Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - May 6, 2019
-
(ACC Blog) Answers to Spray Foam Health and Safety Questions for Workers and Homeowners
May 6, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters
Spray Polyurethane Foam (SPF) is a spray-applied product widely used to insulate buildings and seal cracks and gaps, improving energy efficiency and home comfort. If you’ve ever seen a video clip of SPF being installed, you know why... https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2019/05/answers-to-spray-foam-health-and-safety-questions-for-workers-and-homeowners/ -
Chemical Risk Evaluation Critiques Set for June, EPA’s Dunn Says
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA expects scientists to begin critiquing its 10 draft chemical risk evaluations in June to enable the agency to decide by December whether any chemicals under review pose an unreasonable risk that triggers regulation. -
EPA Expands Asbestos SNUR While Curbing Risk Evaluation, Irking Critics
May 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA's recently finalized rule regulating renewed uses of asbestos expanded the number of applications subject to regulation but cut some of those applications from a related risk evaluation of existing uses, angering critics who say... -
EPA Has Taken Steps to Improve Timeliness, Transparency of Chemical Assessments, GAO Says
May 6, 2019 | Safety + Health Magazine
The Environmental Protection Agency has made progress addressing “historical timeliness and transparency challenges” in its Integrated Risk Information System Program’s assessment process, the Government Accountability... -
New Findings Show Jump in Sites With PFAs Contamination
May 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
New findings from the Environmental Working Group (EWG) say that, based on public data, the number of locations with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) contamination has jumped from 172 locations identified last year to 610... -
Map Shows PFAs Contamination Across U.S.
May 6, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Ariana Figueroa
The number of locations in the United States with a class of toxic chemicals found in drinking water has tripled since 2018, according to a new map released today by public health advocates and researchers. Those chemicals are per... -
Solvay Fights New Jersey’s Fluorinated Chemical Cleanup Order
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Solvay Specialty Polymers USA LLC is protesting a New Jersey order for the company to pay the state $3.1 million to investigate and fix statewide fluorinated chemical contamination, because the company says it shouldn’t have to pay... -
Monsanto Gets Partial Win in Seattle PCB Contamination Case
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven M. Sellers
Seattle is entitled to dismissal of some, but not all, counterclaims asserted by Monsanto Co. in ongoing litigation over PCB contamination in the city’s water bodies, a federal court in Washington ruled. The May 3 decision allowed... -
Will This Proposal Help DoD’s Water Cleanup Efforts?
May 6, 2019 | Military Times
By Karen Jowers
The Pentagon is on board with a new proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency aimed at clarifying state and federal cleanup standards to address groundwater and drinking water contaminated by decades of seepage of... -
Geneva Meeting Agrees Global Ban on PFOA, With Exemptions
May 6, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Ginger Hervey
International negotiators at the meeting of the UN Conference of the Parties in Geneva have unanimously agreed a global ban on the use of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), with some exemptions. Delegates at the meeting agreed on... -
The Energy 202: Trump Administration Heeds Oil and Gas Industry Calls to Remove Protections for Imperiled Beetle
May 6, 2019 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
The Trump administration said it plans to weaken protections for a beetle facing a threat of extinction from climate change, a move welcomed by oil and natural gas drillers lobbying for the change. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service... -
Ewire: Castor Pledges Select Panel Focus on Drilling Moratorium
May 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL), the chairwoman of the House select committee on climate change, says her panel will explore the issue of halting fossil fuel leasing on federal lands, a policy that has been embraced by several Democratic... -
Exxon Directors Face Shareholder Revolt Over Climate Change (1)
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily Chasan
A group of Exxon Mobil Corp. shareholders launched a proxy fight against the oil giant’s directors after failing to get a climate proposal onto the ballot for the company’s annual meeting. The New York State Common Retirement Fund... -
The World Has Already Found All the Oil It Should Ever Burn
May 6, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Chris Tomlinson
A ghastly specter is casting a shadow over the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston this week, and none of the ingenious new inventions and cost-saving innovations on exhibit will address a fundamental threat to the industry. -
Comment: Ensuring the Safety of Offshore Workers
May 6, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Scott Angelle
Our nation’s energy story is one of innovation, growth, and determination, and nowhere is it more evident than in my home state of Louisiana. Today, offshore energy production occurs on less than one percent of our nation’s outer... -
Thai Operator Wraps Revamp of Idled Louisiana Ethane Cracker
May 6, 2019 | Oil & Gas Journal
By Robert Brelsford
Indorama Ventures Olefins LLC (IVO), an indirect subsidiary of Thailand’s Indorama Ventures PCL (IVP), Bangkok, has achieved mechanical completion of its previously announced project to renovate and restart a dormant ethane cracker... -
Three Believed Dead After Illinois Chemical Plant Explosion
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Linly Lin
Three workers are believed dead after an explosion at a chemical plant in Waukegan, about 40 miles (64 km) north of Chicago, late on May 3, the Associated Press reported, citing local authorities. Steven Lenzi, Waukegan fire marshal... -
At Least Three Dead in Illinois Factory Explosion
May 6, 2019 | AP (In the Journal of Emergency Medical Services)
Search and recovery personnel found the body of another worker Sunday in the rubble of a northern Illinois silicone factory that exploded and burst into flames two days earlier, bringing the death toll to three employees with one more... -
Sterigenics Plant to Stay Shuttered After Judge Tosses Lawsuit
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Joyce
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Sterigenics U.S. LLC that challenged the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s seal order that effectively shut down the company’s Willowbrook, Ill., medical-sterilization facility.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News - There are no clips to report at this time.
-
(ACC Blog) Answers to Spray Foam Health and Safety Questions for Workers and Homeowners
May 6, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters
Spray Polyurethane Foam (SPF) is a spray-applied product widely used to insulate buildings and seal cracks and gaps, improving energy efficiency and home comfort. If you’ve ever seen a video clip of SPF being installed, you know why it is the product of choice for so many professionals. It reacts quickly, fills the wall cavities and seals gaps, and delivers great value. Because it is applied on site, we get questions from builders and homeowners and others interested in this one-step product to seal and insulate.
The American Chemistry Council’s Center for the Polyurethanes Industry (CPI) is a leader in research and product stewardship efforts to provide information to workers and homeowners about SPF. CPI’s Spray Foam Coalition recently published an easy-to-understand document called: High Pressure SPF Insulation in New Home Construction and Retrofit Applications: Worker and Homeowner Health and Safety Information. The document outlines the many years of research conducted on SPF, provides and overview of industry practices for workers, and helps answer questions in a concise and simple manner that builders, workers and homeowners might have about the chemicals used in SPF. The document describes how SPF works and provides guidance on determining when people can go back to a space that has been sprayed. The document also reminds builders and homeowners about maintaining proper mechanical ventilation in a home that no longer has energy-wasting air leaks or poor insulation.
It is important that builders, workers, and homeowners be educated and prepared regarding the use of SPF. To download your copy today of the white paper, click here and additional health and safety resources can be found at www.spraypolyurethane.org. If you would like to learn more about SPF, visit www.whysprayfoam.org for more information.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2019/05/answers-to-spray-foam-health-and-safety-questions-for-workers-and-homeowners/
-
Chemical Risk Evaluation Critiques Set for June, EPA’s Dunn Says
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA expects scientists to begin critiquing its 10 draft chemical risk evaluations in June to enable the agency to decide by December whether any chemicals under review pose an unreasonable risk that triggers regulation.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals is likely to hold its first meeting in June, Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention, told Bloomberg Environment on May 6.
The first draft risk evaluation that committee will examine will be Pigment Violet 29, a colorant used in coatings in a variety of consumer products, she said.
The committee will peer review the remaining draft risk evaluations in groups, Dunn said. For example, the advisers may evaluate a group of chemical solvents in a single meeting, Dunn said.
The EPA is evaluating nine chemicals and one group of chemicals: asbestos; Pigment Violet 29; 1-bromopropane; carbon tetrachloride; 1-4 dioxane; methylene chloride; n-methylpyrrolidone; perchloroethylene; trichloroethylene; and a group of three flame retardants called the cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster.
The agency is working to have peer reviews of all 10 chemicals completed and publish final risk evaluations by December, Dunn said in an interview on her plans for the coming year.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/chemical-risk-evaluation-critiques-set-for-june-epas-dunn-says
-
EPA Expands Asbestos SNUR While Curbing Risk Evaluation, Irking Critics
May 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA's recently finalized rule regulating renewed uses of asbestos expanded the number of applications subject to regulation but cut some of those applications from a related risk evaluation of existing uses, angering critics who say the agency is further narrowing any future toxics rule on existing uses and shows why a total ban on asbestos is needed.
Robert Sussman, a former EPA deputy administrator who is now counsel to the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO), describes it as the “shrinking risk evaluation,” because of EPA's efforts to limit the uses of asbestos.
“Can we still see it?” Sussman asks about EPA's ongoing asbestos risk evaluation. “Is it still there? Yes, but it's pretty small because so many actual and potential pathways of exposure and risk are simply ignored. But at the end of the day, they want to be seen as doing something.”
His comments are directed in part at EPA's decision to subject certain abandoned asbestos applications in cement products, woven products, and packings to potential regulation under its recent significant new use rule (SNUR) should producers seek to revive them.
Since they are now subject to potential regulation under the SNUR, EPA dropped them from the scope of its pending risk evaluation of existing uses. “All the uses [of asbestos] included in the SNUR won’t be addressed in the [risk] evaluation and thus would not be banned under section 6,” of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which requires that EPA assess existing chemicals' risks before managing them, Sussman says.
Such criticisms intensify long-standing concerns that EPA is using its framework TSCA rules to limit the categories of uses it will consider in risk evaluations of existing chemicals, which generally precludes legacy uses and those that are already regulated by other EPA programs or other agencies. For example, firefighters are concerned that without evaluation of legacy uses of asbestos, they could face greater risks.
But many critics are now also raising concerns that EPA is using other mechanisms to limit the scope of its risk evaluation of existing uses, including by limiting the kinds of asbestos fibers it will study and the diseases it will consider.
Betsy Southerland, a former official in EPA's water office and a member of the Environmental Protection Network (EPN) of EPA alumni, is concerned by the agency's “very restrictive definition of asbestos fibers” and the “restricted consideration of disease, by limiting [the assessment] to lung cancer and mesothelioma” only.
“It all indicates the real focus is to ensure the chlor-alkali industry is not affected by the new TSCA,” she says.
As a result of such concerns, the critics are intensifying their calls for a ban on all uses of the mineral, an effort that will kick into high gear as the House Energy and Commerce Committee's environment panel is slated to hold a May 8 hearing on H.R. 1603, which would amend TSCA to require EPA to ban importation to and uses of asbestos in the U.S. within 12 months of passage.
The bill would also broaden EPA's narrow definition of asbestos, adding a number of additional fiber types. And it would require that EPA and the federal housing department assess existing 'legacy' asbestos in buildings around the country to determine quantity and risk.
The committee's leaders have already made clear that they are concerned that EPA is not going far enough in addressing asbestos. “It’s devastating that asbestos continues to kill nearly 40,000 Americans every year considering that [EPA] began the process of banning it 40 years ago,” Reps. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), the full committee chairman, and Paul Tonko (D-NY), the subcommittee chairman, say in a May 2 statement. “The delays must end.”
Final SNUR
EPA's recently finalized SNUR, issued under TSCA section 5(e), generally requires manufacturers and others who want to revive abandoned used of the mineral to inform the agency in advance so it can review those uses and impose restrictions.
The final version of the rule adds at least two new categories of uses subject to the regulation, including a broad category of “all other uses of asbestos that are no longer ongoing and not already prohibited under TSCA,” as well as a category covering “friction materials."
By nature, EPA cannot use a SNUR to control an existing use of a chemical. Rather, the rules are used to give EPA time to review new or revived uses and determine whether they pose risks that must be mitigated.
“The Agency’s intent in this final SNUR is to cover all uses of asbestos that are neither ongoing in the United States nor already banned under TSCA,” the notice says.
Among the obsolete uses that would now be subject to regulation -- should producers seek to revive them -- are applications in cement products, woven products, and packings. “Because additional EPA research indicates that cement products, woven products, and packings are not ongoing uses, this significant new use rule includes them as significant new uses,” the final SNUR says.
But because EPA is now subjecting those applications to regulation under the section 5 SNUR, it dropped them from review in its pending risk evaluation of existing uses, an effort that will inform any future rules under section 6. “Cement products, woven products, and packings have been removed from the scope of the risk evaluation . . . because no information was found to confirm they are conditions of use,” the rule says.
As a result, the agency is drawing criticism from Sussman and others, who are concerned that the agency is further narrowing its risk evaluation of existing asbestos uses.
'Complete Evaluation'
Gary Timm, a former EPA toxics official who is also an EPN member, says EPA's narrowing of the risk evaluation eliminates an opportunity to do “a complete evaluation” of asbestos' uses “and whether under existing authorities controls are adequate."
If not, Timm says uses could be addressed either through TSCA or other statutes. Once EPA completes its section 6 risk evaluations of asbestos, the statue directs EPA to move on to risk management, up to and including a ban if uses do not meet the TSCA risk standard. “The SNUR and the section 6 actions should work complementarily to address all asbestos uses,” Timm says. “If so, great. If not, there was a real flaw” in how the overall assessment was conducted.
Further, Timm notes that some critics outside of the agency “don't appreciate the level of effort” required for a section 6 rulemaking, adding that “a SNUR can address [issues] more quickly. If there were no existing uses with a SNUR, people wouldn't object. It's when you reach into their pocketbook and address [ongoing uses] through section 6 that you really have to be sure you've done your homework.”
But Sussman is concerned because he doubts EPA will regulate revived uses under the SNUR.” EPA has the option under the law to determine that [a SNURed use of asbestos] is not likely to present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment and take no action.”
“The SNUR itself says nothing about whether EPA will make a finding [that a use of asbestos may present unreasonable risk],” Sussman says, adding that the Trump EPA's record so far in reviewing new chemical applications “doesn't give me a lot of confidence.”
“All the SNUR accomplishes is to assure that no new uses will be introduced without EPA knowing about them [in advance]. Then after that, we just don't know what they'll do.”
Sussman adds that among the changes in the final SNUR are its addition of some outdated uses that had been identified as ongoing in EPA's preliminary documents describing the accompanying risk evaluation of ongoing uses of asbestos the agency is undertaking. “All of a sudden, EPA now says [those uses] are obsolete,” he says. “The effect is to remove them from the risk evaluation and narrow it even further.”
EPA's explanation, that it made the change after further research, “is not totally convincing given” reports from the U.S. Geological Survey and earlier statements by EPA on these uses of asbestos, Sussman says. “They've done more digging but I question how adequate it is.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-expands-asbestos-snur-while-curbing-risk-evaluation-irking-critics
-
EPA Has Taken Steps to Improve Timeliness, Transparency of Chemical Assessments, GAO Says
May 6, 2019 | Safety + Health Magazine
The Environmental Protection Agency has made progress addressing “historical timeliness and transparency challenges” in its Integrated Risk Information System Program’s assessment process, the Government Accountability Office concluded in a recently released assessment report.
The IRIS Program, which identifies and characterizes health hazards of chemicals and produces chemical assessments, has been criticized for its slow results and lack of transparency. GAO and the National Academy of Sciences previously offered recommendations to improve these issues.
The new assessment report, published March 27, details three key changes EPA made to IRIS Program:Use of project management principles and new software, which allows officials to manage individual tasks while speeding up literature searches to hone results to the most relevant information.Providing “fit-for-purpose” assessments – tailored reports that are smaller in scope to meet program and regional office needs, rather than wide-ranging assessments that take more time to produce.Implementation of a streamlined peer-review process that is less complex than a usual review by a Scientific Advisory Board or NAS panel.
To address transparency concerns, the program is using a systematic review that demonstrates it considered all available literature in forming conclusions and deriving toxicity values.
IRIS also has increased the frequency, structure and content of its communications with EPA program and regional offices regarding its overall priorities and individual assessments.
In October 2018, EPA offices were asked to limit their chemical requests to a top three or four, then IRIS assessments were halted from being released so the majority of the program’s staff could support implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, which was amended in 2016 by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act.
J. Alfredo Gomez, director of natural resources and environment at GAO, presented the report’s findings to the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee’s Investigations and Oversight and Environment subcommittees.
https://www.safetyandhealthmagazine.com/articles/18377-epa-has-taken-steps-to-improve-timeliness-transparency-of-chemical-assessments-gao-says
-
New Findings Show Jump in Sites With PFAs Contamination
May 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
New findings from the Environmental Working Group (EWG) say that, based on public data, the number of locations with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) contamination has jumped from 172 locations identified last year to 610 locations, likely adding to the pressure EPA is under to regulate the chemicals.
EWG May 6 released an updated interactive web-based map, in conjunction with Northeastern University researchers, using public data on public water systems, military bases, airports, industrial plants, firefighter training sites and dump sites to identify 610 locations in 43 states with known PFAS contamination, according to EWG.
A spokeswoman for EWG says the group used the federal Safe Drinking Water Information System to find data on water, which shows PFAS contamination in the drinking water supplies of 446 communities.
These include drinking water systems serving approximately 19 million people, although that estimate is imprecise and may be much higher, EWG says in an explanation of the findings on its website.
Last year, the group mapped 172 locations in 40 states with PFAS contamination.
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.
EWG, which has long called for a strict drinking water standard for PFAS, says among states, Michigan was found to have the most locations, at 192, but that is partly due to the state's continuing comprehensive testing for the chemicals. In fact, the group says “Michigan environmental officials have estimated that more than 11,000 sites in the state may be contaminated with PFAS.” Second to Michigan were California, at 47 known sites, and New Jersey, at 43 known sites.
The new map also shows that 117 military sites have drinking water contamination, including 77 military airports -- stemming from the military's long use of firefighting foam containing PFAS.
The group on May 6 also released its recommendations for drinking water and cleanup standards for all PFAS as a class -- something environmentalists and citizen groups have been pushing EPA to do, but which industry has discouraged. EWG is proposing levels of 1 part per trillion (ppt) for total PFAS in drinking water, and 1 ppt for total PFAS in groundwater and the cleanup of contaminated sites. The level is 70 times more stringent than EPA's non-enforceable drinking water level and its draft groundwater cleanup level.
EWG says it relied on findings from a 2013 study showing lower vaccine response in children exposed to certain levels of the two most common PFAS, as well as studies finding effects on mammary gland development in rodents, as the basis for its drinking water recommendation.
The group argues for a class approach, saying a “chemical-by-chemical regulatory approach is not currently achievable without an overhaul of U.S. chemical regulation. In the absence of adequate safety data, all members of the group should be considered equally toxic until proven otherwise."
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/new-findings-show-jump-sites-pfas-contamination
-
Map Shows PFAs Contamination Across U.S.
May 6, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Ariana Figueroa
The number of locations in the United States with a class of toxic chemicals found in drinking water has tripled since 2018, according to a new map released today by public health advocates and researchers.
Those chemicals are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, which are found in nonstick kitchenware, food packaging, shoes and firefighting foam. Research has linked them to thyroid issues, low birth rates and cancer.
The Environmental Working Group and the Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute at Northeastern University found 610 U.S. locations that contain PFAS, compared with 94 the previous year.
There are 43 states where the chemicals have a presence, according to the map. It shows PFAS in public water systems, military bases, airports, industrial sites and firefighter training facilities.
The data comes from the federal Safe Drinking Water Information System, which test public drinking water systems, and the Department of Defense's report "Addressing Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA)."
Out of all the states, Michigan contained the highest amounts of PFAS with 192 sites. "Michigan is a crisis," said Bill Walker, EWG's editor-in-chief.
Other states with multiple sites containing PFAS included California, with 47 sites, and New Jersey, with 43, according to the map.
"The updated map shows that PFAS contamination is truly a nationwide problem, impacting millions of Americans in hundreds of communities," Phil Brown, a professor of sociology and health sciences at Northeastern University and director of the Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute, said in a statement.
Brown said EPA should restrict the use of PFAS and push for a national cleanup of the chemicals.
Lawmakers have introduced a slew of bipartisan bills to act on PFAS, including establishing a registry of individuals exposed to the chemicals to requiring an enforceable drinking water limit (Greenwire, April 30).
A Government Accountability Office report last year found that the Defense Department had "identified 401 active or closed military installations with known or suspected releases of PFOS or PFOA." Those are two types of PFAS.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/05/06/stories/1060285399
-
Solvay Fights New Jersey’s Fluorinated Chemical Cleanup Order
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Solvay Specialty Polymers USA LLC is protesting a New Jersey order for the company to pay the state $3.1 million to investigate and fix statewide fluorinated chemical contamination, because the company says it shouldn’t have to pay for statewide impacts that may be unrelated to its operation of a single New Jersey plant.
The company has already spent $25 million since 2013 in investigating and remediating any potential environmental impacts related to the chemicals from its operation of the West Deptford, N,.J., plant, the company said in documents obtained by Bloomberg Environment.
Solvay isn’t legally obligated to pay the $3.1 million the state is asking for the environmental impacts caused by other parties, the company’s attorneys said in an April 17 letter to state officials.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection in March ordered Solvay, DuPont Specialty Products USA LLC, DowDuPont Inc., Chemours Co., and 3M Co. to tell the state where and when they manufactured, dumped, or used poly- or perfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS.
The chemicals have contaminated drinking water around the state, triggering the department’s order for the companies to investigate and fund the cleanup.
‘Unprecedented’The state’s order is “unprecedented in scope and devoid of meaningful or reasonable substantiation,” Solvay said in documents obtained by Bloomberg Environment May 3 through a state public information request.
The Solvay plant didn’t manufacture PFAS chemicals but used them to make specialty plastic products, according to the company.
The department specifically asked Solvay to repay $3.1 million New Jersey spent to address PFAS chemicals near the West Deptford facility.
The company is willing to repay the state for PFAS contamination that can be attributed to its facility, but it is unclear whether local contamination is coming from its manufacturing plant, the company said.
Solvay is “willing to enter good faith discussions” with the state to resolve the $3.1 million claim, as well as future costs related to the West Deptford facility, the company said.
PFAS compounds may cause adverse health effects, including developmental harm to fetuses, testicular and kidney cancer, liver tissue damage, immune system or thyroid effects, and changes in cholesterol, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection hasn’t yet released the other companies’ responses to the order. A spokesman for the department didn’t immediately respond to Bloomberg Environment’s request for comment.
Christopher M. Roe of Fox Rothschild LLP and Kegan A. Brown of Latham & Watkins LLP signed Solvay’s response to the New Jersey order.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/solvay-fights-new-jerseys-fluorinated-chemical-cleanup-order
-
Monsanto Gets Partial Win in Seattle PCB Contamination Case
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven M. Sellers
Seattle is entitled to dismissal of some, but not all, counterclaims asserted by Monsanto Co. in ongoing litigation over PCB contamination in the city’s water bodies, a federal court in Washington ruled.
The May 3 decision allowed Monsanto to pursue Superfund and negligence claims stemming from Seattle’s alleged failure to mitigate the pollution through its storm water and sewage treatment facilities. But it dismissed Clean Water Act, contribution, and unjust enrichment counterclaims brought against the city.
Seattle sued Monsanto in 2016 on public nuisance, negligence, indemnity, and other claims, alleging the company bore responsibility for the cleanup of the Duwamish River undertaken by the city under a consent decree.
Monsanto was a major manufacturer of polychlorinated biphenyls until the 1970s and operated an adhesives factory near the river from 1946 to 1986, according to the decision.
Any causal link between Seattle’s Clean Water Act violations and Monsanto’s response costs was broken by “independent decisions by the EPA and the State of Washington” about the pollution and enforcement actions to remediate it, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington said.
Monsanto’s claims for response costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, however, were sufficient to avoid dismissal.
Whether the company can prove the expenses it incurred were necessary under the Superfund law, rather than designed only to defend against a potential EPA claim, must be determined at a later stage of the case, the court said.
Seattle also argued that it owed no duty to Monsanto and that the company couldn’t prove its injuries were caused by the city. But the court allowed the negligence claims to proceed.
“At this stage, Monsanto has plausibly alleged that it was foreseeable to Seattle that an individual or entity would eventually be forced to address its contaminations of the affected water bodies,” the court said.
Judge Robert S. Lasnik wrote the opinion.
Baron & Budd PC, Gomez Trial Lawyers, and the Seattle City Attorney’s Office represented Seattle. Latham & Watkins, Schwabe WIlliamson & Wyatt, and King & Spalding LLP represented Monsanto.
The case is City of Seattle v. Monsanto Co., W.D. Wash., No. 16-cv-00107, 5/3/19.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/monsanto-gets-partial-win-in-seattle-pcb-contamination-case
-
Will This Proposal Help DoD’s Water Cleanup Efforts?
May 6, 2019 | Military Times
By Karen Jowers
The Pentagon is on board with a new proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency aimed at clarifying state and federal cleanup standards to address groundwater and drinking water contaminated by decades of seepage of chemicals -- including those used in the military’s firefighting foams.
For decades, the military used firefighting foams that contained PFAS chemicals. These per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances are also found in everyday household products. PFAS chemicals have been linked to cancers and other health problems.
Meanwhile, today, an advocacy group that says even those standards are “woefully inadequate” released its updated, interactive map showing PFAS contamination at 610 sites in 43 states. Of those on the Environmental Working Group’s list, 117 are military sites, including 77 military airports. Service members and families can click on military locations to find the levels of contamination, based on EWG’s research on DoD and other data.
The EPA’s proposal doesn’t lower the cleanup standards -- the Pentagon had reportedly sought to weaken the standards, according to press reports. This proposal aligns with the EPA’s 2016 health advisory that recommended water sources contain no more than 70 parts per trillion of the PFAS chemicals perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA, and/or perfluorooctane sulfonate, or PFOS at sites being addressed, including those under federal cleanup programs. The PFOA and PFOS are the two most well-known of the hundreds of PFAS chemicals currently in use. The proposal also would set a rate of 40 ppt as the level where no adverse effects are expected.
While the EPA’s health advisory has been in effect since 2016, neither the Pentagon or any municipality was required to meet the 70 ppt standard.
DoD, NASA and the Small Business Administration had reportedly pushed for increasing the standard to 380 ppt for a clean up standard, which would have allowed higher exposure to the compounds in water sources, according to Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., in a March letter to the EPA. “Such levels would, among other consequences, subject fewer sites that were contaminated through the military’s use of PFOA/PFOS from having to be remediated in the first place,” Carper said.
“DoD fully supports the trigger level for investigation and initial cleanup goal contained in EPA’s draft interim recommendations,” said DoD spokeswoman Heather Babb. “EPA’s draft provides helpful guidance for a consistent approach to PFOA and/or PFOS groundwater cleanups.”
DoD has been using 40 ppt in groundwater as the level to begin a detailed investigation of sites with the PFOS and/or PFOA contamination, Babb said. In addition, DoD “has been using and will continue to use the 70 ppt as the preliminary remediation goal” – the initial target for a cleanup level. That can be adjusted, based on the site, as more information becomes available, she said.
She said DoD has been using the “long-established Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act” process in its cleanups, “The science-based process applies to everyone and every chemical and it indicates 390 ppt as the level that requires the initiation of the cleanup process,” she said.
In testimony May 1 before the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan said, “we’ve agreed with the EPA on a common standard, and it was their standard.”
He said there were discussions on the processes that will be used to implement the EPA’s standard. Noting that the EPA’s recommended guidelines are out for public comment, he told lawmakers, “I think in working with you and others, do we have the right standard is really now the question for us.”With lawsuits on the horizon, DoD looks for ways to cut contaminated water cleanup costs
The Pentagon is already on the hook for $27 billion in environmental cleanup, loosening the PFAS standards cost give it some relief - but at what cost?
The Environmental Working Group contends those proposed EPA standards “are a woefully inadequate response to the growing nationwide crisis of drinking water contaminated with PFAS,” said EWG Senior Scientist David Andrews in a press release.
EWG says ”studies by the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Control, scientists for a number of states, and private researchers have found those levels are far too high to protect public health.” Some states have proposed standards at or near 20 ppt, EWG noted.
The EPA proposal also falls short because it doesn’t declare PFAS chemicals to be hazardous substances under the Superfund cleanup law, and doesn’t legally require the Pentagon or the chemical industry to clean up contaminated military facilities, industrial sites or dumps, according to the EWG.
Virtually every American has some of these chemicals in their bodies, said Bill Walker, editor in chief at Environmental Working Group. These chemicals come from a variety of sources, including waterproof clothing, and food.
As military families check out the EWG interactive map for possible contamination at their current location, the best remedy is to prevent future exposure to the chemicals, said Alexis Temkin, toxicologist at EWG. There are a number of different options for water filtration, for example, and the type used depends on the chemical. EWG’s consumer guides have some information.
“But it’s not right that the burden has to be on the individual resident, the individual citizen to protect his or her health or his family’s health. This should be something that the government is protecting us from," said Walker. "It’s much easier and economic to keep chemicals out of the water supply in the first place, than to filter them out when they get in there. Obviously PFAS chemicals have been in use for decades. We can’t change history, but we need to learn from this situation, that the key is to keep chemicals from getting into the water.”
Shanahan said during his testimony that “no one is drinking contaminated water” at the sites in question identified by DoD. The military no longer uses the PFAS chemicals in training or in testing, he said. “The only use of them is in the event of a fire.
“The real work here is on remediation.”
https://www.militarytimes.com/pay-benefits/2019/05/06/will-this-proposal-help-dods-water-cleanup-efforts/
-
Geneva Meeting Agrees Global Ban on PFOA, With Exemptions
May 6, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Ginger Hervey
International negotiators at the meeting of the UN Conference of the Parties in Geneva have unanimously agreed a global ban on the use of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), with some exemptions.
Delegates at the meeting agreed on Friday to add the chemical, along with its salts and PFOA-related compounds, to Annex A of the Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants (POPs). This requires countries to take action to "eliminate the production and use" of the chemical.
PFOA is widely used in industrial sectors and manufacturing processes for its resistance to water and oil. PFOA-related compounds are used as surfactants and surface treatment agents in textiles, papers and paints and firefighting foams. The substance has been identified as persistent, bioaccumulative and reprotoxic by the EU.
PFOA and other per- and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFASs) have come under fire in recent years amid mounting public concern and political controversy. The chemicals have been found in one-third of drinking water in the US. Earlier in the week a press conference at the event heard calls from firefighters and fire safety experts to ban fluorinated chemicals in firefighting foam.
Several five-year exemptions to the ban were approved for the chemical, including in:
-firefighting foam;
-photolithography or etch processes in semiconductor manufacturing;
-photographic coatings applied to films;
-textiles for oil-and water-repellency for the protection of workers from dangerous liquids that comprise risks to their health and safety;
-invasive and implantable medical devices;manufacturing fluorinated polymers;
-manufacturing plastic accessories for car interior parts; and
-manufacturing electrical wires.
For the exemption on firefighting foam, special additional controls were included, with governments prohibiting the production, export or import and use in training of PFOA-containing foam. The final decision also said alternatives to PFOA-containing foam should be used "where available, feasible and efficient," and added that other flourine-based firefighting foams "could have negative environmental, human health and socioeconomic impacts due to their persistency and mobility."
Iran, China and the EU each requested exemptions at the event, instead of through the usual channel of the Stockholm Convention's scientific review committee. Ipen, an international network of NGOs, protested against the late addition of exemptions.
Dr Mariann Lloyd-Smith, National Toxics Network and Ipen advisor, said that although the "global ban on PFOA and the warning about not using PFAS alternatives starts a new era in addressing this entire class of persistent, toxic chemicals ... some governments betrayed the treaty’s scientific review process by suddenly adding vast, wide-ranging loopholes that continue PFOA’s cycle of harm."
Most of the 182 countries that have ratified the Stockholm Convention have 12 months to implement the ban. The US is not a party to the Convention, so the ban does not apply to it.
However, the US is considering domestic restrictions on PFOA and other fluorinated substances in parallel. In February, the EPA published a federal plan to manage the risks posed by PFASs. This was touted by the agency's acting administrator as the "most comprehensive cross-agency action plan for a chemical of concern ever undertaken by the agency."
PFOS exemptions ended
Delegates at the Stockholm Convention meeting also agreed to tighten a restriction on PFOS, another fluorinated chemical that was added to Annex A in 2009 with several exemptions. The following exemptions were ended:
-photo-imaging, photo-resist and anti-reflective coatings for semiconductors;
-etching agent for compound semiconductors and ceramic filters;
-aviation hydraulic fluid;
-certain medical devices;
-photo masks in semiconductor and LCD industries;
-decorative metal plating;electric and electronic parts for some colour printers and colour copy machines;
-insecticides for control of red imported fire ants and termites; and
-chemically-driven oil production.
The use of PFOS in firefighting foams was also given a five-year deadline, and its production, export or import and use in training was disallowed.
https://chemicalwatch.com/77163/geneva-meeting-agrees-global-ban-on-pfoa-with-exemptions
-
May 6, 2019 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
The Trump administration said it plans to weaken protections for a beetle facing a threat of extinction from climate change, a move welcomed by oil and natural gas drillers lobbying for the change.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced last week a proposal to change the status of the American burying beetle from “endangered” to merely “threatened,” which would make it easier for oil and gas producers who must work around the insect when drilling and laying pipeline.
With that change in status, which has yet to be finalized, energy producers and other businesses in oil-rich Oklahoma would no longer need to seek out federal permits to operate in the insect’s habitat.
Ranchers there and in other states to the north, including Nebraska and South Dakota, would also be exempt from what many of them see as those cumbersome procedures.
Jeff Eshelman, a spokesman for the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA), which initially asked the federal government to review its endangered declaration for the beetle, said the “status change is welcome news.”
But environmental advocates lashed out at the decision to lift the 30-year-old protections on the species. They say it's ironic since the beetle is imperiled by climate change, but removing protections will allow easier oil and gas drilling will only contribute to rising temperatures.
And the decision came just before a United Nations panel issued a major report warning that the world is on the brink of losing up to one million plant and animal species to extinction.
In explaining its decision, the Fish and Wildlife Service said it is beyond its power to save the species in the southern part of its range — which includes much of eastern Oklahoma along with parts of Arkansas, Kansas and Texas — from the biggest threat it faces there: climate change.
Biologists for the agency concluded that higher temperatures and lower soil moisture there over the next three decades will make much of the area too inhospitable for the insect.
“Even with the most aggressive reductions in climate change models,” said Kevin Stubbs, an Oklahoma-based biologist for the Fish and Wildlife Service, “it wasn't going to change the fact that the temperatures down here were going to rise above levels we think would support the beetle.”
That reasoning didn't cut it for environmentalists. “They’re basically throwing their hands up,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director for the Center for Biological Diversity. “It’s totally irrational. It’s crazy.”
The agency said it was following the letter of the law by listing the beetle as "threatened" rather than "endangered." "It fits that definition of not currently endangered, or at risk of extinction, but is within the foreseeable future," Stubbs said.
Preparing for that future, the Trump administration's plan calls for 213,000 acres of conservation area to be set aside for the beetle's southern population so it can later be reintroduced to the north once temperatures warm.
A nocturnal black-and-orange beetle with the scientific name Nicrophorus americanus, the American burying beetle performs the mortician-like ritual of entombing small dead mammals and birds with its own eggs inside. After hatching, the larvae feed on the interred carcass until mature.
Years of farming and other land development dwindled the beetle’s range down from 35 states to just a few corners of Oklahoma and Rhode Island by the time it was originally placed on the endangered species list in 1989.But since then the beetle has mounted a “comeback,” according to the Fish and Wildlife Service, spreading to nine other states due to the reintroduction of burying beetle bred in captivity.
However, Brett Ratcliffe, a beetle researcher at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, disagreed that the insect has significantly recovered over the past three decades, saying it only seems more prevalent because more field tests have been conducted to find it. “Overall, the population is not robust enough” to justify delisting the beetle, Ratcliffe said. “Especially because we have climate change entering into this.”
Still, in 2015, a coalition of industry groups, including the IPAA, petitioned the Fish and Wildlife Service to remove the beetle from the endangered-species list. The petroleum lobby group had long been critical of the original decision by the Fish and Wildlife Service to list the beetle as endangered, which they say was not based in proper science.
It was during President Trump’s administration that IPAA’s lobbying effort went into high gear, according to documents released to the Western Values Project under the Freedom of Information Act.
In an August 2017 email to Vincent DeVito, a political appointee at the Wildlife Service’s parent agency, the Interior Department, Sam McDonald, IPAA’s director of government relations, emphasized how the “listing has cost $6.5 million in protection efforts over the last 20 years” in Oklahoma while causing “delays of essential road and bridge projects” in the state. The pair followed up with a meeting that month.
The IPAA echoed that sentiment when reached for comment about the Trump administration’s decision to “downlist” the beetle. IPAA spokesman Eshelman said that “economic threats to the communities affected by the listing [have] cost private landowners, businesses, and local governments millions and American jobs.”
The Fish and Wildlife Service’s decisions surrounding the beetle have faced controversy before.
In 2017, two outside beetle researchers, Wyatt Hoback and Douglas Leasure, who were working with the agency on its assessment of the species, quit after they said federal wildlife officials pressured them to work on a rushed timeline at odds with what they saw as good science.
And in 2013, a scientific integrity review panel found that two supervisors committed “scientific misconduct” by dismissing the concerns of staff members when trying to shrink the agency’s habitat map in Oklahoma.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-energy-202/2019/05/06/the-energy-202-trump-administration-heeds-oil-and-gas-industry-calls-to-remove-protections-for-beetle/5ccf64e9a7a0a46cfe152c3f/?utm_term=.ede68feb5c9a
-
Ewire: Castor Pledges Select Panel Focus on Drilling Moratorium
May 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL), the chairwoman of the House select committee on climate change, says her panel will explore the issue of halting fossil fuel leasing on federal lands, a policy that has been embraced by several Democratic presidential contenders, as a way to curb carbon emissions and limit climate change.
Castor's made her remarks during a May 3 interview with CSPAN.
, saying her panel would examine that proposal “because what the scientists are telling us now is that we've got to cut our carbon pollution dramatically.”
She added that if the country is going to have a “just transition” for fossil fuel-dependent communities, “it doesn't make a lot of sense to expand extraction, especially on public lands. It's an important issue moving forward in the context of how we cut our carbon pollution.”
Castor's select committee does not have legislative jurisdiction, though it is charged with submitting policy recommendations to standing committees by next March. She argued her panel's work is complementary because those committees are “on the front lines of turning back the damage from the Trump administration's” environmental rollbacks. “There is a little defense to play and a good offense.”
President Barack Obama late in his second term imposed a moratorium on new coal leasing on federal lands, paired with a programmatic review of leasing's climate change effects.
While President Donald Trump's administration has tried to reverse those efforts, they have been suffering court losses in both the coal and oil and gas leasing programs.
However, several Democrats seeking to challenge Trump in 2020 have taken a more aggressive approach to the issue than Obama. For instance, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is pledging a “total moratorium” on not just coal leasing, but oil and gas leasing as well -- while also boosting renewable development on public lands.
“It's not enough to end our public lands' contribution to climate change. We have an enormous opportunity to make them a part of the climate solution, and for both economic and environmental reasons, we should take it,” she wrote in an April article outlining the plan.
According to The Hill, several other Democratic 2020 hopefuls have also endorsed a moratorium on drilling on federal lands, including Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), as well as former Rep. Beto O'Rourke (D-TX).
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ewire-castor-pledges-select-panel-focus-drilling-moratorium
-
Exxon Directors Face Shareholder Revolt Over Climate Change (1)
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily Chasan
A group of Exxon Mobil Corp. shareholders launched a proxy fight against the oil giant’s directors after failing to get a climate proposal onto the ballot for the company’s annual meeting.
The New York State Common Retirement Fund, led by New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, and the Church of England said they would vote against all Exxon directors at the company’s May 29 annual meeting and urged other shareholders to consider doing the same.
Exxon’s “inadequate response to climate change constitutes a serious failure of corporate governance,” they said in a filing May 3.
The investors, which said they are acting with the Climate Action 100+ group of investors who oversee $32 trillion in assets, also urged shareholders to vote in favor of proposals for an independent chairman, the establishment of a climate change board committee and a report on lobbying.
Scott Silvestri, an Exxon spokesman, pointed to the company’s proxy statement where the board recommended shareholders vote against the investor proposals. In the proxy filing, the company said its full board holds at least one session each year dedicated to climate issues.
The shareholders said they have engaged with Exxon on climate change and its greenhouse gas emissions since 2005 and the company has “failed to respond adequately” in contrast to peers such as BP Plc, Chevron Corp., Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Total SA.
New York State’s pension fund, which holds about 10 million shares of Exxon, has faced pressure from state lawmakers and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to divest its holdings of Exxon and other fossil fuel companies. DiNapoli has resisted, saying that he would prefer to engage with the company due to its economic importance.
The New York fund and the Church of England in 2017 led a climate shareholder proposal at Exxon that was backed by more than two-thirds of shareholders and required the company to produce a detailed report on how climate change affects its business. The shareholders were disappointed with the report, so have continued to press the company to set greenhouse gas reduction targets.
“Exxon’s board’s refusal to adequately address significant shareholder concerns and properly account for climate risk in its operations, even as its competitors do so, presents a governance crisis,” DiNapoli said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/exxon-directors-face-shareholder-revolt-over-climate-change-1
-
The World Has Already Found All the Oil It Should Ever Burn
May 6, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Chris Tomlinson
A ghastly specter is casting a shadow over the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston this week, and none of the ingenious new inventions and cost-saving innovations on exhibit will address a fundamental threat to the industry.
The dirty, big secret that only attracts brief mentions and side-long glances at OTC is greenhouse gas regulation, and the world’s need to slash carbon dioxide emissions. As the climate changes and people around the world demand action, the oil industry generally--and offshore drilling specifically--face near extinction without adaptation.
Exploration vessels, floating collection platforms and underwater wells are expensive. For these projects to make money, they need to produce oil for 20 to 30 years. The unanswerable question for executives is how much will greenhouse gas regulation change over the next 30 years? How high will demand be for crude oil in 2045?
The world will undoubtedly still need oil for centuries. Existing wells run dry every day. Oil companies must replace 5 percent of production every year to maintain the current supply. Competition to supply that oil, though, will be fierce.
Shale wells are quick to drill and much cheaper than offshore wells, but production drops 70 percent after the first year. Shale wells can respond quickly to the market and regulation, which is an advantage in uncertain times.
Offshore oil cheerleaders, though, argue that short-lived wells cannot guarantee long-term supply. They say that oil companies are not discovering enough new oil to meet future demand. Sadly, for the future of the industry, that’s not true.
If governments enforce the climate change mitigation policies they have promised, the global supply of oil will far exceed demand, according to a Boston Consulting Group analysis of data from publicly-traded energy companies and the International Energy Agency.
The big energy companies plan to produce 21 percent more oil in 2025, but the IEA expects demand to increase only 10 percent due to climate change regulations. Odds are, though, that the rules will be much stricter than the IEA projects.
If we burn all existing oil reserves, the planet will heat to an unbearable temperature.
Scientists have known since the 1860s that when the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere goes up, more solar energy is trapped on earth, and the planet warms.
The last decade has been the warmest since humans began keeping records, with the average temperature 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in 1900. This spike higher correlates with the industrial revolution, and the concomitant rise in carbon dioxide emissions.
Researchers have calculated that to keep the earth’s temperature from rising to levels that cause widespread natural and economic disruption, humans can only afford to release another 986 gigatons of carbon over the next 50 years. If we exceed this carbon budget, the heat will turn farmland into deserts, kill hundreds of species and make some parts of North Africa and the Middle East uninhabitable.
The world’s 20 largest, publicly-traded energy corporations, though, have promised their shareholders profits from selling 1,541 gigatons of carbonover the next 50 years, according to the London School of Economics. These same companies have pledged to spend billions of dollars more to find new oil reserves and to burn them too.
If these companies did nothing more than sell the $6 trillion in proven reserves they own today, the planet would suffer. But if these companies do not promise to sell those reserves, their stock value plummets.
Cambridge University economist Jean-François Mercure warned of this carbon bubble, where investors overestimate a corporation’s value by mistakenly believing that all of its fossil fuel assets will be sold. New limits on carbon dioxide emissions, or a sudden consumer shift to renewable energy sources, would cause this bubble to burst, he said, creating massive losses for shareholders.
The impetus for a sudden change in policy grows with every record-breaking downpour, every extreme wildfire and each succeeding year of record-high temperatures. Consumer tastes could change quickly, even without new regulations, with dozens of electric vehicles coming on the market over the next five years.
Oil company executives should consider these facts before making a final investment decision on a new offshore platform that will take five years to reach its station in the Gulf of Mexico. A $5 billion capital expenditure today could be a write-off in a decade.
The world will always need oil, but not nearly as much as we burn now. Deciding whether to build and deploy a new offshore platform has never been riskier.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/columnists/tomlinson/article/Oil-industry-ignores-risk-from-climate-13822077.php
-
Comment: Ensuring the Safety of Offshore Workers
May 6, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Scott Angelle
Our nation’s energy story is one of innovation, growth, and determination, and nowhere is it more evident than in my home state of Louisiana. Today, offshore energy production occurs on less than one percent of our nation’s outer Continental Shelf, but is responsible for 16 percent of U.S. oil production, 3 percent of U.S. natural gas production, and billions of dollars in revenue that annually flows into rebuilding our coastline, improving our state and local parks, paying for Veterans’ healthcare.
This story often gets lost with those who fundamentally disagree with resource extraction and who would prefer to “Keep it in the Ground.” But that does not work for the tens of thousands of pipefitters, welders, roughnecks, and vessel operators employed in the energy industry. These men and women are proud to deliver affordable, American-made energy to families and businesses throughout the nation.
The Trump Administration is dedicated to excellence in offshore safety. We launched an additional inspection protocol to stay ahead of potential issues. This risk-based approach uses data analysis to focus inspections on targeted operations and facilities. We are using technology to review testing records onshore allowing for a 6.1 percent increase in physical inspection time of equipment on offshore rigs and platforms, and drastically increased participation in a near-miss reporting program.
The number of offshore inspections has consistently increased under President Trump. In calendar year 2016, BSEE conducted 8,508 inspections. That number jumped to 9,275 and 10,341 in 2017 and 2018 respectively.
Our nation’s regulatory system is meant to protect our workforce and drive safe practices. It is not a tool to stop American energy production. That is why last April, President Trump signed Executive Order 13795, “Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy,” which directed the Secretary of the Interior to review the previous administration’s “Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf-Blowout Preventer Systems and Well Control,” also known as the well control rule.
33 provisions
Riddled with issues and controversy and provisions that many believed would make development less safe, the original regulation required an entire webpage to answer over 100 complex engineering questions to explain how the rule was supposed to work. It was one of several new regulations on offshore energy development and rushed out the door in 2016 to avoid triggering the Congressional Review Act - an important tool employed by Congress to overturn regulatory overreach.
We we have put forward a safer, smarter improved rule. Of the 342 provisions in the previous administration’s Well Control Rule, only 68 provisions were revised, leaving roughly 80 percent of the original rule untouched. Our improvements add an additional 33 provisions to bolster safety, such as ensuring availability of properly maintained well intervention tools and testing of the blowout preventer blind shear rams.
Moreover, technical experts from the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) combed through 424 recommendations from 26 separate reports from 14 different organizations following Deepwater Horizon and found that none of the revisions contravened any of these recommendations.
The rule unveiled Thursday employs a performance-based approach to meet real-time monitoring requirements, removes duplicative certification requirements that add no value, reduces blowout preventer failure risks, and improves the expected lifespan of critical blowout preventer components.
This revised regulation also addresses a troubling outcome of the original rule: the high propensity and significant need for alternate compliance. Alternate compliance, a provision that dates back to 1988, is a tool offshore operators utilize to implement safety and environmental protection alternatives that BSEE deems as safe as - or more safe than - current requirements. There were troves of incoming requests to deviate from the rule in order to ensure the safety of hardworking crews offshore. Under the previous administration, the rate of alternate procedures or equipment approvals per permit was twice as high and the rate of alternate procedures or equipment approvals per day was 79 percent higher.
False narrative
Many have perpetuated the false narrative that this Administration is decreasing safety as we work to reduce bureaucratic red tape. This line of thinking ignores the simple fact that there are always different pathways that can achieve and even improve upon the same end result. Our nation’s regulatory framework has room for improvement, and we will continue to make improvements that ensure safety, while also allowing energy security and prosperity to flourish.
The Trump Administration is focused on smart solutions that keep workers safe and allow for energy development and job growth. Today’s final Well Control Rule does just that, and will ensure that our Gulf economy will continue to be a global beacon of innovation, energy security, and environmental stewardship for decades to come.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Comment-Ensuring-the-safety-of-offshore-workers-13816436.php?cmpid=ffpolitics
-
Thai Operator Wraps Revamp of Idled Louisiana Ethane Cracker
May 6, 2019 | Oil & Gas Journal
By Robert Brelsford
Indorama Ventures Olefins LLC (IVO), an indirect subsidiary of Thailand’s Indorama Ventures PCL (IVP), Bangkok, has achieved mechanical completion of its previously announced project to renovate and restart a dormant ethane cracker in Westlake, La., just west of Lake Charles in Calcasieu Parish (OGJ Online, Sept. 25, 2016).
With construction activities now completed, the 440,000-tonne/year cracker is undergoing trial runs, and IVO has stabilized production of on-spec ethylene and its byproducts at five of its seven furnaces, which will continue ramping up gradually over the course of this year’s second quarter, the operator said.
IVO previously entered a long-term supply agreement with Targa Resources Corp., Houston, for delivery of all ethane and propane feedstock supplies for the project (OGJ Online, Dec. 15, 2016).
Originally planned for commissioning in late 2017, the refurbished cracker—which is to be jointly owned by IVP (76%) and Singapore-based Indorama Corp. (24%)—is designed to process both ethane and propane feedstock from US shale to produce about ethylene and propylene.
Indorama said that, at normalized production, IVP will secure about 75% of ethylene output for internal consumption for production of ethylene oxide and ethylene glycol, with remaining production to be sold to market.
https://www.ogj.com/articles/2019/05/thai-operator-wraps-revamp-of-idled-louisiana-ethane-cracker.html
-
Three Believed Dead After Illinois Chemical Plant Explosion
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Linly Lin
Three workers are believed dead after an explosion at a chemical plant in Waukegan, about 40 miles (64 km) north of Chicago, late on May 3, the Associated Press reported, citing local authorities.
Steven Lenzi, Waukegan fire marshal, said crews had suspended their search for the employees missing at the AB Specialty Silicones LLC plant and that it was “not likely” anyone survived the blast. The Chicago Sun-Times reported one body had been recovered.
A fire that followed the blast at 9:30 p.m. May 3 was extinguished while the search effort continued, CNN said earlier on its website. Nine employees were inside the plant when the explosion occurred; four were earlier reported injured and two declined treatment.
The Lake County Sheriff said in a May 3 tweet that the explosion had been “ground shaking.” Television images showed the plant almost totally leveled.
Closely-held AB manufactures silicone-based raw materials, vinyl polymers, and resins, including products for the cosmetics, dental and medical industries and for various industrial uses, according to its website and LinkedIn page.
In January the company announced it was growing its storage and production capabilities and moving ahead with a “continuous expansion” of the Waukegan campus, which it said comprised four buildings and over 240,000 square feet of R&D, manufacturing, warehousing, and office space.
An AB spokeswoman didn’t immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/three-believed-dead-after-illinois-chemical-plant-explosion
-
At Least Three Dead in Illinois Factory Explosion
May 6, 2019 | AP (In the Journal of Emergency Medical Services)
Search and recovery personnel found the body of another worker Sunday in the rubble of a northern Illinois silicone factory that exploded and burst into flames two days earlier, bringing the death toll to three employees with one more body believed to be in the debris, a fire official said.
Waukegan Fire Marshal Steve Lenzi told a news conference that the body was found as first responders resumed searching in hazardous conditions in the debris from the AB Specialty Silicones plant in Waukegan, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) north of Chicago.
They were searching for the bodies of two of the nine workers who were there when an explosion rocked the building Friday night and left it a shattered skeleton.
It took recovery personnel two hours to bring out the body Sunday afternoon, Lenzi said in a statement. The search for the remaining body was called off Sunday evening and will resume on Monday, he said.
Of the nine employees in the building at the time of the blast, one body was found early Saturday. Four people were taken to the hospital and one of those died later Saturday. The condition of the other three workers in the hospital was not immediately known, Lenzi said. The third confirmed death was the body located Sunday with one other body still to recover. Two other workers did not require treatment at the time.
The cause of the explosion hasn't been determined, although Lenzi said it originated in the building where the silicone is produced.
"Most of the processes that they do are very non-hazardous. Silicone itself, not a hazardous substance," Lenzi said. "Something ... this weekend went horrifically wrong."
AB Specialty Silicones makes specialty silicone chemical raw materials for products such as adhesives, sealants and coatings.
Lenzi said authorities have concluded that the explosion and fire were accidental.
"We are not looking at foul play."
Lenzi said that from information they have gleaned in the preliminary investigation, some of the employees realized something was wrong and alerted others to get out of the building just before the explosion.
Lake County Coroner Howard Cooper said that his office would perform autopsies Monday on at least two of the bodies and would announce the names of the victims and preliminary causes of death. Dental records would be used to identify at least one of the deceased, he said.
https://www.jems.com/articles/news/2019/05/at-least-three-dead-in-illinois-factory-explosion.html
-
Sterigenics Plant to Stay Shuttered After Judge Tosses Lawsuit
May 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Joyce
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Sterigenics U.S. LLC that challenged the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s seal order that effectively shut down the company’s Willowbrook, Ill., medical-sterilization facility.
The order means, at least for now, the Sterigenics plant will remain closed.
Members of Congress have complained that the facility’s ethylene oxide emissions have endangered local residents’ health, but Sterigenics says it complies with all state and federal regulations.
On May 3, Chief Judge Ruben Castillo dismissed the lawsuit filed by Sterigenics in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois that alleged the Illinois EPA overstepped its authority under Illinois law and deprived the company of procedural due process.
On Feb. 15, the state EPA ordered Sterigenics to seal all storage containers of ethylene oxide at its Willowbrook plant, effectively shutting the plant down.
The judge said Sterigenics failed to sufficiently allege any claim under federal law and further said a request for supplemental jurisdiction wouldn’t be appropriate under the state-law claims in Sterigenics’ complaint.
On April 12, the Food and Drug Administration said it is taking steps to prevent patient harm from potential device shortages that could delay or disrupt critical care because the Sterigenics plant shut down means medical devices can’t be properly sterilized.
In March the FDA issued an alert stating a potential medical device shortages from the closure of the Willowbrook facility and the future planned closure of a similar facility in Michigan.
The case is Sterigenics U.S., LLC v. Kim, N.D. Ill., No. 19-cv-1219, 5/3/19.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/sterigenics-plant-to-stay-shuttered-after-judge-tosses-lawsuit
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Add recipients
Suggested