Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 14/06/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) G7 Summit: Leaders Agree to Ocean Plastics Charter
Jun 14, 2018 | Plastics Technology
By Heather Caliendo
The leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom agreed to The Ocean Plastics Charter, an annex to the Charlevoix Blueprint for Healthy Oceans, Seas and Resilient Coastal Communities, at the G7 Summit this past weekend. -
(ACC Mentioned) LLDPE Resin Prices Drop; HDPE and LDPE Flat
Jun 14, 2018 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
Average North American selling prices for linear low density polyethylene resin fell 3 cents per pound in May, while prices for high and low density PE were flat. -
Textile industry Will Adopt Less Hazardous Materials, Report Says
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
In the next ten years, the textile and apparel industry will adopt new materials that deliver unprecedented performance and eliminate harmful chemicals from products and manufacturing processes, according to a venture capital fund report. -
GOP Chairman Seeks ‘Sufficient’ Funding for EPA Watchdog Office
Jun 14, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Republican chairman of the Senate committee that oversees the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to ensure that the agency’s internal watchdog office has the funding it needs. -
Senate Appropriators Approve Interior-EPA Spending Bill
Jun 14, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
The Senate Appropriations Committee voted today to advance its $35.8 billion Interior-EPA spending bill for fiscal year 2019 to the floor. -
Want Pruitt to Talk? Offer Soft Questions and No Press
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Scott Waldman, Robin Bravender and Maxine Joselow
Not long after his confirmation, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt agreed to speak to the Association of Clean Water Administrators — if reporters were barred from the meeting. -
(ACC Mentioned) US EPA to Assess Regulatory Cost-Benefit Analysis
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA is seeking input on whether and how to change the way it evaluates costs and benefits when making regulatory decisions. -
US EPA Round-Up
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has published in the Federal Register the ‘problem formulations’ for the first ten substances subject to risk evaluation under the recently reformed TSCA. -
US Congress Likely to Reject EPA Cuts Again
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
The US Congress has indicated it will probably reject the Trump administration’s proposals to slash the EPA’s budget again, as House and Senate appropriations committees have begun moving spending bills for fiscal 2019 that would fund the agency at or near current levels. -
Study Links Groundwater Pumping to Arsenic in Aquifer
Jun 14, 2018 | News Deeply (In E&E Greenwire)
By Tara Lohan
Excessive pumping of groundwater in California's San Joaquin Valley has led to elevated levels of arsenic in an aquifer, according to new research. -
State Finalizes Nation's Toughest Rules for Lead in Water
Jun 14, 2018 | Detroit News
By Beth LeBlanc
Michigan today will wrap up the toughest lead drinking water rules in the nation. -
US Investors Chide Companies for Thin Conflict Minerals Reports
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A group of US institutional investors has called on companies to continue to submit "thorough" conflict minerals reports, despite the compliance ambiguity introduced by the overseeing agency. -
Cross-Sector Initiative Sets Full Materials Disclosure Goal
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
In its first technical meeting, a group of industry representatives seeking solutions to information on chemicals in products has agreed a long-term objective to achieve full materials declaration. -
EU Policy Must Improve Chemical Content Information, Say NGOs
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
To establish a successful circular economy in the EU, the European Commission must ensure that its plans for a product policy framework help manufacturers avoid hazardous substances, according to European NGOs. -
Cefic Head Urges ‘Smart REACH Foreign Policy’
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Nick Hazlewood
With the passing of the final REACH deadline it is time to turn the Regulation into a competitive advantage, delegates at the Helsinki Chemicals Forum heard today. -
Maryland Suing EPA on Power Plant Pollution in Other States
Jun 14, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
A federal judge has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to respond to Maryland’s request for a declaration that power plants in five upwind states are contributing to Maryland’s air quality problems. -
NYC Tests 'Nuisance' Theory in Federal Court
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Saqib Rahim
A federal judge gave no obvious indication yesterday that he plans to hear New York City's climate lawsuit against five multinational oil companies. -
Rover Ordered to Pay $430,030 for West Virginia Water Pollution Violations
Jun 14, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
Rover Pipeline LLC has agreed to pay a $430,030 civil penalty for numerous sediment and erosion control violations during construction in West Virginia, according to a consent order released by the state’s Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP). -
Higher Carbon Emissions a 'Step Back' for World Energy Order — BP
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
A pickup in world economic activity last year drove up energy use and energy intensity, in what BP PLC described as a "two steps forward, one step back" moment for global progress toward a lower-carbon energy profile. -
Why This Leading Energy Company Sees Opportunity In a Low-Carbon Future
Jun 14, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Tom Murray
Equinor, formerly known as Statoil, is not your average energy company. -
South Dakota High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Keystone XL
Jun 14, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
South Dakota’s Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal from opponents of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, saying a lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear their cases. -
Save the Chemical Safety Board [Editorial]
Jun 14, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
All most of us saw of the burning Arkema plant in Crosby during Hurricane Harvey were pictures of fire and smoke billowing into the air. -
BNSF Seeks PTC Deadline Extension Due to Interoperability Delays
Jun 14, 2018 | Progressive Railroading
BNSF Railway Co. has asked the U.S. Department of Transportation for a two-year extension to the federally mandated positive train control (PTC) deadline due to interoperability delays with other railroads, the Class I announced yesterday. -
GAO Begins Assessment of Carbon 'Cost' Tool
Jun 14, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has begun an assessment of the Obama-era social cost of carbon (SCC) tool for estimating climate damages, the latest official scrutiny of the Trump administration's reduction of the metric's projected benefits of cutting greenhouse gas emissions. -
Study Tallies Adverse Impacts of Rollbacks, Sparking EPA Criticism
Jun 14, 2018 | Inside EPA
Two Harvard professors are estimating that planned Trump administration rollbacks of Obama-era EPA rules will result in more than 80,000 deaths over ten years, sparking strong criticisms from agency officials as well as its new top air quality advisor.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) G7 Summit: Leaders Agree to Ocean Plastics Charter
Jun 14, 2018 | Plastics Technology
By Heather Caliendo
The leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom agreed to The Ocean Plastics Charter, an annex to the Charlevoix Blueprint for Healthy Oceans, Seas and Resilient Coastal Communities, at the G7 Summit this past weekend. The U.S. and Japan did not put their names on the resolution.
The charter seeks to move toward a more resource-efficient and sustainable approach to the management of plastics. Some of the actions include:It pledges to work with the industry toward making all plastics 100% recyclable by 2030.Working with industry toward recycled content of at least 50% in plastic products where applicable by 2030.Working with industry and other levels of government to recycle and reuse at least 55% of plastic packaging by 2030 and recover 100% of all plastics by 2040.Assessing current plastic consumption and undertaking prospective analysis on the level of plastic consumption by major sector use, while identifying and encouraging the elimination of unnecessary uses.
Steve Russell, vice president of plastics for the American Chemistry Council (ACC) released the following statement:
“Marine debris is a pressing global issue, and ACC is committed to being part of the solution. Our plastic makers have set and are working to achieve aggressive goals for the reuse, recycling and recovery of 100% of plastic packaging by 2040, with interim goals by 2030.
To achieve these goals, we will need to work closely with stakeholders and governments, including members of the G7. We look forward to collaborating on a range of activities outlined in the Charter—including sustainable design, research, information sharing, and creative new ideas like the Plastics Innovation Challenge—in the months and years ahead. We believe investing in waste management systems will be critical to making real progress, and we appreciate Canada’s leadership in pledging $100 million to jumpstart that effort.
In facing the challenge of marine litter there is much we can agree on, and even more we must act on, recognizing different approaches and priorities to getting there. Plastics are essential to helping us live safer, more sustainable lives. But they have no place in our oceans or in our environment.
We know ocean pollution is a large and complex problem. But this problem is solvable if we work together and stay focused on capturing and transforming municipal solid waste at its source.”
The Plastics Industry Association (PLASTICS), Washington, D.C., released its first official statement on marine debris:
“Plastics offer many sustainability advantages that can significantly reduce greenhouse gasses, water consumption and air emissions,” says PLASTICS’ President & CEO William R. Carteaux. “But plastics must be prevented from entering the environment through investment in proper recovery systems. The entire plastics industry is committed to being part of the solution – finding real ways to combat the problem.”
In the statement, PLASTICS outlines the following priorities:
PLASTICS supports data driven research efforts that identify opportunities to meaningfully address marine debris. These opportunities include, but are not limited to: educating manufacturers and the public to prevent litterexpanding collection opportunitiesdeveloping new end markets that increase demand for recycled plasticspromoting the design of plastic products in a way that facilitates recoverypromoting clean-upsand, ensuring plastics are managed properly at manufacturing sites through programs like Operation Clean Sweep and Zero Net Waste
Be sure to check out the July issue of Plastics Technology, which will feature an in-depth look at ocean-bound plastics and how some companies are turning a global problem into a useful resource.
https://www.ptonline.com/blog/post/g7-summit-leaders-agree-to-ocean-plastics-charter-
-
(ACC Mentioned) LLDPE Resin Prices Drop; HDPE and LDPE Flat
Jun 14, 2018 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
Average North American selling prices for linear low density polyethylene resin fell 3 cents per pound in May, while prices for high and low density PE were flat.
The 3-cent LLDPE decline came after prices had been flat the previous two months. Prior to that, prices had climbed 4 cents in February. Sources contacted by Plastics News said that increased imports of finished LLDPE bags may have had a short-term impact on domestic resin demand, driving prices down.
Sources added that supplies of HDPE were tight in May, and that supplies of LDPE were snug as well, even though prices for those materials were unchanged for the third straight month.
U.S./Canadian PE sales were mostly positive through April, as the impact of new production capacity throughout North America began to be seen. Regional sales of HDPE surged up 7.5 percent, according to the American Chemistry Council, with LLDPE sales soaring almost 12 percent. But sales of LDPE have struggled, slipping almost 2 percent.
For HDPE, domestic sales growth of almost 7 percent was augmented by export growth of almost 10 percent. Domestic HDPE sales growth in that period was boosted by a gain of almost 18 percent for sales into pipe and conduit, including a gain of almost 26 percent in water pipe.
In LLDPE, exports boomed more than 45 percent in the four-month period, boosting domestic sales that grew almost 3 percent. Domestic LLDPE sales into injection molding grew more than 8 percent in the three-month period.
LDPE's 1 percent domestic sales drop in early 2018 was worsened by a plunge of 3 percent in export sales. In spite of the overall sales decline, sales of LDPE into extrusion coating outside of paperboard jumped more than 13 percent for the four months.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20180614/NEWS/180619950/lldpe-resin-prices-drop-hdpe-and-ldpe-flat
-
Textile industry Will Adopt Less Hazardous Materials, Report Says
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
In the next ten years, the textile and apparel industry will adopt new materials that deliver unprecedented performance and eliminate harmful chemicals from products and manufacturing processes, according to a venture capital fund report.
The report Safer Chemistry Innovation in the Textile and Apparel Industry, says it aims to "stimulate conversations and catalyse innovation that brings safer and more sustainable textiles and apparel to market."
It was released last week by venture capital fund Safer Made, which invests in safer products and technologies, with support from the global initiative, Fashion for Good.
"With this report we aim to enable productive conversations between both sector ‘insiders’ —brands, retailers, mills, and chemicals and equipment suppliers — and those outside the sector, such as innovators, investors, governments and the advocacy and philanthropic community leading to partnerships and investment decisions," said Martin Mulvihill, partner at Safer Made.Materials innovation
"The solutions to safer chemistry challenges are quite often new materials and processes that deliver new performance characteristics," the report says.
It evaluates the role various harmful chemicals have in the production of textiles and apparel and identifies five key innovation areas.
Key innovation areas:new materials - synthetic fibers, cellulosic fibers, leather alternatives;new safer chemistries – safer finishing chemistries, bio-based dyes;waterless processing – waterless dyeing processes, waterless finishing processes;fiber recycling – cotton, polyester, blends, nylon; and supply chain information management – chemical management information systems, traceability systems.
Within each innovation area, the report highlights work by both startups and established suppliers to bring safer chemistry and materials to market. It showcases the work of more than a hundred young innovative companies.
"The industry is hungry for new materials with new performance characteristics, and there are several companies aiming to bring them to market," the report says.
This need for materials innovation "provides the opportunity to adopt new materials that perform better and are safer, and to design safer manufacturing processes," it continues.Drivers to change
It identifies three major factors driving the adoption of safer chemistry in the textile and apparel sector:calls for transparency from consumers, retailers and the advocacy community;increasing public awareness of the environmental pollution associated with the manufacturing of textiles apparel products; andtextile and apparel brands and retailers adopting the circular economy language, concepts and frameworks.
The report concludes that the fashion industry can emerge as a circular and regenerative sector of the economy.
Katrin Ley, managing director of Fashion for Good said: "An open innovation culture is crucial, and Safer Made’s report provides different stakeholders with valuable information to support them in the transition to only good fashion."
https://chemicalwatch.com/67688/textile-industry-will-adopt-less-hazardous-materials-report-says
-
GOP Chairman Seeks ‘Sufficient’ Funding for EPA Watchdog Office
Jun 14, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Republican chairman of the Senate committee that oversees the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to ensure that the agency’s internal watchdog office has the funding it needs.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) sent a letter this week to Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee subpanel with authority over the EPA’s budget, advocating for better funding for the EPA’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
The OIG has taken on numerous high-profile investigations or audits involving EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s ethics and spending scandals, which threatens to strain the office’s budget.
While Barrasso did not endorse a specific funding level, he said he supports “sufficient funding” for the OIG.
Barrasso also cited a letter Inspector General Arthur Elkins wrote in February objecting to the Trump administration’s budget, which proposed $46 million for fiscal 2019, a significant cut. Elkins asked for $62 million.
A $46 million budget for the OIG would “substantially inhibit the OIG from performing the duties of the office,” Elkins said in the letter to Mick Mulvaney, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.
“Please note that since Mr. Elkins' letter, the OIG has not only expanded a number of ongoing reviews, but has also initiated additional reviews concerning a wide range of allegations related to the Office of the Administrator,” Barrasso wrote to Murkowski.
Despite Elkins’s plea, the House Appropriations Committee last week passed a spending bill for the EPA and Interior Department that would provide just $50 million for the EPA’s OIG.
Lawmakers rejected a proposal from Democrats to boost the OIG’s funding level.
Murkowski’s subcommittee approved its version of the EPA and Interior spending bill Tuesday, but it did not release the text of the legislation publicly.
The full Senate Appropriations Committee is planning to vote on the bill Thursday, and will likely release it to the public after the vote.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/392258-gop-chairman-seeks-sufficient-funding-for-epa-watchdog-office
-
Senate Appropriators Approve Interior-EPA Spending Bill
Jun 14, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
The Senate Appropriations Committee voted today to advance its $35.8 billion Interior-EPA spending bill for fiscal year 2019 to the floor.
The legislation cleared the committee unanimously, 31-0. Lawmakers avoided offering any amendments, leaving potentially controversial votes for the Senate floor.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) said he included in the bill’s committee report language prohibiting funds in the bill from being used “to break the standards of ethical conduct for employees of the executive branch.” That includes “use of position for private gain” and “use of official time to perform [personal] duties,” Udall said.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has been accused of using EPA aides and resources to carry out personal errands such as a housing search, and to seek employment for his wife.
The bill keeps EPA funding steady at just over $8 billion, while Interior would get $13 billion, with its key agencies getting roughly the same amounts as in 2018.
The House Appropriations Committee passed its own Interior-EPA package last week.
WHAT’S NEXT: Senate leaders are pushing to get all appropriations bills to the floor this summer, but the Senate has not brought an Interior-EPA appropriations bill to the floor in years.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Want Pruitt to Talk? Offer Soft Questions and No Press
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Scott Waldman, Robin Bravender and Maxine Joselow
Not long after his confirmation, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt agreed to speak to the Association of Clean Water Administrators — if reporters were barred from the meeting.
"Could you please confirm that this is a closed press event?" wrote Millan Hupp, Pruitt's former scheduler.
Organizers told them not to worry.
"If the press should appear, we'll take appropriate action," wrote Annette Ivey, the group's director of operations.
Limited press access, friendly conversations and audiences that welcome conservatives are a few of the perks that industry groups and some media organizations offered Pruitt in return for speaking to them, according to a trove of emails recently released under the Freedom of Information Act.
The thousands of documents, released after the Sierra Club filed a lawsuit to get them, reveal behind-the-scenes negotiations with EPA staff as outside groups tried to lure Pruitt for interviews, speeches and other appearances. The email conversations are the latest examples of Pruitt and his team steering the EPA chief toward groups and press outlets that they deem "friendly."
As Pruitt was preparing for a trip to Iowa in November, the communications director for the Iowa Association of Electric Cooperatives emailed EPA press secretary Kelsi Daniell to ask for an interview with the industry group's magazine. Erin Campbell of the Iowa industry group sent along five questions they wanted to ask and said, "Let me know if any of these give you heartburn. This would be a friendly interview environment and we're keeping the conversation focused on Iowa consumers."
Campbell said EPA could review the article before it went to print.
The pitch worked. An exclusive interview with Pruitt appeared in the Living With Energy in Iowaindustry magazine.
The emails also show that keeping press away from Pruitt is a priority and that aides screen for "unfriendly" outlets. In one email, Pruitt's aides invite a local Fox News television station approved by the White House to an October event for the Tennessee Farm Bureau.
"FYI our comms team has invited Fox 17 to cover and interview Administrator Pruitt after the event. Kevin — would that be an issue for y'all? The White House recommended," wrote Tate Bennett, deputy associate administrator of EPA's Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations.Don't advertise Pruitt's appearance
A constant thread in the emails is Hupp, Pruitt's former scheduler, reiterating to event planners the need for closed press. There are requests to tell reporters about an event after it's over and for keeping the administrator's name off promotional materials. For example, after Pruitt was scheduled to speak at a Federalist Society event in Florida in February, his aides wrote that his participation should not be publicized.
"One item in particular we'll be looking for information on is how this event will be advertised," wrote Hayley Ford, a Pruitt aide. "We would appreciate the Administrator's name not being included on any materials until we have this conversation."
In other emails, right-leaning media outlets promise soft coverage and play up Pruitt's record on rolling back regulations to score interviews. One conservative radio host offered to let Pruitt talk about anything he wanted.
If Pruitt appeared on New York businessman John Catsimatidis' talk radio show, the EPA boss could "talk about anything he would like, most recently coal," wrote Matt Wanning of Red Apple Group, the businessman's real estate and aviation company.
A Breitbart News reporter said he planned to ask Pruitt about common conservative talking points.
Charlie Spiering, Breitbart's White House correspondent, said he wanted to discuss "rolling back some of the overreaching regulations and fighting the special green interest groups."
Spiering scored a sit-down interview with Pruitt in Breitbart's offices. The resulting story was a flattering look at an EPA boss who promised to bring "originalism" and "regulatory certainty" to an agency that he felt had "lost its way in the Obama years."
Last August, the Washington Examiner's editorial director, Hugo Gurdon, wanted Pruitt to do an exclusive interview with his paper, followed by a keynote speech at an energy and environment event.
"Washington Examiner is an ideal platform for the discussion of conservative policy ideas, as we have millions of readers willing to give Republican and conservative politicians a fair and sympathetic hearing," Gurdon wrote to Pruitt's chief of staff, Ryan Jackson.
The Examiner got the interview and published a number of stories, Gurdon told E&E News yesterday. That included this story titled, "Scott Pruitt criticizes Obama as 'environmental savior,' moves EPA away from climate change."
The emails also show that Pruitt prefers a gentle touch at luncheons, with a "fireside chat" format where moderators from conservative think tanks ask him preapproved questions. Before his talk at the Iowa electric co-op event, an organizer reached out with some specific questions, including "Does the Clean Air Act give the EPA the authority to regulate carbon emitted from electric generation facilities?"
Bennett, the deputy associate administrator of EPA's Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, quickly rejected the questions.
"No — if they want to talk to him about these before hand, that's fine. Way too specific for a fireside chat. Sorry," she wrote.
When Pruitt traveled to a Texas Earth Day event in April 2017, a mock-up of the schedule that required the administrator to be on stage shows "questions prepared and agreed beforehand."
Before Michigan Farm Bureau President Carl Bednarski introduced Pruitt at a November event, his comments were sent to EPA for preapproval. They included a request to tell the audience not to shoot videos or take photos "as a show of respect to our special guest."'Nice rumor mill hatchet job'
The emails also offer a glimpse into how EPA staff members deal with press coverage they don't like.
In May 2017, just before President Trump announced his plans to pull the United States out of the Paris climate accord, Axios reporter Amy Harder reached out to Jackson, Pruitt's chief of staff, about a story she was writing.
"We're hearing some stuff about the Paris deal, in particular how Administrator Pruitt has been involved, and we're hearing President Trump is looking to decide this week to withdraw from it," Harder wrote.
Later that day, she sent Jackson a link to the story, co-written with reporter Jonathan Swan.
They reported that Pruitt had been telling aides he wanted them to limit their public lobbying for a withdrawal from Paris and that the White House told Pruitt to lay off TV appearances until Trump announced his decision.
Jackson wasn't pleased. He wrote to Harder, "Nice rumor mill hatchet job. Don't contact me again."
Jackson didn't respond to a request for comment about the exchange.
The emails also show how EPA staff and Andrew Wheeler — then Trump's nominee for deputy administrator — responded to coverage of Wheeler's past criticisms of Trump.
Dino Grandoni of The Washington Post wrote to EPA's press office last October asking for comment about Wheeler's February 2016 criticisms of Trump on Facebook.
Wheeler had said of Trump, "no one really knows what his political beliefs are," he "doesn't understand how the government works" and "he is a bully."
Jackson strategized about a response with Wheeler and then-communications aide Liz Bowman. "Andy, this was when you were supporting [Republican Florida Sen. Marco] Rubio but you changed your support to legitimately favor Trump," Jackson wrote. "What can we say further on this?"
Wheeler, who's now EPA's deputy administrator, wrote that he had later gone to hear Trump speak at a rally, where he gave "the most comprehensive energy speech I had ever heard from a Presidential candidate. I learned quickly that the press had been misrepresenting his views and campaign."
In a later email, Wheeler apologized to Jackson and Bowman that "this has become an issue."
Bowman replied, "Oh gosh, don't apologize. This is the smallest fire we will put out all day."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/06/14/stories/1060084431
-
(ACC Mentioned) US EPA to Assess Regulatory Cost-Benefit Analysis
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA is seeking input on whether and how to change the way it evaluates costs and benefits when making regulatory decisions.
The agency says how it manages its cost-benefit analysis across multiple environmental statutes has been inconsistent, leading to a "risk of uncertainty and confusion".
It has therefore issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), through which it will consider "ways to codify commonsense, best practices" for this.
"Many have complained that the previous administration inflated the benefits and underestimated the costs of its regulations through questionable cost-benefit analysis," EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said.
"This action is the next step towards providing clarity and real-world accuracy with respect to the impact of the agency's decisions on the economy and the regulated community."
The American Chemistry Council welcomed the news. "Efficient and effective rulemaking requires a realistic valuation of economic impacts," the trade group told Chemical Watch. "Greater consistency and transparency in the process will promote a vibrant and competitive US chemistry industry and manufacturing sector."
"While the scope of any future proposal is to be determined, we believe EPA’s process for developing and implementing regulations must allow for robust analysis and a clear understanding of costs and benefits," the ACC added.Impact on TSCA?
Larry Culleen, a partner with law firm Arnold & Porter, told Chemical Watch that the amendments to TSCA provide for risk assessment to be divorced from consideration of costs and benefits.
A new EPA policy on costs and benefits, therefore, "conceptually will only affect the risk management approach" within TSCA, he said.
The EPA has proposed three risk management rules that would see bans or restrictions on certain uses of trichloroethylene (TCE), methylene chloride and N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP).
If the ANPRM results in new guidance before these are finalised, he said, "perhaps it could mean that EPA would redo their initial cost estimates for those rules".
"Arguably, it could slow things up for final regulations, if that is the intention," he added.
The EPA’s recent problem formulations suggest that the agency might not be moving forward rulemakings on TCE and NMP, even while it has announced plans to finalise the methylene chloride rule.
Whether a cost-benefit rule could be put in place prior to the agency’s finalising any such rules remains unclear.
But at a minimum, issuance of the ANPRM "signals the agency’s intentions to be very careful about economic assessments", said Mr Culleen.
Comments on the ANPRM will be accepted until 13 July.Costs and benefits under TSCA
Consideration of cost was a central issue in the 1991 court ruling that overturned the EPA's ban on asbestos. The decision effectively paralysed the agency from acting on existing substances under the old law.
As amended in 2016, the new TSCA explicitly excludes cost and 'non-risk factors' from the risk evaluation process when determining whether a substance poses an "unreasonable risk".
The agency, however, must consider the costs and benefits of proposed regulatory actions taken under section 6 of the law, when it manages identified risks.
The statute no longer requires the agency to impose the "least burdensome" regulation – a key issue in the asbestos ruling.
But some critics of the new law say it has merely shifted economic concerns from the risk evaluation to the risk management phase. In the words of one of them, it "does nothing in practice to address the reality that economics will trump public health and environmental protection".
https://chemicalwatch.com/67591/us-epa-to-assess-regulatory-cost-benefit-analysis
-
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
TSCA ‘problem formulations’ formally publishedThe US EPA has published in the Federal Register the ‘problem formulations’ for the first ten substances subject to risk evaluation under the recently reformed TSCA. Unofficially released last week, the documents outline the scope of each of the high-priority substance’s upcoming assessment.
Comments on the ten problem formulation documents will be accepted through 26 July.
In the same notice, the EPA advised that it is also taking comment on the document, "Application of Systematic Review in TSCA Risk Evaluations".Asbestos Snur published in Federal Register
The agency has also formally published its proposed significant new use rule (Snur) for asbestos. If adopted, this would block industry from initiating new uses of asbestos, or resuming abandoned applications, without first notifying the agency. The EPA could then regulate or deny those requests.
Comments on the proposed rule are due by 10 August.Amendment to TSCA new substance notification ICR
The EPA has submitted an amendment to an existing information collection request (ICR) related to new substance notification under TSCA.
Submitted under an emergency processing process, the update seeks to account for a non-binding guidance document issued last year: Points to Consider When Preparing TSCA New Chemical Notifications.
The agency estimates an increase of 1,379 hours in total respondent burden over the existing ICR as a result of the guidance. The amendment reflects this change. EPA holding ‘community engagement’ on PFAS
The EPA will hold a two-day public event on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) as part of its ongoing effort to manage the risk the substances pose. During this the agency will:hear from the public;provide tools to assist localities in addressing challenges with PFAS in the environment; andwork to understand how it can best support local work.
The meeting is the first of the agency’s ‘community engagements’. It will take place in Exeter, New Hampshire beginning 25 June.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67665/us-epa-round-up
-
US Congress Likely to Reject EPA Cuts Again
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Julie Miller
The US Congress has indicated it will probably reject the Trump administration’s proposals to slash the EPA’s budget again, as House and Senate appropriations committees have begun moving spending bills for fiscal 2019 that would fund the agency at or near current levels.
The House appropriations committee approved a spending bill covering the EPA on 6 June that would fund the agency at $7.95bn. This is $10m less than in the current year but considerably more than the $6.15bn proposed by Trump. It would maintain funding for programmes related to chemical regulation.
In the Senate, meanwhile, a subcommittee advanced legislation on 12 June allocating the same $8.05bn for fiscal 2019 that the agency had for this fiscal year. Details of the Senate bill will not be available until the full appropriations committee votes, probably later the same week.
Fiscal 2019 begins on 1 October, but argument over the federal budget has been protracted in recent years. Congress did not finalise spending for the current fiscal year until March, when it rejected Trump’s massive EPA spending cuts for the second year in a row.TSCA administration
The House appropriations bill would provide the same $92.5m for the "toxics risk review and prevention" funding category as in fiscal 2017 and 2018.
The EPA had asked for reduced funding in light of plans to begin collecting fees from industry in 2019 to support chemical reviews under the amended TSCA.
The Trump budget "again proposes an aggressive schedule for developing the new TSCA fee rule", and for allocating the funds to pay for personnel, the committee said in the report accompanying its spending bill. "In order to avoid a funding lapse that could impact implementation, the recommended level provides for a more gradual transition to fee-funded FTE for fiscal year 2019."
The report also said the panel would again not go along with the proposal to eliminate pollution prevention programmes, which include the Safer Choice ecolabel scheme. Chemical research
The bill would provide $113.9m for "chemical safety and sustainability research", $10m less than 2018 levels. The Trump administration proposed slashing this to $84m.
The bill also rejects the administration’s proposal to cut funding for research on endocrine disruptors and computational toxicology.
The legislation and report do not mention the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) programme, which has been a subject of contention in recent years.
Lat year, a Senate spending plan proposed axing IRIS and moving some of its functions to the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP). This would potentially give control of chemical research to political appointees, who run the regulatory agenda.
The House committee reiterated its interest in the EPA’s initiative to reduce reliance on animal testing, asking for a progress report for the second year in a row. It added that the panel is interested in "how the agency is implementing the same approach in all of its programmes that involve toxicity testing."
https://chemicalwatch.com/67666/us-congress-likely-to-reject-epa-cuts-again
-
Study Links Groundwater Pumping to Arsenic in Aquifer
Jun 14, 2018 | News Deeply (In E&E Greenwire)
By Tara Lohan
Excessive pumping of groundwater in California's San Joaquin Valley has led to elevated levels of arsenic in an aquifer, according to new research.
The Tulare Basin, which stretches across the valley, contains naturally occurring arsenic that was deposited over millions of years by rivers, according to the study from Stanford University.
When too much water is pumped, the naturally occurring arsenic can be released from the clay and contaminate the aquifer, found the study, published in Nature Communications.
"There is a huge societal impact behind this study, because not only is overpumping depleting our groundwater, it's also contaminating it," said Ryan Smith, co-author of the study and a doctoral student in geophysics at Stanford.
"A lot of the groundwater pumping is being done by the agricultural industry, but the people that are being most strongly affected by it are those who are living in this area and need groundwater for their drinking water," he said.
The study builds on earlier research that found overpumping groundwater can also cause subsidence, a phenomenon in which land sinks by as much as dozens of feet, damaging infrastructure such as roads and bridges.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/14/stories/1060084515
-
State Finalizes Nation's Toughest Rules for Lead in Water
Jun 14, 2018 | Detroit News
By Beth LeBlanc
Michigan today will wrap up the toughest lead drinking water rules in the nation.
The rule from the state Department of Environmental Quality will lower the lead action level from 15 parts per billion to 12 ppb starting in 2025.
Communities will also have to take out all lead service lines, even on private property.
The rules are slightly more lenient than the ones proposed by Gov. Rick Snyder (R) after the Flint water crisis that would have put the limit at 10 ppb.
Snyder said the current federal limit of 15 ppb is "dumb and dangerous."
He said the federal lead and copper rule "simply does not do enough to protect public health."
"As a state, we could no longer afford to wait on needed changes at the federal level, so Michigan has stepped up to give our residents a smarter, safer rule — one that better safeguards water systems in all communities," Snyder said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/06/14/stories/1060084483
-
US Investors Chide Companies for Thin Conflict Minerals Reports
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A group of US institutional investors has called on companies to continue to submit "thorough" conflict minerals reports, despite the compliance ambiguity introduced by the overseeing agency.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires publicly traded companies to investigate and disclose their use of conflict minerals – tantalum, tin, tungsten and gold (3TG). The purpose is to prevent the support of armed groups in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and neighbouring countries.
Last year, then-Acting Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Michael Piwowar suggested the agency would not seek enforcement for failure to submit ‘enhanced disclosure’ documents required by the law.
Following this, many companies covered by the law continued to file full reports for the 2016 reporting year.
But according to a statement issued by 47 investor groups, representing some $1.2 trillion in assets under management, others failed to file due diligence forms as a "direct response" to Mr Piwowar’s statements.
The investor group – under the Investor Alliance for Human Rights banner – point to more than a dozen company filings which explicitly mention the SEC’s 2017 statements in indicating why they had chosen not to file the supplemental conflict minerals report.
This demonstrates, they say, that the statement "has created, at minimum, confusion among companies, and at worst, has given the impression that the SEC will not enforce the law."
The investors say they were "disappointed" in the lack of consistent compliance. It "deprives investors of the valuable information" provided under the regulation.
And they say that the SEC’s previous statements "do not provide companies any formal – much less legal – avenue to neglect the due diligence reporting requirements".
They say they will contact companies to "underscore the importance of these disclosures in investment decision-making".
And they added that regardless of whether SEC continues to enforce the rule, the investors will "consider all public and legal options available to us to do so".
The conflict minerals reporting rule has faced headwinds in the US since its enactment, including several efforts to defund it, amid concern from regulated parties at the burden it imposes.
Critics say the rule has resulted in an unintended boycott of 3TG minerals sourced from the DRC region. But recent research suggests these fears are overblown.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67693/us-investors-chide-companies-for-thin-conflict-minerals-reports
-
Cross-Sector Initiative Sets Full Materials Disclosure Goal
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
In its first technical meeting, a group of industry representatives seeking solutions to information on chemicals in products has agreed a long-term objective to achieve full materials declaration.
Following an initial discussion on the sidelines of Chemical Watch’s Global Business Summit in Amsterdam earlier this year, the group held its first technical meeting on 22 May in Frankfurt.
It aims to develop a solution for collecting and sharing material data for articles – including their chemical composition – across sectors.
Calling itself the Proactive Alliance, the group will explore existing standards – such as the electronics sector's materials declaration standard IPC-1752A for example – to see if they can be used as a global cross-sectoral standard for exchanging data on individual articles.
Martin Führ, a professor at Darmstadt University, which with his research group Sofia is coordinating the initiative, explained to Chemical Watch that the standard would enable the transfer of data on substances in articles from one sector system to another, without creating IT problems.
Professor Führ highlighted the significance of the group's goal. "If the group is able to achieve a consensus on a common global cross sector standard, it would be a major step towards achieving the goals of REACH, the 2002 Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, the UN-coordinated Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (Saicm) and some of the UN’s 2030 Sustainable development goals (SDGs)."
The Frankfurt meeting resulted in a common understanding between the attending representatives – who came from the automotive, chemicals, furniture, childcare products, electronics, mechanical, metalworking and metal articles, home textiles, textiles and sporting goods and medical devices sectors.
Members of the group agreed:that the focus to begin with will be on substances in articles, as defined by REACH;
on establishing a cross-sectoral standard on data exchange that can work with the current sector declaration systems;
that this standard should support CBI protection and data quality; and
the group will encourage all sectors to establish a list of declarable and regulated substances for their industry and publish the criteria and methodology.Once the standard is established, the group will take a tiered approach on what it will cover. The different "modules" will allow participating companies to design their level of ambition to their individual needs.
The basic module will cover "generally problematic substances", regulated at a global level, such as those on UN treaty the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs).
The second module will cover cross-sector legislation, such as the EU’s REACH or Waste Framework Directive.
In addition, sector specific legislation, such as the restriction of hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (RoHS) or company specific requirements can be included.
Professor Führ said a timeline on when the group's objectives will be achieved and full materials declaration will commence is not yet agreed.
Many sectors have their own material declaration systems. But currently these do not communicate or share information between companies of different sectors, despite many suppliers selling the same articles and components to multiple sectors.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67695/cross-sector-initiative-sets-full-materials-disclosure-goal
-
EU Policy Must Improve Chemical Content Information, Say NGOs
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
To establish a successful circular economy in the EU, the European Commission must ensure that its plans for a product policy framework help manufacturers avoid hazardous substances, according to European NGOs.
Chemsec, the European Environmental Bureau and the Health and Environment Alliance submitted comments to the Commission’s consultation on its roadmap for a "EU Product Policy Framework that contributes to the circular economy".
Through this work, the Commission is evaluating existing EU policies to see how they contribute to the circular economy and to identify ways to better meet the initiative’s goals.
Chemsec says the "cheapest and most efficient solution to reaching a fully circular economy is by not accepting hazardous substances in products to start with".
To achieve this, companies need to be certain of the chemical content of their products and for this to be possible full material disclosure is needed, it says.
"Chemically progressive companies are usually very positive towards using recycled material, but only if it is free from hazardous substances," says Chemsec. Therefore, it adds, recyclers must also be able to show exactly what their secondary material contains.
The NGO says that relying on recyclers to separate chemicals from recycled materials through "some kind of new technical process" will be extremely complicated and costly.
"Instead, the most rational solution would be to ensure that information on chemical content follows the product into the waste phase. Producer responsibility is crucial," it adds.
In its comments, the EEB calls for an EU harmonised product information system. This, it says, could combine different pieces of information – such as those collected through chemicals, waste and product legislation – into a standard digital format.
Materials declaration has been a hot topic recently, with industry and authorities looking into developing a system that enables better information exchange on products and materials.‘Strong REACH’
Aside from a better flow of supply chain information, the success of the circular economy "hinges on a strong REACH", Chemsec says in its comments.
"Tighter, more controlled chemicals legislation that builds on the precautionary principle can really skyrocket the circular economy into the future," it adds.
HEAL also raises the importance of strengthening regulations for new products, largely through better implementation of REACH. "Speeding up the identification and regulation of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) should be a priority," it says.
All hazardous substances should be restricted or banned from products, leading to their redesign without toxics, the NGO says.
And for products already on the EU market, a screening process should take place, so that they can be safely treated and the recycling of hazardous chemicals is prevented, HEAL says.Hampered by regulation
In its comments, the European Automotive Industries Association (Acea), says that while the Commission is asking industry to commit to using more recycled plastics materials, other overlapping legislations have the potential to dramatically hamper the use of secondary, recycled material for new products.
For example, it says "due to further substance restrictions discussed in the framework of other regulations – such as REACH and UN treaty, the Stockholm Convention – the amount of recycled material which can be supplied safely will be reduced. This, it says, could lead to higher prices, which cannot compete with virgin materials, or an interruption of supply.
Metals trade association Eurometaux says it has "a vision for a ‘risk-controlled’ Europe. This, it says, is where hazardous substances are used when their risk to human health and the environment is controlled.
"Many strategic products often contain metals with hazardous properties, but are produced, used and recycled safely in Europe," it adds.
It calls for a coherent policy approach that secures the safe management of "essential hazardous substances across their lifecycle, without unnecessary stigmatisation".
In response to the consultation – which ended on 4 June – the Commission is expected to hold a conference in the Autumn of 2018 to further engage stakeholders in the process.
In addition, it will carry out more targeted consultation of stakeholders in the sectors addressed by the initiative, for example through workshops. And it will produce a synopsis report, summarising the consultation input and explaining how it has been taken into account.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67673/eu-policy-must-improve-chemical-content-information-say-ngos
-
Cefic Head Urges ‘Smart REACH Foreign Policy’
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Nick Hazlewood
With the passing of the final REACH deadline it is time to turn the Regulation into a competitive advantage, delegates at the Helsinki Chemicals Forum heard today.
In a keynote speech, Marco Mensink (pictured), director general of the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic), told the audience of almost 200 that it is time to develop a "smart REACH foreign policy" in which REACH® compliant becomes a global brand.
"We have to sell REACH abroad," Mr Mensink said. "We have to make sure the world understands the Regulation and that being compliant with REACH is well accepted and is perceived as risk and science-based across the globe."
The spread of the acceptance of REACH around the world would, Mr Mensink said, ensure duplication costs are avoided and make markets more accessible.
"Most of the world doesn’t seem to understand us. If you go around the world and you talk to the different regions the understanding of what REACH is doing, why it’s doing it [and] what the decisions of Echa [are], it is by far not as clear as we hoped to be. And the net result in most cases is people getting angry and lawyers making money."
However, for REACH to work, Mr Mensink said there has to be trust that it delivers. "The Regulation has to be allowed to work, and it needs to be kept centre stage," he said, adding that care needs to be taken, for example, when talking about the quality of registration dossiers: "How will the world buy our brand if we constantly weaken ourselves?"
But, he added, the authorities need to practice what they preach. Central to this, he said, is enforcement. "To avoid others undercutting our market we have to reinforce the enforcement of REACH. We need to make sure no substance enters Europe without being registered."
Speaking to Chemical Watch, Echa executive director Bjorn Hansen said that, although the details of having REACH as a brand need to be worked out, he could definitely see the advantages of it. "What I think is the power of the thoughts behind having REACH as a brand is the opening up of the doors for both trade and environmental protection on chemicals. I think that is the power to work on.
"We actually have a golden opportunity in the EU – EU member states, the Commission and industry – in the context of the Beyond 2020 and SDGs discussions to put chemicals on a higher level, and within that framework to establish more harmonised, more consistent protection for human health and environment across the globe. That slots into Marco's idea which he captures in the phrase of REACH as a brand."
Addressing the conference, Mr Hansen said that passing the REACH registration deadline had seen an "amazing effort" on the part of industry, member states and Echa staff, all of whom have carried out an "enormous shared activity in a shared interest".
However, he also pointed to the recent REACH Review which had highlighted areas where more needed to be done. Collective work is needed on making some of the tools – such as safety data sheets – more usable and more directly applicable. There is also a need for improved efficiencies, he said, not so much in process, but in training and education.
"We need to get more knowledge on chemicals out there earlier," Mr Hansen said. "And we need to work together earlier so that we can identify the problems earlier."
BREAKING NEWS
Echa and Cefic have announced they will sign a joint statement to work together on the effective implementation of REACH. The statement, to be signed on Friday, comes after the completion of the Regulation's third registration deadline, and says it is a recognition of the recommendations in the recent REACH Review report. This called on all actors to help improve its implementation.
The agreement is a commitment from both industry and the agency to focus on improving the scientific assessment of some substances or groups of substances, further enhancing safety information and its communication across the supply chain.
The two organisations have also agreed to work jointly to solve scientific and technical challenges by facilitating technical discussions between experts and to improve the transparency on the quality of dossiers.
https://chemicalwatch.com/67692/cefic-head-urges-smart-reach-foreign-policy
-
Maryland Suing EPA on Power Plant Pollution in Other States
Jun 14, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
A federal judge has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to respond to Maryland’s request for a declaration that power plants in five upwind states are contributing to Maryland’s air quality problems.
The judge on Wednesday ordered the EPA to take final action on Maryland’s petition by Sept. 15.
The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by Maryland officials last year after the EPA failed to meet the deadline for a response.
Maryland is seeking a finding that 36 electric generating units in Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia are violating the Clean Air Act’s “good neighbor” provision by emitting nitrogen oxides in a way that significantly contributes to Maryland’s nonattainment of ambient air quality standards.
The Hogan administration says 70 percent of Maryland’s ozone problem originates in upwind states.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/maryland-suing-epa-on-power-plant-pollution-in-other-states/2018/06/14/40148344-6fee-11e8-b4d8-eaf78d4c544c_story.html?utm_term=.7bef8366663f
-
NYC Tests 'Nuisance' Theory in Federal Court
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Saqib Rahim
A federal judge gave no obvious indication yesterday that he plans to hear New York City's climate lawsuit against five multinational oil companies.
Judge John Keenan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York yesterday heard arguments from Chevron Corp. and the other oil giants seeking to quickly scuttle New York City's litigation.
The city claims the oil companies should compensate it for the cost of adaptation. The oil companies responded that climate change is a complex global issue that should be addressed by the U.S. government, not the courts.
Keenan, an appointee of President Reagan, grilled both sides but reserved his decision.
If he chooses to hear the case, that alone will mark a win for New York City and the other local governments that are testing out a new legal strategy for suing fossil-fuel companies directly. A similar case is being heard in California (Climatewire, June 13).
The oil majors — Chevron, BP PLC, ConocoPhillips Co., Exxon Mobil Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell PLC — warn that legitimizing this legal strategy, anywhere, could unleash a flood of "global warming tort" lawsuits. "It really would involve everybody suing everybody for living our lives the way we do," Chevron's attorney, Theodore Boutrous of Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher LLP, said in arguments yesterday.
Michael Burger, executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, said there have been climate "nuisance" lawsuits before. But New York's and California's are part of a new class of suits, he said, focused on the production and marketing of fossil fuels.
"I think that this is a litigation effort that has been theorized about and under consideration and talked about for many years, for about a quarter of a century," he said.
"Now we're at a moment where the federal branch has failed," he added. "These lawsuits represent a pressure point, and potentially an important pressure point, on the industry to do more to combat climate change."
Much of yesterday's hearing predictably featured a flurry of case law, questions of standing, and other legal technicalities. But at the root, the sides were basically debating whether New York City is pulling a legally extraordinary maneuver, or whether it's within the fairway and is worth hearing at trial.
They were also debating whether New York City's alleged injury from climate change should be addressed in a courtroom, or whether it's the responsibility of Congress and the executive branch because of the interstate and international character of the issue.
Matthew Pawa, an attorney with Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP who's representing New York City, said it's the former. "This is a case of absolute first-rate importance to the city," he said.Who's at fault?
The city claims its residents have suffered, and are projected to suffer, the consequences of a changed climate: rising sea levels, more intense heat waves and extreme rains.
Pawa argued that the oil companies are liable because they knew the oil and gas they produced would contribute to climate impacts and even tried to mislead the public about it. He said they're not responsible for all the oil and gas they've ever produced — only what they produced after they knew the consequences.
New York City is requesting compensation for what it's done, and what it will have to do, to adapt to climate change.
Keenan noted, however, that the New York City police, fire and sanitation departments all have cars and trucks. "Aren't the plaintiffs using the product that's the subject of the lawsuit?", the judge asked Pawa, who said yes.
Earlier, Keenan had brought up the legal principle of in pari delicto, which takes account of whether a party is equally at fault for the thing they're suing for.
The oil companies don't dispute the science of anthropogenic climate change. But they urged Keenan to dismiss the case because, as they argued, climate change is of such complexity and scope, requiring tradeoffs between energy access and environmental consequences, that it needs to be the province of federal authorities, not a smattering of courts.
Climate change has been caused by the lawful actions of billions of human beings, in hundreds of countries, over a time period that goes back to the Industrial Revolution, they said. Federal and even New York state law encourage fossil-fuel production, Boutrous, Chevron's attorney, added.
New York City's case, he said, amounts to holding three oil companies responsible "for the way civilization and humankind has developed over the ages," he said.
Technically, New York City is suing the oil companies for their production and marketing of fossil fuels. But the defendants say the city's alleged injury comes from carbon emissions, not the production of fossil fuels.
As the companies argued — and as New York City disputed — that means the federal Clean Air Act applies. If Keenan agrees, that would make it more of an "uphill battle" for New York City to justify trying its case in this forum, Burger said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/06/14/stories/1060084465
-
Rover Ordered to Pay $430,030 for West Virginia Water Pollution Violations
Jun 14, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
Rover Pipeline LLC has agreed to pay a $430,030 civil penalty for numerous sediment and erosion control violations during construction in West Virginia, according to a consent order released by the state’s Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP).
The order, dated May 15 and signed by a Rover official on June 1, details a series of water pollution violations found during inspections dating back to April 2017 and as recently as April of this year. The alleged violations generally relate to improper controls to prevent runoff during construction in Doddridge, Tyler and Wetzel counties, where the project’s Sherwood and CGT laterals are routed.
The Rover project’s water pollution violations prompted WVDEP to issue cease and desist orders last July and in March that temporarily halted construction in the state, adding to a list of regulatory run-ins for the massive greenfield Appalachian expansion.
Rover, a 713-mile, 3.25 Bcf/d natural gas pipeline designed to transport supply gathered from West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania to markets in the Midwest, Gulf Coast and Canada, increased its daily throughput this month after receiving FERC authorization to place into service several remaining sections of its second and final phase of construction.
But FERC has yet to approve four supply laterals, including the completed Burgettstown and Majorsville lines, potentially limiting supply into the now fully operational mainline.
“Construction on the Rover Pipeline is essentially complete, and the line has received approval from FERC to transport the full 3.25 Bcf/d,” Rover spokeswoman Alexis Daniel told NGI via email. “We anticipate bringing on the four remaining lateral pipelines shortly, and we remain focused on restoring the entire right-of-way, which has always been our commitment to the landowners. We continue to work with the WVDEP on the terms of the consent order.”
Genscape Inc. analyst Colette Breshears said in a note to clients last month that construction on Rover’s CGT and Sherwood laterals appeared to be largely complete but that landslides may have caused delays.
“Continued earth movement/slips along” the remaining laterals could impact Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approval of those lines, “which will impact the addition of supply paths to Rover,” Breshears said at the time.
NGI’s daily Rover Tracker on Wednesday showed the pipeline flowing about 2.1 Bcf/d through its Mainline Zone, including about 1.4 Bcf/d delivered into the ANR and Panhandle Eastern pipelines at Defiance, OH, and just under 800 MMcf/d delivered into Michigan to the Vector Pipeline.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/114712-rover-ordered-to-pay-430030-for-west-virginia-water-pollution-violations
-
Higher Carbon Emissions a 'Step Back' for World Energy Order — BP
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
A pickup in world economic activity last year drove up energy use and energy intensity, in what BP PLC described as a "two steps forward, one step back" moment for global progress toward a lower-carbon energy profile.
Global energy demand growth was 2.2 percent last year, above the 10-year average of 1.7 percent and markedly higher than last year's 1.2 percent year-on-year increase, according to BP's annual statistical review of world energy use, published yesterday. The oversized increase stemmed from faster economic growth in both developed and developing countries, including a pickup in energy-hungry heavy industry in China, where activity had lagged.
Carbon emissions also rose last year by 1.6 percent after three years of little to no growth, reflecting both higher demand generally and an uptick in the energy intensity of economic output.
BP Chief Economist Spencer Dale, presenting the data to a global audience yesterday, described the carbon emissions data as, "on the face of it, a pretty big backward step" for global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Another point of concern: the level share of coal in the power sector over the past 20 years, at 38 percent. Coal's use in power generation increased somewhat in the intervening years during China's period of its fastest economic growth before falling slightly over the past few years to land back at its starting point from two decades ago, BP data show. "I hadn't realized that so little progress had been made until I looked at these data," Dale said, describing the power sector as the most important place to achieve decarbonization to limit climate change.
BP data show that over the past 20 years, the share of non-carbon power generation has fallen slightly, as impressive growth in renewables has been offset by a loss of nuclear power generation.
Dale's assessment of the centrality of limiting carbon emissions from the power sector sidesteps the role of major oil companies like his in the energy-intensive transportation sector, where oil is only very slowly yielding ground to alternatives like electricity and natural gas.
"Despite all the talk of peak oil demand, increasing car efficiency and growth of electrical vehicles," Dale said, the relatively low cost of oil in recent years has driven high demand. "All of those factors are real and are happening, but persistently low oil prices can have a very powerful offsetting effect," he said.
Looking forward, BP sees the slow rate of change in the automotive sector, coupled with the overwhelming latent demand for cars in the emerging middle classes of developing countries, as supporting increasing demand for oil for decades to come.
BP data show that last year, oil production cuts by OPEC and others reined in global supply growth, despite a surge of output in the U.S., leading to a slight reduction in overall oil stocks that have pushed prices higher in recent months. Cuts by OPEC and non-OPEC countries of nearly 1 million barrels per day last year were offset by growth from the U.S. and elsewhere of 1.5 million barrels per day, while demand grew by 1.7 million barrels per day, Dale said.
"The speed and scale of OPEC's actions mean that it continues to have the ability to smooth temporary disturbances to the oil market," Dale said. "But the relatively rapid response of U.S. tight oil reinforces the limits of OPEC power."
In the natural gas sector, BP data show both consumption and production shooting up at rates not seen since the financial collapse a decade ago. World demand was led by China, where air quality problems associated with coal-fired power generation have driven a strong policy shift in favor of natural gas.
BP also pointed to a growing convergence of world gas markets, which have historically operated on a continental basis thanks to pipeline trade, but with a flood of liquefied natural gas crossing world oceans are increasingly becoming interconnected.
Dale said a "glut" of LNG that analysts had predicted would occur now as a result of several massive LNG export projects coming online in the U.S., Australia and Qatar within a close time frame has not materialized. Rather, the data show the supply surge "has resulted in periods of unsustainably low prices rather than idle LNG capacity," as analysts had forecast, BP said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/06/14/stories/1060084447
-
Why This Leading Energy Company Sees Opportunity In a Low-Carbon Future
Jun 14, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Tom Murray
Equinor, formerly known as Statoil, is not your average energy company. The Norwegian-based corporation reports producing oil and gas with half of the CO2 emissions, compared to the global industry average.
The company also stated commitment to building its business in support of the Paris Agreement, and plans to invest over $200 million in Equinor Energy Ventures, one of the world’s largest corporate venture funds dedicated to investing in growth companies in renewable energy. That may be why CDP ranked Equinor as the oil and gas company best prepared for a low-carbon future.
Equinor is also doing its part to detect and reduce methane emissionsby embracing innovation and technology. In fact, Equinor was the first energy producer to purchase and install a new solar-powered technology device to continuously detect methane leaks. And, Equinor collaborates with EDF and Stanford in supporting mobile monitoring advances, such as drone-based sensors.
In advance of the World Gas Conference in D.C. later this month, I spoke with Bjorn Otto Sverdrup, senior vice president of sustainability at Equinor, to learn more about the company’s climate goals and how the company is addressing methane emissions from its oil and gas operations. Here's an edited transcript of our conversation.
Equinor's goal is to be the world's most carbon-efficient producer of oil and gas, further reducing the carbon intensity by 20 percent by 2030, reducing annual carbon emissions by 3 million tonnes by 2030, and scaling up your investments in renewable energy. What led you to set these goals?
We actually started setting climate targets more than 10 years ago, as we set a target in 2007 for what to achieve by 2020. In that time, we’ve discovered that a low-cost portfolio is also a low-carbon portfolio, and that carbon efficient businesses are more sustainable businesses.
The business case for climate action is strong and quite evident both in the short and long term – this led us to change the strategy and vision of the company, and to establish aggressive sustainability goals.
We’ve also developed a very comprehensive climate roadmap, which lays out how we’ll achieve our goals: reducing emissions from oil and gas production, growing the business through new energy solutions and embedding climate in all our decision-making. We’ve also changed key performance indicators, so our CEO’s pay and bonus is now also related to climate performance.
There’s a growing trend of using emerging technology – things like sensors, data analytics and digital collaboration tools – to make environmental problems more visible and more actionable. How are you thinking about innovation at Equinor?Researchers install a Quanta3 solar-powered, continuous methane detection system to monitor a Equinor natural gas well in Texas.
We really believe that technology and digitalization will turn the industry upside down, for the better. Technology has the potential to rapidly bring down costs, make operations safer and lower our carbon footprint. And digitalization is a key priority.
For example, sensors that can detect methane leaks at the well site and provide real-time data to understand what's really happening can help us fix problems quickly when they appear. It’s not just about running a smarter business, it’s also about running a more sustainable business.
Sometimes, though, the solutions are simpler – we have no routine flaring at our offshore installations in Norway, which is also a source of methane leakages. And our subsea pipelines have additional coating around them – we make sure there are no cracks.
What drove you to work with Environmental Defense Fund on a critical problem like methane, and to get involved in the Methane Detectors Challenge?
A few years ago I was quite worried about methane, because I think it's fair to say we didn't understand the challenge. That’s why I wanted to engage with EDF to better understand what is happening with methane in the U.S., and how we could fix problems using science-based insights.
We are now much more confident in our understanding of methane emissions in the U.S., and we’ve already made progress in bringing down emissions.
That’s why we’re working with the industry to try to understand emissions across the value chain, and working with the Norwegian government to assess emissions from the oil and gas industry. We also have drones flying over installations and infrared cameras to detect methane leaks.
Cooperation with groups like EDF and industry partners can help shape and take methane science and innovation to a very new level. So, I'd like to say thank you to EDF for their cooperation.Tech competition aims at major methane problem
We’ve learned that Equinor is particularly interested in and excited about a mobile monitoring solution that actually stemmed from the Mobile Monitoring Challenge. What are your plans for expansion in the mobile and continuous monitoring spaces?
Equinor has tested different methane monitoring technologies on some our onshore and offshore facilities, and is evaluating results from the pilots to see how we best can utilize such technology in our operations.
Technology development within environmental management, including methane management, is an area where external cooperation is seen as strategically important. To be beneficial to the industry, progress has to be shared and adopted across companies.
Through the OGCI Climate Investment, Equinor and nine other oil and gas companies have launched a billion–dollar investment vehicle to invest in technologies that have the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including methane emissions. We are in particular excited about what the OGCI CI Methane Venture Day on June 25 in Washington, D.C.,will bring.The challenge for mobile methane monitoring is now underway
People look to Equinor as one of the leaders in the industry. What kind of results are you seeing in methane emissions?
For Norwegian gas to Europe through the entire value chain, the analysis shows that the emissions of methane are 0.3 percent. But if you look at the emissions on the upstream side, on the oil platform and processing facilities, it's 0.02 percent, which is more than 10 times less than the average for gas consumed in Europe.
So, the numbers are very low and it’s not only because we have been good at monitoring, but I would also say that it's been because of very deliberate design, initiative and attention.
Compared to the U.S. or other geographies, the numbers are not as good yet for the industry as a whole. I think a carbon price will be quite instrumental in providing the right incentives to act.
We are also trying to share what we're doing on methane, to get others to follow our lead – we’ve spent time with both the Norwegian government, the European commission and at the highest level of the U.S. government, where we talked about methane.
We’d love to see a price on carbon in the U.S. What can we learn from the carbon tax in Norway, and how does it affect your business?
Carbon pricing is an efficient part of the solution. The carbon tax provides investors with a line of sight, and drives improvements and energy efficiencies. And we know it works. We have been subject to a CO2 tax, currently above $60 per ton, and it has made us look for and find new business opportunities, like carbon capture and storage.
We are strong advocates for carbon pricing, and even sent a letter to the UN asking for a stronger carbon price. It might sound counterintuitive to ask for more taxes, but we believe that it’s the most efficient way to reach a low-carbon future.
Are investors increasingly asking Equinor for information about how you're tackling and managing climate risks in your business?
Absolutely. They are looking to understand risks related to the business. We publicly disclose our emissions. That's part of my mandate. But we treat climate as an integrated part of the risk management of the company, focusing on both challenges as well as opportunities.
We’re also working to balance our portfolio, which is why by 2030 we aim to devote 15 to 20 percent of capital towards new energy solutions. And 15 to 20 percent might sound like a small number, but since we’re this year making capital investments of about 11 billion dollars, that's quite a sizable business.
We also aim to allocate a quarter of all our R&D activities towards new energy solutions by 2020. We are building up quite a bit of momentum and we will have sharp growth in the renewable space.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2018/06/14/why-leading-energy-company-sees-opportunity-low-carbon-future
-
South Dakota High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Keystone XL
Jun 14, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
South Dakota’s Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal from opponents of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, saying a lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear their cases.
Groups fighting TransCanada Corp.’s pipeline appealed a judge’s decision last year upholding regulators’ approval for the pipeline to cross the state.
But the high court ruled Wednesday that justices didn’t “reach the merits of the case” because the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal of the Public Utilities Commission’s decision.
Attorneys for appealing groups haven’t returned telephone messages requesting comment. TransCanada hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
The project would move crude oil from Canada across Montana and South Dakota to Nebraska, where it would connect with existing pipelines feeding refineries along the Gulf Coast.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/south-dakota-high-court-dismisses-appeal-against-keystone-xl/2018/06/14/2d666428-6fe5-11e8-b4d8-eaf78d4c544c_story.html?utm_term=.37cdffd7abd6
-
Save the Chemical Safety Board [Editorial]
Jun 14, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
All most of us saw of the burning Arkema plant in Crosby during Hurricane Harvey were pictures of fire and smoke billowing into the air.
Only later did we learn the details of what happened: how trailers full of volatile organic peroxides decomposed and started catching fire, how forklifts used to move containers of those chemicals became useless in the rising water, how workers riding out the hurricane tried to forestall a catastrophe by hand-carrying canisters of peroxides through floodwaters on a stormy night.MOST POPULARKHOU traffic anchor Darby Douglas exits the Houston stationHow LeBron James fits with James Harden, Chris PaulWhat Texans have learned about top pick Justin ReidBombshells sports bar in southeast Houston loses legal challenge to resume alcohol salesTilman Fertitta opens his Post Oak Presidential Suite — 5,000 square feet fit for any VIPWelcome to the G-6 plus Trump [Editorial]Astros' balls & strikes: The return of Ken Giles
The inside story of what happened during those disastrous days at the Arkema plant was sorted out by investigators with the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, the federal agency that produced a detailed report released last month. The CSB also issued a series of recommendations that executives and workers at other petrochemical plants can use to learn the lessons their colleagues at Arkema learned the hard way during Hurricane Harvey.
That’s just the latest example of the good work the CSB has done for two decades: Studying accidents in the chemical industry so that similar mishaps can be avoided in the future. It’s not a regulatory body. It does for petrochemical plant disasters what the National Transportation Safety Board does for airline crashes. The CSB is a no-nonsense, fact-finding agency whose reports and recommendations are widely respected within the petrochemical industry. And there’s no telling how many lives it has saved.TRANSLATOR
To read this article in one of Houston's most-spoken languages, click on the button below.Select Language▼OPINIONOn Flag Day, a call for football players to stand up [Opinion]Needless quotas in prison system [Editorial]Save the Chemical Safety Board [Editorial]Thursday letters: Trump and Kim, a first step.Prison reform and a page from Texas’ hymnal [Opinion]
But now, for reasons that are baffling to industry experts, the CSB’s future is in doubt because the Trump administration has recommended eliminating it. Our congressional representatives need to send the White House the message that this agency, which looks out for the safety of average people who work and live around petrochemical plants, needs to be saved.
We’re not talking about a bloated bureaucracy gone amok. The CSB is one of the smallest agencies in the federal government, with a budget of just $12 million. If this safety board has prevented just one petrochemical plant disaster — and industry experts have no doubt it has — that’s a bargain.
But as the Chronicle’s Matt Dempsey recently reported, its staff of 20 investigators has shrunk to 12; it’s hard to keep employees in a workplace that’s threatened with elimination. Meanwhile, the chairwoman of its five-member board has resigned, and there’s no indication she’s going to be replaced.
As a result of these staffing shortages, the CSB has been unable to investigate accidents happening in the Houston area. For example, a Valero refinery explosion in April injured 28 workers, but the short-handed CSB didn’t deploy any investigators. And when it does study accidents, people still working for the agency worry that it’s not doing its job as thoroughly as before. A memo from a half-dozen of the CSB’s investigators that was obtained by the Chronicle says the agency is advocating shorter investigations that avoid analyzing companies’ safety culture.RELATEDCongress should shoot down new nuke plan [Editorial]Chemical Safety Board, OSHA investigate Kuraray explosionThumbs: Population growth slows, Farenthold’s hiring was irregular, and the NFL drops ball.
That’s an important point to experts who’ve followed the CSB’s history. After the 2005 explosion at the BP plant in Texas City, the board investigated not only the physical cause of the disaster, but also the corporate decisions leading up to the accident. BP executives took the report to heart, adding a board member focused on safety, instituting a new incident reporting system and appointing an independent panel examining safety issues within the company.
Now there’s serious question whether the CSB could handle another huge accident like the BP explosion. U.S. Rep. Gene Green, the retiring congressman whose district includes the Houston Ship Channel, bluntly predicts the agency won’t have the staffing capacity for another BP-scale disaster.
Green shouldn’t be the only voice expressing concern. Our congressional delegation, particularly Sen. John Cornyn and Sen. Ted Cruz, know the importance of the petrochemical industry along the Texas Gulf Coast. Saving the modestly funded Chemical Safety Board should be one of their top priorities.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Save-the-Chemical-Safety-Board-Editorial-12992320.php
-
BNSF Seeks PTC Deadline Extension Due to Interoperability Delays
Jun 14, 2018 | Progressive Railroading
BNSF Railway Co. has asked the U.S. Department of Transportation for a two-year extension to the federally mandated positive train control (PTC) deadline due to interoperability delays with other railroads, the Class I announced yesterday.
BNSF announced in December 2017 that it had installed and was operating under PTC on all mandated subdivisions ahead of the Dec. 31, 2018, deadline. However, BNSF will require an extension due to the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) current interpretation of the PTC law.
The FRA's interpretation requires that all other railroads operating across any of BNSF's PTC-equipped lines must be capable of operating with BNSF's PTC system. Not all railroads that operate on BNSF track will have completed their installation by the end of this year, BNSF officials said in a press release.
"BNSF has succeeded in the adoption of this key safety technology. Even with this request for a deadline extension, BNSF's PTC network is installed and we are currently running, and will continue to run, more than a thousand trains daily with PTC as we continue to refine the system and resolve technological challenges," said Chris Matthews, BNSF assistant vice president of network control systems.
The interoperability of PTC systems between Class I, commuter and short-line rail carriers "remains a challenge," BNSF officials said.
BNSF completed installation of all mandated PTC infrastructure by 2017's end, including 88 required subdivisions covering more than 11,500 route miles on its network.
The Class I has "successfully demonstrated" interoperability with several railroads that operate on its network, including commuter railroads and Amtrak, BNSF officials said.https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ptc/news/BNSF-seeks-PTC-deadline-extension-due-to-interoperability-delays--54894
-
GAO Begins Assessment of Carbon 'Cost' Tool
Jun 14, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has begun an assessment of the Obama-era social cost of carbon (SCC) tool for estimating climate damages, the latest official scrutiny of the Trump administration's reduction of the metric's projected benefits of cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
In addition to the GAO review, which has been planned since December following a request from several Democratic senators, EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) voted in late May to review the Trump EPA's “interim” revisions to the SCC.
That review is part of the board's decision to assess the underlying science behind nearly all of the agency's climate policy rollbacks.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), one of several Democrats who had urged GAO to conduct the study, announced the move in a June 13 press release, saying GAO plans a “thorough analysis of the Trump administration’s decision to drastically reduce the value of the [SCC] in the federal government’s decisions.”
Trump officials included interim estimates of the benefits of GHG cuts in several proposed regulations that would roll back Obama-era climate measures. The new figures reduce the projected benefits by relying on a higher discount rate, which is used to estimate the present day value of future benefits, than the Obama SCC and by assessing only domestic benefits of cutting emissions, rather than global benefits.
“The result has been a severe and unsupported reduction in the value of the” SCC, Whitehouse said in the release. EPA's proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan utility GHG rule, for instance, reduced the SCC from $45 per ton to as low as $1 per ton in 2020, he added.
Whitehouse and six other Senate Democrats asked GAO to analyze several aspects of the SCC in a Dec. 5 letter. GAO agreed to conduct the study later that month.
Others joining the request were Sens. Michael Bennet (D-CO), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
An SAB workgroup had called for a review of whether the Trump changes to the SCC “are consistent” with prior reviews of the metric by the National Academy of Sciences, which largely backed the Obama-era estimates and outlined a process for continuously updating the tool. The full SAB accepted the recommendation at its May 31 meeting.
The Trump administration says it is including a 7 percent discount rate to make the tool consistent with White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) guidance on cost-benefit reviews, though supporters of the SCC say the Obama administration's reliance on lower rates was already consistent with the OMB guide.
Trump officials made similar changes to a related Obama-era metric known as the social cost of methane, which has drawn criticism from academics and environmental groups.
The senators have noted that GAO in a 2014 report found that an inter-agency group under the Obama administration “used consensus-based decision making, relied largely on existing academic literature and models, and took steps to disclose limitations and incorporate new information” when crafting the SCC.
In a separate report issued that same year, GAO also urged OMB to “clarify the relationship” between its prior cost-benefit guidance and the SCC.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/gao-begins-assessment-carbon-cost-tool
-
Study Tallies Adverse Impacts of Rollbacks, Sparking EPA Criticism
Jun 14, 2018 | Inside EPA
Two Harvard professors are estimating that planned Trump administration rollbacks of Obama-era EPA rules will result in more than 80,000 deaths over ten years, sparking strong criticisms from agency officials as well as its new top air quality advisor.
The study, “A Breath of Bad Air: Cost of the Trump Environmental Agenda May Lead to 80 000 Extra Deaths per Decade,” presents “highly speculative estimates of health impacts that reflect guess-work and assumptions of unknown validity, not facts implied by available data,” Tony Cox, the new chairman of EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee and an independent consultant in environmental risks told Bloomberg June 13.
Cox, who specified that he was not speaking for EPA, added that such fears led to emissions reduction policies in Ireland that were similar to those proposed by the Obama administration. Cox told Bloomberg that these policies provided no significant reductions in death rates a decade later.
Similarly, EPA told Bloomberg that the JAMA article is “not a scientific article, it’s a political article. The science is clear, under President Trump greenhouse gas emissions are down, Superfund sites are being cleaned up at a higher rate than under President Obama, and the federal government is investing more money to improve water infrastructure than ever before,” the EPA said.
In the essay published June 12 in JAMA, David Cutler, an applied economics professor and Francesca Dominici, a professor of biostatistics, consider more than 60 deregulatory actions undertaken by the Trump EPA, focusing especially on air regulations.
The result is “an extremely conservative estimate is that the Trump environmental agenda is likely to cost the lives of over 80,000 U.S. residents per decade and lead to respiratory problems for many more than 1 million people. This sobering statistic captures only a small fraction of the cumulative public health damages associated with the full range of rollbacks and systemic actions proposed by the Trump administration.”
Of EPA's critique, Cutler told Bloomberg that the estimates they used stem from the cost-benefit analyses that the Obama EPA prepared to justify the original rules. “If they don’t like what their scientists say, they should provide scientific reasons for thinking so,” he said.
Cutler and Dominici write that Trump's proposed changes “are likely to make breathing more difficult. A central feature of [Trump's] agenda is environmental damage: making the air dirtier and exposing people to more toxic chemicals. The beneficiaries, in contrast, will be a relatively few well-connected companies.”
The authors also call out Pruitt's proposal on science transparency, which seeks to bar the agency from using any research where the underlying data are not publicly accessible, as further harming public health. The controversial policy has been met with widespread condemnation from Democrats, academics, doctors, environmentalists and others who fear the rule will allow EPA to ignore studies showing public health affects because they rely on private medical information.
“One might imagine that the science that supported enactment of these rules would make repealing them difficult. But that is not the case. Even as it is targeting environmental rules, the Trump administration is taking aim at the use of science that supports public policy,” Cutler and Dominici write. They describe the purpose of Pruitt's proposed rule as removing “most observational studies of health effects of air pollution exposure from being considered in regulatory settings ... With no evidence of harms (because of constraints on presenting the available evidence), regulations cannot be sustained.”
But they also offer the caveat that Trump's efforts “will take many years. Whoever is sworn in as President in January 2021 will have a large effect on whether the Trump administration’s full environmental agenda goes into effect.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/study-tallies-adverse-impacts-rollbacks-sparking-epa-criticism
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested