Preview Newsletter

ACC PM 26/07/18

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) Global June Chem Production Rises with Gains in Most Segments, Regions
Jul 26, 2018 | ICIS

Global chemical production rose by 0.4% in June from May, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said in its latest Global Chemical Production Regional Index (CPRI).
(ACC Mentioned) Thinktank Defends US EPA 'Science Transparency' Proposal
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin

The US non-profit thinktank the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) has defended the EPA's proposed 'science transparency' rule by saying it will help ensure the validity of agency science and increase the chances that regulations will generate public health benefits.
(ACC Mentioned) Edwards' Rule Changes Add ‘Costs and Uncertainty’ to State Chemical Industry’s Ability to Compete with Texas
Jul 26, 2018 | Watchdog.org
By John Haughey

Gov. John Bel Edwards’ 2016 order linking industrial tax exemptions to job generation and a 2017 bill that restricts manufacturers’ options in choosing between tax credits and exemptions have “added costs and uncertainty” to Louisiana’s $80 billion chemical industry’s ability to compete with rivals in more tax-friendly Texas.
Criminal Cartel Fines Are Pittance Compared to Private Damages
Jul 26, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eleanor Tyler

Criminal fines forthcoming for General Chemical Corp. could be a drop in the bucket compared to the civil damages facing the company and its rivals as the Justice Department is winding up its investigation of illegal price fixing among distributors of widely used water treatment chemicals.
Despite His Assurances, Wheeler Met with Former Clients
Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar

Since Andrew Wheeler was sworn as EPA's second in command on April 20, the lobbying veteran has had at least three meetings with former clients that may have violated the Trump administration's ethics pledge and other promises he made to steer clear of potential conflicts of interest.

LCSA News

US EPA Round-Up
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

The US EPA has submitted amendments to three existing information collection requests (ICRs).

Chemical Management News

(ACC Blog) The Truth About Formaldehyde
Jul 26, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters

Recent media stories have claimed a link between formaldehyde exposure and leukemia.
Toxics Agency Adds School Videos to US Mercury Campaign
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

The US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has released two teacher-training videos as part of its 'Don't mess with mercury' campaign.
Sanders Amendment Would Require PFAS Groundwater Study
Jul 26, 2018 | Inside EPA

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has submitted an amendment for possible consideration as part the Senate debate on EPA and the Interior Department's (DOI) fiscal year 2019 spending bill that would require the U.S. Geological Survey, a DOI agency, in consultation with EPA, to monitor perfluorinated chemicals in groundwater flows.
SC Johnson 'Lagging' on Ingredient Disclosure for Professional Products
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell

Cleaning products giant SC Johnson has been accused of 'lagging behind’ other companies in disclosing the ingredients in its professional products.
Commission Urged to Close EU Regulatory Gaps on EDCs
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton

Member states and NGOs have called on the European Commission to develop a harmonised approach to the identification of endocrine disrupting chemicals across all EU regulations.
Surface Treatment Industry Calls on EU to Revise Authorisations
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer

The European Committee for Surface Treatment (CETS) has called on Echa and the Commission to look again at certain uses of substances that have been added to the REACH authorisation list.
Echa Lifts Lid on Downstream User Notifications
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel

Echa has released the first set of non-confidential data from notifications of downstream users of REACH authorised SVHCs.
Echa Round-Up
Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

Substance evaluation conclusions published.

Energy News

Trump Says Europe Will Buy More American Gas. Is That Possible?
Jul 26, 2018 | The New York Times
By Stanley Reed

When President Trump met with Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, at the White House, the two said they were entering a new phase in their relationship. Crucial to that will be natural gas.
Perry Seeks to Reassure Allies About Trump Trade Moves
Jul 26, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama

Energy Secretary Rick Perry said U.S. allies and energy companies don’t need to worry about President Trump’s trade policies.
Exxon Mobil Starts Up Multibillion-Dollar Baytown Chemicals Project
Jul 26, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum

Exxon Mobil said Thursday it commenced operations at its multibillion-dollar petrochemical expansion at its massive Baytown complex.
CalFrac Boosted by More U.S. Horsepower, Reactivated Fleets
Jul 26, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis

Calgary-based CalFrac Well Services Ltd., which has one of the largest hydraulic fracturing businesses in the world, reported a big gain in revenue from a year ago, fueled mostly by surging activity in the United States.
Petrobras' Texas Refinery Agrees to $3.5M Settlement
Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly

A Texas refinery owned by the Brazilian state-controlled oil company has agreed to pay more than $3.5 million to settle claims that it violated the Clean Air Act.
ACP Cleared to Start Work in North Carolina
Jul 26, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin

FERC has authorized construction to begin on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) in North Carolina.

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Environment News

Half-Baked Carbon Tax is Merely a Vice Tax Offering No Recovery From Addiction
Jul 26, 2018 | The Hill - Opinion
By Mike Carr

It doesn’t take a Ph.D. to understand global warming; it’s simple common sense.
Why Trump Attacks California’s Anti-Pollution Powers
Jul 26, 2018 | Bloomberg (In The Washington Post)
By John Lippert and Ryan Beene

When U.S. President Richard Nixon signed the Clean Air Act in 1970, he recognized a simple truth about his home state of California: When tens of millions of people drive around constantly in a desert, they generate lots of pollution.
EPA Walks Back Climate Recommendations for FERC
Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer and Sam Mintz

A top EPA political official is clarifying a set of climate analysis recommendations sent to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last month.
Group Promoting Carbon Price Registers to Lobby
Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus

Squire Patton Boggs has made it official: The K Street giant is lobbying for Americans for Carbon Dividends, the group backed by Washington heavyweights pushing for a price on carbon emissions.
Walt Disney Company Plans to Eliminate Plastic Straws by Mid-2019
Jul 26, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Aris Folley

The Walt Disney Company on Thursday said it plans to eliminate single-use plastic straws and plastic stirrers at its locations across the world by mid-2019.

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) Global June Chem Production Rises with Gains in Most Segments, Regions

Jul 26, 2018 | ICIS

Global chemical production rose by 0.4% in June from May, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said in its latest Global Chemical Production Regional Index (CPRI).
The increase marked the third consecutive month of gains, following drops in the first quarter.
Year on year, the Global CPRI in June rose by 0.7% on a three month moving average (3MMA).
June capacity utilisation was 84.5%, up by 0.1 percentage point from May. However, this was down from 86.2% in June 2017.
“Among chemical industry segments, June results were good on a product basis with gains in across-the-board with the only weakness in plastic resins,” the report said.
“Considering year earlier comparisons, growth was strongest in plastic resins, followed by bulk petrochemicals and organics, coatings, and other specialty chemicals."
By region, June chemical production in North America rose by 0.4% month on month, with gains in the US, Canada and Mexico.
Latin America production was flat, with Venezuela particularly weak.
June chemical production in Europe rose by 0.4% month on month, with gains in nearly all countries.
Asia production rose by 0.3% month on month, led by gains in China.
The Global CPRI measures the production volume of the business of chemistry for 33 key nations, sub-regions and regions, all aggregated to the world total. The index is comparable to the US' Federal Reserve Board production indices.
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/07/26/10245338/global-june-chem-production-rises-with-gains-in-most-segments-regions/

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) Thinktank Defends US EPA 'Science Transparency' Proposal

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Kelly Franklin

The US non-profit thinktank the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) has defended the EPA's proposed 'science transparency' rule by saying it will help ensure the validity of agency science and increase the chances that regulations will generate public health benefits.
Since the April introduction of the proposal – which seeks to ensure the studies, models and analyses the agency uses to underpin its regulatory decisions are available for public validation – a variety of NGOs, academics, medical societies and scientific journals have sounded off against it. Critics say the rule would block the agency from using legitimate science when making regulatory decisions, and burden agency scientists with "unnecessary and costly procedures".
But according to an analysis by the CEI's Angela Logomasini, the rule is "actually far more modest and flexible than depicted by its critics, and its goals are in fact achievable".'Cornerstone of scientific process'
Dr Logomasini argues that transparency is a "cornerstone of the scientific process". And only when there is access to the data – as well as the underlying methodology used to obtain and analyse it – can reproducibility be achieved.
The EPA's proposal, she says, would promote this. And "by helping ensure the underlying science is valid, transparency will increase the probability that regulations will actually generate public health benefits and not unintentionally undermine public health and well-being".
"The rule's ultimate goal is not to determine how much regulation we will have, but whether the regulations will be effective and necessary to achieve public health and environmental goals," she says. The CEI report adds that the rule applies only to major regulations – those expected to impose costs above $100m a year.
And as far as concerns that the agency would have to discard research that is not publicly available, Dr Logomasini argues that TSCA requires the agency to use "best available science". In cases where data was not fully available, the agency would still be required to rely on those, she says. The rule would simply block the EPA from refusing "to release the data on arbitrary grounds".
The American Chemistry Council said the CEI analysis "offers important perspective and critical facts" about the proposal, and explains why its detractors are "wrong".
"The bottom line is this proposal will strengthen EPA's regulatory process by helping ensure that it is relying on the best available science – science that is reliable and unbiased – and by making the underlying research and data publicly available in ways that protect personal privacy, confidential business information, proprietary interests and intellectual property rights," it said.
Comments on the EPA's proposed rule will be accepted through 16 August.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69031/thinktank-defends-us-epa-science-transparency-proposal

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) Edwards' Rule Changes Add ‘Costs and Uncertainty’ to State Chemical Industry’s Ability to Compete with Texas

Jul 26, 2018 | Watchdog.org

By John Haughey

Gov. John Bel Edwards’ 2016 order linking industrial tax exemptions to job generation and a 2017 bill that restricts manufacturers’ options in choosing between tax credits and exemptions have “added costs and uncertainty” to Louisiana’s $80 billion chemical industry’s ability to compete with rivals in more tax-friendly Texas.
Both “harm economic development in the state,” writes Dr. Loren Scott, a Louisiana State University economics professor emeritus in an April economic analysis for the Louisiana Chemical Association (LCA).
LCA President Greg Bowser has repeatedly referred to Scott’s study during recent interviews and op-eds, including one published July 13 in The Advocate, calling for the Industrial Tax Exemption Program (ITEP) to be restored to the way it was before 2016.
“With strong competition from states like Texas, which has a unified sales tax collection, no corporate or personal income tax and does not tax manufacturing utilities or equipment, we must make sure that Louisiana is an attractive place to do business,” Bowser writes, adding that reviewing ITEP should be among “the first steps in this process.”
Until two years ago, ITEP offered 10-year property tax exemptions for a range of investments, including capital expenditures on new plants, machinery replacement, and upgrades of existing plants.
The ITEP agreements exempted industrial and manufacturing plant operators from paying local property taxes for five years with an opportunity for renewal for another five years if it was investing the exemption in capital improvements.
Last month, the Louisiana Board of Commerce and Industry did approve some changes to the restrictions Edwards placed on ITEP, but manufacturers have said the changes aren't enough.
Since 2012, the LCA maintains the chemical industry has invested $160 billion in new or expanded plants, creating neatly 20,000 new jobs. Its 63 members have invested, or are committed to investing, more than half of that – $90 million – in ITEPS.
Expiring ITEPS will return more than $14.5 million in improved properties to the local tax rolls over the next five years, the LCA says.
“With $90 billion in potential investments, there is a lot to be optimistic about,” Bowser writes. “However, Louisiana has a lot to lose if these projects do not come to fruition. Decisions made today will have meaningful implications for the future of our state.”
In June 2016, Edwards issued an executive order that imposed job-generating requirements on ITEP contracts and made them subject to local approval.
“Effectively, this means industrial tax exemptions will no longer be awarded for replacement equipment, environmental upgrades, maintenance capital, or other investments that do not create new jobs or do not provide compelling evidence of the retention of existing jobs,” Scott explained in his analysis. “The (exemption) can be reduced or eliminated if the applicant does not meet the job goals” in the ITEP agreement.
Scott, co-developer of the econometric model the state uses to provide annual economic forecasts, said the 2016 changes “have brought uncertainty to the incentive and have put any current or future investments in jeopardy.”
He dismissed claims that ITEPs do not benefit local governments, noting his analysis shows “strong ITEP parishes have flourished from the investment.”
Scott’s study documents that the eight parishes with the highest industrial tax exemptions in 2017 all ranked in the top third of parishes in terms of per capita property tax collections.
The top eight ITEP parishes “all collect much more property taxes per capita than the statewide average of $941,” Scott writes, noting Cameron Parish, for example, has the highest ITEP exemptions and also receives the highest per capita property taxes, $4,850 per person, 86.6 percent of which is paid by businesses.
A 2017 bill that requires manufacturers to choose between an inventory tax credit and an industrial tax exemption instead of being potentially eligible for both should also be reviewed, the LCA says.
Both have “added costs and uncertainty to the equation,” Scott writes. “Indeed, economic development professionals have said the ITEP change has created so much uncertainty that it has rendered the industrial tax exemption basically a zero factor in the firm location decisions.”
The flaws stand out because proximity dictates Louisiana is compared to Texas, its greatest competitor for chemical and energy development, he said.
“Unfortunately for Louisiana, firms will consider all tax differences between the two states,” Scott writes. “Louisiana is now at a significant disadvantage compared to Texas.”
Studies by the LCA and the American Chemical Council (ACC) maintain the state’s chemical industry shipped $8.3 billion in products to customers around the world in 2017, contributing $1.1 billion to the state’s treasury, including $959.5 million in state and local taxes.
The LCA says its 63 member companies directly employed more than 29,109 state residents in 2017 at average annual wage of $106,600 – $60,000 more than the state’s median income – for a total yearly payroll of $2.9 billion.
For every chemical industry job, economists estimate an additional 5.5 to 8.3 jobs are created. Using the 5.5 projection, those directly employed in the chemical industry created employment for nearly 160,000 other Louisianans in related jobs, such as in the plastics and rubber industries.
“One of every seven persons owes his/her job to the presence of the chemical industry in Louisiana,” Scott concludes. “Our expectations are that the benefits of the industry are very likely to grow in the future. State decision-makers must keep in mind, however, that Louisiana has a very real, robust competitor for these investments: Texas.”
https://www.watchdog.org/louisiana/edwards-rule-changes-add-costs-and-uncertainty-to-state-chemical/article_885594a6-90d5-11e8-a593-6bd3b07fdb36.html

Return to headline | Return to top
Criminal Cartel Fines Are Pittance Compared to Private Damages

Jul 26, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Eleanor Tyler

Criminal fines forthcoming for General Chemical Corp. could be a drop in the bucket compared to the civil damages facing the company and its rivals as the Justice Department is winding up its investigation of illegal price fixing among distributors of widely used water treatment chemicals.
The government said in a July 19 court filing that its investigation of the water treatment cartel is in the final stages, but that didn’t stop a federal judge from denying the DOJ’s motion to stay civil litigation seeking damages for the same conduct. The criminal and civil cases are continuing in tandem.
A Bloomberg Law analysis of other recent cases involving water treatment, pharmaceutical, and financial services companies found that civil suits following criminal cartel charges or guilty pleas can dwarf the original criminal fine. GEO Specialty Chemicals Inc., another company involved in the water treatment cartel, was given a criminal fine of $5 million, but its civil settlement, finalized last week, is almost three times as large.
In the U.S. legal system, a cartel offense made public by a plea agreement or a government announcement starts the race to file private actions to recover treble damages against the defendant before the four-year statute of limitations runs out. “Follow-on” litigation stacks up quickly for corporations ensnared in a violation.
Companies, regardless of their size, are often inundated with antitrust cases following a criminal cartel guilty plea, according to Bloomberg Law’s Litigation Analytics. GEO has been involved in 89 lawsuits in the past three years, and 88.8 percent are antitrust cases.
As Night Follows Day
Follow-on lawsuits occur within days after a plea agreement. In the case of General Chemical, the DOJ announced Oct. 27, 2015, that former executive Frank Reichl would plead guilty to one felony count of price fixing. The agreement said Reichl had a deal with at least one competitor not to compete for contracts for a coagulant used by municipalities to treat drinking and waste water.
The first follow-on private antitrust action against General Chemical was filed four days later. General Chemical faced 24 more antitrust complaints before the year’s end. To date, plaintiffs filed another 16 complaints for a total of 41 actions. The vast majority of those, 37 out of 41, were filed within six months of the guilty plea.
In the almost three years since Reichl’s plea, 96.6 percent of General Chemical’s federal court actions are antitrust cases, Litigation Analytics shows.
Private cartel damages can be pricey if plaintiffs can prove their case. Damages can be as high as triple the amount the direct buyers overpaid under federal law. Indirect buyers are also eligible for damages under state law.
GEO Specialty Chemicals has finished its price-fixing litigation, giving a window into the cost of damages in private suits. The settlements from the private suits, reached in June with cities and utilities that bought the water treatment chemical directly and those that bought through a wholesaler, amount to more than $14 million, far higher than the $5 million criminal fine. What’s more, the company is on the hook to plaintiffs for roughly another $14 million from the sale of “all or substantially all” of its equity or assets.
GEO Specialty emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy at the end of 2004, and all parties acknowledge that the company is in a weak financial position. That may have helped it in the criminal front. The minimum fine under the sentencing guidelines was $24 million, but the DOJ agreed to knock the penalty back because the company said it couldn’t pay that amount, even on an installment basis. GEO is also settling early in the civil litigation, which often leads to paying less than later-settling defendants in the same cartel.
Other Examples
The DOJ announced Dec. 14, 2016, that it had filed charges against several generic drugmakers for fixing prices. Follow-on private suits popped up even before two former executives of Heritage Pharmaceuticals Inc. pleaded guilty in early January.

Private lawsuits also stem from state enforcement actions. In Heritage’s case, state attorneys general made public a sweeping investigation of pricing in the generic drug industry before Heritage executives pleaded guilty to federal charges. Based on that information, and announcements of subpoenas to large drug companies from the DOJ, a number of lawsuits were filed well before the DOJ filed its lawsuit. Existing suits against Heritage and other drugmakers for price fixing were consolidated Aug. 5, 2015, causing a spike in filings.
Six new private actions were filed within a month of the pleas. There are 111 cases pending in a multidistrict consolidated action today.
Litigation Analytics shows that 83 percent of Heritage’s caseload in the past three years is antitrust litigation.
Snowball Effect
UBS AG provides a different window into the snowball effect of a cartel investigation. UBS entered a nonprosecution agreement with the DOJ and a subsidiary pleaded guilty to rigging the Libor benchmark Dec. 19, 2012. The first private action, filed in California on behalf of the Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, appeared two days later on Dec. 21, 2012.
Once enforcers discovered the Libor cartel, the investigation leapfrogged into other markets. As a result, UBS was named in lawsuits alleging cartels in a wide range of financial instruments.

Securities, contract, and other litigation had been UBS’s most frequent reason for appearing in federal courts, according to Litigation Analytics. After that date, antitrust dominates filings against the big bank at almost 30 percent of all federal litigation, the biggest category of litigation it faces.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/criminal-cartel-fines-are-pittance-compared-to-private-damages

Return to headline | Return to top
Despite His Assurances, Wheeler Met with Former Clients

Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire

By Corbin Hiar

Since Andrew Wheeler was sworn as EPA's second in command on April 20, the lobbying veteran has had at least three meetings with former clients that may have violated the Trump administration's ethics pledge and other promises he made to steer clear of potential conflicts of interest.
Wheeler — who became acting administrator after Scott Pruitt's July 6 resignation — has also attended other events that prominently included the head of a company he is currently prohibited from getting involved with, according to an E&E News review of public documents.
The string of ethically questionable encounters stand in stark contrast to the acting EPA chief's claims that he is taking pains to avoid helping his former clients advance their interests.
"If I lobbied on something, I don't think it's appropriate for me to participate," Wheeler toldBloomberg News on June 27.
But the day before that interview, Wheeler's public calendar shows he participated in a "stakeholder meeting" with Darling Ingredients, a former client. The biodiesel producer paid Faegre Baker Daniels Consulting more than $1.4 million over nine years for Wheeler and the firm's other lobbyists to push changes to the renewable fuel standard as well as renewable diesel and biodiesel tax incentives, according to lobbying disclosures compiled by ProPublica.
Darling — which Faegre identified in disclosures as Darling International, the company's previous name — paid Faegre more for lobbying than any of Wheeler's other lobbying clients, except for coal company Murray Energy Corp.
Which Darling representatives Wheeler met and what they discussed isn't clear from his public calendar. Darling and EPA didn't provide any additional details, and the agency hasn't responded to any of the Freedom of Information Act requests from E&E News for Wheeler's more detailed personal calendar.
But the Irving, Texas-based company has been strongly advocating for EPA to expand the annual amounts of biomass-based diesel that refiners or importers of petroleum-based diesel must use as part of the renewable fuels standard, or RFS. Wheeler will now have the final say on those volumes.
During his time as Pruitt's deputy, Wheeler's public calendar shows he had other so-called stakeholder meetings with agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland Co. (ADM), which Wheeler's October 2017 financial disclosure report notes paid his former firm more than $5,000 in the previous year for the current EPA chief's "strategic advice and consulting," and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), a Southern California regulatory agency that paid Faegre at least $600,000 for lobbying between 2010 and 2012.Wheeler's promises
Those meetings occurred even though Wheeler promised to avoid his former clients until April 20, 2020, or only meet with them in large settings.
"I will not for a period of two years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients," says the Trump ethics pledge Wheeler signed upon taking office.
It's possible that the meetings with former clients weren't about a "particular matter" that Wheeler previously worked on for them. But that's difficult to determine from the public calendars, and EPA didn't provide additional information about the focus of the events.
The June 28 Darling meeting in particular may have violated another clause of the Trump ethics pledge, as well. It requires former lobbyists like Wheeler also not to participate "in any particular matter on which I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment or participate in the specific issue area in which that particular matter falls."
Yet Faegre filed a termination report for Wheeler's lobbying work with Darling on May 31, 2016, less than 24 months before he was sworn in at EPA.
The focus of the Archer Daniels Midland meeting was "an RFS discussion," spokeswoman Jackie Anderson said in an email. "This is the first time we discussed EPA-related issues with Mr. Wheeler."
She also said that ADM's "previous work with Mr. Wheeler was several years ago" — a claim contradicted by his financial disclosure report — and that it was "around un-related food-issues."
In public comments, ADM has been pressing EPA to reduce the number of RFS waivers granted to small refineries and consider allowing more advanced and cellulosic biofuels to be used in the program. Earlier this week, Wheeler approval the use of sorghum oil as a feedstock for renewable fuels (E&E Daily, July 25).
Meanwhile, SCAQMD, which Wheeler only lobbied for in 2010, has its own issues to work out with EPA. For example, the air pollution agency is currently asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to rehear its challenge to EPA's implementation of the 2008 ozone standard. The court previously rejected SCAQMD's argument that changes in the rule made it harder for areas like Southern California's Coachella Valley — where air pollution drifts in from upwind areas — to show progress in achieving the standard (Greenwire, April 24).
That lawsuit didn't come up in SCAQMD Executive Officer Wayne Nastri's meeting with Wheeler, according to spokesman Sam Atwood.
"The topic of their discussion was SCAQMD's petition to US EPA to begin rulemaking for a new nationwide low-[nitrogen oxide] standard for heavy-duty trucks," Atwood added. "This proposed standard is a critical tool needed to bring our region into attainment with federally mandated air quality standards. It is supported by a broad coalition of local regulators and others, as it would provide significant air quality and economic benefits to many regions across the county."
The full guest list for Wheeler's meetings with former clients, which EPA also declined to provided, is another factor needed to determine if they were ethically sound. That's because in a separate EPA recusal statement Wheeler endorsed on May 24, he acknowledged, "If my former employer or a former client is present, then I understand that, generally speaking, at least four other parties should be present to ensure that a diversity of viewpoints is represented and not the same united perspective."
No other parties are listed in Wheeler's public calendar for the Darling and SCAQMD meetings. The discussion with ADM, which occurred on the same day he signed the recusal, included only two additional ethanol producers, POET LLC and Green Plains Inc., not the "four other parties" suggested by the recusal.
Nevertheless, EPA argued that Wheeler's meetings with Darling, ADM and SCAQMD were all permissible because the former clients weren't included on his recusal statement. "Therefore, none of these entities presents any pledge issue for Mr. Wheeler," an agency spokesman said.
Lobbying experts, however, disagreed with the agency's interpretation of the Trump ethics pledge and questioned the usefulness of EPA's recusal statement.
"Andrew Wheeler is just playing it loose here," said Craig Holman, a lobbyist for the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. "He is not supposed to be working with any of his former clients."
Meetings with former clients could cast doubt on Wheeler's decisions at EPA, according to Thomas Susman, a former lobbyist who edits "The Lobbying Manual," a guide to lobbying law and practice.
"The question in these revolving-door issues is, is he going to do [something] because he has come to see only one side of the issue?" he said. "Another possible problem is trying to basically come across in a favorable light for future employment opportunities. And a third problem is the appearance to the public."
Referring to the EPA chief directly, Susman said, "his past financial benefit and issue orientation based on his advocacy for the client are going to, it seems to me, provide an appearance of being unable to be neutral and represent the public, which he's paid by taxpayer dollars to do."The perception of a conflict?
Meanwhile, other gatherings Wheeler attended as deputy administrator could have violated the spirit of his recusal agreement, which specifically prohibits him "from participating in any particular matter involving" International Paper Co. and seven other former clients until April 2020.
The paper giant is responsible for several toxic waste sites around the country and has set aside $128 million to fund their cleanups. Three of those sites — including the San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund site damaged by Hurricane Harvey — could have "material" impacts on the International Paper's bottom line, the company said in its most recent annual report.
Mark Sutton. International Paper
While Wheeler hasn't met directly with International Paper, he has attended events where Mark Sutton, the chairman and CEO of the world's biggest papermaker, played a prominent role.
On June 6, Wheeler's public calendar shows he delivered remarks to the Business Roundtable's Energy & Environment Committee, which is led by Sutton.
Then on June 28, he spoke at a meeting of the American Forest & Paper Association's board of directors, on which Sutton is the second vice chairman. The following day, he had a "stakeholder meeting" with the same forest products trade association and another group.
EPA and International Paper both noted that Sutton wasn't at the June 29 meeting. Even if he had been, though, Wheeler would have been in the clear, according to the agency.
"The meetings were not in fact one-on-one meetings with International Paper as a specific party," the EPA spokesman said. "Rather, as the calendar clearly indicates, these were meetings with or remarks given to organizations that were attended by more than a handful of attendees, including Mr. Sutton."
The Business Roundtable committee meeting Sutton led "consisted of a broad update on EPA's agenda and priorities," International Paper spokesman Tom Ryan added. "No company specific issues were raised at any time."
Still, Holman thinks questions about Wheeler's interactions with his roster of nearly a dozen publicly disclosed former clients were inevitable.
"As soon as he stepped into the EPA, he was a conflict of interest," the Public Citizen lobbyist said.
In the end, whether or not Wheeler is strictly abiding by the letter of his ethics promises may be beside the point to the general public, according to Susman. Voters elected President Trump so he would drain Washington's ethical swamp, not reinforce it.
"There are things that you shouldn't do that may be legal," he said.
The Darling meeting in particular "would certainly come close to if not be over the line for someone to be involved with a firm that was paid a large amount of money from a client and then go into government and meet with that client on matters of interest to the agency," Susman said.
Reporters Mike Soraghan and Kevin Bogardus contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/07/26/stories/1060091287

Return to headline | Return to top

LCSA News

US EPA Round-Up

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

TSCA information requests
The US EPA has submitted amendments to three existing information collection requests (ICRs). Two are renewals, the third is the reinstatement of one that expired on 30 June.
The two renewals are due to expire on 30 November. One deals with section 8(d) of TSCA and its requirements for manufacturers and processors of chemicals to search their records to identify any health and safety studies they have, or any studies that are in progress, and submit the information to the EPA.
The ICR says the agency had overestimated the amount of work needed by more than 1,300 hours.
The other renewal concerns section 5 of the amended TSCA. This requires anyone proposing to manufacture or import a new chemical to notify the EPA at least 90 days in advance, through a pre-manufacture notice (PMN). Through this process, the EPA can determine if the substance might present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment, and impose restrictions to mitigate that risk.
The proposed information request reflects an increase of almost 150,000 working hours over its original estimate. The reasons given include updated confidential business (CBI) requirements and the estimated number of registrations to the Central Data Exchange (CDX).
The plan to reinstate an ICR results from work on section 8(a) of TSCA. This authorises the EPA administrator to promulgate rules requiring manufacturers, importers or processors of chemical substances and mixtures to maintain records and submit reports to the agency as may be reasonably required.
There is an estimated increase of six hours work on that originally identified.
The EPA is taking comments on all three ICRs until 24 September.Colorado PFAS event
The EPA has released further details of its previously announced "community engagement event" in Colorado Springs on on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs).
The two-day public meeting will be held on 7 and 8 August at the city's Hotel Eleganté Conference and Event Centre and will consist of two sessions: a public listening session and PFAS working session.
The agency says the meeting will let it hear "directly from Colorado communities, Mountain West states, and local and tribal partners about their experiences with PFAS".
It is one of a series of events the agency is organising this summer. Previous ones have been held in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, with another planned for North Carolina.
https://chemicalwatch.com/68978/us-epa-round-up

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Management News

(ACC Blog) The Truth About Formaldehyde

Jul 26, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters

Recent media stories have claimed a link between formaldehyde exposure and leukemia. The truth is more than 30 peer-reviewed studies since 2010 show that formaldehyde does not cause leukemia. These irresponsible and unbalanced news reports are simply another example of a widely criticized program within EPA putting politics ahead of science.
The stories base this alleged leukemia link on comments from unnamed EPA bureaucrats about an unfinished draft assessment being conducted by the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program. EPA’s processes require extensive internal review of chemical assessments to ensure the Agency has the science right. The unauthorized and inappropriate decision to leak documents associated with the assessment demonstrates a complete disregard for their accuracy or completeness.
EPA’s IRIS program has been criticized for years for producing substandard reports. In fact, the initial draft assessment of formaldehyde released in 2010 was widely criticized by the scientific community, including the National Academy of Sciences, for its lack of transparent and consistent scientific standards. Moreover, it did not adequately assess alternate scientific viewpoints about potential risk, nor did it rely on the best available data.
The sensationalizing of the disclosure of the assessment at this stage places politics and conspiracy ahead of science and truth. Consumers are not getting the full story and it is critical people understand the facts about formaldehyde.
FACT: formaldehyde is naturally formed in the human body and exhaled in every breath. The IRIS program would have you believe that the normal amount of formaldehyde humans produce is dangerous and can cause cancer, despite the scientific evidence refuting that claim. Accepting the leaked information as fact would mean human breath poses an unacceptable risk of cancer.
FACT: safe levels of formaldehyde exposure have been recognized and implemented by international scientific organizations. Whether it’s used in a glue for the production of plywood for home construction or to make plastic for fuel system components for cars or door and window insulation for modern airliners, products made with formaldehyde provide many benefits for consumers in the form of extended use, consistent quality and improved performance and safety.
FACT: there are decades of scientific data that support a safe level of formaldehyde exposure. According to these publicly available peer-reviewed scientific articles, the low environmental levels of formaldehyde people may be exposed to are highly unlikely to cause negative health effects. Our confidence in this important chemical goes far beyond its critical role in the production of items consumers use every day.
The ongoing leaks to media outlets are yet another example of the ongoing problems within the IRIS program. These leaks further undermine the credibility of the draft assessment and unnecessarily threatens the many safe, longstanding and beneficial uses of this indispensable product. Scare tactics and irresponsible reporting mislead policymakers and consumers about formaldehyde, potentially resulting in unwarranted fears.
IRIS has a troubling history in its approach to performing scientific assessments, and releasing draft findings before they could be fully vetted by the EPA is further evidence of an ongoing problem. When it comes to critically important issues like public health, we should rely only on sound, peer-reviewed science instead of scare tactics. The public has the right to hear the truth.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2018/07/the-truth-about-formaldehyde/

Return to headline | Return to top
Toxics Agency Adds School Videos to US Mercury Campaign

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

The US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has released two teacher-training videos as part of its 'Don't mess with mercury' campaign. Both are targeted at school teachers, administrators and staff.
Across the US, the ATSDR says, the EPA deals with as many as 60 mercury spills a year. Most of these occur in schools, in particular in their science labs.
The videos – 'Mercury: Danger in your school' and 'Mercury spill cleanup' – come as part of its "effort to increase mercury safety", the agency says. They aim to educate staff about the substance's dangers, methods for dealing with a spill and ways to make schools mercury free and are in English and Spanish.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69025/us-toxics-agency-launches-school-mercury-campaign

Return to headline | Return to top
Sanders Amendment Would Require PFAS Groundwater Study

Jul 26, 2018 | Inside EPA

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has submitted an amendment for possible consideration as part the Senate debate on EPA and the Interior Department's (DOI) fiscal year 2019 spending bill that would require the U.S. Geological Survey, a DOI agency, in consultation with EPA, to monitor perfluorinated chemicals in groundwater flows.
Whether the amendment will come up for formal consideration as part of the funding measure -- called a “minibus” because it combines several committee passed spending measures -- is not clear.
But the amendment comes as a recently released draft report from the Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry's (ATSDR) recommends stricter risk values than EPA has adopted for two per- and polyfluoroakyl substances (PFAS), spurring calls for tougher regulation of the substances.
Sanders' amendment, would require completion of such a study, “in not less than 5 regions,” within one year of enactment of the funding measure. The Sanders amendment would also require USGS, in consultation with EPA to submit a report to Congress within 15 months of enactment, and annually thereafter, outlining the study's findings.
And it also “encourages” USGS to develop a public information campaign to inform both impacted communities and the general public about potential PFAS exposure from releases in groundwater.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/sanders-amendment-would-require-pfas-groundwater-study

Return to headline | Return to top
SC Johnson 'Lagging' on Ingredient Disclosure for Professional Products

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Tammy Lovell

Cleaning products giant SC Johnson has been accused of 'lagging behind’ other companies in disclosing the ingredients in its professional products.
Earlier this month, the US conglomerate announced an initiative to reveal the fragrance ingredients in its consumer products down to 0.01% of content.
But the disclosure programme does not extend to products sold under its SC Johnson Professional brands, which are marketed to professional customers, such as commercial distributors and building service contractors.
Under California’s Cleaning Products Right to Know Act (SB258) all ingredients in cleaning products – including those for professional use –must be shared on manufacturer websites by 1 January 2020, and on product labels one year later.
Alexandra Scranton, director of science and research at the US NGO, Women Voices for the Earth, praised SC Johnson as "a leader" for already coming into compliance with SB258 for consumer products, but said it was "odd" this wasn’t extended to its professional range.
"Disclosure of ingredients to cleaning workers, working all day with cleaning products, is a crucial step towards improving worker health and allowing them to avoid potential harm from ingredients they are exposed to," she said.
Kelly Semrau, a vice president at SC Johnson, told Chemical Watch: "SC Johnson Professional will disclose ingredients in its products by 2020, and is in the process of evaluating the best ways to provide ingredient information to professional users."‘Lagging behind’
SC Johnson Professional’s disclosure effort is "lagging behind" other cleaning products companies such as Clorox and Reckitt Benckiser (RB), Ms Scanton added.
Clorox currently discloses basic ingredients for its Clorox Commercial Solutions products and RB does so for its Lysol Professional product.
However, neither companies are currently disclosing fragrance ingredients for their commercial products, with the exception of some fragrance allergens.
An RB spokesperson said the company was "a proud supporter" of SB258 and is preparing its website and on-product labels with "comprehensive ingredient disclosures for both retail and professional products with an aim to be fully compliant ahead of the official deadlines".
Clorox had not responded to Chemical Watch’s request for comment at the time of publication.Working towards compliance
Brian Sansoni, a vice president at trade association, the American Cleaning Institute, told Chemical Watch that companies are "in the process of meeting the ingredient disclosure requirements by the dates prescribed under SB258 for both consumer and commercial cleaning products".
The most important information about commercial cleaning products is "the safety and usage information for each specific product, as well as the proper education and training for those who use these products in commercial and institutional settings," he added.
Also, he said that under the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Osha) rules chemical manufacturers, distributors, or importers are required to provide safety data sheets (SDSs), which provide detailed information about chemicals used in commercial settings.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69020/sc-johnson-lagging-on-ingredient-disclosure-for-professional-products

Return to headline | Return to top
Commission Urged to Close EU Regulatory Gaps on EDCs

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Luke Buxton

Member states and NGOs have called on the European Commission to develop a harmonised approach to the identification of endocrine disrupting chemicals across all EU regulations.
Their comments, alongside trade bodies and research institutions, were submitted to the consultation on the roadmap towards a more comprehensive EU framework on EDCs, which closed on 19 July.
This aims to describe key issues, take stock of achievements and outline future actions on the substances. The consultation received 44 responses.
Belgium’s Federal Service of Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment (FPS) said the chemicals community "cannot work any more in a silo" and needs cross sector talks between areas of covered by different legislation. These include:toys;cosmetics;food contact materials; andconstruction products.
And NGO the Center for International Environmental Law (Ciel) wrote that while the Commission has developed "long-overdue" EDC identification criteria for two regulations – on pesticides and biocides – "major" legislative gaps remain.
Its claim that a comprehensive set of legislative measures is in place to provide a high level of protection to humans and the environment is, it says, "distorted and overlooks the existing gaps".
ClientEarth added that the EU executive "needs to fix both the acute gaps in some sectoral legislations and the lack of coherent and systematic approach to the risk management of EDCs".
The Commission must also ensure all activities are in line with the EU plastics strategy to ensure coherence and effectiveness, it said.New strategy
A number of stakeholders say the roadmap is not extensive enough and propose other measures. The German Environment Agency (UBA) asks for a "more ambitious" EDC strategy, going beyond existing activities to fill scientific knowledge gaps.
What is missing, it says, is defined "detailed activities with verifiable aims and milestones based on a sound timeline".
The European Environmental Bureau (EEB) wrote that the roadmap lacks a "strategy, goals and intention to propose any concrete measures" to reduce exposure to EDCs and "an ambitious and forward-looking approach to one of the greatest environmental health threats for the future generations".
And Kemi, the Swedish Chemicals Agency, said it is "quite vague" and should contain more on "what ought to be achieved through increased scientific efforts and harmonised approaches".
It pointed out that in July last year, the Commission said it would start working on a new strategy beyond pesticides and biocides. Kemi urged it to "include the development of a new community strategy for endocrine disruptors".
Meanwhile, Denmark’s environment ministry commented that the EU Environment Council’s 2016 conclusions on the sound management of chemicals called for an update of the EU endocrine disruptors strategy "not for a framework".
And, it added, the EU's 7th Environment Action Programme (7EAP) asks for minimisation of exposure to EDCs, but it said there is no reference to this or the "important" 7EAP policy goal, which is underlined by the Council conclusions.
Meanwhile, UK NGO CHEM Trust said there should be a specific focus on actions to address the problem of combination effects of exposure to mixtures of EDCs from various sources. "The current single-substances based risk assessment is not protective and a new approach is needed," it said.‘Comprehensive’ efforts
The EEB said: "There is already enough science to take action" but the roadmap is rather focused on compiling information on scientific knowledge, existing policy and legislative measures and cooperation.
Meanwhile, Cefic and the German Chemical Industry Association (VCI) both said the EU policy and legal framework is already "very comprehensive" and experience with the implementation of existing provisions "needs to be assessed".
This applies, they said, in particular to the criteria adopted for biocides and plant protection products Regulations and to procedures for EDCs under REACH. "In our opinion, valid results can only be obtained after a reasonable period," they added, suggesting five years.
"We call on future research projects to focus on filling relevant knowledge gaps, focusing on the adverse effects/diseases that are of most actual concern for public health."
https://chemicalwatch.com/69029/commission-urged-to-close-eu-regulatory-gaps-on-edcs

Return to headline | Return to top
Surface Treatment Industry Calls on EU to Revise Authorisations

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Leigh Stringer

The European Committee for Surface Treatment (CETS) has called on Echa and the Commission to look again at certain uses of substances that have been added to the REACH authorisation list.
The organisation claims some substances were added because they have not been correctly identified as intermediates. Intermediates are exempt from REACH authorisation.
This is because the Commission and Echa have been using narrower criteria than those laid out in REACH, to identify intermediates, it adds.
The Regulation's criteria for identifying intermediates are:the substance must be manufactured for, and consumed in, a chemical process; andthere must be an intentional transformation of the substance into another substance in that chemical process.
In a position paper seen by Chemical Watch, CETS says "there are many uses of substances to which these conditions apply. For example, all metal salts that are used for galvanic or electroless metal deposition, fall under these definitions – laborious authorisations would not be required".
Nevertheless, it adds, the criteria is not properly implemented and enforced under REACH. The revision, it says, should look at all cases where substances are intentionally transformed into different ones, in the workplace.
And it calls on the Commission and Echa to "clearly state that by applying the correct intermediate concept such uses of substances will no longer be threatened by authorisation requirements".
"This would return some certainty to the markets, eventually".
The narrower criteria, says CETS, is found in Echa’s 2010 guidance on intermediates – agreed between the agency, member states and the Commission. This says that when the "main aim of the chemical process is not to transform a substance into another, or when it is not used for this main aim but to achieve another function, the substance should not be regarded as an intermediate under REACH".
CETS says that there is no mention of a specific goal or ‘main aim’ in the REACH legal text and that by using this definition, the legal framework has been "set by enforcement bodies, without consulting legislators".Legal cases
The paper also highlights an Echa Board of Appeal case on the substance diarsenic trioxide. Referring to the REACH legal text, the BOA say it matches the "two clear requirements that need to be met cumulatively in order for a substance to qualify as an intermediate":
The Board concluded that Echa's interpretation of a ‘main aim’ therefore "amounts to an overly restrictive interpretation of the concept of intermediate".
It adds that this is "something that is unsupported by the letter and spirit of the REACH Regulation and ignores economic reality".
However, following the BOA decision, a European Court of Justice (CJEU) case, on the identification of acrylamide as an intermediate, came to a different conclusion.
The CJEU sided with Echa and the Commission, rejecting the appellants claim that acrylamide was being used for an intermediate use. The appellant said the authorities did not identify acrylamide as an intermediate because of the "added condition" regarding the main aim or purpose of the substance. It also said that, once identified as an intermediate, the substance should not be added to the REACH candidate list of those being considered for authorisation.
However, the court concluded that "such a literal interpretation is manifestly contrary to the objective of the REACH Regulation to protect health and the environment … and, it is incompatible with the general scheme of that regulation".
The European Commission and Echa are currently analysing the court's judgment. Chemical Watch understands that, depending on the outcome of the analysis, it may lead to an amendment on the guidance on intermediates.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69021/surface-treatment-industry-calls-on-eu-to-revise-authorisations

Return to headline | Return to top
Echa Lifts Lid on Downstream User Notifications

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

By Clelia Oziel

Echa has released the first set of non-confidential data from notifications of downstream users of REACH authorised SVHCs.
The move is part of the agency’s new approach to disseminating data following consultations with industry, NGOs, trade unions and its Management Board Advisory Group on Dissemination. It will publish the information quarterly.
From now on the following information will be made public unless the downstream user claims confidentiality with a valid justification:company name;location of the site of use;name of the notified use;brief additional description of use; andinformation on substitution activities.
A register of notifications – which includes the names of downstream users and quantities used – is now available online on the following six SVHCs submitted in 2016:bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP);dibutyl phthalate (DBP);hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD);lead chromate molybdate sulphate red;lead sulfochromate yellow; andtrichloroethylene (TCE).
Echa said it plans to make public information on later submissions towards the end of the year.‘More detail needed’
The agency had faced pressure from NGOs demanding public access to information on downstream users for greater transparency and for promoting safer alternatives.
Echa had previously only disclosed statistical data to the public, even though member state competent authorities could fully access the register, including for "commercially sensitive" information, such as the names of downstream users and authorisation holders.
NGO ClientEarth welcomed the publication of quantities used and the aggregated number of staff involved in downstream operations. SVHC supply chains "should not be unduly protected", lawyer Apolline Roger said, adding that Echa's policy supports this.
"However, it is regrettable that the agency has not followed this logic fully," she said, adding that Echa should systematically publish the name and location of downstream users, even where there are less than two authorised holders.
Echa said it consults authorisation holders before publishing the names or site location of their downstream users "if there are only one or two holders" for the specific substance or use.
Ms Roger said she would have liked to see more detail about the SVHC use, and, importantly, information downstream users are required to send to Echa, which often concerns exposure and the availability of alternatives.Confidentiality barrier
Article 66 of REACH requires downstream users to notify Echa of uses of authorised substances within three months of the first supply of the substance.
The agency has been receiving notifications from downstream users since 2016, following the publication of the first authorisation decision on hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD).
The new dissemination approach says Echa will share "non-confidential information from the notifications with the public and specific anonymous information with authorisation holders".
The name of the upstream supplier holding the authorisation will not be published, Echa says, as this is "not needed to achieve transparency in the process".
In any case, it says, the name of the upstream supplier or a specific use may be deducted from the substance name if it has only one or two authorisation holders or a single authorised use. Users may wish to flag confidentiality in both situations, it added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69038/echa-lifts-lid-on-downstream-user-notifications

Return to headline | Return to top
Echa Round-Up

Jul 26, 2018 | Chemical Watch

Substance evaluation conclusions published
Three new conclusion documents are available for:nonylphenol, branched, ethoxylated, added to the Corap list in 2016 and evaluated by the UK;butan-1-ol, added to the Corap list in 2017 and evaluated by Hungary; andn,n'-bis(1,4-dimethylpentyl)-phenylenediamine, added to the Corap list in 2012 and evaluated by Belgium.Rac and Seac Opinion on dibutyl phthalate authorisation application
Echa's Committees for Risk Assessment and Socio-economic Analysis have published their consolidated Opinion on an authorisation application for a use of the SVHC dibutyl phthalate.
AVX Limited applied for industrial use in the manufacture of ceramic sheets for the production of multi-layer ceramic capacitors.Survey on Cloud services
Echa is asking for feedback on its Cloud Services through a 15-minute survey. Responses will help the improvement and development of the service, it says.
The survey closes on 5 August.Soluble cobalt salts restriction proposal delayed
The agency has delayed the submission date of the dossier to 5 October to further develop the restriction proposal.
The European Commission asked Echa to assess the risk of five cobalt salts in industrial and professional uses and restrict those uses where adequate control cannot be demonstrated.Statistics published for downstream user reports
Echa has published an overview of the downstream user reports submitted during the first half of 2018. Downstream users are required to report to Echa when:they prepare a chemical safety report (CSR) to assess a use not covered by the exposure scenario received from their supplier;they rely on certain exemptions from the obligation to prepare a downstream user CSR; ortheir classification is different from that of all of their suppliers.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69003/echa-round-up

Return to headline | Return to top

Energy News

Trump Says Europe Will Buy More American Gas. Is That Possible?

Jul 26, 2018 | The New York Times

By Stanley Reed

When President Trump met with Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, at the White House, the two said they were entering a new phase in their relationship. Crucial to that will be natural gas.
Demand for natural gas — a cleaner-burning fossil fuel than coal or oil — is rising worldwide, and the United States is a growing supplier of liquefied natural gas, or L.N.G. The European Union, meanwhile, wants to diversify its energy supply, which remains somewhat dependent on Russia, with which it has a difficult relationship.
Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that the 28-nation European Union would be “a massive buyer of L.N.G.,” before adding, “We have plenty of it.”
Any such shift won’t happen overnight, though.Europe needs more gas
In simple terms: Europe’s consumption of natural gas is increasing, and its domestic production is falling. Its imports have risen rapidly in recent years, and will most likely increase further in the future.
ADVERTISEMENT
“The question is: Where will these increased imports come from?” said Marco Alvera, chief executive of SNAM, an Italian natural gas infrastructure company.
Many of the region’s power plants are switching from being fired by coal, which has high levels of carbon emissions, to running on gas, which is significantly better for the environment (though not entirely clean).
But gas production in Europe is declining. One major reason is that the Dutch government ordered a sharp reduction of output at the enormous Groningen field, because of earthquakes caused by exploration there.
And some other sources may be near maximum capacity. Pipeline gas, the main source of Europe’s gas imports, might have peaked, especially from sources like North Africa, analysts say.
L.N.G., a chilled form of natural gas sold by the United States that can be transported on ships to any place with a specific type of terminal, offers another option. Europe already has several such terminals in place — in fact, it is using less than half their available capacity.EDITORS’ PICKSHow an Italian Town That Welcomed Migrants Turned Against ThemCruises Are So Uncool They Are CoolMartina Navratilova on Her 1st Wimbledon Win
ADVERTISEMENTBuying gas from the U.S. has its advantages
To start, just having the possibility of importing large amounts of L.N.G. from the United States, or indeed elsewhere, eases the risk that Russia could apply a gas chokehold on Europe. (Germany, for example, imports around half of its natural gas from Russia.) Poland and Lithuania, which are especially wary of Moscow, have recently built L.N.G. receiving terminals for this reason.
Still, Europe’s dependence on Russia is driven largely by one factor — Russian gas is cheap.
European gas prices are now largely determined by trading on financial markets, but they are often too low for American suppliers to compete. The cost of liquefying gas in the United States and transporting it to Europe doubles its price for American companies. So if they were to sell to customers in Europe at current prices, they would lose money.
By contrast, Russian gas sent by pipeline to Germany costs far less, allowing Russian companies to make large profits, according to Jonathan Stern, founder of the natural gas program at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
There is also another benefit: Buying more gas from the United States could give Mr. Trump a reason to hold off on imposing costly tariffs on auto imports. Giles Farrer, an analyst at the energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie, points out that the president has tried to use gas to improve the United States’ trade balance in talks with Europe and China.So what’s stopping Europe?
Cost is a major factor.
Europe has pushed hard in the past two decades to create a freely traded market for natural gas, according to Mr. Alvera of SNAM. The region has, in essence, bet that a functioning market is the best route to easing dependence on any one source.
While American gas exports have grown rapidly, most shipments have gone to Asia and Latin America, where prices have been higher. Price differences mean American gas is usually attractive to European buyers only during cold snaps, when prices on the Continent rise. If a glut of L.N.G. emerges in the future, more of that gas from the United States may wind up in Europe, but that could mean American suppliers lose money, Mr. Stern said.Capacity is another issue
The United States became a natural gas exporter only recently, as large quantities of the fuel have become available from shale drilling. As a result, the country has yet to construct the export terminals necessary to sell its gas to customers further afield. The United States is expected to add substantially to this export capacity in the next few years, though.
“It makes a lot of sense for U.S. L.N.G. to fill the gap,” said Oswald Clint, an analyst at Bernstein Research.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/26/business/energy-environment/trump-europe-natural-gas-lng.html

Return to headline | Return to top
Perry Seeks to Reassure Allies About Trump Trade Moves

Jul 26, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire

By Timothy Cama

Energy Secretary Rick Perry said U.S. allies and energy companies don’t need to worry about President Trump’s trade policies. Speaking to reporters Thursday before a dedication ceremony for a massive liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility built by Dominion Energy, Perry recognized concerns internationally about Trump’s trade battles with China, the European Union, Canada, Mexico and other major trading partners. But the Energy Secretary said there was nothing to worry about. “The president is a disruptor. He doesn’t make any apologies for that. I don’t get, maybe, as concerned about where the markets are going to be on any given day, what the president says or tweets,” Perry said, standing before the massive, labyrinthine system owned by Dominion Energy that freezes the gas to around negative 260 degrees Fahrenheit to increase its energy density. “Here’s the facts: he is negotiating every day to put America in a stronger position economically. I think we all recognize that some of these trade agreements that we’ve had in the past, it’s time to renegotiate them,” Perry said. Perry then specifically named the two-decade-old North American Free Trade Agreement, which removed many barriers to trade with Mexico and Canada and that Trump is trying to renegotiate. “The president always sets the bar really high. And it makes some people nervous. But that’s OK,” Perry continued. Perry also used the visit to boast about Trump’s announcement Wednesday that the European Union would seek to greatly increase its LNG imports from the United States, after earlier meeting with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in the White House. “It is a new day,” Perry said. “It is, I think, a very bright day from the standpoint of America’s standpoint, our national security, and of course being able to send a message to our allies that they can count on us, no strings attached, and that U.S. energy will be flowing their way.” Perry also sought to reassure the domestic energy industry — including a gas industry that has been pushing for federal officials to approve exports for years — that the administration understands the pain they’re feeling from steel tariffs, uncertainty about trade and other problems. “If you have tariffs that are basically saying ‘look, China, you have been unfairly subsidizing the steel industry and it’s hurting our domestic producers,’ the president is addressing that,” said Perry, the former governor of Texas and two-time presidential candidate. “We’re working our way through this and I don’t have any concerns that the president’s role is to push competition.” The Cove Point LNG facility, on the shore of the Chesapeake Bay 50 miles from Washington, D.C., started commercial export operations in April. The plan's major customers will be Japan’s Tokyo Gas Co., Sumitomo Corp., Kansai Electric Power Co., as well as India’s Gail Ltd. The facility had been there for decades, operating as an import terminal, but Dominion decided to enter the export market seven years ago to take advantage of the gas boom caused by fracking and other unconventional drilling methods. It is only the second facility to export LNG from the contiguous United States. The other, the Sabine Pass plant in Louisiana, started shipping gas in 2016. Cove Point has faced fierce protests from nearby residents and activists, who object to it on environment and climate grounds, among other reasons. Protesters rallied just outside the plant’s gates Thursday during Perry’s visit as well.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/398972-perry-seeks-to-reassure-allies-about-trump-trade-moves

Return to headline | Return to top
Exxon Mobil Starts Up Multibillion-Dollar Baytown Chemicals Project

Jul 26, 2018 | Houston Chronicle

By Jordan Blum

Exxon Mobil said Thursday it commenced operations at its multibillion-dollar petrochemical expansion at its massive Baytown complex.
The years-in-the-making project includes its new crown jewel ethane cracker that's designed to churn out billions of pounds a year of ethylene, which is the primary feedstock for the world's most common plastics.
The ethane cracker, which includes eight 23-story-tall furnaces, takes cheap and abundant ethane that's found in shale natural gas liquids and converts it into ethylene. Easy access to the affordable shale ethane is the primary reason Exxon is continuing to expand its Texas petrochemical facilities.
The project was delayed a few months in part by flooding that occurred during Hurricane Harvey nearly a year ago.
Last year Exxon Mobil completed two new plastics facilities at its nearby Mont Belvieu plastics plant that turns the ethylene from Baytown into thinner and stronger versions of the common plastic, polyethylene.
The Baytown expansion includes producing an additional 1.5 million metric tons of ethylene a year, or 3.3 billion pounds, while the Mont Belvieu plant can manufacture an extra 1.3 million tons of polyethylene now. Most of that plastic is headed for export to emerging markets in Asia and elsewhere.
RELATED: Exxon Mobil completes massive plastics expansion near Houston
"Our new ethane cracker will help us meet the growing global demand for high-performance plastic products that deliver key sustainability benefits such as lighter packaging weight, lower energy consumption and reduced emissions, further enhancing our competitiveness worldwide," said John Verity, president of ExxonMobil Chemical Company.
"The abundance of domestically produced oil and natural gas has reduced energy costs and created new sources of feedstock for U.S. Gulf refining and chemical manufacturing while creating jobs and expanding economic activity in the area," he added.
The project represented Exxon Mobil's first major U.S. chemical expansion in more than 15 years.
Exxon Mobil also has a joint venture with the Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., known as SABIC. The companies plan to build a $10 billion chemicals and plastics complex just north of Corpus Christi.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Exxon-Mobil-starts-up-multibillion-dollar-Baytown-13107289.php

Return to headline | Return to top
CalFrac Boosted by More U.S. Horsepower, Reactivated Fleets

Jul 26, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence

By Carolyn Davis

Calgary-based CalFrac Well Services Ltd., which has one of the largest hydraulic fracturing businesses in the world, reported a big gain in revenue from a year ago, fueled mostly by surging activity in the United States.
Based on horsepower, Calfrac is one of the largest global fracturing companies with a combined fleet of 1.3 million hp. Besides fracturing, it also provides coiled tubing, cementing and other well stimulation services to companies that work in Western Canada, the U.S. onshore, Argentina and Russia.
Since the end of June 2017, CalFrac said it has reactivated 72,000 hp and two deep coiled tubing units were transferred from the United States. Through a “combination of this broader operating scale and better pricing,” revenue increased by 18% year/year (y/y).
“The number of fracturing jobs increased by 13%, mainly due to a more active and efficient customer base versus the same period in 2017,” management said. “The number of coiled tubing jobs increased by 37% from the second quarter in 2017, primarily due to higher equipment utilization and larger operating scale.”
CalFrac’s financial results are reported in Canadian currency. Revenue climbed 67% y/y to $544.6 million, while the fracturing job count increased by 33% mostly on the “larger scale of operations and higher activity in Canada and the United States,” management said. CalFrac began working in the Permian Basin, both Texas and New Mexico, beginning in 3Q2017.
During 2Q2018, Calfrac pumped 560,000 tons of sand in the United States, a 56% jump y/y, and it pumped another 227,000 tons in Canada, which was 6% growth. Consolidated revenue per fracturing job increased by 31% from a combination of better pricing, larger job sizes and job mix.
Canadian activity began slowly as spring breakup conditions impacted operations in April, but activity escalated in May and June. Cost inflation has continued to dog the operations, however, driven mainly by higher product and fuel costs, but management is working with customers to share in the cost increases, management said.
In Canada, revenue decreased by 30% sequentially to $131.9 million because of the slowdown in activity during April. Operating income as a percentage of revenue was 8% versus 17% in 1Q2018 mostly because of lower equipment utilization combined with higher costs for diesel fuel, rail transportation and sand.
“Continued strength in oil and liquids pricing should support strong activity levels through the third quarter and early into the fourth quarter across CalFrac's Canadian client base,” management said. With increasing intensity across existing plays and meaningful acceleration in the East Duvernay oil play, Calfrac expects demand for fracturing services to grow.
“Based on current visibility, the company anticipates a slowdown in the fourth quarter, albeit with a more typical pattern than the sharp decrease experienced in 2017.”
In the United States, conditions continued to improve as fleets were reactivated, “aided by improved productivity and no material impact from the industry sand network challenges that occurred in the first quarter,” it said. Sand supply chain issues also were resolved in the quarter by Superior Energy Services Inc.
CalFrac’s U.S. growth “was tempered by some breaks in completion schedules in Texas and New Mexico,” it said. The company reactivated a 17th fracturing fleet in San Antonio, TX, which is now expected to begin work in August because of customer scheduling changes.
“Of the 17 fracturing fleets active in the United States, 14 are large fleets while the remaining three fleets are approximately half the size of a standard fleet,” management said.
Like its peers in recent months, management also discussed potential issues from takeaway capacity, with CalFrac specifically addressing how that might hinder completions in the U.S. market.
“With recent commentary surrounding the impact of production takeaway capacity on the fracturing market in the United States, the company continues to work closely with its clients to manage any issues that may arise,” it said.
“Calfrac expects that up to three of its fleets may experience lower utilization during the third quarter due to changes in client well completion schedules resulting in possible redeployments of fracturing crews into different operating districts. A number of opportunities for short- and long-term work exist in most of CalFrac's U.S. operating districts, and the company will seek to balance risk and growth when looking at any asset reallocation.”
Meanwhile, cost inflation in the U.S. market continued in the second quarter, with products and fuel experiencing the largest increases. CalFrac's work in the United States is covered by agreements that provide “regular opportunities” to pass through cost increases to clients, and the company manages them as part of the normal course of business.
“In the U.S., the horizontal rig count has increased by over 15% since the beginning of the year, and with continued improvement in oil prices, the company's outlook for fracturing fundamentals remains optimistic, despite the short-term issues related to takeaway capacity in the Permian Basin.”
Revenue from U.S. operations more than doubled y/y to $342 million from $153.9 million. The company also recorded a 62% increase in the number of fracturing jobs completed. Revenue per job increased 41% on improved pricing combined with the impact of job mix as the “operations in Texas and New Mexico resulted in the completion of larger overall job sizes.”
U.S. operations generated operating income of $69 million, versus $25.2 million a year earlier, primarily on improved utilization and pricing in Colorado, North Dakota and Pennsylvania, as well as the addition of operations in Texas and New Mexico that did not begin until 3Q2017.
Argentina operations also showed significant improvement during 2Q2018, as several exploration and production companies are developing leaseholds in the Vaca Muertaformation in the Neuquén Basin.
Profits in the Argentina business gained “in spite of a high level of variability in client work programs during the quarter,” management said. “Internal cost control and a focus on field productivity remain central to short-term improvements, and should be aided by an expected increase in activity levels through the remainder of the year” as producers ramp up activity.
Meanwhile, Russian operations experienced ‘continued challenging operating conditions,” impacting activity through May. Most of the work not executed in the second quarter has been rescheduled through the summer months and into the autumn.
Net losses totaled $32.8 million (minus 23 cents/share) in 2Q2018, versus a year-ago net loss of $20.3 million (minus 15 cents). Losses included largely unrealized foreign exchange losses of $32.5 million in 2Q2018 and $16.3 million in 2Q2017.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/115191-calfrac-boosted-by-more-us-horsepower-reactivated-fleets

Return to headline | Return to top
Petrobras' Texas Refinery Agrees to $3.5M Settlement

Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire

By Amanda Reilly

A Texas refinery owned by the Brazilian state-controlled oil company has agreed to pay more than $3.5 million to settle claims that it violated the Clean Air Act.
Under the proposed consent decree, Petrobras would pay a $350,000 civil penalty to the federal government and more than $3 million to the Houston-Galveston Area Council to create a clean vehicles fund.
The company also agreed to install new pollution controls and develop a plan for responding to citizen pollution complaints at the Pasadena Refining System Inc. (PRSI) refinery.
"We welcome PRSI's decision to resolve this case rather than spend years litigating it in court," Brian Zabcik of Environment Texas said in a statement. "Pasadena and Galena Park residents will benefit twice. Refinery upgrades will reduce illegal air pollution, while the electric vehicles project will further improve air quality."
Environment Texas brought the suit against the refinery with the Sierra Club under the Clean Air Act's citizen suit provision, alleging that the refinery violated both hourly and annual limits for air pollutants, including fine particles, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds, during equipment malfunctions and "operational flaws."
During just 2016, the groups alleged, the facility unlawfully released 70,129 pounds of particulate matter. The refinery has a crude oil capacity of more than 110,000 barrels a day.
"These so-called 'emission events' have released millions of pounds of illegal air pollution into surrounding neighborhoods," said Neil Carman, Clean Air Program director for the Sierra Club's Lone Star Chapter.
The creation of a Vehicle Emission Reduction Fund makes up the bulk of the settlement agreement. According to the environmental groups, the fund would provide grants to school districts and local governments in Harris County, Texas, to convert fleets to electric or hybrid models or establish electric vehicle infrastructure.
The settlement is subject to a 45-day comment period, during which the federal government may provide input. It comes as Petrobras is trying to sell the refinery, which it fully acquired in 2008 and which was previously the focus of a corruption investigation by Brazil. The company put the facility up for sale in February.
The consent decree stipulates that if the refinery is sold, the purchaser would become responsible for carrying out its terms.
Separately, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality yesterday approved a $907,191 penalty against the Pasadena refinery for alleged air and water quality violations between March 2011 and December 2013.
Of that total, $250,000 would go toward the Houston-Galveston Area Council for its efforts to replace or retrofit high-emitting buses, while nearly $150,000 would fund a restoration project at the Armand Bayou Nature Center.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/07/26/stories/1060091253

Return to headline | Return to top
ACP Cleared to Start Work in North Carolina

Jul 26, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence

By Jamison Cocklin

FERC has authorized construction to begin on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) in North Carolina.
In a notice to proceed (NTP) issued on Tuesday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission granted the natural gas pipeline project’s request to begin work on construction spreads in the state where trees have been felled and on other properties where the company has access.
ACP has already received several notices to proceed with construction along the 600-mile route that spans West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina. Like other larger infrastructure projects, sponsors have taken an incremental approach in requesting regulatory approvals, as environmental groups have stepped up their fight against oil and natural gas pipelines, and as more federal and state agencies have become involved in the regulatory process.
ACP would originate in West Virginia, pass through Virginia and into North Carolina to move 1.5 Bcf/d of natural gas to the Southeast. The project’s backers are still targeting a 2019 in-service date, even though they continue to face regulatory and legal challenges.
For example, the project was forced to suspend some work along the route in May after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit invalidated its incidental take permit, which is required for activities that could result in the take of, or a negative impact to, threatened wildlife. The company is still waiting for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to revise the permit.
The ruling, however, does not affect any construction plans in North Carolina. FERC’s NTP for work in the state applies to a long list of construction spreads and also allows the project to use and improve access roads there, among other things.
The Sierra Club chided the latest NTP after it was issued, calling the Commission’s decision to green light work in North Carolina “disappointing.”
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/115192-acp-cleared-to-start-work-in-north-carolina

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Environment News

Half-Baked Carbon Tax is Merely a Vice Tax Offering No Recovery From Addiction

Jul 26, 2018 | The Hill - Opinion

By Mike Carr

It doesn’t take a Ph.D. to understand global warming; it’s simple common sense.
Air keeps energy (heat) from escaping. You know this when you put a comforter or down jacket on. It’s not the feathers keeping you warm, it’s the air they trap (the fluffiness).
This is why Venus is hotter at night than Mercury is during the day. Not only is Venus’s atmosphere thick, it’s composed of mostly CO2, which is a "greenhouse gas" (GHG) because it retains the Sun’s energy more than other gases, such as nitrogen, do.

Sure, there’s a technical aspect to global warming. Understanding the science behind warming is critical to crafting workable solutions. Predictive models can help us understand the changes that occur when different policy levers are pulled. But, an over-reliance on parts-per-million and predictive models can lead us astray. The complication of the problem and the possible solutions leads some to resist individual sector solutions in search of a single catch-all solution that solves everything without anyone having to “pick winners and losers.”
This leads people away from the core of climate policy: It’s a moral imperative. Society is going to have to spend trillions of dollars to deal with the damages already caused by unconstrained burning of fossil fuels.
As Cap and Trade was the chosen elixir a decade ago, much of the talknow concerns a carbon tax of some type. Setting aside the politics for a moment, is a carbon tax good policy? Good tax policy raises money to do the things we need as a society in the least burdensome, or disruptive, way possible. Taxing activity that imposes a cost on society — like cigarettes, alcohol, or pollution — is attractive because it can benefit us both by raising needed revenue and acting as a disincentive for imposing costs on all of us.
But, a high cigarette tax, for example, is tough on people who have a physical addiction. So unless you are going to provide people with a way to break their addiction, you end up with an unfair and unsustainable vice tax with no treatment for the vice.
Similarly, the United States has built an energy system that treats the atmosphere as an open sewer where energy prices don’t reflect social costs, and those bills are deferred to the next generation.
As a result, most people can’t respond to a gas tax by moving closer to work or to charges on their electricity bill by switching to low-carbon power — it’s just like taxing the addicted smoker.
Consumers don’t control what their utility burns to generate electricity, or pick the carbon content of their fuel.
In the U.S., energy markets are almost never “free markets” in the way they’re described in economics texts, meaning the signals a carbon tax is supposed to send would be muted.
In transportation for example, a $25 per-ton tax would roughly equal 25 cents-per-gallon to consumers.
This fee per-gallon, however, would only be visible to them after they’ve already made the most important purchasing decision in buying the car — from a carmaker that has no incentive to reduce its margins by building high-tech cars.
In the end, you’d have to levy a very high tax to see real effects. It’d be much less painful to help people break the addiction to carbon by giving them alternatives.
This points to the larger issue with nearly all carbon tax proposals: What’s being traded away? In most cases to date, carbon taxes are proposed as an exchange for suspending other mechanisms. This risks going backward by removing the very policies that are driving technological progress in sectors such as transportation in exchange for an uncertain incentive.
If you trade away such policies as the fuel economy standards and the renewable fuel standard, you will slow the inadequate progress we are making towards decarbonization both in vehicle technology and low-carbon liquid fuels.
This trade-off is a problem even if you believe electrification is the answer for most cars, we’ll still need carbon-free fuels for aviation (and probably shipping) and we’ve barely started that transition.
Effective carbon policy must be comprehensive across many sectors while being targeted enough to drive technology choice in each sector — while being sustainable enough to justify long term investments. We can’t just punish people today for their addiction to a system built to ignore the costs of carbon. A solution has to pave the way for a transition to a fully decarbonized economy. That’s a tall order for a single policy such as a carbon tax.
While a reasonable carbon tax is generally good tax policy (particularly if it replaces a more burdensome tax), because it raises revenue from something that is ultimately costing society, it’s an incomplete climate policy on its own.
To be sure, a carbon tax can be constructed in a way to make a difference in the power sector, where fossil fuels are already losing the battle to cleaner forms of generation.
Pulling this lever could expedite the closure of dirty coal plants and make natural gas less competitive with cleaner power when new plants are needed. That’s a good thing, and it should be pursued. But if we’re serious about really solving the whole problem, we need to let go of our hang-ups.
A sustainable carbon tax is probably good tax policy, and might be a useful part of an effective climate policy, but it’s not the magic bullet that will save us all.
Mike Carr is executive director of New Energy America. He previously served as principal deputy assistant secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, and as senior counsel on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/398935-half-baked-carbon-tax-is-merely-a-vice-tax-offering-no-recovery

Return to headline | Return to top
Why Trump Attacks California’s Anti-Pollution Powers

Jul 26, 2018 | Bloomberg (In The Washington Post)

By John Lippert and Ryan Beene

When U.S. President Richard Nixon signed the Clean Air Act in 1970, he recognized a simple truth about his home state of California: When tens of millions of people drive around constantly in a desert, they generate lots of pollution. The law gave California special authority to write tailpipe emission limits that can be tougher than the federal government’s when the state deems it necessary. Now President Donald Trump is insisting that California fall in line like other states. He says he’s doing it to help out automakers. They’re not entirely sure they want this kind of help.
1. What’s Trump doing?
He’s preparing to upend fuel-economy rules negotiated with the auto industry by his predecessor, Barack Obama. Those rules call for raising the federal government’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy requirement for cars and trucks to at least a 35-mile-per-gallon average by 2020, and to roughly 50 mpg by 2025. Trump wants to freeze the standards at their 2020 levels. He also wants to freeze rules that were adopted jointly by Washington and California requiring the auto industry to cut allowable carbon dioxide emissions by 2025 to a level similar to targets the European Union, Japan and China have already set for themselves.
2. Why does Trump want a rollback?
Trump has been pushing a broad range of measures he says will help businesses by getting rid of excessive regulation, and the Obama fuel standards have been a favorite target. Officials say the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is prepared to back Trump up by asserting that the rollback will reduce traffic fatalities by making it cheaper for drivers to replace older, less-safe cars.
3. Why is he going after California?
Because if California is allowed to keep its own, tougher standards, that would undermine much of the impact of Trump’s move. Traditionally, a dozen states have followed California’s lead on air pollution, and Colorado recently signed on, too. Combined, these states account for more than a third of all U.S. auto sales.
4. What about the Clean Air Act?
Trump officials say California and other states are barred from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under a different law, one passed in 1975 law that established the first federal fuel-efficiency requirements. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency intends to revoke the waiver to the Clean Air Act that allows the state to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle tailpipes and to enforce its electric vehicle sales mandate.
5. What does California say?
It had already sued in May, along with 16 other states plus the District of Columbia, to challenge an EPA determination that the fuel-efficiency rules are overly stringent and must be revised. In a subsequent Bloomberg interview, Brown said he expects a court fight that will last longer than Trump’s tenure in office. In the meantime, California officials have offered to relax the standards if the agreement extends out until 2030.
6. How strong is California’s case?
Ann Carlson, a University of California at Los Angeles law professor, said the state’s best defense of its independent regulatory powers could lie in its requirement for battery-powered cars or gas-electric plug-ins. Such zero-emission vehicles need to make up as many as 40 percent of sales by 2030 if California is to meet its CO2 reduction targets, according to estimates by the state’s Air Resources Board staff. ZEVs are also crucial for California’s plan to meet increasingly stringent federal ozone limits -- limits that so far not even Donald Trump has challenged. The state’s independence in fighting pollutants like ground-level ozone, a precursor to smog, is recognized explicitly in the Clean Air Act, Carlson said.
7. What does the auto industry think?
It had agreed to the Obama proposal, which started to take effect in 2011. But a key concession by Obama was to backload many of the increases. That means the manufacturers had to make only gradual improvements for the first decade but face steeply increasing requirements from 2021 to 2025. After Trump’s victory, they began to attack Obama’s plan as too costly and to ask for relief.
8. Does that mean they’re backing Trump?
Not entirely. They don’t support Trump’s proposal to freeze the federal standards, as opposed to making them less stringent. That’s because they don’t want the U.S. to fall behind carmakers in other countries who are being pushed to develop new technologies. And they don’t want to be branded as heedless of climate change. But what they really worry about is the uncertainty that would be created by both a years-long court battle over the rollback, and by a patchwork of standards if Washington and California stop linking their rules.
• All about the Clean Air Act.
• A Bloomberg News article on Trump’s planned repeal of California’s powers.
• The EPA’s determination on rolling back federal tailpipe standards.
• Trump’s legal strategy failed twice under President George W. Bush.
• An EPA report on fuel economy and emissions trends, 1975-2017.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/why-trump-attacks-californias-anti-pollution-powers/2018/07/26/d8900816-908a-11e8-ae59-01880eac5f1d_story.html?utm_term=.460e752fb05c

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Walks Back Climate Recommendations for FERC

Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire

By Ellen M. Gilmer and Sam Mintz

A top EPA political official is clarifying a set of climate analysis recommendations sent to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last month.
Newly minted policy chief Brittany Bolen told FERC yesterday that EPA wants to "clarify the scope and intent" of a June 21 comment that included suggestions for weighing the greenhouse gas emissions of natural gas pipelines.
The commission has been soliciting feedback on its pipeline review process for months, and EPA's climate-focused remarks last month took many by surprise.
The June letter, signed by career staffer Robert Tomiak, suggested tools that FERC could use to evaluate upstream and downstream emissions from new pipelines, including EPA's greenhouse gas inventory, greenhouse gas reporting program and the "social cost of carbon" method (E&E News PM, June 22).
The letter did not take a position on whether FERC should use these tools or in what contexts, but simply noted that they were available. It was pointedly vague, referring to "situations where FERC decides to conduct analyses of GHG emissions impacts of proposed projects."
"[Social cost of carbon] estimates may be used for project analysis when FERC determines that a monetary assessment of the impacts associated with the estimated net change in GHG emissions provides useful information in its environmental review of public interest determination," the original EPA letter read.
Bolen's clarification, filed yesterday as FERC's comment period closed, stresses that the National Environmental Policy Act and related regulations do not require FERC to monetize the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions and notes that the social cost of carbon may not be an appropriate tool for analyzing individual projects.
"Moreover, EPA notes that the February 2010 social cost of carbon estimates, and subsequent related documents developed by the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, no longer represent government policy," she wrote, pointing to President Trump's 2017 "energy independence" executive order, which disbanded the working group and withdrew its recommendations.
Bolen took over for former policy chief Samantha Dravis this month. She joined EPA last year after working for the Senate Republican Policy Committee and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee under then-Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.).
EPA did not immediately respond to questions about Bolen's clarification or whether the June comments were authorized.
The June letter was particularly notable for its discussion of the social cost of carbon, which FERC's Republican majority has argued is not meant for projects.
Avi Zevin, a staff attorney at the Institute for Policy Integrity, told E&E News in June that in the normal course of events, EPA sending recommendations to FERC is not unusual, but that its focus on tools to measure emissions was notable in light of the Trump administration's moves to undo climate regulations.
Democratic Commissioner Richard Glick has since referenced the original EPA comments as support for his position that FERC should take a closer look at the indirect climate impacts of pipelines.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/07/26/stories/1060091281

Return to headline | Return to top
Group Promoting Carbon Price Registers to Lobby

Jul 26, 2018 | E&E Greenwire

By Kevin Bogardus

Squire Patton Boggs has made it official: The K Street giant is lobbying for Americans for Carbon Dividends, the group backed by Washington heavyweights pushing for a price on carbon emissions.
Lobbying disclosure records released this week by the Senate show a team of seven of the firm's lobbyists have been advocating on the group's behalf since July 2.
Their mission is to help the group's "education and advocacy campaign" for the Baker-Shultz Carbon Dividends Plan.
Named after former secretaries of State James Baker and George Shultz, the plan calls for imposing a $40 tax on every ton of carbon emitted. The tax would be levied at its source and return revenue it generates to the public through dividend checks.
Former Sens. John Breaux (D-La.) and Trent Lott (R-Miss.), co-chairmen of the group's advisory board, are on the roster of the firm's lobbyists. Breaux and Lott launched the group last month (E&E News PM, June 20).
David Schnittger, a former top aide to ex-Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), and Bret Boyles, who was Lott's chief of staff in the Senate, are also on the account.
The push for a carbon tax has been under debate lately in the Republican caucus on Capitol Hill.
The House last week passed a resolution opposing a carbon tax, with only six Republicans voting against the measure. Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.) proposed his own carbon-pricing legislation this week.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/07/26/stories/1060091273

Return to headline | Return to top
Walt Disney Company Plans to Eliminate Plastic Straws by Mid-2019

Jul 26, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire

By Aris Folley

The Walt Disney Company on Thursday said it plans to eliminate single-use plastic straws and plastic stirrers at its locations across the world by mid-2019.
The company said it estimates the effort will result in the reduction of over 175 million straws and 13 million stirrers per year.
“Eliminating plastic straws and other plastic items are meaningful steps in our long-standing commitment to environmental stewardship,” Bob Chapek, the chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences, and Consumer Products, said in a press release. “These new global efforts help reduce our environmental footprint, and advance our long-term sustainability goals.”
The company said that it plans to transition to using refillable in-room amenities in its hotels and on its cruise ships over the next few years and said it estimates the move will reduce the plastics in guest rooms by 80 percent.
The company also said that it will be reducing the number of plastic shopping bags in its parks as well as on its cruise line, providing guests with the option to purchasing reusable bags “at a nominal price.”
“Disney has always been inspired by nature — and it is a uniquely powerful brand that inspires, educates, and entertains, all at the same time,” Dr. M. Sanjayan, CEO of Conservation International, said of the effort in the press release.
“Today’s announcement is more than about reducing single-use plastic waste, it’s also about showing millions of kids and adults from around the world the many ways we can change our daily habits to care for the oceans and protect nature that sustains us all,” Sanjayan said. “It also builds on Disney’s longstanding commitment to conservation and environmental stewardship, a legacy that stretches from the highlands of Peru to the islands of the South Pacific.”
The company’s announcement arrives after Starbucks announced its decision to stop using plastic straws at all of its stores worldwide.
Earlier this year, McDonald’s also said it would stop using plastic straws at all of its stores in the United Kingdom and Ireland.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/398959-walt-disney-company-plans-to-eliminate-its-use-single-use-plastic

Return to headline | Return to top

Add recipients

Suggested