposure limits (OELs). These were for for:
nickel and its compounds;
benzene; and
acrylonitrile.
Additionally, Rac and Seac discussed and agreed on seven draft opinions from the former and five draft opinions from the latter on six applications for authorisation on uses of chromium VI substances.
Meanwhile, Seac adopted final opinions on restrictions proposed on the use of diisocyanates in the workplace – primarily through training of workers – and on the use of lead stabilisers in PVC articles.
Diisocyanates are used in a wide range of sectors and applications, such as foams, sealants and coatings throughout the EU, with a total tonnage of about 2.5m tonnes per year. The restriction was proposed by Germany.
Echa’s proposed restriction on lead stabilisers targets PVC articles used for building and construction applications, such as
window and door profiles;
tubes, pipes and hoses;
floor coverings in rolls or tiles; and
shutters and blinds.
The opinions will be available on Rac and Seac's webpages in "the near future", Echa said.
Seac has recently marked a decade of operation, in which it has adopted 23 final opinions on restriction proposals and 181 final opinions on applications for authorisation.
https://chemicalwatch.com/64992/echas-rac-adopts-lead-shot-restriction-proposal-clp-dossiers
-
Oil Lobbyist Says Industry Needs 'Flexibility' on Steel Tariffs
Mar 19, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard said Monday the U.S. oil and gas industry needs "clarity and flexibility" on steel and aluminum tariffs announced by President Donald Trump earlier this month.
"We expect the [Commerce] Department will acknowledge various market realities and take into consideration the complex supply chains of the U.S. oil and natural gas industry and the need for specialty steel not available domestically for many of its projects," Gerard said in a statement.
The Commerce Department is currently working on determining which industries and types of metal will be excluded from the tariffs, to attempt to minimize damage to the U.S. economy while still putting pressure on China and other Asian steel producers.
The stakes are particularly high for the oil industry, which relies on steel to build to build pipelines and other infrastructure to meet growing production from the hydraulic fracturing boom.
"We support an exclusion process from the Department of Commerce that is both transparent and flexible," Gerard said. "That will allow the U.S. oil and natural gas industry to continue our significant investments in producing, transporting and refining U.S. energy resources, building world-class infrastructure and creating high-paying American jobs."
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Oil-lobbyist-says-industry-needs-flexibility-on-12763794.php
-
Commerce Outlines Procedure For Oil, Gas Industry to Request Tariff Exemptions
Mar 19, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
After garnering feedback from many circles, including the oil and natural gas industry, the Trump administration outlined a procedure for requesting an exemption to its recently announced tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and began accepting such requests on Monday.
On Sunday, the Department of Commerce said U.S. "individuals or organizations" could apply for an exemption from the steel and aluminum tariffs, which were enacted earlier this month, through its Bureau of Industry and Security. The procedure calls for Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to consult "with other administration officials" in evaluating the exemption requests, with a focus on "national security considerations." Commerce said it would process requests within 90 day of receiving them.
A notice outlining the procedure to request an exemption was published as an interim final rule in the Federal Register on Monday.
At issue are specialty steel products, which are used in oil and gas pipelines and at liquefied natural gas export facilities. The oil and gas industry and its allies argue that such products meet the criteria for an exemption from the 25% tariff on steel imports because there is an insufficient supply of comparable products from domestic steel manufacturers.
Jack Gerard, CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, said it was important for Commerce to provide clarity and flexibility to the oil and gas industry during the exemption process. Gerard and several Big Oil executives met with Trump and Vice President Pence at the White House last Thursday to discuss the exemptions, among other things.
"We expect the [Commerce] Department will acknowledge various market realities and take into consideration the complex supply chains of the U.S. oil and natural gas industry and the need for specialty steel not available domestically for many of its projects," Gerard said.
The steel tariff, plus a 10% tariff on aluminum imports, is scheduled to take effect on Friday. Canada and Mexico are excluded from the tariffs, at least for now. Most of the steel imported into the United States is from Canada.
In a note to clients Monday, analysts with ClearView Energy Partners LLC said "at first blush, we regard it as a mixed bag for energy producers -- and other importers.
"On one hand, the exclusion process appears to be limited, narrow and contestable -- which could be bad news. On the other hand, the exclusion process does not appear to reallocate tariffs from exempt countries and excluded products to other imports -- which could be both good and bad news."
ClearView estimated -- based on data from the U.S. International Trade Commission and the U.S. Census Bureau --- that exemptions for Canadian and Mexican steel imports would have sheltered about 0.9 million metric tons (mmt) of steel imported during the 2017 calendar year (CY), or about 17.8% of U.S. pipeline steel imports.
The ClearView analysts added that should South Korea also be granted an exemption later this week, the above figure would rise to about 2.6 million mmt, or about 51% of U.S. pipeline steel imports from 2017.
"[That] would still leave U.S. oil and gas producers to pursue exclusions for products that accounted for about 2.5 million mmt, about 49% of CY2017 U.S. pipeline steel imports," ClearView said.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/113749-commerce-outlines-procedure-for-oil-gas-industry-to-request-tariff-exemptions
-
Europe's Cold Shoulder to Russian Gas Could Lift US LNG Export Goals
Mar 19, 2018 | Platts
By Harry Weber and Ross Wyeno
Europe's efforts to cut its reliance on Russian supplies of natural gas are being seen as a timely business opportunity for US LNG exporters feverishly trying to secure long-term contracts to finance terminal projects.
Comments Monday to that effect by officials from Poland and Lithuania at trade group LNG Allies' Transatlantic Energy Security Forum in Houston come as Russian President Vladimir Putin won his fourth term, guaranteeing that he will be in power through the period in the early 2020s when the second wave of US liquefaction facilities are hoping to come online.
Putin's firm grip on Russia's energy policy ties the interests of Europe and US industry together at a critical juncture for both regions. Breaking Russia's stranglehold on the pipeline flow of natural gas to its neighbors would give Europe access to a competitive marketplace for gas, while US LNG projects stand to gain willing buyers with a strong appetite for imports at a time when they face challenges locking down enough customers to finance construction.
"After yesterday's election, I should say two things are stable in Russia -- this is the president and energy policy goals," said Zygimantas Vaiciunas, Lithuania's energy minister. "The key goal, the key target is the same -- to have the biggest market, the biggest power, the biggest market share as possible."LNG COULD TAKE POLITICS OUT OF GAS FLOW
Demand for gas in European Union countries has increased as the bloc aggressively pursues clean air policies, which means less use of coal for power production. While Russia has been a major source of gas supply to the region for decades, in recent years some countries have expressed a desire to have cheaper, more predictable supplies - to effectively take the politics out of the flow.
LNG provides that opportunity, with new regasification infrastructure being developed in Europe, to turn the chilled gas back into the dry form that is delivered through pipelines.
S&P Global Platts Analytics expects that European LNG imports will increase to 9.4 Bcf/d by 2023, a 3.3 Bcf/d (53%) increase over 2017 and substantially stronger than the global average, which is only expected to increase by 33% over the same period.
Strong LNG imports will be supported by a protracted period of low prices, driven primarily by the expansion of US LNG export capacity over the next few years. Total nameplate US LNG exports are expected to reach roughly 8.9 Bcf/d by the mid-2020's, a near 7 Bcf/d (350%) increase over 2017, and will support annual feedgas demand upwards of 9.8 Bcf/d by 2022, Platts Analytics data shows.
At the forum, Tellurian CEO Meg Gentle said the US LNG export developer sees those dynamics as the "perfect alignment of demand pull and supply push at the exact same time."
MARKET REALITIES SUGGEST RISKS REMAIN
Gazprom's Nord Stream II gas pipeline, which would run across the Baltic Sea to connect Russia and Germany, poses a threat to growth of European imports of US LNG. A bipartisan group of US senators recently sent a letter to US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin calling on the Trump administration to consider sanctions on companies supporting the pipeline project.
As for the US side of the equation, Tellurian has yet to secure any financial commitments to move its Driftwood LNG project in Louisiana forward. Most of the developers that are part of the so-called second wave of projects are in a similar position. Australia's Liquefied Natural Gas Limited has secured commitments covering only about a quarter of the capacity of its proposed Magnolia LNG export facility in Lake Charles, Louisiana, which it hopes to reach a final investment decision on late this year or early next year, said Greg Vesey, a managing director and Texas-based CEO for the company.
Sempra Energy is a partner in the Cameron LNG export project in Louisiana, which is expected to start up next year with three trains. But it has been considering a second export project on the West Coast, at the site of the Energia Costa Azul receipt terminal south of San Diego in Baja California, Mexico. It is also involved in a proposed export project in Port Arthur, Texas.
While it has received expressions of interest from Asian buyers regarding capacity from the West Coast project and it has a memorandum of understanding with South Korea's Kogas regarding capacity at Port Arthur, it has not reached any firm long-term contracts, said Carlos de la Vega, director of commercial development for Sempra's LNG unit. It hopes to make a final investment decision by 2019 on Port Arthur so that terminal can start up in 2023, de la Vega said.
"We certainly don't have enough definitive documents to move forward," de la Vega said of the Port Arthur project.https://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/houston/europes-cold-shoulder-to-russian-gas-could-lift-21594084
-
Firm Agrees to Supply Ethane for American Ethane's New US Terminal
Mar 19, 2018 | ICIS
By Al Greenwood
Private-equity firm Energy & Minerals Group (EMG) will create a portfolio company to supply up to 480,000 bbl/day of ethane to a terminal project being developed by American Ethane Co (AEC), the company said on Monday.
Under the agreement, EMG will create a portfolio company that will source the ethane from midstream companies in the US, AEC said. EMG will also build new export facilities or create partnerships with other operators to expand existing facilities and the infrastructure needed to supply them with ethane.
Altogether, EMG's supply and financial investment will support three 20-year agreements that American Ethane will execute on its end to supply feedstock to three crackers being built in China, AEC said. Those three agreements would account for 7.2m tonnes/year of the 10m tonne/year ethane terminal.
Previously, AEC had said construction on the terminal should start early this year and end in 2020. The company has not specified where on the Gulf Coast it will build the terminal.
So far, two ethane supply agreements have been announced.
In November, AEC announced a $26bn agreement to deliver 2.6m tonnes/year of ethane to a 2m tonne/year cracker being built by Nanshan Group.
The cracker will be part of a new chemical industry economic zone that Nanshan Group is developing in Shandong province.
AEC has also agreed to supply ethane to a new cracker that China’s Ganergy Heavy Industry Group (GNG) plans to build at Jinzhou in Liaoning province.
Under this agreement, AEC will deliver around 2.6m tonnes/year of ethane to the 2m tonne/year cracker.
Back in November, American Ethane's CEO said the company has more than 10 potential petrochemical customers in China. Each are willing to take more than 1m tonnes/year of ethane.
American Ethane has been considering terminals for years, but the destination of those shipments has changed. In 2014, the company was considering a terminal in Shady Grove, Louisiana state, that would export ethane to Jamaica, which would be burned as a fuel to power an alumina plant.
Since that announcement, American Ethane has shifted its focus to the Chinese market.
Another company, Energy Transfer Partners, is also developing a China-focused ethane terminal under a joint venture with Satellite Petrochemical USA.
The joint venture, called Orbit, will build the terminal on the Gulf Coast. The plans call for an 800,000 bbl refrigerated ethane storage tank and a 175,000 bbl/day ethane refrigeration facility.
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/03/19/10203751/firm-agrees-to-supply-ethane-for-american-ethane-s-new-us-terminal/
-
Safety Inspectors to Spend More Time on Offshore Drilling Platforms
Mar 19, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
The Interior Department's safety arm will soon increase its physical inspection time for offshore drilling.
The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) announced Monday that the new plan will make inspections more efficient and reduce taxpayer spending significantly — dropping costs by nearly $20 million over 3 1/2 years.
“We streamlined how inspectors do their job offshore, while achieving a significant cost-savings,” said Michael Saucier, a supervisor in the Gulf of Mexico region, in a statement. “This new process will allow BSEE inspectors to increase physical inspection time on offshore oil and gas facilities.”
There are more than 2,200 facilities in the Gulf of Mexico that will now get longer inspection times under the new plan. According to BSEE, the newly developed approach will allow access to electronic records onshore, which were not previously available. The technological advancement will reduce helicopter operating expenses by 15 percent.
BSEE was established in an effort to separate regulatory responsibilities following the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010. BSEE currently focuses on regulation of offshore drilling facilities while the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Office of Natural Resource Revenue focus on oil and gas leasing and revenue generation, respectively.
The new plan will start April 1.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/379115-interior-increases-offshore-drilling-platform-inspection-times
-
‘Netflix for Oil’ Setting Stage for $1 Trillion Battle Over Data
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Wethe
The service companies that map underground pockets of oil, drill the wells, and lift crude from miles below are generating vast new amounts of data they never before realized could be valuable. But their exploration customers are essentially saying hands off to anything coming out of their wells, including the streams of zeros and 1s.
“There's no doubt to me, we are producing two resources: the oil and gas, and the data,” said Philippe Herve, who spent more than two decades at Schlumberger Ltd. and now helps oil companies use artificial intelligence to make better wells. “The oil and gas is very clear: it belongs to the operator. But who owns the data?”
Answering that question will mean real money for a global industry climbing out of the worst crude crash in a generation. An industry that only uses about 1 percent of the data it generates, according to Baker Hughes, is trying to harness it to see where to pump more oil faster for less money. Transforming to a digital oil field could add almost $1 trillion to the world's economy by 2025, according to a 2015 study by Oxford Economics and Cisco Consulting Services.
To the service companies specifically, owning the data—enough to fill 20 million file cabinets since 2010 alone—would mean a whole new revenue stream, perhaps as they sell subscriptions to huge data libraries.
“It's like Netflix for oil and gas,” said John Gibson, an adviser at Tudor Pickering Holt & Co. who previously ran the oil-services business for Halliburton Co. “Imagine that all data is like a movie that many different people want to watch, but they want to watch it at different times.”
To the producers, though, owning that data means one less check they'd have to write. And it would ensure competing producers couldn't see their data while stealthily moving into a new field. EOG Resources Inc., dubbed by one of its analysts as the Apple Inc. of the oilfield, is widely considered a leader among explorers for bypassing oilfield service companies to generate its own in-house innovations.
“Data is king and one of our most valuable resources,” Sandeep Bhakhri, chief information and technology officer at EOG told investors on a conference call last year. “You have to own the data. You cannot outsource its collection, analysis, or delivery.”
Oil companies have for years bought relatively straight-forward data such as seismic files or drilling logs that contractors gather for their customers. The newer, larger batch yet to be harnessed is coming straight off the oilfield equipment itself—the rigs, pipes, pumps, and vales.
Mapping Reservoirs
“They also have value because they're revealing properties of the reservoir that before you didn't think about,” said Barry Zhang, CEO of the artificial-intelligence provider Quantico Energy Solutions.
Estimated spending on digital technology amounts to less than 10 percent of the $8 million average cost of an onshore well in the U.S., said James West, an analyst at Evercore ISI. But that's expected to climb. More than 7 out of 10 industry executives surveyed by Accenture and Microsoft said they plan to spend more or significantly more on digital over the next three to five years.
Service contracts today are already being drafted with the data-ownership question in mind. And while there's always been a section addressing data, it's far more important now, Brian Richards, a managing director at Accenture, said in a phone interview.
“It went from a thing in a contract—‘We'd like to do this; if we can't, we can't’—to a strategic imperative, like a real sticking point -- ‘We have to have this and here's why,’” Richards said.
Rewriting Contracts
Devon Energy Corp. has been dealing this over the past year as it's embarked upon rewriting all of its service contracts during the downturn. The older contracts had maybe a line or two addressing data ownership, said Garrett Jackson, vice president of drilling and completions for the Oklahoma City driller.
“It was always pretty straightforward, and there was never really a lot of conversation about it,” he said in an interview. “Now the clauses are getting to be a page, page and a half long, trying to parse out what parts are the contractor, what parts are the operator, when there's overlap, how that's divided up.”
Halliburton, which announced an alliance with Microsoft in August to offer a digital platform for customers to collaborate, was asked on an earnings conference call last year how much explorers were willing to share.
More Control
“Customers are taking a closer and closer look at their own data and who owns and controls that data,” CEO Jeff Miller said on the call. “I suspect they will control it more so. I mean, it's just very competitive for our customers.”
Building out a more robust digital business is just as important to the world's biggest service providers, including Schlumberger, Halliburton and Baker Hughes, who are leading the charge, Evercore's West said. While digital represents less than about 2 percent of total sales for the servicers, it can be as much as 4 percent of their operating income, he said.
“It's very profitable,” West said. “There's a bridge that needs to be made here between, ‘What is mine and what is yours?’ because we're going to make a better well with better data.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=130071235&vname=dennotallissues&fn=130071235&jd=130071235
-
Chevron, Oil Giants Lose Latest Fight Over Climate Jurisdiction
Mar 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Kartikay Mehrotra
California cities and counties seeking to hold five of the largest oil companies accountable for their contribution to climate change through a trio of lawsuits will make their case in California state court, a federal district court judge decided.
The March 16 decision, viewed by both sides as a defeat for Chevron, BP, Exxon, ConocoPhilips and Shell, creates a split among a pair of San Francisco federal judges over where the cases should be heard. State court is seen as more favorable to the cities and counties because there's a federal precedent for climate law that would tip the scale in the oil companies’ favor.
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria's decision in cases filed by San Mateo County, Marin County and the city of Imperial Beach conflicts with an order issued Feb. 28 by Judge William Alsup, who determined that cases filed by San Francisco and Oakland would remain in federal court.
“The scope of the worldwide predicament demands the most comprehensive view available, which in our American court system means our federal courts and our federal common law,” Alsup wrote. “A patchwork of 50 different answers to the same fundamental global issue would be unworkable.”
Chhabria on March 16 acknowledged Alsup's ruling, saying that a need to be heard in a federal court “no longer exists.”
Similar lawsuits filed by Santa Cruz County and the cities of Santa Cruz and Richmond are also before Judge Chhabria and could also be remanded back to state court. Plaintiffs have argued that litigating the case in state court creates more favorable prospects than in federal court.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=130071234&vname=dennotallissues&fn=130071234&jd=130071234
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Makers Could Face Tougher, More Costly Air Pollution Controls
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
U.S. chemical manufacturing plants with large industrial boilers may face tighter, more expensive emission control requirements for toxic air pollutants because of a recent federal appeals court decision.
The court ordered EPA to revise a 2015 Clean Air Act regulation for some 14,000 boilers that produce heat or electricity at U.S. industrial plants. According to environmental activists, these industrial boilers are some of the nation’s largest sources of air pollution.
EPA’s regulation requires facilities to install pollution control equipment that limits boilers’ emissions of carbon monoxide to 130 parts per million. The agency said this technology would lower releases of other air pollutants, including hydrochloric acid, fine particulate matter, and mercury.
But EPA failed to explain why the CO standard was an acceptable substitute for establishing individual emission limits for other toxic air pollutants, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit says in a March 16 ruling. It directed EPA to revise the regulation. At the behest of environmental groups that brought the case, the court ordered the CO standard remain in place until the agency finalizes the rewrite.
In the decision, the court upheld another part of the regulation that establishes work practices to curtail emissions during start-up or shutdown of boilers. The American Chemistry Council, the major trade association of U.S. chemical manufacturers which intervened in the case, supports this portion of the regulation.
The ruling is the latest chapter in a 25-year saga of EPA attempting to control toxic air pollutants from industrial boilers. The agency issued its first emission standard for industrial boilers in 2004. A federal court struck it down in 2007. The agency tried again in 2011, but after industry, including chemical manufacturers, complained that those limits were unachievable, EPA revised them in 2013 and 2015.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/96/web/2018/03/US-chemical-makers-face-tougher.html
-
New York Petitions EPA to Cut Ozone from Plants in Nine States
Mar 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
New York State is petitioning EPA to directly regulate interstate air emissions from dozens of power plants in nine upwind states that the Empire State says are significantly contributing to its problems attaining federal ozone standards, part of a broader effort by Eastern states to press the agency to assist in curbing interstate air pollution.
In its petition filed March 12, New York asks the agency to regulate plants under Clean Air Act section 126, which allows EPA to directly limit the emissions of upwind states that are interfering with attainment of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in other states downwind. The petition cites some 66 power plants in Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia as requiring regulation by EPA.
New York says that nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from these plants contribute to ozone formation that leaves its ozone levels in excess of the 2008 ozone NAAQS of 75 parts per billion (ppb), and also the tougher 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb. The state asks EPA to approve or deny its petition within the statutory 60-day period, a limit the agency typically does not meet. EPA has taken many months, or years, to respond to other petitions filed under section 126.
The state's intervention increases pressure from East Coast states on EPA to do more to reduce interstate air pollution. The agency's emissions trading program for power plants, established under the Cross-State Air Pollution rule (CSAPR), does not provide a complete remedy to ensure attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and EPA has no equivalent program to meet the tougher 2015 standard.
New York was one of several East Coast states to petition EPA to massively expand the 12-state Ozone Transport Commission region of Mid-Atlantic and Northeast states, where ozone controls are tougher than elsewhere, under air law section 176. The Obama EPA proposed to deny that petition, citing other mechanisms such as section 126 or the CSAPR program as more appropriate to curb interstate emissions.
EPA finalized the decision in November, triggering a lawsuit against the denial brought by Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
“Given EPA’s endorsement of the section 126(b) statutory option in its November 3, 2017 denial of the section 176A petition, DEC expects a timely approval of this petition,” New York says.
EPA has similarly rejected efforts by some East Coast states, such as Delaware, to redefine ozone “nonattainment” areas from the county level to include many entire states, which would again have the effect of imposing tougher pollution controls on a much wider area.
Delaware is also pursuing a lawsuit in the 3rd Circuit that aims to set a precedent barring EPA from easily granting itself six-month extensions to respond to interstate air pollution petitions, which could bolster the states that are trying to use the petitions to curb their major ozone problems.
EPA recently proposed to deny a section 126 petition from Connecticut, seeking regulation of a Pennsylvania power plant, after Connecticut successfully sued EPA in federal district court to force a response to its petition after an extended delay by EPA.
Maryland is also suing EPA over the agency's failure to respond to its section 126 petition seeking regulation of NOx from 36 electric generating units at power plants in Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/new-york-petitions-epa-cut-ozone-plants-nine-states
-
Tougher Climate Policies Could Save a Stunning 150 Million Lives, Researchers Find
Mar 20, 2018 | The Washington Post
By Darryl Fears
There is an overlooked benefit to greatly lowering carbon emissions worldwide, a new study says. In addition to preserving Arctic sea ice, reducing sea-level rise and alleviating other effects of global warming, it would probably save more than 150 million human lives.
According to the study, premature deaths would fall on nearly every continent if the world’s governments agree to cut emissions of carbon and other harmful gases enough to limit global temperature rise to less than 3 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century. That is about a degree lower than the target set by the Paris climate agreement.
The benefit would be felt mostly in Asian countries with dirty air — 13 million lives would be saved in large cities in India alone, including the metropolitan areas of Kolkata, Delhi, Patna and Kanpur. Greater Dhaka in Bangladesh would have 3.6 million fewer deaths, and Jakarta in Indonesia would record 1.6 fewer lives lost. The African cities of Lagos and Cairo combined would register more than 2 million fewer deaths.
In the United States, the Clean Air Act has improved air quality over the years. Still, more than 330,000 lives in Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Detroit, Atlanta and Washington would be spared, according to the study, published Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change.
“Americans don’t really grasp how pollution impacts their lives,” said Drew Shindell, a professor of Earth science at Duke University and the study’s lead author. “You say, ‘My uncle went to the hospital and died of a heart attack.’ You don’t say the heart attack was caused by air pollution, so we don’t know. It’s still a big killer here. It’s much bigger than from people who die from plane crashes or war or terrorism, but we don’t see the link so clearly.”
Shindell used an automaker’s problem with faulty ignition switches in 2014 to further illustrate his point. When the switches failed, more than 3 million recalls were involved and auto executives were summoned to Washington to testify before Congress. “But the combined tailpipes of automobiles kill dozens and dozens more people than faulty ignition switches,” the researcher said. “We should be far more worried about pollution than the things we actually worry about.”
There is little hope that the Paris climate accord can reach its goal of limiting global temperature rise to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, let alone the 2.7-degree threshold that calls for stricter regulations on greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.
The higher threshold was a bargain struck by politicians and economists who helped negotiate the global agreement as the lowest-cost approach. As a statement that announced the study said, that strategy “permits emissions of carbon dioxide and associated air pollutants to remain higher in the short-term in hopes they can be offset by negative emissions in the far distant future.”
In other words, governments can loosely regulate emissions from power plants, cement factories and other industries in the hopes that technological advancements will reduce future carbon emissions beyond what is imaginable. Shindell said, “That’s a very risky strategy.” It’s akin to loading up on a credit card now in the belief that your future income will be much higher and you can pay later, he said.
Greg Faluvegi, a researcher at the Center for Climate Systems Research at Columbia University, and Carl Seltzer, a researcher at Duke’s Global Health Initiative, contributed to the study. It was funded by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
The researchers ran computer simulations of future carbon dioxide emissions as well as other pollutants — such as ozone and particulate matter — that make it harder for millions of people around the world to breathe, to arrive at different scenarios for its potentially grave effects.
Then they “calculated the human health impacts of pollution exposure under each scenario all over the world — but focusing on results in major cities — using well-established epidemiological models based on decades of public health data on air-pollution related deaths,” the statement said.
The models calculated about 7 million deaths per year if governments fail to work toward zero emissions by the end of the century, starting today.
“There’s got to be a significant amount of progress within the 2020s or it’s too late,” Shindell said. Even for the researchers, it’s a pie-in-the-sky goal, given that South Asian nations such as India, where pollution is among the worst in the world, argue correctly that their per-capita use is small compared with historical use in the Western Hemisphere and that they should be allowed time to develop just as other countries did.
While politicians, the fossil fuel industry and environmentalists fight, some people who matter in the debate are on the sidelines, Shindell said. “We should have doctors and public health professionals weigh into this. We don’t have the understanding of how people are impacted by this.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/03/20/tougher-climate-policies-could-save-a-stunning-150-million-lives-researchers-find/?utm_term=.72dff30c3630
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