Environmental Engineering Newsletter 29 Sept
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING NEWSLETTER 29 SEPT. 2014 This week's edition includes: If you need older URLs contact George at [email protected]. Please Note: This newsletter contains articles that offer differing points of view regarding climate change, energy and other environmental issues. Any opinions expressed in this publication are the responses of the editor alone and do not represent the positions of the Environmental Engineering Division or the ASME. George Holliday This week's edition includes: 1. ENVIRONMENT A HOUSE HEARING EXAMINES VOLATILITY OF BAKKEN CRUDE OIL WASHINGTON – A Republican lawmaker accused the Obama administration Tuesday of using "global warming theory" to advance new safety regulations for transporting Bakken crude oil. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California said the administration was pursuing its effort to reduce use of fossil fuels when it proposed new safety standards for freight rail tankers transporting Bakken crude from North Dakota to coastal refineries. He and other Republicans, speaking at a House committee hearing on the volatility of Bakken crude, bashed the July proposal from federal transportation officials to phase out over two years older DOT-111 railroad tank cars carrying Bakken crude oil or ethanol. http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/2014/09/09/house-hearing-examines-volatility-bakken- crude-oil/15372377/ B. INDUSTRY GROUPS LAWSUITS CHALLENGING COOLING WATER INTAKE RULE FILED IN 5TH AND 7TH CIRCUITS On September 5, 2014, the American Petroleum Institute (API) filed a petition for review of the Existing Facility Cooling Water Intake Rule in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and on September 8th, the Utility Water Act Group (UWAG) and Entergy filed suit in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (where appeals to Texas based challenges are typically are heard). While the petitions are the bare bones filings, API’s prior comments focused on the cost of compliance and UWAG has recently focused on circularity in the rule because EPA requires new units to demonstrate the effectiveness of impingement reduction technologies in their applications for CWA permits – i.e. prior to operating the technology – among other details. Concerns about the Fish and Wildlife Service role under the rule have also been expressed publically by various industry representatives. These new challenges by industry groups follow closely on the heels of suits by environmental groups filed in the First, Second, and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals. The challenges will eventually be consolidated into one lawsuit. It is not yet known which court will ultimately hear the consolidated challenge. C. ENHANCED WEBSITE/PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION CENTER In 2012-2013, Susan Ipri Brown, Past-Vice President of the Board on Government Relations, convened a retreat and follow-up meetings with internal and external members to obtain their recommendations in “helping to align public policy activities within ASME’s new structure, identify goals and initiatives for the PA&O Sector as a whole and align goals and initiatives with the ASME Foundation, with the objective of expanding ASME’s activities on existing programs and creating new programs in key areas such as global impact and energy.” One of the highest priorities to evolve from those discussions was the need to improve communications enhancing the Government Relations website to better attract, inform and involve ASME members and other stakeholders in our advocacy efforts and to encourage policymakers and the public to support ASME’s Public Policy Agenda issue priorities. In response to those recommendations, I am pleased to inform you about integration of a new “ASME Public Policy Education Center (PPEC),” which is now available at http://ppec.asme.org/ The PPEC provides customized issue webpages for Government Relations that will serve as “one-stop-shops” to attract ASME members to our website. The new PPEC will integrate online advocacy and Intuitive content management tools to provide daily news feeds, improve messaging and constituent management, as well as integrate tools for social media. The PPEC provides content specific issues webpage for each of ASME’s priority issues and integrates current Government Relations resources specifically pertaining to ASME’s Public Policy Agenda priorities, including: - Legislation - Regulations and Announcements - ASME Position Statements - Monthly Issue policy reports - ASME’s Congressional Briefings - Related Reports - Capitol Update Of particular interest to ASME members will be the news feeds pertaining to our priority issues that will be posted to the site on a daily basis under “Latest News,” as well as the articles posted under “Washington Insider” that will provide our members with some insight into the politics of the day. It is our goal to enhance ASME’s reputation as a source of accurate and unbiased information by serving as a resource for policymakers, to inform and educate ASME members, non-members and policymakers about ASME’s position on technical policy issues, and engage ASME members and non-members in ASME’s advocacy efforts. Arnold Feldman D. STANFORD PUBLISHES A REPORT ON THE BALANCED USE OF FRACKING From Stanford University – Stanford-led study assesses the environmental costs and benefits of fracking A strange thing happened on the way to dealing with climate change: Advances in hydraulic fracturing put trillions of dollars’ worth of previously unreachable oil and natural gas within humanity’s grasp. The environmental costs – and benefits – from “fracking,” which… http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/13/stanford-publishes-a-report-on-the-balanced-use-of- fracking/ E. EPA OVERREACHED IN PROPOSING CARBON EMISSIONS RULES, GOP GOVERNORS TELL OBAMA Fifteen Republican governors wrote to President Barack Obama last week, arguing that the Environmental Protection Agency exceeded its authority by proposing rules to curb carbon emissions from power plants. The governors urged the administration to provide more details on some compliance and economic issues of the rules. If the administration won't respond to the questions until the Oct. 16 deadline for the public comment period, it should "withdraw the proposal until it gives due consideration to these critical concerns," they wrote. http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/blog/energy/2014/09/republican-governors-sound-off-on- carbon-emissions.html F. EPA EXTENDS COMMENT PERIOD ON CLEAN POWER PROPOSAL AFTER SENATORS ASK FOR EXTENSION On September 16th, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) submitted to the Federal Register an extension ( to 1 Dec. 2014) of the comment period for its Clean Power Rule (control of CO2 emissions from existing Power Plants, 79 FR 34629-34959) by an additional 45 days. The comment period will now remain open until December 1, 2014. The extension should be publish in about10 -15 days. G. SIERRA CLUB HAMMERED FOR BASELESS ACCUSATIONS By DAVID LEE WACO, Texas (CN) - A "meritless" Clean Air Act suit against a Texas coal-fired power plant will cost Sierra Club more than $6.4 million in attorneys' fees, a federal judge ruled. The environmental group sued Dallas-based Energy Future Holdings Corp. and subsidiary Luminant Generation Co. LLC in 2012 regarding the Big Brown Plant in Freestone County. Sierra Club alleged the plant continues to violate particulate matter and opacity limits under the law. After the particulate-matter-violation claims failed at summary judgment, the opacity-limit claims faced a February bench trial that also ended with a win for the defendants. U.S. District Judge Walter Smith granted the defendants' subsequent motion for attorneys' fees on Friday, finding Sierra Club's lawsuit as "frivolous, unreasonable or groundless." Though he found the request for $6.8 million for fees and costs reasonable, Smith did take exception to a request for $300,000 in conditional appellate fees. "Here, defendants were successful against all of plaintiff's claims," the scathing 17-page order stated. "Plaintiff was unable to show a prima facie case of a PM violation, and the claims was dismissed at the summary judgment state of litigation. Plaintiff was aware that Big Brown's Title V permit exempted it from PM deviations during maintenance, startup, or shutdown activities prior to filing suit, which rendered the claim meritless. And at trial, plaintiff failed to prove any causation or injury to its lone standing witness or any other individual." Smith scolded Sierra Club for not heeding Texas Commission on Environmental Quality investigation reports that stated there were no particulate matter or opacity violations of the CAA at Big Brown. "Defendants informed plaintiff that these reports cannot be undermined," the order states. "But even with this knowledge at its disposal, plaintiff admitted that they failed to analyze or investigate the TCEQ investigation reports and filed suit. Consequently, after immense discovery, expense, and use of judicial resources, the court found no evidence supporting any deficiency in the TCEQ's investigation reports." At trial, the evidence showed that virtually the entire time the plant was operating normally, and that opacity was at 10 percent or less - "far below the 30 percent limit," Smith wrote. Sierra Club also failed to persuade Smith that the defendants' hours billed and rates were unreasonable. Sierra Club officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday evening. Mara E. Zimmerman American Petroleum Institute Roger Zymunt H. THE UNINFORMED, HYPOCRITICAL, EMOTIONALLY- DRIVEN PEOPLE’S