Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - February 19, 2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Scientist Says Some Pollution Is Good for You — a Disputed Claim Trump’s EPA Has Embraced
Feb 19, 2019 | LA Times
By Susanne Rust
In early 2018, a deputy assistant administrator in the EPA, Clint Woods, reached out to a Massachusetts toxicologist best known for pushing a public health standard suggesting that low levels of toxic chemicals and radiation are good... -
Fewer Than Half of Chemicals on EPA Toxic List Are Used in U.S.
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
Fewer than half of the chemicals listed in a federal inventory of toxic substances are manufactured, processed, and imported into the U.S., according to the EPA. An update of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxic Substances... -
Us Congress Passes EPA Budget for 2019
Feb 19, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
President Trump has signed into law a last-minute federal spending deal and avoided another partial government shutdown in the process. Congress's 2019 fiscal year budget, which will fund the government until the end of... -
EPA Chemicals Rules May Prompt Firefight With Pentagon
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
The EPA’s latest chemical cleanup plan may spark a war with an adversary that knows a thing or two about combat: the Department of Defense. The Environmental Protection Agency announced Feb. 14 that it will pursue tighter... -
EPA Denied Public’s Right to Know About Asbestos, Lawsuit Says (1)
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA denied the public’s right to know the extent of asbestos and asbestos-containing products being imported into the U.S., a coalition of health and environmental groups say in a lawsuit filed Feb. 18. The groups want the... -
Carper Drops Objection On Wheeler's Nomination After EPA's Pledge On PFAS MCL
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
A top Senate Democrat is dropping one of several objections he had threatened to raise when the upper chamber considers Andrew Wheeler's nomination to be EPA chief later this month after the agency renewed its pledge that it... -
California Sets 'No Significant Risk Level' for Bromodichloroacetic Acid
Feb 19, 2019 | Chemical Watch
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has set a Proposition 65 "no significant risk level" (NSRL) of 0.95 micrograms per day for bromodichloroacetic acid. The substance – a water-disinfectant... -
March 21 Meeting to Explore Health, Environmental Issues of Synthetic Chemicals
Feb 19, 2019 | Penn State News
For decades, a group of synthetic chemicals called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has been used in numerous industrial and consumer products, including nonstick cookware, water-repellent materials, stain- and oil... -
MacArthur Airport to Undergo Environmental Study
Feb 19, 2019 | Newsday
By Antonio Planas
An environmental consultant will study the history of Long Island MacArthur Airport's use of a chemical found in firefighting foam suspected as the source of contamination at a nearby well in Bohemia. Islip councilors voted... -
Children Carry Evidence of Toxins from Home Flooring and Furniture
Feb 19, 2019 | Lab Manager
By Geoffrey Kabat
Children living in homes with all vinyl flooring or flame-retardant chemicals in the sofa have significantly higher concentrations of potentially harmful semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) in their blood or urine than children... -
Senate Passes Pipeline Tampering Bill
Feb 19, 2019 | AP (E&E - Greenwire)
North Dakota's Senate has passed a bill that better defines the legal consequences for people who tamper with pipelines and any groups that help them. The measure passed 42-3 on Friday. Republican state Sen. Janne Myrdal... -
Trump EPA Pick Andrew Wheeler Gets Caught Between Oil and Corn Interests
Feb 19, 2019 | Fortune
By Erik Sherman
Andrew Wheeler, acting administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, is caught between Big Oil and Big Corn. That could affect his Senate confirmation hearing. The fracas started in December 2018 when EPA staff suggested... -
For the Sake of American Energy, It's Time to End the Trade War
Feb 19, 2019 | Real Clear Energy
By Robert L. Bradley Jr.
This week, Chinese President Xi Jinping is again meeting with senior Trump administration officials in Beijing, where they'll attempt to defuse trade tensions between the world's two largest economies. If they fail, the United States will... -
Firms Fracked without Permits, Greens Charge
Feb 19, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A Western environmental group formally threatened seven oil and gas companies with Clean Air Act lawsuits today, alleging they launched fracking operations in Colorado's Front Range without first getting the required permits. -
Oil, Biofuels Groups Slated To Raise Competing Arguments Over 2018 RFS
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Oil and biofuels industry groups are slated to raise competing arguments over alleged flaws in EPA’s 2018 renewable fuel standard (RFS) at Feb. 20 oral arguments over the rule, and the agency’s issuance of several waivers to small... -
Consumer Push for Sustainability Masks Massive Growth in Plastic Demand
Feb 19, 2019 | S&P Global Platts
By Philip Reeder
Barely a week goes by without another headline decrying the use of plastics and plastic packaging in Europe. Plastics are clogging up our oceans, overflowing our landfill sites and even finding their way into our food. -
Congress Passes, President Trump Signs 15-Month CFATS Extension
Feb 19, 2019 | Bulk Transporter
On January 18, the day the program was slated to expire, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law a 15-month extension of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS). The extension, until April 2020, gives... -
USDOT Issues Final Rule Requiring Rail Oil-Spill Response Plans
Feb 19, 2019 | Progressive Railroading
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) last week issued a final rule requiring railroads to develop comprehensive oil-spill response plans and share information about high-hazard flammable train operations with... -
FRA Publishes End-Of-2018 Positive Train Control Data
Feb 19, 2019 | Roads & Bridges
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recently released a status update regarding railroads’ self-reported progress toward full implementation of positive train control (PTC) systems as of the end of 2018. All required... -
FRA Report: All Railroads Met Statutory PTC Requirements by 2018's End
Feb 19, 2019 | Progressive Railroading
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) late last week released a status update regarding railroads' self-reported progress toward implementing positive train control (PTC) by 2018's end. All 41 railroads either met the end-of-2018... -
Ewire: White House Says Deregulation 'Top of the List'
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
With the White House increasingly focused on policies it can enact without the support of a divided Congress, top Trump administration officials say they are redoubling their focus on deregulation -- including rolling back a suite of... -
Summer 2019: Climate Change Will Bring Strong Storms and Smog
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eric Roston
Air pollution is the sixth biggest killer worldwide—more than alcohol use, kidney failure or too much salt. The cause, as we all know, is the burning of fossil fuels, which generates soot and other airborne particles that hang in the atmosphere.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
Feb 19, 2019 | LA Times
By Susanne Rust
In early 2018, a deputy assistant administrator in the EPA, Clint Woods, reached out to a Massachusetts toxicologist best known for pushing a public health standard suggesting that low levels of toxic chemicals and radiation are good for people.
“I wanted to check to see if you might have some time in the next couple of days for a quick call to discuss a couple items …,” Woods wrote to Ed Calabrese.
Less than two weeks later, Calabrese’s suggestions on how the EPA should assess toxic chemicals and radiation were introduced, nearly word for word, in the U.S. government’s official journal, the Federal Register.
“This is a major big time victory,” Calabrese wrote in an email to Steve Milloy, a former coal and tobacco lobbyist who runs a website, junkscience.com, that seeks to discredit mainstream climate science.
“Yes. It is YUGE!” wrote Milloy, in response.
It was a glorious moment for Calabrese, who had been snubbed for decades by mainstream public health scientists because of his controversial research and theories.
It also signified the major shift the EPA has taken under the Trump administration. More than any before it, this White House has actively sought out advice from industry lobbyists and the scientists they commission in setting pollution rules.
Denouncing the Obama-era EPA as an agency beholden to environmental extremists, the administration has not only dismissed mainstream science but embraced widely discredited alternatives that critics say are not consistent with the agency’s focus on improving public and environmental health.
Calabrese’s role illustrates a different side of this shift: the potential removal of longstanding public health practices and the incorporation of industry-backed and disputed science into federal environmental policy.
Calabrese spent decades advancing his ideas, facing skepticism and criticism from peers in the toxicology community while winning funding from companies whose bottom lines conformed with his views.
He says most of the pushback he receives comes from left-of-center toxicologists who see him as “the devil incarnate” for accepting industry funding and challenging their ideology. He maintains his science is solid and will be vindicated in time.
“These environmental regulatory people are very closed-minded,” he said. They won’t reconsider their standards, and see that some of the agents they call harmful “actually can induce adaptive responses,” Calabrese said.
This view — that pollution and radiation can be beneficial — has many experts worried. The fact that such a position may become EPA policy, they say, portends a future in which corporate desires outweigh public and environmental health.
“Industry has been pushing for this for a long time,” said David Michaels, former assistant secretary of labor for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration who’s a professor of environmental and occupational health at George Washington University. “Not just the chemical industry, but the radiation and tobacco industries too.”
If the EPA ultimately adopts Calabrese’s proposed new regulations, researchers say it could change decades of standards and guidelines on clean air, water and toxic waste. It could also fundamentally alter the way the government assesses new chemicals and pesticides entering the marketplace.
“This is industry’s holy grail,” said Michaels.
Can pollution be healthy?
For decades, federal agencies charged with investigating and regulating carcinogens, toxic chemicals and radiation have been guided by the assumption that if a substance is dangerous at some level, it is harmful at any level. The higher the exposure, the more harm done. The lower the dose, the less. And the risk doesn’t entirely disappear until the substance is removed.
This is known as the linear no-threshold model, and industry dislikes it because it generally assumes that there is no level, or threshold, of exposure that can be considered totally safe.
But research done on low exposures to toxins has been less than definitive. Experiments designed to test carcinogens and radiation at low levels often produce conflicting results — with, for example, some studies of a chemical showing harm, other studies showing no effect, and a few suggesting a net benefit. In other cases, there is no information at all to guide regulators.
In the face of such uncertainty, the EPA and other agencies have taken a cautious approach by relying on the linear no-threshold model. Where data are absent or uncertain, they assume some level of risk.
It is an imperfect but protective approach, say many public health specialists. They argue that in a human population that varies widely in age, health and levels of chemical exposures, it is imperative that the agency cast a wide, conservative and protective net.
For decades, national and international scientific bodies have upheld this approach. It has been reviewed and re-reviewed dozens of times, including most recently by the congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine and the EPA.
At the same time, industry has funded scientists to conduct and promote research designed to poke holes in the linear no-threshold model.
And that is where Calabrese comes in. He has long argued that regulators “erred on the side of being protective” at the cost of billions of dollars per year to industry.
Calabrese is a proselytizer of hormesis, the idea that dangerous chemicals and radiation are beneficial at low doses. He says they have a stimulating effect.
Polluting industries have promoted hormesis as an alternative to linear no-threshold for decades, but they had gotten little traction until the EPA embraced it last April.
“It’s clearly not mainstream,” said Thomas Burke, professor and director of the Risk Sciences Institute at Johns Hopkins’ Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Burke and other experts say there are clearly scenarios where toxic chemicals can have beneficial effects in clinical and pharmacological settings, such as in the case of tamoxifen, which at low doses is effective at preventing and treating breast cancer but at higher doses can lead to blood clots, stroke and uterine cancer.
But, they say, what happens in a clinical setting can’t and shouldn’t be immediately applied to a regulatory, public health setting.
In the clinical case, “you have a doctor controlling and administering the medication to an individual,” said David Jacobs, a professor of public health at the University of Minnesota, who has published studies showing hormetic effects in some industrial pollutants. “The doctor can pull the medication at any time.”
“There is no way to control the dose a person gets from an industrial or agricultural chemical,” he said. “It’s not being doled out in pills and monitored by a physician who can lower it if the patient isn’t responding well.”
Therefore, Jacobs said, it would be dangerous to use hormesis as a framework for protecting public and environmental health.
“It really doesn’t pass the sniff test” when applying it to public health, Burke said, while allowing for its place in the forum of ideas. “I always teach my classes that there are other theories. It’s like any part of science, there are different points of view. Whether it’s about climate change or low doses.”
But he also teaches that one needs to know who has skin in the game. And in the case of hormesis, he said, that’s industry.
Big Tobacco embraces disputed research
In the early 1980s, Calabrese was a tenured professor at the University of Massachusetts, stringing together public agency and industry-funded grants to study chemicals in drinking water and the effects of ozone on mice.
His funders included the EPA, the state of Massachusetts, the Hoffman-LaRoche pharmaceutical company and semiconductor giant Digital Corp.
Then in 1985, he reached out to the Council for Tobacco Research, the research arm of the tobacco industry, seeking a grant to examine “a possible inherited and metabolic susceptibility to lung cancer in smokers.” His proposal was declined.
Sheldon Sommers, a physician at New York’s Lenox Hill Hospital and scientific director of the council, wrote in response to the grant application that Calabrese’s proposal “... is a mad hatter’s tea party sort of epidemiologic approach, and a total $2.1 million plus would likely be frittered away in my opinion,” according to documents from the UC San Francisco Truth Tobacco Industry Documents archive.
But by the 1990s, Calabrese had solidly established himself as a trusted scientist with the tobacco industry. He found they were interested in research that questioned the methods that regulatory agencies use to assess risk.
In a 1994 proposal to R.J. Reynolds, Calabrese offered to investigate a new kind of smokeless cigarette for the company, but also incorporate into his research “the loss of current benefits associated with smoking, such as protection from certain types of cancers and other illnesses…”
It was when he began his work on hormesis that Calabrese got attention from a broader range of industries.
With seed money from R.J. Reynolds, Dow Chemical, Procter & Gamble and others, as well as the EPA, Calabrese established a hormesis working group at the University of Massachusetts, which he called the Biological Effects of Low Level Exposures, or BELLE. Minutes from a 1990 advisory board meeting show the group chose not to use the word “hormesis” in its official name.
According to documents, Calabrese and his funders also held off on pushing a hormesis regulatory agenda until they’d built a sizable base of published scientific research.
Between 1990 and 2013, Calabrese received more than $8 million from companies and institutions, including R.J. Reynolds, Exxon Mobil, Dow Chemical, General Electric, the Department of Energy and the U.S. Air Force, to conduct research on hormesis.
Spokesmen from Exxon Mobil and the Air Force say they no longer fund Calabrese’s work.
Calabrese established his own scientific society, the International Dose Response Society, and his own hormesis journal — now called Dose Response — where he served as editor-in-chief.
He wrote hundreds of articles, in his own journal and in others (including “Should hormesis be the default model in risk assessment?” and “The importance of hormesis to public health”), organized dozens of conferences and delivered scores of talks.
And while his publication portfolio is vast, it is also broad. It includes not just studies of hormesis, but research on soil ingestion, opinion pieces on law and regulatory policy, historical treatise on science, and a few scathing, posthumous rebukes of revered scientists, such as Herman Muller, a Nobel prize-winner and supporter of linear no-threshold.
Calabrese insists his funding does not influence his work.
“My job involves finding financial support to do studies in my field,” said Calabrese. “I seek support from the private and public sectors. The University independently evaluates each of these for compliance with the rules.”
Not all of his money comes from industry or government agencies with extensive toxic waste sites. Between 2000 and 2013, Calabrese received $50,000 from the EPA to hold a conference on soil ingestion, and $50,000 from CalEPA for a reference database he built on cancer publications. He also received a $750,000 joint grant from the EPA and the American Chemistry Council, the chemical industry’s trade group, to study soil ingestion by construction workers.
Yet, despite his prolific career, he has instigated criticism and rebuke from many of his peers for his push on public and environmental health policy. He has been described as a “prominent industry consultant,” having “outlying views,” whose science is “way out there.”
For years he failed to get regulatory agencies to take him seriously.
‘We are winning’
On Sept. 5, 2017, nearly nine months after Trump was sworn in as president and seven months after Scott Pruitt was confirmed as head of the EPA, Calabrese wrote an email to Milloy, the former coal lobbyist who is a Fox news commentator. The Los Angeles Times obtained the emails through a public records request to the University of Massachusetts.
“I wanted to connect with you on whether and how it may be possible to get the EPA to consider changing the LNT [linear no-threshold model] to something far better,” Calabrese wrote.
Milloy had served on Trump’s EPA transition team and was still in touch with high-ranking officials in Pruitt’s agency.
A few months later, Calabrese wrote to Milloy again, letting him know that he’d corresponded with Ryan Jackson, Pruitt’s chief of staff, and sensed interest in a move against linear no-threshold.
Not long after Woods, the EPA’s deputy assistant of the Office of Air and Radiation, emailed Calabrese asking if he wanted to talk about “default linear assumptions” and other items.
The two arranged a call, and on April 19, 2018, Woods sent Calabrese draft language for a small section in the EPA’s proposed new ruling on transparency, called “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science.”
“It is good what you have but you need a little more,” wrote Calabrese, who then suggested a line, which he altered twice, in email exchanges with Woods, before settling on this: “EPA shall also incorporate the concept of model uncertainty when needed as a default to optimize low dose risk estimation based on the major competing models (LNT, Threshold, and Hormesis).”
In other words, if the EPA is uncertain about a particular chemical’s impacts at low doses, it would abandon linear no-threshold as a default, and try other models instead, including hormesis.
On April 25, Milloy sent Calabrese the final wording for the draft proposal, which included Calabrese’s line nearly word for word.
“I am almost passing out with surprise and euphoria… ” Calabrese wrote Milloy after seeing the document.
The rule was posted for comment in the Federal Register on April 30, although a final ruling has not been announced.
John Konkus, an EPA spokesman, said the input and perspective from “the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, Dose Response” was welcomed, and reflected the perspective of “a wide variety of scientific experts” the agency reached out to when drafting the proposal.
Public health specialists outside the agency say that if the final language is adopted, it is likely to tie the EPA up in knots as it tries and then debates all the alternative models. It could also have profound effects on current and future standards for drinking water, air and toxic waste sites.
“EPA tries to be conservative in its setting of risks,” said Jan Beyea, a retired radiation physicist who has worked with the National Academies of Science. “Calabrese and collaborators think that most pollutants are good for you at low doses, so no need to be conservative.”
EPA spokeswoman Molly Block declined to speculate on whether the rule would be passed and how it would affect environmental rules that were set based on the linear no-threshold model.
Industry groups have praised the proposed change.
“We support moving away from over-reliance on the linear no -threshold default,” wrote a spokesman for the American Chemistry Council, the trade group for the chemical industry. It’s a method, he says that “frequently results in inflated health risk estimates and unwarranted, costly risk management decisions.”
Milloy also seemed pleased with the proposed ruling.
“The EPA should be open and transparent about how and what they are basing their decisions on,” he said, “and they should be using the best science available.”
In any case, he said, “we’re winning.”
https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-secret-science-20190219-story.html
-
Fewer Than Half of Chemicals on EPA Toxic List Are Used in U.S.
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
Fewer than half of the chemicals listed in a federal inventory of toxic substances are manufactured, processed, and imported into the U.S., according to the EPA.
An update of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxic Substances Control Act inventory shows that only 40,655, or 47 percent, of 86,228 chemicals are in U.S. commerce.
The inventory for the first time distinguishes between chemicals that are in commerce and those that aren’t. It will be illegal for companies to manufacture, import, or mix chemicals not designated as “active in commerce” on the list.
“This will help us with our work prioritizing chemicals, evaluating, and addressing risks,” Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, the EPA assistant administrator in the chemicals office, said in a statement.
Under 2016 TSCA amendments, EPA was required to update the inventory and designate which chemicals are active in U.S. commerce.
Agency designations were guided by information from manufacturers and processors about substances manufactured, imported, or processed in the U.S. over the past 10 years, through June 21, 2016.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/fewer-than-half-of-chemicals-on-epa-toxic-list-are-used-in-u-s
-
Us Congress Passes EPA Budget for 2019
Feb 19, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
President Trump has signed into law a last-minute federal spending deal and avoided another partial government shutdown in the process.
Congress's 2019 fiscal year budget, which will fund the government until the end of September, appropriates $8.8bn for the EPA. Allocation of this money includes:TSCA administration or "toxics risk review and prevention";chemical safety and sustainability research; andthe Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) programme.
The deal, which largely maintains the agency's FY 2018 funding levels, represents a rejection of the President’s initial budget request to slash agency spending by $2.66bn.
The Environmental Protection Network (EPN) – a nonprofit organisation of EPA alumni – said the agreed budget is "not nearly as harmful as the drastic cuts" floated by the Trump administration. But it said that maintaining flat funding is "a recipe for a slow death, as EPA gradually loses the resources."
Frozen funding, it added, "limits the agency’s ability to fully respond to evolving problems and priorities", like implementing changes to TSCA brought about by the 2016 Lautenberg Act.
Meanwhile, the agency is still reeling from the impact of the longest government shutdown in history, which ended in late January when President Trump signed a continuing resolution to fund the government through until 15 February.
The 35-day shutdown effectively halted TSCA programme activities and other "non-essential" agency priorities. In its wake, uncertainty remains as to whether the agency will be able to meet its statutory deadlines for existing chemicals under TSCA, while the new chemicals review process remains backed up.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74384/us-congress-passes-epa-budget-for-2019
-
EPA Chemicals Rules May Prompt Firefight With Pentagon
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
The EPA’s latest chemical cleanup plan may spark a war with an adversary that knows a thing or two about combat: the Department of Defense.
The Environmental Protection Agency announced Feb. 14 that it will pursue tighter, federally-enforceable regulations on a pair of toxic firefighting foam chemicals that have caused environmental problems on numerous military bases across the country.
The Pentagon could see billions in cleanup bills over the next several decades depending on how stringently the EPA chooses to regulate the two chemicals: PFOA and PFOS.
The chemicals are part of a broader family of chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, that were produced for years by 3M, DowDuPont Inc., and other chemical makers and used in nonstick coatings and firefighting foams.
They’re known as “forever chemicals” because they’re extremely slow to break down in the environment, building up in drinking water aquifers and ultimately the human body, causing thyroid disorders and even cancer.
The severity of the health effects and the high costs for cleanup mean the two agencies could be on a collision course.
The EPA is under pressure to set tighter standards as the chemicals are increasingly found in drinking water supplies nationwide, while the Pentagon worries that could push its environmental cleanup budget deep into the red.
“There have been some epic battles between EPA and DOD in the past,” said Bernadette Rappold, an attorney with the firm Greenberg Traurig who specializes in environmental cleanup issues. “It’s not unprecedented.”
Playing Defense
Foams containing PFAS are the military’s most effective tools to put out fires.
For years, trainees sprayed firefighting foam that contained these chemicals on military bases, where they would seep into the ground and into aquifers. Some alternatives have been developed, but many have their own toxicity problems or simply can’t satisfy the Pentagon’s high standards.
“In a lot of cases, they used quite a lot of this,” Rappold, who previously worked at the EPA on issues at federal properties, told Bloomberg Environment. “You’re training people to put fires out on aircraft carriers or other vessels. If you don’t put that fire out, everybody dies.”
But while PFAS chemicals might be good for firefighting, they’re bad for the Pentagon’s long-term finances.
Cleaning up PFAS contamination could cost the Defense Department approximately $2 billion, according to 2017 remarks from Maureen Sullivan, the Pentagon’s top official overseeing environmental issues on bases.
That’s slightly more than it spends each year on all other environmental contaminants, according to a 2017 report from the Government Accountability Office.
Lobbying Edge
Unlike a corporation facing the costs of its legacy pollution, the Pentagon has tremendous influence over the EPA’s regulatory process simply because it’s also a federal agency—and the largest one.
Even though the EPA is likely years away from finalizing a new drinking water standard for PFOA and PFOS, potential conflicts between the two agencies are already beginning to emerge.
The EPA has developed an interim set of guidelines for how to remove these chemicals out of water and sent them in August 2018 to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget for interagency review, typically the final step before federal policies go public (RIN:2050-ZA15).
However, these guidelines have stalled at OMB and multiple former EPA staffers told Bloomberg Environment the reason for the delay is likely the Pentagon’s objections.
Judith Enck, a former regional chief at the EPA, said the Pentagon obstructed efforts to deal with this problem even during the Obama administration.
She said the military sees itself as being able to outlast any particular agency or even presidency that opposes it.
“DOD fights EPA on everything and they are formidable because they don’t listen to anyone,” said Enck, a senior adviser at Bennington College’s Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development. “They treat the White House like holiday help.”
Both the Defense Department and the EPA declined to comment for this story, citing the ongoing interagency review.
War With the States
The EPA’s Feb. 14 action plan committed the agency to deciding before the end of the year whether to set a enforceable limit on the amount of PFOA and PFOS that can exist in water. Currently, the agency has only set a nonbinding advisory standard of 70 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOS.
This new regulation would apply to all water utilities across the country, and would also dictate the lengths a company or a federal agency must go to clean up a polluted water source.
In the absence of binding federal standards, several states have issued their own regulations that are often set at levels far below the EPA’s 70 parts per trillion recommendation.
The Pentagon has already shown that it’s willing to fight those efforts as well.
Both New Mexico and Michigan issued water quality violations to the Air Force late last year over PFAS contamination at Cannon and Wurtsmith bases, respectively. The Air Force formally contested these violations in both instances, even going as far as taking action in federal court against New Mexico.
Ultimate Weapon
Though the Pentagon is a formidable opponent, the EPA may have the ultimate weapon in its arsenal: the law.
Ridge Hall, a retired Superfund attorney who now works with the Chesapeake Legal Alliance, said that environmental cleanup law was written to give the EPA the final say in most of these types of interagency disputes—but not in all.
“EPA is the final referee,” Hall said. But “sometimes it’s conceivable that DOD, just through sheer muscle power in the federal government, wins out on that.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/epa-chemicals-rules-may-prompt-firefight-with-pentagon
-
EPA Denied Public’s Right to Know About Asbestos, Lawsuit Says (1)
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA denied the public’s right to know the extent of asbestos and asbestos-containing products being imported into the U.S., a coalition of health and environmental groups say in a lawsuit filed Feb. 18.
The groups want the Environmental Protection Agency’s to force companies to report their annual imports and uses of asbestos and asbestos containing-products.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco, comes after the EPA on Dec. 21 denied the group’s rulemaking petition asking for this requirement.
“If you don’t know where people are being exposed, how can you prevent their exposure?” Linda Reinstein, president and co-founder of the nonprofit Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, told Bloomberg Environment.
Reinstein said there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos, a known human carcinogen that causes asbestosis, lung cancer, mesothelioma, and other diseases.
The lawsuit seeks to compel the EPA to require importers, manufacturers, and processors of asbestos, asbestos-containing mixtures, and asbestos-containing products, also called “articles,” to submit a range of information to the agency.
Specifically, companies should report the amount of asbestos they import and use, the sites where these activities occur, how they use the mineral, and the resulting potential for exposure to asbestos by workers and members of the public, according to the lawsuit filed by the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, American Public Health Association, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, and Environmental Health Strategy Center.
Unknown Quantity
Three companies—Occidental Chemical Corp., Olin Corp. and Westlake Chemical Corp.—are known to import asbestos into the U.S. They bring in tons of asbestos annually to make chlorine and caustic soda, according to information the EPA has released.
In addition, “certain asbestos containing products can be imported into the U.S., but the amounts are not known,” the EPA said in a plan describing how it will evaluate asbestos risks.
Exposure for workers and others continue and contribute to deaths such as those reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Reinstein said. Between 2011 and 2015, some 16,420 people were newly diagnosed with mesothelioma resulting in 12,837 deaths, according to CDC information.
“We need to understand asbestos’ imports and uses to protect the public,” she said.
The court should take action because “asbestos presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human health and thereby meets the standard for judicial intervention,” the lawsuit said.
An EPA spokesman said the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
State’s Activity
Attorneys general in 14 states and the District of Columbia agreed that the EPA must collect information about the extent to which asbestos and products containing it are used in the U.S.
Although not party to this lawsuit, those attorneys general filed their own rulemaking petition to EPA Jan. 31, asking it to require that companies submit such information.
The EPA hasn’t issued a response to the states’ rulemaking petition.
The case is Asbestos Disease Awareness Org. v. EPA, N.D. Cal., No. 19-00871, 2/18/19.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/epa-denied-publics-right-to-know-about-asbestos-lawsuit-says-1
-
Carper Drops Objection On Wheeler's Nomination After EPA's Pledge On PFAS MCL
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
A top Senate Democrat is dropping one of several objections he had threatened to raise when the upper chamber considers Andrew Wheeler's nomination to be EPA chief later this month after the agency renewed its pledge that it “intends” to develop an enforceable drinking water standard for two of the most common perfluorinated substances.
“I ask my Republican colleagues to believe me when I say that I’m not interested in slowing down Mr. Wheeler’s nomination process for the sake of making a political statement or sticking it to the Administration,” Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), the top Democrat on the Senate environment committee, said in a Feb. 19 statement.
“I’m not interested in a delay for delay’s sake. With Mr. Wheeler’s nomination, we have a rare opportunity to extract meaningful policy concessions from EPA. This new commitment is proof of that winning strategy,” Carper said.
While Carper's statement suggests he will not raise objections on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) issues when Wheeler's nomination comes to the floor later this month for a procedural vote, he continues to raise concerns on several other issues that he had previously urged EPA to address.
As Wheeler's nomination “heads to the Senate floor for a cloture vote, Senator Carper will continue to urge EPA to reverse course and seize four additional bipartisan 'win-win' policy opportunities,” he said, including his past calls for EPA to withdraw its plan to kill the threshold finding for the Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule, support Senate ratification of the Kigali amendment on high-carbon refrigerants, cut a deal between automakers and California on fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards and finalize a ban on methylene chloride, a paint-stripping chemical.
While Carper and other Democrats lack the votes to block any nomination from proceeding, as many as five GOP senators are voicing “serious concerns” over reforms EPA is planning to make to the renewable fuel standard (RFS).
Carper's comments come in response to a Feb. 15 letter from EPA water chief Andrew Ross assuring the senator the agency “intends to establish a maximum contaminant level (MCL)” for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) -- two of the most prevalent PFAS -- under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
“To do so, the EPA is committed to following the MCL rulemaking process as established by [SDWA] -- a process that is designed to ensure public participation, transparencey, and the use of the best available science and other technical information,” Ross continues.
“By the end of this year, the EPA will propose a regulatory determination, which is the next step in the Safe Drinking Water Act process for establishing an MCL.”
The pledge reiterates remarks both Wheeler and Ross made on Feb. 14 when they unveiled the agency's action plan to address PFAS, with Wheeler telling reporters at a Philadelphia press conference that he has “every intention of setting” enforceable MCLs for PFOA and PFOS.
But the acting EPA chief did not rule out the possibility that EPA could elect not to set such a limit given the high legal bar the agency faces as it weighs whether to make an affirmative determination that such a standard is necessary.
Asked whether EPA could potentially choose not to set an MCL upon making the regulatory determination, Wheeler said the agency is “going through the regulatory process,” but that “we can't predetermine what the outcome will be.”
'Clear And Firm Commitment'
Carper initially criticized the Feb. 14 plan on the MCL issue, saying EPA took nearly a year “just to kick the can even further down the road.”
But the new assurances in Ross' letter were enough for Carper to see a “clear and firm commitment” from the agency that it will set enforceable drinking water standards for the two chemicals, Carper says in a Feb. 19 press release.
“This is long-awaited but welcome news by EPA,” he says in the release. “Again and again, I've asked Acting Administrator Wheeler to make a clear and firm commitment that EPA will set a drinking water standard, and it's about time he showed some urgency on this important issue. I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that EPA lives up to its commitment.”
Ross' letter responds to a Feb. 1 letter from a bipartisan group of 20 senators, including Carper, that urged Wheeler to develop enforceable MCLs for PFOA and PFOS and to take “immediate actions to protect the public from contamination from additional” PFAS, responding to media reports that EPA would not move forward with setting the standards after months of weighing the possibility.
In his press release, Carper adds that he will continue to press EPA to speed up other measures in its action plan to address the widespread contamination of this class of chemicals. The chemicals, which number in the thousands, have been linked to adverse health effects including certain cancers and ulcerative colitis and other conditions, sparking concern among communities as their discovery in community drinking water supplies has grown.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/carper-drops-objection-wheelers-nomination-after-epas-pledge-pfas-mcl
-
California Sets 'No Significant Risk Level' for Bromodichloroacetic Acid
Feb 19, 2019 | Chemical Watch
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has set a Proposition 65 "no significant risk level" (NSRL) of 0.95 micrograms per day for bromodichloroacetic acid.
The substance – a water-disinfectant byproduct – was listed as a carcinogen under Prop 65 effective 29 July 2016.
The California law requires manufacturers and retailers to warn workers and consumers exposed to chemicals listed under the scheme. An NSRL, however, establishes a ‘safe harbour’ level, below which a Prop 65 warning is not required.
The safe harbour level takes effect on 1 April.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74354/california-sets-no-significant-risk-level-for-bromodichloroacetic-acid
-
March 21 Meeting to Explore Health, Environmental Issues of Synthetic Chemicals
Feb 19, 2019 | Penn State News
For decades, a group of synthetic chemicals called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has been used in numerous industrial and consumer products, including nonstick cookware, water-repellent materials, stain- and oil-resistant fabrics, firefighting foams and even some cosmetics. Recently, multiple federal agencies have been investigating PFAS and their potential links to health problems. In 2018, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf announced that a PFAS task force would be created.
The Institutes of Energy and the Environment (IEE), in collaboration with the Center for Security Research and Education (CSRE), will host a meeting to discuss PFAS and explore how Penn State can help address this critical issue. In addition, the meeting will be an opportunity to determine who at Penn State is working on PFAS, in order to coordinate for potential future grant calls.
The meeting will be held at 2 p.m. on March 21 in 233 HUB-Robeson Center. Individuals can attend in person or stream the meeting online via Zoom.
Registration is requested to help with planning.
“Penn State is uniquely poised given the width and depth of researchers all across the Commonwealth working on a range of PFAS topics,” said Lara Fowler, IEE’s assistant director for outreach and engagement. “People have work already underway. The challenge now is to build collaborations internally and help support critical state and national needs.”
According to Fowler, Penn State has more than 40 researchers working on some aspect of detection, monitoring, remediation and health impacts of PFAS.
“Pennsylvania is one of the most affected states by PFAS in water, yet we are just learning how widespread of an issue this is, along with the potential health impacts,” Fowler said.
The challenge with PFAS is that the chemicals can transfer to water, soil and air during production or use. The chemicals do not breakdown, and they have been found in people, animals and food products throughout the world.
“PFAS is a national health security concern that requires all levels of government, policymakers, legislatures, academia, private industry and advocacy groups to collaborate to mitigate and prevent any possible health effects associated with PFAS in more than 30 communities across the United States,” said Herbert Wolfe, the CSRE’s associate director.
-
MacArthur Airport to Undergo Environmental Study
Feb 19, 2019 | Newsday
By Antonio Planas
An environmental consultant will study the history of Long Island MacArthur Airport's use of a chemical found in firefighting foam suspected as the source of contamination at a nearby well in Bohemia.
Islip councilors voted unanimously on Feb. 12 to enter into contract with Arcadis Inc., based in Melville, for $353,500 to determine when and where the chemical in the firefighting foam was used, airport Commissioner Shelley LaRose-Arken said.
State officials early last year said the Ronkonkoma airport is a possible Superfund site because the compound could have contaminated drinking water supplies after a well on Church Street, about 2 miles from the airport, tested above federal health advisory levels. The well was found unsafe one out of the seven times it was tested by the Suffolk County Water Authority in 2016, officials said.
Islip Town, which owns MacArthur, is complying with a DEC order to investigate the soil, groundwater and other site conditions. The investigation will determine whether the airport should be added to the state Superfund list, a designation that would require further investigation and creation of a remediation plan if contamination is found, officials said.
The firefighting foam hasn’t been used at MacArthur since 2000, officials said.
“They’ll look at every facility, every square inch of the property,” LaRose-Arken said. “We’re just at step one. … The town and airport feel that it’s important because it’s clearly a federal health concern.”
Islip, state DEC and Arcadis will work together closely, LaRose-Arken said. DEC officials will oversee the investigation, they said.
Representatives of Arcadis could not be reached for comment.Get the Breaking News newsletter!
LaRose-Arken said Arcadis will try to answer questions, such as "Are there any hangars on the property that have foam systems? And were those foam systems installed before or after the year 2000, and if they were installed, were those foam systems ever used?”
The contaminant detected at the well is a compound known as perfluorooctane sulfonate, or PFOS, state officials said. The test in 2016 detected a level of 95 parts per trillion, higher than the 70 parts per trillion that is considered safe under federal standards, officials said.
The well was deemed safe after it was treated with carbon, state officials said. The contaminant, which can be especially harmful for unborn and breast-fed babies, has not been found in the public water supply, experts say.
In early 2016, New York listed PFOS and a related compound known as PFOA as hazardous substances, which allows the state to regulate their use and go after polluters.
Arcadis’ contract will be paid for by airport surplus revenue, LaRose-Arken said.
https://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/macarthur-airport-contamination-1.27479621
-
Children Carry Evidence of Toxins from Home Flooring and Furniture
Feb 19, 2019 | Lab Manager
By Geoffrey Kabat
Children living in homes with all vinyl flooring or flame-retardant chemicals in the sofa have significantly higher concentrations of potentially harmful semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) in their blood or urine than children from homes where these materials are not present, according to a new Duke University-led study.
The researchers presented their findings Sunday, Feb. 17 at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C.
They found that children living in homes where the sofa in the main living area contained flame-retardant polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in its foam had a six-fold higher concentration of PBDEs in their blood serum.
Exposure to PBDEs has been linked in laboratory tests to neurodevelopmental delays, obesity, endocrine and thyroid disruption, cancer, and other diseases.
Children from homes that had vinyl flooring in all areas were found to have concentrations of benzyl butyl phthalate metabolite in their urine that were 15 times higher than those in children living with no vinyl flooring.
Benzyl butyl phthalate has been linked to respiratory disorders, skin irritations, multiple myeolma, and reproductive disorders.
"SVOCs are widely used in electronics, furniture, and building materials and can be detected in nearly all indoor environments," said Heather Stapleton, an environmental chemist at Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment, who led the research. "Human exposure to them is widespread, particularly for young children who spend most of their time indoors and have greater exposure to chemicals found in household dust."
"Nonetheless, there has been little research on the relative contribution of specific products and materials to children's overall exposure to SVOCs," she noted.
To address that gap, in 2014 Stapleton and colleagues from Duke, the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, and Boston University began a three-year study of in-home exposures to SVOCs among 203 children from 190 families.
"Our primary goal was to investigate links between specific products and children's exposures, and to determine how the exposure happened—was it through breathing, skin contact, or inadvertent dust inhalation," Stapleton said.
To that end, the team analyzed samples of indoor air, indoor dust and foam collected from furniture in each of the children's homes, along with a handwipe sample, urine, and blood from each child.
"We quantified 44 biomarkers of exposure to phthalates, organophosphate esters, brominated flame retardants, parabens, phenols, antibacterial agents and perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)," Stapleton said.
Stapleton presented her team's findings at AAAS as part of the scientific session, "Homes at the Center of Chemical Exposure: Uniting Chemists, Engineers and Health Scientists."
She conducted the study with Kate Hoffman, assistant research professor in environmental sciences and policy; research assistant Emina Hodzic; and PhD students Jessica Levasseur, Stephanie Hammel, and Allison Phillips, all of Duke.
https://www.labmanager.com/news/2019/02/children-carry-evidence-of-toxins-from-home-flooring-and-furniture#.XGw26ehKg2w
-
Senate Passes Pipeline Tampering Bill
Feb 19, 2019 | AP (E&E - Greenwire)
North Dakota's Senate has passed a bill that better defines the legal consequences for people who tamper with pipelines and any groups that help them.
The measure passed 42-3 on Friday.
Republican state Sen. Janne Myrdal sponsored the bill, which was inspired by environmental activists who turned an oil pipeline valve in her northeast North Dakota district in 2016.
The legislation says it's illegal to damage energy facilities and other critical infrastructure facilities. It also would increase fines on organizations that conspire with individuals who tamper with infrastructure.
The bill wouldn't prevent the "lawful assembly and peaceful and orderly petition for the redress of grievances, including a labor dispute between an employer and its employee."
The measure now goes to the House for consideration.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/02/19/stories/1060121367
-
Trump EPA Pick Andrew Wheeler Gets Caught Between Oil and Corn Interests
Feb 19, 2019 | Fortune
By Erik Sherman
Andrew Wheeler, acting administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, is caught between Big Oil and Big Corn. That could affect his Senate confirmation hearing.
The fracas started in December 2018 when EPA staff suggested the agency reduce amounts of ethanol, typically produced by processing corn, that oil companies had to blend into fuel from the current 15 billion gallons to 14.3 billion, Bloomberg reported.
Wheeler reportedly said no because a new agency proposal could remove a ban on summer sales of E15 fuel, which is 85% gasoline and 15% ethanol. Currently, the mix is prohibited for sale from June 1 to September 15 because of concerns that it can increase smog. Many gasoline retailers don’t want to change warning labels and pumps twice a year and so have steered clear of the blend.
Lifting the ban would likely increase the availability of E15, which would mean a boost in ethanol sales and, therefore, more revenue for corn growers.
The oil industry doesn’t like ethanol mandates because it means selling less gasoline and forces the oil companies to spend money on ethanol, according to Reuters.
Corn growers had been angry with former EPA head Scott Pruitt, who resigned in July 2018, when the agency had increased the number of ethanol waivers it gave to smaller refineries, lowering the amount of ethanol sold and, therefore, reduced sales of corn.
Five senators from oil-producing states had sent a letter on February 11 to Wheeler, asking about biofuel policies. The group, let by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), had said that his position could influencer their votes on his nomination, expected at the end of February.
Wheeler already has the reputation of resisting climate change initiatives. His confirmation needs 60 senators in favor to avoid the chance of being blocked. A loss of support from five Republicans would make hitting that number more difficult.
http://fortune.com/2019/02/19/oil-corn-andrew-wheeler-epa/
-
For the Sake of American Energy, It's Time to End the Trade War
Feb 19, 2019 | Real Clear Energy
By Robert L. Bradley Jr.
This week, Chinese President Xi Jinping is again meeting with senior Trump administration officials in Beijing, where they'll attempt to defuse trade tensions between the world's two largest economies. If they fail, the United States will raise tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods starting March 1.
The trade war has taken a toll on many sectors of the U.S. economy. That's particularly true for the energy industry. In September, the Chinese put a 10 percent tariff on U.S. liquefied natural gas. As a result, LNG shipments to China have plummeted. While 25 U.S. LNG vessels reached China during the last six months of 2017, only six did during the same period last year.
With U.S. natural gas production surging thanks to fracking, there's more fuel than ever before available for export. And China is poised to be the American LNG industry's best customer. But unless President Trump ends his trade war, he'll squander this business opportunity and the economic benefits it would create for everyday workers.
China consumes more energy and emits more greenhouse gases than nearly every other country. Eager to reduce its use of coal and end the burning of wood and dung in living spaces, the country is actively looking for alternative ways to power its factories and homes. In 2016, China's poor air quality caused over 1 million premature deaths, according to a study from the World Health Organization.
Regarding renewables, China recently decided to only consider new solar and wind projects that can compete with coal on price. The Chinese are also concerned that renewables projects could destabilize their energy grid.
China found an answer to its energy problem in natural gas -- which is more reliable and efficient than renewables, but emits half as much carbon dioxide as coal. "LNG shipments allow the environmental benefits of natural gas to be spread around the world and can help reduce global greenhouse gas emissions," according to a report by energy company PACE Global.
But the country doesn't get enough natural gas via domestic production or pipeline imports to meet demand.
That's where U.S. LNG comes in. Our nation's energy companies are producing nearly 3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas each month, more than any other nation. And we're the sixth largest exporter of liquefied natural gas. The Energy Information Administration projects America will more than double its LNG export capacity by the end of 2019 and could become the top natural gas exporter as early as 2022.
In other words, America is well-positioned to sell China the LNG it needs. But the trade war is complicating things. Last year, the number of U.S. liquefied natural gas vessels that traveled to China fell by around 20 percent compared to 2017.
If the trade war continues, other LNG suppliers like Qatar and Russia will step up to take America's place. Earlier this fall, PetroChina, a subsidiary of state-owned China National Petroleum Corporation, signed a deal with Qatar to purchase 3.4 million tons of LNG annually through 2040 -- the biggest supply deal PetroChina has ever made.
And the same month China implemented tariffs on U.S. LNG, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin dined over Russian crepes and discussed possible joint natural gas projects.
A healthy trade relationship with China would greatly benefit the U.S. economy. If President Trump truly wants to achieve energy dominance and create jobs for American workers, he should pivot east and extend an open hand to China. Both nations will get a lot in return.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2019/02/19/for_the_sake_of_american_energy_its_time_to_end_the_trade_war__110395.html
-
Firms Fracked without Permits, Greens Charge
Feb 19, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A Western environmental group formally threatened seven oil and gas companies with Clean Air Act lawsuits today, alleging they launched fracking operations in Colorado's Front Range without first getting the required permits.
The industry "is willfully violating our clean air laws on a massive scale," Jeremy Nichols of WildEarth Guardians said in a news release announcing the notice-of-intent-to-sue letters alleging the seven firms constructed "major sources" of ozone-forming pollution in the Front Range area before having obtained the nonattainment New Source Review permits. The targeted firms include Noble Energy Inc., which in 2015 reached a $73 million settlement with the federal government over an earlier round of alleged violations at its Colorado operations (Greenwire, April 22, 2015).
Spokespersons for the Houston-based firm did not immediately respond to phone and email messages this morning requesting comment.
The six other companies targeted with letters are Extraction Oil & Gas Inc., Crestone Peak Resources LLC, Great Western Operating Co., Mallard Exploration LLC, PDC Energy Inc. and Bonanza Creek Energy Inc. The Clean Air Act requires a 60-day notice period before the suits can be filed. WildEarth Guardians intends to pursue litigation if the companies don't come into compliance, Nichols, the group's climate and energy program director, said in an email.
Ozone, a lung irritant that is the main ingredient in smog, is spawned by the reaction of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in sunlight. EPA deems the fast-growing Denver-Boulder area, home to more than 3 million people, in nonattainment for both its 2008 ground-level ozone standard of 75 parts per billion and its 2015 standard of 70 ppb.
On Friday, the agency held a public hearing on a package of proposals that includes giving Colorado regulators another year to meet the 2008 standard before downgrading the area's compliance status from "moderate" nonattainment to "serious" nonattainment.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/02/19/stories/1060121403
-
Oil, Biofuels Groups Slated To Raise Competing Arguments Over 2018 RFS
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Oil and biofuels industry groups are slated to raise competing arguments over alleged flaws in EPA’s 2018 renewable fuel standard (RFS) at Feb. 20 oral arguments over the rule, and the agency’s issuance of several waivers to small refiners from having to meet the RFS’ fuel production mandates has emerged as a key issue.
At argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, et al. v. EPA, Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson, David Tatel and Thomas Griffith will hear the wide-ranging attacks on the 2018 RFS. The rule sets the annual targets EPA requires for renewable and alternative fuels that have lower lifecycle greenhouse gases than conventional gasoline.
The RFS typically pits biofuel producers seeking higher goals for blending such fuels into the supply system against refiners and oil producers seeking to lower volumes or to scrap the RFS outright.
However, the refining sector is also split over whether EPA should move the program’s compliance “obligation” away from refiners and importers to place it on fuel blenders.
Environmental groups, meanwhile, increasingly oppose the RFS as harmful to the environment, doubting the program’s ability to reduce greenhouse gases as intended, and citing a host of negative impacts including air and water pollution and species habitat loss when land is converted for crop production for biofuels.
At oral argument, the National Biodiesel Board (NBB) will reiterate claims from its briefs arguing that EPA set biodiesel volumes for 2018 and also 2019 too low in its Nov. 30, 2017, rule that set biofuel volumes for 2018 and set a separate biodiesel volume for 2019. One argument NBB makes is that EPA failed to compensate for blending volume lost to small refiner waivers when setting its mandates.
The waivers are available for refiners processing up to 75,000 barrels per day of crude oil, if they can demonstrate “disproportionate economic hardship.” EPA under former Administrator Scott Pruitt issued such waivers at a much higher rate than the Obama EPA, but they have slowed under acting agency chief Andrew Wheeler.
NBB argues EPA must account for small refiner waivers in its RFS blending volumes, but EPA counters that it cannot predict the waived volumes and has no legal obligation to preemptively compensate for them.
Meanwhile, refiners, represented by AFPM, will back EPA on this point but argue that the RFS volumes are set unrealistically high, and must be reduced. The agency is still systematically overestimating future biofuels production in order to set volumes too high, and EPA should exercise its waiver authority to avoid “severe economic harm” they claim is caused to refiners by RFS compliance mandates, they say. Again, EPA rejects the claim.
Refiners’ Arguments
Refiners and their retail sector allies in the suit will also reprise arguments from prior rounds of litigation that EPA must shift the RFS’ “point of obligation” from refiners to fuel blenders. In this suit, refiners focus on the alleged negative impact to small, independent fuel retailers of the obligation of refiners to comply by surrendering RFS credits known as renewable identification numbers (RINs) to EPA sufficient to cover their blending obligations.
Large, integrated oil companies that refine, blend and sell their own fuels can generate their own RINs, but merchant refiners lacking blending capacity must purchase RINs at market prices, putting the merchant refiners, and also independent fuel retailers, at a competitive disadvantage, AFPM says.
The current RFS structure is “devastating” to small and mid-sized fuel retailers, benefitting large oil companies that “monopolize blending and thus are able to reap windfall profits by selling RINs to obligated parties,” AFPM and the Small Retailers Coalition said in joint briefing in the suit.
The small retailers say EPA violated the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act by failing to conduct a “regulatory flexibility analysis” of its 2018 RFS volumes rule, but EPA rejects this argument. The agency has long resisted shifting the obligation point, and larger oil companies and the biofuels sector back this view.
Environmentalists’ Claims
Meanwhile, environmentalists argue that EPA violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to consult the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service over likely impacts of the RFS on protected animal species. Environmentalists claim a waiver to reduce biofuel volume is required to avoid serious harm to the environment.
But EPA counters that environmentalists may not now broadly challenge the RFS because their suit comes years too late to meet Clean Air Act deadlines to sue. The air law "precludes programmatic challenges to an RFS program," because the RFS has been in existence since 2005, and environmentalists failed to sue over the original regulations governing the program, EPA said in briefing in the case.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/oil-biofuels-groups-slated-raise-competing-arguments-over-2018-rfs
-
Consumer Push for Sustainability Masks Massive Growth in Plastic Demand
Feb 19, 2019 | S&P Global Platts
By Philip Reeder
Barely a week goes by without another headline decrying the use of plastics and plastic packaging in Europe. Plastics are clogging up our oceans, overflowing our landfill sites and even finding their way into our food.
But as the world wakes up to the environmental damage caused by plastic waste and pollution, it may come as a surprise to learn that the industry is looking to dramatically ramp up production, not slow it down.
The International Energy Agency now forecasts demand for petrochemical feedstocks – the specific group of refined oil and gas products used to produce plastics – to grow by nearly 5 million barrels per day to 2040. Meanwhile, the petrochemicals sector itself is now being positioned as the largest driver of global oil consumption at more than a third of the growth in oil demand to 2030, and nearly half to 2050.
In the US, ready access to low-cost unconventional oil reserves has already led to the investment of more than $200 billion in new chemical manufacturing facilities since 2010, while in Europe new investments are counting on exports of US chemicals to produce even more plastics for consumption worldwide. Coal and methanol to olefins projects in China are driving self-sufficient plastics production in East Asia. At the same time a wave of new capacity additions for ethylene – one of the major building blocks of plastics production – in South Korea, India and the Middle East are being met by an average global demand growth year on year of 3.4% from 2018 to 2028 according to S&P Global Platts Analytics.
As the public backlash against plastics intensifies, however, the industry is being forced to manage a difficult double act: meet growing demand while attempting to transition from a single-use economy to true sustainability.
Media spotlight drives policy
Reducing our reliance on single-use plastic and boosting recycling rates is certainly getting lots of attention in the media at the moment and that is a good thing. The 2017 BBC documentary Blue Planet II may have been a turning point, bringing home the scale of the damage plastics are doing to the world’s oceans. The shift in opinion against plastics has been as decisive as it has been central to recent decisions taken to curb their usage.
The European Commission is now moving aggressively to implement stricter recycling measures, the UK is proposing a ban on plastic straws and cotton buds as part of a 25-year plan to eliminate plastic waste, and India is committed to doing the same, only by 2022. Elsewhere, brand-owners such as Coca-Cola, Evian, Unilever and Nestle have committed to higher standards of product design and recycling content targets, and in April last year, supermarkets across the UK signed up to a ‘plastics pact’ which set targets to use 30% recycled material in all plastic packaging.
Yet while efforts are clearly being made to reduce the production of the world’s most harmful plastics, the focus until now has been almost entirely centred on single-use plastics. Legislation to restrict disposable plastic is an obvious win for legislators in Europe, representing a kind of low-hanging fruit to appease both consumers and voters, but the fact is these efforts are likely to do little to offset the massive underlying growth of chemical products globally. The truth is that plastics and the petrochemicals that are used to produce them are an integral part of modern society, and that is not going to change any time soon.
Plastic is everywhere
Chemicals derived from oil and gases are used in just about everything. Besides the manufacture of plastic straws, cotton buds, shopping bags and food packaging, they are used in digital devices, medical equipment and clothing. Synthetic rubber derived from the petrochemical butadiene is used in tires for cars, trucks and bicycles. Polypropylene – a polymer derived from cracking the hydrocarbon chains of distilled fractions of oil and then connecting the by-products – is used to keep tea bags from falling apart.
Beyond even tea bags, however, the attractiveness of plastics also extends to investments in clean energy infrastructure. Silicone is used in solar cells and thermoplastic foams are needed to make wind turbine blades lighter and more durable. Plastics also compose many of the materials needed for the light-weighting of electric vehicles –a fleet expected to number 280 million in 2040, according to S&P Global Platts Analytics.
To achieve the grand challenge of reducing our global carbon footprint, plastics will continue playing a crucial role in leading the transition away from fossil fuels to low-emission, low-cost alternatives.
Investment and innovation
Given the vital role plastics are expected to play in meeting the needs of future economies, major oil and gas companies have already begun moving to integrate downstream assets within their operations. For oil companies with deep pockets, the focus on major downstream initiatives in petrochemicals is both an effort to diversify portfolios and also a hedge against future reductions in road transportation fuels as the world moves to electric powered vehicles.
The recent acquisition by Saudi Aramco of Saudi Basic Industries Corp., the Middle East’s largest producer of plastics and chemicals, is one of many examples of oil giants that now perceive chemicals to be one of the future growth engines of the economy. Last year the company announced its latest investment will be the building of a crude-to-chemicals complex with a capacity to process 400,000 b/d of crude to produce 9 million mt per year of various petrochemicals. News quickly followed that Aramco will be investing $100 billion in chemicals over the next decade and will use 70% of its crude oil in petrochemical production.
Almost paling by comparison then, was news last month of the launch of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, a partnership of companies committed to spending $1 billion to keep plastic waste out of the environment. Despite grabbing headlines, the pact seems unlikely to tackle the production problem at its source. The signatories in the alliance include Shell and Exxon, companies that are actively investing many more billions building integrated chemical production plants worldwide. With global production of more than 300 million metric tons of plastic each year and massive growth expected worldwide, sustainability concerns are unlikely to temper plastics demand.
However, many companies are beginning to see the economic potential in building infrastructure for plastics disposal and re-use. In 2017, furniture giant IKEA acquired a 15% stake in a Dutch polypropylene and high density polyethylene (HDPE) recycling plant. Petrochemical giant Borealis acquired German recycler mtm plastics in 2016 and Austrian recycler Ecoplast in 2018. Add to that list the purchase last summer of French recycler Sorepla by polyethylene terephthalate (PET) producer Indorama.
There are also signs that oil and gas companies are strengthening their links with recycling players, with the signing of an agreement in August last year between oil and gas major MOL and German recycler APK to support completion of the latter’s ‘Newcycling’ plant which will enable recycling of multi-layer packaging.
As the field of waste management evolves, the future of the industry may even lie in a new generation of plastic to fuel (PTF) conversion technologies, aimed at recovering synthetic crude oil from plastic waste. PTF may well be the first step in a move to a truly circular economy, irrespective of the massive increase in plastics demand that recent headlines seem to have missed.
https://blogs.platts.com/2019/02/19/consumer-push-sustainability-masks-growth-plastics-demand/
-
Congress Passes, President Trump Signs 15-Month CFATS Extension
Feb 19, 2019 | Bulk Transporter
On January 18, the day the program was slated to expire, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law a 15-month extension of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS).
The extension, until April 2020, gives Congress more time to bring new committee members and leadership up to speed on CFATS issues while giving regulated industry certainty that the program will continue for the near term without any changes.
Related: ILTA, others laud Congressional extension of CFATS program
The extension also gives industry the opportunity to continue to work to improve the CFATS program in a longer-term reauthorization. For instance, the International Liquid Terminals Association (ILTA) says it will keep up its advocacy to encourage Congress to adopt an amendment to treat gasoline and other fuels mixtures appropriately in the regulations.
https://www.bulktransporter.com/regulations/congress-passes-president-trump-signs-15-month-cfats-extension
-
USDOT Issues Final Rule Requiring Rail Oil-Spill Response Plans
Feb 19, 2019 | Progressive Railroading
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) last week issued a final rule requiring railroads to develop comprehensive oil-spill response plans and share information about high-hazard flammable train operations with state and tribal governments.
USDOT's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), in consultation with the Federal Railroad Administration, issued the rule to improve oil-spill response readiness and mitigate effects of rail accidents and incidents involving oil and other high-hazard flammable trains.
"This final rule is necessary due to expansion in U.S. energy production having led to significant challenges for the country's transportation system," according to PHMSA's executive summary.
PHMSA first proposed the rule in July 2016. The specifics are available here.
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/USDOT-issues-final-rule-requiring-rail-oil-spill-response-plans--56792
-
FRA Publishes End-Of-2018 Positive Train Control Data
Feb 19, 2019 | Roads & Bridges
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recently released a status update regarding railroads’ self-reported progress toward full implementation of positive train control (PTC) systems as of the end of 2018.
All required railroads either met the December 31, 2018, deadlinefor fully implementing PTC systems, or submitted requests demonstrating they met or exceeded the statutory criteria for an alternative schedule which would permit up to two additional years to complete full implementation.
Based upon the latest self-reported data from the end of last year, four railroads have fully implemented PTC systems on their required main lines, while the rest subject to PTC mandate satisfied the six statutory criteria necessary to qualify for an extension. Notably, Quarter 4 data also show PTC systems are in operation on almost 46,000 of the nearly 58,000 route miles where the technology systems must be deployed, and PTC systems are in revenue service demonstration on an additional 288 route miles.
By the end of 2018, all necessary PTC system hardware had been installed, radio spectrum acquired, employees trained, and testing initiated. The key remaining steps for full implementation include conducting revenue service demonstration (advanced testing on the general rail system), submitting a PTC Safety Plan and obtaining PTC System Certification from FRA, achieving interoperability between host railroads and tenant railroads, and activating the PTC system so it governs all operations on the required main lines.
As of December 31, 2018, host railroads’ operations are governed by a PTC system on 83% of the freight railroad route miles subject to the mandate and 30% of the required passenger railroad route miles. Of approximately 233 host-tenant railroad relationships, 16% have reportedly achieved PTC system interoperability as of the end of last year, which means the locomotives of a host railroad and a tenant railroad operating on the same main line can communicate with and respond to the PTC system, including uninterrupted movements over property boundaries. In addition, FRA has conditionally certified 12 host railroads’ PTC systems, based on their PTC Safety Plans; two PTC Safety Plans are currently under review; and 23 additional PTC Safety Plans must be submitted by June 2020.
https://www.roadsbridges.com/fra-publishes-end-2018-positive-train-control-data
-
FRA Report: All Railroads Met Statutory PTC Requirements by 2018's End
Feb 19, 2019 | Progressive Railroading
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) late last week released a status update regarding railroads' self-reported progress toward implementing positive train control (PTC) by 2018's end.
All 41 railroads either met the end-of-2018 statutory deadline for full implementation or submitted requests for an extension up to two additional years by demonstrating they met or exceeded certain criteria for an alternative schedule, such as by installing all wayside systems and training all employees, the status report shows.
As of Dec. 31, 2018, the following four railroads had implemented PTC systems on their required mainlines: the North County Transit District, Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp., Portland & Western Railroad and Southern California Regional Railroad Authority (Metrolink). All other railroads subject to the mandate satisfied the six statutory criteria necessary to qualify for an extension, FRA officials said in a press release.
"Notably, fourth-quarter data also shows PTC systems are in operation on almost 46,000 of the nearly 58,000 route miles where the technology systems must be deployed, and PTC systems are in revenue service demonstration on an additional 288 route miles," they said.
By 2018's end, all necessary PTC system hardware had been installed, radio spectrum was acquired, employees were trained and testing was initiated. The key remaining steps for full implementation include conducting revenue service demonstrations, submitting a PTC safety plan, obtaining system certification from FRA, achieving interoperability and activating the systems, the status report states.
As of Dec. 31, 33 railroads had submitted a written notification formally requesting the FRA's review and approval of an alternative schedule and sequence, and as of Feb. 11, 25 of the requests had been approved.
"PTC is the most significant and complex infrastructure investment America's railroads have ever undertaken," said FRA Administrator Ronald Batory. "FRA will continue to work with a sense of urgency to ensure all railroads, particularly commuter railroads, remain focused and vigilant in satisfying key deadlines ahead."
The report also shows that as of 2018's end, host railroads' operations are governed by a PTC system on 83 percent of all freight railroad route miles subject to the mandate, and 30 percent of the required passenger railroad route miles. The FRA has conditionally certified 12 host railroads' PTC systems, based on their safety plans, and two safety plans are under review. Twenty-three additional plans must be submitted by June 2020.https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ptc/news/FRA-report-All-railroads-met-statutory-PTC-requirements-by-2018s-end--56791
-
Ewire: White House Says Deregulation 'Top of the List'
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
With the White House increasingly focused on policies it can enact without the support of a divided Congress, top Trump administration officials say they are redoubling their focus on deregulation -- including rolling back a suite of Obama EPA climate and environmental rules.
“We knew there was one thing we could do without legislation,” one senior White House official tells Axios. When acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney helps President Donald Trump assess his Cabinet's performance, the source says, “Dereg is going to be top of the list.”
While such reports could signal that the administration is mulling additional environmental rollbacks, they might also underscore a focus on completing the many efforts that have not yet been finalized, including signature measures to weaken greenhouse gas limits on power plants and narrow the scope of the Clean Water Act.
Be sure to check out this great in-depth report from Inside EPA's Dawn Reeves, who looked at whether EPA officials may face additional pressure for more rollbacks in the coming months, to offset the administration's potential willingness to embark on a pro-regulation agenda in areas such as technology and trade.
Myron Ebell, who served as Trump’s EPA transition chief before returning to the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute, expects EPA to be tasked with more deregulatory work, though he is unsure whether it will be to compensate for rules elsewhere.
He notes that two senior White House officials recently said the administration is “just getting started” on its deregulatory agenda.
“Of course, it is much easier to say you are just getting started than to actually take steps two, three, four and five, so I don’t know how seriously to take those comments. But I have heard them,” Ebell adds.
Others question whether EPA has the capacity for more deregulatory actions, given the large number of major rules that remain in the proposal stage and must be defended in court.
“You can’t get any more deregulatory than they’ve already gotten,” says David Bookbinder, chief counsel for the center-right think tank Niskanen Center. “They’re scrapping environmental rules left, right and center as quickly as they can, and you know they’re just going to continue.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ewire-white-house-says-deregulation-top-list
-
Summer 2019: Climate Change Will Bring Strong Storms and Smog
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eric Roston
Air pollution is the sixth biggest killer worldwide—more than alcohol use, kidney failure or too much salt. The cause, as we all know, is the burning of fossil fuels, which generates soot and other airborne particles that hang in the atmosphere.
In a new example of the vicious cycles spun up by climate change, research from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology suggests for the first time that pollution is lingering longer over cities and summer storms are becoming more powerful.
When it comes to the global warming crisis, rising seas, catastrophic flooding, devastating heatwaves and unprecedented hurricanes get all the press. The new study reveals how even the more mundane aspects of weather are being affected by man-made damage in ways likely to become—if they haven’t already—damaging to people and property.
“You can connect observations that people are making on short timescales about weather phenomena to changes in the mean state of the climate,” said lead author Charles Gertler, a graduate student in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences. “In plainer speech, it’s climate change and its fingerprint on weather events.”
The problem has to do with how the atmosphere’s changing heat structure, which is directly related to global warming, drives massive weather systems in regions where most people live. High in the atmosphere, these “extratropical cyclones” are powered by the mix of warm and cool air, and are the force behind blizzards, nor’easters, and everyday thunderstorms. In cities, their winds typically blow away air pollution after a few, smog-filled summer days. In the south, they keep powerful storms moving along. But that has been changing.
While climate change has intensified hurricanes and made seas rise, the circulation of these huge weather systems has been weakening. The result is cities swathed for days in pollution and whole regions more vulnerable to sudden, torrential storms.
“Summertime weather isn’t ventilating American cities at the rate that it did in the past,” Gertler said.
Extratropical cyclones live off the temperature difference between southern and northern latitudes. As the Arctic warms, which it’s doing twice as fast as the global average, that difference is shrinking, and gradually restructuring weather in the hemisphere.
The study published this week in the peer-reviewed journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, also states that these weaker extratropical cyclones may be contributing to longer heat waves, too. The study is based on temperature and precipitation data going back to 1979, the beginning of satellite monitoring.
The energy available to these systems has declined 6 percent during the hot months of June, July, and August, which is a rate “near the extreme end of what different climate models simulate for recent decades,” the authors write.
The researchers found that the cyclones are pushing available energy to the storms in their extremities. The amount of energy available to thunderstorms is “increasing at a pretty significant rate,” or 13 percent, Gertler said, potentially making them stronger. That change is coupled with additional moisture in the atmosphere, and is leading to more rainfall from short, intense bursts.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/summer-2019-climate-change-will-bring-strong-storms-and-smog
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested