Preview Newsletter
ACC PM
-
(ACC Mentioned) Trade Bodies Fight Oregon Bill
Mar 4, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Geraint Roberts
Trade bodies representing a range of sectors, including chemicals, told an Oregon legislative committee on Monday that a bill which would require manufacturers to disclose the presence of priority chemicals in their products, and, in some cases, substitute chemicals with alternatives, is unnecessary and would place a major burden on companies. -
Let's Protect All Kids from Toxic Chemicals—Not Just Some!
Mar 4, 2015 | Insight News
By Kathleen Schuler, Dr. Rose Brewer and Senator Bobby Joe Champion
The lack of effective policies to regulate the use of chemicals in everyday consumer products impacts everyone's health. -
Identifying Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Using ToxCast and Authoritative Lists
Mar 4, 2015 | NRDC Switchboard
By Kristi Pullen
We are constantly awash in a sea of chemicals. -
US EPA to Add More Substances to ChemView Portal
Mar 4, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Dinesh Kumar
The US EPA will continue its efforts to increase access to chemicals data, by adding substances and data to its ChemView portal, according to the director of its office of pollution prevention and toxics, Wendy Cleland-Hamnett. -
US FDA Approves PFOA-Free Additive for Food Packaging
Mar 4, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The US Food and Drug Administration has approved an additive for use in paper and board food packaging, which the manufacturer describes as “PFOA-free”. -
Bill Seeks To Protect Firefighters From Chemicals Linked To Cancer
Mar 4, 2015 | CBS Minnesota
By Liz Collin
A bill to better protect Minnesota’s firefighters from an invisible danger has been introduced at the state Capitol. The -
House Dem: Chemical Agency ‘Off the Rails’
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee declared Wednesday that the Chemical Safety Board (CSB) has “gone off the rails,” citing a number of management issues. -
Senate Moves Up Keystone Veto Override Vote to Wednesday
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - Floor Action
By Jordain Carney
The Senate will take a final vote on whether to override President Obama's veto of legislation authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline on Wednesday, a day sooner than expected. -
Veto Override Vote This Afternoon
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Manuel Quiñones
The Senate is speeding up the process of trying to override President Obama's veto of legislation to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada. -
McConnell Urges Dems to Override Obama's Veto on Keystone Pipeline
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Laura Barron-Lopez
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pressed Democrats on Wednesday to join Republicans in voting to override President Obama's veto of legislation authorizing the Keystone XL oil pipeline. -
McConnell to States: Don't Comply with EPA Climate Rule
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Laura Barron-Lopez
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is urging state officials not to comply with the Obama administration's signature climate rule. -
McConnell to States: Don't Comply with EPA's Clean Power Plan
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
The Senate's top Republican waded into state regulatory policy today, urging state officials in an newspaper op-ed to not let themselves be "bullied" into complying with U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan. -
EPA Responds to McConnell 'Just Say No' Campaign
Mar 4, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Erica Martinson
EPA has been working with states on its Clean Power Plan and will continue to do so, despite calls in an opinion piece today by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for states to reject the regulations, agency officials said today. -
Ky. Regulators Walk Tightrope on Clean Power Plan
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
Kentucky regulators say they've figured out how they might write an implementation plan for the U.S. EPA Clean Power Plan without violating a state law that severely limits their options. -
Shaheen Expects to Reintroduce Efficiency Bill in Coming Weeks
Mar 4, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Andrew Restuccia
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said this afternoon that she hopes to reintroduce her long-stalled energy efficiency legislation in "the next couple weeks." -
Senator Introduces 3 Bills to Stop EPA Regulations
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) introduced a trio of bills meant to rein in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) air pollution regulations. -
Driller Sues Calif. County for Ban on Fracking, Injection
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Another local hydraulic fracturing ban in California is heading for a courtroom battle. -
Calif. Plugs 12 Wells on Groundwater Contamination Concerns
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
Regulators are shutting down 12 wastewater injection wells in California's Central Valley "out of an abundance of caution for public health" amid groundwater contamination concerns. -
Senate Republicans Fault Obama Budget's Emphasis on Climate
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Peterka
Senate Republicans today used a hearing on U.S. EPA's fiscal 2016 budget to blast the Obama administration's priorities in the area of climate change.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time
-
(ACC Mentioned) Trade Bodies Fight Oregon Bill
Mar 4, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Geraint Roberts
Trade bodies representing a range of sectors, including chemicals, told an Oregon legislative committee on Monday that a bill which would require manufacturers to disclose the presence of priority chemicals in their products, and, in some cases, substitute chemicals with alternatives, is unnecessary and would place a major burden on companies.
The bill (SB 478) was introduced into the state Senate on 12 January and was referred to the Environment and Natural Resources Committee. If it passes through the committee, it will be sent to the legislature's Joint Ways and Means Committee and will then, if approved, go to the Senate floor for approval before referral to the House.
If passed, the bill would require the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to establish and publish a list of “high priority chemicals of concern for children's health, when used children's products”. The draft list of 66 chemicals is identical to Washington's. Companies that manufacture children's products, sold in Oregon that contain any of the chemicals, would have to report the amount of each chemical used in each product component to the OHA, or the Interstate Chemicals Clearinghouse (CW 10 February 2011), every two years.
In the case of children's cosmetics, products that are “mouthable” or any made, or marketed, for use by children under three, the manufacturer must remove any chemicals it contains which are on the list, before it makes its third biennial report.
Giving evidence to the committee, Tim Shestek of the American Chemistry Council said the proposals were based on “the false presumption that the presence of an identified chemical in a children's product means the product is somehow harmful.” Products “which only contain a listed chemical in an 'inaccessible component' that a child could never access could still be banned”. Risks associated with a chemical in a product, he said, “are dependent upon the potency of the chemical and the magnitude, duration and frequency of exposure”. He also said the bill's provisions “fail to consider the array of consumer product safety regulations that are in place, at the federal level”.
Mr Shestek's more specific criticisms included that they have a different reporting scope to Washington's legislation, and it is unclear if any information submitted to the OHA would qualify as confidential.
Jennifer Gibbons, state government affairs director at the Toy Industry Association, made similar comments to Mr Shestek. State regulations such as SB 478, she said, “do not consider the existing robust safety system for toys ... and will create an unnecessary burden on companies doing business in Oregon, with no measurable increase in safety.”
Some downstream businesses told the committee they support the proposals. Roger McFadden, vice president and senior scientist at the world's largest office supply company, Staples, described it as “a smart approach” which would benefit product designers and risk managers. Lindsay Dahl, policy and partnerships director of cosmetics company Beautycounter, said it uses a similar approach to that proposed by SB 478 in its own ingredients selection process because “it will save our company money over the long term. By looking for the inherent hazards, associated with particular ingredients, we stave off costly reformulations.”
But Angela Crowley-Koch, legislative director of NGO the Oregon Environment Council, told the hearing “there is sound scientific evidence showing that each of the chemicals on this list is of high concern to children's health.” She added that if a company cannot technically or economically replace a chemical, if it can show the chemical does not leach out of the product, it can apply for a waiver.
Carol Kraege of Washington's department of ecology, said a lesson it has learned from the three submission rounds it has been through since the first in August 2012 is that the definition of “contaminant” in its own law “is too broad and doesn't tell us enough about why a chemical is present in a product. This information is important for assessing alternatives and evaluating opportunities for further action.” However, the definitions in SB 478, she said, should address this issue.
Washington's law, the Children's Safe Products Act, is primarily a disclosure law and does not not say how the government should use the reported information, “but the state legislature is considering proposed legislation that would authorise the department to require alternatives assessments...” Last November, Washington Governor Jay Inslee issued a draft outline of legislation that would give the department of ecology the power to develop chemical action plans to reduce, or in some cases ban, chemicals of concern if alternatives were available. According to the Washington Toxics Coalition, the Washington House Environment Committee heard testimony on the proposals on 2 February.
-
Let's Protect All Kids from Toxic Chemicals—Not Just Some!
Mar 4, 2015 | Insight News
By Kathleen Schuler, Dr. Rose Brewer and Senator Bobby Joe Champion
The lack of effective policies to regulate the use of chemicals in everyday consumer products impacts everyone's health. The Toxic Substances Control Act, the law that regulates industrial chemicals in the U.S., fails to control the flood of toxic chemicals into consumer products, resulting in thousands of little regulated, potentially toxic chemicals ending up in everyday consumer products from hand soap and cleaners to children's nap mats and clothing. These include hormone-disrupting chemicals such as phthalates, bisphenol A, flame-retardants and more. Widespread exposure to toxic chemicals contributes to rising rates of reproductive problems, developmental disabilities and cancer.
Kathleen Schuler
Dr. Rose Brewer
Senator Bobby Joe Champion
While everyone is exposed to toxic chemicals, communities of color and low-income communities experience unequal exposures. Historical environmental injustices have placed more industrial sites, incinerators, superfund sites and other pollution sources in these communities, with accompanying increased exposure to air, water and soil contamination. So routine exposure to the thousands of chemicals in consumer products is on top of already high environmental exposures and underlying health and economic disparities.
Other factors also contribute to disproportionate environmental impacts for low income and communities of color. In North Minneapolis, over 75% of the homes were built before 1978, putting local children at higher risk for lead poisoning. Medicaid enrollment data indicates that low-income children are three-times more likely to have elevated blood-lead levels than children from higher income families. Low income families are more likely to live in rental housing, which can be poorly maintained, subjecting families to mold, poor indoor air quality, and insect and rodent infestations. Pesticides are routinely applied to subsidized housing with or without the consent of residents. In addition, one study found that higher body burden dichlorophenols – probable carcinogens used in pesticides, room deodorizers and a variety of other household products - was correlated with lower income in both Mexican Americans and non-Hispanic blacks. Adjusting for race/ethnicity, those living in a multi-family housing, which is correlated with lower income levels, were one and half times more likely to have the highest levels of these chemicals in their bodies.
Low income and communities of color also have higher exposures to toxins in food. For example, low-income groups had higher levels of urinary bisphenol A (BPA) than higher income groups, likely due to consumption of canned food. Exposure to BPA, a chemical used on food can linings, is linked to higher risk for problems with development and learning. Food dyes frequently used in processed food are associated with hyperactivity and behavioral disorders. Children of color and low-income children are at higher risk because of the availability of fast food restaurants in their communities and reduced access to healthy whole foods without added dyes.
African American and immigrant populations face unique product exposures. For example, African-American and African-Caribbean women are more likely to use hair products with hormonally active chemical ingredients compared with white women, which may place them at higher risk for premenopausal breast cancer. Many Somali women use skin-lightening creams, which can contain high amounts of mercury, a brain toxin that can adversely impact the health of fetuses and young children.
Low-income families also encounter barriers in accessing healthier products, including the time or access to information necessary to research safer products. Products free of toxic chemicals are often more expensive and the stores selling them are not located in their neighborhoods. Low-income families might not be able to afford to replace older furniture and electronic products that contain toxic flame-retardants. They also might have increased exposure to phthalates, lead and other chemicals regulated in new products, through purchasing secondhand toys and baby products or cheap products sold at "dollar stores."
In the absence of federal action to better regulate chemicals, Minnesota has taken action to protect families at all income levels from unnecessary exposures to chemicals found in everyday consumer products. The Minnesota Department of Health has determined that nine chemicals found in children's products potentially place children's health at risk. A bill being introduced in the Minnesota legislature, the Toxic Free Kids Act of 2015 would require that manufacturers report to the Pollution Control Agency if they use any of the nine toxic chemicals in their products. The state agencies would then create consumer education programs to inform parents about which products contain these chemicals, so they can be better-informed consumers.
The Toxic Free Kids Act won't address all of these historical inequities and environmental injustices, but it's a positive step to protect our children from preventable exposures and lighten the burden on parents trying their best to give their children a healthy start in life. It's time to protect all of our kids.
Kathleen Schuler, MPH is Co-Director of Healthy Legacy and the Healthy Kids and Families Program Director at Conservation Minnesota.
Dr. Rose Brewer chairs the Board of Directors of Environmental Justice Advocates of Minnesota and teaches African American & African studies at the University of Minnesota.
Senator Bobby Joe Champion represents SD 59 in the Minnesota legislature. -
Identifying Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Using ToxCast and Authoritative Lists
Mar 4, 2015 | NRDC Switchboard
By Kristi Pullen
We are constantly awash in a sea of chemicals.
Though the exact number is unknown, nearly 85,000 industrial chemicals (not including pesticides, food additives, and pharmaceuticals) have been processed or manufactured in the United States as of July of 2014 (according to the most recent Toxic Substance Control Act Inventory List). While the number of new chemicals increases steadily, government evaluation of the toxicity of these chemicals has largely lagged behind. This has resulted in a large pool of chemicals, used in many consumer products, for which we have little or no toxicity information at all.
For programs like the California Safer Consumer Products (SCP) program, that aim to reduce the number of toxic chemicals we are exposed to through the products we use, identifying the highest priority chemicals -- out of a sea of thousands -- can be expedited and supplemented by multiple sources of information, including emerging computational and molecular biology tools.
The California SCP program at a glance
One of the goals of the SCP is to promote the use of safer alternatives to harmful chemicals in consumer products. The SCP identifies product-chemical combinations that have potential to cause harm in widespread populations, and provides an impetus for manufacturers to find non-chemical or safer chemical alternatives. Using authoritative lists like those from the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer, the National Toxicology Program Office of Health Assessment and Translation, the EPA Integrated Risk Information System, and California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Proposition 65 list (a list of chemicals known by the state to cause cancer or reproductive/developmental toxicity), the SCP has compiled a candidate chemical list of over 2,000 substances with known human health or ecological hazard traits.
The SCP intends to select between five and ten product-chemical combinations, per year, for the first iteration of its work plan -- an assessment process that would take over 200 years to complete for all the chemicals on the list (not taking into account the exponential number of product-chemical combinations). Determining which chemicals should be evaluated first, therefore, is particularly important. One way the SCP chemical list could be prioritized is by combining information from authoritative lists with biological information generated by programs like EPA's Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast).
What is ToxCast?
ToxCast is an EPA-led effort to rapidly evaluate the toxicity of thousands of chemicals using automated screening technologies (also known as high-throughput screens or HTS). The HTS technologies used by EPA-contracted laboratories analyze the effects of chemicals on molecular and cellular processes that are relevant to human and animal biology. ToxCast assays measure changes in protein conformation (the way that a protein is shaped), changes in DNA binding (a way that gene expression can be altered), and changes in cell behavior (for example, how quickly a cell divides, multiplies, or dies).
ToxCast has already evaluated nearly 2,000 chemicals across a wide range of uses (e.g., food additives, pesticides, industrial chemicals, and pharmaceuticals) since it began in 2007, and has generated a vast amount of data that the public and other researchers can access. ToxCast assays have several notable limitations, however.
First, the current suite of assays in ToxCast provides only partial coverage of the many ways that a hazardous agent can cause adverse health impacts. For example, although there are nearly 30 assays for estrogen and androgen receptor binding in the ToxCast platform, the platform only contains four assays for the thyroid receptor (another important target for hormones and hormone-like chemicals in the body). Without full coverage of multiple pathways, and data on how chemicals can alter those paths in ways that don't involve receptors (e.g., changes to proper thyroid functioning can occur by blocking the receptor or by a multitude of other mechanisms), the ToxCast program could miss toxic effects of the chemicals being tested.
Second, ToxCast assays are extremely limited in their ability to determine the effects of metabolism on chemical toxicity. In other words, ToxCast assays are not able to measure how a chemical might change in toxicity (i.e., become more or less toxic) as it travels through, and is processed by, our bodies.
Third, ToxCast assays are limited in their ability to analyze the full spectrum of chemical space. For example, chemicals that are not soluble in the solvent dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), that are not available in sufficient quality and quantity, or have characteristics that make high-throughput analysis more difficult (e.g., high-volatility, heavy metals), are currently outside of the chemicals tested in government-led HTS programs.
Even with these significant limitations, however, the ToxCast platform could provide useful information to aide in identifying chemicals on the SCP candidate chemical list that could be prioritized for replacement.
Finding the SCP chemicals that have been tested by ToxCast
ToxCast data collection has occurred in phases, with the most recent evaluation (Phase II) containing slightly over 1,800 chemicals. Comparing the SCP candidate chemical list to the ToxCast Phase II list, there are several notable findings. First, less than 10% of the chemicals in the SCP database were in the ToxCast Phase II list (Figure 1). This means that while HT technologies can be useful for prioritizing some chemicals, this data stream is not available for all prioritization decisions. Decision-makers must therefore rely on other sources of information, like authoritative lists, animal tests, and other existing toxicity data, when finalizing a priority scheme.
Second, of the 21 hazard traits identified by SCP using authoritative lists (e.g., endocrine toxicity, reproductive toxicity, neurotoxicity, and carcinogenicity) all but neurotoxicity was represented in the overlap group. In other words, though a large portion of the SCP chemicals were not in the ToxCast database, a wide range of toxicity endpoints evaluated by SCP were in the overlap group. The abundance of multiple hazard traits within the dataset can provide a way for researchers and decision-makers to evaluate the ability of ToxCast information to support existing hazard information. The absence of hazard traits, like neurotoxicity, reinforces the usefulness of multiple streams of data in determining chemical toxicity.
Finally, more than half (54%) of the ToxCast overlap chemicals were designated as possessing more than one authoritative list-based hazard trait, with over 20 percent of chemicals having more than four authoritative list hazard traits, meaning that many chemicals can act on more than one system within a body or the environment. Three chemicals on the list (naphthalene, di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), and dibutyl phthalate (DBP)) had hazard traits in ten or more categories. The most common hazard traits for the overlap chemicals were carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity, respiratory toxicity, and developmental toxicity.
Using ToxCast to identify SCP chemicals with endocrine disrupting properties.
There are multiple hazard traits upon which the SCP/ToxCast overlap chemicals could be ranked and prioritized -- one trait of particular importance is endocrine toxicity. Theendocrine system regulates the finely tuned actions of hormones within the body. Hormones are necessary for different processes at different stages of life, including brain and organ development early in life, and reproduction and cellular responses to stress in adult life. Even small changes in the low levels of hormones in our bodies can disrupt the delicately balanced endocrine system, and can result in negative health consequences such as cancer, diabetes, obesity, and reproductive harm. Disruption that occurs during particularly vulnerable life stages (such as during fetal development, infanthood, childhood, and adolescence) can cause harm years, and even generations, later. Because low doses can result in significant changes over the entirety of the life course, endocrine disruption presents a significant public health concern.
Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) interfere with the normal functioning of the endocrine system in multiple ways. They can bind directly to nuclear hormone receptors, like the estrogen and androgen receptors, and either block or add to the normal response of an endogenous (made in our bodies) chemical. They can also bind to receptors outside of the nucleus and impact the ways that signals are sent through the cell. Additionally, EDCs can block the ways that hormones move and/or are stored in the body, or change the ways in which hormones are made. The endocrine system, along with the way that it can be disrupted, is extraordinarily complex, and is not easily evaluated with reductionist techniques (for additional details on tiered methods of evaluating EDCs, see the Tiered Protocol for Endocrine Disruption website). While cell- and protein-based methods like those employed by ToxCast have the potential to provide useful information on chemical toxicity, they do not reveal the entire endocrine disruption story, and can overlook harmful EDCs that act by pathways not covered in the ToxCast assays.
According to EPA's latest analysis, the ToxCast dataset has 18 assays for the estrogen receptor and nine assays for the androgen receptor that have the potential to give researchers clues about how these pathways work in whole animals (for more details on how the ToxCast assays can predict whole animal outcomes, see Rotroff, et al and Cox,et al).
Within the SCP/ToxCast overlap group, there are 32 chemicals with endocrine toxicity as one of their authoritative list hazard traits and 151 chemicals with activity in either the androgen or estrogen pathways. There are four chemicals (4-tert-octylphenol, bisphenol A, bisphenol B, and phenolphthalein) that turn on (also known as agonists) each of the six measured steps in the EPA estrogen agonist pathway (Figure 2) and three (butylbenzyl phthalate, butylparaben, and n-propylparaben) that turn on all but one piece in the measured agonist pathway.
While chemicals that turn on the estrogen pathway are more important for some health impacts (for example, in estrogen responsive cancers), chemicals that turn off (also known as antagonists) the androgen pathway can be particularly harmful to ecosystem and animal health (antiandrogens can cause harm to reproductive organs and cause delays during fetal and pubertal development). In the SCP/ToxCast overlap, there are five chemicals (3,3'-dimethoxybenzidine dihydrochloride, bisphenol A, bisphenol B, tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP), and tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate) that turn on each of the three measured parts of the EPA androgen agonist pathway (Figure 3), and five chemicals (4-tert-octylphenol, C.I. basic violet 3, dichlorophene, tetrabromobisphenol A, and triclosan) that turn on all but one piece in the measured antagonist pathway.
When comparing the 14 chemicals that turn on all or part of the estrogen receptor agonist or androgen receptor antagonist pathways to the authoritative list hazard traits, a striking observation emerges -- the lists do not always agree (Figure 4). Though there are several instances where the authoritative lists and the ToxCast data agree, there are four chemicals (3,3'-dimethoxybenzidine dihydrochloride, phenolphthalein, tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP), and tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate) with strong activity (active in each of part of their respective pathway) that are not labeled as endocrine toxins on any of the authoritative lists used by SCP. Alternately, there are chemicals on the authoritative endocrine toxin lists that might not be considered "strong" (e.g., not fulfilling every piece of a particular pathway) in the ToxCast data set. If one were to rely on either ToxCast data or authoritative lists alone, it is possible that some potentially toxic chemicals could be missed.
At this time, the ToxCast program shows some promise in advancing chemical toxicity testing (e.g., testing of large numbers of chemicals in a short time, providing additional streams of evidence for decision makers) but it still has a number of significant pitfalls (e.g., the lack of metabolism, not all relevant pathways are covered, no information on duration of critical windows of exposure) that reduce its ability to correctly identify EDCs and other hazardous chemicals via high-throughput testing. Even with these limitations, however, ToxCast and other high-throughput platforms can provide useful information for prioritizing chemicals for evaluation in programs like SCP.
Decision makers should use caution in interpreting these data, however, particularly when trying to identify chemicals that are not likely to be EDCs. With the increasing ability of EPA and other state and federal agencies to screen thousands of chemicals quickly and relatively cheaply, chemicals in commerce should be regularly and routinely re-evaluated for toxicity, especially given the evolving nature of emerging HTS technologies. An inactive chemical in the assays of today could be an active chemical in the assays of tomorrow, and our failure to correctly identify EDCs in our air, water, food, and consumer products is not simply a matter of scientific uncertainty, but a failure of public trust and risk to public health.
-
US EPA to Add More Substances to ChemView Portal
Mar 4, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Dinesh Kumar
The US EPA will continue its efforts to increase access to chemicals data, by adding substances and data to its ChemView portal, according to the director of its office of pollution prevention and toxics, Wendy Cleland-Hamnett. The agency will hold a stakeholder meeting, later this month, to discuss adding public health and safety data that it received under the new chemicals programme, but doing it in a way that is “sensitive to some of the issues around confidential business information as well as addressing some of the concerns that NGOs and others have about access to new chemicals data,” she told the GlobalChem conference in Baltimore, Maryland. The portal now has information on about 10,000 chemicals and functionality has been added (CW 9 October 2014).
The EPA also plans to streamline its new chemicals programme and will undertake an assessment of its process methods and tools to identify changes that would enable the agency to manage the potential risks of new chemicals more efficiently and effectively, said Ms Cleland-Hamnett. This comes in the wake of resource constraints that the EPA and other federal agencies face that “get tighter and tighter with every passing year”, she added.
Reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) continues to be a priority for the agency, she said. It has been providing “technical assistance” on reform efforts to individual members of Congress who had sought it. She told Chemical Watch that the EPA has not taken a formal position on any of the reform measures introduced in Congress.
Answering questions from attendees, she said she did not see much benefit in a reset of the TSCA inventory to ascertain which of the more than 80,000 chemicals are still in commerce, because the agency has the information needed to sort through and identify existing chemicals for assessments. "The CDR [Chemical Data Reporting programme] is very valuable in that regard, but going through a process to reset the entire inventory, I am not sure, given the resource we have, is an investment we want to make, at the expense of actually doing assessments on new and existing chemicals.” Some members of Congress and industry say that a reset of the inventory is one of the benefits that TSCA reform will generate.
Meanwhile, the EPA is rolling out the new logo for its Design for the Environment (DfE) safer products labelling programme, this week. Its development was prompted by the fact that though the programme has been very successful in the institutional and industry sectors, it has “not been as effective in the consumer space” as the agency and industry partners would like it to be, said Ms Cleland-Hamnett. In addition, the agency's Office of Inspector General said the prominent use of the words “US EPA” on the old logo ran the risk that people would think the agency endorsed DfE products, and that logo did not “adequately communicate to the consumer that the product is a safer product” (CW 12 September 2014).
Currently, there are more than 2,200 DfE labelled products.
-
US FDA Approves PFOA-Free Additive for Food Packaging
Mar 4, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The US Food and Drug Administration has approved an additive for use in paper and board food packaging, which the manufacturer describes as “PFOA-free”.
Switzerland-based Archroma says the substance is an alternative to long-chain perfluorinated compounds (PFCs), known as C8s, such as perfluorinooctanoic acid (PFOA). Based on a shorter-chain (C6) fluoropolymer chemistry, it is less environmentally persistent than the similar longer-chain substances, the company says. In addition to FDA approval, the additive complies with the recommendations of the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), it says.
In Europe, Danish retailers are collaborating with the national government to find alternatives to PFCs, including PFOA, that meet the chemical's soil, grease and water resistant properties (CW 4 March 2015).
-
Bill Seeks To Protect Firefighters From Chemicals Linked To Cancer
Mar 4, 2015 | CBS Minnesota
By Liz Collin
A bill to better protect Minnesota’s firefighters from an invisible danger has been introduced at the state Capitol. The proposal would ban cancer-causing chemicals from furniture and children’s products.
Studies show more than half of all line-of-duty deaths in firefighting are now caused by cancer.
Steve Shapira spent 17 years fighting fires in St. Paul before his cancer diagnosis. He’s spent the last year on leave going through chemo.
“[The doctor] looked over at me and changed my life with three words: ‘You have lymphoma,'”he said.
Rep. Jeff Howe is backing the bill to better protect firefighters. The Republican representing District 13A is a retired firefighter himself.
“I actually took out cancer insurance when I was 35 years old, because I was that worried about it,” Howe said. “It’s usually not the flame that kills you, it’s the smoke.”
That smoke carries with it chemicals from flame retardants. For decades, they’ve been in everything from couches to carpets, meant to delay the start of a fire but recent studies have linked those chemicals to cancer.
“Lo and behold we’re now finding out the very thing we fought to get in now is now not only killing us, it’s killing children,” Howe said. “It’s time to realize our mistakes and correct them.”
WCCO-TV was in Rochester last year when Dr. Susan Shaw presented her findings to firefighters from across the state. She’s the first researcher to measure what flame retardants do to firefighters.
Shaw found for every five degrees a firefighter’s skin temperature increases, their skin absorption rate rises 400 times.
“These are supposed to be helpful chemicals right? Well, we’ve shown they’re not,” she said back then.
Her research also found chemicals in flame retardants that already pose health problems were 20 times more toxic to them.
More research found furniture treated with flame retardants gave three extra seconds of escape time in a fire. But the flames also produced twice the amount of smoke and 40 times the amount of soot compared to non-treated furniture set on fire.
Minnesota’s bill would ban 10 flame retardants common in children’s products and upholstered furniture.
But a law, if passed, will come too late for Shapira.
“My life and the life of everyone around me have changed forever,” he said.
Still, he’s fighting for those left in the career that cancer forced him to leave.
“I don’t think this is questionable. I think we should move this thing through,” Howe, the lawmaker, said.
The North American Flame Retardant Alliance said it takes firefighters’ concerns seriously but it wants more research.
If the bill passes, Minnesota would become the fourth state in the country to ban these flame retardants.
-
House Dem: Chemical Agency ‘Off the Rails’
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee declared Wednesday that the Chemical Safety Board (CSB) has “gone off the rails,” citing a number of management issues.
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) came to his conclusion at a hearing after listing off “serious management issues,” widespread employee dissatisfaction and allegations that the board’s chairman sought to silence employees and consolidate the body’s power for himself.
“These allegations are appalling, and they indicate that the CSB has gone off the rails,” Cummings said.
Cummings was not alone in his assessment. Members of the Oversight panel from both parties agreed that the CSB faces severe management problems and largely blamed Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso.
“The Chemical Safety Board, with its currently leadership, cannot effectively carry out its important mission,” committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) said at the hearing.
Chaffetz and Cummings were both particular disturbed by allegations that Moure-Eraso and other senior leaders sought to retaliate against employees, including demoting a contracting officer who worked with an outside firm to conduct a management and employee satisfaction evaluation.
“I’m here to tell you: We put up with a lot of things,” Chaffetz told the CSB’s members at the hearing.
“We are not putting up with employee retaliation. It’s a very serious issue, and I know that on both sides of the aisle, we do not take this lightly,” he said.
“I fully agree with you that retaliation is just something that we will not stand for on both sides of the aisle,” Cummings said.
Moure-Eraso defended himself. He said he has made numerous improvements since a June hearing by the committee that identified similar problems.
“I was humbled by the messages I heard loud and clear. I took them to heart,” he said. “I have worked together with other board members and the staff to address the issues you raised.”
Specifically, Moure-Eraso said the CSB has adopted many recommendations made by then-Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) to improve the agency and is working to improve employee morale.
Moure-Eraso was also accused in a January report from the agency’s inspector general of using external, private email systems to avoid transparency.
-
Senate Moves Up Keystone Veto Override Vote to Wednesday
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - Floor Action
By Jordain Carney
The Senate will take a final vote on whether to override President Obama's veto of legislation authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline on Wednesday, a day sooner than expected.
Senators were expected to take a cloture vote on Wednesday, and a vote on final passage Thursday.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the cloture motion was being withdrawn, and that senators would take a final vote at 2:30 p.m.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), however, objected to the time, asking for the vote to be taken even sooner at 2:20 p.m. instead.
"Any way you could change that to 2:20 from 2:30? There are four people who could make planes otherwise," he said to McConnell on the floor.
The Keystone vote at 2:20 p.m. will be the final vote for the Senate this week. The House has cancelled Thursday's session ahead of an expected snowstorm.
Supporters of the pipeline are unlikely to win the 67 votes necessary to override Obama's veto.
-
Veto Override Vote This Afternoon
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Manuel Quiñones
The Senate is speeding up the process of trying to override President Obama's veto of legislation to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada.
Chamber leaders scrapped a planned procedural vote after agreeing to move straight to a roll call on whether to bypass the president's decision. It will be the last vote this week, due to an impending snowstorm.
Pro-KXL lawmakers need 67 votes to override the president's veto. But even though every Republican and most pro-pipeline Democrats have promised to vote yes, the effort will most certainly fail.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) this morning tried to woo on-the-fence Democrats by accusing the president of siding with extreme environmentalists and noting discomfort among pro-pipeline unions.
"I know it makes some of our Democratic colleagues pretty uncomfortable as well," he said. "I suspect that includes Democrats who didn't support the Senate's initial passage of Keystone."
But pipeline backers have been unable to attract any converts. Legislation opponents are either against KXL or would rather allow Obama to make up his mind on whether to allow its transboundary crossing.
Asked by Reuters this week whether he would make a decision on KXL in weeks or months, the president said his administration's review would be completed in "weeks or months," within his time in office.
Asked whether Canada would launch a trade dispute against the U.S., Ambassador Gary Doer said his country's government "can't decide until the decision. Delay is not a decision."
During a panel discussion in Washington, D.C., Doer also addressed claims that both countries could come up with a new climate deal in exchange for the White House approving the project.
"There can't legally be a quid pro quo," said Doer, but he added that it made sense for the U.S. and Canada to pursue uniform rules for oil and gas development.
Natural Resources Defense Council Canada program chief Danielle Droitsch said that Canada would not meet current climate targets and that a deal would not address environmentalist concerns with KXL.
Asked whether there was any scenario in which greens would agree to the pipeline's construction, Droitsch said, "Not likely."
-
McConnell Urges Dems to Override Obama's Veto on Keystone Pipeline
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Laura Barron-Lopez
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pressed Democrats on Wednesday to join Republicans in voting to override President Obama's veto of legislation authorizing the Keystone XL oil pipeline.
"I’m urging every Democrat who still believes their party should be about workers, not these deep-pocketed special interests and extremists, to join us," McConnell said on the Senate floor.
"Vote for cloture. Vote to override," he added.
The Senate will hold a cloture vote Wednesday, setting up the final vote Thursday on whether to override the president's veto of the Keystone bill sent to him by the Republican-controlled Congress last week.
"Keystone’s bipartisan coalition in the Senate is only a few votes shy of the two-thirds majority we’d need to override this partisan veto and bring Keystone’s jobs here to America," McConnell said.
Without wooing more Democrats to vote against the veto, proponents of the pipeline will fall four votes short of the 67 needed to override Obama.
Right now, supporters expect to have 63 votes backing the project. That means the nine Democrats that voted to approve construction of the pipeline in January will vote to override the veto on Thursday.
One of those Democrats, Sen. Tom Carper (Del.), has yet to confirm that he will vote to overturn the president's veto.
McConnell suggested that Obama's veto might have upset Democrats who originally voted against the pipeline.
"We have seen how the president's veto has outraged some in the labor union community. I know it makes some of our Democratic colleagues pretty uncomfortable as well," McConnell said.
"I suspect that includes Democrats who didn't support the Senate's initial passage of Keystone. I suspect it also includes Democrats who might otherwise support their leadership's unprecedented filibuster of a veto override motion."
The administration argues the bill circumvents the ongoing process at the State Department.
In recent comments, Obama said Keystone "bypasses the United States" and is "for Canadian oil to send that down to the Gulf."
His harsh evaluation of the Canada-to-Texas pipeline has spurred hope among opponents, who argue the project will exacerbate climate change, that the president will ultimately reject it.
-
McConnell to States: Don't Comply with EPA Climate Rule
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Laura Barron-Lopez
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is urging state officials not to comply with the Obama administration's signature climate rule.
McConnell, a stringent opponent of the regulation, said states should not submit a design plan for limiting carbon pollution from existing power plants.
"The regulation is unfair. It's probably illegal. And state officials can do something about it; in fact, many are already fighting back," McConnell said in an op-ed published in the Lexington Herald-Leader.
The rule, which the EPA is working to finalize this summer, requires states cut carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants 30 percent from 2005 levels by 2030.
"Think twice before submitting a state plan — which could lock you in to federal enforcement and expose you to lawsuits — when the administration is standing on shaky legal ground and when, without your support, it won't be able to demonstrate the capacity to carry out such political extremism," McConnell said.
McConnell not only calls on Kentucky's state leaders, but every state to join in pushing back against the regulation.
However, Kentucky's Secretary of Energy and Environment Len Peters said last month that he found the EPA's outreach and open door policy for the regulations to be helpful.
"The outreach they’ve done, I think, is incredible,” Peters said.
Each state has different targets they must reach in curbing emissions, and each is required to submit a design plan for those reductions to the EPA based on the energy makeup of the state.
The EPA contends the plan affords states flexibility and can cut emissions as they see fit. Rather than shutting power plants, states have the ability to build up solar or wind, or launch energy efficiency programs.
The agency also noted that "from day one" it has been "reaching out and engaging with the public, industry, environmental groups, other federal agencies and state and regional energy reliability officials."
EPA added that in the coming weeks it will start its planning process to develop a proposed federal plan that state officials can follow, or look to, when drafting their own plans.
Still, McConnell and other Republicans argue the rule would hurt the U.S. economy and kill energy jobs "under the guise of protecting the climate."
"Refusing to go along at this time with such an extreme proposed regulation would give the courts time to figure out if it is even legal, and it would give Congress more time to fight back," McConnell said.
-
McConnell to States: Don't Comply with EPA's Clean Power Plan
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
The Senate's top Republican waded into state regulatory policy today, urging state officials in an newspaper op-ed to not let themselves be "bullied" into complying with U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan.
Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky wrote in the Lexington Herald-Leader op-ed that state lawmakers and officials have little to fear from EPA if they don't comply with its draft rule for power plants' carbon dioxide emissions. Compliance, he said, could make states legally vulnerable.
"Here's my advice: Don't be complicit in the administration's attack on the middle class," he wrote.
Keep up to date on the latest national and state-level developments on EPA's greenhouse gas regulations for the power sector. Go toE&E's Power Plan Hub.
EPA has warned that states that don't complete plans by deadlines beginning next year could face a federal plan that would be less protective of their interests than ones they could have designed. The agency has promised to release a proposed plan this summer.
"It sounds like a scary outcome," McConnell wrote. But he argued that the agency has little legal authority to make its model rule "draconian," and there is even a good chance that it will never happen.
"For starters, the legal basis for this regulation is flimsy at best," wrote McConnell, pointing to Harvard Law School professor Laurence Tribe's criticism that the rule exceeds EPA authority. "And even in the unlikely event that the regulation does pass legal muster, it's difficult to conceive how a plan imposed from Washington would be much different from what a state might develop on its own."
The draft rule sets interim and final emissions targets for states but allows them to decide how to meet them. EPA says that flexibility will allow states to craft plans that ensure reliability of power supply and protect other economic interests. Refusing to submit a plan would mean forgoing those advantages, the agency says.
Kentucky has enacted legislation that limits its Clean Power Plan compliance strategy to what can be achieved inside the fence line at a power plant. The state's Energy and Environment Cabinet is mulling whether that law will allow it to submit a state plan to EPA (see related story).
But McConnell said the rule's much-touted flexibility is cover for a costly and burdensome rule, and that EPA will not approve state plans that don't track with its anti-coal "ideological agenda." And by submitting a plan, he said, states would make their energy policies federally enforceable and open themselves up to litigation by stakeholders.
McConnell promised like-minded state policymakers that congressional Republicans are doing what they can to kill the rule legislatively. Refusing to submit a state plan would buy Congress more time, he wrote.
"We're devising strategies now to do just that," he wrote. "So for now, hold back on the costly process of complying. A better outcome may yet be possible."
But EPA shot back that McConnell and other critics misrepresent the economic consequences of the rule.
"During the development of power sector rules including the proposed Clean Power Plan, EPA devoted significant attention to ensuring that important public health and environmental protections are achieved without interfering with a reliable and affordable supply of electricity," the agency said in an email to Greenwire.
"We believe most states will choose to develop their own state plans," the agency said, reiterating that the Clean Air Act authorizes it to enforce a federal plan if states do not.
-
EPA Responds to McConnell 'Just Say No' Campaign
Mar 4, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Erica Martinson
EPA has been working with states on its Clean Power Plan and will continue to do so, despite calls in an opinion piece today by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for states to reject the regulations, agency officials said today.
“My only comment would be that EPA has been working with the states well before we put pen to paper on this rule. That will not stop. And we continue to have tremendous dialogue with the states — including the state of Kentucky,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told reporters following today’s Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing.
EPA spokeswoman Liz Purchia said in an email that EPA will begin an “open and transparent planning process in the coming weeks to develop a proposed federal plan” for states that do submit their own plans to meet the rule. The agency plans to issue a proposed model plan this summer with the final power plant rules.
Purchia said as well that in in 40 years, “there have been no instances in which Clean Air Act standards have caused the lights to go out.”
Sen. Barbara Boxer, ranking member of the environment committee, was unhappy with McConnell’s piece in the Lexington Herald-Leader. “I can’t remember the leader of the United States Senate telling states to disobey the law that’s been upheld three times by the Supreme Court and a law that’s protecting the health and safety of the people,” she said to reporters after the hearing. -
Ky. Regulators Walk Tightrope on Clean Power Plan
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
Kentucky regulators say they've figured out how they might write an implementation plan for the U.S. EPA Clean Power Plan without violating a state law that severely limits their options.
The Energy and Environment Cabinet hopes to avoid having EPA impose an implementation plan for curbing carbon dioxide emissions with a strategy that relies on retirements of coal-fired power plants that were already planned for the next 15 years.
The agency says those plant shutdowns could generate enough emission reductions to let Kentucky meet its 2030 EPA target.
Kentucky Energy and Environment Secretary Leonard Peters told a Washington, D.C.-area climate conference last week that his agency believes relying on plant shutdowns would not run afoul of House Bill 388, a state law that bars Kentucky from basing its plan on mandated fuel switching, renewable energy or other "systemwide" policies.
The bill -- inspired by the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council -- cleared both chambers of the state Legislature unanimously last year and was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear.
"Obviously, it's always in the background," Peters said of the new law.
Peters said his staff wouldn't complete a plan before the term-limited Beshear leaves office at year's end. His staff intends to hand the incoming administration an "80 percent" plan -- or set of recommendations -- on how to navigate between the state law and the need to provide EPA with a compliance outline by deadlines starting in 2016.
"Will the next governor take that and move with it? I don't know," Peters said. "But we want to give him an opportunity to look at what we have been thinking the last several years."
Kentucky Assistant Secretary for Climate Policy John Lyons said in January the state law would all but ensure that Kentucky will face the federal implementation plan EPA is writing (Greenwire, Jan. 12).
The Kentucky law limits the state plan to requiring energy efficiency upgrades on site at coal-fired power plants, but that requirement means it will fall short of the reduction requirements EPA is seeking. EPA has warned it will use its authority to impose an emissions plan of its own if states lag.
E&E's Power Plan Hub keeps you up to date on the latest national and state-level developments on EPA's greenhouse gas regulations for the power sector. Go to E&E's Power Plan Hub.
But Peters said his agency's lawyers now believe the state law may not prevent Kentucky from writing a plan that assumes expected reductions from coal retirements caused by unrelated market forces and policies, such as EPA's mercury rule for power plants.
These may not technically, he said, be the "inside the fence line" reductions at power plants envisioned by the framers of the state law, but they are not mandates, either. And current market conditions and EPA's proposed carbon dioxide standard for new power plants should guarantee that the retiring units are replaced by combined-cycle natural gas plants rather than new coal -- an emission savings Kentucky can claim credit for.
"I think the general feeling is that we are going to move forward with some recommendations and some thoughts that are a little bit broader, and see whether or not that can fit in with the constraints of the legislation that we have, and make the judgment at that point in time as to whether that would be consistent with an interpretation of that legislation," Peters said.'Very Kentucky-centric'
Kentucky is set to lose a dozen coal-fired generating units between now and 2017, according to data collected by the Department of Energy's U.S. Energy Information Administration.
East Kentucky Power Cooperative Inc., the Tennessee Valley Authority, Kentucky Utilities Co. and Louisville Gas & Electric Co. are all slated to take coal-fired capacity offline. And Peters said more will follow, contributing the lion's share of Kentucky's obligation to cut its power sector's CO2 by 18.3 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2030.
EPA set Jan. 8, 2014, as the dividing line between new and existing power plants for purposes of its Clean Air Act rules, signaling that the agency will credit states under the existing source rule for reductions made after that date. That should include all coal-fired closures after that date as well as any other changes that bring down Kentucky's power-sector emissions.
"We believe that as we look at our fleet today, with some retirements that are highly likely between 2020 and 2030, we can meet it," Peters said, referring to the 18.3 percent cut.
The Energy and Environment Cabinet held a closed-door meeting Feb. 20 to gather feedback on this idea, with guests drawn from industry and stakeholder groups including the Kentucky Coal Association, the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce, several local utility groups and the Cumberland Chapter of the Sierra Club.
"It was very Kentucky-centric," Peters said.
The point of the meeting, Lyons said, was to determine whether the coal plant retirements idea had stakeholder support, or whether it was seen to conflict with the state law.
The Cabinet plans to continue the dialogue with stakeholders until EPA finalizes its rule in midsummer, after which Peters, Lyons and their colleagues will have only a few months to complete their "80 percent" proposal before the new administration takes office. The next Cabinet would complete and submit the plan.
But some participants at the February meeting said they didn't want to see their state submit a plan to EPA at all -- even one that didn't mandate new systemwide reductions.
Bill Bissett, president of the Kentucky Coal Association, said Peters and his staff appeared to be on course to undercut not only the state law, but Attorney General Jack Conway's bid to have the rule thrown out in court.
Conway, who is also favored to win the Democratic nomination to replace Beshear, joined with 11 other state attorneys general last August to file a pre-emptive lawsuit against EPA, hoping to kill a rule they said would be disastrous for their states' coal sectors.
Bissett said he'd like to see the state agency ask for more time to develop a plan, with the hopes that Conway's suit will prevail and a compliance plan will become unnecessary.
"Kentucky's coal industry and many others believe strongly that an extension on the development of Kentucky's response can and should be sought," he said in an email toGreenwire.
"As to Kentucky's ability to comply if coal plant closures up to 2030 are included, I doubt that anything will satisfy the EPA and their ideologues," he continued. "Their endgame remains to move this country away from the use of coal as a source for electricity, and this central philosophy should be remembered when dealing with this federal agency."
But Lyons said Kentucky would be better off charting its own course on the rule.
"We certainly believe that it's better to choose our own destiny than allow EPA to [impose a federal implementation plan on] us and not know what you're going to get," said Lyons, though he noted that the agency will release a proposed model rule this summer before states submit their plans beginning in 2016. That plan, depending on what it looks like, might influence the next administration's choice about how to proceed, he said.Can the plan be enforced?
But one challenge with the coal plant retirement option is that it would rely on voluntary actions by utilities while EPA demands that state plans be enforceable.
"How do you make [coal-fired power plant closures] part of a plan that doesn't look like you're requiring shutdowns and fuel switching, which the law strictly prohibits?" Lyons asked.
Enforceability will be an issue, said Jennifer Macedonia, a senior adviser who tracks the issue for the Bipartisan Policy Center.
Kentucky will need to demonstrate in its plan that the reductions it assumes will come from plant retirements do in fact happen. The state agency could do that by building a review process into its plan that would allow it to stay on track or make adjustments, she said. It could also require utilities to adhere to a particular retirement schedule for their coal-fired power plants as a condition of permitting.
But that kind of requirement would be unlikely to gain the support of state lawmakers of either party who see the Clean Power Plan as an assault not only on the Bluegrass State's coal sector but on its robust manufacturing base.
Kentucky's congressional delegation has pledged to do all it can to kill the rule legislatively and has asked state officials to stand firm as well. Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) has promised to use his chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power to advance legislation to roll back the rule.
And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) wrote in an op-ed in the Lexington Herald-Leader yesterday that state officials must refuse to comply with the measure even if EPA threatens to impose a "draconian" federal implementation plan (see related story).
"It sounds like a scary outcome," he wrote. "But states shouldn't be frightened, nor should they allow themselves to be bullied."
-
Shaheen Expects to Reintroduce Efficiency Bill in Coming Weeks
Mar 4, 2015 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Andrew Restuccia
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said this afternoon that she hopes to reintroduce her long-stalled energy efficiency legislation in "the next couple weeks."
The bill, which she is authoring with Sen. Rob Portman, has been mired in procedural delays for years.
Shaheen said she hasn't yet talked to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell about bringing the bill to the floor.
But she said Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski has "indicated that she's supportive of seeing something happen on it," and Shaheen expects the reintroduced bill to move through the panel.
Shaheen said there will be some minor changes to the bill. And she expects to add to the efficiency bill a series of efficiency amendments that were attached to now-vetoed legislation to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline.
She expressed renewed confidence that the bill will win approval this time around. "The third time is a charm, you know? So hopefully," Shaheen said. -
Senator Introduces 3 Bills to Stop EPA Regulations
Mar 4, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) introduced a trio of bills meant to rein in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) air pollution regulations.
In introducing the bills on the Senate floor Tuesday, Flake said the EPA has gone too far with overreaching and unreasonable regulations of late and he wants to protect Americans and the economy from the agency’s actions.
“All of us are in favor of protecting the environment and the air that we breathe,” he said. “But I think that we are not in favor of an EPA that places surreal regulations over common sense.”
All of his bills have multiple Republican co-sponsors and were introduced last year but did not move.
The first bill, the Ozone Regulatory Delay and Extension of Assessment Length (ORDEAL) Act, would remove the requirement from the Clean Air Act that the EPA reassess every five years whether its standards for ground-level ozone and other air pollutants need to be tightened.
Flake said the five-year timeline allows groups to sue the EPA for missing deadlines and forces the EPA into new regulations.
The legislation would double the time between reviews to 10 years.
The Commonsense Legislative Exceptional Events Reform (CLEER) Act is meant to better protect states and localities if their air pollution concentrations spike due to natural events.
The EPA instituted a rule to that effect in 2007, but it does not work as it should, Flake said.
The final bill, the Agency Paygo for Greenhouse Gases Act, would require the EPA to reduce its budget whenever it institutes greenhouse gas regulations that cost money to other federal agencies.
Similar to a rule adopted by the Republican Senate, each dollar in costs imposed on other agencies would have to be offset by a dollar in the EPA’s budget when the agency proposes any greenhouse gas rule, Flake said.
-
Driller Sues Calif. County for Ban on Fracking, Injection
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Another local hydraulic fracturing ban in California is heading for a courtroom battle.
Citadel Exploration Inc. late last week filed suit against San Benito County for establishing a countywide ban on hydraulic fracturing and steam injection through a ballot initiative known as Measure J. Though the county currently hosts no fracking operations, almost 60 percent of voters supported the measure last November.
Public involvement in San Benito began in 2013 after Citadel Exploration sought permits for 15 exploration wells in the county, south of San Jose. The county Board of Supervisors granted the application, drawing a lawsuit from the Center for Biological Diversity. A local judge ruled for CBD and required Citadel to prepare an environmental impact report to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act before moving forward on the drilling project.
Meanwhile, county lawmakers passed an ordinance allowing certain exemptions from the fracking ban if it results in a regulatory taking: Citadel or any other company losing economic use of their property. That language has yet to be tested, but Citadel has indicated that it will seek compensation if an exemption is not granted.
"Accordingly, Citadel Exploration Inc. will provide the County of San Benito the ability to compensate the company for the diminished value at the Indian Oil Field based on the reasonable Unrisked Resource Potential the property would ultimately yield, or allow Citadel to proceed with full field development and steam injection under the exemption ordinance," the company said in a recent financial filing.
Citadel's lawsuit, filed in San Benito County Superior Court on Friday, accuses the county of acting beyond its authority in enacting the ban -- authority the company says is reserved for state regulators.
California courts have not yet issued any clear guidance on local control, an issue that has cropped up across the country in states with shale oil and gas production that is moving close to where people live. When the Western States Petroleum Association sued the city of Compton for a similar ban, the city ended up revoking the ban, and the lawsuit was dismissed (EnergyWire, Nov. 26, 2014).
-
Calif. Plugs 12 Wells on Groundwater Contamination Concerns
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
Regulators are shutting down 12 wastewater injection wells in California's Central Valley "out of an abundance of caution for public health" amid groundwater contamination concerns.
More than 2,500 of California's 50,000 wastewater injection wells are in areas with drinking water aquifers. A U.S. EPA audit led federal officials to question state oversight of the wells used by oil companies to dispose of toxic waste, including from hydraulic fracturing (Greenwire, Feb. 6).
Chevron Corp. and other companies have voluntarily closed and surrendered the permits for 10 of the wells, which are clustered in Kern County, the hub of California's oil and gas industry. The other two have been ordered to shut down.
State officials said no evidence has yet indicated any effect on drinking water, but Patrick Sullivan of the Center for Biological Diversity said the closures are not enough.
"It's inadequate, it's ridiculous, it's unacceptable," he said. "They've allowed decades of injections into these aquifers that should have been protected. Even now, they're still dragging their feet" (Chris Megerian, Los Angeles Times, March 3). -- DTB
-
Senate Republicans Fault Obama Budget's Emphasis on Climate
Mar 4, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Amanda Peterka
Senate Republicans today used a hearing on U.S. EPA's fiscal 2016 budget to blast the Obama administration's priorities in the area of climate change.
Republican members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee charged that the president was proposing to fund EPA climate change efforts at the expense of other important programs at the agency. In several contentious exchanges, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy sparred with GOP senators over the science of climate change behind the proposed efforts.
"It seems like every hearing we have turns into a global warming hearing," joked Senate EPW Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who last week made headlines for throwing a snowball on the Senate floor in an attempt to demonstrate that climate change was not real (E&E Daily, Feb. 27).
The Obama administration has requested an increase of about $452 million, or 6 percent, from the current enacted level of $8.1 billion for EPA in fiscal 2016. Under the proposal, EPA would receive a discretionary budget of about $8.6 billion.
The budget request would give more money to help states shape plans to comply with the proposed Clean Power Plan, which would set limits on carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants. The administration has also proposed, in addition to the discretionary budget request, to build a $4 billion fund to help states collaborate on multistate and individual programs if they achieve greater or earlier reductions than EPA requires under the Clean Power Plan.
GOP members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee said they were concerned that EPA's plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants would come with high costs for the economy and few benefits.
Several members called into question whether climate change was occurring and the result of man-made actions. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) read an editorial arguing that climate change science was unsettled, while Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) blasted McCarthy for being unable to provide details on climate models predicting increases in global temperature.
He also questioned EPA's assessment that the Clean Power Plan was necessary to stem carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
"It's a plant food and doesn't harm anyone," Sessions said of carbon dioxide.
Keep up to date on the latest national and state-level developments on EPA's greenhouse gas regulations for the power sector. Go toE&E's Power Plan Hub.
Inhofe charged that EPA was sacrificing core agency programs to help increase water quality, reduce diesel air pollution emissions and clean up contaminated sites in order to pursue its climate agenda.
Throughout the tense hearing, McCarthy defended the administration's climate proposals and the underlying science.
"I understand that there are a minority -- a vast minority -- of scientists who believe that the challenge of climate change isn't as significant as the majority do," McCarthy said in response to questions raised over climate science.
EPA has the backing of the Supreme Court in its plan to reduce emissions, McCarthy continued, arguing that the high court was "very clear" that carbon pollution was a danger to public health and welfare.
Democrats on the committee also defended the administration's actions in the area of climate change. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) tied more extreme weather in his home state to climate change, while Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), ranking member on the Environment and Public Works Committee, said the Obama administration's budget rightly places an important focus on climate change.
"I appreciate my colleagues on the Republican side see it differently," Boxer said. "Those of us on this committee on our side of the aisle feel you have to do something. It's in the law. Carbon pollution is pollution."
While they disagreed on climate change, both Democrats and Republicans on the committee raised questions about the administration's proposed cut to state revolving loan funds for clean and drinking water infrastructure.
Boxer commended EPA for proposing funding for the Water Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act, created last year by Congress to help leverage funding for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects. But she said it should not be a "replacement" for the state revolving funds, which EPA has proposed to cut $53 million from overall.
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) also pressed EPA about the proposed cut and the administration's plan to shift funding from wastewater funds to drinking water funds.
"Our states are crying out for more resources in the state revolving fund," Cardin said.
McCarthy defended the proposed SRF budget, noting that it represented a significant boost from President Obama's budget request last fiscal year.
"We certainly recognize there are significant challenges out there, and we are doing the best we can in a conservative and appropriately designed budget," McCarthy said.
McCarthy added that the agency is looking at more "creative" ways of funding infrastructure for drinking water and wastewater treatment and that addressing the gaps would require private as well as public funds.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time
Add recipients
Suggested