Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 13/6/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) American Chemistry Council Creates PPE Infographic For Auto Refinishers
Jun 13, 2018 | Safety+Health Magazine
In partnership with OSHA, the American Chemistry Council has published an infographic to encourage workers in the automotive refinishing industry to wear the correct personal protective equipment. -
(ACC Mentioned) Media Roundup: The EPA's Toxic Proposal; Getting Readers To Pay; And Danny Schechter's Activist Legacy
Jun 13, 2018 | WBGH.org
By Dan Kennedy
The overwhelming crush of news emanating from the Trump administration makes it all but impossible to give more than passing attention to some of its worst and most damaging acts. -
(ACC Mentioned) Princeton Portfolio Strategies Group Has Lowered Its Abbvie (ABBV) Holding as Valuation Declined; Norfolk Southn (NSC) Shareholder Speece Thorson Capital Group Has Increased Its Position by $2.36 Million
Jun 13, 2018 | Thorold News
By Ruchi Gupta
Speece Thorson Capital Group Inc increased its stake in Norfolk Southn Corp (NSC) by 31.43% based on its latest 2018Q1 regulatory filing with the SEC -
(ACC Mentioned) Norfolk Southern (NSC) Reaches $155.79 52-Week High; Mutualfirst Financial (MFSF)’s Sentiment Is 0.54
Jun 13, 2018 | San Times
By Nellie Frank
Mutualfirst Financial Inc (MFSF) investors sentiment decreased to 0.54 in Q1 2018. It’s down -1.09, from 1.63 in 2017Q4. -
Conservative Group Launches Ad Calling on Trump To Fire Pruitt
Jun 13, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A conservative activist group is out with a new television commercial calling on President Trump to fire embattled Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt. -
Practitioner Insights: Scientific Disconnect in Toxic Law’s Single-Study Hazard Policy
Jun 13, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Robert DeMott and Gavin Thompson
The reform of the nation’s primary chemicals law, as directed by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, required the Environmental Protection Agency to take affirmative steps to support the development of nonanimal testing methods and encourage third parties to use them. -
Senators Use Military Bill To Target Delayed Toxics Report
Jun 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
Senators from both parties made a long-shot bid today to force the Trump administration to release a health study of toxic nonstick chemicals. -
'Nightmare' Chemical Study Would See Daylight if Bipartisan Defense Bill Amendment Succeeds
Jun 13, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
A bipartisan group of senators is seeking to force the release of a controversial chemicals assessment as part of the Senate's defense spending bill. -
Consumer Product Group Floats Litigation Over New York Ingredient Policy
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
US consumer product group HCPA is calling on New York to retract its recently finalised cleaning product disclosure policy, and says it will consider litigation to address the programme’s "significant issues". -
US EPA To Unveil New Antimicrobial Testing Programme In November
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
The US EPA plans to release a proposed strategy for revamping its antimicrobial testing programme (ATP) in November. It will publish a formal proposal next year. -
Glyphosate Will Not Be Listed As A Carcinogen In California
Jun 13, 2018 | AGWeb
By Sonja Begemann
Earlier this week a California judge ruled glyphosate does not need a label warning stating it causes cancer. U.S. District Court Judge William Shuff denied an amendment that asked the state to require the warning. -
Canadian NGO Urges Ingredient Disclosure In Consumer Products
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
NGO Environmental Defence is urging the Canadian government to follow the lead set by some US states in requiring full disclosure of ingredients found in consumer products. -
Canada Finalises Environmental Guidelines For BPA, PFOS, Hexavalent Chromium
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemcial Watch
By Julie Miller
Canada has finalised Federal Environmental Quality Guidelines (FEQGs) for bisphenol-A (BPA), hexavalent chromium and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). -
Canada Reduces Review Fees For Disinfectants
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
A review of fees for disinfectant authorisation procedures in Canada will result in significantly lower increases than originally proposed, delegates heard at the Antimicrobial Workshop conference on 8 June. -
EU JRC Issues Policy Brief On The Safety Of Mixtures
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission's Joint Research Centre has issued a policy brief on ensuring the safety of chemical mixtures. -
ClientEarth Slams ‘Unreasonable’ Delays on REACH Decisions
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission is putting human health and the environment at risk because of "excessive delays" in regulatory decisions on chemical controls, NGO ClientEarth has said. -
Phillips 66 to Launch $1.5 Billion Expansion of Sweeny Hub
Jun 13, 2018 | Chron
By Katherine Blunt
Phillips 66 said Wednesday that it would expand its Sweeny Hub near Old Ocean as part of a $1.5 billion project to transport and process more natural gas liquids amid a boom in Gulf Coast petrochemicals manufacturing. -
America's Gas Prices May Double by 2040 as LNG Exports Grow
Jun 13, 2018 | Bloomberg Quint
By Rachel Adams-Heard
American gas prices could double by 2040 as the U.S. exports more liquefied natural gas, but consumers will be shielded as production of the fuel increases and trade balances improve. -
Enbridge Starts Valley Crossing Natgas Pipe Work At Texas-Mexico Border
Jun 13, 2018 | Reuters
By Scott DiSavino
Canadian energy company Enbridge Inc said it started construction of the offshore border crossing section of its $1.6 billion Valley Crossing natural gas pipeline between Texas and Mexico, according to a federal filing made available on Wednesday. -
Records: Air Chief Meets Often With Regulated Industries
Jun 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Bill Wehrum was just settling in as EPA's air chief last December when he returned to familiar turf: the offices of his former law firm for a speech to an audience that included a onetime client, according to newly released records. -
GAO Launches Social Cost of Carbon Study
Jun 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Nick Sobczyk
The government's top watchdog has officially started its study of how the Trump administration uses the social cost of carbon metric to calculate the impact of federal actions on greenhouse gas emissions.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) American Chemistry Council Creates PPE Infographic For Auto Refinishers
Jun 13, 2018 | Safety+Health Magazine
Washington — In partnership with OSHA, the American Chemistry Council has published an infographic to encourage workers in the automotive refinishing industry to wear the correct personal protective equipment.
The infographic, released March 12, states that high-performance polyurethane coatings often contain isocyanates and other organic solvents, additives, pigments and stabilizers. These chemicals have the potential to cause adverse health hazards such as irritation and sensitization.
“It is important to wear the appropriate PPE during the painting process to prevent exposure to these chemicals from skin contact or breathing in vapors,” the council states.
ACC recommends wearing a loose-fitting powered air purifying hood or helmet, chemical-resistant gloves, safety shoes and a faceshield that “can be included as part of respiratory protection.” It also recommends full-body coveralls – coated or film-laminated – that are chemically resistant.
“This infographic provides only generalized information to help increase workers’ awareness on the need for PPE,” ACC states as a disclaimer. “To help determine the appropriate PPE for your specific situation or spray application, consult the coatings supplier’s Safety Data Sheet and the ACC guidance document.”
http://www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com/articles/17141-american-chemistry-council-creates-ppe-infographic-for-auto-refinishers
-
Jun 13, 2018 | WBGH.org
By Dan Kennedy
The overwhelming crush of news emanating from the Trump administration makes it all but impossible to give more than passing attention to some of its worst and most damaging acts.
It can’t be helped. Though you could argue that the media pay too much attention to the president’s sociopathic Twitter feed, you certainly can’t fault journalists for focusing on the childish insults he has directed at Justin Trudeau and his embrace of the murderous dictator Kim Jong Un. To its credit, the press has also managed to provide reasonably comprehensive coverage of the administration’s inhumane treatment of refugee families.
But when you get down to wonkish issues like industry-backed changes in the way that the Environmental Protection Agency regulates toxic substances, well, good luck finding the sort of coverage that truly commands attention and sparks outrage. And yes, I’m going to recount some information I learned from a story that appeared on the front page of The New York Times last week, so this is not exactly a secret. But we all know that without amplification from the media echo chamber in the form of follow-up stories, cable news chatter, and the like, important stories tend to fade away pretty quickly.
The Times article, by Eric Lipton, grabbed my attention for a very specific reason: During the 1980s I was a reporter for The Daily Times Chronicle of Woburn, where I reported on families whose children became sick with leukemia — some fatally so — after the city water supply was contaminated with industrial solvents. The families sued the likely polluters, leading to a federal trial that was featured in Jonathan Harr’s riveting book “A Civil Action.” (The book was made into a less-than-riveting movie of the same name.)
A variety of chemicals were at issue in the Woburn case, but the two most important were trichloroethylene (a degreaser) and tetrachloroethylene (also known as perchloroethylene, used in dry cleaning) — both of which are now on the list of substances the EPA wants to ease up on. According to Lipton’s story, the EPA, acting at the behest of the chemical industry, may abandon an Obama-era initiative to measure the effect of these hazardous chemicals in the ground, water, and air, focusing instead on workplace exposure. Yet contaminated drinking water was precisely what was at issue in Woburn.
“The approach is a big victory for the chemical industry, which has repeatedly pressed the EPA to narrow the scope of its risk evaluations,” writes Lipton, who notes that Nancy Beck, the Trump appointee in charge of the initiative, “previously worked as an executive at the American Chemistry Council, one of the industry’s main lobbying groups.”
The 1986 federal case did not end well for the Woburn families — they settled out of court for short money after the trial ended in a muddle. But they left a legacy regarding what can happen when industry is allowed to dispose of toxic waste without regard for safety or health. Now that legacy is under attack. The media need to shine a light on this story — and to keep shining it until the EPA backs down.
An ambitious challenge
There was a time not too many years ago when newspaper owners hoped they would develop an advertising-based business model for online content that would allow them to earn profits while giving away their journalism. Craigslist, Google, and Facebook put an end to those dreams. In recent years, the emphasis has been on persuading readers to pay for digital news.
Now The Sacramento Bee has issued a challenge to its readers. Editor Lauren Gustus has written a notecalling for digital subscriptions to quadruple, from 15,000 to 60,000. “We could fully fund our newsrooms — from salaries and benefits to notepads and pens — if we had 60,000 people supporting us through digital subscriptions,” she says.
Needless to say, that is a hugely ambitious goal. Though national newspapers such as The New York Times (3 million-plus) and The Washington Post (1 million-plus) have had some real success with digital subscriptions, regional papers have struggled. The Boston Globe, with nearly 100,000 digital-only subscriptions, has done as well as anyone. But though Globe executives say the paper could become sustainable if they double that number, that will likely prove to be an exceedingly difficult task.
Still, the Bee has some factors in its favor. According to Gustus’ message, the paper is bolstering its coverage with more accountability journalism and an audio newscast. Its owner, McClatchy, is widely regarded as one of the better corporate chains. And the price of a digital subscription — $130 a year — is affordable, especially compared with the Globe’s $360.
The best part about reader-funded journalism is that, if it works, owners will be wary of slashing their news coverage. People will pay more for more; they might even pay more for the same. But they’re not going to pay more for less.
Honoring Parkland’s student journalists
The third annual Danny — an honor named for the late, great progressive journalist Danny Schechter — has been awarded to The Eagle Eye, the student newspaper at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The award was announced by Rory O’Connor, Schechter’s friend and longtime business partner.
O’Connor writes in AlterNet that The Eagle Eye was singled out for comments by its student journalists that they sought to combine journalism with activism aimed at preventing mass shootings such as the one that took place at their school. Although some observers criticized the students for not embracing objectivity, O’Connor says that activist journalism is in the best tradition of the work performed by Schechter, “The News Dissector,” starting in the early 1970s at WBCN Radio in Boston and continuing until his death in 2015.
The award comes with a $3,000 donation to the paper’s journalism scholarship fund.
“Increasingly,” O’Connor writes, “it is becoming understood that journalists with strong, transparent points of view are giving us news and insights we truly need and can use.”
https://www.wgbh.org/news/commentary/2018/06/13/media-roundup-the-epas-toxic-proposal-getting-readers-to-pay-and-danny-schechters-activist-legacy
-
Jun 13, 2018 | Thorold News
By Ruchi Gupta
Speece Thorson Capital Group Inc increased its stake in Norfolk Southn Corp (NSC) by 31.43% based on its latest 2018Q1 regulatory filing with the SEC. Speece Thorson Capital Group Inc bought 17,915 shares as the company’s stock rose 5.15% while stock markets declined. The hedge fund held 74,906 shares of the railroads company at the end of 2018Q1, valued at $9.91 million, up from 56,991 at the end of the previous reported quarter. Speece Thorson Capital Group Inc who had been investing in Norfolk Southn Corp for a number of months, seems to be bullish on the $44.16 billion market cap company. The stock increased 0.10% or $0.16 during the last trading session, reaching $156.28. About 1.56 million shares traded. Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) has risen 27.76% since June 13, 2017 and is uptrending. It has outperformed by 15.19% the S&P500. Some Historical NSC News: 18/04/2018 – Norfolk Southern Closes Above 50-Day Moving Average: Technicals; 06/03/2018 Norfolk Southern rolls out next-generation AccessNS online customer portal; 30/04/2018 – Norfolk Southern receives American Chemistry Council award as industry-leading partner in responsible chemical transport; 01/05/2018 – CFO Earhart Gifts 175 Of Norfolk Southern Corp; 16/05/2018 – Norfolk Southern Presenting at Conference May 23; 25/04/2018 – Norfolk Southern beats on revenue, still working to fix service; 25/04/2018 – Norfolk Southern 1Q EPS $1.93; 10/05/2018 – Norfolk Southern is a company moving forward, CEO tells shareholders; 16/03/2018 – DOT STB: Case Title: NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY-ABANDONMENT EXEMPTION-IN AURORA, PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO; 24/05/2018 – Norfolk Southern and New York State usher in a modern era for freight rail with dedication of new railroad bridge – the Genesee
Princeton Portfolio Strategies Group Llc decreased its stake in Abbvie Inc (ABBV) by 18.53% based on its latest 2018Q1 regulatory filing with the SEC. Princeton Portfolio Strategies Group Llc sold 20,007 shares as the company’s stock declined 16.83% with the market. The institutional investor held 87,962 shares of the major pharmaceuticals company at the end of 2018Q1, valued at $8.33M, down from 107,969 at the end of the previous reported quarter. Princeton Portfolio Strategies Group Llc who had been investing in Abbvie Inc for a number of months, seems to be less bullish one the $149.76 billion market cap company. The stock decreased 0.86% or $0.86 during the last trading session, reaching $98.91. About 8.06M shares traded. AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) has risen 52.41% since June 13, 2017 and is uptrending. It has outperformed by 39.84% the S&P500. Some Historical ABBV News: 17/04/2018 – LUPIN LTD LUPN.NS SAYS CO RECEIVES TENTATIVE FDA APPROVAL FOR GENERIC ANDROGEL, 1.62 PCT; 16/04/2018 – DYNAVAX INTERIM DATA FOR SD-101 IN COMBINATION WITH KEYTRUDA® (; 05/04/2018 – $ABBV $BIIB Settlement on Humira #Biosimilar in Europe -; 07/03/2018 – Biogen, AbbVie’s Zinbryta, Yanked From Market, Connected To Three U.S. Cases Of Brain Inflammation — MarketWatch; 26/04/2018 – S&PGRBulletin: AbbVie Rtgs Unaffected By Share Repurchase Plan; 10/04/2018 – AbbVie: Elagolix Clinical Trial Program Largest Prospective Randomized Endometriosis Trial Conducted to Date; 24/05/2018 – ABBVIE: IMBRUVICA PLUS GAZYVA TRIAL MET PRIMARY ENDPOINT; 05/04/2018 – BIOGEN & SAMSUNG BIOEPIS AGREE TO SETTLEMENT WITH ABBVIE; 26/04/2018 – S&PGRBULLETIN: ABBVIE RTGS UNAFFECTED BY SHR REPURCHASE PLAN; 25/05/2018 – IMFINZI® (Durvalumab) Significantly Improves Overall Survival in the Phase lll Pacific Trial for Unresectable Stage lll Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Princeton Portfolio Strategies Group Llc, which manages about $199.15 million and $352.06 million US Long portfolio, upped its stake in Pentair Plc (NYSE:PNR) by 5,350 shares to 29,915 shares, valued at $2.04 million in 2018Q1, according to the filing. It also increased its holding in American Water Works Co Inc (NYSE:AWK) by 7,458 shares in the quarter, for a total of 64,885 shares, and has risen its stake in Henry Schein Inc (NASDAQ:HSIC).
Investors sentiment decreased to 0.7 in 2018 Q1. Its down 0.10, from 0.8 in 2017Q4. It dropped, as 61 investors sold ABBV shares while 737 reduced holdings. 127 funds opened positions while 428 raised stakes. 1.06 billion shares or 0.67% less from 1.06 billion shares in 2017Q4 were reported. Rhumbline Advisers holds 0.48% in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) or 2.45 million shares. Cliftonlarsonallen Wealth Ltd Liability Corp invested 0.11% of its portfolio in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV). Oak Ridge Limited reported 0.56% stake. Marble Harbor Counsel Lc reported 196,899 shares stake. Franklin Street Advisors Nc holds 2.55% of its portfolio in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) for 179,564 shares. Roundview Cap Ltd Llc reported 8,851 shares. Busey invested 0.36% in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV). Davidson Investment Advsrs holds 0.07% or 6,945 shares. Forte Capital Lc Adv has invested 0.6% in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV). Toronto Dominion Bancorporation reported 0.19% stake. Conning accumulated 393,429 shares. Granite Inv Ptnrs Limited Liability reported 36,402 shares or 0.23% of all its holdings. Proshare Advsr Ltd Limited Liability Company reported 0.59% of its portfolio in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV). Ipswich Mgmt Inc invested 0.16% in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV). Fdx has invested 0.21% in AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV).
More notable recent AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) news were published by: Seekingalpha.com which released: “More Thoughts On AbbVie’s Rova-T Implosion” on June 06, 2018, also Fool.com with their article: “Is AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) a Buy?” published on May 30, 2018, 247Wallst.com published: “Major Pharmaceuticals Scare Off Short Sellers” on June 12, 2018. More interesting news about AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) were released by: Benzinga.com and their article: “Benzinga’s Bulls & Bears Of The Week: AbbVie, Lululemon, Netflix, Snap And More” published on June 03, 2018 as well as Seekingalpha.com‘s news article titled: “The 30+1 Portfolio: An Average Investor’s Reasoning For Buying A Stock – AbbVie, Absolutely” with publication date: June 07, 2018.
Since December 14, 2017, it had 0 buys, and 10 sales for $33.62 million activity. The insider GONZALEZ RICHARD A sold $976,084. 87,040 shares were sold by RICHMOND TIMOTHY J., worth $8.57M. The insider SEVERINO MICHAEL sold $311,684. On Wednesday, February 28 the insider SALEKI-GERHARDT AZITA sold $157,458. CHASE WILLIAM J sold $8.31 million worth of stock or 70,928 shares. Another trade for 992 shares valued at $119,351 was sold by Michael Robert A..
Analysts await AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) to report earnings on July, 27. They expect $1.97 EPS, up 38.73% or $0.55 from last year’s $1.42 per share. ABBV’s profit will be $2.98 billion for 12.55 P/E if the $1.97 EPS becomes a reality. After $1.87 actual EPS reported by AbbVie Inc. for the previous quarter, Wall Street now forecasts 5.35% EPS growth.
Among 24 analysts covering Abbvie Inc (NYSE:ABBV), 9 have Buy rating, 3 Sell and 12 Hold. Therefore 38% are positive. Abbvie Inc had 96 analyst reports since July 21, 2015 according to SRatingsIntel. SunTrust maintained AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) on Monday, October 16 with “Buy” rating. Societe Generale initiated AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) on Wednesday, April 6 with “Sell” rating. The stock has “” rating by Citigroup on Monday, September 28. On Monday, March 26 the stock rating was maintained by Bank of America with “Hold”. Morgan Stanley maintained AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) on Monday, April 30 with “Equal-Weight” rating. The firm earned “Hold” rating on Friday, June 1 by Piper Jaffray. On Wednesday, May 23 the stock rating was maintained by BMO Capital Markets with “Underperform”. The rating was downgraded by UBS on Monday, September 25 to “Neutral”. The stock of AbbVie Inc. (NYSE:ABBV) earned “Outperform” rating by Cowen & Co on Wednesday, October 11. The firm has “Neutral” rating by Credit Suisse given on Monday, October 31.
Since February 1, 2018, it had 0 insider purchases, and 8 insider sales for $4.08 million activity. Wheeler Michael Joseph also sold $302,661 worth of Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) on Wednesday, May 16. Earhart Cynthia C sold $994,340 worth of Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) on Thursday, May 10. Another trade for 10,000 shares valued at $1.50M was made by Squires James A on Thursday, February 1.
Speece Thorson Capital Group Inc, which manages about $408.00 million and $480.35 million US Long portfolio, decreased its stake in Wabtec Corp (NYSE:WAB) by 96,547 shares to 102,645 shares, valued at $7.78 million in 2018Q1, according to the filing. It also reduced its holding in Commerce Bancshares Inc (NASDAQ:CBSH) by 6,440 shares in the quarter, leaving it with 150,323 shares, and cut its stake in O Reilly Automotive Inc (NASDAQ:ORLY).
https://www.whatsonthorold.com/2018/06/13/princeton-portfolio-strategies-group-has-lowered-its-abbvie-abbv-holding-as-valuation-declined-norfolk-southn-nsc-shareholder-speece-thorson-capital-group-has-increased-its-position-by-2-36-mill/
-
Jun 13, 2018 | San Times
By Nellie Frank
Mutualfirst Financial Inc (MFSF) investors sentiment decreased to 0.54 in Q1 2018. It’s down -1.09, from 1.63 in 2017Q4. The ratio turned negative, as 15 investment professionals started new or increased stock positions, while 28 decreased and sold their holdings in Mutualfirst Financial Inc. The investment professionals in our database now hold: 3.65 million shares, up from 3.60 million shares in 2017Q4. Also, the number of investment professionals holding Mutualfirst Financial Inc in top ten stock positions was flat from 1 to 1 for the same number . Sold All: 5 Reduced: 23 Increased: 12 New Position: 3.
The stock of Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) hit a new 52-week high and has $163.58 target or 5.00% above today’s $155.79 share price. The 5 months bullish chart indicates low risk for the $44.02 billion company. The 1-year high was reported on Jun, 13 by Barchart.com. If the $163.58 price target is reached, the company will be worth $2.20 billion more. The stock decreased 0.31% or $0.49 during the last trading session, reaching $155.79. About 157,537 shares traded. Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) has risen 27.76% since June 13, 2017 and is uptrending. It has outperformed by 15.19% the S&P500. Some Historical NSC News: ; 06/04/2018 – DOT STB: Case Title: NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY – ABANDONMENT EXEMPTION – IN DAYTON, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO; 26/04/2018 – NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORP NSC.N : UBS RAISES TARGET PRICE TO $192 FROM $186; 30/04/2018 – Norfolk Southern receives American Chemistry Council award as industry-leading partner in responsible chemical transport; 29/03/2018 – Gabby Morrongiello: SCOOP: WH officials involved in decision-making process on Hicks replacement are seriously eying NSC spox; 25/04/2018 – NORFOLK SOUTHERN BOOSTS EXPECTED ANNUAL REPURCHASES TO $1.5B; 18/04/2018 – Norfolk Southern recognizes 52 chemical customers for safe rail-shipping practices; 20/03/2018 – General Electric announces 225 orders for refurbished locomotives; 21/03/2018 – CFO Earhart Gifts 135 Of Norfolk Southern Corp; 10/05/2018 – NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORP NSC.N : BAIRD RAISES TARGET PRICE TO $161 FROM $155; 10/05/2018 – Norfolk Southern is a company moving forward, CEO tells shareholders
Since January 1, 0001, it had 0 insider purchases, and 15 insider sales for $865,828 activity.
Pl Capital Advisors Llc holds 7.27% of its portfolio in MutualFirst Financial, Inc. for 715,773 shares. Fj Capital Management Llc owns 275,000 shares or 1.05% of their US portfolio. Moreover, Ancora Advisors Llc has 0.87% invested in the company for 535,056 shares. The Pennsylvania-based Minerva Advisors Llc has invested 0.59% in the stock. Kessler Investment Group Llc, a Indiana-based fund reported 3,117 shares.
Analysts await MutualFirst Financial, Inc. (NASDAQ:MFSF) to report earnings on July, 24. They expect $0.56 EPS, up 7.69% or $0.04 from last year’s $0.52 per share. MFSF’s profit will be $4.80M for 16.85 P/E if the $0.56 EPS becomes a reality. After $0.57 actual EPS reported by MutualFirst Financial, Inc. for the previous quarter, Wall Street now forecasts -1.75% negative EPS growth.
MutualFirst Financial, Inc. operates as the bank holding firm for the MutualBank that provides various financial services to individuals, and small and mid-sized businesses in the United States. The company has market cap of $323.70 million. It accepts savings deposit, NOW, and demand accounts, as well as certificates of deposit. It has a 23.02 P/E ratio. The firm offers one-to four-family residential property, commercial real estate, construction and development, and commercial business loans; consumer loans, such as auto loans, boat and recreational vehicle loans, loans secured by savings deposits, and credit card and unsecured consumer loans; and adjustable rate loans.
The stock decreased 0.13% or $0.05 during the last trading session, reaching $37.75. About shares traded. MutualFirst Financial, Inc. (MFSF) has risen 13.33% since June 13, 2017 and is uptrending. It has outperformed by 0.76% the S&P500. Some Historical MFSF News: ; 19/04/2018 DJ MutualFirst Financial Inc, Inst Holders, 1Q 2018 (MFSF); 04/05/2018 – MutualFirst Financial, Inc. Declares Cash Dividend; 27/04/2018 – MutualFirst 1Q Adj EPS 57c; 27/04/2018 – MutualFirst 1Q EPS 50c; 29/05/2018 – MutualFirst Financial Access Event Scheduled By Stephens Inc
Since February 1, 2018, it had 0 insider buys, and 8 insider sales for $4.08 million activity. Hurlbut Thomas E sold $419,520 worth of stock. 1,699 Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) shares with value of $244,011 were sold by Wheeler Michael Joseph. Earhart Cynthia C sold 6,588 shares worth $994,340. Squires James A had sold 10,000 shares worth $1.50M on Thursday, February 1.
Among 31 analysts covering Norfolk Southern Corp. (NYSE:NSC), 8 have Buy rating, 5 Sell and 18 Hold. Therefore 26% are positive. Norfolk Southern Corp. had 108 analyst reports since July 28, 2015 according to SRatingsIntel. On Thursday, October 26 the stock rating was maintained by BMO Capital Markets with “Market Perform”. Bank of America upgraded the stock to “Buy” rating in Friday, September 11 report. The stock of Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) has “Hold” rating given on Thursday, April 26 by Bernstein. The firm has “Sell” rating given on Thursday, June 1 by RBC Capital Markets. The rating was maintained by Oppenheimer on Wednesday, July 26 with “Hold”. The firm has “Buy” rating by Cowen & Co given on Monday, July 10. RBC Capital Markets maintained Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) rating on Wednesday, October 25. RBC Capital Markets has “Sell” rating and $123.0 target. The firm has “Neutral” rating by JP Morgan given on Thursday, April 26. Susquehanna maintained it with “Buy” rating and $16600 target in Monday, April 2 report. The firm earned “Hold” rating on Wednesday, April 25 by RBC Capital Markets.
Analysts await Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) to report earnings on July, 25. They expect $2.24 earnings per share, up 30.99% or $0.53 from last year’s $1.71 per share. NSC’s profit will be $632.89M for 17.39 P/E if the $2.24 EPS becomes a reality. After $1.93 actual earnings per share reported by Norfolk Southern Corporation for the previous quarter, Wall Street now forecasts 16.06% EPS growth.
Investors sentiment decreased to 0.75 in 2018 Q1. Its down 0.08, from 0.83 in 2017Q4. It dropped, as 53 investors sold Norfolk Southern Corporation shares while 375 reduced holdings. 94 funds opened positions while 228 raised stakes. 198.67 million shares or 0.72% more from 197.25 million shares in 2017Q4 were reported. Optimum Inv Advisors holds 0.07% of its portfolio in Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) for 1,817 shares. Lakeview Cap Limited Liability Company reported 5,846 shares. Principal Financial Gru accumulated 0.11% or 807,791 shares. Wealth Enhancement Advisory Svcs Ltd holds 0.11% or 12,181 shares in its portfolio. 487,869 are owned by California State Teachers Retirement Systems. Capital One National Association invested 0.16% in Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC). Arrow Financial Corp reported 1,330 shares. Gw Henssler And Associate holds 0.03% in Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC) or 2,052 shares. Employees Retirement Systems Of Texas reported 0.25% stake. Wills Financial Group Incorporated Inc holds 0.69% or 6,892 shares in its portfolio. Captrust Financial Advisors holds 5,822 shares. Hanson Doremus Investment Management accumulated 4,198 shares. Moreover, Centurylink Mgmt has 0.64% invested in Norfolk Southern Corporation (NYSE:NSC). Dorsey Whitney Limited Co holds 2,163 shares. Norinchukin Bancorp The holds 0.06% or 26,038 shares in its portfolio.
Norfolk Southern Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, engages in the rail transportation of raw materials, intermediate products, and finished goods in the United States. The company has market cap of $44.02 billion. It also transports overseas freight through various Atlantic and Gulf Coast ports. It has a 8.37 P/E ratio. In addition, the firm is involved in the operation of scheduled passenger trains; leasing or sale of rail property and equipment; development of commercial real estate; telecommunications; and the acquisition, leasing, and management of coal, oil, gas, and minerals, as well as the transport of automotive and industrial products.
https://santimes.com/norfolk-southern-nsc-reaches-155-79-52-week-high-mutualfirst-financial-mfsfs-sentiment-is-0-54/
-
Conservative Group Launches Ad Calling on Trump To Fire Pruitt
Jun 13, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A conservative activist group is out with a new television commercial calling on President Trump to fire embattled Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt.
“EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is embarrassing President Trump,” the voiceover in the advertisement by the American Future Fund (AFF) says before running through some of Pruitt’s recent high-profile scandals, like spending $43,000 on a soundproof phone booth for his office and giving big raises to close aides by bypassing the White House.
“Mr. President, you know what to do,” the voiceover says, cutting to a clip of Trump from “The Apprentice” saying “You’re fired!”
“For the good of the country, Pruitt must go,” the spot concludes.
AFF has been involved in numerous GOP election and policy battles, such as backing incumbent Republicans in a series of California primaries.
The group doesn’t disclose its donors.
“President Trump needs to make an example out of Pruitt and show that this administration will not tolerate rampant abuse of taxpayer dollars,” Nick Ryan, AFF’s founder, said in a statement. “He is best known for using his office to enrich his wife, buy engraved keepsakes and direct federal guards to help find his favorite moisturizer. He’s the head of the EPA, not the Sultan of Brunei.”
Ryan also noted that Pruitt’s efforts at environmental deregulation “have been mired in court challenges and needless battles over personal spending.”
AFF is initially running the ad in Nebraska and South Dakota.
The group launched its campaign late Tuesday, the day before conservative Fox News host and Trump ally Laura Ingraham said on Twitter that Pruitt has “gotta go.”
Numerous conservative lawmakers who have been allies of Pruitt have also expressed fatigue over his scandals lately. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), for one, called Pruitt “about as swampy as you get here in Washington.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/392062-conservative-group-launches-ad-calling-on-trump-to-fire-pruitt
-
Practitioner Insights: Scientific Disconnect in Toxic Law’s Single-Study Hazard Policy
Jun 13, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Robert DeMott and Gavin Thompson
The reform of the nation’s primary chemicals law, as directed by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, required the Environmental Protection Agency to take affirmative steps to support the development of nonanimal testing methods and encourage third parties to use them. The agency released a big picture plan on New Approach Methodologies (NAM) in March, followed in April by a pilot implementation policy that would set a precedent by allowing the results from a single in vitro test to be sufficient for classifying a substance as a hazard for causing allergy-type responses (sensitizers).
Designating a substance as a sensitizer has consequences with obligations for hazard communication on Safety Data Sheets and labeling, along with regulatory and market pressure for product de-selection and phaseout. That is reason enough to require policies and approaches that lead to scientifically accurate determinations. But there are big-picture implications of direct regulatory endorsement of a “one-and-done” in vitro testing approach. This precedent will certainly be pointed to as sufficient basis for making other consequential hazard designations, such as endocrine disruption and carcinogenicity.
TSCA reform legislation didn’t call for substances to be subject to labeling based on a single fluorescing test tube. Yet the pilot policy floated by the EPA in April opens that path. The goal of reducing animal testing and a plan to identify information of equivalent or better scientific quality ended up at a flow chart rendering the fluorescence of a single protein on the surface of artificially maintained cells sufficient to make a significant regulatory and commercial hazard designation. The path from the initial goal to this flow chart illustrates how this pilot implementation establishes a precedent for conferring hazard designations that carry regulatory and precautionary burdens without requiring that dots be connected between cellular responses and adverse health effects.
Reduce Animal Tests and Rely on In-Depth AnalysisThe EPA draft Strategic Plan to Promote the Development and Implementation of Alternative Test Methods released March 7, 2018, specifies that multi-factor, systematic review methods will be relied upon as an approach to ensure that information from NAM is of equivalent or better scientific quality than existing animal-based testing. TSCA reform requirements [Section 26 (h) and (i)] and the strategic plan refer to weight-of-evidence (WOE) approaches that incorporate information from various sources into evaluations. Researchers have been active and fruitful for more than a decade developing comprehensive, systematic WOE methods to provide updated approaches for balanced, scientific consideration of the overall information set available for substances. The strategic plan indicates that the agency will use several defined and structured WOE systems including the Defined Approach (DA) method and the Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) method.
The agency’s first implementation of the strategic plan released for public comment on April 4, 2018, Interim Science Policy: Use of Alternative Approaches for Skin Sensitization as a Replacement for Laboratory Animal Testing,references a DA framework for determining whether tested substances are designated as skin sensitizers. But the decision matrix pares down testing specifications so that only one element of the DA, addressing a single cellular step in the chain of events leading to sensitization, need be tested. The decision maker is thus relying on results from testing a limited aspect of the DA, rather than on a comprehensive review. This simplification establishes a worrisome precedent that may be cited as sufficient and extended to other endpoints and designations.
The implementation policy lays out the chain of events from chemical reactions to cellular and organ responses that can lead to sensitization as an adverse outcome, summarizing four sequential key events (KE) identified by researchers and incorporated into test guidelines maintained by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The EPA policy correctly acknowledges that “there are no validated non-animal methods that assess the ability of substances to activate KE4,” the final KE in the chain.
Though the chain of necessary events is broken by the absence of this link to the actual outcome, the policy deems two DA methods acceptable for agency submission: 1) AOP “2 out of 3,” and 2) KE3/1 Sequential Testing Strategy (STS). As the name implies for the former, the approach is to conduct validated tests relating to at least two of Key Events 1, 2 and 3. Concordant positive or negative results for two of the KEs are considered sufficient to determine whether or not the substance qualifies as a skin sensitizer. The latter DA provides the “one-and-done” pathway through the decision flowchart, allowing for any of the KE3 tests in OECD Test Guideline 442E to be conducted and the results accepted as sufficient to designate the substance as a sensitizer if this first KE3 test is positive.
If the KE3 test does not produce a positive response, the substance must then undergo KE1 testing, which looks simply at whether the test substance can stick to skin proteins. A positive response in a KE1 test is enough to designate a substance a sensitizer, even without a cellular response for KE3, which is further along in the chain of events and a necessary step prior to a sensitization outcome. Mandating this interpretation of results from sequential tests amounts to adopting a highly precautionary bias. Effectively, a substance that sticks to skin proteins, even if it does not produce the KE3 cellular response that is a prerequisite for sensitization, must be designated a skin sensitizer. Starting from the TSCA reform requirement to use only equivalent or better science in selecting non-animal methods and arriving at this proposed policy of interpreting in vitro tests is a scientific disconnect.
Setting the Bar LowA convenient and scientifically based source can help evaluate the likelihood of misidentifying skin sensitizers via the proposed decision pathways. As part of validating the tests in Test Guideline 442E, OECD reviewed the accuracy of the individual tests, considering both sensitivity (ability of the test to correctly identify known sensitizers) and specificity (ability of the test to correctly rule out non-sensitizers). The validation review also considered the consistency of results from multiple runs of the same test and from multiple laboratories (reproducibility).
Overall, the three specific tests included in the test guideline perform well with regard to correctly identifying known sensitizers. The sensitivity ranged from 91 percent to 100 percent for the three tests, indicating that these tests are not expected to yield many “false negatives,” or miss a substance that actually is a sensitizer.
While a bit less reliable for reproducibility, the tests are similar to many routinely used tests in this regard. For one of the three tests, the reproducibility was only 80 percent when run in either the same laboratory or two different laboratories. This means that one out of five times, a single test will produce the “wrong” answer compared to retests of the same substance. Although not out of the ordinary, this does illustrate the uncertainty associated with relying on a limited testing approach. The reproducibility for the other two Test Guideline 442E tests ranged from 84 percent to 90 percent.
A substantial reliability issue for the policy emerges when looking at the possibility of incorrectly designating non-sensitizers as sensitizers. For two of the tests, according to OECD’s validation, there is less than a 50:50 chance of correctly identifying substances as non-sensitizers. Compared to results of actual human sensitization potential, one of the tests has only 39 percent specificity and another 47 percent specificity. This means that as many as six of every 10 substances tested would be incorrectly designated as sensitizers if these tests were used alone—pursuant to the “one-and-done” pathway provided in the proposed policy. This “false positive” rate is inconsistent with regulatory application and would result in many incorrect labels under hazard communication programs and unnecessary regulatory efforts and responses. The third test has a specificity rate of 66 percent, which would still result in one-third of substances being incorrectly designated as sensitizers.
The fact that none of the validated tests in the test guideline required under the policy yield an appropriately low likelihood of false positives reveals the scientific inadequacy of proposing to rely on one of these tests alone. The OECD test guideline explicitly addresses this limitation, explaining that these tests alone may not be sufficient to reach conclusions about sensitization potential and referencing reliance on a broader base of information: “Data generated with the test methods described in this Test Guideline are proposed to support the discrimination between skin sensitisers (i.e. UN GHS Category 1) and non-sensitisers when used within Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA), together with other relevant information.” The proposed EPA policy thus runs counter to the test guideline it relies on to provide simplification down to the one-and-done approach.
As currently proposed, EPA’s policy goes further, suggesting that the agency expects the use of the one-and-done approach to be preferred. “USEPA acknowledges that the 3/1 STS is simpler, will lead to fewer studies conducted, and is thus more efficient … some chemicals are likely to have existing evaluations using the 2 out of 3 DA; the agency will continue to accept these” (Interim Science Policy, p.2). This language stands in marked contrast to the discussion in the EPA strategic plan needing to rely on weight-of-evidence and systematic review of integrated information to achieve the goal of getting information of equivalent or better scientific quality than traditional animal models.
TSCA Reform and PrecedentsBeyond the need for refinement and less simplification of the WOE approach for designating skin sensitizers are several broader implications of EPA’s proposed policy: First is the issue of whether it meets TSCA reform requirements. Second is the precedent of accepting tests with high false-positive rates for important and expensive hazard designations. Third is the precedent of making decisions based on a set of information that does not connect the links between in vitrotesting responses and actual adverse outcomes.
With regard to TSCA reform, the Lautenberg Act specifically directs the agency to apply the criterion that new methods have equivalent or better scientific quality than animal testing either to list them as agency-approved methods or to require third parties to use them. The strategic plan recognizes and references the applicability of this criterion in both situations. The proposed policy specifies that the included methods are approved for use in third-party submissions to the EPA. The policy applies to single chemical pesticide substance submissions to be reviewed by the agency. This use places it squarely within the requirements of TSCA reform that new methods meet the equivalent or better science criterion.
The proposed policy states that the described DAs “demonstrate comparable or superior performance to the LLNA” [a standard animal test for skin sensitization] (Interim Science Policy, p. 8) and provides a discussion of reviews of LLNA accuracy. The agency adopts the values of 14 percent to 20 percent as the range of false positives from the LLNA. Because no comparison is made to the false positive rates included in the OECD Test Guideline, it is unclear how the agency supports the statement that the one-and-done DA performs comparably. The false positive rates from that source range from 33 percent to 61 percent for the three included tests—all of which are worse, not better, than the LLNA.
The statement quoted above may be intended to purport that the decision matrix in the policy complies with TSCA reform, but the discrepancy between this conclusion and the findings of the OECD test guideline warrants explanation. The OECD guideline is cited as the source for the acceptable DAs, yet the validation findings from this source contradict the conclusion about being better than the LLNA. The policy, therefore, fails to meet the requirements of TSCA reform in that context.
Unrelated to the formality of TSCA reform compliance is the precedent of the EPA relying on methods with such high false-positive rates for significant agency determinations and substance categorization. The obligations that follow designation as a skin sensitizer, or other designations such as endocrine disruptors, entail expenditure of substantial resources, as well as the commercial and competitive implications of being labeled with such hazard properties. If a false positive rate as high as 61 percent is acceptable in a test being interpreted as a one-and-done standard for skin sensitization, arguably a level of accuracy this relaxed would be acceptable for other endpoints and designations.
While the criterion that NAM perform better than the traditional animal test is scientifically sound for relative comparisons, and it is difficult to assign a generally applicable floor level of reliability given the differences among types of tests, there has to be some level of uncertainty that is too great, on an absolute scale, for agency reliance on test results. As the extreme examples of the validation results from OECD Test Guideline 442E illustrate, more than a 50:50 likelihood of erroneously designating a substance as a sensitizer is just too high to make sense as a regulatory policy. An animal method that performed this poorly would not have been acceptable to the agency in the first place. Allowing such relaxed standards for in vitro tests that replace animal tests fails the mandate of being a scientific improvement.
Besides the precedent of a low floor for reliability, there is the additional precedent of accepting DAs that do not include a complete chain of key events between initial chemical reactions and actual adverse outcomes. The analogy of links in a chain fits for evaluations of Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) because these pathways incorporate events and responses that occur in an interconnected sequence. If the chain is broken, that is, one or more of the key events does not occur, then the ultimate outcome in the pathway is not realized.
In the case of the skin sensitization AOP, there is no test for the fourth KE, the only one considered an organ-level response. And, the proposed policy doesn’t require demonstration of an unbroken chain from KE1 through KE3. On the contrary, one of the approved DAs is even named “2 out of 3” and the other starts with KE3 and skips back to KE1 if the substance fails to produce a response in the KE3 test. These inconsistencies underscore the uncertainty of the policy as the first implementation of an approach for endorsing and accepting alternative methods. More importantly, if the agency is willing to overlook the absence of a test connecting the adverse effect in animals to the in vitro progression and rely on varied combinations of demonstrated key events for skin sensitization, these shortcuts could be promoted for complex AOPs such as cancer or endocrine disruption endpoints. Adopting this policy for the skin sensitization pathway will make it more difficult for the agency not to accept such incomplete chains for AOPs on other endpoints. When the overarching directive is to upgrade the scientific quality of decision-making information, implementing shortcuts in the name of efficiency and allowing hazard designation on the basis of a single test result seem off track.
ConclusionA frequently raised criticism of historical regulatory use of toxicity testing information was that adverse outcomes in one animal test were often given excessive or sole weight in data evaluation and priority in determining chemical hazards. Scientists have worked to develop and validate updated approaches that enable extensive sets of results from more refined testing to be considered in systematic, weight-of-evidence approaches. And, TSCA reform and the EPA strategic plan make clear that improved, comprehensive evaluation methods should be used in conjunction with adopting new methods.
Yet, the EPA’s first proposed policy to implement a transition from animal testing to new methods includes an approach that leads to the designation of a skin sensitization hazard as an obligatory interpretation from positive results in a single test. If the proverbial one mouse with a tumor is supplanted by one glowing test tube as a decision criterion for designating the hazard related to a chemical, the link between regulatory characterizations and actual potential for adverse effects will be weakened rather than strengthened using emerging scientific methods and advances.
The lure of quick and convenient testing approaches carries the hook of increased efforts to address the hazard designations that result and develop substitute products. A policy that accepts the results from single tests with high false-positive rates exacerbates the potential for substances to be erroneously labeled with problematic hazard properties. But that is the situation created by the currently proposed EPA policy for replacing skin sensitization testing with in vitro methods. This policy should not become a precedent.
Dr. Robert DeMott is a Principal Toxicologist and global Health Sciences leader in the Environment & Health business of leading global engineering and consulting firm Ramboll. A board-certified toxicologist, he has more than 25 years of experience evaluating exposures to chemicals in the workplace and the environment.
Dr. Gavin Thompson is a Principal Consultant in Ramboll’s global Environment & Health business. He has more than 30 years of experience advising manufacturers, marketers, and industry associations on evaluating chemical exposures to humans from consumer products, food, food processing and packaging, household items and environmental media.
The opinions expressed here do not represent those of Bloomberg Environment, which welcomes other points of view.
https://www.bna.com/practitioner-insights-scientific-n73014476437/
-
Senators Use Military Bill To Target Delayed Toxics Report
Jun 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
Senators from both parties made a long-shot bid today to force the Trump administration to release a health study of toxic nonstick chemicals.
An amendment to the Pentagon spending bill being debated on the Senate floor would require the administration to, within seven days of its passage, "publish in the Federal Register and on an Internet website of the Department of Health and Human Services the results of the toxicological profile prepared by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry."
Drafted by Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M) and co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Ohio Sens. Rob Portman (R) and Sherrod Brown (D), the measure refers to ATSDR's study of four types of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.
The chemicals are widely used to make Teflon and other stain- and heat-resistant products such as firefighting foams, which have contaminated communities surrounding many military bases and manufacturing facilities.
EPA has previously linked exposure to PFAS at certain levels with cancer and other health problems.
But in a January email first reported last month, a White House official warned EPA political appointees that HHS's soon-to-be-published study would find ill effects at significantly lower exposures and could be a "potential public relations nightmare."
Five months later, that politically sensitive report, which EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has denied delaying, remains under wraps.
The PFAS amendment that seeks to compel its publication, however, faces both political and procedural hurdles.
In the wake of fresh primary defeats for the president's critics, fewer and fewer Republicans are likely to be willing to confront the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, arguments over other National Defense Authorization Act measures have led Senate leadership to consider blocking votes on all amendments that lack their blessing (E&E Daily, June 13).
But those challenges didn't stop Portman, who isn't up for re-election until 2022, from backing the PFAS effort.
"It is important to ensure EPA's health advisories are up to date and reflect the best available science and information," Portman said in a statement. "I hope EPA and HHS release this report immediately to ensure that the men and women serving our country, as well as our communities supporting them, are drinking clean, safe water."
Portman and Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) also provided bipartisan backing to a letter about the delayed report sent earlier this week to the heads of EPA and HHS. Capito will face voters again in 2020 (E&E Daily, June 12).
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/13/stories/1060084375
-
'Nightmare' Chemical Study Would See Daylight if Bipartisan Defense Bill Amendment Succeeds
Jun 13, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
A bipartisan group of senators is seeking to force the release of a controversial chemicals assessment as part of the Senate's defense spending bill.
The amendment would require the Department of Health and Human Services to release a toxicology profile for PFOA, PFOS and two related substances. It comes after POLITICO reported last month that the study was poised to find that the substances pose health dangers at far lower levels than EPA has said are safe and that EPA and that White House officials sought to delay it, warning its release would create a "public relations nightmare." If the amendment passes, HHS also would have to report to Congress on any changes made to it after political officials raised concerns in January.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) introduced the amendment today, joined by Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.).
PFOA and PFOS contamination is especially prevalent on and around military bases, where the substances were used in firefighting foam. The military faces enormous liablity for cleaning up nearby water supplies, depending on what level of exposure is determined to be safe.
“The administration’s job, especially at agencies like EPA and HHS, is to look out for public health, not to hide critical safety information through a cynical public relations strategy," Udall said in a statement.
WHAT'S NEXT: The Senate is considering the National Defense Authorization Act on the floor this week. It is unclear whether the chemicals amendment will receive a vote.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Consumer Product Group Floats Litigation Over New York Ingredient Policy
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
US consumer product group HCPA is calling on New York to retract its recently finalised cleaning product disclosure policy, and says it will consider litigation to address the programme’s "significant issues".
According to the guidance for the New York Household Cleansing Product Information Disclosure programme, finalised last week, manufacturers must list on their websites intentionally added ingredients in products by 1 July 2019.
Fragrance and nonfunctional ingredients – such as byproducts and contaminants – must be disclosed by 1 July 2020.
But the Household & Commercial Products Association says that the state’s environmental conservation department (NYSDEC) "[refused] to work collaboratively with all stakeholders" in implementing the rules, dashing hopes for a "consistent national model" for cleaning ingredient disclosure.
Instead, said the HCPA in a statement, the department "deliberately cultivated a complicated and increasingly contradictory set of disclosure rules at the behest of Governor Andrew M Cuomo, prompted by his desire to outdo California."
California’s Cleaning Products Right to Know Act, approved last year, will require manufacturers to disclose intentionally added ingredients online by 1 January 2020. But the states’ policies differ in several ways, including around which impurities and contaminants must be reported.
"The NYSDEC’s decision to move forward unilaterally ... is premature and leaves industry no choice but to consider all options, including litigation, to address the significant issues with this flawed guidance," said the HCPA.
The American Cleaning Institute agreed that the policy is "unnecessary and burdensome to manufacturers". And it will force companies to create new websites in order to sell their products in New York, it said.
The trade group said it is "disappointed by the department’s insinuation that consumers need to be ‘protected’ from ingredients in household cleaning products".
"Consumers should understand that cleaning product manufacturers already provide detailed [ingredient] information online."
The ACI maintains a voluntary ingredient disclosure initiative under which manufacturers list product ingredients, except incidental ones with no technical or functional effect.
It also launched the Cleaning Product Ingredient Safety Initiative (CPISI) website last year, which lists safety data on hundreds of chemicals in the US consumer cleaning product supply chain.‘Healthy for the economy’
But David Levine, co-founder and president of the American Sustainable Business Council, said that consumers are increasingly demanding more information about what is in their products. The new New York requirements, he said, "will help not only deliver what consumers want but will, in turn, grow a strong and healthy New York economy".
Joey Bergstein, CEO of the Unilever-owned consumer goods company Seventh Generation - an ASBC member - said that the company began displaying all ingredients on its packaging nearly ten years ago. He said this shows that disclosure "is not only good for consumers but good for business".
"We’re proud to have collaborated on this legislation and to see New York lead the nation in ingredient disclosure," he added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67601/consumer-product-group-floats-litigation-over-new-york-ingredient-policy
-
US EPA To Unveil New Antimicrobial Testing Programme In November
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
The US EPA plans to release a proposed strategy for revamping its antimicrobial testing programme (ATP) in November. It will publish a formal proposal next year.
The agency suspended the programme last November in response to a critical report from the EPA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). This found that the ATP did not adequately ensure that disinfectants remain effective after they are registered.
The key shortcoming identified by the OIG was that the programme "was not designed to consider risk to prioritise and select antimicrobial products for testing", César Cordero of the EPA’s antimicrobial division said at the Antimicrobial Workshop conference on 7 June.
And the "largest challenge" in redesigning it is weighing the numerous and diverse factors that could be considered in prioritising the approximately 600 substances under its purview, he said. Some of the factors the EPA is looking at include product characteristics, what labelling claims are being made, public health priorities and "implementation of new testing methods", Mr Cordero said.
"We need flexibility to change the priorities as the issues faced by hospitals changes," he added.
The EPA’s proposal will include a framework for periodic testing and a methodology for obtaining test samples, Mr Cordero said.
The EPA’s consultation on the programme redesign will include a webinar, scheduled for 21 June.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67655/us-epa-to-unveil-new-antimicrobial-testing-programme-in-november
-
Glyphosate Will Not Be Listed As A Carcinogen In California
Jun 13, 2018 | AGWeb
By Sonja Begemann
Earlier this week a California judge ruled glyphosate does not need a label warning stating it causes cancer. U.S. District Court Judge William Shuff denied an amendment that asked the state to require the warning.
The court issued its preliminary injunction Feb. 26, 2018, which blocked the enforcement of Proposition 65—requirement for any product known to cause cancer to be labeled. This week’s ruling denies the California Attorney General’s attempt to amend the court’s decision.
In the preliminary injunction the judge states: “It is inherently misleading for a warning to state that a chemical is known to the state of California to cause cancer based on the finding of only one organization (International Agency for Research on Cancer—IARC—which only found that substance is probably carcinogenic), when apparently all other regulatory and governmental bodies have found the opposite, including EPA.”
Even with additional evidence provided by the state’s Attorney General in this case, the judge ruled in favor of the chemical’s safety. “The heavy weight of evidence in record is that glyphosate is not known to cause cancer.”
The National Association of Wheat Growers led the charge to defend glyphosate and were joined by a broad group of agricultural organizations and companies.
https://www.agweb.com/article/glyphosate-will-not-be-listed-as-a-carcinogen-in-california/
-
Canadian NGO Urges Ingredient Disclosure In Consumer Products
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
NGO Environmental Defence is urging the Canadian government to follow the lead set by some US states in requiring full disclosure of ingredients found in consumer products.
The recommendation came in a statement welcoming New York state’s recently finalised ingredient disclosure policy for cleaning products.
"From July 2019, New Yorkers will have information about all of the chemical ingredients in cleaning products, including byproducts and trace-level contaminants," said Muhannad Malas, the NGO’s toxics programme manager.
"Canadian laws, on the other hand, continue to lack full disclosure of toxics in cleaning products, leaving people in the dark about the safety of the products they use to clean their homes."
The NGO is calling on the federal government to implement full disclosure rules for consumer products, such as cleaning and personal care products. This would allow people to "make more informed choices that protect them and their children from toxic chemicals".
The Canadian government is expected to reveal its proposal for revising the country’s chemicals management system, by the end of this month.
"It’s about time that our outdated rules for chemical disclosure that favour industry are updated to fulfil the public’s right to know and truly protect consumers," added Mr Malas.
US consumer products groups have protested that New York's requirements are "unnecessary", and have urged the state to repeal them.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67662/canadian-ngo-urges-ingredient-disclosure-in-consumer-products
-
Canada Finalises Environmental Guidelines For BPA, PFOS, Hexavalent Chromium
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemcial Watch
By Julie Miller
Canada has finalised Federal Environmental Quality Guidelines (FEQGs) for bisphenol-A (BPA), hexavalent chromium and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS).
The guidelines, which are based on the toxicity or hazards of the substances covered, are intended to provide voluntary pollution prevention targets, but can also inform possible risk management action.
Draft versions were published in February 2017.
BPA is used in a wide variety of products, from adhesives to brake fluid. Its use in food packaging, especially can linings, has become controversial. Like the US FDA, Canada has deemed this safe, despite criticism from NGOs. The substance is listed as a reproductive toxicant under California’s Proposition 65.
PFOS has also generated controversy because its presence in drinking water has been linked to health effects. It is no longer produced in the US or Canada, and is banned in Canada. However, debate continues on how to deal with "legacy" PFOS and related chemicals.
Chromium is a naturally occurring element. Hexavalent chromium – used in the metallurgical, refractory and chemical industries – is regulated as a toxic substance in Canada.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67654/canada-finalises-environmental-guidelines-for-bpa-pfos-hexavalent-chromium
-
Canada Reduces Review Fees For Disinfectants
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
A review of fees for disinfectant authorisation procedures in Canada will result in significantly lower increases than originally proposed, delegates heard at the Antimicrobial Workshop conference on 8 June.
Disinfectants are regulated alongside drugs and medical devices in Canada, and thus were covered by the large fee increases the government proposed in October.
A recent revision to this, however, made the increase "about 75% better than where we started", Heather Barker, from RB Hygiene & Home and a former Health Canada official, said at the conference in Arlington, VA.
Health Canada’s original proposal would have increased the annual 'right-to-sell fee' for all products covered from $1,152 to $4,587. The revision, published on 24 May, proposes a 'tiered' structure "that reflects the lower level of effort related to disinfectants and over-the-counter products compared with prescription drugs".
The fee for disinfectants would begin at $1,259 when the fees are finalised in 2019, and rise to $1,433 by 2022, it says.
The fee for 'full review' of a new disinfectant was to jump immediately from the current $4,305 to $16,214. Now, a small rise to $5,600 is proposed for 2019 and then to $10,938 over three years.
Review of disinfectant labelling changes, currently subject to a $325 administrative fee, will rise to $2,948, rather than $2,457.
Finally, the review deadline for disinfectant labelling submissions was shortened from 120 to 90 days. Fee refunds can be triggered if the government misses a deadline.'Fit for purpose'
Ms Barker said industry was also pleased that a revised guidance document on disinfectant regulation had come out of consultation. This was published in February.
"From where we started, I never thought we were going to end up with a set of guidance documents we were all happy with," she said.
Ms Barker said discussion is ongoing to "formalise current policy practices" through amendments to the Food and Drug Regulations.
She said disinfectant manufacturers would like to see legislation focusing specifically on their products rather than grouping them with drugs.
The government’s "focus has really gone towards prescription drugs and over-the-counter medicine," Ms Barker said. "We are looking for regulatory amendments, until we can get an act fit for purpose for our products."
She said proposed amendments are to be published in the spring of 2019 "in parallel" with revision of a new risk-based regulatory system for "self-care products".
That proposal, first issued for consultation in September 2016, will affect cosmetics, over-the-counter non-prescription drugs, and natural health products.
Health Canada will also propose revisions to the regulatory fee schedule for self-care products, once the new regulatory programme is established.
Separate new fees for biocides and pesticides came into effect in April last year. These are regulated by the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) in Canada.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67631/canada-reduces-review-fees-for-disinfectants
-
EU JRC Issues Policy Brief On The Safety Of Mixtures
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission's Joint Research Centre has issued a policy brief on ensuring the safety of chemical mixtures.
In a headline summary, it says:
humans and the environment are exposed to a cocktail of chemicals from different sources;
combined exposure to multiple chemcals can lead to health/environmental effects even if single substances in the mixture do not exceed safe levels;
their assessment and management is only partly covered by current legislation, which focuses on single substances in isolated sectors;
methodology to address their risks is available, yet many knowledge gaps need to be filled. In particular, co-exposure patterns are mostly unknown; and
the JRC is carrying out research on new strategies to assess the combination effects of chemicals.
The brief, Something from nothing, ensuring the safety of chemical mixtures, is freely available on the EU publications website.
It is based on the JRC report: Cross-sector EU approach to the combined exposures and effects.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67646/eu-jrc-issues-policy-brief-on-the-safety-of-mixtures
-
ClientEarth Slams ‘Unreasonable’ Delays on REACH Decisions
Jun 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission is putting human health and the environment at risk because of "excessive delays" in regulatory decisions on chemical controls, NGO ClientEarth has said.
In a letter addressed to the director generals of DG Grow and DG Environment – Lowri Evans and Daniel Calleja Crespo – ClientEarth shared the detailed findings of a study into the time it takes the EU executive to make decisions under the REACH authorisation and restriction processes.
The study revealed that the EU executive’s decisions are "delayed unreasonably in a whopping 96% of all authorisation cases and in 89% of all restriction cases".
Taking into account the different applicable comitology procedures, ClientEarth says the Commission "should not need more than five to seven months" to adopt an authorisation, following the opinion of Echa’s Committees for Risk Assessment and Socio-economic Analysis (Rac and Seac). And it should take "no more than eight to ten months for restrictions".
The Commission is also responsible for another fundamental problem, the NGO says: a lack of transparency in the prioritisation and timeline of adopting authorisation decisions and restrictions. ‘Extreme’ examples
Available data reveals a "systemic problem" with 51% of authorisations adopted in more than 12 months, ClientEarth says. And the situation is not improving: in 53% of the pending authorisation cases, the Rac and Seac opinions are "already more than one year old, and 20% of pending cases [are] between ten and 12 months old".
It also identified several "extreme cases of manifestly excessive" delays: two authorisations adopted two and a half years after the Rac and Seac opinion, and a restriction adopted more than three years after it.
The NGO gives the example of the phthalate DEHP, which is widely used as a plasticiser in the manufacturing of articles made of PVC. Echa’s scientific committees concluded in 2014 and 2015 that the companies requesting authorisation were using the substance "without adequately controlling" risks for workers exposed during its production.
As of June, the Commission is yet to adopt a final decision on these cases and has not explained why these long delays have occurred. While other "certain cases have benefited from special treatment by being decided in less than five months", ClientEarth says.
It has called on the Commission to "use its power and resources to correct its maladministration and speed up" its processes.Commission response
A Commission spokesperson told Chemical Watch that the EU executive takes human health "extremely seriously and strongly rejects" claims that it prioritises business interests over human health and the environment.
Over the past ten years, he said the EU has "significantly reduced" citizens’ exposure to harmful chemicals through bans and has identified more than 181 chemicals that companies need to gradually phase out.
The Commission "constantly evaluates" how to further enhance protection of consumers, workers and the environment, including by speeding up the authorisation process, he said.
In March, it proposed a number of concrete actions to further improve the implementation of REACH. This included measures to improve the quality of registration dossiers submitted by companies and to simplify the overall authorisation process.
On 11 June, the Commission held a conference, attended by over 200 participants representing NGOs, stakeholders, industry and member states, where it discussed how to further improve the system, the spokesperson said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67661/clientearth-slams-unreasonable-delays-on-reach-decisions
-
Phillips 66 to Launch $1.5 Billion Expansion of Sweeny Hub
Jun 13, 2018 | Chron
By Katherine Blunt
Phillips 66 said Wednesday that it would expand its Sweeny Hub near Old Ocean as part of a $1.5 billion project to transport and process more natural gas liquids amid a boom in Gulf Coast petrochemicals manufacturing.
The Houston refining company plans to construct two units to process mixed natural gas liquids into separate components including ethane, propane and butane — all feedstocks used to make petrochemicals or certain types of fuel. Each unit will have the capacity to process 150,000 barrels a day.
It also plans to build additional pipelines and storage to support the expanded operations. The project is expected to start up in late 2020.
In a statement, CEO Greg Garland said the expansion will better position the facility to capitalize on booming production in the Permian Basin in West Texas. Drilling there has unleashed a steady supply of low-cost natural gas that has supported some $60 billion in petrochemicals investments along the Gulf Coast.
The project is expected to support 2,000 construction-related jobs and 25 full-time jobs. When the expansion is complete, the facility will have the capacity to process and separate 400,000 barrels of natural gas liquids a day.
Phillips 66 has for months been expanding its petrochemicals manufacturing capacity through Chevron Phillips Chemical Co., its joint venture with oil producer Chevron.
Chevron Phillips Chemical earlier this year began operating an ethane cracker at its Cedar Bayou complex in Baytown. The cracker, the company's first new one in decades, processes ethane into ethylene to make plastics.
That ethylene supply supports the production of polyethylene — the world's most common plastic — at the company's Sweeny complex. There, it built two new polyethylene units that began operating in September with the combined capacity to produce 4.4 billion pounds of plastics a year.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Phillips-66-to-expand-natural-gas-processing-at-12990532.php
-
America's Gas Prices May Double by 2040 as LNG Exports Grow
Jun 13, 2018 | Bloomberg Quint
By Rachel Adams-Heard
(Bloomberg) -- American gas prices could double by 2040 as the U.S. exports more liquefied natural gas, but consumers will be shielded as production of the fuel increases and trade balances improve.
That’s the conclusion from a study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy that found an almost 50 percent chance of gas reaching $5 to $6.50 per million British thermal units over the next two decades. U.S. consumers won’t suffer, the study said, because LNG exports will boost the economy while higher output helps mitigate the cost.
The U.S. is already shipping record amounts of super-cooled natural gas overseas as production from shale basins surges. The nation is now a net exporter of the fuel for the first time since the 1950s, putting the U.S. on course to rival Qatar and Australia for global LNG dominance in the next five years as new Gulf Coast terminals start up.
U.S. gas futures have averaged about $2.90/MMBtu over the past year amid ample supply. Some groups, including several Democratic lawmakers and manufacturers, have argued that a jump in LNG exports would send prices sharply higher, hurting consumers.
This latest study, conducted by NERA Economic Consulting, should help assuage those concerns, according to Katie Bays, an analyst at Height Capital Markets. "For policymakers who are on the fence on whether or not capping LNG exports is a good policy objective, this will tell them it shouldn’t be a priority," she said by telephone.
https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/2018/06/12/america-s-gas-exports-may-double-prices-by-2040-as-demand-surges
-
Enbridge Starts Valley Crossing Natgas Pipe Work At Texas-Mexico Border
Jun 13, 2018 | Reuters
By Scott DiSavino
(Reuters) - Canadian energy company Enbridge Inc said it started construction of the offshore border crossing section of its $1.6 billion Valley Crossing natural gas pipeline between Texas and Mexico, according to a federal filing made available on Wednesday.
The 168-mile (270-kilometer) Valley Crossing project is designed to carry up to 2.6 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd) of gas from Texas to help Mexico meet its growing power needs as generators there shift away from fuel oil and imported liquefied natural gas.
One billion cubic feet is enough to fuel about five million U.S. homes for a day.
The Valley Crossing project has been under construction since April 2017, according to the Enbridge website. In May, Enbridge said it had “substantially completed” the onshore part of the pipe and was working on the offshore part to meet a fourth quarter 2018 in service date.
Valley Crossing will connect in the Gulf of Mexico to the Sur de Texas-Tuxpan pipeline under construction by a joint venture between units of TransCanada Corp and Sempra Energy. Once complete, it will be the biggest gas pipe between the two countries.
There are already about 20 pipelines that can move gas from the United States to Mexico with a total capacity of around 10.9 bcfd, according to U.S. energy data.
That includes Howard Energy’s 0.6-bcfd Impulsora pipeline, which is expected to enter service this month.
Analysts have said, however, that constraints on the Mexican side of the border have so far limited a big increase in U.S. pipeline exports.
Since the start of the year U.S. exports to Mexico have averaged 4.0 bcfd, up just a bit from the 3.9-bcfd average during the same period in 2017, according to Thomson Reuters data.
While the pipeline constraints remain, Mexican energy companies have been buying more U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) than any other country since February 2016 when the first U.S. LNG export terminal opened in the lower 48 states at Cheniere Energy Inc’s Sabine Pass in Louisiana.
Mexico bought 50 cargoes of LNG totaling 167.8 billion cubic feet of gas from the United States, 18.8 percent of total U.S. LNG exports between February 2016 through the end of 2017.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-enbridge-inc-natgas-mexico/enbridge-starts-valley-crossing-natgas-pipe-work-at-texas-mexico-border-idUSKBN1J926O
-
Records: Air Chief Meets Often With Regulated Industries
Jun 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Bill Wehrum was just settling in as EPA's air chief last December when he returned to familiar turf: the offices of his former law firm for a speech to an audience that included a onetime client, according to newly released records.
His speech at the Washington offices of Hunton & Williams LLP addressed regulations affecting power plants and other stationary sources of air pollution, according to the entry in Wehrum's official work calendar.
Among those represented at the gathering: the Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG), which Wehrum had represented as a Hunton & Williams partner not long before.
While the event didn't cross any ethical boundaries, it typified the close ties Wehrum has maintained to industry players since rejoining EPA late last year, according to almost 600 pages of calendar entries released late yesterday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by E&E News.
The entries — far more detailed than the bare-bones schedule posted on EPA's website and running through February — show dozens of meetings and phone calls with groups representing automakers, manufacturers and other businesses as well as conservative think tanks like the Competitive Enterprise Institute. They show a handful involving consumer or environmental organizations.
In a statement released today through an EPA spokeswoman in response to emailed questions, Wehrum said he is "very accommodating to requests for speeches or meetings and adheres strictly to ethics guidelines before accepting invitations and while attending."
His calendar, Wehrum added, largely reflects the requests received, depending on what works with his schedule.
It's unclear whether many environmental or public health groups, who largely opposed Wehrum's nomination to head the Office of Air and Radiation, have attempted to connect directly since he rejoined EPA last November.
John Walke, clean air director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a phone interview that he had not sought a meeting and doubted it would have made any difference in EPA's positions.
While Walke didn't see any attempt on Wehrum's watch to shut down broader communications between the air office and environmental groups, the calendar entries "do speak for themselves that his agenda is to carry out the wishes and desires of regulated polluters, and that is not NRDC's mission," he said.
This is Wehrum's second tour at the air office. After serving as counsel and then as acting chief from 2001 to 2007 during George W. Bush's administration, he left after congressional Democrats blocked his bid to head the office on a Senate-confirmed basis.
In private practice at Hunton & Williams, his long client list included heavyweights like UARG, Koch Industries Inc., and the American Forest & Paper Association.
In ethics paperwork filed last year before he won Senate confirmation, Wehrum said he would recuse himself from involvement in specific matters involving former clients for a year after last providing a service. But those industry ties — coupled with Wehrum's record in his previous stint at the EPA air office — have sparked continued scrutiny from Democrats.
In April, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, asked EPA for the final list of matters from which Wehrum is recused (E&E News PM, April 25). The agency has not yet responded, a Whitehouse spokesman said today.
Even critics concede Wehrum's expertise in Clean Air Act issues. The calendar entries show he immediately went to work after being sworn in Nov. 13, 2017, as assistant administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation.
Late that afternoon, he attended a briefing in EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's office on the renewable fuel standard program. Controversy surrounding the program temporarily snagged his nomination after corn-state senators questioned the Trump administration's commitment to ethanol.
The issue has continued to be a sticking point for the administration, and RFS-related meetings have since surfaced repeatedly on Wehrum's calendar.
His December speech at Hunton & Williams' offices did not pose a recusal problem, despite the presence of a former client, because it didn't entail taking any official step on UARG's behalf, Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, said in an interview.
"You can talk with them, you can socialize with them, you can give a lecture, as long as it doesn't involve taking official action," Holman said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/13/stories/1060084393
-
GAO Launches Social Cost of Carbon Study
Jun 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Nick Sobczyk
The government's top watchdog has officially started its study of how the Trump administration uses the social cost of carbon metric to calculate the impact of federal actions on greenhouse gas emissions.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and six other Democrats asked the Government Accountability Office in December to look into the Trump administration's rationale for raising its default discount rate for climate regulations, a move that allowed EPA to vastly lower its cost-per-ton calculation for carbon.
They also asked GAO to look at the reasoning behind previous discount rates, as well as how states and other countries assess the social cost of carbon (E&E News PM, Dec. 5, 2017).
GAO agreed to take on the study soon after the request, and Whitehouse and GAO said today work had begun. A GAO spokesman said the independent watchdog did not yet have an estimated completion date for the study and is determining scope and methodology.
"Carbon pollution is triggering big changes. It's threatening our homes and businesses with stronger storms and rising seas. It's sparking bigger wildfires and longer droughts, and killing our crops. And it's warming and acidifying our ocean waters, displacing our fisheries," Whitehouse said in a statement. "These changes all come with a price tag — and we ought to know what that price will be."
The Obama administration pegged the social cost of carbon at around $42 per ton by 2020. That calculation relied on a 3 percent discount rate, a number that helps measure how much society is willing to pay now to avoid future damages.
But EPA's proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan last year estimates the social cost of carbon between $1 and $6 per ton, with a 7 percent discount rate, which some experts feel is unreasonable (Climatewire, Oct. 25, 2017).
President Trump last year also disbanded an interagency working group charged with calculating the social cost of carbon.
"The president's decision to undermine the social cost of carbon in our policymaking is a bad one," Whitehouse said. "This report will help us learn just how bad, and show how states and other countries are using the social cost of carbon to measure the risks they see from climate change. I'm glad to see this study is moving forward."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/13/stories/1060084325
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested