Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 17/10/18
-
(ACC Mentioned) Region’s Plastic Recycling Capability Quietly Died
Oct 17, 2018 | Idaho County Free Press
By Andrew Ottoson
A major part of the region’s recycling capability passed quietly away last month. -
EPA Puts Off Final Decision on Science Transparency Rule
Oct 17, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
The Environmental Protection Agency says it is putting off for at least a year any final announcement on a controversial proposal overhauling how the agency evaluates science. -
Wheeler Punts Pruitt's Science Overhaul
Oct 17, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Maxine Joselow
Acting EPA chief Andrew Wheeler has put Scott Pruitt's plan to restrict the science used in crafting new regulations on the back burner. -
Trump Updates Rule-Busting Agenda, Promises More Budget Cuts
Oct 17, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Heikkinen
Federal agencies have "greatly exceeded" initial targets for slashing regulatory costs, cutting four significant rules for every new one put in place, a senior administration official told reporters yesterday. -
US EPA Received 68 Pre-Manufacture Notices in June
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has announced that it received 68 pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) in June. -
Tribal Epistemology: The Final Frontier
Oct 17, 2018 | Forbes
By Geoffrey Kabat
Several days ago I wrote a column about the wrong-headed claim that glyphosate is a carcinogen and the huge number of tort cases that has resulted from this error. -
Blood, Urine Tests of Chemical Plant Neighbors Find No GenX
Oct 17, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
By Emery P. Dalesio
Dozens of neighbors of a North Carolina chemical plant had industrial compounds in their bloodstreams, but tests by state and federal health officials outlined yesterday didn't find the much-debated and little-studied one they were looking for. -
N.M. Worried About PFAS Contamination at Air Base
Oct 17, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
By Susan Montoya Bryan
Chemicals associated with firefighting foam once used at an Air Force base in eastern New Mexico have been detected in groundwater on and near the military installation, prompting requests by state officials for more tests and a study to determine the extent of the toxic plume. -
New Jersey Jury Clears J&J of Liability in Latest Talc Case
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
In the latest case alleging that Johnson & Johnson talc products caused a plaintiff’s cancer, a New Jersey jury has cleared the company of liability. -
Industry Alarmed by UK REACH Full Data Requirement
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK’s Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) says companies will need to submit a "full" data package in order to register their chemicals under a UK version of REACH in a no-deal Brexit scenario. -
Trump Wants to Expedite a Texas Pipeline Project, But No One Seems to Know What It Is
Oct 17, 2018 | Platts
By Brian Scheid
“I’m baffled,” one US government official said last week. -
Venture Global LNG to Supply U.S. Natural Gas to Poland
Oct 17, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
Venture Global LNG has signed two 20-year contracts to provide U.S. liquefied natural gas to the state-run Polish Oil and Gas Co. -
Schumer Wants Railroads to Notify Locals When Transporting Hazmat
Oct 17, 2018 | Progressive Railroading
U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) this week called on Canadian Pacific, CSX and other freight railroads to provide more information to county emergency management authorities and first responders when trains are transporting hazardous materials through local communities in New York. -
Trump Administration Touts Lower Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Oct 17, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
The Trump administration is set to celebrate strides in slashing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and factories, arguing the reductions are driven mostly by voluntary private sector action -- and not by federal regulations. -
Dems Damp Down Hopes for Climate Change Agenda
Oct 17, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Mike Lillis
Democrats are unlikely to pursue major climate change legislation if they win the House majority, despite a growing body of evidence suggesting time is running out to address the issue. -
Britain Looking at Four Options for Carbon Pricing After Brexit – Govt Official
Oct 17, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Susanna Twidale
Britain is looking at four options for carbon pricing once it leaves the European Union, including launching its own emissions trading system, a government official said on Wednesday.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Region’s Plastic Recycling Capability Quietly Died
Oct 17, 2018 | Idaho County Free Press
By Andrew Ottoson
A major part of the region’s recycling capability passed quietly away last month. Locally, the time of departure was marked at about 10:49 a.m. Sept. 4, when the Idaho County Commission approved a motion to discontinue collection of plastic by Lewis Clark Recyclers.
The cause was a massive market failure, brought on in part by a trade war and policy changes that have seen China stop accepting plastic waste from all over the world.
There is no immediate cure, and if none is found, it will marginally increase the waste management burden local governments already face throughout North Central Idaho.
In Clearwater County, where plastic recycling was discontinued Oct. 10, recyclers reported having separated out enough to fill five rolloffs totaling more than six tons of plastic in 2018.
“For the most part, people want to help the environment,” Clearwater County waste manager Pam Jones told the Free Press, “but this is out of anybody’s hands.”
In Idaho County, plastic recycling totaled nearly 10 tons during the past year of collection.
“If they can find a reliable market, maybe on a limited basis we can start collecting in six months to a year,” local recycler Janie Fluharty told the Free Press. “Almost everybody is aware of the huge problems in the ocean, but even locally, the plastic fills up the landfill. It doesn’t break down. I’ve heard the comment ‘Well, it doesn’t affect us that much.’ But it does if we have to open new grounds or expand current dumps.”
Recycling of other materials continues, with office paper, newsprint and cardboard all making up the largest portions of the total the recyclers divert from entering landfills in favor of marketable use.
In May, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) announced a goal to recycle or recover all plastic packaging used in the United States by 2040.
But in the case of post-consumer plastics, the market, for the moment, is dead.
The loss was described as heartfelt by Lewis Clark Recycling Inc. (LCRI), which still contracts as the recycling service provider for Clearwater and Idaho counties as well as others in the region.
“It is with a heavy heart that LCRI must announce the discontinuation of collecting post-consumer plastics,” LCRI principal owner Mark Anderson said via news release. “Market forces…namely China’s implementation of a pair of initiatives with regard to importing post-consumer goods, have driven the price of these materials to zero.”
An LCRI fact sheet points to China’s implementation of “Green Fence” and “National Sword” policies under which it will no longer accept many products for recycling – of which post-consumer plastic is just one category.
•
A fact sheet provided by LCRI describes contamination in the product to be imported by China as a major barrier: “With the advent of the ‘Single Stream’ recycling method, previously reclaimable plastics are mixed with other products and, in many instances, outright waste. This contamination can, and does, include food residue, paper, wood and other fibers, non-recyclable plastic (Styrofoam, PVC), human and animal waste, bio-hazard materials, chemical waste, and so forth.”
Chinese policies aren’t the only barrier to the plastic industry of America’s own.
U.S. import tariffs engaged in August hit $16.4 billion in the business of plastics and related chemicals, according to the ACC, which has lobbied Washington D.C. for more than 1,500 products to be delisted, noting Chinese retaliation against more than 1,000 U.S. export products hit another $10.8 billion in trade.
“The tariffs – in effect a tax – put U.S. chemical manufacturers at a disadvantage, but we aren’t the only ones that will suffer the impact,” ACC director of international trade Ed Brzytwa noted in a press release Sept. 24. “Since chemistry touches 96 percent of all manufactured goods, taxes on our industry will ultimately raise the prices of popular consumer products – everything from cars and trucks to electronics.”
http://www.idahocountyfreepress.com/news/2018/oct/17/regions-plastic-recycling-capability-quietly-died/
-
EPA Puts Off Final Decision on Science Transparency Rule
Oct 17, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
The Environmental Protection Agency says it is putting off for at least a year any final announcement on a controversial proposal overhauling how the agency evaluates science. Critics say it could bar the use of landmark public health studies.
EPA spokesman Michael Abboud said Wednesday the agency now expects no published action on the proposal for at least 12 months.
The rule was one of the most contentious proposed by former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who stepped down last summer amid ethics scandals.
Supporters say the so-called transparency rule would help the public understand the science behind EPA regulations. Critics say it could block use of the kind of confidential patient data that underpins major environmental regulations.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/10/17/us/politics/ap-us-epa-science.html?login=email&auth=login-email
-
Wheeler Punts Pruitt's Science Overhaul
Oct 17, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Maxine Joselow
Acting EPA chief Andrew Wheeler has put Scott Pruitt's plan to restrict the science used in crafting new regulations on the back burner.
The draft rule issued when Pruitt was EPA administrator — titled "Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science" — was listed under "long-term actions" in the administration's fall 2018 regulatory plan released last night, with an expected completion date of January 2020.
In regulatory parlance, that means the proposal is not a top agency priority at the moment.
The draft rule — touted by supporters as an effort to scrap "secret science" from regulations — was unveiled by Pruitt last April. Pruitt resigned in July under a crush of ethics allegations, and acting EPA Administrator Wheeler suggested he planned to scrutinize the contentious proposal.
The draft rule would effectively bar EPA from using specific studies for developing new regulations unless the underlying data "are publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent validation," according to the text. Critics of Pruitt's plan view it as an effort to stop EPA from using research that could justify the need for tighter regulations.
Regulatory policy experts cautioned against reading too much into the move to long-term actions, since the regulatory plan is nonbinding. Still, they said the move could signal that Wheeler is retreating from one of Pruitt's more controversial — and legally vulnerable — actions.
"I think, first and foremost, I urge caution in terms of reading too much into this," said Yogin Kothari of the Union of Concerned Scientists. "But I think it's an admission that they don't think it's ready for prime time."
He added, "They were trying to rush it earlier this summer and trying to get it out of the door. Moving it to the long term shows that the new political leadership at EPA is taking a longer, harder look at it. And it appears not to be a priority at this time."
Paul Billings, senior vice president for public policy at the American Lung Association, similarly said, "I would caution reading too much into any of this stuff."
"I think it's a sign that there's not a great sense of urgency around this. But it's still on the agenda," Billings added. "It would be far better for them to say that they are withdrawing the rule, or that they're not going to move forward with it. That would be a much more definitive and useful statement."
Asked whether the "secret science" plan is an agency priority, EPA spokesman Michael Abboud said in an email to E&E News, "Long-term actions are those under development, but for which the Agency does not expect to publish an action within the next 12 months. However, the Agency may advance rules on a faster timeline."
Abboud added: "This is not a delay. The Agency is continuing its internal rulemaking development process for this action. The Spring agenda gave no deadline on a final rule."
In unveiling the draft rule in April, Pruitt framed it as a good-government measure that would shed more daylight on the agency's decisionmaking.
Just after taking the helm at EPA in July, Wheeler signaled in an interview with E&E News that he intended to pursue the draft rule (E&E News PM, July 13).
"That was proposed before I got here. I'm going to take a hard look at it," Wheeler said. "But I cut my teeth at the agency working on the Community Right-to-Know Act, and I really fundamentally believe the more information we put out to the public as far as what we're basing our regulations on, the better our regulations will be."
At a hearing earlier this month, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee appeared split on the proposal (E&E Daily, Oct. 4).
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) lent his support to the idea, saying, "I have been concerned that the broad discretion and lack of transparency at the EPA had led the agency to seek out the science that supports a predetermined policy outcome."
Senate Democrats, meanwhile, frame the EPA plan as part of a broader pattern of "regulatory capture" by industries the agency is charged with overseeing (Greenwire, Aug. 17).
The draft rule has its origins in legislation championed by House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas). While various versions of Smith's bill have cleared the House, they have then stalled in the Senate.
The move to long-term actions comes after the departure last month of Richard Yamada, a quiet force behind Pruitt's efforts to curtail the use of science (Greenwire, Sept. 14).
Yamada served as the top political aide in EPA's research office, where he worked on several of the agency's more controversial moves under the Trump administration, including Pruitt's now-defunct "red team, blue team" exercise to debate climate science.
Yamada was also a bridge between EPA and Smith, having previously served as a congressional staffer for the House Science Committee, where he worked on several of Smith's science reform ideas.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/10/17/stories/1060103537
-
Trump Updates Rule-Busting Agenda, Promises More Budget Cuts
Oct 17, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Heikkinen
Federal agencies have "greatly exceeded" initial targets for slashing regulatory costs, cutting four significant rules for every new one put in place, a senior administration official told reporters yesterday.
The deregulatory push resulted in $23 billion in net regulatory cost savings in fiscal 2018, according to the White House. The federal government expects the trend to continue this coming fiscal year, leading to a projected $18 billion in net regulatory savings, excluding the proposed corporate average fuel economy standards.
The White House announced its rule-busting progress in a 2018 regulatory reform report and by releasing the "Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions."
Officials, in a conference call with reporters, described the past two years as an "amazing turnaround." Agencies surpassed the initial target of eliminating the cost of two rules for every new one, as mandated by Executive Order 13771.
The executive order "is the main thing we look at, because those significant rules are the ones that impose the greatest costs on the public. So that is what we're expressly focused on," one official said.
In fiscal 2018, federal agencies cut 57 significant regulations while putting in place only 14 significant regulations. Overall, the administration cut costs for 176 large and small regulatory actions.
The administration has cut $33 billion in costs since the start of the Trump administration. By contrast, the first 21 months of the Obama administration added $245 billion in regulatory costs, the White House said.
By far the biggest cuts to regulatory costs could come from changes to the CAFE standards from the Department of Transportation and EPA, which could save between $120 billion and $340 billion in regulatory costs. The administration is looking for final action by early next year.
"The benefits [of rules] have to outweigh the costs. Which means we are not eliminating regulations that are working. We are only eliminating regulations where the benefits of outweigh the costs," the official said.
This morning, President Trump praised agencies for cutting "red tape" in an event at the Oval Office attended by Cabinet officials and representatives from various industries.
"An ever-growing maze of regulations, rules, restrictions has cost our country trillions and trillions of dollars, millions of jobs, countless American factories, and devastated many industries, Trump said.
The president also announced he would be asking each federal agency to take a 5 percent budget cut in fiscal 2019.
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Administrator Neomi Rao, acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue were among those in attendance.
Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said the deregulatory actions were resulting in "real tangible savings."
"We are actually doing better this year, more things were taken off the books, more things were slowed down," Mulvaney said.Climate, EPA
EPA headquarters in Washington. EPA/Flickr
Many of the major deregulatory actions at EPA have been in process for the past two years. The agency expects to finalize revisions to fuel economy standards, water and climate actions this coming fiscal year, said the official.
The agency is sticking to its projected schedule for finalizing its replacement of the Obama-era rule to cut greenhouse gas emissions from power plants by the beginning of next year.
EPA expects to finalize the Affordable Clean Energy rule, which focuses on efficiency improvements at the facility level, in March 2019. The comment period for the proposed rule ends Oct. 30.
The agency is moving forward with a review of this Obama-era "sister" rule to the Clean Power Plan. EPA is planning to release a notice of proposed rulemaking this November regarding new and modified plants.
The agency expects to finalize amendments to the 2016 rule controlling methane leaks from new and modified oil and gas sources by June 2019.
EPA plans to finalize withdrawal of control technique guidelines for cutting volatile organic compound emissions from the oil and gas industry in ozone nonattainment areas. A final rule is expected in December.
There's a more obscure rule review regarding greenhouse gas emissions from municipal solid waste landfills. The agency is forecasting a notice of proposed rulemaking in March and a final rule a year later in March 2020.
Wheeler credited the president's regulatory reform agenda — and resulting strong economy and surge in energy production — for helping the U.S. reduce greenhouse gas emissions from major industrial sources in the first year of the president's term.
According to newly released data from the 2017 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, greenhouse gas emissions dipped 2.7 percent between 2016 and 2017.
"These achievements flow largely from technological breakthroughs in the private sector, not the heavy hand of government. The Trump Administration has proven that federal regulations are not necessary to drive CO2 reductions," Wheeler said in a press statement.'Secret science,' glider kits
Semi-trucks sitting on the lot at glider kit assembler Fitzgerald Glider Kits in Crossville, Tenn. Maxine Joselow/E&E News
Notably absent from the near-term agenda is mention of EPA's "Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science," more commonly known alternately as EPA's "secret science" or "censoring science" rule. The agency is putting off finalizing it until January 2020 (see related story).
An EPA proposal to repeal emissions standards for glider kits has been moved to long-term status. Glider kits are new truck cabs with refurbished diesel engines.
Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt argued the agency didn't have authority to regulate gliders under the Clean Air Act. The move to long-term status signals a retreat from Pruitt's legally vulnerable argument by Wheeler, who is viewed as a more cautious deregulator than his predecessor.Air pollution
Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt swore in Bill Wehrum last year as assistant administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation as his wife, Cindy Wehrum, looked on. @MAbboudEPA45/Twitter
Ranking high on EPA's air chief Bill Wehrum's to-do list are revamps to the New Source Review pre-construction permitting program and a controversial plan to review the cost-benefit analysis used to justify the Obama-era limits om emissions of mercury and other hazardous pollutants from coal-fired power plants.
After sending a draft plan to OMB a few weeks ago, EPA hopes to publish the proposal by next month, the agenda indicates.
The timetable for issuance of a final rule, however, is still "to be determined." Also up in the air are the agency's options for coming up with an alternative to the 2016 "supplemental finding" EPA released to reaffirm its original decision to crack down on hazardous power plant emissions.
EPA is also pursuing several rulemakings related to New Source Review. Most significant is the proposed overhaul wrapped into the administration's proposed replacement for the Obama-era Clean Power Plan to reduce electricity generators' greenhouse gas emissions.
But any day now, EPA also intends to release a final rule related to project aggregation; OMB completed its review of that rule earlier this month.
And in February, agency officials will move forward with a proposed rule related to what's known as "project emissions accounting," the agenda says. That rulemaking would presumably complement guidance that Pruitt ordered in a March memo (Greenwire, March 13).
On a separate front, the agency signaled it still wants to formalize its January scrapping of the Clinton-era "once in, always in" hazardous air pollutant policy.
That policy, which dated back to 1995, required "major" industrial emitters of mercury and other air toxics to comply with strict control standards even after their releases put them in the category of smaller polluters.
In the memo ending the policy, Wehrum wrote in January that the agency would "soon" take public comments on a proposal. Instead, that draft regulation now won't be released until Febuary, according to the agenda.
Among dozens of other rulemakings that are planed or underway, many are relatively routine. More than 20, for example, relate to legally required "residual risk and technology reviews" to update hazardous air pollutant standards for various industries.
The agency recently finalized its rejection of petitions from Maryland and Delaware that sought federal help in cutting ozone-forming pollution from other states.
Along similar lines, a final rule that more broadly sets "good neighbor obligations" for the 2008 ground-level ozone standard is also scheduled for issuance in December.Coal ash
The agency continues to pursue changes to its 2015 coal ash regulations, notwithstanding a recent appeals court ruling that some provisions are unlawfully weak (Greenwire, Aug. 21).
One set of amendments was released this summer; the agency plans to release a proposed follow-up in December, with the final version scheduled for the end of next year.Chemicals
A crop duster spraying a pesticide. Kevin Wood/Flickr
EPA is planning to issue two proposals to weaken Obama-era regulations for workers applying or potentially exposed to pesticides. One could lower the minimum age for pesticide applicators, and the other could shrink the buffer zones around fields treated by pesticides.
EPA aims to finalize both rules by next September. The rollbacks, like many others on the agenda, have already stoked Democratic opposition (E&E Daily, March 14).
EPA plans to finalize by the end of December restrictions on the production, sale and use of the deadly paint stripper methylene chloride.
Under pressure from the public and Congress, the agency announced earlier this year that it would go forward with the Obama-era rule, but hadn't set a date for when it expected to complete that process (Greenwire, May 10).CEQ, NEPA
The White House Council on Environmental Quality is continuing its push to rewrite its National Environmental Policy Act regulations, a move that could affect permitting across the federal agencies.
CEQ wrapped up a comment period on the initial stage of the rulemaking in August, and the agency will likely issue a proposal detailing what, exactly, it plans to change in coming months (Greenwire, Aug. 20).Water
The Trump administration plans to propose a new definition of what constitutes "waters of the United States" this month. Ricardo Mar/Flickr
The administration plans to propose a new definition of what constitutes waters of the United States this month, with a final rule due in September 2019.
That means the administration will be proposing a new definition five months before it finalizes a repeal of the Obama-era Clean Water Rule in March.
EPA expects a June proposal for a rule limiting when the agency can use its veto power under Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act to veto an Army Corps of Engineers dredge-and-fill permit.
EPA is still planning to propose a new Lead and Copper Rule for drinking water in February. It will release a final version of its lead dust standards in June.DOE
Energy Department headquarters in Washington. Claudine Hellmuth/E&E News
The Department of Energy continues to focus on securing the grid and nuclear know-how while leaving energy efficiency on the back burner.
DOE published a proposed rule for public comment that would designate certain data as critical to electric infrastructure under the Federal Power Act.
The proposal is tied to work that Bruce Walker, DOE's assistant secretary for the Office of Electricity, is conducting to comply with authority the agency was assigned by Congress in 2015 under the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Energywire, Oct. 17).
But multiple efficiency standards continue to not have set timelines for release, despite deadlines by Congress. Regulations for portable air conditioners, commercial packaged boilers and uninterruptible power supplies remain among those classified as "long-term actions."
Those three appliances are part of a lawsuit because the new administration never published final Obama-era rules in the Federal Register.
"We're seeing many of the rules that are overdue, in some cases by a year or more, are still on the DOE's list of long-term actions, which means they don't plan to do anything in the next year or so," said Lauren Urbanek, a senior program advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council's Center for Energy Efficiency Standards.
"These updates are statutorily required, and by not updating the standards, it means consumers and businesses will miss out on savings from updated technologies."
Microwave ovens, pool heaters, walk-in freezers and other products also do not have a current schedule for efficiency rules.
Environmentalists threatened additional lawsuits after DOE first moved many efficiency standards to long-term status last year (E&E News PM, Dec. 14, 2017).
Andrew deLaski, executive director of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), said DOE has now missed 17 legal deadlines for implementing efficiency standards and is on track to miss a "bunch more."
DeLaski noted that DOE also appears to have shelved plans to transform its efficiency program into a "market-based" approach, which remains under long-term status.
DOE last year floated the idea of completely overhauling its efficiency standards to allow more "flexibility," prompting warnings from environmentalists that the program could be weakened dramatically (Greenwire, Nov. 27, 2017).Public lands, offshore
An oil and gas well on public lands in Nevada. Ellen M. Gilmer/E&E News
After finalizing a rollback of the Methane and Waste Prevention Rule last month, the Bureau of Land Management is turning its attention to revising a set of Obama-era orders for oil and gas producers on public lands.
Onshore Orders 3, 4 and 5 updated BLM's site security and energy measurement practices to address concerns from the Government Accountability Office that the agency's prior policies were inadequate.
Under a review prompted by Trump's "energy independence" executive order, BLM said it determined that some provisions of the orders may unnecessarily burden oil and gas operations. The bureau expects to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking in January.
Interior's Office of Natural Resources Revenue said it still expects to complete a proposal to change its royalty calculations for federal oil, gas and coal by November 2019. The current administration repealed the Obama valuation rule shortly after Trump took office.
Ocean energy regulators are moving swiftly toward achieving the goals laid out in Trump's "America-First" offshore energy plan.
According to the agenda, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement is on track to complete its revisions to the 2016 blowout preventer and well control rule by the end of the year. The regulation is considered the capstone of the Obama administration's response to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon rig explosion and subsequent oil spill.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management expects to revamp its financial assurance policies by the end of the month. Changes to that framework could, for example, affect the cost of decommissioning an offshore rig.
BOEM also set targets for streamlining renewable energy development. A notice of proposed rulemaking is expected in March.BLM, Fish and Wildlife
California condor. San Diego Zoo Global
BLM, which routinely holds timber sales in western Oregon, as well as Idaho and Wyoming, plans next month to formally propose a rule aimed at allowing it "to resolve protests of forest management decisions, specifically decisions to implement timber sales."
A formal notice will be published in the Federal Register next month, and it will be open for public comment into January.
The Fish and Wildlife Service will continue considering protecting numerous species including the lesser prairie chicken and the Sierra Nevada red fox under the Endangered Species Act.
As early as this month, FWS will propose to establish another nonessential experimental population of California condors centered on Redwood National Park. The boundaries would encompass Northern California, northwestern Nevada and the entire state of Oregon.
A possible ESA reclassification of the gray wolf is under review, for possible action in December, and as early as this month the agency could rule on a petition to delist the American burying beetle. By next June, several species are set for delisting because of extinction.
This November, FWS anticipates finalizing broader changes in critical habitat designations, listing decisions and threatened species protections.National Park Service
Teepees stood on the National Mall during the Native Nations Rise demonstration in Washington, D.C., last year.Ellen M. Gilmer/E&E News
By February, the National Park Service wants to finalize a controversial rule that would give states more power to regulate fish and wildlife in national preserves.
In a September memo, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said that states are "the first-line authorities" for fish and wildlife management and that the department plans "to defer to the states in this regard."
The issue has been hotly contested in Alaska, where currently banned hunting techniques could be reinstated as a result of the change. The techniques include using artificial lights at black bear den sites, planting bait to attract brown and black bears, riding motorboats to hunt caribou, and deploying dogs to hunt black bears.
The Park Service also plans to decide whether to proceed with a rule that would charge fees for demonstrations on the National Mall. The rule would also identify specific locations "where activities are allowed, not allowed, or allowed but subject to restrictions."
Monday was the last day for the public to submit comments on the proposal, which critics say would infringe on free speech and the right to assembly.
Other proposed rules by the Park Service would amend regulations for nominating properties to list on the National Register of Historic Places and revise regulations for awarding and administering concessions contracts. The agency said it wants to reduce "administrative burdens" while expanding services for visitors.NOAA
NOAA wants to push ahead with its plan to regulate aquaculture in federal waters, even though a federal judge in New Orleans last month said the agency lacked the authority to do so.
As part its agenda, NOAA said it wants to "clarify" its authority, arguing that aquaculture is considered "fishing" and should be regulated under the 1976 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
U.S. District Judge Jane Triche Milazzo tossed out NOAA's proposed rules for aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico, saying Congress only gave NOAA authority to regulate the "traditional fishing of wild fish." Lawmakers are expected to revisit the issue next year.
NOAA also wants to approve new rules to increase the catch limits for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico and implement new fishery management plans for Puerto Rico, St. Croix and St. Thomas/St. John.Renewable fuels, agriculture, forests
President Trump has endorsed year-round sales of E15 fuel. Iowa Renewable Fuels Association
A few items related to ethanol mandates under the renewable fuel standard appear in the new agenda. EPA plans to propose rules in February on lifting summer restrictions on E15 fuel, which is 15 percent ethanol.
Final action would come in May, in time for the summer driving season. In addition, the administration would float ideas for making renewable fuel credit markets more transparent and possibly limiting who's eligible to participate.
EPA said it will propose changes in volume targets for cellulosic biofuel, advanced biofuel and total biofuel for 2020 to 2022. That change is part of a "reset" the agency is required to make to renewable fuel volumes in future years if it used its waiver authority to reduce targets in past years.
EPA will also put forth volume requirements for biomass-based diesel for 2021 and 2022. A proposed rule would be published in January, and a final rule ready by December 2019.
At the Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service is preparing regulations to expedite review and approval of mining projects on national forest lands, and to open the way for more oil and gas extraction on national forest land in cooperation with BLM.
The proposed changes, which the agency said would decrease permitting times, were subject to a public comment period that ended Monday (Energywire, Oct. 17).
USDA plans to publish final regulations on bioengineered food disclosure in November, including which products need to carry a label saying they've been produced with genetically modified organisms.
The department this month will outline possible "minor changes" to rules that require farmers who receive subsidized crop insurance to undertake farmland conservation measures, related to wetland determinations.
USDA also noted the proposed lifting of two insect-related quarantines, as it looks for other ways to fight infestations that are well underway.
A public comment period for ending the quarantine for the emerald ash borer ends Nov. 19, and the agency proposes to end the quarantine related to the pine shoot beetle. A notice of proposed rulemaking on the pine shoot beetle infestation will come in November, according to the agenda.
EPA plans to have a final rule ready in May on exempting concentrated animal feeding operations from air emission reporting requirements under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
That proposal follows up on Congress' agreement in the fiscal 2018 omnibus spending bill to exempt farms from reporting under a companion law, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act.
At the time of that provision's approval, lawmakers debated whether an exemption under CERCLA would also apply to EPCRA, which wasn't mentioned in the legislation. EPA also plans to add definitions of "farm" and "animal waste" to the EPCRA regulations. A notice of proposed rulemaking could be ready this month.Coal and mining
The only regulatory change under consideration at Interior's Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement relates to inflation adjustments for civil penalties due in January 2019.
EPA also once again made no mention of a pending rule on new underground water protections for in-situ uranium mining that the agency delayed more than a year ago (Greenwire, Jan. 6, 2017).
At the Department of Labor, the Mine Safety and Health Administration will continue to gather input until Dec. 24 about how to improve safety around trucks, other "power haulage equipment" and conveyor belts, which accounted for more than half of coal miner deaths in 2017.
An extended comment period on an examination of miners' exposure to diesel exhaust, a known carcinogen, ends March 26.
Despite delays, MSHA plans to issue two more requests for information: one on existing standards and regulations that could be "made more effective or less burdensome" on industry due out in December and another on alternatives to how the agency approves mine safety modifications set for March.
MSHA will continue to gather information until July 2019 on a retrospective study required under the 2014 update to coal dust regulations designed to protect miners from a primary cause of recently resurgent black lung disease.
The agency also plans to publish final changes ordered by a federal court to the training program for seeking refuge in underground mines in December.
Dates for any action on MSHA's new standards for crystalline silica, another cause of lung disease for miners, and proximity detection systems, which alert miners to mobile machinery, remain undetermined.
Reporters Manuel Quiñones, Michael Doyle, Dylan Brown, Nick Sobczyk, Marc Heller, Corbin Hiar, Sean Reilly, Pamela King, Rob Hotakainen, Ariel Wittenberg and Maxine Joselow contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/10/17/stories/1060103555
-
US EPA Received 68 Pre-Manufacture Notices in June
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has announced that it received 68 pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) in June. Of these, the manufacturer's identity was withheld on 40 as confidential business information (CBI). The submissions included 32 new PMNs, and 36 amendments to existing ones.
Also in June, the agency received test data in support of eight previously submitted PMNs; and it received 18 notices of commencement (NOCs).
The update to the TSCA new substance programme was released in a 12 October Federal Register notice.
Section 5 of TSCA requires any person intending to manufacture or import a new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose to provide the EPA with a PMN before initiating the activity. The agency reviews that notice, evaluates risk and takes appropriate action.
Under 2016 updates to TSCA, the EPA must publish a list of these submissions monthly.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71036/us-epa-received-68-pre-manufacture-notices-in-june
-
Tribal Epistemology: The Final Frontier
Oct 17, 2018 | Forbes
By Geoffrey Kabat
Several days ago I wrote a column about the wrong-headed claim that glyphosate is a carcinogen and the huge number of tort cases that has resulted from this error. It was only after I posted the column that a naïve question presented itself, Why is there so little government research on the toxicity of glyphosate, particularly from the FDA, which is responsible for food safety? After all, the FDA has studied a wide range of contaminants that occur in food and animal feed, including soy phytoestrogens, arsenic, acrylamide, pigments, and combustion products.
I put this question to a veteran scientist who has spent his/her career studying the toxicity of various compounds for the federal government. Unfortunately, because questions of risk assessment are so contentious and so widely misunderstood, I am avoiding identifying this person.
The response to my question made perfect sense, but also was stunning in its implications. My contact said that the EPA does the risk assessment to determine what is a "safe level" of a pesticide or other contaminant. The FDA then uses the EPA's risk assessment in setting limits for pesticides in food.
Then my contact went on to say that, “from a risk assessment point of view, all necessary evaluation of chronic toxicity in animal models has been completed, and the low levels of human exposure are well-established. All the evidence supports the notion that this product is a safe use of an agronomic resource.”
In other words, this product, which as been in use for over forty years and is the most popular weed-killer, has been so thoroughly studied for toxicity and the concentrations found in humans are so low that there is no need for further study. Think about how often this can be said about environmental factors that may be affecting our health! Think about scientists who have studied a wide range of chemical exposures, saying that there is really nothing left to justify further research! How often do we hear this said?
Of course, we need to realize that beyond a certain limit we cannot be certain that there is NO risk. All science can do is to use the best methods and measurement techniques to determine that any detectable risk is at a very low level.
In conclusion, my contact made a stunning comment which puts the vexed issue of glyphosate -- and other similar controversies -- in a very different perspective,
“There is nothing left to understand, except how groups of humans can be incited to question the underlying science. Oh, right, IARC and Prop 65.”
---
Geoffrey Kabat is a cancer epidemiologist and the author, most recently, of Getting Risk Right: Understanding the Science of Elusive Health Risks.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreykabat/2018/10/16/tribal-epistemology-the-final-frontier/#6e3365f451f4
-
Blood, Urine Tests of Chemical Plant Neighbors Find No GenX
Oct 17, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
By Emery P. Dalesio
Dozens of neighbors of a North Carolina chemical plant had industrial compounds in their bloodstreams, but tests by state and federal health officials outlined yesterday didn't find the much-debated and little-studied one they were looking for.
None of the 30 people living around a Chemours Co. plant south of Fayetteville showed the chemical GenX produced by the company in their blood or urine. But all 30 neighbors did have in their blood at least four of the 16 similar chemicals tested, North Carolina's Department of Health and Human Services said.
Scientists don't know how much per- and polyfluoroalkyl, or PFAS, chemicals in the body may be unsafe.
The testing "really highlights the fact that we just don't always know what kind of compounds, what kinds of chemicals that we use in our daily lives are making their way into our bodies," said Lee Ferguson, a Duke University environmental analytical chemist who has studied PFAS chemicals. "This data highlights the fact that PFAS compounds are ubiquitous in our bodies from exposure through our daily lives."
Thousands of man-made chemicals listed by EPA haven't been tested for human effects.
PFAS are a large family of man-made chemicals in use worldwide since the 1950s to make carpets, clothing, furniture fabrics, food packaging and cookware to make them resistant to water, grease or stains. They are also used for firefighting at airfields and varied industrial processes.
Seven of the chemicals showed up in blood concentrations beyond 95 percent of the population tested by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most PFAS substances either weren't found in the bloodstreams of the people tested or were detected at levels similar to available U.S. population data.
Nine of 17 PFAS chemicals were detected in blood samples of at least one of the participants, according to testing performed by the CDC.
The tests were performed on volunteers who drank from private wells that earlier testing found had the highest levels of GenX in the groundwater, the state agency said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/10/17/stories/1060103523
-
N.M. Worried About PFAS Contamination at Air Base
Oct 17, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
By Susan Montoya Bryan
Chemicals associated with firefighting foam once used at an Air Force base in eastern New Mexico have been detected in groundwater on and near the military installation, prompting requests by state officials for more tests and a study to determine the extent of the toxic plume.
The New Mexico Environment Department confirmed the contamination yesterday, saying officials at Cannon Air Force Base notified state environment, health and agricultural officials about the compounds.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, have been detected in a small number of the 19 off-base wells tested so far. Some of the wells supply water to local dairies.
The Air Force is making bottled water available for drinking and cooking for residents who rely on wells that exceed a health advisory level set by EPA.
Contamination beyond the base ranges from less than half of the federal advisory level to more than 20 times the level, according to sampling done by the Air Force.
The concentrations are much higher — more than 370 times the advisory level — for some of the on-base monitoring wells.
"This is all in groundwater, so we're concerned about protection and remediation of groundwater in that area. So one of the first steps, of course, would be holding the United States Air Force accountable for that work," said Bruce Yurdin, the department's deputy secretary.
A spokesman for the base did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
The base announced in August that it would be sampling to assess the potential for drinking water contamination stemming from past firefighting activities.
"We are committed to protecting the health of our airmen and community partners and will conduct a thorough investigation to ensure we know if this contaminant has made it beyond the boundaries of Cannon Air Force Base," Col. Stewart Hammons, 27th Special Operations Wing commander, said in a statement at the time.
The chemical compounds have been detected at military bases and other sites around the United States. EPA testing from 2013 to 2015 found significant amounts of PFAS in public water supplies in 33 states, a finding that helped move PFAS up as a national priority.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/10/17/stories/1060103515
-
New Jersey Jury Clears J&J of Liability in Latest Talc Case
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
In the latest case alleging that Johnson & Johnson talc products caused a plaintiff’s cancer, a New Jersey jury has cleared the company of liability. The 11 October decision follows on quickly from two mistrial verdictsin similar cases regarding the company’s baby powder in California.
In the New Jersey case, Rosalind Henry and her husband claimed that asbestos fibres in J&J’s talc products caused Ms Henry’s mesothelioma, a rare cancer associated with asbestos exposure. After less than a day of deliberation, the jury rejected these claims.
This was the seventh mesothelioma trial against the company, which is facing around 10,600 liability lawsuits in the US.
While J&J has been fighting litigation regarding the risks posed by its talc products for several years, the earlier lawsuits mostly alleged that the talc itself caused ovarian cancer.
Now plaintiffs are also arguing that asbestos is contaminating the talc, a fact that has been concealed by J&J. Asbestos has been linked to mesothelioma and ovarian cancer.
The company, however, denies these claims.
"We have deep sympathy for anyone diagnosed with any form of cancer and appreciate that people are looking for answers," said J&J representative Kim Montagnino in a statement to Chemical Watch. "However, Johnson’s Baby Powder is not the cause of this disease."
Over the past 50 years, Ms Montagnino said, many "independent, non-litigation driven scientific evaluations have been conducted by respected academic institutions and government bodies, including the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and none have concluded that the talc in Johnson’s Baby Powder contains asbestos."
https://chemicalwatch.com/71086/new-jersey-jury-clears-jj-of-liability-in-latest-talc-case
-
Industry Alarmed by UK REACH Full Data Requirement
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK’s Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) says companies will need to submit a "full" data package in order to register their chemicals under a UK version of REACH in a no-deal Brexit scenario.
The news, announced at the Health and Safety Executive’s second no-deal Brexit workshop in London last week, was met with disbelief from industry.
Douglas Leech, technical director at the Chemical Business Association (CBA), raised the question of data. He pointed out that for some companies with joint registrations "all they’ve got is name, rank, serial number and tonnage and a little note that says: "See joint registration". The data is all in the Echa system, he told delegates, adding: "Are you really saying that they’ve now got to go and buy the full data package again to do a UK REACH?"
James Dancy, head of EU exit – chemicals at Defra, responded by saying that because the UK is transferring REACH into national law, any new regulatory agency will "require the same information as currently required by EU REACH".
For sole registrants, he said, that should be "fairly simple" because they hold all that data. "Obviously the difficulty comes if you’re in a joint Sief [substance information exchange forum] or are an importer and don’t have any access to this data. We know this is a commercial agreement between every single Sief."
He suggested that companies review their Sief agreements "and see what may be possible about allowing" that data package for UK REACH and REACH IT.
Defra and the HSE are aware of "potential cost implications" for companies trying to get hold of this, he added. From examples industry has already given, this could cost "hundreds of thousands of pounds. I’m not trying to sugarcoat this. This is a difficult area. We’ve had to move EU legislation into UK law and this is the one last difficulty that we need industry to think about and prepare for."Two-year timeframe
Under a statutory instrument, the UK government would set a deadline of two years for companies to provide the data.
Neil Hollis, regulatory affairs specialist at BASF, asked Mr Dancy if this timescale is feasible, given that REACH registration deadlines were implemented over a ten-year period and that industry will need to negotiate access to data or potentially have studies repeated.
"I suggest from industry that it’s not," Mr Hollis said.
Mr Dancy answered that Defra consulted industry on the matter, and a two-year period was deemed "enough for [them] to try and get hold of this data".
David Ashworth, from the British Association for Chemical Specialities (BACS), said the deadline is far too short and "the more we look at it the more complicated it is". He asked Defra to review it and added that the BACS is not at all convinced that there is a need for all data. "We don’t understand what ‘all data’ is and we’d like that to be made more clear."
And Jo Lloyd from consultancy Environmental Resources Management (ERM) said dealing with data transfer and legal concerns within two years is "a huge issue" because of the number of consortia and quantity of registrations being managing on behalf of clients – not just for the EU regulatory regimes.
She gave the example of data transfer in Taiwan and South Korea, which involves a "much smaller number of substances" but where the transition period is a minimum three years. Transferring from EU to UK REACH is "almost kind of impossible", she said.
Mr Dancy said Defra and HSE will "put out some more information soon", while Defra’s deputy director of EU environment Gabrielle Edwards said the department will keep things "under very close review and see how the practicalities will work".
However, Helen Cariss from polymers manufacturer Synthomer said that it is "very disappointing" that the opinions given to Defra by industry "have not really been listened to in relation to a timeframe that’s realistic" for different tonnage bands in comparison with registrations under Echa.
Over 100 stakeholders attended the workshop, which was fully booked within hours of being announced. The HSE plans to run a third workshop, which is expected in early 2019.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71115/industry-alarmed-by-uk-reach-full-data-requirement
-
Trump Wants to Expedite a Texas Pipeline Project, But No One Seems to Know What It Is
Oct 17, 2018 | Platts
By Brian Scheid
“I’m baffled,” one US government official said last week.
“I have no clue,” said another.
“I have absolutely no idea what he’s talking about,” one frustrated analyst said after an hour of phone calls. “I’m not sure anybody does.”
On October 9, President Donald Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he was getting “expedited approval” for a Texas pipeline project.
According to a press pool report, Trump gave no additional details.
“It’s unclear exactly what project he was referring to,” the report notes.
As the week wore on, the Trump administration offered no additional information.
Officials with the US State Department, which can issue permits for cross-border liquid pipelines; the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, which regulates interstate pipelines that cross state boundaries; the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which approves the siting of natural gas pipelines; and the Department of Energy all referred questions to the White House.
The Railroad Commission of Texas, which regulates the state’s roughly 467,000-mile pipeline infrastructure and permits all new intrastate pipelines, declined to comment.
“Any question regarding comments by the President should be directed to the White House or the President’s representatives,” Ramona Nye, a commission spokeswoman, said in a statement.
The White House did not respond to multiple requests for comment from S&P Global Platts and other media outlets.
Analysts speculated that Trump may have misspoke, claiming that the president may have been briefed on Permian oil midstream constraints and thought the federal government could hasten approval of a pipeline project there.
But, as analysts noted, those permitting decisions would likely all be made at the state level.
“How would Trump expedite a Texas pipe?” asked Rusty Braziel, president and CEO of RBN Energy.
Permian oil production is expected to average about 3.5 million b/d this month, up about 843,000 b/d from a year ago.
Platts Analytics forecasts Permian production to grow to about 4.5 million b/d by the end of 2019 as midstream companies add about 3 million b/d of new pipeline takeaway capacity.
Most recently, EPIC Midstream announced earlier this month that it will temporarily move Permian crude oil to the Gulf on its NGL pipeline before its 825,000 b/d pipeline between the Permian and Corpus Christi comes in service.
Trump’s comments on the Texas pipeline project came amid his recent criticism of OPEC for, he claims, driving up global oil prices, an attempt to show he’s addressing rising energy prices ahead of next month’s congressional elections.
For Trump, $80/b Brent and $3/gal retail regular gasoline is a “red line,” according to Bob McNally, founder and president of Rapidan Energy Group and a former White House international and domestic energy adviser.
“It’s binary,” McNally said in an interview with the Platts Capitol Crude podcast. “Below that level, he really doesn’t care too much, he doesn’t tweet much, he doesn’t really talk much about OPEC or oil prices. But everything switched on the approach and then above $80/b Brent, $3/gallon retail gasoline. Oil can quickly become the most important issue.”
Which likely means that if Brent prices fall below $80/b and US drivers are, on average, paying less than $3/gal for gasoline, last week may be the last time we hear about this mysterious Texas pipeline project Trump wants to expedite.
But if prices climb, the project may come up again, even if no one is entirely sure just what it is.
http://blogs.platts.com/2018/10/17/trump-expedite-texas-pipeline-project/
-
Venture Global LNG to Supply U.S. Natural Gas to Poland
Oct 17, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
Venture Global LNG has signed two 20-year contracts to provide U.S. liquefied natural gas to the state-run Polish Oil and Gas Co.
The Virginia-based LNG company is building two export terminals in Louisiana. Its Calcasieu Pass facility is expected to begin operations in 2022, and its Plaquemines facility is expected to follow in 2023.Recommended Video
Under the agreements, each of the facilities will supply the Polish company with 1 million metric tons of LNG a year. The total supply is equivalent to roughly 25 cargoes, depending on the size of the ship.
RELATED: Europe becoming more dependent on Russian gas, DOE official says
Maciej Woźniak, vice president of the Polish company's management board for trade, said in a statement that the deal marks Central Europe's first long-term contracts for the purchase of U.S. LNG.
The deal comes as Europe looks to import more natural gas to help shift its power generation away from coal. U.S. officials have recently called for domestic LNG producers to ramp up exports to the continent, long reliant on Russian natural gas transported via pipeline.
Venture Global last month signed a 20-year contract with Spanish energy company Repsol, which agreed to buy 1 million metric tons of LNG a year. The Calcasieu Pass facility will supply the LNG once it is operational.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Venture-Global-LNG-to-supply-U-S-natural-gas-to-13314135.php
-
Schumer Wants Railroads to Notify Locals When Transporting Hazmat
Oct 17, 2018 | Progressive Railroading
U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) this week called on Canadian Pacific, CSX and other freight railroads to provide more information to county emergency management authorities and first responders when trains are transporting hazardous materials through local communities in New York.
Specifically, Schumer urged better state-local coordination and "proactive" and detailed information sharing when trains loaded with hazmat operate through their areas.
The senator's push for better information follows a 2017 incident involving a CP train that hit a Main Street overpass bridge in Buffalo. No one was hurt and the train's cars were empty. Still, trains traveling through upstate New York communities frequently are carrying highly dangerous chemical materials, Schumer said.
"The September 2017 train accident in Buffalo was a warning whistle that we must heed by being better informed and better prepared to deal with rail accidents," said Schumer in a press release. "We got lucky last time, but this incident showed us that we don't know enough about the hazardous materials that are being transported by rail through residential upstate communities on a daily basis."
The senator called on the railroads to expand their notification system to include more examples of "incredibly dangerous materials — and not exclusively crude oil and highly flammable liquids, as is currently the case."
Moreover, he called on railroads to directly notify county authorities — in addition to New York state officials — in order to improve state and local coordination and information-sharing regarding expected movements of hazardous chemical materials.
Joined by local officials, Schumer made his requests during a press conference held in Buffalo this week.
"Rail cars filled with oil and other hazardous materials frequently travel through the city of Buffalo, and 75 percent of our residents live within one mile of an active rail line," said Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown. "It's imperative that our local first responders receive information on the types of hazardous rail cargo being shipped through the city of Buffalo so they can be prepared to react in case of an accident."https://www.progressiverailroading.com/security/news/Schumer-wants-railroads-to-notify-locals-when-transporting-hazmat--55894
-
Trump Administration Touts Lower Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Oct 17, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
The Trump administration is set to celebrate strides in slashing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and factories, arguing the reductions are driven mostly by voluntary private sector action -- and not by federal regulations.
According to newly updated data from some 8,000 industrial facilities, total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions fell 2.7 percent between 2016 and 2017.
That includes big strides at power plants, where the Environmental Protection Agency said emissions in 2017 were down 4.5 percent compared with 2016 and 19.7 percent from 2011. That reduction reflects a broader transformation in the power sector, as utilities increasingly shift away from coal to natural gas that produces about half as many greenhouse gas emissions when burned to generate electricity.
“Thanks to President Trump’s regulatory reform agenda, the economy is booming, energy production is surging, and we are reducing greenhouse gas emissions from major industrial sources,” EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a news release Wednesday. “While many around the world are talking about reducing greenhouse gases, the U.S. continues to deliver, and today’s report is further evidence of our action-oriented approach.”
The new data come on the heels of a dire report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which warned that countries must take “unprecedented” action over the next 12 years to keep global warming in check and prevent a cascade of catastrophic consequences, from devastating droughts and savage storms to rising seas. Global commitments to cut heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions fall short of what is needed, the IPCC said, which is to slash pollution by more than 50 percent by 2030 and then to zero by 2050.
Read: Trump Says Climate Change No Hoax But Will ‘Change Back Again’
Environmentalists argue the Trump administration is taking credit for emission reductions compelled by federal regulations its agencies are now rolling back. For instance, the EPA has proposed easing requirements for oil companies to detect and repair leaks of the potent greenhouse gas methane at their facilities. It also has proposed scaling back Obama-era limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
But Wheeler argues regulations aren’t the driving factor.
“These achievements flow largely from technological breakthroughs in the private sector, not the heavy hand of government,” he said. “The Trump administration has proven that federal regulations are not necessary to drive CO2 reductions.”
Wheeler’s comments come amid updates in data from the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which collects annual emissions information from roughly 8,000 industrial facilities across 41 sectors of the economy.
President Donald Trump has long questioned climate change, declaring in one November 2012 tweet that the entire “concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” Although Trump subsequently said he was just joking, he continued called global warming an “expensive hoax” and frequently invoked winter snowstorms to question its existence.
Trump further disavowed the “hoax” allegation in an interview that aired on “60 Minutes” on Sunday. “I don’t think it’s a hoax. I think there’s probably a difference, but I don’t know that it’s man-made,” Trump said. “I’m not denying climate change. But it could very well go back.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-17/trump-touts-lower-greenhouse-gas-levels-as-u-s-is-on-defensive
-
Dems Damp Down Hopes for Climate Change Agenda
Oct 17, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Mike Lillis
Democrats are unlikely to pursue major climate change legislation if they win the House majority, despite a growing body of evidence suggesting time is running out to address the issue.
This represents a shift in strategy from when House Democrats last controlled the chamber. In 2009, they passed cap-and-trade legislation, which subsequently died in the Democratic-controlled Senate. The game plan for next year, House Democrats say, is more incremental steps and hearings.ADVERTISEMENT
With President Trump in the White House and Republicans favored to keep the Senate next year, climate legislation would face stiff headwinds, and pushing it could spark backlash from the right — both now and after the Nov. 6 midterm elections.
Considering those “constraints,” said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), Democrats should “focus on the practical and the opportunistic” to make short-term progress while fighting for bolder measures — “the aspirational goals” — over the longer term.
“It’s going to be, I think, more of an opportunistic strategy, where, in various pieces of legislation, across the board, we’re going to insert measures that address climate change,” said Connolly, a leader in the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition.
The office of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), a fierce environmentalist who ushered the cap-and-trade bill through the lower chamber almost a decade ago, declined to comment about the Democrats’ future climate plans. Pelosi has been touring the country stumping for Democratic candidates, with a focus on economic and health-care issues.
Others anticipate a piecemeal approach to climate policy if the Democrats win the chamber.
“I could imagine that we can do ancillary pieces that are very much reinforcing this issue and concern for climate change,” said Rep. Paul Tonko (N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s environment subcommittee.
Not all Democrats share that view. Faced with more data on a warming planet — and the role of human activity in exacerbating the trend — some lawmakers want the party to use its would-be majority to push a bold, sweeping package to hike the cost of carbon emissions.
Their urgency has been fueled by a new report from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which forecasts impacts like massive coral reef die-offs, increased drought and sea-level rise by 2040 if emissions are not significantly cut by 2030. The report’s authors said current climate policies and the 2015 Paris agreement — which Trump promised to exit — are not nearly enough to avoid disaster.
“I do think we need to go big,” said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.). “I’m all for incrementalism in policy. We do lots and lots of it, and it’s a good way to move forward. But this situation is so serious that we can’t do it in little steps.”
Beyer acknowledged the political hurdles facing such a plan, not least Trump’s rejection of consensus climate science. But he sees a path for working with moderate Republican senators and getting a climate change bill to the president’s desk. If it gets that far, he thinks Trump — enticed by the opportunity to claim a victory — might change his tune.
“Politically, it wouldn’t be smart for Democrats to give him a win, but we’re not talking about politics, we’re talking about the fate of the planet and the fate of humanity,” Beyer said.
Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.), a co-chairman of the bipartisan, 90-member Climate Solutions Caucus, rejected the notion that pricing-up carbon is beyond reach, even in the current political environment. He’s pushing for a bipartisan carbon-fee bill that, if passed by the House, would then put pressure on Trump and Senate Republicans to act.
“I’m not expecting the president to lead on this,” he said, “but I think Congress has an opportunity, the House has an opportunity, to move something forward — hopefully with bipartisan support — that the president would then have to respond to.”
Rep. Earl Blumenauer is also on board for bold action. The Oregon Democrat said fighting carbon pollution will be “a top priority” if Democrats win the House.
“My preferred method has been a putting a price on carbon — cap-and-trade is complex and less efficient,” he said.
Progressive groups, a vocal part of Democrats’ base, are certain to push for such an aggressive approach — as will many Democrats who launch 2020 presidential bids. Still, those lawmakers anticipating sweeping climate legislation appear to be in the minority, as more Democrats see a political environment that’s simply too hostile to move a major climate bill.
In a “60 Minutes” interview that aired on Sunday, Trump addressed the changing climate: “I think something’s happening. Something’s changing and it’ll change back again. I don’t think it’s a hoax, I think there’s probably a difference. But I don’t know that it’s man-made.”
Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said the notion that cap-and-trade or carbon tax legislation could pass the Senate and win Trump’s signature “is extremely unlikely.” He suggested Democrats adopt a two-tier approach: Pass piecemeal bills on issues where there’s bipartisan buy-in — like energy efficiency and grid modernization — while simultaneously holding hearings on the larger climate problem to build support among industry leaders and other stakeholders.
“We can’t be blind to the reality of Donald Trump’s climate change denial,” Welch said. “We can’t put all our eggs in that basket.”
Instead, Democrats are eyeing relatively small-ball measures that push energy efficiency, modernize the electric grid to handle more renewable energy, increase incentives for power sources like wind and solar and provide more infrastructure for electric vehicles.
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), the minority whip, said Democrats across the board deem the warming trend a threat to both national security and public health, urging Republicans to tackle it in bipartisan fashion “instead of denying climate change is real and taking steps to exacerbate it.” He singled out energy efficiency and clean energy technology as two areas “of potential bipartisan agreement.”
The failure in 2010 of the Democrats’ cap-and-trade bill is still fresh in House Democrats’ minds. Republicans won 63 seats and the House majority in 2010, campaigning against Democrats on climate change and ObamaCare.
Polling continually shows that voters rank climate far down on their list of priorities. And although energy prices are lower than they were a decade or so ago, few lawmakers want to be responsible for significant increases in consumers’ costs or job losses that could accompany new policies.
Democrats, who are now favored to seize the House, have crafted their campaign message around issues like increasing working-class wages and lowering the cost of prescription drugs. They think the kitchen-table agenda will resonate more effectively, particularly in conservative-leaning districts where voters tend to be wary of the economic impact of climate legislation.
As Speaker of the House in 2007, Pelosi struck deals with then-President George W. Bush on a variety of bills but didn’t push climate change until former President Obama was in the White House. Addressing the issue before the 2008 election, Pelosi said, “I’m trying to save the planet.”
Environmentalists agree with the Democrats’ strategy.
“A long time ago, we came to the realization that there was no real possibility that truly progressive climate legislation was going to be signed by President Trump,” said Lukas Ross, senior policy analyst at Friends of the Earth.
Instead, Ross wants Democrats to focus on investigating the Trump administration and holding officials’ feet to the fire for its environmental rollbacks.
Ana Unruh Cohen, managing director of government affairs at NRDC Action Fund, said next year wouldn’t be the right time for big efforts on climate. The group is the campaign affiliate of the Natural Resources Defense Council.
“You have to hit some singles and doubles to load the bases to hit a grand slam. I think Democratic leadership will be trying to get those bases loaded, even as some others in the caucus will be trying to point to the fences and lay out a big vision,” said Cohen.
“You have to hit some singles and doubles to load the bases to hit a grand slam. I think Democratic leadership will be trying to get those bases loaded, even as some others in the caucus will be trying to point to the fences and lay out a big vision,” said Cohen.
For the Trump administration’s supporters, the fear of a major climate bill shows that Democrats are afraid of backing up their words about climate with action.
“They will please their base, they will gin up the rhetoric on this,” said Tom Pyle, president of the industry-backed American Energy Alliance.
“As far as how bold they will be, it remains to be seen,” he said. “I see a lot of message bills and a whole lot of discussion about it.”
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the lead sponsors of the ill-fated cap-and-trade bill when he was in the House, said the priority for House Democrats should be to restart the legislative conversation on climate.
“I think once Democrats start to have hearings on the severity of the problem, and how many jobs get created if you put in place a plan to deal with the crisis, that we would have a real chance at making some progress,” he said.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/411766-dems-damp-down-hopes-for-climate-change-agenda
-
Britain Looking at Four Options for Carbon Pricing After Brexit – Govt Official
Oct 17, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Susanna Twidale
Britain is looking at four options for carbon pricing once it leaves the European Union, including launching its own emissions trading system, a government official said on Wednesday.
Britain could remain in the EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS); launch a UK ETS which links to the European scheme; set up a stand-alone UK ETS, or revert to a carbon tax, Emily Briggs, deputy head of emissions trading at Britain's Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, said.
Which option is chosen will partly depend on whether Britain can secure a divorce deal with the EU on the terms of its exit from the bloc.
The British government has said that if it secures a Brexit deal with the EU, it intends to remain in the ETS until at least the end of the current trading phase running from 2013-2020, but has not said what it plans to do after that.
ADVERTISEMENT
"We are looking at four options ... whatever we do on carbon pricing will be at least as ambitious as the current scheme," Briggs said at the Carbon Forward conference in London.
If Britain departs the EU with no divorce deal, it would automatically leave the EU's Emissions Trading System and its carbon pricing system would default to a tax, the government said in a no-deal Brexit advisory paper issued last week.
Britain is the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases in Europe and its utilities and industry are among the largest buyers of permits in the ETS, which charges power plants and factories for every tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) they emit.
Companies from these sectors have urged Britain to stay in the ETS until the end of the current trading phase to avoid disruption, but are divided over Britain's longer-term participation in the scheme.
Britain's carbon price is currently made up of two levies, a domestic carbon tax set at 18 pounds ($24) per tonne, paid on top of obligations under the ETS, which forces companies to surrender one carbon permit for every tonne of CO2 they emit.
As Britain is such a big buyer of permits in the ETS, carbon analysts have said Britain's exit from the scheme would likely have a bearish impact on prices.
Setting a price on carbon dioxide emissions is aimed at curbing pollution and helping Britain meet its target to cut emissions by 80 percent on 1990 levels by 2050.
The UK government will publish more details of how it will initially apply a carbon price in a 'no deal' scenario in its annual budget statement on Oct. 29 and legislation will be included in the Finance Bill 2018-19, it said in last week's no deal paper.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/10/17/business/17reuters-britain-carbontrading.html
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested