Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 9/25/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Addressing the Alarm About Plastic Food Packaging (Letter to the Editor)
Sep 24, 2018 | Washington Post
By Steve Russell
Paul D. Thacker’s Sept. 23 Outlook essay, “Dangerous plastics, FDA silence,” stoked unfounded alarm about plastic food packaging — materials that reliably do their job of providing safety and performance benefits for consumers around the world. -
(ACC Mentioned) Tariffs Undermine Benefits of US Tax Cuts, Deregulation – ACC Economist
Sep 25, 2018 | ICIS
By Al Greenwood
The uncertainty surrounding NAFTA as well as tariffs that the US and China are imposing on each other are undermining the benefits that the US chemical industry has enjoyed from the nation's tax cuts and deregulation, the chief economist of the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said on Monday. -
(ACC Mentioned) Tariffs Harm U.S. Chemical Industry
Sep 25, 2018 | Wheeling Intelligencer
By Thomas J. Duesterberg
The Trump administration’s announcement of a new round of tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods has dangerous repercussions for the rapidly growing U.S. chemicals sector. -
(ACC Mentioned) Senate Examining Plastic Waste in Oceans
Sep 24, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Concern over the increasing levels of discarded plastics floating in the world's oceans has now spread into the U.S. Senate. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Hosts Hearings on Vehicle GHG Rule Rollback, 4th Circuit to Hear Pipeline CWA Suits
Sep 24, 2018 | Inside EPA - The Week Ahead
EPA is hosting three hearings this week to hear input on its proposal to freeze Obama-era vehicle greenhouse gas standards and overturn states' ability to implement stricter auto GHG rules -
(ACC Mentioned) Americas Petrochemicals Outlook, W/C Sep 24
Sep 25, 2018 | Platts
US ethylene trade participants said they will continue monitoring feedstock ethane pricing, alongside reduced production rates this week... -
(ACC Mentioned) TD’s Tailgate’s Latest Theme Bar: Spooky Halloween Fun
Sep 25, 2018 | Massillon Independent
By Edd Pritchard
That Halloween Bar opens Tuesday at 2234 Tuscarawas St. W in Canton. It’s the fifth themed bar this year year at TD’s Tailgate Grill. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Makers Expected to Face New EPA Fees as of Oct. 1
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical manufacturers should expect to be charged starting Oct. 1 for a wide range of services the EPA provides as it reviews new and existing chemicals. -
(ACC Mentioned) NGOs Protest EPA Plan to Revisit TSCA Risk Evaluation Rule
Sep 25, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A group of NGOs that has taken the US EPA to court over two of its core TSCA rules has protested against an agency request to revisit certain portions of its risk evaluation process. -
Ecological, Health Data on New Fluorochemicals Coming, EPA Says (1)
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA soon will expand the list of 549 fluorochemicals posted on its ChemView database, the agency told Bloomberg Environment. -
Results of Chemical Policy Lawsuits to Shape Law’s Implementation
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Health protections and manufacturers’ ability to use chemicals that long have kept industries humming hinge on coming court decisions about whether the EPA is correctly implementing the country’s chemicals law, a panel of congressional aides -
Day Care Centers in California Must Test Drinking Water for Lead
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
Prevention and tracking of childhood lead exposure will be getting a more thorough look after California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed three bills Sept. 22, including onethat requires licensed child care centers to test tap water for the heavy metal. -
California Becomes Eighth State to Require Licensed Child Care Centers to Test and Remediate Lead in Water
Sep 24, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Lindsay McCormick
Today, California Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation that will better protect children in the state from the harmful effects of lead exposure. -
Monsanto Roundup Cancer Trial Set for Feb. 25 in San Francisco
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joel Rosenblatt
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria has set the schedule for the first bellwether trial in federal multi-district litigation with more than 900 plaintiffs over the cancer-causing potential of an ingredient in Monsanto’s widely used Roundup herbicide. -
Echa's Rac Recruits New Members for OEL Work
Sep 25, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Echa's Risk Assessment Committee (Rac) has co-opted new members for work on occupational exposure limits (OELs) and authorisation applications. -
UK Government Publishes No-Deal Brexit REACH Notice
Sep 25, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK government has released guidance on REACH in the event that Britain leaves the EU on 29 March 2019 without a trade deal. The UK government has released guidance on REACH in the event that Britain leaves the EU on 29 March 2019 without a trade deal. -
(ACC Mentioned) Shale Gas Means Billions in Chemical Industry Investment
Sep 24, 2018 | Kallanish Energy
The availability of, and inexpensive price for, U.S. shale gas since 2010, has resulted in 333 chemical industry projects cumulatively valued at $202.4 billion being announced, with 53% of the investment completed/under construction, and 41% in the planning phase. -
Utilities Eye State Policies to Replace MATS but 'Co-Benefits' Fight Looms
Sep 24, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A power sector attorney is suggesting EPA use its imminent reconsideration of the Obama-era utility air toxics rule to replace it with state-led programs for curbing power plant emissions using air trading or other more-flexible controls, but that could trigger a fight... -
Oil Giants Pledge to Slash Methane Emissions
Sep 24, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Nick Sobczyk
A group of oil and gas giants today pledged to slash methane emissions by one-fifth by 2025. -
Deepwater Oil Rigs on Brink of Recovery After Years in Doldrums
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Wethe
Deep-sea oil drillers are once again riding the wave of investor enthusiasm that next year will be better for profits. -
Court Halts Atlantic Coast Forest Crossing
Sep 25, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Developers of the Atlantic Coast gas pipeline must stop the project's crossing of the Jefferson National Forest, a panel of judges for the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday. -
Pennsylvania Lawmakers Cleared to Intervene in DRBC Drilling Moratorium Lawsuit
Sep 24, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Three Pennsylvania state senators who want the Delaware River Basin Commission’s (DRBC) moratorium on hydraulic fracturing eliminated have been granted status to intervene in a federal lawsuit challenging the de facto drilling ban. -
Group Seeks Stepped up EPA Facility Safety Data After Court Expedites RMP
Sep 25, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
A public interest group is calling for stepped up enforcement of EPA administered industrial facility safety rules that require disclosure of facilities' data after a federal court expedited compliance with an Obama-era rule strengthening the agency's accident prevention program... -
Protecting Our Electric Grid
Sep 25, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.)
As the federal government considers the use of national security measures to protect our nuclear and coal-powered electric generation plants, we must be ready to enact a comprehensive strategy to protect the entire electric grid. -
Crude Oil Trains Won’t Need Special Brakes in Latest Rule Rollback (2)
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Rail companies that carry crude oil are getting a break on brake requirements from the federal government—a move that drew criticism from a consumer group. -
Trump Officials Roll Back Obama Oil Train Safety Rule
Sep 25, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Trump administration on Monday repealed a mandate that would have required trains carrying crude oil to use special brakes with new technology. -
Court Sets December Hearing for 2015 Ozone Rule Challenges
Sep 25, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold a hearing on EPA's 2015 ozone standard on Dec. 18, the court announced today. -
San Antonio Air Quality Decision Draws Advocate Lawsuit
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Karn Dhingra
Texas environmentalists challenged the EPA’s decision on whether the areas around San Antonio are in violation of federal ozone standards. -
Climate Summit Sparks Hope For Political Shift Amid Federal Inaction
Sep 24, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Curt Barry
California Gov. Jerry Brown's (D) Global Climate Action Summit (GCAS) last week spurred a variety of pledges by countries, states and local governments to reduce greenhouse gases, though a report released at the summit shows the pledges are not likely to counter... -
At N.Y.'s Climate Week Opening, a Welcome Mat for Investors
Sep 25, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By David Iaconangelo
The global climate action circuit arrived in New York yesterday, with corporate executives touting their green credentials and heads of state hoping to persuade investors to sink their dollars into renewable projects back home.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Addressing the Alarm About Plastic Food Packaging (Letter to the Editor)
Sep 24, 2018 | Washington Post
By Steve Russell
Paul D. Thacker’s Sept. 23 Outlook essay, “Dangerous plastics, FDA silence,” stoked unfounded alarm about plastic food packaging — materials that reliably do their job of providing safety and performance benefits for consumers around the world.
Modern plastic food packaging delivers crucial safety benefits, protecting food from contamination, bacteria, mold and dirt. It protects food during transportation and keeps it safe on store shelves longer. The Food and Drug Administration reviews the safety of food-packaging materials before they can be used in the first place. And where there is a need for an updated scientific review, the FDA does it. For example, as to the chemical BPA, after extensive research and the review of hundreds of studies about BPA’s safety, the FDA recently conducted the CLARITY-BPA Core Study — the largest ever undertakenand that has once again reaffirmed that BPA in food containers and packaging is safe. Government agencies worldwide agree.
We should always consider how to further improve our laws and regulatory systems. However, in calling on the FDA to seek continuous improvement, Mr. Thacker regrettably overlooked that the agency’s about 15,000 employees have already helped make food packaging in the United States best in class — a difficult feat that deserves our admiration.
Steven K. Russell, Washington
The writer is vice president, plastics, at the American Chemistry Council.
.......
Paul D. Thacker’s essay cited the American Academy of Pediatrics’s statement calling for U.S. food-additive regulatory process reforms because of evidence that chemicals in food colorings, preservatives and packaging promote disease in children.
As a public-health student, I believe a bottom-up approach is necessary to drive change. Advocacy groups are already providing consumer guidance on safer product choices, placing pressure on companies to reformulate their products.
Advocates for stricter regulation should highlight that certain populations suffer from disproportionately high exposure burdens. For example, low-income neighborhoods are exposed to high levels of BPA and have high incidences of obesity. While BPA exposure alone may not cause obesity, evidence exists that it may act as the tipping point when combined with other factors, such as stress and food insecurity. Such evidence highlights the limitations of individual responsibility and calls for regulation to protect vulnerable populations.
Anna Smith, Berkeley, Calif.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/addressing-the-alarm-about-plastic-food-packaging/2018/09/24/35fca082-bf4c-11e8-9f4f-a1b7af255aa5_story.html?utm_term=.d7ec1e20e4e4
-
(ACC Mentioned) Tariffs Undermine Benefits of US Tax Cuts, Deregulation – ACC Economist
Sep 25, 2018 | ICIS
By Al Greenwood
The uncertainty surrounding NAFTA as well as tariffs that the US and China are imposing on each other are undermining the benefits that the US chemical industry has enjoyed from the nation's tax cuts and deregulation, the chief economist of the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said on Monday.
The US has a trade surplus in chemicals, making the sector especially dependent on access to global supply chains and to export markets, said Kevin Swift. He made his comments during a luncheon hosted by The Houston Economics Club (THEC).
The US chemical industry has experienced a renaissance during the decade, benefitting from a strong US manufacturing base, access to abundant and affordable energy, a favourable regulatory environment and the state of both the US and global economy. The recent tax cuts provided the US with another boost, and business fixed investments have since increased.
These benefits could be offset to some degree by the tariffs, which the ACC has opposed.
"In summary, we feel at the ACC that the best tariffs are no tariffs. Zero," Swift said.
On the same day that Swift spoke, the latest round of tariffs by the US and China went into effect. The US tariffs covered $200bn worth of imports from China, and China's covered $60bn worth of imports from the US.
A total of 1,517 chemical and plastic imports from China, valued at $15.4bn, have now been targeted by three rounds of US tariffs, the ACC said. China has imposed retaliatory tariffs on more than 1,000 chemical and plastics exports from the US. These exports are worth $10.8bn, according to the ACC.
Now that both countries have adopted the tariffs, it could be difficult for them to back down and remove them without losing face, Swift said.
China is just one of the several foreign markets that could be disrupted by US trade policy. The US is in the midst of renegotiating its free-trade agreement with its North American neighbours, Canada and Mexico.
These two markets are important to the US because they are the destination of one-third of the nation's exports, Swift said. Out of those exports to Canada and Mexico, 44% are within the same company. In other words, a company's US division would export chemicals to its divisions in Canada and Mexico.
In fact, Canada and Mexico are the two largest US export markets for chemicals, followed by China, Belgium and Brazil, Swift said.
For imports, products from Canada and Mexico make up a quarter of the chemicals the US acquires from foreign markets, Swift said. Out of those imports from Canada and Mexico, 64% are intracompany.
These shipments are under quite a bit of uncertainty, because NAFTA talks are still ongoing. The US and Canada are still renegotiating NAFTA. Although the US and Mexico has reached a preliminary agreement, the text regarding the chemical portion of the rules of origin is still unavailable.
Swift noted the benefits of NAFTA, which allowed producers in all three countries to become more specialised and to gain economies of scale. Overall, companies have become more efficient and productive.
Terminating NAFTA would raise prices, destroy demand and jeopardise investments, he said. The prices of US chemical exports to Canada could rise by 0.8-4.4%. Those to Mexico could rise by 2.3% to 35.2%.
The tariff burden on US exports to the two country could range from $700m assuming most-favoured nation tariffs to $9bn assuming final-bound tariff levels, he said.
In the best-case scenario, US chemical exports to Canada and Mexico could fall by 4%, he said. Under the worst case, they could fall by 45%.
Terminating NAFTA would create uncertainty for 42% – or $85bn – of announced investments, he said.
Under the worst-case scenario, the US could lose $22bn in demand for chemical exports, Swift said. An additional $7bn could be lost from industries that use chemicals.
Before Swift's speech, credit agency Fitch Ratings said on 21 September that it lowered its forecasts for GDP growth.
It now expects China's economy to grow by 6.1% in 2019, down 0.2 point from its forecast in June, Fitch said. For the world, it should grow by 3.1%, down 0.1 point.
Despite the decline in forecast, global GDP is still growing above its historical average of 2.6%/year, Fitch said. This year, the world economy should grow by 3.3%, up from 3.2% in 2017.
The rationale behind renegotiating NAFTA was updating the decades-old deal and to address the trade imbalances among the US, Canada and Mexico.
For the tariffs against China, the US is imposing them because of alleged unfair policies and practices involving how it treats US technology and intellectual property. The nation has accused China of forcing US companies to transfer technology to their counterparts in the country.
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/09/24/10261631/tariffs-undermine-benefits-of-us-tax-cuts-deregulation-acc-economist/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Tariffs Harm U.S. Chemical Industry
Sep 25, 2018 | Wheeling Intelligencer
By Thomas J. Duesterberg
The Trump administration’s announcement of a new round of tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods has dangerous repercussions for the rapidly growing U.S. chemicals sector.
This huge U.S. industry has opposed the “tariff-first” trade policy of the administration, as the first rounds of Trump tariffs have resulted in retaliation patterns negative for this industry. Is there a better approach to taking on the obvious mercantilism of China and unfair trade practices in other parts of the world? A multilateral approach, in coordination with our traditional trading partners, would lessen the damage to the U.S. chemicals sector and could ultimately be more effective.
Now that tariffs on China have been expanded, there could be a sizable disruption to the promising growth path of this dynamic, export-oriented industry. With more than 800,000 workers and output well over $800 billion per year, the U.S. chemicals industry is one of the pillars of our manufacturing sector, and a key part of the Trump administration’s plan for economic revitalization. Corporate tax cuts and a lighter hand of regulation since 2016 have strengthened it considerably.
The shale gas revolution has been a powerful force for growth in recent years, as natural gas and associated liquids are the leading feedstock for the chemicals industry, accounting for around two-thirds of raw material input in its production. Competitors such as Europe, Japan, and China rely on more expensive petroleum for basic feedstock and are at an inherent disadvantage due to the cost differential. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) estimates that the new investment in chemicals production publicly announced and linked directly to shale gas is more than $200 billion since 2010 and counting.
Trade policy has aided the rise of this industry. The three biggest markets for U.S. exports, which account for nearly 20 percent of total output of all chemicals and plastics, are Canada, Mexico, and China. Exports to Mexico and Canada have more than tripled since the inception of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the United States had a trade surplus of around $20 billion in chemicals in 2017.
Pharmaceutical exports to China have grown by 650 percent since 2007. Although it has a small trade deficit with the Middle Kingdom in this sector, much of this is likely due to intra-company trade between U.S. firms operating in China and their parent in the United States. Seventy percent of all U.S. chemical imports are from intra-company trade.
Worldwide, the United States has a small trade deficit in chemicals, although it would be a surplus if imports of pharmaceuticals from Ireland were not counted. (U.S. firms relocated production of final product to Ireland in the last few decades to take advantage of its extremely low corporate tax rate.) The ACC estimates that a properly executed North American trade agreement could expand U.S. exports by another 34 percent in the next seven years.
According to the ACC, the Section 301 tariffs on China, which have already spurred retaliation by the Chinese, are a dangerous threat to the industry. In the second wave of U.S. tariffs imposed on Chinese products implemented in August, 54 percent of the products affected were in the chemicals and plastics industry. The U.S. list for the latest round of tariffs targets $15 billion worth of chemicals and plastics products from China, the majority of which have no alternative foreign sources of supply.
In its testimony to the U.S. Department of Commerce, the ACC notes that “significant disruptions of supply chains … would significantly disadvantage the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers.”
http://www.theintelligencer.net/uncategorized/2018/09/tariffs-harm-u-s-chemical-industry/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Senate Examining Plastic Waste in Oceans
Sep 24, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Concern over the increasing levels of discarded plastics floating in the world's oceans has now spread into the U.S. Senate.
On Wednesday the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing entitled "Cleaning Up the Oceans: How to Reduce the Impact of Man-Made Trash on the Environment, Wildlife, and Human Health?" Among those scheduled to appear are representatives of both the National Geographic Society and the plastics industry's principal lobbying group, the American Chemistry Council.
The hearing comes as governments worldwide are beginning to take action to reduce the environmental impact of plastics, a major industry along the Texas Gulf Coast which relies upon large supplies of oil and natural gas. A number of U.S. cities are already taxing the use of plastic bags and California recently banned restaurants from providing a plastic straw unless requested by the customer.
Roughly 8 million metric tons of plastic end up in the ocean each year, according to the environmental group Oceana. That threatens marine animals and sea birds, that can get caught up in plastic nets or six pack containers or mistakenly eat pieces of plastic thinking it to be food.
"Current projections show that increasing plastic production will outpace recycling, and if all else remains equal, the amount of plastic getting into the oceans will increase. And it will accumulate. This is clearly unsustainable," Jacqueline Savitz, Oceana's chief policy officer, wrote in a letter last week.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Senate-examining-plastics-waste-in-oceans-13254403.php
-
Sep 24, 2018 | Inside EPA - The Week Ahead
EPA is hosting three hearings this week to hear input on its proposal to freeze Obama-era vehicle greenhouse gas standards and overturn states' ability to implement stricter auto GHG rules. Meanwhile, a federal appeals court is poised to hear oral argument in two pipeline project challenges that involve key questions about Clean Water Act (CWA) sections 401 and 404 issues.Vehicle GHG Rule Hearings
EPA is hosting a series of public hearings on its joint proposal with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to freeze Obama-era vehicle GHG standards. The administration's plan would drastically scale back the federal requirements, by essentially gutting GHG requirements after model year 2020 and overturning the ability of California and numerous other states to implement the current standards.
The first hearing takes place Sept. 24 in Fresno, CA, followed by a hearing Sept. 25 in Dearborn, MI, and a third hearing on Sept. 26 in Pittsburgh, PA. Environmentalists, state officials, auto industry representatives and others are expected to testify.
Meanwhile, the California Air Resources Board -- which strongly opposes the rollback plan -- is slated to hold a Sept. 27-28 board meeting in Sacramento, CA, to discuss issues including the vehicle proposal, such as its pending planto force automakers to continue complying with its standards that align with the Obama-era measure. The board's meeting is being closely watched for signs of whether or how state officials may be seeking to avert a clash as the two sides continue talks on the issue.Pipeline Arguments
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit will hear oral argument Sept. 28 in two cases over pipeline project challenges that include arguments about CWA policy issues.
The first case, Appalachian Voices v. Virginia State Water Control Board, contests Virginia's CWA section 401 certification for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Section 401 governs states' approval of federally permitted pipelines and other projects. EPA is looking to revise its section 401 program but is facing major pushback from state regulators, including at least one GOP official, who question the need for changes and oppose any diminution of their power.
The second case, Sierra Club v. Army Corps of Engineers, challenges the Corps' approval of a CWA section 404 general permit that allows construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline across streams. Section 404 addresses dredge-and-fill permitting authority, and the Corps last month issued new guidance aimed at encouraging states to assume the authority.SAB Meeting
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) will hold a Sept. 26 teleconference to review two major agency issues: Its draft toxicological reviews of ethyl tertiary butyl ether and tert-butyl alcohol, and its framework for assessing biogenic carbon dioxide emissions from stationary sources. The panel will also hear “updates on current SAB projects and future topics,” according to the agency's announcement of the call.TSCA Reform
More than two years after President Barack Obama signed a major overhaul of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) into law, key participants in the reform process will speak at an event on its implementation. The Obama EPA proposed a host of rules to adopt the revised law, and the Trump administration finalized them -- but many face legal challenges.
The event is taking place Sept. 24 in Washington, D.C., and is hosted by the American Bar Association, American Chemical Society, and the Environmental Law Institute (ELI). Panelists include industry representatives, former agency officials, and former and current Senate staffers who were heavily involved in the reform effort.General Counsel
EPA General Counsel Matthew Leopold will speak about environmental law and policy issues at a Sept. 27 event hosted by the D.C. Bar. He will also discuss his “vision and priorities for the EPA Office of General Counsel, and the Administration's legal and regulatory reform efforts,” according to the event's website. Leopold could face questions on some of the many legal challenges facing the Trump administration, including litigation over its various air, water, climate and other regulatory rollbacks.CAAAC Meeting
EPA's Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC), which offers input to the agency on air and climate policy issues, will hold its next meeting Sept. 26-27 in Arlington, VA. CAAAC “advises EPA on economic, environmental, technical, scientific and enforcement policy issues,” says a Federal Register notice of the meeting, though no agenda of the topics slated for discussion was available at press time.PFAS
The Senate Homeland Security & Government Affairs' emergency management panel will hold a Sept. 26 hearing to receive testimony from EPA and other government officials on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). EPA is grappling with whether to craft an enforceable cleanup standard for PFAS, while private litigation and regulatory enforcement related to contamination from the substances increases due in part to a lack of such standards.
The Senate subcommittee's hearing on “The Federal Role in the Toxic PFAS Chemical Crisis” will hear from Peter Grevatt of EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, as well as officials from the Department of Defense, Department of Health and Human Services, and Government Accountability Office, among other witnesses.CAFO Roundtable
The Association of Clean Water Administrators, representing state and interstate water regulators, is hosting a Sept. 25-27 roundtable aimed at identifying “challenges and barriers” for concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) programs. EPA, state, and other officials will meet to share “new technologies, best management practices” and showcase “innovative state programs and initiatives.”Flame Retardants
An ad hoc committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will meet in Washington, D.C., Sept. 25-26 to craft a scoping plan for assessing the health risks from additive, nonpolymeric organohalogen flame retardants, including cancer and birth defects.Supreme Court
ELI will hold its annual preview of the upcoming Supreme Court term on Sept. 27 in Washington, D.C. Two law professors will discuss the potential major environmental cases facing the court, which currently has eight justices following the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy. The prospects for Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump's nominee to replace Kennedy, winning confirmation remain uncertain amid the sexual assault allegations he is facing.Climate Week
Climate Week NYC 2018 is taking place Sept. 24 through Sept. 30 in New York City where state and local government officials, environmentalists and others will meet to discuss climate policy and related issues. The event is likely to address the Trump administration's rollbacks of Obama-era GHG regulations.Endangered Species
The House Natural Resources Committee has scheduled a Sept. 26 hearing to hear from environmentalists, the Department of Interior, the farming sector and others on several bills to revise the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Among the measures under consideration is H.R. 6360 that would amend the ESA “to provide for greater certainty and improved planning for incidental take permit holders,” and H.R. 6344 that aims to encourage voluntary conservation efforts.Transportation Efficiency
The 50x50 Commission will host a Sept. 26 event in Washington, D.C., to outline its policy recommendations on improving the efficiency of the U.S. transportation sector with the goal of reducing its energy use by 50 percent by 2050. The Commission includes representatives from government, civil society and business groups focused on improving efficiency.Pesticide Spraying
EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs has scheduled a Sept. 27 webinar on “Best Practices for Aerial Application” that the agency says is aimed at “growers, pesticide applicators, pest management professionals, and other interested stakeholders who work in crop production.”National Clean Energy Week
Organized by renewable power groups and others, the National Clean Energy Week (NCEW) is taking place in Washington, D.C., from Sept. 24 through Sept. 28. As part of the agenda, NCEW is hosting a Sept. 26 Policy Makers Symposium where federal government officials, members of Congress and others will talk about clean energy policy issues such as barriers to developing new energy sources.Flooding And Droughts
EPA's Office of Research and Development and the Office of Water are hosting a joint Sept. 25 webinar on flooding and droughts. David Goldbloom-Helzner of the water office will discuss the agency's flood resilience guide for water and wastewater utilities, followed by a presentation from the water office's Jeff Fencil on EPA's drought response and recovery guide.Air Monitoring
Daniel M. Sullivan of the think tank Resources for the Future will give a Sept. 25 presentation at EPA to discuss satellite-based air monitoring. Sullivan will talk about a new research paper that uses such monitoring data to assess compliance with the agency's fine particulate matter national ambient air quality standards.Drinking Water
On Sept. 26, EPA has scheduled a webinar on “Removal of Organic Contaminants from Polyethylene Drinking Water Pipes by Flushing” where participants will “discuss the effectiveness of decontamination by flushing, and the employment of a numerical solution to the diffusion equation to predict flushing decontamination times.”CompTox Dashboard
Dr. Antony Williams of EPA's Center for Computational Toxicology will host a Sept. 27 event by webinar and in-person at Research Triangle Park, NC, to discuss the latest update to the CompTox Dashboard, which the agency calls “a one-stop-shop for chemistry, toxicity and exposure information for over 760,000 chemicals.” The newest update, Version 3, “adds a wealth of new features along with a complete user interface overhaul,” the agency says.Ocean Cleanups
The Senate Environment & Public Works Committee will hear from the American Chemistry Council, National Geographic Society, Sea Education Association, and Coca-Cola North America at a Sept. 26 hearing on “Cleaning Up the Oceans: How to Reduce the Impact of Man-Made Trash on the Environment, Wildlife, and Human Health?”
https://insideepa.com/week-ahead/week-ahead-september-24-2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Americas Petrochemicals Outlook, W/C Sep 24
Sep 25, 2018 | Platts
US OLEFINSUS ethylene trade participants said they will continue monitoring feedstock ethane pricing, alongside reduced production rates this week. Spot ethylene prices peaked at 23 cents/lb last week as ethane rose to 61 cents/gal. By Friday though, ethylene spot levels came down to 19.25 cents/lb FD USG, alongside a decline in ethane prices. Meanwhile, Chevron Phillips Port Arthur, Texas, facility, remains on a 60-day turnaround, while Dow's LHC #8 unit remains at reduced rates, sources said. Trade participants have also said they were expecting the recent increase in prices to impact September ethylene contracts. Some sources have said they expected the September contract to move up 2-3 cents, with some pushing for as high as 5 cents. US propylene trade participants are expected to confirm September contracts this week. September contract settlements emerged last week at a decline of 1 cent from August, but additional confirmation from other participants was still pending. Meanwhile, sources said Enterprise's Mont Belvieu, Texas, PDH unit and Dow's Freeport, Texas, PDH unit should be online this week following operational issues.
US POLYPROPYLENE
Trade sources said heading into this week, domestic PP prices were mostly holding steady as feedstock propylene contracts appeared to be moving down by 1 cent/lb. Some sources said prices could come down, but it would depend on the supplier and the grade of PP. The stable market also comes as Phillips 66's force majeure on PP remains in place at its Bayway refinery in Linden, New Jersey.
US AROMATICS
US benzene prices were expected to continue to hover in the mid- to upper-280's cent/gal range as the market works through the contract period for October. The market will remain well supplied in the near-term as derivative demand from the styrene segment is likely to remain soft, despite an ongoing maintenance at CosMar's Carville, LA, facility. US PX prices were expected to move slightly higher after posting steep declines last week on the heels of lower Asian PX and PTA pricing. MX prices will likely remain strong in the near term, with bids from September to October and sellers remaining absent. Toluene demand would remain contingent upon demand from the disproportionation segments and was expected to remain snug headed into October.
US PVC
October pricing negotiations for US export polyvinyl chloride were expected to ramp up this week after a producer increased an initial offer by $65/mt from September settlements to a range of $845-$860/mt FAS Houston. That offer came a day before a major Asian producer announced October offers down $50-$90/mt from September levels. While US pricing fell nearly 7% from late July to the September range of $780-$790/mt FAS Houston, Asian pricing rose in July and August, when producers rolled over pricing to September. However, market reaction was skeptical to an increase of that magnitude, with some participants saying it was more about setting a tone for October talks. Others insisted soft global demand required a sharp decrease in pricing in order to move product, particularly with traders holding robust inventories. Pricing for US caustic soda, a byproduct of chlorine used in the PVC chain, also was expected to decline further from $500/mt FOB USG as quotes to buyers in Europe had been heard below that level, according to market sources.
US POLYETHYLENE
September pricing direction for the domestic polyethylene market remained a bit unclear as some buyers continued to call for additional decreases while producers strengthened their call for increases with announcements for 3-cent October hikes on top of those already on the table for this month. The attempts to raise prices comes on the heels of decreases in August, while total polyethylene stocks were slightly higher in August even as total sales grew by 6% compared to July, preliminary American Chemistry Council showed earlier this month. Sources have attributed the latest increase attempt to shrinking margins as upstream ethane and ethylene prices firm, sources have said. But sources have said the latest announcements are an attempt to hold off additional decreases. In the export market, prices have edged slightly lower over the past week as market participants continued to push for a floor amid limited export options due to tariff-aided weak demand and currency devaluations in some key regions.LATIN POLYMERS
Demand for PE in Brazil is expected to remain soft this week as buyers continue holding out for a price floor, with a recent uptick in imports from the US further fueling those beliefs. Demand for domestic resin has weakened to the point that local producer Braskem has cut run rates on PE units in favor of exporting feedstock ethylene to Asia, where elevated pricing has made for favorable netbacks, sources said last week. Braskem did not respond to requests for comment on production and demand in Brazil. Along South America's Pacific Coast, market players were also confident that current US-China trade tensions will continue to lead to lower offers into markets from Colombia to Chile. Rising US inventories have led some Pacific market players to believe US producers are struggling to move PE into China. Buyers in Pacific markets have not shown a willingness to restock normal volumes in recent weeks.LATIN AROMATICS
Following last week's restart of Alpek's PTA plant in Altamira, current feedstock paraxylene inventory levels were reported to be enough for the startup but the company's normal supply will be restored soon, a market source said. The Alpek plant runs primarily on imported PX, sources have said.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/petrochemicals/092418-americas-petrochemicals-outlook-wc-sep-24
-
(ACC Mentioned) TD’s Tailgate’s Latest Theme Bar: Spooky Halloween Fun
Sep 25, 2018 | Massillon Independent
By Edd Pritchard
That Halloween Bar opens Tuesday at 2234 Tuscarawas St. W in Canton. It’s the fifth themed bar this year year at TD’s Tailgate Grill.
CANTON A pair of local businesses have teamed up for some Halloween fun this year.
The Shapiro Restaurant Group opens its Halloween-themed cocktail lounge today inside TD’s Tailgate Grill, at 2234 Tuscarawas St. W. It’s the fifth themed bar this year.
To decorate the bar, Shapiro worked with John Eslich, owner of Factory of Terror in Canton and the Haunted Schoolhouse & Laboratory in Akron.
Once they decided to go with the Halloween theme, Kim Shapiro, restaurant group co-owner, followed a suggestion to contact Eslich. As it turned out, Elsich needed advice on opening a bar at the Haunted Schoolhouse, Shapiro said. The two companies collaborated.
Crews from Factory of Terror assembled sets for the themed bar and installed them last week. There is a Victorian wall decorated with a collection of dolls and clowns, a haunted cabin and a crypt scene featuring floating ghosts and skeletons. There also are video loops tied into the displays.
“We took the spooky part from the haunted houses, but not the gore,” Shapiro said of the decorations.
Shapiro’s mixologists, meanwhile, crafted some seasonal beverages.
Specialty martinis include the Ghost in the Graveyard, a creamy white chocolate served with a tombstone cookie, the Abracadabra Martini, a color changing cocktail, the Barnabus Collins, a version of a Tom Collins and the Morgue-arita, a raspberry margarita served in a skull glass with gummy worms. A selection of seasonal beers and ciders, along with a caramel apple sangria will be available.
With Factory of Terror staff providing Halloween decorations, Shapiro’s staff is helping with the bar and specialty drinks at the Haunted Schoolhouse, which opened last weekend.
Shapiro said the Halloween-themed bar will remain open until Nov. 3, the weekend after the holiday. The bar opens at 4 p.m. Tuesday through Saturday.
After Halloween, the theme will change again, picking up where it started last year with Christmas.
Utica Summit VI
Companies that process plastics are expanding in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana, according to a report compiled by the American Chemistry Council.
The impact of that anticipated growth will be discussed during Utica Summit VI on Oct. 10 at Walsh University’s Barrette Center. The Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce and Shale Directories are presenting the daylong program.
Panels will consider the potential opportunities for the Appalachian Basin and Ohio, including whether the chemical industry will expand and the impact on highway, rail and river transportation. Group discussions include panels chemicals and plastics, economic development, logistics and supply chain, investing and natural gas power generation.
For more information or to register, visit www.UticaSummit.com.
Merger approved
Shareholders gave their approval to the merger of Marathon Petroleum Corp. and Andeavor during special meetings on Monday.
Shareholders also approved plans to issue shares in connection to the merger. But at the Marathon meeting, shareholders rejected a proposal to add two more directors to the board.
The merger, announced earlier this year, should close before Oct. 1, the company’s said in a press release. Marathon operates a refinery in Canton.
Massillon job fair
OhioMeansJobs Stark County has a job fair planned in Massillon for Oct. 3.
It’s the fifth year for the event, which will be from 9 a.m. to noon at the Massillon Recreation Center, 505 Erie St. N. Job seekers and veterans will have a chance to meet with employers that are actively hiring.
Co-sponsors for the event are the Massillon WestStark Chamber of Commerce, city of Massillon and its parks and recreation department, The Massillon Independent and ZipRecruiter, and Mix 94.1 and NewsTalk 1480 WHBC.
On the list
Diebold Nixdorf ranked sixth among the top 100 financial technology companies in the 2018 IDC Financial Insights FinTech Rankings.
It’s the 15th year for the rankings, which represent leading software, service and hardware providers to financial services companies worldwide. Providers are ranked according to 2017 revenue attributed to financial institutions.
IDC Financial Insights helps financial service businesses and IT companies, along with the suppliers that serve them, make technology decisions. It is a subsidiary of IDG, a technology, media, research and events company.
Diebold Nixdorf officials said in a statement announcing the rankings that placing in the top 10 shows the company’s leadership in connected commerce. The company noted that over the past year it introduced the DN Vynamic retail software suite and AllConnect Services. The company also collaborated with Mastercard and ACTV8me on platforms for banking and retail sectors.
http://www.indeonline.com/news/20180925/tds-tailgates-latest-theme-bar-spooky-halloween-fun
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Makers Expected to Face New EPA Fees as of Oct. 1
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical manufacturers should expect to be charged starting Oct. 1 for a wide range of services the EPA provides as it reviews new and existing chemicals.
The fees are among the issues likely to be discussed during a Toxic Substances Control Act forum that the Environmental Law Institute is hosting Sept. 24.
“We anticipate that the fees rule will be finalized in the near future,” an Environmental Protection Agency spokeswoman told Bloomberg Environment Sept. 21.
The agency did not disclose what the final fees will be, but in February it proposedcosts for medium and large chemical manufacturers ranged from $4,700 to $2.6 million. The EPA proposed that small businesses typically would pay 80 percent less than the standard fees.
Fee Bump
All of the fees that the EPA proposed would exceed the $2,500 fee most companies now pay to have the agency review new chemicals they would like to start selling.
Whatever final fees the agency charges are to help it recoup up to 25 percent of its costs of implementing the 2016 TSCA amendments.
The fees the EPA proposed covered services ranging from limited reviews it conducts for certain types of new chemical notices to detailed manufacturer-requested and paid-for analyses of the health and environmental risks existing chemicals may pose.
The EPA’s proposed fees rule said the agency would begin to assess fees starting Oct. 1 but that it would not collect those fees until the final rule is effective.
‘Effective Decision-Making’
3M Co., the Albemarle Corp., DowDupont Inc., and Eastman Chemical Co., were among the six chemical manufacturers and trade associations that Bloomberg Environment asked for comment on the coming fees.
“We hope that increased fees will help support more efficient and effective decision-making under TSCA,” the American Chemistry Council, which represents the bulk of the chemical industry, said in an emailed statement. “ACC continues to support the expansion of EPA’s authority to collect fees to help defray the costs of administering the law,” it said.
“If implemented as proposed, the TSCA user fees will hinder the market entry of new chemical substances, which are significant drivers of innovation in the U.S. economy,” Robert Helminiak, vice president of legal and government relations at the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates, told Bloomberg Environment.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/chemical-makers-expected-to-face-new-epa-fees-as-of-oct-1
-
(ACC Mentioned) NGOs Protest EPA Plan to Revisit TSCA Risk Evaluation Rule
Sep 25, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A group of NGOs that has taken the US EPA to court over two of its core TSCA rules has protested against an agency request to revisit certain portions of its risk evaluation process.
And they are asking the court to deny, in part, the EPA's motion.
This NGO action is the latest development in ongoing litigation over two TSCA framework rules, which govern how the agency conducts prioritisation and risk evaluation under the recently reformed law.
In 2017 a coalition of NGOs filed a lawsuit that claimed the rules had been dramatically skewed in industry's favour, with particular concern that the agency is excluding certain conditions of use from substance reviews.
Last month, the EPA requested that the court allow it to take a second look voluntarily at three provisions of its risk evaluation rule. Two of these deal with manufacturer-requested risk evaluations. The third allows for criminal penalties against parties that submit inaccurate or incomplete information.
But in a response, filed in the US court of appeals for the ninth circuit last week, the petitioning NGOs have asked the court to reject the motion because it relates to the two 'manufacturer-discretion provisions'.
The NGOs argue that because the EPA has sought remand for these without vacatur – that is, they will remain in effect while undergoing review – it would "effectively deny petitioners any opportunity to seek judicial review of [these] provisions, while leaving [them] in place indefinitely".
They also argued that the EPA's request has only signalled that it "intends" to revisit the contested portions, but it is not bound to do so.
The groups have urged the court to reject the request, or to require that the provisions be vacated if granted. They did not, however, protest against the agency’s plans to revisit the penalty provision, as the EPA has sought vacatur for that.
Intervenor brief
Even as the two sides debate these provisions, the broader lawsuit – and the central dispute over defining conditions of use – continues.
Last week, a diverse collection of industry organisations filed a so-called intervenor brief in support of the agency and its rules (see box).
In this, the intervening groups said that in passing the Lautenberg Act, "Congress required the agency to continuously complete chemical reviews on aggressive timelines, while affording EPA substantial discretion to determine and define the conditions of use it will consider in its evaluations."
To consider all possible uses of a chemical, as petitioners request, would "waste significant resources, as EPA would be required to investigate circumstances or conditions of use that do not present a real risk of exposure," they said.
The organisations called on the court to reject the petitioners' legal challenge. "EPA's rules appropriately balance Congress's goals of continuously evaluating on a meaningful timeline those priority chemicals that may present unreasonable risks," they wrote.
The industry brief follows a separate amicusbrief filed by animal rights group Peta last month. In it, the group supported the argument that the rule gives the EPA discretion to determine which conditions of use to evaluate.
Evaluating every condition of use would probably lead to increased animal testing, which runs counter to the requirement under the reformed law that the agency reduce such testing, Peta argued.
Looking ahead
Speaking at a recent TSCA seminar hosted by law firm Keller and Heckman, partner Herb Estreicher said if the NGOs prevail, risk evaluation will "become immensely more complicated and require more time due to the vast scope of past, present and future uses".
This, he said, would reduce the agency's ability to conduct assessments under statutory time limits, and could present challenges in structuring risk management rules that address legacy uses – including those that are covered by other agencies or other statutes than TSCA.
Oral arguments in the case, Safer Chemicals Healthy Families, et al v EPA, are expected to begin in early 2019.
Industry intervenors
American Chemistry Council (ACC)
American Coatings Association (ACA)
American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute (ACCCI)
American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA)
American Fuel & Petrochemicals Manufacturers (AFPM)
American Petroleum Institute(API)
Battery Council International(BCI)
Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America
EPS Industry Alliance (EPS-IA)
IPC International
National Association of Chemical Distributors(NACD)
National Mining Association (NMA)
Polyurethane Manufacturers Association (PMA)
Silver Nanotechnology Working Group (SNWG)
Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates (Socma)
Styrene Information and Research Center (Sirc)
Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG)
https://chemicalwatch.com/70510/ngos-protest-epa-plan-to-revisit-tsca-risk-evaluation-rule
-
Ecological, Health Data on New Fluorochemicals Coming, EPA Says (1)
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA soon will expand the list of 549 fluorochemicals posted on its ChemView database, the agency told Bloomberg Environment.
The expanded list will add new ones the agency reviewed and companies have manufactured, the agency said. The website will include information chemical manufacturers submitted for those chemicals, the Environmental Protection Agency said by email Sept. 22.
The agency didn’t say exactly how many will be listed or the specific information it will add. State agencies that are deciding whether to regulate new fluorochemicals have struggled to find safety information on the substitutes on EPA websites.
“I haven’t been able to get any specific information” from the EPA about the new fluorochemicals it has evaluated, Barbara Morrissey, a toxicologist with the Washington State Department of Health, told Bloomberg Environment on Sept. 20.
The dearth of information was a problem when the state’s Legislature was deciding whether to pass legislation restricting new and old fluorochemicals, she said.
Earlier this year the Legislature approved two laws: One restricted the chemicals’ use in paper food wrappers if safer alternatives are available, and the other prohibited fluorochemical-containing firefighting foams from being used to train firefighters and restricted some uses of the chemicals in such foams.
Those types of restrictions have the potential to affect companies such as Solvay SA, which makes fluorinated fluids for oil and grease-resistant food packaging; the Chemours Co., which makes many fluorochemicals some of which are approved for food contact packaging; and Chemguard Inc., which makes aqueous film-forming foam, which contains fluorochemicals and is used to quickly suppress jet fuel and other fires.
More Information ExpectedTypes of information the EPA will post includes physical-chemical, environmental fate, acute toxicity, repeated dose toxicity, and reproductive and developmental toxicity and cancer data, the EPA said.
The information will be available under the “Chemical Information” section of ChemView. Database users should click on the “Chemical Group” tag and select the term “Perfluorinated Substances List.”
The agency also described new resources it has been posting for states and other interested parties on its fluorochemicals website. The chemicals can accumulate over time in the human body and the environment, and there is evidence that exposure can harm human health, the website says.
How Much Data UnclearYet it’s not clear how much information the EPA obtained from chemical manufacturers.
Bloomberg Environment located details on three new fluorochemical submissions and enforceable restrictions, called “consent orders,” that manufacturers signed in 2012 and 2014. The three companies sought to make a total of seven fluorochemicals. What they provided to the EPA ranged from nothing to a full package of basic toxicity data.
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) doesn’t require chemical manufacturers to submit any specific toxicity, environmental fate, or other data when asking the EPA to allow them to produce new chemicals.
The law requires companies to tell the EPA the chemical structure and certain other basic information, which it uses to estimate potential toxicity and exposures.
Former OfficialsThe EPA sought a lot of safety, environmental persistence, and other data from the manufacturers of new fluorochemicals as it reviewed those chemicals, two former agency chemists told Bloomberg Environment.
Companies making new fluorochemicals had to generate more than $25 million worth of health, environmental fate, degradation data, and other information under agreements they made, the agency told Bloomberg Environment in October 2008.
All of the companies Richard Engler, a chemist who worked at the EPA from 1997 until 2015, worked with had to provide more than the usual amount of new chemicals data to get the agency’s approval to make their products, he said.
They did this either by providing it upfront during discussions with the agency or through consent orders that required “triggered” or “pended” data, Engler told Bloomberg Environment Sept. 20.
Triggered or pended data means the companies would have to provide the additional toxicity, chemical degradation, or other information if, for example, they exceeded certain production volumes or sought to make or use the chemicals in a new way, said Engler, who now directs chemistry at the Washington office of Bergeson & Campbell PC.
Subsequent “significant new use rules” then placed those requirements on other companies that wanted to make the same chemicals. EPA’s ChemView database, which listed 549 new and older fluorochemicals as of Sept. 21, showed that 502, or 91 percent, of those chemicals were regulated.
Yet companies rarely submit triggered or pended data, Richard Denison, lead senior scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund, told Bloomberg Environment Sept. 24.
Making whatever health and safety data it receives for new chemicals available and easy to find should be a core function the EPA fulfills as it implements the 2016 TSCA amendments, he said.
Lags in Posting DataReviewing submitted data to ensure it contains no confidential business information and formatting it to be easily searchable also takes time, and the EPA’s chemicals office has lacked the time it needs since TSCA was overhauled in 2016, Engler said.
Jim Kelly, manager of environmental surveillance and assessments at the Minnesota Department of Health, said he’s not certain the type of information chemical companies provided the EPA to get their chemicals approved would be enough to answer state health and environmental agencies’ questions.
But he’d like to see it.
“It would be helpful to know the findings of the EPA evaluation for each compound listed on the TSCA inventory, even if the specific compound name and structure were kept confidential,” Washington state’s Morrissey said.
The specific identities of 353 of the 549 new fluorochemicals the EPA reviewed and companies began to make are confidential business information that the agency is not allowed to reveal, the agency told Bloomberg Environment.
(Updated with Richard Denison's comments starting in the 21st paragraph.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/ecological-health-data-on-new-fluorochemicals-coming-epa-says-1
-
Results of Chemical Policy Lawsuits to Shape Law’s Implementation
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Health protections and manufacturers’ ability to use chemicals that long have kept industries humming hinge on coming court decisions about whether the EPA is correctly implementing the country’s chemicals law, a panel of congressional aides, attorneys, and former EPA officials said Sept. 24.
Rulings in two federal appeals court cases are expected to be issued in 2018 and 2019 in lawsuits opposing the Environmental Protection Agency’s interpretations of the 2016 Toxic Substances Control Act amendments.
The EPA’s interpretations and implementation of the law are the single biggest issue facing the agency, said Lynn Goldman, dean of George Washington University’s School of Public Health, and other panelists speaking at an Environmental Law Institute forum on TSCA.
The first core concern raised in a case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Safer Chemicals Healthy Families v. EPA, is whether the EPA has correctly decided it can exclude ways people can be exposed to chemicals from its analyses of the potential health and environmental risks those chemicals pose, said Goldman. She oversaw the EPA’s chemicals and pesticide offices during the Clinton administration.
Findings of risk may eventually lead to regulatory controls under the law.
Discretion to Exclude Uses?Dozens of trade associations representing manufacturers that make chemicals—and others that use them to make goods—have intervened in the lawsuits supporting the EPA’s conclusion that it has broad discretion to exclude chemical uses from its analyses.
Yet “that is specifically not what Congress wanted; that is a departure from what Congress intended,” said Michal Freedhoff, who helped negotiate the TSCA amendments on behalf of Democratic members of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Different people will have divergent views of how many uses of a new or existing chemical the EPA must review, Dimitri Karakitsos, a former senior staffer and lead TSCA negotiator for the Republicans on that same committee, said.
It is too early in the law’s implementation to say it is succeeding or failing, said Karakitsos, now a partner with Holland & Knight’s Washington office.
“What Congress did was a critical first step,” he said. But legislators recognized the law would have to be interpreted by the agency and that its implementation would have to be evaluated by courts, Karakitsos said.
“I’m in wait and see mode,” he said.
Confidential Business Information
The second core issue is being litigated in the D.C. Circuit and involves whether the EPA is taking seriously the law’s intention to give the public access to chemical information, Goldman said.
That case, Envtl. Def. Fund v. EPA, involves confidential business information provisions of the amended law. The amended law requires companies to substantiate any claim they make that the EPA has to keep information they provide out of the public’s eyes.
Bob Sussman—an attorney representing a large group of non-profits that filed two of three lawsuits opposing EPA’s implementation of TSCA—said he hasn’t seen the agency give the additional scrutiny TSCA required of chemical manufacturers’ confidential business information claims.
“An enormous amount of information is simply inaccessible to the public,” said Sussman, a former attorney and deputy at EPA, who most recently served during the Obama administration.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/results-of-chemical-policy-lawsuits-to-shape-laws-implementation
-
Day Care Centers in California Must Test Drinking Water for Lead
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
Prevention and tracking of childhood lead exposure will be getting a more thorough look after California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed three bills Sept. 22, including onethat requires licensed child care centers to test tap water for the heavy metal.
In addition to the testing at about 10,000 child care centers, the other bills also require the state to report blood-testing rates and make data about lead testing, exposure, sources, and removal efforts on a county-level available to the public. They were developed as a package by the Environmental Working Group.
“There is no safe level of lead and the neurological damage it can cause in young children can last a lifetime,” the organization said in a news release. “That is why it is so critical the state take these additional steps to protect California’s most vulnerable population from further exposure to lead.”
Brown vetoed a fourth bill that would have set goals for blood-level screening tests in at-risk toddlers that match federal requirements, saying the move was premature because the state was working to improve its screening rates.
“Updated and more thorough data on periodic screening tests is being developed with the Department of Public Health to assist in tracking compliance,” Brown wrote.
Requirement in Eight States
With the signature, California becomes the eighth state to require child care centers to test for lead, which can cause developmental delays, speech, and language problems, and nervous system damage in children. Toddlers who could be drinking formula mixed with water can be especially at risk if it contains lead, Susan Little, a senior advocate with the Environmental Working Group told Bloomberg Environment Sept. 24.
Under the new law, any licensed day care center built before 2010 will have to test for lead between January 2020 and January 2023 and then every five years. The centers, which serve about 700,000 children, will have to notify parents if elevated levels of the metal are detected and provide alternative drinking water sources.
Connecticut, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington state also require testing of water at child care centers. A 2017 state law requires water systems that serve schools with buildings built before 2010 test drinking water for lead by July 2019.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/day-care-centers-in-california-must-test-drinking-water-for-lead
-
Sep 24, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Lindsay McCormick
Today, California Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation that will better protect children in the state from the harmful effects of lead exposure. AB 2370, sponsored by Assembly Member Chris Holden and passed unanimously by state lawmakers, sets forth new requirements for licensed child care centers to test their drinking water for lead and use an alternative source if elevated lead levels are discovered.
EDF recently released a report highlighting child care facilities as a major gap in protecting kids from lead in water. As children under the age of six are most vulnerable to harm from lead, these facilities should be prioritized for reducing exposure. Compared to lead in schools, which has garnered national attention, child care has gone relatively unnoticed.
We applaud California for taking this important step to expand its school lead in water testing mandate to include child care. With the new legislation, California joins seven other states that have enacted such requirements. The state’s approach is largely similar to other states but it has an unusual feature – laboratories must directly report results to the state, which then will post the results online. Most of the details – including the definition of an elevated lead level in drinking water that warrants shutting off the fixture – are left to the state’s child care licensing agency to define in rulemaking.
California’s new law requires licensed centers built prior to 2010 to test their drinking water for lead between January 2020 and January 2023 and continue testing every five years thereafter. Environmental Working Group (EWG) sponsored the legislation (as part of a suite of California bills addressing lead) as well as the accompanying budget appropriation. Notable aspects of California’s requirement and key differences between other states with child care lead in water testing requirements include:
· Reporting and notification: Like several of the other states, California’s new law requires facilities to notify parents of the testing and results. However, California has gone a step further by requiring labs to electronically report results directly to the State Water Resources Control Board – which then will make testing results available online. To our knowledge, only New York City, and no other state is currently publicly posting child care lead in water test results.
· Funding: Notably, California is providing financial support for some facilities through grants from the State Water Resources Control Board. $5 million was approved in the state’s latest budget to cover testing, remediation, and technical assistance. Funding priority will go to centers that serve younger children, have 50% or more children receiving subsidized care, and are not “chain” centers.
· Facilities covered: Unfortunately, California’s new law is limited to child care centers, excluding those family home-based child care facilities that are more likely to have lead service lines (LSLs). This differs from several other recent state requirements, such as those in Illinois, New Jersey, and Oregon, which apply more broadly to both centers and home-based facilities.
· Sampling frequency: Resampling is important to demonstrate reduced lead levels over time. California’s new law requires resampling just every 5 years. This is consistent with several other states, such as New Hampshire, Oregon, and Washington, which each require resampling every 5-6 years. In contrast, Illinois and Connecticut require resampling every year or two years, respectively.
Most of the specifics – including sampling protocol, requirements to ensure the collection and submission of valid water samples, the standard for action (i.e., what is an “elevated lead level” that triggers action), and remediation requirements – remain to be defined through regulations. The State Department of Social Services, in consultation with the State Water Resources Control Board, is required to promulgate such rules by January 2021. In implementing the law, we encourage California to develop robust regulations, specifically by:
· Adopting a health-protective standard to define an elevated lead level. Based on our pilot project, EDF recommends setting an action level of 5 ppb or below to investigate and remediate interior lead sources.
· Specifying practical and effective remediation options for lead at the tap. The rules should provide remediation options (such as fixture replacement, flushing, aerator cleaning with vinegar, and filtration), but allow facilities flexibility in developing their own remediation plans.
· Incorporating lead service line investigation and removal. When present, LSLs are the largest source of lead in water – and can unpredictably release lead particulates into water. If identified, the facility should work with the local water utility to remove the LSL. California recognized this issue when it enacted SB 1398, which requires the development of LSL inventories and a plan for their removal (though its impact may be limited by the statute’s definition of service line, learn more here). It is unclear how the implementation of AB 2370 and SB 1398 will be coordinated; ideally, LSL replacement at child care facilities would be prioritized.
With over 700,000 children in licensed facilities in California, the new legislation is an important step to better protecting young kids. EDF encourages other states to follow California’s leadership and implement similar requirements for testing and remediation in child care facilities.
http://blogs.edf.org/health/2018/09/24/california-becomes-eighth-state-to-require-licensed-child-care-centers-to-test-and-remediate-lead-in-water/
-
Monsanto Roundup Cancer Trial Set for Feb. 25 in San Francisco
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joel Rosenblatt
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria has set the schedule for the first bellwether trial in federal multi-district litigation with more than 900 plaintiffs over the cancer-causing potential of an ingredient in Monsanto’s widely used Roundup herbicide.
Judge Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California said during a Sept. 24 hearing that he wants to schedule a second trial in early May.
A San Francisco jury in August awarded a $289 million judgment in favor of a groundskeeper who was exposed multiple times to glyphosate, the ingredient in question.
Chhabria proposed to hold a hearing around Feb. 4, 2019, over Monsanto’s final arguments to get multiple trials thrown out based on the grounds that the plaintiffs have insufficient evidence.
He set a final pretrial conference for Feb. 13, 2019, and jury selection for Feb. 20, 2019.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/monsanto-roundup-cancer-trial-set-for-feb-25-in-san-francisco
-
Echa's Rac Recruits New Members for OEL Work
Sep 25, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Echa's Risk Assessment Committee (Rac) has co-opted new members for work on occupational exposure limits (OELs) and authorisation applications.
Earlier this year, the European Commission announced its intention to reassign the responsibilities of DG Employment's Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (Scoel) to Rac. This followed concerns over an overlap between OELs required under occupational safety and health (OSH) legislation and workplace derived no-effect levels (Dnels) under REACH.
Next year, Echa intends to publish a short guidance document on deriving OELs. This will consolidate aspects of the Rac-Scoel joint taskforce reports, Scoel's 2018 methodology and current Echa guidance, Rac chair Tim Bowmer told Chemical Watch. "The Scoel methodology has actually incorporated many of the aspects we had been discussing in the first and second joint joint taskforce reports. So in actual fact, a lot of the previous differences have been resolved," Dr Bowmer said.
Rac will evaluate proposals for OELs under the chemical agents Directive and the carcinogens and mutagens Directive, when requested by the Commission, as it did with five substances in 2017-18. "Dnels have their own place under REACH as an integral part of the risk assessment of chemicals," confirmed an Echa spokesperson.
In March, Rac recommended EU-wide OELs for three genotoxic carcinogens: benzene, acrylonitrile and nickel, including its compounds. DG Employment's working party on chemicals, a sub-group of the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work, is currently assessing whether these are feasible and could be applied by industry.
In June 2017, Rac adopted scientific opinions on occupational exposure for two carcinogens: MOCA and arsenic and its inorganic salts.
Rac is expecting a "continued high workload" next year, with a large number of harmonised classifications, applications for authorisations and many restrictions. Further mandates for OELs may be part of this work, said Dr Bowmer.
https://chemicalwatch.com/70501/echas-rac-recruits-new-members-for-oel-work
-
UK Government Publishes No-Deal Brexit REACH Notice
Sep 25, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK government has released guidance on REACH in the event that Britain leaves the EU on 29 March 2019 without a trade deal.
The paper – Regulating chemicals (REACH) if there’s no Brexit deal – spells out how businesses producing, registering, importing or exporting chemicals would be affected.
In a no-deal scenario, the government says it would ensure national legislation replaces EU legislation via the EU Withdrawal Act. It would also establish a national regulatory framework and build domestic capacity to deliver functions currently performed by Echa.
The legislation would preserve REACH "as far as possible", while making technical changes because of the UK’s departure, according to the notice released 24 September.
To preserve continuity for business, the government says it will:
· transfer existing REACH registrations held by UK-based companies directly to the UK’s replacement for REACH, legally ‘grandfathering’ the registrations into the British regime. Grandfathering is the act of exempting something from new legislation or requirements;
· set up a transitional "light-touch" notification process for UK companies importing chemicals from the EEA before the UK leaves the EU that do not hold a REACH registration. This reduces the risk of supply chain disruption for companies currently relying on a registration held by an EEA-based company; and
· carry into the UK system all existing authorisations to continue using SVHCs held by UK companies.
Should the UK leave the EU without a deal, companies with substances registered under REACH would no longer be able to sell into the EEA market without transferring their registrations to an EEA-based organisation.
UK downstream users currently importing chemicals from an EEA country would face new registration requirements, the paper says. Under Britain’s replacement for REACH, importers would have a duty to register chemicals. Similarly UK downstream users of authorisations would no longer be able to rely on authorisation decisions addressed to companies in the remaining EEA countries.
What UK firms need to do
To ensure it has the information needed to regulate the safe use of chemicals, the government has asked UK companies to take action in the following areas.
· businesses with existing EU REACH registrations being automatically grandfathered into the UK regime or authorisations would have to validate their existing registration with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), opening an account on the new UK IT system and providing basic information on their existing registration within 60 days of the UK leaving the EU;
· companies with grandfathered registrations would have two years from the day the UK leaves the EU to provide the HSE with the full data package that supported their original EU registration and is held on Echa's IT system;
· businesses that imported chemicals from the EEA before the UK leaves the EU (but which did not have an EU REACH registration), would need to notify the HSE and provide basic data on the chemicals within 180 days of Britain’s withdrawal, instead of having to undertake a full registration immediately. This would be an interim arrangement for those importers and they would need to move to full registration at a later date following a review of this approach; and
· importing businesses would be responsible for identifying appropriate risk management measures and recommending them to their customers.
In a no-deal scenario if a business wishes to place new chemicals on both the EEA and UK markets they would have to make two separate registrations, one to Echa and one to the UK. The information and data package needed would be the same for both, the government's paper says.
https://chemicalwatch.com/70518/uk-government-publishes-no-deal-brexit-reach-notice
-
(ACC Mentioned) Shale Gas Means Billions in Chemical Industry Investment
Sep 24, 2018 | Kallanish Energy
The availability of, and inexpensive price for, U.S. shale gas since 2010, has resulted in 333 chemical industry projects cumulatively valued at $202.4 billion being announced, with 53% of the investment completed/under construction, and 41% in the planning phase.
Fully 68% of the total is direct foreign investment or includes a foreign partner, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) reported. Project types include new facilities and capacity expansions, Kallanish Energylearns.
“This is an exciting milestone for American chemistry and further evidence that shale gas is a powerful engine of manufacturing growth,” said ACC president and CEO Cal Dooley. “The U.S. remains the most attractive place in the world to invest in chemical manufacturing. We look forward to continuing to transform energy into a stronger economy and new jobs.”
ACC analysis shows $202.4 billion in capital spending could lead to $292 billion annually in new chemical and plastics industry output and support 786,000 jobs across the economy by 2025.
A note of caution is in order however, the ACC warns. U.S. manufacturers often rely on inputs unavailable or made in the U.S. to create products that cost less yet perform at the high level downstream customers expect.
“Protectionist trade policies such as tariffs and quotas unnecessarily raise the costs of those inputs, deter innovation and economic growth, and could ultimately weaken our country’s competitive advantage,” the ACC said.
Hours after President Trump announced the third round of U.S. tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese imports, China responded with its own levies of up to 10% on $60 billion worth of U.S. products.
The U.S. tariffs start at a rate of 10%, before rising to 25% at the end of the year, according to the ACC. They went into effect yesterday and apply to thousands of Chinese products.
China also imposed its tariffs on more than 5,000 items yesterday.
The third U.S. list includes 1,363 chemicals and plastics products, of which the U.S. imported $12.9 billion worth from China in 2017, according to ACC and International Trade Commerce (ITC) data.
http://www.kallanishenergy.com/2018/09/25/shale-gas-means-billions-in-chemical-industry-investment/
-
Utilities Eye State Policies to Replace MATS but 'Co-Benefits' Fight Looms
Sep 24, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A power sector attorney is suggesting EPA use its imminent reconsideration of the Obama-era utility air toxics rule to replace it with state-led programs for curbing power plant emissions using air trading or other more-flexible controls, but that could trigger a fight over whether the programs will have a “co-benefit” of reducing other air pollution.
EPA as early as this week could formally launch the reconsideration process, sources say, which the agency has said will include assessing the validity of the previous administration's threshold finding that the utility mercury and air toxics standards (MATS) rule was “appropriate and necessary” under the Clean Air Act. Scrapping that finding would undo the basis for the rule and allow the agency to scrap it entirely, though many utilities have already complied with it.
Although emissions controls are in place across much of the industry, abandoning MATS would allow power plants to run controls less or not at all, potentially hiking emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).
EPA Office of Air & Radiation Assistant Administrator William Wehrum has repeatedly expressed opposition to the MATS rule and the finding that regulating power plants as an air toxics source under Clean Air Act section 112 was appropriate and necessary even after consideration of costs. He has said the reconsideration could allow the agency to “eliminate this regulation” or alternatively take steps to weaken its requirements.
Informed sources tell Inside EPA that EPA is poised to send for White House Office of Management & Budget review a proposal to revoke the appropriate and necessary finding.
EPA did not respond to a request for comment, but sources say the proposal from EPA could take the form of a proposed rule to revoke the finding, or the agency could issue an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) to solicit comment on how this can be done. EPA could also propose a revocation of the MATS emissions standards now, and take comment on alternatives, or simply move to scrap the rule in its entirety.
Wehrum has floated the possibility of using the air law's risk and technology review (RTR) process -- under which EPA must assess for potential revision its HAP standards eight years after their implementation -- to make changes to MATS. Environmentalists have warned RTRs cannot be used to soften HAP limits.
But former EPA attorney Joseph Goffman, now executive director of Harvard Law School's environmental and energy law program, tells Inside EPA that a MATS RTR rulemaking is unlikely.
Goffman believes that one of Wehrum's goals is to revive an effort to delist power plants as a section 112 air toxics source and thereby avoid further review and regulation under that section.
But utilities would strongly oppose any regulatory void given the billions of dollars many have invested in MATS compliance, sources say. Nor would scrapping the MATS rule be politically realistic, given the likely attacks EPA would face over not having any rules for regulating utility mercury and other air toxics, they add.
“Pulling out the rug” on MATS entirely would be unwise, says a second industry legal source. “The politics of mercury are poisonous,” the source adds, suggesting the agency could offer more-flexible alternatives to the rule.
Section 111(d) Regulation
The first power sector attorney suggests that rather than work within the confines of the current rule, the agency return to the Bush-era policy of regulating plants under section 111(d), which applies to existing sources of air pollution.
Similar to the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP) rule for existing power plants, which the Trump EPA is now seeking to roll-back, under section 111(d) EPA would require that states determine a “best system of emissions reduction” (BSER) for power plants, then task them with writing crafting compliance plans.
The section also gives states flexibility, meaning plans could include options such as air trading. Section 111(d) is a broad, “catch-all” provision that is less expensive and less prescriptive than section 112, the source says.
EPA could also potentially bolster its legal case for a utility sector section 111(d) rule because of a provision in the air law that says section 111(d) sources cannot be subject to section 112(d) HAP regulation.
While the attorney is urging EPA to advance a section 111 approach, the agency is currently proposing to replace the CPP with a narrower section 111(d) Affordable Clean Energy rule. Proponents of scrapping MATS could argue that the regulation of power plants under section 111(d) precludes an air toxics policy.
But replacing MATS with a section 111(d) rule would require delisting of power plants as a section 112 HAP source, a step that environmentalists say the agency would struggle to take.
EPA “would need either to have a valid basis for overturning the revised appropriate and necessary finding under section 112(n), or identify a basis for 'delisting' power plants under Section 112(c)(9), which establishes a set of rigorous health-based findings EPA must make before removing a power plant from the list,” one environmentalist attorney says.
“I think the factual record would pose serious challenges for them with either of these. But Bill Wehrum seems intent upon relitigating Bush era battles that he lost,” the source adds.
President George W. Bush's EPA tried to delist power plants as a section 112 HAP source, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the effort. The Obama EPA then implemented MATS, which survived a lengthy legal battle at the D.C. Circuit and Supreme Court.
And Goffman warns that delisting power plants and crafting a state-led section 111(d) rule for their non-greenhouse gas emissions poses the risk of a reduction in emissions controls under more-flexible programs than hard emissions limits. For example, a state emissions trading program could set limits on power plant emissions but some utilities could comply through the purchase of emissions credits rather than reducing pollution.
While the details of EPA's pending proposal remain unclear, Goffman said that using section 111(d) would be “potentially quite damaging” in terms of public health. EPA would also have to justify its decision to delist power plants as a section 112 source category, a prerequisite to making such a switch.
Emissions Co-Benefits
A key issue in any new air pollution regulatory system for power plants would be the relative costs and benefits of the alternative, and EPA's possible disregard of co-benefits of regulating non-target pollutants.
The Obama EPA justified the 2011 MATS by counting the health benefits of reducing fine particulate matter (PM2.5) as a co-benefit, outweighing the projected implementation costs at the time. EPA estimated the benefits of mercury reduction at between only $4 million and $6 million annually, but estimated PM2.5 benefits in the billions of dollars, to give a total estimated benefit of between $37 billion and $90 billion, far outstripping the annual estimated costs of $9.6 billion. Some estimates put the actual cost to comply so far at around $18 billion.
But industry and GOP opponents of the rule have long argued that EPA cannot use PM2.5, which is not a HAP, in a rule aimed at regulating air toxics. PM2.5 is regulated under other air law provisions, they argue. And without counting the PM2.5 benefits of a power plant rule, the rule's projected health benefits could plunge.
Indeed, the Trump administration in a June ANPR on cost-benefit analysis has already contemplated shifting its approach to counting co-benefits, citing the revised MATS cost finding required by the high court and issued by the Obama EPA in 2016 as an example of a rule that may fall afoul of a revised approach. The industry sources expect the MATS reconsideration to attack the previous administration's cost-benefit findings.
Legal sources say the agency could opt to propose weakening the MATS standards, based on a new cost-benefit analysis. But this would be complicated by not only the co-benefits issue, but new scientific evidence available since 2011 showing more harm to public health from PM2.5 than was previously thought likely. Also, implementation of MATS appears to have been less expensive than initially projected by EPA.
On co-benefits, the first power industry attorney advocates that a section 111 (d) system “could actually have even greater reductions” of HAPs than MATS, because states could ensure that industry uses the most cost-effective and efficient systems of emissions reduction. The greater efficiency of a 111(d) rule could lower costs relative to MATS, making it easier to justify the new rule under cost-benefit analysis, the source says.
Also, the co-benefits issue could result in the ultimate vacatur of MATS, if the rule ever again reaches the Supreme Court, where the co-benefits issue could again be a question. The court in its initial consideration of MATS in Michigan v. EPA did not rule on the merits of that question, although the question arose at oral argument, where Chief Justice John Roberts, for one, was skeptical of the inclusion of PM2.5 co-benefits.
Goffman said that section 111(d)'s BSER “does not put cost-benefit analysis into play quote so squarely” as section 112 does. Although cost and feasibility are factors under BSER, he said the agency “could fairly easily sidestep” the co-benefits question, because BSER “does not really compel the agency to take on the issue."
Goffman argued that another objective of the MATS reconsideration process appears to be a bid by the Trump EPA at “every opportunity” to “limit the benefits calculus in any cost-benefit analysis.”
But the environmentalist attorney warns that “the exclusion of co-benefits is indefensible, irrational, bizarre . . . and therefore extremely likely to encounter difficulties on judicial review,” with environmental groups and Democratic-led states likely to sue if EPA finalizes a rule that weakens or scraps MATS entirely.
Excluding monetized co-benefits it seems likely that the section 111(d) alternative would be weak, “perhaps extremely weak,” compared to MATS, the source says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/utilities-eye-state-policies-replace-mats-co-benefits-fight-looms
-
Oil Giants Pledge to Slash Methane Emissions
Sep 24, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Nick Sobczyk
A group of oil and gas giants today pledged to slash methane emissions by one-fifth by 2025.
The Oil and Gas Climate Initiative — an international climate effort aimed at reducing emissions in the oil and gas sector — announced an effort to cut its collective average methane intensity to below 0.25 percent, compared with the 2017 baseline of 0.32 percent.
The initiative includes major international players, such as BP PLC and Royal Dutch Shell PLC. And last week, OGCI announced its first U.S.-based members, with the addition of Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp. and Occidental Petroleum Corp. (Greenwire, Sept. 20).
The cuts would reduce emissions of methane, a highly potent greenhouse gas, by 350,000 metric tons each year, OGCI said today.
"Our aim is to work towards near zero methane emissions from the full gas value chain in support of achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement," OGCI companies said in a statement. "We have worked to make our ambition concrete, actionable and measurable, helping to ensure that natural gas can realize its full potential in a low-emissions future."
The announcement mirrors efforts at individual companies in recent months to reduce methane emissions, including Exxon, BP and, most recently, Shell.
The goal is to slash methane emissions even further to 0.20 percent, which would be a reduction of one-third.
The Environmental Defense Fund praised the pledge but also warned companies will have to "adopt more robust measurement protocols" to get real reductions.
EDF President Fred Krupp also noted that the rest of the industry in the U.S. often lags behind, arguing that voluntary reductions only go so far.
"This is a good strong goal, and these companies deserve real credit for that," he said in a statement. "The OGCI ambition sets a new bar by which the whole industry will be measured."
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/09/24/stories/1060099487
-
Deepwater Oil Rigs on Brink of Recovery After Years in Doldrums
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Wethe
Deep-sea oil drillers are once again riding the wave of investor enthusiasm that next year will be better for profits.
But this time there seems to be a bigger chance it will actually happen, according to analysts at Credit Suisse Group AG and Morgan Stanley.
Some of the world’s biggest owners of rigs that drill oil wells in more than two miles of water, including Transocean Ltd., Ensco Plc and Diamond Offshore Drilling Inc., saw rallies in their shares near the end of 2016 and 2017, only to see their stocks tumble by the start of the following year as reality set in.
“So here we are in mid-September and the trade beckons again,” James Wicklund, analyst at Credit Suisse, wrote Sept. 24 in a note to investors. “This time, however, we are one year closer to a recovery after 4 1/2 years of decline, with the drilling contractors sounding more optimistic than in years, with small, light green shoots being seen.”
Offshore drillers have been among the most beaten-up names from the worst crude-market crash in a generation, due to an oversupply of their vessels and high operating costs. This year marks the lowest in projected offshore spending since oil prices first fell in 2014, according Morgan Stanley. Explorers are expected to boost spending 45 percent to $188 billion by 2022, the bank wrote Sept. 18 in a note to investors.
Meanwhile, major oil trading houses are predicting the return of $100 crude for the first time since 2014.
Offshore vs. Shale
The rise of offshore drilling is also coming as shale work back on land is hitting a speed bump, according to Rystad Energy.
The renewed interest in offshore is driven by a “steep reduction” in offshore costs that’s allowing explorers to turn a profit at lower oil prices, Audun Martinsen, head of oilfield research at Rystad, said earlier this month in a statement.
Shale spending is expected to reach $120 billion this year, short of Rystad’s $160 billion estimated spending globally offshore.
With more unused rigs still left to be scrapped around the globe, though, the higher utilization of deep-water vessels won’t translate into significantly higher rental prices until late next year, Wicklund wrote.
No. 1 deep-water driller Transocean, which said earlier this month it could reactivate as many as three rigs a year during the recovery, has climbed about 40 percent since early April. In that same time, smaller rival Rowan Cos. is up by more than 60 percent.
Noble Corp., which has nearly doubled in value in little more than five months, announced last week the purchase of a newly built shallow-water rig, known as a “jack-up” because of its legs that extend to the sea floor and lift its body out of the water.
“The deep-water space, obviously, as anybody who has followed this industry knows, always is lagging in the recovery period as it is this year,” Julie Robertson, chief executive officer at Noble, told investors in New York on Sept. 5. “The jack-up market is well underway to recovery, which is very pleasing to be able to say after this long cycle that we’ve been in.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/deepwater-oil-rigs-on-brink-of-recovery-after-years-in-doldrums
-
Court Halts Atlantic Coast Forest Crossing
Sep 25, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Developers of the Atlantic Coast gas pipeline must stop the project's crossing of the Jefferson National Forest, a panel of judges for the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday.
Chief Judge Roger Gregory, a Clinton appointee, halted tree-cutting in the southern Virginia forest pending the court's consideration of environmentalists' challenge of Forest Service permits. Judges James Wynn and Stephanie Thacker concurred.
"Because of this decision, Atlantic's chain saws will remain idle until the court has had an opportunity to decide our case," said Southern Environmental Law Center attorney D.J. Gerken. "For the same reason, [the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission] should stop construction elsewhere until these issues are resolved, to avoid wasting ratepayer dollars building a route that may not be viable."
The Atlantic Coast pipeline will carry Appalachian gas for 600 miles from West Virginia to North Carolina.
Oral arguments on Forest Service and state permits for the Atlantic Coast project are set for Friday.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/09/25/stories/1060099595
-
Pennsylvania Lawmakers Cleared to Intervene in DRBC Drilling Moratorium Lawsuit
Sep 24, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Three Pennsylvania state senators who want the Delaware River Basin Commission’s (DRBC) moratorium on hydraulic fracturing eliminated have been granted status to intervene in a federal lawsuit challenging the de facto drilling ban.
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania granted the senators’ motion to intervene earlier this month after a federal appeals court in Philadelphia overturned the lower court’s 2017 decision to throw out the lawsuit that was filed by a small exploration and production company. The senators' previous effort to intervene was denied by the lower court after it found they had no standing.
The Wayne Land and Mineral Group (WLMG) filed a lawsuit against the DRBC in 2016, arguing that the commission lacks authority under the Delaware River Basin Compact to review and approve natural gas development. The senators were allowed to intervene after a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit remanded the case to the lower court for further fact-finding about exactly what projects the commission has authority to review under the 1961 compact that established it.
Sens. Lisa Baker, Gene Yaw and Joseph Scarnati -- all Republicans that represent the north-central and northeast parts of the state where unconventional natural gas development has been heavy, or where it hasn’t been allowed to occur due to the moratorium -- want the court to invalidate the ban and prevent the DRBC from enforcing it.
They argue the commission is violating the U.S. Constitution by preventing landowners from profiting from private property. They also claim the state is being thwarted in earning revenue from public land that could be leased for natural gas drilling in the basin. The senators said in their motion that the General Assembly, not the DRBC, has the authority to oversee and regulate such development.
“In enforcing the moratorium, the commission has attempted to exercise legislative authority vested in the General Assembly and subject over five million citizens of the commonwealth residing in the basin to its dictates, rather than the comprehensive statutory scheme enacted by their duly elected senators,” the motion said.
The basin consists of 13,539 square miles. More than half of that is located in Pennsylvania, where 2,338 square miles is prospective for the Marcellus Shale. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the senators said, the land holds an estimated $40 billion worth of natural gas reserves.
The DRBC decided in 2009 that all gas drilling in the basin needed to be reviewed, saying it would not approve any development until it adopted new rules governing the industry. The next year it decided to postpone the review of natural gas development and has failed to act on adopting new rules, leaving in place a de facto moratorium.
Congress approved the Delaware River Basin Compact in 1961. It's an agreement among the United States, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware to protect the Delaware River watershed.
WLMG, which owns acreage in Northeast Pennsylvania that it wants to develop within the river basin, argues the commission is impeding the development of private land and appeasing environmental groups opposed to oil and gas produced by unconventional drilling.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/115889-pennsylvania-lawmakers-cleared-to-intervene-in-drbc-drilling-moratorium-lawsuit
-
Group Seeks Stepped up EPA Facility Safety Data After Court Expedites RMP
Sep 25, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
A public interest group is calling for stepped up enforcement of EPA administered industrial facility safety rules that require disclosure of facilities' data after a federal court expedited compliance with an Obama-era rule strengthening the agency's accident prevention program, even as the Trump administration seeks to roll the rule back.
An industry attorney says that because of the Risk Management Plan (RMP) rule's staggered implementation deadlines, facilities will have to begin complying with some facility audit and emergency coordination provisions.
A two-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Sept. 21 grantedenvironmentalists' call to expedite its ruling scrapping the Trump administration's delay of an Obama-era rule strengthening EPA's Risk Management Plan (RMP) facility accident prevention program, quickly triggering the rule's effectiveness, and thereby compliance obligations for some provisions.
The ruling was a blow to industry groups and the Trump administration, which is seeking to rescind key RMP provisions.
But the Center for Progressive Reform (CPR), a group that advocates for robust regulation, is calling for increased enforcement of RMP, as well as a separate EPA rule, issued under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), that also requires public disclosure of facility data.
In a Sept. 24 CPR blog post, “From Surviving to Thriving -- Disaster in Disaster: The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act Must Be Enforced,” Rebecca Bratspies, a professor at the City University of New York School of Law, argues that both EPCRA and RMP include sweeping requirements for disclosure of facility data that should be better enforced, especially given increased risk of releases caused by flooding from Hurricanes.
“U.S. federal, state, and local governments too often fail to ensure that first responders, localities, and individuals have the information they need to prepare for chemical disasters,” Bratspies says, arguing that greater resources are needed to ensure adequate enforcement of the laws' disclosure provisions.
“EPCRA and RMP-mandated programs are typically low priorities, thinly staffed with small budgets,” she adds. “Violations often go unchecked, and fines for noncompliance are light and sparsely enforced."
In her push for greater enforcement of EPA rules requiring disclosure of facility data, Bratspies argues that fear of terrorist attacks have led regulators to go too far in curbing disclosure of facility data under EPCRA.
“The disclosures necessary for effective natural disaster safety are not in-depth or technical. They need not reveal information at the heart of the unintended use concerns; people do not need to know precise, trade secret chemical 'recipes,' nor do they need precise address or location descriptors directing people to the chemicals themselves,” she says. “Rather, citizens simply need to know what the risks are and whether they are in a location that is at risk."
RMP Update
EPA's January 2017 final rule strengthening the RMP program generally requires facilities to conduct third-party audits, analyze safer alternatives, and streamline data disclosure to first responders and the public, among other requirements.
In response to petitions from industry and some GOP-led states, the Trump administration issued a final rule delaying the Obama-era RMP update for nearly two years, until February 2019, to allow time for the agency to reconsider and potentially revise the rule.
But the D.C. Circuit Aug. 17 struck down the lengthy delay, ruling that it violated a Clean Air Act limit on delaying rules for purposes of revision, and the law's mandate to swiftly implement protections.
The subsequent Sept. 24 decision granting petitioners' request for an expedited mandate triggers compliance with at least some rule provisions -- even as the Trump administration is seeking to revise the Obama-era rule strengthening RMP.
As advocates push for greater enforcement, an industry attorney is advising employers on compliance obligations of the Obama-era rule. While the court's expedited ruling triggers certain compliance obligations, future compliance with the rule remains murky given the Trump administration's pending effort to revise the RMP rule and the possibility of an appeal.
In a Sept. 24 Tweet, Eric Conn, of the firm Conn Maciel Carey, notes that given staggered compliance deadlines of the Obama-era rule, the issuance of the court's expedited mandates triggers compliance with only certain provisions.
“Most of the requirements kick in later as designed in the original rule, but an immediate effective date does impact the 3-year Compliance Audit and Emergency Response Coordination,” Conn says.
After the court scrapped the Trump administration's delay of the RMP update last month, Conn wrote on his firm's website that while the pending revision of the RMP rule makes the rule's future unclear, the court's ruling vacating the delay is “of greatest concern” for employers' compliance with the rule requirements in the short run.
Additionally, Conn said in his Aug. 17 post to his firm's website that EPA has until early October to petition for rehearing of the court's vacatur of the delay rule, and that employers had expected that compliance obligations would not kick in until after that date. He noted that an appeal could have further delayed the rule's effectiveness for several more months.
While the issuance of the mandate, triggers compliance with aspects of the rule, facilities have until March 15, 2021 to comply with other requirements, including controversial provisions calling for certain facilities to conduct third-party audits, analyze safer alternatives, and streamline disclosure of facility data to the public.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/group-seeks-stepped-epa-facility-safety-data-after-court-expedites-rmp
-
Sep 25, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.)
As the federal government considers the use of national security measures to protect our nuclear and coal-powered electric generation plants, we must be ready to enact a comprehensive strategy to protect the entire electric grid.
The electric grid is the very backbone of our national infrastructure and must be made stronger, harder to penetrate and disable, and more resilient so power can be restored rapidly in the event of a major attack or outage. Upgrading the grid represents a critical national investment in our future ability to compete in an increasingly global marketplace, and will require major cooperation across multiple levels of government and the private sector. It must be done, and soon.
We all know that a cyber-attack on the electric grid is a clear and present danger. Indeed, we have seen repeated warnings from the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security that we are under “a multi-stage intrusion campaign” designed to ultimately infiltrate the computer networks of “major, high value asset owners within the energy sector.” A year ago, another confidential government report made public detailed a narrower set of activities aimed at the nuclear, energy, and manufacturing sectors that U.S. authorities had been monitoring for months.
As an almost 30-year veteran of the U.S. Air Force with leadership experience in intelligence and cyber warfare, and as a current member of the U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection, I know we are highly vulnerable to a cyber-attack on our electric grid. Such an attack could have devastating, long-term consequences for our economy, our national security – for our very way of life. The Russian goal is to create chaos during a time of crisis, making it difficult for our nation to respond to their aggression.
Because a major cyber-attack on the electric grid is difficult to detect and prevent, and the potential consequences are so significant, our major focus must be to make the grid more robust (considerably harder to hack into and damage), more resilient (rapidly adaptable to changing circumstances and on-going threats), and easier to repair (able to be restored quickly).
Government agencies, regulators, academics, and the National Academy of Sciences have all been examining grid improvements for some time, and it appears all support the reality we face. Major electric grid upgrades and improvements are feasible, necessary and long overdue. Building on that work, I believe that the steps to strengthen the grid could include the following:
· Conduct an independent, thorough and candid assessment of exactly where grid improvements and upgrades are needed, in order of priority. This assessment will provide the basis for a national plan that could drive short- and long-term grid improvements,
· Allow utility company investments in equipment and technology to make the grid more resilient in the near-term to be recovered promptly,
· Continuously implement industry best practices so that the grid keeps pace with evolving threats and solutions,
· Ensure that any new grid standards are developed and implemented quickly to address rapidly evolving cyber threats in a timely manner,
· Continue to explore the role of distributed energy resources that can be quickly isolated in the event of an attack, and thereby help prevent the spread of an outage and speed the restoration of power.
Today’s grid is a complex system of power plants, wires, poles, transformers, and cables that deliver electricity to hundreds of millions of homes, businesses, and critical service organizations every day. However, much of the grid sits above ground and was built in piecemeal fashion over the last 100 years, leaving it at risk to an increasingly sophisticated range of man-made attacks and the forces of nature. The system works well under normal circumstances, and many components have been routinely updated and replaced, but it is critical we build a 21st century electric grid.
Advanced technology and innovative solutions for grid challenges exist today, and many more are in the pipeline, allowing for an opportunity for the grid to make a quantum leap forward. Ensuring that our electrical backbone is as strong, resilient, and easily repaired as possible is a national security imperative, and Congress must play a leading role in establishing a policy framework that enhances the grid and ensures coordination and cooperation across government and regulatory agencies.
Bacon serves Nebraska’s 2nd District and is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture, Armed Services, and Homeland Security committees.
https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/408044-protecting-our-electrical-grid
-
Crude Oil Trains Won’t Need Special Brakes in Latest Rule Rollback (2)
Sep 24, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Rail companies that carry crude oil are getting a break on brake requirements from the federal government—a move that drew criticism from a consumer group.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is revoking a regulation for installing special brakes on train cars that transport flammable liquids, such as crude oil. The requirement wasn’t worth the cost, the agency said in a final rule to be published Sept. 25 in the Federal Register.
The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act of 2015, which former President Barack Obama signed into law, mandated the study of electronically controlled pneumatic brake systems. Federal agencies said requiring the brakes would reduce the frequency and severity of accidents.
The pipeline agency is issuing the rule (RIN:2137-AF35) without providing an opportunity for public comment because it said offering the opportunity would be “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.”
The original initiative “is a really significant cornerstone of regulatory efforts to improve the safety of oil trains, and to essentially rescind this, without public comment, is concerning,” Tyson Slocum, energy program director for advocacy group Public Citizen in Washington, told Bloomberg Environment.
Public Citizen is reviewing its legal options in response to the agency’s decision not to offer a public comment period, he said.
The electronically controlled systems, an improvement on manually operated brake systems, “were seen as providing significant control benefits for train operators and engineers to be able to stop the train, or reduce derailment risks,” Slocum said.
Rule Adopted in 2015
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration adopted a rule in 2015 requiring certain types of trains that carry hazardous, flammable liquids to have such a system installed by January 2021 or May 2023, depending on the type of liquids carried.
The upcoming rule removes requirements to install electronically controlled pneumatic brake systems.
The Association of American Railroads “welcomes this final decision,” Jessica Kahanek, a spokeswoman for the association, told Bloomberg Environment in an email. The association’s members include CSX Transportation Inc. and Union Pacific Railroad Co. Inc.
The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers replied to the agency’s analysis of the 2015 rule with a comment dated Nov. 1, 2017. The braking requirement doesn’t address the primary root causes of most derailments, the manufacturers’ association said, which are human error and the quality of railroad tracks.
The association, which represents companies such as BASF Corp. and Chevron USA Inc., asked the agency to rescind its requirements for trains to be equipped with electronically controlled pneumatic brake systems.
(Updates with comment from Association of American Railroads in 10th paragraph.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/crude-oil-trains-wont-need-special-brakes-in-latest-rule-rollback-2
-
Trump Officials Roll Back Obama Oil Train Safety Rule
Sep 25, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Trump administration on Monday repealed a mandate that would have required trains carrying crude oil to use special brakes with new technology.
The Department of Transportation's Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) said it undertook a congressionally mandated analysis of the provision in a 2015 regulation under which oil trains would have had to use electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes.
“The Department [of Transportation] determined that the expected benefits, including safety benefits, of implementing ECP brake system requirements do not exceed the associated costs of equipping tank cars with ECP brake systems, and therefore are not economically justified,” PHMSA said.
The mandate to phase out traditional air brakes for crude oil use was part of a comprehensive rule that the Obama administration wrote in 2015 to try to improve the safety of crude oil trains.
Transporting crude oil by rail has increased dramatically in recent years due to a boost in domestic and Canadian oil production. But with the increased traffic have come major crashes and explosions, like one in 2013 in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, that killed 47, one in 2013 in North Dakota and one in Oregon in 2016.
The rule was mainly meant to implement a new design for tank cars that carry crude, with new requirements for metal thickness and fire protection. The brake mandate and speed limits were also in the new regulation.
The brake requirement was a top target for the railroad and oil industries in pushing back against parts of the 2015 rule.
Congress, in the bipartisan Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act of 2016, told the PHMSA to conduct a new cost-benefit analysis of the brake provision. If the costs outweighed the benefits, the PHMSA was required to repeal it.
“Despite the additional testing and modeling, we still believe that there is insufficient data demonstrating that ECP braking systems provide a demonstrable increase in safety over other more widely used braking systems,” the American Petroleum Institute told the PHMSA after it proposed Monday’s action in December.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/408125-trump-admin-rolls-back-obama-oil-train-safety-rule
-
Court Sets December Hearing for 2015 Ozone Rule Challenges
Sep 25, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold a hearing on EPA's 2015 ozone standard on Dec. 18, the court announced today.
The standard was originally set to have its day in court in spring 2017, but the Trump administration asked for time to consider revising or repealing the rule. It ultimately decided to keep and defend it.
The rule faces attacks on one side from red states and companies that argue the standard is too strict, and on the other side from environmentalists and public health groups who call it too lax.
The case will be heard by Judges Thomas Griffith, a George W. Bush appointee, and Cornelia Pillard and Robert Wilkins, both Obama appointees.
WHAT'S NEXT: The oral arguments will take place on Dec. 18. The parties had already briefed the issues out before the case was placed on hold last year. The hearing date means a ruling likely will not come until spring or summer 2019.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
San Antonio Air Quality Decision Draws Advocate Lawsuit
Sep 25, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Karn Dhingra
Texas environmentalists challenged the EPA’s decision on whether the areas around San Antonio are in violation of federal ozone standards.
The Environmental Protection Agency determined that Bexar County—home to San Antonio—doesn’t meet the standards, but excluded the city’s surrounding counties. That distinction is important because localities that violate the standards may have to require additional pollution controls on factories, refineries, and vehicles to get back in compliance.
The Sierra Club, which filed a Sept. 21 lawsuit challenging the EPA’s decision, wants the entire region surrounding San Antonio to be labeled as being in violation of the 70 parts per billion standards.
The Sierra Club has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg Environment is operated by entities controlled by Michael Bloomberg.
‘Part Good, Part Bad’
“The EPA’s decision was part good and part bad,” Chrissy Mann, a senior campaign representative for the Sierra Club’s Lone Star Chapter, told Bloomberg Environment. “Industrial activity in counties near San Antonio, like Comal and Atascosa, have contributed to rising ozone levels in the entire region.”
The Sierra Club and other environmental groups have studied transportation patterns that show pollution from the vehicles of commuters from surrounding Atascosa, Bandera, Comal, Guadalupe, Kendall, Medina, and Wilson counties have contributed to ozone concentrations in central Texas, Mann said.
Texas Challenging DesignationsTexas is challenging the EPA’s decision to designate Bexar County as being in violation of federal ozone standards. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) and Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) sued the EPA Aug. 28 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The city and county expect to be in compliance by 2020.
Mann told Bloomberg Environment that the Sierra Club may join other environmental groups as an intervenor soon against Texas’ challenge to the EPA’s ruling on San Antonio’s air quality.
The case is Sierra Club v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 18-1262, 9/21/18.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/san-antonio-air-quality-decision-draws-advocate-lawsuit
-
Climate Summit Sparks Hope For Political Shift Amid Federal Inaction
Sep 24, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Curt Barry
California Gov. Jerry Brown's (D) Global Climate Action Summit (GCAS) last week spurred a variety of pledges by countries, states and local governments to reduce greenhouse gases, though a report released at the summit shows the pledges are not likely to counter the impact of the Trump administration's inaction on climate issues.
Broadly, supporters of the Sept. 12-14 conference in San Francisco say it provided a needed jolt into climate politics as the midterm elections approach and as experts look further ahead toward the United Nations' annual climate meeting in 2020, where countries are expected to offer their second round of GHG mitigation targets under the Paris Agreement.
The summit “provided California and hundreds of businesses and other subnational actors an important opportunity to demonstrate a strong, unified commitment to driving the global economy towards decarbonization in the shadow of a U.S. federal government moving in the opposite direction,” says Noel Perry, founder of the clean energy group Next 10.
He adds that while binding international climate targets are important, “unity and energy are also needed to help maintain momentum and drive progress on climate change. I think the legacy of the summit will be a new-found sense of empowerment – affirming that subnational actors can and will play a critical role in moving the world forward towards a decarbonized global economy.”
Announcements during the summit by major corporations such as Walmart and Unilever to provide billions of dollars toward projects and programs to address climate change in different ways could have major political implications, according to one source with a major environmental group.
“I think the summit will make a difference on politics, [election] results and on giving both businesses and members of both parties that feel like they really have a higher bar for speaking out,” the source says. “This gives them a lot of ammunition and evidence that there's really a lot going on and that getting on the train – as opposed to staying on the platform – is an increasingly desirable place to be.”
The summit also showed that “that there are fewer and fewer places that aren't represented by strong climate leadership – either at the state or city level,” the source adds. “There are few places you could go and walk down the street and not see the logo of a corporation taking strong climate action. This is making a huge political difference . . . and continues to drive public sentiment for change.”
Craig Ebert, president of the carbon offset registry Climate Action Reserve, says in a Sept. 17 statement that the summit “served as a launchpad for deeper worldwide commitments and accelerated action from countries and companies to prevent dangerous climate change, realize the historic Paris Agreement, and move beyond Paris to a low/no carbon economy.”
Former Vice President Al Gore (D) added that he has “been to a lot of gatherings and conferences related to the climate crisis for many years now, and this is really top-notch,” according to the Washington Post. “The nature of the commitments being announced is extremely heartening."
GHG Commitments
A key event at the summit was the release of a report by Brown and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg that found that efforts by states, cities and businesses to reduce GHGs fell short of the GHG reduction goals set by the Obama administration.
The Sept. 12 report, released by a coalition of subnational entities committed to achieving the Obama administration's Paris GHG target, finds that non-federal climate action will cut economy-wide emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, roughly two-thirds of the way to the Obama goal.
The report adds that “enhanced engagement” could achieve a 24 percent cut, which is within “striking” distance of Obama's 26-28 percent target. “In the absence of federal leadership, the report’s findings provide a roadmap for increased climate ambition from all levels of society,” Brown said in a press release.
The report aligns with prior analysis showing that while state-level climate efforts would help counterbalance Trump administration rollbacks, they likely will not fully offset the impact of relaxed federal policies.
Brown and European Union climate leaders also announced Sept. 13 that they would discuss “the potential for greater alignment” between the jurisdictions' cap-and-trade programs. Sources said the effort is not aimed at linking the two cap-and-trade programs anytime soon, but represents “higher-level agreement focused on working together on program alignment and information exchange” with the EU's carbon market.
In addition, leaders of Canada and Mexico said they will work toward achieving the goals of several major climate programs in a host of U.S. states, including those requiring clean cars, clean power, a reduction in potent greenhouse gases and the use of the social cost of carbon in policymaking.
The commitments were announced Sept. 13 by Hawaii Gov. David Ige (D), who is one of 17 governors in the U.S. Climate Alliance, which Brown, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) formed in response to Trump's pledge to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement.
Leaders of California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia set a regional goal of halving food waste by 2030 that they expect will reduce GHG emissions associated with food disposal. The states are part of the Pacific Coast Collaborative, which also includes the cities of Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Oakland and Los Angeles.
ZEVs And HFCs
Bolstering the sale of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) and building thousands of new charging stations was another highlight of the summit. Brown signed a host of new bills into state law to advance ZEVs, including SB 1014 which directs the state to develop GHG reduction targets for ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft.
“This bill will help ensure that work the governor has set into motion to increase adoption of ZEVs in public and private fleets throughout the state continues,” Brown's office says, referring to a recently launched effort by the state to consider new ZEV mandates for public and private light- and heavy-duty fleets.
More broadly, ChargePoint, a leading EV charging infrastructure company, committed to accelerate its efforts and deliver 2.5 million charging units by 2025. In addition, EVBox committed to building 1 million new chargers by 2025.
The Hydrogen Council announced a new goal of ensuring that 100 percent of hydrogen fuel used in transportation is decarbonized by 2030.
Other commitments included National Grid planning to enable 10,000 public charging ports by 2025 in Maine, New York and Rhode Island. Overall, 26 states, cities, regions and businesses announced 100 ZEV targets, according to a summit press release.
In addition, the GCAS saw significant state movement on limiting hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants that act as potent GHGs. Brown signed a bill codifying recently overturned EPA rules targeting HFCs, and three other states – New York, Maryland and Connecticut – pledged to craft similar rules.
Environmentalists have said the state rules could help ensure the refrigeration sector remains “on track” in their plans to transition away from HFCs to more climate-friendly chemicals. The rules are aimed to prevent “backsliding” by the sector in the face of an adverse court ruling against the EPA rules and the agency's recent reversal of its interpretation of its Clean Air Act authority regarding HFCs.
Both industry and environmentalists also hope the state rules could help persuade the Trump administration to embrace a 2016 international agreement to limit HFCs – an issue on which Trump officials have largely remained mum.
GHG Emissions Satellite
Brown said at the close of the summit that the state's eventual launch of a satellite to track emissions of climate-warming gases including methane will offer “an important complement” to the Environmental Defense Fund’s (EDF) “MethaneSAT” satellite, which was announced last spring.
An initiative of the California Air Resources Board in partnership with San Francisco-based Earth imaging company Planet Labs, California's new satellite is intended to detect concentrated “point sources” of climate pollutants, monitoring leaks and other anomalies at specific locations where emissions are known to occur. Planet Labs was founded by ex-NASA scientists in 2010 and operates the world’s largest constellation of satellites, according to a Sept. 14 release by Brown's office.
EDF’s MethaneSAT, on the other hand, will provide broader, more frequent coverage, quantifying emissions from oil and gas fields producing at least 80 percent of global output roughly once every four days, according to EDF.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/climate-summit-sparks-hope-political-shift-amid-federal-inaction
-
At N.Y.'s Climate Week Opening, a Welcome Mat for Investors
Sep 25, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By David Iaconangelo
The global climate action circuit arrived in New York yesterday, with corporate executives touting their green credentials and heads of state hoping to persuade investors to sink their dollars into renewable projects back home.
Coming in the wake of California's own summit this month, the opening ceremony of Climate Week foreshadowed a sort of encore for the Wall Street crowd, with big business's fidelity to the energy transition as motif.
"Government policy really doesn't figure in the long-term strategy [of investors]. If nothing else, in the U.S., the cycles are too short," Paul Coster, executive director at JPMorgan, said during a late-morning panel. "When you make an investment, you are looking out 20-plus years."
With low wind and solar costs driving up adoption, he added, those types of power "are in the money in many parts of the world."
"Although policy helps — and can sometimes hinder — I don't think it's going to matter that much over the next 10 to 15 years," said Coster.
Zipcar co-founder Robin Chase and Helen Clarkson, chief executive of summit organizer the Climate Group, supplied counterpoints.
At some companies, sustainability and environment officers and other divisions were sometimes, counterproductively, at odds with one another, said Clarkson.
And in the transportation sector, said Chase, governments would need to manage a sweeping change in emphasis from private, gas-burning vehicles to shared, electrified uses — or even motorless modes, like biking and walking.
"Because government is in control of building that infrastructure and the rights of way, it's definitely a public-private partnership," she said.
The summit's first day also featured one significant emissions announcement, with the Marshall Islands saying it would join nine other countries in pledging to decarbonize entirely.
"Today, we the Marshall Islands are formally launching a strategy to reach net-zero emissions by 2050," said President Hilda Heine, who asked the Paris accord's other signatories to come forward with their own strategy by 2020, in order to stay within the 1.5-degree Celsius global warming threshold.
She and other heads of state also made reference to a dispute between the accord's wealthy, industrialized signatories and its other members, which say the former is not living up to its promises to fund the latter's climate adaptation.
That matter is expected to be a main item in December, when the accord's parties gather in Poland.
"We will need access to public and private financing immediately, especially for the adaptation components" of the Marshall Islands' plan, said Heine.
"I therefore invite all those concerned with financing or investing in these types of projects to urgently assess how accessible your funding is to highly vulnerable countries," she said, noting that her country faced "an existential threat from climate change."
Haitian President Jovenel Moïse offered a balder appeal to investors, whom he asked to take part in a public-private partnership that would build up the country's solar capacity.
"Far from being a charitable endeavor, it is rather a gesture that is part and parcel of the capitalist economy to which you all subscribe," he said.
"I urge you to put your money where your mouth is."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/09/25/stories/1060099593
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested