Paul Quinlan, E&E reporter
Published: Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Environmental, public health and fishing groups in Alaska and the Gulf
Coast filed a lawsuit against U.S. EPA yesterday to prod the agency to
write new rules governing the use of oil-dispersing chemicals.
Citing accelerating oil and gas drilling activity in their regions,
the groups want EPA to perform more robust tests on the toxicity and
effectiveness of dispersants in specific water bodies.
EPA publishes a national contingency plan for oil spills that lists
dispersants that are either authorized or eligible to be pre-
authorized for use. The lawsuit accuses the agency of an “ongoing
failure” to include details in the plan about the water bodies or
quantities in which the chemicals can be safely deployed, as required
under the Clean Water Act.
The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
calls for the court to vacate dispersant listings of the last six
years and order EPA to publish a product schedule that includes all
the required information. Earthjustice filed the lawsuit on behalf of
the Louisiana Shrimp Association, the Florida Wildlife Federation, the
Gulf Restoration Network, the Louisiana Environmental Action Network,
Alaska-based Cook Inletkeeper, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, the
Waterkeeper Alliance and the Sierra Club.
“We’re disappointed that the agency doesn’t seem to understand the
widespread public urgency to initiate this rulemaking process,” said
Jill Mastrototaro, director of the Sierra Club’s Gulf Coast Protection
Campaign. “If a spill or blowout happened tomorrow in the Gulf of
Mexico, or any U.S. water for that matter, any dispersant that is used
would not necessarily be safe for the waters, ecosystems, response
workers or nearby communities.”
The groups first notified EPA of their intent to sue in October 2010
(E&ENews PM, Oct. 13, 2010), not long after the Deepwater Horizon
exploded, setting off an 87-day spill. They fear a repeat of what
happened then: 1.8 million gallons of oil dispersants used in the Gulf
of Mexico, even as scientists raised sharp questions about the
strategy.
Dispersants break up oil into tiny droplets that sink below the ocean
surface, effectively keeping it out of sensitive coastal marshes and
enabling it to be consumed by bacteria and other marine organisms.
Many experts fear what effect the accumulation of the oil and
chemicals in the underwater ecosystem might have on the food chain and
whether the overall approach does more harm than good.
Forced to rely on its own incomplete data during the spill, EPA
waffled over whether to allow the dispersant use to continue and
engaged in what amounted to a shoving match with oil giant BP PLC
(Greenwire, April 22, 2011). EPA did not respond to a request for
comment in time for publication.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has said the agency needs to learn more
about the use and long-term impacts of dispersants, telling the
presidential commission that investigated the spill that she was
“committed to revisiting” the dispersant listing process Greenwire,
Sept. 28, 2010).
Current federal requirements allow dispersant manufacturers to submit
toxicity data in advance of their chemical’s listing on the national
contingency plan product schedule. That is a prerequisite to pre-
authorization of their use in fighting spills. Without a pre-
authorization plan in place, the on-scene coordinator may authorize a
dispersant’s use, provided it is listed.
In those scenarios, the groups argue that failure to include more
detail on the product schedule leads to uninformed and potentially
dangerous decisionmaking.
“EPA’s failure to obtain, and in turn include on the NCP Product
Schedule, this statutorily-mandated information has seriously hobbled
emergency response to oil spills, most recently in the Deepwater
Horizon oil disaster,” the lawsuit said.
Special thanks to Richard Charter