Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 07/06/18
-
(ACC Blog) ACC’s Biocide Panel Announces New Name: Center for Biocide Chemistries
Jun 7, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Biocides Panel announced its new name today, the Center for Biocide Chemistries (CBC), at the Twelfth Antimicrobial Workshop in Arlington, Virginia. -
(ACC Mentioned) Clariant’s Deepak Parikh to Join American Chemistry Council Board of Directors
Jun 7, 2018 | Ink World Magazine
Clariant announced that Deepak Parikh, Clariant’s region president of North America, has been appointed to the Board of Directors of the American Chemistry Council (ACC). -
(ACC Mentioned) Most Forecasters See Modest Growth Boost From Bank-Regulation Rollback
Jun 7, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Ben Leubsdorf
Most economists think the U.S. will experience somewhat stronger growth in the coming years due to recent legislation that relaxed postcrisis rules on some banks, though a sizable minority said the measure could at least modestly weaken financial stability. -
(ACC Mentioned) Most Forecasters See Modest Growth Boost From Bank-Regulation Rollback
Jun 7, 2018 | Independent Recorder
By Alexander John
In the wake of the 2007-09 financial crisis and recession, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank law tightening oversight and regulation of the financial system. -
(ACC Mentioned) Is Recession 2020 is Approaching? Economists Warned
Jun 7, 2018 | Pakistan Observer
As reported by the Associated Press, the United States may be in for a major recession in 2020. -
(ACC Mentioned) Republicans in Turmoil Over Trump’s Trade Moves
Jun 7, 2018 | Politico
By Adam Behsudi
Republican senators may broadly agree that President Donald Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum aren’t good for the economy, but they’re split over how to deal with it and many don’t think a bill introduced Wednesday by Sen. Bob Corker is the way to go. -
(ACC Mentioned) OMB Completes Review of EPA Cost-Benefit 'Consistency' Prerule
Jun 7, 2018 | Inside EPA
The White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) has completed its mandatory pre-publication review of an EPA preule that will aim to increase “consistency and transparency” in how the agency considers costs and benefits in the rulemaking process, a win for several major industry groups that have pushed hard for the measure. -
In Bipartisan Push, Over 100 Lawmakers Urge Pruitt to Withdraw His So-Called Transparency Rule
Jun 7, 2018 | ThinkProgress
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt’s plan to limit scientific research available to agency scientists and experts who draft regulations is attracting widespread resistance on Capitol Hill. -
(ACC Mentioned) CLF Starts Spending in OH-12 Special
Jun 7, 2018 | Politico
By Elena Schneider
CLF starts spending in OH-12 special: The Congressional Leadership Fund is jumping into the House special election in Ohio, airing broadcast TV ads in Columbus, according to a media tracking firm. -
GOP Retains EPA Policy Riders In FY19 Bill, Setting Up Further Hill Fights
Jun 7, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee have rejected Democratic efforts to remove from EPA's fiscal year 2019 funding bill riders that would curtail the agency's power, including undoing its Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule, previewing policy fights when the full House and Senate seek to negotiate a final spending bill. -
US 'Problem Formulations' Raise Fears for TCE, NMP Rules
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
Concerns have been raised that recently released 'problem formulation' documents confirm the US EPA will abandon pending rules banning some uses of trichloroethylene (TCE) and N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP). -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Fears 'Restructuring' of IRIS Formaldehyde Assessment
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
The American Chemistry Council has written to the EPA voicing concern over the long awaited IRIS programme’s chemical assessment of formaldehyde. -
(ACC Mentioned) Republicans Will Question Cancer Agency Chief on Weedkiller
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
House Science, Space and Technology Committee leaders want the incoming director of the World Health Organization's cancer agency to testify next month about its controversial study of the pesticide glyphosate. -
99.99% Of The Pesticides We Eat Are Made By Plants
Jun 7, 2018 | American Council on Science and Health
By Josh Bloom
When Bruce Ames talks about toxicity, it's time to listen (1). -
Triclosan May Worsen Gut Inflammation and Trigger Cancer, Study Suggests
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The antimicrobial chemical triclosan may promote inflammation in the colon and trigger associated colon cancer, according to a rodent study. The inflammation appears to result from triclosan's effects on bacterial populations in the gut. -
NGOs Urge Restriction Proposal on Titanium Dioxide Consumer Articles
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
A group of NGOs has called on EU member states to propose a restriction on the use of titanium dioxide in consumer articles, based on REACH article 68(2). -
Dollar General CEO to Meet With Chemical Campaigners
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
Todd Vasos, the CEO of US discount chain Dollar General, has agreed to meet with campaigners to discuss their concerns about hazardous chemicals in the stores’ products. -
New York Finalises Cleaning Products Disclosure Policy
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation has published its finalised cleaning product disclosure policy, which sets out information requirements for manufacturers. -
Echa and Efsa Specify Mode-of-Action Analysis for EDCs
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Davies
A mode-of-action approach should be used when identifying endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) using the EU's agreed criteria, according to guidance from Echa and the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa). -
Echa Round-Up
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Echa has received an intention from Sweden to identify 2,2-bis (4'-hydroxyphenyl)-4-methylpentane as a substance of very high concern due to its suspected reprotoxic properties. -
In Climate Case, Oil Giants Prevent Document Search
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Anne C. Mulkern
Two cities that are suing several oil companies for causing sea-level rise were stopped yesterday from seeking corporate documents related to the energy giants' business dealings in California. -
Natural Gas Producers Say Trump is Using Them As a 'Scapegoat' to Bail Out Coal and Nuclear Plants
Jun 7, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
One of the natural gas industry's largest lobbying groups called out President Donald Trump's plans to bail out the coal and nuclear industry Thursday, saying he was using their industry as a "scapegoat." -
Energy Relationship Between Texas, Mexico Touted at Energy Summit
Jun 7, 2018 | San-Antonio Express News (In Houston Chronicle)
By Rye Druzin
Mexico's government is touting the connections between its energy industry and the U.S. despite continuing trade frictions. -
Natural Gas Trade Activity Numbers Leap After ICE Agreement
Jun 7, 2018 | Platts
By John DeLapp
Since a collaboration with Intercontinental Exchange took effect six months ago, S&P Global Platts has seen a substantial increase in natural gas trade information on a day-to-day basis, resulting in a more enhanced view of the markets. -
Pennsylvania to Require Gas Drillers to Reduce Air Pollution
Jun 7, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
Pennsylvania will begin enforcing tougher air pollution standards on its booming natural gas industry. -
Boston, Other Cities, to Work to Curb Renewable Energy Costs
Jun 7, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
Boston Mayor Martin Walsh is hoping to work with other cities to drive down the cost of renewable energy by asking developers for price estimates to meet their collective energy demand. -
N.M. Official Says Texas is Stealing Water for Fracking Boom
Jun 7, 2018 | Texas Tribune (In E&E Greemwire)
By Jay Root
New Mexico's top land manager is accusing Texas of stealing its water to feed the hydraulic fracturing boom, highlighting differences in state water policies in a drought-parched region. -
W.Va. Explosion Shoots Flames Into the Sky
Jun 7, 2018 | Pttsburgh Post-Gazette (In E&E Greenwire)
A gas pipeline explosion early this morning near Wheeling, W.Va., sent flames into the sky that were visible for miles. -
Panel Sends Transportation, Military Bills to Senate Floor
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Maxine Joselow and Nick Sobczyk
The Senate Appropriations Committee this morning cleared bills to fund transportation and military programs, as Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) pushes the panel to finish up its fiscal 2019 work before the Fourth of July. -
Judge Rules EPA Must Provide Evidence Used for Pruitt's Climate Change Claims
Jun 7, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Jacqueline Thomsen
A U.S. district judge has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to release any documents used by Administrator Scott Pruitt to make his public statement that human behavior is not a “primary contributor” to climate change. -
Court Rules EPA Ozone Report Due July 31
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A federal appeals court, again squelching EPA's hopes of ending two related lawsuits, is ordering the agency to report by July 31 on its progress in making area attainment designations for its 2015 ground-level ozone standard. -
IKEA to Use Only Renewable and Recycled Materials by 2030
Jun 7, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Anna Ringstrom
IKEA, the world's biggest furniture retailer, plans to use only renewable and recycled materials in its products by 2030, in the latest commitment by a global store group to reducing its impact on the environment.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Blog) ACC’s Biocide Panel Announces New Name: Center for Biocide Chemistries
Jun 7, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
The American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Biocides Panel announced its new name today, the Center for Biocide Chemistries (CBC), at the Twelfth Antimicrobial Workshop in Arlington, Virginia. The CBC, under its former name, was established in 1986 and represents more than 50 companies that manufacture active biocide ingredients and/or formulate biocide products.
Biocides, also known as “antimicrobials” or “antimicrobial pesticides,” are a group of chemistries that help prevent the spread of disease, are essential to preserving products, and ensure countless manufacturing and industrial processes are not compromised by microorganism growth.
The benefits of biocides are clear and include:Ensuring safe drinking waterDestroying harmful bacteria and viruses in our healthcare facilities and homesPromoting sustainability by preserving products to extend their useful lives
The biocide industry also plays a key role in the U.S. economy. The North American biocides market alone was $2.19 billion in 2016, with U.S. production estimated at $1.97 billion and payrolls an estimated $89.5 million. [1]
As the CBC, the group will continue its commitment to drive innovation, collaborate with key stakeholders and regulators, and establish scientifically sound approaches to the regulation of biocides. The CBC will also enhance the public’s understanding for the critical need for biocides and facilitate discussions with policymakers across jurisdictions on regulations and policies.
______________________________________________________________________
[1] American Chemistry Council, IMPLAN, Bureau of Labor Statistics and IHS Markit
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2018/06/accs-biocide-panel-announces-new-name-center-for-biocide-chemistries/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Clariant’s Deepak Parikh to Join American Chemistry Council Board of Directors
Jun 7, 2018 | Ink World Magazine
Clariant announced that Deepak Parikh, Clariant’s region president of North America, has been appointed to the Board of Directors of the American Chemistry Council (ACC). Parikh was approved to serve on the Board of Directors during the ACC Annual Meeting in Colorado Springs, for a term from Jan. 1, 2019 until Dec.31, 2021.
“I am proud to join the ACC’s Board of Directors and appreciate this opportunity to align further with our industry colleagues in the US,” said Parikh. “I look forward to working with the ACC leadership to ensure the chemical industry continues building its reputation and achieving sustainable success in the US.”The American Chemistry Council represents the diverse set of companies that make up the $768 billion enterprise that is the chemistry business in North America.
Parikh joined Clariant’s North American region as region president and CEO of both Clariant Corporation and Clariant Canada Inc. in July 2017. Parikh most recently served as Clariant’s region president for India, Middle East Africa as well as vice chairman and managing director of Clariant Chemicals (India) Limited. During the previous two decades, he worked with Dow Chemical and DuPont in the US and Asia, where he held various global and regional leadership roles in research and development, commercial and business development functions.http://www.inkworldmagazine.com/contents/view_breaking-news/2018-06-07/clariants-deepak-parikh-to-join-american-chemistry-council-board-of-directors/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Most Forecasters See Modest Growth Boost From Bank-Regulation Rollback
Jun 7, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Ben Leubsdorf
Most economists think the U.S. will experience somewhat stronger growth in the coming years due to recent legislation that relaxed postcrisis rules on some banks, though a sizable minority said the measure could at least modestly weaken financial stability.
Among dozens of forecasters surveyed in recent days by The Wall Street Journal, 61% said they expected U.S. growth in the medium term would be modestly stronger thanks to the bill signed last month by President Donald Trump. Some 33% said they expected no effect on economic growth from the rules-rollback. Few expected a decline or significant increase.
There should be a modest increase, though “banks were not that constrained,” said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors.
There could be a tradeoff: 40% said the law would at least modestly weaken the stability of the financial system. Just over half said the law would have no effect and the rest said it would leave the system stronger than before.
The “cost will only become apparent if there’s a financial crisis,” said Gus Faucher, chief economist at PNC Financial Services Group.
In the wake of the 2007-09 financial crisis and recession, a Democratic-controlled Congress in 2010 passed the Dodd-Frank law tightening oversight and regulation of the financial system. This year, a Republican-controlled Congress passed legislation relaxing rules on small and midsize banks but leaving many elements of the 2010 law in place.
“This is all about the Dodd-Frank disaster, and they’ve fixed it, or at least gone a long way toward fixing it,” Mr. Trump said May 24 when he signed the bill into law.
The limited scope of the rollback won support from some Democratic lawmakers and led some forecasters to speculate its effects on the economy and financial system could be relatively modest.
“This is more about correcting overreach than a return to precrisis regulation,” said Sean Snaith, director of the University of Central Florida’s Institute for Economic Competitiveness.
It is not the only recent legislation that could affect the economy’s trajectory in the coming years. Congress in late 2017 enacted a package of corporate and individual tax cuts that most economists surveyed by the Journal predicted would boost growth over the next few years. Forecasters, however, were split over whether the tax-code overhaul would affect the nation’s long-term growth trajectory.
Overall, economists think the U.S. will see strong growth this year, and that the jobless rate will decline over the next 12 months to a level last seen at the end of the 1960s.
The average forecast for gross domestic product growth in the fourth quarter of 2018 from a year earlier was 2.9% in this month’s survey. Economists on average expected growth would ease to 2.4% in 2019 and 1.9% in 2020. In the long run, they said, GDP growth should average 2.1%.
The unemployment rate fell to 3.8% in May, the Labor Department reported last week, a level last seen in 2000. Economists expect it will head even lower in the coming months. They on average predicted the rate would be 3.6% at the end of 2018 and 3.5% in mid-2019, a rate last seen in December 1969.
Most economists surveyed last month said they thought the next recession would arrive in 2020 but, for now, they expect the expansion will continue. The average probability of the U.S. entering recession in the next 12 months was 16% in June, continuing to inch up—it was 13% back in January—but still relatively low.
“Leading barometers still showing gains—albeit slowing—into 2019,” said Thomas Kevin Swift, chief economist at the American Chemistry Council.
Still, forecasters remain worried about the potential for trade disputes to derail growth. Some 47% said the risks for GDP growth over the next year were tilted to the downside, versus 43% who saw risks tilted to the upside. More than two dozen economists mentioned tariffs or a trade war as potential risks.
As negotiations with Canada and Mexico continue over changes to the North American Free Trade Agreement, economists on average pegged the probability of President Donald Trump pulling the U.S. out of Nafta at 29%.
“The demands that the U.S. is making of Mexico and Canada are forcing....them to consider walking away; that once would have been considered unimaginable,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Grant Thornton.
The Journal’s survey of 56 business, financial and academic economists was conducted June 1-5. Not every forecaster answered every question.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/most-forecasters-see-modest-growth-boost-from-bank-regulation-rollback-1528380000?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1
-
(ACC Mentioned) Most Forecasters See Modest Growth Boost From Bank-Regulation Rollback
Jun 7, 2018 | Independent Recorder
By Alexander John
In the wake of the 2007-09 financial crisis and recession, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank law tightening oversight and regulation of the financial system. This year Congress passed legislation relaxing rules on small and midsize banks but leaving many elements of the 2010 law in place.
Photo:
bryan r. smith/Agence France-Presse/Getty ImagesByBen LeubsdorfBen LeubsdorfThe Wall Street JournalBiography@BenLeubsdorfben.leubsdorf@wsj.com
Updated June 7, 2018 10:02 a.m. ET0 COMMENTS
Most economists think the U.S. will experience somewhat stronger growth in the coming years due to recent legislation that relaxed postcrisis rules on some banks, though a sizable minority said the measure could at least modestly weaken financial stability.
Among dozens of forecasters surveyed in recent days by The Wall Street Journal, 61% said they expected U.S. growth in the medium term would be modestly stronger thanks to the bill signed last month by President Donald Trump. Some 33% said they expected no effect on economic growth from the rules-rollback. Few expected a decline or significant increase.
There should be a modest increase, though “banks were not that constrained,” said
Joel Naroff,
president of Naroff Economic Advisors.
There could be a tradeoff: 40% said the law would at least modestly weaken the stability of the financial system. Just over half said the law would have no effect and the rest said it would leave the system stronger than before.
The “cost will only become apparent if there’s a financial crisis,” said
Gus Faucher,
chief economist at PNC Financial Services Group.
In the wake of the 2007-09 financial crisis and recession, a Democratic-controlled Congress in 2010 passed the Dodd-Frank law tightening oversight and regulation of the financial system. This year, a Republican-controlled Congress passed legislation relaxing rules on small and midsize banks but leaving many elements of the 2010 law in place.
“This is all about the Dodd-Frank disaster, and they’ve fixed it, or at least gone a long way toward fixing it,” Mr. Trump said May 24 when he signed the bill into law.
The limited scope of the rollback won support from some Democratic lawmakers and led some forecasters to speculate its effects on the economy and financial system could be relatively modest.
Explore the WSJ Economists Survey
The Wall Street Journal“This is more about correcting overreach than a return to precrisis regulation,” said Sean Snaith, director of the University of Central Florida’s Institute for Economic Competitiveness.
It is not the only recent legislation that could affect the economy’s trajectory in the coming years. Congress in late 2017 enacted a package of corporate and individual tax cuts that most economists surveyed by the Journal predicted would boost growth over the next few years. Forecasters, however, were split over whether the tax-code overhaul would affectthe nation’s long-term growth trajectory.
Overall, economists think the U.S. will see strong growth this year, and that the jobless rate will decline over the next 12 months to a level last seen at the end of the 1960s.
The average forecast for gross domestic product growth in the fourth quarter of 2018 from a year earlier was 2.9% in this month’s survey. Economists on average expected growth would ease to 2.4% in 2019 and 1.9% in 2020. In the long run, they said, GDP growth should average 2.1%.
The unemployment rate fell to 3.8% in May, the Labor Department reported last week, a level last seen in 2000. Economists expect it will head even lower in the coming months. They on average predicted the rate would be 3.6% at the end of 2018 and 3.5% in mid-2019, a rate last seen in December 1969.
Most economists surveyed last month said they thought the next recession would arrive in 2020 but, for now, they expect the expansion will continue. The average probability of the U.S. entering recession in the next 12 months was 16% in June, continuing to inch up—it was 13% back in January—but still relatively low.
“Leading barometers still showing gains—albeit slowing—into 2019,” said Thomas Kevin Swift, chief economist at the American Chemistry Council.
Still, forecasters remain worried about the potential for trade disputes to derail growth. Some 47% said the risks for GDP growth over the next year were tilted to the downside, versus 43% who saw risks tilted to the upside. More than two dozen economists mentioned tariffs or a trade war as potential risks.
As negotiations with Canada and Mexico continue over changes to the North American Free Trade Agreement, economists on average pegged the probability of President
Donald Trump
pulling the U.S. out of Nafta at 29%.
“The demands that the U.S. is making of Mexico and Canada are forcing….them to consider walking away; that once would have been considered unimaginable,” said
Diane Swonk,
chief economist at Grant Thornton.
The Journal’s survey of 56 business, financial and academic economists was conducted June 1-5. Not every forecaster answered every question.
https://www.independentrecorder.com/most-forecasters-see-modest-growth-boost-from-bank-regulation-rollback-113146.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) Is Recession 2020 is Approaching? Economists Warned
Jun 7, 2018 | Pakistan Observer
As reported by the Associated Press, the United States may be in for a major recession in 2020. A report by the National Association for Business Economics suggests that the significant tax cuts made by President Donald Trump could boost economic growth for 2018 and 2019, but by 2020, the country could enter into a new recession. A number of factors could contribute to this development, including a wave of retirement among workers of the Baby Boomer generation, dwindling productivity rates and more.Two Years of Economic Growth, But Caution NonethelessThe report, created by a panel of 45 economists, suggests that the economy, as measured by GDP, will expand throughout this year and next. However, the predicted expansion rate for 2018 of 2.8% is down marginally from the panel’s previous forecast, made in March. At that time, the expected growth rate was 2.9% for this year. NABE vice president Kevin Swift, the chief economist at the American Chemistry Council, explains that the panel members are “slightly less optimistic about the U.S. economy in 2018 than they were three months ago,” suggesting that the drop-off may be due to Trump’s tough approach on trade and its impact on growth prospects domestically. Indeed, three-quarters of the panel believes that current trade policies, such as those involving steep penalties on steel and aluminum imports from U.S. trading partners like the EU, Canada, and Mexico, could have a negative impact on the economy.
On the other hand, the forecasting panel was more optimistic about the short-term effects of the $1.5 trillion tax cut passed by Congress last December. Panel members predicted a median growth of 0.4% and 0.3% next year as a result of this cut.2020 Recession?
After two years of growth, many panel members believe that a recession may be on the way in 2020. Two thirds of the economists on the panel expect a recession to start by the end of 2020, and 18% of panel members were more pessimistic than that, expecting a recession to begin by the end of 2019.
Key to the predictions of these panelists is the expectation that Trump’s tax cuts will only have a short-term benefit, and that the gains from this move will exhaust themselves within a period of roughly two years. Beyond that, weak productivity gains and retirements are among the leading factors contributing to panel member pessimism about the state of the economy about two years from now.
Currently, the economy has been recovering since 2009. This marks the second-longest economic expansion period in U.S. history. If economic growth continues through the end of June 2019, as many panelists expect, it will become the longest period of continued expansion.
https://pakobserver.net/is-recession-2020-is-approaching-economists-warned/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Republicans in Turmoil Over Trump’s Trade Moves
Jun 7, 2018 | Politico
By Adam Behsudi
REPUBLICANS IN TURMOIL OVER TRUMP’S TRADE MOVES: Republican senators may broadly agree that President Donald Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum aren’t good for the economy, but they’re split over how to deal with it and many don’t think a bill introduced Wednesday by Sen. Bob Corker is the way to go.
“Most of us believe those tariffs are too broad but we’d like to tell the president we want to have his back in having a better deal. And give us an idea about what a better deal will look like,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said. “A lot of people agree, intellectually, with Bob [Lighthizer].”
Corker’s bill, which would allow Congress to block those tariffs, was introduced as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act. It could still get a vote next week after lawmakers discussed the matter at a spirited caucus lunch on Wednesday.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), who is managing the defense bill in the absence of Senate Armed Services Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.), said after the GOP lunch that Corker’s bill would get a vote. “It will. And I have no objection. Look, I’m in agreement with Corker,” Inhofe said. “The likelihood of passing something isn’t all that great. But they need a vote.”
White House meetings: Graham and about a dozen other senators met with Trump at the White House late Wednesday afternoon. After the meeting, Graham said in a statement that “now is not the time to undercut President Trump’s ability to negotiate better trade deals. I will not support any efforts that weaken his position.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley, who also attended the meeting, tweeted that Trump “is very confident he can get a better deal for America generally but particularly agriculture.” However, the Iowa Republican warned that the administration needs to be careful “or else agriculture is the first to be retaliated against.”
Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) met quietly with Trump on Tuesday and gently urged the president to take a friendlier stance toward allies. “We’re getting major concessions right now,” Perdue said of NAFTA negotiations and other trade deals Trump is pressing for. “The president’s got the attention of the world. For us to confuse that right now with the Corker amendment I think would really do harm to the momentum we have with these negotiations.” POLITICO’s Burgess Everett has the story here.
IT’S THURSDAY, JUNE 7! Welcome to Morning Trade, where your host loved going to Fort McHenry as a kid but doesn’t remember Canada ever being mentioned. Got any hot trade news to share? Let me know: abehsudi@politico.com or @abehsudi.
POLITICO convened leading thinkers and policymakers to look closely at the financial well-being of future American retirees. Explore the latest issue of The Agenda to dig more into this important topic and download the Working Group Report to see what potential solutions are being proposed to solve the country’s retirement puzzle. Presented by Prudential
Join the Global Public Affairs Club, a new global community dedicated to C-level public affairs professionals launched by POLITICO’s sister company, DII. Members receive the GPAC weekly newsletter, including original reporting and analysis on new transparency standards, recent lobbying regulation, risk management and industry best practices. In addition, members have access to the Global Public Affairs Forum on Sept. 28 in Paris. For additional information on GPAC, email Chloé Mimault-Talagrand at cmimault@dii.eu.
BUSINESS GROUPS WELCOME CORKER TARIFF REVIEW BILL: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups showered praise Wednesday on a bipartisan bill spearheaded by Corker and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) that would rein in Trump’s ability to impose tariffs in the name of national security, such as those on steel and aluminum.
“The U.S. business and agriculture community is profoundly concerned about how newly imposed tariffs – and the inevitable foreign retaliation arriving in the next few weeks – will lead to lost American jobs,” Neil Bradley, U.S. Chamber executive vice president and chief policy officer, said in a statement. “This emerging trade war endangers the remarkable economic progress we’ve seen in the past year. The constitutional authority of the Congress to ‘regulate foreign trade’ and its oversight of tariff policy is unambiguous. This modest proposal to clarify congressional prerogatives is welcome and long overdue.”
The National Retail Federation, American Chemistry Council, Alliance for Competitive Steel and Aluminum Trade, and Koch Industries also welcomed the bill. “In many respects, America has never been as strong as today, in large part thanks to robust tax and regulatory reforms undertaken by Congress and the administration. To sustain the momentum, Koch supports this bipartisan legislation, which helps restore Congress’ constitutional authority on matters of trade,” said Philip Ellender, Koch president of government and public affairs.
Ryan and McConnell’s reality check: House Speaker Paul Ryan didn’t outright pour cold water on the legislative effort to check Trump’s trade powers but revealed an inconvenient truth that any bill would need a veto-proof majority.
“You would have to pass a law that he would want to sign into law and that would be what it would take,” Ryan said at a House GOP leadership press conference on Wednesday. “You can do the math on that.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell also downplayed the legislation’s chance of success. He told SiriusXM late Wednesday that he opposes the bill and called it an “exercise in futility” that the president won’t sign — potentially dooming its prospects.
The other side: The Alliance for American Manufacturing, which represents steel companies and union groups, blasted the bill, which it said would jeopardize “thousands” of new steel and aluminum jobs created by the tariffs. "Sen. Corker and his colleagues may pretend this is about preserving ties with our allies, but its effect would be to send American workers back to the unemployment line while letting China skate,” AAM President Scott Paul said.
U.S. BROUGHT AG TRADE BARRIER WISH LIST TO CHINA: During talks in Beijing last weekend, the focus around agriculture was less on getting China to buy more stuff and more about demanding that the country remove a long list of barriers to U.S. farm goods, a source close to the talks said.
“You pick the product and we can show you two or three Chinese policies that are bothering us,” the source said. “A lot of them are regulatory. Some of them are tariffs. Some of them are the way they operate their quotas. There’s a whole grab bag."
Unless a deal is reached within the next nine days — or Trump decides to delay imposition of tariffs — the United States could miss one of the best opportunities it has ever had to achieve meaningful new agricultural market openings, the source said.
However, China has signaled it will not take any steps to remove the trade barriers if new U.S. tariffs are imposed, the source said. It also has indicated it will impose retaliatory tariffs on $50 billion worth of U.S. agricultural, chemical and other products if the U.S. penalties are imposed. Doug has the full story here.
CFIUS OVERHAUL AMENDMENT STALLS NDAA MOVEMENT: Senate leaders wanted to quickly start debate on the fiscal 2019 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday. However, the process hit a snag after Sen. Pat Toomey objected, blocking the move to secure a vote on his amendment to the overhaul of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States attached to the massive policy bill.
Instead, the Senate will be forced to vote to cut off debate on the procedural motion, a move that requires 60 votes and all but ensures substantive action on the must-pass legislation will be delayed until next week. Inhofe, who is leading Republicans in McCain's absence, said he and ranking Democrat Jack Reed want "an open amendment process," but warned Toomey's objection could grind amendment consideration to a halt.
NDAA ride or die: The procedural hang-up doesn’t bode well for the NDAA, which has emerged as the vehicle of choice for a number of legislative rebukes of recent Trump trade decisions.
The Trump administration supports the overarching Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act, but the version attached to the NDAA includes language that would make it harder for Trump to lift sanctions on Chinese telecom company ZTE. Corker also sees the NDAA as a vehicle for his bill that would rein in Trump’s power to impose tariffs for national security reasons.
On the ZTE language, lawmakers appeared confident that it could be shielded by a veto-proof majority.
“I do believe that,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat who offered the ZTE amendment that is now embedded in the NDAA. He added that he thought the House would accept the amendment in conference.
Sen. Brian Schatz said the ZTE language has broad support. “I don’t know a Democrat who’s against this,” he said.
ZTE’S DARK SIDE: Critics of Trump’s proposal to ease sanctions on ZTE say it shows that the president is willing to ignore the national security advice of his own intelligence and defense officials in his pursuit of a larger trade agreement with China. Even Trump's new CIA Director Gina Haspel said during her recent confirmation hearing that she would not use ZTE phones.
“This is where you have unanimity between both the Obama and Trump administration officials talking about ZTE and Huawei — this is a national security concern,” Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the Intelligence panel’s ranking member, told POLITICO. “You don’t trade that away in an off-again, on-again conflict with China.”
Washington lawmakers, military and intelligence officials, as well as cybersecurity experts have become increasingly worried about the risks posed by foreign tech companies, especially considering Russia's campaign to influence the 2016 presidential campaign. Pro Cybersecurity’s Martin Matishak has the story here.
NAFTA HOPES CONTINUE TO FADE: Ryan remains circumspect on the future of NAFTA 2.0, saying it would be up to the U.S. International Trade Commission to decide if there was still time to get a final deal to Congress for a vote in December. The ITC has a 105-day period to do an economic analysis after a deal is signed.
“I think we’re down the road and unless the ITC says they don’t need as much time and they could do it in the timeline to get it on the floor in December, that’s what it would take to do that,” Ryan said at a House leadership press conference on Wednesday.
House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady on Wednesday said “it’s safe to say the timetable for action this year has been missed.” However, the affable Texan said he is continuing to urge the administration to reach a “pro-growth” deal this year.
Deal still out of reach: U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer repeated this week in a statement to POLITICO that the three countries aren’t anywhere close to a deal: “There are differences on intellectual property, data localization, agricultural market access, de minimis levels, energy, labor, rules of origin, geographical indications, and much more. We however are making progress and will continue to engage in negotiations.”
TRUMP TO SIT DOWN WITH TRUDEAU, MACRON AT G-7: Trump is set to hold bilateral meetings with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and French President Emmanuel Macron at the upcoming G-7 meeting, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow told reporters on Wednesday. Both leaders recently spoke with Trump about the steel and aluminum tariffs — and Trump reportedly brought up the War of 1812 in the call with Trudeau, an anecdote that went viral Wednesday afternoon — but they are all but certain to press again for relief when they sit down for face-to-face meetings in Charlevoix.
Kudlow, in a roughly 25-minute briefing on the G-7 for reporters, downplayed the prospects that drama and awkward moments would dominate the summit. “I regard this very much like a family quarrel,” he said. “I’m always the optimist. I believe it can be worked out.”
But he also underscored Trump’s belief in the tariffs and made clear that the president would not easily be persuaded to walk them back, even in the face of retaliation from U.S. allies.
“President Trump is very clear with respect to his trade reform efforts that we will do what is necessary to protect the United States, its businesses and its workforce. So we may have disagreements, but he has always said — and I agree — that tariffs are a tool in that effort,” Kudlow said. “And people should recognize how serious he is in that respect.”
— Will he or won’t he? The summit might be slated to start Friday, but rumors are swirling that Trump could still change his mind and opt not to attend. Kudlow rejected a question on Wednesday about whether the president even wants to go on the trip, saying that Trump is “at ease with all of these tough issues. … I don’t think there’s any issue there at all.”
But many observers are less sure. “I’m not 100 percent convinced that the president will go, notwithstanding what we’re hearing from Mr. Kudlow and others,” said Scotty Greenwood, the CEO of the Canadian-American Business Council. “This president is so instinctive … that we’ll know when Air Force One is wheels down whether or not he’s going.”
HEITKAMP PRESSES FOR CONTINUED CLOSE TIES WITH MEXICO: Heitkamp and seven North Dakota agriculture leaders met with Mexican Ambassador Gerónimo Gutiérrez on Wednesday to underscore how U.S. farmers want to keep close ties with Mexico in the face of heightened trade tensions between the U.S. and its closest allies. Heitkamp and the farmers agreed that “tariffs and hostility toward our top trading partners” are creating more uncertainty for already struggling commodity growers.
“Trade relationships take significant investments and are developed over long periods of time,” said Heitkamp, who added that she and agriculture leaders are “working to maintain those critical relationships so our farmers and ranchers can continue to export to Mexico, despite the uncertainty created by the administration’s actions on trade.”
BIG CHANGES AT U.S.-CHINA BUSINESS COUNCIL: John Frisbie, the longtime president of the U.S.-China Business Council, is stepping down to pursue other opportunities in the China policy space. “After 13-plus years, it’s just time for a change!” Frisbie told Morning Trade in an email after the group’s announcement. “The U.S.-China dynamic remains compelling and interesting; I intend to stay involved, just in a different role.”
He will be succeeded on July 26 by Craig Allen, a Commerce Department veteran who has been U.S. ambassador to Brunei Darussalam since 2014. Allen has spent much of his government career in Asia and working on China-related issues. He has served in China three times, most recently as the senior commercial officer from 2002-2005. He later was deputy assistant secretary for Asia and deputy assistant secretary for China at the Commerce Department.
— Chubb Chairman and CEO Evan Greenberg was reelected this week to another term as USCBC chairman. A complete list of USCBC officers and directors can be found here.
INTERNATIONAL OVERNIGHT
— Europe could be a pivotal player for China in a three-way trade puzzle, the South China Morning Post reports.
— U.S. farmers are facing broadening trade threats with retaliation now from Canada and Mexico, The Wall Street Journal reports.
— Emails from business lobbyists show just how frenzied and frustrated some in Washington are over Trump’s trade policies, The New York Times reports.
— A family-owned factory was ready to bring jobs back from China until steel tariffs hit, The Washington Post reports.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-trade/2018/06/07/republicans-in-turmoil-over-trumps-trade-moves-244957
-
(ACC Mentioned) OMB Completes Review of EPA Cost-Benefit 'Consistency' Prerule
Jun 7, 2018 | Inside EPA
The White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) has completed its mandatory pre-publication review of an EPA preule that will aim to increase “consistency and transparency” in how the agency considers costs and benefits in the rulemaking process, a win for several major industry groups that have pushed hard for the measure.
OMB completed its review of the advance notice of proposed rulemaking on June 5 after receiving it from the agency on April 11. The Trump administration's Unified Agenda of pending regulations updated this spring says that the agency planned to publicly release the prerule in May, a non-binding deadline it missed.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt can now sign the prerule and publish it in the Federal Register after OMB approved it with revisions, although the agency's timeline for publicly releasing it is unclear.
In a notice in the Unified Agenda, EPA said it is “considering developing implementing regulations that would increase consistency across EPA divisions and offices, increase reliability to affected stakeholders, and increase transparency during the development of regulatory actions.”
The agency claimed that historically “costs” have been interpreted differently depending on EPA offices in how they conduct cost-benefit analyses for rules issued under environmental statutes such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. “This has led to EPA choosing different standards under the same provision of the statute, the regulatory community not being able to rely on consistent application of the statute, and EPA developing internal policies on the consideration of costs through non-transparent actions,” the agency said.
“By developing implementing regulations through a notice-and-comment rulemaking process, it will provide the public with a better understanding of how EPA is evaluating costs when developing a regulatory action and allow the public to provide better feedback to EPA on potential future proposed rules,” EPA claimed.
While the prerule was undergoing OMB review, groups including the National Association of Manufacturers, American Petroleum Institute, American Forest and Paper Association and the American Chemistry Council met with OMB and EPA officials to make the case for the rule to be issued. They urged OMB to devote resources to the effort and broadly played down legal obstacles to consideration of costs in future rules, especially in the wake of two Supreme Court decisions that generally favored more-aggressive cost reviews.
One industry source has cited as an example of varying cost-benefit approaches complaints about EPA's tendency not to take into account operating costs at specific facilities installing Clean Air Act controls that could render the controls uneconomic. And the source notes that different laws set up different tests for consideration of costs, and sometimes different thresholds for weighing costs in the same statute.
But imposing a more-consistent approach for cost-benefit across all agency offices will almost certainly anger environmentalists, who have long criticized overly aggressive cost considerations, which they say usually come at the expense of adequately considering the benefits of regulation.
Several former EPA officials have already warned that the rulemaking is likely to consume significant resources and is likely to face significant legal hurdles. “That is a huge undertaking without [assuming] legislative fixes,” one former EPA official said, noting that both the rule and regulations based on it would be prime targets for judicial scrutiny. “I would suggest they apply some cost-benefit analysis to their own endeavor. If you end up obtaining nothing, was it worth the cost that went into it?” the former official asks.
The former official added that addressing numerous and varied cost and benefit requirements in different sections of different statutes would likely add to the burden. “It's a Herculean undertaking to reconcile all the provisions in all the statutes,” the source says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/omb-completes-review-epa-cost-benefit-consistency-prerule
-
In Bipartisan Push, Over 100 Lawmakers Urge Pruitt to Withdraw His So-Called Transparency Rule
Jun 7, 2018 | ThinkProgress
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt’s plan to limit scientific research available to agency scientists and experts who draft regulations is attracting widespread resistance on Capitol Hill.
More than 100 members of Congress — Democrats and Republicans — sent a letter to Pruitt, dated June 7, urging him to withdraw his so-called transparency rule. The proposal would create an “opaque process allowing EPA to selectively suppress scientific evidence without accountability and in the process undermine bedrock environmental laws,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter.Advertisement
The letter was signed by 103 House members, led by Reps. Diana DeGette (D-CO), Dan Lipinski (D-IL), Paul Tonko (D-IL), and Don Beyer (D-VA). Four Republicans, all members of the Climate Solutions Caucus, signed the letter: Reps. Carols Curbelo (FL), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), and Ryan Costello (PA).
The proposed rule “appears to be targeted at excluding important public health studies while privileging industry-sponsored research,” the bipartisan letter said. “The discretion it grants the administrator to grant case-by-case exemptions completely undermines the stated goal of transparency.”
The proposed rule requires that all data underlying the EPA’s regulatory actions be made publicly available to allow for independent validation.
But scientists fear that Pruitt’s new science standards will severely limit the kinds of public health studies that the agency can use when considering new rules, because many large-scale public health studies rely on anonymous data. That data is, by law, kept anonymous due to patient privacy policies — though the studies are still subject to the same kinds of peer-review process as studies that use publicly available data.
Scott Pruitt’s new science transparency rule may seriously backfire
Once such piece of health research is a study known as Six Cities, which followed more than 8,000 participants for nearly 20 years and was key in establishing a link between chronic air pollution exposure and increased mortality.Advertisement
The results of this study have “stood up” to extensive subsequent analysis, the lawmakers said. But it also serves as an example of an entire class of studies that Pruitt’s rule would remove from consideration.
Excluding such health studies would “hobble” the agency’s ability to implement laws like the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act, they argued.
Nearly a thousand scientists and many leading scientific organizations have opposed the proposed rule since it was issued in late April.
The rule was originally inspired by climate science denier Lamar Smith (R-TX), the House Science, Space, and Technology Chairman who has for years been trying to push legislation through on the issue. The initiative, also known as the “secret science” rule, was picked up during a March meeting between Pruitt and the Heritage Foundation, a Washington, D.C. think tank known for promoting climate science denial and which was instrumental in influencing Trump’s transition team.
In their letter on Thursday, the lawmakers also pointed out that the proposed rule is inconsistent with EPA’s statutory obligations to ground its actions on scientific evidence. The Toxic Substances Control Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, for example, require that EPA use the “best available science.” Courts have found this language to require that agencies “seek out and consider all existing scientific evidence” and not ignore existing data.
Facts don’t match Scott Pruitt’s vision, so Pruitt is changing the facts at the EPA
“This standard would be impossible to meet under the proposed rule,” they said.
The House members insisted they support transparency and scientific integrity. But the proposed rule — which they claimed lacks an “underlying rationale” — will have the opposite effect by undermining the scientific integrity and limiting transparency.
https://thinkprogress.org/bipartisan-push-lawmakers-against-pruitt-science-transparency-rule-cdb527caa552/
-
(ACC Mentioned) CLF Starts Spending in OH-12 Special
Jun 7, 2018 | Politico
By Elena Schneider
SIREN — FIRST IN SCORE — CLF starts spending in OH-12 special: The Congressional Leadership Fund is jumping into the House special election in Ohio, airing broadcast TV ads in Columbus, according to a media tracking firm. The initial buy totals $165,000, airing ads from June 8 to June 12. Republican Troy Balderson and Democrat Danny O’Connor are running to replace Rep. Pat Tiberi, who declined to run for reelection in a district that President Donald Trump won by 11 points in 2016.
CALIFORNIA ROUNDUP — “How Democrats escaped disaster in California,” by POLITCO’s David Siders: “Faced with the prospect of getting locked out of the November ballot in several competitive districts, party officials embarked on a desperate, no-expense-spared sprint to ensure that Democrats didn't blow a handful of races that were critical to the party's bid to retake the House. On Tuesday night, those efforts paid off. Though large numbers of absentee and provisional ballots still hadn't been counted as of Wednesday, a Democrat was running in second place in each of seven Republican-held House districts Democrats are targeting this election cycle, ensuring competitive general elections in the fall.” Full story.
— “'This is basically a home run for Democrats,’” by POLITICO’s Siders and Elena Schneider: “Democrats claimed new life in their bid to retake the House Tuesday, with a path back to the majority that once again runs squarely through the Golden State. ... For months, though, the party feared a nightmare scenario in which no Democrat would appear on the November ballot in several critical House races — victimized by the state's top-two primary system in which the top two vote-getters advance to the general election regardless of party affiliation. But as results from the primary election on Tuesday rolled in, Democrats breathed a loud sigh of relief.” Full story.
CALLED RACES — California Senate: Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein will face a fellow Democrat, Kevin de León, in the California Senate election this fall. Full story.
— CA-39: Republican Young Kim and Democrat Gil Cisneros have advanced out of the top-two primary in California's 39th District, as the Democratic Party avoiding getting locked out of a top battleground seat. Full story.
— CA-45: GOP Rep. Mimi Walters will face Democratic attorney and UC Irvine professor Katie Porter in November in California's 45th District. Full story.
UNCALLED RACES — CA-48: Democrat Hans Keirstead edged ahead of fellow Democrat Harley Rouda Wednesday afternoon, pulling ahead by 45 votes. But Rouda’s campaign, which declared victory early Wednesday morning, said it still feels confident with 180,000 ballots still uncounted in Orange County. Keirstead’s campaign called the race “too close to call” in a statement.
— Still waiting for calls in battleground districts by the AP: CA-10, CA-25 and CA-49.
ICYMI — “Top takeaways from 2018's biggest primary night,” by POLITICO’s Siders, Natasha Korecki, Carla Marinucci and Steven Shepard. Full story.
— “Women dominate in Tuesday primaries,” by POLITICO’s Heather Caygle. Full story.
MANCHIN’S REELECT STRATEGY — “Manchin goes full MAGA,” by POLITICO’s Burgess Everett: “[M]ore than any other Democrat in Congress, he's positioned himself as a vocal Trump ally. In fact, the senator, up for reelection in a state Trump won by more than 40 points, told POLITICO he isn’t ruling out endorsing Trump for reelection in 2020 — a position practically unheard of for a politician with a ‘D’ next to his name. … Trump’s popularity in West Virginia has Republicans salivating over the prospect of knocking off the legendary 70-year-old senator and former governor this fall. In response, Manchin is sidling up to the president — his policies, his nominees, at times even Trump himself — as the independent-minded Democrat prepares for the toughest race of his career against GOP state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey.” Full story.
— Donald Trump Jr., who recently campaigned with Morrisey, responded in a tweet: “What a joke. You can’t go “Full #MAGA” in WV while voting against Tax Cuts, voting for excessive regulations, and voting with Bernie Sanders more than you do with POTUS. It’s time for someone who will vote with DJT! Vote @MorriseyWV #wv.”
PARTY PROBLEMS — "House Dems seethe over superdelegates plan," by POLITICO's John Bresnahan and Heather Caygle. "The controversial issue of 'superdelegates' and their future in the Democratic Party led to an angry confrontation on Tuesday night between Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez and House Democrats, according to several lawmakers. But the members’ angst may not help them since it appears that the DNC is ready to rein in the status of superdelegates, also known as 'unpledged' delegates, no matter what lawmakers say or do." Full story.
Days until the 2018 election: 152.
Upcoming election dates — June 12: Maine, Nevada, North Dakota, South Carolina and Virginia primaries. June 26: Colorado, Maryland, New York (congressional), Oklahoma and Utah primaries and Mississippi and South Carolina primary runoffs.
Upcoming filing deadlines — Connecticut: June 12.
Thanks for joining us! You can email tips to the Campaign Pro team at sbland@politico.com, eschneider@politico.com, dstrauss@politico.com, mseverns@politico.com and jarkin@politico.com.
You can also follow us on Twitter: @politicoscott, @ec_schneider, @danielstrauss4, @maggieseverns and @jamesarkin.
POLITICO convened leading thinkers and policymakers to look closely at the financial well-being of future American retirees. Explore the latest issue of The Agenda to dig more into this important topic and download the Working Group Report to see what potential solutions are being proposed to solve the country’s retirement puzzle. Presented by Prudential
How can Washington help the financial well-being of future American retirees? POLITICO convened leading thinkers and policymakers to identify some solutions. Read the report. Presented by Prudential
Join the Global Public Affairs Club, a new global community dedicated to C-level public affairs professionals launched by POLITICO’s sister company, DII. Members receive the GPAC weekly newsletter, including original reporting and analysis on new transparency standards, recent lobbying regulation, risk management and industry best practices. In addition, members have access to the Global Public Affairs Forum on Sept. 28 in Paris. For additional information on GPAC, email Chloé Mimault-Talagrand at cmimault@dii.eu.
Join POLITICO Playbook Co-Authors Anna Palmer and Jake Sherman on Tuesday, June 12 at The D.C. Bar Headquarters, for a Playbook Interview featuring House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.). This conversation will provide intelligence and insight around Scalise's policy priorities and the Republican leadership agenda, along with politics and news of the day. Register today.
** A message from MarketPredict: Need live political data that is easy to understand and implement to help you win? With the launch of MarketPredict’s live predictive modeling, data will be delivered to you when you need it. Covering Gubernatorial, Senate or Ballot and staffed with political-data and media experts to support your campaigns. Just consider us your extended team! info@market-predict.com | 202-408-2713 | Market-Predict.com **
ON THE AIRWAVES — FIRST IN SCORE — “New Casey TV ad highlights work on opioid crisis,” via Campaign Pro’s James Arkin: “Sen. Bob Casey’s campaign released a new TV ad today highlighting his work on behalf of families impacted by the opioid crisis. The 60-second ad, Casey’s (D-Pa.) second of the cycle, features a woman telling the story of her daughter, Emily, who died of an overdose nine months after her own daughter, Carter, was born.” You can view the 60-second version of the ad here. The campaign also released a 30-second version that can be viewed here. Full story.
— “Maryland gubernatorial candidate Madaleno tries to irritate Trump — with a kiss,” by The Washington Post’s Steve Thompson: “The ad ends with an on-screen gesture designed to irritate Trump’s conservative base: a lip-smacking kiss between [Rich] Madaleno, a longtime state senator who if elected would be the state’s first openly gay governor, and his husband, Mark Hodge.” Full story.
— Delgado releases new TV ad in NY-19 primary: Democrat Antonio Delgado is out with a new TV ad in the Democratic primary, emphasizing his support for “universal, affordable, quality health care for everyone.” The ad is airing on broadcast and cable stations in the district. Watch the ad here.
— American Chemistry Council ad praises Heller in Nevada: “The American Chemistry Council is running an ad praising Nevada GOP Sen. Dean Heller ahead of his reelection this November, according to data from Advertising Analytics.” Watch the ad here. Full story.
WHERE THE MONEY GOES — Issa asks FEC if he can use campaign funds to repay personal loan from 1998: Retiring Congressman Darrell Issais taking an unusual step with the Federal Election Commission that could save him some money: Issa asks the FEC if he can reopen his 1998 primary committee for Senate, then transfer money from his current congressional committee into the old committee in order to repay part of a $9 million debt that he left in the old campaign. Issa has $770,000 in his current campaign account that he could refund himself, if the FEC approves his request. Issa’s net worth was estimated above $280 million in 2018 by the Los Angeles Times. Read the request here.
WEB WARS — American Bridge attacks Rosendale in TV ad in Montana: American Bridge released a new digital ad targeting GOP midterm voters, going after Republican Matt Rosendale, a day after he clinched the nomination to take on Sen. Jon Tester. “Montana Republicans say you can’t trust Matt Rosendale,” the ad says. Watch the ad here.
HOUSE DEMS SEEKING PROMOTIONS — Four House Democrats who are running statewide this fall spoke at the League of Conservation Voters annual Capital Dinner Wednesday night: Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham, who is running for governor of New Mexico, was the featured speaker, and Reps. Beto O'Rourke of Texas, Jacky Rosen of Nevada and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who are all running for Senate, gave opening remarks.
PARTY UNITY — “Bernie Sanders: ‘Absolutely’ a Mistake for DNC Chair to Endorse Cuomo,” by The Daily Beast’s Gideon Resnick: “Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) openly waded into the New York gubernatorial race on Wednesday, telling The Washington Post that he believes it was ‘absolutely’ a mistake for Democratic National Committee chair Tom Perez to endorse incumbent New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Asked if the decision makes it harder to trust that the DNC won’t play establishment favorites in the 2020 presidential election, Sanders responded: ‘It does.’” Full story.
DONOR WATCH — “GOP megadonor: ‘I’m not writing one penny to any of them’ until DACA is resolved,” by POLITICO Illinois’ Natasha Korecki: “A billionaire Florida healthcare mogul and Republican megadonor says he will cut off contributions to elected officials and candidates who refuse to fix immigration laws. Mike Fernandez, long at odds with President Donald Trump over deportations, told POLITICO in a phone interview he’s behind a broadening strategy among donors to punish politicians who will not sign a discharge petition in the House that would trigger a congressional showdown over the fate of hundreds of thousands of so-called Dreamers.” Full story.
STAFFING UP — Greg Pence adds comms, finance director: Molly Gillaspie is joining Republican Greg Pence’s campaign for Congress as communications director. Gillaspie was previously communications director for Rep. Luke Messer. Jamie Weber has also joined Pence’s campaign as finance director. Weber was previously finance director for Rep. Todd Rokita’s campaign for U.S. Senate.
— Lamb adds comms adviser, via POLITICO’s Daniel Lippman: Coleman Lamb is now a senior communications adviser for his brother Rep. Conor Lamb(D-Pa.)'s campaign in the new 17th district of Pennsylvania. He previously was communications director for Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.).
CODA — QUOTE OF THE DAY: “So much for the big Blue Wave, it may be a big Red Wave.” — President Donald Trump tweeted after the primaries on Wednesday morning, POLITICO reported.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-score/2018/06/07/clf-starts-spending-in-oh-12-special-244892
-
GOP Retains EPA Policy Riders In FY19 Bill, Setting Up Further Hill Fights
Jun 7, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee have rejected Democratic efforts to remove from EPA's fiscal year 2019 funding bill riders that would curtail the agency's power, including undoing its Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule, previewing policy fights when the full House and Senate seek to negotiate a final spending bill.
However, the appropriations panel at a June 6 markup of the spending bill did make several changes to the text of the legislative language and the accompanying non-binding report language. For example, lawmakers agreed to add language in the report language calling on EPA to finalize guidance on reviews of CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, and to speed approval of new renewable fuel standard (RFS) pathways.
GOP panel members also largely rejected amendments from Democrats seeking to tighten oversight of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's various ethics scandals about travel, security, and spending.
The full committee approved the FY19 funding bill in a 25-20 vote, sending it to the House floor for consideration.
The Senate Appropriations Committee is yet to release its FY19 funding bill for EPA.
The House funding panel's debate on the spending measure also indicates efforts are underway to forge agreement on tightening Hill restrictions on the ability of federal agencies -- including the Department of Interior and EPA -- to “reprogram” funds -- a subject of further bipartisan negotiations between Hill appropriators.
“This markup is the beginning of a long process,” House Appropriations Committee interior panel Chairman Ken Calvert (R-CA) said in his opening statement at the markup of the FY19 bill.
The legislation would cut EPA funding from its existing $8.058 billion budget by $100 million down to $7.958 billion, targeting a range of research and regulatory programs. The funding proposal is higher than the $6.1 billion President Donald Trump is seeking for the agency in FY19.
Previewing the expected House debate over the funding measure, Democrats did not disagree with Calvert's assessment that the bill will be revised, even while the two parties clashed on policy.
“Once again, the majority is proposing to cut the Environmental Protection Agency,” House Appropriations Committee interior panel ranking member Betty McCollum (D-MN) said. “While the proposed reduction is not as bad as in years past, a $100 million cut is untenable.”
McCollum during the proceedings offered an amendment -- rejected in a 19-28 vote -- that would have stripped out 14 environmental riders curbing EPA and other federal agencies, including language in the bill that scuttles the 2015 Obama EPA rule defining CWA jurisdiction; a provision that limits GHG reporting; and another rider that would force the agency to treat biomass as carbon neutral, as Pruitt has advocated.
While Democrats did not have the votes to fight the riders in committee, such riders will remain an issue in subsequent negotiations with the Senate and given that enactment of final spending bills will require at least some Democratic votes in order to overcome the upper chamber's 60-vote filibuster threshold.
In addition, House Republicans typically need some Democratic votes to move final versions of spending measures, given opposition to spending bills among House conservatives.
Legislative Changes
House Appropriations Committee approval of the FY19 bill came after lawmakers agreed to add a number of changes to the legislative text and its accompanying non-binding report language, beginning with a managers' amendment that included several noncontroversial changes.
Among the included manager amendment changes is an addition to report language to encourage EPA to redouble efforts in its own research to “reduce and replace” use of animal testing for chemical screening.
The panel also adopted another amendment by voice vote -- over the objections from McCollum -- by Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) that revises the report language to include a call for new final CWA guidance on permitting.
Specifically, the language on section 401 certifications “encourages” EPA to finalize guidance on implementation of CWA section 401 NPDES permits that, among other things, “shall reinforce that the statutory time period for review does not exceed one year.”
The language also calls for the guidance to emphasize that the “scope of the review is limited to Federal water quality standards,” clarify that waiver of the certification obligation occurs when a State fails to act within one year from the date of application, and lay out a “suggested schedule” for a state to make section 401 decisions that respects the one year deadline.
In a rare embrace of a Democratic amendment on policy, the House appropriations panel also approved an amendment to report language from Rep Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) that “strongly encourages” EPA to take action on existing applications for approving alternative pathways for credit under EPA's RFS, within 90 days of enactment of the spending bill. The amendment cites a backlog in processing of such approvals, and notes in particular a lack of action on potential approvals related to electricity generation from renewables.
Another adopted amendment to the bill report, from Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), encourages EPA to establish “new outreach methods” to educate consumers in order to avoid misfueling of gasoline engines with E15 when those engines are not suitable for such higher level ethanol blends.
Environmentalists are criticizing the bill, with the Environmental Defense Fund's Senior Director for Strategic Planning Environmental Defense Fund Elgie Holstein saying, “The committee is falling in lockstep with Pruitt’s reckless agenda to cripple EPA and harm families and children. This bill is another attack on the commitment to science, transparency, conservation and rule of law that undergirds EPA and our country.”
Agency 'Reprogramming'
Meanwhile, the committee markup telegraphed continuing appropriator concerns about whether federal agencies are following through with congressional intent on funding of programs, as well as adhering to limits on “reprogramming” of agency funds. Those concerns may gain new relevance focus in the wake of pending Trump administration proposals to reorganize the executive branch.
The panel rejected an amendment from Rep, Cartwright (D- PA) that would have codified limits on reprogramming -- now expressed in the report language -- into the bill's statutory language, but only after comments from both Calvert and McCollum indicating that the issue was the subject of continuing bipartisan discussions.
McCollum, in subsequent remarks to Inside EPA, indicated that while lawmakers during the markup explicitly singled out concern with Department of Interior compliance with congressional intent, that the issue is relevant to other federal agencies, including EPA.
Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME) similarly offered, and then withdrew, a separate amendment directing DOI to take all necessary steps to ensure that Hill appropriations are available for obligation or expenditure within 60 days of enactment of the spending bill, after Calvert indicated an intention to work with lawmakers on the issue.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/gop-retains-epa-policy-riders-fy19-bill-setting-further-hill-fights
-
US 'Problem Formulations' Raise Fears for TCE, NMP Rules
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
Concerns have been raised that recently released 'problem formulation' documents confirm the US EPA will abandon pending rules banning some uses of trichloroethylene (TCE) and N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP).
The new documents, published by the agency on 1 June, clarify how the EPA will conduct risk evaluations on the first ten chemicals to be assessed under the amended TSCA.
But they also have implications for proposed rules on three of those substances – TCE, NMP and methylene chloride. Published in the final days of the Obama administration, two of these seek to prohibit the use of TCE in vapour degreasing, and as an aerosol degreaser and spot cleaner in dry cleaning. Another would ban the use of NMP and methylene chloride in consumer and commercial paint strippers.
After a period in which these proposals seemed to be dropping off the agenda, the rule on methylene chloride now seems certain to progress. Its changed trajectory follows a May meeting between EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and families of people who died as a result of using paint strippers containing the substance.
However, Melanie Benesh, legislative attorney for NGO the Environmental Working Group, told Chemical Watch the problem formulations suggest that the pending bans for uses of TCE and NMP will not be similarly revived.
"It seems pretty clear those rules are not going to be finalised," she said.Changed course
The changed tack comes after preliminary 'scoping documents', published in June 2017, said the EPA would not carry out further analysis of the uses covered by the proposed rules as it awaited the pending regulations.
But the latest documents indicate that the EPA’s upcoming risk evaluations of TCE and NMP will take a fresh look at those previously evaluated uses, to make the assessments "more robust".
"This means that it could be years before the EPA prohibits these uses," said Ms Benesh. Or the agency "could also scrap the bans altogether".
The problem formulation for methylene chloride does not similarly call for a reevaluation of its paint stripping use. It instead cites plans to address that use by finalising its proposed risk management rule.
"They were on the same path with methylene chloride" until EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt met with the families of victims, said Richard Denison, lead senior scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund. He "apparently changed course," on this substance.
But when the EPA signalled plans to proceed on methylene chloride, it did not indicate whether the forthcoming action would also address NMP – a replacement solvent that was also covered in the original proposal.
The divergent treatment of paint stripping in the two substances' problem formulations suggests they are likely to be considered separately.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67411/us-problem-formulations-raise-fears-for-tce-nmp-rules
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Fears 'Restructuring' of IRIS Formaldehyde Assessment
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
The American Chemistry Council has written to the EPA voicing concern over the long awaited IRIS programme’s chemical assessment of formaldehyde. In the letter sent earlier this year, but shared with Chemical Watch last week, the ACC said it feared the final assessment would merely be a "restructuring" of the original draft and not a revisiting of the science.
The final version has been in the pipeline for eight years, after the draft received criticism from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) and industry. Last month, three Senate Democrats suggested in a letter to the EPA that the programme had actually completed its "revised draft" last autumn, but was stalling its release under pressure from industry.
The ACC says the programme must revisit the science, including consideration of mode of action, to ensure it overcomes the shortcomings of the draft from 2010.
But, during a meeting in January, National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) and IRIS staff allegedly told the ACC they were not doing this. The ACC then wrote to the EPA on 26 January.Revisiting the science
The science in question concerns leukaemia, and a suggested causal link with formaldehyde exposure. In its draft assessment, the IRIS programme concluded that there was evidence of this.
However, this conclusion was disputed by industry. And in its 2011 review of the assessment, the NAS was highly critical of the process that was used.
The IRIS programme has since embarked on a redrafting exercise, but there is disagreement about to what extent it needs to revisit the science.
Jennifer Sass at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a US NGO, says that the NAS did not question the conclusions of the assessment and that this is key. The NAS was concerned first and foremost that the IRIS programme had not shown exactly how it arrived at its conclusion. "Essentially, they didn’t show their work," Dr Sass says.
But the ACC says that in the 2010 draft the IRIS programme failed to properly integrate all the evidence streams, and this failure – which the organisation says was clearly identified by the NAS – led to a false conclusion: that formaldehyde causes leukaemia.Three data streams
The scientific evidence can be divided into three data streams:epidemiological (human);animal; and mode of action.
The human data – derived from studies of workers exposed to formaldehyde – is, at best, inconsistent, with some studies showing no link and others showing a weak link, says Kimberly White, who manages the ACC’s formaldehyde panel. Furthermore, those that do show a link, such as the Zhang study, are flawed.
Bernard Goldstein, a physician and emeritus professor of environmental and occupational health at the University of Pittsburgh, says he remains "less than convinced" that formaldehyde causes leukaemia. But he is nonetheless critical of many aspects of the ACC position.
Professor Goldstein was part of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) working group that assessed formaldehyde in 2012. The group was split on the leukaemia risk. The majority found the evidence "sufficient" and a minority, which included Professor Goldstein, found it "limited".
But he says industry has taken the wrong approach to the human data. Instead of reanalysing the data from the Zhang study, the study should have been repeated with a different cohort to eliminate potential confounding factors.
Industry funded reanalysis of the data, published last year, found "no association between individual formaldehyde exposure estimates and frequency of aneuploidy [which is indicative of leukaemia] among those exposed". But Professor Goldstein criticised the "Mundt paper" in a letter to the editor, in which he said that, if anything, it reinforced the original findings.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67514/acc-fears-restructuring-of-iris-formaldehyde-assessment
-
(ACC Mentioned) Republicans Will Question Cancer Agency Chief on Weedkiller
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
House Science, Space and Technology Committee leaders want the incoming director of the World Health Organization's cancer agency to testify next month about its controversial study of the pesticide glyphosate.
Elected last month, Elisabete Weiderpass won't actually begin leading the International Agency for Research on Cancer until next January (Greenwire, May 17).
Elisabete Weiderpass.International Epidemiological Association
But House Science Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Vice Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) and committee members Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) and Neil Dunn (R-Fla.) are already raising concerns about her endorsement of the 2015 glyphosate study. Biggs has signed on to several other letters to IARC in his role as chairman of the Environment Subcommittee.
The agency's assessment found that glyphosate, the active ingredient in the popular Monsanto Co. weedkiller Roundup, is a "probable human carcinogen."
That conclusion broke with past scientific studies of glyphosate and prompted immediate backlash from the chemical and pesticide industries, as well as their allies on the House Science panel.
Monsanto is now facing thousands of lawsuits from people alleging that using Roundup caused them to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma (Greenwire, March 5).
"Some of your previous statements were in support of the status quo," the committee leaders wrote in their latest glyphosate letter. "It is the hope of the Committee that you will use your directorship to correct the flaws in IARC, both with the quality of assessments and the evaluation process itself."
They went on to "request that you make yourself available for testimony so that the Committee can better understand how you intend to address the many issues confronting the Programme."
Soon after the letter was publicly released, a representative of the Campaign for Accuracy in Public Health Research, a project of the American Chemistry Council and other industry groups, sent it around to reporters.
The email provided background information on Weiderpass and her husband, Harri Vainio, who also has "direct history with IARC and the agency's questionable practices," according to the campaign. That includes two stints leading IARC's chemical assessment program.
IARC didn't immediately respond to questions about the lawmakers' invitation but strongly defended the integrity and independence of its assessments and processes earlier this year (E&E Daily, Feb. 7).
In a bid to obtain more information about the individuals responsible for editing the glyphosate study, Smith and Biggs last year threatened to cut off IARC's U.S. funding. The international scientific body has received more than $48 million from Congress since 1985 (Greenwire, Dec. 8, 2017).
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/07/stories/1060083835
-
99.99% Of The Pesticides We Eat Are Made By Plants
Jun 7, 2018 | American Council on Science and Health
By Josh Bloom
When Bruce Ames talks about toxicity, it's time to listen (1). Ames is the inventor of the hugely important Ames test for mutagenicity, which measures the damage done to DNA by a given chemical. The Ames test is an essential hurdle in the world of drug discovery research. While a positive Ames test is not de factoproof that a chemical will be carcinogenic in humans, it's a huge red flag in drug development. Many promising drugs have met their maker simply because of a positive Ames test.
GOOD LUCK AVOIDING PESTICIDES
Since pesticides and herbicides are routinely in the news, lately because of the "Glyphosate Wars," (2) I thought it might be interesting to examine a review article that Ames and colleagues wrote nearly three decades ago in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). If you are dwelling under the illusion that you can prance into Whole Foods and overpay for a bunch organic stuff without pesticides, this article will disabuse you of that fallacy. If you don't want to consume pesticides, then you better stop eating, because you are consuming them with each bite. Plenty of them. According to Ames:99.99% (by weight) of the pesticides consumed by the American public are made by the plants themselvesas a defense mechanism.Synthetic and natural pesticides are equally likely to be carcinogenic.
(You are unlikely to see this information posted in a Whole Foods.)
Ames writes (emphasis mine):
"Toxicological examination of synthetic chemicals such as pesticides and industrial pollutants, without similar examination of the chemicals in the natural world to use for comparison, has generated an imbalance in both data and perception about potential hazards to humans."
No kidding. At the American Council, we have been screaming this for many years, only to be called "shills for industry" anytime we dare to call a chemical safe. Not only are we not shills (3) but we have been right about one key point all along. The divide between "natural" and "artificial" chemicals is meaningless - something many Americans do not know. The origin of a chemical is irrelevant. Your body cannot tell what is natural or synthetic - only the properties of the chemical matter.
It is hard to blame consumers; the organic food industry and Internet quacks have done a masterful job in creating a narrative that maintains that we are all being poisoned by tiny quantities of thousands of man-made chemicals, and the way to avoid this is to buy so-called "natural" products because they don't contain chemicals. But the narrative is dead wrong. Great marketing. Terrible science. Let's take a look at how Ames reached his conclusions.
RAT AND MOUSE MODELS OF CARCINOGENICITY - PLENTY OF LIMITATIONS
All of the carcinogenicity data in the PNAS paper was derived from rat and mouse models of cancer, which are notoriously unreliable in predicting human cancers, but the best we have. Ames and colleagues at UC Berkeley scoured the literature looking for studies about foods that contained known natural pesticides. The numbers are enormous. For example, in cabbage alone, 49 pesticides and their metabolites were detected. Of these, two chemicals, chlorogenic acid, and allyl isothiocyanate were found to cause tumors in rats, but not in mice (4). Ames estimates that Americans consume 5,000-10,000 different natural pesticides.
CARCINOGENS ARE EVERYWHERE
The review also identified studies in which plant-based pesticides had been tested (in high doses) (5) to see if they caused cancer in rodents. Fifty-two of these pesticides, all commonly found in a variety of foods, were evaluated in this manner; 27 were found to be carcinogens. More than half.
"Nature's pesticides are one important subset of natural chemicals. Plants produce toxins to protect themselves against fungi, insects, and animal predators."
Bruce Ames, et. al.
Plants do not exist to serve humans; they are here because they have survived and reproduced. In order to do so, they evolved the ability to synthesize chemicals to protect them from predators. Despite the constant railing against pesticides, we would have nothing to eat if plants didn't make the ones they needed for defense.
AND WE EAT A LOT OF THEM
Our silly obsession with avoiding tiny quantities of pesticide residues on an apple looks even sillier when we examine the relative amounts of both natural and synthetic pesticides that we consume. When the FDA analyzed food for the presence of important synthetic chemicals (likely to be found in the environment), 105 different chemical residues were detected in food (6). The sum total of these 105 chemicals (combined) was estimated to be about 0.09 mg per person per day, about half being carcinogens. By contrast, we consume about 1.5 g of natural pesticides daily.
We also conclude that at the low doses of most human exposures the comparative hazards of synthetic pesticide residues are insignificant.
BUT WE ARE NOT ALL DEAD
We regularly consume thousands of pesticides, most made by the plants, and a much smaller quantity of pesticide residues that were applied to the crops. Yet, here we are still here. The reason is obvious, and it is the same reason that the tiny quantities of ubiquitous environmental boogeymen like BPA, phthalates, and parabens are nothing to worry about - dose. Carcinogenic chemicals, whether they are plant-based or synthetic, are processed by the liver and excreted. This is the liver's job, and it does it quite well. Otherwise, there would be no need for synthetic pesticides because the cabbage would have already planted us in the ground.
NOTES:
(1) Bruce Ames, one of the founders of the American Council has not won the Nobel Prize for his invention. This leaves me bewildered.
(2) Although there is nothing funny about it, there has been plenty of funny business concerning glyphosate lately, including fraud. Speaking of fraud, see my colleague Alex Berezow's brutal takedown of the corruption of IARC. Dr. Berezow has also written about plant-based pesticides here.
(3) Shills? Hardly. At ACSH we keep a wall between science and fundraising to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest. At this time it is an unnecessary wall. I have been told that 97% of our funding comes from individual donors. I have no idea where the other 3% comes from.
(4) Today's regulatory status of allyl isothiocyanate is not consistent with Ames' findings. The chemical does not appear on California's Proposition 65 list and is in the IARC Group 3 - not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans.
(4) This discrepancy is explained by the National Toxicology Program as the mice not receiving the maximum tolerated dose of the two chemicals while the rats did.
(5) I'm not kidding about high doses. About half of these tests were run at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) - the dose at which animals start dying if it is exceeded. What, if anything, this has to do with humans consuming small amounts of the chemical is not known - another limitation of rodent carcinogenicity tests.
(6) National Research Council, Board on Agriculture (1987) Regulating Pesticides in Food (National Academy Press, Washington, DC).
https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/06/07/9999-pesticides-we-eat-are-made-plants-12962
-
Triclosan May Worsen Gut Inflammation and Trigger Cancer, Study Suggests
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The antimicrobial chemical triclosan may promote inflammation in the colon and trigger associated colon cancer, according to a rodent study. The inflammation appears to result from triclosan's effects on bacterial populations in the gut.
A team from the US and China found that triclosan – at concentrations reported in human blood – caused a low level of gut inflammation in healthy mice. They then used chemicals to induce gut inflammation before feeding mice food laced with triclosan. They also engineered some mice to develop inflammatory bowel disease while in others they administered chemicals known to cause colon cancer.
Triclosan increased the severity of colitis symptoms and "spurred" colitis-associated colon cancer cell growth, according to the report in Science Translational Medicine.
Led by Haixia Yang and Weicang Wang at the University of Massachusetts, the researchers also carried out tests on germ-free mice – which have no gut bacteria – finding that triclosan had no inflammatory effect. This reinforces the idea that possible harmful effects may result from changes to gut bacteria, they suggest.
Further studies are "urgently needed", write the researchers, who are also concerned about other, less documented, anti-microbial compounds.
In 2016, more than 200 scientists and medical professionals published the so-called Florence Statement, calling for governments and industry to limit the use of triclosan and triclocarbon in consumer products. The chemicals should only be used when they provide an evidence-based health benefit, said the statement. The signatories pointed to evidence that the chemicals persist in the environment and can harm aquatic organisms.
In Europe, triclosan has been banned from use in human hygiene products since 2017. The European Commission has also amended the EU cosmetics Regulation to restrict triclosan to a maximum concentration of 0.3% in products, including toothpastes, hand soaps and body soaps. It is permitted in mouthwashes at a maximum concentration of 0.2%.
The US FDA recently banned triclosan from use in over-the-counter healthcare antiseptics.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67511/triclosan-may-worsen-gut-inflammation-and-trigger-cancer-study-suggests
-
NGOs Urge Restriction Proposal on Titanium Dioxide Consumer Articles
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
A group of NGOs has called on EU member states to propose a restriction on the use of titanium dioxide in consumer articles, based on REACH article 68(2).
The article provides a "simplified procedure" that can be applied when substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction (CMR) could be used by consumers.
The standard restriction procedure of articles 69 to 73 requires preparation of an Annex XV dossier to initiate the restriction process, a public consultation, opinions by Echa committees and a consultation with the agency’s Enforcement Forum.
In a letter to REACH committee members, the NGOs urge the proposal in addition to a scheduled discussion at their meeting on 13 June on measures for the harmonised classification and labelling of the substance as a category 2 carcinogen.
The French authorities submitted an intention to propose a harmonised classification for titanium dioxide as a category 1B carcinogen in November 2015.
The European Environmental Bureau (EEB), the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL); and the European Environmental Citizens Organisation for Standardisation (Ecos) say they are "deeply concerned" about recent industry lobbying to push the CLP regulation’s "purely scientific endeavour" to include socio-economic considerations, such as:market consequences of the decision;impact on the circular economy;claimed lack of alternatives; andeven the indispensable ‘bright colours’ it provides.
They are also concerned that risk and exposure aspects are being considered when classification should be based solely on the hazards of the substance.
"The CLP process is a scientific hazard-based process where there is no room for these misleading risk or political considerations," they say.Inhalation
Additionally, a proposed derogation for the classification of titanium dioxide when suspended in a liquid – even for products that are sprayed and therefore may be inhaled and potentially cause cancer – is "worrying", the NGOs say.
Such a derogation "is not supported by robust scientific data that demonstrates that a sprayed liquid or solid matrices containing titanium dioxide will undoubtedly not cause cancer", they add. "On the contrary it seems logical that spray particles can in fact be very easily inhaled. For example, if paint is being sprayed, the possibility of intoxication by inhalation remains."
In 2017 Echa's Risk Assessment Committee (Rac) issued an Opinion on the hazard classification of all forms of titanium dioxide and proposed classification as a carcinogen category 2 through inhalation. The NGOs say there is "no reference at all to either powder or liquid form of [titanium dioxide], indeed the proposed classification applies to the overall chemical substance".
As acknowledged by Rac, the NGOs add, titanium dioxide lung carcinogenicity is associated with inhalation of respirable particles. For this reason, Rac considers the toxicity profile observed as a basic property of inhaled and respirable particles of titanium dioxide. Therefore, the NGOs say, from a toxicological point of view (following the CLP regulation criteria) all inhalable forms of the substance "deserve a classification as carcinogen category 2 at the least".
They urged member states to follow Rac’s opinion on the classification of the chemical and reject any derogation or limitation to the classification.OELs
The NGOs refute arguments that workers are already protected through occupational health legislation and derived occupational exposure limits (OELs) and that consumers are not exposed. "There is extensive evidence that OELs are not protective for the nano forms and freelancers and artists are not covered by occupational legislation in the EU," they say and give the example of consumers being put at risk by using spray paints and spray sunscreens containing the chemical.
The NGOs end their letter by warning that if the competent authorities do not follow Echa’s opinion, "a very bad precedent will be set as competent authorities will open the door for disregarding science in future".
https://chemicalwatch.com/67520/ngos-urge-restriction-proposal-on-titanium-dioxide-consumer-articles
-
Dollar General CEO to Meet With Chemical Campaigners
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
Todd Vasos, the CEO of US discount chain Dollar General, has agreed to meet with campaigners to discuss their concerns about hazardous chemicals in the stores’ products.
Activists from the Campaign for Healthier Solutions (CHS) network of environmental justice groups, bought shares in Dollar General so they could attend its annual shareholders’ meeting on 31 May.
They used the meeting as an opportunity to question executives about chemicals in the company’s products and its lack of a chemicals policy.
Although they did not receive an immediate answer to their concerns, Mr Vasos agreed to meet with campaign representatives at a future date.
Eric Whalen of CHS told Chemical Watch: "Dollar General, one of the nation’s leading retailers, is one of the last remaining stores that hasn’t taken action on chemicals yet, so the appearance that they’re starting to make moves in the right direction is definitely good."
CHS campaign coordinator Jose Bravo, said that until Dollar General announced a publicly accountable chemical policy, it will continue to fall further behind other stores and "increasingly risk becoming a liability to its shareholders".
Dollar General did not respond to Chemical Watch's request for comment by the time of publishing. Disproportionate impact
CHS focuses on campaigning to reduce chemical exposures from the growing retail sector of dollar stores, which have lagged behind other major retailers such as Walmart and Target in implementing chemical policies.
Discount stores were rated among the lowest performers in last year’s retailer 'report card' from the Mind the Store NGO campaign, which evaluated chemical policies from 30 US retailers.
Dollar General ranked bottom with an F rating, while discount retail chain Dollar Tree ranked 16th overall, with a D score.
Mind the Store campaign director, Mike Schade, said that although meeting with campaigners was a step in the right direction for Dollar General, it was "no substitute for effective public chemical safety policies."
The agreed meeting is the latest victory for the CHS campaign after fellow discount store Dollar Treecommitted to the elimination of 17 chemicals of high concern from its products by 2020.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67513/dollar-general-ceo-to-meet-with-chemical-campaigners
-
New York Finalises Cleaning Products Disclosure Policy
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation has published its finalised cleaning product disclosure policy, which sets out information requirements for manufacturers.
Manufacturers will be required to post specific information about their products and the ingredients they contain on their websites.
Adoption of the policy - the Household Cleansing Product Information Disclosure Programme - follows an announcement last year that the state would begin to mandate ingredient disclosure from the sector. It covers soaps and detergents, containing a surfactant as a "wetting or dirt emulsifying agent and used primarily for domestic or commercial cleaning purposes, including but not limited to the cleansing of fabrics, dishes, food utensils and household and commercial premises".
DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos said the policy will "help the state better understand what chemical hazards the public is exposed to, especially from products made in countries with less protective environmental laws than the US, and reduce exposure to chemicals of concern".Ingredients
The manufacturer's webpage must list intentionally added and nonfunctional ingredients in the product, by weight in a descending order.
The function of intentionally added ingredients must also be provided, such as stating it acts as a surfactant, colourant, preservative or fragrance. Non intentionally added ingredients should be reported as non functional ingredients, byproducts or contaminants.
Manufacturers must also identify the presence of any 'chemicals of concern'. These include substances found on a number of 'authoritative lists' set out in the policy.
These include:those identified by the US EPA as chemicals of concern, PBTs, priority chemicals, or ozone-depleting substances;the EU Endocrine Disruptor list and list of substances of very high concern (SVHCs);substances listed as reproductive toxicants or carcinogens under California’s Proposition 65;chemicals classified as a group 1, 2a or 2b by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc); andthose ingredients classified under the GHS as skin or eye irritants, respiratory or skin sensitisers, mutagens or aquatic toxicants.
An ingredient in a product must be disclosed if it is present on one or more of the authoritative lists of chemicals of concern. This includes those being withheld as confidential business information (CBI).
Manufacturers are also required to list any nanoscale materials, as defined under the new TSCA. This includes any substance that is processed to form particles in the size range of 1-100 nanometers.
They must also post on their websites any investigations or research they have carried out or commissioned on the effects the products or ingredients have on human health and the environment.Deadlines
Ingredients intentionally added to these products, present above trace quantities, must be posted online by 1 July 2019. This does not apply to fragrance and nonfunctional ingredients – such as byproducts and contaminants – which must be disclosed by 1 July 2020.
However, manufacturers with 100 employees or fewer have until the later July 2020 deadline to make available information on intentionally added ingredients.
The DEC said in a press release that the policy - borne from a forgotten and unenforced 1970s law - is expected to "serve as an example that can be expanded into other sectors of public disclosure or mirrored by other governments".
Ingredient disclosure has been a focus for both state and federal legislators in recent years. And fragrance ingredients have been a key industry issue, with the likes of Unilever, Procter & Gamble and SC johnson all increasing disclosure efforts.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67515/new-york-finalises-cleaning-products-disclosure-policy
-
Echa and Efsa Specify Mode-of-Action Analysis for EDCs
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Davies
https://chemicalwatch.com/67516/echa-and-efsa-specify-mode-of-action-analysis-for-edcs
-
Jun 7, 2018 | Chemical Watch
New intention to identify an SVHCEcha has received an intention from Sweden to identify 2,2-bis (4'-hydroxyphenyl)-4-methylpentane as a substance of very high concern due to its suspected reprotoxic properties. The proposal is expected to be submitted by 6 August.Help with submission difficulties
The agency has reminded registrants of ways to access help with REACH registration problems. They are:REACH-IT is open every day, 24 hours a day;REACH 2018 Support live chat is open on weekdays from 9:00 to 16:00 CEST until 8 June; andquestions can also be posed via the agency's contact form.Video: last-minute advice on REACH 2018 registration
The agency has released the video of its last-minute advice Q&A session on REACH 2018 registration. Questions were posed to an agency expert panel.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67503/echa-round-up
-
In Climate Case, Oil Giants Prevent Document Search
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Anne C. Mulkern
Two cities that are suing several oil companies for causing sea-level rise were stopped yesterday from seeking corporate documents related to the energy giants' business dealings in California.
The oil companies Royal Dutch Shell PLC and CononcoPhillips agreed to rescind one line of argument that claimed the case should be dismissed because they're a global conglomerate and therefore not liable for decisions made by their subsidiaries in California. By withdrawing that argument, the companies blocked the cities from pursuing discovery of documents related to jurisdictional issues.
Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California gave the cities the ability to ask for internal company documents last month. He also warned the oil giants that it might expose them to a line of disclosure that could become uncomfortable.
At a hearing in May, Alsup told the companies that if they made that jurisdiction claim, the cities had a right to see if it was true.
The companies dropped their request Monday to dismiss the case based on jurisdiction.
"To avoid the delay, burden, and expense of jurisdictional discovery and supplemental briefing, Royal Dutch Shell withdraws ... the portions of its motion to dismiss that gave rise to Plaintiff's' request for jurisdictional discovery," the company said in its filing. "Plaintiffs agree that, in light of this withdrawal, jurisdictional discovery and supplemental briefing are no longer necessary."
ConocoPhillips made a similar filing.
It's the latest move in an unusual courtroom drama pitting the cities against Chevron Corp., BP PLC, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell. The cities claim that the oil giants are causing sea-level rise and other damages. They also accuse the companies of knowing the dangers of climate change decades ago and of orchestrating a campaign to muddy the science.Discovery opens door to inquiries
Sean Hecht, co-executive director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law, said it's understandable why the companies gave up their argument on jurisdiction. One might be aimed at pleasing Alsup, who had signaled he was unhappy about the claims. The end result, however, is the oil giants avoid discovery, he said.
"They didn't want the discovery enough that they were willing to drop these jurisdictional claims in order to avoid it," Hecht said. "We just don't know why."
The judge's order on discovery was only for documents and other information related to jurisdiction. It wouldn't have allowed the cities to look for anything connected to their other claims. Hecht said, however, that once discovery starts, it's hard to know where it will go.
The oil companies and cities might disagree on the scope of what could be collected, he said. The cities "might try to interpret their right to discovery a little more broadly" and the "defendants will say no, no, no," Hecht said.
Discovery also means questioning people under oath, and "I suppose you never know what might be revealed in that testimony," he said.
Hecht said it's common in lawsuits for defendants to withdraw claims after a judge orders discovery.
The companies are still arguing that the court lacks jurisdiction but are doing so on different grounds. They claim the tie between their operations in California and what they're accused of in the suits is too tenuous.
The essence of the cities' claims "is that Defendants allegedly misled the public and regulators by promoting continued use of fossil fuels in the face of their actual knowledge that this use would cause sea-level rise and attendant injuries," ConocoPhillips said in a court filing. "But even if true, none of this alleged policy- and decision making or opinion-shaping conduct, so central to Plaintiff's substantive claims and its jurisdictional averments, occurred in California."
"If ConocoPhillips exercises substantial control over its subsidiaries, as Plaintiff alleges, as a simple matter of common sense that control was exercised from the company's headquarters in Texas," the company said.
Alsup's order allowing discovery also applied to BP. That company has not revised its claim, so the cities can conduct discovery on the jurisdiction argument. BP did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Alsup is still considering the motions to dismiss but will look at fewer layers of arguments. Chevron and the other companies argue that the cities' claims are invalid because EPA, not the courts, has jurisdiction over greenhouse gases. They point to what they see as precedent-setting cases that give the agency that authority through the Clean Air Act.
The lawsuits by San Francisco and Oakland are the first to go forward among a growing group of climate cases. Also in California, Imperial Beach, San Mateo, Marin County, Richmond, Santa Cruz and Santa Cruz County are suing two dozen or more fossil fuel companies and trade associations in separate cases.
A decision in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is pending on whether to uphold an order by federal Judge Vince Chhabria that moved those suits from federal to state court.
King County in Washington state has filed a claim similar to those from Oakland and San Francisco.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/06/07/stories/1060083777
-
Natural Gas Producers Say Trump is Using Them As a 'Scapegoat' to Bail Out Coal and Nuclear Plants
Jun 7, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
One of the natural gas industry's largest lobbying groups called out President Donald Trump's plans to bail out the coal and nuclear industry Thursday, saying he was using their industry as a "scapegoat."
Under pressure from Trump, Energy Secretary Rick Perry has repeatedly questioned the reliability of the nation's natural gas pipeline network, stating coal and nuclear plants could be better counted on in a crisis because they store their fuel on-site. A plan drawn up by the Energy Department would raise rates for two years for coal and nuclear plants, at a time many are being driven out of business by new natural gas plants and wind and solar farms.
"The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America is deeply troubled by the Trump administration's apparent move to scapegoat natural gas to prop up uneconomic coal and nuclear plants," a statement from the gas lobbying group read.
RELATED STORY: Perry, citing cyber threat, says Trump is "right" on coal, nuclear closures
Gas producers are one in a long list of groups opposing Trump's plans, including everyone from the American Petroleum Institute to the Natural Resources Defense Council to corporations like Apple and General Electric.
In its statement, INGAA questioned the Energy Department's analysis of the vulnerability of the U.S. natural gas pipeline network, stating pipeline operators "have measures in place to protect pipeline infrastructure from cyber and physical security threats and mitigate the effect of a successful intrusion."
"While there are threats to the natural gas delivery system that warrant and are receiving attention, the draft [Energy Department report] focuses exclusively on these threats and ignores equally, if not more, serious threats to other critical energy infrastructure sectors," said INGAA President Don Santa. "For example, an attack on electric transmission would render fuel storage at generators irrelevant."
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Natural-gas-producers-say-Trump-is-using-them-as-12975423.php
-
Energy Relationship Between Texas, Mexico Touted at Energy Summit
Jun 7, 2018 | San-Antonio Express News (In Houston Chronicle)
By Rye Druzin
Mexico's government is touting the connections between its energy industry and the U.S. despite continuing trade frictions.
Lluvia Ponce Avalos from the Consulate of Mexico in San Antonio said Mexico's natural gas demand is expected to increase 27 percent by 2031 and that the border region along Texas is expected to account for nearly a third of Mexico's overall natural gas demand.
She stressed that the link between Texas' energy industry and Mexico remains strong, pointing to the billions of cubic feet of natural gas pipeline capacity running from Texas to its southern neighbor.
"When we talk about Texas and Mexico we need to remember that we're trading partners, we're friends, we're neighbors," said Avalos, consul for political and economical affairs.Recommended Video:Ivanka Trump Talks Growing Relationships Between India and the U.S.
Now Playing: Ivanka Trump Talks Growing Relationships Between India and the U.S.
Ivanka Trump Talks Growing Relationships Between India and the U.S.Media: Time
Avalos was speaking to more than 100 people at the 4th Mexico Gas Summit in San Antonio, a gathering of industry and government representatives to discuss the state of oil and gas opportunities in Mexico.
The importance of the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico is underscored U.S. exports of 4.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day into Mexico in 2017, according to data from the U.S. Energy Department.
Mexico opened its energy industry to outside investment in 2014 after nearly 80 years of state control.
The country has held multiple rounds of bidding for both onshore and offshore oil and gas resources since 2016.
In March Mexico's nationally held oil and gas company Petroleos Mexicanos or PEMEX signed a deal with San Antonio-based Lewis Energy to develop part of the Eagle Ford Shale oil field that extends into Mexico.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Energy-relationship-between-Texas-Mexico-touted-12975417.php
-
Natural Gas Trade Activity Numbers Leap After ICE Agreement
Jun 7, 2018 | Platts
By John DeLapp
Since a collaboration with Intercontinental Exchange took effect six months ago, S&P Global Platts has seen a substantial increase in natural gas trade information on a day-to-day basis, resulting in a more enhanced view of the markets.
In the agreement, which went online October 31 for spot trades and in December for bidweek transactions, Platts incorporates ICE trades when compiling indices, and also publishes all natural gas indices for Platts and ICE trading locations.
The agreement with ICE came at a time when Platts and other price reporting agencies had seen a progressive decline in daily and monthly volumes reported.
Spot daily volumes averaged 21,430 MMBtu/d in 2011. By 2016, they were 15,687 MMBtu, down 27% in five years.
A similar drop was seen in volumes during bidweek action. In 2011, monthly volumes averaged 14,962 MMBtu; by 2016, they were down to 10,995 MBtu, a 26.5% drop.
That trend was quickly reversed when the Platts-ICE agreement took hold.
In November 2016, market participants reporting trade data to publishers turned in deals that averaged 16,000 MMBtu in volumes. In November 2017, the average daily volumes seen jumped to 28,205 MMBtu — a 76% increase.
The increase in volumes reported has continued unabated, with every month showing higher volumes than the corresponding month in 2017. In May, volumes were up 76% over the May 2017 total, at 25,560 MMBtu.
Platts will continue to monitor the impact the ICE agreement has had on our daily and monthly indices, issuing regular updates on how the deal has bolstered our assessments.
http://blogs.platts.com/2018/06/07/natural-gas-trade-activity-leap-ice-agreement/
-
Pennsylvania to Require Gas Drillers to Reduce Air Pollution
Jun 7, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
Pennsylvania will begin enforcing tougher air pollution standards on its booming natural gas industry.
Gov. Tom Wolf's administration said Thursday that in August it will begin requiring the Marcellus Shale exploration industry to use better equipment to reduce methane emissions and other pollutants. It'll apply to new or updated well sites and compression, processing and transmission stations along pipelines.
The administration has worked on the new permits for several years.
Preventing methane leaks from well-site equipment and pipelines has become important for regulators because methane is a potent greenhouse gas.
Industry officials point to government data that says methane pollution is falling, even as production rises, and that companies have every incentive to ensure methane makes it into the pipeline, rather than the atmosphere.
Pennsylvania is the nation's second-largest natural gas-producing state.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/06/07/us/ap-us-gas-drilling-air-pollution.html
-
Boston, Other Cities, to Work to Curb Renewable Energy Costs
Jun 7, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
Boston Mayor Martin Walsh is hoping to work with other cities to drive down the cost of renewable energy by asking developers for price estimates to meet their collective energy demand.
Walsh said the first cities to join the initiative include Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Orlando, and Portland, Oregon.
Walsh, a Democrat, announced the project Thursday in Boston at the start of an international summit on climate change. Former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy are scheduled to speak at the event. Both served under President Barack Obama.
About two dozen mayors and city leaders were attending the event, billed as a chance to explore ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for the challenges posed by climate change.
ADVERTISEMENT
In Boston those strategies include creating deployable flood walls to protect waterfront neighborhoods and elevating certain streets and parks to ease flooding concerns, Walsh said.
Another goal is for the city to be carbon neutral by 2050 — which will require increased reliance on renewable energy.
Walsh said the proposal to seek lower renewable energy costs is one way to reach that goal. He said he hopes to finalize a list of participating cities later in the summer and then seek estimates from renewable energy companies for ways to meet that combined demand.
Other mayors said they were eager to sign on, saying the agreement could also help create jobs in the renewable energy market.
"Cities wield the power to create demand and transform the energy market, and when we act together we can show the world that environmental stewardship and economic prosperity go hand in hand," Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said.
The summit comes about a year after President Donald Trump's administration announced plans to pull out of the Kerry-negotiated Paris climate accord.
Trump defended the move last June when he announced his decision, saying it was in the country's best interests to pull out of the agreement.
"I cannot in good conscience support a deal that punishes the United States," Trump said at the time. "We're getting out. But we will start to negotiate and see if we can get a better deal. If we can, great. If we can't, that's fine."
Walsh called Trump's decision irresponsible and said it's up to cities to fill what he called a leadership void in part by reducing reliance on fossil fuels and cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions.
"He certainly didn't consult with America's mayors," Walsh said. "He's tried to send us backward. He's tried to pit the environment against the economy. We know this is nonsense."
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/06/07/us/ap-us-mayors-climate-summit.html
-
N.M. Official Says Texas is Stealing Water for Fracking Boom
Jun 7, 2018 | Texas Tribune (In E&E Greemwire)
By Jay Root
New Mexico's top land manager is accusing Texas of stealing its water to feed the hydraulic fracturing boom, highlighting differences in state water policies in a drought-parched region.
Oil and gas companies along the border in both states have spiked demand for water, in some cases making it more lucrative for ranchers to sell water than to sell the crops they irrigate with it.
The issue is that New Mexico has tight controls on both surface water and groundwater, while Texas allows private landowners to essentially pump as much groundwater as they want from beneath their land.
New Mexico Land Commissioner Aubrey Dunn says unregulated pumping near the border is drying up shared aquifers.
"Texas is stealing New Mexico's water," he said. "If you put a whole bunch of straws in Texas and you don't have any straws in New Mexico, you're sucking all the water from under New Mexico out in Texas and then selling it back to New Mexico."
Texas lawmakers on both sides of the aisle don't see much of a problem. Landownership on the state border is fluid, and besides, Texas water is feeding an industry boom in New Mexico.
"What does it matter if it goes 5 feet across the county line or to the moon?" said state Rep. Poncho Nevárez (D). "I could see the pushback if Pecos proper was having trouble getting water, and here you have these guys moving massive amounts of water to New Mexico. ... You gotta take care of the people where the resource generates from first."
Dunn believes millions of gallons a day flows across state lines through unpermitted pipelines.
If oil and gas companies are allowed to cash in on Texas water in the long term, he said, it could damage the supply for rivers and streams in both states.
"You're taking a resource that's not really rechargeable, and using it," Dunn said. "I think in the long run, water is going to be more valuable than oil."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/07/stories/1060083831
-
W.Va. Explosion Shoots Flames Into the Sky
Jun 7, 2018 | Pttsburgh Post-Gazette (In E&E Greenwire)
A gas pipeline explosion early this morning near Wheeling, W.Va., sent flames into the sky that were visible for miles.
"Thank God, nobody is hurt. Everything else can be taken care of," Marshall County 911 Director Larry Newell said.
The blast on the TransCanada line happened around 4:20 a.m. County Emergency Management Director Tom Hart said the fire was extinguished within two hours.
"TransCanada officials were able to remotely secure the line and shut it down. It was a new line in the ground," he said.
The company reported an "issue" with the line on its Columbia Gas Transmission system but said in a statement that it did not know the cause of the blast. "Our first priority is to protect the public and the environment. Emergency response procedures have been activated and the impacted area of pipeline has been isolated at this time," the TransCanada statement said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/07/stories/1060083797
-
Panel Sends Transportation, Military Bills to Senate Floor
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Maxine Joselow and Nick Sobczyk
The Senate Appropriations Committee this morning cleared bills to fund transportation and military programs, as Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) pushes the panel to finish up its fiscal 2019 work before the Fourth of July.
The panel passed its transportation, housing and urban development bill 31-0. It includes $71.4 billion, a $1.1 billion increase over current levels.
A $26.6 billion slice would go to the Department of Transportation, including $2.8 billion for the Federal Railroad Administration and $13.5 billion for the Federal Transit Administration.
And $1 billion would go to the Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) grant program. The Trump administration has proposed cutting funding for the program, formerly known as Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants, for two years in a row.
"The funding in this legislation will allow us to invest in our nation's infrastructure, while fully funding the renewal of housing assistance for low-income seniors and other vulnerable populations, such as teenagers and veterans who are homeless," said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies.
The panel included a manager's amendment that, among other things, addressed concerns from Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) about hours of service for livestock haulers.
"I think everyone can understand and appreciate when you're hauling livestock you have to accommodate those live animals. And flexibility is required," Hoeven said. "We're not completely done, but this is another step in the right direction. We need to get to a long-term permanent solution."
The manager's amendment also addressed concerns from West Virginia Sens. Joe Manchin (D) and Shelley Moore Capito (R) about Amtrak agents.
"We had one part-time agent in West Virginia, and they were going to eliminate that," Manchin said. "With this amendment now, we're saying that every state that has an Amtrak train coming through, it's got to have at least one agent, whether it's part-time or full-time. In a state where you don't have a lot of internet connectivity, it means the world to the people to be able to go and buy a ticket."
The bill would also provide $260 million for combating lead hazards, a $30 million boost above current levels. “We must do more to protect our children from the dangers of lead paint,” Collins said.
The panel passed its military construction bill 31-0. The $98 billion bill would boost funding for the Pentagon's energy resilience, renewable energy and water conservation projects.
It also includes $277.5 million for environmental cleanup at installations that have been shut down through the Base Realignment and Closure process, a more than $20 million jump over the fiscal 2018 omnibus (E&E Daily, June 6).
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/07/stories/1060083833
-
Judge Rules EPA Must Provide Evidence Used for Pruitt's Climate Change Claims
Jun 7, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Jacqueline Thomsen
A U.S. district judge has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to release any documents used by Administrator Scott Pruitt to make his public statement that human behavior is not a “primary contributor” to climate change.
The chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Beryl Howell, said in a ruling issued last Friday but first widely reported this week that the EPA had to comply with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed last year by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
PEER requested any documents Pruitt used to inform a statement he made on climate change last year.
“I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” Pruitt said during an appearance on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” last March.
He also said on the show that “there’s a tremendous disagreement” on the impact of “human activity on the climate.”
Howell gave the EPA until July 2 to search for and find the documents, which should then be disclosed “promptly to the plaintiff.”
She also set a July 11 deadline to “produce to the plaintiff, an explanation for any documents withheld in full or in part.”
An EPA spokesperson did not immediately return The Hill’s request for comment.
The EPA had argued that the FOIA request was overbroad and an undue burden. The agency also claimed that Pruitt’s statement was a personal opinion and not an EPA policy.
“The public statements of an agency head about the causes of climate change, even if those statements do not reflect an ‘Agency decision,’ but merely ‘personal opinion,’ may nonetheless guide the agency’s regulatory efforts and, to the extent any agency records provide the basis for such public statements, those agency records are a perfectly proper focus of a FOIA request,” Howell wrote in her ruling.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/391130-judge-rules-pruitt-must-provide-evidence-used-for-climate-change
-
Court Rules EPA Ozone Report Due July 31
Jun 7, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A federal appeals court, again squelching EPA's hopes of ending two related lawsuits, is ordering the agency to report by July 31 on its progress in making area attainment designations for its 2015 ground-level ozone standard.
A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered the fresh status report yesterday. That was one day after EPA lawyers had reiterated their request that the court dismiss as moot the two legal challenges brought last summer by a coalition of Democratic-leaning states and advocacy groups. The plaintiffs had brought the suits after EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt announced in June 2017 a uniform one-year delay in making the attainment designations, which were statutorily due by October 2017. Pruitt eventually withdrew that decision, but the court has since repeatedly rebuffed EPA's requests to throw out the lawsuits.
Ozone, the main ingredient in smog, is a lung irritant tied to asthma attacks in children. The designations are a milestone in enforcement of the 70-parts-per-billion standard because they start the clock for states to come up with cleanup plans for areas that are out of compliance.
EPA, now bound by a court-ordered timetable stemming from a separate bout of litigation before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, has already made two rounds of designations this past November and in April. All that remains is a decision, due by July 17, on an eight-county area in and around San Antonio.
But EPA officials again came under fire for alleged foot-dragging last month after they were slow to proceed with Federal Register publication of the April designations, thereby putting off the date they take effect for compliance purposes. In response to a previous status report, the states and advocacy groups accused the agency of "illegal delay" (Greenwire, May 25). EPA finally published the designations this week, with an effective date of Aug. 3 (Greenwire, June 1).
In a Tuesday filing, EPA attorneys reiterated their argument that the plaintiffs, which include New York, California and the American Lung Association, had provided "no basis for the court to find that this case is not moot."
In yesterday's order, Judges Judith Rogers, David Tatel and Patricia Millett gave no reason for requiring the July 31 status report. Rogers and Tatel were named to the court by former President Clinton; Millett is an appointee of former President Obama.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/07/stories/1060083839
-
IKEA to Use Only Renewable and Recycled Materials by 2030
Jun 7, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Anna Ringstrom
IKEA, the world's biggest furniture retailer, plans to use only renewable and recycled materials in its products by 2030, in the latest commitment by a global store group to reducing its impact on the environment.
Inter IKEA, the owner of the brand best known for its low-cost flat-pack furniture, said on Thursday it aimed to reduce the climate impact of each of its products by more than two thirds by the end of next decade.
Currently, 60 percent of the IKEA range is based on renewable materials, while nearly 10 percent contain recycled materials, an Inter IKEA spokeswoman said.
"Through our size and reach we have the opportunity to inspire and enable more than one billion people to live better lives, within the limits of the planet," Inter IKEA CEO Torbjorn said in a statement to accompany the company's 2030 sustainability strategy document.
"We are committed to taking the lead, working together with everyone – from raw material suppliers all the way to our customers and partners."
Inter IKEA joins a growing list of global companies striving to make their operations more environmentally sustainable, although there are question marks over whether enough are taking action and whether they should be doing more.
The world's 250 biggest listed companies account for a third of all man-made greenhouse gas emissions, but few have concrete goals to limit rising temperatures, a Thomson Reuters Financial & Risk white paper concluded in October.
Raw materials account for most of IKEA's greenhouse gas emissions and, along with extending the potential lifespan of its products, is where IKEA sees the biggest opportunities for reducing its impact on the environment.
Along with phasing out non-recycled plastic, the company will implement changes ranging from greener glue in particleboard and more vegetarian food in its restaurants to a new candle recipe, Loof told Reuters.
Inter IKEA's plan is the first to target all IKEA stores - the bulk of which are run by IKEA Group, but some of which are run by other franchisees - as well as the supply chain.
In total, there are 418 IKEA stores across 49 markets. Retail sales in the year through August 2017 were a combined 38.3 billion euros ($45.3 billion).
Inter IKEA set a so-called science-based target for IKEA Group to cut the climate impact of stores and other operations by 80 percent in absolute terms by 2030 compared with 2016.
Global brands including H&M, Coca-Cola and Sony have also committed to science-based targets, which aim to help limit global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius - the goal set in the 2015 Paris agreement.
The Science Based Targets Initiative is a collaboration between the Carbon Disclosure Project, the World Resources Institute, the World Wide Fund for Nature, and the United Nations Global Compact.
Inter IKEA also said it would remove all single-use plastic products from its range and in-store restaurants by 2020, and that IKEA Group would roll out the sale of home solar solutions to 29 markets by 2025.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/06/07/business/07reuters-ikea-sustainability.html
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested