Preview Newsletter
ACC AM May 7
-
(ACC Mentioned) Third Annual Recycling Innovators Forum To Highlight Game-Changing Ideas
May 6, 2015 | Nasdaq
Entrepreneurs with innovative ideas for bolstering the recycling industry will receive a helping hand this fall. The 2015 Recycling Innovators Forum is seeking entries from people and organizations with actionable ideas to advance recycling. The contest aims to support invention, originality and measurable improvements in recycling-related... -
(ACC Mentioned) Quality Distribution Agrees to be Acquired by Funds Advised by Apax Partners for $16.00 Per Share in All Cash
May 6, 2015 | Nasdaq
Quality Distribution, Inc. (Nasdaq:QLTY) ("Quality Distribution" or the "Company"), a North American logistics and transportation provider with market leading businesses, today announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to be acquired by funds advised by Apax Partners ("Apax"), a global private equity firm, for approximately ... -
(ACC Mentioned) Research and Markets: Global Trends in Resin Distribution 2015
May 6, 2015 | Business Wire
Research and Markets (http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/hwr2zg/trends_in_resin) has announced the addition of the "Trends in Resin Distribution" report to their offering. The growth of the North American resin distribution market is undeniable - and industry officials are confident that growth will continue into 2015 and... -
(ACC Mentioned) Differences In House, Senate TSCA Bills Hint At Contentious Conference
May 7, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Differences between House and Senate Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform bills on major issues such as preemption of state chemicals programs and EPA prioritization for reviewing substances hint at likely contentious conference committee talks to try and close the policy gaps if lawmakers want TSCA reform to succeed. -
EPA Head 'Encouraged' by Bipartisan Support for TSCA Bill
May 7, 2015 | The Washington Post
By Dinesh Kumar
The changes made to the Udall-Vitter bill, before its passage in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (CW 29 April 2015), addressed the shortcomings previously identified by the US EPA, says the agency’s head, Gina McCarthy. Testifying last week before the Senate Subcommittee on Appropriations for Interior... -
Draft EPA Guidance Issued for Extending Post-Closure Care at Hazardous Waste Sites
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
The Environmental Protection Agency has released draft guidance to help regulators decide whether additional post-closure care is required for hazardous waste disposal facilities under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Evaluating whether an extension of post-closure care beyond the 30-year period required under RCRA should be... -
Global Textile Group Reports on Hazardous Substances Progress
May 6, 2015 | Chemical Watch
Key achievements and plans towards improving the textile industry’s environmental performance have been set out in the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals (ZDHC) group's latest annual report. Last year, the group, which is made up of 21 major apparel and footwear brands, released a list of manufacturing restricted substances (MRSL). -
Updated LNG Facility User Fee 68 Percent Lower than Initial Proposal, PHMSA Says
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The federal pipeline safety office will implement a user fee for liquefied natural gas facilities that is 68 percent lower than it initially expected to charge, according to an agency notice to be published in the Federal Register May 7. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration decreased the user fee rate, which funds specific federal... -
President Obama’s Pipeline Safety Agency Waits For A Leader
May 6, 2015 | Politico
By Andrew Restuccia & Elana Schor
President Barack Obama has blown past the legal deadline to name a permanent boss for the agency that oversees the safety of the nation’s oil trains and fossil-fuel pipelines — while potentially life-or-death regulations continue to sit in limbo. It’s part of a pattern for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, where an internal... -
Safety Board Moves to Rescind Consolidation Of Power, Boost Transparency, Accountability
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Robert Iafolla
In the first public meeting since the resignation of former chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board boosted transparency and restored internal checks and balances by passing a series of governance motions May 6. Most notably, the board voted 2-1 to rescind most of a controversial measure... -
Split CSB Rolls Back Ex-Chairman's Policy Change
May 6, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
Chemical Safety Board members decided today to ax a controversial change to the agency's operating procedures made by their divisive former chairman, Rafael Moure-Eraso. In a 2-1 vote, they rescinded an order that granted powers to the chairman that previously were reserved for board members. -
(ACC Mentioned) Eastman Receives Energy Efficiency Awards for 22nd Consecutive Year
May 6, 2015 | 3bl Media
Eastman Chemical Company was one of 20 American Chemistry Council (ACC) members honored at the annual ACC Responsible Care® Conference and Expo for implementing energy-efficiency improvements in 2014. Eastman received 10 of the 59 awards presented for outstanding projects, marking the 22nd consecutive year the company has earned energy efficiency awards from ACC. -
U.S. Could Join Biggest Oil Exporters If Ban Lifted, EIA-Backed Study Finds
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Lynn Doan and Dan Murtaugh
The U.S. could become one of the world's largest oil exporters if domestic production continues to surge and policy makers lift a four-decade ban that keeps most crude from leaving the country, a government-sponsored study shows. America would be capable of sending as much as 2.4 million barrels a day overseas in 2025 if federal policy makers... -
House Lawmakers, Drilling Group Oppose Merger of Ariz., N.M. Offices
May 7, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Phil Taylor
A Bureau of Land Management proposal to merge its Arizona and New Mexico offices would compromise the agency's relationship with the public it serves, according to more than a dozen House lawmakers. A dozen Republicans and one Democrat sent a letter yesterday to BLM Director Neil Kornze urging him to abandon plans to... -
Bills on Cross-Border Energy Projects, Pipeline Permits Focus of Senate Hearing
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Legislation to expedite decisions on international energy projects such as the Keystone XL oil pipeline and a bill to speed up the federal approval process of oil and gas pipelines are among the measures expected to be considered during a Senate Energy and Natural Resources hearing planned for May 14, Senate aides said. -
Senator Pushes Bill To Speed Up Pipeline Approval
May 6, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.) has introduced a bill to speed up the pipeline approval process. Capito's bill looks to reform the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's pipeline permitting process by pushing for more coordination between the federal and state agencies charged with approving them, and setting firm deadlines for ... -
Democrats Call For Stronger Venting And Flaring Regs
May 7, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Phil Taylor
Three Democratic lawmakers are calling on the Interior Department to strengthen regulations for venting and flaring natural gas and to ensure taxpayers get full market value for minerals produced from federal lands. Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) and Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) wrote a letter to Interior... -
Fort Knox Taps Natural Gas, Declares Itself 'Energy Independent'
May 6, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Ariel Wittenberg
The Army base best known for being secure just became even more invulnerable. With the completion of five power generators fueled by natural gas drilled onsite, Fort Knox, Ky., is now the first Army installation to achieve total energy security. While the base will be using energy provided by a local utility, Fort Knox now also has the ability ... -
Let’s Embrace Natural Gas as a Transition Fuel
May 6, 2015 | The New York Times
By Todd Myers
The Obama administration’s energy policy goal has been to leap from a high-carbon economy to a low-carbon economy. To that end, it adopted rules that virtually rule out new coal energy generation and discourage natural-gas production, such as the president’s opposition to the Keystone pipeline. -
Keystone Foes Win Big In Alberta Election
May 6, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Elana Schor
Keystone XL foes got some help from an unlikely source in their quest to persuade President Barack Obama to kill the project: the Canadian oil province where the project would start. Voters in Alberta delivered a stunning rejection on Tuesday to the ruling Conservative party, which had reigned over the province for 44 years and had hitched its... -
Steyer Backs Clinton Despite Keystone Caution
May 6, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Andrew Restuccia & Elana Schor
Tom Steyer jumped into national politics two years ago by drawing a line in the sand on the Keystone XL pipeline, even suggesting he’d spend part of his vast fortune attacking Democrats who support the project. As recently as last fall, he opined that a primary challenge might be a “good thing” for Hillary Clinton, who has remained conspicuously... -
Hints Of Potential Compromise Emerge In New Energy Bill Drafts
May 7, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Nick Juliano and Hannah Northey
An energy bill is continuing to take shape on Capitol Hill as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle yesterday floated infrastructure and supply proposals they hope to see included in a comprehensive, bipartisan piece of legislation. The House and Senate energy committees continue to solicit proposals for a bill to address energy supply... -
Clean Power Plan Expected to Prompt New York to Invest in Energy Infrastructure
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald B. Silverman
New York state will need to invest a significant amount of money into energy infrastructure such as natural gas pipelines if the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan is implemented, Stephen Whitley, president and chief executive officer of the New York Independent System Operator, said May 6. -
EPA Publishes Rule on Greenhouse Gas Permitting
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
A process for states to rescind some greenhouse gas permits will be published in the Federal Resister May 7 as a direct final rule by the Environmental Protection Agency. The direct final rule (RIN 2060-AS57), which will take effect July 6, will allow states to rescind prevention of significant deterioration permits that were issued to industrial facilities based... -
Hoeven to ‘Definitely' Push Coal Ash Bill, Possibly as Amendment to Energy Bill
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) told Bloomberg BNA May 6 he will “definitely” push legislation on the management and disposal of coal ash this year but remains undecided on whether to do so through standalone legislation or as an amendment to a forthcoming energy package from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). -
Bank Of America Backs Away From Financing Mining Companies
May 6, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Manuel Quiñones
Bank of America Corp., one of the country's largest financial institutions, today released a sweeping policy to move away from financing coal companies and mining projects. The release of Bank of America's new policy paper coincided with the company's shareholders' meeting in Charlotte, N.C., where the company is based. -
BNSF Railway Oil-Train Crash Sparks Fire, Evacuation of Residents in North Dakota
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Richard Clough and Eliot Caroom
A BNSF Railway train carrying crude oil derailed in North Dakota, setting several tank cars on fire and prompting the evacuation of nearby residents, U.S. and local authorities said. The Federal Railroad Administration sent a 10-person team May 6 to the site near the town of Heimdal to determine the cause of the accident, Acting Administrator Sarah... -
Foxx Should Issue Emergency Order On Crude-by-Rail Disclosure, Senators Say
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The disclosure requirements within a final Transportation Department rule governing crude-by-rail transport are a “setback” for emergency response efforts and must be remedied through an emergency order, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash) and seven other senators said in a May 6 letter obtained by Bloomberg BNA. -
Sen. Cantwell, Others Want DOT to Amend Safety Reporting Provisions in Tank Car Rule
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephanie Beasley
Requirements for the disclosure of information to emergency responders that are included in a recently released final rule on new oil tank car standards are “insufficient” and should be amended, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said at a hearing May 6. In response to a crude-by-rail train derailment earlier in the day in North Dakota, Cantwell said... -
Oil Train Derails, Explodes In North Dakota
May 6, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A train carrying crude oil partially derailed and exploded in North Dakota on Wednesday, days after the federal government announced a set of rules meant to prevent and mitigate the effects of such disasters. The train, operated by BNSF Railway, derailed near Heimdal, causing the evacuation of the entire town, Valley News Live reported. -
Safety Rules Give Eight Years for Ethanol Tank Car Upgrades
May 6, 2015 | The Wall Street Journal
By Bob Tita
The decade-long schedule devised by government regulators to improve the crashworthiness of railroad tank cars allows the ethanol industry eight years to upgrade its car fleet. The U.S. Department of Transportation had originally proposed a three-year timetable for replacing or modifying the 28,000 tank cars that haul ethanol. But the final rule...
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Full Text of Stories Below
-
(ACC Mentioned) Third Annual Recycling Innovators Forum To Highlight Game-Changing Ideas
May 6, 2015 | Nasdaq
Entrepreneurs with innovative ideas for bolstering the recycling industry will receive a helping hand this fall.
The 2015 Recycling Innovators Forum is seeking entries from people and organizations with actionable ideas to advance recycling.
The contest aims to support invention, originality and measurable improvements in recycling-related customer experiences, processes, technology and markets.
Up to 10 finalists will receive scholarships for travel, hotel and food for the sixth annual Resource Recycling Conference, to be held Sept. 28-30 in Indianapolis. The finalists will present their ideas to a panel of judges and an audience of investors and recycling professionals at the Recycling Innovators Forum, held on Sept. 28 in conjunction with the conference. Judges will select a winner to receive a $20,000 prize to help move the winning innovation forward.
Resource Recycling magazine will also feature finalist ideas in online and print stories read by thousands of industry professionals across North America.
The third annual Recycling Innovators Forum is made possible thanks to major sponsorships from the American Chemistry Council, Waste Management and Resource Recycling, Inc., with additional support from the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries and the Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers.
Last year, one winner was Ruby Lake Glass LLC, a company that color-coats pulverized recovered glass and uses it in a variety of applications, including bus and bike lane demarcation. Another winner was the Healthcare Plastics Recycling Council, which aims to build stakeholder coordination around recovering and recycling plastic materials from hospitals.
Anyone may apply to the contest, though previous Forum winners are not eligible.
Proposals must be submitted by June 1, 2015 for consideration. Innovators should go to the Forum website to document their interest in the contest and to see full contest details: http://www.recyclinginnovators.com.
"The recycling world is changing fast, with new materials and product lightweighting resulting in changes to recyclables entering our materials recovery facilities. The industry needs new, practical ideas to help us manage the challenges presented by these 'evolving tons,'" said Susan Robinson, federal public affairs director at Waste Management. "We look forward to supporting ideas that will improve the business of recycling and our planet's environment."
"The American Chemistry Council's Plastics Division is thrilled to help support this competition and looks forward to seeing more new ideas that will help invigorate this vital industry," said Craig Cookson, director of sustainability and recycling for American Chemistry Council's Plastics Division. "Strengthening our ability to recycle valuable plastics materials is a clear benefit to people, business and the planet." - See more at: http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2015/05/07/733283/10133222/en/Third-annual-Recycling-Innovators-Forum-to-highlight-game-changing-ideas.html#sthash.5IB5jihP.dpuf
-
May 6, 2015 | Nasdaq
Quality Distribution, Inc. (Nasdaq:QLTY) ("Quality Distribution" or the "Company"), a North American logistics and transportation provider with market leading businesses, today announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to be acquired by funds advised by Apax Partners ("Apax"), a global private equity firm, for approximately $800 million, including the assumption of debt, or $16.00 per share in cash. The transaction price represents a premium of approximately 63% over Quality Distribution's closing share price on May 6, 2015. Quality Distribution believes that the transaction provides its shareholders with an attractive premium that delivers immediate compelling value for their shares. The definitive agreement was unanimously approved by Quality Distribution's Board of Directors, which recommended that Quality Distribution's shareholders approve the agreement.
The acquisition is subject to customary closing conditions, including obtaining the approval of the holders of a majority of the total outstanding shares of Quality Distribution common stock and the expiration or termination of the applicable waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act. The transaction is expected to be completed in the third quarter of 2015. Under the terms of the agreement, Quality Distribution may solicit alternative proposals from third parties during a 40-day "go-shop" period following the date of execution of the definitive agreement. There can be no assurances that this process will result in a superior acquisition proposal.
"We believe our sale to Apax maximizes value for our shareholders and provides Quality Distribution with the increased financial flexibility we need to continue to grow," said Gary Enzor, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Quality Distribution. "Apax supports our strategy and is committed to helping us continue our pursuit of strategic growth in our Chemical and Intermodal businesses while managing the current market conditions in the energy industry. They will bring financial resources and expertise that will assist us as we expand Quality Distribution through internal investment and initiatives as well as disciplined acquisitions. This, in turn, should provide more opportunities for our employees and independent affiliates and benefit our customers through greater scale and cost-effective capabilities."
Quality Distribution operates the largest chemical bulk logistics network in North America through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Quality Carriers, Inc., and is the largest North American provider of intermodal tank container and depot services through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Boasso American Corporation. Quality also provides logistics and transportation services to the unconventional oil and gas industry through its wholly-owned subsidiary, QC Energy Resources, Inc. Quality's network of independent affiliates and independent owner-operators provides nationwide bulk transportation and related services. Quality is an American Chemistry Council Responsible Care® Partner and is a core carrier for many of the Fortune 500 companies that are engaged in chemical production and processing.
"Having followed Quality for several years, we have been impressed with the strategy and vision articulated by the Company's management team," said Ashish Karandikar, a Partner on Apax's Services team. "As the leading logistics platform in the bulk chemical transportation industry, Quality is well positioned to take advantage of both organic growth opportunities and strategic acquisitions while benefiting from the financial and operational flexibility of operating as a private company. We look forward to partnering with Quality's management team as they pursue the Company's next phase of growth."
RBC Capital Markets is serving as financial advisor to Quality Distribution, and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP is serving as legal counsel to Quality Distribution. Skadden Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Kirkland & Ellis LLP are serving as legal counsel to Apax.
Apax has secured committed financing for the transaction, which will be provided by Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch, Bank of America, N.A., Jefferies Finance LLC, MIHI LLC and SunTrust Bank.
Quality Distribution intends to announce its first quarter 2015 financial results in a separate press release on Wednesday, May 6, 2015. In light of the pending transaction, Quality Distribution has cancelled its previously scheduled first quarter 2015 financial results conference call.
About Quality Distribution
Headquartered in Tampa, Florida, Quality operates the largest chemical bulk logistics network in North America through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Quality Carriers, Inc., and is the largest North American provider of intermodal tank container and depot services through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Boasso America Corporation. Quality also provides logistics and transportation services to the unconventional oil and gas industry through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, QC Energy Resources, Inc. and QC Environmental Services, Inc. Quality's network of independent affiliates and independent owner-operators provides nationwide bulk transportation and related services. Quality is an American Chemistry Council Responsible Care® Partner and is a core carrier for many of the Fortune 500 companies that are engaged in chemical production and processing.
About Apax Partners
Apax Partners is one of the world's leading private equity investment groups. It operates globally and has more than 30 years of investing experience. Apax Partners has advised funds that total over $40 billion around the world in aggregate. Funds advised by Apax invest in companies across four global sectors of Consumer, Healthcare, Services and Tech & Telco. These funds provide long-term equity financing to build and strengthen world-class companies.
Past and current investments by funds advised by the Apax Services team, which invest in a diverse range of businesses from financial services to industrial and support services, include: Azelis Group, a pan-European specialty chemical distributor; GardaWorld, the global provider of business solutions and security services; Rhiag, the leading distributor of automotive spare parts in the independent Italian and Eastern European aftermarkets; Hub International Limited, a leading global insurance brokerage; SULO Group, one of Germany's largest waste management companies; and IFCO Systems, one of the world's leading business service providers of reusable packaging containers and pallet management services.
For further information about Apax, please visit: www.Apax.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains, and other written or oral statements made by or on behalf of Quality may include, forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In addition, we or our executive officers on our behalf, may from time to time make forward-looking statements in reports and other documents that are filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or in connection with oral statements made to the press, potential investors or others. Specifically, forward-looking statements may include, but are not limited to, statements relating to our future economic performance, business prospects, revenue, income, and financial condition; and statements preceded by, followed by, or that include the words "expects," "believes," "intends," "will," "anticipates," and similar terms that relate to future events, performance, or our results. Examples of forward-looking statements in this press release include, but are not limited to, statements about the price, terms and closing date of the proposed transaction and statements regarding shareholder and regulatory approvals. Forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, expectations, or outcomes to differ materially from our historical experience as well as management's present expectations or projections. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: (i) the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstances that could give rise to the termination of the merger agreement; (ii) the inability to complete the proposed merger due to the failure to obtain Company Requisite Vote or the failure to satisfy other conditions of the proposed merger within the proposed timeframe or at all; (iii) the failure to obtain the necessary financing arrangements as set forth in the debt and equity commitment letters delivered pursuant to the merger agreement, or the failure of the proposed merger to close for any other reason; (iv) risks related to disruption of management's attention from Quality's ongoing business operations due to the transaction; (v) the outcome of any legal proceedings, regulatory proceedings or enforcement matters that may be instituted against Quality and others relating to the merger agreement; (vi) the risk that the pendency of the proposed merger disrupts current plans and operations and the potential difficulties in employee retention as a result of the pendency of the proposed merger; (vii) the effect of the announcement of the proposed merger on Quality's relationships with its customers, operating results and business generally; and (viii) the amount of the costs, fees, expenses and charges related to the proposed merger. Consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements. Additional factors that may cause results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements are set forth in Quality's Annual Report on Form 10—K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014, which was filed with the SEC on March 13, 2015. The forward-looking statements represent Quality's views as of the date on which such statements were made and Quality undertakes no obligation to publicly update such forward-looking statements.
Participants in the Solicitation
Quality and its directors, executive officers and certain other members of management and employees of Quality may be deemed to be "participants" in the solicitation of proxies from the shareholders of Quality in connection with the proposed merger. Information regarding the interests of the persons who may, under the rules of the SEC, be considered participants in the solicitation of the shareholders of Quality in connection with the proposed merger, which may be different than those of Quality's shareholders generally, will be set forth in the proxy statement and the other relevant documents to be filed with the SEC. Shareholders can find information about Quality and its directors and executive officers and their ownership of Quality's common stock in Quality's annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 and in its definitive proxy statement relating to its 2015 annual meeting of stockholders filed with the SEC on April 24, 2015. Additional information regarding the interests of such individuals in the proposed merger will be included in the proxy statement relating to the merger when it is filed with the SEC. These documents may be obtained free of charge from the SEC's website at www.sec.gov and Quality's website at https://www.qualitydistribution.com/.
Important Additional Information and Where to Find It
This communication may be deemed to be solicitation material in respect of the proposed acquisition of Quality by Apax and its affiliates. In connection with the proposed transaction, Quality will file with the SEC and furnish to its stockholders a proxy statement and other relevant documents. QUALITY STOCKHOLDERS ARE ADVISED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT WHEN IT BECOMES AVAILABLE (INCLUDING ALL AMENDMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTS THERETO) BECAUSE IT WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. Investors may obtain a free copy of the proxy statement (when it becomes available) and other relevant documents filed by Quality with the SEC at the SEC's Web site at http://www.sec.gov. The proxy statement and such other documents filed by Quality with the SEC may also be obtained for free from the Investor Relations section of Quality's web site (https://www.qualitydistribution.com/) or by directing a request to: Quality Distribution, Inc., 4041 Park Oaks Blvd., Suite 200, Tampa, FL 33610, Attention: Investor Relations.
Quality and its respective directors, executive officers and other members of their respective management may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from Quality's stockholders in connection with the proposed transaction. Information concerning the interests of persons who may, under the rules of the SEC, be considered participants in the solicitation of stockholders of Quality in connection with the proposed transaction, which may be different than those of Quality's stockholders generally, will be set forth in the proxy statement and other relevant documents to be filed with the SEC. Stockholders can find information about Quality and its directors and executive officers and their ownership of Quality stock in Quality's annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 and in its definitive proxy statement relating to its 2015 annual meeting of stockholders filed with the SEC on April 24, 2015. Additional information regarding the interests of such individuals in the proposed transaction will be included in the proxy statement to be filed with the SEC in connection with the proposed transaction.
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/press-release/quality-distribution-agrees-to-be-acquired-by-funds-advised-by-apax-partners-for-1600-per-share-in-20150506-01854#ixzz3ZRQROtPs -
(ACC Mentioned) Research and Markets: Global Trends in Resin Distribution 2015
May 6, 2015 | Business Wire
Research and Markets (http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/hwr2zg/trends_in_resin) has announced the addition of the "Trends in Resin Distribution" report to their offering.
The growth of the North American resin distribution market is undeniable - and industry officials are confident that growth will continue into 2015 and beyond.
Resin producers keep a watchful eye on crude oil and natural gas prices, which ultimately impact the prices of their materials.
At the start of 2015, the global slump in crude oil prices has impacted the North American polyethylene resin market, sending prices down an average of 4 cents per pound in December.
Oil was trading near $100 per barrel in July 2014 - the level it had occupied for much of the last few years - but fell below $49 in trading in the first few weeks of 2015. Low demand and increasing supplies in the U.S. and Middle East played a role in the slide. U.S. oil production in particular has increased as a result of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) and horizontal drilling.
North American polyethylene and polypropylene resin makers increased their distribution channel sales during 2014. At the same time, they reduced the amount of material they sold through resellers, according to the American Chemistry Council.
By Feb. 13, oil rose above $60 a barrel amid signs that deeper industry spending cuts could curb excess supply. There also are expectations that low prices will lead to lower supply growth in 2015.
Key Topics Covered:
1. Outlook Positive For Resin Distribution Market
2. Resin Sales Increase Amid Lower Volume Through Resellers
3. Oil, Shale Could Fuel Resin Rollercoaster In 2015
4. Resin Market Benefits From Consolidation
5. Sponsor Spotlight
6. Executive Spotlight
7. Resin Distributor Profiles
- Chase Plastics
- M. Holand co.
- Osterman & Co. Inc.
- Thornton & Co.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Differences In House, Senate TSCA Bills Hint At Contentious Conference
May 7, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Differences between House and Senate Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform bills on major issues such as preemption of state chemicals programs and EPA prioritization for reviewing substances hint at likely contentious conference committee talks to try and close the policy gaps if lawmakers want TSCA reform to succeed.
“The main difference now [between the House and Senate bills] is preemption,” says an environmentalist, with the scaled-back House legislation taking a narrower approach to blocking state programs than a much broader Senate bill introduced by Sens. David Vitter (R-LA) and Tom Udall (D-NM). In the upper chamber, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and several other Democrats are opposing the bipartisan bill largely due to the preemption provision.
If both chambers approve significantly different legislation then they will have to hold conference negotiations to craft a compromise bill that lawmakers could approve and send to President Obama for his signature.
But the divisions between the two bills suggest that House and Senate members might face difficulty closing the gaps between the measures -- in particular due to an ongoing split over how to handle preemption.
Udall told a May 1 town hall teleconference that the Senate could debate the bill on the floor as early as June, while the House Energy & Commerce Committee's environment panel is slated to hold a May 14 markup on its bill.
One chemical industry source says that the preemption provisions in the Senate bill are unlikely to be adopted in the upcoming House revisions, in particular the grandfathering provisions. “I do not have the sense that the House GOP would support grandfathering provisions, but there could be negotiations,” the source says.
The environmentalist says the House preemption language largely echoes existing law. The legislation, floated by Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), would preempt state rules only after EPA issues a requirement or a rule for a particular substance or finds that it meets a safety standard as established in the legislation.
The source opposes the Senate bill, fearing it would preempt states from taking any action on chemicals once EPA has started to review a substance. The source says the Senate bill would create first-time hurdles to the process for states to seek preemption waiver if they want to act on new requirements during the preempted period.
During the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee's (EPW) April 28 markup of the TSCA bill, S. 697, panel ranking member Boxer supported an amendment offered by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) that would have adopted the House language on preemption, but senators voted to defeat the amendment.
Whether lawmakers could bridge the divide on preemption is therefore uncertain. One state source tracking TSCA reform says, “While we appreciate the strides that have been made in the preemption area and the waiver area, we hope there will be future changes there, but I don't know if that will actually happen.”
EPW members at the markup voted on an amended Senate bill, introduced as a substitute to an earlier draft, with several revisions aimed at addressing concerns raised by Democratic lawmakers and others.
For example, the revised Senate bill narrows state preemption language, limiting state regulation of chemicals to a period beginning when EPA defines the scope of uses of a chemical and ending when the safety determination is made and includes grandfathering for existing state laws put into place prior to Aug. 1, 2015.
Other revisions include allowing states to be co-enforcers of chemical regulations, modifying the factors for when EPA designates a chemical as a “high priority,” and changing the safety standard to be consistent with existing law while clarifying the term “unreasonable risk” to be consistent with the standard.
Chemicals Prioritization
Prioritization of chemicals could also be another contentious issue in conference talks. The latest draft of the House TSCA reform effort, which has not formally been introduced, differs from the Senate approach in that it does not include a comprehensive system in which the agency would screen chemicals as “high-and low-priority.”
Still, House lawmakers could at some point in the legislative process adopt some form of prioritization to assist in providing a driver for EPA to select chemicals for assessment, the industry source says.
A criticism of the House draft has been that because it contained no prioritization regime, no set number of chemicals EPA must assess, and fewer deadlines for agency action than the Senate bill, it would be difficult for the agency to find time and resources to evaluate a substantial number of substances.
But, the industry source says, “I don't expect a low-priority [provision] would be added in,” especially given that “support from Democrats came in part from what is not in the bill,” such as the low-priority designations. Some critics of the Senate bill have suggested the designations could make it difficult for EPA to act in the future if more information became available once a chemical had been designated as “low-priority.”
The House bill could eventually contain revisions to timeframes for EPA to assess chemicals, given that EPA toxics chief Jim Jones during an April 14 hearing on the draft bill suggested that a six-month timeframe in the bill for the agency to assess chemicals at the request of manufacturers is unrealistic, the industry source says.
Both the industry source and the environmentalist say that House lawmakers are expected to revise the fee structure in the lower chamber's bill after Jones raised concerns that as written, the funding mechanism would allow the fees to be deposited in the general treasury instead of being allocated to EPA's toxics office.
Reforming TSCA
Despite the differences between the bills, Michael Walls, vice president of regulatory and technical affairs for the American Chemistry Council, said during a May 4 American Bar Association event, “Removing Roadblocks to TSCA Reform Legislation,” in Washington, D.C., that the advancement of the Senate bill is “notable” because it represents that both chambers are beginning to come around to at least some agreement on reforming TSCA.
Many stakeholders say that reform of the decades-old chemical safety law is critical to give EPA the authority to address the thousands of chemicals already in the marketplace.
Udall said during the May 1 call that the House's plans to move ahead with its own bill soon is a “very good sign” because moving on a similar timeline could allow lawmakers the time to “iron out any differences” in the legislation by the end of summer, with a goal of enactment some time this year.
Also during the ABA event, Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, executive director of Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) -- representing many state environmental agencies -- said a reform bill that establishes a robust and effective TSCA could render preemption moot if states feel more confident in EPA's ability to restrict harmful chemicals.
Still, she said that the existing legislative proposals include “a number of things that are not quite there yet.”
For example, Dunn said more there is a need for more certainty that the Senate bill's funding mechanisms would provide ample resources for EPA to implement the law. Still, states -- while “non-monolithic” on preemption -- are generally “feeling much more comfortable” with the revisions in the Senate bill, she said.
Nevertheless, she told the event that “I don't think we'll see a dramatic statement from ECOS” on TSCA reform. While the group is working to try to develop a cohesive position on a toxics law overhaul, she cautioned it may be difficult given that at least one “outlier state” has set a high bar for allowing preemption in a reform bill -- though she did not name the state. On the grandfathering provisions in the Senate bill, Dunn said it is an “intriguing concept” and could play a “very important role,” also saying that the effect of reform legislation on existing state programs absent “artfully handled in grandfathering” language could be problematic.
-
EPA Head 'Encouraged' by Bipartisan Support for TSCA Bill
May 7, 2015 | The Washington Post
By Dinesh Kumar
The changes made to the Udall-Vitter bill, before its passage in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (CW 29 April 2015), addressed the shortcomings previously identified by the US EPA, says the agency’s head, Gina McCarthy.
Testifying last week before the Senate Subcommittee on Appropriations for Interior, Environment and Related Agencies on the agency's 2016 budget request, Ms McCarthy was asked by the bill's co-author, Tom Udall (D-New Mexico), whether the amended version met the Obama administration's principles (CW 30 September 2009) for reforming the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Back in March, the EPA’s head of chemicals policy, assistant administrator Jim Jones, had “identified a couple of areas where the bill fell short of the administration's principles,” Ms McCarthy told the subcommittee. “But I am pleased that the most recent amendments really addressed those issues.”
Mr Udall told the subcommittee that because of a 1991 court ruling against an EPA Rule on asbestos, the substance was the “poster child” for TSCA reform. He wanted to know whether the amended bill would give the EPA the “tools it needs” to act on the substance. In response, Ms McCarthy said the agency would have the “authority to make asbestos what we call now a 'high priority' chemical and, with that, the agency would be on a schedule for assessing and making regulatory determinations for asbestos.”
In a conference call with business leaders and journalists on 1 May, Mr Udall said he expects the bill to hit the Senate floor in June. Because it is “complex” and other senators may want to offer amendments, it could take three to six weeks to pass it out of the Senate.
Referring to the House draft TSCA measure, Mr Udall said a bill text would be marked up in the House Subcommittee on the Environment and the Economy on 18 May. “We are kind of moving in tandem, which is a very good sign to get the House and the Senate both moving a bill at the same time. If we can get something done in the summer and try to iron out the differences [between the two bills], we might be able to get this [TSCA reform] done this year.”
Meanwhile, industry executives and lawyers have different takes on the issues that could arise, if the bill moves forward to a conference committee – a committee appointed by the House and Senate to resolve disagreements on a particular bill.
The House draft is an alternative approach to the more comprehensive Udall-Vitter bill because it targets “specific TSCA problems”, said Mark Duvall of law firm Beveridge & Diamond. It is not clear yet in which direction Congress, as a whole, would want to go, so it would be useful for conference committee members to have two approaches to work on, he added.
The pre-emption language in the House draft is not ideal but “we understand major concessions were being made to make this bill bipartisan,” said Bill Allmond, vice president of government relations at the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates. “We have confidence that the essence of pre-emption, and our concerns with states creating their own laws, will be adequately addressed when they go to conference.”
Pre-emption is one of the areas where there are likely to be “big changes and significant discussions” in conference between the House and the Senate, said Ernie Rosenberg, president of the American Cleaning Institute. “Our key interest is making sure there is a credible federal programme because our principal vulnerability is from retailer and other private sector restrictions on chemicals.”
-
Draft EPA Guidance Issued for Extending Post-Closure Care at Hazardous Waste Sites
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
The Environmental Protection Agency has released draft guidance to help regulators decide whether additional post-closure care is required for hazardous waste disposal facilities under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Evaluating whether an extension of post-closure care beyond the 30-year period required under RCRA should be made on a case-by-case basis and should begin no later than 18 months before the initial 30-year period expires.
Under Subtitle C of RCRA, owners of closed hazardous waste facilities must maintain waste containment systems and monitor the sites for 30 years following closure. Permitting authorities, often state environmental regulatory agencies, may extend or shorten the 30-year, post-closure care requirements (40 C.F.R. pts. 264 and 265).
Comments will be accepted on the draft guidance through June 30, and the EPA said it is specifically seeking input from treatment, storage and disposal facilities, permit writers, trade associations and environmental groups.
The guidance, dated April 29 but posted online later, only applies to hazardous waste facilities regulated under Subtitle C of RCRA.
State waste regulators specifically asked the EPA in April 2013 to develop guidance on how to evaluate whether to extend post-closure care requirements because many hazardous waste facilities were nearly at the end of the initial 30-year period required under RCRA (75 DEN A-12, 4/18/13).
Site-by-Site Evaluations Needed
“The decision to adjust the post-closure care period will be made on a facility or unit-specific basis by the permitting authority, typically based on the most recent information available,” the guidance document said.
Factors that should be considered include whether hazardous waste remains on site, the nature of the waste, the type of unit storing the waste, the integrity of leachate collection systems and the quality of groundwater on site, among others.
Regulators also should consider whether the facility has a history of noncompliance, whether the facility has landfill gas capture technology and whether the mitigation measures will be preserved without long-term care.
There may be instances where formal post-closure care is no longer required at sites, but regulators should still consider whether certain controls are needed to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment, according to the guidance.
Funding for Post-Closure Care Period
“Even in cases where the post-closure care period need not be extended to protect human health and the environment, the permitting authority may want to ensure that some long-term [institutional controls], such as an easement that provides access to the property, are continued,” the document said. “EPA also recommends that consideration be given as to whether a funding source is available to support any necessary long-term maintenance beyond the post-closure care period.”
Regulated facilities have the obligation to provide any necessary information to the EPA to evaluate the further need for post-closure care, according to the draft guidance. Failure to do so may necessitate the extension of the post-closure care period to protect human health and the environment.
At least 18 months are needed to identify and gather information, analyze the data, make a decision about whether to extend post-closure care and incorporate a tentative decision into the permit renewal process, according to the draft guidance.
States May Have Stricter Rules
The draft guidance notes states may have broader or more stringent rules governing their hazardous waste facilities, so regulated sites should consult their state regulatory agencies to ensure they follow appropriate post-closure care requirements.
-
Global Textile Group Reports on Hazardous Substances Progress
May 6, 2015 | Chemical Watch
Key achievements and plans towards improving the textile industry’s environmental performance have been set out in the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals (ZDHC) group's latest annual report.
Last year, the group, which is made up of 21 major apparel and footwear brands, released a list of manufacturing restricted substances (MRSL). It also issued a framework for prioritising hazardous chemicals for elimination or substitution and a “research list”- a list of prioritised chemicals for which alternatives do not exist and on which the group will focus its research efforts (CW 5 June 2014).
The latest report, covering 2014, says that by encouraging key stakeholders to develop alternatives to chemicals on the research list, the group hopes to move these substances more rapidly onto the MRSL so that they can be phased out of the supply chain.
Chemicals on the research list, for which safe limits are being sought, include ethylbenzene, methanol, phenol, 2-(2-methoxyethoxy)-ethanol and 2-methoxypropanol. Substances for which the group is seeking safer alternatives include dimethyl formamide (DMF), n,n-dimethylacetamide (DMAC) and toluene.
The group has started research on alternatives to short-chain perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs), which members say are a replacement for long-chain PFCs, until a safer substitute is found. However, the group acknowledged this may take many years and, in a few cases, there may never be a suitable alternative.
Eleven chemical guidance sheets to support the MRSL have been issued on toluene, nonylphenol, nonylphenol ethoxylates, long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids, phthalates, halogenated solvents, organotins, short-chain chlorinated paraffins, chlorophenols, chlorinated benzenes and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons/naphthalene. They are available in English, Hindi, Kannada, Urdu and simplified Chinese.
The group is developing an MRSL compliance framework to verify chemical formulations and a draft document is currently under review. There are also plans to update the MRSL to include limits for leather processing.
-
Updated LNG Facility User Fee 68 Percent Lower than Initial Proposal, PHMSA Says
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The federal pipeline safety office will implement a user fee for liquefied natural gas facilities that is 68 percent lower than it initially expected to charge, according to an agency notice to be published in the Federal Register May 7.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration decreased the user fee rate, which funds specific federal pipeline safety actions, to roughly $1.5 million from about a $3.8 million total for these entities and shifted a larger portion of this sum to larger plants, the notice said.
The fee rate, which will require these facilities to pay 1.6 percent of PHMSA's gas program costs rather than 5 percent, better reflects “program costs relevant to LNG expenditures,” it said.
Because the agency will implement a 1.6 percent fee rather than the larger fee, the new fee will take effect in the 2015 billing cycle rather than being phased in over three years, according to the notice.
Six organizations have previously expressed interest in the notice, such as the American Gas Association, the American Public Gas Association and Baltimore Gas and Electric Co.
The agency is authorized to assess and collect user fees for certain pipeline safety activities under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-272).
Predecessor Agency Set Up Earlier Fee Schedule
PHMSA's predecessor agency, the Research and Special Programs Administration, in 1986 required LNG facilities to pay 5 percent of the total gas program costs, PHMSA said. The research administration established fees for these facilities split into five categories based on storage capacity, with fees ranging from $1,250 to $7,500 per plant.
PHMSA decided to update the user fee because liquefied natural gas rates hadn't been changed since 1986, and these fees were no longer in line with actual gas program costs, it said.
The agency only recouped $467,500 or 0.62 percent of the gas program costs from LNG facilities in the 2014 billing cycle, according to PHMSA's initial July notice of agency action to update the fees.
The agency proposed in July a user fee to be split among LNG facilities that would equate to 5 percent of the agency's total gas program costs. However, after further review, PHMSA determined that only 1.6 percent of gas program costs were relevant to LNG facilities and altered its fee, it said.
These fees will be distributed over 10 tiers rather than five tiers based on the sum of storage capacity for all of a given operator's plants, a step intended to protect small operators, the agency said. These fees will range from $2,394 to $40,212; mobile and temporary LNG plants will be exempt, the notice said.
-
President Obama’s Pipeline Safety Agency Waits For A Leader
May 6, 2015 | Politico
By Andrew Restuccia & Elana Schor
President Barack Obama has blown past the legal deadline to name a permanent boss for the agency that oversees the safety of the nation’s oil trains and fossil-fuel pipelines — while potentially life-or-death regulations continue to sit in limbo.
It’s part of a pattern for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, where an internal structure that gives deference to industry has helped stymie safety initiatives for years, even as pipeline accidents have caused more than 170 deaths, 670 injuries and $5 billion in property damage during the past decade. Critics say the agency is in dire need of an overhaul — and want Obama to appoint a leader who’s willing to carry one out.
The White House’s short list for administrator includes one insider — the acting PHMSA chief who has been filling in since October — and two outsiders: a state pipeline regulator from Rhode Island and a conservationist who has served on one of the agency’s advisory committees.
The agency has been without a permanent boss for 214 days as of Wednesday, four days longer than federal law says an acting chief can serve unless the president has nominated a replacement. Before that, PHMSA spent nearly five years helmed by a former industry lawyer who did little to erase the agency’s reputation for laxness. A growing number of fellow Democrats say Obama just needs to pick somebody — and soon, since the clock is ticking down on his administration’s opportunity to make wholesale changes.
“PHMSA deserves a shakeup,” Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state, the top Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, told POLITICO. “I certainly want them to be aggressive, and if getting a new permanent administrator is key to that, then yes, that would be great.”
“Not having a permanent administrator removes the possibility of leadership for long-term changes,” said Carl Weimer, executive director of the nonprofit watchdog group Pipeline Safety Trust. Until then, he said, a short-term boss “doesn’t know if he really has the backing of the administration to move on issues, and all the PHMSA staff are in a holding pattern waiting to see which way the wind might change under a new administrator.” But Weimer also noted that it’s “hard to tell whether much long-term vision can be accomplished” during the time left in Obama’s presidency.
The agency, part of the Department of Transportation, oversees the regulation of 2.6 million-plus miles of oil and gas pipelines. It’s also one of two DOT agencies overseeing the nation’s record-high shipments of crude oil in rail cars, which have caused a series of fiery derailments during the past two years in states from North Dakota to Illinois and Virginia.
PHMSA and the Federal Railroad Administration released new safety rules for oil trains on Friday — nearly four months after a Congress-imposed deadline — but its major pipeline safety reform efforts have remained paralyzed for years. That delay is due in part to an internal structure that gives industry outsized influence compared with public watchdogs, as a POLITICO investigation showed last month.
-
Safety Board Moves to Rescind Consolidation Of Power, Boost Transparency, Accountability
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Robert Iafolla
In the first public meeting since the resignation of former chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board boosted transparency and restored internal checks and balances by passing a series of governance motions May 6.
Most notably, the board voted 2-1 to rescind most of a controversial measure that had consolidated power in the Chemical Safety Board chairman's office. The move reinstated 18 orders that spell out how the board manages matters such as spending, investigations, staffing, ethics and administrative functions.
“I want to stress that process does affect product,” said Mark Griffon, the CSB board member acting as chairman. “I believe that if we stabilize our governance and management procedures, it will have a very positive effect on the efficiency and effectiveness of the agency.”
Health and safety officials from three major unions at the meeting applauded the board for trying to bring accountability and transparency to an agency that has been mired in controversy.
The meeting represented the board's opening bid to rebuild trust and credibility after the rocky tenure of Moure-Eraso, who resigned his leadership post under White House pressure March 26 and left the agency April 10. But the dissenting votes of board member Manuel Ehrlich Jr. hinted at possible friction at the board after June 24, when Griffon's five-year term expires and just Ehrlich and Richard Engler remain.
Undoing Controversial Measure
Moure-Eraso and Ehrlich supported the Jan. 28 measure that rebuilt internal board governance by increasing the chairman's authority and canceled three investigations short of completion. They passed the measure, 2-1, over the objections of Griffon. Engler had been confirmed by the Senate, but hadn't officially joined the board at that time.
During the May 6 meeting, Ehrlich voted against rescinding the Jan. 28 measure, disputing the notion that the measure consolidated power in the chairman's office.
The board also dealt with the investigations that were canceled by the Jan. 28 measure. The board unanimously agreed to keep the case closed of the Horsehead zinc facility in Monaca, Pa., where an explosion in July 2010 killed two workers. It also decided not to reopen the case involving the Silver Eagle refinery in Woods Cross, Utah, site of two incidents in 2009, or the case involving an incident in 2009 at the CITGO refinery in Corpus Christi, Texas, but instead to incorporate them into a broader study on refinery safety.
Rulemaking to Add Transparency
The board voted 2-1 to initiate a rulemaking to enhance transparency in the CSB's operations. The proposal would amend the agency's regulations to require quarterly public meetings and guarantee that calendared agenda items be raised at future meetings.
The CSB will open a 30-day public comment period on the proposal after publishing a Federal Register notice in the next few days.
“As an independent agency, we're not required to go through a major process that we are going through,” Engler said. “We're doing this because we believe that you should have input.”
Voting Without Chairman
Ehrlich voted against initiating the rulemaking because the CSB has no chairman.
The White House has nominated Vanessa Allen Sutherland, chief counsel at the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, to become the agency's chairwoman. Sutherland, however, still needs to clear the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and win a confirmation vote in the full Senate before she can join the CSB as its leader (78 DEN A-4, 4/23/15).
“Putting these issues into effect now would mean doing it in the absence of a chair,” Ehrlich said. “Which means hopefully when—not if—Ms. Sutherland gets appointed, she would be faced with all of this type of information in front of her, and it may not necessarily be to her liking, which would mean we'd have to go back and revisit this process again.”
Engler responded by noting that the motion is intended to bring the sort of transparency and accountability that the head of any government agency should agree with.
Schedule of Public Meetings
In another motion aimed at increasing transparency, the board unanimously agreed to adopt a schedule of seven public meetings over the next 12 months.
The board will hold a large stakeholder dialog June 10. It will then hold public business meetings June 18, July 22, Sept. 16, Oct. 21, Jan. 20, 2016, and April 20, 2016.
Ehrlich joined Griffon and Engler in support of the schedule, while noting that the schedule should be “subject to the appointment and wishes of the new chair.”
In its final motion of the meeting, the board unanimously agreed to establish an internal CSB task force to develop a case management system.
Griffon explained that the agency lacks a centralized system to track investigations from inception to completion and deal with changing deadlines and priorities when emergency deployments pull staff off of existing cases.
Although Ehrlich supported developing a case management system, he asked his colleagues whether they needed to formally vote on a motion in order to set the goal of creating the system.
Board Praised for New Course
During the public comment period following the votes, union health and safety officials praised the board for embarking on a new course marked by transparency.
The leadership controversies that roiled the CSB for the past several months degraded the public and Congress’ trust in the agency, said Peg Seminario, the AFL-CIO's director of safety and health. At the same time, Seminario said, the board had become too insular.
Having open processes, clear priorities and the board being accountable should go a long way toward restoring that trust, Seminario said.
Rolling the Silver Eagle and CITGO investigations into a broader refinery safety study makes sense, particularly if the study deals with the use of hydrofluoric acid in the refining process, said Jim Frederick, the United Steelworkers’ assistant director for safety, health and environment.
But in light of the closed Horsehead case, Frederick pleaded with the board not to make promises that it can't keep.
“On a number of occasions, people at the facility were promised dates that reports would be issued,” Frederick said. “None of them were met.”
‘Unwarranted Affront.'
A notable dissenter among the public commenters was Jeff Ruch, executive director of the watchdog group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
Ruch accused the board of rigging rules to make the chairman subservient to the board and perpetuating the “culture of conflict” at the CSB.
“Today's action can only be seen as an unwarranted affront to the president's appointee for the chair, Vanessa Allen Sutherland,” Ruch said. “Moreover, it's done in a way that doesn't clarify and maybe further muddies a whole host of issues concerning the inherent executive authority of the president's appointee.”
Ruch's organization issued a series of press releases in 2014 advocating for the safety case regime, a regulatory framework that Moure-Eraso repeatedly and unsuccessfully championed.
Looking Forward
Former CSB board member Gerald Poje applauded the board for its initial steps to rebuild the agency, but emphasized that it still has a long way to go.
The forcing of Moure-Eraso's resignation by the Obama administration, as well as calls by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for the removal of the managing director and general counsel, is a statement that the CSB has gone “terrifically awry,” Poje said.
The board must decide before Griffon leaves June 24 about how it will delegate authority after he is gone, Poje said.
-
Split CSB Rolls Back Ex-Chairman's Policy Change
May 6, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Sam Pearson
Chemical Safety Board members decided today to ax a controversial change to the agency's operating procedures made by their divisive former chairman, Rafael Moure-Eraso.
In a 2-1 vote, they rescinded an order that granted powers to the chairman that previously were reserved for board members.
Moure-Eraso's critics say the order was introduced at a meeting on Jan. 28 in Richmond, Calif., without proper public notice. Board member Mark Griffon said the proposal was introduced by board member Manuel Elhrich and quickly passed with little discussion. Elhrich voted today against rescinding the plan.
Since Moure-Eraso's resignation in March, the board agreed to designate Griffon as its presiding officer until the Senate confirms a new leader for the board. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee recently held a confirmation hearing for CSB nominee Vanessa Sutherland, who's currently general counsel at the Department of Transportation's Pipeline Safety and Hazardous Materials Administration, but has yet to vote on her nomination (Greenwire, April 22).
Moure-Eraso submitted his resignation to the White House on March 26 in the wake of a prolonged campaign by lawmakers to oust him. He had been under fire for more than a year amid accusations that he mismanaged the agency, stonewalled investigations and created a hostile work environment (E&E Daily, March 27).
CSB members said today it's time to focus on the agency's mission of helping companies prevent chemical accidents.
"It's boring, but it's our business," Griffon said. "This is good. This is what we want."
CSB has just three of five posts filled: Griffon, Ehrlich and Richard Engler.
Ehrlich defended his introduction of the board order that was rolled back today. He said his proposal had been misconstrued by the agency's critics. It was not, he said, an attempt to usurp board members' authority.
"It was never intended to do that," Elhrich said, "and, in fact, did not do that."
Elhrich said he didn't believe CSB should be making changes to its operating procedures until Sutherland is confirmed by the Senate. But his fellow board members disagreed, saying it was unclear how long it would take for Sutherland to assume the post and said CSB could not afford to put the reforms on hold.
Board members also approved a motion to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking on changes to CSB procedures that would require greater disclosure of upcoming meetings and agendas; it would require that when board members vote to include an item for discussion at a meeting, the item is considered at a public forum within 90 days. The proposed rule would also mandate that the board hold public business meetings in Washington, D.C., at least four times per year.
They also voted to incorporate previously closed investigations into a January 2009 flash fire and hydrogen explosion at the Silver Eagle Refinery in Woods Cross, Utah, and a hydrofluoric acid release at the Citgo refinery in Corpus Christi, Texas, in July 2009 into a forthcoming refinery safety report.
These decisions have been on Griffon's wish list for years, but Moure-Eraso didn't support setting up the meetings, Griffon said.
Under a schedule approved by the board, the agency will hold seven business meetings in 2015 and 2016 in D.C. to discuss governance issues, the status of ongoing investigations and other items.
The agency also typically holds public meetings in other locations when it is releasing the results of a completed safety investigation of a facility in that area.
Sutherland, for one, expressed support for the idea of revisiting the January board order at her confirmation hearing last month. She told lawmakers that, unlike Moure-Eraso, she understood her position lacks "unilateral authority to make all decisions for the board."
She also told lawmakers that "revisiting the board orders is probably a good thing to do, given how much controversy and ambiguity there have been regarding the interpretations and practices of the board orders."
While Moure-Eraso's move to assume a stronger role at the agency was met with hostility from lawmakers and some of his colleagues, some advocates said the move to weaken the chairman's powers was misguided and could make the agency less effective.
Changing the rules before Sutherland could participate amounted to "rigging the rules for your successor," Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility President Jeff Ruch said.
Ruch said CSB should maintain a model of a strong chairman, akin to that of the National Transportation Safety Board.
Rolling back the January order would, in effect, make Sutherland "subservient" to the board members because she would need their consent to make most decisions, Ruch said.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Eastman Receives Energy Efficiency Awards for 22nd Consecutive Year
May 6, 2015 | 3bl Media
Eastman Chemical Company was one of 20 American Chemistry Council (ACC) members honored at the annual ACC Responsible Care® Conference and Expo for implementing energy-efficiency improvements in 2014.
Eastman received 10 of the 59 awards presented for outstanding projects, marking the 22nd consecutive year the company has earned energy efficiency awards from ACC.
According to ACC, total annual energy savings of all winning projects was seven trillion BTUs, enough to power all the homes in a city the size of Erie, Pennsylvania for one year. Combined, Eastman’s winning projects save enough energy to power more than 1800 homes and eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from over 2,700 cars.
“At Eastman, we continuously look for opportunities to drive energy improvements. These winning projects exhibit innovative solutions, including implementation of new equipment, creative process redesign, and operational changes. All of this great work is attributed to the commitment and focus on sustainability of our employees,” said Sharon Nolen, Worldwide Energy Manager.
Eastman’s Tennessee Operations in Kingsport, Tenn., received awards for the following projects: 300# Flash System – Installation of a flash system that utilized 600 psig condensate from columns eliminated sending 600 psig steam through valves to produce 300 psig steam.B-276 Warehouse Lighting - Replacing 452 watt fluorescent lights with LED lights with occupancy sensors not only reduced energy use but also provided a work area for employees with improved visibility.B-280/B-310 Energy Reduction – An energy reduction effort involving not only specific projects but also employee involvement resulted in an energy reduction of 26% from the previous year.Azeo Energy Optimization – To reduce energy consumption, a process control strategy was developed to optimize low and medium pressure steam use on distillation columns.Weak Mixed Acid Target Change – By optimizing the concentration of an acid feed stream, downstream acid reprocessing was reduced.Group 13 Vacuum Pumps – Less efficient steam jets were replaced with liquid ring vacuum pumps which eliminated the loss of steam condensate and resulted in lower energy use.
Eastman’s Indian Orchard Operations in Springfield, Mass., received awards for the following projects: Hot Water Recycle Project – Cooling water which was previously being sent to the sewer is now being recycled for use as feed to the washing process.RB Condensate Coil Heat Recovery – A reduction in dryer steam consumption was achieved by installing a new heat recovery system designed to re-use waste condensate which was previously being sent to the sewer.
Eastman’s Chestertown Operations in Chestertown, Maryland received an award for the following project: Thermal Efficiency Improvements by Conversion to Propane Fuel - Steam generation units were converted to propane from #6 fuel oil, burners were replaced, and a new burner management system was installed on the larger, primary steam boiler which improved the efficiency. The plant retired two of the older, less efficient thermal oil furnaces and replaced them with a new more efficient unit.
Eastman’s joint venture partner located at its Kingsport, Tenn. site, Primester, received an award for the following project: Heat Integration – In Primester’s Acid Recovery process, a new heat interchanger was installed upstream of a cooling water condenser to capture the extra heat in a hot process stream and preheat the feed to a primary distillation column, thereby reducing total steam used to heat the process.
Earlier this year, Eastman was recognized with the 2015 ENERGY STAR® Partner of the Year Sustained Excellence award for continued leadership in superior energy management by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Winning its fourth consecutive award, Eastman is the only chemical company to be recognized by ENERGY STAR more than once.
About the American Chemistry Council (ACC)
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) represents the leading companies engaged in the business of chemistry. ACC members apply the science of chemistry to make innovative products and services that make people's lives better, healthier and safer. ACC is committed to improved environmental, health and safety performance through Responsible Care®, common sense advocacy designed to address major public policy issues, and health and environmental research and product testing. The business of chemistry is a $720 billion enterprise and a key element of the nation's economy. It is one of the nation’s largest exporters, accounting for ten cents out of every dollar in U.S. exports. Chemistry companies are among the largest investors in research and development. Safety and security have always been primary concerns of ACC members, and they have intensified their efforts, working closely with government agencies to improve security and to defend against any threat to the nation’s critical infrastructure. http://www.americanchemistry.com -
U.S. Could Join Biggest Oil Exporters If Ban Lifted, EIA-Backed Study Finds
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Lynn Doan and Dan Murtaugh
The U.S. could become one of the world's largest oil exporters if domestic production continues to surge and policy makers lift a four-decade ban that keeps most crude from leaving the country, a government-sponsored study shows.
America would be capable of sending as much as 2.4 million barrels a day overseas in 2025 if federal policy makers were to eliminate restrictions on most crude exports, an analysis by Turner, Mason & Co. for the Energy Information Administration shows. That would make the U.S. the fourth-largest oil exporter, behind Saudi Arabia, Russia and the United Arab Emirates, based on 2013 EIA data. The report assumes domestic output rises by 7.2 million barrels a day from 2013.
The analysis is part of a series of studies the U.S. government is conducting following a 58 percent surge in domestic oil production over the last four years. Drillers including Harold Hamm of Continental Resources Inc. and John Hess of Hess Corp. have been calling on the government to lift the ban on crude exports as they pump more light oil out of shale formations from North Dakota to Texas.
“We are already the world's leading exporter of refined products,” John Auers, executive vice president at Dallas-based energy consultant Turner Mason, said by telephone Tuesday. “Based on developments in the last few years in tight oil formations and deepwater, the U.S. has the resource base to be a big crude exporter as well.”
The report doesn't account for potential changes in domestic crude output and prices because of the lifting of the U.S. export ban, nor does it consider competition abroad.
Extreme Scenario
The Turner Mason study was designed to show the upper and lower bounds of the future for U.S. energy, Auers said. Exports of “2.4 million is probably not a likely scenario, but it shows what might be possible,” he said.
The consultant's forecast for exports in 2025 is almost double what EIA Administrator Adam Sieminski said the U.S. could export right away if restrictions were limited. During a Dec. 11, 2014, congressional subcommittee hearing, Sieminski said there was space in today's global market for 1 million to 1.5 million barrels a day of U.S. crude.
Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, the Republican chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee, has said she'll bring a bill forward this year to overturn the export ban. Several reports including one issued last year by IHS Inc. found that ending the ban would lower U.S. pump prices by putting pressure on international crude oil markets (84 DEN A-22, 5/1/15).
Refiners such as PBF Energy Inc. have argued against lifting restrictions, saying it would reduce investment in new equipment in the U.S. and possibly hurt East Coast plants that now depend on rail shipments of domestic crude for more than half of their supplies.
Refinery Expansions
The country's capacity to refine light shale oil would still expand should legislators vote to lift the ban, just not as much as it would if the restrictions remain in place, the Turner Mason report shows. Domestic capacity increases by 2.4 million barrels a day, assuming the ban is unchanged and by 800,000 if it's lifted.
“More costly hydroskimming refineries are not built,” the report shows, “because the ability to export crude oil prevents the price of [West Texas Intermediate] from declining to a level that would support such investment.”
-
House Lawmakers, Drilling Group Oppose Merger of Ariz., N.M. Offices
May 7, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Phil Taylor
A Bureau of Land Management proposal to merge its Arizona and New Mexico offices would compromise the agency's relationship with the public it serves, according to more than a dozen House lawmakers.
A dozen Republicans and one Democrat sent a letter yesterday to BLM Director Neil Kornze urging him to abandon plans to merge the two offices into one in Santa Fe, N.M.
"We believe that having state BLM offices in states with a high proportion of BLM land ownership is essential to maintaining healthy relationships between states, local stakeholders and the BLM," said the letter spearheaded by Reps. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) and Steve Pearce (R-N.M.). "A combination of these particular state offices would be detrimental to the longstanding relationships that have been developed in these states."
BLM state directors regulate land use across about 250 million acres of the West and should keep "a continuous presence in the public land states they oversee," the lawmakers wrote.
The other signatories were Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.) and Republican Reps. Trent Franks, Martha McSally and Matt Salmon of Arizona; Mark Amodei and Cresent Hardy of Nevada; Scott Tipton and Doug Lamborn of Colorado; Ryan Zinke of Montana; Chris Stewart of Utah; and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming.
The merger has been in the works as far back as March, according to sources close to the agency (E&ENews PM, March 13).
"Increased workloads and a shrinking workforce is having a serious impact on the BLM's field-level operations where the majority of the agency's on-the-ground work gets done and the most contact with the public takes place," BLM spokesman Craig Leff said in an email last night. "Greater support for these field teams is needed, and streamlining the agency's management structure is one potential option for redirecting more resources to our ground level operations."
"BLM is looking for the most effective ways to align its resources so as to best serve the needs of the American public," Leff added. "We look forward to a continued dialogue with Congress about how to increase support for BLM's community-level operations."
According to Gosar, BLM Deputy Director Steve Ellis held a private briefing for congressional staff on April 24 and has promoted the merger as an efficiency measure that would save BLM $1.2 million each year.
The Western Energy Alliance, a Denver-based oil and gas trade group, is also opposing the merger. It sent a letter Tuesday to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell warning that the merger would result in "less efficient land management without providing any of the intended long-term cost savings."
The letter signed by WEA's Kathleen Sgamma noted that BLM's New Mexico office works heavily in oil and gas resources while the Arizona office oversee more mining and park issues.
"BLM has traditionally operated on a state-by-state basis, which allows each office to have intimate knowledge of the issues faced in each individual state," Sgamma wrote. "In contrast to this model, the proposed consolidation would establish a state office with responsibility for managing BLM lands and resources in five states."
The agency's New Mexico office, based in Santa Fe, oversees roughly 700 employees in New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas and Kansas who manage 14 million acres of public lands and 26 million acres of federal minerals, including the federal helium reserve near Amarillo, Texas, and significant oil drilling in the Permian Basin.
The Arizona office, which is based in Phoenix, oversees 428 employees who manage 12 million acres in the Grand Canyon State and 18 million acres of federal minerals.
It is unclear how many employees would have to relocate if the merger moved forward and how many jobs might be cut.
Former BLM officials said such mergers have been explored in the past, but they tend to be controversial. State congressional delegations prefer having their own BLM state office overseeing resource issues in their state, rather than having to call across state lines to a regional director who may not be as attuned to their concerns.
BLM operations are generally siloed by states, which contrasts to the Forest Service's regional approach.
The Forest Service model is "unmoored from state boundaries and local accountability" and "suffer[s] from a lack of collaboration with local stakeholders," the lawmakers wrote.
-
Bills on Cross-Border Energy Projects, Pipeline Permits Focus of Senate Hearing
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Legislation to expedite decisions on international energy projects such as the Keystone XL oil pipeline and a bill to speed up the federal approval process of oil and gas pipelines are among the measures expected to be considered during a Senate Energy and Natural Resources hearing planned for May 14, Senate aides said.
The hearing, which has yet to be formally announced, is expected to cover “a grab bag” of energy bills that may be included in the infrastructure title of the committee energy bill, similar to a previous committee hearing on energy efficiency in which 22 bills were discussed, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) told Bloomberg BNA. Murkowski is the committee chairman and is taking the lead role in writing the legislation.
“Obviously, when you are talking about infrastructure it's important to consider how we move our energy, and pipeline is one of them,” Murkowski said. “But whether it is specific to Keystone or more generic transportation, we are still working.”
The North American Energy Infrastructure Act, introduced by Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), wouldn't automatically approve the Keystone XL project itself, but it would establish a federal permitting process with definite timelines for making decisions on future cross-border energy projects such as oil and gas pipelines and electricity transmission lines.
Would Set State Department Timeframe
The bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), would give the State Department 120 days to either issue a certificate of crossing or deny approval for a project once a National Environmental Policy Act review has been completed. It also would limit the NEPA process to the border crossing and would leave the siting of the route to the states.
In addition, it would require the Energy Department to approve permits for natural gas pipeline projects to Canada or Mexico within 30 days, and it would streamline permitting for electricity transmission permits by consolidating two separate DOE reviews into one determination.
“We can produce more energy than we use, but we can't get to the point of energy independence without the infrastructure necessary to achieve it,” Hoeven, who introduced the bill May 6, said in a statement. “Energy infrastructure projects are too important to our economy and our national security to be dragged out, virtually for years in the case of the Keystone XL pipeline. We need a process that is fact-based, transparent and nonpartisan—a process that serves the interests of the American people now and into the future. Our bill achieves that goal.”
Murkowski was a co-sponsor of a previous version of the bill introduced in the 113th Congress.
FERC Also Would Face Deadlines
The legislation (S. 1210) to expedite the federal approval process for oil and gas pipelines, introduced by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), would require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to approve or deny an application within one year of receiving a complete application that is ready to be processed, according to a bill summary.
The agency then responsible must make a decision to approve or deny a project within 90 days of FERC's review, the summary said
“The current permitting process for pipelines often takes months or years,” Capito, a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said in a statement. “The slow and uncertain regulatory approval process delays construction, which delays manufacturing projects and hurts families and businesses that rely on affordable energy. ”
Murkowski to Announce Bills
Separately, Murkowski is expected to announce the introduction of roughly two-dozen energy bills May 7 that may be included in the broader energy bill, Robert Dillon, a Murkowski spokesman, said. In all, the overall energy bill may incorporate about 100 different bills, he said.
“We are seeking all the best ideas for consideration,” Dillon told Bloomberg BNA. “Sen. Murkowski will determine what ideas make it into the final bill.”
-
Senator Pushes Bill To Speed Up Pipeline Approval
May 6, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.) has introduced a bill to speed up the pipeline approval process.
Capito's bill looks to reform the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's pipeline permitting process by pushing for more coordination between the federal and state agencies charged with approving them, and setting firm deadlines for permitting.
The bill would allow simultaneous review between federal and state agencies considering a pipeline application, give pipeline applicants the option of paying an outside contractor or FERC staffer to help them prepare or review their application, and require a federal online "regulatory dashboard" to track the review process.
In a statement, Capito said her bill was spurred by increased gas production in her state's Marcellus Region, which "has been great for our economy, but has outpaced our pipeline's capacity."
"This bill increases pipeline capacity, allowing the U.S. to fully take advantage of its vast natural gas reserves and limit any overload on existing pipelines," she said.
Oil state Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.) co-sponsored the bill.
-
Democrats Call For Stronger Venting And Flaring Regs
May 7, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Phil Taylor
Three Democratic lawmakers are calling on the Interior Department to strengthen regulations for venting and flaring natural gas and to ensure taxpayers get full market value for minerals produced from federal lands.
Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) and Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) wrote a letter to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell yesterday noting that her agency has made "significant progress" in updating oil and gas regulations but that "additional work remains to protect the environment and ensure fair returns for taxpayers."
They cited a Government Accountability Office report released yesterday that found Interior has not updated regulations for measuring onshore oil and gas production in 25 years.
"We are particularly concerned with the lack of regulations to limit venting and flaring natural gas from Federal leases, which GAO first identified as a problem over ten years ago," the lawmakers wrote.
The Bureau of Land Management is nearing the release of a draft rule to reduce the amount of venting and flaring that occurs on federal leases, a move that could boost domestic production and royalties and reduce some greenhouse gas emissions.
"Despite years of effort, Interior has not completed any action on measures to reduce the negative economic and environmental impacts of venting and flaring," the lawmakers wrote. "We would like your assurance that the department will redouble its efforts to regulate these wasteful practices."
Wyden, DeFazio and Grijalva last year asked GAO to study Interior's efforts to improve its verification of oil and gas produced from federal leases and the accuracy of royalty data.
The GAO report found Interior has "made considerable progress" in taking better stock of the oil and gas produced from federal lands and in the "reasonableness and completeness" of royalty data.
But while Interior has implemented 28 of 36 GAO recommendations since 2009, more work needs to be done, GAO found.
Specifically, Interior has not updated regulations for measuring oil and gas production in 25 years, which could result in lost royalty revenue, GAO found. Current regulations are falling behind newer measurement technologies and industry standards, GAO said.
Agency officials told GAO that Interior is planning to update the measurement regulations this fiscal year and finalize them in 2016. "However, Interior has twice before unsuccessfully attempted to update these regulations," the GAO report said.
GAO recommended that the Interior secretary ensure BLM meets its established time frames for issuing final oil and gas measurement rules and a separate regulation for oil and gas site security. It also recommended that BLM be required to provide an explanation for delays in the rulemaking in its annual budget submissions to Congress.
-
Fort Knox Taps Natural Gas, Declares Itself 'Energy Independent'
May 6, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Ariel Wittenberg
The Army base best known for being secure just became even more invulnerable.
With the completion of five power generators fueled by natural gas drilled onsite, Fort Knox, Ky., is now the first Army installation to achieve total energy security.
While the base will be using energy provided by a local utility, Fort Knox now also has the ability to power itself -- including all 400 buildings -- when needed.
"As of today, that makes us energy independent," said energy program manager R.J. Dyrdek, who cut the ribbon at a ceremony marking the project's completion today.
Achieving energy security at bases has been a Pentagon priority for years (Greenwire, Jan. 16, 2012).
Since Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast in 2005, cutting power to training facilities, command centers and air towers alike, the Defense Department has sought to find ways to power its installations through a crisis.
Fort Knox has a natural advantage in that it sits atop its own vast gas reserve. Dyrdek said installation officials didn't realize that was the case until a third-party contractor pointed out that companies were drilling for natural gas all around the base.
"It was pretty obvious once they showed us that the gas would be here, too," he said.
While other installations may be able to harness wind or solar power on-base, Fort Knox is the only Army installation that now has a continuous fuel supply it can tap into regardless of the weather.
"We are very proud of this," Dyrdek said. "Other bases, they can generate power, but they are still dependent because they need to bring their fuel in from the outside. Everything we need is right underneath us."
Fort Knox's system relies on micro-grid technology that's been the focus of energy security efforts at top levels (Greenwire, Jan. 27, 2012). The grid essentially functions as a small-scale version of a centralized electricity system that allows the base to tap into and out of a utility power at a moment's notice.
The threat of a power failure is real at Fort Knox, which was left without electricity for a week after a devastating 2009 ice storm.
Almost an inch of ice fell on the state, paralyzing utility trucks, which struggled to turn the lights back on. Fort Knox had to set up an emergency shelter for its residents, and virtually all base operations stopped.
"Everything was affected," Dyrdek said. "The water capabilities were down, the sewer treatment plant was down. We couldn't heat the buildings, and, of course, the electric was down."
If that same ice storm were to happen next winter, officials say, the base will be prepared.
Dyrdek estimates that, in subzero temperatures, the base could power itself at least a week without having to curb electricity use. If temperatures are moderate or non-critical uses like hair dryers are cut out of the equation, Dyrdek said the base could power itself "indefinitely."
The base's new energy security system is not going to be put to waste while the installation waits for disaster.
While the base has made an agreement with the local utility that it will not go completely off the grid, the two have agreed that Fort Knox can run its own system during times of peak use.
"We'll be running on our own at 2 p.m. in the summer time when it's blistering hot, and at 8 a.m. in the winter when it's freezing cold," Dyrdek said.
And eventually, Dyrdek said, the base does plan to phase out its reliance on the utility completely.
"I have every confidence that we will be able to get to that point," he said. "We had a ribbon-cutting ceremony this morning when we were running all on our own, and it was flawless."
-
Let’s Embrace Natural Gas as a Transition Fuel
May 6, 2015 | The New York Times
By Todd Myers
The Obama administration’s energy policy goal has been to leap from a high-carbon economy to a low-carbon economy. To that end, it adopted rules that virtually rule out new coal energy generation and discourage natural-gas production, such as the president’s opposition to the Keystone pipeline.
The problem with this approach is the inability to recognize that transitioning to a low-carbon economy requires that we embrace natural gas as a transition fuel.
Between 2005 and 2014, energy generated by natural gas increased by twice the amount of non-hydro renewables. By way of contrast, solar energy represents only 0.4% of all electrical generation in the U.S., compared with natural gas which accounts for 27%.
Thinking that solar will replace coal and natural gas electricity any time in the near future is to ignore reality.
Embracing natural gas has also reduced carbon emissions. Since 2000, per capita CO2 emissions declined by nearly 19%, even though GDP is about 25% larger today than in 2000. This reduction is due in large part to the boom in natural gas and energy efficiency.
Discouraging natural-gas production, however, has high costs. Renewables are significantly more expensive than natural gas. Those who argue the cost of solar is now “comparable” to natural gas are notably silent when asked if that means we can eliminate enormous taxpayer subsidies.
Restricting natural-gas production also has a global cost. Europe’s dependence on Russian natural gas is having an obvious cost for Ukraine and global stability. As prices have fallen, the ability of Russia, Iran and Venezuela to create conflict has fallen as well. North American energy independence and increased supply is a critical tool in international relations.
Natural-gas production has come largely despite the Obama administration’s efforts. Those efforts have wasted time and energy fighting economic and global energy realities.
-
Keystone Foes Win Big In Alberta Election
May 6, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Elana Schor
Keystone XL foes got some help from an unlikely source in their quest to persuade President Barack Obama to kill the project: the Canadian oil province where the project would start.
Voters in Alberta delivered a stunning rejection on Tuesday to the ruling Conservative party, which had reigned over the province for 44 years and had hitched its reelection hopes to Keystone and the energy industry. The victors, new Premier Rachel Notley and her center-left New Democratic Party, are dubious about Keystone and have no intention of lobbying for it on Capitol Hill — which means a significant loss of leverage for pipeline supporters in D.C.
The climate activists who have relentlessly pressed Obama to reject Keystone cheered the Tuesday upset.
“It’s too early to say what this means for energy policy — I don’t think the age of fossil fuels ended in Alberta last night — but on Keystone specifically, it’s a surprising and huge win,” 350.org spokesman Karthik Ganapathy said. The shift in power away from the pro-Keystone Conservatives, he added, removes “another obstacle for President Obama to reject this pipeline.”
Greens see Notley’s victory as giving Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry fresh evidence to assert that Keystone is not in the U.S. interest.
Danielle Droitsch, Canada project director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that she doubted the State Department and White House would overlook Alberta’s turn away from a strategy that saw its government “aggressively partner” with Keystone developer TransCanada to promote the pipeline.
The new Alberta leader’s desire to retreat from conservatives’ industry-friendly energy policy could offer even more for the anti-Keystone crowd. Some longtime observers say Notley’s win could give the Obama administration hope that despite Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s resistance to pursuing strong climate change action, Washington might finally have a Canadian leader it can work with to bolster the oil sands industry’s environmental credibility.
Notley used her acceptance speech on election night to call for “a national approach to the environment and to Canada’s energy sector, that builds bridges and opens markets — instead of giving us a black eye.” High on her list: a review of the province’s royalty structure for oil and gas companies.
Notley’s knock on Keystone, however, does not mean she won’t try to be an ally for a Canadian oil industry that is seeking new markets for its energy resources. Instead, the 51-year-old has been critical of Keystone because it would ship unprocessed crude oil rather than the higher-value products that could come from job-creating refineries north of the border.
Exporting oil sands crude to U.S. refineries “is not good for Albertans and not good for the economy in the long run,” Notley told CBC Radio on Saturday.
Republicans in Congress might find themselves missing the company of Notley’s predecessors at future pro-Keystone events. But one source close to the Canadian industry suggested that the GOP deserves partial credit for her rise.
The two previous Keystone-promoting premiers “were knocking on Republicans’ doors and to some extent, that was not helpful,” the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “It became partisan not because Alberta wanted it to be, but because Republicans saw an opportunity.”
Despite her near-disavowal of Keystone, Notley is likely to face pressure to temper her criticism of the pipeline or risk significantly damaging relations with an oil industry that remains her province’s dominant revenue engine. The crude from Alberta oil sands that Keystone would ship is also valuable to Canada as a whole, and the contribution to the nation’s economy is expected to nearly double by 2025, according to a study released last year by the energy consulting giant IHS.
“You’ve got to be sure that you sustain a business environment,” said former Canadian diplomat Colin Robertson, now a vice president at the Calgary-based Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute. “Now that she’s premier, she’ll be reaching out to industry to say, ‘What can I do to keep you competitive?’”
Chris Severson-Baker, managing director at the influential Canadian green group Pembina Institute, agreed that Notley is “not going to spend a lot of time and energy aggravating the energy industry. What she’s going to focus on is the big issues, looking for a collaborative opportunity rather than a confrontational one.”
And TransCanada is “looking forward to working with” Notley and her New Democrats, company spokesman Mark Cooper said in a statement.
“The value of the energy industry to Canadians and Americans is unquestionable,” Cooper added. “It creates thousands of jobs, provides millions in tax revenue and is one of the key drivers of our national economy. We also recognize resource development must be done responsibly.”
Obama has already yoked his decision on Keystone to efforts to responsibly develop the Canadian oil sands — which many environmentalists say cannot be done, given the fuel’s high carbon footprint as well as concerns about its land use and groundwater impacts. The president told The New York Times in 2013 that Canada “could potentially be doing more” to rein in greenhouse gases from the oil sands, adding that progress on that front “will go into the mix” of his Keystone review.
That statement stoked long-running speculation that Harper and the industry could win Obama’s approval for the pipeline by agreeing to set binding emissions limits in the oil sands.
Harper has since made clear that he won’t move on climate rules for oil and gas until Obama does, but Notley’s success five months before the conservative prime minister faces a tough election of his own could change the political calculus.
Notley “said she wants to work with other premiers in addressing a growing climate crisis within Alberta,” Greenpeace Canada climate campaigner Mike Hudema said. “That does mean tackling emissions from oil sands. The tar sands are the fastest-rising source of emissions within the country, so any real climate policy needs to address those emissions.”
The source close to the Canadian industry was hopeful that Notley was planning to attend December’s pivotal United Nations climate talks in Paris. If she can make a good enough impression on the Obama administration, the source held out hope that the U.S. government could “step back and say, ‘we might have a good reason to punt — maybe we should revisit this after the Canadian election and Paris.’”
-
Steyer Backs Clinton Despite Keystone Caution
May 6, 2015 | PoliticoPro
By Andrew Restuccia & Elana Schor
Tom Steyer jumped into national politics two years ago by drawing a line in the sand on the Keystone XL pipeline, even suggesting he’d spend part of his vast fortune attacking Democrats who support the project. As recently as last fall, he opined that a primary challenge might be a “good thing” for Hillary Clinton, who has remained conspicuously silent on where she stands on the project.
But on Wednesday, the environmentalist billionaire hosted a $2,700-per person-fundraiser for Clinton at his San Francisco home overlooking the Golden Gate Bridge — while some anti-Keystone activists were left to wave signs on the streets outside.
It’s yet another sign that Steyer has never been the free-wheeling cage-rattler that he and his aides have sometimes portrayed him to be — and that Clinton’s reluctance to weigh in on the Keystone controversy isn’t quite the existential threat to her presidential ambitions that some punditry has assumed. Indeed, from the very beginning, the former hedge fund trader has proven to be a loyal Democrat with a long history of supporting Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Steyer’s devotion to the presumed Democrat front-runner rubs some greens the wrong way, prompting complaints that he’s demanding too little in return. As secretary of state, Clinton presided over studies that said the pipeline would pose few environmental risks, and she infamously said in 2010 that the administration was “inclined” to support the project. Now she’s avoiding public comment on the issue while Secretary John Kerry and President Barack Obama weigh the pipeline’s fate.
“I am not surprised that he would want to get on board the Clinton train, but I’m disappointed he did so apparently without obtaining any commitments from her on issues like Keystone,” said Guy Saperstein, a San Francisco lawyer, Clinton critic and past president of the Sierra Club Foundation. “If I’m wrong about that, Tom can correct me.”
Steyer’s aides say Clinton has won him over by offering forceful rhetoric on climate change — the issue that has always been the billionaire’s top priority. They say his opposition to Keystone, a project that would funnel Canadian crude oil to the Gulf Coast, stems from his fear that it would worsen carbon pollution.
One source familiar with Steyer’s thinking pointed to remarks Clinton made last year at a clean-energy summit in Las Vegas hosted by Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, in which she called climate change “the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of challenges we face as a nation and a world.” Those words “made clear the primary importance of addressing this critical issue,” the source said.
But Clinton conspicuously left some topics out of that speech, including her views on Keystone. The Center for Biological Diversity, the environmental group organizing Wednesday’s rally outside Steyer’s mansion, says she also never responded to its plea from a year ago for her to speak out against the pipeline.
“If we’re going to have a planet that’s livable for people and wildlife, we need Hillary Clinton standing with millions of Americans calling for an end to fossil fuel addiction,” the group’s Valerie Love said in a news release this week. “Tackling the climate crisis ought to start with rejecting projects like Keystone XL followed by a visionary plan to dramatically reduce carbon pollution and steer us toward cleaner, safer energy sources.”
“Keystone is one of the issues that would help people understand where she’s coming from on climate more precisely,” said Peter Galvin, the center’s director of programs.
The group’s rally included an activist dressed in a polar bear costume that has also dogged some of Obama’s travels.
But even greens’ left flank isn’t exclusively focused on the pipeline.
“The goal of all our bird-dogging and protests is to push [Clinton] to be better on the climate issue as a whole, which includes Keystone but isn’t limited to that,” said Karthik Ganapathy, spokesman for the climate activist group 350.org. “When she starts articulating her policy agenda, we’re going to be looking for more than just Keystone.”
Bold Nebraska founder Jane Kleeb, whose group has played a central role in stalling the pipeline, also calls Keystone just “the first step” on issues Clinton needs to weigh in on.
“Standing with citizens on risks of fracking, oil trains and drilling in the Arctic are all issues [Secretary] Clinton must address,” Kleeb said by email. “It is not enough to say you believe climate change exists, we want to know what [Secretary] Clinton is going to do about it.”
The source who spoke about Steyer’s thinking agreed that Clinton needs to flesh out her plan for tackling climate change — one of several big policy blank spots on her 2016 agenda.
“We look forward to Secretary Clinton’s plan to promote clean energy jobs and curb carbon pollution,” the source said. “Climate change is the challenge of our generation, and every 2016 candidate, including Secretary Clinton, needs to lay out a concrete plan to tackle this issue and build the future the American people deserve.”
After leaving the 105-person fundraiser at Steyer’s home, which could raise as much as $280,000, Clinton was scheduled to attend a second fundraiser at The Century Club hosted by Esprit clothing line co-founder Susie Tompkins Buell, another deep-pocketed anti-Keystone environmentalist. That event was expected to draw 220 people and could raise as much as $590,000.
Steyer and Buell aren’t the only greens who have lavished praise on Clinton. Other major green groups, including the League of Conservation Voters and the Natural Resources Defense Council, have been hesitant to criticize her, even after liberal Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) entered the race with an explicitly anti-Keystone message. Environmentalists know that, for the Democrats’ White House hopes, Clinton is the only game in town.
Steyer’s support for Clinton came as no surprise for those who have been following him closely. He backed her 2008 bid for the White House and has worked with the Clintons on child advocacy issues. His staff also has ties to the Clintons, including Ann O’Leary, who headed the children and families program at the Steyer-backed group Next Generation before joining Clinton’s campaign as a senior policy adviser last month.
Still, Steyer’s initial foray into national politics raised some hackles among Democrats who feared he could become a disruptive force within the party: In 2013, he spent millions championing Ed Markey’s Senate campaign in Massachusetts while clobbering Stephen Lynch, Markey’s pro-Keystone rival in the Democratic primary. His tactics included hounding the candidate with aerial banners and mobile billboards for his Keystone stance.
Steyer’s decision to go after Lynch in Massachusetts had some party operatives worried that he would start targeting other Democrats, in the same way that the tea party has taken down Republican candidates who failed to hew to the ideological line. Steyer himself stoked those fears in a 2013 interview with POLITICO, saying: “This is about consequences. If you have a pattern of voting for subsidies for oil and gas and voting against renewables and all this other stuff … there have to be consequences. That’s the whole point of this exercise.”
But Steyer hasn’t seriously attacked any Democratic candidates since 2013, even though his aides flirted with running ads against then-Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu last year for supporting Keystone. He also hasn’t backed any Republican candidates, even though other environmental groups like the League of Conservation Voters and the Environmental Defense Fund have. Instead, all seven candidates he backed last year — with decidedly mixed results — were Democrats.
As Steyer’s prominence rises, he is becoming more engrained in the Democratic establishment. He is also an influential member of the Democracy Alliance, a coalition of liberal donors. And he has hosted high-dollar fundraisers for Washington’s top Democrats, including Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
-
Hints Of Potential Compromise Emerge In New Energy Bill Drafts
May 7, 2015 | E&E Daily News
By Nick Juliano and Hannah Northey
An energy bill is continuing to take shape on Capitol Hill as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle yesterday floated infrastructure and supply proposals they hope to see included in a comprehensive, bipartisan piece of legislation.
The House and Senate energy committees continue to solicit proposals for a bill to address energy supply, infrastructure, efficiency and regulatory reforms. Several senators introduced bills yesterday and more are expected today, as Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) has asked her colleagues to get their ideas in this week. The chairwoman is expected to announce more energy bill hearings today.
In the House, the Energy and Commerce Committee yesterday released two discussion drafts on hydropower and natural gas pipelines, ahead of the Energy and Power Subcommittee's third energy bill hearing next week.
The pipeline draft -- and a similar Senate bill -- indicated an effort to find common ground on the issue of how to expand the nation's network of natural gas pipelines. The new proposal sets a deadline on federal reviews but does not mandate automatic approval if the deadline is missed. It is seen as a toned-down version of legislation the House passed several times last year -- and again in January -- over sharp objections from the White House.
While the pipeline revision is a sign of possible compromise, a few other bills floated yesterday were straightforward reintroductions of ideas that have previously run into roadblocks across the aisle. Some members also offered new ideas they hope to become part of an energy bill. Pipeline compromise
Pipeline proposals floated by Republicans in both chambers appeared to show the first signs of compromise.
Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee appeared to take a step back from a controversial bill aimed at fast-tracking natural gas pipelines that drew Democratic opposition and a White House veto threat earlier this year.
Instead, they pivoted to draft language they hope will be more palatable and draw wider support.
The draft is most notable for what it does not include, compared to Kansas Republican Rep. Mike Pompeo's "Natural Gas Pipeline Permitting Reform Act," H.R. 161, which passed in January over a White House veto threat.
Pompeo's bill would have given the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a year to review pipeline applications. Additional permitting or licensing agencies would have no more than four months after FERC's review to approve or deny the project; otherwise, it would be allowed to go forward within 30 days.
The Energy and Commerce draft eliminates the automatic approval provision from Pompeo's bill, instead opting for a conflict resolution process if agencies take too long.
The issue of infrastructure has drawn far-reaching bipartisan interest on Capitol Hill as production of shale gas grows -- and with it, the need for pipeline infrastructure to move that gas from producing regions to hungry markets. The focus is squarely on FERC, the federal agency that sets the schedule for conducting environmental reviews of proposed natural gas interstate pipelines before granting permits. Under the current law, applicants can take the rare step of filing a lawsuit against any state or federal agency that doesn't comply with the timelines FERC lays out.
Pompeo's bill earlier this year drew a sharp back-and-forth debate between Republican proponents and Democrats who warned that the language would push dangerously short reviews of complex pipelines. The Obama administration warned that Pompeo's bill would impose unworkable timelimes on FERC (E&ENews PM, Jan. 21).
The same sort of dealmaking could be seen in the Senate.
Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, one of several states home to the Marcellus Shale play, unveiled the "Oil and Gas Production and Distribution Reform Act," a bill that would also lay out a conflict resolution process for agencies that don't comply with FERC's time frame. Sens. Heidi Heitkamp, a North Dakota Democrat, and Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican, co-sponsored the bill.
The Senate bill also lays out a process for publicly tracking the review process and requiring federal agencies to report problems to FERC and Congress. It will likely be tweaked to clarify that it addresses interstate natural gas pipelines, according to a spokeswoman for Capito's office.
Whether the draft language will succeed in drawing the support of the interstate pipeline industry is yet to be seen. Don Santa, CEO and president of natural gas advocacy group the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America Foundation, has said provisions in the Pompeo bill are critical to ensuring that FERC enforces deadlines for permitting agencies as it conducts environmental reviews of proposed gas pipelines.
Pompeo's bill passed the House in January, with 14 Democrats joining all Republicans in supporting it, but a companion has not been introduced in the Senate. The White House threatened to veto it at the time, saying that while it recognized the need for additional infrastructure, the bill could force hasty decisions based on incomplete information and lead to denial of projects that otherwise would have been approved. In threatening the veto, the administration also noted that FERC has completed 91 percent of its pipeline reviews within a year since 2009. Hoeven, Donnelly reintroduce cross-border pipeline bill
Sens. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) today reintroduced legislation meant to make it easier to build pipelines and power lines between the United States and Canada or Mexico.
The "North American Energy Infrastructure Act" mirrors a cross-border bill they sponsored last year. The bill would replace an existing requirement for cross-border projects to obtain a presidential permit and impose a 120-day deadline for the State Department, in the case of oil pipelines, or the Department of Energy, for transmission, to complete National Environmental Policy Act reviews and approve or deny the projects. Natural gas pipelines would have to be approved by DOE within 30 days.
NEPA's scope also would be curtailed by the bill, which directs federal agencies to consider only the part of the pipe or wire that physically crosses the border without taking into consideration environmental or climate change impacts associated with the project as a whole.
Bill supporters say it is meant to eliminate the types of delays that have plagued the Keystone XL pipeline, which has been awaiting a decision on its presidential permit for most of President Obama's term.
"Energy infrastructure projects are too important to our economy and our national security to be dragged out, virtually for years in the case of the Keystone XL pipeline," Hoeven said in a statement. "We need a process that is fact-based, transparent and nonpartisan -- a process that serves the interests of the American people now and into the future. Our bill achieves that goal."
Despite its bipartisan support, a previous version of the bill drew sharp objections from the Obama administration. A companion bill from Reps. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Gene Green (D-Texas) passed the House last year with 17 Democrats on board. But the White House said Obama would veto the bill if it ever reached his desk, saying it would "impose an unreasonable deadline" on permitting decisions and prevent full consideration of issues that "could result in serious security, safety, foreign policy, environmental, economic, and other ramifications."
Murkowski has said she is interested in working closely with the administration in developing the broader energy bill and has pointed to DOE's recently released Quadrennial Energy Review (QER) as a potential template for parts of the legislation.
The QER includes a chapter on "Integrating North American Energy Markets," but its only discussion of presidential permits comes in a single reference to pending permit applications for transmission lines filed at DOE.
While the QER does not propose any fundamental reform to the existing process, it does call for the creation of partnerships among various government agencies, universities and nonprofits to study U.S. regulations "to identify gaps, best practices, and inconsistencies with regulations in Canada and/or Mexico with the goal of harmonization," according to a summary of its recommendations.
The flurry of bills being introduced from both sides of the aisle this week will serve as the basis for an upcoming hearing designed to craft the energy bill's infrastructure title, but not all bills will make it into the final package. Shaheen targets heat efficiency with new bill
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), one of the Senate's leading efficiency advocates, yesterday introduced a new bill aimed at helping factories, hospitals and other large facilities more widely deploy heat-recovery technologies.
The bill would direct DOE and FERC to establish recommendations, which states would have the option to follow, to overcome regulatory barriers to combined heat and power (CHP) and waste heat to power (WHP) technology. It also would establish a voluntary $5 million U.S. EPA grant program to assist states that would like to update their air pollution regulations to use "output-based" emissions standards, which Shaheen says can encourage CHP and WHP.
"It's important that rules regarding energy generation keep pace with new advancements in efficient technology," Shaheen said in a statement. "Combined heat power and waste heat to power have tremendous potential for facilities around the country and we should be doing everything we can to spur their use."
A Shaheen spokesman said she hopes to see the bill included with in the energy bill's supply title. Markey reintroduces pipeline repair bills
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) yesterday reintroduced a pair of bills aimed at repairing old natural gas pipelines, which leak methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
"When we fix old, leaking natural gas pipelines, we can help save lives and money and put people to work building new critical infrastructure," Markey said in a statement.
The "Pipeline Modernization and Consumer Protection Act" would require pipeline operators to accelerate repairs of leaky lines or those that are prone to leaking and to consider making the leakiest pipes a priority. The "Pipeline Revolving Fund and Job Creation Act" would establish a grant program at the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to support state revolving funds aimed at repairing leak-prone pipelines. Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) are co-sponsoring the bills.
Both bills were referred to the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee -- of which Markey is a member -- not ENR. But a Markey spokeswoman said he introduced the bills yesterday to have them considered for inclusion in an energy bill. It remains to be seen how or whether additional committees get involved in the process. Neither bill was considered in committee last year.
-
Clean Power Plan Expected to Prompt New York to Invest in Energy Infrastructure
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald B. Silverman
New York state will need to invest a significant amount of money into energy infrastructure such as natural gas pipelines if the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan is implemented, Stephen Whitley, president and chief executive officer of the New York Independent System Operator, said May 6.
New York will become more dependent on natural gas generation and renewables if the plan were to be implemented, Whitley told reporters at a conference of the Independent Power Producers of New York (IPPNY).
“To make that happen reliably, we're going to have to have a lot of infrastructure built—transmission lines and gas pipelines,” Whitley said. “It can be done. It's going to be very expensive; it's going to take a lot of time.”
Given the last two winters in New York have been cold and energy-intensive, “the lights would go out” if infrastructure isn't improved and the Clean Power Plan is put in place, Whitley said.
The EPA's Clean Power Plan (RIN 2060-AR33), proposed in June 2014, would set a unique carbon dioxide emissions rate for each state. The EPA expects the rule would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants by 30 percent from 2005 levels when it is fully implemented in 2030 (106 DEN A-1, 6/3/14).
The rule relies on transitioning power generation from coal to cleaner natural gas.
RGGI Is Model for Compliance
The last major electric transmission line was built in New York in 1987, and the last major natural gas pipeline in 2008.
John Reese, IPPNY chairman and senior vice president of US Power Generating Co., told the conference that the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), an existing regional emissions trading program, “has been a huge success for New York” and a model for compliance with the Clean Power Plan.
“We have a market-based approach that's resulted in huge emissions reductions and raised for the State of New York over $760 million,” Reese said.
He said RGGI will provide New York with the mechanism to comply with the Clean Power Plan.
“From our view, RGGI has worked as a model,” he said. “It's helped us get there [to carbon dioxide emissions reductions] without a lot of disruption in the marketplace.”
Using Proceeds for Market-Based Projects
Reese encouraged New York to use more of its RGGI proceeds for market-based projects to improve energy efficiency in the electricity generation industry.
The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority issued a request for proposals this year for $14.5 million for such projects, he said.
“We think that's a great start,” he said. “We'd like to see more.”
Gavin Donohue, IPPNY president and chief executive officer, told reporters the group has supported RGGI's goals.
“We think the model works,” he said. “What we've looked for and what we've asked for is a national program.”
Donohue said IPPNY would like more of the New York proceeds from RGGI auctions to be used to curb emissions at the point of generation.
Cut Seen in Air Emissions
Whitley said the competitive market has contributed to a significant reduction in air emissions in New York over the past 15 years.
He said some 6,000 megawatts of energy from coal plants and inefficient oil and gas plants have been replaced by more efficient fuel sources, combined cycle units and imports from Canada.
“The markets have driven the inefficient units, the high-cost units to repower,” he said. “The latest, cleanest, most efficient [units have] driven the heat rate of the fleet down so much. It's been a great success story for reliability, for the environment and for costs for consumers.’’
Carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector in New York declined by 41 percent from 2000 to 2013, while sulfur dioxide emissions declined by 94 percent and nitrogen oxide emissions by 81 percent, according to IPPNY.
Wind generation grew from 48 megawatts in 2003 to 1,700 megawatts in the state in 2014, IPPNY said.
“New York wholesale electricity markets facilitate the development and increased use of renewable energy resources by constantly adapting and sending price signals that attract investments in new technologies,” according to an IPPNY report released at the conference.
-
EPA Publishes Rule on Greenhouse Gas Permitting
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
A process for states to rescind some greenhouse gas permits will be published in the Federal Resister May 7 as a direct final rule by the Environmental Protection Agency. The direct final rule (RIN 2060-AS57), which will take effect July 6, will allow states to rescind prevention of significant deterioration permits that were issued to industrial facilities based solely on their greenhouse gas emissions. That would comply with a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that only facilities that are required to obtain prevention of significant deterioration permits for other regulated pollutants must also permit their greenhouse gases. The EPA will also issue the permitting revisions as a proposed rule should it receive any adverse comment on the direct final rule. The EPA announced the revisions to the permitting program April 30 (84 DEN A-3, 5/1/15). The EPA's direct final rule is available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2015-10628.pdf.
-
Hoeven to ‘Definitely' Push Coal Ash Bill, Possibly as Amendment to Energy Bill
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anthony Adragna
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) told Bloomberg BNA May 6 he will “definitely” push legislation on the management and disposal of coal ash this year but remains undecided on whether to do so through standalone legislation or as an amendment to a forthcoming energy package from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).
Other options for advancing language include surface transportation legislation—onto which Hoeven almost succeeded in attaching coal ash language in 2012—or “some other possibilities” that Hoeven declined to specify. The key, however, will be securing floor time for consideration of the North Dakota Republican's provision.
“Whether I drop it [as a] standalone or offer it as an amendment to [Murkowski's bill], I haven't decided yet,” Hoeven said. “It's definitely one I'm planning to bring up next time we're on energy.”
Hoeven said he might ultimately pursue moving coal ash language through multiple avenues, including standalone legislation.
In January, Murkowski announced plans for comprehensive energy legislation that will focus on strengthening supply, modernizing infrastructure, supporting efficiency and ensuring federal accountability. Hoeven said such a bill would be a tempting target for an amendment on coal ash (75 DEN A-2, 4/20/15).
Rule Drew Congressional Heat
The Environmental Protection Agency published the first-ever national standards for managing coal ash on April 17 (RIN–2050–AE81), opting to regulate the residue from coal-fired power generation as a nonhazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (80 Fed. Reg. 21,302).
Lawmakers in the House and Senate have criticized the final EPA rule, and the House has moved swiftly to advance the Improving Coal Combustion Residuals Regulation Act of 2015 (H.R. 1734).
Introduced by Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.), the bill would grant states broader authority to establish their own coal ash permitting programs while preventing the EPA from ever regulating the material as a hazardous waste.
Hoeven and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) told Bloomberg BNA in March they were working on similar legislation to McKinley's, but those closely tracking the issue have wondered when the senators might move their own legislation (47 DEN A-4, 3/11/15).
Standalone Bill or Amendment?
While he believes standalone legislation could get the six Democratic votes to overcome a filibuster, Hoeven said attaching coal ash language to a broader legislative vehicle would improve its chances for consideration amid a packed Senate floor schedule.
“I've got a number of things that would pass, but you've got to get floor time,” Hoeven said.
-
Bank Of America Backs Away From Financing Mining Companies
May 6, 2015 | E&E News PM
By Manuel Quiñones
Bank of America Corp., one of the country's largest financial institutions, today released a sweeping policy to move away from financing coal companies and mining projects.
The release of Bank of America's new policy paper coincided with the company's shareholders' meeting in Charlotte, N.C., where the company is based.
"Over the past several years," said the policy paper, "Bank of America has significantly reduced our exposure to coal extraction companies. Going forward, Bank of America will continue to reduce our credit exposure to coal extraction companies."
Bank of America noted the recent headwinds against coal, including cheaper natural gas and increased government oversight. But the company also touted due diligence concerning the environment, including site visits, and coal mining's impact on communities.
"The bank will not finance coal mining companies that are not working to address significant, ongoing or recurring material violations of these and other relevant environmental, health or safety standards," it said.
When it comes to mountaintop-removal mining, Bank of America said it would continue to reduce its involvement in financing the practice.
The bank did express support for carbon capture and sequestration efforts meant to make coal viable amid climate concerns. Financing has been difficult for the expensive projects.
"Through our partnerships we will promote the necessary conditions for implementing carbon capture and storage on a global scale," said Bank of America's policy paper. "We will employ our resources as a financial institution to promote the development and deployment of these advanced technologies to reduce carbon emissions produced by the burning of fossil fuels."
Environmental groups that pressure banks against financing fossil fuels celebrated the announcement. The Rainforest Action Network said it announced its campaign targeting Bank of America in 2011.
"Today's announcement from Bank of America truly represents a sea change: It acknowledges the responsibility that the financial sector bears for supporting and profiting from the fossil fuel industry and the climate chaos it has caused," said Amanda Starbuck, RAN's climate and energy program director.
Pro-coal advocates stress the importance of keeping the fuel part of the country's energy portfolio. And National Mining Association spokesman Luke Popovich pointed to part of the policy recognizing that all energy sources have impacts and that coal would continue playing a role in U.S. generation.
He added about Bank of America, "This is the same bank whose lending policies fueling the housing bust destroyed massive shareholder value and ceded mortgage leadership to rival Wells Fargo."
Recently, PNC Financial Services Group Inc. and Barclays PLC announced their intention to join other banks in reducing their involvement with mountaintop-removal mining.
-
BNSF Railway Oil-Train Crash Sparks Fire, Evacuation of Residents in North Dakota
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Richard Clough and Eliot Caroom
A BNSF Railway train carrying crude oil derailed in North Dakota, setting several tank cars on fire and prompting the evacuation of nearby residents, U.S. and local authorities said.
The Federal Railroad Administration sent a 10-person team May 6 to the site near the town of Heimdal to determine the cause of the accident, Acting Administrator Sarah Feinberg said in a statement. No injuries were reported, according to a BNSF statement.
“Today's incident is yet another reminder of why we issued a significant, comprehensive rule aimed at improving the safe transport of high-hazard flammable liquids,” Feinberg said. “The FRA will continue to look at all options available to us to improve safety and mitigate risks.”
The fire, coming almost two years after a crude-train derailment killed 47 people in Lac Megantic, Quebec, highlights the growing debate in the U.S. and Canada over how to move oil by rail. This month, officials in both countries jointly set new rules on tank-car design and safety procedures to reduce the risks.
Overheating Cars
U.S. regulators want the industry to upgrade the so-called CPC-1232 cars that were involved in the May 6 derailment. Built to the current industry standard, the cars can overheat and explode in a fire more quickly than previously thought, the National Transportation Safety Board said in April.
The BNSF derailment involved six or seven cars, according to Deputy Janelle Pepple of the Wells County sheriff's office. The FRA said there was “a large fire involving several tank cars.” All but two of the 109 cars on the BNSF train were carrying crude oil, the company said in a statement.
The train derailed in a sparsely populated area, about 50 miles (80 kilometers) east of Minot, N.D. Heimdal is unincorporated and has a population of 27, according to the 2010 U.S. Census.
The accident occurred about 7:30 a.m. local time, said Michael Trevino, a spokesman for BNSF, which is owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. BNSF said company personnel are on-site to assess the accident, which will result in delays of some customer shipments by 24 to 48 hours.
-
Foxx Should Issue Emergency Order On Crude-by-Rail Disclosure, Senators Say
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven
The disclosure requirements within a final Transportation Department rule governing crude-by-rail transport are a “setback” for emergency response efforts and must be remedied through an emergency order, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash) and seven other senators said in a May 6 letter obtained by Bloomberg BNA.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration rule that sets tank car requirements, speed limits and other restrictions for the rail transport of flammable liquids includes requirements that could “hamper” emergency response and harm public safety, the senators told Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx in the letter.
The senators requested that the Transportation Department ensure that state emergency response commissions (SERCs) are receiving and can disclose crude-by-rail movement information; require railroads to proactively share information with emergency responders; allow the public access to “broader” crude-by-rail information that isn't harmful to transportation safety such as volumes and movements of these products; and ensure that emergency responders can quickly access necessary information in case of a derailment.
“The unsafe movement of crude-by-rail is a threat to communities across this country. Therefore, to improve information for first responders and protect the general public, we call upon you to issue an Emergency Order that ensures that SERCs, and by extension first responders, have clear access to detailed, up-to-date information about crude-by-rail shipments and that the public continues to have general information about crude-by-rail volumes and routes that does not compromise security,” the senators said to Foxx.
The letter is one of the first organized criticisms of the PHMSA rule that was released May 1, which is intended to improve the safety of rail transport of crude oil and other Class 3 flammable liquids that has become more frequent in recent years (85 DEN A-14, 5/4/15).
With the increased frequency of crude-by-rail transport, there have been increased threats to the environment and public safety from more frequent derailments, including one that occurred May 6 in North Dakota (see related story).
The May 6 letter was also signed by Sens. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).
-
Sen. Cantwell, Others Want DOT to Amend Safety Reporting Provisions in Tank Car Rule
May 7, 2015 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephanie Beasley
Requirements for the disclosure of information to emergency responders that are included in a recently released final rule on new oil tank car standards are “insufficient” and should be amended, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said at a hearing May 6.
In response to a crude-by-rail train derailment earlier in the day in North Dakota, Cantwell said she was concerned the new set of mandates for railroads to provide information to states and emergency responders “rolls back on where many of my colleagues want to go.”
The lawmaker introduced a bill (S.859) that would establish federal safety standards for oil trains, mandate more safety inspections of rail carriers, and authorize $40 million for first responder training programs.
Cantwell said during the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing that she and other lawmakers were sending a letter to Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx urging him to amend the disclosure provisions included in the rule so that emergency responders and communities can be better prepared to deal with crude-by-rail accidents (see related story).
Safety Reporting Requirements
The final rule released May 1 removed the requirement for railroads to notify State Emergency Response Commissions or other appropriate stated designated entities with information regarding certain larger rail shipments of crude oil (85 DEN A-14, 5/4/15).
The rule requires only that railroads give certain state or regional centers and officials a railroad point of contact for hazmat transport information in their jurisdictions.
Railroads also would have to provide estimates of the number of certain trains expected to travel through the county each week, the routes where those trains would be travelling, the identity and the description of the crude oil being shipped and at least one railroad point of contact.
Responses to DOT's Time Line
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the committee chair, said the committee is very interested in crude-by-rail issues and is paying close attention to the administration's recommendations. Yet, he said Cantwell wants to go “farther, faster” than what the administration is recommending.
Thune said he thinks that the rule contains a good schedule for implementing changes.
“We want to be realistic,” Thune told reporters. “You can order them to have it done tomorrow and that's just not going to happen.”
Thune said there are still a lot of outstanding issues and conflicting analysis about electronically controlled brakes installed on trains transporting flammable liquids. The committee is pushing for the Government Accountability Office to examine those issues, he said.
However, Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program, criticized the DOT's plan to phase in implementation of new safety standards over the next five years.
“It is unconscionable that the Obama administration is proposing new oil train safety regulations to leave dangerous rail cars in service for another two to five years,” Slocum said in a statement. “Federal regulators have already determined through exhaustive study that these cars are fundamentally unsafe.”
-
Oil Train Derails, Explodes In North Dakota
May 6, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A train carrying crude oil partially derailed and exploded in North Dakota on Wednesday, days after the federal government announced a set of rules meant to prevent and mitigate the effects of such disasters.
The train, operated by BNSF Railway, derailed near Heimdal, causing the evacuation of the entire town, Valley News Live reported.
The train had 107 tank cars full of crude, 10 of which reportedly caught fire, according to emergency officials. No one was injured, and the cause of the derailment has not been determined.
The incident is the latest in a series of high-profile explosions in recent years that have spurred regulators in the United States and Canada to crack down on oil trains, which have grown in number by more than 4,000 percent during the domestic oil production boom.
Environmentalists quickly pointed to the North Dakota disaster as an example of why the Department of Transportation’s rules do not go far enough in taking older tank cars off the rails quickly.
“This accident is another example of how the American people are shouldering the risk for crude oil transport — whether an exploding train or a ruptured pipeline — while Big Oil rakes in the profits,” Devorah Ancel, an attorney with Sierra Club, said in a statement.
“The Department of Transportation's new rules for transporting crude oil by rail would have done nothing to stop a disaster like the one in Heimdal,” she said.
Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen’s energy program, called the rules “unconscionable.”
“Just days after the new but still insufficient safety regulations were released, another derailment has clearly and tragically illustrated that these dangerous rail cars must be taken off the tracks now,” he said.
-
Safety Rules Give Eight Years for Ethanol Tank Car Upgrades
May 6, 2015 | The Wall Street Journal
By Bob Tita
The decade-long schedule devised by government regulators to improve the crashworthiness of railroad tank cars allows the ethanol industry eight years to upgrade its car fleet.
The U.S. Department of Transportation had originally proposed a three-year timetable for replacing or modifying the 28,000 tank cars that haul ethanol. But the final rule bumped the deadline for ethanol cars to May 1, 2023. The rules for the ethanol fleet were part a broader set of regulations issued Friday to make all tank cars that haul flammable liquids sturdier.
The Renewable Fuels Association, the ethanol industry’s trade group, credited Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx with listening to the ethanol industry’s concerns about the availability of enough repair shops to complete extensive upgrades to its tank cars in three years.
The ethanol industry argued that it should have more time because its corn-based fuel additive poses less of a risk to public safety than crude oil shipped by rail.
“Secretary Foxx appears to have struck a fair balance in setting comprehensive standards while at the same time being sensitive to the limitation of retrofit capacity by giving less hazardous flammables, like ethanol, additional time to retrofit railcars,” said Bob Dinneen, president of the association.
Most of the ethanol fleet, however, consists of older tank car models known as DOT-111s that have been singled out by the government as particularly vulnerable to puncturing and burning during derailments.
The government is requiring DOT-111s and other tank cars models already in service to be fitted with heat-resistant tank insulation that would be covered with an outer steel jacket. Steel plating will be added to the ends of the tanks for crash protection along with other safety features, including upgraded brakes for tank cars that travel in trains with high volumes of flammable liquids.
About 23,000 DOT-111s in crude oil service without tank insulation will have to be replaced or retrofitted by Jan. 1, 2018. Canada is requiring these cars be improved by May 1, 2017. There are about 7,000 insulated and jacketed DOT-111s carrying oil that will have to be upgraded or replaced by March 1, 2018.
The DOT-111 has come under greater scrutiny since July 2013 when a runaway oil train of DOT-111s crashed into a town in Quebec, killing 47 people. Tank cars built since late 2011, known as CPC-1232s, have slightly thicker tanks than the DOT-111s. But the uninsulated version of the car in oil service has fared poorly in derailments this year in the Ontario, West Virginia and Illinois.
The owners of 22,000 uninsulated CPC-1232s in oil service will have until April 1, 2020 to complete upgrades. Some transportation safety advocates have been critical of allowing the 1232 cars to operate without upgrades for another five years in the wake of recent crashes involving the cars.
The owners of about 36,000 insulated CPC-1232s carrying all types of flammable liquids, including oil, will have until May 2025 to upgrade their cars.
The Railway Supply Institute, a trade group representing railcar manufacturers and car leasing companies, described the schedule for modifying the existing tank cars as “aggressive, but appropriate,” and predicted “it will be a challenge to meet” the deadlines because of the shop space available to work on cars. The group estimates that about 7,000 cars a year could be retrofitted at his time though more shop capacity is expected now that new rules have been issued.
After Oct. 1, newly built tank cars for flammable liquids will feature tanks with 9/16-inch thick walls. Most of the 154,500 tank cars already hauling flammables have tank walls that are 7/16-inch thick. The new tank cars will be known in the U.S. as the DOT-117 model. The order backlog for tank cars at North American railcar builders was nearly 52,400 cars at then end of the first quarter, according to the Railway Supply Institute. Most of these cars were ordered for crude oil service.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News
Full Text of Stories Below
Add recipients
Suggested