Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 12/20/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Chemical Industry Rebounds in November As Output Rises
Dec 20, 2018 | Zacks
By Anindya Barman
U.S. chemical production expanded in November on gains in output across most chemical producing regions, according to the recent monthly report from the American Chemistry Council (“ACC”). -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Urges US-Japan Trade Negotiators to Promote Regulatory Compatibility
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Sunny Lee
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has urged US and Japanese negotiators to use upcoming trade talks – which may begin as early as January 2019 – to develop and promote regulatory compatibility and data sharing for trade in chemicals. -
Q&A: Incoming Energy Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Rush
Dec 20, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolff
Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), the likely incoming chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy, isn't a fan of the effort to create a new House select committee on climate change. -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Pushes for Regulatory Cooperation in US-EU Trade Deal
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has pressed for regulatory coordination and a relaxation of trade barriers under negotiations for a new US-EU trade deal. -
EPA Scales Back IRIS Assessment Schedule, Creating New Uncertainties
Dec 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Following a high-level review, EPA has released a scaled-back agenda of chemicals that its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program will assess over the next few years, providing some certainty after months of limited public activity. -
No New Initiatives as EPA, Housing Department Detail Lead Plans
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
The EPA will lay out in March the steps it will take to reduce lead exposure and better help children who have already been exposed, Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said Dec. 19. -
Industry Groups Call for Abandonment of Prop 65 Reprotox Calculation Amendments
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A broad industry coalition has pushed back on proposed changes to how exposures to reproductive toxicants are calculated under Proposition 65. They claim the amendments would "place additional and unjustified burdens solely on the backs of businesses". -
Coatings Industry Presses for US/Canada Alignment on Preservatives
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
The American coatings industry is leaning on the US and Canadian governments to better align their regulatory decisions on biocides, in order to tackle rising concerns over a dwindling number of in-can preservatives authorised for use. -
3M Sued Over Scotchgard Chemicals by Maker of Saucony, Merrell
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Kary
Wolverine World Wide Inc., the maker of shoe brands like Merrell, Saucony, and Cat Footwear, has sued 3M Co., alleging it concealed information about the environmental and health risks of chemicals it sold to make shoes water and stain repellent. -
EU Plan to Ban Plastic Items Will Lessen Litter
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
Burger joints and coffee shops in the European Union will be rethinking their use of plastic under a draft EU law provisionally approved Dec. 19. -
NGOs Rally Against Industry's Call to Scrap Echa SVHC Database
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
A group of NGOs has called on Echa to "remain determined" in developing and implementing a database of candidate list substances in articles. -
Over a Third of UK Councils Not Testing Products for Hazardous Chemicals
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A survey into inspections by UK local authorities found that more than a third of those questioned have not tested any products for hazardous chemicals content in the last five years. -
Toys Contain More ‘Banned Chemicals’ Than Other Product Types
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
There have been more chemical safety warnings issued in the EU this year for toys than any other product type, according to analysis by NGO the European Environmental Bureau. -
Pipeline Safety Needs Congress Action on Confidentiality (1)
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Kinder Morgan Inc., NiSource Inc., state officials, and pipeline safety advocates want Congress to grant confidentiality for data about companies’ mistakes and incidents, to encourage sharing that information to improve safety. -
Why Clean Energy Investments Should Be Part of Your Risk Management Strategy
Dec 20, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Jake Hiller
There’s a new way to approach energy risks that should interest business leaders who navigate today’s changing economy. -
Energy Department Lifts Reporting Requirements for LNG Exports
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rebecca Kern
Exporters of liquefied natural gas, such as Cheniere Energy and Dominion Energy, no longer have to track all of the overseas destinations for their cargo under a new Energy Department policy intended to reduce reporting requirements. -
Southwest Governors Strike Natural Gas Deal with Mexican State
Dec 19, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rafael Bernal
The governors of Arizona and New Mexico struck a deal Wednesday with the governor of Sonora, Mexico to export American natural gas from Mexican ports. -
Subtle Industry Split Emerges Over Scope Of EPA Methane Rule Rollback
Dec 20, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan
A subtle split is emerging in the oil and gas sector over the scope of EPA's efforts to roll back Obama-era methane standards for the industry... -
Rising LNG Demand to Exert More Pull on U.S. Natural Gas Prices
Dec 20, 2018 | Reuters
By Scott DiSavino
U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity is on the brink of doubling in 2019, which will boost the super-cooled fuel’s influence on the U.S. natural gas market, where volatility surged in 2018 after several years of slumber. -
TSA's Oversight Isn't Ensuring Pipeline Security, GAO Reports
Dec 20, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
The Government Accountability Office reported yesterday it has found "significant weaknesses" in the oversight of cyber and physical defenses of the nation's natural gas, oil and other hazardous liquids pipelines by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). -
Permian’s Growth Spurt at Risk Amid Oil-Price Collapse (Corrected)
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Kevin Crowley
The U.S.’s biggest oil field may be about to pump the brakes if crude keeps plunging. -
2019 Outlook: Arctic to See More Ship Traffic, Oil Exploration
Dec 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By James Munson
Relaxed shipping rules from Russia, Chinese investment in natural gas, and U.S. steps toward oil and gas exploration will make for increased activity in the Arctic region in 2019. -
Congress Poised To Extend EPA Funds, Chemical Programs, Until Feb. 8
Dec 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Congress is poised to vote in the coming days on a stopgap bill that will extend level funding for EPA and six other federal agencies into February, a move that will avoid a partial government shutdown while creating an early test for the new Democratic Congress... -
Georgia-Pacific to Spend $4.7 Million in Arkansas Air Claims
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Stinson
An Arkansas-based chemical facility owned by Georgia-Pacific Chemicals LLC will spend $4.7 million on environmental projects and pollution controls as part of a settlement being published Dec. 20 in the Federal Register. -
Opinion: Freight Rail Reform Can Help Louisiana’s Economy
Dec 19, 2018 | Houma Courier
By Gregory M. Bowser
To date, the chemical industry has announced that it will invest $58 billion to support 85 new chemical production projects in Louisiana, which will provide a much-needed boost to our state’s job growth and economic output. -
There Is Now a Bipartisan Carbon Tax Bill in the Senate
Dec 20, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
The first bipartisan carbon tax bill in a decade now has a late-breaking Senate companion. -
New Climate Committee Unlikely to Get Subpoena Power
Dec 20, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Mark K. Matthews and Nick Sobczyk
House Democratic leaders said yesterday they have no intention of granting subpoena power to a proposed committee on climate change that's in the works for the next Congress. -
Exxon Seeks Years-Long Halt in Massachusetts Climate Suit
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adrianne Appel
Exxon Mobil is seeking a years-long halt in a landmark lawsuit alleging the company’s Massachusetts oil and gas terminal is vulnerable to climate change, while the company awaits an EPA review.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Chemical Industry Rebounds in November As Output Rises
Dec 20, 2018 | Zacks
By Anindya Barman
U.S. chemical production expanded in November on gains in output across most chemical producing regions, according to the recent monthly report from the American Chemistry Council (“ACC”). This marks a rebound from declines witnessed in the previous two months.
November Readings Show Broad-based Regional Gains
The Washington, DC-based chemical industry trade group said that the U.S. Chemical Production Regional Index ("CPRI") ticked up 0.2% in November on a monthly comparison basis, following a 0.5% drop a month ago and a 0.2% decline in September. The U.S. CPRI, which is measured using a three-month moving average, was created by Moore Economics to track chemical production in seven regions nationwide.
Per the ACC, production went up across all regions in the reported month barring the Gulf Coast – the epicenter of the U.S. specialty chemicals and petrochemicals industry. Production from Midwest went up 0.3% in November. Output rose 0.4% across Ohio Valley, Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Southeast and West Coast. However, output from the Gulf Coast edged down 0.1% in the reported month.
By products, chemical production was mixed in November. Gains across plastic resins, adhesives, pesticides, coatings, fertilizers, consumer products, and synthetic dyes and pigments were neutralized by lower production of organic chemicals, synthetic rubber, manufactured fibers, chlor-alkali, other inorganic chemicals, and other specialty chemicals.
According to the ACC, activity for the U.S. manufacturing sector – the largest consumer of chemical products – was flat in November after a 0.2% growth a month ago. The sector is a major driver for the chemical industry which touches around 96% of manufactured goods. Manufacturing activity is also a key indicator for chemical production.
Within the manufacturing sector, production rose in several chemistry end-user markets in November including appliances, aerospace, machinery, fabricated metal products, semiconductors, petroleum refining, iron and steel products, foundries, plastic products, rubber products, tires and furniture.
Overall chemical production also shot up 4.2% on a year over year comparison basis in November. All regions scored gains on a year-over-year basis with the Gulf Coast racking up the strongest growth.
US Chemicals Set For Solid Upside in 2019
The American chemical industry is poised for an upswing in 2019. The ACC expects U.S. chemical production (excluding pharmaceuticals) to rise 3.6% in 2019, following a 3.1% growth in 2018. The expansion is expected to be partly driven by growth in manufacturing and export, demand strength across major end-markets and gains in business investment. However, trade tensions pose a risk to the outlook.
The trade group also expects basic chemicals production to expand 4.8% in 2019. The specialty chemicals segment is also expected to see production growth of 2.2% in 2019. Growth in manufacturing and exports markets this year will continue to boost demand for basic chemicals. These factors coupled with growth in construction markets are also expected to drive the specialty chemicals segments.
Per the ACC, strength in export markets and higher business investment have boosted demand in major chemical end-use markets such as light vehicles and housing.
The United States also remains an attractive investment destination for chemical investment and domestic chemical industry continue to enjoy the competitive advantage of access to abundant supplies of shale gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs). Economics of shale gas is driving strong capital investment in new chemical projects, leading to growth in the domestic chemical industry.
Chemical Stocks Worth a Look
A few stocks currently worth considering in the chemical space are Celanese Corporation (CE - Free Report) , Albemarle Corporation (ALB - Free Report) , Innospec Inc. (IOSP - Free Report) and W. R. Grace & Co. (GRA - Free Report) , each carrying a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.
Celanese has an expected earnings growth of 47.7% for 2018. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 3.3% upward over the last 60 days.
Albemarle has an expected earnings growth of 18.3% for 2018. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 0.9% upward over the last 60 days.
Innospec delivered an average positive earnings surprise of 10.5% in the trailing four quarters. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 4.6% upward over the last 60 days.
W. R. Grace has an expected earnings growth of 17.9% for the current year. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 1.5% upward over the last 60 days.
https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/343840/us-chemical-industry-rebounds-in-november-as-output-rises
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Urges US-Japan Trade Negotiators to Promote Regulatory Compatibility
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Sunny Lee
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has urged US and Japanese negotiators to use upcoming trade talks – which may begin as early as January 2019 – to develop and promote regulatory compatibility and data sharing for trade in chemicals.
In a public comment to a consultation on US objectives in the talks, the ACC said the trade agreement between the US and Japan will be vital for the industry as it will "set the precedent" for other deals and for regulatory development in the region.
The organisation added that it and its Japanese counterparts have been "working in parallel with our respective governments to promote regulatory cooperation on chemicals". And it has encouraged negotiators to "support development of science- and risk-based regulations across the Asia-Pacific region".
Specifically, the ACC recommended that the two countries "build on the sectoral annex on chemical substances in the proposed US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), strengthening and adding to these provisions where possible." This calls for a risk-based approach for regulating chemicals and encourages aligned risk assessment methodologies and risk management approaches, among others.
The ACC set out its overall priorities for supporting the trade agreement which include eliminating all tariffs on chemicals, enhancing regulatory compatibility and fostering data sharing.
It said it will continue to add input on regulatory cooperation as negotiations continue.
More details are available on CW+AsiaHub
https://chemicalwatch.com/72937/acc-urges-us-japan-trade-negotiators-to-promote-regulatory-compatibility
-
Q&A: Incoming Energy Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Rush
Dec 20, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolff
Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), the likely incoming chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy, isn't a fan of the effort to create a new House select committee on climate change.
The lawmaker from Chicago, who's been in Congress for a quarter of a century, made no secret of his opposition to the select committee on climate change that likely incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has promised. It is, he said in an interview before Pelosi backed the committee, simply a repeat of the effort that occurs with every new Congress to take jurisdiction from the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Rush also said he has big plans for an energy infrastructure bill early in the upcoming Congress, and he wants it to cover everything from pipelines and power transmission to energy storage and electric vehicles.
And he plans "robust oversight" of the administration, especially with regards to preserving the independence of FERC, though he say his focus will be on policy, not policymakers.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
You're very likely to end up the chairman of the Energy Subcommittee in the coming Congress, what are your top priorities for the coming year?
My top priority is to make sure we maintain the jurisdiction of the committee. Every time there's a new Congress ... in the first place everybody wants to rob Energy and Commerce of its jurisdiction, and that's going on now. So I want to fight the good fight to keep our jurisdiction from being diluted to the point we have no jurisdiction at all. They seem hellbent on getting rich on Energy and Commerce and eating off the skeleton of what it used to be. And so that's my first priority.
Are we talking about this select committee on climate change, is that what you're thinking of?
That's one of them, yes, that's one of them. And it's foolhardy.
Why foolhardy?
Because, first of all, it's not necessary. Over the last eight years, there have been some of us on Energy and Commerce that have been fighting the good fight of David versus Goliath against the Republican majority who has consistently denied there is climate change. And they refused to have hearings on it. They refused to hear from scientists at hearings. Any mention of it, they would object if the words "climate change" were voiced into the record at all. So we've been there fighting this battle. We ain't had nobody to help us, alright?
Now all of a sudden, we're in the majority, and now everybody's [saying] "Well, we have to have a select committee on climate change." What? Where were you when the going was tough? Where were you when we were the voice in the wilderness? Where were you then? And so I really think that it's foolhardy, it's unnecessary. The last time we had a select committee, the only thing that came out of it was Sen. [Ed] Markey was able to use it as an arrow in his quiver to help get elected to the Senate.
The intention [from Green New Deal advocates] is the committee would have legislative authority.
Then it really wouldn't make any sense. What are they going to do, messaging? We've been messaging and trying to do the legislative work for eight years. So now we have a ... dog and pony show Select Committee on Climate Change.
Let's move to the infrastructure bill. What would be in it, and do you think you can bring in any Republicans?
We want the energy sector to be the most robust and far-reaching job creation sector in the economy. And so we want to go to rural communities and urban communities to look at how we can use energy dominance of the U.S. economy to help create the jobs and the infrastructure. ... I think that there's a whole area of battery storage technology that has to be seriously looked at in terms of infrastructure it needs. You know you've got these electrified vehicles — where are they made? Who makes them?
We need a meaningful target for energy infrastructure. Then basic things, public utilities and what are the opportunities to upgrade public utilities? What are the opportunities to create pipelines across the nation? In my home state I didn't realize that one-eighth of the pipelines are underground in the state of Illinois. Some of them haven't been inspected for decades. Some of them need a repair, alright? Every aspect of travel, interstate commerce, has an energy predicate to it. So, it's pretty vast. I'm pretty excited about it.
This seems like an enormous bill you're talking about.
We are already going to be an all-of-the-above energy nation. It's enormous, it is enormous.
You're hoping to write legislation you can get through the House?
We have to be ambitious, we have to start out shooting for the moon and see where we land.
This is something we can expect to see early on?
First hundred days.
The Democratic base is clamoring for oversight of this administration. Do you have a vision of priorities for oversight?
We will have very vigorous and robust oversight. I don't view oversight as being an attack-and-counterattack effort. Oversight in my opinion means having some sharp exchanges that is aimed not at reducing the individuals but magnifying the policy.
I do believe that we ought to have a principled, focused, aggressive initiative on it .... What I hear in your question is that over the last eight years nothing's really been done, and that's why they're clamoring. Well, I'm not going to be pointing the finger at the individual, I'm going to point the finger at policy. I just hope the individual doesn't get in the way.
Are there particular policies that you expect to focus on? Any areas of concern in terms of this oversight?
I know a lot of my time is going to be spent on climate change. I don't have right now what kind of policies. ... I don't like this whole idea of FERC and FCC having these kind of fights. We want to be telling FERC that they don't put their hand on the scale.
Are you concerned about the critique of Democratic leadership that they aren't setting a clear path for the next generation to come up?
Your talents, your gifts — they'll make room for you. Your gifts, your talents, your commitment, your hard work will make room for you, no matter where you are.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/article/2018/12/q-a-incoming-energy-subcommittee-chairman-bobby-rush-1036283
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Pushes for Regulatory Cooperation in US-EU Trade Deal
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has pressed for regulatory coordination and a relaxation of trade barriers under negotiations for a new US-EU trade deal.
The group testified in a 17 December hearing at the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), which gathered 35 industry representatives to discuss priorities under the construction of the deal.
The groundwork for it was laid in July, when President Trump and European Commission President Juncker discussed addressing regulatory concerns and eliminating tariffs on most industrial goods. Formal negotiations could begin as soon as mid-January.
In the ACC's testimony — and in a letter to the USTR from ACC director for international trade Ed Brzytwa — the organisation emphasised regulatory cooperation as one of the means for improving trade productivity.
Mr Brzytwa recommended building on the regulatory alignment outcomes under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and creating "a distinct track for regulatory cooperation for the chemicals sector".
In particular, he noted hopes to "facilitate regulator-to-regulator dialogue on critical issues such as prioritisation and classification".
Concerns about titanium dioxide, siloxanes
The ACC also used the trade talks to raise issues on specific chemicals: titanium dioxide (TiO2) and siloxanes.
On the pending EU regulation to classify TiO2 as a suspected carcinogen by inhalation, the ACC maintains that this was put forward without allowing the completion of the substance’s evaluation under REACH, which was due to start in 2017. The group raised concerns that the classification could precipitate a "domino effect" for classifying other widely used, poorly soluble particles.
Meanwhile, it objected to the "primarily hazard-based" evaluation that led to two siloxanes (D4 and D5) being restricted in certain personal care products. These evaluations, said the ACC, are inconsistent with what Canada and Australia found for the same substances.
"The EU siloxane restrictions limit consumer choice, reduce product quality and jeopardise innovation without any measurable environmental benefit," Mr Brzytwa wrote in an annex to his letter.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72922/acc-pushes-for-regulatory-cooperation-in-us-eu-trade-deal
-
EPA Scales Back IRIS Assessment Schedule, Creating New Uncertainties
Dec 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Following a high-level review, EPA has released a scaled-back agenda of chemicals that its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program will assess over the next few years, providing some certainty after months of limited public activity.
But the plan appears to create new uncertainties as there is no mention of formaldehyde, an assessment Democrats are demanding be released, and several pending assessments lack milestones.
EPA Dec. 19 released a “Program Outlook” for IRIS, describing “assessments that are currently in development and their projected public milestones,” according to an email from the program.
The list contains some 13 chemicals or groups of chemicals at various stages of assessment, including likely controversial assessments of toxic or hazardous substances, such as arsenic, hexavalent chromium (Cr6), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), methylmercury and related compounds, and five perfluorinated chemicals.
The list appears to put the IRIS program -- which assesses the hazards of substances -- on a somewhat firmer footing in the face of calls to eliminate it by many industry and GOP critics, who charge its assessments are too conservative and drive overly stringent standards.
But the new agenda provides anticipated release dates for various steps in the development of only five of the assessments, while the remaining eight are listed as “to be determined.”
EPA appeared to downplay any potential uncertainties about the program's schedule. “These assessments have been identified as high priority needs of the Agency for fiscal year 2019. The anticipated dates of the IRIS activities communicated in this update are based on several factors, including complexity of the assessment products and the availability of resources,” the agency said.
The list is significantly scaled back from an agenda the program released in 2015, when the agency said it was assessing 22 substances, and listed 15 more as being of high priority to begin assessment.
Noticeably absent from the current list is any indication that the agency is continuing work on its draft assessment of formaldehyde, which several Democratic senators accuse the Trump EPA of blocking from public release.
Sens. Ed Markey (D-MA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Tom Carper (D-DE), ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, wrote former Administrator Scott Pruitt last May, urging him to release the assessment. In the letter, they charged that the draft had been completed more than a year ago, and that industry groups were pressuring the Trump EPA not to release it because it links formaldehyde exposure to leukemia.
More recently, Markey and others have sought commitments from EPA to release the document in association with the pending confirmation of EPA nominees, including Alexandra Dunn, President Donald Trump's nominee to head EPA's toxics office, and Peter Wright, the nominee to lead EPA's waste office.
Wheeler's Review
Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler told reporters last summer that he would release the formaldehyde assessment once he had completed a review of it to ensure its accuracy as well as a broader review of the IRIS program's agenda and whether it is adequately serving regulatory programs.
“What I have asked the IRIS program is that we need to make sure we have identified the customer for analysis,” Wheeler told reporters. “And we need to know what the end result of the product will be, and what the regulatory process” is, “not just for formaldehyde but for all the IRIS assessments,” he said.
Wheeler's review appeared to stall the program's public activities for months. While that broader review now appears to be complete, the formaldehyde assessment remains in limbo. Markey has signaled that he anticipates Wright will be confirmed without EPA committing to the assessment's release; it is unclear if Democrats will be able to secure commitments related to Dunn or Wheeler's nominations.
The outlook document indicates that two IRIS assessments, of ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE) and tert-Butyl Alcohol are at the peer review stage, but does not provide an estimate of when the documents will be finalized.
EPA's Science Advisory Board subcommittee on chemical assessments met for a public peer review of the two draft chemical assessments in August 2017. At the time, the panel appeared to have some split conclusions, which could complicate EPA's ability to address the panel's recommendations.
A footnote on the outlook explains, “[u]pon receipt of the final external peer review report, the IRIS Program will update Table 1 with the projected date for the next public milestone.”
The outlook describes eight chemicals in the “draft development” stage, including arsenic, Cr6, PCBs, and five per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA), perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS) and perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA).
The PFAS assessments “under development are in support of EPA’s Actions to Address PFAS.”
The IRIS program indicates that its public comment draft for the arsenic assessment will be completed in the second quarter of fiscal year 2020; for the Cr6 assessment in the first quarter of FY20 and for the PCB assessment the first quarter of FY21.
The three are perhaps surprising picks, considering their complexity and controversy. EPA in that past has tried to update existing IRIS assessments of arsenic and Cr6, but in each case was met with strong pushback from regulated entities fearful of strict and expensive regulations, as well as scientific controversies related to how to assess human health risks at low doses of exposure.
Scoping & Problem Formulation
The outlook lists three chemicals that are in the “Scoping and Problem Formulation” stage of development: mercury salts, methylmercury and vanadium and compounds.” The outlook anticipates a public comment draft for the mercury salts assessment will be completed in the fourth quarter of FY20 and a draft for the methylmercury assessment in the second quarter of FY21. Vanadium's schedule is to be determined.
“The anticipated dates are based on several factors, including complexity of the assessment products and the availability of resources,” the outlook states. “While projected dates reflect the IRIS Program’s best estimate based on available information, they are subject to change.”
The PFAS chemicals are the only chemicals new to IRIS' agenda from 2015, also a multi-month development project that sought to gather intra-agency input on programs' priorities to develop the agenda.
When new staff took over the IRIS program in early 2017, they sought to re-evaluate the 2015 agenda, describing it at one public meeting as overly ambitious for the resources available to the program.
The vanadium compounds assessment is an interesting choice, as the agency program several years ago came close to finalizing an assessment of vanadium pentoxide (V2O5) rather than all of the related compounds.
The IRIS program in its fiscal year 2015 budget request had said the V205 assessment was "anticipated to be complete in early 2015," but industry and the defense department in 2014 sought a second peer review of a portion of the V2O5 assessment, as well as a decision from EPA on whether IRIS staff must review the results of the industry-military research program before completing the assessment.
In its 2015 agenda, the IRIS program stated that it would not finalize the V2O5 assessment "at this time," saying that in discussing the agenda “it was determined that an evaluation of the potential toxicity of multiple vanadium-containing compounds, including vanadium pentoxide, was a cross-Agency high priority need."
The methylmercury assessment is also one of controversy, involving a joint advisory that EPA and the Food and Drug Administration release periodically to advise women of childbearing age on seafood in their diets. Eating seafood is considered the major, if not the only, exposure route for methylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. The IRIS assessment could be unique, because many stakeholders are calling for it to assess not only the risks of methylmercury exposure but also the health benefits of consuming fish.
EPA's Inspector General in April 2017 released a report urging the agency to EPA review whether it should reassess its 2001 methylmercury IRIS assessment, among other recommendations.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-scales-back-iris-assessment-schedule-creating-new-uncertainties
-
No New Initiatives as EPA, Housing Department Detail Lead Plans
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
The EPA will lay out in March the steps it will take to reduce lead exposure and better help children who have already been exposed, Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said Dec. 19.
The EPA and other agencies released a Federal Action Plan focusing on all the ways federal agencies—including the EPA, the Housing and Urban Development Department, and the Health and Human Services Department—can take steps to eliminate the sources of lead that children can come into contact with. Lead is a toxic metal that can have irreversible effects on a child’s brain development even at very low exposure levels.
The action plan contains dozens of bullet points listing what the federal government can do to reduce lead exposure and better help children who have already been exposed. For example, it says the EPA should update its standards for lead in drinking water and also consider imposing new regulations on leaded airplane fuels.
But both of these items, and many of the plan’s other of the items, are issues that the EPA has already been working on for some time. The effort to update standards for lead in drinking water, for instance, dates back to near the beginning of the Obama administration.
At an event at EPA headquarters to unveil the plan, Wheeler couldn’t specifically point to any new initiatives in it. But he said some of its items were announced earlier because the EPA didn’t want to wait for this action plan to be ready to get started on them.
Wheeler said his agency will release another document in March that will detail the EPA’s steps to fully realize all of the items in the plan that fall under its responsibility.
Communicating Risk
Children aren’t the only ones acutely at risk of lead exposure, Wheeler said.
Minorities, non-English speakers, and other disadvantaged communities are also at a high risk because they tend may not have ready access to information about lead.
Wheeler said the federal government does a disservice to these communities when it fails to convey to them the risks of lead exposure.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/no-new-initiatives-as-epa-housing-department-detail-lead-plans
-
Industry Groups Call for Abandonment of Prop 65 Reprotox Calculation Amendments
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A broad industry coalition has pushed back on proposed changes to how exposures to reproductive toxicants are calculated under Proposition 65. They claim the amendments would "place additional and unjustified burdens solely on the backs of businesses".
The comments, spearheaded by the California Chamber of Commerce and co-signed by more than 200 organisations across a range of business sectors, come in response to an October proposal from California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha). This proposed making "clarifying" changes to how businesses calculate exposures to consumer products – a key step in determining whether a warning must be provided under the state’s right-to-know scheme.
Along with amendments aimed at calculating chemical intake from foods, the proposal seeks to specify that a company should use an arithmetic mean when calculating a level of exposure for an average user of a consumer product.
Oehha, which oversees Prop 65, says this will help businesses "to correctly determine the rate of intake or exposure for average users of the consumer product and properly decide whether a warning is required for a given exposure".
But in their comments industry argued the changes run against longstanding practice and would "exacerbate" the problem of businesses carrying the burden of proof in Prop 65 litigation.
More specifically, they said that defaulting to an arithmetic mean over other averaging measures is "inconsistent with sound principles of statistics and data evaluation". When the distribution of data is not bell-shaped, they said, the arithmetic mean will be more influenced by the highest and lowest values, and therefore become less representative of the actual average value.
"The obvious practical effect of the Arithmetic Mean Proposal would be to significantly increase the number of Proposition 65 warnings on products and the number of consumers who are unnecessarily receiving" them, the coalition said.
It also wrote that it "disagrees in the strongest possible terms" with Oehha's conclusion that the proposal will not have a significant adverse impact on businesses.
Oehha's proposals are not a 'clarification' to existing regulations, it said, but rather "present entirely new regulatory requirements that will directly affect businesses in their Proposition 65 compliance efforts, as well as placing additional obstacles to a defendant meeting its burden of proof in litigation".
The groups have urged Oehha to continue to allow case-by-case determinations for selecting an averaging measure, and to withdraw the proposal entirely.
Consumer advocates welcome changes
However, consumer advocates and frequent Prop 65 private enforcement plaintiffs back the planned changes.
The Center for Environmental Health applauded Oehha's proposal, noting that calculations using a geometric mean are often a level of magnitude less than the arithmetic mean. The proposed amendment, it said, "addresses this problem and specifies that the use of the geometric mean is not appropriate … This is the correct interpretation."
CEH also urged Oehha to adopt the arithmetic mean as the default averaging measure not just for reproductive toxicants, but for carcinogens, as well.
NGO As You Sow agreed in its comments that a geometric mean is "inappropriate, and that the arithmetic mean better products consumers".
But the group sought further clarifying changes, such as noting that an arithmetic mean is only appropriate in situations "where averaging is appropriate".
The Environmental Law Foundation, meanwhile, pressed Oehha to propose regulations that "tackle other lingering issues" in enforcement, such as the "inappropriate" use of averaging over time for exposures to teratogenic chemicals.
The consultation on the proposal closed on 3 December. Oehha must address substantive comments when finalising regulatory changes.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72929/industry-groups-call-for-abandonment-of-prop-65-reprotox-calculation-amendments
-
Coatings Industry Presses for US/Canada Alignment on Preservatives
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
The American coatings industry is leaning on the US and Canadian governments to better align their regulatory decisions on biocides, in order to tackle rising concerns over a dwindling number of in-can preservatives authorised for use.
The American Coatings Association (ACA) raised the issue in response to a December request for information (RFI) to the US-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC).
It pointed out that Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Control Agency (PMRA) made several decisions last year to ban or restrict the use of in-can preservatives, even while they continue to be permitted in the US.
A reevaluation of octhilinone (OIT), for instance, led to a ban on its use in the formulation of architectural paints on the Canadian market, even as the EPA recently added the substance to its Safer Chemical Ingredient List.
And this year the PMRA also restricted use of the widely used CMIT/MIT. Together with OIT, these decisions affect 45% of the volume of paint shipped from the US to Canada, the ACA warns.
The trade body’s concerns echo those raised by the Canadian Paint and Coatings Association (CPCA) last year. CPCA president Gary LeRoux said at the time that PMRA’s decisions on in-can and film preservatives would force industry to reformulate a large number of products or cease operations.
Now, he told Chemical Watch, the ban on OIT could "create grave problems" for trade between the US and Canada.
The ACA is calling on the RCC to establish a regular, biannual meeting of key officials in the EPA and PMRA to work on aligning their reviews of biocides used in the coatings industry.
In addition, the trade body wants an industry-government stakeholder group focused on this issue, with a "common set of data points, test methods and general studies" used to facilitate increased alignment.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72930/coatings-industry-presses-for-uscanada-alignment-on-preservatives
-
3M Sued Over Scotchgard Chemicals by Maker of Saucony, Merrell
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Kary
Wolverine World Wide Inc., the maker of shoe brands like Merrell, Saucony, and Cat Footwear, has sued 3M Co., alleging it concealed information about the environmental and health risks of chemicals it sold to make shoes water and stain repellent.
Wolverine’s suit says 3M made money by “actively concealing information regarding potential environmental risks known only to 3M.” The lawsuit was filed Dec. 19 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan.
3M Co. already faces lawsuits from its long history of making and selling chemicals known as PFAS to other companies, many of which are over their use in firefighting foams.
A 3M spokeswoman wasn’t immediately available for comment. The company has said in past statements that the chemicals are safe at the concentrations usually found.
“3M made it, 3M sold it at a profit to thousands of companies and millions of consumers for decades, and 3M can no longer run from its responsibilities to Wolverine, the community, and the state of Michigan for the impacts of Scotchgard,” Wolverine Chief Executive Officer Blake W. Krueger said Dec. 19 in a statement.
Wolverine had already been sued, in lawsuits that sought property damage and medical surveillance for families affected by the pollution. Wolverine also said in the statement that it has filed a notice in federal court urging the state of Michigan to add 3M as a defendant in the state’s existing lawsuit against Wolverine.
The case is Michigan Dep’t of Envtl. Quality v. Wolverine World Wide, W.D. Mich., No. 18-cv-00039, 12/19/18.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/3m-sued-over-scotchgard-chemicals-by-maker-of-saucony-merrell
-
EU Plan to Ban Plastic Items Will Lessen Litter
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
Burger joints and coffee shops in the European Union will be rethinking their use of plastic under a draft EU law provisionally approved Dec. 19.
Companies including the Coca-Cola Co., Nestle SA, and PepsiCo Inc will also face challenges from provisions in the draft law on plastic bottles and their caps.
The law, which negotiators from the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union agreed upon, is intended to cut wildlife-harming plastic litter by banning a number of single-use items most commonly found discarded in the streets and on beaches.
Bans will affect plastic plates and cutlery, plastic straws, expanded polystyrene fast-food containers and cups, and plastic cotton bud sticks. The law also will ban items made from oxo-degradable plastic, or partially biodegradeable plastic that breaks down into increasingly smaller fragments in the environment.
The law will introduce other requirements as well, including an obligation for EU countries to reduce the use of plastic lids for single-use cups and a requirement for cigarette producers to contribute financially to the cleanup of plastic cigarette filters.
Beyond the provisional backing, the law must be ratified formally by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU, which represents the bloc’s member country governments. The Parliament’s environment committee will vote on the draft law in January.
The bans and most other provisions will take effect two years after the law is finalized, probably meaning in 2021.
Bottle-and-Cap ConundrumThe law also will oblige producers of bottled drinks to ensure that the caps of plastic bottles are nondetachable in normal use, effectively requiring companies to reconfigure their bottle designs and production lines.
The provision on nondetachable bottle tops will take effect three years after the law is finalized. In addition, plastic drinks bottles will be required to contain at least 25 percent recycled material by 2025.
Companies say the requirement on nondetachable caps will mean significant one-off costs to rearrange production lines and will hurt the environment by increasing the amount of plastic per bottle.
“We’ve set ambitious goals for our global business, starting with helping to collect and recycle a bottle, including its cap, or can for every one we sell— regardless of where it comes from—by 2030,” Coca-Cola said in a statement.
“This is part of our World Without Waste vision, which also calls for us to use an average of 50% recycled content in our bottles and cans by 2030. While the vast majority of our packaging is recyclable today, we are working to get to 100 percent by 2025,” the company said.
“We can’t do this alone, and it will take some time to accomplish. But we recognize the need for action and the importance of creating a World Without Waste.”
Soft Drinks Europe, which represents companies including Danone waters, PepsiCo, and Coca-Cola, and which has campaigned against the nondetachable caps provision, was unable to comment, having not seen the full provisionally agreed text of the law, spokeswoman Sam Rowe told Bloomberg Environment Dec. 19.PepsiCo also wasn’t able to comment, the company said in a statement to Bloomberg Environment. Danone didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Nestle Looks to Fulfill Voluntary Pledges
The provisionally agreed law, if finalized, would help Nestle achieve voluntary pledges already made for 2025, including a pledge to collect 90 percent of its plastic bottles and their caps, the company’s European affairs manager, Johannes Weber, told Bloomberg Environment Dec. 19.
“We share the goal of eliminating waste from the ocean and reducing the impact of plastics, including plastics from beverage bottles and their caps, on the environment. We are prepared to do our part to help address this important challenge.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/eu-plan-to-ban-plastic-items-will-lessen-litter
-
NGOs Rally Against Industry's Call to Scrap Echa SVHC Database
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
A group of NGOs has called on Echa to "remain determined" in developing and implementing a database of candidate list substances in articles.
In a letter to the agency, 41 European NGOs call on the agency to ensure the database requires the information needed to "achieve the objectives set by the EU legislators and to achieve a non-toxic circular economy".
And they call on European industries to become "champions of transparency and world-wide leaders, and to seize this opportunity to reinforce trust with their global supply chains and customers".
The NGO letter was sent in response to a position paper released by a group of European trade associations calling on Echa to reconsider its plans to develop the database and instead put forward incentives to invest in recycling technologies.
The industry paper takes particular issue with Echa's 'draft scenario' which proposes information requirements to meet the objectives of the database, including:
· article identifiers;
· location of SVHCs; and
· concentration ranges.
These would "not be workable for industry nor enforceable by authorities," the industry paper says.
The proposal to develop the database came out of the revised waste framework Directive that entered into force in July. The database would contain information submitted by companies producing, importing or supplying articles that contain candidate list substances. They will need to submit this information for articles placed on the market from 5 January 2021.
The aim is to strengthen supply chain communication as foreseen under REACH and contribute to the EU's circular economy package, with waste treatment operators and consumers being the primary users of the resource.
The NGO letter says the "responsible industry reaction is to help put it in place rather than asking Echa to reconsider its creation".
Information requirements
The NGOs say the proposed requirements mostly concern information that industry has been legally obliged to have, keep and disseminate for more than ten years under Article 33 of REACH. This requires companies to provide a recipient of their product or article "sufficient information, available to the supplier, to allow safe use including, as a minimum, the name of that substance". It applies to a product containing any SVHC above a concentration of 0.1%.
"So far, industry has systematically underestimated the amount of information it was supposed to collect and share and has under-complied with its obligation," the letter says.
"Such failure does not justify industry’s claim that collecting or providing this information adds a new burden: it has had to know about the location and concentration of substances of very high concern present in its products for over a decade," it says.
The letter says that some information that industry may have to provide is new – such as unique identifiers for their articles.
However, it says, this has been "rightly identified as information indispensable to create a functioning database".
"Industry cannot oppose requirements indispensable to creating the database required by the EU legislators and presume to retain legitimacy in presenting their companies as responsible enterprises," it says.
Negotiations on how the database will be funded could risk a delay in its development and implementation. The agency and the European Commission are currently in talks on how resources to support and maintain the database will be provided.https://chemicalwatch.com/72919/ngos-rally-against-industrys-call-to-scrap-echa-svhc-database
-
Over a Third of UK Councils Not Testing Products for Hazardous Chemicals
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A survey into inspections by UK local authorities found that more than a third of those questioned have not tested any products for hazardous chemicals content in the last five years.
Using freedom of information requests, NGO CHEM Trust asked 164 councils how many products they inspected between 2014 and 2018, and how many of those were found to breach legal chemical limits. Eighteen councils did not respond.
Out of the 146 that did, just over 40% – 58 local authorities – revealed they had not carried out any testing.
Out of the 88 councils that carried out inspections, 46 found hazardous substances over legal limits. In total, councils tested 2,199 products over the five years. Nearly a quarter of those tested (23% or 495 products) were found to contain hazardous chemicals that were over legal limits.
Seventeen councils that found the limits had been breached took legal action against those selling the products. Overall, 55 prosecutions were made. Thirty local authorities that found illegal levels of chemicals in products did not take legal action.
CHEM Trust’s Brexit and chemicals campaigner Kate Young said the NGO was shocked by the results of the survey. "The high number of councils not conducting any testing at all means that a large proportion of the population is at risk of exposure to hazardous chemicals in the products they use – it’s a postcode lottery."
Money issues
In its survey, CHEM Trust also asked how much councils spent on monitoring consumer products containing hazardous chemicals.
Budget cuts have hit councils’ ability to proactively protect the public from hazardous chemicals, the NGO said. Overall budgets have decreased by 23.5% between 2010-11 and 2015-16, according to the National Audit Office.
Budgets for trading standards services have also fallen from £213m in 2009 to £105m in 2018, and the number of enforcement officers plummeted has by 56%, it said.
"Budget cuts are clearly part of the problem and councils need help from national government to help fund effective protection for the public," Ms Young said.
CHEM Trust is calling for:
· increased funding for trading standards services, both through local authority budgets and nationally from the Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy;
· stronger collaboration between the government and local councils in identifying priority areas of focus for consumer protection in local trading standards services; and
· development and publication of a comprehensive review of the UK’s enforcement of chemical regulations, setting out an effective strategy for enforcing regulations on hazardous chemicals.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72943/over-a-third-of-uk-councils-not-testing-products-for-hazardous-chemicals
-
Toys Contain More ‘Banned Chemicals’ Than Other Product Types
Dec 20, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
There have been more chemical safety warnings issued in the EU this year for toys than any other product type, according to analysis by NGO the European Environmental Bureau.
The EU rapid alert system (Rapex) reported warnings for 290 toys that contained substances above limits set by EU authorities.
Most (250) were issued for plastic toys, 150 were for plastic dolls, 21 for modelling clays or slimes and 31 for balloons or balls.
More toys failed chemical checks than any other type of product, including clothing (42), cosmetics (91), jewellery (51) and even protective equipment (5), according to the analysis.
Of the 1,996 products of all types checked for all risks, 563 failed chemical tests, the NGO's analysis found.
Toys in the spotlight
A recently-reported joint customs and market surveillance operation by four EU countries found that of 104 samples of toys it checked, more than a third contained illegal levels of phthalates. Of the offending items, 92% carried the CE marking that indicates conformity with health, safety, and environmental protection standards for products sold within the European Economic Area.
Last week, UK consumer group Which? found that some children's slime products it tested exceed EU safety standards for boron, an SVHC. The toy slimes and putties tested came from a range of high-street and online retailers including Hamleys, Amazon, eBay, Etsy and Argos.
Ebay did not respond to questions on how it plans to avoid the situation in the future, but said it works with regulators to ensure that all listings comply with the law and there are blocks in place to prevent the listing of illegal items.
Amazon said: "sellers must follow our selling guidelines and those who don’t will be subject to action, including potential removal of their account. The products in question are no longer available."
Sainsbury’s, which owns retailer Argos, said it hasn't "received any complaints but we're in close contact with our supplier, Zuru, while they investigate."
Hamley's meanwhile said it was pulling the product tested from its store.
In addition to Which?, consumer organisations in Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Italy have conducted studies on ‘slime’ products. According to European consumer organisations Anec and Beuc, the test results showed that illegal levels of boron were found in more than four slime pots out of ten.
The organisations have shared the results with the European Commission and called on it to alert member states and ensure signatories to a product safety pledge, launched by the Commission earlier this year, stop selling "harmful slime toys".
Industry response
Commenting on media coverage of the issue, the European toy industry association, TIE, said on its website that toys being picked up in these statistics are not made by "reputable manufacturers".
"For the most part, they come from rogue traders who do not care about the rules. They do not represent the billions of safe toys being sold in the EU as a whole, and are actually a sign of good market surveillance in action," the statement said.
It added that due to stricter EU laws – imposed under the EU Toy Safety Directive – and more frequent inspections, "toys appear more often in market surveillance statistics than other products".
"However, their inclusion in these figures does not mean that toys are unsafe for children to play with: if all consumer products enjoyed the same level of scrutiny, we would see a comparable number of notifications for other categories," it said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72927/toys-contain-more-banned-chemicals-than-other-product-types
-
Pipeline Safety Needs Congress Action on Confidentiality (1)
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Kinder Morgan Inc., NiSource Inc., state officials, and pipeline safety advocates want Congress to grant confidentiality for data about companies’ mistakes and incidents, to encourage sharing that information to improve safety.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s working group is creating a framework for a nationwide information-sharing system. Pipeline operators and other parties would voluntarily contribute data and, the group hopes, the system would help operators and the agency identify conditions that lead to incidents and accidents before they happen.
To do that, the group needs Congress to authorize the system and enact legislation to provide confidentiality and legal protections to pipeline operators and their information.
“It’s been hard in this industry to share information,” Drue Pearce, the federal agency’s deputy administrator, said at the working group’s Dec. 19 meeting in Washington. Pipeline operators would need to voluntarily provide their information for the system to be successful.
“You’re only as good as your safety system, and that means everybody has to be part of it,” Pearce said.
The Voluntary Information-Sharing System Working Group is tasked with creating recommendations for Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao. In its draft recommendations, which the group discussed at its Dec. 19 meeting, members said new legislation is essential to the success of a national system.
Some members were skeptical that would materialize in a timely manner.
“I just don’t have faith in Congress giving us what we’ve worked on over the past two years,” Walter Jones, a working group member and associate director at the Laborers’ Health & Safety Fund of North America, said at the meeting.
‘Widest Possible Participation’“Without the legislation we need, we don’t have a [system],” Dan Cote, vice president of pipeline safety and compliance at NiSource Gas, said at the meeting.
That legislation should be part of the agency’s 2019 reauthorization process, the working group said.
The information-sharing system “is intended to encourage the widest possible participation by industry. Such participation will only be achieved by providing confidentiality protection,” the working group’s draft recommendations said.
The group is expected to recommend that submission of sensitive data always remain voluntary, that transparency be a primary aspect of how data are managed and utilized, and that identities are removed from pipeline operator and vendor data. The group is working to finalize its recommendations this month.
It will submit its report to the agency, which will then pass it on to the Transportation Department secretary, by the end of January. The report will also be open to public comment, according to Christie Murray, the pipeline agency’s director of outreach and engagement.
Mark Hereth, a member of the working group and principal at Process Performance Improvement Consultants LLC in Houston, said at the meeting that building the system will take time.
“It’s a multi-year effort,” he said. “You’re in 2023 before you get everything up and running.”
The working group’s members include representatives from Sunoco Logistics Partners LP, the Utility Workers Union of America, and the Pipeline Safety Trust, as well as consultants, state representatives, and academics.
(Updated with additional information throughout.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/pipeline-safety-needs-congress-action-on-confidentiality-1
-
Why Clean Energy Investments Should Be Part of Your Risk Management Strategy
Dec 20, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Jake Hiller
There’s a new way to approach energy risks that should interest business leaders who navigate today’s changing economy.
Is your corporate risk management strategy considering these three realities, and how to respond?1. Energy prices are volatile and hard to predict
Energy prices fluctuate so knowing when to lock in the best price, and for how long, is a perennial challenge for businesses. Unless, that is, you consider signing a long-term Power Purchase Agreement with an energy provider that specializes in predictable renewable energy – or install your own clean energy infrastructure.
Both options will help you avoid that energy price roller coaster and likely save your business money over time.
PPAs have become mainstream in recent years as the renewable energy sector continues to expand; corporate PPAs grew 20 percentover the last two years to 5.4 gigawatts procured in 2017. Just this month, for example, an Illinois wind farm signed a $325-million to sell energy to Bloomberg LP, General Motors; and to 340 Starbucks stores through Constellation, an energy services company.
On-site renewable infrastructure is another option businesses use to hedge again energy risks. So far, Fortune 500 companies such as Target, Walmart and Apple have installed solar arrays or roofs at nearly 2,000 individual project sites in the United States to secure stable and lower energy prices.
Such investments are not limited to huge companies or brands. Increasingly, smaller companies are also making on-site installations to reduce uncertainty and bills. 2. Energy choices, competition go hand-in-hand
Knowing how to maximize the benefits of your energy choice requires a thorough analysis of your energy needs and appetite for risk.
A PPA procurement deal, which can last up to 30 years, gives a business a predictable power rate that will often beat the prices fossil-fueled sources can offer today. New and innovative PPA models are now opening up more possibilities for companies that opt for this solution.
By locking in the price, however, a PPA can preclude future savings should the price of, say, wind power drop significantly over the next five or 10 years. Such a structure may suit a company with few competitors that seeks stability, even if it means it won’t have access to lower prices down the line.
Those facing fierce competition, or companies specializing in energy-intensive production where power prices have a direct impact on production costs, may seek to avoid a PPA, however. These businesses may want to have the option of regularly renegotiating their power purchase deals to take advantage of better rates.
Businesses for which a PPA is a poor fit may choose the other option: a large capital investment in on-site renewables. In addition to shielding the owner from energy price volatility, such infrastructure investments can benefit from millions in federal and state tax credits and maybe generate new revenue by selling power back to the grid.
Even so, there can be some challenges.3. Business needs and policies must be aligned
To this day, 9 states still won’t let a company go directly to a third-party provider of renewable energy to negotiate a PPA. Thirty-one states still won’t offer state tax credits for solar panels, and seven states still don’t let companies sell power back to the grid – to mention a few barriers.
If your company has offices or plants in any of those states, you may be out of luck – unless you get on the phone and start knocking on your utility’s and policymakers’ doors. That’s what companies such as Walmart are doing successfully to gain broader access to renewables.
Some of our largest brands are also trying to break down barriers to PPAs in Europe, where the market is largely untapped. The message for anyone struggling with limited energy options is that applying pressure on state and national lawmakers is good for business and our economy.
Because when companies manage risks, everybody wins.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2018/12/19/why-clean-energy-investments-should-be-part-your-risk-management-strategy
-
Energy Department Lifts Reporting Requirements for LNG Exports
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rebecca Kern
Exporters of liquefied natural gas, such as Cheniere Energy and Dominion Energy, no longer have to track all of the overseas destinations for their cargo under a new Energy Department policy intended to reduce reporting requirements.
The Dec. 19 policy statement, effective immediately, discontinues the department’s “end use” directive that exporters track and report every country or countries ultimately receiving their LNG. The statement simply requires the shippers to tell the department the first country where their cargo is offloaded.
Discontinuing this requirement will “reduce administrative burdens” for the U.S. LNG export market and will apply to all future export authorizations, the department said. The department also issued an order removing the end use provision in all export authorizations issued since February 2016.
“The impetus was because we want to reduce regulatory burdens,” Steven Winberg, the head of the department’s Fossil Energy Office, told Bloomberg Environment in an exclusive interview.
“Commonsense regulation is good for the government as well as the stakeholders that are working in this arena,” he said.
‘Follow Those Molecules’He said LNG is becoming more of a global commodity and has the potential to pass through several countries before being used.
“It becomes pretty onerous to follow those molecules, and it has the potential to create a competitive disadvantage from one stakeholder to another,” he said.
The LNG industry pushed for the change, which has the backing of the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas, a trade group that represents LNG producers, shippers, terminal operators, and developers.
“It will help all parties and, as DOE explains, more accurately reflect what is happening with U.S. LNG cargoes globally,” Charlie Riedl, executive director CLNG, told Bloomberg Environment.
Companies that would be affected by the change include Cheniere Energy Inc. and Dominion Energy Inc., two businesses that operate LNG export terminals. Cheniere’s Sabine Pass is in Louisiana and Corpus Christi, Texas, while Dominion’s Cove Point is in Maryland.
Additional Clarifications on DocumentsAdditionally, the department proposed an interpretive rule intended to clarify the types of contracts and purchase agreements that LNG exporters must provide to the Office of Fossil Energy.
The proposal also would direct exporters to notify the Energy Department within 30 days of executing any contract of any prospective or actual changes to the information.
The interpretive rule merely clarifies the existing regulation overseeing the department’s export authorization and therefore doesn’t doesn’t qualify for a Trump administration two-for-one executive order, under which a federal agency has to propose two existing regulations to repeal for every new regulation it adopts.
Public comments on the proposed interpretive rule are due Jan. 18.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/energy-department-lifts-reporting-requirements-for-lng-exports
-
Southwest Governors Strike Natural Gas Deal with Mexican State
Dec 19, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rafael Bernal
The governors of Arizona and New Mexico struck a deal Wednesday with the governor of Sonora, Mexico to export American natural gas from Mexican ports.
Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey and New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, both Republicans, signed the pact in Phoenix with Gov. Claudia Pavlovich of Sonora, the AP reports.
Under the memorandum of understanding, the three states will join forces to export natural gas to Asia by way of Sonora's Gulf of California ports. The natural gas will be sent using existing pipelines to Sonoran ports, where it will be liquefied for export to Asia.
"Asia's burgeoning demand, New Mexico's abundant supply, and Arizona and Sonora's strategic location and transport networks all combine to present an opportunity for continued regional growth," reads the non-binding agreement.
By using Sonoran ports, Southwestern gas exports will avoid a much longer route that involves Gulf Coast ports and then shipping through the Panama Canal, AP reported.
Ducey won reelection in November and Pavlovich started a six-year term in 2015.
Martinez did not run for reelection because of term limits and will be replaced by Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-N.M.) in January.
https://thehill.com/latino/422138-southwest-governors-strike-natural-gas-deal-with-mexican-state
-
Subtle Industry Split Emerges Over Scope Of EPA Methane Rule Rollback
Dec 20, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Lee Logan
A subtle split is emerging in the oil and gas sector over the scope of EPA's efforts to roll back Obama-era methane standards for the industry, with smaller producers arguing the plan does not go far enough and should indefinitely defer rules for low-production wells while larger firms are embracing some level of regulation for existing equipment.
The divisions may not fully materialize in EPA's instant proposal to weaken the 2016 new source performance standards (NSPS), given broad industry agreement on the need to ease the rule's compliance burdens. EPA released its proposed rollback Sept. 11 and took comment on the plan through Dec. 17.
However, the divisions among oil and gas producers over the proposal could become a much more high-profile matter if EPA follows through with expectations to drop direct regulation of methane and instead rely on a prior approach that limited smog-forming pollution and captured methane as a co-benefit. EPA has said it could float such a plan in the coming weeks.
One key implication of dropping direct methane standards is that it would remove a legal requirement for EPA to eventually craft methane rules for existing oil and gas equipment.
Underscoring EPA's tricky position, oil giant ExxonMobil says in Dec. 17 comments that it supports “maintaining the key elements of the underlying regulation,” and that it also supports federal methane standards “for both new and existing source oil and gas facilities.”
However, Exxon does not endorse retaining the Obama-era NSPS without change, stating that it supports Dec. 17 comments submitted by the American Petroleum Institute (API) that largely back EPA's rollback proposal, which weakens monitoring and repair schedules for methane leaks and recognizes compliance with various state methane programs as equivalent to the relaxed federal rules.
“We appreciate EPA's efforts to make this comprehensive rulemaking more cost-effective, encourage new leak detection technologies and maintain the overall methane emission reduction goals,” the company says.
As such, Exxon is signaling that it likely backs the current rollback proposal but could chafe at any new plan to drop direct methane standards entirely. The company had previously outlined “preferred “elements” of any federal methane rules, and said in September that its efforts to reduce methane emissions would not change even if EPA's rules are “modified or eliminated.”
Exxon's embrace of methane rules for existing sources puts it at odds with smaller oil and gas operators, represented by the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) and various state oil groups.
IPAA's Dec. 17 comments says EPA's rollback “has not gone far enough,” even though it provides more lenient treatment for low-producing wells.
Arguing that EPA's underlying data for the sector's emissions is faulty, IPAA says the agency “should defer any fugitive emissions regulations of low production wells until it obtains information on emissions from low-production wells.” It cites a research effort on the issue that the Energy Department has initiated.
The group also complains that the proposal does not scrap direct methane limits, a decision that “subjects hundreds of thousands of existing wells to regulation. [IPAA] assert[s] that the application of the proposed requirements to existing sources is not effective.”
Further, it argues that even the proposed softer emissions monitoring requirements for low-producing wells “are not cost effective,” given the small volumes of fuel and emissions from such sources.
Existing Source Rules
The push from some industry quarters for a rule that relies on volatile organic compound (VOC) standards would also block existing source rules due to the structure of section 111 of the Clean Air Act, under which NSPS rules are crafted.
The section requires EPA to eventually regulate existing sources once a sector is covered by an NSPS, though it specifically prohibits such rules if the targeted pollutant in an NSPS is one of six criteria pollutants or is a hazardous air pollutant.
VOCs are a precursor to ozone, which is a criteria pollutant, while methane is not a criteria pollutant. As such, the law effectively bars such regulation of existing sources.
The Obama EPA had begun preliminary work on an existing source methane rule, though Trump officials shortly after taking office scuttled that effort.
Trump officials also unsuccessfully sought to pause implementation of the NSPS, though court rejections of those attempts mean the rule remains in effect even as EPA is seeking to rewrite its requirements.
Among other provisions in EPA's rollback proposal, is a plan to relax a current requirement to check for methane leaks every six months, and instead require operators to check annually. For low-production wells, operators must conduct monitoring every two years, up from the current annual requirement for those sites.
EPA's proposal also extends from 30 to 60 days the amount of time that owners and operators have to complete repairs once leaks are found.
Further, EPA's plan proposes to allow operators in certain states to follow state requirements for monitoring, repair and recordkeeping in lieu of the NSPS, with some variation across state programs. Specifically, it would allow this equivalency for well sites and compressor stations in California, Colorado, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and for well sites in Texas and Utah.
API in its comments says EPA's proposal includes “several missed opportunities,” and despite the deregulatory intent, it actually increased the stringency of the rule in terms of recordkeeping. The group also argues that EPA should drop its proposed requirement for site-specific approval of new emission detection technology.
API further urges EPA to incorporate new industry data that it argues supports the proposal's shift to annual monitoring requirements and shows the agency “has significantly overestimated the emissions resulting from implementation of this rule as proposed.”
The group largely sidesteps the legal issues surrounding a “VOC-only” rule, though it says it has long pushed to identify “cost-effective emission control requirements that reduce VOC emissions for new and modified sources and, as a co-benefit, also reduce methane emissions.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/subtle-industry-split-emerges-over-scope-epa-methane-rule-rollback
-
Rising LNG Demand to Exert More Pull on U.S. Natural Gas Prices
Dec 20, 2018 | Reuters
By Scott DiSavino
U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity is on the brink of doubling in 2019, which will boost the super-cooled fuel’s influence on the U.S. natural gas market, where volatility surged in 2018 after several years of slumber.
LNG exports have been the fastest growing source of U.S. natural gas demand since the country started ramping up exports in 2016, and is expected to expand deliveries in coming years as several more export terminals enter service.
Its imprint is being felt in the U.S. gas futures market, which in November experienced its longest stretch of extreme volatility in nine years due to demand, low inventories and unseasonably cold U.S. weather.
LNG currently accounts for just a small amount of overall domestic gas demand. But as the country opens more facilities for export to meet growing needs abroad, analysts said more ups and downs in prices are expected.
“As LNG exports increase, so will future gas prices,” said Tom DiCapua, managing director of wholesale energy services at Con Edison Energy, a provider of energy management services, including the purchase of gas, for power plants owned by several companies.
Prices at the U.S. Henry Hub benchmark in Louisiana hit $4.929 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) in November - their highest in four-and-a-half years. That was also well above the five-year average from 2013-17 of $3.25/mmBtu.
EXPORT GROWTH SOARS
The United States is on track to export about a trillion cubic feet of LNG by year-end, or about 3 percent of overall U.S. gas demand in 2018.
But LNG exports are expected to rise to 5 percent of overall U.S. gas demand in 2019 and to 10 percent in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), boosting LNG’s potential to affect prices.
“LNG exports will be one of the most bullish demand factors for U.S. natural gas prices over the coming two years, when several terminals are set to come online,” Raymond James analyst Muhammed Ghulam said.
There are three LNG export terminals presently in operation in the United States. Those include Corpus Christi in Texas, which shipped its first cargo in December. Three more terminals are expected to enter service in 2019, boosting U.S. LNG export capacity to 8.9 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd) of gas, making it third largest in the world behind Australia and Qatar.
U.S. production is expected to rise 11 percent to a record 83.3 bcfd in 2018, the biggest year-over-year increase since 1951, according to EIA projections. One billion cubic feet is enough gas to fuel about 5 million U.S. homes for a day.INVESTMENTS EYED
Investment decisions are imminent on another three U.S. Gulf Coast projects worth an estimated $20 billion, in 2019, while several other facilities are in the planning stages in the Pacific Northwest.
“The first half of 2019 will be an especially busy one for the U.S.,” said Alex Munton, Americas LNG analyst at energy consultant Wood Mackenzie.
Some consumers say there may not be enough gas production and pipeline capacity to support growing domestic markets in addition to LNG exports.
“Pressure on U.S. gas prices at peak demand mounts with every additional LNG export,” said Paul Cicio, president of Industrial Energy Consumers of America, an industry lobby group. He said the United States should not approve new LNG export terminals until the government determines the country can first meet domestic demand.
Houston-based Cheniere Energy Inc, the biggest U.S. buyer of natural gas, said its LNG exports are not causing market volatility.
“Cheniere’s demand is not variable, it is steady,” Cheniere spokesman Eben Burnham-Snyder said. “We’ve encouraged more natural gas production and pipeline development in basins all across the country because of our consistent demand for natural gas.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lng-prices-analysis/rising-lng-demand-to-exert-more-pull-on-u-s-natural-gas-prices-idUSKCN1OJ0H9
-
TSA's Oversight Isn't Ensuring Pipeline Security, GAO Reports
Dec 20, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
The Government Accountability Office reported yesterday it has found "significant weaknesses" in the oversight of cyber and physical defenses of the nation's natural gas, oil and other hazardous liquids pipelines by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
TSA, the Department of Homeland Security division in charge of airport security, has been unable to make a comprehensive review of pipeline cybersecurity defenses because of a gaping shortage of qualified inspectors, the GAO report confirms. TSA's Pipeline Security Branch had six full-time staff positions in fiscal 2018, an improvement over 2014, when there was one, the GAO report said. TSA's oversight handicaps were documented in an E&E News special report in 2017 (Energywire, May 23, 2017).
Without a more defined process for security reviews, TSA cannot ensure that its voluntary cyber and physical defense guidelines "address the persistent and dynamic security threat environment currently facing the nation's pipeline system," GAO said.
Jim Crumpacker, director of DHS's liaison office with GAO, wrote to the agency last month that DHS concurs with 10 recommended actions GAO advanced, but added that the "significant weaknesses" conclusion "is an unfortunate mischaracterization" that doesn't convey the effectiveness of TSA's overall program and its achievements.
The GAO critique, requested by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) as ranking members on their chamber's energy committees, is likely to escalate a policy debate about how the gas pipeline industry in particular should be regulated at a time when electric power generators are increasingly reliant on gas, according to insiders involved in the issue.
More than 3,000 companies operate the U.S. pipeline systems, spanning 2.7 million miles of pipes, the majority of which deliver long-distance transportation and local distribution of natural gas. Gas is a critical source of fuel for heating and electricity generation, and it's the major feedstock for petrochemical production. Gas pipelines were among the energy facilities targeted by Russian state-backed hackers in 2017 who sought to implant hidden surveillance malware, the FBI and DHS reported in March. DHS has not identified any pipelines that were compromised.
Cantwell and Pallone released a letter sent yesterday to DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen asking DHS to determine the cyber and physical security of the pipeline networks and to respond to GAO's issues.
"TSA relies on the industry's self-evaluation using ill-defined criteria provided by TSA to determine whether a specific pipeline has a critical facility within its pipeline system," the two legislators said. Operators of one-third of the nation's 100 largest pipeline systems have told TSA that they have no "critical" pipeline segments, based on assessments of threats and vulnerabilities, and thus were not subject to TSA review.
Calls for reform
Congress gave responsibility for pipeline cyber and physical security oversight to TSA following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. TSA has authority to institute mandatory regulation of the sector but elected for a voluntary, collaborative approach, in contrast to the enforced cyber regulations that high-voltage power grid operators must meet.
Pipeline companies and their trade groups say they are heavily engaged in sharing cyberthreat information, best defensive practices and skills training, but have not done comprehensive industry reviews. Neither the Energy Department nor the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has explicit authority to inspect pipeline cybersecurity.
Criticism of TSA's performance has led senior DOE officials and several FERC commissioners to question whether pipeline oversight should be strengthened. DHS officials and pipeline industry lobbyists are dug in to oppose a change in TSA's review role that would shift the responsibility to DOE.
In January, Pallone is in line to lead the House Energy and Commerce Committee, giving him the gavel on pipeline security scrutiny. His office declined comment yesterday on how Pallone will take up the issue next year when Democrats gain the majority in the House.
FERC Chairman Neil Chatterjee in a Twitter post yesterday said the GAO report "underscores concerns" that he and Commissioner Richard Glick raised earlier this year about TSA's pipeline role, though he added he was pleased by recent efforts by DHS and the industry to improve security. Chatterjee added later he was "proud to join" Glick in calling for heightened natural gas cybersecurity measures.
The newest FERC commissioner, Bernard McNamee, played an important role at DOE in preparing a DOE policy proposal in 2017 that would channel subsidies to coal and nuclear power plants to prevent their premature retirement as a power grid security measure. McNamee was then deputy DOE general counsel for policy. DOE policy officials have argued that natural gas generators are at greater risk than coal and nuclear plants because of their long-distance gas supply lines. McNamee said consideration of a change from voluntary to mandatory security standards for pipelines was an issue best suited for Congress and TSA rather than FERC, in comments to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
The GAO reviewers balanced their criticism by noting that the pipeline sector "is generally considered to be resilient and versatile." They added that pipeline operators historically have been able to quickly respond to outages, the agency's report said.
But pipeline operators are increasingly deploying computer-based control systems to manage pipeline operations, expanding vulnerabilities to cyberattack from inside and outside the networks, GAO said. The agency made no assessment of whether or how much pipeline systems are at risk but found that TSA oversight doesn't answer the question.
Pipeline industry organizations defended their cybersecurity readiness in statements yesterday.
Industry prefers voluntary standards
Congress gave responsibility for pipeline cyber and physical security oversight to TSA following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. TSA has authority to institute mandatory regulation of the sector but elected for a voluntary, collaborative approach, in contrast to the enforced cyber regulations that high-voltage power grid operators must meet.
Pipeline companies and their trade groups say they are heavily engaged in sharing cyberthreat information, best defensive practices and skills training, but have not done comprehensive industry reviews. Neither the Energy Department nor the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has explicit authority to inspect pipeline cybersecurity.
[+] This map shows gas and hazardous liquid transmission pipelines in the U.S. GAO
Criticism of TSA's performance has led senior DOE officials and several FERC commissioners to question whether pipeline oversight should be strengthened. DHS officials and pipeline industry lobbyists are dug in to oppose a change in TSA's review role that would shift the responsibility to DOE.
In January, Pallone is in line to lead the House Energy and Commerce Committee, giving him the gavel on pipeline security scrutiny. His office declined comment yesterday on how Pallone will take up the issue next year when Democrats gain the majority in the House.
FERC Chairman Neil Chatterjee in a Twitter post yesterday said the GAO report "underscores concerns" that he and Commissioner Richard Glick raised earlier this year about TSA's pipeline role, though he added he was pleased by recent efforts by DHS and the industry to improve security. Chatterjee added later he was "proud to join" Glick in calling for heightened natural gas cybersecurity measures.
The newest FERC commissioner, Bernard McNamee, played an important role at DOE in preparing a DOE policy proposal in 2017 that would channel subsidies to coal and nuclear power plants to prevent their premature retirement as a power grid security measure. McNamee was then deputy DOE general counsel for policy. DOE policy officials have argued that natural gas generators are at greater risk than coal and nuclear plants because of their long-distance gas supply lines. McNamee said consideration of a change from voluntary to mandatory security standards for pipelines was an issue best suited for Congress and TSA rather than FERC, in comments to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
The GAO reviewers balanced their criticism by noting that the pipeline sector "is generally considered to be resilient and versatile." They added that pipeline operators historically have been able to quickly respond to outages, the agency's report said.
But pipeline operators are increasingly deploying computer-based control systems to manage pipeline operations, expanding vulnerabilities to cyberattack from inside and outside the networks, GAO said. The agency made no assessment of whether or how much pipeline systems are at risk but found that TSA oversight doesn't answer the question.
Pipeline industry organizations defended their cybersecurity readiness in statements yesterday.Industry prefers voluntary standards
The American Petroleum Institute said: "Cyber threats are not new or unique to pipelines; they are present across the energy system, including at coal and nuclear plants. Pipeline companies have layers of security in place to protect against cascading failure, which also include mechanical controls that are not capable of being overridden through any cyber compromise."
Reliance on voluntary cooperation is a better defense "than prescriptive standards or regulations," API said.
Don Santa, president and CEO of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, representing long-distance pipelines, said in a statement, "In the time since this study was commissioned, a number of initiatives have been undertaken by the industry and our federal agency partners."
He cited a new joint partnership with TSA, DHS and DOE to conduct cybersecurity assessments of pipelines. "We believe this interagency approach will bring to bear the particular expertise of each agency, along with those of the industry itself." Making a case for continuation of voluntary oversight and adaptive responses, he said, "Experience shows that mandatory standards are all too often outdated almost as soon as they are introduced."
Dave McCurdy, chief executive of the American Gas Association, speaking for gas utilities, gave TSA a vote of confidence. "They understand the industry and have a strong working relationship with natural gas utilities." AGA is "advocating to increase the federal government's capability to assess our members' cybersecurity programs by expanding budgets and staff at TSA so that they can come into our member companies and make the assessments themselves."
In a statement yesterday, a DHS official said, "TSA is extremely proud of the effective work done in fostering collaboration with the pipeline industry to significantly improve physical security and cybersecurity. This has included the publication of security guidelines, extensive information sharing, and the conduct and analysis of pipeline security reviews.
"TSA looks forward to working with Federal partners and the pipeline industry in continuously improving physical and cyber security in this critical mode of transportation."
Reporters Blake Sobczak and Rod Kuckro contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/12/20/stories/1060110191
-
Permian’s Growth Spurt at Risk Amid Oil-Price Collapse (Corrected)
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Kevin Crowley
The U.S.’s biggest oil field may be about to pump the brakes if crude keeps plunging.
Just 10 weeks ago, the Permian Basin was on course to grow almost 1 million barrels a day by the end of 2019, potentially surpassing Iraq, OPEC’s second-largest producer. Now, it may not grow at all, removing a large chunk of expected production from global oil markets.
Shale is highly sensitive even to small changes in prices and the Permian is not immune. With West Texas Intermediate oil at $70 a barrel, the basin would likely produce 4.9 million barrels a day by end of next year, but at $40, output will likely stagnate at around 4 million barrels a day, according to Oslo-based consultancy Rystad Energy.
The U.S. benchmark dipped below $46 in New York on Dec. 18, down almost 40 percent from early October. In Midland, the heart of the Permian, prices were even worse, touching $38.99 a barrel, the lowest since the depths of the 2016 crash.
“We’ll definitely see some companies next year revisit their activity plans versus what they initially had in mind,” said Artem Abramov, vice president of shale analysis at Rystad.
It’s already starting to happen. Diamondback Energy Inc., one of the biggest Permian-only producers, is rowing back its 2019 capital budget, forecasting about $2.9 billion of spending, less than analysts’ estimates of $3.2 billion. Chief Executive Officer Travis Stice said the “dramatic decline in oil prices” were to blame as well as higher service costs.
Breakevens for new wells in various counties that contain the Spraberry layer of oil-soaked rock in the Permian currently average between $32 to $47 a barrel, according to Bloomberg NEF data. But well performance varies substantially. In Upton County, for example, top-quartile wells make money at $31 a barrel, while the bottom quartile need $65.54 a barrel.
“BNEF’s break-even model calculates that an average Permian well can produce oil for under $50 a barrel, but only the top performers in the Denver-Julesburg or Bakken can match that,” BNEF analyst Tai Liu said Dec. 14 in a research note.
The Permian’s better productivity means output isn’t dropping, just slowing down, if oil averages $50 a barrel and halting growth at $40, Rystad said. IHS Markit and RS Energy, agree that modest growth is likely at current prices because companies in the Permian have dropped their well costs so much over the last four years through productivity improvements.
“There’s a lot less cash flow to go around but it’s not an existential threat like it was in 2014,” said Ian Nieboer at RS Energy, referring to the oil-price crash of that year. Higher-cost production in the Bakken in North Dakota and Eagle Ford in south Texas are more susceptible to the recent price plunge, he said.
One of the key advantages of shale is that crude flows from wells within weeks of drilling, rather than years for large, offshore megaprojects that defined the production growth in the early 2000s. That means shale can be turned on or off like a tap, depending on whether it’s profitable or unprofitable at any given price. That may be of no consolation to equity investors starved of earnings, cash flow and dividends but it does help to rebalance oil markets.
“If we don’t get those barrels in 2019, they will simply be waiting to show up in 2020, or 2021, or whenever the market needs them,” said Raoul LeBlanc, a Houston-based analyst at IHS Markit. “The eventual limit is sweet spot exhaustion, and in the Permian, that will not happen in the next seven years.”
—With assistance from Catherine Ngai and Rachel Adams-Heard.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/permians-growth-spurt-at-risk-amid-oil-price-collapse-corrected
-
2019 Outlook: Arctic to See More Ship Traffic, Oil Exploration
Dec 20, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By James Munson
Relaxed shipping rules from Russia, Chinese investment in natural gas, and U.S. steps toward oil and gas exploration will make for increased activity in the Arctic region in 2019.
Russia’s new shipping regulations, due to take effect in May, will permit vessels with weaker ice protections to reach the country’s growing constellation of energy and mining projects. Some ships currently allowed in Arctic waters only in summer will be allowed to travel there year-round, and rules governing when icebreakers must accompany ships will be changed.
Yamal, a sprawling facility on Russia’s Arctic coast that produces 16.5 million metric ton of liquefied natural gas annually and that currently serves as the focal point of Russia’s vision to turn the Arctic into a bustling economic zone, reached full production ahead of schedule in late 2018, creating the need for more ships, said Malte Humpert, founder of the Arctic Institute, a Washington-based research group.
Meanwhile, China, which has a 20 percent stake in Yamal through China National Petroleum Corp., could further extend its holdings in the polar region by buying a share of the Arctic LNG project, which sits across a river delta from Yamal, Humpert said. However, the Chinese face an uphill battle against other prospective investors like Saudi Arabia after having driven a hard bargain for the Yamal stake, he said. China declared itself a “near-Arctic state” that seeks to develop a “Polar Silk Road” over Eurasia this past January.
Laying Groundwork for ExplorationAcross the Arctic Ocean, Alaska’s oil and gas sector will also be busy.
The Trump administration’s efforts to open up more of the state to exploration will inch through the regulatory process in 2019, but environmental groups are likely to start legal challenges if the Interior Department gets as far as publishing a draft environmental impact statement in some of the areas eyed for exploration, Kara Moriarty, president and CEO of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, said.
Interior officials are preparing a draft statement for a lease sale in the coming year for federal waters in the Beaufort Sea, as well as for 1.5 million acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in an area where caribou are known to calve.
The department is also replacing a land management plan for the National Petroleum Reserve that made 11 million of the reserve’s 22.8 million acres off limits to development. The existing plan prevents the extraction of 350 million barrels of oil and 45 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, the department says.
Officials didn’t respond to requests for a timeline on those regulatory processes, but Moriarty said a lease sale in the refuge area, known as the 1002 Area, could come in 2019 or 2020.
Several court challenges to the U.S. government’s plans in Alaska will conclude in 2019, beginning with expected decisions in a lawsuit that argues the Trump administration didn’t have the authority to overturn an Obama-era ban on Arctic offshore drilling and in a suit that argues lease sales in 2016 and 2017 in Alaska didn’t take into account their impact on climate change, said Kristen Monsell, oceans program litigation director at the Center for Biological Diversity.
Later in the year, the center is expecting Judge Sharon L. Gleason of the U.S. District Court of Alaska—who is overseeing the cases—to deliver a judgment in its challenge to the administration’s decision not to list the Pacific walrus as an endangered species, a move that overturned a previous decision, Monsell said.
Canada Ban May Be LiftedAny increased interest in Beaufort Sea oil and gas could generate activity across the border in Canadian waters, said Paul Barnes, manager for the Atlantic and Arctic for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, the country’s largest oil and gas group.
Canada has banned offshore oil and gas activity in the Arctic since 2015. Legislation expected this spring would enable the federal government to return security deposits petroleum companies made on leases before the ban was announced. The final amount could be in the tens of millions for some companies, depending on how much they spent, Barnes said.
There are 13 active exploration licenses in the Beaufort Sea, according to the Canada’s National Energy Board.
Ottawa launched negotiations in October with the Northwest Territories, Yukon, and the Inuvialuit Regional Corp. to develop a new regulatory plan for oil and gas in the Beaufort Sea, an agreement that could allow for the moratorium to be lifted.
Further east, increased cargo traffic is expected in 2019 from the Mary River iron ore mine on Baffin Island, which the federal government is allowing to increase annual production from 4.2 million metric tons to 6 million metric tons temporarily until December 2019.
Baffinland Iron Mines Corp., the majority of which is owned by ArcelorMittal, has increasingly sent ships through the Northwest and Northeast Passages, said Adam Lajeunesse, an Arctic specialist at St. Francis Xavier University.
North of that mine, Canada is expected to announce the creation of a national marine conservation area in Lancaster Sound in Nunavut, nicknamed the Serengeti of the Arctic for its abundant wildlife, said Louie Porta, vice-president of operations and projects at advocacy group Oceans North. At 42,000 square miles, the area will be the largest protected zone in Canada and the culmination of over 40 years in conservation work, Porta said.
Canada will also be under pressure at an International Maritime Organization environmental meeting in February to support a heavy fuel oil ban in the Arctic, said Andrew Dumbrille, senior specialist on sustainable shipping at the World Wildlife Fund Canada. The organization signaled its intention to bring one into force in 2021, he said.
Ottawa may have more room to support a ban after Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., an Inuit political and economic body, came out in support of a ban in October, Dumbrille said. Heavy fuel oil is used in the Arctic because it handles cold temperatures better than other fuels, but it is difficult to clean up in a spill and its soot can accelerate global warming.
A Freezing ExperimentA Freezing Experiment
A major scientific milestone will take place back in Eurasian waters in late 2019 when the German research icebreaker the Polarstern, owned by Alfred Wegener Institute, will be “frozen in” the Arctic Ocean to conduct experiments on the atmosphere, the polar landscape, and ecosystem, Julienne Stroeve, senior research scientist with the U.S. National Snow & Ice Data Center, said.
A research vessel has only been frozen in the Arctic ice over the winter once before—the 1997 SHEBA study—and the upcoming one will be the first one in the Eurasian Arctic, Stroeve said.
Scientists will also begin publishing papers based on data from ICESat-2, a NASA satellite launched in August, in 2019, she said. Ice thickness data from the satellite is expected to be a big improvement over current information.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/2019-outlook-arctic-to-see-more-ship-traffic-oil-exploration
-
Congress Poised To Extend EPA Funds, Chemical Programs, Until Feb. 8
Dec 19, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Congress is poised to vote in the coming days on a stopgap bill that will extend level funding for EPA and six other federal agencies into February, a move that will avoid a partial government shutdown while creating an early test for the new Democratic Congress to negotiate a longer-term deal with Senate Republicans and the White House.
The continuing resolution, released Dec. 19, also provides short-term extensions for two expiring chemical programs: EPA's Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) program that allows the agency to collect industry fees for pesticide registrations, as well as the Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program, which requires industrial facilities to craft performance-based plans to limit chemical risks.
The CR essentially punts a fight over President Donald Trump's demand for $5 billion of border wall funding -- the issue that has held up the bills -- into next year, as well as final decisions on FY19 funding levels for the agency.
But prospects that the incoming Democratic majority will be able to cut a deal with Republicans appears limited as Democrats reiterated their view that they will not provide the funds for a wall next year.
“When House Democrats assume control in two weeks, my primary focus will be to pass reasonable spending legislation that does not fund President Trump’s wasteful wall,” Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), who is slated to chair the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement.
“Our talented incoming subcommittee chairs and the rest of our new Democratic Majority will work together to write responsible legislation that reflects the American people’s priorities and fully funds the government for the rest of the fiscal year,” she added.
Republicans expressed disappointment that they were unable to approve the underlying legislation before the current CR expires Dec. 21 but indicated that they wanted to avoid a partial government shutdown.
“Having already funded 75 percent of the government on time with broad bipartisan support, I am disappointed that we could not come to an agreement on the remaining 25 percent,” Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-AL) said in a statement.
“However, I am committed to keeping the government open and will take the next six weeks to continue working toward that end . . . I hope that this continuing resolution will provide us the time to work out our differences in a thoughtful manner and reach a bipartisan consensus on important national priorities.”
A Capitol Hill source says votes are expected Dec. 19 in the Senate and Dec. 20 in the House on the CR that would extend current funding until Feb. 8, 2019.
Blunt Approach
Funding through such stopgap measures is a blunt approach that generally maintains the status quo, precluding more detailed final instructions from Congress that could boost or cut funding while setting an array of conditions for EPA activities.
As such, it forfeits in procedural terms a chance for Congress to weigh in with detailed updates to its instructions to agencies as well as funding for specific programs.
But even before this CR was released, lawmakers had been edging close to bipartisan agreement for the first time in years on a full Interior appropriations measure that includes EPA funding, amid indications that a yet-to-be released compromise between the House and Senate might fund the agency's top line budget at something at or near the status quo.
Defenders of the agency, however, including former EPA officials, have also said that this status quo perpetuates a pattern of inadequate resources at the agency, which is now operating at roughly Reagan-era staffing levels despite new mandates to address an array of environmental challenges.
And this means that the looming Democratic takeover of the House might give Democrats new leverage to seek at least some funding boost for the agency, whether in talks to resolve FY19 funding levels or in FY20.
For the moment, however, the apparent stopgap deal keeps the notion of a full bill “alive,” according to a Hill source.
“This is just time to extend those [funding] deadlines” to avoid a shutdown, a Hill source says.
While the CR gives lawmakers time to resolve their differences over government funding, it will also give them time to address differences on the two expiring chemical sector programs.
PRIA, which allows EPA to collect fees in exchange for meeting a strict schedule for reviewing registrations, is already operating under an extension from what would have been the end of its long-term authorization earlier this year, but this is Congress' first time adding CFATS to a temporary CR, since that program is not slated to expire until January.
Lawmakers have struggled to reauthorize both statutes despite broad support for their overall goals, including among industry -- as shown by the bipartisan reluctance to let their authority lapse entirely.
PRIA supporters had hoped to include reauthorization in this month's Farm Bill, but the House-Senate conference report did not address the pesticide program. As a result, industry supporter were considering other options, such as advancing a stand-alone House bill that has languished for nearly two years, or making a full reauthorization part of whatever long-term FY19 bill ultimately clears Congress.
Similarly, legislators of both parties have backed the broad goal of reauthorizing CFATS but have been at odds over the details of such an extension, with Democrats rejecting a bill put forward by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, that would ease regulations on facilities that demonstrate compliance with industry best practices.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/congress-poised-extend-epa-funds-chemical-programs-until-feb-8
-
Georgia-Pacific to Spend $4.7 Million in Arkansas Air Claims
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Stinson
An Arkansas-based chemical facility owned by Georgia-Pacific Chemicals LLC will spend $4.7 million on environmental projects and pollution controls as part of a settlement being published Dec. 20 in the Federal Register.
The Justice Department Dec. 14 lodged a proposed consent decree directing the company to put in place three supplemental environmental projects valued at $1.8 million as well as a $2.9 million mitigation project to resolve the government’s claims the facility violated several air pollution control requirements.
The company also will pay civil penalties of $600,000, divided equally between the Justice Department and Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, according to the proposed consent decree, which must still be approved by a federal judge.
Air Pollution ViolationsThe chemical and paper and pulp plants located on adjoining properties in Crossett, Ark., exceeded federal limits for sulfur and other pollutants, the Justice Department had alleged.
A 26-count complaint also alleged equipment leaks allowed formaldehyde emissions to escape, failure to use an approved method in performance testing of a wood pulping system to ensure compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s toxic air pollution standards, failure to maintain compliance records required by federal law, and other violations.
The company “will continue to work cooperatively with the EPA and other regulatory agencies” to address issues raised, Georgia-Pacific spokeswoman Jennifer King said in a Dec. 19 email.
“Regarding the major health concern expressed by some community members, there is no evidence that our emissions cause illness in the community, including those emissions addressed in the reports,” King said.
The case is U.S. v. Georgia-Pacific Chemicals LLC, W.D. Ark., No. 1:18-cv-01076, consent decree proposed 12/14/18.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/georgia-pacific-to-spend-47-million-in-arkansas-air-claims
-
Opinion: Freight Rail Reform Can Help Louisiana’s Economy
Dec 19, 2018 | Houma Courier
By Gregory M. Bowser
To date, the chemical industry has announced that it will invest $58 billion to support 85 new chemical production projects in Louisiana, which will provide a much-needed boost to our state’s job growth and economic output.
As we invest in the future of our state, we have to make sure that we’re not bogged down by regulatory policies of the past. Take our nation’s freight rail policies, for example, many of which lawmakers have not updated in more than 30 years despite massive changes and consolidation within the freight rail industry.
As a result, freight rail rates have doubled – more than three times the rate of inflation over the past decade while rail service has deteriorated.
Fortunately, leaders in Washington, D.C., thanks to Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., are starting to listen to voices of reason.
The U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, led by Kennedy, just held a field hearing in New Orleans to learn how small businesses would benefit from smart regulatory reforms.
Those businesses described to committee members how outdated freight rail regulations are disastrous for growing our economy, the freight rail system is anything but dependable and that increased access to competitive rail service is the key to supporting businesses in our state.
One company lamented that high rail costs and current regulations stifle growth and make it hard to manage supply chains and product costs. These problems can have a broad impact since many chemical manufacturers depend on freight rail to get their products to thousands of smaller companies that in turn rely on them to stay in business. Often, it’s the smaller businesses that suffer because of chronic freight rail problems.
And, because chemicals are used to make everything from electronics to cleaning products to cars, the impacts trickle down through the economy and hit consumers in their wallets.
Many businesses are at the mercy of the railroads. That’s why the Rail Customer Coalition, a group made up of about 80 trade associations representing a wide range of commodities shipped by rail, is leading the fight to reform outdated rail regulations and open the free market to competition.
The first step to set things right is for the U.S. Senate to confirm three pending nominees to the Surface Transportation Board, which is responsible for overseeing the nation’s rail network.
Once new members are in place, the board should quickly move forward on two significant reforms: competitive switching and rate benchmarking.
Competition is the foundation of the free enterprise system, and it is what helps drive innovation and cost-savings throughout our economy. Competitive switching would remove regulatory barriers and put the marketplace to work. It would allow a rail customer, served by a single railroad, to request that its freight be moved to another railroad, for a fee, if one is reasonably accessible.
Rate benchmarking would help shippers without competitive options by replacing the STB’s overly bureaucratic rate review process with streamlined, market-based process. Benchmarking uses the wealth of existing rate data for shipments in competitive markets. A shipper could challenge a rate that is unreasonably higher than its competitive benchmark. This change would dramatically reduce the amount of time and money it takes for shippers, railroads and the federal government to decide a rate case.
Competition and free enterprise are values that we all support because they create jobs, promote innovation, and lower prices. It’s time to get our nation’s freight rail policies back on track so we can keep Louisiana’s economy moving in the right direction.
-- Gregory M. Bowser is president of the Louisiana Chemical Association.
https://www.houmatoday.com/news/20181219/opinion-freight-rail-reform-can-help-louisianas-economy?rssfeed=true
-
There Is Now a Bipartisan Carbon Tax Bill in the Senate
Dec 20, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
The first bipartisan carbon tax bill in a decade now has a late-breaking Senate companion.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) and outgoing Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) introduced yesterday the Senate version of the "Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act," the House bill floated last month by Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) and other members of the Climate Solutions Caucus.
Practically, the legislation won't mean much with the 115th Congress coming to a close as soon as today and Flake on the way out the door. But backers see it as another sign of bipartisan support that could give the bill momentum heading into the next Congress.
"Obviously Flake's not coming back, but Coons is in discussions with some other senators, so we've got both chambers now interested in moving this legislation forward," said Steve Valk, spokesman for Citizens' Climate Lobby, which has been pushing a version of the legislation for years.
"I don't know of any climate change legislation this advanced going into the next Congress," Valk added.
The Senate measure is largely the same as the House bill, which would put a $15-per-metric-ton fee on carbon, rising by $10 per year, with net revenue given back to households as a rebate (E&E Daily, Nov. 28).
Backers say it would reduce U.S. carbon emissions by a third in only a decade and 90 percent by 2050, all compared with 2015 levels.
"Sen. Coons and I have introduced bipartisan, revenue-neutral carbon tax legislation that provides an honest path to clean energy," Flake said in a statement. "This free-market solution will reduce carbon pollution and encourage American innovation."
But the two bills would treat EPA regulations differently. The House version would nix certain EPA greenhouse gas regulations for stationary sources but restore regulatory authority if cumulative emissions targets aren't met after 10 years.
The Senate version would not include a regulatory rollback, but there would be a review after six years to determine whether EPA regulations are still necessary.
The Senate measure came, in part, out of the close friendship between Flake and Coons. Flake has been floated as a potential primary challenger to President Trump in 2020, though he has played down that speculation.
But Flake was also the co-sponsor of the last bipartisan carbon tax bill in 2009 during his time in the House, alongside Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) and then-Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.). Inglis now pushes carbon-pricing legislation in the advocacy world.
"Thanks to Senator Coons and Senator Flake, we're now showing the American people that our plan to put a price on carbon and return the net revenue back to the American people has earned bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress," Deutch, the Democratic co-chairman of the Solutions Caucus, said in a statement.
"I look forward to working closely with Senator Coons and my fellow House sponsors to re-introduce the legislation next year."
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/12/20/stories/1060110215
-
New Climate Committee Unlikely to Get Subpoena Power
Dec 20, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Mark K. Matthews and Nick Sobczyk
House Democratic leaders said yesterday they have no intention of granting subpoena power to a proposed committee on climate change that's in the works for the next Congress.
At a roundtable with reporters, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) argued it was unnecessary for the proposed panel.
"I don't know that they think they need subpoena power," Hoyer said. "They are going to have [climate] experts who are, I think, dying to come before them."
If enacted, the decision would further weaken the panel, as Democratic leaders also are unlikely to give it the ability to move legislation.
A lack of subpoena power would stand in contrast to the previous select climate change committee that Democrats created the last time they controlled the House. That panel, led by then-Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), also couldn't move bills, but it had the power to issue subpoenas — which Markey used to threaten EPA leaders during the Bush administration.
"The Members of the Committee should know that I do not take the issuance of a subpoena lightly," Markey wrote during a 2008 spat with then-EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson over documents related to the landmark Supreme Court case Massachusetts v. EPA. "In my 32 years as a member of Congress and my many years chairing subcommittees in both the Energy and Commerce and the Resources Committees, this is the first time that I have ever found it necessary to issue a subpoena."
Shortly after the November midterms, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced her plans to resurrect the climate change committee as an environmental protest engulfed her Capitol Hill office (Climatewire, Nov. 14).
Since then, incoming progressive Democrats such as Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York have clashed with veterans such as Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) — who is in line to lead the Energy and Commerce Committee — over the parameters of the new panel (E&E Daily, Nov. 16).
Ocasio-Cortez and her allies want it to focus on drafting plans for a "Green New Deal" — their idea of a climate-friendly jobs program — while limiting its membership to lawmakers who don't accept campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry.
House Democratic leaders have tried for weeks to negotiate the terms, which will be finalized early next year.
Hoyer said it was his expectation that the panel wouldn't be given subpoena authority this time around and that its chief purpose would be to advise the House's traditional committees, such as Energy and Commerce.
A Democratic leadership aide confirmed Hoyer's read of the situation and said there never were plans to grant the new committee the ability to issue subpoenas.
Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), the incoming chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, mirrored Hoyer's comments. His understanding of Pelosi's proposal is that the select committee would have no legislative authority, no subpoena power and no deposition.
Grijalva suggested that proponents of the select committee had "signed off" on that outline.
"They said this is fine that it doesn't have legislative authority," Grijalva added.
The latest revelation, though, could further inflame tensions between establishment Democrats and a new generation of activists who have been chomping at the bit to do more on global warming.
"If true, this decision is an insult to the thousands of young people across the country who have been calling on the Democratic Party leadership to have the courage to stand up to fossil fuel billionaires and make sure our generation has a livable future," Varshini Prakash, a spokeswoman for the Sunrise Movement, said in a statement. "Whip Hoyer is standing in the way of a plan that huge majorities of Americans support."
But Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who endorsed the Green New Deal select committee resolution last week, said yesterday she didn't see a problem with the lack of subpoena power.
"I don't think not including subpoena power makes it toothless," Jayapal, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told reporters last night.
It would be a "mistake," she added, to view the select panel in competition with the standing committees with jurisdiction over climate issues. Even the lack of legislative authority wouldn't be a problem because any member can introduce a Green New Deal bill, even if the committee is not specifically tasked with crafting it, Jayapal said.
"I just don't understand the distinctions that people are trying to make because I really think that the legislative committees are another opportunity — and we should see it that way — to have hearings, to subpoena people, to pass legislation, even if it's smaller than the grand idea," she said. "And the select committee is this incredible tool to do real work to build the movement for that change."
Democratic aides said Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) is rumored to be Pelosi's pick to lead the select committee, but it likely won't be finalized until over the holiday break or early next year.
"I heard that same thing, but it's all supposition and rumor," Grijalva said. "There hasn't been a declarative statement on the part of Pelosi or anybody in leadership."
A House Democratic leadership aide said the select committee chairman would work in "close coordination" with the standing committees should an "issue arise." The comment suggests the Democratic chairmen of the permanent panels could use their existing subpoena power if the select committee needed it to help get access to witnesses or information pertinent to its work.
One factor likely weighing on the decision about the committee's power is the widespread enthusiasm among Democrats to do battle with President Trump.
Veteran Democrats already have talked a big game about their plans to launch investigations and conduct climate hearings once their party takes control of the House in January.
Denying subpoena power to the proposed climate committee could be one way for Democratic leaders to better manage what's sure to be a multifront war between the House and the Trump administration.
Reporter George Cahlink contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/12/20/stories/1060110177
-
Exxon Seeks Years-Long Halt in Massachusetts Climate Suit
Dec 19, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adrianne Appel
Exxon Mobil is seeking a years-long halt in a landmark lawsuit alleging the company’s Massachusetts oil and gas terminal is vulnerable to climate change, while the company awaits an EPA review.
The lawsuit, filed in 2016 by the Conservation Law Foundation, is the first of its kind and is being watched by corporations and environmental groups nationwide. The foundation alleges the company hasn’t effectively fortified its oil and gas facility on the Mystic River in Everett, Mass., to withstand the impacts of climate change.
The case took a new turn in late November when Judge Mark Wolf of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts said an Environmental Protection Agency review of the terminal may address the issues at the center of the case.
Review Not ImmediateThe soonest the EPA will have time to start the review is 2020, but it may not be until 2022, Ken Moraff, director of EPA’s Office of Ecosystem Protection in the New England region, said in a Dec. 17 letter to attorneys in the case.
The EPA listed many projects that take precedence over the Exxon review.
The EPA would review Exxon’s terminal as it considers the company’s application for a renewal of its 2014 various water pollution and discharge permits.
The judge should stay the case until the EPA conducts the permit renewal review, Exxon attorneys Daniel Toal of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and Deborah Barnard of Holland & Knight LLP, said in a Dec. 18 reply to Wolf’s order.
An alternative to halting the case is to call the EPA to testify as to whether Exxon is meeting the terms of its existing permit, the attorneys said.
“By participating as a witness, EPA could make unmistakably clear the meaning of disputed terms in the permit,” the attorneys said.
Act ImmediatelyThe Conservation Law Foundation wants the court to immediately force Exxon to fortify its facility, rather than waiting years for the EPA review, Zachary Griefen and Christopher Kilian, attorneys with Conservation Law Foundation, and Allan Kanner of Kanner & Whiteley LLC said in a Dec. 18 statement to the court.
The current permit “will adequately protect human health and the environment if the terms and conditions of the permit are enforced,” the attorneys said.
The case is Conservation Law Found. v. Exxonmobil Corp., D. Mass., No. 16-cv-11950, reply filed 12/18/18.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/exxon-seeks-years-long-halt-in-massachusetts-climate-suit
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested