Newsletter

California Air Resource Board:

The International Liquid Terminals Association (ILTA) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the California Air Resource Board’s (“CARB”) California Corporate Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, and writes specifically in response to CARB’s implementation question(1)(d):

Should entities that sell energy, or other goods and services, into California through a separate market, like the energy imbalance market or extended day ahead market, be covered?

We write to strongly discourage CARB from including such entities under the definition of entities that “do[] business in California” as including them raises serious constitutional concerns. Specifically, a definition that included these entities would create significant Due Process concerns, as well as violate the Commerce Clause and notions of federalism by attempting to subject out-of-state entities to this law based on actions that have no or at best only a theoretical nexus to the State of California. CARB must adopt a reasonable definition of “doing business” in California in order to provide a clear and workable definition to regulated entities and to ensure its climate disclosure implementation rules are on sound legal footing.

Attached below is a copy of the full comments.

Dear Assistant Secretary Parker:

On behalf of the Employers Heat Illness Prevention Coalition (the “Coalition”), I am pleased to submit these Comments addressing the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (“OSHA” or “the agency”) August 30, 2024, proposed rule on Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings set forth at 29 CFR § 1910.148 (Docket No. OSHA-2021-0009) (hereinafter the “proposed rule”).

The Coalition is composed of a broad and diverse group of employers and trade associations representing many industries, including construction, manufacturing, energy, delivery and distribution, retail, warehousing, petroleum refining, liquid terminal operations, recycling, supermarkets and other grocers, automotive manufacturing, and many more, with millions of employees across hundreds of thousands of workplaces in every state in the Nation. In addition to representing a vast array of industries, Coalition members also represent essentially every kind of workplace affected by the proposed rule. For example, we have potential heat illness exposure hazards in outdoor-only, indoor-only, and outdoor/indoor work settings, and represent every size employer, from large international corporations to small businesses with brick-and-mortar locations. As our member organizations would be directly impacted by the proposed rule, the Coalition has a substantial interest in the outcome of this rulemaking.

The common thread among the Coalition’s diverse members is that they are responsible and conscientious employers that care deeply about their employees’ safety and health. Indeed, although no two are the same, each employer in the Coalition already has in place a heat illness prevention program. Our motivation here is to ensure that if OSHA promulgates a heat injury and illness prevention standard, that it is effective in its purpose–protecting workers from heat illness hazards–and reasonable in the burdens it places on employers.

Attached below is a copy of the full comments.

Dear Administrator Regan:

The International Liquid Terminals Association (“ILTA”) hereby petitions the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA” or “Agency”), pursuant to Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (“CAA” or “Act”),1 to reconsider and amend provisions of New Source Performance Standard (“NSPS”) Subpart Kc identified below, and to stay certain of the subpart’s unique provisions (40 CFR § 60.110c(e), § 60.112c(c)(2)(vi), the final sentence of § 60.112c(d)(1), and paragraph (d)(1)(i)) until the requested amendments to Subpart Kc have been adopted.

EPA adopted Subpart Kc as part of the final rule entitled New Source Performance Standards Review for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (Including Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels), 89 Fed. Reg. at 83,296 (October 15, 2024). Herein this rulemaking is referred to as the “Final Rule,” and the rule proposal, New Source Performance Standards Review for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (Including Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels), 88 Fed. Reg. at 68,535 (October 4, 2023), is referred to as the “Proposed Rule.”

Attached below is a copy of the full comments.

Dear Commissioner LaTourette,

On behalf of its membership, the International Liquid Terminals Association (ILTA) is seeking clarification regarding the New Jersey Discharges of Petroleum and Other Hazardous Substances regulations.

Founded in 1974, ILTA represents 80 companies operating liquid terminals in all 50 states and in over 40 countries. Our members’ facilities provide critical links between all modes of transportation for liquid commodities, such as crude oil, petroleum products, chemicals, renewable fuels, fertilizer, vegetable oils and other food-grade materials that are central to the U.S. economy. Terminals provide essential logistics services that spur trade both within the United States and connect the U.S. economy with overseas markets. ILTA’s membership also includes about 400 companies that supply equipment and services to the terminal industry.

Regarding the regulation, the preamble states that there is no requirement to implement mitigation measures identified in the climate resiliency plan. N.J.A.C 7:1E-4.12b requires that major facilities identify measures to mitigate the impacts of climate change identified in the analysis required by the proposed rule, to identify those mitigation measures that are deemed to be feasible, and to develop an implementation schedule for those measures.

It looks like the Department is requiring that facilities conduct an assessment and establish an implementation schedule, while the preamble states that the proposed rule does not require the owner or operator to implement mitigation measures.

We are asking the Department to clarify the mitigation implementation requirements for the climate resiliency plan, and whether the plan needs to be certified by NJ Certified Professional Engineer. We would also like to know what format is required for the climate resiliency plan, and whether it needs to be integrated into DPCC/DCR or can be a standalone plan.

Please do not hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions.

Respectfully,
Leakhena Swett
President
International Liquid Terminals Association

The International Liquid Terminals Association (ILTA), submit these comments responding to the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act (CIRCIA) Reporting Requirements Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) published by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) in the Federal Register on April 04, 2024. ILTA represents 82 commercial operators of over 600 aboveground liquid storage terminals that handle a wide range of liquid commodities, including crude oil, refined petroleum products, chemicals, fertilizers, animal fats, and vegetable oils. For this reason, CIRCIA’s reporting requirements are of special interest to ILTA.

Download the comments below.