Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 5/1/2019
-
(ACC Mentioned) US PVC Inventories Grow Slightly During the First Quarter
Apr 30, 2019 | ICIS
US and Canada polyvinyl chloride (PVC) inventories grew slightly during the first quarter and started the second quarter on 1 April with about 621.8m lb (282,033 tonnes) on hand, according to figures from an industry group released this week. -
(ACC Mentioned) Farm Hands on the Potomac
May 1, 2019 | Agri-Pulse
By Hannah Pagel
Krysta Harden, a deputy secretary of agriculture during the Obama administration, has been named executive vice president of global environmental strategy of Dairy Management Inc. -
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Refuels in Florida
Apr 30, 2019 | BedTimes Magazine
By Barbara T. Nelles
The 2019 ISPA Industry Conference hosted by the International Sleep Products Association lived up to its reputation as the perfect combination of education, networking opportunities and fun in the sun. -
Florida Legislature Moves to Block Plastic Straw Bans
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Florida would block its cities from banning or regulating plastic drinking straws under legislation headed to Gov. Ron DeSantis (R). -
Interior Official Defends Reorganization Plan to Congress
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Lee
House Democrats during an April 30 oversight hearing labeled the Interior Department’s massive reorganization a politically motivated ploy to fundamentally weaken the agency. -
EPA Nixes Request by Attorneys General to Gather Asbestos Data
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA won’t require companies importing asbestos or asbestos-containing products to report that information, the agency told a group of attorneys general April 30. -
D.C. Circuit Largely Upholds EPA’s Treatment of Confidentiality Under TSCA
Apr 30, 2019 | Lexology
By Thomas M. Duncan
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected all but one of the Environmental Defense Foundation’s (“EDF”) challenges to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) rulemaking implementing a statutory mandate... -
(ACC Mentioned) Bipartisan Group Seeks PFAS Rule as Data Shows Contamination Expanding
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
As environmentalists prepare to release new data showing growing contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers has introduced legislation setting a two-year deadline for EPA to regulate the substance... -
(ACC Mentioned) Chlorpyrifos – a Pesticide in Our Food
May 1, 2019 | Antartica Journal
This pesticide – chlorpyrifos – was banned by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) about 20 years ago for indoor use and was in the process of banning it for outdoor use when Dow Chemical made a million-dollar donation to President Trump’s inauguration committee, they reversed their decision. -
(ACC Mentioned) Foam Takeout Containers Banned in Maine
May 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adrianne Appel
Maine is the first state in the nation to ban foam food containers under a bill Gov. Janet Mills signed into law April 30. -
New York Approves Ban on Chlorpyrifos Pesticide
May 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Keshia Clukey
New York State would phase out and then entirely ban the use of chlorpyrifos by the end of 2021, according to legislation passed April 30. -
EPA Affirms No Public Health Risk Posed by Glyphosate
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
The Environmental Protection Agency found that glyphosate poses no risk to public health and is not a carcinogen, as long as it’s used in accordance with updated instructions, an interim registration review said. -
Committee Investigates 'Plastic Paradox'
May 1, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Philip Athey
With no new federal recycling law since 1976, lawmakers on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee had plenty of questions when hearing from experts on plastic recycling. -
Drinking Water Utilities Meet with OMB on Perchlorate
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
A group representing drinking water utilities is scheduled to meet with White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) officials April 30 to discuss EPA's pending proposed health-based drinking water goal and enforceable standard for the rocket fuel ingredient perchlorate... -
Legislation Would Set PFAS Drinking Water Limit
May 1, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Ariana Figueroa and George Cahlink
A group of lawmakers is pushing bipartisan legislation to require EPA to set enforceable standards for toxic chemicals in drinking water. -
Burning Fluorinated Chemicals May Move Water Problem Into Air
May 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan and Amena H. Saiyid
Almost three years after the EPA warned the public about two ubiquitous fluorinated chemicals present in drinking water nationwide, regulators are still grappling with how to dispose of the substances before they end up in wells and waterways. -
Washington State Paint Stewardship, HFC Bills Head to Governor
May 1, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Washington state’s legislature has passed a bill on hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and another on paint production and waste. Both have now been sent to Governor Jay Inslee’s desk for his signature. -
France, Sweden Propose Ban on over 1,000 Allergens in Textiles
May 1, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
France and Sweden have submitted a proposal to Echa to ban or restrict over 1,000 skin sensitisers in textiles, leather, furs and skins sold to consumers. -
FERC Chairman: No Rush on Changing Pipeline Permit Policy
Apr 30, 2019 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolff
FERC Chairman Neil Chatterjee is signaling changes to FERC’s pipeline permitting policies are unlikely anytime soon. -
White House OKs Rewrite of Blowout Rule
May 1, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Dylan Brown
The White House has approved the Interior Department's rewrite of offshore drilling standards that the Obama administration had imposed in response to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. -
White House Starts ACE Review, Sticking to June Deadline for Final Rule
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
White House regulatory officials have started interagency review of EPA’s draft final Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule addressing greenhouse gases from existing power plants, the last step before the rule can go final, a move that suggests the agency remains on track... -
New LNG Plants Could Surpass Nameplate Capacities, Adding to Supply in Coming Years
Apr 30, 2019 | Platts
By Jason Lord
LNG facilities currently under construction are able to achieve output above their nameplate capacity specification. Should this additional capacity materialize on a reliable, long-term basis, it could relieve some anticipated tightness in the LNG market. -
Cuomo Signs Offshore Drilling Ban into Law
May 1, 2019 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
Gov. Andrew Cuomo has signed into law a new ban on drilling for oil and gas off the New York coast. -
DHS Keys in on 55 Critical Infrastructure Risks
May 1, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
What do Wi-Fi availability, access to medical records and oil exploration have in common? -
Wisconsin Explosion Prompts Call for Updates to Chemical Study
May 1, 2019 | Insurance Journal
The U.S. Chemical Safety Board wants federal regulators to re-examine a 1993 study on hydrofluoric acid after an explosion at a Superior oil refinery last year. -
(ACC Mentioned) Groups Urge STB To Pull Rail Competitive Switching Rule
May 1, 2019 | Law 360
By Linda Chiem
Business advocacy groups urged the Surface Transportation Board on Tuesday to pull a proposal establishing new regulations allowing customers and shippers served by only one major railroad in their region to access another railroad, saying it's more harmful than beneficial. -
Trump, Dems Agree on $2T Price Tag
May 1, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Maxine Joselow and Geof Koss
President Trump and congressional Democrats finally settled on a price tag for an infrastructure bill: $2 trillion. -
Infrastructure Meeting ‘Constructive’ but Policy Issues Emerge
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
President Donald Trump and top congressional Democrats are calling their April 30 meeting on transportation infrastructure legislation “constructive,” with lawmakers saying the president agreed to spend $2 trillion in federal money on a package... -
Democrats Say Trump Open to Grid Modernization
Apr 30, 2019 | PoliticoPro
By Anthony Adragna
Democratic senators who attended a White House gathering today say President Donald Trump appeared willing to support modernizing the electric grid and improving drinking water infrastructure as part of a larger package. -
North Dakota, Washington State at Odds over Oil Train Rules
Apr 30, 2019 | AP (In KATU News)
By Blake Nicholson
North Dakota officials are pressuring the state of Washington to back off from legislation requiring oil shipped by rail to have more of its volatile gases removed, urging the governor to veto the bill and promising a lawsuit if he doesn't. -
Select Committee Hearing Highlights Limited Paths for Action
May 1, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
The Select Committee on the Climate Crisis yesterday continued to grapple with political currents that have for years made large-scale national action on the issue difficult, as it made its first substantive progress toward its goal of writing a climate policy outline. -
House Poised to Debate Bill Blocking Trump's Paris Withdrawal
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
The House is poised to begin floor debate May 1 on legislation backed by Democratic leaders that would block President Donald Trump from leaving the Paris climate agreement and require the administration to submit a plan for meeting the Obama administration's GHG targets under the deal. -
Pelosi Takes Easiest Path on Climate. Will She Do More?
May 1, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick and Mark K. Matthews
The climate bill that House Democrats plan to vote on this week wouldn't reduce a single ton of greenhouse gas emissions. -
O'Rourke Plan Highlights Push to Make Climate Top-Tier Democratic Issue
May 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke's (D-TX) new climate change platform is highlighting the pressure on Democratic presidential candidates to prioritize the issue in the lead up to the 2020 elections, a dynamic that could elevate a debate that observers have long said is a prerequisite... -
Ocasio-Cortez Says O'Rourke's New Climate Plan Not Aggressive Enough
Apr 30, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rebecca Beitsch
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said Democratic presidential hopeful Beto O’Rourke’s new climate plan isn’t aggressive enough. -
GAO to Review If Climate Change Hinders Military Contractors' Response to National Security Threats
Apr 30, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rebecca Beitsch
The Government Accountability Office has announced that it will review how climate change impacts military contractors’ ability to respond to national security threats. -
Climate Change Tops Primary Poll
May 1, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Dylan Brown
Climate change is the most important issue for Democratic voters ahead of the presidential election next year, according to a new CNN poll. -
Maine Governor Introduces Bill to Jump-Start Climate Goals
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adrianne Appel
Maine needs to move forward with its goal to cut greenhouse gases 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050, Gov. Janet Mills (D) said April 30 as she introduced legislation that would create a climate council to jump-start the process.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) US PVC Inventories Grow Slightly During the First Quarter
Apr 30, 2019 | ICIS
US and Canada polyvinyl chloride (PVC) inventories grew slightly during the first quarter and started the second quarter on 1 April with about 621.8m lb (282,033 tonnes) on hand, according to figures from an industry group released this week.
The inventories in Canada and the US started the year with 609m lb, or about 276,202 tonnes, on hand, the equivalent of about one third of monthly production, according to figures released by the American Chemistry Council (ACC) using data compiled by Vault Consulting.
That volume is also roughly the amount US and Canada producers and other suppliers export monthly to offshore markets and grew by just 5,831 tonnes during the period, according to the ACC figures.
Major US PVC producers include Occidental Chemical, Westlake Chemical, Shintech and Formosa Plastics.
https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/news/2019/04/30/10356230/us-pvc-inventories-grow-slightly-during-the-first-quarter?intcmp=mega-menu-
-
(ACC Mentioned) Farm Hands on the Potomac
May 1, 2019 | Agri-Pulse
By Hannah Pagel
Krysta Harden, a deputy secretary of agriculture during the Obama administration, has been named executive vice president of global environmental strategy of Dairy Management Inc. (DMI). Harden is tasked with driving the dairy checkoff’s environmental sustainability strategy and will report to Barb O’Brien, president of DMI and the Innovation Center. Harden most recently served as senior vice president of external affairs and chief sustainability officer for Corteva Agriscience, the agriculture division of DowDuPont. Before joining DuPont, Harden spent three years as deputy secretary of agriculture under Secretary Tom Vilsack after a stint as his chief of staff.
USDA’s Rural Development has announced new leadership changes and appointments. Misty Ann Giles has been appointed to chief of staff. Giles has been with USDA since 2007 and has been serving as acting chief of staff. Appointed to chief of staff for USDA Rural Development’s Rural Business-Cooperative Service is Stephanie Holderfield. She has been serving in the role of senior adviser at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development since 2017. Justin Domer has been tapped as chief of staff for Rural Development’s Rural Housing Service. His experience includes being a regional representative for former Florida Gov. Rick Scott. Stepping into the role of chief of staff for Rural Development’s Rural Utilities Service is Curtis Anderson. He served as chief of staff for Rural Development’s Rural Housing Service since 2017 and previously served as deputy administrator for Rural Development’s Rural Utilities Service in the George W. Bush administration. He has also held positions at Farm Credit, the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture and at telecommunications companies. Tapped to become Rural Development’s chief operating officer is Angilla Denton, who previously served as the civil rights director. Scott Williams has been named Rural Development’s deputy chief finance officer. Sharese Paylor has been promoted to civil rights director; she previously served as program compliance branch chief for Rural Development-Civil Rights. Before that, she was a senior equal opportunity specialist with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The Corn Refiners Association hired Steve Gardner to serve as its new COO. Gardner comes from Crosby-Volmer International Communications where he served as COO. Before that, he worked for US Pharmacopeia, The Aluminum Association, and the American Chemistry Council. Gardner’s first day was Monday.
CHS Inc. tagged Jason Marthaler as its new vice president of commodity risk management and supply chain for the Country Operations division. Marthaler previously served as director of trading, supply and risk management for CHS Agronomy.
Bunge officially appointed Gregory Heckman as chief executive officer. Heckman was named acting CEO in January 2019 after Soren Schroder announced he would resign from the position. Heckman joined the Bunge board of directors last October as part of a settlement deal with Continental Grain Co. and D.E. Shaw & Corp. Heckman previously served as the CEO of the Omaha-based grain company Gavilon Group.
The Conservation Technology Information Center welcomes Mike Komp as its new executive director. In this role, Komp will help build collaborative networks that promote conservation farming systems, gather funding for new programs, and help analyze digital data on conservation practices. He most recently served as technical program manager for agricultural technology at the Noble Research Institute.
Rep. Rick Crawford, R-Ark., announced his intent to run for chairman of the House Agriculture Committee in the 117th Congress. Crawford has served on the Ag Committee since he was first elected in 2010, and has experience in the agriculture industry including working as a farm broadcaster and a marketing manager for a John Deere dealership.
Yesterday, was Andrew Jerome’s last day with the National Farmers Union. He has been with NFU for the past five years serving as communications director and has moved on to join Michael Torrey Associates. He will begin with MTA on May 6.
The National Pork Producers Council brought on Andrew Bailey to serve as NPPC’s science and technology legal counsel. Before joining NPPC, Bailey was an attorney with Siff & Associates, practicing regulatory and administrative law, with a focus in food and agriculture issues at the USDA and FDA. Before that, he was the manager of scientific and regulatory affairs at the National Turkey Federation.
Thomas Brunet has joined the Biotechnology Innovation Organization as the new director of federal government relations. He has already registered as a lobbyist underneath a variety of legislative issues. His latest position was serving Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., as a senior counsel for domestic policy.
Anne-Marie Boisseau has been brought on to serve as legislative assistant for Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, D-Texas. She has the portfolio for energy, environment and protection, foreign trade and international finance, and telecommunications.
Zack Linick has left the office of Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas. He served as legislative director covering agriculture and food, energy, trade and foreign affairs, water and environment. Cuellar’s office is in the process of hiring a new LD, but in the meantime his portfolio has been taken over by senior legislative assistant Travis Knight.
Patrick Byrne is new to the office of Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, where he serves as a legislative assistant covering energy, environmental protection and social welfare issues. He previously worked as a government relations associate for CJ Lake LLC.
John Insinger became the new chief of staff for Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho. He fills the shoes of longtime chief of staff John Sandy, who worked with Risch for over three decades, first serving as his chief of staff in the governor’s office. Insinger is a lawyer in Risch’s firm Risch Pisca, PLLC and has served on the board of commissioners for the Idaho Housing and Finance Association. ... Kaylin Minton has left the office of Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, to begin a new role as communications director for Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, for the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Thomas Woodburn has started as a legislative director covering foreign trade, telecommunications, and labor and employment for Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Co.
Brian Simonsen is now a legislative specialist for the U.S. Sentencing Commission. He previously served as a counsel for Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.
Yesterday, was Will Boyington’s last day in Rep. Dan Newhouse’s, R-Wash., office. Boyington served as communications director since 2015 for Newhouse. Before that, he served Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee as deputy press secretary. Liz Daniels is the new communications director for Newhouse. She previously served as his legislative assistant and deputy press secretary.
Sara Broadwater is stepping in as the new communications director for Rep. Roger Williams, R-Texas. She comes from the U.S. Department of Education where she served as deputy press secretary.
Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., promoted Brad Decker to legislative and press assistant from legislative correspondent. Decker will cover public lands and natural resources and housing and community development issues.
Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, hired Christine Brennan to his staff as his new scheduler. Brennan just completed an internship for Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.
Jenna Galper is the new digital director and press secretary for Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.
Eva Cline has left the office of Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Mich., where she served as his legislative assistant. Jayson Schimmenti, legislative director, has taken over her portfolio. … Settling in as the agriculture policy assistant for Moolenaar is Noah Yantis. He also serves as staff assistant.
Alec Bartishevich is promoted to legislative correspondent for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. He previously served as staff assistant.
Maggie Farry switched offices to Sen. Krysten Sinema, D-Ariz., as her new legislative aide. She previously served Rep. Tom O’Halleran, D-Ariz., as his legislative assistant.
Natalie Burkhalter has left the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee under Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. She served as Paul’s staff director for the committee.
Laura Epstein has left the office of Rep. Antonio Delgado, D-N.Y., where she served as communications director. Delgado’s office is currently searching for a new communications director.
Bart Chilton, a former Commodity Futures Trading Commissioner (CFTC) died over the weekend at the age of 58. Chilton began his career in 1985 working in the House of Representatives, serving as legislative director for three U.S. representatives. From 1995-2001, he worked at USDA and rose to deputy chief of staff for former Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman. After his time at USDA, he became senior adviser to South Dakota Democrat Sen. Tom Daschle. In 2005, he was appointed by President George Bush to serve as the executive assistant to the board of the Farm Credit Administration and nominated again by Bush and confirmed by the Senate in 2007 to serve as a CFTC commissioner. He was reappointed in 2009 by President Obama. Before being confirmed as a commissioner, he served as chief of staff and vice president of government relations at the National Farmers Union. After CFTC, Chilton joined the law firm DLA Piper as a senior policy adviser for regulatory and public policy issues.
Indiana’s longest serving senator, Republican Richard Lugar, died from complications related to CIPD; he was 87 years old. Lugar was known for being a foreign policy expert and fighter for America’s farmers. He served as chair and ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and strongly supported the farm bill’s locally-led and voluntary conservation title programs and encouraged bipartisan support for biofuels that led to the RFS. House Ag Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., said Lugar was “a problem solver who could work with anybody to get things done.” He was a six-term senator who worked heavily on agricultural issues and later teamed up with Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn to work on control of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. He ran for president in 1996, lead efforts to end apartheid in South Africa, and worked to secure weapons of mass destruction from the former Soviet Union.
Veteran agricultural trade negotiator Charles J. (Joe) O’Mara died April 27 of complications from a stroke suffered a week earlier. He was 75. He operated consulting firm O’Mara & Associates for 23 years following his retirement after a 28-year career at USDA. O’Mara retired from USDA in 1995 as career minister in the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) following three years as counsel to the secretary of agriculture for international affairs. He also was a USTR special trade negotiator for agriculture in the Uruguay Round of the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). He previously was career minister-counselor at the U.S. mission to the GATT in Geneva, deputy administrator for international trade policy at FAS and agricultural counselor in U.S. embassies in Buenos Aires and Sao Paolo. O’Mara’s expertise “almost single-handedly resulted in a successful conclusion to the Uruguay Round and creation of the WTO,” said Joseph Glauber, a subsequent agricultural negotiator. A funeral mass will be held at Monday, May 6, at Annunciation Catholic Church in Washington, D.C.
https://www.agri-pulse.com/articles/12144-farm-hand-on-the-potomac-harden-heads-to-dairy-management-inc
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Refuels in Florida
Apr 30, 2019 | BedTimes Magazine
By Barbara T. Nelles
The 2019 ISPA Industry Conference hosted by the International Sleep Products Association lived up to its reputation as the perfect combination of education, networking opportunities and fun in the sun. The biennial event held at the Vinoy Renaissance Resort & Golf Club in St. Petersburg, Florida, March 13-14, featured a whirlwind schedule that kept attendees busy — and smiling — for two days straight.
“The Industry Conference is unlike any other event in that it exemplifies what this trade association is all about,” said Mary Helen Rogers, ISPA vice president of marketing and communications. “Our attendees are the ones who support ISPA and its mission, which is all about lifting up each other and the industry as a whole. This year’s event felt extra special as these are changing — and challenging — times and the business leaders who attended reaped many benefits. They had plenty of opportunities to share ideas, learn new strategies for creating future successes, and build stronger relationships with their peers and their customers.”
Golfing, receptions and parties were on the agenda, as was a full slate of timely business sessions and speakers. Attendees represented a mix of bedding manufacturers, suppliers and retailers. They went home with new tools, new thinking and strengthened industry relationships.
This year’s program began with the ISPA Golf Tournament at the Vinoy’s 18-hole course. The tournament was sponsored by Outlast Technologies, and a portion of proceeds was earmarked for the Colorectal Cancer Alliance.
Next up, the ISPA Women’s Network held a “flamingle” reception. The theme was pink flamingos, and the crowd of industry women gathered outside on the patio to chat, sip pink bubbly and nibble hors d’oeuvres. Wright Global Graphics sponsored the event, and it also had a giving theme. Attendees had been encouraged to pack a donation of women’s clothing or travel toiletries for a local women’s shelter.
The Wednesday evening Welcome Reception, sponsored by Atlanta Attachment Co. and Hickory Springs, featured drinks, hors d’oeuvres and a first chance to meet with event exhibitors who ringed the hall.
Attendees awoke early Thursday and headed back over for a hearty breakfast. Breakfast and lunch were sponsored by Logicdata.
The opening keynote address was delivered by motivational speaker Capt. Mike Abrashoff. Never say, “That’s the way we’ve always done it,” said the former commander of the USS Benfold and author of the best-selling “It’s Your Ship.” His inspirational talk was sponsored by the CertiPUR-US Certification Program, and he urged listeners to achieve breakthrough performance by empowering those around them to think and act differently.
Using a lot of audience participation, Bob Phibbs, also known as The Retail Doctor, showed the crowd how to hit reset and stop living in the past in order to develop new strategies for stressful times.
Then, ISPA President Ryan Trainer led a panel discussion on the current regulatory and business environment for the sleep products industry. Topics included the shifting dynamic at retail, the status of the anti-dumping petition on mattresses from China and an update on activities at the state level that could affect mattress flammability standards.
Latexco U.S. Holdings LLC was the sponsor of a rousing closing keynote delivered by celebrated quarterback Joe Theismann. The Super Bowl champ, NFL MVP, former broadcaster and successful entrepreneur began with a football toss to some key players in the room and then delivered his “Game Plan for Success.” Some key takeaways were the importance of teamwork and of being “stronger together,” a philosophy that fits right in with ISPA’s mission, Theismann said. He advised listeners to “know yourself — and then do things that make you uncomfortable — it will keep you sharp and keep you growing.”
The 2019 ISPA Industry Conference concluded with a fun-filled outdoor party and dinner with a Nantucket theme. Sponsored by Leggett & Platt Inc., the event began in the sunny late afternoon on a grassy overlook on the bay. There was live music, games like croquet and pingpong, drinks, and hors d’oeuvres, followed by a seafood dinner that continued as the stars came out.
Enjoy these photo galleries from the event. The editors of BedTimes extend our sincerest thanks to Rose Fleming of MFI International for her excellent camera work.Day One FunWomen in the sleep products industry got their “flamingle” on at the ISPA Women’s Network reception
1. Group photo
2. Vicki Fishman of Wright Global Graphics, Sandy Brown of Culp Inc.
and ISPA’s Deb Chapman3. ISPA’s Kerri Bellias and Wright Global Graphics’ Kim Grubb
4. Joanne Mattiace of the law offices of Joanne E. Mattiace, Tempur Sealy International Inc.’s Martha Caywood and Carol Pollack-Nelson of Independent Safety Consultants LLCISPA Golf TournamentAdam Lava of A. Lava & Son. Co.; The Bedding Group’s Jeffrey Sherman with wife, Tana; and Mike Urquhart of Future FoamJim Thomas of Linak U.S. Inc., FXI Inc.’s John Stowe, Bryan Smith of Southerland Inc. and SABA North America’s Kevin McGuireMattress Recycling Council’s Mike O’DonnellJim Cande of WestRock, Enso Sleep’s Mark Akerman, Alexium’s Steve Gravlee and Colonial’s Derek RitzelJimmy Fleming of Tietex International Ltd. with Jomel’s Lila Walker and Phil IulianoLatexco U.S. Holdings LLC’s Brent Limer, NCFI Polyurethanes’ Dan Manning and Alexium’s Chris CarterTalalay Global’s Jeff Gober and Michael Tilki with ISPA’s Mary Helen RogersOutlast’s Guy Eckert, Carpenter Co.’s Dan Schecter, Serta Simmons Bedding LLC’s Kevin Fealy and Franz Nowak of Elevance Renewable SciencesLearning Experiences1. ISPA President Ryan Trainer opens the program.
2. Capt. Mike Abrashoff presents the keys to achieving breakthrough performance.
3. “When your people feel empowered, they take ownership and responsibility,” Abrashoff said.
4. “What you focus on becomes reality,” said speaker Bob Phibbs, The Retail Doctor, so stop with the negative thinking.
5. Time to stand up and practice looking at things from a new perspective.
6. Phibbs’ audience happily casts aside bad thoughts.
Closing Keynote
1. Ben Ducatteeuw, Evi Brilleman and Brent Limer of Latexco U.S. Holdings LLC with closing keynoter and NFL great Joe Theismann
2. “When is the last time you congratulated yourself?” Theismann asked.
3. Theismann begins his presentation by passing footballs to lucky audience members.
4. Leggett & Platt Inc.’s Eric Rhea meets Theismann.
5. Pass complete to Furniture Today’s Dave Perry.
6. ISPA’s Ryan Trainer (far right) leads a panel discussion on the current business environment with (from left) Lane Hochschwanger of the American Chemistry Council Inc., Yohai Baisburd of Cassidy Levy Kent (USA) LLP and Raymond James’ Bobby Griffin.
Mixing and Mingling
1. Kevin McGuire, Roman Torres and Andy Schaaf of SABA North America with Gary Del Matto of Encapsys LLC
2. Kim Grubb of Wright Global Graphics, Helen Sullivan of CertiPUR-US Certification Program and Sabrina Kilmer of William T. Burnett & Co.
3. Hickory Springs’ Mark Jones; ISPA’s Ryan Trainer; and Danette Little, Randy Clark and Hank Little of Atlanta Attachment Co.
4. Wade Wallace and Jimmy Fleming of Tietex International Ltd.
5. Kevin Vandaveer of Georgia-Pacific, Scott Tinsley of Serta Simmons Bedding LLC, Matt Anderson of Elite Comfort Solutions and Adrian Quigg of Georgia-Pacific
6. Travis Bouck, Mark Jones and Michael Hinshaw of Hickory Springs
https://bedtimesmagazine.com/2019/04/industry-refuels-in-florida/
-
Florida Legislature Moves to Block Plastic Straw Bans
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Florida would block its cities from banning or regulating plastic drinking straws under legislation headed to Gov. Ron DeSantis (R).
H.B. 771, which won final passage in the Legislature on April 30, would put a five-year moratorium on local ordinances regulating straws. It would prevent new ordinances and also block enforcement of existing ordinances already enacted by 10 Florida cities including St. Petersburg and Miami Beach, according to a legislative staff analysis.
The governor’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment April 30.
Florida joins a number of other Republican-led state legislatures taking action to block bans on single-use plastic bags, containers, and straws. These include Tennessee, where the governor recently signed a similar bill into law, and Alabama, where the legislature is considering a similar preemption of local ordinances.
On the other hand, many Democratic-led cities as well as the state of California have moved to regulate or ban single-use plastics.
Overseas, leaders of the European Union voted March 27 to ban the use of certain plastic items such as cutlery, plates, and straws by 2021 across most of Europe with the goal of limiting plastic pollution in the world’s oceans.
Florida law already preempts local ordinances regulating disposable food containers, wrappers, and plastic bags.
H.B. 771 also would require municipalities and for-hire waste haulers to address in their contracts how contaminated recyclable materials should be handled during curbside pickup and hauling, as well as strategies for reducing contamination of municipal recycling streams.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/florida-legislature-moves-to-block-plastic-straw-bans
-
Interior Official Defends Reorganization Plan to Congress
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Lee
House Democrats during an April 30 oversight hearing labeled the Interior Department’s massive reorganization a politically motivated ploy to fundamentally weaken the agency.
But Scott Cameron, principal deputy assistant secretary for policy, management and budget at Interior, told the House Natural Resources Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee defended the reorganization. He said it a good-faith effort to improve the department’s coordination among its bureaus, save money by unifying back-office services, and improve contact with affected communities by moving some offices to the West.
Rep. TJ Cox (D-Calif.) also demanded a copy of Interior’s comprehensive document about the plan. Cameron said the department is “in the process of producing a response,” but that he couldn’t promise that it would be delivered.
Interior’s reorganization plan would collapse 49 overlapping field offices into 12 and move the headquarters of the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Geological Survey from Washington, D.C., to as-yet-undetermined western states. Congress appropriated $17.5 million in the fiscal 2019 budget for the plan.
The sharpest critiques came from Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who said the plan displays all the hallmarks of a systematic bid to undermine the department. The reorganization moves key agencies “as far away from Congress to minimize contact with appropriators and authorizers,” indicates to Interior staff that they’re not valued, and creates a “culture of fear to demand total loyalty,” Grijalva said.
Those concerns were echoed by witness Michael Bromwich, the former director of DOI’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management under former President Barack Obama, and the leader of the 2010 effort to split the former Minerals Management Service into two separate agencies.
In Bromwich’s view, reorganizations are “too often undertaken for reasons of executive vanity.”
Republicans Defend ReorganizationRep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), the subcommittee’s ranking member, countered that Interior needs reshaping because it’s too disorganized to function efficiently.
Similarly, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) said it makes sense to place officials closer to the communities they serve.
“It is easy to work with the local officials,” Bishop said. “They live in the community. They know the situations. They usually are the most creative. Almost any time we have a problem, it’s as those [issues] go up the food chain and end up in Washington.”
Interior is still exploring possible locations for new headquarters for both the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Geological Survey, and hopes to make a decision later this fiscal year, Cameron said.
The USGS will likely move to Denver, but there are “more places in play” for BLM, Cameron said. Interior is in talks with the Government Accountability Office to assess the availability of office spaces and cost of rent in different cities, he said.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/interior-official-defends-reorganization-plan-to-congress
-
EPA Nixes Request by Attorneys General to Gather Asbestos Data
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA won’t require companies importing asbestos or asbestos-containing products to report that information, the agency told a group of attorneys general April 30.
The Environmental Protection Agency has all the information it needs to decide whether ongoing uses of the mineral and products made with it pose an unreasonable risk to public health or the environment, the agency said in a noticedetailing its reasons for denying a rulemaking request 15 attorneys general submitted Jan. 31.
A risk assessment the EPA is conducting of asbestos should be finished by mid-2020, and any decision about whether regulatory controls are needed would follow.
The agency also issued a final significant new use rule April 17 that expanded its oversight of products that no longer contain asbestos, but could, the EPA said.
“I am deeply disappointed, but not at all surprised, by the EPA denial of the AG’s petition,” said Linda Reinstein, president of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization. “For now, litigation and legislation are our only courses of action.”
Fifteen AGs’ PetitionAttorneys general representing California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia had petitioned the EPA to issue a data-collection rule to collect information about the imports of asbestos and products made with it.
That information is needed so the EPA and states can protect health, the AGs said.
It would also help the public avoid potentially dangerous exposures to asbestos-containing products, they said.
The California and Massachusetts attorney general’s offices couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.
Asbestos ImportsThe U.S. Geological Survey estimated a specific type of chemical manufacturer—which uses asbestos to make chlorine and caustic soda—imported 750 tons of the mineral in 2018.
Three companies—Occidental Chemical Corp., Olin Corp., and Westlake Chemical Corp.—are known to import asbestos into the U.S., according to information the EPA has released as it evaluates some of its health risks.
“In addition to asbestos minerals, an unknown quantity of asbestos was imported within manufactured products, including asbestos-containing brake materials, rubber sheets for gaskets, tile, wallpaper, and potentially asbestos-cement pipe and knitted fabrics,” the Geological Survey said.
Asbestos exposure is the sole known cause of mesothelioma, a rare and deadly cancer of the chest or abdominal lining caused by exposure to asbestos fibers.
Better information about asbestos imports and use could offer insight into the 16,420 people who were newly diagnosed with mesothelioma between 2011 and 2015, the attorneys general told the EPA in their petition.
Of those people, 12,837 died, they said, citing information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Lawmakers frequently cited asbestos—specifically the EPA’s inability to ban it under the original 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act—as a reason for overhauling the law in 2016.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/epa-nixes-request-by-attorneys-general-to-gather-asbestos-data
-
D.C. Circuit Largely Upholds EPA’s Treatment of Confidentiality Under TSCA
Apr 30, 2019 | Lexology
By Thomas M. Duncan
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected all but one of the Environmental Defense Foundation’s (“EDF”) challenges to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) rulemaking implementing a statutory mandate to update the chemical substances inventory under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2692. See Envtl. Def. Fund. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, No. 17-1201, 2019 WL 1867846 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 26, 2019).
In 2016, TSCA was amended to, in part, require EPA to establish a rule to update the TSCA inventory, which is a list of chemicals that are manufactured or processed within the U.S. EPA thereafter published a rule to implement this requirement. See 82 Fed. Reg. 37,520 (Aug. 11, 2017). EDF challenged the rule in several respects, each pertaining to the level of public disclosure required.
To assert a claim for confidentiality under TSCA, a person must include a statement that the person has “a reasonable basis to believe that the information is not readily discoverable through reverse engineering.” See 15 U.S.C. § 2613(c)(1)(B). The person must also “substantiate” that claim. See 15 U.S.C. § 2613(c)(3). EPA had initially included certain questions in the proposed rulemaking that required companies that sought to keep the identity of a particular chemical confidential to substantiate that the chemical identity is not readily discoverable through reverse engineering. Those questions were removed in the final rulemaking. The Court agreed with EDF that EPA’s removal of those questions was arbitrary and capricious because it subverted EPA’s statutory duty to ensure that confidentiality claims are “substantiated.”
The Court upheld the remaining aspects of the rule that were challenged by EDF, as follows: The Court upheld the portion of the rule that allows any manufacturer or processor to maintain an existing confidentiality claim even if that company was not the source of the original claim that caused the chemical to be listed on the confidential portion of the TSCA inventory.
The Court disagreed with EDF’s position that EPA’s failure to restate in the rule all of the disclosure procedures mandated by the statute necessarily means that the rule contradicts the statute, and instead found that the rule’s disclosure procedures “complement and elaborate upon some of the statutory requirements without displacing the others.”
The Court rejected EDF’s argument that EPA acted unlawfully by failing to develop a unique public identifier for each chemical identity EPA keeps confidential, noting that TSCA did not place a deadline on EPA to establish those unique public identifiers and that EPA is free to publish a separate rule at a later date addressing that issue.
The Court upheld EPA’s decision to exclude export-only chemicals from the rule’s notification requirement.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=94572bd2-f87a-469c-b957-9e2dc25b9448
-
(ACC Mentioned) Bipartisan Group Seeks PFAS Rule as Data Shows Contamination Expanding
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
As environmentalists prepare to release new data showing growing contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers has introduced legislation setting a two-year deadline for EPA to regulate the substance, though the bill leaves open key issues the agency would have to address.
The Environmental Working Group (EWG), which has long called for a strict drinking water standard for PFAS, says that the group and Northeastern University researchers will release an updated report next week showing that the number of locations with PFAS-contaminated tap water “has soared,” far past the 172 locations they identified in 40 states last year.
The data release will come as the House Energy & Commerce Committee -- a key panel with oversight over drinking water and other environmental laws -- is expected in the coming weeks to hold a hearing on PFAS legislation, including a just-introduced bipartisan bill, which is co-sponsored by committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ).
The bill, H.R. 2377, would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act by requiring EPA to publish a maximum contaminant level goal and set a drinking water regulation for “total” PFAS within two years of the bill's passage.
H.R. 2377, along with other related legislation to respond to PFAS contamination, will be considered by the Energy & Commerce Committee in the coming month, Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-PA), a co-sponsor of the bill, says in an April 29 press release.
At press time, Boyle's spokesman did not yet have a schedule for the hearing, and a committee spokesman did not respond to a press query.
But the bill could prompt questions at the hearing as it does not specify which of the thousands of PFAS would be included in the “total” PFAS number, though Boyle's spokesman says the chemicals designated under this term could potentially be specified in the legislation as it moves forward.
It is also not clear what kind of “regulation” the agency would be required to issue as the legislation requires the EPA to craft a “primary drinking water regulation,” a term that includes both a health-based maximum contaminant level (MCL) that environmentalists and states have sought and a technology-based treatment standard that environmentalists and others have pursued as an interim step before regulators craft an MCL.
Regardless of the questions the bill may face, key officials have publicly raised doubts that lawmakers will be able to advance PFAS legislation anytime soon rather than leaving it to EPA.
PFAS are a class of over 4,000 chemicals that are widely used for their nonstick properties. But they have been linked to adverse health effects including certain cancers, ulcerative colitis and other conditions, sparking concern among communities as their discovery in community drinking water supplies has grown.
But many believe EPA has been slow to address the concern. As such, the just-unveiled bill would force EPA's hand after officials in February released a PFAS action plan in which the agency deferred a decision until the end of the year on whether it should write an MCL for two of the thousands of PFAS.
EPA's deferral meant the agency was not committing definitively to issuing such regulation despite heavy pressure from lawmakers, communities around the country and environmentalists to do so.
'Binding Standard'
Pallone, who chairs the committee, calls PFAS contamination “one of the greatest public health crises of our time,” and says the legislation “directs EPA to at long last take that crisis seriously, and set a strong, binding nationwide drinking water standard.” Along with Pallone and Boyle, the bill's other co-sponsors are Reps. Paul Tonko (D-NY) -- chairman of the environment subcommittee -- Dan Kildee (D-MI) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA).
EWG, in an April 30 press release, applauds the legislation, contending Congress must “force” EPA to act as millions of Americans are being exposed to the chemicals.
An analysis conducted by EWG of federal and state data concluded that more than 1,500 drinking water systems that serve up to 110 million people may be contaminated with the two most common PFAS -- perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS).
EWG, as well as a coalition of community groups from sites around the country and others, contend that EPA should address the chemicals as a class. “A legal limit covering the entire class of chemicals is needed because some have been linked to similar health effects and the vast majority have not been studied for safety,” EWG says in its release.
But industry discounts a one-size-fits-all approach, pointing to scientific issues. The American Chemistry Council's Vice President Robert Simon in replying to questions from Inside EPA earlier this month noted here are “vast differences within the PFAS family of chemistry.” While some chemicals in the family sound similar, he said, PFAS have different characteristics, formulations, intended uses and environmental and health profiles.
“So blanket, one-size-fits-all approaches to regulate all PFAS as a class are not only misleading for the public, they are scientifically-inaccurate,” he said.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/bipartisan-group-seeks-pfas-rule-data-shows-contamination-expanding
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chlorpyrifos – a Pesticide in Our Food
May 1, 2019 | Antartica Journal
This pesticide – chlorpyrifos – was banned by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) about 20 years ago for indoor use and was in the process of banning it for outdoor use when Dow Chemical made a million-dollar donation to President Trump’s inauguration committee, they reversed their decision. These toxic chemicals have been known to cause brain damage, low IQ’s, lung cancer, and Parkinson’s disease. Most people already have these chemicals in their bodies from the water we drink to the fruits and vegetables we eat. It has been found to cause low sperm count in males, infertility, developmental disorders, cancer, and other serious diseases. This nerve gas was originally developed by Nazi Germany. The Administration is handing this over to the American Chemistry Council and other industry groups to take care of this situation.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Foam Takeout Containers Banned in Maine
May 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adrianne Appel
Maine is the first state in the nation to ban foam food containers under a bill Gov. Janet Mills signed into law April 30.
Environmental groups lobbied for the ban on the grounds that foam polystyrene cups and takeout containers are the most commonly littered items in Maine and the nation and they break down into tiny plastic beads that release toxins that persist in the food supply.
“Polystyrene cannot be recycled like a lot of other products, so while that cup of coffee may be finished, the Styrofoam cup it was in is not,” Mills said April 30.
Fourteen towns and cities in Maine already prohibited the products and the statewide ban will “create consistency for businesses that operate in multiple municipalities,” she said.
The law provides an exemption for hospitals, meal-delivery programs for homebound residents, and foam containers used in the seafood industry. It takes effect Jan. 1, 2021.
Maine will join New York City; Los Angeles; and Washington, D.C., in banning single-use foam food containers. The Maryland Legislature recently approved a ban on polystyrene, but Gov. Larry Hogan (R) hasn’t taken action on it yet. The European Union will prohibit polystyrene starting in 2021.
Dart Container Corp., the world’s largest manufacturer of foam cups and containers, opposes bans on foam containers, as does the American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group. The manufacture and sale of polystyrene products creates thousands of jobs, Dart said. According to its website, the company collects foam for recycling.
Dart, based in Mason, Mich., has 40 locations around the world and employs 15,000 people.
Broad Ban
The ban in Maine will apply at convenience stores, restaurants, grocery stores, markets, delicatessens, and any other retailer or wholesaler that sells food, according to the law.
Sarah Lakeman, a director at the Natural Resources Council of Maine, an environmental group that lobbied for the ban, said the new law will reduce foam containers “that have become a common, costly, and deadly form of plastic pollution.”
More than 256 million disposable foam food containers are used every year in Maine and they cannot be recycled in the state, she said.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/foam-takeout-containers-banned-in-maine
-
New York Approves Ban on Chlorpyrifos Pesticide
May 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Keshia Clukey
New York State would phase out and then entirely ban the use of chlorpyrifos by the end of 2021, according to legislation passed April 30.
The bill (A.2477/S.5343), passed by the state Senate and Assembly as part of a larger environmental package now heads to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) desk for final approval.
Chlorpyrifos has been linked to neurological damage in children and has been banned for home use nationally since 2001. It is one of the most common bug killers and is used on a wide array of crops such as corn, apples, and almonds.
The pesticide is primarily produced by Corteva Agriscience, DowDupont Inc.’s agriculture division. Corteva Agriscience did not immediately respond to a request for comment April 30.
A Cuomo spokesman said the governor’s office is reviewing the measure and pointed to his “aggressive environmental agenda.”
New York is the second state to pass a ban after Hawaii, which approved a similar measure in June 2018. Other states, including Connecticut and Oregon, have proposed bans, and California has passed a suite of measures taking the pesticide off store shelves in 2015 and only allowing for permitted and licensed applications. California further restricted commercial use in 2018 and said it can only be used on crops where there are few alternatives.
New York’s legislation comes after a federal court of appeals April 19 gave the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 90 days to decide whether to ban the use of chlorpyrifos on food. Under the Obama administration, the EPA proposed ending all agricultural uses of the pesticide, but didn’t make a final decision on the issue. Under the Trump administration, the agency has called for further evaluation of the neurodevelopmental effects of chlorpyrifos.
Farm Groups Concerned“I think it’s important that we make sure that our farm workers, that the food that we eat, and the others who come in contact with chlorpyrifos are no longer poisoned by that chemical,” state Sen. Todd Kaminsky (D), chairman of the Senate Environmental Conservation Committee and the bill’s Senate sponsor, said in an interview.
Agriculture groups are concerned about the ban’s potential impact on New York’s large farming industry, particularly on onions and cabbage crops—two of the largest vegetable commodities in the state.
“There aren’t many alternatives, if any. It definitely puts the plants more at risk of loss and disease,” New York Farm Bureau spokesman Steve Ammerman said in an interview.
The Farm Bureau is also concerned the bill disregards the current pesticide registration process, which requires a review by the EPA and the state Department of Environmental Conservation.
“We are concerned that the legislation is taking this from the scientific realm and putting decisions on crop tools into the political realm,” Ammerman said.
Phaseout PlannedThe bill provides a phaseout, which gives time for farmers to try different products and for corporations to develop alternatives, Kaminsky said.
It would prohibit the aerial application of the pesticide starting in 2020, and would ban all use of chlorpyrifos except on apple tree trunks by 2021. The chemical would be completely banned by Dec. 1, 2021.
Environmental advocacy groups praised the measure.
“It’s another strong standard that will prevent New Yorkers from being exposed to a chemical that we know as dangerous,” Environmental Advocates Executive Director Peter Iwanowicz said in an interview.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/new-york-approves-ban-on-chlorpyrifos-pesticide
-
EPA Affirms No Public Health Risk Posed by Glyphosate
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
The Environmental Protection Agency found that glyphosate poses no risk to public health and is not a carcinogen, as long as it’s used in accordance with updated instructions, an interim registration review said.
Glyphosate is the active ingredient found in Bayer AG’s Roundup, the most popular herbicide on the market.
“Today’s proposed action includes new management measures that will help farmers use glyphosate in the most effective and efficient way possible, including pollinator protections,” EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a statement on April 30.
“We look forward to input from farmers and other stakeholders to ensure that the draft management measures are workable, realistic, and effective,” he said.
A Controversial ReviewGlyphosate has been registered as a pesticide in the U.S. since 1974. Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), all pesticides must undergo a registration review every 15 years.
EPA’s interim decision comes amid a growing pushback from environmental groups who say the science on glyphosate is unclear.
“Unfortunately American consumers cannot trust the EPA assessment of glyphosate’s safety,” said Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity.
“As with past EPA studies, the agency has relied heavily on confidential industry studies that cannot be reviewed by independent scientists and reached an industry-friendly conclusion that is simply not based on the best available science,” he said in a statement.
Legal ChallengesBut administration officials say glyphosate is an important crop protection tool.
“If we are going to feed 10 billion people by 2050, we are going to need all the tools at our disposal, which includes the use the glyphosate,” Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue said in a statement.
“USDA applauds EPA’s proposed registration decision as it is science-based and consistent with the findings of other regulatory authorities that glyphosate does not pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans.”
EPA’s review comes as legal challenges mount against Roundup maker Bayer.
Two California juries have ruled in favor of plaintiffs with non-Hodgkin lymphoma who blamed exposure to the herbicide for their cancer.
Bayer, which bought Monsanto last year, has said it would appeal the decisions.
EPA Says Benefits Outweigh RisksAccording to its interim review, EPA concluded that the benefits of using glyphosate “outweigh the potential ecological risks when glyphosate is used in accordance with the label.”
In an effort to reduce instances of off-site drift, the EPA is proposing the addition of spray drift management language to product labels. The agency is also recommending that glyphosate makers coordinate closely with growers and researchers to develop programs to slow the spread of herbicide-resistant weeds.
The EPA also proposed adding a “non-target organism advisory statement,” to communicate potentially negative impacts to pollinators and other non-target plants.
Once the Federal Register notice is published, the public will have 60 days to submit comments. Once the interim registration review decision is issued, glyphosate makers, called registrants, must then submit amended labels for review within 60 days.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/epa-affirms-no-public-health-risk-posed-by-glyphosate
-
Committee Investigates 'Plastic Paradox'
May 1, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Philip Athey
With no new federal recycling law since 1976, lawmakers on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee had plenty of questions when hearing from experts on plastic recycling.
While members grilled witnesses on issues including replacements of single-use plastic straws and microplastics in the food chain, the focus continually swung around to the problem of making recycling on a large scale economically feasible.
The discussion came as communities around the country look to either reduce or do away with plastic items.
"It is not realistic to think we can up disposable plastic altogether," Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), chairwoman of the Research and Technology Subcommittee, said when opening the hearing. "We must invest in research and development of sustainable materials and processes."
That sentiment was echoed by ranking member Jim Baird (R-Ind.), whose workers in his state's plastics industry could benefit from "a new circular economy for the United States — an economy that produces, recycles and reuses materials to reduce cost and waste."
Witnesses, however, said that given the current technology and processes used for recycling at a large scale, most companies cannot make enough of a profit to justify investment in the field.
"While recycling is the right thing to do, it is also a business," said Paul Sincock, city manager for Plymouth, Mich. "Municipalities across the country must have cost-effective programs that allow our residents to easily recycle materials."
Utah Democratic Rep. Ben McAdams called on his experience as the former mayor of Salt Lake City to discuss how to make large-scale recycling a possibility for cities around the nation.
McAdams said he found that technology made his city's waste management "greener, smarter and less costly to taxpayers."
Govind Menon, director of the School of Science and Technology and chairman of the Department of Chemistry and Physics at Troy University, said using emerging technologies in academia shows a bright future for plastic recycling. For now, innovations are often too expensive for cities and companies to implement.
"It's one thing for academia to have instrumentation," he said. "It's another thing entirely for recycling facilities to have instrumentation."
Because recycling companies only make "pennies to a pound," said Menon, they do not necessarily have the means to invest in new technologies.
His solution is to have academia develop new processes and work to scale them up. Government funding can boost the effort.
"Not every industry is profitable from the get-go. Sometimes governments have to intervene and help start industry," Menon said. "As of now, if we have to clean up the oceans, we have to pay the price. The burden falls on us."
Stevens said she was hopeful, despite the "alarming statistics," that the country would "meet the charge of this time" and find a solution to the "plastic paradox."
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/05/01/stories/1060249489
-
Drinking Water Utilities Meet with OMB on Perchlorate
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
A group representing drinking water utilities is scheduled to meet with White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) officials April 30 to discuss EPA's pending proposed health-based drinking water goal and enforceable standard for the rocket fuel ingredient perchlorate, potentially raising concerns about the agency's methodology.
The American Water Works Association (AWWA), which represents both municipally owned and investor-owned utilities, has repeatedly urged EPA to change its approach for crafting a perchlorate drinking water standard, arguing the agency should use a traditional algebraic formula using a 2007 risk estimate rather than a biologically-based dose-response (BBDR) model as recommended by agency science advisers in 2013.
EPA is under a judicial deadline to propose by May 28 a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) and national primary drinking water regulation for perchlorate, and sent its proposal to OMB April 16. OMB's website says AWWA representatives are scheduled to meet with officials April 30 to discuss the proposal.
The fall 2018 Unified Agenda notes EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) recommended in 2013 that the agency use models rather than the traditional approach to set the MCLG for the perchlorate regulations. Scientists from EPA and the Food and Drug Administration worked collaboratively to develop BBDR models, and EPA completed peer reviewof the analysis in March 2018. “The EPA will utilize the best available, peer-reviewed science to inform regulatory decisionmaking for perchlorate,” the Unified Agenda says.
But AWWA questions the BBDR model's fitness for use in crafting the standard and funded an analysis by consultants that was recently published in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology supporting their argument.
The consultants' analysis says that until more data can be developed to address uncertainties in the current BBDR model, EPA should continue to rely on the 0.7 microgram per kilogram bodyweight per day reference dose the National Academy of Sciences recommended in 2007.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/drinking-water-utilities-meet-omb-perchlorate
-
Legislation Would Set PFAS Drinking Water Limit
May 1, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Ariana Figueroa and George Cahlink
A group of lawmakers is pushing bipartisan legislation to require EPA to set enforceable standards for toxic chemicals in drinking water.
Those chemicals are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, which are found in nonstick household products, shoes and military firefighting foam.
The bill, H.R. 2377, sponsored by Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), follows a slew of legislation seeking to address PFAS — from funding research to providing medical resources for people exposed.
Co-sponsor Dan Kildee (D-Mich.), who has been deeply active on the issue, said he and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have talked about possibly including the bill in a spending package.
"I don't discount the possibility of being able to move this and some other PFAS legislation," Kildee said, adding that he's "talked to the speaker about it and she's very open to it."
Kildee said he's hoping to get some type of PFAS legislation passed this year, but for now he's focusing on increasing the amount of money allocated for cleaning up areas where PFAS is found in drinking water.
"President Trump's Environmental Protection Agency is entrusted with keeping our drinking water safe but has delayed protecting our families from toxic PFAS chemicals in drinking water," Kildee said in a statement. "We know that PFAS chemicals are harmful to human health and families deserve safe water from their taps."
Other co-sponsors include Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who chairs the Energy and Commerce Committee; Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), who chairs the Environment Subcommittee; and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.).
People in Fitzpatrick's district are having to "take drastic action" to reduce their exposure to two of the best-known PFAS — PFOA and PFOS — the lawmaker said in a statement today.
"PFAS chemical contamination is a public health crisis and the EPA must act with an urgency that matches the scale of the problem," Fitzpatrick said. "If the EPA won't act, then Congress must take action to protect American communities from these dangerous chemicals."
Other PFAS legislation includes designating the chemical as a hazardous substance and establishing a registry for people exposed to PFAS because of their proximity to a military base.
A Government Accountability Office report found the Defense Department "identified 401 active or closed military installations with known or suspected releases of PFOS or PFOA."
The only PFAS bill without bipartisan support — S. 1023 and its companion H.R. 2102 — would provide hospital care and medical services to veterans and their dependents who were stationed at a military base where they were exposed to PFAS.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2019/04/30/stories/1060247803
-
Burning Fluorinated Chemicals May Move Water Problem Into Air
May 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan and Amena H. Saiyid
Almost three years after the EPA warned the public about two ubiquitous fluorinated chemicals present in drinking water nationwide, regulators are still grappling with how to dispose of the substances before they end up in wells and waterways.
One option is incineration, which 3M Co., the state of Vermont, and the Pentagon have used. But no one knows for sure if it is safe to burn poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances, a family of thousands of heat- and water-resistant chemicals known as PFAS.
“I worry about the life cycle,” David Ross, the assistant administrator for water at the Environmental Protection Agency, told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee at a March 28 hearing. “You take them out of the water supply; are we just transferring the media?”
The chemicals are present in a vast array of consumer and industrial products, including nonstick and stain-resistant coatings in clothing, fast-food wrappers, and carpets. They are also part of some firefighting foams made to put out jet fuel fires because the chemicals are resistant to heat.
The EPA since 2016 has been warning about the health risks to drinking water associated with two of the most well-known and prevalent PFAS compounds, PFOA and PFOS. While states have started to regulate the chemicals, federal regulators have just started to study the broader health effects from the entire class of PFAS chemicals.
Now, regulators are worried about moving the risks associated with these chemicals from water to air.
‘All Options Are on the Table’Tests have found PFOS, PFOA, and other fluorinated chemicals in water supplies and soil samples across the nation.
The question is what to do about them once they are removed from drinking water—absorbed in activated carbon, for instance, or captured in high-pressure membranes—or how to dispose of firefighting foam.
Many state and federal regulators agree incinerating the waste might be the most viable option, but the Conservation Law Foundation has protested the practice.
“All options are on the table,” said Becky Keogh, president of the Environmental Council of the States and director of Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality. “I believe the question is, ‘Can we safely incinerate PFAS compounds?’”
PFAS isn’t yet regulated as hazardous waste, and there aren’t any air quality standards for regulating PFAS waste incineration and the waste itself, state officials and engineers say.
Current practices incorporate an incinerator permitted to capture acidic hydrogen fluoride, one of the byproducts of incinerating PFAS, said Gale Hoffnagle, senior vice president and technical director for the TRC Environmental Corp., an engineering and environmental consultant for industry. The incinerators don’t have to be permitted to just burn hazardous materials, he said.
Incinerating these chemicals takes a considerable amount of energy, from around 300 degrees to more than 1,000 degrees Celsius (about 572 to 1,832 F), according to the Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council, a state-led coalition that works to reduce barriers to the use of innovative technologies for cleaning up air, water, and waste.
Burning for DecadesPFAS chemicals “can be combusted and destroyed, but they have to be burned under fairly strict conditions,” said Dan Costa, former national program director in the EPA’s Air, Climate, and Energy Research Program.
Some states, the military and at least one company, 3M Co., have chosen to burn waste with at least three of these fluorinated chemicals.
3M, which developed, manufactured, and sold PFOA and PFOS, has been incinerating PFAS-containing waste at its Cottage Grove, Minn., facility since the 1970s, said Laura Opsahl, a spokeswoman for the company.
The military has chosen to dispose of PFAS through incineration at permitted hazardous waste disposal facilities, where air emissions are “strictly controlled,” a spokeswoman for the Department of Defense said in an emailed statement. The department defers to the EPA on the risks of incineration, she said.
State EffortsStates, including Massachusetts and Vermont, have gathered firefighting foam and opted to incinerate it. A year ago, Vermont decided to send PFAS-containing foam collected from local fire departments to an incinerator in Ohio for disposal.
When seeking a place that could handle 2,500 gallons of foam, Vermont’s Department of Environmental Conservation sought facilities that scrubbed air emissions of resulting harmful chemicals, said Richard Spiese, who heads the department’s Waste Management and Prevention Division.
Lab tests indicate that the PFAS should break down in the incineration process, but in the real world it’s difficult to tell, Spiese said.
“It’s really hard to even sample for,” he said.
The Conservation Law Foundation’s Vermont chapter questioned the state’s decision to incinerate the foam.
“There do not appear to be any studies that show burning PFAS in a hazardous waste incinerator is safe and effective at commercial scales, as opposed to laboratory bench-scale testing,” Jen Duggan, director of the organization’s Vermont operations, wrote to the state. “No burning of PFAS should occur until incineration technologies are proven safe at a commercial scale.”
The foundation also had questions about the Ohio incinerator’s qualifications for burning the waste. In the end, Vermont sent the gallons of foam to a Albany, N.Y., incinerator for disposal because the company that owns the Ohio facility was cited for Clean Air Act violations.
‘We Certainly Need More Science’The EPA, mindful of the health risks posed by air pollution, is also considering how to monitor incinerators’ stack emissions, or the chemicals released into the air from burning waste.
“Holistically, we certainly need more science across the entire realm of the PFAS world,” Ross said.
But the agency doesn’t explicitly mention such a risk in its action plan for dealing with the compounds.
“It is all a balance of risk,” said Costa, the former EPA air official. “If you have this stuff and want to get rid of it, how do you want to get rid of it?”
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/burning-fluorinated-chemicals-may-move-water-problem-into-air
-
Washington State Paint Stewardship, HFC Bills Head to Governor
May 1, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Washington state’s legislature has passed a bill on hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and another on paint production and waste. Both have now been sent to Governor Jay Inslee’s desk for his signature.
HB 1112 – sent to the governor on 26 April – would reduce greenhouse gas emissions from hydrofluorocarbons. It will require various state agencies to study their uses and establish policies to phase them out in certain products in Washington, including in:
· propellants;
· rigid polyurethane applications, spray foam and other polyurethanes;
· supermarket refrigeration systems and vending machines;
· refrigerated food processing and dispensing equipment;
· residential consumer refrigeration products; and
· cold storage warehouses.
HFCs are a group of industrial chemicals used for cooling and refrigeration, and have replaced ozone-depleting substances that are being phased out internationally under the Montreal Protocol. However, they are considered greenhouse gases contributing to global warming, and have elicited their own concerns.
Meanwhile, HB 1652 – sent to the governor on 28 April – would impose extended producer responsibility and product stewardship obligations on paint companies.
The bill would create a "paint product stewardship" organisation to represent producers of architectural paints and require stewardship of discarded latex- and oil-based paint.
That organisation would be required to submit a plan for the implementation of a paint stewardship programme by 30 May 2020 (or within one year of the effective date of the bill, whichever comes later). Producers who do not participate in the programme will be barred from selling architectural paint in the state.
Both bills were introduced in January, and made their way through the legislature in the final days of the 2019 legislative session, which has now adjourned.
Governor Inslee will have 20 days (excluding Sundays) from the legislature’s adjournment to act on the bills, or they will become law without his signature.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76959/washington-state-paint-stewardship-hfc-bills-head-to-governor
-
France, Sweden Propose Ban on over 1,000 Allergens in Textiles
May 1, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
France and Sweden have submitted a proposal to Echa to ban or restrict over 1,000 skin sensitisers in textiles, leather, furs and skins sold to consumers.
The joint initiative includes all substances classified as skin sensitisers under the CLP Regulation and 25 substances of the family of disperse dyes with sensitising properties.
Ahead of the proposal, the French Agency for Food, Environment and Occupational Health and Safety (Anses) conducted a study to identify substances present in certain articles. And the Swedish Chemicals Agency (Kemi) carried out an analysis of risk management options under REACH on skin sensitisers in textiles.
The two agencies propose to limit the concentration of sensitising substances under REACH to the following thresholds:
· 1mg/kg for chromium VI compounds (textiles, leather, furs and skins);
· 130mg/kg (textiles) and 110mg/kg (leather, furs and skins) for nickel and its compounds;
· 70mg/kg (textiles) and 60mg/kg (leather, furs and skins) for cobalt and its compounds;
· 75mg/kg for formaldehyde (textiles, leather, furs and skins);
· 250mg/kg (textiles) and 210mg/kg (leather, furs and skins) for 1,4 paraphenylene diamine; and
· 130mg/kg (textiles) and 110mg/kg (leather, furs and skins) for other substances classified as skin sensitisers.
Anses also undertook an analysis of possible safe substitutes for these substances. "Chemical alternatives exist, in particular for disperse dyes for which substitution is feasible and already underway in Europe," it said.
For other families of substances such as diisocyanates, implementing best production practices should reduce or eliminate the presence of these chemicals in finished articles, the agency added.
Anses and Kemi estimate that four to five million EU citizens have allergies to chemicals that are present in textiles and leather. It is thought that between 45,000 and 180,000 people in the Union develop an allergy to these chemicals every year, they added.
"These days it is difficult to avoid exposure to allergenic substances that may be present in textiles and leather. Once you have developed a skin allergy, it is a life-long problem," Kemi risk manager Helena Dorfh said.
Echa is expected to start a public consultation on the restriction proposal in June. It will be open for six months, Anses said.
After that, Echa's Risk Assessment (Rac) and Socio-economic Analysis (Seac) Committees will formulate, on the basis of all the data, an opinion which will be sent to the European Commission to decide on the adoption of this restriction.
If adopted, it will be included in REACH Annex XVII and will be mandatory for textiles, hides, furs and skins placed on the market in Europe.
Industry welcome
Textiles and apparel industry association Euratex said that, while it is too early to comment on the impact of the preliminary list of substances and scope, it welcomes the effort to increase consumer protection. Businesses, it added, are already undertaking voluntary initiatives to ensure product safety in this area.
Like the adopted restrictions on carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic (CMR) substances in textiles, this new proposal "may truly contribute to the safety of textile articles if properly enforced", Euratex sustainability officer Dunja Drmač said.
The challenge, she added, is in controlling these substances in the large quantities of imported products that may not comply with EU regulations.
European consumer organisation Beuc said the proposal is "great news for millions of consumers" across the Union.
Senior policy officer Pelle Moos said EU action "so far has been scandalously slow. Now we expect that the EU Commission and the EU chemicals agency ensure that the proposal is finalised quickly, without compromising the current ambition."
https://chemicalwatch.com/77003/france-sweden-propose-ban-on-over-1000-allergens-in-textiles
-
FERC Chairman: No Rush on Changing Pipeline Permit Policy
Apr 30, 2019 | PoliticoPro
By Eric Wolff
FERC Chairman Neil Chatterjee is signaling changes to FERC’s pipeline permitting policies are unlikely anytime soon.
“As we’ve heard from stakeholders in this process, many commentators are saying the existing policy statement is good law,” he said today at a lunch hosted by the American Council of Capital Formation, a nonprofit that acts as a liaison between policy makers and the business community. “For something like a policy statement to be durable, it is really important that you have not just consensus, but unanimous, bipartisan consensus.“
The commission launched the review of the 1999 pipeline certificate policy early last year under former chairman Kevin McIntyre, who died in January. President Donald Trump has yet to nominate anyone to replace McIntyre, and Democratic Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur must leave by the end of the year.
Chatterjee said he would prefer to wait for FERC to have five commissioners in place before making any updates to the pipeline procedures.
“Because it’s good policy, it has stood the test of time today,” Chatterjee said of the 1999 policy. ”A split policy statement, I don’t think has that much value. With a vacancy on the commission, and with Commissioner LaFleur announcing she is not seeking another term, a full complement on the commission is needed to take action.“
Chatterjee later told reporters he might issue an order if the remaining four commissioners agree.
Dena Wiggins, president of the Natural Gas Supply Association, an industry group happy with existing procedures, was pleased that Chatterjee sounded unlikely to make big changes to FERC policy.
“I would like to see the docket closed at some point,” she said.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2019/04/ferc-chair-no-rush-on-changing-pipeline-permit-policy-3172089
-
White House OKs Rewrite of Blowout Rule
May 1, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Dylan Brown
The White House has approved the Interior Department's rewrite of offshore drilling standards that the Obama administration had imposed in response to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs' approval on Monday means the Blowout Preventer Systems and Well Control Rule is on its way to the Federal Register.
It was a failed blowout preventer that helped create Interior's Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) in 2010. After BP PLC safety valves failed to stop the release of more than 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, the Obama administration broke up the old Minerals Management Service, citing lax oversight and cozy relationships with industry.
BSEE spent six years of drafting the Obama-era standards for blowout preventer design and maintenance, monitoring requirements, and a certification program for third-party inspectors.
But industry never hid its distaste for the rule. Within months of taking office, President Trump ordered the rule be reopened as part of his "American-First Offshore Energy Strategy."
The new rule mirrors current industry safety standards and would remove the requirement that BSEE approve the contractors hired by oil and gas companies to evaluate their well equipment.
"By reducing the regulatory burden on industry, we are encouraging increased domestic oil and gas production while maintaining a high bar for safety and environmental sustainability," BSEE Director Scott Angelle said when the proposed rule was announced.
Obama-era BSEE Director Michael Bromwich decried the rule changes as not in "the public's interest" (Energywire, Jan. 7).
"If you went up to a well-informed citizen on the street and asked, 'How would you feel about these standards set entirely by the industry?'" Bromwich told E&E News in January. "I think they would be shocked."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/05/01/stories/1060248971
-
White House Starts ACE Review, Sticking to June Deadline for Final Rule
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
White House regulatory officials have started interagency review of EPA’s draft final Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule addressing greenhouse gases from existing power plants, the last step before the rule can go final, a move that suggests the agency remains on track to complete the rule by the end of June.
The timeline for the measure -- which environmentalists and others roundly criticize for lacking national GHG standards and potentially allowing emissions to increase -- is important because Trump officials hope to complete the first round of litigation before the end of President Donald Trump’s current four-year term.
While a late June completion date for ACE would not guarantee that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issues a ruling on the merits of legal challenges by the end of 2020, sources say they would expect a ruling to be issued by then.
EPA is advancing the rule to replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP), siding with utility sector groups pushing for a narrow policy that could provide regulatory certainty over hard-line conservatives that want the agency to entirely drop all climate rules for the power sector.
The agency is moving on a slower timeline for its revisions to companion GHG standards for new and modified power plants, writing in an April 30 status report to the D.C. Circuit that the agency intends to issue a final new source performance standard (NSPS) in the fall.
The NSPS is a legal prerequisite to existing source GHG standards, and the Obama-era version of the rule will remain in effect until Trump officials complete their changes, which includes a high-profile reversal on basing coal plant targets on the use of partial carbon capture technology.
The White House Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) says on its website that it received the draft final ACE rule on April 26, and that it has not yet held meetings on the rule with outside groups.
The CPP would have created a framework for stringent GHG standards for coal- and gas-fired power plants by deeming generation shifting to lower-emitting sources as the “best system of emission reduction” and setting specific GHG targets for states to achieve. Overall, the agency estimated it would have resulted in power sector emissions 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.
The August 2015 rule drew lawsuits from industry and Republican-led states, which persuaded the Supreme Court to issue an unprecedented stay of the rule in February 2016. The stay remains in effect because the litigation technically has not concluded.
The full D.C. Circuit heard oral argument that September, but it never issued a ruling and has paused the case while the Trump EPA develops its replacement policy.
Trump officials have said they hope to avoid a repeat of this scenario with their ACE rule, and are thus prioritizing the measure to allow appellate litigation to play out before the 2020 election.
Emission Impacts
In contrast to the CPP, ACE’s emission cuts would be negligible beyond what would occur from a business-as-usual scenario, and some critics say the rule could even result in the perverse outcome of GHG increases if coal plants run more often after undergoing efficiency upgrades.
ACE also does not set any specific GHG reduction targets but rather lists a set of efficiency measures for states to consider. States would be required to set their own limits based on those measures and other factors, such as the remaining useful life of a coal plant and whether facilities can avoid stringent new source review (NSR) permit requirements to install state-of-the-art emission controls.
EPA is expected to separate controversial NSR changes that were included in the ACE proposal, with the agency hoping to move the two issues separately in an effort to better protect the legality of each policy and not have lawsuits combined.
Also, EPA is making industry-requested fixes to the NSR piece, including changes to alternative methods for calculating emission increases that determine whether NSR is triggered and better linking “causation” of a plant modification to the emissions change. Those revisions are expected to put the final NSR rule about three months behind ACE.
EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler told a major energy conference in Houston last month that ACE will result in a 34 percent power sector GHG cut from 2005 levels, ensure that power plant conventional emissions continue to decline and encourage new technologies to “ensure coal plants can be a part of a cleaner future.”
He did not mention the NSR portion of the package, which EPA noted in its own regulatory impact analysis could boost sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions, and cause additional premature deaths.
The scope of those potential emission increases was quantified for the first time in a Jan. 15 peer-reviewed paper by Resources for the Future and Harvard and Syracuse Universities. The study found that 18 states plus the District of Columbia could have higher GHGs, NOx and SO2 levels compared to no policy, because the NSR exemption would cause almost one-third of existing coal plants to run more often.
The paper raised legal questions about the validity of the policy, warning that courts could find the rule to be arbitrary because it ignores likely emissions increases. It also found that nationally, the rule would only modestly reduce GHGs from the power sector.
Without the NSR changes-- should EPA not finalize them or should they be vacated in court -- the amount of GHG reductions from ACE would be even lower. That is because states’ compliance plans would account for the likelihood that efficiency upgrades could trigger NSR, thus imposing soft requirements for coal plants within their borders.
Market Shifts
The final ACE rule also comes after EPA released data in February showing that power sector GHGs increased by 0.6 percent last year after several years of decline, potentially complicating the agency’s message for why it is rolling back the CPP. Trump officials have argued that long-term market shifts toward lower-carbon generation means that strict rules are not necessary.
In response to EPA sending its draft final ACE rule to OIRA, the Environmental Defense Fund reiterated sharp criticism of the plan, calling it “an abomination” and noting that while the CPP “would protect Americans from climate change and unhealthy air pollution, Wheeler’s substitute would expose us to more climate pollution and would cause more deaths and disease from smog and soot.”
The group adds that if the final rule is similar to the proposal, “it will be an unlawful and unacceptable substitute for the historic [CPP]. We will pursue every avenue to oppose a harmful rollback and fight for stronger clean air and climate protections.”
In contrast, industry groups strongly support ACE because an enforceable GHG rule -- even a narrow one -- would protect them from common law suits over their emissions. They also argue that the CPP overstepped EPA’s authority because its targets were based on actions beyond a regulated plant’s fenceline
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/white-house-starts-ace-review-sticking-june-deadline-final-rule
-
New LNG Plants Could Surpass Nameplate Capacities, Adding to Supply in Coming Years
Apr 30, 2019 | Platts
By Jason Lord
LNG facilities currently under construction are able to achieve output above their nameplate capacity specification. Should this additional capacity materialize on a reliable, long-term basis, it could relieve some anticipated tightness in the LNG market.
These details can be confirmed in documents and permits from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. S&P Global Platts Analytics has also done research on additional debottlenecking that Cheniere has considered at Sabine Pass, its liquefaction facility located in Louisiana.
While debottlenecking is one way to achieve additional production gains, there is also potential for additional incremental volumes that are not quantified until a year or two of operations is achieved at the facility and efficiency gains are realized at individual trains.
If these additional volumes are ultimately achieved, they could be marketed in new contracts as facilities come online, in the US and globally.
The case for this comes from performance and capacity guarantees by engineering procurement and construction companies – known as EPCs. These include turbine manufacturers and other liquefaction technology licensing companies. The guarantees specify a minimum stated performance, and ultimately higher liquefaction capacities to meet the obligations of these contracts.
Similar to minimum – and maximum – quantities that are specified in a sales and purchase agreement between LNG producers and LNG buyers, contracts between an LNG developer and these EPC parties ensure that the liquefaction equipment is designed to meet the specifications required, sometimes well above what has been marketed.
Freeport’s potential
An example of this could be at a Texas LNG export facility with its first train slated to come online this year. Freeport LNG could have excess production capacity over and above what is currently committed to firm contracts.
Freeport’s CEO, Michael Smith, mentioned in a recent interview at CERAWeek that the potential capacity at each respective train is expected to be over 5 million mt/year – the nameplate capacity stated by the company. Realization of any additional liquefaction capacity, which Smith said the company expects to know sometime in 2020, would allow Freeport to market these volumes once they are confirmed to be available long term.
The waiting period in demonstrating individual train performance will allow ample time for Freeport’s first three trains to come online, after running through both winter and summer seasons, providing an approximate excess liquefaction capacity of 1–2 million mt/year, suggested by Smith. These smaller-scale volumes could be sold into the market before 2023 and 2024.
This potential additional capacity is particularly significant given that 2023-2024 is expected to be a critical period in the global LNG market, when there could be a supply crunch as LNG demand continues to grow globally. Freeport’s case is just an example of a larger scenario that creates potential for higher LNG capacities than expected, at new brownfield and greenfield facilities coming online globally in the coming years.
Setting aside other economic factors dictating LNG fundamentals, extra capacity above the expected nameplate capacity could add up to meaningful additional volumes to the current outlook for first-phase US, and global, LNG production facilities.
https://blogs.platts.com/2019/04/30/new-lng-nameplate-capacities/
-
Cuomo Signs Offshore Drilling Ban into Law
May 1, 2019 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
Gov. Andrew Cuomo has signed into law a new ban on drilling for oil and gas off the New York coast.
The Democrat was joined by musician Billy Joel for a bill signing Monday on Long Island.
Members of the Democrat-led state Legislature passed the ban earlier this year following the Trump administration's proposal to open up more coastal areas to drilling.
Specifically, the ban would bar state permits for drilling or oil or gas exploration in offshore areas controlled by the state.
That would make it much more difficult for any drilling to occur close to coastal New York, even in waters controlled by the federal government.
Opponents of drilling off the Long Island coast say it would put the local environment, water quality and human health at risk.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/05/01/stories/1060247579
-
DHS Keys in on 55 Critical Infrastructure Risks
May 1, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
What do Wi-Fi availability, access to medical records and oil exploration have in common?
Homeland security officials consider all three to be so vital, their loss "would have a debilitating effect" on national security, according to a new Department of Homeland Security publication.
After six months of deliberation, DHS's National Risk Management Center has shared its list of 55 crucial functions, meant to offer a jumping-off point for allocating cyber and physical security investments and prioritizing emergency response.
Whether hackers or hurricanes are bearing down on the U.S., "our first analytic question is: Is there any potential impact to a national critical function?" said NRMC Director Bob Kolasky, whose office consulted with private companies and federal agencies to prepare the list. "You've done some work in advance to understand: What could those cascading impacts be?"
Kolasky said more detailed analyses of threats and vulnerabilities for each critical infrastructure category will likely stay under wraps. DHS said that it "will be looking for information to help answer the question of 'what keeps you up at night'" for its follow-up risk register.
From an adversary's perspective, "there's nothing Earth shattering in what we've just produced," Kolasky said. The set's energy-related items are fairly general: "distribute electricity," for instance, and "transport materials by pipeline."
"We judged that getting this out there at this level would not give attackers any new insight into what systems are important to the functioning of society," Kolasky said in an interview.
The release of the list drew a warm welcome from the American Gas Association, whose president and CEO had previously urged the department to straighten out how the agency would handle potentially sensitive information contained in the report.
"AGA applauds DHS for this collaborative engagement with the critical infrastructure community, including natural gas utilities," Karen Harbert said in a statement yesterday. "They have taken a holistic approach to risk management which effectively helps identify systemic risks that may have roots across multiple sectors and AGA looks forward to opportunities to contribute to the national discussion."
The list of functions is NRMC's first major publication. Former DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen stood up the planning and analysis office last year ahead of a larger shuffle of DHS cybersecurity responsibilities, including the congressionally authorized launch of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.
President Trump pushed Nielsen to resign last month over her handling of the White House's hard-line immigration policies, replacing the cybersecurity-savvy secretary with Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan (Energywire, April 8).
At a House budget hearing yesterday, McAleenan signaled he would stay the course for DHS's cybersecurity activities.
"DHS is always a multimission department, and we will not lose momentum across any of our key missions and the numerous efforts that we are facing, including, critically, cybersecurity, securing the 2020 elections, preparing for the upcoming hurricane season and everything else that we're asked to do," he told members of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.
Kolasky said election security is an issue that "demands additional attention" from his own office.
"The function of 'conducting elections' is an area that we continue to see a lot of risk in advance of the 2020 elections, so that remains a priority," he said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/05/01/stories/1060248607
-
Wisconsin Explosion Prompts Call for Updates to Chemical Study
May 1, 2019 | Insurance Journal
The U.S. Chemical Safety Board wants federal regulators to re-examine a 1993 study on hydrofluoric acid after an explosion at a Superior oil refinery last year.
The board sent a letter Wednesday to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency asking the agency to review the study to determine the effectiveness of existing regulations and the viability of using safer technologies in refineries, Wisconsin Public Radio reported.
Hydrofluoric acid, also known as hydrogen fluoride, is a highly toxic chemical that can cause serious injury or death at a concentration of 30 parts per million. The chemical is used in about 50 of the nation’s approximately 150 oil refineries.
An April 2018 explosion at the Husky Energy refinery in Superior sent debris within 150 feet of the refinery’s hydrofluoric acid tank, forcing a large part of the city to evacuate. A similar blast occurred at the ExxonMobil refinery in Torrance, California, in 2015.
The safety board’s interim executive, Kristen Kulinowski, said the board has found failures in application of safety standards and the standards didn’t anticipate the hazards that may exist at sites.
“We would like to see the protective action taken before we have to suffer some terrible tragedy, and we’re hoping that EPA agrees and takes a fresh look at (hydrofluoric acid), the risk management plans and potentially safer alternatives,” Kulinowski said.
An EPA spokeswoman said the agency is reviewing the board’s request.
Husky spokesman Mel Duvall said the company appreciates the board’s efforts. He stressed the Superior blast didn’t release any hydrofluoric acid and the refinery has already installed additional protective measures. The company also plans to add a rapid transfer system that can move the chemical to another holding tank in the event of a release and enhance leak detection efforts.
https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/midwest/2019/04/30/525139.htm
-
(ACC Mentioned) Groups Urge STB To Pull Rail Competitive Switching Rule
May 1, 2019 | Law 360
By Linda Chiem
Business advocacy groups urged the Surface Transportation Board on Tuesday to pull a proposal establishing new regulations allowing customers and shippers served by only one major railroad in their region to access another railroad, saying it's more harmful than beneficial.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, Heritage Action and other conservative-leaning business and consumer advocacy groups sent a letter to the STB saying they are "deeply concerned" about the status of rule-making on the so-called reciprocal or competitive switching issue.
The STB is an independent adjudicatory board that's part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and has regulatory jurisdiction over railroad rates, service disputes, mergers and other nonsafety rail issues.
The groups want the STB to abandon its July 2016 proposal to draft new rules to compel a given rail carrier to pass off customers' shipments to a rival railroad at interchanges if certain operating conditions are met. It's a process called reciprocal, or competitive, switching, and it's rarely been used under the existing STB regulations, which have been in place for 30 years.
The groups claim that "the future of freight rail investment and quality service is at risk from unnecessary, harmful government restrictions." The rule-making has been at a standstill in recent years since the STB took public comments from supporters touting it as a way to stimulate competition and from opponents who view it as government overreach and a recipe for chaos along railways.
The groups said in their letter on Tuesday that the STB should continue its measured approach to regulating the railroad industry, saying imposing forced reciprocal switching and reducing the flexibility that railroads have had in setting rates could result in railroads having to cut their investments in rail infrastructure and service improvements.
"Many have also observed that the proposed competitive switching framework is backdoor rate regulation designed to sidestep established procedures defined in statute," they said. "The proposed competitive switching rule threatens railroads, shippers, and consumers with degraded service quality and higher prices on goods, which would naturally follow the resulting reduction in operational efficiencies and private railroad investment."
Railroad giants have long opposed the proposal as being too far-reaching and disruptive to how they manage and operate their complex network of tracks across the country, saying it would represent government intrusion. Furthermore, the rail lobby has argued, railroads inherently face competition from trucks and barges, and existing STB standards already protect shippers from unreasonable railroad pricing and conduct.
The Association of American Railroads has pointed out that there are myriad steps involved when switching operations on a track from one railroad to another.
Having widespread forced switching would significantly compromise efficiency by "gumming up" the nation's rail network, the group has argued, creating unnecessary movements of rail cars in yards and slowing the overall movement of goods just to fulfill the narrow interests of a certain shipper — or the regulator's desire to "regulate something" in the absence of any demonstrated need for government intervention.
Meanwhile, the Rail Customer Coalition, a collection of trade associations representing a broad cross-section of manufacturing, agricultural, and energy-producing industries that ship their goods along railways, have fervently lobbied the STB to move forward with finalizing the reciprocal or competitive switching proposal. The coalition says its members depend on the railroads to deliver reliable and affordable service in order to remain competitive in a global market.
The rail shippers have said they want the new rules because they'll boost competitive access to rail service and, in theory, better rates.
The STB on Monday indicated that it may revamp its existing rate review processes to make them "more attuned to the realities of the current transportation world" following the release of a task force report recommending changes in the way the board reviews the rates set by freight railroads and how it handles rate challenges between rail shippers and carriers. The STB commissioned the task force in January 2018.
The American Chemistry Council, which represents chemistry companies and has supported rail rate reform, said in a statement Tuesday that some of the STB's suggested reforms represent a marked difference in how the board has approached problems in the past and could signal some important changes to come.
"We applaud the task force for taking a very thorough approach in developing their report on rate review reforms and providing more evidence that business as usual is unacceptable," said Jeff Sloan, ACC's senior director of regulatory & technical affairs for transportation, in the statement. "The report makes it clear that the STB's decades-old rate review procedures have become too complex and burdensome, leaving many shippers with no realistic avenue for challenging abusive railroad practices."
--Editing by Jay Jackson Jr.
Read more at: https://www.law360.com/projectfinance/articles/1154949/groups-urge-stb-to-pull-rail-competitive-switching-rule?copied=1
https://www.law360.com/projectfinance/articles/1154949/groups-urge-stb-to-pull-rail-competitive-switching-rule
-
Trump, Dems Agree on $2T Price Tag
May 1, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Maxine Joselow and Geof Koss
President Trump and congressional Democrats finally settled on a price tag for an infrastructure bill: $2 trillion.
But they still can't agree on how to pay for it.
That was the main takeaway of today's meeting among Trump, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and other congressional Democrats.
While both sides touted the meeting at the White House as constructive, they left Pennsylvania Avenue without discussing any of the funding options on the table, including an increase in the federal gasoline tax.
Pay-fors will be the focus of a subsequent discussion in three weeks, Pelosi and Schumer told reporters outside the White House after the meeting.
"We agreed that we would meet again to talk about how it would be paid for," Pelosi said.
Schumer touted the discussion as "very productive."
"It's clear that both the White House and all of us want to get something done on infrastructure in a big and bold way," Schumer said.
"We agreed on a number, which was very, very good: $2 trillion for infrastructure," he said. "Originally, we had started a little lower. Even the president was eager to push it up to $2 trillion. And that was a very good thing."
Trump agreed with Democrats that a broad infrastructure package should include surface transportation as well as water and broadband, Schumer added.
White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders confirmed the account, saying in a statement that both parties "had an excellent and productive meeting on rebuilding our Nation's crumbling infrastructure including roads, highways, bridges, tunnels and railroads, modernizing our air travel system, and expanding broadband access for our great farmers and rural America."
Also attending today's meeting were adviser to the president Ivanka Trump, National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, according to White House spokesman Judd Deere.
Climate change: The elephant in the room
The meeting came after Pelosi and Schumer sent the White House a letter saying any infrastructure deal must include components to address climate change, such as clean energy and resilience (E&E Daily, April 30).
Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway told reporters ahead of the meeting that Democrats should not attempt to incorporate the Green New Deal into an infrastructure package.
"I read the letter yesterday, and hopefully, they're coming here not to try to shove the Green New Deal that couldn't make it through Congress without a single Democratic vote into the infrastructure package," Conway said outside the White House this morning.
"We also have as our president a builder, not a typical politician," she added. "So he understands how to repair and construct and plan and execute on big projects."
House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) told reporters after the meeting that Democrats brought up climate change in general terms.
"We didn't talk about climate change per se," DeFazio said. "But, you know, transit is green transportation, especially when we electrify the buses."
He added, "Sen. Schumer brought up the power grid and being able to transit renewable power further and at different times of day through different parts of the country. And the president seemed favorable on the transmission grid. So I think, you know, if you put it in terms that don't say 'climate change,' that there's ways to get there."
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said that clean energy "was discussed obliquely."
"We made it part of our request; the president wanted to know more," Durbin said.
Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), vice chairwoman of the House Democratic Caucus, said she has met with 18 communities in her district to discuss potential resilience components of the legislation.
"It is our bridges, our roads, our transit systems, but it's also in our homes and neighborhoods that are threatened by rising sea levels and coastal and inland flooding," Clark said.
Funding talks down the road
Looking ahead, lawmakers said they expect more discussion on pay-fors in three weeks, with an emphasis on raising the federal gas tax.
The tax of 18.4 cents per gallon hasn't been raised since 1993, meaning it hasn't kept pace with inflation.
Trump surprised lawmakers last year by privately backing a 25-cent increase in the gas tax (E&E News PM, Feb. 14, 2018). But he has never publicly endorsed the idea.
DeFazio said Trump's public support would provide political cover for Republicans who are hesitant to back the idea and fear backlash from their constituents.
"The president is absolutely critical in bringing Republicans on," DeFazio said. "We had a number of Republicans on our side of the Hill say, 'If he supports revenues, I support revenues.'"
Delaware Sen. Tom Carper, the top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee, said Trump appeared to recognize the importance of endorsing a funding option and getting GOP lawmakers on board.
"I think the president came into the meeting not much interested in talking about how to pay for an infrastructure bill," Carper told reporters. "But I think by the end of the meeting, he seemed to understand if he didn't lead ... it's not likely that we'd be able to get a lot done."
But Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.), a member of the T&I Committee, said he has little appetite for a gas tax hike, even if some in the Trump administration are inclined to support it.
"I think that there are a lot of people who are talking about increased revenue streams, which certainly I do think that additional revenues invested in infrastructure is something that has broad support," Graves told reporters yesterday.
"But that doesn't necessarily mean that we're talking about raising taxes and fees," he said. "I think there are some other efficiencies that need to be discussed."
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2019/04/30/stories/1060247709
-
Infrastructure Meeting ‘Constructive’ but Policy Issues Emerge
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
President Donald Trump and top congressional Democrats are calling their April 30 meeting on transportation infrastructure legislation “constructive,” with lawmakers saying the president agreed to spend $2 trillion in federal money on a package and will meet again soon to discuss possible funding sources.
Despite the apparent progress at the April 30 meeting, there remains significant skepticism that a big infrastructure deal can get done in the current Congress, especially given disagreements over environmental and climate provisions.
For example, White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney says Democrats will be unable to agree to GOP demands to streamline reviews of projects’ environmental effects. And Democrats are renewing their calls for an infrastructure bill to include key climate change provisions that are unlikely to be embraced by Republicans.
The last time Trump met with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the trio discussed ways to end the month-long government shutdown early this year, and the president abruptly left the meeting.
White House press secretary Sarah Sanders called the infrastructure gathering -- which also included several other Democratic lawmakers -- “an excellent and productive meeting on rebuilding our Nation’s crumbling infrastructure including roads, highways, bridges, tunnels and railroads, modernizing our air travel system, and expanding broadband access for our great farmers and rural America.”
She added that there will be “another meeting in three weeks to discuss specific proposals and financing methods.”
Pelosi and Schumer issued a joint statement calling the meeting “constructive” and that the leaders agreed on “a big and bold initiative to build the infrastructure of America.”
They said they are pleased that Trump suggested a federal contribution of $2 trillion. “We agreed to meet again in three weeks, at which time we will hear the president’s idea for how he would pay for such a package.”
The Democrats said investing in infrastructure would create jobs and bolster commerce, while “advancing public health with clean air and clean water, and improving the safety of our transportation system, and addressing climate change with clean energy, clean transportation and resilient infrastructure.”
But Mulvaney, speaking at an event in Los Angeles, said he is advising Trump to push for environmental deregulation to speed permitting, arguing that $1 trillion in new spending wouldn’t get any new roads or bridges built within 10 years.
“I want to change the environmental laws, how do you feel about that as a Democrat?” he said, according to a New York Times report. “It’s going to be a very difficult place for them to go. I think that may be the place where discussions break down.”
In response to the meeting, the Natural Resources Defense Council issued a statement saying that any infrastructure plan has to transition to clean energy and address “the current threats from extreme weather, and redress[] the legacy of past investments.”
Last year, the White House advanced an infrastructure plan in which the federal government would contribute just 20 percent out of an envisioned $1.5 trillion investment, leaving the remaining 80 percent to be provided by states and public-private partnerships. That proposal was dead on arrival even in the Republican-controlled Congress.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/infrastructure-meeting-%E2%80%98constructive%E2%80%99-policy-issues-emerge
-
Democrats Say Trump Open to Grid Modernization
Apr 30, 2019 | PoliticoPro
By Anthony Adragna
Democratic senators who attended a White House gathering today say President Donald Trump appeared willing to support modernizing the electric grid and improving drinking water infrastructure as part of a larger package.
But Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Trump did not “say yes or no” on climate change and clean energy infrastructure provisions pushed by Democrats.
“Green energy is very important to members of our party,” Schumer told reporters. “On a couple of things, like power grid, [Trump] was okay. He was fine. On others, we’ll have to discuss and debate, but we’re going to push for green.”
Multiple Democrats said Trump agreed with Democrats on setting the scope of the package at about $2 trillion, and that they would reconvene in three weeks when the White House would offer its plan to pay for the package.
Environment and Public Works ranking member Tom Carper(D-Del.) said there is “more that we agreed on than we disagreed on,” including the desire to fund improvements to roads, highways, bridges, broadband, wastewater and drinking water infrastructure.
“The president came into the meeting not much interested in talking about how to pay for infrastructure broadly, but I think by the end of the meeting he seemed to understand if he didn’t lead on that front as well, it’s not likely we’re going to get a whole lot done,” Carper told reporters.
Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said Trump expressed interest in learning more about his plan to simplify and streamline energy tax incentives into longer-term, performance-based standards.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2019/04/democrats-say-trump-open-to-grid-modernization-3168630
-
North Dakota, Washington State at Odds over Oil Train Rules
Apr 30, 2019 | AP (In KATU News)
By Blake Nicholson
North Dakota officials are pressuring the state of Washington to back off from legislation requiring oil shipped by rail to have more of its volatile gases removed, urging the governor to veto the bill and promising a lawsuit if he doesn't.
The bill awaiting Gov. Jay Inslee's signature requires a lower vapor pressure limit for crude shipped by rail than either North Dakota requirements or industry standards. Violations could result in fines of up to $2,500 per day per rail car.
That "would result in a de facto ban of crude-by-rail traffic from North Dakota to refineries throughout the Pacific Northwest," North Dakota's three members of Congress said in a letter sent Friday imploring Inslee to veto the bill that North Dakota officials worry could hamper the energy industry of the nation's No. 2 crude producer.
Inslee, who has made climate change a focus of his 2020 Democratic presidential campaign, indicated in a statement to The Associated Press on Tuesday that he's likely to sign the bill.
"It's pretty striking that the governor of the state of Washington is seeking to protect the people of North Dakota from oil spills, more than their members of Congress," he said.
North Dakota's Industrial Commission, which regulates the oil and gas industry, discussed its options on Tuesday. The group comprised of the governor, attorney general and agriculture commissioner intends to sue if Washington's bill becomes law because the commission believes it would violate interstate commerce law.
"The likelihood that this law if signed is unconstitutional is rather high," Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said.
The volatility of oil trains drew widespread public attention following several explosive derailments, including one in 2013 in Lac-Megantic, Quebec that killed 47 people. Washington's bill is aimed at boosting safety for schools and homes that are near passing oil trains, according to Democratic Senate Majority Leader Andy Billig, the sponsor.
"These large shipments of extremely flammable fuel run through the heart of our state, starting with my community in Spokane," he said in March after the Washington Senate gave initial approval .
The bill sets a vapor pressure limit of less than 9 pounds per square inch for oil unloaded from trains, lower than North Dakota's limit of 13.7 psi and what is considered the national standard for stable crude of 14.7. North Dakota's limit, implemented in 2015 , builds in 1 psi as a margin of error.
About 150,000 barrels of North Dakota crude, or about one-tenth of the daily production in the state, is shipped to Washington refineries. Lowering that oil to a vapor pressure below 9 psi would require the removal of components such as butane, which is needed as an additive for winter gasoline blends so vehicles start in cold weather. That would devalue the product, said Kari Cutting, vice president of the North Dakota Petroleum Council, a trade group representing about 500 energy companies.
Council President Ron Ness said the Washington bill is "frankly scary" and the group "will be looking at all of our legal options."
The Washington bill would require new refineries to adhere to the new vapor pressure standard. Existing facilities would have to follow the rule beginning two years after increasing their oil volume by more than 10 percent from 2018. Cutting said some of the refineries had "major maintenance downtime" in 2018 and that they could trigger the requirement simply by resuming their normal volumes.
North Dakota Mineral Resources Director Lynn Helms said West Coast markets offer the best price for North Dakota crude, and as pipeline capacity in the state continues to shrink, "there is a lot of potential growth in the crude-by-rail industry."
The West Coast "is the prime growth market for North Dakota crude oil, and by capping it like this they're without question harming the state," he said.
North Dakota produces more oil than any other state but Texas, accounting for about 12 percent of U.S. production. The state saw record production in January of 1.4 million barrels daily.
If Bakken crude is cut off from the Pacific Northwest it ultimately will find other markets, though "there will be some time that it will be restrained," Cutting said. But she said the pressure on Washington to backtrack on the oil train rule is important because "it can't be allowed (for) one state to hamper commerce for other states."
https://katu.com/news/nation-world/north-dakota-washington-state-at-odds-over-oil-train-rules-05-01-2019
-
Select Committee Hearing Highlights Limited Paths for Action
May 1, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
The Select Committee on the Climate Crisis yesterday continued to grapple with political currents that have for years made large-scale national action on the issue difficult, as it made its first substantive progress toward its goal of writing a climate policy outline.
For one thing, Democrats are still feeling out what that action should look like. Beyond staying in the Paris Agreement, there are obvious disagreements in the caucus about how to force a transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.
And with Republicans fractured and reluctant to address the issue head on, yesterday's hearing largely served to underscore calls for increased spending on energy research and development of renewables, advanced nuclear, battery storage, and carbon capture and storage technology.
Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.), a member of the select panel, said it would more than likely be Democrats who get the gears turning on major climate legislation as the 116th Congress progresses.
"If we at least get the legislation drafted up, maybe past the House, at least through committee, give ourselves a parcel so that when we get adults who give a crap about the future in the other branch of this House, we can actually pass them into law," Casten said after the hearing.
Asked if there are any Republicans he's interested in working with now, Casten said, "I promise I'll let you know once I meet one."A narrow path forward
While witnesses called for some sort of energy standard to spur deployment of those technologies, research spending may be one of the few paths forward on climate in this Congress.
"Everybody on this panel, I think everybody in this room, agrees technology is a key to success here," Hal Harvey, CEO of Energy Innovation, told the committee. "Right now, the United States of America spends less than one-half of 1% of its energy budget on R&D. That's pitiful. It's the wrong number."
To get technology into the market, Harvey suggested a national standard of 80% clean energy by 2035, an increasingly popular idea among Democrats on Capitol Hill.
But even Republicans who accept climate science remain concerned about the economic impacts of a quick transition away from fossil fuels and reluctant to acknowledge the potentially massive future costs of climate change.
Rep. Carol Miller (R-W.Va.) stressed the importance of a diverse energy mix, mirroring rhetoric from the Trump administration, while Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) got affirmation of his concerns about excessive regulations from a witness from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
"Even with the best intentions, American history, and probably the history of democracy globally, is littered with unintended consequences," Christopher Guith, acting president and CEO of the chamber's Global Energy Institute, told the panel. "We see state by state and even national policies are creating headwind for nuclear power right now."
Ranking member Garret Graves (R-La.), meanwhile, offered a rebuttal of the Paris Agreement as Democrats bring a bill to the floor to force President Trump to stay in.
The United States is already reducing emissions, but further action will mean little if India and China are allowed to abdicate their goals under the agreement, Graves said, repeating a common theme he and other GOP lawmakers have hit on in the past.
"We've got to stop this ridiculousness of beating up on the United States," Graves said.
Changing climate views at the chamber
Another factor in play in both the hearing yesterday and the broader Republican shift on climate is the Chamber of Commerce, long a force in conservative and business-friendly politics.
Guith called for action on climate change and even said the business community supports the Paris Agreement as a way to "remain at the table internationally."
But Democrats at times attacked him, with Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) pointing out the chamber's past advocacy against climate regulations and legislation.
And Guith appeared to be skeptical of H.R. 9, the Democratic bill to stay in the Paris Agreement, calling it "a completely separate issue."
Guith told Huffman the chamber's position on climate has not changed, but that did not appear to satisfy the California Democrat.
"I am drawn to the fact that you're saying, 'Inaction is not an option,' and believe me, I'm encouraged by that statement as far as it goes," Huffman said. "But my challenge is I'm looking at a couple of decades of action by the chamber here in Congress and elsewhere that is all about preventing action on addressing climate change."
More GOP skepticism
Similar partisan attitudes were on display later in the afternoon yesterday at a House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Environment hearing on the public health effects of climate change.
Democrats brought in four academics who specialize in public health, while the GOP went with Caleb Rossiter, executive director of the CO2 Coalition, a group founded by Princeton University physicist William Happer.
Happer is now spearheading a White House "adversarial review" of federal climate science, and Rossiter made a false claim that "CO2 emissions are having a positive and modest impact on American health."
Public health experts and climate scientists, including those testifying yesterday, say that effects of heat waves, extreme weather, sea-level rise and potential food shortages as climate change makes populated areas less suitable for growing crops all outweigh any marginal benefits of carbon dioxide.
"As a physician I have to look at all the facts, and what Mr. Rossiter told you were some of the facts," said Aaron Bernstein, co-director of Harvard University's Center for Climate, Health and the Global Environment.
He added that the most recent U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and National Climate Assessment say with high confidence that heat waves are already more prevalent due to climate change.
Ranking member James Comer (R-Ky.) took a slightly different tack and said he fears a premature transition away from fossil fuels, adding that "coal mining is a way of life in many parts of America."
"It appears that many of the solutions proposed to address climate change, like the Green New Deal, would have a detrimental impact on poorer nations to develop the types of programs that the U.N. says are most effective to address public health," Comer said.
Democrats did not do much to address concerns that climate policies can create economic losers in fossil fuel-dependent communities.
But the experts testifying alongside Rossiter did not agree with his claims, which mirror long-standing skeptic talking points.
All four other witnesses said they agreed that climate change is affecting public health in response to a question from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
"We are not debating whether climate change is real, and we are not debating any of those effects," Ocasio-Cortez said, summing up Democratic frustrations with GOP talking points. "We are debating and discussing here today the effects on public health and human health."
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/05/01/stories/1060249275
-
House Poised to Debate Bill Blocking Trump's Paris Withdrawal
Apr 30, 2019 | Inside EPA
The House is poised to begin floor debate May 1 on legislation backed by Democratic leaders that would block President Donald Trump from leaving the Paris climate agreement and require the administration to submit a plan for meeting the Obama administration's GHG targets under the deal.
Debate is expected to include votes on over two dozen amendments, including three from Republicans, after the House Rules Committee deemed them in order at an April 29 meeting.
In broad terms, the debate would give Democrats a chance to contrast their position in favor of action on climate change with resistance from most Republicans, with the party able to control a floor debate on the issue for the first time in nearly a decade.
But prospects for enacting the bill after expected House passage are essentially nil, with Democrats to date lacking a companion bill in the Republican-controlled Senate.
The White House in an April 29 Statement of Administration Policy criticized the Obama administration's GHG target as overly costly while arguing that “other countries did not take on similarly stringent commitments.” Administration officials said they would urge Trump to veto the measure.
The House Rules Committee ruled in order 30 amendments, including two amendments from Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) that would undo the legislation's prohibition on using funds to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and require a Senate vote on the pact before taking steps to implement it.
A third GOP amendment from Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL) would require that the administration's climate plan be subject to public comment.
But most of the amendments come from Democrats who embrace the Paris Agreement, including an amendment from Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA) that would require a National Academy of Sciences report on how withdrawing from the Paris deal would have on domestic competitiveness.
Other amendments made in order include a bipartisan amendment that would require a Government Accountability Office assessment of the effect of the administration's plan on United States territories; an amendment from New Hampshire lawmakers requiring a study of the Paris deal's impact on clean energy jobs in rural areas; and an amendment from Rep. Andy Kim (D-NJ) requiring the president to detail how the Paris deal affects infrastructure resiliency.
A report in The Hill notes that Democrats have not filed a companion bill in the Senate, but it also says that party leaders plan to urge Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to take up the measure after it clears the House.
The expected House debate, which could stretch into May 2, comes just weeks after the GOP-controlled Senate debated the Green New Deal climate resolution in a bid to split Democrats on the issue. House Republican aides say they are similarly poised to argue the Paris legislation is a messaging stunt.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/house-poised-debate-bill-blocking-trumps-paris-withdrawal
-
Pelosi Takes Easiest Path on Climate. Will She Do More?
May 1, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick and Mark K. Matthews
The climate bill that House Democrats plan to vote on this week wouldn't reduce a single ton of greenhouse gas emissions.
Instead, it aims to keep the United States in the Paris climate accord by barring President Trump from using federal funds to withdraw from the landmark agreement. But it has no chance of becoming law under Trump, and if a Democrat defeats him next year, it would become obsolete.
The entire Democratic field of presidential candidates has expressed support for the global deal agreed to by 195 nations in 2015. A New York Times survey of 18 Democrats seeking the presidency showed that none opposed U.S. participation in the deal, and former Vice President Joe Biden, who threw his hat into the ring on April 25, is likely to claim that the Obama administration's role in brokering the accord is part of his legacy.
So, assuming Trump follows through on his 2017 threat to make the United States the only nation to stand outside of Paris — something he can't do until the day before the 2020 election — his Democratic successor could reverse the decision with a stroke of a pen on Inauguration Day. And many 2020 Democratic hopefuls have said they would.
Why then did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) choose as one of her first 10 bills of the new Congress a measure that is neither necessary from a policy perspective nor likely to clear the GOP-controlled Senate?
According to its author, Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), H.R. 9 is about sending a signal to the world that at least part of the U.S. government still cares about fighting global warming.
"It is so important to let the American people know — and other folks across the globe — that America is still in [and] we are still committed to reducing greenhouse gas pollution," Castor, who chairs the House's new climate committee, told E&E News.
Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.), another member of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, said the measure would defend the nearly two-decade legacy of U.S. global climate leadership that Trump's Paris decision threatens to upend.
"Were we moving fast enough? No," he said. "Were we doing enough? No. But we were moving in the right direction."
The Paris bill "is essentially playing defense to restore what we had done before and then give us a platform where we can start building from there."
A Democratic leadership aide called the Paris bill an "opening salvo" on climate change.
"We want to take action quickly," said the aide. "And the withdrawal from the Paris accord has been one of the Trump administration's sort of signature abandonment of action on climate."
In addition to a prohibition on using funds to complete the Paris withdrawal, H.R. 9 also would require the executive branch to report annually to Congress on progress toward the U.S. commitment outlined in the accord. Where the 2015 deal allows countries to modify their pledges up or down, the bill would codify into law the Obama-era pledge to cut emissions 26% to 28% compared with 2005 levels by 2025, and it acknowledges the pledge is meant to be strengthened over time. The leadership aide said those provisions would require the Trump administration to formulate its own plan for climate mitigation, now that it has disassembled Obama's climate policies.
But the aide hinted at other action later in Congress.
"It's a first step. It lays the foundation for more action, so it's not the period on the end of the sentence, it's the beginning," he said.
In that regard, the bill doesn't break new ground. It was described as both politically popular or overly cautious by climate advocates.
"It's incredibly important that Democrats demonstrate that there is a unifying and popular action to take on climate change that is in direct contrast to what is happening today with our fed government," said Christy Goldfuss, who chaired Obama's Council on Environmental Quality during the Paris summit and is now a senior vice president for energy and the environment at the Center for American Progress. "And that is why H.R. 9 and the first vote [on climate] in a decade is so important to getting us back on track."
There's also this fact: It's the easiest climate legislation available to Pelosi. It doesn't confront divergent opinions among Democrats about the best way to reduce emissions, either through carbon prices, regulations or a sharp increase in renewable energy. And it's not the Green New Deal, which elicited Republican attacks for suggesting that America could decarbonize in 10 years.
"It's not that it's wrong in and of itself," said Paul Bledsoe, a lecturer at American University's Center for Environmental Policy and a Clinton White House adviser, referring to H.R. 9.
"It's easiest for Pelosi to start with a symbolic vote on the Paris Agreement rather than the tough sledding of domestic policy," said Bledsoe.
But he said the international framing was weaker than domestic legislation, which would have done more to highlight the risks and opportunities associated with climate change. And he said legislation to take carbon out of the atmosphere at home would revive U.S. credibility abroad and put pressure on developing nations like China to stop "backsliding" and deliver on their global climate commitments.
Pelosi probably couldn't have chosen a less controversial climate symbol than the Paris deal. A poll released last July by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs showed that 68% of registered voters wanted the United States to stay in the accord. Among likely Democratic voters, polls show near-consensus levels of support that justify Paris' place in the early talking points of presidential hopefuls.
Meanwhile, the Green New Deal, an ambitious resolution introduced early this year in the House by freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), has exposed fault lines within Pelosi's Democratic caucus. The resolution pairs a massive investment in low-carbon infrastructure with an overhaul of the U.S. welfare state. And its author has been at odds at times with Pelosi, who famously dismissed the blueprint as "the Green Dream."
While the Green New Deal has become a Republican punching bag in recent months, H.R. 9 has 224 co-sponsors.
Castor told E&E News she hoped the bill would be "a unifying effort, and hopefully we'll have a good number of Republicans." Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) told E&E News yesterday that he intends to vote for the measure.
But while it's uncontroversial, Sara Chieffo, legislative director at the League of Conservation Voters, said it was meaningful that Pelosi included the Paris bill in her first 10 priorities.
"I think she has really come out of the gates fast with this new majority in the House," she said of Pelosi. "This vote this week is just another step in a lot of climate progress that she has led since becoming speaker again."
She noted that House committees have held 30 hearings on climate change since January.
But Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, said the new Democratic majority would be judged on its ability to close an "aspirational gap" on climate change, rather than clinging to Obama-era policies that he said were inadequate in light of the technological and scientific advances of the last decade.
"I think that there is a policy inertia within the Democratic Party right now, particularly in the House," said Pica, who has been critical of the Paris Agreement.
While he didn't criticize Pelosi for moving the Paris legislation first, Pica said H.R. 9 must be followed with more substantive climate action.
"I think Pelosi should put up a repeal of the oil and gas tax breaks fossil fuel subsidy bill like she did with H.R. 6," he said, referring to provisions stripped from the 2007 energy law. "There are a number of bills like that that she could put up that I think would force hard votes."
But forcing hard votes is precisely what Pelosi is trying to avoid.
Ten years ago, Pelosi presided over House passage of a cap-and-trade bill that would never see a vote in the then-Democratic-controlled Senate. Instead, Republicans used the vote to help them seize control of the House. Pelosi didn't touch the gavel again until January.
Pelosi has been unclear about whether she plans to bring future climate legislation to the floor. Castor said House Democrats weren't planning any stand-alone climate bills in the short term, but two other legislative packages offered a chance to address the issue.
The first would be a large infrastructure package, which was discussed yesterday at the White House. "It has to be clean and green," she said (E&E News PM, April 30).
The second would be through the annual appropriations process, which might include more funding for items such as clean energy research and development.
Casten of Illinois suggested that his party concentrate these next two years on combining incremental climate bills into one "coherent policy."
That way, if Democrats retake the upper chamber, "on day one of the 117th session, we have something that we can get through the Senate."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/05/01/stories/1060249239
-
O'Rourke Plan Highlights Push to Make Climate Top-Tier Democratic Issue
May 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke's (D-TX) new climate change platform is highlighting the pressure on Democratic presidential candidates to prioritize the issue in the lead up to the 2020 elections, a dynamic that could elevate a debate that observers have long said is a prerequisite for major legislation but which could also split key party constituencies.
His plan, released April 29, carries echoes of the Green New Deal (GND) climate resolution that is embraced by many climate change advocates, with a centerpiece his call for a “legally enforceable standard” for achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and 50 percent decarbonization by 2030.
Many environmentalists are praising the platform as one of the most ambitious proposals floated by a 2020 hopeful, particularly when compared with climate plans in previous presidential campaigns. However, critics such as Gov. Jay Inslee (D-WA), a fellow 2020 candidate who has focused his campaign on climate, say the plan is at odds with O'Rourke's record in Congress.
"Climate change will be the top issue in this primary, and it's good news that Democratic candidates are putting forward ideas on the issue,” Inslee's campaign said in a statement. “But, voters have a right to look closely at Democratic candidates' plans to separate rhetoric from results on climate change.”
Additionally, several observers say that O'Rourke's definition of climate change as a top priority -- rather than merely one of many policy priorities -- underscores a level of attention to the issue that has been largely absent in prior campaigns.
“In previous elections we have not seen climate change front and center as a priority. It is new that the prioritization has placed climate change at the top of the list,” says one proponent of reducing GHGs.
Determining in early 2019 the ultimate significance of individual policy documents in a 2020 field of nearly two dozen Democrats is a tricky affair, as those candidates jockey for positions in a crowded primary.
Nevertheless, O'Rourke's plan is already drawing attention for its pledge to “work with Congress” within the first 100 days of his presidency to enact the enforceable 2030 and 2050 decarbonization standards, which would “send a clear price signal to the market to change the incentives for how we produce, consume and invest in energy.”
The plan also promises of “a series of forceful executive actions” on his first day in office that would reverse Trump administration rollbacks of GHG policies, while imposing stricter standards for power plants, oil and gas facilities and vehicles.
O'Rourke also pledges that the first bill he will send to Congress would mobilize $5 trillion over 10 years to “transform” aging infrastructure, accelerate innovation and “empower our people and communities to lead the climate fight,” including communities on the “front lines of a changing climate and those disrupted by the forces of an economy in transition.”
The mobilization plan would include $1.5 trillion in federal funds, to be paid for through “structural changes to the tax code,” including cutting tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations and ending fossil fuel subsidies.
“O’Rourke’s plan is the most comprehensive and far reaching climate plan we’ve seen from a presidential candidate so far -- and we’re confident there will be more to come,” said League of Conservation Voters' (LCV) Tiernan Sittenfeld, in a statement.
She added that climate change is “a top-tier issue for Democratic primary voters, and every single candidate must commit to an ambitious plan to address the crisis on day one as president.” LCV added that it is “noteworthy that this is the first policy plan O'Rourke has released and that the first bill he would send to Congress would be a climate bill.”
GND Echoes
The plan's broad ambition carries echoes of the GND resolution, unveiled in February, that includes a call for a 10-year “mobilization” toward achieving net-zero GHG emissions in tandem with a just transition for workers and communities.
Its discussion of trillions of dollars in investments arguably goes beyond the GND in articulating the scale of the investment challenges implied by a major effort to address the climate problem.
Even so, O'Rourke's policy is drawing fire from the youth-oriented Sunrise Movement -- a driving force behind the GND -- because it embraces a 2050 net-zero emissions goal. The group argues that is weaker than comments O'Rourke made several weeks ago calling for getting as close to that target as possible by 2030.
“We are glad to see Beto release a climate plan as first policy,” the group writes in an April 29 statement. “Unfortunately, Beto gets the science wrong and walks back his commitments from earlier this month in Iowa to move to net zero emissions by 2030.”
Such claims appear to be at odds with the GND resolution itself -- which called for a 10-year mobilization of low-carbon technology but did not set a 2030 net-zero GHG target. Further, the resolution references findings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change emphasizing the need to get to net-zero emissions by 2050, and to achieve a 40-60 percent reduction by 2030.
It is not fully clear whether the sparring over 2030 and 2050 targets will be a minor kerfuffle or major sticking point for presidential candidates.
Regardless, O'Rourke's announcement -- and the reactions to it -- underscore ongoing efforts to make climate change a top-tier issue, rather than an also ran, in 2020. Even Sunrise argued that O'Rourke's embrace of climate as a day one priority shows the issue will be “central” to the 2020 election.
The proponent of GHG cuts agrees that O'Rourke's plan points to an elevated importance of the climate issue in 2020, which carries both benefits and risks for those wanting major action on GHGs.
A greater discussion and awareness of what must happen to reduce emissions is “the most important thing that will come out of this debate” in the campaign,” the source says.
But the source cautions candidates against getting too specific regarding which technologies should receive government support or wedded to specific policy mechanisms for achieving GHG cuts because doing so could split Democratic constituencies and provide an easier targets for President Donald Trump, who dismisses the need to reduce GHGs.
The source suggests that O'Rourke's plan appears to largely avoid such problems by focusing on end goals and the need for investments that can improve people's lives.
Democratic Jockeying
The climate debate at the presidential level is at its earliest stages, but several sitting senators in the race have already cosponsored the GND.
In addition, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has pledged to impose a “total moratorium” on fossil fuel leasing on federal lands if she wins the White House, and Inslee has called for holding a primary debate exclusively on climate change.
In his statement, Inslee also criticized O'Rourke's climate plan for including “general references” to steps he has already achieved at the state level, while adding that he “will need to answer why he did not lead on climate change in Congress and why he voted on the side of oil companies to open up offshore drilling.”
A recent survey by the New York Times also shows that the Democratic candidates are engaged in a delicate balancing act when pressed for the specifics of their plans, with the outlet finding “no broad consensus” on issues like a carbon tax and “even less agreement” on issues like whether to build new nuclear plants.
In this vein, O'Rourke's plan skirts the issue of carbon pricing or specific policies such as a clean energy standard.
But he says his “legally enforceable” GHG standard would send a “clear price signal to the market,” language that leaves the door open to some type of market-based program.
The plan also embraces a series of executive actions, including reducing methane leaks from existing oil and gas facilities, strengthening clean air and hazardous waste limits for power plants and fuel economy standards, setting a first-of-its-kind net-zero carbon budget by 2030 for federal lands, establishing a new federal “buy clean” program for steel, glass and cement, and leading international negotiations on GHG cuts for 2030 and beyond.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/orourke-plan-highlights-push-make-climate-top-tier-democratic-issue
-
Ocasio-Cortez Says O'Rourke's New Climate Plan Not Aggressive Enough
Apr 30, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rebecca Beitsch
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said Democratic presidential hopeful Beto O’Rourke’s new climate plan isn’t aggressive enough.
O’Rourke’s plan, which he released Monday, calls for getting to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, but Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal calls for doing so by 2030.
“Personally, I think we need to have more aggressive timelines than that to be honest,” she told The Hill.
“I think that the science and the IPCC [report] shows exactly what we need, and our legislation needs to be in line with that,” she added, referring to the climate assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Ocasio-Cortez is not alone in calling for a faster timeline to combat climate change.
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, a fellow 2020 Democratic candidate, argued that O’Rourke didn’t do enough to fight climate change while in Congress, and The Sunrise Movement, a youth climate organization that backs the Green New Deal, said the former Texas congressman should stick to the 2030 timeline required by the resolution.
O'Rourke's team offered the same statement when his plan was previously criticized: "This historic $5 trillion investment is not only the world’s largest ever climate change investment in infrastructure, innovation, and our communities but it is also in line with the 2050 emissions goal of the Green New Deal," a spokesman said by email.
Climate change is increasingly becoming a top issue for Democratic voters, and a trio of environmental groups also announced Monday that they are hoping to raise $1 million for the future Democratic nominee through a “Beat Trump Presidential Climate Unity Fund.”
Ocasio-Cortez said Republicans have put themselves in a difficult political situation when it comes to dealing with climate change.
“Climate [change] is now a politically strong issue around which we can galvanize a lot of pressure,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “After introducing the Green New Deal we’ve made climate a top electoral priority across the country, and so Republicans are now in a very difficult political position where after decades of being the party of climate denial, it’s no longer a politically acceptable position for them to do nothing.”
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/441416-aoc-says-betos-new-climate-plan-not-aggressive-enough
-
GAO to Review If Climate Change Hinders Military Contractors' Response to National Security Threats
Apr 30, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Rebecca Beitsch
The Government Accountability Office has announced that it will review how climate change impacts military contractors’ ability to respond to national security threats.
In a letter sent last week but released Tuesday, the agency committed to “review potential threats to national security resulting from the impacts of climate change on defense contractors and the defense supply chain." It will also look into "the extent to which the Department of Defense addresses climate change and other environmental risks during the contracting process.”
The review, which comes in response to a request from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), would brush up against the Trump administration's efforts to hedge the military consensus on global warming.
Warren requested the agency review in April, shortly after the Trump administration began forming a panel largely viewed as a way to counter the military’s assessment that climate change poses a risk to U.S. safety.
"Climate change is a threat to national security," Warren said in a release about her request. "Defense contractors receive hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars each year. We need to ensure that their vulnerabilities to climate change do not threaten military readiness, and that defense contractors are doing their part to fight climate change and mitigate climate change-related risks."
The Pentagon warned in January that climate change poses a national security issue, noting that two-thirds of critical military installations are at risk of being hurt by climate change–related flooding and wildfires over the next 20 years.
“The effects of a changing climate are a national security issue with potential impacts to Department of Defense missions, operational plans, and installations,” the report stated.
By February, the Trump administration had begun to form a panel to counter that government report and others showing climate change as a risk to national security.
Warren, a 2020 presidential candidate, released her letter as a growing number of Democratic candidates have released climate-related policies.
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) has pitched himself as the climate change candidate, while Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke(D-Texas) each recently rolled out climate-related plans of their own.
Warren was one of the first candidates to announce a major climate policy, unveiling a plan earlier this month to stop drilling on public lands.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/441383-gao-will-review-military-contractors-climate-change-readiness
-
Climate Change Tops Primary Poll
May 1, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Dylan Brown
Climate change is the most important issue for Democratic voters ahead of the presidential election next year, according to a new CNN poll.
Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who are registered to vote, 96% say it's somewhat or very important for the Democratic candidate to take "aggressive action to slow the effects of climate change," according to the poll released yesterday.
That outshines other issues like Medicare for All (91%), tightening gun laws through executive action (85%), making public colleges tuition-free (78%), impeaching President Trump (71%), paying reparations for slavery (63%) or restoring voting rights for felons (60%).
Those results are similar to a March poll of Iowa Democrats. Caucusgoers said they most wanted candidates to talk about health care (81%) and climate change (80%), according to the CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom Communications Corp. poll.
The latest CNN poll also found that Democrats think it's more important to nominate someone who can defeat Trump (92%) than choose someone with "progressive positions" (66%) or a consistent record (62%).
Among candidates, former Vice President Joe Biden led with 39%, followed by independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (15%); Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (8%); South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg (7%); former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke (6%); and California Sen. Kamala Harris (5%).
All other candidates polled at 2% or lower — including Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who's made climate change central to his candidacy.
The poll sampled 411 registered Democratic-leaning voters nationwide on landlines and cellphones, with a margin of error of 5.9 percentage points. Respondents were contacted Thursday to Sunday.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/05/01/stories/1060249345
-
Maine Governor Introduces Bill to Jump-Start Climate Goals
Apr 30, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adrianne Appel
Maine needs to move forward with its goal to cut greenhouse gases 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050, Gov. Janet Mills (D) said April 30 as she introduced legislation that would create a climate council to jump-start the process.
The bill (LR 2478) would create a climate council made up of agency heads, business leaders, scientists and advocates that would develop a plan for the state to reduce its greenhouse gases and ramp up its reliance on renewables, she said.
Mills’ call for a climate council is her latest effort to push the state on renewable energy and transportation after the previous governor, Paul LePage (R), who left office in January, showed little interest. His antipathy toward renewable energy had a chilling effect on the state’s robust wind industry and slowed solar development, industry and environmental advocates have said.
“For the past eight years this state has ignored the domestic and international scientific community’s consensus belief that climate change is real, harmful,” Jeremy Payne, executive director of the Maine Renewable Energy Association, said. Mills has “rightly set aside partisan politics and is leading the way to a sustainable future for the people of Maine.”
The Legislature will need move quickly if it is to approve the measure by the time it adjourns in mid-June.
Bipartisan Support ExpectedThe lead sponsor of the bill, which is likely to enjoy broad support in the Democrat-led Senate and House, is Republican Sen. David Woodsome, which may help attract other Republicans.
“We may not agree on everything, but I think this is something people across Maine and the country need to work on together,” Woodsome said during an April 30 news conference announcing the legislation.
Support for aggressive renewable development in Maine is far from universal, however.
“Friends of Maine’s Mountains is always concerned about additional mountain wind development because Maine has reached its limit,” Christopher O’Neil, spokesman for the group, said April 30.
The Moosehead Region Futures Committee, a group representing the tourist industry and residents in the north-central part of the state, also opposes adding wind development, arguing its purpose is to help neighboring Massachusetts meet its energy goals.
About 40 percent of electricity in Maine comes from renewable sources. Thirty percent of electricity comes from biomass, primarily wood chips that are a byproduct of the state’s lumber and paper industry.
Maine’s goal is to become 80 percent reliant on renewable energy by 2030 and 100 percent by 2050.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/maine-governor-introduces-bill-to-jump-start-climate-goals
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested