Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - April 2, 2019
-
(ACC Mentioned) Experts Urge Voluntary Data Submission to Support TSCA Evaluations, Prioritisation
Apr 2, 2019 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has cautioned that, in the absence of industry providing it with high quality data, it will need to use conservative assumptions in its prioritisation and risk evaluation of chemicals under TSCA. And a range of experts at a... -
(ACC Mentioned) Dirty Devices Await FDA Alternative to Cancer-Causing Sterilizer
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ayanna Alexander
Dirty stents, needles, and medical mesh need a new sterilizer because companies that use a common—but cancer-causing—cleaner keep closing. However, the FDA’s options may be limited. More than half of all medical supplies are... -
(ACC Mentioned) Window of Opportunity to Deal with Harmful Chemicals Closing, UN Warns
Apr 2, 2019 | Chemistry World
By Maria Burke
Almost 20 years ago, governments from around the world agreed to minimise the harmful effects of chemicals and waste on health and the environment by 2020. But they are failing to meet this target and, with the chemical industry -
Top Democrats Press Wheeler on IRIS Program
Apr 2, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
The top Democrats on the appropriations subcommittees funding EPA are accusing Administrator Andrew Wheeler of violating congressional directives by attempting to "undermine" the agency's independent program assessing chemical... -
Appropriators: EPA Trying to 'Debilitate' Testing Program
Apr 2, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
Top Democratic appropriators are accusing EPA of "undercutting" its chemical risk assessment efforts "in violation of Congressional directives" and are ratcheting up their oversight of the agency. At issue are changes EPA has made to... -
FDA Formalises Hold on Lead Acetate Ban
Apr 2, 2019 | Chemical Watch
The US FDA has officially placed a hold on its rule banning the use of lead acetate as a colour additive in hair dye, with immediate effect. To determine the rule’s fate, the agency will next hold an administrative hearing – a rare process that... -
Los Angeles County Halts Use of Roundup Until Safety Risks Can Be Determined
Apr 2, 2019 | The Legal Examiner
By Roopal Luhana
Shortly after a California court linked glyphosate, the herbicide in the popular weed killer Roundup, to a plaintiff’s cancer, Los Angeles County officials ordered a moratorium on that same weed killer, citing a need for further research... -
Calif. Jury Orders Chevron to Pay $21m for Cancer Claims
Apr 2, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
A Northern California jury ordered Chevron Corp. to pay the families of two brothers who died of cancer a combined $21.4 million after concluding the company failed to properly warn the men about the dangers of a toxic solvent they... -
(ACC Mentioned) Shell to Leave Oil Lobby Group Over Climate Policy Concerns
Apr 2, 2019 | Bloomberg
By Kelly Gilblom
Royal Dutch Shell Plc’s position on climate change is misaligned with about half of the trade associations it’s a part of, and the disagreement with one is so severe the company will let its membership lapse next year. The findings were... -
Supreme Court Could Be Best Shot for Alaska Offshore Drilling
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Lee
The Trump administration’s best hope to overturn a March 29 lower court decision shutting down oil and gas drilling off the Alaskan coast may lie across the country at the U.S. Supreme Court, environmental lawyers said. All five... -
Federal Court’s Rebuke Threatens Interior’s Offshore Drilling Plan
Apr 1, 2019 | Politico Pro
By Ben Lefebvre
The Trump administration's upcoming offshore drilling plan may need some reworking after the federal court ruling late Friday that upheld a ban on drilling in some Arctic and Atlantic Ocean areas. The Interior Department is drawing... -
West Virginia Governor Vetoes Bills Pushed by Natural Gas Industry
Apr 2, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice in an unexpected move has vetoed two bills aimed at helping smaller natural gas producers in the state. -
Oil Industry Urges Trump to Appeal Arctic Ruling
Apr 2, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Oil and gas executives are urging President Donald Trump to appeal a federal court ruling Friday that his plans to expand offshore oil and gas drilling into the Arctic Ocean are unlawful. On Friday U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason... -
Ewire: Shell to Drop AFPM Membership over Climate Stance
Apr 2, 2019 | Inside EPA
Shell, the world's second-largest oil and gas producer, says it will drop its membership in a trade group representing refiners due to “material misalignment” in a range of climate change policy positions, even though the company will... -
Pipeline Leaks Rule Becomes Top Priority After Fatal Explosions
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is switching gears to work on pipeline leak detection regulations after a deadly Massachusetts gas pipeline explosion last year. The agency’s proposed leak detection rule... -
Officials Blow up Derailed Cars, Sending Fireball Soaring
Apr 2, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By Brady McCombs
A massive fireball soared into the sky in the central Utah desert after officials blew up 11 derailed tanker cars containing propane and biodiesel. The controlled detonation Sunday night was the safest way to deal with the... -
North Dakota Decries Washington's Oil Train Safety Bill
Apr 2, 2019 | KFGO
North Dakota's top oil regulator is trying to convince legislators in Washington state that a proposal they're considering to reduce the volatility of Bakken crude oil transported by rail is not supported by science. The... -
E&C to Mark up First Climate Change Bill April 3
Apr 1, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
The House Energy and Commerce Committee announced it would mark up legislation, H.R. 9 (116), barring President Donald Trump from withdrawing from the landmark Paris climate accord on April 3. The legislation, backed by... -
Judges Struggle with Finality of EPA ‘Once In, Always in’ Memo
Apr 1, 2019 | Politico Pro
By Alex Guillén
A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel today struggled to determine whether they have jurisdiction over an EPA guidance memo reversing a long-standing policy designed to maintain strict limits on air pollution from power plants, factories... -
Urban War Games Draw Environmental Suit Against Air Force
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mike Leonard
The U.S. Air Force is facing a lawsuit alleging it authorized a “permanent” urban war games program across southern Idaho, including in Boise, without performing mandatory environmental reviews. Rather than meaningfully reviewing... -
Democratic Green New Deal Defectors Chart Their Own Climate Path
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
As the founder of a company that turns industrial emissions into energy, Sean Casten turned a career spent fighting climate change into the centerpiece of his successful campaign for Congress. But don’t expect the first-year House... -
New York Is Poised To Pass A Comprehensive Climate Bill
Apr 2, 2019 | Natural Resource Defense Council
By Jackson Morris and Miles Farmer
Long before grassroots activists captured the nation’s attention with the Green New Deal, the New York Renews coalition was hard at work in New York State crafting a bold vision to fight climate change that put equity principles front and... -
New Mexico Environment Department Receives Grant
Apr 2, 2019 | Water & Wastes Digest
In Roswell, N.M., an old dry cleaning business left behind toxic chemicals after closing up shop. This caused the site to be declared a U.S. Environmental Agency (EPA) Superfund site. According to Irrigation & Green Industry, the site...
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Experts Urge Voluntary Data Submission to Support TSCA Evaluations, Prioritisation
Apr 2, 2019 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has cautioned that, in the absence of industry providing it with high quality data, it will need to use conservative assumptions in its prioritisation and risk evaluation of chemicals under TSCA. And a range of experts at a recent conference has joined the agency in urging industry to voluntarily submit information – in particular, exposure data – to support these efforts.
Speaking at last month’s GlobalChem conference in Washington DC, EPA’s Joel Wolf said the agency needs to learn about the manufacturing, processing, distribution, use and disposal of substances to support its efforts to prioritiseand then evaluate them.
And he said that while the agency relies on such information sources as the TSCA chemical data reporting (CDR) rule, the toxics release inventory (TRI) and data from state and federal agencies, he also emphasised the importance of voluntary industry submissions.
"The better the information we have, obviously the higher quality and the less conservative assumptions that get built into any decisions that we make," said Mr Wolf, who is chief of the agency’s existing chemicals programme.
Bill Greggs, an industry consultant, agreed that without key information the "EPA really only has one option: and that option is to take a conservative approach."
"That’s not a good thing, I don’t think, for your chemical or for your chemical use," he told industry attendees.
Regarding the types of information that are most essential, Martha Marrepese, a partner at Wiley Rein, identified exposure data as the biggest gap.
"We’re really in great shape, in general, on the tox side," she said. "But where we really need to go is [to] dig a little deeper, in all of our work, on the exposure side."
Successfully generating such information, she said, "will be a tremendous contribution of this [the TSCA] programme, and it will also make the outcomes of the programme be much more predictable and reasonable," she said.
"Risk evaluations involve complex decisions that we have to make," agreed the EPA’s Mr Wolf. "The more comprehensive the exposure information, the most informative [it will be] to the work that we’re going to do."
Mr Wolf acknowledged that substances in articles can prove difficult for industry, particularly when a company might import an article and not know what it contains.
"We recognise these challenges, but we still need to get an understanding of the chemicals in various articles and products, so we continue to try to figure out new ways to engage in that area," he said.
The American Chemistry Council’s Steve Risotto agreed, saying that "use and exposure may be the most critical part of the evaluation."
Consortia
To support these efforts, experts have recommended that industry work to form consortia and generate data the agency needs.
"I want to encourage industry to provide data voluntarily to EPA for these exercises, especially exposure data," said Ms Marrapese. "I think that consortia – dedicated consortia, downstream consortia – for exposure data collection is going to be critical."
Mr Risotto added that, when the EPA designates a substance as high priority, it has probably already determined that it has enough hazard information to form the basis of an assessment. Additional data, he said, needs to come early in the process.
"If there’s more data that you want to provide, provide it quickly. If there’s more research that you want to do, start it now," he said. "The sooner that you can get that information in to the agency for evaluation, the better off you will be, the more likely that will be incorporated into the draft evaluation."
Bill Griggs agreed: "Given the statutory deadlines, today may not be too soon to get started" with data gathering and consortia-building.
https://chemicalwatch.com/75839/experts-urge-voluntary-data-submission-to-support-tsca-evaluations-prioritisation
-
(ACC Mentioned) Dirty Devices Await FDA Alternative to Cancer-Causing Sterilizer
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ayanna Alexander
Dirty stents, needles, and medical mesh need a new sterilizer because companies that use a common—but cancer-causing—cleaner keep closing. However, the FDA’s options may be limited.
More than half of all medical supplies are disinfected with ethylene oxide (EtO), a colorless, odorless gas that the EPA has labeled a carcinogen. The chemical is facing new scrutiny after elevated ethylene oxide emissions from Sterigenics U.S. LLC’s Willowbrook, Ill., facility prompted outrage from local residents and the state’s senators.
Sterigenics ultimately closed the facility in February, and Viant Medical Inc., a Michigan-based sterilizer that also uses ethylene oxide, will also shut its doors later this year. Sterigenics and Viant Medical clean over 600 medical products, according to the FDA.
That’s left the Food and Drug Administration scrambling for alternatives, but the instruments that are sterilized with the gas are very specific, Lawrence Muscarella, a hospital safety consultant who has written extensively about the problems of cleaning and sterilizing endoscopes and other medical devices, said.
“If we use a different sterilization technology, at least one perceived to be safer, we want to ensure we’re not damaging the instrument, which could cause no net gain and harm to patients,” he said.
FDA Considering Options
The FDA issued a four-step plan March 26 intended to settle any disruption from the closings and help device makers transition to other sterilization sites. It includes a new ethylene oxide resources webpage and a device shortage inbox for makers, patients, and organizations to tell them if products become scarce. The agency still plans to discuss the possibility of alternatives for this type of sterilization later this year.
The American Chemistry Council, a chemical industry trade association, said it isn’t aware of any proven alternate to ethylene oxide.
The options need to be scientifically evaluated and not driven by political winds, Muscarella said.
“It’s also fair to ask where were all of these discussions five years or 10 years ago?” he said. “FDA has approved and promoted EtO gas in the past, so now if we plan to mitigate its use, let’s do so with objective science using safe technologies that address all concerns, including cost-effectiveness, sterilization efficacy, and material compatibility, as well as environmental. I want everyone to be safe.”
The American Hospital Association declined to comment.
Too much exposure to ethylene oxide over time has been linked to breast cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, lymphocytic leukemia, brain damage, and difficulty breathing, according to the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2016 Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) report, which describes the health effects of chemical exposure.More Monitoring,
Alternatives
Illinois Sens. Tammy Duckworth (D) and Dick Durbin (D) told Bloomberg Law they’ve encouraged the FDA to seek alternatives to ethylene oxide.
Medline Industries, another medical product sterilizer, said it uses many methods of sterilization, including gamma radiation, e-beam, dry heat, and terminal steam sterilization. These methods aren’t necessarily the best for low-heat specific devices.
In the meantime, Duckworth and Durbin want the EPA to expand its ethylene oxide monitoring to other sites that use the gas in Illinois.
“Results of the EPA’s air quality monitoring confirmed that high levels of ethylene oxide were being emitted by Sterigenics, posing a significant public health threat to the people of Willowbrook and the surrounding communities,” they said in a March 29 statement.
The Illinois EPA turned down a similar request from Kristina Kovarik, the mayor of Gurnee, Ill., earlier this month.
“The [FDA] recognizes that sterile medical devices are critical for preventing infections and ensuring patients have safe surgeries and medical treatments, and, crucially, that a large number of medical device types cannot be sterilized without the use of ethylene oxide,” the Advanced Medical Technology Association said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/dirty-devices-await-fda-alternative-to-cancer-causing-sterilizer
-
(ACC Mentioned) Window of Opportunity to Deal with Harmful Chemicals Closing, UN Warns
Apr 2, 2019 | Chemistry World
By Maria Burke
Almost 20 years ago, governments from around the world agreed to minimise the harmful effects of chemicals and waste on health and the environment by 2020. But they are failing to meet this target and, with the chemical industry growing rapidly, a new UN report is calling for urgent action.
The UN’s second Global Chemicals Outlook was recently released as countries met to discuss global chemicals policies beyond 2020 under the auspices of the UN strategic approach to international chemicals management (SAICM). The report suggests that there is still a window of opportunity to develop a ‘global platform’ for the sound management of chemicals and waste beyond 2020. But this needs widespread global commitment from all relevant sectors and stakeholders. It urges countries to honour previous international commitments, scale-up collaborative action and do more to track progress. Sounding a note of optimism, it says ‘innovative new solutions’ to chemicals and waste management could protect human health and the environment, while also delivering economic benefits in ‘the high tens of billions of dollars annually’.
Behind the report’s recommendations lie concern over strong growth in chemical production, which is projected to double by 2030. ‘Whether the growth in chemicals becomes a net positive or a net negative for humanity depends on how we manage the chemicals challenge,’ said Joyce Msuya, acting executive director of UN Environment. ‘What is clear is that we must do much more, together.’
The chemicals boom is being driven by economic development, population dynamics and other global megatrends such as growth in related sectors like construction and textiles. Chemical production and consumption is shifting to emerging economies – China in particular. The Asia–Pacific region is projected to account for more than two-thirds of global sales by 2030. High growth rates are also expected in Africa and the Middle East.
2020 goal out of reach
Back in 2002, the World Summit on Sustainable Development adopted the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. Governments sat down together and agreed ‘to achieve, by 2020, that chemicals are used and produced in ways that lead to the minimisation of significant adverse effects on human health and the environment.’ But the latest UN report warns that countries will not reach this target.
Progress has been uneven. While some legally binding treaties and voluntary instruments are working, such as the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances, others are not. A review of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants identified gaps in regulatory and assessment schemes for industrial chemicals and the large remaining stockpiles of obsolete pesticides and PCBs. Meanwhile, the SAICM, which supports a voluntary, comprehensive life-cycle approach for hazardous chemicals, is a good example of collaboration to raise awareness, increase knowledge and reduce risks. But it suffers from several weaknesses, such as poor engagement with different sectors, a lack of tools to measure progress and limited financing, and insufficient and uneven advances in significant areas such as illegal international traffic in toxic chemicals and waste.
What’s more, developing countries and economies in transition still lack basic chemicals and waste management systems such as pollutant release registers. The UN is particularly concerned that more than 120 countries still have not implemented the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), intended to provide a common language for classifying hazardous chemicals.
The scale of the problem
Production processes continue to generate significant chemical releases to air, water and soil, as well as large amounts of waste, including hazardous waste, the report notes. Moreover, hazardous chemicals are released in home setting by ‘chemical-intensive’ products such as consumer goods leaking phthalates and brominated flame retardants. Developing countries and transitioning economies face particular challenges, such as the release of heavy metals from battery recycling and mercury from artisanal and small-scale gold mining. Chemicals of concern are also routinely detected in humans. Examples include dioxins and furans in breast milk, phthalates in urine and heavy metals in human blood.
‘The burden of disease from chemicals is high, and vulnerable populations are particularly at risk,’ the report states. In 2018, the World Health Organization estimated the ‘disease burden’ preventable through sound management and reduction of chemicals in the environment at around 1.6 million lives. This is likely to be an underestimate, the report says.
Animals are also threatened. Examples include suppression of immune systems in seals and turtles due to exposure to PCBs and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and feminisation of male fish due to exposure to synthetic oestrogens.
However, the report stresses that solutions do exist. There is hope because government are taking regulatory action on chemicals, while some ‘frontrunner’ companies are developing processes and standards that go far beyond what is legislated. Consumers are also playing a big part in driving demand for safer products and production. The report also notes that science can play a role in cleaning up chemical production, noting that green chemistry is a developing field and universities are changing the way they teach chemistry.
The report has come up with a list of recommendations for policymakers and stakeholders, while emphasising that commitments already made, such as implementing the GHS, require ‘urgent attention and renewed commitment’. Other recommendations include seeking global commitment for an ambitious and comprehensive framework for chemicals and waste beyond 2020, mobilising resources, assessing and sharing chemical risk assessments and implementing life-cycle approaches to make chemical production far more sustainable.
Work still to be done
Michael Walls, vice president of regulatory and technical affairs at the American Chemistry Council, which currently holds the secretariat for the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA), says that the ICCA supports the report’s call for a global approach to manage chemicals and waste. However, he adds that the report fails to discuss that health and environmental effects are ‘multifactorial and should be deeply analysed’. Governments, industry and other stakeholders have made significant progress, although he acknowledges that work remains to be done.
‘Under the auspices of the SAICM, ICCA has partnered with governments and NGOs to collaborate in ways that would not otherwise be possible without a voluntary approach to address the adoption and implementation of programmes and policies to safely manage chemicals and waste,’ Walls says.
One of industry’s key contributions to the SAICM is the Responsible Care programme for the safe production, transport, use and disposal of chemicals and waste, used in 68 countries and representing 82% of global chemical production. ‘SAICM has highlighted that the key contribution to the sound management of chemicals worldwide needs to come from effective and pragmatic regulatory approaches at the national level, supported by voluntary initiatives such as Responsible Care,’ Wells adds.
The European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) also supports the report’s key messages and adds that the key to improving sustainable management of chemicals is industry engagement. It argues that global chemicals growth does not necessarily have to result in more damage to human health and the environment if nations’ infrastructure and governance are strengthened. The first step should be implementing the GHS, followed by global implementation of multilateral environmental agreements, such as the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions on hazardous chemicals and wastes and the Minamata Convention on mercury. Cefic also supports the SAICM objectives. ‘Under the SAICM beyond 2020 discussions, we are proposing to improve information sharing on chemicals and support to developing countries to develop their infrastructures,’ it says.
However, Genon Jensen, executive director of the charity Health and Environment Alliance, warns: ‘Lessons need to be drawn from the failure to reach the 2020 goal. While the size of the global chemical industry is estimated to double in the next 10 years, this situation could get even worse.’ Having said that, Jensen is cautiously optimistic. The SAICM meeting is a key opportunity for governments to show their commitment to finding a public health solution that goes beyond voluntary agreements, for instance through the mandatory adoption of national action plans and systems, she says. These would hold industry legally and financially accountable for the impact of their products.
‘Protecting our health and those of future generations is far from impossible,’ she adds. The EU, which has started to tackle several chemicals of concern, including hormone-altering endocrine disruptors like bisphenol A, is a good role model. ‘Europe can free its environment from toxic chemicals if it starts defending its unique precautionary approach to legislating these substances.’
For Eliot Metzger, a senior associate at the World Resources Institute, the report poses an important question about growth. ‘We have been encouraging companies to “do the math” when it comes to expected future demands for their products and services. But few industries have fully grasped the implications. If they were to meet that future demand with today’s products, what would that mean for all the environmental and social stresses we are already seeing? Those that ignore the elephant in the room will be caught unprepared when new innovators – or social and environmental pressures – completely disrupt their industry.’
Metzger points out that the chemical industry includes several companies that have operated for 100 years or more, and have transformed several times over those decades. Companies can seek to do this by, for example, setting science-based greenhouse gas targets through an initiative run by WRI, he points out. ‘The hope is that some of those organisations will be able to transform again. But they will need to shift far more quickly now to new models of production and consumption to meet needs in tomorrow’s markets. One of the best ways to do that is to align their growth with what science tells us is necessary to avoid major environmental and economic disruptions.’
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/window-of-opportunity-to-deal-with-harmful-chemicals-closing-un-warns/3010318.article
-
Top Democrats Press Wheeler on IRIS Program
Apr 2, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Annie Snider
The top Democrats on the appropriations subcommittees funding EPA are accusing Administrator Andrew Wheeler of violating congressional directives by attempting to "undermine" the agency's independent program assessing chemical risks.
In a letter sent to Wheeler, who testifies before the House Appropriations subpanel this morning and its Senate counterpart on Wednesday, Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.) laid out "deep concerns" about a recent Government Accountability Office report that found political interference with the Integrated Risk Information System program. Specifically, the report found that political officials took steps to limit the number of chemicals being reviewed by the program and reassigned nearly the entire staff of the small program to support the agency's toxics program.
"We view these actions by EPA leadership as deliberate efforts to undermine the continued operation of the IRIS program," the Democrats wrote.
They point to language in the fiscal 2019 appropriations bill funding the IRIS program at the previous year's level and requiring it to stay within the Office of Research and Development — a specification that came after the Trump administration tried to move it to the toxics office where it would have been overseen by a former top expert for the chemicals industry.
The fact that, despite this congressional direction, EPA reassigned IRIS staff to do work for the toxics office "directly violates Congressional directives," the pair of appropriators wrote. They argued that if EPA needed more funding for the toxics program they should have requested it from Congress.
EPA did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
WHAT'S NEXT: EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler is due to testify before the House Appropriations Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Subcommittee this morning and before the Senate Interior, EPA and Related Agencies Subcommittee Wednesday.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2019/04/top-democrats-press-wheeler-on-iris-program-2987897
-
Appropriators: EPA Trying to 'Debilitate' Testing Program
Apr 2, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
Top Democratic appropriators are accusing EPA of "undercutting" its chemical risk assessment efforts "in violation of Congressional directives" and are ratcheting up their oversight of the agency.
At issue are changes EPA has made to the chemical-testing priorities and staffing resources of its Integrated Risk Information System, a science-focused program housed in the agency's research arm (E&E News PM, March 4).
After the Republican-controlled Senate released a fiscal 2019 spending bill that sought to zero out IRIS's $22 million budget, appropriators passed an omnibus bill last year that maintained funding for the program and directed that it continue to reside "within the Office of Research and Development" (Greenwire, March 22, 2018).
But last month, an IRIS audit by the Government Accountability Office found "EPA leadership took steps to effectively cut the IRIS program's funding by reducing its workload by 50 percent and reassigning significant portions of staff time to other activities," wrote Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.).
"We view these steps as clear efforts to debilitate the IRIS program," the lawmakers said in the March 28 letter obtained by E&E News. Udall and McCollum are ranking member and chairwoman, respectively, of each chamber's Interior-EPA spending panel.
They're calling on EPA to "immediately comply" with its budget and respond to a series of questions about the amount of time IRIS staff had spent working for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention — a regulatory arm of the agency that's historically been more prone to political interference — and how the staffers were paid for their efforts.
Asked for comment on the letter, EPA spokesman Michael Abboud said "we will respond through the proper channels."
Wheeler defended EPA's fiscal 2020 budget request in McCollum's subcommittee this morning and will face Udall tomorrow (see related story).
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/04/02/stories/1060140265
-
FDA Formalises Hold on Lead Acetate Ban
Apr 2, 2019 | Chemical Watch
The US FDA has officially placed a hold on its rule banning the use of lead acetate as a colour additive in hair dye, with immediate effect.
To determine the rule’s fate, the agency will next hold an administrative hearing – a rare process that the Environmental Defense Fund’s chemicals policy director Tom Neltner said could take eight years or more. While certain companies have already pulled lead acetate hair products from their shelves, any that remain are likely to be allowed to remain in the meantime.
The change in course comes in light of comments submitted last autumn by personal care products company Combe International, which questioned FDA evidence that showed there is no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm for the use of lead acetate in progressive hair dyes. These are applied to the scalp and gradually darken grey hair.
By law, the FDA is required to place a hold on the rule while it addresses objections via legal proceedings. And in a 1 April Federal Register notice – the publication of which was allegedly delayed due to the partial government shutdown earlier this year – the FDA has formalised the fact that it is addressing Combe’s objections and pausing the rule.
But it clarifies: "This action does not reflect any change in our determination that new data demonstrate that there is ‘no longer a reasonable certainty of no harm’ from the use of this colour additive."
The notice represents the latest development in a years-long process of petition and objection.
In 2017, a group of NGOs including the EDF petitioned the FDA to prohibit the use of lead acetate as an additive in hair dye. After further research, the agency issued an October 2018 final rule granting the petition. However, the manufacturer Combe objected and requested a formal evidentiary public hearing on the rule.
According to Mr Neltner, the agency will next explain the process and give stakeholders an opportunity to intervene and present evidence on either side of the issue.
The EDF plans to take that opportunity, continued Mr Neltner, and he anticipates other organisations will as well.
https://chemicalwatch.com/75806/fda-formalises-hold-on-lead-acetate-ban
-
Los Angeles County Halts Use of Roundup Until Safety Risks Can Be Determined
Apr 2, 2019 | The Legal Examiner
By Roopal Luhana
Shortly after a California court linked glyphosate, the herbicide in the popular weed killer Roundup, to a plaintiff’s cancer, Los Angeles County officials ordered a moratorium on that same weed killer, citing a need for further research on the herbicide’s safety risks.
“I am asking county departments to stop the use of this herbicide until public health and environmental professionals can determine if it’s safe for further use in L.A. County and explore alternative methods for vegetation management,” Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger stated.
More than 50 other U.S. cities and counties have already banned the use of glyphosate from schoolyards and playgrounds.
Courts and Counties Considering the Question of Whether Roundup Causes Cancer
Back in 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) released a statement saying that glyphosate was “probably carcinogenic to humans.” They based their conclusion on the review of the scientific literature at the time, though not all studies on the herbicide were included.
Monsanto, the manufacturer of Roundup, disputed the findings, pointing to studies that have not found a link between glyphosate and cancer. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies glyphosate as not likely to be carcinogenic, but a more recent review published in the scientific journal Environmental Sciences Europe shows that the EPA ignored many large peer-reviewed studies linking glyphosate to cancer.
A new study from researchers at the University of Washington published in the journal Mutation Research adds to the evidence showing that glyphosate may increase the risk of certain forms of cancer. Scientists analyzed the most recent update of the Agricultural Health Study cohort published in 2018, along with five case-control studies, and found that glyphosate does increase the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma by 41 percent.
Meanwhile, individuals who have used Roundup for years, particularly those using it in a professional capacity, have filed lawsuits against Monsanto, claiming that the company failed to warn about the dangerous risks associated with the product. Hundreds of those cases have been consolidated in San Francisco for pre-trial proceedings.
In the first case to go to trial in that litigation, the judge bifurcated the trial so that the jury had to first answer the question of whether the weed killer caused the plaintiff’s cancer. The jury found in favor of the plaintiff on that question, so now the court will consider the question of whether Monsanto will be held liable for the plaintiff’s injuries.
Los Angeles County Seeks Recommendations from Department of Public Works
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors directed the Department of Public Works to coordinate with public health and other experts to examine the evidence on glyphosate and cancer, explore alternatives to the product, and identify best practices used in other jurisdictions. The department is supposed to submit a report with its recommendations to the county within 30 days.
https://newyork.legalexaminer.com/health/los-angeles-county-halts-use-of-roundup-until-safety-risks-can-be-determined/
-
Calif. Jury Orders Chevron to Pay $21m for Cancer Claims
Apr 2, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
A Northern California jury ordered Chevron Corp. to pay the families of two brothers who died of cancer a combined $21.4 million after concluding the company failed to properly warn the men about the dangers of a toxic solvent they worked with at a company-owned tire factory.
The San Francisco Chronicle reported that the Contra Costa County jury's verdict Friday came after three days of deliberations and four weeks of trial.
The jury concluded that the solvent benzene caused the cancers that killed brothers Gary Eaves and Randy Eaves. The brothers worked at a tire manufacturer in Arkansas owned by Unocal for decades. San Ramon, Calif.-based Chevron purchased Unocal in 2005. Both brothers at times worked as a "spray booth operator" responsible for spraying the solvent on tires. Gary also hauled tires coated in benzene.
Gary died of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2015 at age 61. Randy died of leukemia in 2018, also at age 61.
The families' lawyer, Mary Alexander, argued that none of the plant workers wore respirators or protective clothing while working with the solvent. Alexander also argued that workers were never advised to handle benzene inside of a ventilation booth.
The families of the men filed their wrongful death lawsuit in the San Francisco suburb of Contra Costa County where Chevron is based.
Chevron said it is mulling its next legal step.
"We do not believe that Unocal had any role in the claimed injuries and we are evaluating the jury's decision and the court's rulings in this matter," the company said in a statement.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/04/02/stories/1060140163
-
(ACC Mentioned) Shell to Leave Oil Lobby Group Over Climate Policy Concerns
Apr 2, 2019 | Bloomberg
By Kelly Gilblom
Royal Dutch Shell Plc’s position on climate change is misaligned with about half of the trade associations it’s a part of, and the disagreement with one is so severe the company will let its membership lapse next year.
The findings were issued in a first-of-its-kind report on whether the company’s association with lobbying groups is undermining its work on climate change. The report is likely to reverberate across the industry, with most of Shell’s peers also members of the same groups and already facing enormous pressure from shareholders to line up their business models with the Paris climate accord.
Shell will leave the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers association next year because of its climate-change policy stance. It also named nine other groups that it disagrees with, including the powerful American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, but said it will “engage further” with them.
Organization Area of Misalignment
American Fuel & Petchem Manufacturers Paris accord, carbon pricing
American Chemistry Council Methane rules
American Petroleum Institute Methane rules, Clean Power Plan, Paris accord
BusinessEurope Carbon trading reform
Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers Paris accord, carbon pricing
European Chemical Industry Council Carbon trading reform
FuelsEuropeCarbon trading reform
National Association of Manufacturers Carbon tax, CAFE standards, Clean Power Plan
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Paris accord, carbon pricing, Clean Power Plan
Western States Petroleum Association Carbon pricing, “lobbying approach”
“The publication of this report is a first step to greater transparency around our activities in this area,” Shell said in the report. “Shell’s investors, and more broadly civil society, must be confident that we engage constructively with others on climate change.”
Trade associations have long been a target of environmental activists who support tougher regulation on the industry. Following investor pressure, Shell said last year it would prove through greater reporting that it isn’t funneling money into institutions that hinder progress on cutting greenhouse-gas emissions.
Of the nine groups it’s misaligned with but will stay a member, Shell only disagrees with some of their positions. For example, it said the API fought to repeal rules around methane emissions in 2017, while the company wanted those to stay.
Shell said it found a “material misalignment” with the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, something it cannot rectify. Unlike Shell, the group neither supports carbon pricing or hasn’t publicly supported the goal of the Paris accord, the Anglo-Dutch oil major said.
AFPM works on “myriad issues” for its members, and “like any family, we aren’t always fully aligned on every policy, but we always strive to reach consensus positions on policies that are in the best interest of our membership and the communities and consumers that rely on us,” Chet Thompson, the group’s chief executive officer, said in an emailed statement.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-02/shell-to-leave-oil-lobby-group-on-concerns-over-climate-policy
-
Supreme Court Could Be Best Shot for Alaska Offshore Drilling
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Lee
The Trump administration’s best hope to overturn a March 29 lower court decision shutting down oil and gas drilling off the Alaskan coast may lie across the country at the U.S. Supreme Court, environmental lawyers said.
All five conservative justices on the high court have shown skepticism about agency claims of authority where Congress hasn’t clearly delegated it—the core issue in the Alaska case. A federal district judge struck down an executive order from President Donald Trump that opened Arctic waters to oil and gas drilling.
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act can be seen as a “one-way ratchet” that grants the president the right to withdraw certain areas for drilling, but not for revoking prior withdrawals, said Patrick Parenteau, an environmental law professor at Vermont Law School in Royalton, Vt., and currently a visiting professor at the University of New Mexico law school in Albuquerque.
“That would leave it to Congress to decide whether to either amend the OCSLA or revoke or modify any prior withdrawal,” Parenteau said. “That might appeal to the conservative view of the separation of powers doctrine.”
Conservatives have recently been ramping up their attacks on long-standing agency deference doctrines as part of a broader plan to give the power to interpret laws to Congress and the courts.
The March 29 decision by U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Gleason of the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska restores Obama-era protections for the Chukchi and Beaufort seas in the Arctic Ocean, as well as waters in the North Atlantic coast.
Randall Luthi, president of the National Ocean Industries Association, said he thinks an appeals court will have good reason to review the Alaska decision because the federal leasing process is revisited every five years.
That gives the administration a chance to review new information about the need for oil and gas leasing and its environmental impacts, according to Luthi.
“Congress certainly didn’t intend these things to be set in stone forever,” he said.
A Close Call
But even at the Supreme Court, the decision would be a close call, because the justices would still have to grapple with the further question of whether Trump’s reversal was based on “neutral and objective factors,” according to Parenteau.
The late Justice Antonin Scalia ruled in a leading administrative law case from 2009 that a federal agency needs a more detailed justification for reversing course if it wants to disregard “facts and circumstances that underlay or were engendered by the prior policy.”
Further, “arguing that Congress meant the opposite of what it said in a statute is always an uphill battle in court, and really would be in the current Supreme Court,” said Hillary Hoffman, a natural resources law professor at Vermont Law School.
A late March Supreme Court decision about an Alaska moose hunter who wanted the right to ride his hovercraft on a state river showed that the justices will take Congress at its word when interpreting statutory powers, according to Hoffman.
Case law has also firmly established that Congress, under the property clause of the Constitution, decides what authority to delegate to the Secretary of the Interior, and reserves to itself any powers not delegated, such as the power to remove conservation protections, according to Hilary Tompkins, an environmental lawyer at Hogan Lovells in Washington and a former solicitor for the Interior Department.
The property clause generally gives Congress the authority to regulate and dispose of territory or other federal government property.
Clock Is Ticking
The clock is also working against the Trump administration. An appeal of the Alaska decision would first go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, meaning a Supreme Court review almost certainly couldn’t happen until after the 2020 election—by which time a Democratic president who doesn’t want to open up offshore drilling could be in office.
Moreover, lower-court decisions often color the way appeals courts view the same set of facts, according to Sean Hecht, an environmental law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.
“In theory, an appellate court should not be giving deference to a lower court’s determination of a purely legal issue,” Hecht said. “In real life, if a court writes a well-reasoned decision and it comes from a respected judge, that’s going to be something the court of appeals takes into account.”
DOJ ‘Won’t Let This Lie’
The Trump administration hasn’t signaled whether it will appeal the decision. But an appeal seems likely, because the administration and such allies as the state of Alaska and the American Petroleum Institute—both of which were intervenors in the litigation—are determined to expand drilling.
Further, the Justice Department “won’t let this ruling lie, as it jeopardizes their argument in other cases involving the Antiquities Act,” Hogan Lovells’ Tompkins said.
The Antiquities Act allows the president to protect buildings, sites, and “objects of historic or scientific interest by designating them as National Monuments,” according to information on the National Park Service website.
The Alaska ruling doesn’t establish legal precedent, but other courts “will refer to this as potentially persuasive,” Hecht said.
That means the decision could apply to the Trump administration’s plans to reduce national monuments onshore. The Antiquities Act, like OCSLA, doesn’t have language directly addressing whether a president has the authority to undo a previous president’s decision.
Natalie Barefoot, an environmental justice professor at the University of Miami, predicted that the administration on appeal will likely take up the same arguments it did in the lower court.
No Case Law
Others said the lack of precedent makes it difficult to predict which way an appeals court will rule.
“There’s really no case law on the issue, so it’s a matter of statutory interpretation,” said Alexandra Klass, an environmental law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. “No president has tried to undo the work of his predecessor using these statutes in such a radical way.”
Law scholars broadly predicted the Ninth Circuit will uphold the Alaska district court ruling.
“I would assume the Ninth Circuit would affirm because this decision is firmly based in the Constitution and section 12(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which is very clear about the president’s power to prevent offshore drilling and other forms of mineral development by withdrawal,” Hoffman said.
Appeal Nearly a Certainty
Virtually no observers thought the Trump administration will accept Judge Gleason’s ruling without a challenge.
Parties on the losing end of a district court decision do sometimes opt not to appeal, especially if they don’t want to risk another loss in the appeals courts, “which would carry more weight,” said Thomas Jackson, an environmental lawyer at Baker Botts LLP in Washington.
“But that seems unlikely here,” Jackson said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/supreme-court-could-be-best-shot-for-alaska-offshore-drilling
-
Federal Court’s Rebuke Threatens Interior’s Offshore Drilling Plan
Apr 1, 2019 | Politico Pro
By Ben Lefebvre
The Trump administration's upcoming offshore drilling plan may need some reworking after the federal court ruling late Friday that upheld a ban on drilling in some Arctic and Atlantic Ocean areas.
The Interior Department is drawing up a new five-year leasing plan that is slated to include some of the areas off Alaska's coast that President Donald Trump sought to make available to the oil and gas industry through an executive order last year revoking President Barack Obama's 2016 order that banned drilling there. But U.S. District Court of Alaska Judge Sharon Gleason's decision rejected that move, saying Trump overstepped his authority, and that only Congress could lift the Obama protections, which also included portions of the north and mid-Atlantic.
While the Trump administration is expected to appeal Gleason’s decision, the issue is unlikely to be settled until it reaches the Supreme Court, which could take years — a timetable that effectively takes the Arctic waters off the oil industry's radar.
“Out of Alaska for the foreseeable future,” one source at a oil company with offshore operations said of the court decision.
Interior's initial offshore drilling proposal issued early last year called for opening nearly all federal waters to oil and gas exploration. That triggered a bipartisan political backlash that prompted then-Secretary Ryan Zinke to hint to at least half a dozen states that their coasts would not be affected, including several on the Atlantic. But Interior has said it plans to offer leases in Alaska's Beaufort Sea this year as part of the new five-year plan.
A spokesperson for Interior declined to comment on pending litigation.
Interior's upcoming five-year drilling plan — which was originally expected last year — could still include analysis of the costs and benefits of offering those areas for oil and gas production, said Randall Luthi, president of National Ocean Industries Association. But it would have to note that the areas in question would remain off the table pending a Supreme Court decision or action from Congress.
“One [option] is Interior could continue, but with the caveat that they evaluated the areas currently under the 2016 withdrawals that could never be offered per se,” Luthi said.
The industry does not expect that Democrats in Congress who are opposed to offshore drilling will step in and place the Alaska and Atlantic regions back into consideration, Luthi added.
“I don’t think you’re going to see that, certainly on the House side,” he said.
A bipartisan group of congressional lawmakers are in fact taking the opposite tack.
Members of the House Natural Resources subcommittee plan to consider several bills at Tuesday's meeting that would potentially increase the acreage of federal waters that would be off limits for drilling.
Rep. Joe Cunningham (D-S.C.) is sponsoring a bill that would permanently ban drilling in federal waters in the Atlantic and Pacific, according to a committee spokesperson. Another, sponsored by Rep. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.), would make permanent a moratorium on drilling in federal waters in the eastern Gulf of Mexico that expires in June 2022.
That pushback from Congress and the courts may force the administration to back off efforts to open up more waters for oil and gas production, said Alex Taurel, conservation program director for environmental group League of Conservation Voters.
“We see this is as yet another rebuke for Trump’s radical offshore drilling plan,” Taurel said. “They have to rethink their plan somehow.”
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2019/04/federal-courts-rebuke-threatens-interiors-offshore-drilling-plan-1310175
-
West Virginia Governor Vetoes Bills Pushed by Natural Gas Industry
Apr 2, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice in an unexpected move has vetoed two bills aimed at helping smaller natural gas producers in the state.
Subscription required for full article.
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/117895-west-virginia-governor-vetoes-bills-pushed-by-natural-gas-industry
-
Oil Industry Urges Trump to Appeal Arctic Ruling
Apr 2, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Oil and gas executives are urging President Donald Trump to appeal a federal court ruling Friday that his plans to expand offshore oil and gas drilling into the Arctic Ocean are unlawful.
On Friday U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason ruled the administration had violated orders by former president Barack Obama protecting 125 million acres in the Arctic Ocean, along with deepwater canyons in the Atlantic Ocean.
On Monday, National Ocean Industries Association President Randall Luthi, who represents drilling companies in Washington, urged the White House to both continue leasing outside the protected areas and to challenge the ruling of the "Obama appointed judge."
"A court with more experience and knowledge of the full breadth of the executive branch may very well come to a different conclusion," he said in a statement.
The ruling late Friday followed an almost two-year long legal battle by environmental groups to restrain the Trump's administration announced plans to expand offshore drilling beyond the Gulf of Mexico and into the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans.
"For an administration rushing to expose nearly all our coasts to the dangers of oil and gas leasing, this court decision is a bright red stop sign," said Niel Lawrence, senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Oil-industry-urges-Trump-to-appeal-Arctic-ruling-13731888.php?cmpid=ffpolitics#item-85307-tbla-2
-
Ewire: Shell to Drop AFPM Membership over Climate Stance
Apr 2, 2019 | Inside EPA
Shell, the world's second-largest oil and gas producer, says it will drop its membership in a trade group representing refiners due to “material misalignment” in a range of climate change policy positions, even though the company will remain with several larger industry groups.
The company announced the move in an April 2 review of its membership in 19 trade groups across the globe, saying it found too many climate-related differences with the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) to renew its membership next year.
Key differences are that AFPM opposes carbon pricing, while Shell supports the policy; the group's support for EPA's rollback of vehicle greenhouse gas standards, which Shell opposes; and the refiner group's backing of litigation challenging the Obama EPA's Clean Power Plan, which Shell did not join.
Reuters reports that the review is part of Shell's effort to show investors that it is taking action to meet the Paris Agreement's long-term temperature goals, and that it reflects “how investor pressure on oil companies is leading to changes in their behavior around climate.”
However, the Washington Post notes that Shell is retaining its membership in several larger domestic industry groups that have fought climate policies, including the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The company cited “some misalignment” on climate issues with those groups, and said it would try to change their positions, the article said.
For example, the company cited API's initial opposition to the Obama EPA regulating methane from new oil and gas facilities, a rule that created an eventual obligation to limit emissions from existing sources.
“Since then, API’s positions have evolved. Today, API and Shell both support reforming, not repealing,” EPA's standards, the company's report said.
Regarding the Chamber, Shell notes that the group has been critical of the cost of U.S. commitments under Paris and has not supported carbon pricing. However, it added that the group also “did not support a congressional resolution to prohibit future carbon price proposals” that House Republicans floated in 2018.
The company also discussed its membership in the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA), which it says “contributed to the implementation” of California's economy-wide cap-and-trade program. However, they “took a different” approach to a Washington state ballot initiative to create a carbon tax, with WSPA strongly fighting the measure and Shell staying out of the dispute.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ewire-shell-drop-afpm-membership-over-climate-stance
-
Pipeline Leaks Rule Becomes Top Priority After Fatal Explosions
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is switching gears to work on pipeline leak detection regulations after a deadly Massachusetts gas pipeline explosion last year.
The agency’s proposed leak detection rule (RIN:2137-AF06) “has, quite honestly, languished behind” other gas pipeline rules that the agency previously prioritized, Administrator Skip Elliott said at a House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure hearing April 2.
Elliott said he hopes to have a final rule “in the very near future.”
The proposed rule would affect new or completely replaced natural gas transmission and hazardous liquid pipelines. The new requirements aim to shorten the amount of time it takes for a pipeline operator to find, isolate, and shut off a leaking pipeline.
Outsiders Detect
Most pipeline leaks aren’t detected by operators, but by the public and first responders, Jennifer Homendy, member of the National Transportation Safety Board, said at the hearing.
Workers for Columbia Gas were replacing cast iron gas pipes shortly before issues with pressurization caused multiple explosions across three towns in Massachusetts’ Merrimack Valley in September. The explosions and fires resulted in one death and tens of thousands of evacuations.
Democratic lawmakers on the committee pressed Elliott to accelerate the leak detection rulemaking to bolster pipeline safety.
“I’m afraid that what happened in Merrimack Valley is going to happen in one of my neighborhoods,” Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) said at the hearing.
The leak detection regulations “can’t come soon enough,” Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) told Elliott at the hearing.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/pipeline-leaks-rule-becomes-top-priority-after-fatal-explosions
-
Officials Blow up Derailed Cars, Sending Fireball Soaring
Apr 2, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By Brady McCombs
A massive fireball soared into the sky in the central Utah desert after officials blew up 11 derailed tanker cars containing propane and biodiesel.
The controlled detonation Sunday night was the safest way to deal with the explosive material, Juab County Undersheriff Brent Pulver said yesterday about the decision by state and federal agencies, including EPA.
The derailment occurred Saturday when 24 of the 165 cars of a Union Pacific freight train went off the tracks. One car landed on its side and was leaking propane.
The conductor and engineer were not hurt in the derailment, whose cause was not immediately known. Nine rail tankers carried propane, and two had biodiesel.
Officials initially planned to move the rail cars but worried that leaking propane could cause an explosion and injure the crew.
Pulver posted photos and video online showing the fireball about 75 miles south of Salt Lake City. The nearest town is Eureka, with fewer than 1,000 residents, about 15 miles away.
The fire burned for several hours.
"It was impressive. There is no other way to put it," he said.
Crews were cleaning up the site and planning to bring in heavy equipment to move the rail cars that are damaged beyond repair, Pulver said.
There have been no reported effects to people or wildlife, EPA spokeswoman Katherine Jenkins said. The agency is checking to see whether Union Pacific is liable under Superfund rules to pay back the costs of the cleanup, she said.
Union Pacific spokeswoman Kristen South said the company is clearing the derailment site, repairing the railroad track and working with environmental officials to determine what needs to be done to deal with the impacts of the crash.
The cause of the derailment is under investigation, South said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/04/02/stories/1060140107
-
North Dakota Decries Washington's Oil Train Safety Bill
Apr 2, 2019 | KFGO
North Dakota's top oil regulator is trying to convince legislators in Washington state that a proposal they're considering to reduce the volatility of Bakken crude oil transported by rail is not supported by science.
The Washington Senate voted last month to mandate a lower vapor pressure limit for Bakken crude shipped through the state by rail, aiming to limit fiery derailments.
The Department of Mineral Resources has requested state money to sue Washington if the legislation advances. Data from North Dakota's Pipeline Authority shows that refineries in Washington state are the primary destination for Bakken deliveries of crude by rail, with daily averages of 200,000 barrels.
Federal authorities have mandated regional response teams for oil train wrecks after a series of fiery derailments since 2013.
https://kfgo.com/news/articles/2019/apr/02/north-dakota-decries-washingtons-oil-train-safety-bill/
-
E&C to Mark up First Climate Change Bill April 3
Apr 1, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
The House Energy and Commerce Committee announced it would mark up legislation, H.R. 9 (116), barring President Donald Trump from withdrawing from the landmark Paris climate accord on April 3.
The legislation, backed by Speaker Nancy Pelosiand Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), would further direct the administration to develop a plan for hitting the emissions reductions targets in the agreement.
It will be marked up along with a host of other legislation addressing net neutrality, health care and prescription drug costs.
WHAT'S NEXT: The markup will be held April 3 in 2123 Rayburn at 9:30 a.m.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2019/04/e-c-to-mark-up-first-climate-change-bill-april-3-2985249
-
Judges Struggle with Finality of EPA ‘Once In, Always in’ Memo
Apr 1, 2019 | Politico Pro
By Alex Guillén
A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel today struggled to determine whether they have jurisdiction over an EPA guidance memo reversing a long-standing policy designed to maintain strict limits on air pollution from power plants, factories and other sources.
At issue is a January 2018 memo issued by EPA air chief Bill Wehrum that spared facilities from having to comply with stringent permitting requirements once their emissions of toxic pollutants fell below a certain level. Wehrum's memo reversed a “once in, always in” guidanceissued in 1995 that kept the stricter “MACT” requirements in place forever.
Judges appeared conflicted on whether Wehrum’s memo is a final agency action subject to judicial review. They also questioned how revoking one or both of the memos would affect existing permitting decisions.
“The problem is it’s not final yet,” Judge Laurence Silberman said. He suggested an “as-applied” challenge to individual permitting decisions would be the proper avenue for a court to review the policy.
Judge Judith Rogers, meanwhile, noted that the D.C. Circuit has come down on both sides of whether such guidance is a final agency action but noted that in this case, EPA sent a "clear signal to sources" about their permitting liabilities.
Further complicating the case is a proposed rule on the topic from EPA that has been under reviewat the White House since February. A Justice Department attorney said today the proposed rulemaking should be released by June and is expected to be finalized within a year of that.
Wehrum has said the perpetual classification goes against the Clean Air Act; environmental groups and California argued the change would lead to more pollution.
A ruling on the guidance is expected in the coming months.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2019/04/judges-struggle-with-finality-of-epa-once-in-always-in-memo-2980407
-
Urban War Games Draw Environmental Suit Against Air Force
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mike Leonard
The U.S. Air Force is facing a lawsuit alleging it authorized a “permanent” urban war games program across southern Idaho, including in Boise, without performing mandatory environmental reviews.
Rather than meaningfully reviewing the impact of the military exercises, including thousands of F-15 flyovers a year, the Air Force prepared only perfunctory versions of the environmental assessments required by the National Environmental Policy Act, according to the April 1 complaint filed in federal court. The war games will also include Singaporean military forces.
NEPA explicitly required a “hard look” at potential adverse impacts on wildlife, habitats, and humans, but the Air Force instead “summarily asserted” without evidence that the war games won’t be harmful, the suit says.
The training exercises, which will take place “up to 160 days per year,” began even before those reviews were completed, according to the plaintiffs, seven Boise residents and the environmental group Great Old Broads for Wilderness.
The constant jet flyovers will interrupt bird migration patterns, affect wildlife refuges, and interfere with human sleep and speech, according to the complaint. Military targeting lasers could also allegedly blind anyone who accidentally views one through a telephoto lens or telescope, the complaint says.
The harm will hit poorer communities harder, especially the homeless, and the military noises could “psychologically injure” combat veterans in the area, the suit says.
According to the complaint, the Air Force held public meetings to discuss the proposal, but only in some of the affected cities, only in the middle of the workday, and “without widely publicizing” them. Several of the public meetings were allegedly canceled or rescheduled at the last minute.
The Air Force also rejected, without an adequate explanation, less invasive alternatives suggested by members of the public at those meetings, the suit claims. Those alternatives include building a training “range” away from population centers and holding the exercises at Nellis Air Force Base’s simulation facility in Nevada, according to the complaint.
Cause of Action: Violations of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
Relief: An order setting aside the Air Force’s final environmental assessment and ordering it to prepare a NEPA-compliant environmental impact statement; costs and fees.
Response: The Air Force didn’t immediately respond to an April 2 request for comment.
Attorneys: The plaintiffs are represented by Advocates for the West.
The case is Hausrath v. U.S. Air Force, D. Idaho, No. 19-cv-103, 4/1/19.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/urban-war-games-draw-environmental-suit-against-air-force
-
Democratic Green New Deal Defectors Chart Their Own Climate Path
Apr 2, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
As the founder of a company that turns industrial emissions into energy, Sean Casten turned a career spent fighting climate change into the centerpiece of his successful campaign for Congress.
But don’t expect the first-year House Democrat, who defeated a six-term Republican incumbent in Illinois, to back the ambitious climate plan championed by progressives such as New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
“The Green New Deal is a political document,” said Casten, a member of the moderate New Democrat Coalition of 101 lawmakers. “If we all passed it tomorrow, it wouldn’t make a lick of difference.”
Casten is a Democratic Green New Deal defector, one of a group of moderates who are rejecting the progressive package that has become a lightning rod for critics and are instead crafting their own climate change policies. Among the ideas some defectors are considering are measures that would impose a national mandate for the use of cleaner power sources or implementing a carbon tax.
Many, such as Virginia freshman Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria, defeated Republican incumbents in moderate-to-conservative districts and helped their party win back the House.
“The Green New Deal is aspirational,” Luria said. “What we plan to do is offer tangible, achievable things.”
Different Options
The Green New Deal calls for shifting to 100 percent clean power within 10 years, upgrading all U.S. buildings, and providing health care and housing for all. It has captured national attention but also has been used by Republicans to label Democrats as socialists who want to ground air travel, ban hamburgers, and pay people who aren’t working.
The Green New Deal would do none of those things, but its still only supported by 39 percent of House Democrats—92 out of 235 Democrats. In the Senate, the plan is backed by all six of the chambers presidential hopefuls, but only 12 out of its 49 Democrats.
“I like the fact a lot of new members are coming up with ideas that we need to look at like the Green New Deal, but we’re going to look at all different options,” said Frank Pallone, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, who has questioned the political and technical feasibility of the plan. “We’re looking at a number of things that could be done to address greenhouse gasses and the problem with climate change.”
One of them is a federal mandate that could require the use of clean energy sources such as wind, solar, and other renewables, as well as possibly nuclear and coal with carbon capture technologies as well, according to Paul Bledsoe, an adviser with the Progressive Policy Institute who said he has had discussions with congressional committee aides on the various ideas.
A carbon tax also is being eyed by the House’s main tax writing committee, which is led by Green New Deal holdout Richard Neal of Massachusetts, who said he plans to hold a hearing on the fee in the future.
A $25-per-ton fee that oil refiners, utilities, and other carbon dioxide emitters pay could generate $1 trillion, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, but it lacks the GOP support needed to become a reality. Rep. Don Beyer, a Ways and Means Committee member, hopes the Green New Deal changes that.
“The Green New Deal has almost created a space on in them middle and on the center right for carbon pricing as something that is concrete and real and supported by economists across the political spectrum,” said Beyer, a Virginia Democrat.
Paris Revisited
Another bill that would require the U.S. to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets under the Paris climate agreement that President Donald Trump vowed to pull out of is being championed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has dismissed the Green New Deal as a “green dream.”
The alternatives come as some moderate Democrats believe the House passage of a Green New Deal is important ahead of the 2020 presidential elections. Critics say it is a needless political risk that will end up costing Democrats seats.
“They correctly believe that the notion of the keep it in the ground crowd are both political liabilities and unnecessary at this point,” Bledsoe, who worked on climate change issues in the Clinton White House, said in an interview. “The Democrat party became captive to far left environmental groups for the last couple of decades and it’s become a political disaster.”
Asked about members of her party who don’t support her plan, Ocasio-Cortez said they may be more interested in saving their congressional seats than saving the planet.
“We don’t have time for five years of a half-baked, watered-down position,” she said during a televised March 29 townhall on MSNBC.
https://db0ip7zd23b50.cloudfront.net/dims4/default/6f2d60b/2147483647/crop/2990x1149%2B8%2B639/resize/960x369%3E/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbloomberg-bna-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fc2%2F67%2F3105ac12465d9292b4ddc330dee0%2Fgettyimages-610522878.jpg
-
New York Is Poised To Pass A Comprehensive Climate Bill
Apr 2, 2019 | Natural Resource Defense Council
By Jackson Morris and Miles Farmer
Long before grassroots activists captured the nation’s attention with the Green New Deal, the New York Renews coalition was hard at work in New York State crafting a bold vision to fight climate change that put equity principles front and center. Thanks to their tireless advocacy in promoting the Climate and Community Protection Act (CCPA), and leadership from the State Assembly, Senate and Governor (who all agree on the need to codify in law a comprehensive plan to fight climate change), the state is poised to adopt a nation leading climate plan that invests in historically marginalized communities impacted by climate change. Now is the time for the state’s leaders to cooperate and cross the finish line together in this important battle.
As NRDC explained in our testimony in support of a comprehensive climate bill, and more recently in a memo compiled and circulated to the legislature by a number of environmental groups, good ideas from both the CCPA and the Governor’s Climate Leadership Act can and should be combined with other emissions fighting strategies to yield a winning legislative package that can be signed into law and effectively implemented.
Craft a comprehensive plan to address emissions that builds on existing state efforts
The CCPA provides for the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to develop a “scoping plan” to reduce emissions from nearly all sectors of the economy, including energy, transportation, buildings, industrial, commercial, and agriculture. The governor’s bill adds another smart idea to the mix: having such a plan act as an input to the State Energy Plan, which guides the state’s current clean energy regulatory efforts, and is developed with the help of rigorous analyses from the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority (NYSERDA).
Our recommendation is to combine these approaches by building from the existingstate energy planning process to create a more comprehensive State Climate Plan. This approach would provide a seamless mechanism for state regulators to address topics like land use planning, agriculture, resilience, and adaptation which are not currently reflected in the State Energy Plan, without creating a redundant or complicated new reporting structure.
As we explained in our CCPA testimony, New York has already developed a host of successful programs which contribute to the State Energy Plan goals, including the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to cap and cut carbon pollution from power plants; the $1 billion NY-Sun program to scale up solar power; ChargeNY, EVolve NY, and the Drive Clean Rebate to expand electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure statewide and get more EVs on the road; the state’s initiative to deploy 3,000 megawatts of battery storage by 2030; and a successful Clean Energy Standard to expand renewable energy penetration. By updating existing efforts rather than starting from whole cloth, this approach would facilitate faster progress toward the state’s climate goals.
Set the most aggressive goals possible, but require a plan to get there
The CCPA changed the climate conversation by boldly calling for zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Governor Cuomo recently indicated conceptual support for a similar goal at the national level, but suggested a need to demonstrate doing so is feasible before enshrining such a goal in statute, saying “I get the goal. Zero carbon emissions, yes. How?” While the Governor’s Climate Leadership Act as proposed in the Executive’s budget bill did include a 100 percent zero emissions target for the power sector by 2040, it did not alter the state’s current 80 percent by 2050 from 1990 levels economy-wide target that has been established via Executive Order.
In our view, both the need for a truly transformative vision and the requirement to demonstrate a path to feasibility can be met by adopting a structure that sets a net zero emissions goal (such as by 2045, as the Governor outlined in his State of the State earlier this year), but calls for the state’s agencies to work to develop plans to chart a path to zero net GHG emissions in each economic sector before the goal becomes a binding target. This process would allow for the state’s existing 80 x ‘50 target to be formally strengthened in each sector (transforming the net zero emissions goal for each sector into a legally binding mandate) as soon as a plan demonstrates a feasible path to doing so. The work for such a plan is already complete in the power sector, where the Governor’s plan charts a course to zero emission power by 2040 and appropriately includes a binding target for that sector in the legislation.
By setting truly ambitious goals for every sector, as the CCPA does, and focusing on the how, as Governor Cuomo asks, we can ensure that concrete plans are developed for every sector to make real progress on a transformation to a 100 percent clean economy. Further, all relevant state agencies should be granted the full regulatory authority necessary to act on these recommendations (the CCPA provides extensive authority and authorization to the Department of Environmental Conservation but can be further strengthened with comparable explicit detailed authorization for all state agencies to act in concert).
Provide for net zero emissions
We think net zero emissions is the right approach, as opposed to simply zero emissions, because as Columbia Professor Michael Gerrard discusses here, some emissions, like those from out-of-state vehicle use, cannot be fully eliminated solely under state authority. Further, a net zero approach will allow the state to leverage the power of land-use, agriculture, and forestry best practices to fight climate change. Importantly, cleaner air in the state’s communities must be guaranteed. Any net zero plan must include rigorous safeguards to ensure that emissions are eliminated to the greatest extent possible, and emissions reductions credits are used only as a last resort. No greenhouse gas emissions reduction credits should be permitted to offset power sector emissions from sources located in environmental justice communities. The State Climate Plan should be developed in a transparent and analytically rigorous manner to ensure that stringent criteria are established for any potential greenhouse gas emissions reduction crediting programs.
Codify and strengthen the state’s aggressive clean energy and efficiency programs
New York has adopted a number of aggressive clean energy programs through regulatory order, including the Public Service Commission (PSC)’s Clean Energy Standard, which currently provides a path to 50 percent renewables supply by 2030. The CCPA rightfully recognized that codifying those ambitious programs in law is necessary to enshrine the Clean Energy Standard goals so as to safeguard them from erosion in future administrations. The governor’s bill smartly borrows from this approach, and even goes a step further: calling for the Clean Energy Standard to be strengthened to require 70 percent renewable energy by 2030. We agree with enshrining this new renewable energy goal in statute, and also recommend that the state safeguard another major pillar of the clean energy transition: energy efficiency.
The PSC also recently adopted a much-needed framework to rapidly expand energy efficiency in New York. Utilities can induce savings by funding programs through electricity and gas rates that incent companies to provide attractive energy savings opportunities to customers. For example, when you buy a new home heating system, a rebate offered by the utility might make more efficient options cheaper, allowing you to pick that option and thereby reducing pollution and reducing the costs of serving the system for everyone else.
The legislation should adopt the PSC’s target and make clear it sets a floor not a ceiling for utilities, who should be free to invest in all cost-effective opportunities to deliver even greater savings to customers. Further, the legislation should require utilities to assess the opportunity for energy efficiency investments to reduce or eliminate the need for gas pipeline infrastructure investments, requiring all cost-effective energy efficiency investments to be pursued before other options are explored.
Prioritize equity
The CCPA also includes important commitments to equity and outlines critical measures for authentic community participation and transparency. For too long communities disproportionately impacted by climate change, including low-income communities of color, have been sidelined in climate policy discussions. As a consequence, some proposed climate solutions have not adequately accounted for the impacts on those communities. To truly support the workers and communities who are affected by the transition away from fossil fuels, New York State must strengthen how those communities are included in the decision-making process. The CCPA takes a big step forward in this regard by providing for environmental justice and labor representation on a Climate Action Council tasked with providing input to the DEC’s scoping plan, and creates working groups focused on environmental justice and climate justice to provide input into the DEC’s policy formation. The Governor’s bill calls for the creation of similar working groups, and likewise brings environmental justice and labor representatives to the table of a Climate Action Council. We agree with this general approach and recommend that environmental justice and labor representatives be given a direct avenue for input into the State Climate Plan.
The CCPA also requires 40 percent of any funds collected pursuant to a market-based program enacted to achieve the state’s climate goals be invested in a manner which will benefit disadvantaged communities. We agree that programs targeted at disadvantaged communities need to be prioritized, with a significant portion of any revenue specifically earmarked for investment in those communities.
We’re almost there – time to get it across the finish line
We’re at an unprecedented moment in New York State, with both houses of the legislature and the Governor poised to enact a nation-leading climate program that jumpstarts an inclusive clean energy economy and invests in New Yorkers that have too often been overlooked. But to paraphrase the journalist David Roberts, stitching together diverse interests, building up functional institutions, and crafting policy mechanisms that work as intended is difficult, both emotionally and intellectually. Enshrining a climate program in statute will require collaboration from all involved. We think New York is up to the task. Let’s get it done!
https://www.nrdc.org/experts/miles-farmer/new-york-poised-pass-comprehensive-climate-bill
-
New Mexico Environment Department Receives Grant
Apr 2, 2019 | Water & Wastes Digest
In Roswell, N.M., an old dry cleaning business left behind toxic chemicals after closing up shop. This caused the site to be declared a U.S. Environmental Agency (EPA) Superfund site.
According to Irrigation & Green Industry, the site includes spots where dry cleaners had operated from 1956 to 1963, contaminating soil, soil vapor, indoor air and groundwater with tetrachloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene. The PCE plume extends over two miles to the southeast of the 1100 block of Main Street in Roswell.
A five-year review of the site by the EPA and the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) that was completed in September of 2017 found that the leading edge of the groundwater plume has expanded about 2,200 ft further to the southeast of the dry‐cleaning area since 2008. According to Irrigation & Green Industry, the EPA recommended that a public information campaign be conducted to notify well owners and users of well water in the area. It also was recommended that private wells in and around the groundwater plume area should be sampled for these contaminants.
“Cleaning up contaminated sites is central to EPA’s mission of protecting human health and the environment,” said Anne Idsal, Regional Administrator. “This grant further empowers the state of New Mexico and the city of Roswell to lead this effort at the McGaffey and Main site.”
According to Irrigation & Green Industry, the funding will allow NMED to lead the cleanup effort while involving other state and local partners.It will also allow them to consult with the EPA before, during or after the cleanup in the interests of protecting human health and the environment. The money will supplement remedial activities related to the cleanup and go toward paying for the work of characterizing the type and scope of the contamination.
“New Mexicans living in Roswell deserve to see this site cleaned up in a scientifically sound and timely manner,” said James Kenney, New Mexico Environment Department Secretary. “Securing federal funding is a critical piece of ensuring that happens.”
https://www.wwdmag.com/chemical-cleanup-systems/new-mexico-environment-department-receives-grant
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested