Preview Newsletter
acc am feb 25
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Chemical Activity Barometer Falls in February
Feb 24, 2015 | Hydrocarbon Processing
The Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB), a leading economic indicator created by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), dipped 0.2% this month after a 0.3% gain in January. The figures are as measured on a three-month moving average (3MMA). Accounting for adjustments, the CAB remains up 3.2% over this time last year. -
(ACC Mentioned) Plastic Film Recycling Rises 11 Percent, While Rigid Plastics Rate Drops Slightly
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Recycling of plastic wraps, bags and films surged in 2013 to a reported 1.14 billion pounds, the largest amount recorded since measurement began, according to a report released Feb. 24 by the American Chemistry Council. The 2013 “National Postconsumer Plastic Bag and Film Recycling Report”, compiled by Moore Recycling Associates... -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Touts Increased Recycling of Plastic Wraps, Bags, Film in 2013
Feb 24, 2015 | Plastics Today
By Clare Goldsberry
The recycling of postconsumer plastic film packaging surged 116 million pounds, or 11%, in 2013 to reach a reported 1.14 billion pounds, according to a national report released on Feb. 24 at the 2015 Plastics Recycling Conference. This marks the highest annual collection of plastic film—a category that includes product wraps... -
(ACC Mentioned) Solutions For Plastic Waste Come With Collaboration
Feb 25, 2015 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
Multiple levels of the plastics industry will need to work together to find innovative solutions to the issue of plastic waste, according to a panel of industry experts at the 2015 Plastics News Executive Forum. “Less than half of packaging is diverted from landfills,” market veteran Alan Blake said at the event, Feb. 4-6 in Lake Las Vegas. -
(ACC Mentioned) Plastic Bag and Wrap Recycling Up 11% in 2013
Feb 24, 2015 | Packaging World
By Anne Marie Mohan
The recycling of postconsumer plastic film packaging surged 116 million pounds, or 11%, in 2013 to reach a reported 1.14 billion pounds, according to a national report released at the 2015 Plastics Recycling Conference. This marks the highest annual collection of plastic film—a category that includes product wraps, bags, and commercial... -
Chemical Companies Seek Permanent Tax Credit
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
Small- and medium-sized chemical manufacturers anticipate their introduction of new chemicals to be the primary way they will grow their businesses in 2015, according to survey results released Feb. 24 by the Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates (SOCMA). -
Proposed Rule in Vermont Would Require Disclosure of Toxics in Children's Products
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Martha Kessler
Vermont health officials are seeking comment on a proposed rule that would establish requirements for the disclosure and reporting of toxic substances that are intentionally added to, or found to be present in, children's products for sale in that state beginning in 2016. -
ASTM Guide on Alternative Assessment Aims to Tailor Decisions to Business Context
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
An ASTM International committee is developing a guide to help companies tailor alternative chemical assessments to business decisions they are accustomed to making. For example, the guide will urge companies to consider the customer acceptability of a product made without a chemical of concern... -
Plastic Bag Ban Suspended in California As Overturn Measure Qualifies for Ballot
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Michael B. Marois
California suspended its statewide ban on single-use plastic shopping bags until next year after a referendum to overturn it qualified for the November 2016 ballot. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed the bill into law last year, making California the first state to halt use of plastic shopping bags (191 DEN A-13, 10/2/14). -
(ACC Mentioned) House, Senate Introduce Two Bills Aimed At Boosting EPA Scientific Transparency
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Senate and House lawmakers unveiled two bills Feb. 24 that they say will improve scientific transparency in the Environmental Protection Agency's rulemaking process and modernize the role of the agency's scientific advisory panel. One bill, the Secret Science Reform Act (no number available), would prohibit the EPA from finalizing... -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Claim on Meeting Air Toxics Obligations Would Prove Unlawful, Sierra Club Alleges
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency's claim that it has met its obligations to set emissions standards covering seven hazardous air pollutants is unlawful because the agency hasn't set standards for individual pollutants, according to the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club, in comments filed on the organization's behalf by Earthjustice... -
As Fracking Debates Roil, It's Time for National Standards | Commentary
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Rep. Diana DeGette
Few developments on the energy landscape have been as disruptive as the spread of hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking. The technique has transformed the economy of communities across the country while raising concerns about safety and environmental impacts. -
Obama Vetoes Keystone XL Pipeline Bill; Senate Republicans Plan Override Vote
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
President Barack Obama vetoed legislation Feb. 24 that would authorize the Keystone XL pipeline, saying the bill “earned my veto” because it would circumvent the role of the executive branch in ensuring the cross-border project is in the national interest. The legislation (S. 1), sponsored by Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.)... -
Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Steven Dennis
President Barack Obama has vetoed the Keystone Pipeline bill as promised, using his veto pen for just the third time and the first since 2010. Obama had repeatedly vowed to veto the bill, one of the first major legislative efforts by Republicans now in charge of both chambers of Congress, citing process. -
Republicans Intensify Scrutiny of Administration Following Veto
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Manuel Quiñones
President Obama's veto yesterday of legislation to approve TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada has only intensified scrutiny from the project's supporters on Capitol Hill. Even before the veto became official, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) promised to try to override the president's veto. -
Terrorism Alert: Inside Big Oil's Fight for Keystone XL Pipeline
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Isaac Arnsdorf
The intelligence was alarming: homegrown extremists were said to be targeting the Keystone XL pipeline. It was April 2013, and environmentalists had joined together in opposition to the 1,700-mile (2,735-kilometer) Keystone system, which connects the oil sands of Alberta to refineries in the U.S. -
Murkowski Blasts Jewell as ‘Hurting’ Alaska
Feb 24, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Darren Goode
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski said she didn’t want to get into a personal feud with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell. But the Alaska Republican used a budget hearing in her panel Tuesday to publicly chastise Jewell and the Obama administration for “hurting Alaskans” by blocking oil, gas, coal and mineral ... -
Van Hollen Bill Would Require Oil, Gas, Coal Sector to Purchase Carbon Permits
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The oil, coal and natural gas sector would need to purchase carbon permits for each ton of greenhouse gases they emit, with all revenue returned to U.S. households, under a bill introduced Feb. 24 by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). The Climate and Family Security Act (H.R. 1027) would put mandatory caps on U.S. carbon emissions, requiring... -
Resources Chairman Bishop Discusses Panel Priorities, Plans for Climate, Drilling Action
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
As the Obama administration takes action on drilling, fracking and Arctic exploration, how will the 114th Congress shape its policy priorities on natural resources? During today's OnPoint, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, discusses his panel's policy objectives for this session ... -
Administration Strategies on Energy Draw Fire of Murkowski, Praise by Democrats
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
The Obama administration “is actively impeding many of the best economic opportunities in the West,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said Feb. 24. “It is depriving thousands who live in our states of the ability to find a good job, earn a good wage and live... -
Murkowski Blasts 'Unprecedented Attack' on Alaskan Energy
Feb 24, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Senate Republicans sharply criticized Interior Secretary Sally Jewell Tuesday for her budget request and other actions that they say are hurting energy development and the economy. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairwoman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, has repeatedly clashed with Jewell over how the administration treats Alaska... -
Portman Seeks Vote on Mini Efficiency Bill After President Vetoes Keystone Legislation
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
A slimmed-down energy efficiency bill that had been approved as an amendment to Keystone legislation in the Senate has been introduced as a standalone bill. The bill (S. 535), sponsored by Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), includes measures that would loosen energy efficiency standards... -
The President's Misplaced Energy Priorities | Commentary
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Rep. Edward Whifield
Earlier this month, the White House doubled down on President Barack Obama’s pronouncement that climate change is a bigger threat to Americans than terrorism. The comments reveal a startling disconnect and come at a time when we have witnessed an unsettling uptick in terror attacks. These recent statements also underscore just how out of... -
Mr. President, Say Yes to Energy | Commentary
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Rep. Renee Ellmers
For far too long, our country’s energy policies have been based on the idea of energy scarcity and foreign dependence. Now, we seem to be on the verge of energy independence. In order to unleash our true energy potential, we must explore all options — including exploration on federal lands. -
California Court Upholds Offset Rules In State's Cap-and-Trade Program
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
A California appellate court has upheld the carbon offset rules in the state's greenhouse gas emissions cap-and-trade program (Our Children's Earth Found. v. California Air Res. Bd., Cal. Ct. App., No. A138830, 2/23/15). In a Feb. 23 opinion, the California Courts of Appeal's First Appellate District said the “voluminous” administrative... -
U.S. May Hit Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cut Target Sooner Than 2025, Kerry Says
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The U.S. may be able to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent before its pledged deadline of 2025, Secretary of State John Kerry told a Senate committee Feb. 24. “We set a goal of somewhere between a 26 to 28 percent reduction in our emissions by 2025 with the hope that we are going to actually do better—make cuts... -
API Seeks To Stay GHG Reporting Lawsuit While EPA Considers Changes
Feb 24, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Dawn Reeves
The American Petroleum Institute (API) is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to put its latest suit over EPA's 2014 greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting rules for the oil and gas sector on hold while the agency considers potential changes to its 2010 GHG reporting requirements that could resolve issues in the new suit. -
House, Senate Launch Investigations Into Funding Sources for Climate Change Skeptics
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Two congressional Democrats have launched investigations into which groups fund the small group of researchers who reject the scientific consensus that human activity significantly contributes to climate change. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, sent letters Feb. 24... -
Republicans Resume Assault on 'Secret Science'
Feb 24, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Amanda Peterka
Senate and House Republicans today resurrected legislation aimed at boosting transparency in the science that U.S. EPA uses in rulemaking. House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said their "Secret Science Reform Act of 2015" would compel EPA to make its science... -
GOP Attacks EPA on ‘Secret Science’
Feb 24, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Republican lawmakers introduced new legislation Tuesday aimed at shining a light on the science behind the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulations. Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tenn.) said the EPA relies heavily on “secret science” to justify its regulations, and the public should be able to scrutinize... -
Panel to Vote on Bills Targeting Advisory Board, 'Secret Science'
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Robin Bravender
House lawmakers are reviving their offensive against U.S. EPA's data and roster of scientific advisers. The House Science, Space and Technology Committee has scheduled a vote for this afternoon on two bills that aim to overhaul what EPA critics have called "secret science" that the agency uses to underpin costly regulations... -
Focus Legislative Energy on a National Carbon Policy, Not Keystone XL
Feb 25, 2015 | The Washington Post
Climate change warriors of all stripes were focused on the White House on Tuesday, where President Obama vetoed a bill that would have authorized construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. Like all the other attention slathered on this overblown issue, the focus was misplaced. It would have been better placed on the Capitol... -
Compressor Stations May Be Permitted Individually Under Clean Air Act, Court Rules
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rebecca Wilhelm
Eight compressor stations operated by a Pennsylvania company may be permitted individually as minor air contamination sources instead of aggregated as a major source subject to stricter requirements under the Clean Air Act, a federal district court has ruled (Citizens for Pa.'s Future v. Ultra Res., Inc., M.D. Pa., No. 4:11-CV-1360, 2/23/15). -
Resources Chairman Bishop Discusses Panel Priorities, Plans for Climate, Drilling Action
|
-
White House Energy Review to Include Crude-by-Rail Recommendations, DOE Says
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
A broad interagency assessment of national energy policy being conducted by the Obama administration will include recommendations related to improving crude-by-rail safety, a senior Energy Department official said Feb. 24. The administration's Quadrennial Energy Review will include an initiative to improve the quality of data on shipments... -
Lawmakers Offer Bills to Strengthen Response to Oil Train Accidents
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Sean Reilly
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and three co-sponsors yesterday reintroduced legislation to bolster preparedness for firefighters and other emergency responders who would be first on the scene in dealing with oil train derailments and other rail mishaps involving hazardous materials. -
Heitkamp Reintroduces Crude Oil Rail Transport Emergency Response Bill
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
Legislation to ensure emergency responders have adequate resources and training to respond to derailments of trains carrying crude oil and other flammable liquids was reintroduced Feb. 24 by Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.). The introduction of the bill (S. 546) comes roughly a week after a train carrying crude oil in West Virginia derailed... -
CSX Derailment Probe Unlikely to Alter Crude-by-Rail Debate, May Expedite Rule
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
Federal railroad and hazmat safety officials can begin investigating what caused or contributed to the recent West Virginia derailment of a train carrying crude oil, as well as determining what enforcement actions are warranted, the Transportation Department announced Feb. 22. The derailment itself could—and a senator and a federal safety... -
Shell Refinery Modifications to Accommodate Crude-by-Rail Need EIS, County Official Finds
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Shukovsky
Washington state environmental activists prevailed Feb. 23 in their first challenge to what they say amounts to government rubber-stamping of plans to build crude-by-rail infrastructure at the state's five refineries. A hearing examiner for Skagit County overturned a decision by county planners that said construction of crude-by-rail... -
PHMSA Wants Global Radioactive Transport Input
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is soliciting proposals on what needs to be changed in international radioactive material transport standards, an agency official announced at a Feb. 24 PHMSA meeting. The proposals are not for domestic rule changes but rather are for changes to the International Atomic...
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Chemical Activity Barometer Falls in February
Feb 24, 2015 | Hydrocarbon Processing
The Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB), a leading economic indicator created by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), dipped 0.2% this month after a 0.3% gain in January.
The figures are as measured on a three-month moving average (3MMA). Accounting for adjustments, the CAB remains up 3.2% over this time last year.
The Chemical Activity Barometer has four primary components, each consisting of a variety of indicators:1) production;
2) equity prices;
3) product prices; and
4) inventories and other indicators.
During February, the components were mixed, with production and equity prices up, product prices down, and inventories continuing to improve.
“Heavy snows in New England and severe cold weather across much of the nation are affecting growth prospects this quarter,” said Dr. Kevin Swift, chief economist at the ACC. “However, chemical equity prices still surged in February and have outperformed the overall stock market, which is always a good sign."
The Chemical Activity Barometer is a leading economic indicator derived from a composite index of chemical industry activity. The chemical industry has been found to consistently lead the US economy’s business cycle given its early position in the supply chain, and this barometer can be used to determine turning points and likely trends in the wider economy, according to the ACC.
Month-to-month movements can be volatile, so a three-month moving average of the barometer is provided. -
(ACC Mentioned) Plastic Film Recycling Rises 11 Percent, While Rigid Plastics Rate Drops Slightly
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Recycling of plastic wraps, bags and films surged in 2013 to a reported 1.14 billion pounds, the largest amount recorded since measurement began, according to a report released Feb. 24 by the American Chemistry Council.
The 2013 “National Postconsumer Plastic Bag and Film Recycling Report”, compiled by Moore Recycling Associates, attributed the record collection of plastic film, made primarily from polyethylene, to more comprehensive reporting and greater collection efforts around the country.
That 1.14 billion pounds in collected plastics film represents an 11 percent increase from the 1.02 billion pounds collected in 2012. It also represents an increase of 74 percent since 2005, when 652.5 million pounds of the film was collected and measurement began.
“We are pleased to see such strong growth in the recycling of polyethylene wraps,” Steve Russell, vice president of plastics for the American Chemistry Council, said in a statement. “These increases highlight the critical role that grocers, retailers and other businesses play in collecting this valuable material.”
Recycled plastic film can be used in products including lawn and garden products, crates, film for new plastic packaging, durable composite lumber for outdoor decks and fencing, pipe and other uses.
Separate Rigid Plastics Report
A separate Feb. 24 report, also compiled by Moore Recycling Associates for the American Chemistry Council, found just over 1 billion pounds of rigid plastics, excluding bottles, were collected for recycling in 2013. That represents a 1 percent decline from 2012.
The report linked the drop from 1.02 billion pounds in collected rigid plastics in 2012 to 1 billion in 2013 to newly implemented stricter standards for accepting scrap imports in China.
Despite the decrease, the report notes collection of rigid plastics has increased 210 percent since 2007.
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Touts Increased Recycling of Plastic Wraps, Bags, Film in 2013
Feb 24, 2015 | Plastics Today
By Clare Goldsberry
The recycling of postconsumer plastic film packaging surged 116 million pounds, or 11%, in 2013 to reach a reported 1.14 billion pounds, according to a national report released on Feb. 24 at the 2015 Plastics Recycling Conference. This marks the highest annual collection of plastic film—a category that includes product wraps, bags and commercial stretch film made primarily from polyethylene (PE)—for recycling, since the survey began in 2005.
The 2013 National Postconsumer Plastic Bag & Film Recycling Report also found a 75% increase in polyethylene film collected for recycling since 2005. Moore Recycling Associates Inc., which authored the report for the American Chemistry Council's (ACC) Plastics Division, attributes the gain to a combination of increased collection and more comprehensive reporting.
The increases detailed in the report show that greater collection is taking place among small- and mid-sized businesses and that consumers are bringing more of their used flexible plastic wraps to at-store collection programs to be recycled.
"We are pleased to see such strong growth in the recycling of polyethylene wraps," said Steve Russell, Vice President of plastics for the ACC. "These increases highlight the critical role that grocers, retailers and other businesses play in collecting this valuable material."
In recent months, several major brands and retailers have started placing the Sustainable Packaging Coalition's (SPC) "store drop-off" label on their film packages to remind consumers to bring their used polyethylene wraps back to participating grocery and retail stores to be recycled. In addition, the SPC, Flexible Film Recycling Group and Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers have launched the Wrap Action Recycling Program, or WRAP, which makes it easier for state and municipal governments, brands and retailers to increase awareness of opportunities to recycle used PE wraps at local stores.
Recycled PE film is used to make a range of products, including durable composite lumber for outdoor decking and fencing, home building products, lawn and garden products, crates, pipe, and film for new plastic packaging.
A separate report released on Feb. 24 found that just over one billion pounds of rigid plastics, excluding bottles (measured separately), was collected to be recycled in the United States in 2013, representing triple the amount collected since 2007 and a slight dip (1%) since 2012.
The 2013 National Postconsumer Non-Bottle Rigid Plastic Recycling Report also found a 17% annual increase in domestic processing of these postconsumer items, with 67% processed in the United States and Canada—the highest rate since the annual report was introduced in 2007.
Of the resin categories measured in the survey, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and polypropylene (PP) showed modest increases in 2013, with HDPE making up 36% and PP making up 39% of the total one billion pounds. The primary domestic uses for these postconsumer materials include automotive parts, crates, buckets, pipe, and lawn and garden products.
An important driver of domestic processing is the growth of plastic recovery facilities, or PRFs, which purchase mixed rigid bales (typically less valuable) and separate them into segregated resins, said the ACC release.
The one-percent decrease in rigid plastics recycling is the only dip in the report's history and is largely attributable to China's stricter standards for accepting scrap imports, commonly referred to as the Green Fence, which began in 2013. According to Moore Recycling Associates, the Green Fence had a two-fold impact on markets for recycled plastics: China's tighter controls resulted in more material available for U.S. plastic processors, and U.S. recyclers have had to meet higher quality standards to sell this material domestically and abroad.
"Recyclers addressed the challenges and opportunities presented by the Green Fence, and we believe that the plastic recycling industry emerged stronger as a result," said Patty Moore, President of Moore Recycling. "Recycled plastic producers have invested in advanced separation infrastructure or taken other steps to create higher quality bales with greater yields."
-
(ACC Mentioned) Solutions For Plastic Waste Come With Collaboration
Feb 25, 2015 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
Multiple levels of the plastics industry will need to work together to find innovative solutions to the issue of plastic waste, according to a panel of industry experts at the 2015 Plastics News Executive Forum.
“Less than half of packaging is diverted from landfills,” market veteran Alan Blake said at the event, Feb. 4-6 in Lake Las Vegas. “There’s a big opportunity out there.”
Blake is executive director of PAC NEXT, a Valencia, Calif.-based trade group that represents more than 130 packaging firms.
Lightweighting of plastic bottles has reduced landfill waste by 24 million pounds per year, according to David Clark, vice president of safety, sustainability and environment for Australia-based packaging giant Amcor Ltd. Even something as simple as a new design for strawberry packaging can produce results, lowering landfill rates by 700,000 pounds per year.
Amcor uses 80 million pounds of recycled PET and high density polyethylene per year, but even so, Clark added that processors “have to consider the right material for the right application.”
Susan Robinson has a great view of the plastic waste topic as federal public affairs director for solid waste giant Waste Management Inc. of Houston.
“Plastic recycling rates are growing,” she said. “But the pinch point is the recycling facility.
“It takes a lot of equipment and labor to sort material, and there are challenges with flexible film and flexible packaging,” Robinson added. “We need to keep our eyes on the prize — that the ultimate goal is reducing greenhouse gas emissions, not just recycling.”
She also said that progress is being made in pyrolysis, fermentation and other methods that can divert plastics waste from landfills.
Dow Chemical Co. — a leading global materials firm based in Midland, Mich. — also has been active on the plastic waste front. The firm has worked with the American Chemistry Council to promote the recycling of PE film and also has been involved with Project Reflex, a U.K.-based program aimed to create “a circular economy for flexible packaging,” according to Jeffrey Wooster, the firm’s global sustainability leader.
Dow has worked to develop PE grades for standup pouches for food applications. The pouches can replace paperboard containers, Wooster said, resulting in 90 percent less post-consumer solid waste.
In California, Dow currently is involved with an energy bag pilot project, in which non-standard recycling products can be placed in purple garbage bags which are then converted into synthetic fuel via pyrolysis.
But even with the progress made, Wooster said that the plastics industry needs to continue to promote these positive steps.
“Plastics are good for sustainability, but we have an identity crisis,” he added. “People think we’re bad — but we’re really good.”
-
(ACC Mentioned) Plastic Bag and Wrap Recycling Up 11% in 2013
Feb 24, 2015 | Packaging World
By Anne Marie Mohan
The recycling of postconsumer plastic film packaging surged 116 million pounds, or 11%, in 2013 to reach a reported 1.14 billion pounds, according to a national report released at the 2015 Plastics Recycling Conference. This marks the highest annual collection of plastic film—a category that includes product wraps, bags, and commercial stretch film made primarily from polyethylene—for recycling, since the survey began in 2005.
The “2013 National Postconsumer Plastic Bag & Film Recycling Report” also found a 74% increase in PE film collected for recycling since 2005. Moore Recycling Associates Inc., which authored the report for the American Chemistry Council's Plastics Division, attributes the gain to a combination of increased collection and more comprehensive reporting.
The increases detailed in the report show that greater collection is taking place among small and mid-sized businesses, and that consumers are bringing more of their used flexible plastic wraps to at-store collection programs to be recycled.
“We are pleased to see such strong growth in the recycling of polyethylene wraps,” says Steve Russell, Vice President of Plastics for ACC. “These increases highlight the critical role that grocers, retailers, and other businesses play in collecting this valuable material.”
In recent months, several major brands and retailers have started placing the Sustainable Packaging Coalition’s “store drop-off” label on their film packages to remind consumers to bring their used PE wraps back to participating grocery and retail stores to be recycled.In addition, the SPC, the Flexible Film Recycling Group, and the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers have launched the Wrap Action Recycling Program, or WRAP, which makes it easier for state and municipal governments, brands, and retailers to increase awareness of opportunities to recycle used PE wraps at local stores.
Recycled PE film is used to make a range of products, including durable composite lumber for outdoor decks and fencing, home building products, lawn and garden products, crates, pipe, and film for new plastic packaging.
-
Chemical Companies Seek Permanent Tax Credit
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
Small- and medium-sized chemical manufacturers anticipate their introduction of new chemicals to be the primary way they will grow their businesses in 2015, according to survey results released Feb. 24 by the Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates (SOCMA). Of the 134 businesses that responded to SOCMA's survey, 61 percent said new product introduction will be their top strategy to increase profits. The results illustrate speciality chemical manufacturers' need for a permanent research and development tax credit, Bill Allmond, vice president of government relations for SOCMA, said as the society released its survey results. The tax credit expired Dec. 31, 2014. SOCMA members will urge Congress to make the tax credit permanent and to modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act on April 21-22 when they meet for the society's annual fly in. The survey results are available at http://op.bna.com/env.nsf/r?Open=prio-9u2t8j.
-
Proposed Rule in Vermont Would Require Disclosure of Toxics in Children's Products
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Martha Kessler
Vermont health officials are seeking comment on a proposed rule that would establish requirements for the disclosure and reporting of toxic substances that are intentionally added to, or found to be present in, children's products for sale in that state beginning in 2016.
The proposed rule lists 66 substances that are considered to be chemicals of high concern to children, including such chemicals as formaldehyde, aniline and N-nitrosodimethylamine, which would trigger the disclosure and reporting requirements. The proposed rule also would apply to a chemical listed under 18 V.S.A Sec. 1773.
The Vermont Department of Health said it will hold a hearing on the proposed rule (Chap. 6 Environmental Health Rules, Subchapter 7) titled Chemicals of High Concern in Children's Products March 20 in Burlington, Vt., and will accept comments until March 27. Public comments may be e-mailed to AHS.VDHRules@state.vt.us.
According to the proposed rule posted Feb. 18, a manufacturer of a children's product or a trade association representing those manufacturers would be required to submit biennially to the state health department a disclosure notice containing certain product and chemical information as specified in the rule.
-
ASTM Guide on Alternative Assessment Aims to Tailor Decisions to Business Context
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
An ASTM International committee is developing a guide to help companies tailor alternative chemical assessments to business decisions they are accustomed to making.
For example, the guide will urge companies to consider the customer acceptability of a product made without a chemical of concern, Michael Schmeida, chairman of ASTM's Committee E60 on Sustainability, told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 23.
“There are tools for doing alternative assessments that do a really good job,” Schmeida said.
Some companies, however, are skeptical about these tools because alternative assessment methods don't always place the choices users must make into the context of a company's day-to-day decision-making process, said Schmeida, who also manages sustainability at the Oatley Co., a family-owned plumbing supply manufacturer.
Michael Kirschner, a consultant with Environ International Corp., said nearly a dozen alternatives assessment guidelines are available that have been produced primarily by governments and environmental organizations.
Yet manufacturers have to do the actual work, Kirschner told BNA in an e-mail.
Manufacturers know how to assess trade-offs and look at the function, cost, availability and other technical and business parameters because that expertise exists within industry, Kirschner said.
“The expertise must be developed within industry, up and down the supply chain, to assess and ‘trade off’ environmental and human health parameters,” he said. “I think the ASTM guideline will give industry an avenue to develop an approach that meets the needs, but does so efficiently, based on how such assessments are already done.”
Organizes Monthly Information Exchange
Kirschner helps organize the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Network on Chemical Regulation's monthly phone meeting where companies throughout the chemical supply chain exchange news on chemical regulations and policies. Schmeida described ASTM's guide during the network's Feb. 19 meeting.
ASTM's guide is designed to help specific industries, companies and regulators conduct comprehensive assessments that address all life stages, Schmeida said.
The guide won't tell users how to assess alternatives, but it will help them structure the results of an assessment to make and justify a final decision, Schmeida said.
Drivers spurring the development of the guide include California's Safer Consumer Product Regulation, he said.
Customer Acceptance Called Part of Activity
Ensuring customer acceptance is one factor companies know they must consider as they evaluate chemicals or engineering methods that may substitute for a chemical of concern, Schmeida said.
Customer acceptance of alternatives is a tenet several trade associations supported in the Principles of Alternatives Assessment they unveiled in 2014 (44 DEN A-11, 3/6/14).
ASTM's guide will urge companies to examine social, economic and ecological factors of various alternatives while they also consider life cycle events such as the acquisition of materials to make a product, the production and transportation of the product, its use and what occurs to it at the end of its life, Schmeida said.
The social consideration is where companies would be encouraged to listen to their customers regarding possible alternatives, Schmeida said.
The guide will define terms it uses, Schmeida said.
The selection of terms for the final guide is still being revised, but examples are likely to include “green chemistry” and “alternative assessment,” he said.
Participation Urged
The E60 subcommittee that is preparing the guide completed its first ballot in late January, Schmeida said. The goal is to have a second ballot in April and aim for a complete guide by late 2015 or early 2016, he said.
To maximize the guide's benefit, Schmeida encouraged additional companies and trade associations to join the subcommittee as it completes its work.
Standards form the foundation of contracts and other critical business documents, he said.
Kirschner said: “I think it's time for more manufacturers to step up to the plate and participate in this project. While all stakeholder voices are important in this, the voice that's most important, and has been the most under-represented, is that of the knowledgeable manufacturer. There are some manufacturers, primarily in the chemical and formulation spaces, who have expertise I'd like to see participating in the development of this ASTM guideline.”
Symposium Planned
U.S. and European regulators, industry professionals and other interested parties will discuss alternative assessments at a symposium to be held at the National Institutes of Health in Maryland March 5-6.
Organized by the Lowell Center for Sustainable Production at the University of Massachusetts at Lowell, the symposium will discuss gaps in knowledge and methods confronting the use of alternatives assessment, identify elements of a research agenda for alternatives assessment and a process for moving it forward and advance the practice for alternatives assessment.
-
Plastic Bag Ban Suspended in California As Overturn Measure Qualifies for Ballot
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Michael B. Marois
California suspended its statewide ban on single-use plastic shopping bags until next year after a referendum to overturn it qualified for the November 2016 ballot.
Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed the bill into law last year, making California the first state to halt use of plastic shopping bags (191 DEN A-13, 10/2/14).
Supporters of the overturn referendum led by the American Progressive Bag Alliance, which represents plastic bag makers, turned in more than enough signatures to qualify for the ballot, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla said. California's Constitution suspends the law until voters have a chance to keep or reverse it.
Brown signed the bill at the urging of environmentalists, labor unions and grocery and retail industries, according to a bill analysis. They argued about 14 billion one-use bags are handed out to California shoppers per year, contributing to pollution and blight.
A call requesting comment from the American Progressive Bag Alliance wasn't immediately returned.
To qualify for the ballot, the referendum needed 504,760 valid petition signatures, which is equal to 5 percent of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2010 gubernatorial election. A random sampling of petition signatures found more than enough were valid, Padilla said.
Under the law enacting the statewide ban, stores with at least 10,000 square feet of floor space had to stop offering shoppers plastic carry-out bags and instead charge at least 10 cents for paper substitutes. The ban would apply to smaller stores next year.
Los Angeles and San Francisco are among more than 100 cities and counties that already outlaw plastic bags. Local prohibitions in California aren't suspended.
-
(ACC Mentioned) House, Senate Introduce Two Bills Aimed At Boosting EPA Scientific Transparency
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Senate and House lawmakers unveiled two bills Feb. 24 that they say will improve scientific transparency in the Environmental Protection Agency's rulemaking process and modernize the role of the agency's scientific advisory panel.
One bill, the Secret Science Reform Act (no number available), would prohibit the EPA from finalizing regulations unless the agency makes public scientific and technical information used in their development. The bill, similar to one last session, would ensure protection of personal and confidential information, according to the sponsors.
The other, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act (no number available), would modify the Science Advisory Board selection process, seek to ensure dissenting opinions are heard and expand public participation opportunities.
Similar versions of both bills passed the House in 2014, though the White House threatened to veto both if they reached President Barack Obama's desk (224 DEN A-10, 11/20/14).
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy pushed back in April 2014 against what she described as “manufactured” attempts by groups with political motivations to undermine the work of the agency's scientists and advisers (82 DEN A-7, 4/29/14).
Going After ‘Secret Science.'
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said their Secret Science Reform Act would ensure independent experts could review the science used by the EPA in crafting its regulations.
“Costly regulations should not be created behind closed doors and out of public view,” Smith, chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, said in a statement. “Hardworking American families foot the bill for EPA's billion dollar regulations and have a right to know that policy is based on sound science and thoughtful analysis.”
Republican Sens. David Vitter (La.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) will cosponsor the legislation.
Environmental advocates were quick to slam the bill and urged the White House to veto it if needed.
Bill Called ‘Irresponsible.'
“This irresponsible bill continues to obstruct EPA enforcement of health and environmental safeguards and prohibits EPA from using peer-reviewed science to uphold the law,” John Walke, clean air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told Bloomberg BNA. “The legislation also has a pro-polluter double-standard, simultaneously letting industry gain regulatory approvals while hiding science, data and information from the public.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce disagreed and said the bill would restore transparency and confidence in the regulatory process.
“The Secret Science Reform Act would improve the transparency and reliability of scientific and technical information agencies rely on to justify regulatory actions,” Bill Kovacs, senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, told Bloomberg BNA in a statement. “The American public must have confidence that the scientific and technical data driving regulatory action can be trusted.”
Other groups backing the previous version of the legislation include the American Chemistry Council, the American Coatings Association, the Fertilizer Institute, the American Foundry Society, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute and the National Association of Chemical Distributors.
Advisory Board Reform Required
The other bill, introduced by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and John Boozman (R-Ark.), would implement a number of reforms to the EPA's Scientific Advisory Board.
According to the bill's sponsors, the legislation would modernize the selection of board members, expand public participation opportunities, enable reviews of EPA risk or hazard assessments, limit non-scientific policy advice, expand required disclosures and increase the ability of board members to express dissenting views.
“The EPA's overreaching regulations have resulted in an environment that is too closed off to the public and too vulnerable to conflicts of interest and insider politics,” Manchin said in a statement. “The EPA should improve its credibility with the American people as well as our energy sector.”
Reps. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) and Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) introduced companion legislation in the House.
-
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Patrick Ambrosio
The Environmental Protection Agency's claim that it has met its obligations to set emissions standards covering seven hazardous air pollutants is unlawful because the agency hasn't set standards for individual pollutants, according to the Sierra Club.
The Sierra Club, in comments filed on the organization's behalf by Earthjustice, challenged the EPA's claim that it has met its Clean Air Act obligations to promulgate emissions standards covering source categories accounting for at least 90 percent of aggregate emissions of seven pollutants—alkylated lead compounds, polycyclic organic matter, hexachlorobenzene, mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofurans and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
The EPA, in a December proposed rule (RIN 2060-AS42), said it had met its obligations under Section 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air Act and identified the promulgated emissions standards that collectively satisfy those requirements (241 DEN A-1, 12/16/14).
James Pew, an attorney with Earthjustice, told Bloomberg BNA after the proposed rule was released that the regulation probably will be challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unless the agency changes it approach.
The Sierra Club comment letter raises several issues that could provide the basis for a legal challenge to the EPA's determination, including what the environmental group described as an unlawful use of surrogates and an alleged failure to set maximum achievable control technology standards for emissions of polycyclic organic matter or polychlorinated biphenyls from large municipal waste combustors.
EPA Determination Called Unlawful
The Sierra Club argued in its comments, submitted prior to a Feb. 17 deadline, that the Clean Air Act requires that sources the EPA identifies as contributing to 90 percent of the total emissions of one or more of the seven identified pollutants must be regulated by an emissions standard for the specific pollutant ensuring the maximum emissions reduction.
Instead, the agency has unlawfully claimed that it can meet its Clean Air Act obligations under Section 112(c)(6) by setting a single limit on aggregate emissions of all hazardous air pollutants from an industrial source category, according to the environmental group.
“This is contrary to the plain language of the Clean Air Act and unreasonable,” the Sierra Club said.
Congress wouldn't have singled out the seven hazardous air pollutants if it intended for the EPA to set a single emissions limit covering aggregate emissions of 200 different toxic pollutants, according to the Sierra Club.
‘Unreasonable Approach' to Surrogacy
The Sierra Club comments also said that the EPA took an “unreasonable approach” to setting standards for emissions of surrogates for the seven covered air pollutants.
The Sierra Club targeted the EPA's decision to use total organic hazardous air pollutant emissions as a surrogate for polycyclic organic matter in air toxics rules covering refineries, industrial organic chemicals manufacturing and other industries.
The agency's approach to surrogacy conflicts with the Clean Air Act, which requires that the EPA must set maximum achievable control technology standards for each of the seven pollutants listed under Section 112(c)(6) for which each source category was listed.
“There is nothing left of this obligation if EPA can simply define a category of pollutants—such as total HAP—broad enough to include all the pollutants it must regulate and then set an aggregate limit for the category,” the Sierra Club said.
The Sierra Club also objected to the EPA's claim that it has regulated emissions of polycyclic organic matter and polychlorinated biphenyls when it set emissions guidelines for existing large municipal waste combusters. In response to comments on that rulemaking, the EPA “unequivocally denied” that it was setting surrogate standards for polycyclic organic matter and polychlorinated biphenyls, according to the Sierra Club.
Industry Defends EPA Approach
A coalition of industry groups, including the American Chemistry Council, the National Mining Association and the American Wood Council, filed comments in support of the EPA's proposed determination that the agency has completed its obligations.
The rules cited by the EPA in its proposed determination have achieved “substantial reductions” in air toxics emissions and shouldn't be modified to establish additional pollution control requirements on the basis of Section 112(c)(6), according to the industry groups.
The industry coalition defended the EPA's use of “scientifically sound” surrogate pollutants, citing several decisions by the D.C. Circuit that upheld the use of a surrogate substance to regulate hazardous pollutants, including a 2000 decision upholding the use of particulate matter emissions as a surrogate for hazardous air pollutant metal emissions from cement kilns (Nat'l Lime Ass'n v. EPA, 223 F.3d 625, 51 ERC 1737 (D.C. Cir. 2000); 243 DEN A-4, 12/18/00).
The Council of Industrial Boiler Owners filed separate comments also defending the “reasonable conclusions” that the EPA made regarding surrogacy relationships between pollutants to set emissions standards.
Merits Not Reached by Court
The Sierra Club previously argued before the D.C. Circuit that the EPA hasn't actually satisfied its requirements to set emissions standards for all of the covered pollutants, but the D.C. Circuit never reached the merits of those arguments.
The Sierra Club successfully challenged a March 2011 determination by the EPA that it had satisfied its Section 112(c)(6) obligations. The court vacated that determination on procedural grounds after ruling that the agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to provide a proper notice and comment opportunity Sierra Club v. EPA, 699 F.3d 530, 75 ERC 1644, 2012 BL 295906 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
-
As Fracking Debates Roil, It's Time for National Standards | Commentary
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Rep. Diana DeGette
Few developments on the energy landscape have been as disruptive as the spread of hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking. The technique has transformed the economy of communities across the country while raising concerns about safety and environmental impacts.
Fracking has benefitted many local and regional economies as drilling has brought new jobs and growth, particularly in communities that were previously struggling to attract business development. Over the past five years, direct employment in the fossil fuels sector has grown by 18 percent nationwide, while my home state of Colorado has seen even larger growth of nearly 30 percent. This level of activity, much of which is generated by new oil and gas development driven by fracking, has helped people and communities get by during the Great Recession and the ongoing recovery.
For all of the economic growth fracking has powered, concerns about safety and risks to drinking water and air quality have closely followed. With thousands of new drilling sites popping up in areas sometimes unaccustomed to energy development, environmental and safety regulators have been working to keep up. With an unfamiliar industry operating nearby many local communities have raised concerns about fracking.
While the tension between economic development and environmental and safety concerns is neither new nor unique to fracking, the discussions and political debates about it have grown heated. In my home state of Colorado, local communities with drilling sites nearby have fought for more control over fracking activity. After New York State announced a six-year moratorium on fracking, several towns in the Southern Tier region that depend on energy development for jobs have expressed alarm about their future economic viability.
I support fracking as long as it is done is a way that does not jeopardize safety or human health. To reduce the tension and begin a more constructive conversation about energy development and its local consequences, we can start by applying the protections of the Safe Drinking Water Act to fracking activity. We currently lack baseline water safeguards for fracking, and so it is not surprising that the public has little consensus about the best way to deal with fracking.
Here, the FRAC Act that I have championed can make a real contribution to this discussion and move energy policy forward. The FRAC Act would knit together the patchwork of different state regulations that the industry currently has to comply with and would set up a consistent and effective system to safeguard our precious drinking water from fracking operations. In addition, by requiring the disclosure of the chemical constituents used in the fracturing process while protecting proprietary chemical formulas — much like Coca-Cola must reveal the ingredients of Coke, but not its secret formula — we can provide the public the information they need without compromising confidential business information.
If we establish national standards on fracking activity that apply across the country, we will be able to have a clearer discussion about what constitutes safe activity. This won’t end our debates about fracking — nor should it — but reducing uncertainty will lead to better-informed choices for us all.
-
Obama Vetoes Keystone XL Pipeline Bill; Senate Republicans Plan Override Vote
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
President Barack Obama vetoed legislation Feb. 24 that would authorize the Keystone XL pipeline, saying the bill “earned my veto” because it would circumvent the role of the executive branch in ensuring the cross-border project is in the national interest.
The legislation (S. 1), sponsored by Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), would circumvent an ongoing Obama administration review of the $8 billion pipeline, which would carry crude from Alberta oil sands to Gulf Coast refineries in Texas and has become a symbol of the administration's commitment to addressing climate change. A review of the project, which needs a presidential permit because it crosses an international boundary, is ongoing at the State Department.
In its message to the Senate announcing the veto, the White House said, “Because this act of Congress conflicts with established executive branch procedures and cuts short thorough consideration of issues that could bear on our national interest—including our security, safety and environment—it has earned my veto.”
Despite the veto, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Feb. 24 “it certainly is possible” Obama would decide to approve the project.
“The president will keep an open mind as the State Department considers the wide range of impacts that this pipeline could have on the country, both positive and negative,” Earnest said. “Once the [State Department] review has been completed, there would not be a significant delay in announcing the results of that review and ultimately making a decision on this project.”
Senate Plans Override Vote
The Senate is planning a vote to override the veto, Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 24.
The vote, expected to occur by March 3, comes despite the Senate falling five votes short of the 67 needed to override a presidential veto and is part of a Republican strategy to put Democrats on the record as voting against the project, which proponents have said will create thousands of jobs and increase domestic energy security.
“Even though the President has yielded to powerful special interests, this veto doesn't end the debate,” McConnell said in a statement. “Americans should know that the new Congress won't stop pursuing good ideas, including this one.”
Meanwhile, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Interior Subcommittee Chairman Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) sent a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry requesting “all reports, recommendations, letters, and comments received by the State Department from the advising agencies” related to the project's permit.
-
Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Steven Dennis
President Barack Obama has vetoed the Keystone Pipeline bill as promised, using his veto pen for just the third time and the first since 2010.
Obama had repeatedly vowed to veto the bill, one of the first major legislative efforts by Republicans now in charge of both chambers of Congress, citing process. Obama has said the State Department’s years-long review of the project must finish first, and Press Secretary Josh Earnest has left open the possibility Obama could approve it then.
The veto came without public fanfare or a big ceremony.
The Senate received the veto message Tuesday afternoon. Immediately after that, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., announced on the floor that action in response to the veto would be considered no later than March 3.
Republicans note the project generally fares well in public opinion polls.
And though the project has bipartisan support, it does not have a veto-proof majorities of 291 in the House and 67 in the Senate. That means an override vote is certain to fail.
It remains to be seen whether Keystone might become a bargaining chip at some point down the line as Obama faces showdowns with Republicans on any number of issues.
And it almost assuredly won’t be the last veto of the next two years. Obama’s already threatened vetoes on many of the major bills being considered by Republicans so far, including any effort to stop his immigration executive actions.
Although if Senate Democrats continue to act as his de facto veto pen on measures like the DHS funding bill via the filibuster, Obama’s veto pen might not get as big a workout as had been expected.
-
Republicans Intensify Scrutiny of Administration Following Veto
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Manuel Quiñones
President Obama's veto yesterday of legislation to approve TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada has only intensified scrutiny from the project's supporters on Capitol Hill.
Even before the veto became official, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) promised to try to override the president's veto.
And almost immediately after Obama's decision became public, House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) asked the State Department for documents related to its review of TransCanada's application for KXL's transboundary crossing.
Obama, according to his official message, said he decided to veto the legislation because it would cut short that 6-year-old process.
"Through this bill," the president wrote, "the United States Congress attempts to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest."
Because of administration delays in completing its review of KXL, a Republican aide on Capitol Hill said pro-pipeline forces would focus on trying to woo Democrats who voted against the legislation but have expressed concerns about the length of review.
Maine independent Sen. Angus King, for example, last year expressed support for some congressional action on KXL if the president failed to make up his mind. A spokesman said the senator remains a "no" vote for now.
"I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress to try and gain the support necessary to override the veto," said KXL bill sponsor Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who has been helping corral pro-pipeline votes in the Senate.
McConnell said he wants the Senate to take up the president's veto soon, following consultation with Democratic leaders, but hopes to do so no later than March 3.
Senate Democratic leaders could technically try to delay moving forward with an override vote, but a GOP aide questioned whether the minority would try to block consideration of the president's own veto message.
The Senate passed the KXL bill by a vote of 62-36. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) was not present for the roll call but would almost certainly vote to override the president's veto. Still, that leaves KXL supporters four votes short of the 67 necessary for success.
An effort to approve pro-KXL legislation late last year, while the Senate was still in Democratic control, fell one vote short despite relentless whipping from supporters.
And Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, a top member of the Senate Democratic leadership and once a target of that whipping, said yesterday afternoon that he was certain KXL supporters would be unable to get to 67.
No lawmaker has yet expressed an intention to switch his or her vote from "yes" to "no." At the same time, none of the nine Democrats who supported the pipeline has expressed plans to break ranks. After all, they voted for the bill despite White House opposition.
A spokesman for Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), who supported the bill, said the senator remained a "yes" and would vote to override the veto. A spokesman for Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), who also supported the measure, said his boss's vote on the question of an override remained to be determined.
"We must continue to look for other avenues and also work for more votes and compromises on legislation that would ultimately approve this project," said Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), "and I'll keep working to find a path forward that will finally get shovels in the ground on this project."
One option, Hoeven said, "is to attach this legislation to other energy, infrastructure or appropriations legislation that the president won't want to veto. The will of the American people and Congress is clear."
To the possibility of attaching KXL to a broader bill, Durbin said, "That's their prerogative. They can do what they want to." He added, "I guess we're going to see it again, but the president is going to continue to veto it." House action
On the House side, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) called the veto a "national embarrassment." But his chamber may not get to vote on overriding the veto. Because the measure originated in the Senate, that chamber has to go first in trying to bypass the president.
What the House can readily do is step up its oversight of the administration's review process. Yesterday, Chaffetz and the Oversight panel's Interior Subcommittee Chairwoman Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) asked State to turn over recommendation letters from various agencies on KXL.
"So the committee can review the recommendations that the State Department is considering in the course of the Keystone XL permitting process, please produce all reports, recommendations, letters and comments received by the State Department from the advising agencies," said the letter from Chaffetz and Lummis to Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday.
State has for weeks refused to turn over the letters, saying they are part of the administration's internal deliberations on whether the pipeline is in the national interest.
In a statement, State said it "continues its review of the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline's presidential permit application in accordance with Executive Order 13337. Once the review is completed, and the final documents are prepared, a determination will be made."
U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy heard about the veto while speaking to Native American leaders in Washington, D.C. Her agency recently asked State to revisit some of its conclusions on KXL's environmental impacts.
"He feels pretty strongly that as a president, he needs to retain his ability to make science-based decisions, decisions that are right for this country," she said. "And he has made it very clear that that is his intent, and I thank him for it."
While KXL critics cheered the veto and pressed the president to reject the pipeline altogether, supporters pointed out that yesterday's developments were by no means the death of the project.
"It is not a question of if this project will be approved," said Canadian Minister of Natural Resources Greg Rickford, "it is a matter of when."
-
Terrorism Alert: Inside Big Oil's Fight for Keystone XL Pipeline
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Isaac Arnsdorf
The intelligence was alarming: homegrown extremists were said to be targeting the Keystone XL pipeline.
It was April 2013, and environmentalists had joined together in opposition to the 1,700-mile (2,735-kilometer) Keystone system, which connects the oil sands of Alberta to refineries in the U.S.
Inside the Nebraska State Patrol's training center, the briefing painted an ominous picture. Radical groups had threatened oil workers and vandalized equipment in Texas and Oklahoma. Now, they might target pipeline construction in Nebraska. The recommendation: under the law, it was possible to consider these people potential terrorists.
That risk assessment, laid out in documents obtained through open-records requests, wasn't provided by law enforcement. It was provided by TransCanada Corp., the Calgary-based company that has waged a long campaign to sell America on Keystone XL and the Canadian crude it would carry. President Barack Obama vetoed Congress's approval of extending the pipeline, but the fight is far from over.
Few understand the threats facing corporations better than corporations, and few could argue with putting safety first. Yet the alarms TransCanada raised in Nebraska that morning were part of a broad campaign for Keystone XL, the documents suggest. Time and again, in private e-mails and closed-door meetings with federal, state and local law enforcement, the Canadian company characterized peaceful opponents engaged in constitutionally protected protest as dangerous radicals or worse.
Civil Disturbance
“We were simply discussing various issues and potential problems with civil disturbance or criminal disturbance, that's all,” Thomas Herzog, an attorney for Holt County, Nebraska, said of the April 2013 briefing. “We're criticized for meeting about it, and we'll be criticized if something happens and we didn't have any plan.”
Since 2008, as the energy industry has touted Keystone and hydraulic fracturing, companies like TransCanada have also tried to mold opinions in the communities where they operate.
TransCanada representatives have met with law-enforcement officers in at least two states. Hundreds of pages of meeting logs, police e-mails and other documents obtained by Bloomberg suggest TransCanada provided intelligence on protesters' activities and, at times, helped guide law enforcement's response.
“When we are asked to share what we have learned or are prepared for, we are there to share our experience,” Shawn Howard, a TransCanada spokesman, said in an e-mail. “We do not direct law enforcement at any time.”
Pepper-Sprayed
In the presentation in Nebraska, a TransCanada representative provided the names and photographs of 27 activists. Two of them had been pepper-sprayed, Tasered and arrested after locking themselves to Keystone construction equipment in rural Texas, police records show. They've filed a lawsuit saying the police used excessive force at the behest of a TransCanada official, a claim the local officials and the company deny.
“The main goal of corporations working in this way is to try to have a small group of activists get hammered with serious charges so the community will be afraid to stand up and protest,” said Lauren Regan, director of the Civil Liberties Defense Center in Eugene, Oregon, who has helped Keystone activists.
Different Strategy
TransCanada isn't alone in facing criticism for how it deals with opposition. Richard Berman, a veteran political consultant, helped the oil and gas industry wage a public-relations campaign called Big Green Radicals: “win ugly or lose pretty.” Berman has urged members of the Western Energy Alliance, an industry association, to discredit opponents by researching how they're financed and mocking them in ads, according to a recording provided to Bloomberg by an environmental advocate who got it from an attendee.
Sarah Longwell, a spokeswoman for Berman & Co., didn't answer messages seeking comment.
In November, TransCanada ended its contract with public-relations firm Edelman after leaked documents showed a strategy of investigating opponents of a different TransCanada pipeline project. Edelman stands by its strategy, Michael Bush, an Edelman spokesman, said.
Agents of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation called or visited the homes or workplaces of at least 12 activists in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, Nevada, Colorado and Pennsylvania between October 2014 and January 2015, according to Larry Hildes, a lawyer in Bellingham, Washington, who represents some of the people. Their only apparent connection is opposition to oil sands and the Keystone XL pipeline, he said.
Gathering Information
When Hildes asked the FBI about the contacts, he was told the agents were just gathering information; there was no actual or potential criminal investigation. Denise Ballew, an FBI spokeswoman, said the bureau doesn't comment on individuals or groups it may have contacted.
In the past, the FBI has been criticized for improperly targeting Greenpeace, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and anti-war groups in domestic terrorism investigations. A 2010 report by the Inspector General of the Department of Justice found there was “little or no basis” for the investigations, which extended from 2001 to 2006. At least two innocent people were placed on the domestic terrorism watch list for years.
The investigations started with tips that suggested potential crimes and the bureau didn't target groups based on their political activities, then-FBI Deputy Director Timothy P. Murphy said at the time.
Darker Picture
Even peaceful protests can endanger lives and property, particularly when heavy equipment and oil pipelines are involved. But violence directed against the oil industry has been rare in the U.S.
Oil companies were victims of sabotage three times and arson twice from 1970 to 2013, according to Jennifer Varriale Carson, a professor at the University of Central Missouri in Warrensburg who studies terrorism. The most recent attack was in September 2001, when the Earth Liberation Front sabotaged oil exploration equipment in Moab, Utah. No one was hurt.
Energy companies have painted a darker picture. At a 2011 industry conference in Houston, for instance, a representative of The Woodlands, Texas-based Anandarko Petroleum Corp. told attendees that oil and gas companies were facing nothing less than an insurgency, according to a recording. To prepare, the representative, Matt Carmichael, said, the audience should download the U.S. Army/Marine Corps Counter-Insurgency Field Manual, the military's guidebook to a post-9/11 world and the age of international terrorism.
“Those comments in no way reflect the approach we take to our stakeholders,” said John Christiansen, an Anadarko spokesman. “We value open communication at every step of the process.”
Carmichael could not be reached for comment.
Sharing Information
TransCanada and law-enforcement officials agree: some anti- Keystone activists have broken the law. Given the potential threat, the company willingly shares what it knows.
TransCanada's 60-slide presentation to the Nebraska State Patrol in Grand Island noted that there had been no physical violence in Texas and Oklahoma, and the “level of capability and intent” in Nebraska was “low.” The protesters were professionally organized and well-funded, with active recruiting on social media, the company said. Their tactics included climbing trees, locking themselves to equipment and sabotaging machinery, resulting in long standoffs or arrests, according to the presentation.
‘Couple Incidents.'
Before the meeting, Michael Nagina, a corporate security adviser at TransCanada, e-mailed police and state intelligence officers about issues such as an arrest in another state, an online petition and a news article quoting a hostile landowner, according to records obtained by Bloomberg.
“Just wanted to let you know of a couple incidents which occurred this week,” Nagina said in the 2011 e-mail to state police officers and an FBI agent. “Although there is no imminent threat and they were not criminal in nature they could be an indicator of future demonstrations or protests and provided as intelligence.” Details of the information he shared were redacted by the state patrol.
Activists say law enforcement has gone too far. In Oklahoma, for instance, undercover police officers infiltrated a group of protesters, preempting a planned demonstration at a TransCanada storage facility, according to a police report obtained by Bloomberg News.
Radical Fringe
The FBI has taken the threat seriously and shares TransCanada's position that some Keystone opponents are members of the radical fringe. In 2014 the FBI issued a warning to be on the lookout for “environmental extremists” who, in the absence of the Keystone pipeline, would target rail shipments of oil from fracking sites or Canadian oil sands.
In that “Private Sector Advisory,” entitled “Increased Use of Railways to Transport Crude Oil May Lead to Acts of Environmental Extremism,” the FBI acknowledged there were no specific threats. The list of things to watch for included vandalism, interrupting rail traffic, organizing on social media, cyberattacks, homemade bombs and graffiti.
“They want it to be known that they're watching,” said Adam Briggle, a philosophy professor at the University of North Texas in Denton who said he was questioned by the FBI and Dallas police in 2012 after protesting against fracking. “It makes you more leery and wary of who's watching. It puts you on guard.”
With assistance from Michael Novatkoski in Princeton.
-
Murkowski Blasts Jewell as ‘Hurting’ Alaska
Feb 24, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Darren Goode
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski said she didn’t want to get into a personal feud with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.
But the Alaska Republican used a budget hearing in her panel Tuesday to publicly chastise Jewell and the Obama administration for “hurting Alaskans” by blocking oil, gas, coal and mineral development in her state.
“I don’t want to make this personal,” Murkowski said as she launched into a nine-minute statement to open the hearing on Interior’s budget. “But the decisions from Interior have lacked balance,” she said, and are an “unprecedented attack on our ability and responsibility” to produce energy and mineral resources that are critical to Alaska’s economy.
Murkowski noted that the Trans-Alaska pipeline system, which carries oil from Alaska’s North Slope fields and is the backbone of the state’s energy industry, now operates at less than half its capacity, and she said the administration’s actions “seem destined to shut [it] down.”
She has chided Interior for trying to permanently prohibit oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and portions of the federally controlled Arctic waters, and she has criticized Interior’s conditions that are slowing ConocoPhillips’ efforts to tap into oil fields for the first time in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.
Interior’s budget request for next year makes things worse, Murkowski said, since it calls for redirecting the proceeds of revenues that are shared with the coastal states’ that host offshore oil and gas production, and does nothing to resolve a long-running dispute over building a road in the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge.
“I do not see a substantive effort to work with Congress,” Murkowski said. “Instead, I see a willful disregard for enacted law. That has to change.”
Still, Jewell told reporters after the two-and-a-half-hour hearing that she and Murkowski have a “constructive relationship” and referenced a meeting they both attended in Alaska last week with other congressional, state and local officials.
“There weren’t fireworks,” she said. “It was respectful and thoughtful and I did a lot of listening.”
Jewell said she does “appreciate” that Alaska “is feeling the effects of dramatically falling oil prices on its budget” and the need to carry more oil in the Trans-Alaska pipeline.
But she also said that Interior has kept most of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas off Alaska open for development and that there is a “meeting of the minds” as far as supporting development in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. She had earlier told Murkowski at the hearing that she was “fully committing to supporting the efforts” to try to keep the Trans-Alaska pipeline system full.
She also defended her department’s overall budget as “forward-looking” and “responsible.” Interior is requesting $13.2 billion, an increase of 8 percent over the 2015 enacted level.
Jewell told Murkowski she is still trying to develop an alternative with the Army Corps of Engineers in lieu of building a 10-mile gravel road through the Izembek refuge that Murkowski and others have long sought to connect the remote King Cove community with an all-weather airport 30 miles away in Cold Bay.
Murkowski previously called Jewell’s decision to reject the road — which she conveyed to Murkowski in a phone call two days before Christmas in 2013 — as “callous and cold-hearted.”
On Tuesday, she said that Interior’s latest budget request still leaves the King Cove problem as “totally unresolved.”
Alaska political observers say it’s smart politics for Murkowski to be aggressive and rally the troops against Washington ahead of a reelection campaign where she may be challenged both from the right and the left. Four years ago, Murkowski notched up an unprecedented win as a write-in candidate after she was beaten in the Republican primary by tea party-backed Joe Miller.
“I want to be clear. It’s not just me that is banging the table,” she said at the hearing. “I don’t think that I am overreacting. I think that I am speaking clearly in articulating the concern of most Alaskans.”
But she also has a reputation for being a moderate, and there is pressure on her to bring home some victories for Alaskans from her perches not just at the helm of the Senate energy panel but also the subcommittee directly overseeing Interior’s spending.
Murkowski said she wanted to cooperate with Interior, but that so far the state’s concerns had fallen on deaf ears.
“My complaint is that you hear from us but you do not actually hear us. … The challenge really is to find common ground, working together. But what we have seen is very, very discouraging.”
Other Republicans on the panel used Tuesday’s hearing to poke Jewell about the department’s positions on hydraulic fracturing and protecting habitat for the sage grouse and the department’s budget’s proposal to redirect offshore drilling revenue.
And Murkowski said Washington’s attitude toward Alaska should be a warning for all western states, and was also evident in how the Interior Department is handling the protection of the sage grouse in Wyoming and Idaho, oil shale development in Utah and Colorado and permitting of new copper mines in Arizona.
Jewell told Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) that the long-awaited proposed federal controls of hydraulic fracturing will be coming “soon,” though she declined to give a specific date. “We have gone through our extensive process,” she said, and are “just waiting for final clearance.”
She also said Interior and 11 Western states like Idaho and Wyoming are “on the cusp of something that is pretty incredible” in the effort to protect the sage grouse. Protection of the bird species involves millions of acres across the West that some green groups have hoped to put off limits to development.
After Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho) complained at the hearing of being “incredibly frustrated when the goal posts keep moving on us,” Jewell said that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and the states are “very close to the goal line, and the goal line is not moving.”
“I feel good about where we are, where the states are,” she added. “It’s been a rocky road to get there, but people are at the table working hard.”
-
Van Hollen Bill Would Require Oil, Gas, Coal Sector to Purchase Carbon Permits
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The oil, coal and natural gas sector would need to purchase carbon permits for each ton of greenhouse gases they emit, with all revenue returned to U.S. households, under a bill introduced Feb. 24 by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).
The Climate and Family Security Act (H.R. 1027) would put mandatory caps on U.S. carbon emissions, requiring an 80 percent reduction by 2050 from 2005 levels. The emissions trading approach would require coal mines, coal importers and oil and natural gas operations to buy tradeable allowances at auction for each ton of greenhouse gases they emit.
Van Hollen said the bill would combat climate change, which he said is “already creating a real toll on our economy and our communities around the country” while also helping to boost income for U.S. households. The bill “provides for American households to have economic security,” he told reporters during a media call.
“Jobs are returning, unemployment is down and job growth [is] up,” he said. However, U.S. workers face “a stubborn and persistent problem” of stagnant wage increases, he said.
All the proceeds would be distributed quarterly to U.S. households, he said.
Departure From Cap-and-Trade?
Van Hollen has repeatedly returned to what he terms a “cap-and-dividend” approach after a cap-and-trade bill that passed the House in 2009 collapsed in the Senate in 2010 (27 DEN A-7, 2/10/15).
That bill would have covered a far larger number of emitters, from power plants to manufacturers to oil and gas companies.
Van Hollen, a member of the House Democratic leadership, introduced his cap-and-dividend bill most recently in 2014 (147 DEN A-11, 7/31/14). Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;}
-
Resources Chairman Bishop Discusses Panel Priorities, Plans for Climate, Drilling Action
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
As the Obama administration takes action on drilling, fracking and Arctic exploration, how will the 114th Congress shape its policy priorities on natural resources? During today's OnPoint, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, discusses his panel's policy objectives for this session and explains how he plans to frame the conversation on climate change in his committee. Bishop reacts to the Obama administration's action on federal land oil and gas drilling, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge protections, and fracking regulations. Today's OnPoint will air on E&ETV at 10 a.m. EST.
-
Administration Strategies on Energy Draw Fire of Murkowski, Praise by Democrats
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski
The Obama administration “is actively impeding many of the best economic opportunities in the West,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said Feb. 24.
“It is depriving thousands who live in our states of the ability to find a good job, earn a good wage and live a good life,” Murkowski said.
A committee hearing on the administration's fiscal year 2016 budget request for the Interior Department gave Murkowski a forum to express her anger over policy announcements in late January on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and Arctic offshore oil and gas leasing.
She also vented her long-running frustration about management of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska and barriers to logging and mining.
The budget request “would impose billions of dollars' worth of new fees and higher taxes on oil, gas, coal and mineral production—regardless of the consequences—and would eliminate offshore revenue sharing,” Murkowski said.
Democrats Back Administration
She wasn't the only senator troubled by Interior's actions or inactions. But two Democrats signaled they were ready to defend the administration's policies.
While Murkowski said the administration's decisions “have lacked balance,” Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), ranking member on the committee, said she considered the administration's 2016 budget request for Interior “a balanced and forward-leaning proposal. It creates jobs and long-term economic opportunity.”
Also, while the chairman expressed her opposition to the administration's effort to get ANWR considered for wilderness designation, Cantwell and Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) expressed their support for the idea.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), whose state stands to benefit from increased sharing of oil and gas revenues from federal offshore waters, said he was “incredibly” opposed to a proposal included in the Interior budget request that would redirect that money. “I cannot put enough hyperbole in front of this,” Cassidy said.
Under the Gulf of Mexico Security Act (Pub. L. No. 109-432), a 2006 law, revenue sharing will be increased for the four Gulf Coast oil and gas producing states (Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama) for the purpose of coastal environmental restoration.
Jewell Defends Budget Request
Interior Secretary Sally Jewell defended the budget request as one that would advance efforts to deal with climate change, promote national parks and foster development of renewable and conventional energy.
The proposal would increase spending 8 percent over the 2015 enacted level. In effect, it would reverse the sequester that has limited spending in recent years under the Budget Control Act of 2011 (Pub. L. No. 112-25).
That strategy didn't sit well with Murkowski. “This request violates the Budget Control Act, ignoring the statutory caps and proposing spending as if we had already lifted sequestration—but that amounts to wishful thinking, not responsible governance.”
Jewell dealt with questions on several of the hot-button topics of the past year, including federal regulations for hydraulic fracturing, the possibility of coal exports from the West Coast and the possibility of the greater sage-grouse being listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
Fracking Rule Due Soon
The final rule on fracking, still undergoing review at the White House Office of Management and Budget, will be issued “soon,” Jewell said. “We're just waiting for final clearance.”
The Interior secretary repeated the administration's position that the rule from the Bureau of Land Management on hydraulic fracturing will provide minimum standards but won't supersede state standards that are equally protective or more so.
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) asked about the fate of the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal that could, if approved, export coal and other dry bulk cargoes from Cherry Point in Whatcom County, Wash.
The project, which is undergoing an environmental impact review under the National Environmental Policy Act, would allow the Crow Indians in Montana to reach international markets with their coal, Daines said.
Jewell promised to take into account the views of all tribes on any matter that has an impact on them.
Sage Grouse Protections Discussed
On the greater sage grouse, a bird found in 11 Western states, Jewell said the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is obligated under a court settlement to make a decision by Sept. 30 on whether to list the bird for Endangered Species Act protections, but she acknowledged that a budget rider would prevent the service from writing a final rule detailing the impact of a listing.
As she has in the past, Jewell expressed a hope that the word of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management and many states, businesses and localities to protect the species would result in a decision not to list it.
Sen. James Risch (D-Idaho) warned that there were troubling signs of the wildlife service and BLM not working with each other, but Jewell insisted the agencies were collaborating well now and were involved in something like 98 conservation plans for the birds.
“I think that you will find that we are on the cusp of something pretty incredible here,” Jewell said. “We are soon going to have to turn it over to the FWS to make their determination.”
-
Murkowski Blasts 'Unprecedented Attack' on Alaskan Energy
Feb 24, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Senate Republicans sharply criticized Interior Secretary Sally Jewell Tuesday for her budget request and other actions that they say are hurting energy development and the economy.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairwoman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, has repeatedly clashed with Jewell over how the administration treats Alaska, and kept up the pressure at Tuesday’s hearing.
“I don’t want to make this personal, but the decisions from Interior have lacked balance, and instead of recognizing the many opportunities Alaska has with regard to resource production, you have enabled an unprecedented attack on our ability to responsibly bring these resources to market,” Murkowski told Jewell.
The Alaska Republican criticized recent decisions from President Obama to further restrict the possibility of oil and natural gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, put new conditions on an oil drilling permit in the National Petroleum Reserve and to take much of Alaska’s outer continental shelf off the table for drilling.
“The president has withdrawn over 22 million more acres of Alaska from energy production just in recent weeks, and that has occurred on top of many other restrictions and regulations being imposed on us,” she said.
“When you take off all of these areas for any development at all, how do your states operate? What do you do?” Murkowski asked her colleagues.
The budget request itself ignores funding cap agreements, imposes billions of dollars of new fees and taxes on energy production, and did not find realistic offsets for its new spending, she said.
“In looking at this request, I do not see a substantive effort to work with Congress,” she said.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) criticized the administration’s proposal to reduce the amount of funding from offshore drilling that goes directly to states.
He said Louisiana relies on that funding to restore its coast from damage that he blames on the federal government’s management choices.
“I am incredibly — I cannot put enough hyperbole in front of this — opposed to the department’s budget proposal to deprive the Gulf Coast states of revenue promised under the Gulf of Mexico Security Act,” Cassidy said.
“Monies that, by our state constitution, when we receive, go to mitigate damage caused by federal mismanagement of our wetlands.”
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) took issue with a number of decisions made by the Interior Department, including one to determine whether the sage grouse needs protection under the Endangered Species Act and upcoming rules on hydraulic fracturing on federal land.
Barrasso cited a letter Jewell wrote to Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead (R) saying that, despite Congress blocking funding for a regulation on sage grouse protection last year, the Fish and Wildlife Service will still make a determination.
“With all due respect, I can’t make sense of your letter, and I find your plans to ignore federal law troubling,” he said.
Jewell said her actions fit within the law, and the agency is obligated by a legal settlement to make the determination.
“We are bound by court to make a determination and bound by law not to write a rule,” she said. “So I’m working very hard to support the states’ efforts and federal government efforts so that a listing is not warranted, so that we don’t have to call the question on this issue.”
Barrasso also criticized the coming fracking rule, saying state rules should override federal ones.
Jewell defended the budget request.
“This is a forward-looking budget that provides targeted investments to grow our domestic energy portfolio, creating jobs here at home, to build climate resilience and revitalize our national parks as they approach their 100th anniversary,” she said.
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the committee's top Democrat, defended the department's budget request.
“In my view, this budget represents a balanced and forward-leaning proposal,” she said.
“It creates jobs and economic opportunity, it builds strong partnerships with states and tribes and local communities when it comes to managing our infrastructure and ecosystem resources, it invests in public lands for future generations to enjoy.”
In addition to leading the Energy panel, Murkowski is also chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee subpanel with authority over the Interior Department’s budget, giving her even more power over the agency’s funds.
-
Portman Seeks Vote on Mini Efficiency Bill After President Vetoes Keystone Legislation
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
A slimmed-down energy efficiency bill that had been approved as an amendment to Keystone legislation in the Senate has been introduced as a standalone bill.
The bill (S. 535), sponsored by Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), includes measures that would loosen energy efficiency standards for grid-enabled water heaters, increase energy efficiency in government data centers and promote energy efficiency in commercial buildings.
The Senate voted 94-5 to attach the efficiency bill as an amendment to legislation to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, which President Barack Obama vetoed Feb. 24 (see related story.)
A spokeswoman for Portman said the senator is seeking a vote on the stand-alone measure now that the president has vetoed the Keystone bill, which would have deemed TransCanada Corp.'s $8 billion Canada to Texas oil sands pipeline approved.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) moved Feb. 23 to bring the bill directly to the Senate floor, but a spokesman for McConnell told Bloomberg BNA via e-mail that no floor time decisions have been announced.
The bill, which is a portion of a larger energy efficiency measure that has failed to advance in the Senate for the past four years, would benefit General Electric and other manufacturers of water heaters that otherwise would be required to meet more rigorous energy efficiency standards.
Similar legislation was approved by the House in the 113th Congress.
Portman and Shaheen have said they plan to introduce a broader version of the efficiency bill in the coming weeks (28 DEN A-12, 2/11/15).
-
The President's Misplaced Energy Priorities | Commentary
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Rep. Edward Whifield
Earlier this month, the White House doubled down on President Barack Obama’s pronouncement that climate change is a bigger threat to Americans than terrorism. The comments reveal a startling disconnect and come at a time when we have witnessed an unsettling uptick in terror attacks. These recent statements also underscore just how out of touch the White House is from the daily priorities of Americans. Despite growing strife around the world and a sluggish economic recovery at home, this president’s No. 1 priority continues to be climate change. Moreover, White House officials do not shy away from the desire to make climate the president’s legacy, regardless of the cost and consequences to Americans.
While the president has been delivering expensive climate regulations since 2009, he did not formally unveil his climate action plan until the summer of 2013 in a televised speech. As the touchstone of this plan, the president announced that he had instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to finalize regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s new and existing power plants.
The first blow of this one-two punch to affordable energy came shortly after the president’s climate speech. The EPA announced its proposal for new power plants in September 2013. The proposal is so stringent it would amount to a de facto ban on the construction of any new coal-fired power plants. The rule requires new coal plants to be built using expensive carbon capture and sequestration technologies which have not yet been demonstrated at any full-scale power plant in the United States, and have not been proven to be commercially viable. In sum, even highly-efficient, state-of-the-art coal plants being constructed in Europe, Japan and elsewhere in the world could not be built in America.
The second blow came last June, when the EPA unveiled its proposed rule for the nation’s existing power plants — something the administration calls the Clean Power Plan. This top-down plan requires states to submit for approval plans to meet federal emissions targets for their electricity system. The EPA is asserting unprecedented new authority over states’ energy decision-making, and is seeking to dictate to states how they can generate and use electricity. This includes effectively forcing states to shut down many existing coal plants, redesign their electricity sector and consider adopting cap-and-trade programs. For states such as Kentucky, which currently relies on coal to meet more than 90 percent of its electricity needs, this rule threatens to have devastating economic impacts.
There is significant controversy about whether the EPA even has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants, much less force states to redesign their electricity systems. The EPA bases its proposal for existing plants on a rarely used section of the Clean Air Act — section 111(d). This section of the Clean Air Act applies only in very limited circumstances, but the EPA is using it to assert unprecedented authority over state energy markets. Laurence Tribe, Obama’s former law professor, recently penned an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal calling the president’s Clean Power Plan “unconstitutional.”
-
Mr. President, Say Yes to Energy | Commentary
Feb 24, 2015 | Roll Call
By Rep. Renee Ellmers
For far too long, our country’s energy policies have been based on the idea of energy scarcity and foreign dependence. Now, we seem to be on the verge of energy independence. In order to unleash our true energy potential, we must explore all options — including exploration on federal lands. It is time to have a long-term energy policy for America. While I welcome President Barack Obama’s recent Mid- and South-Atlantic offshore plan, I view it as one step forward and two steps back because he has removed millions of acres of potentially resource-rich land from exploration. It is time this administration says yes to energy; it is time to open the 87 percent of federal land currently prohibited from potential energy exploration.
The president’s decision to open areas for energy exploration in the Mid- and South- Atlantic Region but to close areas in Alaska sends mixed signals on his commitment to securing America’s energy needs. While the president may waver in his efforts to promote American energy security, here in Congress we are working on an energy package to unleash America’s potential as an energy superpower.
We are the world’s largest oil and gas producer, and consumers are seeing the benefits of this energy renaissance at the pump with lower fuel and heating prices. This boom in energy production is largely a result of state policies and private sector innovation; not, as the president would have you think, a direct result of his actions. The potential for economic growth and job creation is immense if we adopt a federal energy policy that expands access to energy exploration.
In addition to securing the nation’s energy demands, opening the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf will greatly benefit the nation from an economic standpoint. It is estimated that oil and natural gas development in the Atlantic OCS would create 280,000 new jobs along the East Coast from 2017 to 2035. Production here will create an annual impact of $23.5 billion for the U.S. economy while providing billions more in new tax revenue for the federal government. Further, beginning production in the Atlantic would see close to $200 billion in new private investment. In my home state of North Carolina, we would see more than 55,000 new jobs and more than $4 billion of new economic investment injected into the state’s economy. This is new revenue that can be reinvested into our nation’s aging energy infrastructure and highway system.
-
California Court Upholds Offset Rules In State's Cap-and-Trade Program
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
A California appellate court has upheld the carbon offset rules in the state's greenhouse gas emissions cap-and-trade program (Our Children's Earth Found. v. California Air Res. Bd., Cal. Ct. App., No. A138830, 2/23/15).
In a Feb. 23 opinion, the California Courts of Appeal's First Appellate District said the “voluminous” administrative record the California Air Resources Board produced in promulgating the regulations for the program supports the agency's policy decisions.
The decision marks another legal victory in the state's defense of the economywide emissions trading program. To date, state and federal courts have rejected substantial challenges to the three-year-old program.
“We are pleased that the Court of Appeal has upheld the validity of using carbon offsets in California's cap-and-trade program,” CARB said in a Feb. 24 e-mail. “This ruling is the latest to demonstrate that the legal foundation for these programs is sound. We are confident our climate change programs will continue to withstand legal challenges.”
Court Rejects Claims of Overstepped Authority
Affirming a trial court, the appellate panel rejected claims that CARB overstepped its authority in approving four offset projects that cap-and-trade program participants can use to meet a portion of their emissions reduction obligations. The CARB “did not exceed its power, but rather exercised the legislative authority delegated to it by the Legislature,” the panel said.
The decision comes in Our Children's Earth Foundation's appeal of a Jan. 25, 2013, ruling in the advocacy group's lawsuit challenging the integrity and enforceability of the offset projects CARB approved for use in the economywide emissions trading program.
George E. Hays, an attorney representing the petitioner, told Bloomberg BNA he hadn't read the opinion, so was unable to comment on the opinion.
Citizens Climate Lobby, a Coronado, Calif.-based advocate of carbon fees or taxes, was a co-plaintiff in the initial action but opted not to pursue the appeal, Allan Zabel, another advocate for fees or taxes over an emissions trading program, told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 24.
Zabel and his wife, Laurie Williams, both of whom work as attorneys at the Environmental Protection Agency, remain involved in the litigation as volunteers.
Goals of A.B. 32 Undercut?
At issue was whether the compliance offset projects CARB approved undercut the goals of the state's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (A.B. 32) because they fail to ensure the emissions reductions achieved would be “additional” to those otherwise achieved under the state's climate policies.
Specifically, the lawsuit targeted four compliance offset protocols CARB adopted providing credits for two types of forestry projects, projects that reduce methane from livestock operations and destroy refrigerants with high-global warming potential and programs. The agency has since adopted a fifth offset protocol for projects that capture methane from certain types of mines.
All the offset protocols were based on those developed by the Los Angeles-based nonprofit Climate Action Reserve for offset projects.
“We're strong believers in the value of third-party validation, and having the California courts provide their stamp of approval over the work we did to pioneer the standardized, performance-based approach to offsets is tremendously gratifying,” Climate Action Reserve President Gary Gero told Bloomberg BNA in a Feb. 24 e-mail.
CARB's Guidelines Challenged
Also, the petitioner challenged CARB's guidelines allowing early action credits for certain voluntary emissions reductions projects implemented prior to 2011, alleging they, too, fail to provide “additional” emissions reductions.
“Although the 2006 Act requires additionality in the context of a market-based compliance mechanism, it does not define the word ‘additional,' ” the panel said. “Nor does it define the term ‘otherwise would occur.' ” However, the Act does define “market-based compliance mechanism” as including GHG “emissions exchanges, banking, credits, and other transactions, governed by rules and protocols to be established by the Board.”
“Within this authority, the Board established rules and protocols which give sufficient meaning to the concept of additionality so that the statutory requirement is capable of enforcement,” the appellate court said. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;}
-
U.S. May Hit Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cut Target Sooner Than 2025, Kerry Says
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The U.S. may be able to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent before its pledged deadline of 2025, Secretary of State John Kerry told a Senate committee Feb. 24.
“We set a goal of somewhere between a 26 to 28 percent reduction in our emissions by 2025 with the hope that we are going to actually do better—make cuts closer to the 28 percent level—and do it sooner” than a decade from now, Kerry told members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
“We think the technology is going to help us do it sooner,” he said, given rapid improvements and declining costs in renewable energy technologies that he predicted could accelerate in the years to come. The U.S. pledge, to be formally unveiled by the end of March, is to make that reduction of 26 percent to 28 percent from its 2005 emissions total.
The U.S. pledge was unveiled in November 2014 by President Barack Obama alongside China President Xi Jinping, who pledged that China's emissions would peak around 2030 and possibly earlier (219 DEN A-8, 11/13/14).
Kerry, appearing before the panel to defend the State Department's fiscal year 2016 budget request, touted Obama's climate pledge as evidence of U.S. leadership in getting more than 190 nations to sign on to a global climate accord in Paris in December. The U.S.-China announcement was hailed by many as crucial to sealing that global deal, which would be the first in which developed and developing nations alike pledge actions to address climate change.
A Sea Change in China Pledge?
Kerry spent the bulk of the hearing defending the administration's policies in confronting challenges in Iraq, Syria and threats of terrorism. But he said the U.S. sees a significant global threat in rising global temperatures, which if left unchecked are projected to increase more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial times just 30 years from now (07 DEN B-11, 1/12/15).
The secretary conceded that China's pledge—which essentially still would allow its emissions to rise unabated for 15 years—has been criticized as too modest. But he said China's announcement marked a sea change for a nation that still is developing and has long opposed taking on any international commitment to cut its emissions.
“I would love to see them doing more, but this is the most we could get,” Kerry said. “Up until last year, China was on the opposite side of the table and stopping us from doing anything” within the international climate negotiations, he said. “And we turned that around in a year” of behind-the-scenes talks in the run-up to the November announcement, the secretary said.
-
API Seeks To Stay GHG Reporting Lawsuit While EPA Considers Changes
Feb 24, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Dawn Reeves
The American Petroleum Institute (API) is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to put its latest suit over EPA's 2014 greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting rules for the oil and gas sector on hold while the agency considers potential changes to its 2010 GHG reporting requirements that could resolve issues in the new suit.
API in a Feb. 20 motion in the case, API, et al. v. EPA, asks the court to hold its challenge in abeyance “pending EPA's review of petitions for reconsideration” of its 2010 GHG reporting rule, suggesting the agency could address the group's concerns as it responds administratively to concers over the 2010 rule.
“Because the present petitions seek review of closely related regulations . . . that may be affected by EPA's ultimate conclusion regarding reconsideration of the 2010 rule, API is requesting the consolidated cases also be held in abeyance under the same terms” as other long-pending cases the group has filed challenging EPA rules issued in 2010 and 2011.
API and the Gas Processors Association late last month filed separate challenges to EPA's revised GHG reporting rules for the oil and gas sector. The rule finalized Nov. 15 amended the agency's subpart W reporting rule governing petroleum and natural gas systems, changes the agency says are aimed at improving clarity and consistency of the reported data it receives.
Should the rule survive, it could bolster agency efforts to regulate methane emissions from the oil and gas sector -- though some industry officials have argued that without the reporting data, EPA may not have adequate information to regulate the emissions.
The revisions include eliminating best available monitoring methods (BAMM), alternative calculation methods EPA allowed in the reporting rule in order to give facilities time to adopt the necessary methods. EPA made the changes in response to a 2013 petition from environmentalists who have been pushing the agency to step up its oversight of the sector's emissions of methane, the potent GHG.
Among other things, the petition urged the agency to eliminate the BAMM and expand the scope of its GHG reporting rule for the oil and natural gas sector to include natural gas distribution infrastructure and oil wells that co-produce methane, saying the existing rule's failure to include the units gives an “incomplete picture” of the drilling sector's emissions.
API's Criticisms
API criticized the proposal, writing in April 30 comments that the changes if finalized “will significantly expand reporting requirements for some sources and require additional data collection that was not previously required. EPA should not utilize this proposed rule as an opportunity to further expand reporting requirements and introduce new burdens on the regulated industry at this stage.”
After EPA adopted the rule, the industry groups sued and the two cases were consolidated. Now API says EPA supports the group's request for a stay while the gas processors are not objecting to it.
A gas industry source says the main concern has to do with GHG reporting requirements for compressors.
An API spokesman declined to detail specific concerns but said that “some technical aspects of the reporting rule need to be worked out.” The source says API hopes to “avoid litigation if possible.”
EPA in a Feb. 10 status report in one of the other stayed cases notes that it is reconsidering five administrative petitions in response to the 2010 rule. “Because issues related in the administrative petitions for reconsideration overlap with the issues in this litigation, EPA moved to hold the case in abeyance pending completion of the reconsideration process. . . . EPA's review of the administrative petitions is ongoing.”
API says in its new motion that the petition for review of the subpart W revisions is related to the other cases “because the 2014 rule includes revisions to the same regulatory provisions . . . that were addressed in the 2010 and 2011 rules and for which administrative petitions for reconsideration are still pending.”
EPA Nov. 25 finalized the amended subpart W of the GHG reporting rule. API and the gas processors filed suit Jan. 23. These subpart W changes are separate from a proposal EPA issued Nov. 15 to expand the subpart to several new energy sectors and address methane releases from oil wells used in hydraulic fracturing. That proposal remains pending, and is also raising significant industry concern.
-
House, Senate Launch Investigations Into Funding Sources for Climate Change Skeptics
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Two congressional Democrats have launched investigations into which groups fund the small group of researchers who reject the scientific consensus that human activity significantly contributes to climate change.
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, sent letters Feb. 24 to seven universities requesting information on sources of external funding, consulting fees, compensation and draft testimony from researchers who have almost all testified before Congress and questioned the role of human activity in climate change.
Separately, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 24 he would investigate whether oil and other fossil fuel companies, industry groups and others funded research designed to cast doubt on the role of human activity in climate change.
The renewed scrutiny comes following the release of documents Feb. 21 detailing the more than $1.25 million received by Willie Soon, a high-profile climate change skeptic, from Exxon Mobil, Southern Co., the American Petroleum Institute and a foundation funded by conservative groups for his research. Greenpeace obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act Request.
Soon called his congressional testimony and papers “deliverables” in correspondence with groups funding his research, according to the documents. The part-time researcher for the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics believes solar activity can explain recent global warming rather than human activity.
He didn't respond to a request for comment but has long maintained that groups funding his research have no impact on his work. The documents were first provided to the New York Times and The Guardian.
A 2013 survey of scientific literature published in the journal Environmental Research Letters found that 97.2 percent of climate scientists believe human activity plays a major role in climate change.
Focus on Visible Skeptics
Adam Sarvana, communications director for the House Natural Resources Committee Democrats, said the letters sent to the seven universities attempted to get information on researchers that are skeptical about climate change with the biggest impact on public discourse.
“We could probably send a hundred similar letters,” Sarvana told Bloomberg BNA. “Our first round of inquiries is based on perceived impact on the scholarly and public process of assessing climate change's risk to the public. We're hoping to learn more about where funding for such high profile research comes from, whether that funding has been fully disclosed to the employing institution, and whether the problems” are isolated to one institution.
Grijalva sent letters seeking information on David Legates of the University of Delaware; John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville; Judith Curry of Georgia Institute of Technology; Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Robert Balling of Arizona State University; Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado; and Steven Hayward of Pepperdine University.
Nearly all of those researchers have testified before Congress, and some have multiple times.
“Companies with a direct financial interest in climate and air quality standards are funding environmental research that influences state and federal regulations and shapes public understanding of climate science,” Grijalva wrote. “These conflicts should be clear to stakeholders, including policymakers who use scientific information to make decisions.”
Markey Pushing Issue Into Public
In his own investigation, Markey will seek to determine if climate science research intended to influence public policy has been secretly funded and directed by fossil fuel and trade groups.
“We just want to continue to be pointing out how much funding comes in from these sources that have a stake in denying climate change and trying to make that public,” Markey told Bloomberg BNA. “To have a debate on science requires the science be unimpeachable, in terms of its source.”
Markey plans to send letters to companies, trade groups and others to determine whether other researchers besides Soon who deny a human role in climate change are funded through them. The letters also will seek to determine if the researchers disclose where their funding comes from and if the organizations provide direction for the research.
Letters will be sent to Southern Co., Exxon Mobil, BP, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and the American Petroleum Institute, among others, according to a Markey aide.
Inhofe Cites Suspicion
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who denies any human role in climate change and chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, declined to comment on whether Soon should have disclosed his funding sources in papers but told Bloomberg BNA he was “most suspicious” of researchers who received federal funding for climate change research.
The Smithsonian, for its part, sought to distance itself from Soon in a Feb. 23 statement by asking its inspector general to investigate whether he failed to properly disclose his funding and describing him as a “part-time researcher” who relies on “external grants to fund his research.”
“The Smithsonian is greatly concerned about the allegations surrounding Dr. Willie Soon's failure to disclose funding sources for his climate change research,” the statement said. “The Smithsonian does not support Dr. Soon's conclusions on climate change. The Smithsonian's official statement on climate change, based upon many decades of scientific research, points to human activities as a cause of global warming.”
-
Republicans Resume Assault on 'Secret Science'
Feb 24, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Amanda Peterka
Senate and House Republicans today resurrected legislation aimed at boosting transparency in the science that U.S. EPA uses in rulemaking.
House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said their "Secret Science Reform Act of 2015" would compel EPA to make its science more publicly available.
The House last year passed similar legislation in a 237-190 vote that was mostly along party lines (E&ENews PM, Nov. 19, 2014).
"Costly regulations should not be created behind closed doors and out of public view," Smith said in a statement. "The data that underpins EPA regulations should be available to the public so that independent scientists have a fair chance to verify findings."
Text of the bill was not immediately available, but last year's iteration would have prohibited EPA from finalizing rules that are based on science that isn't "transparent or reproducible." The legislation would have also compelled EPA to make public all the science, data and models used to shape rules before it can take action.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who has pledged to take on EPA regulations in his committee, expressed "strong support" for the legislation.
"The real test for sound science is transparency and reproducibility," Inhofe said. "Especially at a time when the American people are facing costly and burdensome EPA regulations, underlying science must be scientifically sound and unbiased."
Last November, eight Democrats voted in support of the legislation on the House floor, but many more rose in objection to it during floor debate, calling it a misunderstanding of how scientists operate. Democratic critics also said it would violate health privacy laws because it would require health data to be made public in order for it to be used in shaping regulations.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science and more than 40 other scientific organizations last year opposed the bill.
-
GOP Attacks EPA on ‘Secret Science’
Feb 24, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Republican lawmakers introduced new legislation Tuesday aimed at shining a light on the science behind the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulations.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tenn.) said the EPA relies heavily on “secret science” to justify its regulations, and the public should be able to scrutinize the research.
“For years, the EPA has based its rules and regulations on secret data that they refuse to publish and make available to all Americans,” Barrasso said in a statement.
“Since the American people bear the expensive costs of EPA red tape, they deserve to have access to the science behind these regulations. Our bill will force the Obama administration to finally start living up to its claim of being the ‘most transparent administration’ in history,” he said.
Under the legislation, the EPA would not be allowed to write any regulations unless they’re based on the “best available science” that is made publicly available on the web.
It revives a common talking point among Republicans, who say that the EPA needs to be more transparent about what goes into its rules.
“The data that underpins EPA regulations should be available to the public so that independent scientists have a fair chance to verify findings,” said Smith, chairman of the House Science Committee.
“Our freedoms are best protected when citizens are informed,” he said. “The Secret Science Reform Act would prohibit the EPA from using science they aren’t willing to make public.”
The House passed a similar bill last year, but it did not move through the Democratic-controlled Senate.
The Obama administration previously threatened to veto the legislation, saying it would hamper development of regulations, while defending itself against the “secret science” charge.
“If EPA is being accused of 'secret science' because we rely on real scientists to conduct research, and independent scientists to peer review it, and scientists who’ve spent a lifetime studying the science to reproduce it — then so be it,” EPA head Gina McCarthy said last year.
-
Panel to Vote on Bills Targeting Advisory Board, 'Secret Science'
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Robin Bravender
House lawmakers are reviving their offensive against U.S. EPA's data and roster of scientific advisers.
The House Science, Space and Technology Committee has scheduled a vote for this afternoon on two bills that aim to overhaul what EPA critics have called "secret science" that the agency uses to underpin costly regulations and a perceived bias when it comes to picking agency science advisers.
Similar legislation cleared the House last year but failed to move in the Senate, which was then under Democratic control. Opponents of EPA rules are giving it another shot now that the GOP is holding the reins of the upper chamber, although both bills received veto threats from the White House last year.
The panel will vote on the "EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act," a bill introduced yesterday by Reps. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) and Collin Peterson (D-Minn.). A similar bill, H.R. 1422, passed the chamber last November (E&E Daily, Nov. 19, 2014).
Sens. John Boozman (R-Ark.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) introduced a companion bill yesterday in the Senate.
The measure would add new peer-review requirements when it comes to balance and independence in the board, set a quota for state and local officials to be included on the panel and allow corporate interests to serve after disclosing financial conflicts of interest. It would also require academics to disclose previously received grant funding from EPA and add requirements for board members to respond in a written format to public comments.
The EPA advisory panel has about 50 members at any given time and advises the agency on the science behind federal rulemakings. The EPA administrator appoints members to three-year terms.
"Some members on this board have received grant money from the EPA, and several of the members have openly expressed policy preferences in the same areas they are asked to independently study," Lucas said yesterday in a statement. "The heavy costs of EPA's regulations warrant some degree of public oversight to ensure SAB's findings are free from bias or conflicts of interest and not simply provided by a set of handpicked advisors."
His bill would fix those issues, he said, "by ensuring the science guiding EPA's regulatory policy is open to review by the public and requiring members who serve on this board to disclose their professional backgrounds."
The White House argued last year that the legislation would affect the board's ability to perform its "essential functions."
"The SAB, along with other functions, reviews the quality and adequacy of certain scientific and technical information used by EPA or proposed as the basis for EPA regulations," the administration said in a statement of official policy. "Therefore, it is imperative that the SAB be composed of the most knowledgeable scientific and technical experts available." 'Secret science'
The House panel is also scheduled to vote today on the "Secret Science Reform Act of 2015," a bill that was reintroduced yesterday by House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas). Companion legislation was introduced in the Senate by John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) (E&ENews PM, Feb. 24).
That measure, a version of which also passed the House last year, would bar EPA from finalizing rules based on science that isn't publicly available in a form that can be independently reproduced.
When the House cleared H.R. 4012 last year, the White House and other critics blasted the measure as a harmful attack on EPA rules.
In its veto threat, the White House said the bill would impose "arbitrary, unnecessary and expensive" requirements on EPA that would hurt its ability to protect public health and the environment.
The bill "could be used to prevent EPA from finalizing regulations until legal challenges about the legitimate withholding of certain scientific and technical information are resolved," the White House said. "The bill also could prevent EPA from making crucial decisions, including those concerning the cleanup of contaminated sites, if the data supporting those decisions cannot, for legitimate reasons, be made publicly available" (E&ENews PM, Nov. 19, 2014).
Schedule: The markup is Wednesday, Feb. 25, at 2 p.m. in 2318 Rayburn.
-
Focus Legislative Energy on a National Carbon Policy, Not Keystone XL
Feb 25, 2015 | The Washington Post
Climate change warriors of all stripes were focused on the White House on Tuesday, where President Obama vetoed a bill that would have authorized construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. Like all the other attention slathered on this overblown issue, the focus was misplaced. It would have been better placed on the Capitol, where Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), without much fanfare, reintroduced a bill that would address the nation’s greenhouse-gas emissions in a serious way.
The Keystone XL controversy has occupied a far larger share of the national debate than it deserves. Environmental activists turned what should have been a routine infrastructure question into an existential war, styling it as a test of Mr. Obama’s commitment to fighting climate change. Conservatives responded with misleading claims about the number of jobs the project would create, and Republicans bizarrely chose to make the pipeline their top order of business after taking control of the Senate. With his veto, Mr. Obama refused once again to settle an issue that has been delayed for a ridiculous length of time.
Environmentalists should have kept their sights higher, on creating a national carbon policy that would reduce demand for dirty fuels, cutting emissions by attacking the root problem.
There have been many advocates for this sort of policy over the years — including Republicans, such as Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) and John McCain (Ariz.). GOP senior statesman George P. Shultz has argued for this sort of plan, too. Mr. Van Hollen’s market-based version is elegant and effective. It would put a slowly declining cap on the country’s carbon dioxide emissions, requiring an 80 percent cut by 2050, and rely on basic economics, not Environmental Protection Agency commands.
Firms putting coal, oil or natural gas into the U.S. market would have to buy permits that account for the carbon dioxide those fuels release when burned. That is, energy companies would finally have to pay the full cost of the products they sell. The buying and selling of limited numbers of permits would raise the cost of carbon-heavy goods and make alternatives relatively more attractive. In their everyday purchasing decisions, companies and consumers would determine how best to wring greenhouse emissions out of the economy.
The government would raise a lot of money in permit auctions, but Mr. Van Hollen’s bill would give all of it back, sending rebate checks to every American with a Social Security number. Mr. Van Hollen reckons that 80 percent of U.S. households would come out ahead, despite the higher cost of gasoline and other carbon-dependent products.
Encouragingly, anti-Keystone XL leader Bill McKibben joined Mr. Van Hollen on a Tuesday conference call boosting the bill. This is a market-based plan that environmentalists should march for and Republicans should embrace. The impact would dispatch Keystone to the footnote it deserved in the first place.
-
Compressor Stations May Be Permitted Individually Under Clean Air Act, Court Rules
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rebecca Wilhelm
Eight compressor stations operated by a Pennsylvania company may be permitted individually as minor air contamination sources instead of aggregated as a major source subject to stricter requirements under the Clean Air Act, a federal district court has ruled (Citizens for Pa.'s Future v. Ultra Res., Inc., M.D. Pa., No. 4:11-CV-1360, 2/23/15).
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania Feb. 23 granted summary judgment to Ultra Resources Inc. in a lawsuit brought by Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, finding the stations aren't “adjacent,” and the state Department of Environmental Protection properly issued individual nitrogen oxides emissions permits to the eight facilities.
“Because a number of separate and unconnected parcels of land on which the compressors are located would have to be aggregated in order for the (nitrogen oxide) emissions to reach the level of a ‘major’ source, and some of these properties are separated by several miles, the properties at issue cannot reasonably be considered … to be ‘adjacent,’ ” the district court wrote in its opinion.
The compressor stations are in Tioga and Potter counties within roughly five square miles.
Individually, the stations don't have the capacity to emit more than 100 tons of nitrogen oxides per year, but collectively the stations have the potential to meet this threshold, which would have required a major source permit.
Court Relied on Sixth Circuit
The district court relied on a similar case decided in 2012 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, even though the district court falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the Sixth Circuit's decision is non-binding in this district.
The Sixth Circuit is the only federal appeals court that has addressed this issue.
In Summit Petroleum v. EPA, the Sixth Circuit vacated the Environmental Protection Agency's determination that a Michigan natural gas operation's plant and production wells constitute a single major source and remanded to the Environmental Protection Agency to reassess the physical proximity of Summit's operations in Rosebush, Mich. (Summit Petroleum v. EPA, 690 F.3d 733, 75 ERC 1129, 2012 BL 198736 (6th Cir. 2012); 152 DEN A-2, 8/8/12).
The EPA had determined that Summit Petroleum Corp.'s plant and wells, located on various parcels within a 43-square-mile area, are functionally interrelated and therefore “adjacent” to one another.
Other Courts Expected to Follow Sixth Circuit
Jeffrey Holmstead, an attorney at Bracewell & Giuliani and a former EPA assistant administrator for air and radiation, told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 24 that he expects all courts will take the Sixth Circuit's approach.
“The courts seem to be very skeptical of the idea that you can treat something as one source even if individual units are located a long distance away from one another,” Holmstead said. “Every court that's looked at this has taken a common-sense approach by saying that a single source means something that's all on the same site.” Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;}
-
Resources Chairman Bishop Discusses Panel Priorities, Plans for Climate, Drilling Action
|
-
White House Energy Review to Include Crude-by-Rail Recommendations, DOE Says
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
A broad interagency assessment of national energy policy being conducted by the Obama administration will include recommendations related to improving crude-by-rail safety, a senior Energy Department official said Feb. 24.
The administration's Quadrennial Energy Review will include an initiative to improve the quality of data on shipments of crude and ethanol by railroad, among other recommendations, Melanie A. Kenderdine, energy counselor to Secretary Ernest Moniz, said during a forum hosted by the Natural Gas Round Table.
“If we can't look at how our oil and our ethanol is moving in shared infrastructure, we're not getting a full energy picture,” she said. ”It has been difficult and problematic to gather the kind of information we think we need, and its not just from the private sector, but all the agencies collect information differently in that regard.”
The report comes as the Transportation Department is developing new crude-by-rail regulations meant to address a spate of fiery tanker car crashes—including a Feb. 16 fireball in rural West Virginia—that could cost shippers billions of dollars.
“We've seen enormous increases in oil shipment by rail, oil shipment by barge,” Kenderdine said. “The increased oil production and ethanol mandates have perturbed existing barge, rail and truck transport.”
Final Edits Underway
The review, called for every four years, is undergoing final edits by the White House and is expected to be publicly released soon, Kenderdine said.
The Quadrennial Energy Review will include “a major focus” on electricity grid reliability, improving the national oil stockpile known as the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and the need to improve transportation infrastructure—rail, inland waterways and ports—that moves commodities as well as materials related to energy, Moniz told reporters Feb. 12 (30 DEN A-6, 2/13/15).
“We are looking at promoting reliability and climate mitigation trough the grid of the future,” Kenderdine said.
In addition to addressing crude-by-rail, Kenderdine said the report also will broach methane leaks from natural gas distribution systems by providing incentives to accelerate the replacement of old leaky pipelines. “That's something we have looked at pretty extensively in this QER,” she said.
The review, which is designed to serve as a “road map” to inform a national energy strategy, is expected to include short- and long-term objectives, possible executive actions and legislative proposals for Congress.
-
Lawmakers Offer Bills to Strengthen Response to Oil Train Accidents
Feb 25, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Sean Reilly
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and three co-sponsors yesterday reintroduced legislation to bolster preparedness for firefighters and other emergency responders who would be first on the scene in dealing with oil train derailments and other rail mishaps involving hazardous materials.
Under S. 546, the Federal Emergency Management Agency would create a public-private advisory panel to pull together government agencies, technical experts and others to review the current regimen for gaps in training and funding, according to a summary from Heitkamp's office.
The panel would have a year to report back with recommendations that would address the quality of current training, development of a train incident database, and potential ways to get needed information more quickly to first responders. The recommendations would then go to FEMA's National Advisory Council, which could pass them on to Congress and other federal agencies represented on the panel.
Driven in large part by oil production from western North Dakota's Bakken formation, the number of rail cars carrying crude oil shot up by more than 4,000 percent between 2008 and 2013, according to the Association of American Railroads. Last week, a CSX Corp. oil train derailed and caught fire in Mount Carbon, W.Va. In late 2013, a BNSF Railway Co. train carrying some 400,000 gallons of oil crashed and exploded outside of Casselton, N.D.
When such accidents occur, "our first responders need to have the training and skills to control the situation and respond as effectively as possible," Heitkamp said in a news release. Co-sponsoring the measure are Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Angus King (I-Maine) and Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). Heitkamp had introduced a similar measure last June, but it never came out of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Also yesterday, Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) introduced an identical bill in the House, with Reps. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) and Cedric Richmond (D-La.) as co-sponsors, according to Kind's office.
-
Heitkamp Reintroduces Crude Oil Rail Transport Emergency Response Bill
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
Legislation to ensure emergency responders have adequate resources and training to respond to derailments of trains carrying crude oil and other flammable liquids was reintroduced Feb. 24 by Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.).
The introduction of the bill (S. 546) comes roughly a week after a train carrying crude oil in West Virginia derailed, igniting a house and several tank cars and causing oil to spill into the nearby Kanawha River. It is the latest in a series of high-profile derailments that has drawn the public's attention to the increased frequency of rail cars transporting crude oil and the accompanying safety risks (see related story).
“We will always need to have first responders who are prepared to respond to an incident, and that's why I'm not going to give this up,” Heitkamp said in a call with reporters.
Under the Railroad Emergency Services Preparedness, Operational Needs and Safety Evaluation (RESPONSE) Act, a subcommittee of the Federal Emergency Management Agency National Advisory Council would be created.
Its primary task would be to assess the effectiveness and adequacy of emergency response training, resources, best practices and hazardous materials rail transport response.
The subcommittee would have one year from when it is formed to conduct its evaluation and to provide recommendations to Congress regarding first responder training quality and availability for crude-by-rail incidents, training funds' use and the development of a potential new train incident database.
The subcommittee also would offer actions for locations that don't have emergency response plans for these types of incidents.
Similar Measure Introduced in 2014
Heitkamp introduced the RESPONSE Act in June 2014. It was referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs but never received a hearing or a committee vote (124 DEN A-18, 6/27/14).
Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) introduced the same bill in July 2014. It was referred to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials and also never received a hearing or a committee vote.
-
CSX Derailment Probe Unlikely to Alter Crude-by-Rail Debate, May Expedite Rule
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
Federal railroad and hazmat safety officials can begin investigating what caused or contributed to the recent West Virginia derailment of a train carrying crude oil, as well as determining what enforcement actions are warranted, the Transportation Department announced Feb. 22.
The derailment itself could—and a senator and a federal safety board hope it will—prompt the White House to speed up review of a Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration rule that would govern transporting crude by rail, speculators said. However, the derailment and the findings from the Federal Railroad Administration and PHMSA investigation are unlikely to alter the focus of the broader debate over safe transportation of crude oil, especially over the content of the PHMSA rule, Cynthia Quarterman, a former PHMSA administrator, told Bloomberg BNA.
“Every time one of these incidents happens and it's clearly a close call—because a house burns nearby or it's a stone's throw away from a big city—I think the conversation gets reignited,” Quarterman, now a distinguished senior fellow for the Atlantic Council, said. “I don't think it changes it, but it reminds people that this issue is still out there.”
Derailment in West Virginia
Twenty-seven CPC-1232 tank cars (not owned by CSX Transportation Inc.) carrying crude oil derailed off a 109-car unit train Feb. 16 near the Kanawha River outside Montgomery, W.Va., leading West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin (D) to declare a State of Emergency for Kanawha and Fayette counties that evening. The derailment occurred nearly one year after another train carrying crude oil derailed on the same CSX route (32 DEN A-8, 2/18/15).
One house and several of the tank cars caught fire and oil spilled into the river, according to the Environmental Protection Agency on-scene coordinator. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection announced Feb. 22 that oil spilled from the tank cars hadn't contaminated the local drinking water supplies and air and water are being monitored for public safety.
Weather and safety issues kept investigators from fully commencing their review of the site until Feb. 22.
Now that conditions have improved, FRA investigators, who will lead the forensic assessment, will examine the damaged tank cars and rail to assess whether wheel, track, axles or other equipment issues contributed to or caused the accident, the department said in a news release.
PHMSA will examine several issues, including the classification, volatility and gas content of the crude oil carried on the CSX railroad and the performance of the tank cars that carried the crude oil. These are issues it also identified as key factors affecting the safety of oil-by-rail transport in the agency's proposed rule.
Months to a Year
The federal investigators could remain at the site for days or weeks, Kevin Thompson, associate administrator for the Federal Railroad Administration, told Bloomberg BNA. However, full investigations of these kinds typically take between two to three months up to more than a year, depending on what the FRA finds, he said.
CSX also will conduct its own investigation of the incident, which will be completed after the site is restored and the federal investigation is completed, Rob Doolittle, a spokesman for CSX, told Bloomberg BNA.
The derailment itself could result in a quicker review by the White House of the PHMSA rule, Quarterman told Bloomberg BNA, which legislators, businesses and environmental groups alike have been seeking for months. The White House's Office of Management and Budget received PHMSA's final rule on Feb. 5 and has 90 days to review it (26 DEN A-3, 2/9/15).
The rule would directly affect trains such as the one carrying crude oil on the CSX track and some requirements in the proposed rule would lower the risk for similar trains. For example, the least stringent tank car standard proposed by PHMSA was a “jacketed” version of the CPC-1232 tank cars, meaning the tank cars involved in this incident would have to have been more protective.
A quicker release of the rule would please federal officials and legislators, some of whom have cited the West Virginia derailment as another reason why the rule's finalization is urgent.
‘Swift Regulatory Action.'
For example, Christopher Hart, the acting chairmain of the National Transportation Safety Board, called for “swift regulatory action” by federal regulators to strengthen operational control and tank car standards. While the proposed rule would significantly improve tank car performance, another 36,000 CPC-1232 tank cars without jackets are to be built for transporting crude oil this year alone, he said.
“[T]he effect of new tank car safety rules could be weakened by a vast new fleet of cars built to older and less-safe standards,” Hart said.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cited the West Virginia derailment and others in a Feb. 20 letter to the Office of Management and Budget, urging fast action by the administration.
“This week's disastrous oil train accidents raise red flags about whether the newer, supposedly safer, rail cars are doing the best job protecting our communities,” Wyden said.
However, the impact of the federal investigation's findings on the West Virginia derailment on the crude-by-rail safety debate is likely to be little, on both the crude-by-rail conversation in Washington and on the PHMSA rulemaking, Quarterman said.
Even though rail incident investigations tend to be more straightforward than, for example, pipeline incident investigations, the findings won't likely be released until after the rule is finalized, which is scheduled to occur in May, she said.
Debate Unchanged
Additionally, while much of the focus in the public arena has been on tank car performance, rail safety has always been a component considered in the derailment of trains, Quarterman said.
That means even if federal investigators identified the primary cause of the derailment as a rail issue, rather than one associated with the tank cars or operational controls, it wouldn't likely change the conversation because rail safety has already been highlighted, she said. There should be more federal, state and industry inspections of rails, however, Quarterman said.
“It's hard to imagine that any of the findings coming out of this would change the conversation,” Quarterman said.
The Association of American Railroads and the American Petroleum Institute declined to comment on the ongoing investigation. The railroads group told Bloomberg BNA they will continue to call for tougher tank car standards, while the petroleum organization emphasized that tank car performance is only one element of a stronger mitigation strategy.
The Railway Supply Institute didn't respond to Bloomberg BNA's message requesting comment.
Lynchburg Consent Order
As the West Virginia train derailment drives attention to the crude-by-rail issue, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality has begun wrapping up the previous crude oil train derailment that occurred in April 2014 on the same rail route—CSX's primary crude oil route, according to Doolittle—in Lynchburg, Va.
CSX has agreed to pay a $361,000 penalty for damages associated with the April 2014 derailment involving a tank car carrying crude oil, the Virginia department announced Feb. 23. CSX would also conduct restoration work on the James River bank near where the derailment occurred, monitor the river for long-term environmental effects and pay more than $18,500 for costs associated with the department's investigative work.
In the April 30 derailment in Lynchburg, Va., nearly 30,000 gallons spilled from the breached tank car and roughly 98 percent of the oil burned, according to a department news release.
The proposed consent order is available for public comment through March 25, before it is sent to the State Water Control Board to be approved, the department said.
-
Shell Refinery Modifications to Accommodate Crude-by-Rail Need EIS, County Official Finds
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Shukovsky
Washington state environmental activists prevailed Feb. 23 in their first challenge to what they say amounts to government rubber-stamping of plans to build crude-by-rail infrastructure at the state's five refineries.
A hearing examiner for Skagit County overturned a decision by county planners that said construction of crude-by-rail facilities at Shell's Puget Sound Refinery did not require an environmental impact statement. Wick Dufford, the hearing examiner, applied the “clearly erroneous” standard in reversing the planners' determination of non-significance under the State Environmental Policy Act.
As sea-going shipments of Alaska crude have diminished, Shell is seeking to construct a rail spur from the existing BNSF line that could bring 102 tank cars hauling Bakken crude six times a week to its refinery at Anacortes. The refinery is on waters that include Padilla Bay, home to a National Estuarine Research Reserve that Dufford said supports “an astonishing diversity of flora and fauna.”
Noting that the other three refineries in Skagit and in an adjacent county on north Puget Sound have already proceeded with crude-by-rail projects without completing an EIS, Dufford wrote: “Shell is in a difficult position as the last player in line for permission in this region. Subjecting them to a process none of the others have had to endure may seem unfair. However, the need for this process is compelled by the law and basic prudence.”
‘Under the Radar.’
In Dufford's finding of fact and conclusions of law, he reasoned that the Skagit County planners and Shell had essentially neglected to perform any meaningful analysis of the cumulative impacts of all four local refineries' crude-by-rail activities.
“Shell's (and the County's) cumulative effects analysis is really a reiteration of assertions about the lack of local direct and indirect effects,” he said. “There is really no analysis of cumulative effects at all.”
He said Shell's discussion did not include information on the cumulative risks created by introducing the proposed six loaded unit trains per week into a region where three other refineries are also importing large quantities of crude by rail.
“The County assumed that the spill response prevention efforts of BNSF and federal and local entities would be effective to reduce spills along the route to an insignificant level,’’ Dufford wrote. “There is nothing in the record which even arguably proves this proposition.”
Earthjustice attorney Jan Hasselman—representing six environmental groups, including Friends of the Earth and the Washington Environmental Council, in challenging the determination of non-significance—told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 24 that this is the first time anyone has challenged the adequacy of environmental review of a crude-by-rail refinery project in the state. The other projects were already in operation before the July 2013 rail disaster in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, that resulted in 47 fatalities, he said.
Before Lac-Mégantic, “nobody even knew to look for these, and so they all went under the radar,” Hasselman said. “There was no environmental analysis, no public conversation about the risks. The process failed. Those projects are now built and operating.”
Shell ‘Disappointed.’
Shell spokesman Curtis Smith told Bloomberg BNA Feb. 24 in an email that the company was disappointed by the decision.
“This project is critical for the refinery, and we strongly believe that the County's environmental analysis was thorough and based on sound science and evidence,” Smith said.
“We respect the Hearing Examiner's decision and are determined to stay the course in this process in order to achieve a win/win for Shell and the community,” Smith wrote. “We are still going through the details of the ruling, and it is too early at this point to comment on specific next steps.” Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE HE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;}
-
PHMSA Wants Global Radioactive Transport Input
Feb 25, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is soliciting proposals on what needs to be changed in international radioactive material transport standards, an agency official announced at a Feb. 24 PHMSA meeting. The proposals are not for domestic rule changes but rather are for changes to the International Atomic Energy Agency's Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, Michael Conroy, a PHMSA Engineering and Research Division staff member, said. These proposals are due to PHMSA by April 17, Conroy said. The agency will review and compile proposals to submit to the international organization by May 10. Those proposals will be reviewed by the international organization's Transport Safety Standards Committee at its June 15-19 meeting in Vienna. The international transport committee will then determine at its November meeting whether the member states' agreed-to changes warrant updating the international standards in the 2015 review cycle or should be assessed in the 2017 period instead, Conroy said. Relevant documents are available at http://www-ns.iaea.org/tech-areas/radiation-safety/transport.asp. All input for PHMSA should be sent to ramcert@dot.gov.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested