Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 04/06/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) ICC Approves Code Change From Home Innovation Research Labs
Jun 4, 2018 | Builder Magazine
By Home Innovation Research Labs
In late April, Vladimir Kochkin, director of building science at Home Innovation Research Labs, had a code change he co-sponsored to improve coordination between energy code and building code requirements approved by an International Code Council (ICC) committee. -
Pruitt Limited Press After Scandals. He’s Back
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
Scott Pruitt is back on the media circuit after lying low for a while. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Issues TSCA ‘Problem Formulation’ Documents
Jun 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has released the ‘problem formulation’ documents of the first ten substances subject to risk evaluation under the recently reformed TSCA. -
EPA’s Asbestos “Problem Formulation” Puts Americans at Risk
Jun 1, 2018 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
Today the EPA released its long-awaited “problem formulation” documents for the first ten chemicals under review as required by the 2016 amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). -
EPA Moves to Regulate Past Asbestos Products, Limit Reviews
Jun 1, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
EPA today moved to make it harder for phased-out asbestos products to return to the market and took another step toward evaluating existing uses of the cancer-causing mineral and nine other dangerous chemicals. -
US CPSC Plans to Act on Furniture Flammability Standard in 2019
Jun 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
The US Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) plans to make a decision in 2019 on whether to adopt California's Technical Bulletin (TB) 117-2013 as a national flammability standard for residential upholstered furniture, amid ongoing concern of the safety and necessity of added flame retardants. -
Ombudsman Probes EU's Slow Adoption of Non-Animal Tests
Jun 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
The European ombudsman is investigating a complaint by NGO Cruelty Free International about the European Commission’s "ongoing failure" to regularly update the list of alternatives to animal tests that can be used to assess the safety of chemicals under REACH. -
Field Hearing Promotes Colo.'s Role in 'Energy Dominance'
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Increasing production from Western natural gas and oil shale formations could support local economies and feed a proposed West Coast export terminal, industry advocates, local officials and congressional Republicans said during a field hearing in Colorado last week. -
Americas Path to Energy Independence: The Shale Revolution
Jun 4, 2018 | Forbes
By Simon Lack
In the history of American Energy Independence, September 29, 2016 was a significant day. -
Small Gains Reap Big Benefits in U.S. Shale Fields
Jun 4, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal (In E&E Energywire)
By Spencer Jakab
Small efficiency gains by drillers are adding up in U.S. shale fields, tilting the balance of global market influence away from Saudi Arabia and other major exporters. -
US Oil Producers Have All Their DUCs In a Row: Fuel for Thought
Jun 4, 2018 | Platts
By Bob Williams
With all the talk about sanctions, conflict and nationwide implosions, stakeholders could be overlooking a potential sleeper for the US oil market: DUCs–drilled but uncompleted wells. -
FERC's Climate Review on Dominion Pipeline Under Fire
Jun 4, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
A phalanx of environmental and community organizations last Thursday asked FERC to reconsider approvals of enhancement work on the Dominion Energy Transmission Inc.’s New Market natural gas pipeline project in New York. -
Pope Francis to Meet with Moniz, Top Oil Execs
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
Pope Francis is expected to huddle with former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and a host of oil executives at a two-day conference Friday and Saturday to discuss climate change. -
Perry's Defends Trump's Directive: 'Attacks Are Coming'
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey and Blake Sobczak
Energy Secretary Rick Perry today said President Trump was "right" to order the Department of Energy to halt the closure of coal and nuclear plants, while warning that the nation's pipelines are vulnerable to cyberthreats. -
(ACC Mentioned) Schneider’s Bulk Intermodal Container Service Celebrates Six-Year Milestone
Jun 4, 2018 | American Journal of Transportation
Schneider (NYSE: SNDR) has reached a new milestone within its Bulk division, which is responsible for the transportation of liquid products. -
Majority of Railroads on Track for Positive Train Control Implementation
Jun 4, 2018 | Transportation Today
By Melina Druga
During the first quarter of 2018, the commuter rail industry made progress in implementing positive train control (PTC), according to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). -
Emails Show To-Do List For Tearing Down Climate Rules
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Zack Colman and Scott Waldman
Just after President Trump entered the White House, his team crafted an ambitious to-do list that aimed to shred the Obama administration's climate policies and drastically downsize EPA, according to a document recently obtained by E&E News. -
Did Trump Just Propose the Opposite of Pricing Carbon?
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Adam Aton
The Trump administration is scrambling the economics of climate change by proposing to subsidize carbon emissions rather than tax them. -
EPA Ordered to Produce Records Backing Pruitt Claims
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
A federal judge Friday ordered EPA to produce documents related to Administrator Scott Pruitt's claims dismissing human activity as a primary contributor to climate change. -
SAB Approves Report Supporting EPA Air Toxics 'Screening' Methods
Jun 4, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) May 31 approved a working group's draft report on EPA “screening” methods designed to better focus the agency's efforts in air toxics risk reviews, but the board nonetheless expressed some doubts that the screening methods will help EPA whittle down its workload and seeks some changes to the report. -
EPA Signals Rejection of Bids by Del., Md. For Help On Smog
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
To Maryland and Delaware, ozone-forming emissions from out-of-state power plants are unneighborly violations of the Clean Air Act.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) ICC Approves Code Change From Home Innovation Research Labs
Jun 4, 2018 | Builder Magazine
By Home Innovation Research Labs
In late April, Vladimir Kochkin, director of building science at Home Innovation Research Labs, had a code change he co-sponsored to improve coordination between energy code and building code requirements approved by an International Code Council (ICC) committee.
The purpose of the code change is to provide designers and builders with more options for building energy-efficient and durable walls for compliance with existing energy codes and energy programs. Along with Kochkin, the code change was co-sponsored by Jay Crandell, representing the Foam Sheathing Committee of the American Chemistry Council.
“Because we are able to engage directly with builders constructing energy-efficient homes across the country,” Kochkin says, “we get firsthand knowledge of the types of solutions the industry is seeking as it transitions to the next generation of building codes and construction solutions. Then, we can apply our building science expertise to find the ‘sweet spot’—the most practical intersection of energy efficiency, durability, and ease of construction.”
The code change coordinates the requirements for continuous insulation with provision for Class II vapor retarder (e.g., Kraft paper). As a result, less foam sheathing can be required on the exterior surface of walls with continuous insulation while still ensuring good moisture performance of the wall assembly. This change will enable solutions that are more practical to build in the field—for example, cladding and windows are easier to install with less foam sheathing required on the outside wall.
The code change will also allow builders to continue to use Kraft paper—the tried-and-true longtime industry favorite—or take advantage of modern materials, such as responsive or “smart” vapor retarders. In this way, traditional 2x4 and 2x6 walls with Kraft paper vapor retarder and R-5 foam sheathing can deliver the overall wall R-value required by the energy code with only minimal changes from conventional practices.
The code change proposal was informed by a multiyear research program, conducted by Home Innovation Research Labs, that studied energy-efficient wall systems.
For more information about the research program, click here.
http://www.builderonline.com/building/code/icc-approves-code-change-from-home-innovation-research-labs_o
-
Pruitt Limited Press After Scandals. He’s Back
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
Scott Pruitt is back on the media circuit after lying low for a while.
Over the last week, the EPA administrator has participated in at least three interviews with conservative-leaning media outlets. The string of appearances marks a shift for Pruitt, who has kept a low media profile in recent months as steady news reports have detailed allegations of his unethical behavior and spending scandals.
But in quick succession last week, around the one-year anniversary of the Trump administration’s announced withdrawal from the Paris climate accord, the EPA administrator appeared on a podcast hosted by The Washington Free Beacon; a local Sinclair Broadcast Group affiliate, WJLA; and a Mississippi talk radio program, "The Gallo Radio Show." Then, on Friday, Fox News ran an op-ed by Pruitt on the United States' exit from the Paris deal.
"I'm not surprised to see him back out on the right-wing media circuit now that the barrage of bad press has slowed down," said Lisa Hymas, the climate and energy program director at Media Matters for America, a left-leaning nonprofit that tracks conservative media.
She noted that his decision follows a pattern of Pruitt avoiding interviews with reporters who cover EPA. The conservative outlets he spoke to last week didn’t press him on issues like his use of federal funds or the impact of his deregulatory actions on human and environmental health.
Speaking about the Paris withdrawal gives Pruitt the chance to talk about a policy move that’s popular among conservatives. President Trump’s announcement was an especially meaningful one for Pruitt, who had both publicly and privately lobbied for an exit from the accord. After the announcement last June, Pruitt touted the decision the following Sunday in an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press." He also went on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," where he defended the withdrawal despite international criticism.
This year, though, Pruitt stuck to conservative outlets as he marked his political triumph. In his op-ed on Fox, Pruitt described Trump's decision as "bold" and "courageous."
He wrote, "President Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement was one of the earliest indications of his commitment to put America first. From regulatory reforms to tax relief, the president continues to take decisive action on behalf of hardworking Americans.”
Among the allegations Pruitt has faced this year: He helped two political staffers score steep raises, got a "sweetheart" condo deal from a lobbyist and marginalized staffers who disagreed with him. Most recently, newly released agency records show EPA spent about $3.5 million on Pruitt's 24/7 security detail in his first year in office (Greenwire, May 25).
As a number of news stories about spending at the agency broke, Pruitt at first appeared poised to counter the reports head-on.
He sat down for an April 6 interview with Fox News' Ed Henry. That network has been a favorite outlet for Pruitt. A March analysis by Media Matters found that Pruitt appeared on Fox more than twice as many times as on all other major networks combined.
But that interview backfired for Pruitt. The administrator faced probing questions about his knowledge and involvement in the agency's spending decisions. News reports at the time suggested the tense interview rankled the White House, and Pruitt's media appearances subsequently dried up.'Eco-geekos … are very, very radical'
If the EPA administrator feared further criticism, he did not find it in his interviews last week. Although interviewers did not ignore the scandals, they either did not push him to answer questions about them or implied that the concerns were a distraction cooked up by Pruitt's critics.
In the lead-up to Pruitt's appearance on “The Gallo Radio Show,” the host, Paul Gallo, blamed the negative press on environmental groups.
"The eco-geekos, as I've always called them, these are a powerful group of people. They don't like you screwing with the environment there. .... They will kill in some cases, as you all know. But these people are very, very radical," Gallo said.
When Pruitt called in to the show several minutes later, the administrator described the recent criticism as a result of the changes he was introducing at EPA. He compared the actions under the Trump administration to the types of regulatory shake-ups that happened under President Reagan.
"That just demonstrates what we're about is consequential and making a difference across the country," he said.
Pruitt found similar support in other interviews last week.
When Boris Epshteyn at WJLA rounded out his brief interview with Pruitt on the Paris exit, Epshteyn — a former Trump aide — echoed the administrator's criticism of the international agreement.
"Here's the bottom line: The United States was never truly a party to the Paris Agreement. The Obama administration never truly followed the constitutional steps of a treaty in entering that agreement. The Senate never had the opportunity to vote on it. A year later, the decision to leave the agreement has proven to be correct both for constitutional and policy reasons," he said.
Meanwhile, Elizabeth Harrington of The Washington Free Beacon joked with Pruitt about proposed bans on plastic straws and his connections with baseball, and even tried to get him to speculate about which contestant on ABC’s reality show “The Bachelorette” he favored.
"Oh, goodness gracious, you know I can honestly say that's not a show I know much about," Pruitt said. "You are a little bit outside my lane there, so if we go back to baseball, that would be better."
Pruitt didn’t stay in Washington last Friday to mark the anniversary of the Paris withdrawal. Instead, he headed south to address the 2,000 members of the Delta Council in Mississippi.
Surrounded by Republican politicians and business leaders, he praised Trump yet again.
"President Trump promised to put the American people first, and he delivered," Pruitt said in a statement.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083283
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Issues TSCA ‘Problem Formulation’ Documents
Jun 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has released the ‘problem formulation’ documents of the first ten substances subject to risk evaluation under the recently reformed TSCA.
The documents refine the scope of the risk evaluations the agency will conduct on certain high-priority substances – which include asbestos, several chlorinated solvents, consumer products contaminant 1,4-dioxane and the flame retardant HBCD.
The documents serve as an interim step between last June’s ‘scoping documents’ and the final risk evaluations, which must be completed by December 2019. They provide further clarity as to which ‘conditions of use’ will be evaluated for each substance.
According to the preamble of each problem formulation, the agency has removed from its risk evaluation those activities and exposure pathways it says "do not warrant inclusion in the risk evaluation". These include uses for which it has received insufficient information to demonstrate they actually are "intended, known, or reasonably foreseen" to take place.
To use its resources efficiently and to avoid duplicating efforts, it says it plans to "exercise its discretion … to focus its analytical efforts on exposures that are likely to present the greatest concern and consequently merit a risk evaluation under TSCA," and exclude others.Asbestos Snur, systematic review
Along with announcing release of the problem formulations, the EPA has issued a proposed significant new use rule (Snur) for asbestos.
It also published for public comment its systematic review approach document. This outlines how the EPA selects and reviews studies, and provides "continued transparency regarding how the agency plans to evaluate scientific information."
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said these actions provide "an opportunity to comment on how EPA plans to evaluate the ten chemicals undergoing risk evaluation, select studies, and use the best available science to ensure chemicals in the marketplace are safe".Stakeholders remain divided
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) called the documents an "important milestone" in the new law’s implementation.
The trade body said it will be analysing the documents to ensure they are "grounded in the best available science and the weight of the scientific evidence ... and are focused on the conditions of use that present the greatest potential risks so that the risk evaluations are protective and practical".
But the NGO community roundly criticised the formulations.
The Environmental Defense Fund said that by excluding certain conditions of use, the documents reflect a "seriously flawed approach" that will "severely underestimate" the risk the substances pose.
The agency will overlook "millions of pounds of toxic pollution", said Richard Denison, EDF’s lead senior scientists. "EPA is both ignoring the law and endangering public health."
The Environmental Working Group added: "These woefully incomplete problem formulations signal the EPA’s intent to discount human health risks to justify weak regulations of these chemicals."
Comments on the problem formulations and systematic review approach will be due within 45 days of their publications in the Federal Register. The asbestos Snur will be subject to a 60-day consultation.Conditions of use
How the EPA defines the ‘conditions of use’ that will be evaluated in a substance’s risk evaluation has remained hotly contested since the Lautenberg Act reformed TSCA in June 2016.
Industry groups have argued that assessing every possible use of a substance is "unworkable". But consumer advocates have countered that omitting certain uses will incompletely capture the risk a substance poses – and correspondingly lead to insufficient risk management approaches.
The EPA’s finalised ‘framework rules’ last June which narrowed the conditions of use to be evaluated in a risk evaluation, versus its original proposals.
A coalition of NGOs is now challenging this more limited scope in court.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67389/epa-issues-tsca-problem-formulation-documents?q=%22american+chemistry+council%22
-
EPA’s Asbestos “Problem Formulation” Puts Americans at Risk
Jun 1, 2018 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
Today the EPA released its long-awaited “problem formulation” documents for the first ten chemicals under review as required by the 2016 amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families’ Acting Director Liz Hitchcock issued the following statement in response:
“We are profoundly disappointed that the asbestos problem formulation released today by the EPA indicates that the agency will not consider legacy uses of asbestos in its risk evaluation of this deadly chemical.
With an estimated 15,000 Americans dying each year from diseases associated with asbestos exposure, it’s past time for the EPA to finish the job of protecting human health from this notoriously deadly fiber. If the fatal flaw of ‘old TSCA’ was that the EPA could not use it to ban asbestos, the fatal flaw of the Pruitt EPA is that they will not use reformed TSCA to protect us from asbestos.”
BACKGROUND:
Safer Chemicals’ comments to the EPA on the scope of its TSCA risk evaluation for asbestos
https://saferchemicals.org/newsroom/epas-asbestos-problem-formulation-puts-americans-at-risk/
-
EPA Moves to Regulate Past Asbestos Products, Limit Reviews
Jun 1, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
EPA today moved to make it harder for phased-out asbestos products to return to the market and took another step toward evaluating existing uses of the cancer-causing mineral and nine other dangerous chemicals.
The agency's action on asbestos would apply only to some building materials and industrial products that historically contained asbestos. If companies wanted to resume manufacturing or importing such products, they'd need to get approval from EPA first.
"Those uses that EPA believes are currently ongoing" wouldn't be affected by the proposed rule, the agency said in a notice that will be published soon in the Federal Register. That means asbestos can still be used in industrial processes by chemical, oil, automotive and cement companies.
The health risks posed by existing uses of asbestos — a known human carcinogen that is prized for its fire-resistant properties — will be evaluated as part of the agency's broader review of the mineral under the overhauled Toxic Substances Control Act, the notice said.
EPA also released so-called problem formulation documents for the other nine priority chemicals that the agency is preparing to consider the dangers of under the new TSCA.
"These actions provide the American people with transparency and an opportunity to comment on how EPA plans to evaluate the ten chemicals undergoing risk evaluation, select studies, and use the best available science to ensure chemicals in the marketplace are safe," EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said in a news release. "At the same time, we are moving forward to take important, unprecedented action on asbestos."
The problem formulations refined the previously released scoping documents for the chemicals, based on comments the agency had received since then. Comments on the formulations will then guide the drafting of the risk evaluation frameworks for each chemical.
Public health advocates believe EPA is inappropriately limiting its health reviews of chemicals to avoid considering the impacts of those already in the environment. But the agency hasn't been swayed by their pushback.
In response to comments, EPA said it believes TSCA requires the agency to "conduct risk evaluations and any corresponding risk management to focus on uses for which manufacturing, processing, or distribution in commerce is intended, known to be occurring, or reasonably foreseen to occur (i.e., is prospective or on-going), and consequently does not generally intend to evaluate the risks associated with legacy uses, associated disposal, and legacy disposal."
That means the agency won't consider the dangers posed by, for example, asbestos-containing tiles, adhesives and piping in millions of homes and commercial buildings nationwide.
The agency also rejected public health advocates' calls for it to consider the impacts of all exposures to the chemicals it is reviewing.
"Cumulative exposure is not required under the statute," the agency said. "EPA retains the discretion to conduct a cumulative assessment but has not yet determined whether to do so for any of the first 10 risk evaluations. However, EPA may ultimately determine that for a certain chemical or category, a cumulative exposure assessment is appropriate for certain endpoints."
Public health advocates are likely to be disappointed, as well, by EPA's problem formulations for trichloroethylene (TCE) and n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP), two of the other first 10 chemicals.
At the end of the Obama administration, EPA moved to prohibit the manufacture, import, processing and distribution of the carcinogenic TCE in degreasing and dry cleaning operations, the chemical's two primary uses in the United States. It also proposed a ban on methylene chloride and NMP for most commercial paint and coating-removal applications. NMP is a suspected carcinogen, and methylene chloride has been linked to dozens of deaths from acute exposure.
Pruitt vowed to finalize the rule restricting commercial sales of methylene chloride, which is also being evaluated under TSCA, after pressure from Republican lawmakers and families who lost young men to the paint-stripping chemical (Greenwire, May 10).
But EPA has decided to re-evaluate the proposed restrictions on "TCE and NMP in the risk evaluation," the agency said today. "EPA is including these conditions of use so that they are part of EPA's determination of whether TCE and NMP presents an unreasonable risk 'under the conditions of use.'"
The six other chemicals for which problem formulations were released today are 1,4-dioxane, 1-bromopropane, carbon tetrachloride, cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster, pigment violet 2, and tetrachloroethylene, which is also known as perchloroethylene.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/01/stories/1060083229
-
US CPSC Plans to Act on Furniture Flammability Standard in 2019
Jun 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
The US Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) plans to make a decision in 2019 on whether to adopt California's Technical Bulletin (TB) 117-2013 as a national flammability standard for residential upholstered furniture, amid ongoing concern of the safety and necessity of added flame retardants.
The agency held a "technical meeting" on 16 May where stakeholders discussed furniture flammability hazard data, available technology and policy options.
According to the CPSC’s regulatory agenda, staff are working with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), ASTM International and the California Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation (Bearhfti), "to evaluate new provisions and improve the existing consensus standards related to upholstered furniture flammability."
The commission expects staff to present a briefing package recommending a course of action in fiscal year 2019, which begins this autumn.
The CPSC has been studying the issue for more than 15 years. It published a proposed rule in 2008 that would require upholstered furniture to have cigarette-resistant fabrics or flame-resistant barriers.A de facto standard
In the absence of a federal standard, California's requirements have served as the de facto national standard for furniture flammability. Until a 2013 update, these had included an "open flame" test that effectively required the use of flame retardants.
The updated version of the California regulation, TB 117-2013, removed the open flame test and made more stringent a smoulder-resistance test. The result was a standard that could be met more readily without added flame retardants, and a marketplace shift away from their use.
A coalition of nine furniture industry groups petitioned the CPSC in 2014 to adopt the California standard, arguing that a national rule would improve fire safety and accelerate reductions in the use of flame retardant chemicals in furniture.
The North American Flame Retardant Alliance (Nafra) maintains that removing flame retardants from furniture eliminates important fire protection.
But the International Association of Fire Fighters sides with industry groups and NGOs that oppose use of the chemicals, arguing that burning furniture containing them is hazardous to firefighters.Flame retardant ban pending
Arguments surrounding the substances' toxicity were raised when the CPSC voted in 2017 to grant a separate petition calling for a wholesale ban on the use of organohalogen flame retardants (OFRs) in furniture and other categories of consumer products.
However, the 3-2 Democratic majority that took the vote is gone, and it is unclear how the agency will proceed with that rulemaking.
The commissioners ordered staff to convene a Chronic Hazard Advisory Panel (CHAP) to assess the risks of OFRs when they granted the petition. The current regulatory agenda says staff will complete a "scoping and feasibility study in cooperation with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) of the direction given by the Commission." That study is due in April 2019.
Separately, the NFPA voted earlier this year to halt development of its own furniture flammability standard amid concern that flame retardants would be used to meet it, going against the current trend.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67353/us-cpsc-plans-to-act-on-furniture-flammability-standard-in-2019
-
Ombudsman Probes EU's Slow Adoption of Non-Animal Tests
Jun 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
The European ombudsman is investigating a complaint by NGO Cruelty Free International about the European Commission’s "ongoing failure" to regularly update the list of alternatives to animal tests that can be used to assess the safety of chemicals under REACH.
In its complaint to the ombudsman last December, CFI argued that the long delays the Commission "routinely allows" for the inclusion of validated non-animal tests in the Test Method Regulation (TMR) constitute "maladministration".
As a consequence CFI claims it is likely that as many as four million animals have been used in tests to meet the 2018 deadline.
The overriding principle under REACH Article 13 is that animals can only be used as a last resort – the so-called three Rs (replacement, reduction and refinement). TMR is the regulatory step to bring a validated alternative into the legal system.
The Commission has a 'duty' to amend the TMR as soon as possible to advance the three Rs, CFI said
The Commission has a "duty" to amend the TMR as soon as possible to advance the three Rs, CFI said.
The time it should take to include a validated test method, it added, is about nine to 12 months. But, according to CFI, it is averaging four years. This includes a delay of between two and three years, following the OECD's acceptance of an alternative test.
One method was validated over 16 years ago and has yet to be included in the TMR, it said.
It asked the ombudsman to recommend that the Commission:removes the OECD stage from updating the TMR; andtakes steps to significantly reduce the current delays.
The NGO is also challenging the Commission’s position, set out in its reply to CFI in July last year, that updating the regulation "is not pivotal".
The Commission has until 31 July to respond to the ombudsman’s request.
In July last year, the ombudsman dismissed a complaint by a UK-based animal rights NGO about the Commission's "misleading" approach to animal testing for cosmetics products. It concluded there was "no maladministration" on the part of Commission and Echa.Four million animals
In a statement released shortly after the REACH 2018 deadline, CFI said its analysis has shown that 2.2 million animals have been used in experiments for REACH in ten years of the Regulation.
It added that the figure does not include animal tests that will be conducted for "tens of thousands more substances" registered by 31 May.
The Commission had previously set out a ‘best case’ estimate of 1.9 million animals that would be tested on under REACH by 2018 and a ‘worst case’ estimate of 3.9 million, CFI said. The latter figure, it added, is "likely to be exceeded".
"Before everyone starts patting themselves on the back about how the numbers of animals are less than expected, let’s look at the facts," Katy Taylor, director of science and regulatory affairs at CFI said. "They are higher than the Commission’s worst-case estimate. The Commission and the agency have let animals down, as well as the public who were promised that animal testing would be a ‘last resort’."
Animal tests continue to be carried out in the EU even where validated alternatives exist, CFI said. It called for "appropriate sanctions" in such situations.
Furthermore, if the EU deems a test unnecessary, there is "little benefit" in carrying it out for a third country that has "more onerous" requirements to satisfy, for example to assess toxicity, it added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67375/ombudsman-probes-eus-slow-adoption-of-non-animal-tests
-
Field Hearing Promotes Colo.'s Role in 'Energy Dominance'
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Increasing production from Western natural gas and oil shale formations could support local economies and feed a proposed West Coast export terminal, industry advocates, local officials and congressional Republicans said during a field hearing in Colorado last week.
Their push to develop western Colorado's Piceance Basin comes as the Trump administration is prioritizing expedited drilling permit processing and other changes as part of its "energy dominance" agenda.
"Our Western states hold vast reservoirs of liquid natural gas and oil shale, but there remains unnecessary regulatory burdens to moving energy products to areas of demand," said House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah).
Committee ranking member Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) did not attend Friday's hearing in Grand Junction, Colo.
"Anyone who attends hoping to see meaningful action from Republican leaders will go home disappointed," Grijalva said in a statement. "The hearing will be a pre-scripted show with no serious legislative purpose, and Democrats aren't giving it more credence than it deserves. We have introduced bills to establish a cleaner, more sustainable energy economy and create good jobs for the long haul. This event, like the Republican agenda throughout this Congress, has nothing to do with those priorities."
Local officials promoted Colorado's energy potential as a way to support the proposed Jordan Cove liquefied natural gas terminal in Oregon. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in 2016 rejected the terminal developer's first proposal due to a lack of demonstrated market demand.
Several witnesses cited a 2016 U.S. Geological Survey assessment of the Piceance's Mancos Shale that found 66 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, technically recoverable gas in the formation (Energywire, June 9, 2016).
"This new information further dispels the myth that we are running out of natural gas in this country and strengthens the case that the United States needs to export LNG, which is why we need federal approval of the proposed Jordan Cove LNG facility and associated connector pipeline in Oregon," said Mesa County, Colo., Commissioner Rose Pugliese.
Ashley Korenblat, owner of Western Spirit Cycling Adventures and managing director of Public Lands Solutions in Moab, Utah, cautioned against emphasizing energy development on federal lands above all other uses.
"Deference to energy development and processing often leads to serious degradation of our public lands. From unbreathable air to endless service roads, with no real reclamation in sight, many communities are left burdened with Superfund sites and bad reputations," Korenblat said in her testimony. "Unhealthy conditions make rebranding a place as an attractive place to live quite a challenge."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083359
-
Americas Path to Energy Independence: The Shale Revolution
Jun 4, 2018 | Forbes
By Simon Lack
In the history of American Energy Independence, September 29, 2016 was a significant day. OPEC was two years into a strategy to bankrupt the U.S. shale industry, by allowing prices to drop to unprofitable levels. The Shale Revolution had led to increasing U.S. output, such that by 2014 the cartel led by Saudi Arabia and Russia concluded that the continued loss of market share had to stop. Believing that the new U.S. supply was high cost, they expected a couple of years of ruinously low prices would drive these new producers out of business, allowing OPEC to subsequently profit as U.S. output slowed.
It turned out to be a colossal miscalculation, which led to the spectacular triumph of American free-market capitalism over 40% of the world’s oil output. The U.S. shale industry responded to the existential threat by innovating, cutting costs and becoming ruthlessly efficient. It was the only way they were to survive. They drilled deeper, and longer. They adopted multi-pad wells, which were vastly more productive. They crunched enormous amounts of data to refine their techniques, and made substantial IT investments. As a result, U.S. output dipped but didn’t collapse.
Most OPEC nations ran substantial government deficits as their oil revenues slumped, and by late September 2016 they’d had enough. A new strategy of higher prices supported by production limits was adopted, conceding a permanent role for U.S. shale producers. As prices rose again so did U.S. output, and America is now likely to be the world’s biggest oil producer by the end of 2019.
In 2016 OPEC Switches Strategies and U.S. Output Recovers
Many people are surprised to learn that horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) are almost exclusively found in America. While the porous rock holding oil and gas can be found in many parts of the world, the U.S. Shale Revolution required more than geology.
Fracking requires large amounts of accessible water, which is forced into the rock at high pressure so as to form countless tiny cracks. Sand mixed in with the water props these cracks open so oil and gas can flow out.
The U.S. already has an existing energy industry with a highly skilled labor force and an extensive midstream infrastructure network. Access to capital comes from the world’s biggest financial markets.
A culture of entrepreneurialism and new business formation exists in spades. Many of the success stories of the Shale Revolution are smaller independents who have left the integrated oil majors struggling to catch up.
All these advantages exist in America more than anywhere else, and in combination they are only in America.
Privately owned mineral rights are a uniquely American concept. Many take for granted that oil or gas found in their backyard belongs to them, but in other countries the government would claim ownership. U.S. landowners routinely contract with drillers to exploit what’s found, to their mutual benefit. This has made oil and gas production, a necessarily noisy, disruptive process, far more acceptable to communities since they’re sharing in the economic benefit. Government run drilling would draw strong local opposition, whereas many regions of the U.S. recognize the positive economic impact of energy production.
America’s path to energy independence is also creating geopolitical benefits. We are net exporters of natural gas, and our oil imports are falling. Moreover, we’re buying less from regions that are potentially hostile to us, and more from allies such as Canada.
The Shale Revolution reflects America’s dynamic capitalist economy at its very best.
I often have the opportunity to tell this story to groups of investors, and as an immigrant from Britain I especially enjoy pointing out how proud we should be of what’s taken place. OPEC tried and failed to bankrupt our shale industry. American innovation, technological expertise and drive to succeed overpowered the world’s biggest producers. We’re all beneficiaries. It’s a great country.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/simonlack/2018/06/04/americas-path-to-energy-independence-the-shale-revolution/#720cff227554
-
Small Gains Reap Big Benefits in U.S. Shale Fields
Jun 4, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal (In E&E Energywire)
By Spencer Jakab
Small efficiency gains by drillers are adding up in U.S. shale fields, tilting the balance of global market influence away from Saudi Arabia and other major exporters.
The innovations are recent: Just two years ago, Saudi Arabia's ramp-up of crude production was driving down prices to levels that put some U.S. shale producers out of business, or close to it.
But others were able to improve efficiency using giant pads that host several wells and rigs that can move between wells without being disassembled. Those rigs can cover more ground and are often guided by instruments capable of peering farther underground, among other output-boosting measures.
That has allowed the Permian Basin to produce three times more crude than in October 2011, though the number of rigs is the same.
"High prices tend to create sloppiness in this industry because people focus only on growth," said Doug Suttles, chief executive with oil and gas producer Encana Corp. "Downturns make you focus on cost because it's the only thing you can control — the oil price is out of your hands."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083239
-
US Oil Producers Have All Their DUCs In a Row: Fuel for Thought
Jun 4, 2018 | Platts
By Bob Williams
With all the talk about sanctions, conflict and nationwide implosions, stakeholders could be overlooking a potential sleeper for the US oil market: DUCs–drilled but uncompleted wells.
Many observers are wondering, with oil prices topping $70/barrel and flirting with $80/barrel, why aren’t US producers drilling more wells to capitalize on commodity revenue gains.
A good deal of that perception is based in an apparently short-sighted fixation that the rig count equals more wells, which equals more production.
But focusing on the rig count without context can be misleading.
US active land rig counts spiked by 56% in the first half of 2017, according to S&P Global Platts’ RADAR methodology, as oil prices climbed about 6% from $47/barrel to $50/barrel.
But the rig tally gained just another 14% in the second half of the year as oil prices continued to rise.
Late in the year, many more wells were spudded, or just started. New wells drilled–which are not included in the rig count–increased by 17% in the second half of the year compared to the first, while the number of active rigs stalled–averaging 924 rigs in Q3 and 906 rigs in Q4. All that drilling activity came as oil prices rose by another 4%.
As market confidence grows, however, a new circumspect approach has operators high-grading prospects for the best return instead of drilling mainly for growth’s sake, even with oil prices up an average of 19% year over year.
But that was $20/barrel ago. And now with some investment banks and industry executives talking about $80-plus/b this year, the average rig count through the first quarter of 2018 is up by just 4% compared with the H2 2017 average, while oil prices ratcheted up another 21%.
The rig count boom is more of a boomlet so far.
With a capability to move quickly across a drill pad, AC-powered, 1,500-horsepower rigs are continuing to expand their market dominance. Their consequent greater efficiencies helped the number of new well starts rise by 13% in Q1 over H2 2017’s average to top 5,000 for the first time since Q1 2015.
But many of those new wells were not completed. The number of DUC wells rose steadily throughout the period, not by as much as the number of new wells spudded–or 37% versus 45%–but by more than the rig count gain of 32%. (A caveat: The data for DUCs lags the well and rig counts because of the nature of the data.)
CHANGE IN FOCUS
The new DUC numbers also reflect a spike of more than 80% in Bakken DUCs in the early part of this year, a reflection that Bakken drilling is spreading outside the sweet spots and that deferred completions there are pending better well economics. Generally speaking, DUC growth elsewhere was much more modest.
With that said, oil production growth proceeds largely unfettered. US oil output increased by another 6% year over year in 2017 and has risen by another 14% in Q1 2018 compared to 2017’s overall average, according to the US Energy Information Administration.
The number of wells per rig and the proportion of growth in the DUC inventory relative to those new wells have both inched up fairly steadily in the past five quarters; however, both were substantially outpaced by the rate of increase in crude production.
That suggests even with their new circumspection, US operators cannot help but boost crude production. As other maturing tight oil plays follow the Bakken’s lead, the DUC inventory could grow further, even with relatively modest gains in rig counts.
While that might flatten the production growth curve a bit, it also increases the overhanging potential of added oil supply in the US, which may by itself help rein oil price spikes in an increasingly volatile world.
http://blogs.platts.com/2018/06/04/us-oil-producers-ducs/
-
FERC's Climate Review on Dominion Pipeline Under Fire
Jun 4, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
A phalanx of environmental and community organizations last Thursday asked FERC to reconsider approvals of enhancement work on the Dominion Energy Transmission Inc.’s New Market natural gas pipeline project in New York.
The pipeline upgrades, approved last year, have been completed on the upstate New York interstate transmission pipeline that added 112 MMcf/d of capacity beginning last November.
In rejecting a rehearing of its decision, federal regulators said they were no longer going to go beyond the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in their environmental assessments of pipeline projects. The original environmental assessment of the project was launched three years ago.
Led by Otsego 2000, the activists claim the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is abusing its powers and "showing a bias" toward the pipelines at the expense of providing the correct environmental reviews and mitigation. At issue is how FERC is assessing impacts on greenhouse gas emissions.
Regulators contend that they should calculate the upstream and downstream emissions when precise information is available and the effects in specific cases if they are "sufficiently causally connected" to the pipeline involved.
The groups sent a letter to FERC alleging the Commission "has misused its authority" and should reverse a May 18 order denying a rehearing on New Market. FERC concluded assessing upstream and downstream production and gas use for the project was outside the scope of the NEPA analysis.
A Dominion spokesperson told NGI on Friday the project is now fully operational, allowing the local utility National Grid to expand its gas service in the region.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/114591-fercs-climate-review-on-dominion-pipeline-under-fire
-
Pope Francis to Meet with Moniz, Top Oil Execs
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
Pope Francis is expected to huddle with former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and a host of oil executives at a two-day conference Friday and Saturday to discuss climate change.
The Vatican invited the Obama-era Energy Department chief to attend the meeting, said David Ellis, a spokesman for the Energy Futures Initiative, a research think tank and advisory firm Moniz launched to promote low-carbon power and innovation.
The Vatican summit, arriving in the wake of President Trump's exit from the Paris climate accord, is expected to feature a number of executives from the world's largest oil producers and investment banks.
Vatican spokesman Greg Burke confirmed that the meeting was occurring in an interview with the Associated Press. Burke said the conference is a follow-up to the pontiff's release of an encyclical three years ago calling on people to tackle climate change and other environmental problems.
Axios, which first reported the event, noted that Exxon Mobil Corp. CEO Darren Woods, BP CEO Bob Dudley, and Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock Inc., the world's largest asset manager, are all expected to attend. Leo Burke, director of the University of Notre Dame's business school's climate investing initiative, is reportedly leading the effort.
While Burke and a number of executives did not immediately respond to a request for comment, an Exxon Mobil spokesman confirmed that Woods would attend.
"We're hopeful that this kind of dialogue can help develop solutions to the dual challenge of managing the risks of climate change while meeting growing demand for energy, which is critical to alleviating poverty and raising living standards in the developing world," said Bill Holbrook, a spokesman for the oil major.
The pope has repeatedly made tackling climate change a focus and pointed to the Paris Agreement as an example of how countries can take on the challenge together.
Francis has also condemned climate change doubters and said "history will judge" those who fail to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with global warming (E&ENews PM, Sept. 11, 2017).
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083397
-
Perry's Defends Trump's Directive: 'Attacks Are Coming'
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey and Blake Sobczak
Energy Secretary Rick Perry today said President Trump was "right" to order the Department of Energy to halt the closure of coal and nuclear plants, while warning that the nation's pipelines are vulnerable to cyberthreats.
"Fuel-secure units are retiring at an alarming rate that, if unchecked, will threaten our ability to recover from intentional attacks or from natural disasters," Perry told DOE's cybersecurity conference in Austin, Texas.
"The president is right to view grid resilience as a serious national security issue, and he's directed me to prepare immediate steps to stop the loss of these critical resources," he said.
Cyberthreats, Perry said, are growing in size and sophistication and "metastasizing," while bad actors — hostile regimes, terrorist groups and criminals — are zeroing in on the United States' critical infrastructure, energy assets and connected "internet of things" devices.
Perry also said the nation must focus on protecting infrastructure like pipelines but that the federal government cannot forget about the rest of the fuels that make the grid diverse, reliable and resilient.
The secretary's cyber-focused comments are the first he has made since the White House revealed Friday that the president had ordered Perry to immediately stop the closure of nuclear and coal plants (Greenwire, June 1).
One proposal the White House appears to be considering would require grid operators to buy power from unidentified U.S. coal and nuclear power plants to prevent their "premature" retirement.
While that draft plan has not yet been approved, DOE is moving forward with a separate reorganization centered on cybersecurity.
The department's newly minted Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security and Emergency Response (CESER), currently led by acting Assistant Secretary Bruce Walker, is charged with leading the federal response to grid threats from hackers, natural disasters or wide-scale physical attacks.
Perry today outlined a new program, dubbed "accelerating cybersecurity in the energy sector," or ACES, that appears to fit in with the reorganization.
He said the goal of the effort is to address "known gaps" in cyber readiness, such as those highlighted in a DOE report last week on the energy sector's preparedness for a major hacking incident (Energywire, May 31).
That "Assessment of Electricity Disruption Incident Response Capabilities" keyed in on the risk of a blackout disrupting military operations at major defense installations, a risk Perry again emphasized in his speech today.
Parts of DOE's draft plan to keep coal and nuclear plants open are drawn word-for-word from the assessment, including the takeaway that the U.S. military's dependence on the commercial power sector "makes electricity reliability and resilience enormously important for national defense."
Today made clear that DOE is using cyberthreats as further justification for propping up "subject generation facilities," but exactly how the agency or the Trump administration will move forward in the face of mounting legal questions remains uncertain.
"We know that attacks are coming, and we can never let down our guard," Perry said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083413
-
(ACC Mentioned) Schneider’s Bulk Intermodal Container Service Celebrates Six-Year Milestone
Jun 4, 2018 | American Journal of Transportation
Schneider (NYSE: SNDR) has reached a new milestone within its Bulk division, which is responsible for the transportation of liquid products. A premier provider of transportation and logistics, Schneider is celebrating the sixth anniversary of its – and one of the shipping industry’s – first bulk intermodal container movement.
During the initial years of operating Bulk Intermodal containers, Schneider focused on building out its service and growing relationships with the rails. Then, in the first six months of 2014, capacity-crunched chemical shippers latched onto Schneider’s Bulk Intermodal offering, increasing the company’s volume by 75 percent. First-quarter 2018 results show that Bulk Intermodal volume continues to grow, increasing 13.5 percent year-over-year.
The growth of the chemical industry also contributes to the demand. According to the American Chemistry Council, there are plans for 294 new production units for chemicals in the U.S. – representing $179 billion in new capital investment in the industry. As one of the only carriers to offer Bulk Intermodal services, Schneider looks forward to supporting this growing industry.
“With an improving economy and growing driver shortage, bulk shippers are experiencing extremely tight capacity conditions,” says Jason Howe, senior vice president and general manager of Schneider’s Bulk division. “Schneider has increased its number of Bulk Intermodal containers from 100 in 2012 to more than 400 today to better serve shippers struggling to move their product.”
Unique to the 40-foot Schneider Bulk Intermodal containers is the ability to haul up to 45,600 pounds of specialty chemical and liquid payloads. Also, unlike the typical ISO bulk 20-foot containers, Schneider’s Bulk Intermodal containers:Have standard fittings for easy offloading
Fit standard loading racks for safe service
Give shippers the feel of a regular tank trailer for ease of use and consistencyShippers are actively adapting Schneider’s Bulk Intermodal service to complement its over-the-road service. The company started offering this service in 2012 with two customers and by late 2017 it has grown to 68 customers.
“Customers are realizing the many benefits of shipping Bulk Intermodal, including that it produces more capacity by freeing up additional drivers to move over-the-road loads,” said Howe. “With Intermodal using less fuel than truckload, shippers also get a competitive rate per mile, lower per-pound transportation cost and a smaller carbon footprint.”
To provide as much capacity and flexibility to its customers as possible, Schneider is hiring dray drivers dedicated to Bulk Intermodal at major ramps in all major Bulk markets.
https://www.ajot.com/news/schneiders-bulk-intermodal-container-service-celebrates-six-year-milestone
-
Majority of Railroads on Track for Positive Train Control Implementation
Jun 4, 2018 | Transportation Today
By Melina Druga
During the first quarter of 2018, the commuter rail industry made progress in implementing positive train control (PTC), according to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA).
PTC is required under law to be implemented by the end of 2018, or if certain milestones are met, by Dec. 31, 2020.
APTA discovered 88 percent of the PTC spectrum has been acquired, 81 percent of onboard equipment has been installed, 79 percent of on-track equipment has been installed, 70 percent of back-office control systems are ready for operation, 61 percent of employees have been trained, and 30 percent of commuter rail miles are either in the process of testing PTC or the system is fully operational.
“Safety is the commuter railroad industry’s number one priority,” Paul P. Skoutelas, APTA president and CEO, said. “Implementing this complex communications technology will provide a critical safety overlay on top of already safe commuter rail systems. APTA members are working aggressively to implement this important safety system as soon as possible.”
Implementing PTC has brought the industry many challenges including that fact that it will cost more than $4.1 billion. Railroads will need diverting funds from infrastructure and other improvements to pay for implementation.
Commuter rail operators also have faced technological challenges in regards to PTC installation.
https://transportationtodaynews.com/news/9582-majority-railroads-track-positive-train-control-implementation/
-
Emails Show To-Do List For Tearing Down Climate Rules
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Zack Colman and Scott Waldman
Just after President Trump entered the White House, his team crafted an ambitious to-do list that aimed to shred the Obama administration's climate policies and drastically downsize EPA, according to a document recently obtained by E&E News.
A draft memo titled "Priority Issues List," released in a trove last week under the Freedom of Information Act, includes a bullet-point agenda for the Trump EPA.
EPA has already begun implementing some of the major policy shifts outlined in the document. At the top: "Scrap Climate Power Plant Rules," "Eliminate Climate Action Plan" and "Suspend Social Cost of Carbon." Those items formed the bedrock of the Obama administration’s climate agenda.
If that document is a reliable predictor, more drastic measures await.
Among the actions not yet taken: reopening the agency's endangerment finding for greenhouse gases, rescinding the stricter ozone pollution limit approved by the Obama administration and reassessing Clean Air Act regulations like mercury pollution levels. Even more foundationally, it aims to "Restructure and Downsize the Agency" and "Reform the Use of Science."
Whether that document is part of a much-discussed long-term strategy the EPA transition team crafted to guide two Trump terms is unclear. What is clear in the emails between transition members is that they wasted no time assembling an outline for potentially sweeping changes to major climate change policies.
The Trump administration hasn’t pursued everything discussed in the exchanges, some of which occurred through a Google group named “EPAdeplorables,” a reference to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s gaffe describing Trump supporters.
An early draft executive order titled "War on Coal" called for withdrawing entirely from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change on top of exiting the Paris climate accord. Doing so would have enabled the United States to ditch the accord a full year earlier but likely would have been met with greater international condemnation. That draft executive order also called for rescinding the endangerment finding and nixing a number of executive orders issued under President Obama.
The draft order was dated Jan. 20, 2017, the first day of the Trump presidency.
"David: Attached are DRAFT points for EO #1. Please let me know asap what you think of these so that I can incorporate your directions into my remaining work on the others," wrote then-EPA spokesman John Konkus to David Schnare, both early arrivals on the so-called beachhead team of EPA political employees.
But members of that beachhead team, many of whom are no longer affiliated with the agency, hope EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt eventually will take on some of the more contentious battles.
Myron Ebell, who led the EPA transition team, said in an interview that the agency has been "clumsy" in its deregulation efforts. But he said that could change on the heels of Andrew Wheeler arriving as Pruitt’s second in command and other top agency positions getting filled.
"Now that they’re close to being fully staffed, I think that they will do better," said Ebell, who directs the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Attacking the endangerment finding tops the wish list for critics of mainstream climate science like Ebell. So far, Pruitt has resisted challenging that anthology of climate science, which forms the legal underpinning for greenhouse gas regulations.Climate wish list
Long-term plans on other matters are also tucked away in the thousands of pages of emails.
EPA early on intended to block California’s waiver for setting its own vehicle fuel economy standards, according to a Feb. 7, 2017, email from Schnare to Kevin Minoli, principal deputy general counsel at EPA.
"I have just been directed by the White House Domestic Policy Advisor that in the near future the President will sign an executive order directing EPA to take steps to reopen and reconsider the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for 2025 and notice of an intent to withdraw the associated California waiver," Schnare wrote.
Doing so would have significant implications for ongoing discussions among California, EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and automakers. The administration has proposed freezing fuel standards after 2020. That has irked California, which wants to set a more aggressive target. Automakers, meanwhile, want to ensure that the federal government and the Golden State agree on one fuel economy standard.
The emails also show that, from the moment the Trump administration’s EPA team arrived, they were laser-focused on cutting back the agency’s climate work.
At the same time, the emails show, industry voices immediately turned to Trump’s EPA for help in regulatory rollbacks.
On Jan. 30, 2017, Schnare forwarded an E&E News story about climate change awards being handed out by the regional EPA office in Chicago. He flagged the event for other officials as an example of the type of climate change-related event they needed to track more closely.
"We need to find out exactly what our role in this meeting is, whether we are sponsors and whether the awards are from EPA or the other sponsors. We also need to find out what other such events are planned for which EPA is a sponsor," he wrote.
John Hall, an attorney who runs the Center for Regulatory Reasonableness and who has filed multiple suits against EPA over the years, reached out to Schnare days after Trump’s inauguration seeking to roll back water pollution protections in New England that EPA put in place in the final days of the Obama administration. He also offered to fly to Oklahoma to brief Pruitt personally.
Hall, whose group represents industry and municipalities, claimed that it was the work of "environmental organizations" and not based on law. He accused the Obama administration of overreach and said environmental groups ran the agency unfairly. Hall accused EPA’s Boston-based Region 1 office of fabricating science and suggested EPA headquarters could influence the region.
"They are intended to give environmental groups and EPA control over land use planning (something also plainly outside the scope of their authority) and to switch the burden of proof on compliance (presumed guilty)," Hall wrote. "So, in short, this is quite a mess, but a nice case study in what has been going on under the purview of the Obama Administration appointees (who were typically former heads of environmental organizations — like Regional Administrator [Curt] Spalding who signed the permit)."
Schnare wrote back that the proposed rule had been removed from the Federal Register, blocking it from moving forward.
Marlo Lewis of the Competitive Enterprise Institute wrote on Feb. 21, 2017, that it was time to reconsider the agency’s Clean Power Plan to limit power plants’ greenhouse gas emissions, a signature Obama administration climate policy. He said the plan was not enough to accelerate coal plant retirements or increase the deployment of renewable energy.
"In short, the CPP is an attempt to inflate a three-sentence, seldom-used provision of the [Clean Air Act] into far-reaching legislative authority to decarbonize the U.S. electric supply system — a policy Congress has not approved in almost three decades of debate on climate policy. For the foregoing reasons, it should reexamine this action and the regulations that resulted from it."
Pruitt is expected to release a scaled-back version of the Clean Power Plan this summer.
The emails also show that Schnare defended his use of Freedom of Information Act requests to go after the emails of climate scientists, a tactic now being used by environmental groups to obtain the correspondence of Trump administration officials. In response to an inquiry about his work from a reporter at InsideClimate News, Schnare said those who oppose making emails public generally have an opposite political position.
"There is no way to discover facts about these issues other than through freedom of information requests," he wrote. "Because global warming is such an important issue, full transparency throughout the scientific and policy community is essential to having confidence in the science and the policy itself."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083313
-
Did Trump Just Propose the Opposite of Pricing Carbon?
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Adam Aton
The Trump administration is scrambling the economics of climate change by proposing to subsidize carbon emissions rather than tax them.
President Trump's plan to prop up struggling coal plants moves in the opposite direction from what energy producers, greens, economists and even oil companies have been asking for: a tax on carbon dioxide. The ramifications could reverberate through the highest-emitting sectors for years to come — if only because of the signal the plan sends.
Utilities and energy companies, which look several decades into the future when planning investments, have been operating under the assumption that a carbon tax or other types of regulations would eventually add new costs for releasing CO2. For instance, the utility giant American Electric Power Co. is executing a pivot to natural gas and renewables to help cut its emissions 80 percent over the next 30 years.
Trump's move throws big new questions at those plans.
"If there's one thing companies and investors like, it's certainty. And this type of intervention flips the table on everybody," said John Larsen, a Rhodium Group analyst who tracks power markets.
Trump ordered Energy Secretary Rick Perry to take "immediate steps" to prevent unprofitable coal and nuclear power plants from closing for national security reasons, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, told reporters on Friday. Her statement followed a report by Bloomberg revealing a secret administration memo that in part suggests the Energy Department could force grid operators to buy electricity from struggling coal and nuclear facilities for two years.
The White House says that would strengthen the grid against shocks like cyberattacks and natural disasters by preventing plants that store fuel on-site from shuttering. Details of the plan are still murky (Greenwire, June 1).
If subsidies only postpone retirements to keep coal plants available for electricity generation in extreme circumstances, like a hurricane, the plan might make fewer waves in the power market, Larsen said.
The plan also calls for propping up nuclear power plants — something that would keep emissions from rising. But many more coal plants are slated to retire in the next 24 months than nuclear plants, and many observers suspect the plan is aimed at rewarding Trump's political constituency rather than preventing electricity shortages. Grid operators reject the idea that the electric grid is vulnerable to widespread blackouts based on declining coal generation.
"If the goal is to burn more coal in America and save coal miners through this thing, then it's a totally different ballgame," Larsen said.
Trump appointees on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission have already shot down a similar plan, and the latest proposal is opposed by leaders in the oil and gas and renewable energy sectors.
Politically, the move threatens to fracture the fossil fuel coalition — already stinging from Trump's steel tariffs — while emboldening environmentalists.
"We look forward to forcefully opposing it every step of the way," Michael Panfil, the Environmental Defense Fund's director of federal energy policy, wrote in a blog post.
Even some conservative groups expect huge hurdles for Trump's plan, which relies on emergency provisions in the Federal Power Act. Other presidents have used the law to safeguard the supply of electricity during periods of crisis. But the idea of using it to financially buttress an industry that's losing market share to an influx of cheaper and cleaner fuels is new.
David Bookbinder, chief counsel at the free-market Niskanen Center, pointed to a 1978 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that differentiates the kind of wartime emergency the law was created for from ideological disputes over the source of fuel that's being used for electricity.
If Trump succeeds, it could mark a huge expansion of federal control in energy markets, he said.
A carbon tax is popular with conservative economists and some corners of industry because it's flexible. Instead of a regulator dictating terms to emitters and consumers, the market would drive everyone to cut emissions as they see fit, proponents say. The revenue could also be used to soften the financial impact of the tax or for projects that strengthen infrastructure against the physical impacts of climate change.
Trump's intervention in the electricity market could offer liberals a new justification for aggressively clamping down on carbon emissions. If Trump successfully argues that national security demands government support for certain kinds of electricity, then a Democratic administration might argue that the national security threat from climate change also demands government intervention, some observers said.
"If they get away with this, even with a targeted intervention, then what's going to stop anybody from doing something even crazier next time?" Larsen asked.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083347
-
EPA Ordered to Produce Records Backing Pruitt Claims
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
A federal judge Friday ordered EPA to produce documents related to Administrator Scott Pruitt's claims dismissing human activity as a primary contributor to climate change.
Chief Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found that the agency failed to respond to a watchdog group's Freedom of Information Act request seeking the records.
"Although more than one year has elapsed since the plaintiffs submitted the FOIA request, EPA has conducted no search for any responsive records, not produced any records to the plaintiff," Howell wrote.
At issue: a 2017 interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box" in which Pruitt stated that human activity is not a "primary contributor" to climate change. He also said that "there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact" that human activity has on global warming.
A day after the March 9 interview aired, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility filed a FOIA request seeking studies upon which Pruitt based his claim. The group also asked for any EPA scientific finding that human activity is not the largest factor driving global climate change.
PEER noted that EPA's own climate change webpage — which the agency has since taken down to update — cited as "basic information" that "humans are largely responsible for recent climate change."
EPA argued that the request was overbroad, unduly burdensome and "not a proper request under FOIA," prompting PEER to take the case to court. The agency later argued that the lawsuit was a "trap" and a "fishing expedition" to elucidate Pruitt's "personal opinion" on climate change.
But in her opinion Friday, Howell rejected EPA's "excuses for failing to comply" with the FOIA request as "not persuasive." EPA's "hyperbolic objection strays far afield from the actual text" of PEER's request, she wrote.
According to Howell, who was appointed by President Obama, PEER's request was "straightforward" and appropriately targeted the records that Pruitt relied upon in making his statements on climate change, not whether those records reflected his personal views.
"Particularly troubling is the apparent premise of this agency challenge to the FOIA request, namely: that the evidentiary basis for a policy or factual statement by an agency head, including about the scientific factors contributing to climate change, is inherently unknowable," Howell wrote.
She gave EPA a month to conduct and complete a search for the records PEER requested and ordered the agency to disclose any records it finds on a rolling basis. Under the order, EPA is also required to submit by July 11 an explanation for any documents it decides to withhold from disclosure.
"The beauty of FOIA is that a government agency can run but ultimately can't hide," PEER senior counsel Paula Dinerstein said in a statement. "This suit forces EPA to determine whether Mr. Pruitt's statements had a factual basis or were full of hot air."
Click here to read the court's opinion.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083389
-
SAB Approves Report Supporting EPA Air Toxics 'Screening' Methods
Jun 4, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) May 31 approved a working group's draft report on EPA “screening” methods designed to better focus the agency's efforts in air toxics risk reviews, but the board nonetheless expressed some doubts that the screening methods will help EPA whittle down its workload and seeks some changes to the report.
The working group's report reviews screening methods that EPA has for the most part already implemented to narrow down the number of industrial facilities it has to fully evaluate when determining the “residual” air toxics risk of a particular industry sector. The group reviewed an EPA staff document titled, “Screening methodologies to support risk and technology reviews: a case study analysis."
Residual risk and technology reviews are required eight years after EPA first regulates a sector with maximum achievable control technology (MACT) air toxics controls. The risk review is a one-time requirement, but the technology review is a recurring requirement every eight years. If EPA finds residual risks, or cost-effective new control technology, or both, it can tighten the standards.
EPA is now fighting to clear a years-long backlog of overdue reviews, and is on court-ordered deadlines to issue dozens in the next few years.
EPA's screening method incorporates several elements including three-tiered multi-media human exposure screening; environmental risk screening; ingestion risk from urban production of fruits or vegetables; chronic inhalation risks; methodology related to waterbodies and fish consumption; and use of census bloc “centroids” to calculate risk.
The work group is broadly supportive of EPA's method, but the group found it lacked sufficient information to evaluate all aspects of the agency methodology. “Insufficient detail was provided in Agency’s draft RTR methods document for the SAB to assess the overall operational effectiveness of the screening methodology such as how many facilities are screened out by each of the three tiers. Some data was provided later by the EPA that did help the SAB to understand the screening efficacy,” the group said in its draft report.
But members of the full SAB expressed concern that the risk screening might require too much work, and would not substantially reduce EPA's workload. For example, conservative assumptions included under the screening method may not screen out enough facilities, some panelists worried. Others remarked that the screening itself might be unnecessary where a source category only includes a few sources.
Further, “probabilistic analysis” recommended by the work group for EPA to estimate risks in the future may be too intensive to serve as a screening mechanism, SAB members said. EPA does not currently employ such analysis. Also some SAB members wanted the workgroup to more clearly spell-out and prioritize its recommendations.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/sab-approves-report-supporting-epa-air-toxics-screening-methods
-
EPA Signals Rejection of Bids by Del., Md. For Help On Smog
Jun 4, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
To Maryland and Delaware, ozone-forming emissions from out-of-state power plants are unneighborly violations of the Clean Air Act.
EPA disagrees.
Both states failed to make the case that power plant pollution from beyond their boundaries is undercutting their ability to meet federal ground-level ozone standards, the agency said in a proposed rejection notice quietly posted online Friday.
Between them, the two states had filed a total of five petitions in 2016 asking EPA to crack down on upwind emissions from those coal-fired facilities.
But in its proposal, EPA said the states "have not met their burden to demonstrate" that the plants' emissions violated the law's "good neighbor" provision.
Maryland's analysis of the alleged impact is "technically deficient," the EPA notice said, while Delaware is ultimately expected to meet EPA's latest ozone standard by a 2024 deadline.
The tentative denial carries a 45-day public comment period when published in the Federal Register. EPA also plans to hold a public hearing on a date to be announced later, according to the notice.
The agency's move comes after it scotched a similar petition from Connecticut earlier this year and as it is embroiled in a lawsuit brought by Northeastern states — including Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland — after rebuffing their bid to dramatically expand a regional ozone control program (Greenwire, Jan. 2).
In a statement Friday, Maryland Environment Secretary Ben Grumbles voiced "strong" disagreement with EPA's proposed denial of the state's petition, saying state officials would "use all available tools, including litigation, to ensure we can keep our commitment to upholding aggressive air quality standards and protecting the Chesapeake Bay."
A spokesman for the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control didn't immediately respond to an emailed request for comment this morning.
Ozone, the main ingredient in smog, is spawned by the action of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds in sunlight. It is linked to asthma attacks in children and worsened breathing problems for adults with emphysema and other chronic respiratory diseases.
The five requests for EPA action, all filed under Section 126 of the Clean Air Act, date to the final months of the Obama administration.
In their November 2016 petition, Maryland regulators charged that NOx emissions wafting in from 19 power plants in Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia were hurting their state's ability to comply with EPA's 2008 ozone standard of 75 parts per billion.
In four separate petitions brought between July 2016 and December 2016, Delaware blamed NOx releases from plants in West Virginia and Pennsylvania for impeding efforts to meet both the 2008 benchmark and the more stringent 70-ppb standard set in 2015.
By law, EPA is supposed to act on those petitions within 60 days. After the agency missed that deadline, Maryland sued last September to force action on its petition. Delaware also formally threatened legal action but so far appears not to have followed through, according to online federal court records.
Among its reasons for tentatively rejecting all four of Delaware's petitions, EPA noted that NOx releases at one of the targeted plants, Brunner Island Steam Electric Station in south-central Pennsylvania, plunged by about 75 percent during last year's summertime ozone season after it also began burning natural gas. EPA also cited that drop in denying Connecticut's petition earlier this year (Greenwire, April 10).
Under a deal with the Sierra Club, the plant's owner, Talen Energy Corp., has agreed to phase out the use of coal at the 1,400-megawatt plant near York, Pa.., during the ozone season by 2023 and then end coal combustion entirely by 2028 (Greenwire, Feb. 14).
To lock in those terms, the two sides filed a proposed consent decree last month with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. A judge's approval could come as early as next month following a mandatory public comment period.
EPA currently lists parts of both Maryland and Delaware as being in "marginal" or "moderate" nonattainment with the 2008 ozone standard.
In a sweeping round of designations for the more stringent 2015 standard announced at the end of April, the agency deemed one county in Delaware and 11 in Maryland in "marginal" nonattainment. Under EPA's five-point sliding scale, marginal and moderate are at the lower end of the noncompliance thresholds, followed by "serious," "severe" and "extreme."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/04/stories/1060083417
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested