Preview Newsletter
ACC AM Feb 12
-
Watchdog Faults US EPA's New Chemicals CBI Procedures
Feb 12, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA's procedures for dealing with confidential business information (CBI) requests in its new chemicals programme are “predisposed to protect industry information rather than to provide public access to health and safety studies,” according to report by the agency's watchdog. -
Progress Slow on High-Risk Cybersecurity, Climate Change, Tax Fraud, GAO Report Says
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The federal government continues to struggle to show it's making progress on dozens of “high-risk” issues, from threats posed by cybersecurity risks and tax fraud to rising sea level and other climate change impacts, the Government Accountability Office said Feb. 11. -
GAO Says Climate, Toxics Still Government 'High Risks' Despite Progress
Feb 11, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Lara Beaven
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) says management of climate change risks and EPA's ability to asses toxic chemicals remain “high risk”areas requiring Congress and the administration to act, despite some progress such as President Obama's crafting of climate change policies and EPA's bid to improve toxics management. -
PCB Control Is Sole Focus of Draft Toxic Reduction-Prevention Strategy for Bay
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jeff Day
Efforts of the Environmental Protection Agency and the six states sharing the Chesapeake Bay watershed to reduce toxic pollution would focus on reducing polychlorinated biphenyls alone, if a working draft recommendation were to be adopted this summer by the governors and EPA administrator. -
Proposed Lower Migration Limits for Chromium VI in Toys
Feb 11, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The current migration limits for chromium VI should be lowered for the safety of children, the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks concludes, in its final opinion on the substance in toys. Scher evaluated whether migration levels in toys and toy components need revising in the light of new evidence... -
HHS to Develop Toxicological Profiles For Two Widely Used Herbicides, Silica
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
Toxicological profiles of two widely used herbicides and two other substances are being prepared by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, according to a notice scheduled to appear in the Feb. 12 Federal Register. The agency announced it is developing profiles for the following four chemicals... -
EU Group Says Permitted Level of Chromium In Toys Should Be Lower Based on New Data
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The permitted level of hexavalent chromium, or chromium VI, in toys sold in the European Union should be cut significantly because of research indicating that a safe dose of the substance is only about a 20th of what was previously thought, according to an opinion of the EU Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks ... -
Crude Oil Export Proponents Need To Build Case, Upton Says
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said Feb. 11 that proponents of loosening restrictions on U.S. crude oil exports still “need to build the case for it.” Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) told reporters he has yet to decide whether to include a repeal or other changes to the 40-year-old export... -
California Oil Regulator Cites ‘Serious Concerns’ On Data Collection
Feb 11, 2015 | The Sacramento Bee
By Jeremy B. White
Pressed by lawmakers about failing to shield protected aquifers from waste generated during oil drilling, California’s state regulator overseeing the oil industry conceded Wednesday that his agency is falling short. “We do have a serious data management problem,” Dr. Steve Bohlen, appointed last year to head California’s... -
New Coalition Urges Denver to Ban Fracking In City, Protect South Platte River Basin
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
A coalition of 26 antifracking groups led by Food & Water Watch is urging Denver to impose a moratorium on the drilling technique in the city. Don't Frack Denver, which includes environmental, health, business, labor, community and faith-based organizations, delivered a petition... -
Forest Service Signs Leasing Plan for Pawnee
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Forest Service has signed a record of decision that will allow oil and gas leasing on 100,000 acres of the Pawnee National Grassland northeast of Denver but will prohibit wells and well pads on the land. The “no-surface occupancy” alternative will have the least surface disturbance on the grassland and the surrounding area... -
Senate Committee Advances Tweaks to LNG, Coal, Waste-Heat Credits
Feb 11, 2015 | E&E New PM
By Nick Juliano
The Senate Finance Committee today advanced a group of minor tax bills, including legislation addressing treatment of certain waste-heat-to-energy, liquefied natural gas and clean coal projects. The legislative package, which was adopted on a voice vote after a brief markup this morning... -
Keystone Measure Heads to Obama For Expected Veto Following House Vote
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jim Snyder and Billy House
Congressional Republicans achieved a top legislative goal Feb. 11, sending a bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline to President Barack Obama. Yet after three years of effort, the victory is somewhat hollow as falling oil prices and an improving job market conspire to weaken any practical or political payoffs. -
House Sends Keystone Bill to White House Doom
Feb 11, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Elana Schor
The House easily passed a bill on Wednesday that would allow construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, setting up President Barack Obama to issue the third veto of his presidency. The vote capped off a four-year Republican effort to force Obama to approve the Alberta-to-Texas oil artery... -
Senate Finance Approves Bills to Lower LNG Tax, Add Credit for Cogeneration
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The Senate Finance Committee voted Feb. 11 to approve bills that would lower the federal tax on liquefied natural gas as an incentive to make it more competitive with diesel fuel and extend a 10 percent investment tax credit for cogeneration technologies. -
Pennsylvania Governor Proposes New Tax on Natural Gas Extraction
Feb 11, 2015 | Reuters
By Hilary Russ
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf on Wednesday proposed a new 5 percent severance tax on the state's booming natural gas extraction industry, a turnabout from his Republican predecessor who opposed such a tax. The measure could generate $1 billion or more, Wolf said again on Wednesday, repeating a figure he touted during... -
EPA's Power Plant Rule Defies Will Of Congress, Senate Republicans Say
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
An Environmental Protection Agency proposal to curb carbon dioxide pollution from power plants would impose significant costs on utilities and ratepayers without providing tangible benefits for the climate, Senate Republicans said. Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee argued... -
Moniz, GOP Spar Over Agency Budget
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Daniel Bush and Manuel Quinones
House Republicans went after President Obama's proposed fiscal 2016 energy budget during a hearing yesterday, leveling criticism at U.S. EPA regulations but also leaving the door open for reaching a deal on a broad bipartisan energy bill. -
Vitter Suggests NRDC-EPA Link on Model Power Plant Rule
Feb 11, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Jean Chemnick
The Natural Resources Defense Council found itself unexpectedly back on the hot seat today at the first Senate Environment and Public Works Committee climate hearing since Republicans took control of the Senate -- this time for advising U.S. EPA to craft a model rule for its Clean Power Plan. -
Virginia Senate OKs Bill to Freeze Base Rates To Help Utilities Meet Clean Power Plan Costs
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jeff Day
The Virginia Senate passed legislation that would temporarily freeze base electricity rates and allow the state's investor-owned electrical utilities to retain unexpected earnings that would normally be rebated to customers to help them recover the costs of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. -
EPA Defends Authority For Novel Boiler MACT 'Energy Assessment' Mandate
Feb 11, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA is defending its Clean Air Act authority for its novel requirement in its boiler air toxics rule that industrial facilities conduct one-time “energy assessments” to improve boiler efficiency, a mandate that could affect a host of EPA policies given its potential to encourage reductions in air toxics, energy use and greenhouse gases (GHGs). -
GOP Senators' Attacks On EPA Climate Rules Could Aid Future Challenges
Feb 11, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Lee Logan
Republicans are targeting EPA's authority to issue its greenhouse gas (GHG) rules for power plants, offering at a recent Senate hearing several legal and practical critiques of the policies that could lay the groundwork for legislative and legal challenges after the rules are completed. -
New GOP Senate Begins Assault on Obama's Climate Rules
Feb 12, 2015 | The Hill - E2Wire
By Laura Barron-Lopez
The new Republican-controlled Senate kicked off its first of likely many hearings on President Obama's signature climate rules aimed at cutting carbon pollution on Wednesday. Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee attempted to poke holes in the administration's carbon rules, calling the regulations... -
Sides Square Off Over Climate Change Proposals by California Democrats
Feb 10, 2015 | LA Times
By Chris Megerian
The release of climate change proposals by Senate Democrats on Tuesday quickly spawned a heated debate over the direction of California's economy and the potential effect of new environmental regulations. Some unions and companies welcome the legislation, saying it will lead to new jobs and foster... -
EPA's FY16 Air Toxics Budget Remains Tight Despite Risk Review Backlog
Feb 12, 2015 | InsideEpa
By Stuart Parker
EPA faces a tight fiscal year 2016 funding proposal for its air toxics program despite a backlog of Clean Air Act-mandated residual risk reviews for potential updates to existing air toxics regulations, delays that have prompted a legal threat from environmentalists to try and force court-ordered deadlines for conducting the reviews. -
ARPA-E's Martin Discusses Agency's Successes, New $125M Funding Opportunity
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
What more can the federal government do to ensure the United States stays ahead of the energy technology innovation curve? During today's OnPoint, recorded at the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) Innovation Summit, Dr. Cheryl Martin, deputy director for commercialization at ARPA-E, discusses... -
EU Shutters More Natural Gas, Coal Power Plants Due to Falling Demand for Electricity
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mathew Carr
European utilities shut more coal and natural gas power plants in 2014 than in any year since at least 2009 amid falling demand for electricity and tougher pollution curbs, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. European Union power companies turned off 63 percent more coal- and gas-fed generation than they started... -
Absent Fix to Trust Fund, DOT Would Begin Rationing Billions in July -- Foxx
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Sean Reilly
The Department of Transportation could begin rationing billions of dollars in road-building payments to states in July if Congress doesn't find a way to pump more money into the Highway Trust Fund within the next few months, DOT Secretary Anthony Foxx said yesterday. -
Boxer Defends Shakeup, Calls Transportation a 'Legacy Issue'
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Daniel Bush
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ranking member Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) yesterday defended her decision to take charge of the subpanel that oversees transportation, calling the topic -- and a potential highway bill reauthorization -- a "legacy" issue for her during her last two years in Congress.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
Watchdog Faults US EPA's New Chemicals CBI Procedures
Feb 12, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA's procedures for dealing with confidential business information (CBI) requests in its new chemicals programme are “predisposed to protect industry information rather than to provide public access to health and safety studies,” according to report by the agency's watchdog.
In a report to Congress, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) said the agency also lacks integrated procedures and measures to ensure that “chemicals entering commerce do not pose an unreasonable risk to human health and the environment.” The report found limitations in three processes of the new chemicals programme – assessment, oversight and transparency. “The programme is limited by an absence of test data and a reliance on modelling because the Toxic Substances Control Act does not require upfront testing as part of a pre-manufacture (PMN) notice submission.”
PMN submitters are required to provide health and safety data in their possession, but the majority of such submissions do not include chemical toxicity or environmental fate data. Also, oversight of regulatory actions “designed to reduce known risks is a low priority, and the resources allocated by the EPA is not commensurate with the scope of the monitoring and oversight work,” the report says.
As of 30 September 2014, the EPA was still in the “development stage” of a proposed rulemaking on, among other things, establishing a time limit for confidential business information claims and does not have a “timeframe for issuing the proposal.” In addition to asking the agency to look into setting time limits for such claims, the OIG had recommended that the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention develop a more detailed classification guide that provides criteria for approving CBI requests.
The EPA continues to support “much-needed reform” of TSCA, and until it is done it is “committed to increasing the public's access to chemical information and reducing unwarranted claims of confidentiality of chemical reporting,” the report says.
The EPA had not commented on the semi-annual Compendium of Unimplemented Recommendations as of September 30, 2014 by our deadline.
-
Progress Slow on High-Risk Cybersecurity, Climate Change, Tax Fraud, GAO Report Says
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The federal government continues to struggle to show it's making progress on dozens of “high-risk” issues, from threats posed by cybersecurity risks and tax fraud to rising sea level and other climate change impacts, the Government Accountability Office said Feb. 11.
Gene Dodaro, the head of the GAO, told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that his 2015 list expands upon two items in the previous 2013 one: enforcement of tax laws, particularly the IRS’ failure to prevent fraudulent refunds from identify theft, which totaled $5.8 billion in 2013; and failure by agencies to shield taxpayer information from cybersecurity threats.
“It's a bit of an urban legend that if you get on the GAO high-risk [list] you can never come off,” Dodaro told the Senate committee. But he said agencies “need to demonstrate progress. They don't need to have a 100 percent fix,” he said, but they need to be able to point to results “and ultimately solutions” to get their programs off the list.
For climate risks, the 2015 GAO report, titled “High Risk Series: An Update,” said the Obama administration deserves credit for moving to cut greenhouse gas emissions and working with other nations toward a global climate agreement.
But the U.S. continues to struggle to coordinate plans to adapt to risks such as rising sea level and more intense and frequent weather events that pose “significant financial risk” to the federal government, the GAO said.
Climate change was added to GAO's high-risk list in 2013, with Dodaro saying then that the federal government had “no strategic direction” to coordinate state and federal efforts to prepare for rising sea level and other climate impacts (32 DEN A-1, 2/15/13).
High-Risk List Covers 32 Areas
The now 32-item high risk list includes two new issues: inadequate oversight and accountability at Veterans Affairs' healthcare facilities; and better management of information technology improvements at agencies, which the report said have long been prone to cost overruns and “schedule slippages.”
The GAO updates its high-risk report for Congress every two years and presents the findings at the beginning of each new congressional session. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee also was briefed on the findings at a separate hearing Feb. 11.
The report also was once again critical of the Environmental Protection Agency's Integrated Risk Information System, which struggled to keep its chemical assessments up to date or address new chemicals of concern.
The agency failed to issue a single IRIS assessment in fiscal year 2014 and has repeatedly delayed a multi-year plan that would both outline steps to improve the program and provide an orderly process for future assessments, GAO said.
Top agency officials have demonstrated leadership in publicly committing to improvements, the report said, since the GAO first added the program to its high-risk list in 2009(13 DEN A-2, 1/23/09).
But it also urged the EPA to work with Congress “to facilitate legislative changes that could provide the agency with sufficient authority to assess and control toxic chemicals.”
Some Progress on Climate Risks
The GAO said the Obama administration deserves credit for moving to cut greenhouse gas emissions and working with other nations to complete a global climate agreement.
But the U.S. continues to struggle to coordinate plans to adapt to climate risks such as rising sea level that could pose threats to infrastructure, the report said.
Through President Barack Obama's 2013 climate action plan and other initiatives, his administration has been able to “identify climate change as a priority and demonstrate commitment and top leadership support.”
But the federal government isn't well organized to address the fiscal exposure presented by climate change, partly because of the inherently complicated” nature of coordinating local, state and federal efforts to improve U.S. resilience, the report said.
Since compiling its first high-risk report in 1990, the number of areas added to the list has slowly increased, from 14 programs or areas of concern that year to the 32 in the current report.
High Priority Items Still on List
Dodaro told the Senate panel that while overall progress has been made on many high priority items, many have languished for decades: Nearly half of the high-risk areas in the 2015 report were in that original report, he said.
For a program to move off the list, it must meet criteria set by GAO. For example, agencies must demonstrate leadership commitment to improving the problem; develop a correction action plan outlining steps for solutions; monitor and independently validate improvements; and demonstrate progress in implementing corrective measures.
-
GAO Says Climate, Toxics Still Government 'High Risks' Despite Progress
Feb 11, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Lara Beaven
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) says management of climate change risks and EPA's ability to asses toxic chemicals remain “high risk”areas requiring Congress and the administration to act, despite some progress such as President Obama's crafting of climate change policies and EPA's bid to improve toxics management.
In a Feb. 11 report, “High Risk Series: An Update,” GAO describes the status of programs of concern that were included in a similar 2013 report. “Solutions to high-risk problems offer the potential to save billions of dollars, improve service to the public, and strengthen government performance and accountability,” it says.
GAO first listed the financial risks of climate change's adverse impacts as a high risk for the federal government in the 2013 report, a major finding that was seen as boosting calls for EPA to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The agency has developed several GHG and fuel economy rules for vehicles, and Obama has proposed his Clean Power Plan that includes proposed climate rules for both existing and newly constructed power plants.
On managing climate change risks, GAO says the June 2013 Climate Action Plan and November 2013 Executive Order 13653 on Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate change show how federal agencies have made some progress on better organizing across agencies, within agencies and among different levels of government.
But this leadership needs to be sustained and include an increased focus on implementing the federal plans, the report says.
“While individual agency actions are necessary, a centralized national strategy driven by a government-wide plan is also needed to reduce the federal fiscal exposure to climate change, maximize investments, achieve efficiencies, and better position the government for success,” GAO says. But “[t]he challenge is to develop a cohesive approach at the federal level that also informs state, local and private-sector action,” the report adds.
Among the “many” areas that GAO says may need additional attention are incorporating climate change information into infrastructure planning processes and determining how to account for climate change in National Environmental Policy Act analyses; providing the best available climate-related information to decision makers at all levels and assisting them in translating available climate-related data into information that officials need to made decisions; and addressing potential gaps in satellite data.
The GAO report says its recommendations echo many of the same actions outlined in a November 2014 report to President Obama from the State, Local and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience.
Chemicals Management
On the separate high risk issue of managing toxic chemicals, the report says EPA has not fully addressed recurring issues concerning the clarity and transparency of its development and presentation of draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments, and has not addressed other long-standing issues regarding the availability and accuracy of current information to IRIS users.
GAO says “EPA needs to work with Congress to ensure that the resources dedicated to IRIS activities are sufficient to maintain a viable IRIS database of chemical assessments that are produced in a timely manner.”
Additionally, EPA should continue to use its independent scientific advisory boards “to monitor and independently validate the effectiveness and sustainability of EPA's IRIS assessment process -- including the changes made to the IRIS process in response to the National Academies' suggestions.”
The report notes that in the absence of congressional reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA has been working since 2009 on using its existing authorities to better regulate chemicals. And the 2013 report found EPA had made progress in implementing its new approach.
But EPA needs to take additional action, GAO says. EPA and Congress need to ensure that the resources dedicated to TSCA activities are sufficient to effectively implement TSCA, and “EPA must also demonstrate progress toward fully utilizing existing TSCA authorities, identifying needed legislative changes, and continuing to work with Congress to facilitate these legislative changes to TSCA,” the report says.
For example, EPA has not clearly articulated how it will address challenges associated with obtaining toxicity and exposure data needed for risk assessments, and placing limits on or banning chemicals under existing TSCA authorities, the report says.
-
PCB Control Is Sole Focus of Draft Toxic Reduction-Prevention Strategy for Bay
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jeff Day
Efforts of the Environmental Protection Agency and the six states sharing the Chesapeake Bay watershed to reduce toxic pollution would focus on reducing polychlorinated biphenyls alone, if a working draft recommendation were to be adopted this summer by the governors and EPA administrator.
The Chesapeake Bay Program workgroup developing a strategy for reducing toxic pollution discussed the “policy and prevention” strategy draft Feb. 11. It recommends focusing on PCBs because of their wide distribution, the proven adverse health impacts on fish and on humans who consume fish, and ongoing PCB reduction programs in parts of the 64,000-square-mile watershed.
Reducing toxic contaminants is one of the aspirational goals of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement signed in 2014 by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, the governors of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, and other officials.
A separate draft document discussed Feb. 11, on toxic contaminants research priorities, recommends focusing on mercury and emerging contaminants such as endocrine disrupting chemicals, as well as identifying “best management practices” that might reduce levels of the contaminants in aquatic species. The watershed agreement does authorize research into the human health impacts of toxic materials, EPA manager and workgroup leader Greg Allen said.
Watershed-Wide PCB Standards Unlikely
Allen said one of the challenges in developing a PCB reduction strategy is that the six states sharing the basin have different standards for what constitutes hazardous levels of PCBs in fish.
A committee member asked why the Chesapeake Bay states have varying fish PCB standards when states sharing the Delaware River watershed have a single, very stringent standard. The Delaware River Basin Commission has authority not available to the Chesapeake Bay Program, Allen said.
The Delaware River Basin Commission's work on PCB contamination also was discussed at the last full meeting of the Chesapeake Bay Program toxic reduction workgroup (6 DEN A-12, 1/9/15).
A watershed-wide total maximum daily load for PCBs might well work, but the idea is strongly opposed by some stakeholders, Allen said.
Convincing stakeholders that new loading of PCBs is occurring is one of the challenges facing voluntary PCB reduction efforts, according to the draft strategy. It recommends engaging with and educating local governments and the public.
Voluntary, Regulatory Possibilities
PCB reduction initiatives mentioned in the draft include developing a voluntary action program to remove or retrofit transformers that are classified as PCB-free but contain fluid with up to 50 parts per million PCBs. The effort could be extended to other PCB-containing equipment, such as fluorescent bulb ballasts.
Some regulatory tools do exist. The EPA Region 3 Land and Chemicals office since 2002 has conducted PCB inspections across the watershed and taken five enforcement actions under the Toxic Substance Control Act, according to the draft.
The draft suggests the possibility of setting PCB reduction requirements in industrial and municipal stormwater permits.
Work on the draft continues but must be completed by the end of February, Allen said. He explained that the draft must be approved by the Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board before it can be released for public comment in March.
-
Proposed Lower Migration Limits for Chromium VI in Toys
Feb 11, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The current migration limits for chromium VI should be lowered for the safety of children, the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks concludes, in its final opinion on the substance in toys.
Scher evaluated whether migration levels in toys and toy components need revising in the light of new evidence, particularly relating to its carcinogenic effects (CW 4 August 2014). This included a 2008 study by the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) on cancer occurrence, after oral uptake of chromium VI in animals, which the committee has based its proposed new limits on. These are: 0.0094 mg/kg for scraped-off toy materials; 0.0008 mg/kg for dry, (powder-like or pliable) toy materials; and 0.0002 mg/kg for liquid or sticky toy materials.
Considering children’s exposure limits may already be reached through drinking water, air and other sources, any additional exposure should be minimised “to the lowest achievable level with best available technology”, the opinion states. On the other hand, Scher admits that the proposed limits are “conservative” and “may not be achievable for certain toy materials”. It also points out that detection methods are limited.
Trade body, Toy Industries of Europe (TIE), says Scher is being very conservative, considering that the proposed limits are based on a 5% allocation to toys of the virtual safe dose, even though the opinion states that 10% is considered to be safe. “It is important to note that it is very unlikely that chromium VI is present in toys,” the TIE says, adding that exposure through others sources, such as air and drinking water, is the real problem. The committee's considered exposure to the compound is also “an extreme overestimation”, being based on daily ingestion of toy materials, it says.
NGO, Women in Europe for a Common Future (Wecf), which has been campaigning for stricter EU rules on chemicals in toys, says it is “relieved” that Scher wants the limits to be lowered, and considers it a good sign that data taken from a US scientific body can be used to protect human health in Europe. “We wish the concept of 'minimising the exposure to the lowest achievable level with best available technology' to be used in the future for any other compounds, like lead or barium, for example,” says Elisabeth Ruffinengo, project and advocacy officer at Wecf.
-
HHS to Develop Toxicological Profiles For Two Widely Used Herbicides, Silica
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
Toxicological profiles of two widely used herbicides and two other substances are being prepared by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, according to a notice scheduled to appear in the Feb. 12 Federal Register.
The agency announced it is developing profiles for the following four chemicals:
• antimony (CAS No. 7440–36–0),
• glyphosate (CAS No. 1071–83–6),
• 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) (CAS No. 94–75–7) and
• silica (CAS No. 7631–86–9).
The agency's profile of antimony will be an update to an earlier profile it had assembled in 1992.
The ATSDR is required by law to prepare toxicological profiles for all 275 items on its Priority List of Hazardous Substances, a list of substances commonly found at Superfund sites that pose the greatest threat to human health. ATSDR is an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services.
This is the 28th set of substances profiled by the ATSDR. The agency began seeking nominations for this set in May (79 Fed. Reg. 29,446).
The agency is currently working on profiles for four other sets, which contain 16 substances in total. Additionally, the agency is working on profiles of two other substances for the Department of Defense.
The ASTDR said its toxicological profiles of antimony, glyphosate, 2,4-D and silica will be finished and available to the public in mid-October.
According to the 1992 profile of antimony, “Most antimony oxide produced is added to textiles and plastics to prevent their catching on fire.” The profile also cites uses in batteries, sheet metal and ammunition.
Glyphosate, the active ingredient in the weed killer Roundup, and 2,4-D are two of the most widely used herbicides in the U.S.
Use of 2,4-D is expected to skyrocket in the coming years after the Department of Agriculture's approval in September of corn and soybean crops genetically engineered to withstand repeated exposure to the herbicide (182 DEN A-4, 9/19/14).
-
EU Group Says Permitted Level of Chromium In Toys Should Be Lower Based on New Data
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The permitted level of hexavalent chromium, or chromium VI, in toys sold in the European Union should be cut significantly because of research indicating that a safe dose of the substance is only about a 20th of what was previously thought, according to an opinion of the EU Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER), published Feb. 10.
The EU Toy Safety Directive (2009/48/EC) currently sets chromium VI migration limits, or the maximum amount of a compound that can be transferred from a toy to a child, at between 0.005 and 0.2 milligrams per kilogram of material used in the toy. The levels should be cut to between 0.0002 and 0.0094 mg/kg, the SCHER opinion said.
The lower recommended levels were based on a downward revision of the assumed safe dose for chromium VI from 0.0053 micrograms per kilogram of body weight, to 0.0002 micrograms, the SCHER opinion said.
SCHER added that the proposed new limits were “conservative and may not be achievable for certain toy materials,” but because of the carcinogenicity of chromium VI, the exposure of children to the substance from toys “should be minimized to the lowest achievable levels using the best available technology.”
SCHER opinions are used by the European Commission, the EU's executive arm, in preparing regulatory proposals.
-
Crude Oil Export Proponents Need To Build Case, Upton Says
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said Feb. 11 that proponents of loosening restrictions on U.S. crude oil exports still “need to build the case for it.”
Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) told reporters he has yet to decide whether to include a repeal or other changes to the 40-year-old export ban as part of broad energy legislation that he is writing and plans to move to the House floor this year.
A policy framework outlining a vision for the bill released by Republican committee leaders Feb. 9 makes reference to a “decision to allow the export of energy commodities,” but it didn't specify the type of energy.
The House in January voted to approve legislation (H.R. 351) by a vote of 277-133 that would require the Energy Department to expedite the licensing process for applications to export liquefied natural gas overseas (19 DEN A-9, 1/29/15).
Among the most vocal champions of lifting the export restriction in the House is Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), who reintroduced legislation earlier this month (H.R. 702) that would remove all restrictions on the export of U.S. crude oil.
Barton Decries Law of ‘Yesterday.'
“Growing domestic production from recently discovered shale reservoirs has made our nation the largest oil producer in the world, but the laws governing the export of this resource are nearly 40 years old,” Barton said in a statement. “Today we are presented with the unique opportunity to undo a piece of legislation that reflects an America of yesterday.”
Co-sponsors of the legislation are Reps. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.), John Carter (R-Texas), Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), Michael Conaway (R-Texas), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Bill Flores (R-Texas), Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas), Steve Pearce (R-N.M.), Robert Pittenger (R-N.C.), Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) and Joe Wilson (R-S.C.).
In addition, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) introduced legislation (H.R. 156) that would lift crude oil export restrictions in January. The measure has nine co-sponsors.
The ban, which was put in place in the wake of the 1973-1974 Arab oil embargo, is getting a second look as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling techniques have led daily U.S. oil production to soar to more than 9.2 million barrels per day in January, according to the Energy Information Administration.
Passage of the legislation in the 114th Congress, however, still is considered an uphill battle because of opposition from independent refiners concerned that changing the law would raise domestic oil prices.
-
California Oil Regulator Cites ‘Serious Concerns’ On Data Collection
Feb 11, 2015 | The Sacramento Bee
By Jeremy B. White
Pressed by lawmakers about failing to shield protected aquifers from waste generated during oil drilling, California’s state regulator overseeing the oil industry conceded Wednesday that his agency is falling short.
“We do have a serious data management problem,” Dr. Steve Bohlen, appointed last year to head California’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, said during a state Senate hearing. “Our problems are on the table, and I am not hiding them. The division is not hiding them.”
The recent revelation that oil companies were allowed to inject wastewater into federally protected aquifers has spurred alarm from the federal Environmental Protection Agency and put state regulators on the defensive. State regulators sent a letter to the U.S. EPA pledging to get back into compliance and setting up a timeline to shut down some wells.
Bohlen made his remarks at a hearing about California’s landmark law regulating hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in which a cocktail of water and chemicals is blasted underground. Passed in 2013, Senate Bill 4 imposes new rules around reporting and permitting new wells, notifying neighbors, releasing information about which chemicals are used and conducting water quality inspections.
The law does not cover injecting wastewater underground, though it does require well operators to submit a waste disposal plan as a condition of getting a permit. It also requires the state to develop a groundwater monitoring program, which an official described as a work in progress.
“In the next few years we’ll have a much better understanding of the groundwater (impacts)” of hydraulic fracturing, Jonathan Bishop of the California State Water Resources Control Board testified.
In the past, some lawmakers have criticized state regulators for being overly lax with the oil industry. Department of Conservation Director Mark Nechodom’s predecessor, Derek Chernow, was fired after resisting pressure from Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration to speed up permitting of new injection drilling projects.
Bishop said state water regulators are bound to a tight timeline as they work to craft groundwater rules required by the new hydraulic fracturing law.
“We have a lot of pressure on us to move forward fast,” Bishop testified. “We also have a lot of pressure on us to not make mistakes.”
-
New Coalition Urges Denver to Ban Fracking In City, Protect South Platte River Basin
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
A coalition of 26 antifracking groups led by Food & Water Watch is urging Denver to impose a moratorium on the drilling technique in the city.
Don't Frack Denver, which includes environmental, health, business, labor, community and faith-based organizations, delivered a petition Feb. 9 to Denver Mayor Michael Hancock (D) and the Denver City Council urging them to “keep fracking out of the city and its water supply.”
Sam Schabacker, western region director with Food & Water Watch, said fracking threatens Denver's “exceptional quality of life.”
“Fracking makes Coloradans sick, drives down property values and contaminates our public water and clean air,” he said.
Fracking involves the high-pressure injection of water, sand and chemicals into tight shale formations deep underground to release trapped natural gas and oil that would otherwise be uneconomical to produce. Opponents say the practice harms groundwater and air quality, while industry and most state and federal regulators say it's safe.
Vital for Colorado, a group that supports the oil and gas industry, responded to the kickoff of the “Don't Frack Denver” campaign by saying anti-drilling activists “are declaring war on Denver's economy.”
“We cannot let anti-science extremists destroy Denver's economy over hype and environmental hysteria,” said Peter Moore, Denver attorney and board chairman of Vital for Colorado. “Fracking has been done safely in Colorado for decades, and the EPA has never found fracking fluids in our underground drinking water.”
“Groups that peddle fear, instead of facts, are out to hurt Colorado's economy and out to reduce the tax base that supports our schools, parks and libraries,” he added.
Currently, there are no active wells within the city limits of Denver. However, Schabacker said, wells are in operation near the Denver subdivision of Green Valley Ranch—with more drilling planned.
BLM Working on South Park Plan
Schabacker said the coalition also is calling on the city to object to future oil and gas activity in the South Park area, which includes the South Platte River Basin, the source of drinking water for about a third of Denver residents.
“The South Platte Basin also supports Denver's economy: sport fishers, boaters and Denver's iconic craft brewers rely on clean water,” Schabacker said.
The Bureau of Land Management is planning to conduct a master leasing plan (MLP) for South Park as part of a resource management plan revision being conducted by the bureau's Royal Gorge Field Office.
The purpose of the MLP is to plan for oil and gas development in a defined area containing a high level of potential resource concerns, BLM said.
The BLM is only at the beginning of the master leasing plan process for South Park, and no oil and gas lease auction is planned at present, Steven Hall, spokesman for the bureau in Lakewood, Colo., told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 11.
-
Forest Service Signs Leasing Plan for Pawnee
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Forest Service has signed a record of decision that will allow oil and gas leasing on 100,000 acres of the Pawnee National Grassland northeast of Denver but will prohibit wells and well pads on the land. The “no-surface occupancy” alternative will have the least surface disturbance on the grassland and the surrounding area, according to a record of decision signed Feb. 9 by Glenn P. Casamassa, forest supervisor for the grassland. Oil and gas producers will be able to extract all of the recoverable oil and gas using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, the service said. WildEarth Guardians has filed an objection to the Forest Service decision (14 DEN A-18, 1/22/15). Forest Service documents concerning oil and gas leases on the Pawnee National Grassland are available at http://1.usa.gov/1IW2mc8.
-
Senate Committee Advances Tweaks to LNG, Coal, Waste-Heat Credits
Feb 11, 2015 | E&E New PM
By Nick Juliano
The Senate Finance Committee today advanced a group of minor tax bills, including legislation addressing treatment of certain waste-heat-to-energy, liquefied natural gas and clean coal projects.
The legislative package, which was adopted on a voice vote after a brief markup this morning, represented something of a new approach for the committee, which has in recent years avoided discrete tax proposals absent consideration of comprehensive tax reform or periodic renewal of regular "tax extenders" provisions.
Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) acknowledged that the committee has been "learning as we go" and said he hoped this morning's markup established a "template" for future business later this year.
The bipartisan package combined more than a dozen tax bills, including three related to energy tax issues.
One provision in the legislation would extend an existing 10 percent investment tax credit for combined heat and power systems to include generation of electricity from waste heat associated with industrial processes. Sen. Thomas Carper (D-Del.), who introduced the provision, said it corrects a drafting error that caused waste heat to be made ineligible for the CHP tax credit, contrary to Congress' intent when it established the credit in 2008.
Another component would reduce the excise tax on liquefied natural gas to ensure that taxes assessed on LNG and diesel match the disparate energy content from the two fuel sources; currently, both pay the same per-gallon rate, although trucks can drive about 170 percent farther on diesel than on the same volume of LNG.
A third piece would allow recipients of clean coal power grants established by the 2005 energy law to not treat those grants as normal income for tax purposes.
-
Keystone Measure Heads to Obama For Expected Veto Following House Vote
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jim Snyder and Billy House
Congressional Republicans achieved a top legislative goal Feb. 11, sending a bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline to President Barack Obama.
Yet after three years of effort, the victory is somewhat hollow as falling oil prices and an improving job market conspire to weaken any practical or political payoffs.
The House passed the measure 270-152. The Senate passed it last month.
Obama has vowed to veto the legislation because it would circumvent his administration's review of the pipeline. Neither chamber appears to have the two-thirds vote needed to override a veto.
“This allegedly important policy issue has become almost nothing but politics, save for those who build and operate it, on both sides,” said Burdett Loomis, a political science professor at the University of Kansas who tracks energy issues. “It's policy significance comes close to nil, especially in our current oil environment.”
TransCanada Corp., a Calgary-based pipeline company, applied to build Keystone XL in September 2008. While a southern section is up and running, the northern leg needs a presidential permit because it crosses the U.S.-Canada border.
The project, in limbo during a State Department review, has galvanized environmental advocates and led to massive rallies around the White House urging Obama to reject the pipeline as a threat to the climate.
Supporters say it will create thousands of jobs and improve U.S. energy security.
‘Get It Done.'
“Let's pass this bill this afternoon. Let's send it to the president,” Representative Fred Upton of Michigan, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said during debate on the bill Feb. 11. “Let's hope that he might reconsider a proposed veto on this bill. Let's deal with the issue. And let's get it done.”
The House vote was the 11th on Keystone legislation in four years. Until this most recent measure, the efforts failed. House lawmakers had to take up the bill again after the Senate amended an earlier version.
House Speaker John Boehner is planning an “enrollment” or signing ceremony on Feb. 13, said Michael Steel, a spokesman for Boehner. Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, as the president pro tempore, will also sign. How soon after the bill will be sent to the White House hadn't been decided as of Feb. 11, Steel said.
Once that happens, the Constitution provides 10 days, excluding Sundays, for a president to sign a bill. A veto occurs when a president returns the unsigned legislation within 10 days to the chamber in which it originated, typically with a message explaining why.
Project's Fate
Obama probably will retain the power to decide the fate of the $8 billion project. While he has pledged to veto the Keystone bill on process grounds, he hasn't indicated what his decision will be on the project itself.
He must choose between angering his allies in the environmental movement or the Canadian government, which is looking to Keystone to support oil sands producers in Alberta.
Representative Joe Barton, a Texas Republican and a member of the energy committee, backed the vote on Keystone.
“It's good public policy,” even if Obama is going to reject the bill, Barton said in a phone interview before the vote. “It shows how rigidly he's in the clutches of radical environmental groups that he keeps opposing it.”
Debate Shift
The dynamics of the debate have shifted considerably since July 2011 when the House first voted to advance Keystone.
Back then, oil traded about $100 a barrel and Obama faced a tough re-election in an economy yet to fully shake the effects of a deep recession.
Now oil is half that cost, about $50 a barrel, and Obama is two years into his second term. Unemployment fell to 5.7 percent in January from 9.1 percent in July 2011.
Polls show Americans supporting the pipeline outnumber those who oppose it, though the political payoff for Republicans in backing it probably is small.
A Washington Post/ABC News poll last month found 34 percent of respondents wanted the pipeline built now, while 61 percent said the review should continue. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found 41 percent favored the project.
More than a third—37 percent—said they didn't know enough to have an opinion.
‘Actual Sentiments.’
Michael McKenna, a lobbyist and strategist close to House Republican leaders, said Keystone remains a good talking point “that exposes the administration's actual sentiments about energy production.”
Paul Bledsoe, a White House energy aide in the Clinton administration now with the German Marshall Fund of the U.S., said the timing works for Obama.
Coming a week after the Interior Department unveiled plans to open the Atlantic Ocean to drilling for the first time in decades makes it harder for opponents to peg Obama as reflexively against fossil fuel development, Bledsoe said.
Keystone's critics say only about 50 permanent jobs will remain after construction, and that is not worth the cost of more carbon dioxide emissions causing dangerous climate change or the risks a spill poses to farmland and wildlife on the route across Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska.
A State Department environmental review completed last year said Keystone wouldn't have much significance for global warming because the oil from Alberta would find another way to market if the pipeline wasn't built.
Oil Prices
The Environmental Protection Agency, in a response last week that heartened Keystone's environmental foes, said falling oil prices may mean Keystone has a bigger effect on the environment than previously thought.
Gary Doer, Canada's U.S. ambassador, criticized EPA's analysis in a Feb. 10 letter to the State Department.
“One is left with the conclusion that there has been significant distortion and omission to arrive at the EPA's conclusions,” Doer wrote.
Obama has said he won't approve the project if he believes it would “significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution.”
He also criticized Republican arguments that the pipeline would provide much economic benefits to Americans, arguing the oil would likely be sold overseas after reaching refiners in the U.S.
Republicans have once before advanced to Obama's desk legislation on Keystone.
Keystone Review
Late in 2011, when the Keystone review was in its third year, as part of a broader tax bill they set a 60-day deadline for Obama to make a decision. In January 2012, he rejected the project saying the administration couldn't adequately weigh its merits by the Congress-imposed deadline.
He also encouraged TransCanada to reapply, which it did in splitting the project and shifting a route further east in Nebraska in an effort to resolve concerns about Keystone's potential threat to a sensitive habitat.
More recently, Obama has questioned the merits of the project, arguing most of the oil would end up being shipped overseas from Gulf Coast ports.
There are signs the State Department may be nearing completion of its long review. It required other federal agencies, including the EPA and the departments of Energy and the Interior, to submit comments by Feb. 2.
-
House Sends Keystone Bill to White House Doom
Feb 11, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Elana Schor
The House easily passed a bill on Wednesday that would allow construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, setting up President Barack Obama to issue the third veto of his presidency.
The vote capped off a four-year Republican effort to force Obama to approve the Alberta-to-Texas oil artery, but the weeks of debate in the Senate and two votes in the House this year on the $8 billion project are likely be little more than a political exercise. Keystone backers lack the votes to override the veto.
Following the expected veto, the fate of the Keystone will remain solidly in the hands of the Obama administration, which has spent six years examining the oil sands pipeline project but has set no deadline to make a decision.
The 270-152 vote in the House saw 29 Democrats voting in favor of the measure, while every GOP House member except one voted to push Keystone through.
The White House has steadfastly opposed the pipeline bill on the grounds that it would wrongly strip authority from the president to judge whether cross-border infrastructure projects are in the national interest and would prematurely end a long-running Obama administration review that is entering its last lap at the State Department.
And though Obama hasn’t tipped his hand on whether he would approve the Keystone project, he has expressed skepticism over the impact on jobs that its backers have touted and questioned whether the additional fuel would remain in the U.S. to benefit consumers here.
Still, Republicans held out hope that they might change Obama’s mind before he uncaps the veto pen.
“[T]he president shouldn’t stand in the way of creating those good American jobs and that important energy security,” House Majority Whip Steve Scalise told reporters before the vote.
And earlier on Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner accused Obama of standing far outside the mainstream on the pipeline.
“Keystone has been reviewed and approved several times; … instead of listening to people, the president’s standing with a bunch of left-fringe extremists and anarchists,” he told reporters.
Democratic leaders in both chambers are confident they can keep the Keystone bill from winning the two-thirds support needed to overcome Obama’s threatened rejection. Overriding the president would require four more Senate Democrats and 20 more House Democrats to join the GOP.
House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (D-Mich.) told reporters Wednesday that he anticipates Republicans would hold a vote to try to override Obama’s Keystone veto despite their slim chances of success.
Another senior Energy and Commerce Republican, Rep. Joe Barton, said that “if we’re close enough that it’s possible, I’d be a supporter of” trying to override Obama.
Because it is the Senate’s version of the bill that is headed to the president, however, the Senate GOP would have to win an override vote before House Republicans could take their turn.
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) said Republicans were considering a vote to override a veto.
“We may very well want to test to see if there is support to override,” he said.
Environmental groups are watching the drama play out in Washington with increasing confidence that the president will ultimately deny the pipeline a border-crossing permit on climate change grounds, particularly after the EPA carved out new political cover for such a decision.
In comments on the pipeline’s environmental assessment, EPA said State should give “additional weight” to whether the sharp drop in oil prices since last summer would increase the pipeline’s environmental impact, making its fate more vital to ensure future production in the carbon-rich Canadian oil sands.
State’s environmental report issued last year had said that high oil prices provided an incentive for oil companies to ship the fuel from the Alberta oil sands via truck or train even if the pipeline was not built. But with oil prices at roughly half the level than a year ago, the pipeline’s importance to the economics of the oil sands has grown, opponents say.
Obama, who has turned his attention in the past two years to reining in greenhouse gases, has said a key test for the pipeline would be whether it significantly exacerbates climate change.
“On the heels of the EPA’s confirmation that Keystone XL fails his climate test, we commend President Obama for his commitment to veto the bill and urge him to reject the pipeline permit once and for all,” Tiernan Sittenfeld, a League of Conservation Voters senior vice president, said in a statement.
Secretary of State John Kerry could send Obama his recommendation on whether the pipeline is in the national interest — a broader question than environmental impact, examining Keystone’s geopolitical and economic value — any day now. But the president is not required make a final ruling by a certain time.
“It’s an ongoing process that doesn’t have a deadline,” State spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters when pressed on the department’s long-running Keystone review.
Still, most observers expect Obama to settle on the pipeline’s future before Republicans set up another politically risky veto by trying to attach Keystone to a spending bill or other legislation considered must-pass.
-
Senate Finance Approves Bills to Lower LNG Tax, Add Credit for Cogeneration
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
The Senate Finance Committee voted Feb. 11 to approve bills that would lower the federal tax on liquefied natural gas as an incentive to make it more competitive with diesel fuel and extend a 10 percent investment tax credit for cogeneration technologies.
The measure by Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) would reduce the 24.3 cent-per-gallon tax on liquefied natural gas to a rate based on the energy equivalent of a gallon of diesel, or to about 14.1 cents per gallon, according to a summary of the proposal posted by the Joint Committee on Taxation.
“We have an opportunity to help grow this market and increase the use of natural gas as a transportation fuel,” Bennet said in a statement following the vote. “We've watched our domestic energy markets undergo a drastic change over the last decade, and this bill will help harness that momentum.”
The bill is supported by Calgary, Alberta-based natural gas producer Encana Corp. and NGVAmerica, a trade association that represents companies such as UPS, Ford and Volvo.
Both bills were among 17 measures wrapped into a chairman's mark (no bill number) that was approved by voice vote en bloc.
Tax Credit Approved for Cogeneration Technologies
In addition, the committee approved a bill that would allow cogeneration technologies to be eligible for a 10 percent investment tax credit introduced by Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.).
Cogeneration, also known as combined heat and power or CHP, involves using the heat generated during the production of electricity and using it to warm buildings or to generate additional electricity.
According to Carper, Congress intended to make combined heat and power among the technologies eligible for the tax credit in 2008 tax legislation, the Tax Extenders and Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act of 2008. However, “due to a drafting error,” it was deemed ineligible by the Internal Revenue Service to receive the tax credit under Section 48 of the tax code.
“Companies can invest in technology that converts this wasted heat—that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere—into usable electricity, but often these investments are very costly,” Carper said in a statement. “Tax credits are one way to reduce costs and encourage the deployment of this clean technology.”
-
Pennsylvania Governor Proposes New Tax on Natural Gas Extraction
Feb 11, 2015 | Reuters
By Hilary Russ
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf on Wednesday proposed a new 5 percent severance tax on the state's booming natural gas extraction industry, a turnabout from his Republican predecessor who opposed such a tax.
The measure could generate $1 billion or more, Wolf said again on Wednesday, repeating a figure he touted during his campaign. He said he would use "the lion's share" of the additional revenue to boost education funding. Wolf, a Democrat, ousted incumbent Tom Corbett in November in part because some voters believed Corbett had dramatically underfunded the school system.
"We have the natural resources to actually do something about the problem here," Wolf said during his announcement, broadcast from Caln Elementary School, about an hour west of Philadelphia. Like other public schools in Pennsylvania, Caln gets about 30 percent of its funding from the state.
Wolf noted that Pennsylvania ranks forty-fifth in the nation for state support for education.
With its rich Marcellus shale formation, Pennsylvania's industry for natural gas extraction has boomed. It is now second in production behind only Texas, which, like all other major natural gas producing states, already has a severance tax on the value of the gas extracted at the wellhead.
Wolf said his proposal is modeled after the severance tax levied in West Virginia.
Calling it the Education Reinvestment Act, Wolf said his plan would also add a tax, based on volume of extraction, of 4.7 cents per thousand cubic feet of natural gas. And it would include some protection for property owners leasing their land, he said.
If approved by the state legislature, it would go into effect Jan. 1, 2016, and provide revenues for the state beginning fiscal year 2017. The state is facing an estimated budget gap of at least $2 billion, which Wolf is expected to address in his budget proposal on March 3.
The measure could face some pushback in the state's Republican-controlled legislature. But some kind of fracking tax stands a chance of passing, as lawmakers from both parties have already proposed their own such taxes in recent weeks ranging from 3.2 percent to 8 percent.
"I don't think lawmakers are gearing up for gridlock," Wolf said. "Done right, a reasonable tax is actually the best thing for the private sector. This is a reasonable tax. It's been working all around the country."
-
EPA's Power Plant Rule Defies Will Of Congress, Senate Republicans Say
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
An Environmental Protection Agency proposal to curb carbon dioxide pollution from power plants would impose significant costs on utilities and ratepayers without providing tangible benefits for the climate, Senate Republicans said.
Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee argued Feb. 11 that the EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan is based on flawed science and dubious legal authority.
Setting carbon dioxide emissions limits on power plants would only drive more manufacturing jobs to China while imposing significant costs on the U.S. economy, Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said.
“There are certain incontrovertible facts we have dealt with,” Inhofe said. “One, this is a program that states reject. It ignores the will of Congress.”
Committee Republicans touted the 32 states that have expressed concerns with the EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan in comments on the rule as evidence the regulation should be revised or withdrawn.
The proposed rule (RIN 2060-AR33) would establish unique carbon dioxide emissions rates for the power sector in each state. The rule, which is expected to be finalized this summer, would be implemented by state officials who would determine how best to achieve the emissions targets.
“When a majority of states object to a rule, I think you've done something wrong,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said.
The committee called Janet McCabe, the EPA's acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, to testify about the Clean Power Plan.
Agency Met With States, Utilities
McCabe said the EPA met extensively with states and utilities prior to proposing the rule, and the agency has continued its engagement with them as it reviews public comments on the proposal.
The EPA is open to addressing issues raised by states and utilities in the final rule, particularly whether the interim emissions rates that states must achieve beginning in 2020 are feasible, McCabe said.
“That is something we're looking very, very closely at,” she said.
Ameren Corp., which generates more than half of its electricity from coal, suggested improvements to the Clean Power Plan in a Feb. 11 white paper that could make it more palatable to utilities.
Proposed improvements include replacing the interim emissions rates states must achieve by 2020 with periodic reporting, providing additional credit for replacing coal-fired generation with renewable energy and allowing states to exceed the 2030 compliance deadline if they can demonstrate the additional time will provide significant emissions reductions.
Rules Circumvent Congress
Committee Republicans said Congress rejected all prior legislation to address climate change. The EPA's attempt to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants flouts the will of Congress, they said.
“I do believe this regulation we're discussing today is EPA's most blatant overreach so far, and there have been a number of them,” Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said.
Along with the Clean Power Plan, the EPA also has proposed carbon dioxide standards for new and modified power plants.
Congress's failure to pass climate change legislation doesn't permit the EPA to act on its own authority, Republicans said.
Administration Pursuing Executive Actions
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) accused the Obama administration of following a pattern of pursuing executive action after attempts to work with Congress have failed on a host of issues, including climate change.
“Your agency, in my view, has been one of the biggest abusers of this two-step approach,” Sullivan told McCabe.
McCabe said the EPA is acting within the confines of the Clean Air Act as it moves to regulate carbon dioxide from power plants.
“I believe the rule we have proposed and we're going through comment on today is squarely based on our Clean Air Act authority,” McCabe said.
Inhofe said the U.S. commitment to curb its greenhouse gas emissions would only hurt its economic competitiveness and dismissed a recent agreement in which China agreed to peak its carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, with an intention of peaking earlier, and increase the use of non-fossil fuels to 20 percent of the nation's energy mix by 2030.
“Are you operating under some kind of delusion that China's going to change its behavior?” Inhofe said.
Vitter Criticizes NRDC
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) criticized the involvement of the Natural Resources Defense Council in the proposed rule's development. The environmental group had developed a similar plan that also would set state-specific emissions rates for the power sector prior to the EPA's proposal.
Vitter had explored the relationship in 2014 when he was ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee (199 DEN A-1, 10/15/14).
“The number of these communications is pretty staggering and is unprecedented as far as I can see,” Vitter said.
McCabe said the EPA's interaction with the Natural Resources Defense Council was part of the normal outreach process the agency undertakes when it develops regulations.
Agency Seeks Wide Interaction
“We take all of that input and put it in a proposed rule which is fully open for everyone to look at. If the rule is not grounded in the science and the law, people will tell us that,” she said.
The Natural Resources Defense Council defended its action in a Feb. 11 statement from David Goldston, the group's director of government affairs.
“Sens. Vitter and Barrasso are against EPA taking any action on climate change,” he said. “They are seeking to distract attention from this pressing issue by raising baseless charges about NRDC and EPA. We made recommendations to the agency, and sometimes EPA has found them helpful. The senators’ efforts to stifle debate should disturb anyone who wants to participate in the democratic process, regardless of where they stand on climate action.”
Inhofe to Examine Science
Inhofe, who has called climate change a hoax, said he plans to hold a hearing on climate science.
“When you don't have science on your side and you keep saying, ‘the science is settled, the science is settled, the science is settled,’ there's an assumption that is the case,” Inhofe said.
A 2013 survey of scientific literature published in the journal “Environmental Research Letters” found that 97.2 percent of climate scientists believe human activity plays a major role in climate change.
-
Moniz, GOP Spar Over Agency Budget
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Daniel Bush and Manuel Quinones
House Republicans went after President Obama's proposed fiscal 2016 energy budget during a hearing yesterday, leveling criticism at U.S. EPA regulations but also leaving the door open for reaching a deal on a broad bipartisan energy bill.
The Energy Department's $30 billion budget request would allow EPA to "handicap coal and other fossil fuels in the name of addressing climate change," House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) said at a hearing.
The DOE budget proposal represents a 5 percent increase from fiscal 2015 spending levels and includes $10.7 billion for science and energy programs, plus another $7.4 billion for clean energy development efforts generally opposed by GOP lawmakers.
Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz defended the spending plan, telling lawmakers on the panel that the administration is committed to an "all of the above" strategy that includes oil, natural gas and nuclear energy production in addition to funding for wind, solar and other renewable power sources.
The budget would provide solar energy with a $104 million boost over 2015 spending levels, as well as increased funding for wind and geothermal energy. It also proposes $562 million for fossil fuel energy research and development, though the amount is a slight decrease from current appropriations.
Moniz touted the increase in domestic oil and gas production under Obama and noted that policies put in place to reduce carbon emissions haven't affected the fossil fuel boom.
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), the full committee's ranking member, called the proposed budget the "logical next step in an already highly coherent energy strategy."
"The budget would increase funding for important national priorities" such as energy efficiency and renewable energy, Pallone added.
Whitfield dismissed the proposed budget as "wishful thinking" and argued that, coupled with the administration's regulatory plans, it would eliminate jobs in coal-producing states like Kentucky and drive up energy costs around the country.
While most of the panel's GOP members used the hearing to slam the budget and EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan, the full committee's chairman, Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), struck a more conciliatory tone, extending an opening to Moniz and Democrats to work with Republicans on crafting a comprehensive energy package.
"The areas of disagreement between Republicans and the Obama administration often get most of the attention," Upton said. "Let's not lose sight of the opportunity to turn America into an energy superpower and the bipartisan efforts that will help us get there."
Upton was referring to a broad energy bill being sketched out by members of both parties in the House and Senate. The package would incorporate bills introduced last year by Republicans and Democrats that focus on infrastructure, job training, diplomacy and efficiency (see related story).
"All of those issues" are priorities for DOE, said Moniz, who has held discussions with Upton on the legislation. "We look forward to working on the framework."Sharp exchange
Still, GOP and Democratic lawmakers found plenty of other issues to argue about at the hearing, a reminder of the gaping divide that exists between the parties on energy and climate policy.
Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) took Moniz to task over the administration's decision to once again zero out funding in its budget request for the long-stalled Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository site in Nevada.
Shimkus pointed to a report released last month by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that concluded Yucca Mountain can safely store nuclear waste but should not be opened until DOE completes an environmental review of the site (E&ENews PM, Jan. 29).
In a sharp exchange with Moniz, Shimkus insisted that "the Department of Energy is required to carry out the [review] but isn't doing it."
Moniz responded that DOE has "responded completely" to NRC's request.
"We'll just agree to disagree," Shimkus said.
The budget request would provide funding for a program -- expected to cost $5.8 billion during its first decade -- to create a pilot interim storage facility for nuclear waste by 2021. The program would also create a larger interim facility by 2012 and a final repository more than two decades later.
Lawmakers and Moniz also clashed over proposed funding in the budget for carbon capture technology and DOE's decision last week to scrap federal funding for FutureGen 2.0, a high-profile $1.6 billion carbon capture and storage (CCS) pilot project (Greenwire, Feb. 4).
Republicans and other pro-coal lawmakers have used the decision to argue against the viability of EPA's proposal to require the technology at new coal-fired power plants.
"EPA has effectively put a moratorium on construction by requiring that new plants use carbon capture technology that has not been demonstrated as commercially viable for power generation in this country," Whitfield said.
Whitfield, like other Republicans on the panel, also wanted to know whether DOE, EPA and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission were collaborating on rules affecting power plants to ensure reliability.
Also citing delays in Southern Co.'s Kemper carbon capture project in Mississippi, Whitfield asked Moniz about EPA: "Have they talked to you all about this and the state of viable CCS technology?"
Moniz said at one point during the hearing, "The answer is yes, in the sense that it happens. We provide technical assistance, and that's with both EPA and FERC."No war on coal, says Moniz
Moniz rejected some lawmakers' claims that the administration is waging a war on coal. And he said EPA's CCS mandate would require plants to capture much less of their carbon compared to demonstration projects in question.
"They are different levels of ambition," Moniz said about demonstration projects that promise to capture 90 percent of their emissions compared with EPA's proposed mandate. "That's a very, very different level of challenge than the projects we are putting together."
But beyond EPA rulemaking and the death of FutureGen, lawmakers wanted to know whether Moniz and DOE remain committed to developing technologies to make coal cleaner and, therefore, comply with tougher oversight.
Moniz said his department is "demonstrably committed" to the issue. The budget includes roughly $370 million for research under the clean coal banner, plus new tax incentives for CCS.
In response to lawmakers concerned about lab funding, Moniz said he is looking forward to continued research, like whether coal combustion waste is a good source for rare earth elements.
And he said the National Energy Technology Laboratory, contrary to lawmaker concerns, would not see significant reforms. In 2013, union leaders worried about a proposal to have a contractor run it.
"I think in terms of scale, it will be very much the same," said Moniz. "It's not going to change in terms of organizational structure. I think it's going to be comparable in size."
-
Vitter Suggests NRDC-EPA Link on Model Power Plant Rule
Feb 11, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Jean Chemnick
The Natural Resources Defense Council found itself unexpectedly back on the hot seat today at the first Senate Environment and Public Works Committee climate hearing since Republicans took control of the Senate -- this time for advising U.S. EPA to craft a model rule for its Clean Power Plan.
Sen. David Vitter reprised a line of attack he used often as ranking member of the committee in the last Congress, blasting EPA for a "really dramatic pattern" of allowing the influential green group special access to staff who were writing the power plant carbon dioxide proposal.
In remarks at the morning hearing, the Louisiana Republican referenced 14 emails his committee staff obtained last year via a Freedom of Information Request to EPA, which he argued showed NRDC was behind key components of the draft. They mention meetings and correspondence between EPA and NRDC (Greenwire, Oct. 14, 2014).
E&E's Power Plan Hub keeps you up to date on the latest national and state-level developments on EPA's greenhouse gas regulations for the power sector. Go to E&E's Power Plan Hub.
"The number of these communications is pretty staggering and unprecedented as far as I can see," Vitter told EPA air chief Janet McCabe, who was testifying before the committee.
Vitter, who is now a senior member of the panel's majority, asked McCabe whether NRDC had a hand in EPA's January announcement that it would write a federal implementation plan (FIP) for the rule. NRDC had urged the agency to provide a model to guide state plans and to act as a backstop for states that choose not to submit approvable compliance strategies. The agency has now said it will propose one this summer, to be finalized a year later.
But Vitter pointed to a June 2013 email between NRDC's climate policy director, David Doniger, and EPA air and radiation senior counsel Joe Goffman in which Doniger offers legal advice on EPA's options for promulgating a FIP.
"Prior to this email, had EPA even considered issuing a model FIP?" Vitter asked.
McCabe said EPA consults with a wide variety of stakeholders throughout its rulemaking processes but said the choice to offer a model rule was guided by statute.
"I can assure you that the notion of a federal implementation plan is fully laid out in the Clean Air Act, and that is what is motivating us to consider offering a model plan," she said.
Nor was Vitter the only panel Republican to pound NRDC during the hearing. Sen. John Barrasso painted the 2010 settlement agreement between NRDC and EPA that committed the agency to write the existing power plant rule as a particularly egregious case of "sue and settle."
The Wyoming Republican said that states and utilities that would be affected by the Clean Power Plan had no say in the settlement, while the green group did.
"These rule were crafted to please the NRDC," he charged.
But McCabe said EPA's agreement to promulgate carbon dioxide rules for the power sector followed from its 2009 finding that CO2 endangers human health.
And she said states also have substantial input during rulemakings.
"I speak with states all the time," she said. "They have very good access to discuss all of these issues with us. And they certainly know how to reach us, and do."
NRDC became a favorite target for Vitter and EPW Republicans last year after The New York Times published a much-discussed story that hinted that the power plant draft relied heavily on an earlier proposal by the environmental group.
The agency hit back, insisting that the draft rule was its own product (E&E Daily, July 11, 2014).
NRDC said today that Vitter and Barrasso were grasping at straws to keep EPA from acting on CO2.
"They are seeking to distract attention from this pressing issue by raising baseless charges about NRDC and EPA," said NRDC Government Affairs Director David Goldston in a statement. "We made recommendations to the agency, and sometimes EPA has found them helpful. The senators' efforts to stifle debate should disturb anyone who wants to participate in the democratic process, regardless of where they stand on climate action."
-
Virginia Senate OKs Bill to Freeze Base Rates To Help Utilities Meet Clean Power Plan Costs
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jeff Day
The Virginia Senate passed legislation that would temporarily freeze base electricity rates and allow the state's investor-owned electrical utilities to retain unexpected earnings that would normally be rebated to customers to help them recover the costs of reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
The bill (S.B. 1349) is designed to help the utilities comply with the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan, the proposed regulation under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act.
Approved on a 32-6 vote Feb. 6, the Virginia Senate bill would establish “transitional rate periods” for the state's largest utilities, Dominion Virginia Power and Appalachian Power, according to an official state summary of the legislation.
Dominion, the bigger of the two companies, would get a five-year “test period,” from Jan. 1, 2015, to Dec. 31, 2019. Appalachian would receive a four-year test period, from Jan. 1, 2014, to Dec. 31, 2017.
The legislation would freeze base rates, allow retention of “overearnings” and allow the companies to seek rate adjustment clauses (RACs) to cover the costs of early retirement of generation facilities caused by the Clean Power Plan.
The State Corporation Commission normally approves base rates and requires rebates of over-earnings, but that wouldn't take place during the transitional rate periods.
The SCC would have to approve rate adjustment clauses. The agency also would be authorized to conduct unannounced inspections of company records to verify their integrity.
Solar Power Amendment Approved
Under an amendment to the legislation made on the Senate floor and backed by environmental groups, investor-owned utilities also would be able to recover the costs of building solar power stations with a collective generation capacity of up to 500 megawatts.
Meanwhile, the House of Delegates Feb. 10 approved a bill (H.B. 2237) that would allow utilities to purchase solar power stations able to generate up to 500 megawatts and recover the costs through an enhanced rate of return on equity, through rate adjustment clauses.
On Feb. 5, Dominion announced that it plans to construct several large-scale solar power stations buy 2020, collectively capable of producing 400 megawatts (25 DEN A-12, 2/6/15).
Utilities Would Have to Help Consumers
Another adopted floor amendment to the Senate bill would require both utilities to establish pilot programs to provide “energy assistance” and home weatherization services for low-income, elderly and disabled individuals.
The Virginia office of the Southern Environmental Law Center hailed the amendments to the Senate bill. “As Virginians work to build a new, clean energy economy, we need to take advantage of job-creation opportunities in solar energy and energy efficiency,” the group said.
The bill that passed the Senate “does just that,” SELC said in a statement distributed to reporters Feb. 9.
Dominion didn't respond to requests for comment on the bill. Dominion employs eight registered lobbyists in Richmond and has retained the services of six other Richmond lobbyists.
In the last two years, Dominion made $1.5 million in in-state campaign contributions, according to the Virginia Public Access Project, the long-time tracker of Virginia money and politics data.
Appalachian Power Cool to Bill
A spokesman for Appalachian Power, the state's other investor-owned utility, said the base rate freeze in the Senate bill would give the company unusual long-term revenue certainty.
However, the spokesman, John Shepelwich, told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 11 that the bill would force the utilities to absorb the costs of severe storms. He also expressed skepticism that RACs will allow Appalachian to recover the bulk of the costs it would incur in complying with EPA's Clean Power Plan.
Other provisions of S.B. 1349 would require that the State Corporation Commission deliver annual reports to the governor and General Assembly on the amount, reliability and type of generation facilities needed for the Virginia economy—compared to what is then available and what may be needed in view of market conditions and current and pending state and federal environmental regulations
DEQ Would Report on Impacts
The Department of Environmental Quality would be required to produce annual reports for lawmakers on the impacts of the Clean Power Plan on the utilities, “among other matters.”
The House Commerce and Law Committee approved S.B. 1349 on Feb. 10. It was awaiting action on the House floor Feb. 11.
-
EPA Defends Authority For Novel Boiler MACT 'Energy Assessment' Mandate
Feb 11, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA is defending its Clean Air Act authority for its novel requirement in its boiler air toxics rule that industrial facilities conduct one-time “energy assessments” to improve boiler efficiency, a mandate that could affect a host of EPA policies given its potential to encourage reductions in air toxics, energy use and greenhouse gases (GHGs).
In a Feb. 11 final brief in ongoing litigation over EPA's maximum achievable control technology (MACT) air toxics rule for larger “major” source boilers, the Department of Justice (DOJ) on the agency's behalf says the assessments are a legitimate measure for EPA to require beyond the “MACT floor” -- the rule's minimum emissions standard.
Under the Clean Air Act's air toxics program, EPA can choose to impose “beyond-the-floor” measures if it deems this necessary and cost-effective to reduce health risks, according to the brief.
The suit over the major source boiler MACT is proceeding in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in parallel with litigation over EPA's air toxics rule for smaller “area” source boilers, as well as suits over a related rule for commercial and industrial solid waste incinerators (CISWI) and a regulation defining waste used in combustion, which determines whether facilities fall under the MACT or CISWI rule.
In the major source boiler MACT suit, United States Sugar Corporation, et al. v. EPA, et al., industry groups are challenging the rule for setting excessively stringent standards beyond air law mandates. Major sources emit more than 10 tons per year (tpy) of one hazardous air pollutant (HAP) or 25 tpy of a combination of HAPs.
One part of the rule industry opposes is the requirement to conduct an energy assessment to measure the energy consumption not just of the boiler itself, but of related equipment within an industrial facility.
Industry has argued that this is regulatory overreach, and that EPA has exceeded its statutory authority by regulating equipment beyond the source category at issue, but DOJ rejects those claims.
Energy Assessments
The assessments include energy conservation measures and management practices. Their purpose “is to identify processes and practices that will reduce or conserve energy consumption because '[i]mprovement in energy efficiency results in decreased fuel use which results in a corresponding decrease in emissions (both HAP and non-HAP) from the [boiler],'” DOJ says in its new brief, citing language in EPA's final rule.
EPA in the rule says, “the scope of assessment is based on energy use by discrete segments of a facility and not by a total aggregation of all individual energy using elements of a facility.”
DOJ in its brief therefore notes that the obligation for the energy assessments is not entirely open-ended, but is instead tied to the components of the facility that together serve to increase or decrease HAPs. As such, the assessments “cannot be considered to be beyond EPA’s authority,” DOJ argues. “While emissions are generally measured at the boiler or other combustion equipment from which hazardous pollutants emanate, Congress did not limit EPA’s regulatory authority to that specific combustion equipment,” the brief says.
Also, DOJ notes, the assessments are not unduly expensive, and facilities are not forced to take steps to reduce energy use in line with the assessments' findings. Boiler owners and operators “are expected to voluntarily use the results of the assessment to increase the energy-efficiency and cost-efficiency of their boiler system.”
While reducing toxics and other traditional air pollutants through increased energy efficiency is a stated goal of the assessments, EPA in its final rule also acknowledged that the addition of certain control technologies to limit toxics from some boilers may lead to a rise in energy use and increased GHG emissions. Making boilers more efficient would therefore serve to counteract this by reducing energy consumption and GHGs.
DOJ's Defense
DOJ in its brief also rejects various other arguments industry groups have raised against the boiler MACT. For example, DOJ again defends EPA's method of setting MACT on a “pollutant-by-pollutant” basis, which EPA says is the only legal and practical way to set sufficiently tough emissions limits. Industry says this approach leads to standards that often no one source can meet.
Also, DOJ says EPA is correct not to take periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction into account when setting MACT floors, as to do so would be “impracticable.”
DOJ also rejects environmentalists' criticisms that its use of carbon monoxide (CO) as a “surrogate” for other pollutants is inappropriate, because it underestimates toxic emissions, and hence is illegal. CO is an “overly conservative surrogate because elevated CO levels can persist when all the organic compounds have been destroyed,” DOJ says.
EPA also again defends its use of a statistical method called the Upper Prediction Limit when calculating MACT floors. Environmentalists say the method is not an “average” of the best performing units' emissions, as required by the air law, but DOJ says the technique is legitimate to account for variability in sources' performance over time.
-
GOP Senators' Attacks On EPA Climate Rules Could Aid Future Challenges
Feb 11, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Lee Logan
Republicans are targeting EPA's authority to issue its greenhouse gas (GHG) rules for power plants, offering at a recent Senate hearing several legal and practical critiques of the policies that could lay the groundwork for legislative and legal challenges after the rules are completed.
The Feb. 11 hearing is the first on EPA's existing source performance standards (ESPS) and companion new source power plant rules since the GOP took control of the Senate.
Environment & Public Works Committee (EPW) Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK) says he will hold several more oversight hearings on the rules featuring state officials, climate scientists and other federal agencies.
The oversight hearings could achieve multiple objectives for GOP senators, including providing political messaging for base supporters, helping critics' litigation over the rules and winning targeted changes to soften the rules.
Republicans have been hesitant to date to discuss legislative options they could use to weaken the rules, though Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has vowed to use an array of tools, including appropriations bills, to block EPA's climate efforts.
Several panel Republicans at the hearing made it clear that they strongly oppose the ESPS, and their criticisms appear aimed at undermining the rule rather than improving it. “It's something that many of us here oppose and are going to continue to try to dismantle,” said Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY).
Inhofe added: “We’re going to do what we can to keep my people in Oklahoma from incurring the largest tax increase in history for something that is not really occurring,” referencing his belief that humans do not contribute to climate change.
Acting EPA air chief Janet McCabe -- the hearing's sole witness -- largely reiterated agency announcements about the ESPS and rules for new and modified sources, mentioning several times that the agency is weighing millions of comments when asked about EPA's thoughts on specific issues in the rule.
However, in an exchange with Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), McCabe also indicated for the first time that the agency plans to promulgate a final federal implementation plan (FIP) for states that do not submit adequate compliance plans within one year of proposing it.
“We'll have a proposed FIP out in the summer, and I would expect we would have that finalized within a year,” she said.
EPA has previously said it would issue a proposed FIP by mid-summer -- around the same time it finishes the ESPS and rules for new and modified sources -- but officials had not previously said when they would finalize the federal plan.
Vitter noted that the timeline is “perfectly consistent with this direction and advice” from a June 2013 email from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to EPA that laid out the legal case for finalizing a backstop FIP even before the deadline for states to submit their own compliance plans. Under that scenario, the email said, EPA could finalize the FIP as long as it does not “implement” controls until a reasonable time after a state misses its deadline.
EPA's plan to finish the FIP a year after it is proposed would roughly coincide with states' deadlines to submit an initial ESPS compliance plan in the summer of 2016, though many states are expected to request year-long extensions for their final plans, and states could receive an extra two years if they are working on multi-state approaches.
But McCabe rejected the idea that NRDC spurred the idea of crafting a backstop FIP. “We get a lot of detailed advice from a lot of people,” she said. “The notion of a federal implementation plan is fully laid out in the Clean Air Act, and that is what is motivating us to think about the need for a backstop federal plan.”
NRDC's David Goldston in a Feb. 11 statement pushed back on the charges from Vitter and other Republicans, saying, “We made recommendations to the agency, and sometimes EPA found them helpful. The senators' efforts to stifle debate should disturb anyone who wants to participate in the democratic process, regardless of where they stand on climate action.”
'Transformative Expansion'
Offering one potential legal attack on the ESPS, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) also cited the recent Supreme Court ruling in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, a case he said undermines EPA's power plant rules.
That ruling, which struck down a portion of EPA's tailoring rule for GHG permits, found that “EPA's interpretation is also unreasonable because it would bring about an enormous and transformative expansion of EPA’s regulatory authority without clear congressional authorization.”
“I think you're doing exactly what the [Supreme Court] reprimanded you for doing in its recent case,” Sullivan said. “You are taking significant power under the Clean Air Act that's dramatically expanded, that's dramatically expanding your powers over the U.S. economy without clear Congressional authorization.”
McCabe rejected the notion that the ESPS “dramatically expands” its authority. “I believe that the rule we have proposed and that we’re going through comment on today is squarely based on our authority in the Clean Air Act,” she replied, adding, “I believe we are following what the Clean Air Act requires.”
Democrats largely praised the ESPS for curbing GHGs that cause climate change, and also defended EPA's statutory authority for the rule. “This is a situation where the Clean Air Act requires you to act,” ranking member Barbara Boxer (D-CA) said. “It doesn’t require [Congress] to act, it requires you to implement the act, unless we repeal the Clean Air Act. I haven't heard anyone say that they want to repeal the Clean Air Act. If they do, bring it on.”
Boxer added that EPA must “follow the law” and follow Supreme Court holdings that found carbon dioxide to be included as a “pollutant” under the air law. “If you didn't do your work, you would be sued for not doing it, am I right?”
“In all likelihood,” McCabe said.
“I think so, because I know some of the folks who would do it, including me, probably,” Boxer said.
New Source Rule
Barrasso, whose state is a major exporter of coal and electricity, also touched on a major legal criticism of the new source performance standards (NSPS), arguing that the recent Energy Department (DOE) decision to scrap funding for the FutureGen carbon capture sequestration (CCS) plant shows the technology is not “adequately demonstrated” as the Clean Air Act requires.
“How can the federal government require the private sector to build CCS power plants under your proposed rule when it can't even build a CCS plant on its own?” he said.
The NSPS' emission standard for new coal plants is based on an emissions level achieved by a plant using partial CCS, but the rule technically would not require use of the technology. “The rule in no way requires anybody to build anything in particular, including CCS,” McCabe replied.
Barrasso also referenced a recent report from the National Coal Council -- a DOE advisory group -- that argued CCS was not adequately demonstrated. “The energy experts are telling DOE that CCS isn't adequately demonstrated. My question is, is the EPA really listening?”
McCabe said EPA is “paying attention to all the input we've gotten” on the NSPS. “I'll note that since last fall there has been a plant operating, using CCS at 90 percent capture. That is moving along as everybody expected. That's a technology that's out there in use, and that's certainly not the only example.”
McCabe was referencing SaskPower's recently launched Boundary Dam CCS project in Canada, a facility that sources have said will be a key piece of evidence EPA will use to justify its NSPS, given recent significant construction delays and cost overruns at Southern Company's Kemper plant in Mississippi.
-
New GOP Senate Begins Assault on Obama's Climate Rules
Feb 12, 2015 | The Hill - E2Wire
By Laura Barron-Lopez
The new Republican-controlled Senate kicked off its first of likely many hearings on President Obama's signature climate rules aimed at cutting carbon pollution on Wednesday.
Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee attempted to poke holes in the administration's carbon rules, calling the regulations "costly," "job killing," and "unnecessary."
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the committee, charged that the the rules would "do nothing to save us from global warming" and that they were "unconstitutional."
It's a move by Republicans to lay a foundation of criticism and doubt concerning the standards, but they still have yet to offer any details on a comprehensive plan to dismantle, repeal or replace them.
Despite overwhelming opposition from Republicans to the regulations — which would mandate states cut carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants 30 percent by 2030 — it remains unclear how the new majority under Sen. Mitch McConnell's direction (R-Ky.) will try to block the rules.
Instead, each Republican on the committee sought to draw attention to parts of the administration's climate agenda they disagree with on Wednesday.
Freshman Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) challenged the head of air and radiation at the Environmental Protection Agency, Janet McCabe, on the agency's authority to regulate carbon emissions from industrial sources.
"Do you think this regulation dramatically expands your authority?" Sullivan asked.
"I do not. I don't. I believe we are following what the Clean Air Act requires," McCabe said, citing an endangerment finding by the Supreme Court.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) went another route, drawing into question the administration's recent deal with China to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
"It's something many of us here oppose and are going to try to dismantle," Barrasso said.
Inhofe piled on as well, noting that roughly 31 states oppose the rule, and accused the EPA of believing false science on climate change, which he said has "become a religion."
Throughout the hearing, McCabe remained calm, and Democrats readily came to her defense, arguing for the need to act on global warming.
"I want to compliment you for your calm presentation," said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). "This is not an administration gone rogue. This is an administration following the Clean Air Act."
Boxer shot back at claims that rules would kill states like West Virginia's economy by raising energy costs, arguing that California has steadily moved toward a cleaner economy and pays less for electricity.
Others like Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said that coastal states like his, which rely on a fishing industry for its economy, are blaming warmer oceans for the disappearance of lobster and other species.
McCabe stressed in her testimony that the "risks are clear" and pushed back at Republican assumptions that the science on climate change has yet to reach a consensus.
"The high costs of climate change inaction are clear," McCabe said. "These steps will help build a more resilient nation, and lead the world in our global climate fight."
She added that the EPA would weigh all comments equally and that final rule will address a number of the questions raised by opponents.
"[The] comments we receive may well lead to adjustments in the final rule… to the extent that adjustments are appropriate and within our authority we will be looking at those kinds of things," McCabe said.
Still, both parties remained at odds over the regulations, and it will not be the last hearing the Environment and Public Works Committee holds on the president's climate agenda.
More are expected throughout the year in both chambers, but the GOP may not be able to launch a robust attack on the rules until they are finalized, which is when opponents are planning to challenge the standards in court.
-
Sides Square Off Over Climate Change Proposals by California Democrats
Feb 10, 2015 | LA Times
By Chris Megerian
The release of climate change proposals by Senate Democrats on Tuesday quickly spawned a heated debate over the direction of California's economy and the potential effect of new environmental regulations.
Some unions and companies welcome the legislation, saying it will lead to new jobs and foster a growing market in clean energy technologies. But oil companies, utilities and other business groups viewed the proposals with skepticism, if not outright hostility.
"This is not going to be easy," said Kathryn Phillips, director of Sierra Club California. "There will be a lot of negotiation."
The proposals largely reflect goals set by Gov. Jerry Brown during his inaugural address last month. One bill would require stricter limits on greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and another would require greater energy efficiency in older buildings, expanded generation of renewable energy and reduced gasoline use on state roads by 2030.
Other bills would create an advisory committee on job growth and order state pension systems, the two largest public pension funds in the country, to divest from coal companies. cComments "Discussions of Global Warming spawned a heated debate" Say...sounds like that could be counter productive? Add in all the "hot air" from the Warmists and we could have a global uptick in temperature.
During Tuesday's news conference outside the Capitol, Senate leader Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) said environmental regulations could spur innovation and help California's economy transition away from fossil fuels.
"My Senate colleagues and I have seen clean energy jobs growing across California, and we want to make sure they reach every single district," De León said.
Sen. Ben Hueso (D-San Diego) described it as "the California gold rush of the modern era." L.A. Unified sides with farmworkers union in dispute with grower
It's a pitch intended to win over Democrats worried about the effect of new legislation on the economy.
"It will be a tough lift," said Assemblyman Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood), who joined De León on Tuesday to show his support. "People have concerns about dependability. People have concerns about costs. We take all of those concerns very seriously."
A coalition of oil companies reiterated their opposition to the "radical" goal of reducing gasoline use 50% by 2030, describing the Senate proposals as "attacks on an important industry." In addition, utility companies have circulated an alternative energy proposal, and some business groups questioned the potential effect of higher electricity prices.
"The jobs you lose in manufacturing could outweigh the jobs you gain in the clean, emerging economy," said Dorothy Rothrock, president of the California Manufacturers & Technology Assn.
If the Senate proposals are enacted, meeting the targets will be left up to state agencies responsible for drafting and enforcing new policies. Assemblyman James Gallagher (R-Nicolaus) said that reduces accountability, and he's pushing legislation to give lawmakers the final word on regulations.
"Shouldn't we have some say in it?" Gallagher said.
De León disagreed, saying that would "politicize" the regulatory process.
-
EPA's FY16 Air Toxics Budget Remains Tight Despite Risk Review Backlog
Feb 12, 2015 | InsideEpa
By Stuart Parker
EPA faces a tight fiscal year 2016 funding proposal for its air toxics program despite a backlog of Clean Air Act-mandated residual risk reviews for potential updates to existing air toxics regulations, delays that have prompted a legal threat from environmentalists to try and force court-ordered deadlines for conducting the reviews.
Although overall funding for air and climate programs would increase under President Obama's FY16 EPA budget proposal released Feb. 2, the plan does not detail any specific funding increases for the air toxics program. Instead, the agency says it will prioritize rules for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) based on its available resources.
Obama is proposing to give EPA a $452 million boost to its current $8.139 billion budget, taking funding in FY16 to $8.591 billion. As part of that increase, the president is seeking a roughly $120 million increase for EPA's air and climate change efforts in FY16 for a total of $1.112 billion compared to the $992 million it received in FY15.
The air toxics program -- including the mandatory residual risk reviews of rules to cut HAPs -- is covered by the agency's fund for federal stationary sources. Under the president's proposed budget, the account would receive $37.5 million in FY16, a $12.5 million increase over the account's $25 million current funding.
EPA's budget documents do not specify how much funding would be dedicated to the risk and technology review (RTR) program, under which EPA is required to review its maximum achievable control technology (MACT) air toxics rules eight years after their promulgation and decide whether there is a need to strengthen them.
An EPA spokesman was unable by press time to provide clarification on the air toxics program's funding.
The RTR program, established under the air law's section 112 air toxics section, is years behind schedule, which observers attribute in part to chronic underfunding.
EPA is again facing the threat of litigation asking a court to force the agency to stick to an agreed schedule for issuance of outstanding RTR rules. In a Feb. 3 letter to EPA, environmental law firm Earthjustice gave 60 days' notice of its intent to sue the agency on behalf of environmentalists seeking deadlines for 33 delayed RTRs.
However, in its congressional justification document for the FY16 budget proposal, EPA says that, "the program cannot address all regulatory reviews statutorily mandated by the [air law] so work will be prioritized, according to resources, and to meet court-ordered deadlines."
For example, it cites section 112(d)(6) of the air law that "requires the EPA to review and revise, as necessary, within eight years, all of the MACT standards that have been promulgated under . . . section 112 since 1990."
The agency adds, "Similarly, section 112(f) . . . requires the EPA to conduct reviews of the risk that remains after the implementation of MACT standards within eight years of promulgation. There are over 80 stationary source (air toxics) rules due for review under Section 112 . . . , and the agency is expecting litigation over already-missed deadlines."
EPA says it "will engage in rulemaking efforts to review and revise, as necessary and appropriate, priority industry sectors, including, but not limited to Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing, Aerospace Manufacturing, Coke Ovens, Publicly Owned Treatment Works, Plywood and Composite Wood Products, Ethylene Production, and several coatings source categories."
-
ARPA-E's Martin Discusses Agency's Successes, New $125M Funding Opportunity
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
What more can the federal government do to ensure the United States stays ahead of the energy technology innovation curve? During today's OnPoint, recorded at the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) Innovation Summit, Dr. Cheryl Martin, deputy director for commercialization at ARPA-E, discusses her agency's evolution and the most compelling innovations coming out of this year's summit. Martin, who recently announced she will be leaving ARPA-E, also talks about her next steps in the energy sector. Today's OnPoint will air on E&ETV at 10 a.m. EST.
-
EU Shutters More Natural Gas, Coal Power Plants Due to Falling Demand for Electricity
Feb 12, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mathew Carr
European utilities shut more coal and natural gas power plants in 2014 than in any year since at least 2009 amid falling demand for electricity and tougher pollution curbs, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
European Union power companies turned off 63 percent more coal- and gas-fed generation than they started, James Cooper, an analyst for New Energy Finance in London, said by e-mail Feb. 11. Net decommissioning of five gigawatts, which is equivalent to about five nuclear power plants, was the most in at least six years.
Fossil fuel burning fell on measures to cut particulate air pollution as well as the U.K.’s carbon price floor that sets a minimum cost on power plant emissions. The region's warmest year in three decades cut demand for heating, while utilities generated a record amount of electricity from renewable sources such as wind and solar.
“Fossil generators are facing an increasingly difficult operating environment, with a poor demand outlook, aging fleet, subsidies for renewables and policies to reduce emissions all having their hand in closures,” Cooper said.
EU power companies shut 13 gigawatts of fossil capacity last year, the most since 2009 when New Energy started tracking the data, Cooper said. They added 8 gigawatts of new coal- and gas-fed generation. The data excludes shorter term closures known as mothballing.
Carbon Market
EU policies to combat greenhouse gas emissions include the world's biggest cap-and-trade carbon market, which requires utilities and industry to hold allowances to cover their pollution. Lawmakers are taking steps to strengthen the program after permit prices plunged more than 75 percent since 2008.
Benchmark EU carbon allowances rose 1 percent Feb. 10 to 7.25 euros ($8.20) a metric ton on the ICE Futures Europe exchange in London. While prices jumped a record 48 percent last year, they remain below the 10-year average of 11.75 euros.
Europe's policy of providing free carbon allowances to power stations through 2012 kept fossil power stations open longer than necessary, according to Dave Jones, an analyst at Sandbag, an environmental lobby group in London.
“Plant closures can and should be happening even faster than they are,” Jones said by e-mail Feb. 11.
Coal-fired power generation is set to slump further under the bloc's Large Combustion Plant Directive, which is intended to cut emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and dust by closing the most-polluting power stations.
The LCPD cut 8.7 gigawatts of capacity in the U.K. alone in “recent years,” Cooper said. One gigawatt can supply about 2 million European homes.
Price Fall
German power prices for 2016, a benchmark for Europe, dropped 8.9 percent last year, extending the 24 percent decline in 2013, according to broker data. Prices have risen 1.4 percent this year.
E.ON SE, Germany's biggest utility, retired 3.3 gigawatts of capacity last year, 21 percent more than in 2013. It earmarked 1.8 gigawatts for retirement this year, the Dusseldorf-based company said in a Jan. 9 statement.
E.ON, which is spinning off its traditional generation business, will “immediately react” should additional plants begin to lose money, Georg Oppermann, a spokesman for E.ON, said in January.
-
Absent Fix to Trust Fund, DOT Would Begin Rationing Billions in July -- Foxx
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Sean Reilly
The Department of Transportation could begin rationing billions of dollars in road-building payments to states in July if Congress doesn't find a way to pump more money into the Highway Trust Fund within the next few months, DOT Secretary Anthony Foxx said yesterday.
While cautioning that the situation is "very fluid," Foxx told reporters that the department would likely warn states in June about possible "cash management" measures, with implementation starting the next month. Although he did not spell out what those emergency steps would be, DOT officials last year had planned to both delay and cut reimbursements to states when a similar shortfall threatened.
"I hope we don't get there," Foxx said.
Last year's crisis was averted through the last-minute passage of an almost $11 billion bailout intended to keep the trust fund solvent through May. Foxx's comments yesterday came after a three-hour House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing that underscored the obstacles to enactment of a long-term fix.
Foxx, for example, called for Congress to "go big" with the Obama administration's six-year transportation plan that calls for hefty spending increases on roads, rail and transit. But Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, the committee's top Democrat, flatly predicted that the Republican-controlled Congress would reject the White House's proposal to cover about half of the $478 billion price tag by taxing U.S. company earnings held overseas.
GOP lawmakers have yet to offer a competing strategy for plugging a recurring hole in the $50 billion trust fund, as gas tax receipts regularly fall short of spending demands. Afterward, House T&I Chairman Bill Shuster (R-Pa.) reiterated his goal to push though a long-term bill by May, though he acknowledged that the House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee will first have to come up with a way to pay for it.
Neither panel has so far volunteered any information on what approaches it is considering.
"Our goal, of course, is a multi-year bill, but a lot of work remains to be done," Ways and Means spokesman Brendan Buck said yesterday in an email when asked what options are on the table. Senate Finance spokesman Aaron Fobes did not respond to a similar emailed request for comment.
The hearing coincided with the release of the Government Accountability Office's latest update to its high-risk roster of particularly troubled programs. Highway and transit financing has been on the list since 2007. Through 2024, the trust fund will need another $157 billion to stay solvent at current spending levels adjusted for inflation, according to the report, which cites an earlier Congressional Budget Office estimate.
Already, the latest bout of uncertainty has prompted Arkansas and Tennessee transportation officials to shelve a combined $500 million worth of highway projects, Foxx said. "We may not see it directly, but failure to act on a long-term bill is actually making investment in critical infrastructure more expensive -- and more difficult, for all of our state DOTs," he said in his prepared testimony.
By law, the trust fund cannot run out of money. For the highway account, DOT officials start considering emergency steps once the balance dips below $4 billion; for the mass transit account, the threshold is $1 billion.
As lawmakers peppered him with questions on subjects ranging from trucking regulations to freight policy, Foxx touted administration efforts to reduce red tape on planned projects, as well as a proposed $6 billion program to encourage state and local governments to adopt changes in areas such as safety and better managing rush-hour traffic.
In response to a question from Rep. Jeff Denham, a California Republican who chairs the T&I Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials, Foxx said he couldn't predict when the department will issue final crude-by-rail regulations that are now under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget, but he added that DOT is tackling the rulemaking "with the highest level of urgency."
"Our goal is to get it out very, very quickly," he said.
Foxx also deflected a request from Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.) that the Transportation Department block Amtrak's bid for an exemption from "Buy America" standards in purchasing 28 high-speed trainsets. In a letter that Garamendi and other lawmakers plan to send to Foxx shortly, they write that the Federal Railroad Administration last November waived the requirements both for Amtrak and the California High-Speed Rail Authority to allow final overseas assembly of four prototype trainsets.
Although the circumstances were unique, the letter says, "we urge the department to resist any further attempts to move away from or weaken important Buy America standards that help maximize the benefits of federal transportation investments."
The matter, Foxx said yesterday, is "under review."
-
Boxer Defends Shakeup, Calls Transportation a 'Legacy Issue'
Feb 12, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Daniel Bush
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ranking member Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) yesterday defended her decision to take charge of the subpanel that oversees transportation, calling the topic -- and a potential highway bill reauthorization -- a "legacy" issue for her during her last two years in Congress.
Boxer's surprise announcement yesterday afternoon that she would replace Sen. Thomas Carper (D-Del.) as the top Democrat on the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure sent a ripple effect through EPW's Democratic ranks.
But the veteran California lawmaker was characteristically blunt when asked to explain her reasons for the shakeup, which included other changes that affect several Democrats on the committee.
Transportation "is a legacy issue for me," Boxer said in a brief interview off the Senate floor.
EPW is playing a lead role in negotiating a reauthorization of a long-term surface highway bill that is set to expire on May 31. The bill is considered one of the few areas where Democrats and Republicans could potentially find agreement this year, but its chances of passing remain slim.
That didn't stop Boxer from reshuffling her Democratic colleagues on EPW in order to give herself the Transportation Subcommittee gavel.
Boxer named Carper the ranking member on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee, replacing Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a vocal environmental advocate who used the post as one of his platforms for pushing for climate change action.
Carper could not be reached for comment. Whitehouse, who will now serve as the top Democrat on the Fisheries, Wildlife and Water Subcommittee, downplayed the change.
"Seniority has its privileges, and that's the nature of the beast," Whitehouse told E&E Daily. He added that he would still be "relentlessly active on air and climate issues" despite losing the post.
Whitehouse also serves as the co-chairman of the Bicameral Climate Task Force.
Boxer also installed Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) as the chairman of the Superfund, Waste Management and Regulatory Oversight Subcommittee.
EPW Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who took over the full committee after Republicans gained control of the Senate last month, said he was surprised by Boxer's decision.
"I don't know if people are upset" or not, Inhofe said in an interview. But "I'm surprised that they're making any changes," he added.
Boxer announced last month that she would retire at the end of next year and forgo a shot at a fifth term in the Senate.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested