Preview Newsletter

ACC PM 5/9/18

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) US ACC Sets Goals to Recycle, Recover All Plastic Packaging by 2040
May 9, 2018 | ICIS
By Tracy Dang

The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Plastics Division has established three goals for the recycling and recovering of all plastic packaging in the US by 2040, the industry group said on Wednesday.
(ACC Mentioned) US Plastics Industry Sets 100 Percent Packaging Diversion Goal
May 9, 2018 | Recycling Today
By Brian Taylor

The Washington-based American Chemistry Council (ACC) and its Plastics Division have announced three goals it says “crystalize U.S. plastics producers’ commitment to recycle or recover all plastic packaging used in the United States by 2040.”
How Trump’s Proposed Cuts to the EPA's Science and Technology Budget Endanger Our Health and Safety
May 9, 2018 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Kathleen Rest

Most people have a vague understanding of what our nation’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does.

LCSA News

Cape Fear River Watch, SELC Demand State Take Action on Chemours’ Pollution
May 9, 2018 | Port City Daily
By Johanna Ferebee

The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality is being asked, once again, to exercise its authority over Chemours for polluting the public water and air supply.
EPA Launches Lead Paint Education Effort on Seacoast
May 9, 2018 | New Hampshire Business Review

An initiative aimed at improving compliance with laws that protect children from lead paint poisoning has been launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s New England office.

Chemical Management News

Methylene Chloride Campaigners Meet with EPA Administrator
May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin

NGO campaigners have met with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to request that the agency act on its proposed rule to ban methylene chloride paint strippers.
There’s an App for That
May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Warmington

The duty of suppliers of articles containing substances of very high concern (SVHCs) at concentrations above 0.1% w/w in an article, including – as per a European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in 2015 – each article "incorporated as a component of a complex product", is enshrined in REACH Article 33. What is happening in practice is quite another matter.
REACH Nano Changes Get Industry Nod, but Concerns Linger
May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel

Industry and NGOs have broadly welcomed EU member state approval of revisions to REACH annexes to address substances in nanoforms, yet concerns over loopholes remain.
J&J Talc Litigation Spreads to Canada
May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller

A Quebec judge has authorised a class-action lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson arguing that its talc products caused ovarian cancer. The plaintiffs’ lawyer has also sought certification to sue on behalf of women in Canada’s other provinces.
Anses Warns Against Hazardous Substances in Homemade Toy ‘Slime’
May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch

Homemade toy 'slime' can pose health risks to children as they may contain hazardous substances, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety has warned.

Energy News

Schneiderman's Energy Legacy: A Finger in Every Pie
May 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Saqib Rahim

Even in the tumultuous world of New York politics, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's sudden resignation Monday registers as an earthquake.
Assuring Energy Security with a Modern NAFTA
May 9, 2018 | Forbes
By Earl Anthony Wayne and David R. Shedd

As negotiations reach the go/no go point for a revised North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), President Trump should recognize the agreement’s impact on one of his top priorities: U.S. energy dominance.
Committee Passes Resource Diplomacy Bill
May 9, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder

The House Foreign Affairs Committee this morning put its support behind a bipartisan bill that would create a new assistant secretary dedicated to energy security and diplomacy at the State Department.
Crude Drops Ahead of U.S. Iran Policy Shift
May 9, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal (In E&E Energywire)
By Stephanie Yang

Crude prices fell yesterday ahead of President Trump's announcement that the U.S. would abandon the Iran nuclear deal.
EPA Extends Scope of Streamlined Oil and Gas Air Permitting
May 9, 2018 | Inside EPA

EPA is proposing to extend the scope of its federal implementation plan (FIP) for streamlined Clean Air Act “minor source” permitting for oil and gas production on tribal lands to cover a newly created ozone “nonattainment” area in the Uinta Basin, UT, that would apply until the agency crafts an area-specific plan to reduce ozone emissions.
Drilling Plan Is Good for Consumers — and the Environment
May 9, 2018 | Real Clear Energy
By Ross Marchand

Five years is a long time. Sporting victors, ruling parties, and business conditions are constantly changing, making it hard to plan for the next half-decade.
Oil States See Chance to Speed U.S. Drilling Permits
May 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee

Regulators in oil- and gas-producing states said they're getting closer to their long-held goal of speeding up the permitting process for drilling on federal land.
State Faces Power Crunch as Aliso Canyon Limits Gas Use
May 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Anne C. Mulkern

Southern California faces an upcoming power crunch as it wrestles with how much to use natural gas from a site where a historic methane leak occurred.
Tellurian Says 20-Plus Companies Eyeing Investments in LNG, Gas Infrastructure
May 9, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis

Nearly two-dozen companies are analyzing Tellurian Inc.’s natural gas prospects and partners could be identified soon, CEO Meg Gentle said Wednesday.

Chemical Security News

Cybersecurity, LNG Bills Clear House Energy and Commerce Committee
May 9, 2018 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna

Four bills aimed at bolstering the Energy Department's ability to protect the nation's electric grid cleared the full House Energy and Commerce Committee today.

Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Environment News

Climate Hawk's Stunning Fall from Grace Emboldens Skeptics
May 9, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Josh Kurtz and Benjamin Hulac

Ex-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) was at the vanguard of the climate movement, heading legal and political fights against Trump administration attempts to weaken environmental regulations.
Will Schneiderman's Replacement Continue His Climate War?
May 9, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Scott Waldman

The gravity of New York politics shifted dramatically within a few hours Monday, and with it so may have the state's role as a leading Trump administration foe in the fight over climate change policy.
'Climate Will Not Be on the Agenda' — Emails
May 9, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen

A trove of email correspondence from Scott Pruitt's scheduler reveals details about the EPA administrator's approach to climate policy.

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) US ACC Sets Goals to Recycle, Recover All Plastic Packaging by 2040

May 9, 2018 | ICIS

By Tracy Dang

The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Plastics Division has established three goals for the recycling and recovering of all plastic packaging in the US by 2040, the industry group said on Wednesday.
The goals are:
-100% of plastics packaging is re-used, recycled or recovered by 2040;
-100% of plastics packaging is recyclable or recoverable by 2030; and
-100% of US manufacturing sites operated by ACC’s Plastics Division members will participate in Operation Clean Sweep-Blue by 2020, with all of their manufacturing sites across North America involved by 2022.
“We are embracing the drive toward a circular economy for plastics because it helps demonstrate our overarching commitment to sustainable materials management,” said Steve Russell, ACC’s vice president of plastics.
“In setting these goals, our industry is publicly affirming our vision of the future [that] we want for safe, sanitary plastic packaging and our intention to get there quickly.”
The ACC said US plastic resin producers plan to focus on six areas:
-Designing new products for greater efficiency, recycling and reuse;
-Developing new technologies and systems for collecting, sorting, recycling and recovering materials;
-Making it easier for more consumers to participate in recycling and recovery programmes;
-Expanding the types of plastics collected and repurposed;
-Aligning products with key end markets; and
-Expanding awareness that used plastics are valuable resources awaiting their next use.
“Plastics resin producers are accelerating their commitments by building new coalitions and forging new business models that will help optimise a range of environmental, economic and societal outcomes,” said Rick Wagner, global sustainability manager at Chevron Phillips Chemical. “Some of these involve turning used plastics back into their basic building blocks so we can create new plastics.”
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/05/09/10220269/us-acc-sets-goals-to-recycle-recover-all-plastic-packaging-by-2040/

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) US Plastics Industry Sets 100 Percent Packaging Diversion Goal

May 9, 2018 | Recycling Today

By Brian Taylor

The Washington-based American Chemistry Council (ACC) and its Plastics Division have announced three goals it says “crystalize U.S. plastics producers’ commitment to recycle or recover all plastic packaging used in the United States by 2040.”
As part of that goal, the ACC says it intends “to further enhance plastic pellet stewardship by 2022.” Members of the ACC’s Plastics Division have set the following goals for capturing, recycling, and recovering plastics: 100 percent of plastic packaging to be re-used, recycled or recovered by 2040;100 percent of plastics packaging used should be recyclable or recoverable by 2030; and100 percent of the U.S. manufacturing sites operated by ACC’s Plastics Division members will participate in Operation Clean Sweep-Blue (designed to minimize pellet, flake and powder loss) by 2020, with all of those manufacturing sites in North America involved by 2022.
“We are embracing the drive toward a circular economy for plastics because it helps demonstrate our overarching commitment to sustainable materials management,” says Steve Russell, ACC’s vice president of plastics. “In setting these goals our industry is publicly affirming our vision of the future we want for safe, sanitary plastic packaging and our intention to get there quickly.”
He continues, “Together with our value chain partners we intend to transition to increasingly circular systems for designing, manufacturing, recycling and recovering our plastic packaging resources.
To achieve the stated goals, plastic producers plan to focus on six key areas: 1) designing new products for greater efficiency, recycling and reuse; 2) developing new technologies and systems for collecting, sorting, recycling and recovering materials; 3) making it easier for more consumers to participate in recycling and recovery programs; 4) expanding the types of plastics collected and repurposed; 5) aligning products with key end markets; and 6) expanding awareness that plastic scrap is a valuable resource awaiting its next use.
“Our industry has a long history of leading on stewardship initiatives, such as Responsible Care, and supporting recycling through research, technology, infrastructure and education,” says Rick Wagner, global sustainability manager at Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. “Today’s announcement marks the next step in this critical journey. “
Adds Wagner, “Plastics producers are accelerating their commitments by building new coalitions and forging new business models that will help optimize a range of environmental, economic and societal outcomes. Some of these involve turning used plastics back into their basic building blocks so we can create new plastics.”
http://www.recyclingtoday.com/article/acc-plastic-recycling-diversion-100-percent-goal-usa/

Return to headline | Return to top
How Trump’s Proposed Cuts to the EPA's Science and Technology Budget Endanger Our Health and Safety

May 9, 2018 | Union of Concerned Scientists

By Kathleen Rest

Most people have a vague understanding of what our nation’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does. Some people may have memories of killer smog and rivers on fire and how badly our air and water were contaminated in the not-so-distant past. They may know that the agency is somehow responsible for ensuring that our air and water are clean, that our land and treasured natural resources are protected, and that our health is not damaged by toxic chemicals and pollutants.
Because the environment is a critical determinant of human health, the EPA is really a public health agency, with environment in its name. And science plays a fundamental and essential role in its ability of to fulfill its responsibilities to the American public.
With hearings and debates on the fiscal year (FY) 2019 federal budget getting underway in Congress, we are once again working to defend the budget of the EPA against attacks from the Trump administration and some in Congress. We are paying particular attention to the science and technology (S&T) component of the EPA budget because of the fundamental role that science plays across the agency in its mission to protect our health and the health of our environment.
Rather than cutting the resources for critical programs, our leaders should be boosting investment in them. Here’s why.Understanding the EPA’s Science and Technology account
The S&T account: It may sound esoteric and parsing this budget component can certainly be daunting. But what it covers and the benefits it brings us are easy to understand. Essentially, the S&T account funds science-based research throughout the agency.
Here’s just a snapshot of the programs, activities, and research and development efforts that fall under this EPA budget category—along with some info on what the Trump administration is proposing for them in FY19. These budget proposals are chilling and, if implemented, would certainly hamper the EPA’s ability to fulfill its mission.
Clean air: Know someone with asthma, heart, or respiratory disease? The S&T account is critical to their health. It supports EPA efforts and activities to monitor air quality levels, estimate population exposure to air pollutants, examine the effects of air pollution on public health, track progress in improving air quality and reducing associated risks, and provide models, tools, and technical guidance to states. The EPA is our nation’s primary source of atmospheric data on acid deposition, regional ground-level ozone, and other forms of particulate and gaseous pollutants that put our families and communities at risk.
And that pollution from cars, trucks, buses, nonroad vehicles (such as farm and construction equipment)—and the fuels that power them? The S&T budget is critical to developing and implementing standards to control their harmful emissions, as well as evaluating new control technologies. It allows the EPA to provide information and tools to states, local, and tribal agencies, as well as communities, to reduce air toxics emissions and risks specific to their local areas.
The S&T budget also supports our National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Testing Laboratory—a state of the art facility and national resource in Ann Arbor, Michigan that conducts the research and testing needed to develop and ensure compliance with tailpipe emissions standards—the safeguards that control and protect us from breathing in harmful chemical and particulate pollutants from transportation sources. And remember the news that Volkswagen and Audi were cheating on their US emissions tests by installing software in their diesel cars? It was our national Vehicles Lab that confirmed it and then recalled the offending vehicles.
Recent analysis has shown that the public will reap clean air benefits to the tune of $2 trillion (that’s trillion with a T) by the year 2020, compared to estimated costs of $65 billion in the same time period. Given that clean air is absolutely essential to our health and EPA efforts around clean air have been one of EPA’s biggest public health success stories, it’s pure folly to entertain cuts to these efforts. To keep them robust and up-to-date, increases in funding make much more sense. But President Trump has proposed cutting $30,845,000 from EPA S&T programs that focus on clean air. That’s 27% cut from the final budget passed in FY18. That certainly won’t help us breathe any easier!
Indoor Air: The administration is proposing to eliminate two indoor air programs funded by the S&T account and shift the responsibility of protecting families from exposure to indoor air pollutants back to the states. These include the radon program and the program to reduce risks from indoor air. Radon is a known human carcinogen and a significant cause of lung cancer, even at low exposure levels.
Other indoor air contaminants also pose health risks, and the EPA has been conducting and coordinating research on indoor air quality, doing field testing, and providing information and technical support to states and localities. As the EPA seeks to increasingly shift responsibility back to the states, it’s reasonable to question if the states will have the resources and capacity to address radon and other indoor air pollution in residents’ homes and living spaces and adequately help protect them from the associated health effects.
Given the public health significance of indoor air pollution and the fact that we spend the vast amount of our lifetimes indoors, what we really need to see is increased funding to support research and technology to reduce the health risks to our children, our families, and our communities.
Emergency Response Preparedness: When emergencies and disasters strike, we expect our federal agencies to be ready to respond. Through its Homeland Security sub-budgets, the S&T account at the EPA ensures that the agency (and thus we the affected public) will have the science, analyses, sampling, and measurement capacity needed to respond to radiological or nuclear incidents, to oil and hazardous substance emergencies, to terrorist and cyber threats, and to all-hazard events on our nation’s critical water infrastructure.
The EPA is responsible for remediating contaminated environments affected by industrial accidents, natural disasters, and terrorist attacks. The S&T budget supports the research needed to fill the critical gaps in the EPA’s ability to carry out these responsibilities and help communities prepare for, absorb, and recover from disasters.
Given the many serious chemical emergencies experienced by our communities in just the past few years—like explosions at oil refineries and chemical plants—along with the health impacts, social disruption, and property damage caused by these events and by the increasing ferocity of extreme weather events like hurricanes, wildfires, and floods it is critical to ensure that the agency has the funding it needs to help us prepare, respond, and recover effectively when disaster strikes.
Pesticides: By design, pesticides are meant to kill—pests. But they are dangerous neurotoxins that can and do kill and sicken people as well. A 2012 study of human exposure to pesticides in the US reported an average of 130,136 calls to poison control centers from 2006 to 2010, with an average of 20,116 cases (17.8%) treated in health care facilities annually. The Agency for Health Care Quality and Research reported an annual average of 7385 emergency room visits during 2006 to 2008, and 1419 annual hospitalizations during 2005 to 2009. Between February 2016 and February 2017, 2,577 pesticide exposure incidents were reported by the National Pesticide Information Center.
The EPA is responsible for registering and re-evaluating pesticides to protect consumers, pesticide users, and workers who apply them, as well as children and other sensitive populations. The agency’s Chemical Safety, Pollution Prevention and Pesticide program relies on the science and analytical capability of two of its laboratories to evaluate possible adverse effects of pesticide use and determine the risks they pose to public health. EPA pesticide programs also use the latest science and conduct risk assessments to determine the risks that pesticides pose to human health and ecological effects on plants, animals, and ecosystems that are not the targets of the pesticide. The agency also has responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act related to pesticide use. Despite all this, the administration is proposing to cut the EPA pesticide licensing program by 15%.
Research: While most if not all of the above mentioned programs include analytical components, EPA’s S&T account specifically identifies several budget categories as research. These include:
Air and Energy Research provides scientific information to EPA programs and regional offices. This line item supports the analysis and publication of research to disseminate EPA research findings on air quality, emissions, and health impacts across all 50 states. It is the scientific cornerstone on EPA efforts to identify and recommend action to reduce air pollution, including the health disparities of air pollutants, and to protect the health and well-being of the American public.Our communities, local and state officials, public health agencies, and health care institutions rely on the findings of this research to stay informed and take necessary action. In this year’s proposed budget, down by a whopping 66%.
Chemical Safety and Sustainability Research evaluates how the use and disposal of thousands of chemicals, both existing and under development, might affect public health and the environment. This research provides the fundamental information, tools, and methods needed to make better-informed and more timely decisions about the chemicals in use in the US—including those used in our homes, schools, and workplaces and that find their way into our consumer products, household items, water, and food.It also supports the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), the gold-standard of toxicity reviews that provides critical and impartial information on cancer and non-cancer health risks—independent of its use by EPA programs and regional offices. In FY18, the administration proposed eliminating IRIS, but Congress did not agree and provided IRIS with level funding. In its FY19 proposal, the administration plans to “review” IRIS, including moving from traditional IRIS assessments to “fit-for-purpose” products to ensure risk assessments remains responsive to stakeholders/partners. This modification will surely be welcome news to the agency’s industry stakeholders; not so much for their public, community, and public health stakeholders.In this year’s proposed budget, the chemical safety and sustainability research line is down 33%.
Safe and Sustainable Water Resources Research provides the robust research and scientific analysis needed to inform policy making under the Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act. This is the essential research needed to ensure that the water in our lakes, streams, and rivers are healthy and safe enough to drink, to fish, and to enjoy for swimming and boating. The program develops analytical methods for detecting emerging contaminants, and develops sampling protocols and risk models to help states and communities protecting human health from well-known contaminants, like lead in drinking water. One needs only to reference Flint to understand the critical importance of this research program.
Sustainable Communities Research supports regulatory activities and provides on-demand technical support for federal, tribal and state-led cleanup activities and during emergencies. It conducts health, environmental engineering, and ecological research, translating their findings into planning and analysis tools for communities to improve environmental and health outcomes. For example, program researchers found a way to estimate how drinking water, food, dust, soil, and air contribute to the lead levels in the blood of infants and young children. Communities take note: The administration proposes to cut this research program by 60%.
Our national labs
EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD), supported by the S&T Account, supports three national labs and four national centers located in 14 facilities across the country. The experts in these labs and centers are the linchpins of research and development efforts that inform the EPA programs and efforts described above. They are also members of their local communities, maybe even your neighbors. Locations include: Ada, OK; Athens, GA; Chapel Hill, NC, Cincinnati, OH; Corvallis, OR; Duluth, MN; Edison, NH; Grosse Ile, MI; Gulf Breeze, FL; Las Vegas, NV (soon to be shuttered); Narragansett, RI; Newport, OR; Research Triangle Park, NC; and Washington, DC.
Despite the centrality of ORD research to our public health, environmental quality, and emergency preparedness, President Trump has proposed cutting its FY19 budget by 46% and staffing levels by 37% compared to the FY18 annualized continuing resolution budget. Ask yourself: Does this ensure that EPA has the robust and necessary resources and expertise to meet the scientific challenges of the future? To me, this looks more like a giant step backwards.From Alaska and Hawaii to the lower 48: cause for concern
No matter where you call home in this vast and beautiful country, we can likely all agree that our health, our communities, our air, land, water, our treasured landmarks, and our critical environmental resources need safeguarding and protecting. The song says, “This land is our land.” We need to remember that “this EPA is our EPA”—we the people are meant to be the primary beneficiaries of its mission. Not the regulated industry.
Air pollution remains a significant risk for cancer, cardiovascular disease, respiratory illness, and premature death across the country. More than half of all Americans—166 million people—live in counties where people are exposed to unhealthful levels of air pollution. Fairbanks, Alaska was ranked #1 for annual particulate pollution out of 187 metropolitan areas and #4 for 24-hour particulate pollution out of 201 metropolitan areas. Los Angeles – Long Beach, CA ranked #1 for high ozone days out of 227 metropolitan areas, #7 for 24-hour particle pollution out of 201 metropolitan areas, and #4 for annual particle pollution out of 187 metropolitan areas.
And the recent EPA decision to strip away a key component of the agency’s “once in, always in” (OIAI) air pollution protection policy could result in increased emissions of toxic pollutants from major industrial sources in essentially every state. The Union of Concerned Scientists has produced an interactive map of industrial facilities with reduced pollution control requirements and potential emission increases by congressional district. A double whammy when coupled with the proposed cuts in EPA clean air programs and research.
Oh, and don’t get me started on EPA’s new proposal to restrict the science going into its decision-making. Actually, the science community has sounded the alarm loud and clear—here, here, and here.Stand up for science at the EPA
The EPA is a critical component of our nation’s efforts to protect our health and the quality of the environment on which it depends. Without a robust scientific enterprise, it is hard to imagine how EPA can address the problems we are facing today, let alone the known and unknown threats we will be facing tomorrow.
The current administration’s proposal for resourcing science and technology at EPA reflects dangerous short-term thinking. Now is the time to weigh in and ask your legislators to oppose any cuts to the EPA S&T budget and to support an increase in funding for the critical scientific research and staff needed to protect and advance our health now and into the future.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/kathleen-rest/how-trumps-proposed-cuts-to-the-epas-science-and-technology-budget-endanger-our-health-and-safety

Return to headline | Return to top

LCSA News

Cape Fear River Watch, SELC Demand State Take Action on Chemours’ Pollution

May 9, 2018 | Port City Daily

By Johanna Ferebee

The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality is being asked, once again, to exercise its authority over Chemours for polluting the public water and air supply.
The Southern Environmental Law Center, on behalf of Cape Fear River Watch, has filed a request for declaratory action asking NCDEQ to act.
Earlier this year, five southeastern North Carolina municipalities passed resolutions requesting NCDEQ to immediately require Chemours—a subsidiary of DuPont—to cease production of fluorochemical compounds.
Those resolutions held no legal weight, though they did add political pressure on the state’s regulatory environmental agency. Now, with the Cape Fear River Watch’s May 7 filing, NCDEQ is required to respond within 30 days.
Last month, NCDEQ filed legal action against Chemours in Bladen County Superior Court. The filings required Chemours to “remove, treat or control” air emissions of GenX compounds. NCDEQ also issued a 60-day notice of intent on April 6 to modify Chemours’ existing Air Quality Permit.
On April 27, Chemours responded to the NCDEQ’s intent to modify its permit, outlining plans for emissions control activities through 2020. NCDEQ spokesperson, Megan Thorpe, said Chemours’ response is still under review.Not enough
For the Cape Fear River Watch and the Southern Environmental Law Center(SELC), these actions have not been enough.
“So what DEQ has done is they’ve asked Bladen County Superior Court to stop emissions and discharges,” Geoff Gisler, a senior attorney at SELC said. “What they haven’t done is (admit) that they have the authority to do it on their own.”
Under the Toxic Substances Control Act and the Clean Water Act, Cape Fear River Watch and SELC argue that NCDEQ has the authority to immediately force Chemours to cease production of “toxic per-and poly-fluoroalkyl (PFAS) compounds.”
Kemp Burdette, riverkeeper for Cape Fear River Watch, said NCDEQ’s “small actions to limit discharge” fall beneath the agency’s legal and moral obligations.
“They have the authority right now, today, right this second, to stop Chemours from discharging this stuff,” Burdette said. “Not only do they have the authority, but they have the obligation to stop it according to the law.”The case
The filing cites DuPont’s track record of knowingly contaminating the public water and air supply. It states that Chemours and DuPont “have knowingly polluted North Carolina’s public water sources with GenX and other toxic PFAS compounds for nearly four decades, causing widespread and dangerous contamination to the state’s surface and groundwaters.”
According to the filing, the GenX compound has been found up to 5.5 miles away from Fayetteville Works facility in at least 690 private wells. These measurements detected GenX at 28 times the state’s health goal.
“It’s very clear that Chemours has misled the state. It’s clear that they have lied to the state. It’s clear that they have covered up spills that have occurred at the site,” Burdette said. “They’ve failed to report these things.”
Under a provision that permits NCDEQ to act during emergency events that cause a threat to public health, Burdette said NCDEQ is falling short of its responsibilities.
“I don’t understand why the state seems to be so willing to just continue to allow them to do this—it doesn’t make any sense,” he said. “[Chemours] are right now as we speak, they are omitting GenX and this host of other perfluorinated compounds into the environment.”NCDEQ’s response
Cape Fear River Watch and SELC’s filings—a request for declaratory action and two notice of intents to sue Fayetteville Works—were all filed Monday.
Bridget Munger, a spokesperson for NCDEQ, said the filings ask for actions the agency has already taken.
“DEQ will review SELC’s petition thoroughly and make an appropriate decision on their request,” Munger wrote in an email. “It appears SELC’s petition is primarily based on the multiple enforcement actions the department has already taken against Chemours to halt the company’s emissions of GenX and protect North Carolinians’ water and air.”
For Burdette, getting NCDEQ to force Chemours to stop the production of perfluorinated compounds is the highest priority.
“This is a company that has an incredible amount of resources and attorneys, they can drag out a court case for decades and that’s too long,” Burdette said. “We cant deal in the cape fear region with 20 more years while they fight tooth and nail to dump on citizens and to poison people in order to watch their profits increase.”
https://portcitydaily.com/local-news/2018/05/09/cape-fear-river-watch-selc-demand-deq-to-act-on-chemours-pollution/

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Launches Lead Paint Education Effort on Seacoast

May 9, 2018 | New Hampshire Business Review

An initiative aimed at improving compliance with laws that protect children from lead paint poisoning has been launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s New England office.
Earlier this month, the office began sending certified letters to about 400 home renovation and painting contractors, property management companies and landlords in and around the Portsmouth, NH, and Portland, Maine, areas.
Under the initiative, EPA will provide educational materials on lead paint rules, and it will outline steps the agency is taking to increase compliance on the part of these entities with the federal lead-based paint Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule under the Toxic Substances Control Act. The RRP Rule became effective in April 2010.
Alexandra Dunn, regional administrator of EPA’s New England office, said what she called the “place-based initiative” is a focused effort “aiming to reduce lead exposure in the Maine and New Hampshire seacoast areas, where there is a large amount of older housing stock that hasn’t been renovated and lead paint has not been removed.”
EPA said it met with stakeholders and local governments in both Portsmouth and Portland at the end of April, and there will be continued outreach in May.
Over the course of several weeks in June and July, it said, the agency will conduct inspections of renovation, painting and property management companies in the area to assess compliance with the RRP Rule.
EPA said it may also assess compliance with the Real Estate Notification and Disclosure Rule, which requires landlords, property management companies, real estate agencies and sellers to inform potential lessees and purchasers of the presence of lead-based paint and lead-based paint hazards in pre-1978 housing.
“Enforcing lead paint notification and worksite standards helps to level the playing field for companies complying with the law, as well as helps to provide a safer and healthier environment for children,” said Dunn.
EPA engaged in similar efforts in the New Haven, Conn., area in 2014; in the Nashua, NH, area in 2015; and in the Lewiston/Auburn, Maine, area in 2016.
As a result of those efforts, EPA said, it “has educated thousands of individuals either engaged in this type of work or impacted by it, settled numerous formal and informal enforcement actions, and levied fines against the most serious violators. Importantly, because of the compliance assistance provided, many renovation firms have stepped forward to become newly certified and have sent their workers to be trained.”
http://www.nhbr.com/May-25-2018/EPA-launches-lead-paint-education-effort-on-Seacoast/

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Management News

Methylene Chloride Campaigners Meet with EPA Administrator

May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Kelly Franklin

NGO campaigners have met with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to request that the agency act on its proposed rule to ban methylene chloride paint strippers.
The meeting is the latest development in a months-long push for action on the paint removal products, which have caused dozens of consumer and worker deaths in recent years.
Mr Pruitt has continued to insist that the proposal – which was issued in the final days of the previous administration – has not been dropped, but rather is under review.
But NGOs and families of those who have died using the products are urging the agency act immediately.
Cindy Wynne – the mother of a South Carolina man who was killed while using a paint stripper containing methylene chloride – added that while she appreciated the meeting, Mr Pruitt’s "words of consolation and explanation" are insufficient.
Meanwhile, NGO Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families is leading health advocacy groups in a "week of action" in dozens of states demanding that Lowe’s home improvement stores pull the products from their shelves.
Under the organisation’s Mind the Store campaign, more than 120,000 consumers have petitioned the company to stop selling the paint strippers.
https://chemicalwatch.com/66726/methylene-chloride-campaigners-meet-with-epa-administrator

Return to headline | Return to top
There’s an App for That

May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Andrew Warmington

The duty of suppliers of articles containing substances of very high concern (SVHCs) at concentrations above 0.1% w/w in an article, including – as per a European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in 2015 – each article "incorporated as a component of a complex product", is enshrined in REACH Article 33. What is happening in practice is quite another matter.
Article 33 stipulates that suppliers "shall provide the recipient of the article with sufficient information, available to the supplier, to allow safe use of the article including, as a minimum, the name of that substance". It also requires suppliers to provide consumers with the same information, free of charge, within 45 days of receiving a request.
Recently, representatives of industries including automotive, electronic, aerospace, apparel, furniture and chemicals began discussions on collecting and sharing material data for articles, including their chemical composition. Although they have their own material declaration systems, there is little information sharing and it is recognised that a common approach could:facilitate the collection and sharing of material composition information;allow companies to better identify SVHCs; andensure compliance as regulations change.
This would be particularly helpful to upstream companies, which currently receive multiple requests for the same or similar information in multiple formats. An accord is some way off as there has to be agreement on such thorny issues as a common data structure, the level of detail to be communicated, data quality and data security.
When implementing legislation, says Martin Führ, professor of public law, comparative theory and legal theory at Hochschule Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences in Germany, it is important to follow the legislators’ intentions as well as the letter of the law. In this case, it is clear that REACH aims to substitute SVHCs with other solutions.
Moreover, he says, Article 1, which aims for a high level of protection for health and environment, requires "a dynamic approach, involving the actors in the supply chain directly. No interference by public authorities as such is needed." Obviously the definitions in Article 33 are extremely broad.
A ‘supplier’ could be a producer, distributor or other actor in the supply chain. An ‘article’ can be tiny but, as the principle states, "once an article, always an article", as the ECJ also established in 2015. ‘Placing on the market’ can mean simply selling it, but also holding it as stock in an online shop or offering it free of charge, such as a paper towel in a public restroom. All in all, says Professor Führ, "it’s difficult not to be a supplier of an article".
These findings are mirrored when it comes to the question who is entitled to a consumer request: REACH does not define a ‘consumer’; but from a legal perspective, a consumer does not necessarily have to be a buyer. Downstream users are excluded, as they are covered by Article 32 (1), but all other natural and legal persons are entitled to ask for information - possibly including the authorities in their role as buyers of articles.
"Behind Article 33 is the duty to cooperate with other actors in the supply chain," Professor Führ says. "This is not written in the legal text but it is the precondition that the whole system works on."
For consumers to be informed, as the legislators clearly intended, there has to be transparency and traceability. This has the extra benefits of complying with product safety and liability requirements.
There are many ways to comply with Article 33. Often, they can be rather unhelpful. For example, some major electronic goods suppliers have put generic information on the internet about how some of their hundreds of products "might contain" unspecified SVHCs, saying that they all do to be on the safe side, or sending test results running to many pages, which may not refer to SVHCs or may be out of date because the candidate list has since been updated.
This will no longer be acceptable, Professor Führ says. The EU’s circular economy package is on its way and a provision in that links Article 33 to a central database that Echa will host. This is due to go online in 18 months, with obligations starting after 30 months’ time.
The upcoming review of the waste framework Directive is another relevant issue here. In March, a proposed amendment was added to Article 9, requiring suppliers to notify Echa of the presence of SVHCs in articles. This followed on from a European Parliament vote to adopt other proposed changes with the specific aim of ensuring a ‘progressive substitution’ of SVHCs.
The issue also goes beyond the EU framework. It addresses initiatives like the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (Saicm) and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 12, ‘Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns’, for which targets are due in 2020. "Article 33 could have been really helpful to reaching this SDG," says Professor Führ.
Ten years on from REACH coming into force, however, implementation of Article 33 has barely begun. A report by Echa in 2016 showed very low consumer awareness of the right to request information and various studies of compliance have shown that it is not functioning properly.
For instance, in a study commissioned in Belgium by DG Environment in 2016, only 23% of the companies selling construction materials which were sent a request about the presence of SVHCs in their products replied within 45 days.
Of those which did: some provided a formal letter of declaration, of the kind they send to downstream users, stating that no SVHCs were present in their products;some did not understand the request or declined to provide information; andsome said that they were not obliged to provide information because the request had not been made by a consumer.
"There are various reasons why the system does not work well," says Arno Biwer, senior R&T associate at the Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology. "Limited awareness among consumers, retailers and suppliers about their rights and obligation; difficulties for consumers in making requests; suppliers’ answers being inadequate or wrong, or just not answering. All of this leads to risks to human health and the environment."
In any case, adds Professor Führ, today’s consumers see no point in asking questions in a shop that may or may not be answered 45 days later. They want answers immediately. The only viable way to address that is to use mobile apps to scan information from barcodes on the products themselves.
Denmark has already pioneered this approach and the lessons learned there are informing ongoing initiatives. The Tjek Kemien app was launched in 2014 and trialled with the country’s two largest supermarkets. In 2016, there were 88 requests but in the first two months of 2018, 100m consumer visits to the Co-op generated only three requests, according to Jakob Lamm Zeuthen, head of environment policy at the Danish Chamber of Commerce, which represents retailers.
This failure had multiple causes, he says. Consumers are mostly concerned about food and cosmetics, but these were not in the scope of the project. "The scan went to the wrong person in the company, or was lost, or the information was difficult to understand, or people lost interest after waiting for 45 days. Retailers don’t want to upload SVHC details into database: they want to answer consumers directly by email, so as to maintain trust with them."
In late 2016, Mr Zeuthen adds, the Danish Consumer Council tested the information on the barcodes of 58 hardware products for the presence of phthalates from the SVHC list. Of these, 8 (31%) incorrectly stated that there were no SVHCs when there were. Usually, this was because the barcodes did not work. No answer was received in many cases and some replies were very late. Key causes of misinformation included: difficulty in obtaining suppliers’ declarations;lack of understanding of how to check these declarations; wrong or inadequate information from producers;lack of understanding about what questions to ask producers;different results from tests on the same product by different bodies; and an unclear definition of articles as opposed to products.
The pressure for information is still growing, thanks in part to a press article in January 2017 about consumers buying products containing hormone-disrupting chemicals, and partly as a result of these tests. Both the press and the authorities in Denmark have been urging retailers to act.
The Danish EPA, the Chamber of Commerce, industry and building centres consequently formed a partnership that ran from September 2017 to January 2018. The aim was to solve the reasons for misinformation and help retailers in all sectors fulfil their Article 33 obligations.
Working with consultants, the partners have now created guidelines to ensure that information about candidate list articles is collected and passed through the supply chain consistently in the same format until it reaches consumers.
They have also created a tool to train purchasers in where to look for SVHCs in articles and identify those with highest risk of containing them.
Based on this experience, Mr Zeuthen concludes that what works best for companies is also likely to work better for consumers. Retailers, he agrees, would like to have an EU-wide app that takes their needs into account. He also recommends:creating a helpdesk to make it easier for retailers to upload information that is useful for consumers and give reminders of when to update; sufficient ongoing verification of data, so as to build trust and exclude misleading information. This is not a business obligation; keeping food and cosmetics completely outside the database and making it clear this is only about articles; andgiving the app a name that does not overpromise - in hindsight, ‘Tjek SVHCs’ would have been better than ‘Tjek Kemien’.
On a pan-European scale, the AskREACH project started in September 2017 and will run for five years. It is coordinated by the German Environment Agency, with 19 partners from 13 member states, including NGOs, authorities and research institutes. AskREACH will mainly produce:an EU-wide app for consumers, which will be adapted to each member state, in terms of language but also specific information about any aspects particularly relevant in any of them; and a central European database, where article suppliers and retailers can upload information of their articles via a barcode, including SVHC details and where within the article any SVHC(s) are contained.
Two apps already exist in Germany, ToxFox and Scan4Chem, and companies involved in those are part of the consortium, as well as the creators of Tjek Kemien, Mr Biwer says. Thus, AskREACH will be able to apply lessons from these projects, learning from the deficiencies of a national approach.
"The principle is similar. You scan the barcode and receive information directly from the database if available; if it is not, a request can be sent automatically to the barcode owner and the retailer to get an individual answer, and the barcode owner can update the database," he explains.
AskREACH will make the database as easy as possible to use, including: bulk uploading of articles; automatic updating of information on SVHCs if any changes are made in article composition; a standardised data exchange format so that information in existing internal company tools can easily be transferred; andcompatibility with the Echa database, so that requests can be made in standardised way.
Supplier and retailer duties to the app users will be fulfilled by uploading information, because everything else will be done automatically. Different language versions will use standard sentences so that most translation is done directly.
Professor Führ, who is also involved in the project, hopes to see an additional option of declaring that there are no SVHCs in a product, in order to increase transparency and traceability. Suppliers who feed the database can benefit from the option to offer additional, more detailed information on the scanned article, such as via a link to a company website.
Currently, the project partners are benchmarking the challenges companies are facing, the tools they are using and how to adapt these if needed. Professor Führ says that there are already tools to hand that are "comprehensive, effective, reliable and flexible", as well as and capable of addressing confidential business information (CBI) issues.
The app is due to be launched in April 2019 and AskREACH is inviting companies to participate and to test the tools and give input on possible improvements. "This will give you an opportunity to have an impact early on and show your willingness to take care of consumers’ concerns," says Mr Biwer.
Of course, there are technical challenges to overcome, as Professor Führ recognises. "One will be how to identify an article. The supply chain sometimes uses the same barcode for different products and different versions or batches of them. This needs to be addressed when the article identifier system is enhanced," he says.
His concluding advice is: "To all those who are covered by the definition of supplier, be prepared to address a lot of issues." There are a lot of customer demands for information and they might be driven by consumer requests once the European app is available and workable, he says.
"Be prepared for increasing awareness from investors and be aware that existing products as well as new ones are covered. At least consider how to address this, as well as updates of the candidate list and similar lists in other parts of the world."
https://chemicalwatch.com/66735/theres-an-app-for-that

Return to headline | Return to top
REACH Nano Changes Get Industry Nod, but Concerns Linger

May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Clelia Oziel

Industry and NGOs have broadly welcomed EU member state approval of revisions to REACH annexes to address substances in nanoforms, yet concerns over loopholes remain.
Last month, member states voted through the long-overdue amendments. The draft European Commission Regulations, with the revised annexes, will now be submitted for a three-month scrutiny period by the European Parliament and Council, before adoption by the Commission.
The amendments help to create a more "predictable" regulatory environment for industry to innovate and use nanomaterials, the chemical industry trade body, Cefic, said.
They will ensure nanomaterials are treated in "a standardised way" and bring more clarity to companies on how to provide adequate information within the REACH framework, it added.
However, Cefic also reiterated its concerns that while annex revisions have been approved and are due to enter into force in 2020, the process for revising the Commission's Recommendation on the nanomaterial definition is still ongoing.
Industry had asked the Commission to delay changing the annexes until this was agreed. Since this has not happened, Cefic said it prefers to keep the current definition "to give companies sufficient time to prepare the dossiers without further modification of the legal text".
The guidelines for some tests requested in the annexes have also not been validated and it is unclear how many laboratories will be able to carry out the new tests, Cefic added, warning that results may not be ready in time for the annex changes.
David Carlander, regulatory affairs director at the Nanotechnology Industries Association (NIA), said the provisions would support the use of nanomaterials in all sectors, but there will be "additional industry resources required that may impact some sectors more than others".'Far from perfect'
NGOs have also welcomed the changes but noted they are "far from perfect".
Some loopholes and limitations remain, David Azoulay from the Center for International Environmental Law (Ciel) said. These include the "vagueness" around the definition of ‘sets of nanoforms’, he added, which could allow registrants to "limit" the amount of data they would provide.
The challenge is now in the implementation and will largely depend on the registrants, Mr Azoulay said. "Will they continue to use every possible excuse to limit the amount of information they provide to Echa as they have been doing for years, or will they finally accept to put the safety of their product under the scrutiny of the agency?"
Echa's ability to request additional information on nano substances from registrants is also limited, NGOs say, even if deemed necessary for assessing their safety on the market.The provision on information requirements was previously placed in Annex IX, which is for 100 tonnes and above. A group of NGOs including Ciel and EEB wrote to member states just before the vote, urging them to move it to Annex VI, which would have covered all registered nanomaterials.

EU member states then agreed on the provision being moved to Annex VIII, which concerns substances above ten tonnes. The European Environmental Bureau’s (EEB) Tatiana Santos said this is not ideal but "certainly an improvement". It gives Echa the legal tool to ask for further information if safety is not demonstrated for those substances, she added.
The proposed changes have previously attracted strong criticism from NGOs. They accused the Commission of failing to "future proof" them. They also criticised the delay, which meant they would have no impact on the final REACH registration deadline this month.
https://chemicalwatch.com/66695/reach-nano-changes-get-industry-nod-but-concerns-linger

Return to headline | Return to top
J&J Talc Litigation Spreads to Canada

May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Julie Miller

A Quebec judge has authorised a class-action lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson arguing that its talc products caused ovarian cancer. The plaintiffs’ lawyer has also sought certification to sue on behalf of women in Canada’s other provinces.
The Quebec lawsuit was authorised to proceed on 2 May. It also names as a defendant Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, which acquired the right from J&J to produce Shower to Shower, one of the relevant talc products, in 2012.
Quebec has a separate legal system. Nevertheless, Merchant Law Group LLP, which is representing the plaintiffs, has said it is pursuing certification for a class action representing women in other provinces across Canada. The firm said it has signed up more than 400 women.
J&J is fighting many talc-related lawsuits in the US, some of which are also class actions.
Juries have handed down multimillion dollar awards in multiple cases linking genital talc use to ovarian cancer. The largest single verdict, however, was overturned in October 2017 by a California judge, who ruled that the plaintiffs had not proved that the products caused their cancer.
In the most recent action, a federal judge decided that the addition of Walgreens - which is headquartered in a Chicago suburb – as a defendant allows plaintiffs to sue J&J in a local court.
J&J and supplier Imerys Talc were ordered in April to pay $117m in damages to a man who claimed talc products caused him to develop mesothelioma, the first award not related to ovarian cancer.
https://chemicalwatch.com/66675/jj-talc-litigation-spreads-to-canada

Return to headline | Return to top
Anses Warns Against Hazardous Substances in Homemade Toy ‘Slime’

May 9, 2018 | Chemical Watch

Homemade toy 'slime' can pose health risks to children as they may contain hazardous substances, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety has warned.
Several cases of skin damage related to the product have been reported to the agency, poison control centres and various allergy control networks, Anses said.
The slime kits have become very popular with younger children and teenagers in France, and tutorials on the internet on home fabrication have increased interest in the product.
In a joint warning with the French Directorate-General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control (DGCCRF), Anses said detergents and adhesives used in homemade slime contain allergenic or irritant preservatives that are not meant to be handled in large quantities, repeatedly and for a prolonged time.
Liquid adhesives – the most common ingredient – contain preservatives such as formaldehyde liberators or isothiazolinones, which are "very allergenic substances", as well as many solvents, which can cause irritation of the airways and damage to the central nervous system, Anses said.
The majority of online do-it-yourself recipes also contain boron compounds. These substances, intended for cleaning contact lenses or as detergents, are reprotoxic, may impact foetal development and "must not be manipulated by children repeatedly", it said.
The DGCCRF also conducted a survey of slime kits sold in shops. Of the 15 samples analysed, two contained a boron content exceeding the permissible limit and were withdrawn from the market. The DGCCRF will continue its market controls in 2018.
Last month, the Norwegian Environmental Directorate removed some ready-made slime products from the market, after it found they contained high levels of lead and arsenic.
https://chemicalwatch.com/66731/anses-warns-against-hazardous-substances-in-homemade-toy-slime

Return to headline | Return to top

Energy News

Schneiderman's Energy Legacy: A Finger in Every Pie

May 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire

By Saqib Rahim

Even in the tumultuous world of New York politics, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's sudden resignation Monday registers as an earthquake.
From the standpoint of energy and environment, though, it might not change all that much.
Why? According to veteran political observers, there's a deep bench of ambitious, left-leaning lawyers in the state's Democratic circles. Moreover, Democrats in the state Legislature get to pick his immediate replacement, setting the tone before elections this November.
Barring an upset by Republicans, these analysts said they expect Schneiderman's successor to be every bit the bulldog he was on energy and climate.
"I think whoever takes his place, it doesn't change anything. Anything," said Kevin Rooney, CEO of the Oil Heat Institute of Long Island and a former lobbyist in Albany. "All the positions that he's taken on the environment, on climate change, moving to renewables, the whole bit, they're going to get picked up by whoever comes in there."
There's plenty to pick up. Schneiderman, a Democrat who was elected attorney general in 2010, was already an active litigant on energy and climate even before President Trump took office in January 2017; he joined a lawsuit against President Obama's EPA to make soot regulations tougher, for example. Schneiderman intensified his federal campaigning under Trump, marshaling a legal challenge, or the threat of one, with seemingly every action the White House took.
When Energy Secretary Rick Perry asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to look at special payments for coal and nuclear power plants, Schneiderman opposed it. When New York blocked natural gas pipelines and the pipeline companies sued, Schneiderman opposed them. Under Schneiderman's supervision, his office has sued to maintain federal greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and threatened to sue if the Interior Department allows oil drilling off the New York coast.
As recently as Monday afternoon, he was tweeting big plans to lead a group of eight state attorneys general "against Scott Pruitt's absurd plan to have the EPA limit the science it uses to make decisions about our public health and our environment."
That litigious zeal was utterly typical for New York, where the last two attorneys general, Andrew Cuomo (D) and Eliot Spitzer (D), eventually became governors. (Spitzer resigned in 2008 following a prostitution scandal.) And to politicos in New York, it was clear that Schneiderman had his eye on the governor's seat in the medium-to-long term.
But Schneiderman's tenure came to an abrupt end this week, after a New Yorker story quoted women on the record alleging that he had physically abused them. Schneiderman resigned hours later; he denies that he assaulted anyone. The Manhattan district attorney is investigating the allegations.
Cuomo, who called for Schneiderman's resignation after the New Yorker story came out, yesterday applauded the women who spoke out.
"I think the collective movement is to be applauded," Cuomo said.
"This nation has a chronic disturbing disgusting behavior of sexual harassment against women, and it has gone on for a long, long time, and it must stop," he said.
Barbara Underwood, the state's solicitor general since 2007, was sworn in yesterday as Schneiderman's acting replacement. In a statement, she said the staff of the attorney general's office "will ensure that our work continues without interruption."
The Schneiderman news set off a chaotic day of speculation in New York politics. Democrats already control the governorship and one house of the Legislature, with the prospect of gaining yet more seats in this November's election. The state Assembly, led by Speaker Carl Heastie, a Bronx Democrat, will have outsize importance in selecting Schneiderman's replacement.
In a state that already has an effective ban on hydraulic fracturing, an aggressive renewable energy program and a deepening anti-fossil-fuel mentality, that might not mean much in terms of policy changes. But it will mean a lot for the state's Democratic power hierarchy.
"There'd been a settled structure for how the hierarchy in Democratic state politics had looked like ... people had a good idea of what it looked like, and now they don't," said James Coleman Battista, a professor of political science at the University at Buffalo. "It's going to be an event that spurs a lot of competition, and in this environment, who knows what's going to happen?"
As for Schneiderman's huge portfolio of energy and climate cases, experts said they expect this work to continue as it was.
In many of the high-profile federal cases, some noted, Schneiderman was one of several state attorneys general who signed on, so his absence won't have an effect. And the staff in Schneiderman's office hasn't changed, they pointed out.
Peter Iwanowicz, executive director of Environmental Advocates of New York, said he expects the post-Schneiderman attorney general to be just as aggressive as he was.
"We've seen that the New York State Attorney General's Office, regardless of party, has a rich history of standing up for New York's environment and litigating against people who have not only violated the law but harmful policies from Washington," he said. "I don't believe there'll be much change."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081211

Return to headline | Return to top
Assuring Energy Security with a Modern NAFTA

May 9, 2018 | Forbes

By Earl Anthony Wayne and David R. Shedd

As negotiations reach the go/no go point for a revised North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), President Trump should recognize the agreement’s impact on one of his top priorities: U.S. energy dominance. While the United States has been strengthening its domestic energy sector, Mexico and Canada have become our two most important energy partners. Securing and expanding those partnerships benefits the U.S. economically, and enhances America’s national security posture as well. An updated NAFTA that facilitates energy investment and preserves investor protections would give America the double victory of boosting energy security, while maintaining advantage over geopolitical rivals like China and Russia.
Energy trade and production have flourished under NAFTA. Private sector trade, innovation, and investment have created a North American energy market that is highly interdependent and multidirectional. Experts argue that North America’s energy cooperation under NAFTA could take us toward liquid fuels self-sufficiency as early as 2020 and the “energy dominance” sought in President Trump’s 2017 National Security Strategy. The United States, Mexico, and Canada represent 20 percent of global oil and gas supply, as well as 20-25 percent of the expected additions to international supply over the next 25 years. Deepened energy cooperation gives North America an industrial advantage via low priced and plentiful energy as well. Failure to conclude a modern NAFTA could cause major damage in the energy sector and to North American energy independence.
The U.S. Natural Gas Act requires a free trade agreement, such as NAFTA, to be in place for automatic U.S. natural gas exports to another country. Exports to our neighbors have grown accordingly – Canada and Mexico are America’s top two export markets in crude oil and natural gasrespectively. Their energy markets, integrated by NAFTA, promote production and investment in the United States. U.S. net energy imports have fallen to roughly a third of their levels during the mid-2000s, and the United States moved from an energy trade deficit with Mexico to a surplus. Without increased energy exports, two Federal Reserve economists estimate that the U.S. trade deficit would be as much as 35 percent higher. Expanded U.S. energy exports and reinforced cooperation with strong NAFTA terms could improve the trade balance even further and encourage more energy investment and production across the region. While the administration in particular should welcome this trend, threats to withdraw from NAFTA could jeopardize U.S. natural gas exports.
Mexico’s 2013 reforms of its energy sector have also expanded North America’s opportunity. Those constitutional reforms opened up oil, electricity, gas, transmission, production, and sales to private investment. Mexico’s previous state-dominated approach proved ineffective in developing the country’s massive energy reserves, and production was declining. (Mexico’s 2018 proven reservesinclude 6.46 billion barrels of oil and 10 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.) The 2013 reforms created significant opportunities for U.S. businesses, ranging from exploration and pipeline construction and ownership, to natural gas exports and commercial gasoline sales. Just last August, a consortium including an American company made major shallow-water oil discoveries off Mexico’s coast.
Particularly with Mexican elections coming on July 1, an updated NAFTA would help safeguard energy reforms from political fluctuations. Mexico’s presidential front-runner, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), has long criticized his country's 2013 energy reforms. Recently, he announcedthat, if elected, he would seek to stop upcoming exploration auctions, reduce the sale of Mexican crude oil abroad (which would presumably include sales to U.S. refineries), shift investment from exploration to building new refineries, and freeze domestic gasoline prices for three years. Mexico’s energy reforms can be improved, as a new study by the Wilson Center’s Mexico Institute argues. However, the kinds of policy shifts raised by AMLO could hurt all three North American countries – they could undermine desperately needed modernization of Mexico’s energy sector, limit opportunities for U.S. firms to invest, and stymie the cross-continental cooperation that enhances energy security for the entire continent.
The Mexican energy opportunities have naturally piqued the interest of U.S. rivals like Russia and China, who seek to expand their influence in the region. China in particular has signaled clear interest in expanding its economic presence in Mexico. Two Mexican offshore auction blocks that China won in December 2016 stand just miles away from the U.S. maritime border. Weakening investor protections or withdrawing from NAFTA would hurt U.S. investment and tempt Mexico to turn to U.S. competitors. We can see in Venezuela what Russian and Chinese influence can produce by propping up President Nicolas Maduro’s authoritarian government.
Finally, a revitalized NAFTA should retain the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism to ensure fair treatment of U.S. investment abroad, as American business groupswrote President Trump on May 2. This is especially important for U.S. companies that already have won contracts in Mexico. While critics have expressed concerns about the ISDS and U.S. sovereignty, the United States has not lost an ISDS case under NAFTA. Maintaining the current ISDS mechanism will facilitate investment and let the United States take full advantage of opportunities in Mexico without losing out, economically or geopolitically, to China or other global competitors. An updated NAFTA should also avoid a “sunset” clause that would risk termination of the agreement every five years. Such a clause would pose a serious burden for U.S. companies building cross-continental relationships that support U.S. prosperity.
Energy is a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, supporting over 10 million jobs and contributing almost 8 percent of the GDP. An updated NAFTA that facilitates energy trade and investment will strengthen America’s energy security. It will also build stronger ties with our two neighbors, who are essential for our security and prosperity. In a new era of great power competition, the United States cannot afford to take a back seat on energy trade in its own neighborhood.
Earl Anthony Wayne is a Public Policy Fellow at the Wilson Center. Wayne served as a U.S. diplomat for 40 years including as Ambassador to Mexico and Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs.
David R. Shedd, a former acting director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, is a visiting distinguished fellow in the Heritage Foundation’s Davis Institute for National Security, and a member of the Board of Advisors to Beacon Global Strategies.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/themexicoinstitute/2018/05/09/assuring-energy-security-with-a-modern-nafta/2/#219084853aeb

Return to headline | Return to top
Committee Passes Resource Diplomacy Bill

May 9, 2018 | E&E Greenwire

By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder

The House Foreign Affairs Committee this morning put its support behind a bipartisan bill that would create a new assistant secretary dedicated to energy security and diplomacy at the State Department.
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said his H.R. 5535, the "Energy Diplomacy Act," would help alleviate U.S. allies' reliance on natural gas from "unpredictable regimes" like Russia.
"This will empower the State Department to promote and advance a bold energy diplomacy abroad," McCaul said.
The assistant secretary would be responsible for encouraging the development of energy resources to benefit the U.S. and its allies, and ensuring a well-functioning global energy market.
"Congress must ensure that the State Department is able to protect and promote our energy policies abroad," said the bill's co-sponsor, Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.).
McCaul said the bill would also ensure the State Department has enough staff dedicated to energy matters.
The bill passed by voice vote and included an amendment from Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) that would ensure that personnel working on energy diplomacy within State coordinate their efforts with the Energy Department.
"This addition will help integrate our domestic and foreign policies relating to energy resources, energy technologies and nuclear nonproliferation," Kinzinger said.
Rep. Dina Titus (D-Nev.) said she hopes the assistant secretary will consider the impacts of climate change in his or her future role.
"As I look at the specific responsibilities laid out for this office ... I see several that stand out where this consideration would be very important," Titus said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081259

Return to headline | Return to top
Crude Drops Ahead of U.S. Iran Policy Shift

May 9, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal (In E&E Energywire)

By Stephanie Yang

Crude prices fell yesterday ahead of President Trump's announcement that the U.S. would abandon the Iran nuclear deal.
The fall reflected oil traders' belief that even if the president announced a withdrawal, the U.S. could be open to renegotiating the terms of the deal. That could preserve Iran's gains in crude production and exports, which have risen about 1 million barrels per day since Western sanctions were lifted.
Global Brent crude prices fell 3.1 percent by midday to $73.82 per barrel. Light, sweet crude for delivery in June was down 3.6 percent.
Traders were on pins and needles waiting for the decision to be made public, said Michael Hiley, head of over-the-counter energy trading at LPS Futures LLC before the announcement. "The whole speculative world is long," he said. "It was easy for it to fall into a vacuum. To me, this is no material change, but certainly the [electronic] algos ran with it" (Yang/Sider, Wall Street Journal, May 8). — DI
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081167

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Extends Scope of Streamlined Oil and Gas Air Permitting

May 9, 2018 | Inside EPA

EPA is proposing to extend the scope of its federal implementation plan (FIP) for streamlined Clean Air Act “minor source” permitting for oil and gas production on tribal lands to cover a newly created ozone “nonattainment” area in the Uinta Basin, UT, that would apply until the agency crafts an area-specific plan to reduce ozone emissions.
In a May 8 Federal Register notice, the agency explains that an existing FIP for minor oil and gas sources on tribal land issued in 2016 only applies to areas attaining ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The FIP offers a “streamlined” permitting process for approval of oil and gas drilling sources through general requirements rather than onerous site-specific analyses.
Because EPA recently designated the Uinta Basin area as out of attainment with the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 parts per billion, the agency says it needs to extend the reach of the FIP to include nonattainment areas.
Failure to expand the existing FIP to minor sources in nonattainment areas “will immediately cause a disparity in the regulatory landscape facing such activity in the affected area, as compared to all other areas of Indian country that will remain covered by the FIP,” EPA says in the proposed rule. Minor sources are those that emit more than 100 tons per year (tpy) or 250 tpy of air pollution, depending on the pollutant.
EPA's proposal, if finalized, would provide a temporary solution addressing air permitting for oil and gas operations in the Uinta basin while the agency crafts a new rule that “will address the Uinta Basin’s particular situation in an area-specific manner; this proposal today seeks to bridge the gap in authority that the nonattainment designation will cause during the interim period where the designation will be in place, but the environmental needs requiring area-specific treatment have not yet materialized.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-extends-scope-streamlined-oil-and-gas-air-permitting

Return to headline | Return to top
Drilling Plan Is Good for Consumers — and the Environment

May 9, 2018 | Real Clear Energy

By Ross Marchand

Five years is a long time. Sporting victors, ruling parties, and business conditions are constantly changing, making it hard to plan for the next half-decade. Maybe that’s why five-year plans don’t have the best track record. But the Trump administration’s five-year plan to dramatically increase offshore drilling around the United States gives cause for celebration — especially for taxpayers, consumers, and businesses vulnerable to high oil prices and onerous regulations.
The blueprint, unveiled by the president in January, identified areas in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to be leasable for oil and gas exploration purposes. Now, as the Department of Interior (DOI) firms up the plans drawn out four months ago, additional details have emerged from the administration’s agenda. Under the leadership of Secretary Ryan Zinke, DOI is planning significant modifications to drilling safety and inspection regulations put into place under President Obama.
To many on the Left, the one-two punch of expanding leasing and curtailing regulations amounts to a surprise attack on the environment. Earthjustice president Trip Van Noppen, for instance, calls the plan an “all-out assault on public lands and waters.” These and similar concerns arise in part from past spills that have resulted in billions of dollars worth of damage.
While ecological advocates are right to keep risk in mind, they fail to consider the unintended consequences of drilling restrictions and regulations. A full accounting of risk shows that the administration’s permissive policies will lead to better outcomes for customers, taxpayers, and, yes, even the environment.
To many advocates of drilling restrictions, the case for heavy-handed rules seems straightforward. Most remember the terrible pictures of birds and fish drenched in “black gold” following the Gulf of Mexico spill nearly a decade ago. But as with most policy, the devil lies in the details. The problems that led to the Deepwater Horizon spill largely had to do with equipment that was wired incorrectly and had a failed battery, according to an analysis by the U.S. Chemical Safety Board. Resulting regulations, ushered into law in 2016, applied an array of technical measures designed to reduce risk.
But new “drilling margin” requirements meant to make companies work more carefully around water pressure while drilling may actually cause an increase in blowout risk. With the new rules, operators using lighter muds to fill wells while drilling stand less of a chance of getting fined by the government. Mud weight, however, must be at a sweet spot, and getting the weight too low can result in a myriad of issues. Engineering scholars at the University of Uyo caution that, “too low mud weight may result in collapse and fill problems.” Frequently opening up blowout preventers to inspections can also compromise the system’s structural integrity, opening up the door to further risk.
When the federal government tried to quantify the costs and benefits of the proposed drilling margin rule, they simply assumed that tighter rules and more inspections would cause at least a 1 percent reduction in blowout risk. This made it easier to make the math work, since industry costs from the rule are estimated to be around $1 billion over the next decade. But not only is this assumption unjustified, the added costs inevitably get passed onto customers in the form of higher fuel prices and scarcer supply. Taxpayers also get squeezed, as the federal government spends tens of billions of dollars each year in petroleum costs.
To some environmentalists, however, hiking the price of fossil fuels and limiting extraction is a positive development. But here, advocates of green energy would be wise to think through the broader environmental impacts. If electric cars pick up the slack, for instance, the resulting increase in nickel mining in Indonesia and the Philippines will drastically increase pollution. What’s more, unlike the U.S., these countries have fewer safeguards in place to minimize the health and environmental consequences. The same goes for solar panel production, which comes at a hefty cost to residents of the developing world, recent tariffs notwithstanding.
Rather than exporting jobs and ecological harm to poorer countries, the U.S. can take the lead on energy while also increasing well-paying drilling jobs that are getting safer by the day. Already, robots are performing vital inspection services that were unavailable at the time of the Gulf of Mexico disaster. Private innovation plus safety improvement means more jobs, lower prices at the pump, less taxpayer money wasted on expensive energy sources, and a cleaner environment.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2018/05/09/drilling_plan_keeps_costs_low_for_consumers__and_the_environment_110290.html

Return to headline | Return to top
Oil States See Chance to Speed U.S. Drilling Permits

May 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire

By Mike Lee

Regulators in oil- and gas-producing states said they're getting closer to their long-held goal of speeding up the permitting process for drilling on federal land.
Six governors, led by Susana Martinez of New Mexico (R), sent a letter to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke earlier this year asking for four policy changes aimed at speeding up energy production on the vast federal estate. The governors' letter, sent in January but made public yesterday, also included detailed proposals for how Interior could implement the streamlining plans.
The governors asked Zinke to change an Obama-era decision on which projects can be excluded from environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act.
The "categorical exclusions," which allow the Interior Department to waive a NEPA review for small projects under some circumstances, were part of the 2005 Energy Policy Act enacted under the George W. Bush administration. The Obama administration agreed not to enforce the exclusions in 2010, in response to a lawsuit by environmental groups that objected to an exclusion for drilling at Nine Mile Canyon in Utah (Land Letter, April 1, 2010).
Interior might make a decision soon on at least one of the governor's requests and proposals, said Ken McQueen, who is Martinez's Cabinet secretary for energy development.
"These are very specific proposals, and because of that, we think we have a lot of traction," McQueen said at a meeting of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, a trade group for state oil and gas regulators.
The Interior Department and the Bureau of Land Management, which handles most federal oil and gas permitting, didn't respond to a request for comment.
North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum (R), along with the governors of Alaska, Idaho, Oklahoma and Utah, also signed off on the request.
The sentiment wasn't unanimous among state regulators attending the IOGCC conference. Colorado and California, both of which have significant oil and gas production on federal land, voted against a resolution calling for the Trump administration to cede control to the states.
Environmentalists have generally tried to slow down development of oil and gas on federal land, citing the impact of oil development on climate change, along with local environmental problems.
"We think we need to keep oil and gas in the ground, and the best place to start doing that is on federal land," said Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club's land protection program.
The oil state regulators, though, saw the election of President Trump as a chance to push for a long-held goal. They're also supporting legislation in Congress that would expedite federal permitting (Energywire, Oct. 4, 2017).
"It's important to keep the heat on," said John Baza, the director of Utah's Division of Oil, Gas and Mining.
The governors also asked Zinke to give the states more permitting authority for wells on federal property. They also requested more authority to waive federal permitting requirements for wells that aren't on federal property.
Another request would create a standardized federal drilling permit, or permit by rule. It would be similar to the nationwide permits the Army Corps of Engineers issues under the Clean Water Act for roads and other projects that cross rivers and streams.
The states argue that they can process drilling permits far faster than BLM. It can take months to get a federal permit, and the states complain that they lose tax money because of the delays.
New Mexico, for instance, gets about one-third of its revenue from oil and gas drilling, and more than half the state's drilling happens on federal land, McQueen said. It takes BLM several months to issue a drilling permit in the state, and the backlog costs New Mexico taxes and royalties, he said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081205

Return to headline | Return to top
State Faces Power Crunch as Aliso Canyon Limits Gas Use

May 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire

By Anne C. Mulkern

Southern California faces an upcoming power crunch as it wrestles with how much to use natural gas from a site where a historic methane leak occurred.
Until it was repaired and sealed in February 2016, the leak at Aliso Canyon in Los Angeles County spewed nearly 100,000 metric tons of methane, about the annual greenhouse gas pollution of 572,000 cars. It forced the evacuation of an estimated 8,000 residents and the relocation of some schools.
The facility was reopened but now operates with a lower limit on gas storage. Fuel is withdrawn from the site only as a sort of last resort. The California Energy Commission and others looked at the effects of the restrictions placed on utility Southern California Gas Co., known as SoCalGas, owner of the Aliso Canyon site.
A series of problems with natural gas pipelines worsen the situation, shrinking how much gas can flow into the region, experts said at a gathering yesterday to examine the forecast.
"The SoCalGas system continues to operate at less than full capacity due to a significant number of pipeline outages and continuing restrictions on use of the Aliso Canyon gas storage facility," a report released Monday said. "This reduction in capacity creates a moderate threat to electric reliability this summer. The more serious threat lies ahead. With so many pipeline outages, it will be difficult for SoCalGas to fill storage to a level sufficient to ensure energy reliability throughout the coming winter."
The state Legislature has directed the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to look at minimizing or eliminating the use of Aliso Canyon. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) wants a plan to phase out use of the facility within a decade.
Officials said they are looking at the minimum generation needed to keep the system running. It's not a target, they said, but a number to keep in mind. The decision affects a swath of people. SoCalGas, the nation's largest natural gas distribution utility, delivers the fuel to 21.6 million consumers between the state's Central Valley and the Mexican border.
Last year, the region largely avoided pulling gas from Aliso Canyon, experts said, because of warmer-than-expected weather in the winter. That changed during a cold snap Feb. 19 through March 6. The facility was used during five of 14 days of peak natural gas demand. At the same time, there were orders to power plants to curtail generation in certain hours to limit natural gas demand. The fuel widely is used to heat homes in the area.
Currently, there are outages on four key pipelines, the report said. Current available pipeline capacity of 2,655 million cubic feet per day (MMcfd) is significantly lower than the 3,185 MMcfd that was available last summer.
Total system capacity — a combination of pipeline capacity and non-Aliso Canyon storage capacity — is about 3,555 MMcfd. An analysis group also looked at what would happen if additional constraints were added to the system. That could happen if there is added demand because of hot weather this summer, for example, at the same time as there are difficulties getting more natural gas into the region. In that scenario, supportable demand would drop to 3,425 MMcfd, compared to 3,638 MMcfd last summer.
In that situation, "peak gas demand cannot be met," the report said. "This case would result in gas curtailments to electric generators."New steps to ease crunch
There already are numerous mitigation measures in place, including use of demand response, where customers are asked to cut their energy use. Experts are suggesting a series of new moves. They include getting 230 MMcfd from the Otay Mesa storage facility in San Diego County, using liquefied natural gas; expediting any pending transmission upgrades that would cut the minimum generation requirement; and allowing SoCalGas to buy gas. Right now, it transmits but does not purchase.
As it currently stands, experts said, it's unlikely the region could get through a peak demand day without withdrawing gas from storage.
"The way I read the assessment is that if we have too many hot days in the summer, we will have to withdraw" gas from storage, "or even if we don't have to withdraw, we won't be able to inject much more into the [storage] fields," said CPUC Commissioner Liane Randolph. "Then we start winter with less than we need, unless our mitigation measures work."
Rodger Schwecke, senior vice president at SoCalGas, questioned the policy to limit the use of Aliso Canyon.
"We do believe that greater utilization of Aliso Canyon can help mitigate" some of the supply and demand crunch, he said, and can assist in building storage inventories in other natural gas fields.
A few residents of the area near Aliso Canyon, however, urged a permanent closure of the facility. They said they are still feeling illnesses they connect to emissions from the storage wells.
Issam Najm, president of the Porter Ranch Neighborhood Council, a local group, said the wells are still leaking. He showed a graphic from the California Air Resources Board, from flights over the site, that he said documents air pollution from the wells.
"The facility releases gas even when it's not operational," Najm said.
It's not just methane, he said; there are other pollutants, including benzene. "It is a known human carcinogen, and there's no doubt about it," he said.
The state faces tough decisions, said Jane Long, chairwoman of the California Council on Science and Technology's California's Energy Future committee. There is no "silver bullet" to replace underground gas storage in the 2020 and 2030 time frame, she said. Policy market mechanisms could reduce but not eliminate the need, she said.
Wind energy generation dies down dramatically in the winter, Long said, and solar production declines by 60 percent. The state's grid manager, the California Independent System Operator, requires backup electricity from gas equal to renewable capacity online, she said.
"Batteries and energy storage are unlikely to be able to obviate the need for gas storage as a method of backing up renewable energy in the winter," Long said.
California has a rule requiring utilities to generate 33 percent renewable power by 2020. The state also seeks to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
"We don't really know yet how that system is going to work in 2050, and we don't know exactly how we're going to come up with a reliable system of energy that is also very low-emissions," Long said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081209

Return to headline | Return to top
Tellurian Says 20-Plus Companies Eyeing Investments in LNG, Gas Infrastructure

May 9, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence

By Carolyn Davis

Nearly two-dozen companies are analyzing Tellurian Inc.’s natural gas prospects and partners could be identified soon, CEO Meg Gentle said Wednesday.
Gentle disclosed the news as part of the Houston-based company’s first quarter results. Tellurian is building a global gas business, both in the U.S. onshore and to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the Gulf Coast.
Earlier this year Tellurian engaged Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC and SG Americas Securities LLC (Societe Generale) to serve as financial advisers for Driftwood Holdings LLC, formed to own and operate the network of gas production, LNG trading and infrastructure, which includes the proposed 27.6 million metric tons/year Driftwood LNG export facility.
Tellurian wants to raise $24 billion for Driftwood Holdings. Equity interests in Driftwood Holdings were expected to be offered at a cost of $1,500/metric ton in exchange for LNG at cost.
“There are more than 20 companies conducting detailed analysis in our data room for Driftwood Holdings and we expect to be able to identify our partners soon,” Gentle said. “We intend to begin construction of the Driftwood LNG terminal in 2019 and produce first LNG in 2023.”
Driftwood LNG, to be sited on 1,000 acres in Calcasieu Parish, LA, would require up to 4 Bcf/d of feed gas. The project is designed for up to 20 trains, three storage tanks and three marine berths. The project could begin construction early next year if FERC issues a favorable environmental impact statement (EIS) and Tellurian executes a final investment decision (FID).
According to Tellurian’s estimated timeline, a draft EIS could be issued by mid-year, with a final EIS in October. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order and federal authorization may be issued in early 2019 [CP17-117; CP17-118]. If all goes according to plan, an FID could be issued by the middle of next year, followed by construction startup.
Tellurian, which was co-founded by Cheniere Energy Inc. co-founder Charif Souki and former BG Group plc executive Martin Houston, is making progress on related plans to provide feed gas for the project. During the first three months, nonbinding open seasons were launched to secure prospective shippers for two proposed pipelines: Haynesville Global Access Pipeline (HGAP) and Permian Global Access Pipeline (PGAP).
As designed, HGAP would be a 42-inch diameter pipeline that would connect up to 2 Bcf/d of Haynesville and Bossier shale volumes to customers in southwestern Louisiana. The open season for HGAP closed on April 6.
PGAP as proposed also would be a 42-inch diameter system able to transport up to 2 Bcf/d that would run 625 miles, originating at the Waha Hub in West Texas and terminating near Gillis. The open season is scheduled to be completed on May 25.
The pipelines are part of Tellurian’s proposed pipeline network, the development of which is expected to represent a roughly $7 billion investment in U.S. infrastructure and to create close to 15,000 jobs in Texas and Louisiana.
During 1Q2018, Tellurian generated about $6 million in revenue from LNG marketing and about $1 million from natural gas sales. It also received a $50 million investment from an affiliate of Bechtel Oil, Gas and Chemicals Inc. Bechtel Oil last November was awarded contracts worth $15.2 billion to begin the engineering, procurement and construction groundwork for Driftwood LNG.
In addition to Bechtel Oil, Tellurian in 2016 received a $25 million preferred equity investment from GE Oil & Gas and sold a 23% stake to France’s Total SA.
Tellurian reported a net loss in 1Q2018 of about $25.2 million (minus 12 cents/share). The company began trading on Nasdaq last year after it raised more than $100 million in a public offering, including underwriter allotments, and it completed a reverse merger with Magellan Petroleum Corp.
Tellurian ended March with about $112.5 million of cash and cash equivalents and said it remains debt free. The balance sheet consists of $280 million in assets, of which $91 million represents proved natural gas properties.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/114318-tellurian-says-20-plus-companies-eyeing-investments-in-lng-gas-infrastructure

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Security News

Cybersecurity, LNG Bills Clear House Energy and Commerce Committee

May 9, 2018 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard

By Anthony Adragna

Four bills aimed at bolstering the Energy Department's ability to protect the nation's electric grid cleared the full House Energy and Commerce Committee today.
Those cybersecurity bills — H.R. 5174 (115); H.R. 5175 (115); H.R. 5239 (115) and H.R. 5240 (115) — all cleared the committee by voice vote.
H.R. 5174 would have DOE bolster its emergency response efforts, while H.R. 5175 asks DOE to coordinate the federal, state and business responses to physical and cybersecurity threats. H.R. 5239 would establish a voluntary DOE program to test the cybersecurity of products intended for use in the bulk-power system and H.R. 5240 would encourage public-private partnerships on cybsersecurity efforts.
In addition, the committee advanced an amended version of H.R. 4606 (115) on a 35 to 15 vote. The bill would allow the expedited approval of small-scale shipments of liquefied natural gas that qualify for categorical exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act.
WHAT’S NEXT: The measures move on to House floor consideration, though it's not clear when they will be taken up.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard

Return to headline | Return to top

Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Environment News

Climate Hawk's Stunning Fall from Grace Emboldens Skeptics

May 9, 2018 | E&E Climatewire

By Josh Kurtz and Benjamin Hulac

Ex-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) was at the vanguard of the climate movement, heading legal and political fights against Trump administration attempts to weaken environmental regulations.
Schneiderman is also a pugnacious and media-savvy figure whose abrupt and stunning political fall this week after cringe-worthy sexual abuse allegations is an undeniable blow to climate hawks across the country. It may force them to reshuffle their tactics and, to a lesser extent, their priorities.
But as shocked, saddened and disgusted as climate activists are about Schneiderman, they are convinced that reinforcements are readily available and that the movement to defend environmental laws from legal and legislative attacks remains strong, even in the absence of a fallen leader.
"It should not have a significant impact," said Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh (D), another top environmentalist. "He was a leader, he was very energetic, and the New York attorney general's office was fully engaged and I expect that that will continue. ... Other [Democratic] AGs are also working these issues. If there's any slack at all, one of us will pick it up — or all of us will collectively."
Despite those fighting words, Schneiderman's political foes are gleeful about — and feeling emboldened by — his demise.
In a statement yesterday, Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, who is chairwoman of the Republican Attorneys General Association, called Schneiderman "a disturbed monster" and a "sick man," and suggested he ought to be prosecuted, or at least "held accountable," for his alleged acts of violence against former girlfriends.
"A lot of climate skeptics are smiling at his downfall because he was an out-of-control, really wacky guy who held a lot of power," said Marc Morano, who runs the blog Climate Depot.
Morano and his allies have been especially disdainful of the legal attempts Schneiderman led to hold Exxon Mobil Corp. and other oil companies accountable for global warming, calling him "the ultimate shakedown artist."
"Let's take a moment to pause and take a look at the strategy of blaming energy companies for bad weather," Morano said. He added that Schneiderman's resignation and quick disappearance from the public scene will force climate activists to reconsider their approach.
"He was the lightning rod," he said. "He was the instigator. It definitely limits the movement when you take out the lead guy."Building his credentials
After his election as attorney general in 2010, Schneiderman became a climate change policy advocate, and that reputation magnified as he began fighting with the Trump White House on dozens of environmental issues and in the high-profile case against Exxon.
In 2007, when now-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) was attorney general, he used a little-noticed law known as the Martin Act to subpoena five energy companies — a coal company and four utilities — over climate change. Accusing the companies of misleading investors by failing to provide details about how climate regulations could affect them, Cuomo secured settlements in four cases (Climatewire, Sept. 6, 2016).
When he took office, Schneiderman applied that rubric to Peabody Energy Corp., the coal giant, and to Exxon.
Not only does New York have deeper pockets than other states to pursue such litigation, but the law itself is a muscular tool unavailable elsewhere. The Martin Act is particularly powerful because, unlike federal securities law, it does not require prosecutors to prove a defendant knew its acts were deceptive — just that they happened.
"That simple act alone provides the New York attorney general a lot of power," said Betty Huber, an environmental lawyer with Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP.
After he launched an investigation into Exxon in late 2015, Schneiderman set out to further burnish his climate credentials.
"Every fossil fuel company has a responsibility to be honest with its investors and the public about the financial and market risks posed by climate change," he said in a speech in the spring of 2016, speaking alongside other Democratic attorneys general and former Vice President Al Gore.
Yet Schneiderman wasn't battling the oil companies alone. Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey (D) has been equally involved in the legal fight with Exxon Mobil.
"I am confident that the investigation will continue regardless of who is its public face, and I greatly appreciate everything Maura Healey has done," said RL Miller, founder of the group Climate Hawks Vote.
Similarly, while Schneiderman often took the lead in environmental litigation against the Trump administration, other Democratic attorneys general including Healey, Frosh, Xavier Becerra of California, Lisa Madigan of Illinois and Hector Balderas of New Mexico have been regular plaintiffs in lawsuits against Trump's agenda.
Is one of those Democrats poised to increase his or her visibility on climate and the environment now that Schneiderman is out?
"I don't think Becerra's office is popping the champagne" because Schneiderman has resigned, said Andrew Acosta, a Democratic consultant based in Sacramento, Calif.
Yet inevitably, given California's deep-blue political tint and long-standing commitment to combating climate change, Becerra will find himself at the forefront of many legal and policy battles, Acosta said — especially with the national agenda dominated by Trump and the GOP Congress.
"The real opportunity for California and Becerra was Donald Trump," he said. "The president is a good foil in California."Will N.Y. stay 'extremely aggressive'?
Pat Parenteau, a climate change and environmental law professor at Vermont Law School, said he doesn't see New York slipping as an important player in environmental litigation, even with Schneiderman gone.
"As strong and aggressive as Eric Schneiderman has been, that office is so deep, the bench there is so deep, I have really no doubt that they're not going to lose a step," Parenteau said by phone, adding that the office has a rich history in environmental law.
"The capacity is huge," he said. "I think it really does have to do with the number of people in that office, the amount of environmental expertise."
During Schneiderman's term, and before and during the tenures of Cuomo and Eliot Spitzer, a Democrat who preceded Cuomo as attorney general, the office clashed with Washington over environmental safeguards.
"They challenged Reagan, they challenged George W. Bush," Parenteau said. "There's 40 years of experience with this particular AG's office being extremely aggressive on the Martin Act and on environmental issues."
Beyond a handful of states, including California and New York, which has "distinguished itself in being able to dive into the most technical, challenging kind of environmental rulemaking," the list of attorneys general who take on complicated environmental cases thins out quickly, according to Parenteau. "They just don't have the horses, the horsepower."
Frosh said that the New York attorney general's office will continue to be every bit as active on climate issues even with Schneiderman gone. He called New York's acting attorney general, Barbara Underwood, who had been serving as the state's solicitor general, "a brilliant lawyer" and predicted that whomever the state Legislature selects to replace Schneiderman will be equally committed to fighting global warming (see related story).
"Climate deniers can rejoice that one of their opponents has fallen," Frosh said, "but it doesn't affect the war."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081219

Return to headline | Return to top
Will Schneiderman's Replacement Continue His Climate War?

May 9, 2018 | E&E Climatewire

By Scott Waldman

The gravity of New York politics shifted dramatically within a few hours Monday, and with it so may have the state's role as a leading Trump administration foe in the fight over climate change policy.
There is already a crowded field in the race for attorney general, once considered a lock for former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's third term. Schneiderman announced his resignation Monday night after four women alleged in a New Yorker story that he had physically abused them. The names of more than a dozen candidates were floated yesterday as potential replacements, including state lawmakers, the lieutenant governor, members of Congress, former state officials, county district attorneys and city officials.
While it's certain that most of the candidates from one of the most liberal states in the country will continue to battle the Trump administration, less clear is whether they will continue Schneiderman's climate battles or focus on other priorities for Democrats, like immigration or health care.
For now, the state's solicitor general, Barbara Underwood, will fill Schneiderman's role until the state Legislature chooses a successor. Schneiderman's replacement will be voted on by the combined state Assembly and Senate. Democrats far outnumber Republicans in Albany, which effectively puts the choice in the hands of Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, who controls the 150-member Assembly.
An appointment of a new attorney general would only be for the short term, until the November election. In a race where Schneiderman was seen as a shoo-in, Republicans will now try to take back a seat they have not held for 20 years and the liberal Working Families Party may give its ballot line to a candidate to Schneiderman's left. State lawmakers may also opt to keep Underwood on the job or appoint a placeholder candidate to let the electoral process play out independently before the November election.
It's likely that Schneiderman's successor will keep fighting his same political battles, which include lawsuits against the Trump administration's rollback of President Obama's greenhouse gas emission policies, said Richard Brodsky, a former Democratic Assembly member. The likely successors are not expected to make dramatic changes in policy because "New York is not up for grabs ideologically," he said.
"It's impossible to know whose political interest will be relevant to the decision," he said. "Is it the members of the Legislature? Does the governor have a role; even if he doesn't, does he know that? There is very little you can say with certainty except, 'Don't expect big changes in policy.'"
Heastie has prioritized climate legislation in the Assembly, including bills that would require the state to significantly increase its reliance on renewable energy, but Albany observers don't think his choice for the next attorney general will be based on any particular political issue.
The pick of an attorney general in the Assembly will be based entirely on Albany's inside politics, said Gerald Benjamin, a veteran political science professor at the State University of New York, New Paltz. In similar situations in the past, the body picked one of its own members, such as when Alan Hevesi stepped down as state comptroller after his corruption conviction and Assemblyman Tom DiNapoli was named as his replacement. After such an embarrassing resignation, Democratic lawmakers may be wary of engaging in a divisive political fight right now, Benjamin said.
"[Heastie] might try to convince the members that they should pick somebody who is not a member, if there is no natural preferred person that emerges," Benjamin said. "If there is multiple people to choose from and he thinks it would be too divisive, his calculations are going to be internal, not broadly systemic; it's political but in a different way."
This time, however, the priority may be to select a woman because of the nature of the accusations. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) yesterday said that a "qualified woman would be great," and Assembly members discussed the need for a woman to fill the role in a closed-door conference in the Capitol yesterday, according to multiple news reports.
Even the replacement attorney general chosen by state lawmakers could still face a challenger, or challengers, in November.
Here's a look at some of the candidates being floated as potential replacements who have prioritized climate issues in the past:
New York City Public Advocate Tish James: James was one of the first names Albany insiders tossed out as a possibility after Schneiderman announced he would step down. James has called attention to environmental justice issues and has held hearings on how New York City can better prepare for climate change. She has pushed for the city to divest from fossil fuel investments and to make more investments in renewable energy. It's unclear if James wants the job. Yesterday, rather than declare her interest in running for attorney general, James ignored reporters' questions.
Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul (D): Cuomo has reportedly wanted Hochul, a former congresswoman from western New York, to run for the seat now held by Republican Rep. Chris Collins. He could then potentially replace her with a candidate to her left in his primary race against Cynthia Nixon. Hochul has not expressed interest in that job, but in a public statement yesterday, she did not deny an interest in the state attorney general job. When she served in Congress, Hochul often sided with GOP lawmakers against Obama, including on the Keystone pipeline, fracking and restraining EPA.
State Sen. Mike Gianaris of Queens: Gianaris is one of the senior Democrats in the state Legislature and is known for aggressively taking on Republican colleagues on the floor of the Senate. He has earned high scores from environmental groups for his policies, and has pushed legislation that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and that would incentivize the private sector to invest in clean energy. Gianaris already has $2 million in a statewide campaign account and previously ran for the attorney general post in 2006.
Zephyr Teachout or Preet Bharara could run on the Working Families Party line in the November election, although neither would get much support in the state Capitol. The party is at war with Cuomo, after his fight to be named the nominee for both the Democratic and Working Families parties caused some of the party's labor unions to back away. Bharara, a former U.S. attorney, has not given any signal that he is interested in the job. He's seen as unpopular with the governor and the state Legislature. Teachout, who's helping run Nixon's campaign, is an outspoken opponent of fossil fuels who has called for a fracking ban. Teachout tweeted yesterday that she is "seriously considering" a run. She is credited with shifting Cuomo's stance on fracking, and after she garnered almost 40 percent in a primary against Cuomo despite little name recognition and little advertising, Cuomo banned natural gas drilling in New York.
Republican Manny Alicandro: Alicandro, a Wall Street lawyer, announced his candidacy for attorney general just hours before The New Yorker published its Schneiderman story. One of his chief criticisms of Schneiderman was all of the lawsuits he had filed against the Trump administration. A Republican candidate would be the most likely to abandon Schneiderman's legal battles against the Trump administration, though he or she would still have to get re-elected in a mostly Democratic state dominated by New York City voters.
Republican John Cahill: A former aide to then-Gov. George Pataki (R), Cahill lost to Schneiderman in the 2014 race. Cahill was Pataki's former Department of Environmental Conservation commissioner and pushed for safe regulation of fracking.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081177

Return to headline | Return to top
'Climate Will Not Be on the Agenda' — Emails

May 9, 2018 | E&E Climatewire

By Niina Heikkinen

A trove of email correspondence from Scott Pruitt's scheduler reveals details about the EPA administrator's approach to climate policy.
Specific mentions of climate change and greenhouse gas regulations were scant in over 10,000 pages of emails with Millan Hupp, director of scheduling and advance at EPA. But the documents — obtained by the Sierra Club through the Freedom of Information Act — show how the administrator and his staff approached discussions about climate and deregulation and how he engaged with critics of the Clean Power Plan and the Paris Agreement.
Here are a few highlights from the EPA emails:Australia trip
Pruitt planned to make a trip to Australia last August that was canceled as Hurricane Harvey devastated parts of Texas. Just as with similar foreign travels, the planned trip to Australia involved significant outside input.
Emails show Matthew Freedman, CEO of Global Impact Inc., corresponded extensively with Hupp about the planned trip, offering suggestions on everything from official talking points on EPA policy to potential restaurant recommendations. Freedman is also treasurer of the American Australian Council, a group whose members include Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips. He worked on planning the trip with Richard Smotkin, a former Comcast Corp. lobbyist linked with another Pruitt trip to Morocco (Greenwire, May 4).
"I think it is important to play both offense and defense. Offense to move forward the Agenda from the Administrator, and defense in terms of a 'risk mitigation' strategy to address in a proactive manner critics from whatever perspective," Freedman wrote.
He appeared especially concerned about making sure Pruitt at least would give the appearance of listening to his critics.
"The trip will undoubtedly turn to issues where the Administration differs from the current Aus government — climate change is but one issue, but there is no reason not to have informed and thoughtful discussion. It allows both parties to address critics, and to move on," Freedman wrote on July 6 to Hupp.
In a later email, Freedman noted that climate change would not be part of the agenda, but Pruitt should still prepare a response to questions on the topic.
"Climate will not be on the agenda except it come up and we need to be able to say that we 'agree to disagree' as good friends. I suggested to the Embassy that Victorian Minister for Innovation and Trade [Philip Dalidakis] be included on their side since having him at the table would be good."
Freedman also suggested that the trip should have a theme of environmental cooperation between the United States and Australia that would focus on innovation and "doing much more with less."
"The US press has made it sound like less money equals less commitment so changing the dynamic would be useful," he wrote.
Freedman's tips also extended to sightseeing and restaurant recommendations in the Sydney area. He recommended a water taxi ride to breakfast at the Boathouse on the Circular Quay and dinner at a "traditional German place" in The Rocks, a tourist neighborhood in Sydney. Potential excursions to the Great Barrier Reef and Tasmania, however, would take too long for this specific trip, he added.
Freedman's involvement in planning even led staff at the U.S. Embassy in Australia to send Pruitt's draft schedule directly to him.
"I've received an updated/more detailed draft schedule from the Embassy but reminded them that I'm simply providing input to you and that all the normal decision-making processes and communications need to remain in place, and that my only role is to provide informal input and suggestions to decision-makers," he wrote.Clean Power Plan
On March 13, 2017, Pruitt spoke before 250 energy executives at the Mandarin Oriental hotel in Washington, D.C., at a closed-press event hosted by the utility trade group Edison Electric Institute. The event occurred just a month after Pruitt took over EPA, and the talking points for the event presaged many of the messages he would continue to push over the next year, as The New York Times first reported.
An outline of the planned remarks prepared by the administrator's adviser, Lincoln Ferguson, show Pruitt would focus in part on industry's progress in cutting emissions and its upcoming actions on the Clean Power Plan, and would tout the agency's return to rule of law.
"Opportunity is knocking, and new leadership in the White House and EPA will answer," the remarks read.
The emails obtained by the Sierra Club also show Pruitt traveled to Union Pacific Corp.'s headquarters in Omaha, Neb., to talk about deregulation.
On Oct. 20 last year, Pruitt met with a small group of the company's executives to talk about the Clean Power Plan, along with the Obama-era Waters of the U.S. rule, a Railroad Ties Combustion Rule and permitting reform.
The railroad company is indirectly affected by regulations on the power sector, as it ships coal across the country.
The attendees of the October meeting included Lance Fritz, CEO of Union Pacific; Cameron Scott, executive vice president and chief operating officer; Scott Moore, senior vice president of corporate relations; and Mike Rock, vice president of external relations, who coordinated the meeting.
"Our folks will be coming back from a field visit so they won't be in coat and tie — just FYI," Rock wrote to Hupp.Paris Agreement
The emails also contain correspondence between EPA official Tate Bennett and Rick Curtsinger, director of public affairs for Wyoming-based coal company Cloud Peak Energy Inc., about Pruitt's planned participation in an Aug. 3 event at Cloud Peak Energy's Broomfield, Colo., office.
Cloud Peak opposed environmental restrictions imposed on coal and coal-fired power during the Obama administration, but before President Trump announced plans to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on June 1, the company urged him to stay in the deal.
Curtsinger drew Bennett's attention to that position in emails in July, referencing an April letter to Trump echoing a message from Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who argued that U.S. companies might benefit from remaining in the accord with a laxer emissions commitment.
"We strongly support the approach outlined in Representative Cramer's letter and believe it promotes a prosperity-focused approach to addressing climate concerns," Colin Marshall, Cloud Peak's president and CEO, wrote in the April letter to Trump. Rollbacks to Obama-era rules had already fulfilled Trump's campaign pledges on Paris, he argued.
In addition to mentioning the letter on Paris, Curtsinger laid out a list of regulatory policies affecting coal producers, including the Clean Power Plan.
By the time Pruitt visited Broomfield, Trump had already announced the Paris withdrawal, a move Pruitt had pushed for.'Red-team blue-team' debate
In July, EPA received a request for the administrator to meet with Oren Cass, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. It was unclear from the email who was requesting the introductory meeting with Pruitt.
Cass has argued that recent research overstates the risk of climate change and doesn't take into account human adaptability.
An email from Cass' "friend and co-author" strongly suggested Pruitt meet with Cass to discuss how the administrator would structure a "red-team blue-team"-style debate on climate science. Cass wanted EPA to focus on the baseline emissions being used to project future potential emissions of greenhouse gases, according to the email.
"[T]his is a huge shortcoming of current science and is being badly mischaracterized/misused. An EPA analysis of it would be hugely valuable. I can't recommend strongly enough that you meet Oren soon," the email read.
When reached by E&E News, Cass declined to comment about his meeting with Pruitt, saying it was an off-the-record conversation. He referred questions to EPA. The agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/05/09/stories/1060081217

Return to headline | Return to top

Add recipients

Suggested