Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 6/15/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Production Forecast to Grow by 3.6% in 2019
Jun 14, 2018 | Powder Bulk Solids
Gains in America’s manufacturing, construction, and export markets are projected lift the growth rate of U.S. chemical production to 3.6% in 2019 from an estimated rate of 3.4% this year, according to a new report by the American Chemistry Council (ACC). -
(ACC Mentioned) Commentary: Chemicals Go Circular
Jun 14, 2018 | ICIS
By Joseph Chang
The circular economy just got another big push from the US – the world’s fastest growing country for new plastics volumes. The circular economy just got another big push from the US – the world’s fastest growing country for new plastics volumes. -
(ACC Mentioned) Insulation Market Expanding 6.0% CAGR to Cross $70,000 Mn by 2024
Jun 15, 2018 | The Camping Canuck
By Rahul Varpe
As per a recent report by the American Chemistry Council – The Contributions of Insulation to the U.S. Economy in 2016, the U.S. Insulation Market nearly contributes USD 20 billion annually to the country’s economy. -
(ACC Mentioned) Industry, States Seek Revisions to Draft Waste Rule for Aerosol Cans
Jun 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
State officials and a host of industry groups are generally supporting EPA’s proposal to add hazardous waste aerosol cans to the list of waste covered by streamlined federal universal waste regulations in order to ease requirements... -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Sides with Chemical Companies on Drinking Water Pollution
Jun 15, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
One of the most widespread chemical pollutants found in ground water will not be evaluated by the EPA for the risks it poses in drinking water in a victory for the chemicals industry. -
EPA Eyes Individual PFAS but Sees Limits in Chemical-Specific Approach
Jun 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Even as EPA moves to assess and possibly regulate several individual perfluorinated chemicals, the agency's top policy official on the issue is acknowledging that given the thousands of chemicals in the class, they will eventually have to be considered in groups rather than individually... -
Senate's Interior-Environment Bill Would Compel Release of PFAS Report
Jun 15, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
The Senate Appropriations Committee's report to its Interior-Environment funding bill includes language that would compel the release of a stalled health assessment of PFAS chemicals. -
EPA Paint Program Endangered Public Health — Probe
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Corbin Hiar
The Office of Special Counsel said today that the lead paint inspection program in EPA's Southeast region "created a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety." -
Colorado Approves Chemicals Standard After Air Force Spills
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
A new site-specific standard for perfluorinated chemicals in groundwater will take effect June 30 in an area south of Colorado Springs where drinking water supplies are contaminated as a result of firefighting foam used at a nearby Air Force base. -
US House Republicans Push Plan to Penalize States Blocking Offshore Drilling
Jun 15, 2018 | Platts
By Brian Scheid
Republicans in the US House of Representatives want to penalize states who block oil and natural gas drilling off their coasts by forcing them to pay the federal government potentially billions of dollars to compensate for unused leases. -
GOP Offshore Drilling Proposal Triggers Debate
Jun 14, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Republicans used a Natural Resources hearing Thursday to tout newly proposed legislation that would give states a larger share of royalties to incentivize them to back expanded offshore drilling. -
States Would Have More Say Over Oil, Gas Leasing in GOP Plan
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
Republican package of ideas about how to revamp oil and gas leasing in federal offshore waters would use a carrot-and-stick approach to encourage states to support leasing while at the same time giving them partial veto authority. -
Pennsylvania Clears Mariner East 1 for Service, But Some Construction Still Pending
Jun 14, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) on Thursday said Sunoco Pipeline LP’s Mariner East (ME) 1 could restart natural gas liquids (NGL) service after it was suspended again last month, but commissioners upheld a stay on construction of the ME 2 and 2X projects... -
(ACC Mentioned) Democrats Seek to Preserve EPA's RMP Provisions in CFATS Renewal
Jun 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Rebecca Rainey and Dave Reynolds
As the Trump administration works to roll back the Obama-era rule strengthening EPA's facility accident prevention program, House Democrats are seeking to codify portions of the rule in pending legislation renewing the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) facility security program... -
Lawmakers Fight over Reach of Anti-Terrorism Effort
Jun 15, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Corbin Hiar
Several House Democrats raised concerns yesterday during a key subcommittee hearing about changes senators are pursuing for a soon-to-expire Department of Homeland Security program created to protect chemical plants from terrorist threats. -
First Responder Group Criticizes Eased Rules for Chemical Plants
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam McQuillan
The EPA’s proposal to scale back a chemical safety regulation will make it harder for firefighters, police, and other first responders to prepare for chemical facilities’ emergencies, the head of a first-responder group told the agency June 14. -
Explosives Makers May Get Exemption from Anti-Terror Plans
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
House Republicans and homeland security officials are open to the explosives industry’s desired exemption from a chemical facility security program, even as Democrats warned the move would bring risks. -
Kristen Kulinowski to Lead Chemical Safety Board
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jeff Johnson
Kristen Kulinowski will head the Chemical Safety Board as its “interim executive authority” following the resignation of chair Vanessa Allen Sutherland, according to a CSB statement. -
Why Railroads Are Making Freight Trains Longer and Longer
Jun 15, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Daniel Machalaba
The freight train is now on track to stretch up to 3 miles long, with 200 cars or more. And it’s being powered, in part, by an unusual energy source: the activist investor. -
Senators Approve EPA Bill with Ethics Language
Jun 14, 2018 |
By Kevin Bogardus
Senate appropriators have taken note of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's ethics troubles as spending debates chug along on Capitol Hill. -
Climate Impacts Need to be Considered in Oil, Gas Lease: Court
Jun 15, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
Federal agencies leasing properties for oil and gas drilling must analyze the foreseeable impacts of greenhouse gases—not only from the lease sites but from downstream activities such as automotive fuel combustion and from cumulative emissions of any sources, a court ruled. -
Scott Pruitt, Under Fire, Plans to Initiate a Big Environmental Rollback
Jun 14, 2018 | New York Times
By Coral Davenport
Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is expected on Friday to send President Trump a detailed legal proposal to dramatically scale back an Obama-era regulation on water pollution, according to a senior E.P.A. official familiar with the plan. -
Democrats Decry Plan to Overhaul Statutory Reviews
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Maxine Joselow
Seventy-one Democrats yesterday urged EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to abandon his "dangerous" approach to setting air quality standards.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Production Forecast to Grow by 3.6% in 2019
Jun 14, 2018 | Powder Bulk Solids
Gains in America’s manufacturing, construction, and export markets are projected lift the growth rate of U.S. chemical production to 3.6% in 2019 from an estimated rate of 3.4% this year, according to a new report by the American Chemistry Council (ACC).
Released this month, the ACC’s “Mid-Year 2018 Chemical Industry Situation and Outlook” posits that production of fertilizers, crop protection products, coatings, consumer products, and petrochemicals will increase during the next 18 months.
“During 2018, output gains are expected to be strongest in agricultural chemicals, consumer products, coatings, and bulk petrochemicals and organics,” the report said. “In addition, production of plastic resins is set to grow at the fastest pace since 2012 as new capacity comes on line and demand firms for domestic customers and those abroad. The specialty chemicals segment is also set to grow as industrial activity improves.”
The ACC forecasts that chemical production is likely to grow the most in the Gulf Coast, Midwest, and Ohio Valley regions this year. High availability of domestic sale gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs) are projected to fuel capacity investments and capital spending through 2023.
While the organization’s report offered a positive outlook for the U.S. chemicals industry into 2019, the ACC cautioned that shifts in U.S. trade and economic policies may hinder growth.
“Introducing barriers to trade within the chemical sector and downstream sector will negatively impact the industry’s grade growth performance,” the ACC’s report stated. “Indeed, even the threat to such policies introduces uncertainty for future investments and the ability to fully employ the U.S. as an export platform.”
http://www.powderbulksolids.com/news/US-Chemical-Production-Forecast-to-Grow-by-3-6-in-2019-06-14-2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Commentary: Chemicals Go Circular
Jun 14, 2018 | ICIS
By Joseph Chang
The circular economy just got another big push from the US – the world’s fastest growing country for new plastics volumes.
Driven by increasing consumer awareness about plastic waste, especially in the oceans, the EU kicked off the circular economy discussion in earnest in January with a framework to achieve 100% of all plastics packaging in the EU either reusable or recyclable in a cost-effective manner by 2030.
But it is critical the US gets on board, as it is the country most aggressively boosting plastics capacity on the back of advantaged shale gas.
The awareness of marine plastic waste has only grown with the publication of a series of graphic images along with multiple articles on the effects of plastics pollution on marine wildlife by National Geographic magazine, at least one copy of which appeared at the American Chemistry Council (ACC) annual meeting in Colorado Springs in early June.
The impact of these types of photos was acknowledged by Jerry MacCleary, CEO of Covestro LLC, who is also chairman of the executive committee of the ACC board of directors.
At the meeting, the ACC laid out its commitment to reducing plastic waste with its own circular economy goals to achieve 100% of plastics packaging being recyclable or recoverable by 2030, and 100% of plastics packaging actually reused, recycled or recovered by 2040.
Plastics waste was at the top of the agenda at the ACC press briefing at the annual meeting, with LyondellBasell CEO Bob Patel and Chemours CEO Mark Vergnano, along with ACC CEO Cal Dooley advocating for real commitment by its members and developing concrete solutions.
Patel is also chairman of the board of the ACC, and Vergnano vice chairman.
This move by the leading US chemical trade group requires leadership and dedication. Critically, after the ACC annual meeting, the association announced that Dooley has agreed to delay his retirement and extend his tenure as CEO through 2019 instead of retiring at the end of 2018.
“The global chemicals and plastics industry has an imperative to fight the spread of mismanaged plastic waste that is increasingly littering our rivers, oceans and landscapes,” said Dooley.
He called ending plastic waste “an issue of personal, as well as professional interest”, and called for “swift and aggressive actions to make the most of all resources and leverage technology to dramatically increase rates of reuse, recycling and recovery of all plastic products.”
Actual plastic resin producers must get involved, even if they cannot directly control the streams of plastic waste going into the oceans, which are coming predominantly from Asia. Any positive actions they can take should be explored and then executed, if feasible. Doing nothing is not a choice.
The most effective solutions will ultimately come down to collection and recycling – two competencies the developing world lacks at the moment.
