Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 20/03/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) What's to Be Done About Plastic Particles Found in Water Bottles?
Mar 20, 2018 | Waste Dive
By Cody Boteler & Cathy Siegner
According to a report from Orb Media, a nonprofit digital journalism organization based in Washington, D.C., 93% of 259 bottles of branded water it tested contained microscopic pieces of plastic. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Chem Activity Barometer Rises in March for Sixth Consecutive Gain
Mar 20, 2018 | ICIS
By David Haydon
The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB) rose in March, its sixth gain in a row following the 2017 hurricane season, the trade group said on Tuesday. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chinese Corporation Alibaba Joins Group Ghostwriting American Laws
Mar 20, 2018 | The Intercept
By Lee Fang and Nick Surgey
Chinese E-Commerce Giant Alibaba has joined the American Legislative Exchange Council, a private group set up for corporations and other interest groups to ghostwrite legislation that is sponsored by legislators in state capitols around the country. -
(ACC Mentioned) Consensus Forming Around TSCA Unique Identifier Provision
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Stakeholders from industry and public advocacy groups have backed a single proposed approach to applying a 'unique identifier' to confidential information submitted under TSCA.https://chemicalwatch.com/64994/consensus-forming-around-tsca-unique-identifier-provision -
(ACC Mentioned) Pruitt Aide Didn't Have to Sign Trump Ethics Pledge
Mar 20, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus and Amanda Reilly,
One of U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's top aides wasn't required to sign President Trump's ethics pledge. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Plans Summit on Politically Toxic Nonstick Chemicals
Mar 20, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has invited governors from every state and territory to a two-day meeting on a class of stain- and water-resistant chemicals after concerns about their health effects sank the nomination of his chemical safety adviser. -
EPA Pledges New Plan on Contaminant from Non-Stick Coatings
Mar 19, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
Federal environmental regulators say they’ll consult with states on managing contamination from a range of long-used non-stick coatings. -
US EPA to Convene PFAS Summit
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA is convening a summit to identify risks associated with, and ways to take action on, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). -
Global Action Needed on PFHxS, Says Draft Risk Profile
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Global action to address the risks associated with PFHxS is warranted, according to an international committee responsible for identifying persistent organic pollutants (POPs) under the Stockholm Convention. -
Bothered by Fragrances? This Story Will Be a Breath of Fresh Air.
Mar 20, 2018 | The Washington Post
By Elisabeth Leamy
“More and more, I walk into homes, stores and businesses and am greeted with an immediate blast of perfumed air. . . . And what is added scent but a chemical?" -
Bolstering EPA Rules, New Study Details Risks Of Lead Exposure In Adults
Mar 20, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
A new study linking low-level lead exposure with increased risk of adult deaths from cardiovascular disease could help EPA strengthen its cost-benefit analyses and drive new or updated rules to address the metal, including a measure addressing lead paint in public and commercial (P&C) buildings where the agency is struggling to assess risks to adults.' -
Chemicals Industry Welcomes Brexit Transition Period Agreement
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Cefic and the UK chemicals industry have broadly welcomed a conditional agreement between Britain and the EU on the transition period, after the country leaves the Union. -
Some States Block Plans for New Power Plants
Mar 20, 2018 | Wall Street Journal (In E&E Energywire)
By Erin Ailworth
Natural gas may be the new king of electricity generation, but some states want to knock it off its throne. -
IG Finds 'Allegedly Flawed' Methane Studies Not Used for Rules
Mar 20, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) is reporting that a pair of “allegedly flawed” studies estimating methane emissions from the oil and gas sector were not used in EPA's regulatory standards for the sector or official inventory of greenhouse gases, though it questions the degree of the “flaws.” -
Complaints About Falsified Pipeline Endorsements Draw No Response
Mar 20, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By James V. Grimaldi
Dozens of people haven’t heard back from U.S. regulators nearly two years after their names were falsely used in letters supporting approval of a gas pipeline from Ohio to Canada, lawyers for the complainants said. -
Pruitt Plans to Change EPA Policy on Scientific Studies
Mar 20, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt plans to change how the agency considers scientific information when writing regulations in a way that likely will exclude certain studies, he told the Daily Caller. -
Negotiators Aim to Settle Policy Fights, Post Omnibus Tonight
Mar 20, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By George Cahlink and Geof Koss
Congressional leaders hope to have massive omnibus spending legislation on the House floor by Thursday, assuming they can resolve a few dozen outstanding policy fights.
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) What's to Be Done About Plastic Particles Found in Water Bottles?
Mar 20, 2018 | Waste Dive
By Cody Boteler & Cathy Siegner
Dive Brief:According to a report from Orb Media, a nonprofit digital journalism organization based in Washington, D.C., 93% of 259 bottles of branded water it tested contained microscopic pieces of plastic. The water came from 11 different brands — including Aquafina (PepsiCo), Dasani (Coke), Evian (Danone), Nestle Pure Life and San Pellegrino (Nestle) — and was purchased in 19 locations in 9 countries.
The highest level found was more than 10,000 particles per liter, while the lowest was zero. The average across all brands was 325 microplastic particles per liter. The report stated that the plastic particles contained polypropylene, nylon, and polyethylene terephthalate (PET).
Nestle, The Coca-Coca Company and other bottled water manufacturersresponded by noting that microplastics are common in the environment and that their filtering and testing protocols are designed to assure the safety of their products. Following the Orb Media report, the World Health Organization told the BBC that it planned to assess the current level of research and review how much of a threat microplastics pose to public health.Dive Insight:
Bottled water manufacturers have a lot to lose if their products are seen as being contaminated with plastic, even if the particles are microscopic and relatively small in number. Bottled water is a $147-billion global industry and has been growing at about 9% per year, according to Zenith Global figures quoted by The Economist.
The study found a wide range of microscopic plastic particle levels across brands — and even varying levels within brands — which makes it hard to gauge the severity of these findings. The report noted that most ingested microparticles, depending on size, could pass through the intestines and not cause problems, but that some could possibly migrate to the lymphatic system. It added that little research has been done in this area and that some scientists view that factor as cause for concern.
These findings may not be a surprise to the waste industry, however. Marine waste — and plastics especially — have been a hot topic for years, and the industry is well-aware of how much plastic winds up in waterwayson a regular basis. Plastics in water do break down overtime, creating the microplastic particles that Nestle and Coca-Cola said are common in the environment.
Diverting plastic from entering the environment, and finding ways to integrate non-virgin plastic into new products, has been something of a priority for some sectors of the waste and recycling world — and the efforts have gained prominent political attention, too. Canada's environment minister, for example, recently declared she wants to build on a "zero-plastics-waste" charter, and British Prime Minister Theresa May wants her country to cut out all "avoidable" plastic waste in the next 25 years.
And it's not just governments. At the Our Ocean Conference in October, the Ocean Conservancy partnered with a number of corporations, including PepsiCo, Proctor & Gamble and the American Chemistry Council to announce a $150 million funding plan to divert plastic waste from reaching the ocean. Earlier in March, Closed Loop Partners announced they were seeking to expand their efforts in Southeast Asia, a major source of plastic waste pollution.
Efforts to remove plastic waste from the environment could be a step in reducing the amount of plastic microparticles that eventually wind up in water bottles. Plastic that's diverted from landfill (or from becoming litter) can also re-enter the value chain as a scrap commodity.
https://www.wastedive.com/news/whats-to-be-done-about-plastic-particles-found-in-water-bottles/519520/
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Chem Activity Barometer Rises in March for Sixth Consecutive Gain
Mar 20, 2018 | ICIS
By David Haydon
The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB) rose in March, its sixth gain in a row following the 2017 hurricane season, the trade group said on Tuesday.
On a three-month moving average (3MMA) basis, the March CAB rose by 0.2% from February and was up by 3.8% compared to a year earlier.
Two of the CAB’s four main components, production and inventories, improved. Product prices and equity prices slipped, the ACC said.
Production-related indicators for March showed improvement following suppression from recent weather-related events.
The ACC noted positive gains in construction-related pigments as well as performance chemistries.
US exports also continues to rise, the ACC added.
The CAB is a leading economic indicator derived from a composite index of chemical industry activity.
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/03/20/10204197/us-chem-activity-barometer-rises-in-march-for-sixth-consecutive-gain/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chinese Corporation Alibaba Joins Group Ghostwriting American Laws
Mar 20, 2018 | The Intercept
By Lee Fang and Nick Surgey
Chinese E-Commerce Giant Alibaba has joined the American Legislative Exchange Council, a private group set up for corporations and other interest groups to ghostwrite legislation that is sponsored by legislators in state capitols around the country.
Bill Anaya, head of government affairs for Alibaba operations in the Americas, spoke at ALEC’s States & Nation Policy Summit in Nashville, Tennessee, in December 2017, according to notes taken at the meeting that were obtained by The Intercept and Documented. The gathering brought together over 1,000 state and local lawmakers and lobbyists.
Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. did not respond to a request for comment, but at the conference, Anaya heralded his company’s entry into the lobbying group. “We’re so excited to be a part of ALEC,” said Anaya. “We are probably the world’s largest e-commerce company you have never heard about. We have business-to-business marketplace solutions. We have VC marketplace solutions. And we have over 500 million active buyers on our marketplaces.”
Anaya, a registered lobbyist for Alibaba, told those assembled that he was brought to the summit by ALEC staffer Cara Sullivan and state Rep. Ken Ivory, a Republican from Utah.
ALEC has gained increasing attention for its outsized role in shaping state-level policy by providing a forum for lobbyists to meet with legislators and formulate “model” legislation that lawmakers take back to their home states. The group allowed lobbyists for fossil fuel giants, such as Koch Industries and Peabody Energy, to draft legislation that was designedto undermine regulations on air pollution and climate change. In recent years, a wave of preemption laws crafted by ALEC with the support of retailers, fast food companies, and other major employers, have been implemented in states across the country to block minimum wage increases and efforts to enact paid sick days.
ALEC is attractive to major corporations, even ones without a particularly conservative bent, because lobbying 50 states and additional territories can be time- and resource-intensive when done solo. Alibaba’s decision to join the powerful legislation-writing organization comes as many Chinese companies have entered the U.S. market and stepped up their influence in domestic politics.
As The Intercept first reported, Wanhua Chemical, a major chemical manufacturer, recently joined the American Chemistry Council, a lobby group known for pouring corporate cash into Super PACs and other political ventures.
HNA Group, a diversified Chinese conglomerate, has not only gone on an eyebrow-raising buying spree of U.S. and European companies, but also has an unusual pattern of outreach to high-level American political figures from both the Obama and Trump administrations.
The Intercept also revealed that the American subsidiary of SingHaiyi, a Singapore-listed real estate firm controlled by Chinese nationals, provided a $1.3 million donation to the Super PAC that supported Jeb Bush during the 2016 presidential election.
In 2013, Chinese pork-processing company Shuanghui, now known as WH Group, spent $7 billion to acquire Smithfield Foods, one of the largest pork producers in the U.S., in one of the largest Chinese takeover deals in history. Executives involved in the transaction denied the Chinese government’s involvement in the sale. But the Center for Investigative Reporting later revealed that a Chinese government-backed bank had given Shanghui a $4 billion loan to take over Smithfield.
The takeover coincided with a larger push by the Chinese government to buy up overseas farmland and foreign food companies.
Shortly after the Shuanghui deal, Missouri legislators backed by Smithfield’s political action committee repealed a law restricting foreign ownership of agricultural property. Smithfield denied involvement in the legislation, though the company appeared to provide targeted donations to the lawmakers spearheading the effort, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. In Nebraska, Smithfield similarly provided donations to lawmakers that were pressing to repeal a law designed to prevent corporate consolidation in the pork industry.
The Chinese-owned Smithfield has gone on to use its lobbying muscle to pressure Congress on trade rules in China and product labeling issues, among other policies.
Alibaba, which specializes in e-commerce and online payments, has recently ramped up its political presence on Capitol Hill. In 2016, the firm hired former Barack Obama aide and Brookings Institute fellow Malcolm Lee to serve as its chief lobbyist.
Its not clear which of ALEC’s “model” bills Alibaba has sought to influence. Alibaba’s Anaya was brought to the summit in Nashville by an ALEC staffer involved in the group’s actions on minimum wage issues. At the summit, Anaya boasted that the chairman of Alibaba had met with President Donald Trump in Trump Tower to talk about “accessing the China marketplace” in order to help “U.S. companies sell and export their goods into China.”
Disclosures show his lobbying team has also provided briefings on “proposed acquisition and foreign direct investment in the United States.”
https://theintercept.com/2018/03/20/alibaba-chinese-corporation-alibaba-joins-group-ghostwriting-american-laws/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Consensus Forming Around TSCA Unique Identifier Provision
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Stakeholders from industry and public advocacy groups have backed a single proposed approach to applying a 'unique identifier' to confidential information submitted under TSCA.
The US EPA has been grappling for more than a year with a requirement under the new TSCA that it develop a system for applying a unique identifier (UID) to a substance, whose identity is protected as confidential business information (CBI).
It made two proposals aimed at addressing the challenge of consistently identifying information, while maintaining confidentiality.
Industry had initially rallied around the second option – a company-specific approach – until it became apparent that once the agency published the UIDs and their corresponding chemical accession numbers, it would inadvertently create linkages that could divulge CBI.
Last month, the EPA consulted on a third approach. This called for giving a single UID to each confidential chemical substance, and applying it to pertinent information, both confidential and non-confidential. In cases, however, where the application of the identifier would allow the public to work out the identity of the CBI substance, the agency would omit the UID and simply identify the substance by its name.
In comments to the agency, a majority of industry groups – including the American Chemistry Council, Socma, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the International Fragrance Association North America (Ifrana) – endorsed this latest option.
Meanwhile, NGO the Environmental Defense Fund has also agreed this is the "preferable" of the three options. "If implemented narrowly, as promised in the Federal Register," the EDF said in its comments, the third approach would "result in substantially fewer violations of the statute as compared with the earlier alternatives proposed by EPA."
The is a significant development. Previously the NGO had vehemently opposed the industry-backed second option.Concerns persist
Nonetheless, the EDF continues to argue that even the third option is "flawed". It has called on the agency to "follow the plain text of the statute" and to require UIDs to be applied "consistently to all information relevant" to the chemical substance.
And industry has also raised concerns. The ACC was among groups that highlighted a risk of the EPA erring in its assessment of whether application of a UID would result in CBI disclosure, and applying it where it should not. It called on the agency to use caution and "implement a robust system of quality control and quality assurance to mitigate any risk of error".
And the American Petroleum Institute said it does not support the third option, because it "does not offer enough protection against CBI disclosure".
The approach, said the API, requires the EPA to screen non-confidential information for possible disclosure of CBI before determining whether to omit the UID – a "resource-intensive" process that carries a risk that the agency "would not be thorough" in its determinations.
The Lautenberg Act requires the EPA to annually publish a list of substances for which it has approved claims of protected chemical identity, together with those substances’ unique identifiers.
The EDF pointed out in its comments that the agency’s failure to do so – together with its apparent failure to begin applying any unique identifiers to date – has "already resulted in innumerable statutory violations". It has called on the agency to "act expeditiously" to address this.Unique identifier
TSCA allows companies to request to keep a substance’s identity confidential. If the EPA grants this, the substance is listed in the public portion of the TSCA inventory by an accession number and a generic chemical name that masks the specific substance identity.
Under section 14 of the new TSCA, the EPA must:develop a system to assign a UID to each specific chemical identity, for which it has approved a confidentiality request;apply that identifier consistently to all information relevant to the applicable substance;annually publish a list of confidential substances with their UIDs, including the expiration date for the claim;ensure that any non-confidential information received uses them to identify the substance; andfor any expired confidentiality claim, link the chemical identity back to its unique identifier.
But in a May Federal Register notice, the agency said that two requirements – to apply the unique identifier to all non-confidential information related to the substance, while ensuring the identity is protected from disclosure – "do not appear to be completely reconciled in the statute". And it cited several examples where universally applying them to every information submission could result in CBI, including the chemical identity, being revealed.
https://chemicalwatch.com/64994/consensus-forming-around-tsca-unique-identifier-provision
-
(ACC Mentioned) Pruitt Aide Didn't Have to Sign Trump Ethics Pledge
Mar 20, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus and Amanda Reilly,
One of U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's top aides wasn't required to sign President Trump's ethics pledge.
Byron Brown, deputy chief of staff for policy, was hired in an "administratively determined" position — a unique hiring authority held by the agency under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Consequently, Brown was not designated as a political appointee and didn't have to abide by the pledge.
"Because I am in an Administratively Determined position, I have been advised by [Office of General Counsel]/Ethics that I am not considered an appointee for the purposes of Executive Order 13770 and therefore not required to sign the Trump Ethics Pledge," Brown said in his recusal statement, obtained by E&E News under the Freedom of Information Act.
Brown did note that as an executive branch employee, he was subject to federal impartiality standards and that he had a "covered relationship" with his spouse's employer, Hess Corp. According to his statement, dated last Sept. 26, Brown has recused himself from matters that would have an impact on Hess — even issues of "general applicability" that are focused on oil and gas exploration and production as well as oil and gas processing and transportation.
Brown's recusal lasts until his spouse is no longer employed by Hess. But he is not recused from "broad policy deliberations" related to "diverse interests," such as EPA's risk management plan rulemaking, which was specifically cited by the EPA official.
The Obama-era regulation would require chemical plants to draft plans to prepare for potential disasters. It was originally scheduled to be implemented in March 2017, but Trump's EPA has since delayed the rule for nearly two more years, a decision that is being challenged in court.
Brown is one of several former aides to Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) to join EPA under Pruitt. Last year, he was picked to serve on the agency's regulatory reform task force, which was tasked with identifying rules for repeal or modification.
EPA press officials didn't respond to a request for comment from E&E News, including to a question on whether Brown planned to sign the Trump ethics pledge.
Other senior officials have avoided signing the president's ethics pledge.
Nancy Beck, deputy assistant administrator in EPA's chemicals office, was also brought on in an administratively determined slot and didn't sign the pledge. That attracted scrutiny due to her prior job before joining the agency as a top executive with the American Chemistry Council (Greenwire, Aug. 8, 2017).
EPA can hire up to 30 employees in administratively determined positions under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The specific provision for that hiring authority was added in the law's 1977 amendments. It allows the administrator to bring on new staff "without regard to the civil service laws."
Last year, Democrats on Capitol Hill took notice of the agency's use of the hiring authority and called for probes to see whether it was used to avoid ethics rules. That led to both the EPA inspector general and the Government Accountability Office committing to investigate the matter (Greenwire, Jan. 9).
Jennifer Kaplan, an EPA IG spokeswoman, confirmed to E&E News that the watchdog office's audit of EPA's use of administratively determined positions is still ongoing. Meanwhile, GAO spokesman Chuck Young said the agency's probe is "on hold" because the EPA IG audit is underway and GAO doesn't want to overlap with that investigation.
"We don't want to duplicate efforts," Young said. "We will make a determination on whether there are still questions for GAO to examine once the IG work is completed."Lobbyists pledge not to lobby
Like Beck, other top EPA officials have grabbed attention for industry ties. Democratic senators questioned the hire of Tate Bennett at the agency last year due to her previous lobbying work for the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, a powerful utility trade group (Greenwire, May 16, 2017).
Tate Bennett. Bennett/Facebook
Bennett, who leads EPA's public engagement office, said in a recusal statement dated last November that she is prohibited from participating in "any particular matter" involving NRECA. Her recusal lasts until March 19 next year — two years after she joined government service.
She also noted that she "personally lobbied" on matters that might arise at EPA, but only in her "final months" on the job with the utility trade group — specifically the Clean Power Plan, ozone standards and coal combustion residual issues. Bennett said she wouldn't participate in discussions about those issues, although she can be involved in "logistical matters," such as setting up meetings. She will seek guidance from ethics officials if she is asked to participate "in a more substantive role" in those issues.
Other records obtained under FOIA show that Bennett has signed Trump's ethics pledge, as well. So did Pruitt, just a few days after he was confirmed as EPA administrator by the Senate in February 2017.
Like Bennett, other top EPA officials have pledged to stay away from their prior employers.
Troy Lyons, who leads EPA's congressional and intergovernmental relations office, was a Hess lobbyist before coming to the agency. Before he worked at Hess, he had lobbied for BP PLC.
In his recusal statement, Lyons said he was banned from being involved in matters with Hess and BP. His recusal will expire in April 2019.
He noted that during the previous two years, he had lobbied Congress on the renewable fuel standard, crude oil exports, offshore air emissions and methane emissions — issues that are before EPA. Yet as head of congressional affairs, Lyons said, he wouldn't be involved in the "strategy, development or implementation" of those matters, although he would consult with ethics officials if he did become more involved.
Henry Darwin, assistant deputy administrator at EPA, said in his recusal statement that he would abide by an "one-year cooling off period" with his former employer, the state of Arizona. His recusal lasts until July 4 this year and doesn't extend to matters of "general applicability," like rulemaking.
Darwin joined EPA last year as its chief of operations after serving as a top aide to Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R). He also has been director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
Darwin also said in his statement that he was recusing himself from "any award, promotion, or any other personnel or administrative matter" that involves his wife, Veronica, who works at EPA, as well.
Veronica Darwin, a senior adviser in EPA's Office of Land and Emergency Management, also has an one-year cooling off period with the state of Arizona, her previous employer, which ends this June, according to her recusal statement.
Richard Yamada.Yamada/LinkedIn
Richard Yamada, a deputy assistant administrator in EPA's Office of Research and Development, has owned stock in companies like ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil Corp. and Statoil ASA, all valued in the range of $1,001 to $15,000, according to his financial disclosure report, dated last October.
But Yamada has a sizable investment in Berkshire Hathaway Inc., the sprawling conglomerate whose holdings include PacifiCorp, the Oregon-based electricity producer, and several other utility and energy companies.
Because of that "current level of [Yamada's] financial ownership" in the company — reported in the range of $100,001 to $250,000 — Yamada said he is recused from any matter that will have a direct effect on Berkshire Hathaway, "including any particular matter of general applicability that is focused on sectors in which" the company and its subsidiaries operate. Those encompass pipelines, renewable fuels, alternative fuels, natural gas and electricity, Yamada wrote.
While EPA ethics officials don't expect that his work with the research office will likely "have a direct and predictable financial effect" on Berkshire Hathaway, Yamada said he would first consult with them "prior to participation" if any such situation should arise.
Other senior political appointees have pledged to stay away from certain issues. Dave Ross, head of EPA's water office, has recused himself from participating in the agency's deliberations regarding the Pebble mine project in Bristol Bay, Alaska (see related story).Legal team's recusals
Several members of the Trump administration's legal team at EPA have ties to companies and entities that have been closely involved in environmental policy or battled with the agency during the Obama administration. Because of those ties, Trump officials have been recused from a number of matters in front of the agency, according to documents obtained through FOIA.
Matt Leopold, the top lawyer at the agency, has several potential conflicts due to his past work for the state of Florida.
Matt Leopold. U.S. EPA
Leopold served as general counsel to the state Department of Environmental Protection until March 2015. Leopold continued to provide legal services to the state until June 30, 2017. He was sworn in as general counsel at EPA on Jan. 8.
In a Jan. 10 impartiality determination, principal deputy general counsel Kevin Minoli granted Leopold permission to participate as general counsel in matters that involve Florida, though he wrote that Leopold is required to recuse himself from any matters in which he participated "personally and substantially" as a lawyer for the state. In a Feb. 1 recusal statement, Leopold wrote that he would not participate in any matters involving Okaloosa County, Fla.
In his statement, Leopold noted that several former industry clients, including AT&T Inc., BASF Corp., Ford Motor Co., Siemens Corp., and the Republican National Committee may have environmental interests that conflict with his work at EPA. He is barred from working on matters involving those entities until Jan. 7, 2020.
Leopold also recused himself from litigation brought by the federal government against the South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection regarding phosphorus pollution at Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and Everglades National Park. Leopold also wrote that he would not participate in BASF's challenge to pollution loads for northern Florida's Ochlockonee Basin.
Erik Baptist, EPA's senior deputy general counsel, was a senior counsel and a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute prior to joining the agency. He was registered to lobby for four years up until 2016, and his portfolio included working on legislation dealing with the renewable fuel standard program.
Last year, Baptist received a limited waiver from Trump's ethics pledge to participate in discussions involving the RFS.
In an October memo, Baptist recused himself from other issues in which API is a party and said he would not participate in litigation that the oil and gas group filed or was involved in against EPA during the Obama administration. The recusal statement expires June 18, 2019.
The long list of cases from which Baptist is recused includes challenges to the 2015 ozone standard and Obama-era methane limits for the oil and gas industry. Baptist also said he would not participate in the ongoing litigation filed by opponents of the Trump administration over Pruitt's decision to delay safety and emergency response rules for chemical plants.
Baptist also agreed to not participate in matters involving the George Washington University Law School alumni association, Alphabet Inc. or U.S. Bancorp.
Deputy general counsels at EPA have also recused themselves from matters in front of the agency.
David Fotouhi, who joined EPA in March 2017, wrote that he would not participate in matters involving several clients he represented while an attorney at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, including the Association of American Railroads, Carnival Corp., Daimler AG, General Electric Co., Lockheed Martin Corp., Tesoro Corp. (now known as Andeavor) and Trout Unlimited. The recusal period ends March 26, 2019.
Justin Schwab, who was part of the Trump administration's "beachhead" team before joining EPA permanently, pledged to not take part in matters involving law firm Baker and Hostetler LLP, his former employer. His list of former clients includes the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, Caterpillar Inc., Chevron Corp., Southern Co. and Valero Renewable Fuels Co. LLC.
Schwab also said he wouldn't participate in legal issues where the state of Oklahoma or the Virginia House of Delegates is a party. Those recusal periods have already ended — Sept. 23 last year for Oklahoma and Aug. 31 for Virginia (E&E News PM, March 1).
Other top officials' past legal work has led them to recuse themselves from issues before EPA.
Sarah Greenwalt. U.S. Embassy in Italy
Sarah Greenwalt, the agency's senior adviser for water and cross-cutting initiatives, came to EPA after serving as general counsel at the Oklahoma attorney general's office during Pruitt's tenure there.
In November 2017, Greenwalt submitted a recusal statement stating she would not participate in any cases in which Oklahoma is a party, petitioner or intervenor. The 15 listed cases included challenges to the Obama administration's Clean Water Rule, its Clean Power Plan and various air rules, including methane standards and a rule setting requirements for industrial facilities during periods of startup and shutdown.
Greenwalt also said she would not participate in the litigation against Volkswagen AG over the German automaker's diesel emissions cheating scandal.
The recusal period lasted until March 2. Greenwalt was not barred from working on cases in which Oklahoma participated only as an amicus and not directly as a party.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/stories/1060076851/search?keyword=%22american+chemistry+council%22
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Plans Summit on Politically Toxic Nonstick Chemicals
Mar 20, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has invited governors from every state and territory to a two-day meeting on a class of stain- and water-resistant chemicals after concerns about their health effects sank the nomination of his chemical safety adviser.
The National Leadership Summit, as EPA is referring to it, will take place in Washington on May 22 and 23. Governors or their representatives will share information on ongoing efforts to evaluate and respond to contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.
"EPA's leadership summit will bring together stakeholders from across the country to build on the steps we are already taking and to identify immediate actions to protect public health," Pruitt said in a news release. "Through this event, we are providing critical national leadership, while ensuring that our state, tribal, and local partners have the opportunity to help shape our path forward."
Using information gathered at the summit and in state visits that will follow it, EPA plans to develop a "PFAS Management Plan" later this year.
The agency currently has no drinking water standards for PFAS, which have been used since the 1940s to make products like Teflon.
But in May 2016 the agency issued health advisories for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), two types of PFAS that U.S. manufacturers had voluntarily phased out the prior year.
"Studies indicate that exposure to PFOA and PFOS over certain levels may result in adverse health effects," EPA said in a Federal Register notice announcing the advisories. Those include testicular and kidney cancer, liver tissue damage, weakened immune systems and increased cholesterol, and developmental problems like low birth weight, accelerated puberty and skeletal variations, the notice said.
To avoid those dangers, EPA advised federal, state and local officials to keep PFOA and PFOS levels below 70 parts per trillion in drinking water.
The advisory, however, is not legally enforceable.
Partially as a result, there are currently 11 states with "site-specific PFAS challenges and problems," according to EPA: These include Colorado, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Vermont and West Virginia.
The biggest PFAS problems have arguably occurred in Hoosick Falls, N.Y., and the Cape Fear River area of North Carolina.
Last year, EPA declared a plastics manufacturing facility in Hoosick Falls a Superfund site, a designation reserved for the nation's most polluted areas. The agency found the Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics site had contaminated the village's groundwater with dangerous levels of PFOA, trichloroethylene and vinyl chloride (Greenwire, July 31, 2017).
North Carolina regulators are currently battling Chemours Co. over its decision to dump GenX, a newer type of PFAS, into the Cape Fear River.Dourson derailed by PFAS
The PFAS contamination in New York and North Carolina has already had consequences for Pruitt and EPA.
During the confirmation hearing of Michael Dourson, President Trump's ill-fated pick to lead EPA's chemical safety program, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), pointing to Hoosick Falls community members in attendance, asked him if he would promise not to weaken the drinking water standard for PFOA. He didn't offer any specifics (E&E Daily, Oct. 5, 2017).
Then Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) cited "the current GenX water issues" as one of his reasons for opposing Dourson. Before briefly working as an adviser to Pruitt, the nominee often did industry-funded research on chemicals like GenX that consistently found them to be safer than government standards recommended (Greenwire, Nov. 16, 2017).
Unified Democratic opposition, along with concerns from Burr and fellow North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, ultimately derailed Dourson's confirmation for that post.
The chemical industry welcomed the summit but claimed that GenX and other types of PFAS on the market today are safe.
"We are fully supportive of EPA's efforts to closely evaluate these chemicals," said Jessica Bowman, executive director at the FluoroCouncil, a PFAS industry group administered by the broader American Chemistry Council trade association. Chemours is a FloroCouncil member.
"It is important for everyone to understand that PFAS is a diverse group of chemicals, and the ones that are currently on the market have been thoroughly reviewed by regulators who have relied on a robust body of scientific data supporting the safety of these products for their intended uses," Bowman added. "So we look forward to contributing to this effort and sharing the science-based information on these chemistries with EPA."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/03/20/stories/1060076861
-
EPA Pledges New Plan on Contaminant from Non-Stick Coatings
Mar 19, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
Federal environmental regulators say they’ll consult with states on managing contamination from a range of long-used non-stick coatings.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Monday it would hold a May summit with state officials. The session will focus on a family of industrial chemicals used for decades in everything from non-stick pans to food wrappers to bags for microwaveable popcorn. The chemicals are known as perfluoralkyls and polyfluoralkyls, or PFAs. Studies now link long-term exposure to the industrial chemicals to increased risks of cancer, hormone changes and other disturbances.
Researchers say water supplies serving millions of Americans show potentially dangerous levels of the contaminants.
The EPA says it will use input from state officials to develop a new management plan for the chemicals this year.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal_government/epa-pledges-new-plan-on-contaminant-from-non-stick-coatings/2018/03/19/482101ec-2bcf-11e8-8dc9-3b51e028b845_story.html?utm_term=.dc3f8a03df0c
-
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA is convening a summit to identify risks associated with, and ways to take action on, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The agency says it plans to develop and release a PFAS management plan later this year, using information from the meeting.
In letters to state and US territory governors, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said that the substances have "emerged as a concern in communities across the nation, and it is time to come together to identify near-term actions to protect the health of all Americans."
The National Leadership Summit will take place on 22-23 May in Washington, DC. The EPA says it will include:discussion on characterising risks, monitoring and cleanup techniques of PFAS;identifying "specific near-term actions" that can be taken; anddeveloping communications approaches to "address public concerns" with the chemical class.
The latest action follows the announcement late last year of a "cross-agency effort" to address PFAS substances, even as states continue to ramp up efforts to address the highly persistent substances.
Ongoing work by the agency includes the development of additional toxicity values, analytical methods, and treatment options for PFAS in drinking water.
The EPA has published drinking water health advisories for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), but has not formally regulated them.
Instead, the agency took the approach of working with industry to phase out their use, under a stewardship programme slated for completion by 2015. It proposed a significant new use rule (Snur) to codify the voluntary phase-out and apply it to manufacturers which were not party to that agreement, but the Snur has not been finalised.
https://chemicalwatch.com/65231/us-epa-to-convene-pfas-summit
-
Global Action Needed on PFHxS, Says Draft Risk Profile
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Global action to address the risks associated with PFHxS is warranted, according to an international committee responsible for identifying persistent organic pollutants (POPs) under the Stockholm Convention.
The draft risk profile from the UN Environment Programme’s (Unep) POPs review committee concludes that the substance is likely to lead to significant adverse human health and environmental effects.
The document is another step towards risk management under the convention, which can take the form of elimination, restriction or efforts to reduce unintended release.
PFHxS (perfluorohexane sulfonic acid) is one of the per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) that are used in a wide range of consumer and industry applications. In general, PFASs are valued for high thermal stability and a tendency to repel common contaminants, such as water, oil and grease.
PFHxS is used in textiles, carpet protectors, leather, papermaking, pesticides, electroplating, firefighting foams, photosensitive materials and some synthetic materials. It has also been found in printing inks, sealants and non-stick cookware.
But there is concern within the chemical risk assessment community about the effects of PFASs on human health and the environment. Last year, Norway proposed the addition of PFHxS to the convention and the committee agreed that it met the screening criteria. The scope of the proposal covers PFHxS (Cas number 355-46-4), its salts and some related substances.
The profile says that 3M was, most likely, the main manufacturer, with an annual production of about 227 tonnes in the US in 1997. Current manufacturers include at least one producer in Italy, plus most likely several in China, but public information on current production volumes is limited, it adds.
Releases to the environment arise from production, processing, use and disposal of the substances, as well as from consumer products containing them, the profile says. Furthermore, "numerous" studies have reported elevated levels of PFHxS in soil, water and a variety of biota. Exposure of the general population is through consumption of food, including breast milk and drinking water, inhalation of indoor air and uptake of dust from consumer products.
Studies have detected PFHxS in human blood and breast milk, and once in the body, adversely affects various organs and processes, including the liver, the thyroid and lipid protein metabolism.
Unep has opened a consultation on the profile. The deadline for comments is 6 April.
https://chemicalwatch.com/64995/global-action-needed-on-pfhxs-says-draft-risk-profile
-
Bothered by Fragrances? This Story Will Be a Breath of Fresh Air.
Mar 20, 2018 | The Washington Post
By Elisabeth Leamy
“More and more, I walk into homes, stores and businesses and am greeted with an immediate blast of perfumed air. . . . And what is added scent but a chemical? Why breathe that in constantly?”
When a Washington Post reader wrote the comments above and implored me to write an article about how to avoid scented products, I was an easy sell. I find artificially perfumed products so distracting that I have trouble concentrating in their presence. I can’t stand to have certain brands of dryer sheets in my house, even in an unopened box in the basement. And I confess that I once sneaked an air freshener out of an Uber and tossed it in the trash!
A growing stink
Despite negative reactions from some consumers, scented products seem to be gaining popularity. For example, plastic garbage bags never used to be scented, but an industry blog says that many now are and that “the market is a fiercely competitive one, so the battle to win the noses of consumers is on.”
As manufacturers make more of their products smell, consumers are putting up more of a stink. Dozens of blogs rail against scented products, including one called “Fragrance Free Living” and another called “Think Before You Stink.” These citizen bloggers call fragrance “the new secondhand smoke.” They’re not crazy. The Environmental Protection Agency says indoor air pollution is real, partly because of fragrances, and that our homes and offices “can be more seriously polluted than the outdoor air in even the largest and most industrialized cities.”People who are concerned about safe ingredients can look for the Safer Choice label on products at the store. Those that have no chemical scents are marked “fragrance free” in the upper left-hand corner of the label (EPA)Health effects
The people who suffer the most from fragrances are those with multiple chemical sensitivity, or MCS. “Fragrances rank high among the chemical exposures I find problematic,” said Alison Johnson, who has MCS and founded the Chemical Sensitivity Foundation. “One thing that alarms me is that in the last few years, the phone calls and emails I’m receiving are now predominantly from people in a panic because exposure to fragrances in the workplace is making it impossible for them to keep a job.” Johnson produced an educational video and is lobbying lawmakers to mandate fragrance-free workplaces.
But artificial fragrances aren’t just a problem for certain groups. More than a third of Americans surveyed reported experiencing health problems when exposed to them, according to a study by Anne Steinemann of the University of Melbourne. “All fragranced products that I tested . . . emitted chemicals classified as hazardous air pollutants,” Steinemann said in an email. “You may not realize you’re being affected until it’s too late.”
The Canadian Center for Occupational Health and Safety lists the following possible symptoms of exposure to fragrances: “headaches, dizziness, nausea, fatigue, weakness, insomnia, numbness, upper respiratory symptoms, shortness of breath, skin irritation, malaise, confusion and difficulty with concentration.”
Labeling confusion
If you’re allergic to nuts or sensitive to gluten, you can read the ingredients on a food package and steer clear. By contrast, fragrances have long been considered trade secrets, so the federal government doesn’t require manufacturers to print what’s in them. The Food and Drug Administration requires manufacturers to list the ingredients in personal-care products, but they are allowed to just state “fragrance” as an ingredient, rather than spelling out what chemicals are in the fragrance.
Federal regulations for household cleaning products are even looser. Manufacturers are not required to list any of these products’ ingredients. A few big companies have begun disclosing their ingredients voluntarily, including SC Johnson, Clorox and Reckitt Benckiser, maker of Lysol. Two states, California and New York, recently took matters into their own hands, passing laws requiring manufacturers to divulge the ingredients in their cleaning products.
Here’s another confusing labeling issue involving fragrances: The terms “unscented” and “fragrance-free” sound the same but are totally different. Unscented means that a product doesn’t have a detectable odor — but it does not mean that it contains no artificial scents. Manufacturers are allowed to use artificial scents in “unscented” products if they are there to cover up the smell of other ingredients.
By contrast, “fragrance-free” is the label to look for if you are bothered by chemical fragrances, as it means no artificial smells have been added to a product. You can double-check this claim, if there are ingredients listed, by looking for the words “perfume,” “parfum” or “fragrance” on the list.
Resources for consumers
Here are some resources for finding fragrance-free products.
EPA Safer Choice-certified products: The EPA scrutinizes product ingredients for safety and certifies those that meet its criteria. When you search the Safer Choice database, you can check a box to look for fragrance-free products only. I found 860 of them when I looked. You can also look for the Safer Choice label on products at the store. Those that have no chemical scents are marked “fragrance free” in the upper left-hand corner of the label.
Environmental Working Group guides: The EWG provides easy-to-use online databases where you can search for what it deems healthy cleaners and healthy personal-care products. You can then check those products’ ingredients, if provided, to see whether “fragrance” or “perfume” is listed.
New York state’s asthma-friendly guide : Because people with asthma suffer more than most from exposure to chemicals and fragrances, New York created a list of green cleaning products for them that could be useful to you, too. If you type “fragrance free” into the keyword box, the site returns a page full of options.
DIY cleaning product recipes: Women’s Voices for the Earth has been working for better cleaning-product disclosures. Meanwhile, the group provides several recipes to make your own cleaning products. Note: The essential oils used as fragrance are considered more natural but still bother some people. If they bother you, skip them!
Non-perfumed magazines: If the perfume inserts in magazines you’ve subscribed to bother you, contact the publisher. Most large publishers have programs in place to send you magazines without the scented pages.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/home/bothered-by-fragrances-this-story-will-be-a-breath-of-fresh-air/2018/03/19/ace83e8a-26cd-11e8-b79d-f3d931db7f68_story.html?utm_term=.28b201a20385
-
Bolstering EPA Rules, New Study Details Risks Of Lead Exposure In Adults
Mar 20, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
A new study linking low-level lead exposure with increased risk of adult deaths from cardiovascular disease could help EPA strengthen its cost-benefit analyses and drive new or updated rules to address the metal, including a measure addressing lead paint in public and commercial (P&C) buildings where the agency is struggling to assess risks to adults.'
"One thing they struggled with, in the rulemaking world, is that unless you quantify the [dose-response] relationship you can't use [the analysis] for benefit-cost assessment," one environmentalist says. "This study makes that connection."
The new study, published on the website of the journal The Lancet Public Health March 12, was the first to correlate lead exposure below five micrograms per deciliter (ug/dl) of blood with cardiovascular disease and death, in a study of nearly 14,300 Americans.
"Our findings suggest that, of 2.3 million deaths every year in the USA, about 400,000 are attributable to lead exposure, an estimate that is about ten times larger than the current one," the authors write.
The study was led by Bruce Lanphear, of Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada, whose 2005 study showing IQ losses in children exposed to lead at levels lower than those thought to cause such harm helped drive an earlier EPA rule setting safety standards for lead paint in residential structures.
Lanphear's earlier study "shook up the conventional wisdom, [showing] harm to IQ is bigger at low levels and happening at lower levels [of exposure]. And it's now established. This [study] may do too, because it's Lanphear and The Lancet, after all, that gives this extra oomph," the environmentalist says.
The environmentalist says that providing quantitative evidence of an adverse adult health effect correlated with lead exposure could drive several upcoming and ongoing EPA rulemakings, including the lead and copper drinking water rule, the next national ambient air quality standard for lead, Superfund cleanup levels, and two court-ordered actions on renovation-created lead dust hazards in homes and other buildings built before lead-based paint was phased out in 1978.
The findings are particularly relevant to EPA's pending court-ordered decision to determine whether renovations in P&C buildings do not create a lead-based paint hazard or propose a rule to address it.
The pending decision stems from litigation environmentalists filed over loopholes in the agency's 2008 Lead Renovation Repair and Paint rule, which set standards to protect residents and children in child care facilities from lead dust produced when repairs and renovations are undertaken in homes and child care buildings built before 1978.
That standard is based on data, like Lanphear's 2005 study, regarding children's neurological risks from exposure to lead.
But the suit, New York Coalition to End Lead Poisoning v. EPA, pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, charged that the renovation standards to protect building occupants from exposures to lead dust should be expanded beyond pre-1978 residences to pre-1978 P&C buildings.
Renovation Standards
Expanding lead dust protections to those structures, however, has been challenging, in large part because such buildings are most frequently occupied by adult workers, rather than children, a cohort for which EPA lacks adequate data.
As a result, EPA must perform a largely new analysis of lead's risks to adults to support expanding the renovation standards to P&C buildings.
EPA in 2013 hired consultants Abt Associates to study the health effects of lead exposure to adults -- an analyses which focused on cardiovascular disease -- the same health effects addressed in the new study.
But the agency recently told the court that it still cannot meet an earlier March 2017 deadline because it is seeking to revise a survey questionnaire for nearly 20,000 contractors and others but has no schedule for when its analysis will be completed.
The new Lancet study utilized records of some 14,289 adults enrolled in the National Institutes of Health's Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES-III) between 1988 and 1994 and followed them through 2011.
Initial blood samples from these individuals had a geometric mean concentration of lead of 2.71 ug/dL, while some 20 percent "had a concentration of lead in blood of at least 5 ug/dL."
In the more than 19 years that the researchers followed up on the cohort, "4,422 people died, 1,801 (38 percent) from cardiovascular disease and 988 (22 percent) from ischaemic heart disease."
They explain that the "key reason for this difference is because the previous estimate assumed cardiovascular disease was only evident at concentrations of lead in blood as low as 5 ug/dL. Our findings show that concentrations of lead in blood lower than 5 ug/dL are associated with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease mortality, and ischaemic heart disease mortality ... our study is the first to test whether the relation with cardiovascular disease mortality was evident in a population with concentrations of lead in blood below 5 ug/dL."
The authors add that their results "suggest that low-level lead exposure is an important, largely overlooked, risk factor for death in the USA, particularly for cardiovascular disease deaths. A comprehensive strategy to prevent deaths from cardiovascular disease should include efforts to reduce lead exposure."
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/bolstering-epa-rules-new-study-details-risks-lead-exposure-adults
-
Chemicals Industry Welcomes Brexit Transition Period Agreement
Mar 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Cefic and the UK chemicals industry have broadly welcomed a conditional agreement between Britain and the EU on the transition period, after the country leaves the Union.
Yesterday’s accord between EU negotiator Michel Barnier and his UK counterpart David Davis is dependent on both sides agreeing a final withdrawal treaty. It sets the transitional period from ‘Brexit day’ on 29 March 2019 to 31 December 2020.
During this time the UK will continue to adhere to all EU chemicals regulations, including REACH, and remain a member of Echa. However, it will have observer status only and will not have any say in policy development.
Britain will also be able to negotiate, sign and ratify its own trade deals and will be party to those existing between the EU and other countries.
Cefic, the Chemical Business Association and the Chemical Industries Association have all welcomed the agreement, but questions remain over what happens once this period ends.
René van Sloten, Cefic’s executive director of industry policy, said that while the announcement "caters for an orderly" withdrawal, it is "still no guarantee to avoid a ‘hard Brexit’ and we would welcome clarity on some of the issues that are important for us".
He said that, with reference to article 123.6 of the draft EU withdrawal agreement, "we remain concerned about the further involvement of the UK in Echa after Brexit". This article states that during the transition period, "the United Kingdom shall not act as leading authority for risk assessments, examinations, approvals and authorisations at the level of the Union or of member states acting jointly referred to in the [acts/provisions] listed in Annex [y+6]".
Peter Newport, CEO of CBA, said the deal "provides a degree of certainty" based on 'business as usual’ for the time being. The CBA is calling on negotiators to "quickly finalise" the remaining differences in the transition agreement, he said, and rapidly "agree the longer-term certainty that business craves, including in respect of REACH, its registrations and access to the European chemicals market".
Steve Elliott, chief executive of the CIA, said the period "will be essential" in adapting to the future relationship. "The more certainty and clarity we can bring to our exit arrangements, including trade deals with the EU and the rest of the world, the easier it becomes for businesses to consider investment opportunities in our country," he said.
He added that industry now hopes the prime minister’s proposal of associate membership of Echa "can be given serious consideration in the detailed negotiations to follow and we can progress [with] those as efficiently as possible".
Both the UK and the EU say they hope the terms of an agreement on the transition period can be finalised by the leaders of the 27 other member states, at the EU summit this week.
https://chemicalwatch.com/64998/chemicals-industry-welcomes-brexit-transition-period-agreement
-
Some States Block Plans for New Power Plants
Mar 20, 2018 | Wall Street Journal (In E&E Energywire)
By Erin Ailworth
Natural gas may be the new king of electricity generation, but some states want to knock it off its throne.
Gas made up 32 percent of the country's power generation in 2017, having won a full one-tenth of the market in the span of a decade. But regulators, environmentalists and citizens groups in states like Arizona, Massachusetts and Michigan have blocked the construction of new gas-fired power plants.
Regulators in California — where the biggest utility, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., has no plans for future plants and two other projects were recently abandoned — have been especially keen on turning away from gas in favor of renewables. The California Public Utilities Commission directed PG&E earlier this year to take bids for renewables that would replace three gas plants.
"You're not going to get anywhere if you are just adding more and more gas," said California Energy Commission Chairman Robert Weisenmiller. "At some point soon, we'll be permitting the last gas plant in California."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/03/20/stories/1060076757
-
IG Finds 'Allegedly Flawed' Methane Studies Not Used for Rules
Mar 20, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) is reporting that a pair of “allegedly flawed” studies estimating methane emissions from the oil and gas sector were not used in EPA's regulatory standards for the sector or official inventory of greenhouse gases, though it questions the degree of the “flaws.”
At issue in OIG's March 16 report is a pair of studies released in 2013 and 2014 jointly conducted by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and the University of Texas-Austin.
The report notes that some engineers have critiqued the studies for using a device known as a “Hi Flow Sampler” to measure emissions from some aspects of the oil and gas sector, arguing the device can malfunction and ultimately cause the studies to underestimate emissions.
Some environmental groups also have criticized the EDF/UT-Austin studies for underestimating emissions, and the OIG launched its investigation into the issue in June 2017.
The OIG found that while EPA solicited formal comment on the two studies when developing its GHG Inventory in 2015 and 2016, the agency “ultimately did not make any methodological revisions to the inventory based on the EDF/UT-Austin studies, and data from the studies have not been incorporated into the inventory.”
In addition, EPA did not revise its GHG Reporting Program based on these studies, nor did it incorporate them into its first-time methane standards for the oil and gas sector that were issued in 2016.
Regarding the substance of the alleged “flaws” in the studies, OIG says the “extent and significance” of any failures in the sampling device has not been established, and that a claim that the device can malfunction in other segments of the industry is “unproven.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ig-finds-allegedly-flawed-methane-studies-not-used-rules
-
Complaints About Falsified Pipeline Endorsements Draw No Response
Mar 20, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By James V. Grimaldi
Dozens of people haven’t heard back from U.S. regulators nearly two years after their names were falsely used in letters supporting approval of a gas pipeline from Ohio to Canada, lawyers for the complainants said.
An energy-lobbying group that was backing the pipeline, which hasn’t been built, generated the comments falsely attributed to the Ohio residents—and later said it had happened inadvertently.
Twenty-three people said in sworn affidavits to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in 2016 that they never submitted letters to the agency in support of the pipeline that were sent in their names. Fifteen other expressions of support for the pipeline were identified separately as fakes and sent to FERC, according to documents filed with the agency.
“Nothing has come of it—yet,” said Debby Christy, a retired draftsperson for a manufacturing firm who first identified the fakes. Ms. Christy lives outside Medina, Ohio, near the proposed pipeline’s route, and opposes the project.
FERC has approved the pipeline project, but the decision is being appealed at FERC and in federal court.
A FERC spokeswoman, Mary O’Driscoll, said the agency received and entered into the record the affidavits saying an earlier filing was fraudulent. “We tell complainants that they should file with the U.S. Postal Service,” Ms. O’Driscoll said. She didn’t explain why she recommended the Postal Service and wouldn’t answer whether the comments came in via U.S. mail or over the internet.
The Postal Inspection Servicepublic-affairs office wouldn’t say whether it is looking into the matter any further, per usual policy. The people who filed complaints said they haven’t received any response from postal inspectors.
Statements of support or in opposition to a policy change by FERC or other regulatory agencies can influence outcomes of regulatory decisions that affect millions. A Wall Street Journal investigation last year uncovered thousands of people whose names and email or address were used to post bogus comments—a federal crime—on websites of agencies including the Federal Communications Commission and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Members of Congress and others have called for investigations of fake comments at the FCC and the CFPB. The Government Accountability Office, a congressional watchdog agency, said a probe has just launched.
The Consumer Energy Alliance, a Houston-based nonprofit, in a filing took responsibility for the letters about the pipeline, calling them an “inadvertent error” that occurred as it was “gathering grassroots support.” The CEA said the letters were generated through an automated-phone-call system that asked respondents to indicate support for the pipeline by pressing a button on their phone. If they did so, a letter would be generated in their name.
CEA, which said it no longer uses the automated-calling system, said some indications of support were generated in error and that while someone approved the comments, in some cases they were attributed to the wrong people.
“A few people in the households were misidentified,” said David Holt III, president of CEA and managing partner of HBW Resources, a lobbying firm. “We regret that anyone was misidentified.”
The partners on the pipeline are Spectra Energy Partners LP, a unit of Canadian pipeline giant Enbridge Inc., and DTE Energy Co. A spokesman for the pipeline referred the Journal to a September 2016 letter from pipeline management to FERC, which said there were “hundreds of letters in support of the project” but acknowledged that some of those letters “have been questioned.”
The letter said the pipeline partners didn’t engage in “fraud or other intentional wrongdoing” in submitting the letters.
CEA received more than $550,000 from 2009-2014 from the American Petroleum Institute, the Nuclear Energy Institute, Independent Petroleum Association of America and the American Natural Gas Alliance, according to a review of those organizations’ most recent tax returns.
It wasn’t the first time that CEA had been accused of filing unauthorized names attached to comments to a regulator. In 2014, the group submitted comments in support of a utility rate increase in Wisconsin with names of people who said they not only didn’t agree with the rate hike but never authorized the use of their names. A local prosecutor who investigated told the group in a letter he found that the filing was unintentional.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/complaints-about-falsified-pipeline-endorsements-draw-no-response-1521550801?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=2
-
Pruitt Plans to Change EPA Policy on Scientific Studies
Mar 20, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt plans to change how the agency considers scientific information when writing regulations in a way that likely will exclude certain studies, he told the Daily Caller.
Pruitt told the news site he will reverse longtime agency policy to require that any studies used to support regulations make their raw data available for review and replication by independent scientists.
“We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record,” Pruitt said. “Otherwise, it’s not transparent. It’s not objectively measured, and that’s important.”
The changes are in line with legislation that House Science Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) has pushed for years, but which was never been passed by the Senate. Democrats, environmentalists and scientific groups have long criticized that legislation as an attempt to cherry-pick data friendly to industry from the voluminous body of epidemiological science. And EPA already releases significant amounts of this data, they said.
CBO said last year the changes “would significantly reduce the number of studies that the agency relies on.” And although EPA said it could make the changes at little to no cost, CBO estimated it would spend $5 million from 2018 through 2022. EPA previously told CBO it would have to spend $250 million a year scrubbing information from thousands of studies "to ensure the transparency of information and data supporting some covered actions."
WHAT’S NEXT: Pruitt did not say when he will issue a formal directive changing EPA’s science policy.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Negotiators Aim to Settle Policy Fights, Post Omnibus Tonight
Mar 20, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By George Cahlink and Geof Koss
Congressional leaders hope to have massive omnibus spending legislation on the House floor by Thursday, assuming they can resolve a few dozen outstanding policy fights.
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said this morning he's "hoping" to file the $1.3 trillion spending bill late tonight, paving the way for the House Rules Committee to consider the bill tomorrow and then floor action Thursday.
He said he does not expect to need to pass an interim stopgap spending bill to avert a federal shutdown when current funding runs out Friday.
Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a senior appropriator, said 20 to 30 policy riders are still being hammered out by leaders in both chambers. He said funding fights were largely resolved earlier this year when Congress passed a budget that boosted spending for fiscal 2018 and 2019 by a combined $200 billion.
Another senior appropriator, Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), said the outstanding issues "remain the same" as those that held up the release of the omnibus last night, including funding for the $900 million Gateway rail and transit project, opposed by the White House, and a push for $1.6 billion in border wall funding.
Environmental and energy industry groups continue to watch several riders, including proposals to block the Waters of the U.S. rule and ozone attainment goals, wildfire funding and forest management reforms, and a bid to begin work on raising the Shasta Dam in Northern California.
A coalition of environmental scientists, led by the John Muir Project, sent a letter to congressional leaders yesterday warning about a proposed "fix" for wildfire funding, which would permanently allocate dollars for a range of prevention programs and end ad hoc borrowing from Forest Service accounts to cover fighting the natural disasters. They warn Republicans are coupling the fix with other environmental rollbacks, favoring loggers, that would ultimately lead to more fire losses.
"Since more losses in our communities, more degradation of our forest ecosystems through logging, and more taxpayer dollars spent is certainly not what anyone who supports this legislation as a 'fix' is hoping to achieve, we encourage you to oppose inclusion of these policies," the group said in a lengthy letter that also laid out its proposal for reforms.
Several environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and Earthjustice, wrote congressional leaders yesterday, raising concern about a provision that would exempt small, remote incinerators from the Clean Air Act. They say the provision is being championed by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), the chairwoman of the Senate Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, and would benefit incinerators in her state.
The letter warns attaching the incinerator rider would "set us on a dangerous path towards the piecemeal dismantling of clean air protections that are meant to provide consistent protection to all Americans."
Whatever deal emerges, it will need at least some bipartisan support to get through the House and Senate.
House conservatives, led by the three dozen members of the Freedom Caucus, are likely to oppose it over spending levels. If they hold together and with the GOP holding a 23-seat majority, Democratic support would be needed to move the bill.
The tight margins in both the House and the Senate, where 60 votes will be needed to move the bill, likely guarantee many of the most contentious environmental riders will be knocked out. Last year, leaders stripped about 160 riders from the omnibus in order to win bipartisan backing.
Beyond the House, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) could begin taking procedural steps today to make sure the bill can pass by Friday.
Without those actions, any single senator could potentially hold up action on the bill into the weekend.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/03/20/stories/1060076859
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