The collection should ideally be done on land before the waste hits the waterways, but there are also technologies being developed to collect plastic waste from the sea for recycling.
Collection is not a core competency of plastic resin producers either, and they are not likely to delve into this business in a big way. However, they can partner with waste management companies – firms that are experts in collection.
LyondellBasell in March invested in Netherlands-based plastics recycling company Quality Circular Polymers (QCP) in a joint venture with SUEZ, where SUEZ will seek to improve waste collection for feedstock at QCP to produce virgin quality polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene(PP).
While operations will initially be focused in the Netherlands and Germany, where recycling awareness and capabilities are high, LyondellBasell aims to replicate the technology and operations elsewhere over time.
Producers should make sure they have an actual stake in recycled plastics, said Paul Bjacek, principal director at Accenture, at the ACC meeting. He pointed out that by 2040, around 275m tonnes/year, or almost a third of global plastics supply, will be “new” recycled material representing “lost conventional capacity”.
It is going to be a long journey to a plastics circular economy and the chemical industry is in the very early stages. But now the wheels are turning.
Additional reporting by Al Greenwood
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/06/14/10231835/commentary-chemicals-go-circular/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Insulation Market Expanding 6.0% CAGR to Cross $70,000 Mn by 2024
Jun 15, 2018 | The Camping Canuck
By Rahul Varpe
As per a recent report by the American Chemistry Council – The Contributions of Insulation to the U.S. Economy in 2016, the U.S. Insulation Market nearly contributes USD 20 billion annually to the country’s economy. Not just that, the expansive business space also creates an employability of approximately 400,000 throughout U.S. In fact, the overall regional insulation industry is deemed to have a perpetual and positive impact on three mainstream domains – energy, infrastructure, and healthcare, which are also ruled by the legislative policies.
Fi-Foil’s launch of two revolutionary insulation products in 2017 NAHB sent out waves of anticipation in insulation market, especially amidst the backdrop where energy efficiency trends are predominantly shaping the business landscape. Reportedly, these two highly innovative, environmentally viable reflective insulators, brainstormed by renowned architect Phil Kean, were presented at the yesteryear International Builders Show in Orlando. The two products dubbed HY-Fi and M-Shield were allegedly chosen for The New American Remodeled Home and The New American Home respectively.
While HY-Fi is claimed to be a hybrid insulation system which works in conjunction with spray foam, M-Shield is a paperless insulation for masonry walls. Fi-Foil has already gathered rave reviews across the entire insulation market for these two products, primarily for its groundbreaking in built technology. The U.S. based company reportedly has utilized cavity air space in manufacturing these flagships to ensure improved performance with reduced radiant heat transfer. The huge popularity of these devices depicts a fraction of the ongoing developments underlining globally that grabbed a valuation of USD 45 billion in 2017.
Having already pegged a commendable proportion of authority in global insulation market, North America has turned out to be one of the potential hotbeds for market investment. This can be primarily attributed to the increasing governmental initiatives with regards to energy efficient housing schemes across the belt. Moreover, the active participation by the private entities has also added substantially to the regional landscape. In this regard, the IEX USA (Insulation Expo USA) event held last year created a significant buzz in the North America market. Reportedly, 1200 insulation industry players including Armacell, Johns Manville, Edge-Sweets Company, Roxul Technical Insulation, and Climatech International attended the event which encompassed innovative technologies around thermal insulation for industrial as well as commercial applications. In terms of profitability potential, North America is forecast to surpass USD 16 billion by 2024.
According to a survey organized by the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association (NAIMA) in the year 2016, U.S. manufacturers nearly utilized over 1.8 billion pounds of recycled materials in the production of commercial, residential, thermal, and acoustical insulation. Speculation states it is roughly around total municipal solid waste generated in the country by 1 million Americans in a year. The statistic vividly underlines the sustainability trends predominant in the U.S., that not only promotes energy saving insulation products but also meets the environmental protection criteria.
It is prudent to mention that not only the U.S. but the entire world has been a recipient of these trends. While Europe procured 25% of the global market size in 2017, Asia Pacific has also registered lucrative proceeds with an anticipated CAGR of 6% over 2018-2024. Backed by a barrage of such strong regulatory guidelines to promote advanced insulating techniques, the market stands to gain much over the ensuing years. Speaking of the competitive landscape, the industry is rather fragmented with the participation of myriad players inclined toward adoption of modern and sustainable technologies. While the major players including the like of Rockwool International, Huntsman International, etc. already procure a major portion of the market share, the anticipated trends point toward various small-scale manufacturers and regional players gaining a substantial edge in the competitive terrain. All in all, the global insulation market share is projected to exceed a valuation of USD 70 billion by 2024.
http://www.thecampingcanuck.com/insulation-market/12478/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry, States Seek Revisions to Draft Waste Rule for Aerosol Cans
Jun 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
State officials and a host of industry groups are generally supporting EPA’s proposal to add hazardous waste aerosol cans to the list of waste covered by streamlined federal universal waste regulations in order to ease requirements, but they vary on improvements they say can be made, according to recently filed comments on the proposed rule.
But environmentalists are opposing the proposed addition, arguing the plan is inconsistent with the Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA) because of the test EPA applies to allow exemptions from stringent hazardous waste rules.
“EPA’s proposal fails to comport with RCRA, and its mandate to regulate hazardous wastes ‘as necessary [to] protect human health and the environment,’” Earthjustice says in May 15 comments on behalf of California Communities Against Toxics (CCAT).
The group takes issue with the proposed rule’s eight-factor test for determining whether substances are eligible for less stringent “universal waste” requirements.
“Furthermore, EPA’s proposed [universal waste] standards unlawfully exempt generators and transporters of hazardous waste aerosol cans from important requirements, like recordkeeping, reporting, and the manifest systems, that are expressly mandated by RCRA and that EPA has deemed necessary to protect human health and the environment,” the group adds.
The draft rule “also unlawfully allows unpermitted ‘handlers’ to receive hazardous waste aerosol cans, store them for one year, puncture and drain them, and then send them to other handlers or destination sites,” CCAT says.
But many other commenters express support for EPA’s proposal to add hazardous waste aerosol cans to the list of federal universal waste regulations, thereby easing disposal requirements for the retail sector.
The move by the Trump EPA follows through on a determination made during the Obama administration that aerosol cans are a good candidate for eased waste management rules.
In the proposed rule, titled “Increasing Recycling: Adding Aerosol Cans to the Universal Waste Regulations,” which EPA released in March, the agency says it believes aerosol cans meet the universal waste rule’s eight factors for hazardous waste that is appropriate for management under the streamlined universal waste system.
“Adding aerosol cans to the universal waste rule simplifies handling and disposal of the wastes for generators, while ensuring that aerosol cans are sent to the appropriate destination facilities, where they will be managed as a hazardous waste with all applicable [RCRA] subtitle C requirements,” the rule says.
EPA took comment on the draft rule until May 15, receiving a host of comments from a variety of business sectors, as well as states and the one environmental group.
Simplify Management
The business sector says it generally supports the draft rule, with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce noting in its comments that regulating under the universal waste rule “will simplify managing this ubiquitous waste stream.”
It says that existing regulations “require detailed waste characterizations for each can, difficult ‘point of generation’ determinations, full satellite accumulation area requirements, and unnecessarily short time frames for generators to ship these materials off-site.”
Similarly, retail groups -- which include the largest percentage of entities affected by the rule and which have been pressing for the classification -- say in May 14 comments that they “strongly support the classification and regulation of hazardous aerosol can wastes as universal wastes,” adding that aerosol cans meet all criteria specified by the universal waste rule.
And the Northeast Waste Management Officials’ Association (NEWMOA) -- comprised of the states of Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont -- May 15 submitted commentsgenerally supportive of the concept as well. “Our members believe that the universal waste regulatory framework is appropriate for the collection and management of hazardous waste aerosol cans,” the group says.
But these groups and others offer a variety of recommendations -- some in contrast with each other -- to revise the proposal, with industry generally seeking to broaden the rule’s applicability.
“While the proposed universal waste rules will simplify the specific requirements that apply to intact hazardous waste aerosol cans, the Chamber believes that there is an opportunity to greatly broaden the positive impacts of regulating aerosol cans as universal waste if EPA expands the applicability provisions of the rules,” the Chamber says in May 15 comments.
“As proposed, and if applied in practice, limiting the universal waste category to only non-leaking intact cans greatly restricts the advantages of using the universal waste category to only a portion of the aerosol can waste stream and may not create the intended simplified system for a greater number of generators,” the Chamber adds.
And the retail groups -- which include the Retail Industry Leaders Association, the Food Marketing Institute and the National Association of Chain Drug Stores -- cite concerns that EPA has unnecessarily narrowed the scope of the rule to make it “unworkable,” particularly in the retail sector.
The retailers urge EPA “to expand the scope of its proposal by including non-aerated products and gas-only products, by removing or modifying the exclusion for aerosol cans with evidence of leaking or damage, and by clarifying the status of empty aerosol cans.” In effect, the groups want leaking or damaged aerosol cans to be included as universal waste. They argue the proposed exclusion for this “has the potential to become the exclusion that swallows the entire rule.”
Further, the retailers urge EPA “to clarify that empty aerosol cans are not reactive and thus do not have to be managed as either universal or hazardous wastes.”
Also, the retailers appeal to the agency to issue guidance clarifying “when aerosol cans are subject to hazardous waste regulation in the first instance.” It advises EPA to issue the guidance before or with the final rule.
The chamber and American Chemistry Council (ACC) also cite the need for modifications to the draft rule’s treatment of puncturing and draining aerosol cans. The chamber says EPA should clarify the draft rule’s permitting exemption for puncturing and draining activities. And ACC calls on EPA to “finalize a rule that provides for fewer limitations on puncture and draining activities in order to allow states to decide whether to opt in and provide additional limitations of their own, if needed.”
The Environmental Technology Council (ETC) -- which represents recycling, waste treatment and disposal service companies -- says it generally supports the draft rule, but asks for changes. Among these, ETC disagrees with EPA’s proposal to limit puncturing and draining activities to universal waste generators that are not commercial processors.
ETC says in its comments that EPA should reverse this policy, and bar generators from such activities, but allow commercial processors, also known as hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs), to conduct those activities as they are better equipped and trained to handle such work.
The group also asks EPA to require generators to give disposal facilities information about the contents of the aerosol cans to be disposed of.
Varying Positions
States also seemed to take varying positions on the proposed rule. Ohio EPA in its May 15 comments makes reference to its own universal waste rules, adopted in December. Like retailers, it urges EPA to broaden the rule to allow leaking or damaged aerosol cans to be managed as universal waste. “Excluding damaged or leaking aerosol cans from the universal waste program complicates implementation of the universal waste rule for the handler and makes the rule less understandable,” Ohio EPA says.
In terms of puncturing and draining, though, NEWMOA argues that once a can has been punctured, it should not qualify as a universal waste. The group also raises questions and calls for clarifications on EPA’s consideration of who should be allowed to puncture and drain containers under the rule, noting that commercial processors, as opposed to generators, are more likely to have expertise on contents of cans and puncturing equipment.
But the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) in its May 2 comments is at odds with ETC on the issue of who should be allowed to puncture and drain cans. ADEM notes the draft rule would limit that to the generator, which would be responsible for characterizing the waste generated, and the destination facility, which would be permitted and have a “robust inspection schedule, and possess financial assurance to ensure the process and the resultant wastes are properly managed.”
ADEM says it therefore advises EPA to add “language to the proposed regulations that would prohibit ‘commercial processors’ from puncturing universal waste aerosol cans.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/industry-states-seek-revisions-draft-waste-rule-aerosol-cans
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Sides with Chemical Companies on Drinking Water Pollution
Jun 15, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
One of the most widespread chemical pollutants found in ground water will not be evaluated by the EPA for the risks it poses in drinking water in a victory for the chemicals industry.
The EPA was ordered by Congress in 2016 to conduct a review of the 85,000 chemicals found in commerce. To start the process, the agency chose 10 high priority chemicals—compounds that are both highly toxic and known to accumulate in the environment. If a chemical is shown to present unreasonable risks, it will be regulated in some capacity.
On the list of ten is 1,4-dioxane, a common solvent found in trace amounts in everything from sunscreen, shampoo, and detergents, to cosmetics and lotion. 1,4-dioxane, a probable carcinogen, also has been turning up in groundwater in multiple sites across the country which often feeds into drinking water supplies.
The agency, however, has opted to limit its risk evaluation for 1,4-dioxane just to occupational and industrial exposures. This means that other exposure pathways—including drinking water—will not be part of the evaluation used to restrict or ban its use.
That was one of many revelations taken from the agency’s risk evaluation documents, released on June 1.
Good News for Chemical MakersEver since the list of 10 was created, the American Chemistry Council—the industry’s main trade group—has argued that evaluating chemicals based on all conditions of use, regardless of how small, was a deeply flawed approach. It appears now that the EPA is heeding those concerns.
“It is essential that TSCA risk evaluations are grounded in the best available science and the weight of the scientific evidence, as required by Section 26 of the law, and are focused on the conditions of use that present the greatest potential risks,” the chemistry council said in June 1 statement.
Other chemical makers Bloomberg Environment reached out to either declined to comment or deferred to the chemistry council.
By limiting the scope of the risk evaluation, environmental groups argue that EPA is signaling to industry that significant restrictions on 1,4-dioxane are less likely. By focusing on a few narrow exposure pathways the EPA is making it much easier for companies to continue business as usual.
In response to emailed questions from Bloomberg Environment, an EPA spokesman said the decision to limit the hazard assessment for 1,4-dioxane was because no consumer uses for 1,4-dioxane were reported to the EPA.
Outside of industrial exposure, 1,4-dioxane exists mainly as a chemical byproduct, and might therefore be better regulated under other laws such as the Clean Air Act or the Safe Drinking Water Act, the agency said.
In 2016, approximately 1 million pounds of 1,4-dioxane were produced or imported into the U.S., as reported to the EPA. About 675,000 pounds released into the environment in 2015. Two companies—BASF Corp. and Tedia Co. in Fairfield, Ohio—reported that they produced and imported it. A third company concealed its name under confidentiality provisions of the law.
‘Cancer Doesn’t Care’“Cancer doesn’t care if you’re getting exposed in an industrial setting or through your drinking water,” said Melanie Benesh, an Environmental Working Group legislative and regulatory attorney based in Washington. “It’s important that EPA take into consideration the entire exposure profile before making a safety determination.”
Benesh told Bloomberg Environment that looking at a chemical in isolation risks missing the total exposure that people experience over the course of a lifetime.
“When you’re doing a risk assessment, you want to understand the total exposure,” she said. “I understand that EPA is not going to set new drinking water limits under TSCA, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t take into consideration that fact that people are being exposed through drinking water when determining if a chemical is safe.”
In its evaluation documents, the EPA cited the need to avoid duplicating efforts under other laws, as well as the impending December 2019 deadline for the ten risk assessments as also contributing to the decision to narrow its review.
“This is entirely defensible position for EPA to take,” James Votaw, a partner with Keller and Heckman LLP, a Washington law firm specializing in chemical regulatory compliance, said.
There are some limitations on this approach, Votaw told Bloomberg Environment. For instance, the EPA has a certain amount of time to make determination over what law is best suited to regulate.
“But if they find a case where there is clear regulatory overlap, they can push the issue over to the Office of Water,” Votaw said.
States Moving on 1,4-dioxane First1,4-dioxane is classified as a “likely human carcinogen, found in groundwater at sites throughout the United States. It is highly mobile and does not readily biodegrade in the environment,” according to an EPA factsheet. It’s been on California’s official list of cancer-causing chemicals since 1988.
In the absence of an over-arching federal regulation, more than a dozen states have set their own regulations or health notices for specific concentrations of 1,4-dioxane.
“New York has decided they can’t wait for the federal government,” Dennis Kelleher, a spokesman for the Long Island Water Conference, a coalition of more than 50 public water utilities, said.
Kelleher told Bloomberg Environment that among the 1,200 public supply wells on Long Island, 170 test higher than 0.35 parts per billion, the level EPA estimates would cause one additional case of cancer for every 1 million people who drink that water for a lifetime.
Depending on where New York sets the maximum contaminant level, he said cleaning up 1,4 dioxane could cost water suppliers billions of dollars in capital spending as well as millions more to run and maintain treatment systems.
Other Statutes in PlayIn the absence of regulatory action under TSCA, the next vehicle for those seeking tougher regulations for 1,4-dioxane would be something called the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR), which is part of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
The monitoring rule kicks in every five years requiring water utilities to gather sampling data on certain unregulated chemicals and then send it over to the EPA for consideration in possible regulations.
1,4 dioxane was one of 28 chemicals included in the monitoring rule for 2013 through 2015.
“The UCMR should offer sufficient protection for consumers, but the process is extremely slow,” said Tom Mohr, a contaminant hydrologist who wrote a book about cleaning up 1,4-dioxane sites.
Mohr told Bloomberg Environment that a better regulatory approach would be for the EPA to act under the precautionary principle.
“If we know something is bad, we should move to mitigate exposure first, without worrying about how bad, or which kind of bad, or whether it’s an issue for drinking water, inhalation or skin.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/epa-sides-with-chemical-companies-on-drinking-water-pollution
-
EPA Eyes Individual PFAS but Sees Limits in Chemical-Specific Approach
Jun 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Even as EPA moves to assess and possibly regulate several individual perfluorinated chemicals, the agency's top policy official on the issue is acknowledging that given the thousands of chemicals in the class, they will eventually have to be considered in groups rather than individually, an approach that the agency has previously struggled to advance.
The progress made on individual compounds “doesn't really even begin to tell us the whole story that we need to understand,” Peter Grevatt, director of EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, told EPA's summit for addressing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) last month.
Grevatt, who is leading EPA's efforts to address PFAS, was responding to questions from citizen groups -- members of the National PFAS Contamination Coalition -- that are urging regulators to regulate the entire PFAS class of compounds, rather than its current approach to address individual substances, such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), in contaminated drinking water.
The coalition, spread across 13 states, is pressing policymakers to adopt an all-encompassing standard that looks beyond those chemicals in the class that are currently being targeted to the next generation of PFAS chemicals.
The substances are a class of environmentally persistent chemicals known for their non-stick qualities but have been linked to certain types of cancer and other harmful effects and are turning up in the drinking water of numerous community water systems across the country.
While the coalition is still formulating specifics about how such a group-wide standard could be set, others agree that the agency should focus on the chemicals in groups.
Erik Olson, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's health program, told the summit that it could take “the next thousand years” if regulators were to focus on each chemical in sequence. “We've got to figure out a way to treat these as a class and to be setting standards for them as a class,” and possibly thinking about treatment options as a class, he said. He suggested that “perhaps a total PFAS standard would make sense."
He further suggested that states should be looking more broadly across PFAS “so that we're not on this treadmill of constantly switching from one PFAS to another PFAS, to another PFAS. And we'll never get off the treadmill.”
But EPA's past efforts to assess or regulate chemicals in groups have struggled. For example, early in the Obama administration the agency announced plans to regulate 16 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in drinking water as a group, rather than individually -- an approach on which the agency appears to have made little progress.
"The strategy is actually designed to transform the agency so we can use our existing safe drinking water laws to achieve greater health protection more quickly, more cost effectively and transparently," then-EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in 2011.
But agency officials acknowledged that they faced legal and technical challenges.
Outside of Grevatt's remarks, agency officials have not publicly signaled plans to address PFAS in groups. In 2016, the agency set non-binding health advisory levels for two of the most common PFAS -- PFOA and PFOS. Officials also recently announced it is starting a formal look at the need for a federal, enforceable drinking water standard for those two PFAS, but the agency has not set any regulatory requirements so far for any PFAS.
Lack Of Toxicity Data
Part of the reason for that may be the “lack of toxicity data for many PFAS compounds,” according to an EPA presentation to the agency's Science Advisory Board earlier this month.
As such, the agency appears to be ramping up efforts to assess a host of individual PFAS. According to the presentation, the agency has completed literature reviews for 21 of 31 PFAS of interest to the agency.
The agency is also conducting toxicity assessments for GenX and perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS), noting that there may be “potential additional PFAS toxicity assessments.” The agency also has Tier 1 computational assays underway for “75 PFAS representative of PFAS chemical space” and has created a repository of standards that is approaching 300 PFAS.
EPA's presentation also acknowledges a “lack of standardized/validated analytical methods” for many PFAS analytes, especially short-chain compounds, and in media other than drinking water.
As a result, the agency is taking steps to provide “standardized analytical guidance for meeting a variety of site investigation and remediation needs,” the presentation adds.
And the agency is also working to provide new methods to assess site contamination and potential exposure, new remediation methods and other steps to limit the harms from PFAS.
In his remarks, Grevatt referenced much of the work being done on development of toxicity data. But he said “at least as important” is a focus “to begin to look at these compounds in groups, and understand that when you're dealing with thousands of them, there's no way to handle one at a time.”
He noted that the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), part of the Department of Health and Human Services, is eying such an approach in research it is funding, saying that work coming out of NIEHS and happening at the state level is “exciting."
In remarks from the audience, Linda Birnbaum, director of NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program (NTP), told the summit, that her agencies are working on a larger pool of PFAS.
According to Birnbaum, NTP has been conducting studies on seven of the more traditional PFAS, and is now collaborating with EPA to look at as many as 75 different PFAS, representing various classes of compounds.
According to EPA's website, the two entities are developing a “risk-based approach for conducting PFAS toxicity testing.” It starts by screening approximately 75 PFAS. The website says the results “will be combined with exposure estimates to identify potentially high priority PFAS for further study. Data may also be used to infer the toxicological properties of other PFAS that have little or no available data."
Birnbaum said there are a wide variety of different types of toxicity being examined, including liver toxicity, developmental toxicity, immuno-toxicity, neurotoxicity and the blood-brain barrier.
She also told Inside EPA that many grantees are also studying PFAS, some in mechanistic studies and animal studies. In addition, there are epidemiology studies where grantees are looking at the levels of PFAS in people to determine if health effects are seen, she said.
Among states, New Jersey is at the forefront of developing enforceable PFAS standards at strict levels, with its Drinking Water Quality Institute on May 25 finalizing a recommendation of 13 parts per trillion for PFOS in drinking water -- the strictest in the country. The New Jersey environment commissioner is expected to consider the recommendation in a few weeks.
https://insideepa.com/weekly-focus/epa-eyes-individual-pfas-sees-limits-chemical-specific-approach
-
Senate's Interior-Environment Bill Would Compel Release of PFAS Report
Jun 15, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
The Senate Appropriations Committee's report to its Interior-Environment funding bill includes language that would compel the release of a stalled health assessment of PFAS chemicals.
The language, offered by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), was approved as part of the manager's amendment to the bipartisan spending bill. It would direct the HHS agency that conducted the assessment to publish it in the Federal Register within 15 days of the bill's enactment. It would also direct the agency to report to Congress on any changes made to the report since Trump administration officials began raising concerns about the report at the end of January.
POLITICO reported last month that political officials at EPA and the White House sought to delay the assessment, which found that some PFAS chemicals can pose health dangers at lower levels than EPA had previously said were safe. Their emails indicate that the assessment was poised for release at the end of January, but it has yet to be made public.
The director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, which drafted the assessment, toldan EPA summit on the chemicals last month that the report has been delayed while his agency works with EPA, DoD and others to assemble a communications strategy "that's all consistent and approved and agreed upon."
WHAT'S NEXT: Senate leaders are pushing to get all appropriations bills to the floor this summer. It has been years since the Interior-Environment measure has received floor consideration.
Alex Guillén contributed to this alert.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
EPA Paint Program Endangered Public Health — Probe
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Corbin Hiar
The Office of Special Counsel said today that the lead paint inspection program in EPA's Southeast region "created a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety."
Particularly at risk were pregnant women and children, OSC told President Trump and lawmakers in a letter prompted by a now-retired EPA whistleblower.
Special Counsel Henry Kerner said that "none of the individuals conducting lead-based paint inspections in EPA Region 4 from mid-2013 to late-2014 met training or credentialing requirements, and so should not have been conducting inspections."
Furthermore, a quarter of the inspection files from 2012 through last year that OSC reviewed "lacked documentary evidence required to show whether renovators had taken required steps to protect the public from lead-based paint hazards during renovations," Kerner said. Even worse, fewer than 2 percent of the sampled files "revealed whether children occupied the premises at the time of renovation."
Pregnant women and children are most at risk from exposure to lead, a potent neurotoxin that can lead to learning disabilities and other health problems.
Administrator Scott Pruitt has said EPA is "committed to taking action to address this threat" and has even toyed with the idea of declaring a "war on lead" (Greenwire, Dec. 11, 2017).
In response to the OSC's findings, which the independent watchdog agency laid out in a detailed report accompanying Kerner's letter, EPA promised to audit and improve the training of all of its lead paint inspectors.
EPA said it would increase oversight and management of inspection reports and issue a policy statement re-emphasizing the importance of "trying to obtain information about occupants" of inspection sites who are pregnant women or children.
But Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility — a nonprofit group that represented EPA whistleblower Elizabeth Wilde in the OSC process — believes EPA's limited response to the program's problems and failure to hold anyone accountable for them cast doubt on Pruitt's lead commitments.
"EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt says he has 'declared war' on lead exposure but his agency is issuing voluntary guidance and checklists, suggesting he is on war footing for a pillow fight," PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch said in a statement.
In a separate interview with E&E News, Ruch noted that EPA's inspector general previously found that the agency's Southwest region had been improperly dumping piles of closed lead and asbestos inspection and enforcement files, making it harder to catch and punish repeat offenders (Greenwire, Sept. 28, 2016).
That internal investigation, he said, was also initiated after concerns were raised by Wilde, who at the time was serving as a lead adviser in EPA's Atlanta regional headquarters.
Asked to comment on PEER's allegations, an EPA spokesperson said that "Administrator Scott Pruitt has made reducing children's exposure to lead a priority" and reiterated the steps the agency is taking to respond to the OSC findings.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/06/14/stories/1060084547
-
Colorado Approves Chemicals Standard After Air Force Spills
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
A new site-specific standard for perfluorinated chemicals in groundwater will take effect June 30 in an area south of Colorado Springs where drinking water supplies are contaminated as a result of firefighting foam used at a nearby Air Force base.
The Colorado Water Quality Control Commission adopted a limit (Regulation 42) in April of 0.070 micrograms per liter, or 70 parts per trillion, for an area in the vicinity of Fountain Creek in central El Paso County. Violators of the standard would have to mitigate the effects to drinking water using filtration methods, or provide bottled water.
Chemical contamination was found in that area in groundwater aquifers linked to large municipal drinking water systems, Tracie M. White, unit leader for federal facilities remediation and restoration in the Colorado Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division, told Bloomberg Environment June 13.
An initial investigation linked the contamination of drinking water supplies to elevated levels of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) found in firefighting foam used in emergency response and training exercises at the nearby Peterson Air Force Base, White said. Air Force officials reported the discharge of about 150,000 gallons of wastewater laced with the compounds in October 2016.
Range of Health EffectsThe chemicals don’t break down easily in the environment, according to the commission. The Environmental Protection Agency issued health advisories in May 2016 saying PFOA and PFOS have been linked to developmental effects, liver toxicity, kidney toxicity, immune effects, and cancer.
The site-specific standard proposed by the division will apply only to a region known as area 7 of the Widefield Aquifer, which supplies drinking water to some 60,000 people in Fountain, Widefield, Security, and surrounding communities, White said. No other public drinking water systems in the state were identified as having elevated levels of the chemicals, she said.
White said the Solid and Hazardous Waste Commission in February listed PFOA and PFOS as hazardous constituents in Colorado’s hazardous waste regulation, but stopped short of establishing a statewide standard for the chemicals.
The division is “continuing to assess the need for a statewide standard,” she said.
Environmentalists PleasedThe Fountain Valley Clean Water Coalition, a local environmental group, celebrated the approval of the site-specific standard and applauded the commission’s decision to apply the standard to a delineated site that includes Colorado Springs Utilities’ waste management facilities. The utility argued its solid waste facility, which lies within the alluvial aquifer targeted for protection, was hydrologically disconnected.
The coalition presented evidence there was evidence of nitrates leaking from the facility as well as potential for seepage, Biosolids have been identified as a possible source of PFOS contamination, the group said.
The utility testified before the commission that its engineered groundwater controls were sufficient to protect the aquifer.
The Air Force didn’t return Bloomberg Environment’s request for comment. It recently prepared an analysis of alternatives for dealing with PFOS and PFOA contamination in drinking water in the supply wells of the Security Water District, one of the affected drinking water systems.
Options include continuing to buy drinking water for district customers, treating water using a granular-activated carbon system, or treat the water using an ion exchange system, the option that the Air Force recommended.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/colorado-approves-chemicals-standard-after-air-force-spills
-
US House Republicans Push Plan to Penalize States Blocking Offshore Drilling
Jun 15, 2018 | Platts
By Brian Scheid
Republicans in the US House of Representatives want to penalize states who block oil and natural gas drilling off their coasts by forcing them to pay the federal government potentially billions of dollars to compensate for unused leases.
The proposal would allow states to keep drilling off their shores, but would levy a "lost production fee" on states who block drilling in more than half of the blocks off their coasts, Representative Paul Gosar, an Arizona Republican, said during a House Natural Resources Committee hearing Thursday. The proposal was included in a draft proposed bill, the Enhancing State Management of Federal Lands and Waters Act, discussed at Thursday's hearing. It would expand offshore revenue sharing to all states with offshore drilling and allow states to block up to half of lease blocks without penalty. But if a state blocked more than 50% of those blocks, it would be required to pay roughly one-tenth of the estimated revenue from offshore production, including from lease sales and royalties.
Gosar said several details of the bill, including how state offshore boundaries would be defined and how penalties would be calculated, have yet to be worked out.
But the legislation, even in its draft stage, already faces severe opposition from Democrats and coastal governors.
Representative Alan Lowenthal, a California Democrat, said the proposal amounted to a "shakedown" from the federal government and a way to "extort enormous sums" from states opposed to offshore drilling.
Lowenthal estimated that California, if it blocked offshore drilling, would need to pay $1 trillion in penalties over a 10-year period.
"It penalizes states for wanting a clean environment," Lowenthal said at Thursday's hearing.
In a letter sent to House leaders Wednesday, the governors of New Jersey, North Carolina, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Virginia wrote that the proposed bill "would impose a hefty cost on states that choose to exercise jurisdiction over their shorelines."
"Such an approach aims solely to penalize states that oppose offshore oil and gas drilling, while risking the nation's thriving and ever-expanding tourism industry," the governors wrote. "Rather than foster collaboration with states, this legislation needlessly pits the federal government against the states and their citizens."
In a separate letter sent to Representative Gosar Wednesday, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, called the draft bill "a federal extortion system that requires states to pay the federal government for the privilege of protecting their own coastal resources from offshore drilling."
The bill was unveiled as the Trump administration plans to greatly expand oil and gas drilling into more federal waters.
Interior January 4 unveiled a draft proposed program for oil and gas lease sales from 2019-2024 that included sales for acreage off every coastal state except Hawaii. The proposal is fully opposed by every governor along the West Coast and nearly every East Coast state except Maine.
On January 9, following a meeting with Florida Governor Rick Scott, a Republican, Zinke announced that Florida would be exempt from the plan, later arguing that Florida's unique geology and its reliance on tourism justified its removal from the plan.
Interior has not offered any details of the exemption for Florida and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the agency within Interior that developed the draft proposed lease sale plan, says that sales off Florida waters remain in the plan, at least until the next stage of the approval process later this year.https://www.platts.com/latest-news/oil/washington/us-house-republicans-push-plan-to-penalize-states-21085487
-
GOP Offshore Drilling Proposal Triggers Debate
Jun 14, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Republicans used a Natural Resources hearing Thursday to tout newly proposed legislation that would give states a larger share of royalties to incentivize them to back expanded offshore drilling.
States that do not agree to allow offshore drilling, or that propose moratoriums on it, would see their share of revenue from federal drilling drop.
Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) touted the bill as a way to give states more authority, while saying they should not be able to veto lease sales.
“While states are highly involved in the offshore lease planning process they do not have a veto over lease sales,” Gosar said at a Thursday House Natural Resources subcommittee on energy and mineral resources hearing.
“It’s an acknowledgment that such an attempt to strand federal assets comes at the expense of the American taxpayer,” said Gosar, the subcommittee’s chairman.
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, said the bill would be an example of federalism at its best.
The bill, which was proposed this week, would take away management of offshore drilling from the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management and place it in the hands of states.
If a coastal state chooses to expand drilling and increase production of fossil fuels, they’d get a larger portion — 60 percent — of the royalties from the lease sale.
States opting to impose a moratorium on drilling or cuts would see their share of revenue from the federal lease sales drop dramatically.
Myron Ebell, the director of International Environmental Policy at the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute, testified that the bill would be a win for states opposed to offshore drilling because it would give them power to definitively say no to drilling.
“It’s the idea that if a state wants a moratorium on offshore development they can actually get it. They don’t have to apply political pressure, they can actually say we want a moratorium and here is what we are willing to pay for it,” said Ebell, a vocal champion of President Trump’s energy policy.
Democrats criticized the proposal because of its punishments for states that opt out of expanding drilling.
Ranking member Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.) said the bill offered a “bribe” or a “shake-down.”
“This title is a bribe for states to take public land out of the public’s hand,” he said. “Title 2 is arguably more extreme...it would allow the federal government to extort enormous sums of money from coastal states that want to protect their beaches from offshore drilling.”
He also criticized the bill for solely focusing on the use of public land for mineral extraction and not as areas for public use or tourism.
“This discussion draft makes a clear statement that our shared public lands and waters are only worth the oil and gas that we can wring out of them, nothing else is worth anything,” said Lowenthal.
Trump touted energy independence and security during his campaign, and since taking office his administration has worked to explore ways to expand fossil fuel production.
In January, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke announced new exploration of offshore drilling in every corner of U.S. owned waters including the Arctic Ocean.
His announcement was met with fervent opposition by most states with coastlines. They said they feared what expanded drilling might do to their tourism industries, pointing to disasters such as the 2010 BP oil spill.
In April, the Trump administration took its first steps in opening up drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Last week, Interior announced it was starting $4 trillion in construction projects to ready lease sales for 1.6 million acres in the area’s coastal plain.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/392302-gop-offshore-drilling-proposal-triggers-debate
-
States Would Have More Say Over Oil, Gas Leasing in GOP Plan
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
Republican package of ideas about how to revamp oil and gas leasing in federal offshore waters would use a carrot-and-stick approach to encourage states to support leasing while at the same time giving them partial veto authority.
A share of the revenues would be one of the carrots. Fees for obstructing federal development would be one of the sticks. If the incentives worked, oil and gas companies could expect to see more exploration and production opportunities.
Democrats at a House subcommittee hearing June 14 said they didn’t want to see coastal states hit with hefty fees for exercising veto authority. It would amount to extortion, Rep Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.) said.
The ideas were released in a “discussion draft” bill, Enhancing State Management of Federal Lands and Waters Act. The draft was written to get a conversation started, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) said.
Gosar, chairman of the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, chaired the hearing as an exploration of ideas. Some of the ideas, such as the penalties for states blocking leases, were so roughly sketched that they amounted to placeholders awaiting revision.
Lowenthal, ranking member of the subcommittee, said he hoped the Republicans were just trying to make a point, not launching a serious legislative effort. To a large extent, Republicans did appear to regard the draft bill as a platform for discussion of the flaws and virtues of state or federal regulation of land.
Onshore Options OfferedThe draft contained provisions for onshore as well as offshore management. States would be allowed to assume regulatory control of sections of onshore federal land and would be able to increase or decrease oil and gas development as they chose—a strategy that could get around the restrictions, costs, and obligations of federal regulation.
There, too, would be carrots and sticks—a larger share of revenue for states that increased leasing and production, a smaller share of revenue for reduced leasing and production.
State control also would mean the application of state laws, not such federal laws as the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, and Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
Democrats have repeatedly opposed Republican efforts to amend NEPA and even the suggestion of amendments for the Endangered Species Act. Democrats in the recent past have similarly opposed suggestions that federal land should be sold or transferred to states.
Most debate during the hearing focused on the offshore provisions, however. That may have been a reflection of the public attention they received in the previous 24 hours—including statements from governors opposed to offshore drilling.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/states-would-have-more-say-over-oil-gas-leasing-in-gop-plan
-
Pennsylvania Clears Mariner East 1 for Service, But Some Construction Still Pending
Jun 14, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) on Thursday said Sunoco Pipeline LP’s Mariner East (ME) 1 could restart natural gas liquids (NGL) service after it was suspended again last month, but commissioners upheld a stay on construction of the ME 2 and 2X projects until they have more information.
With few NGL takeaway outlets in the Appalachian Basin, the 70,000 b/d pathway for ethane and propane that ME 1 provides is considered crucial, while the other projects also are said to be needed. Service on ME 1 was also suspended by the PUC earlier this year after the Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement (I&E) determined that three sinkholes that had formed near it were a threat. The PUC eventually lifted the orderafter the I&E was satisfied by the surveys, analysis and corrective actions undertaken by Sunoco.
Counting both suspensions, ME 1 has been offline for nearly three months this year.
“Upon review of the record in this matter, I do not believe the integrity of ME 1 remains at issue as Sunoco performed all of the necessary steps as directed in that matter to the satisfaction of our Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement,” Chairman Gladys Brown said during a hearing, referring to the first suspension and the work that went into reversing it.
The ME project has experienced significant delays, hit regulatory snags and was even ordered by the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) earlier this year to pay $12.6 million in fines for dozens of spills and violations during the construction of ME 2 and 2X. Despite such mishaps, Brown said there is no “new credible evidence to support a finding that the continued operation of ME 1 poses a clear and present danger to life or property in West White Township.”
Administrative Law Judge Elizabeth Barnes ordered the latest halt to operations and construction in response to a complaint from state Sen. Andrew Dinniman, which was filed after the sinkholes were discovered in a residential area in West Whiteland.
Dinniman, who represents citizens in Chester County living near the ME right-of-way that have staunchly opposed the project, sought to stop construction and clarify the role that the PUC should play in the installation and safety of such pipelines. Barnes granted an interim emergency order to halt activity while the broader complaint is pending.
The PUC, however, gave Sunoco 20 days to provide inspection and testing protocols, an emergency response plan and the safety training curriculum it uses for employees and contractors. Sunoco must also file the permission it receives from the DEP to continue with construction in West Whiteland. The commission would then review all of that information so it can make a decision about the status of ME 2 and 2X construction.
“We are concerned that upholding other aspects of the administrative law judge’s order does not follow applicable law and if not corrected brings uncertainty to Pennsylvania's entire regulatory environment,” said spokeswoman Lisa Dillinger, of Sunoco’s parent Energy Transfer Partners LP. “This can only be seen as an inherently political decision as Sen. Dinniman does not have legal standing to bring this suit in his political capacity,” she said, adding that the company is considering its legal options to ensure ME 2 stays on schedule for service in 3Q2018.
Barnes’ order lays out a litany of conditions Sunoco has to meet in order to resume activity. The PUC decided on Thursday not to address many of those, such as requirements for additional geophysical and geotechnical testing and a another that the company provide training and education to first responders. Instead, Brown said the commission would review those matters during proceedings for Dinniman’s complaint.
The commission voted 3-2 to allow ME 1 to resume operations and uphold the construction stay. Commissioners John Coleman, Jr. and Norman Kennard dissented with the decision to prevent construction from resuming, saying Dinniman failed to prove an immediate safety threat.
“To date, the commission’s pipeline safety experts have not reported any safety issues that warrant halting the construction of ME 2 and 2X,” Coleman said at the hearing.
ME 2, which is nearly complete, and 2X would run parallel along the same route as ME 1 to move ethane, butane and propane from processing facilities in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia to the Marcus Industrial Complex near Philadelphia. The work stoppage in West Whiteland impacts a 3.5 mile segment, while construction continues on other parts of the system.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/114715-pennsylvania-clears-mariner-east-1-for-service-but-some-construction-still-pending
-
(ACC Mentioned) Democrats Seek to Preserve EPA's RMP Provisions in CFATS Renewal
Jun 15, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Rebecca Rainey and Dave Reynolds
As the Trump administration works to roll back the Obama-era rule strengthening EPA's facility accident prevention program, House Democrats are seeking to codify portions of the rule in pending legislation renewing the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) facility security program and incorporate some of its provisions into any future DHS program.
“We must examine federal chemical safety and security policy holistically,” Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ), told a June 14 Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on whether to reauthorize DHS' Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program, which expires in January.
“We cannot turn a blind eye to the Administration’s actions to undermine the efficacy of EPA’s [Risk Management Plan] (RMP) program.”
While the chemical sector and DHS are urging Congress to quickly approve a multi-year re-authorization of CFATs, Pallone, the committee's ranking Democrat, and Rep. Paul Tonko (D-NY) echoed calls from environmental, community and labor groups to preserve the Obama administration's update to the agency's RMP facility accident prevention program.
Pallone also cited a recent U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) report calling for EPA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to bolster their facility and worker accident prevention programs, including RMP, to account for increased risks from flooding and extreme weather.
“Preventing terrorism at these facilities is important, but accidents and industrial incidents due to extreme weather are far more common and they should be given due consideration by this Committee,” Pallone said.
“We must ensure the safety and security of the workers, first responders and communities living near our nation’s chemical facilities by being prepared on both fronts.”
Tonko backed Pallone's argument that EPA's January 2017 update to RMP is an integral part of a holistic approach to facility safety and security, and he suggested preserving aspects of the Obama-era RMP rule in a reauthorized CFATS.
“If there is an opportunity to improve CFATS in a way that closes security gaps, reduce[s] risk, better address[es] emerging threats, such as cybersecurity, and keep first responders and workers safer, now is an opportunity to consider those changes to the program,” Tonko said.
The lawmakers' push to use CFATS to preserve portions of the Obama-era EPA RMP rule also got a boost earlier this week when the Government Accountability Office (GAO) urged the Senate to bolster chemical information sharing between facilities and communities, undercutting efforts by the Trump administration to roll back portions of the rule.
But Democrats' calls to include RMP-like provisions in the CFATS bill is facing hurdles as the chemical sector is urging Congress to quickly pass a multi-year reauthorization of CFATS that streamlines the program while backing a Trump administration plan to largely scrap the Obama-era update to EPA's RMP program.
While the RMP rule imposes specific mandatory requirements, CFATS allows companies to choose security measures to comply with the DHS's risk-based program.
EPA Hearing
The hearing comes on the same day that EPA held a public hearing on its May 17 proposed rule that would scrap most of the January 2017 RMP update rule's facility accident prevention requirements while preserving, with some modifications, requirements for facilities to coordinate with first responders.
Shortly before the Obama administration left office in 2017, EPA issued a final rule updating RMP with new requirements. The rule was issued in response to the former president's August 2013 executive order on improving industrial facility safety after a 2013 explosion at a fertilizer facility in West, TX, killed 15 people, including first responders.
The RMP update rule imposed new requirements for certain facilities to conduct independent audits and analyze safer alternatives, and included provisions aimed at streamlining disclosure of facility data, and improved coordination between facilities and first responders.
But the Trump administration in June delayed the effective date of the rule by nearly two years -- until Feb. 19, 2019, saying it needed the time to reconsider and potentially reverse some of the changes. The delay followed petitions from industry and roughly a dozen Republican-led states that argued that the revisions were unnecessary and that the disclosure provisions could worsen terror threats, a risk industry backs mitigating through CFATS.
EPA is seeking comment through July 30 on the proposed RMP rescission rule that would scrap the update rule's new requirements that certain facilities conduct third-party audits and analyze safer alternatives. The plan would also scrap certain incident investigation and information sharing requirements.
Environmental, public health groups, and an official with the New York Attorney General 's Office argued at the public hearing that dozens of accidents have occurred since the Trump administration delayed the Obama-era rule, which could have prevented or reduced the consequences of some of the incidents.
Laura Mirman-Heslin, of the New York AG's office, which has sued EPA over its delay of the RMP update, also cited the CSB's May 24 report on the Arkema Inc. industrial facility fire sparked by Hurricane Harvey flood waters, arguing the incident showed that greater requirements for facility accident-prevention are needed in the face of extreme weather.
She also argued that EPA's plan to scrap facility accident prevention requirements puts too much emphasis on enforcement at a time when the agency is lacking resources and the Trump administration has proposed eliminating CSB, which provides reports that can inform EPA enforcement.
Timothy Gablehouse of the National Program SARA Title III Program Officials, which represents state and local emergency planning committees, argued that EPA's RMP revision should protect emergency planners' authority to request facility data to inform preparedness and response plans.
Former Obama-era OSHA Deputy Chief Jordan Barab faulted the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' (ATF) finding that the fire that sparked the West, TX, explosion likely resulted from arson, and said the conclusion should not form a basis for revising the January 2017 RMP update rule.
Barab said the ATF finding was based on process of elimination rather than hard evidence of arson, and that the explosion resulted from improper storage of ammonium nitrate rather than the initial fire.
Facilities 'In Compliance'
But Richard Gupton of the Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) countered that ammonium nitrate is not covered under the RMP rule, and that the Obama OSHA declined to strengthen existing rules that govern safe handling of the substance.
Gupton and the American Chemistry Council's (ACC) Bill Erny argued that the RMP program, prior to the Obama-era update, had significantly reduced accidents and that the bulk of the remaining incidents are at a few facilities that fail to comply with existing regulations.
“Facilities that have been in compliance and operating safely should not be subject to a broad new federal mandate that would take attention and resources away” from those facilities' effective accident prevention efforts, Erny said.
While supporting the Trump administration's plan to largely scrap the Obama-era RMP update rule, ACC is backing a lengthy reauthorization of CFATS.
In a June 14 letter to Reps. John Shimkus (R-IL) and Tonko, ACC and other industry groups, including ARA, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, and the American Petroleum Institute argue that facilities have invested millions of dollars and instituted thousands of security measures to comply with CFATS.
The groups seek a swift multi-year re-authorization of the program despite a crowded congressional schedule.
“The CFATS program has focused our industries on security, helping to make our nation more secure,” the trade groups say. “A multi-year reauthorization of CFATS in the next few months would allow for the continuation of this positive momentum.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/democrats-seek-preserve-epas-rmp-provisions-cfats-renewal
-
Lawmakers Fight over Reach of Anti-Terrorism Effort
Jun 15, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Corbin Hiar
Several House Democrats raised concerns yesterday during a key subcommittee hearing about changes senators are pursuing for a soon-to-expire Department of Homeland Security program created to protect chemical plants from terrorist threats.
The Democratic objections — over moves to exempt some plants from the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program and other issues — could complicate efforts by industry and DHS to secure another multiyear extension of CFATS, which was created in 2006 and is set to end in January 2019.
Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, told members of the Environment Subcommittee and witnesses that he would like the program reauthorized and extended to cover "several significant categories of facilities ... such as public water systems and wastewater treatment plants."
He added, "We should also reject a suggestion from Senate Republicans that we exempt explosives manufacturers from this anti-terrorism program."
The chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has expressed support for removing from CFATS 31 facilities that contain only completed explosives.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF, already effectively regulates completed explosives, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) reasoned at a roundtable on the program earlier this week.
"It seems like the ATF, from what I've read, has done a really good job of keeping explosives out of the hands of malign actors," he said (E&E Daily, June 13).
Pallone and other Democrats also want lawmakers to consider CFATS in conjunction with a chemical plant safety standard finalized in the waning days of the Obama administration that EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has since moved to weaken.
EPA's risk management rule aimed to protect emergency responders from chemical exposure, prevent accidents at plants and help facility operators learn from accidents that do occur.
But Pruitt delayed its implementation for nearly two years, prompting a lawsuit from 11 state attorneys general, and is now proposing to roll back portions of the rule (E&E News PM, May 17).
Subcommittee Chairman John Shimkus (R-Ill.), however, argued that the EPA rule was beyond the scope of the DHS program's reauthorization process.
"I know there are some who would like to see the CFATS universe expanded to also do EPA's job, or [the Occupational Safety and Health Administration]'s job, or [the Federal Emergency Management Agency]'s job, or addressed some other way," he said. "CFATS must excel at its present obligations before being given new responsibilities."
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/06/15/stories/1060084585
-
First Responder Group Criticizes Eased Rules for Chemical Plants
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam McQuillan
The EPA’s proposal to scale back a chemical safety regulation will make it harder for firefighters, police, and other first responders to prepare for chemical facilities’ emergencies, the head of a first-responder group told the agency June 14.
The success of first responders depends on their ability to get ready for emergencies at those facilities—something the proposed rollbacks make more difficult—said Tim Gablehouse, president of the National Association of SARA Title III Program Officials, a consortium that represents first responders.
The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to scale back Obama-era initiatives requiring firmer risk analysis from facilities handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals.
Gablehouse said he knew of no case in which information provided for the good of response workers had compromised security. He spoke at a June 14 public hearing at EPA headquarters on the Trump administration’s planned replacement for the regulation.
The agency estimates its changes to the risk management plan rule will save companies roughly $88 million a year and bolster their security from potential attackers—such as terrorists—by eliminating some new information disclosure requirements.
Unnecessary BurdensFollowing a high-profile 2013 fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas, that left 15 dead—12 of whom were first responders—President Barack Obama pushed to better equip emergency workers by demanding more stringent reporting from chemical companies.
Under the Obama administration’s version of the rule, the EPA would have mandated companies handling dangerous chemicals such as toxic or flammable material to provide the agency and the public with information about their chemicals. This includes emergency response procedures, steps to identify the effects of a hazardous chemical accident, and steps to prevent them.
But third-party audits required by the risk management protocol changes would have placed unnecessary burdens on those not versed in the expertise of chemical safety, Ron Chittim, a representative for the American Petroleum Institute, said at the June 14 hearing.
The institute’s members include Exxon Mobil, Anadarko Petroleum Corp, and Marathon Oil Co.
The Trump administration’s changes to the risk management plan would relieve companies of the requirement to analyze possible safer chemical processes by which to run their facilities. It would also eliminate requirements for companies to investigate the causes behind chemical accidents or near accidents.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s delay of the Obama-era rule is further supported by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives’ findings that the incident in Texas was an act of arson, and wasn’t caused by a chemical accident, the EPA said.
However, Jordan Barab, a former deputy assistant secretary at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration under Obama, told the public hearing that the ATF findings of arson weren’t consistent with science, as ATF used a process of elimination to reach its conclusion.
Pending LawsuitA coalition of environmental and public health organizations are currently embroiled in a lawsuit over the process the EPA took to delay the Obama-era rule.
“We have many tools in the toolbox to make sure that we get the remedy and redress that our communities need,” Michelle Roberts, national co-coordinator of the Environmental Justice Health Alliance, told Bloomberg Environment outside of the hearing. “We have no choice.”
Pruitt delayed the regulation from taking effect until February 2019, which was challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The court has yet to rule on the case, Air Alliance Houston v. EPA.
Further public comments on the proposed replacement for the risk management plan are due by July 30.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/first-responder-group-criticizes-eased-rules-for-chemical-plants
-
Explosives Makers May Get Exemption from Anti-Terror Plans
Jun 14, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
House Republicans and homeland security officials are open to the explosives industry’s desired exemption from a chemical facility security program, even as Democrats warned the move would bring risks.
The explosives industry maintains its facilities are already regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, creating duplication with the Homeland Security program.
But House Democrats said they are skeptical about a possible exemption and want the scope of the program broadened to include extreme weather events and other risks.
Ripe for ReauthorizationCongress is mulling how to reauthorize the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program within the Department of Homeland Security that aims to ensure at-risk facilities operate with appropriate security measures to prevent chemical releases, theft, diversion, or sabotage through intentional acts. The program’s authorization expires in January 2019.
Among the issues to be worked out are how long the reauthorization should be, and whether legislation should mandate changes to the scope of the program or its operation.
Under the program, launched in 2007, facilities holding certain chemicals above specified quantities must submit information to the Department of Homeland Security. Sites are then placed in four tiers based on their risk and must submit security plans addressing the risk.
Since its inception, several industries have been exempt from the program, even though their facilities contain large chemical stockpiles that could attract terrorists. Nuclear power plants, water and wastewater treatment facilities, and port facilities don’t have to comply with the program, as other regulations address their security.
For the explosives industry, which includes companies like Austin Powder Co., Davey Bickford North America, Dyno Nobel Inc., and others, winning its own exemption could free about 30 facilities with explosive chemicals from reporting to the department, David Wulf, Homeland Security’s acting deputy assistant secretary for infrastructure protection, said at a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Environment June 14.
The idea received interest from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, at a roundtable June 12.
Johnson’s committee would oversee any potential legislation reauthorizing the program in the upper chamber.
Duplicative?The explosives industry said these facilities are already regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and thus do not need dual regulation by the Homeland Security program.
Keeping these facilities under Homeland Security’s authority would bring benefits, Wulf said, but such an exemption would pose minimal risk.
“Among the things I do not lose too much sleep over exiting the program, explosives are one of those,” Wulf said.
Democrats on the subcommittee warned weakening the program by exempting explosives facilities would be a mistake. They also want to expand the program to incorporate broader risks, such as extreme weather.
“The program shouldn’t have any gaps,” Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), the full committee’s ranking member, said June 14.
Republicans countered that the program’s scope must be narrowly focused on preventing terrorism, and the explosives industry’s views should be given weight.
“Compliance under CFATS does not measurably improve their security,” Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/explosives-makers-may-get-exemption-from-anti-terror-plans
-
Kristen Kulinowski to Lead Chemical Safety Board
Jun 14, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Jeff Johnson
Kristen Kulinowski will head the Chemical Safety Board as its “interim executive authority” following the resignation of chair Vanessa Allen Sutherland, according to a CSB statement. The board will now be down to three members, two short of the number set by law. “I am committed to ensuring that the CSB’s current investigations are completed in a timely and efficient manner and that the lessons learned are available to industry, workers, and members of the public,” Kulinowski said. The board currently has 10 investigations under way. A longtime American Chemical Society member, Kulinowski was a research staff member in the Science & Technology Policy Institute of the Institute for Defense Analyses before being appointed to CSB in 2015. Earlier, she spent 13 years at Rice University as executive director of the Center for Biological & Environmental Nanotechnology and director of the International Council on Nanotechnology. At CSB, she has focused her outreach efforts on laboratory safety and safe practices for welding and other “hot work” in the chemical industry. The U.S. president nominates and the Senate confirms CSB members and the chair. President Donald J. Trump has twice proposed eliminating CSB.
https://cen.acs.org/safety/industrial-safety/Kristen-Kulinowski-lead-Chemical-Safety/96/i25
-
Why Railroads Are Making Freight Trains Longer and Longer
Jun 15, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Daniel Machalaba
The freight train is now on track to stretch up to 3 miles long, with 200 cars or more. And it’s being powered, in part, by an unusual energy source: the activist investor.
Companies have plenty of reasons to keep adding train cars. Long trains save on fuel and crews, reducing the cost of rail transportation.
Longer trains also decrease the volume of trains through communities and improve productivity, said Raquel Espinoza, spokeswoman for Union Pacific Corp. And fewer trains on the network frees up track space for other traffic.
“Railroads thrive on economies of scale,” said Christopher Barkan, professor and director of the railroad engineering program at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign, Ill. “Longer trains are the most important advance in achieving economies of scale in the past quarter century.”
A confluence of pressures—from the long-term decline of coal deliveries to competition from trucking to activist investors—are forcing railroads to improve efficiency and cut costs.
In a nod to activist investors, who have pressed for improved operations and the return of capital to shareholders, major railroads now report average train length with quarterly earnings. CSX Corp. , for instance, in April said its average train length rose 5% in the first quarter from a year earlier, a signal to investors and analysts that the railroad is gaining efficiency.
Operating trains that are double the length of standard size trains involves mastering the distribution of weight and pulling force. The longest, heaviest trains may have four locomotives in front, two in the middle and two at the end.
Some critics say the railroads are moving in the wrong direction, given the demand for faster, more frequent deliveries of smaller batches of raw materials and goods. Long trains take longer to assemble and disassemble in freight yards and can lead to delays on main lines.
“Every time I see one of these trains, I think this type of operation is destroying our ability to compete in the freight marketplace,” said Edward Burkhardt, president of Rail World, a railroad consulting and investing company, and an advocate for short, fast trains.
And as these superlong trains test the limits of physics, concerns are growing surrounding safety and the impact on the communities they pass through. Long trains can block multiple crossings, delaying emergency vehicles and other motorists, as they take 5 minutes or more to go from front to back through a crossing,
“I used to think that 100 cars was a long train,” said Norman Schmelz, mayor of Bergenfield, N.J., which is located on a busy CSX freight route. Now, he sees freight trains twice that size. “Waiting for them to pass seems an eternity,’’ he said. “They go on forever.”
A high-profile accident with a long train last year has caught the attention of regulators. The National Transportation Safety Board said train length, car arrangement and operation are a part of its investigation into the derailment of a 178-car CSX freight on a mountain grade in Hyndman, Pa., in August 2017. The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, has launched a study into the safety and other issues related to longer trains.
In response to Hyndman and other accidents, CSX has recently hired a firm to audit its safety and also added a senior safety executive to its management team.
John Gray, senior vice president of policy and economics at the Association of American Railroads, said that the long trains represent a fraction of all freight trains and that 95% of trains are shorter than 10,000 feet.
What’s more, he said, railroads are taking advantage of the nearly $100 billion spent on rail infrastructure and equipment over the past several years. The spending included high-horsepower locomotives and upgraded track strong enough to withstand the extreme forces that can pull a long, heavy train off of the track on tight curves.
Some railroads are adding remotely controlled diesel locomotives at the end or in the middle of superlong trains so that locomotives are both pulling and shoving at the same time. Distributing the locomotive power reduces the heavy loads on the couplers that can break a train in two, improves train handling by reducing slack action and makes brake applications quicker and smoother.
As a business strategy, superlong trains are in for the long haul. Cameron Scott, Union Pacific’s chief operating officer, told investors late last month that the railroad is running 14,000- to 15,000-foot trains on a daily basis on a good portion of its double track railroad. “And we’re doing it very safely,” he said. “So from a safety perspective there is not an issue there.”
At Berkshire Hathaway Inc.’s BNSF Railway, train length averages about 8,000 feet. BNSF spokeswoman Amy Casas said the railroad is testing cargo trains as long as 16,000 feet on its double track Southern Transcon route between southern California and Chicago.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-railroads-are-making-freight-trains-longer-and-longer-1529055002
-
Senators Approve EPA Bill with Ethics Language
Jun 14, 2018 |
By Kevin Bogardus
This article was updated at 5:52 p.m. EDT.
Senate appropriators have taken note of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's ethics troubles as spending debates chug along on Capitol Hill.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) included a new ethics provision in the bill report for EPA, the Department of the Interior and related agencies' funding legislation. The underlying bill passed the Senate Appropriations Committee on an unanimous vote earlier today.
"I am appalled at the number of scandals piling up — especially at the EPA. Frankly, it's hard to keep track," said Udall, the ranking member on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that oversees EPA. "While I would have preferred bill language, I think the report language we are including sends a strong message."
The report provision would specifically bar the use of agency funds to break the code of federal employees' ethics standards.
Ethics allegations have swirled around Pruitt in recent months, including his use of EPA aides to help find his wife employment like potentially running a Chick-fil-A franchise back home in Tulsa, Okla.
"These are regulations that cover situations like one's use of position for private gain and the use of official time to perform official duties. I think it's just common sense to make it clear in a spending bill that individuals entrusted with spending taxpayer dollars must maintain a basic level of ethical behavior," Udall said.
Udall's Democratic counterparts in the House have also targeted Pruitt in their own spending bill, albeit more directly. Earlier this month, they offered amendments to have EPA disclose his travel every 10 days, boost funding for the agency's inspector general and limit spending on fountain pens. That last measure ended up passing the House Appropriations Committee (E&E Daily, June 7).
Republicans have similarly sought to increase funding for the EPA inspector general. The watchdog office has expressed worries about its flat budget while requests for more Pruitt investigations pile up.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, sent a letter earlier this week to Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairwoman of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees EPA, supporting "sufficient" money for the IG.
The Senate spending bill that passed committee today, however, would keep IG funding the same at $41.49 million from fiscal 2018 to fiscal 2019.
Barrasso said he was having discussions with members of his committee about holding a hearing with Pruitt to review the allegations against him.
In contrast, House Speaker Paul Ryan, when asked about Pruitt by E&E News, said he hadn't "paid close attention" to the controversies.
Senate appropriators rejected EPA budget cuts proposed by President Trump. Instead, they voted to keep the same level of funding from the prior year — more than $8.05 billion for fiscal 2019.
The legislation would also not support workforce reshaping, as requested by the White House. According to bill report language, EPA is not expected to close or consolidate any of its regional offices in fiscal 2019.
Funding would also be maintained for state revolving funds for drinking water at $1.16 billion and clean water at $1.7 billion. The Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loan program would get $63 million, which should support lending up to $6 billion.
EPA's geographic programs, like the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Chesapeake Bay cleanup, would remain untouched, despite being proposed for cuts by Trump.
In addition, the agency's categorical grant programs — used by state environmental regulators — would increase by $17 million.
Another provision tacked onto the bill would force the Trump administration to release a delayed health study of toxic nonstick chemicals that has raised political concerns in the White House and EPA. Udall and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who jointly drafted the amendment, previously sought to attach it to the military spending bill (Greenwire, June 13).
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/06/14/stories/1060084551
-
Climate Impacts Need to be Considered in Oil, Gas Lease: Court
Jun 15, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
Federal agencies leasing properties for oil and gas drilling must analyze the foreseeable impacts of greenhouse gases—not only from the lease sites but from downstream activities such as automotive fuel combustion and from cumulative emissions of any sources, a court ruled.
Judge Christina Armijo of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico remanded a 2015 decision involving 13 leases to the Bureau of Land Management for additional environmental analysis.
The ruling requires the BLM to conduct estimates that the agency has said are impractical.
The leases are in Santa Fe National Forest in northern New Mexico, within a region of extensive natural gas production that oil companies call the San Juan Basin.
Plaintiffs were several environmental groups including the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg, the ultimate owner of Bloomberg Environment.
“Today’s ruling sends a strong message that this administration cannot ignore the effects on water, climate, and communities in their reckless attempts to sell off America’s public lands to the fossil fuel industry,” Sierra Club Rio Grande Chapter Director Camilla Feibelman said in a statement.
Feasibility QuestionedClimate change depends on the sum total of global emissions, the BLM said in its record of decision for the approval of the leases. “It is currently not feasible to know with certainty the net impacts from particular emissions associated with activities on public lands,” the BLM said.
The agency said the small increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the lease sale would not produce estimates of climate change that would differ from estimates for not selling the leases.
The judge dismissed the federal reasoning as “facile” and “insufficient” to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. The additional analysis was obligatory, she concluded.
Courts have differed over the extent of NEPA obligations for downstream impacts, primarily the eventual combustion of fossil fuels. The judge cited half a dozen decisions by district and appellate courts requiring environmental analyses of downstream impacts in cases involving resource management plans, gas pipelines, coal mining, and coal trains.
The case is San Juan Citizens v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., D.N.M., 6/14/18.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/climate-impacts-need-to-be-considered-in-oil-gas-lease-court?context=landing-heroes
-
Scott Pruitt, Under Fire, Plans to Initiate a Big Environmental Rollback
Jun 14, 2018 | New York Times
By Coral Davenport
Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is expected on Friday to send President Trump a detailed legal proposal to dramatically scale back an Obama-era regulation on water pollution, according to a senior E.P.A. official familiar with the plan. It is widely expected to be one of his agency’s most significant regulatory rollback efforts.
And, as soon as Monday, the same official said, Mr. Pruitt is expected to publish another major change: his agency’s legal proposal to gut President Barack Obama’s rule to reduce climate-warming pollution from vehicle tailpipes. That proposal risks triggering a court battle with California and raises the prospect that the American car market could be split in two, with different groups of states enforcing different pollution rules.
Mr. Pruitt’s two moves come as he is dogged by allegations of legal and ethical violations and is seeking to burnish his reputation in the eyes of his boss, the president. While Mr. Pruitt has initiated the rollback of dozens of environmental rules over the past year and a half, the latest one-two push comes as he is battling allegations that he improperly used his government post to secure a job for his wife.
This week, the chorus of critics calling for Mr. Pruitt’s resignation swelled to include the conservative National Review, which once championed his appointment. And on Wednesday, Mr. Pruitt’s onetime political mentor, Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, told the conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham that Mr. Pruitt needed to move past his management blunders and that it may be “time for him to go.”
The weakening of the water and tailpipe-pollution regulations have been top priorities for Mr. Trump since he took office. The release of a new water regulation to replace the Obama-era rule, known as Waters of the United States, would hand a victory to two important groups for the president: farmers and rural landowners (who make up his political base), as well as golf-course and real estate developers.
The Trump Organization, the Trump family’s real estate conglomerate, itself owns more than a dozen golf resorts in the United States. White House officials did not respond to a request for comment on the potential for Mr. Trump’s business interests to benefit from the potential changes.
“It perhaps helps Pruitt show the White House that he’s still very effective, even while he’s under fire,” said Myron Ebell, who led Mr. Trump’s E.P.A. transition team and works for the industry-funded Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington organization. “The water rule was front and center in the president’s campaign promises.”
While both the proposed water and tailpipe plans represent major steps toward weakening those regulations, the proposals are still in draft form, and could still be changed during a public comment period. The final versions of the regulatory rollbacks are to be published this year. The E.P.A. official who described the filing plans for both requested anonymity to discuss internal agency planning.
Farmers, real estate developers and golf course owners protested vociferously in 2015 when the Obama administration put forth its clean-water regulation, which took an existing federal prohibition on pollution in major public waters, like the Chesapeake Bay and Puget Sound, and expanded that protection to include the streams, tributaries and wetlands that flow into those waters.
A regulation protecting large public water bodies is legally required under the Clean Water Act. But there have been decades of legal battles over how expansive such a regulation should be. The Obama administration’s regulation took a wide view of how far the federal government could go in its effort to protect waters; Mr. Trump directed Mr. Pruitt to take a far narrower view of the law.
In his 2017 executive order directing Mr. Pruitt to rework the clean water regulation, Mr. Trump told Mr. Pruitt to be guided by the views of Antonin Scalia, the conservative Supreme Court justice who died in 2016. In a 2006 opinion in the case Rapanos v. United States, Justice Scalia argued for an extremely narrow interpretation of the Clean Water Act, one that protected only major water bodies and the water that flowed into them from continuously running tributaries.
It is widely believed that Justice Scalia’s opinion has shaped Mr. Pruitt’s forthcoming proposal, according to people familiar with the plan. It would regulate pollution only in large, public bodies of water, and in permanent streams and tributaries that drain into them. Exempt from regulation would be seasonal streams, water bodies that flow in some portions of the year but not others.
Environmental groups say Mr. Pruitt’s expected proposal will mean dirtier water. “Roughly 60 percent of the stream miles in the U.S. are intermittent, so if that’s what the proposal cuts out, it will make it easier for polluters to dump in them,” said Jonathan Devine, an expert in clean water law at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an advocacy group.
The Obama rule, if implemented, could have prevented farmers and developers — particularly of water-rich properties like golf courses — from using chemical fertilizers and pesticides that might have drained into streams and wetlands. In particular, opponents complained, the rule could have required farmers and other property owners to register for E.P.A. permits to use such chemicals on their land even if the land did not directly abut a major water body.
The anger among farmers fed directly into the populism that helped drive Mr. Trump into office, and he has seized upon it as a rallying cry.
“Really, they were trying to regulate land use,” said Donald Parrish, director of regulatory relations with the American Farm Bureau Federation. “It would have called into question where and how farmers could use things like manure spreaders and pesticide sprayers. Or how deeply they could plow. Or even what kinds of crops could be grown where.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/14/climate/pruitt-clean-air-water-rollbacks.html
-
Democrats Decry Plan to Overhaul Statutory Reviews
Jun 14, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Maxine Joselow
Seventy-one Democrats yesterday urged EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to abandon his "dangerous" approach to setting air quality standards.
Led by Democratic Reps. Don Beyer of Virginia and Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, the lawmakers sent a letter to Pruitt expressing concern over his May 9 memo on the handling of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act.
The memo directed the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) to consider "adverse social, economic or energy effects" that might result from revisions to the standards (Greenwire, May 10).
The seven-member CASAC advises EPA during statutorily required reviews of the standards for ozone and five other "criteria" pollutants.
The Democrats argue that although costs can inform the implementation of the standards, they shouldn't inform their establishment.
In fact, the lawmakers contend, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld this argument in the 2001 case Whitman v. American Trucking Associations Inc.
"Allowing the consideration of factors other than health in setting future NAAQS would not only result in inadequate standards that would cause undue harm to the health of millions of Americans, it would also set a dangerous precedent for setting EPA standards," the letter states.
In the memo, Pruitt also called for accelerating ongoing assessments of the ground-level ozone standard and particulate matter standards.
"Your memo calls for the expedited review of two pollutants, particulate matter and ozone, which have the potential to aggravate asthma, increase the severity of chronic lung diseases, damage the lungs, cause cardiovascular harm, and even cause death," the lawmakers said.
Beyer told E&E News that he thought Pruitt's directives wouldn't survive a challenge in court.
"This flies in direct contradiction to a unanimous Supreme Court decision," Beyer said in an interview. "So I don't think this can stand even from the mildest lawsuit against it. I don't think this will go through."
Beyer added that he thinks President Trump should be more concerned about Pruitt's directives on environmental and public health standards than on his numerous ethics controversies.
The EPA boss is facing a mounting list of allegations of professional misconduct — from tasking security guards to fetch Ritz-Carlton Hotel lotion to using government staffers to inquire about a Chick-fil-A franchise for his wife.
"It is ironic that what gets people's attention are using his security to drive to the Ritz-Carlton or using political connections to get his wife a job," Beyer said.
"It may end up that he gets booted from the job by Trump because of all the scandals, but the real reason he should get booted is these efforts to undermine clean water and clean air protections."
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/06/15/stories/1060084571
Industry and Association News
LCSA News There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested