BP Oil Spill Response Update: Statement of Lisa P. Jackson Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency / Legislative Hearing on Use of Dispersants in BP Oil Spill
SEE ALSO: Complete EPA BP Spill News
Chairman Mikulski, Ranking Member Shelby and Members
of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the role
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the Deepwater Horizon
BP oil spill response. My testimony today will provide you with an overview
of EPA’s role and activities in the affected Gulf Coast region
following the April 20, 2010 Deepwater Horizon mobile offshore drilling
unit explosion and resulting oil spill as well as a summary of our primary
environmental activities, including dispersant use, waste management, and
beach cleanup. I also want to express my condolences to the families of
those who lost their lives and those injured in the explosion and sinking
of the Deepwater Horizon.
EPA’s
Oil Spill Program
EPA’s Oil
Spill Program focuses on activities to prevent, prepare for and respond to
oil spills from a wide variety of facilities that handle, store, or use
various types of oil. EPA regulates approximately 620,000 of these
facilities, including oil production, bulk oil storage, and oil refinery
facilities that store or use oil in above-ground and certain below-ground
storage tanks. Additionally, EPA is the principal federal response agency
for oil spills in the inland zone, including inland waters. Such inland
zone oil spills may come from, oil pipeline ruptures, tank spills, and
other sources.
The National Contingency
Plan (NCP) is the federal government's blueprint for responding to both oil
spills and hazardous substance releases. Additionally, it provides the
federal government with a framework for notification, communication, and
responsibility for oil spill response. Under the NCP, the EPA or the USCG
provide federal On-Scene Coordinators (FOSCs) for the inland and coastal
zones, respectively, to direct or oversee responses to oil spills. The
exact lines between the inland and coastal zones are determined by Regional
Response Teams (RRTs) and established by Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs)
between regional EPA and USCG offices.
Other federal agencies with related authorities and expertise
may be called upon to support the FOSC. The NCP established the National
Response Team (NRT), comprised of fifteen federal agencies, to assist
responders by formulating policies, providing information, technical
advice, and access to resources and equipment for preparedness and response
to oil spills and hazardous substance releases. EPA serves as chair of the
NRT and the USCG serves as vice-chair.
In addition to the NRT, there are thirteen RRTs, one for each
of EPA’s ten regional offices and one each for Alaska, the Caribbean,
and the Pacific Basin. RRTs are co-chaired by each EPA Region and its USCG
counterpart. The RRTs are also comprised of representatives from other
federal agencies and state representation, and frequently assist the
federal OSCs who lead spill response efforts. The RRTs help OSCs in their
spill response decision making, and can help identify and mobilize
specialized resources. For example, through the RRT, the FOSC can request
and receive assistance on natural resource issues from the Department of
the Interior (DOI), the Department of Commerce, and the States, or borrow
specialized equipment from the Department of Defense or other agencies.
Involvement of the RRT in these response decisions and activities helps
ensure efficient agency coordination while providing the FOSC with the
assistance necessary to conduct successful spill response actions. Under
the NCP, authority to use dispersants rests with the FOSC but requires
concurrence of certain RRT members. For example, RRT representatives from
EPA, DOI, the Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the states with jurisdiction over
the navigable waters under consideration may pre-authorize application of
approved dispersant products so that the FOSC can authorize dispersant use
without obtaining further concurrences.
EPA’s Role in Spill
Response
USCG is the
incident-specific Chair for the response following the April 20, 2010
Deepwater Horizon mobile offshore drilling unit explosion and resulting oil
spill. EPA is one of many agencies providing support to the USCG-led
federal response. EPA’s monitoring and sampling activities provide
the USCG, states, and local government with information about the potential
impacts of the oil spill and response on human health of residents and
aquatic life along the shoreline. EPA is collecting samples along the
shoreline and beyond for chemicals related to oil and dispersants in the
air, water and sediment, supporting and advising USCG efforts to clean the
reclaimed oil and waste from the shoreline, and closely monitoring the
effects of dispersants in the subsurface environment.
The USCG, in consultation with EPA and the states,
approved waste management plans outlining how recovered oil and waste
generated as a result of the BP oil spill will be managed. The plans take
into consideration review of applicable federal, state, and local
regulations, planning for waste characterization, and, BP’s proposed
locations for waste management activities in order to consider the
suitability of specific sites and the impacts on the surrounding
communities. Given the unprecedented aspects of the BP oil spill, these
plans may be updated as necessary to minimize any unforeseen environmental
and human health impacts. EPA will post any updates to the plan on its
website.
In addition, USCG, in
consultation with EPA, issued directives to BP on June 29, 2010, on how the
company should manage recovered oil, contaminated materials and liquid and
solid wastes recovered in cleanup operations from the BP oil spill in the
affected Gulf states. The directives create enforceable requirements,
implementation procedures and oversight plans related to BP’s
handling of waste materials by providing guidelines for community
engagement activities and sets transparency requirements on information
regarding the proper management of liquid and solid wastes, requiring BP to
give EPA and state agencies access to facilities or any location where
waste is temporarily or permanently stored. Access includes allowing the
agencies to perform any activities necessary, such as assessments, sampling
or inspections, and requiring BP to comply with all applicable federal,
state and local laws and regulations and to ensure that all facilities
where waste is located or placed have obtained all permits and approvals
necessary under such laws and regulations. The directives complement the
state’s activities by providing further oversight and imposing more
specific requirements. USCG and EPA, in consultation with the states, will
hold BP accountable for the implementation of the approved waste management
plans and ensure that the directives are followed in the Gulf Coast states.
EPA is also responsible for maintaining
the NCP Product Schedule, which lists chemical and biological products
available for federal OSCs to use in spill response and cleanup efforts.
Due to the unique nature of each spill, and the potential range of impacts
to natural resources, FOSCs help determine which products, if any, should
be used in a particular spill response. If the application of a product is
pre-authorized by the RRT, then the FOSC may decide to use the product in a
particular response. If the product application does not have
pre-authorization from the RRT, then the FOSC must obtain concurrence from
the EPA representative and the representatives of states with jurisdiction
over the navigable waters under threat. In addition, the FOSC must consult
with representatives of DOI and NOAA, as natural resource trustee agencies
before authorizing incident-specific use of a dispersant.
Use of Dispersants
Following the April 20, 2010 Deepwater Horizon
mobile offshore drilling unit explosion and resulting oil spill, the USCG,
in consultation with EPA, DOI, NOAA, and the State of Louisiana, granted BP
authorization to use approved dispersant on oil on the surface of the water
in an effort to mitigate the shoreline impacts of the oil on fisheries,
nurseries, wetlands and other sensitive environments. Dispersants contain a
mixture of chemicals, that, when applied directly to the spilled oil, can
break down the oil into smaller drops that can sink below the water’s
surface. Dispersed oil forms a "plume" or "cloud" of oil droplets below the
water surface, and mixes vertically and horizontally into the water column,
and is ideally rapidly diluted. Bacteria and other microscopic organisms
are then able to act more quickly than they otherwise would to degrade the
oil within the droplets.
The
application of dispersant is part of a broader environmental triage
approach to minimize the known threat to the environment to the greatest
extent possible. The spill management strategies, practices, and
technologies currently being implemented include mechanical removal
techniques (use of sorbents, booming and skimming operations), in-situ
burning, and lastly dispersants. There are environmental tradeoffs and
uncertainties associated with the widespread use of large quantities of
dispersants. We know dispersants are generally less toxic than the oils
they break down. We know that surface use of dispersants decreases the
environmental risks to shorelines and organisms at the surface and when
used this way, dispersants break down over several days to weeks. In
addition, the use of dispersants at the source of the leak represents a
novel approach to addressing the significant environmental threat posed by
the spill. Results to date indicate that subsea use of the dispersant is
effective at reducing the amount of oil reaching the surface, and can do so
by using less dispersant than is needed to disperse oil after it reaches
the surface, and has resulted in significant reductions in the overall
quantity of dispersants being used to minimize impacts in the deepsea.
On May 10, 2010, EPA and USCG issued a
Directive requiring BP to implement a monitoring and assessment plan for
both subsurface and surface applications of dispersants as part of the BP
oil spill response. Additionally, on May 26, 2010, EPA and USCG directed BP
to significantly decrease the overall volume of dispersant used and to
cease use of dispersant on the surface of the water altogether unless
conditions on the ground limited the use of other mechanical means. Since
that directive, we have seen the total volume of dispersants used fall by
almost 70% from their peak levels.
EPA
has also established an extensive network to rigorously monitor the air,
water, and sediments for the presence of dispersants and crude oil
components that could have an impact on health or the environment. All
monitoring information and data are posted on EPA’s website at:
http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/. In addition, for subsea monitoring, the toxicity data
generated from this monitoring to date does not indicate significant
effects on aquatic life. We are closely watching the dissolved oxygen
levels, which so far remain in the normal range. Moreover, decreased size
of the oil droplets is a good indication that, so far, the dispersant is
effective.
Because of the unprecedented
volumes of dispersant being used in the United States and because much is
unknown about the underwater use of dispersants, Addendum 2 to the May 10,
2010 directive requires BP to determine whether a less toxic, equally
effective product is available. Normally the manufacturers conduct such
tests independently; however, EPA began its own scientific testing of eight
dispersant products on the National Contingency Plan Product Schedule. EPA
required toxicity tests to standard test species, including a sensitive
species of Gulf of Mexico invertebrate (mysid shrimp) and fish (silverside)
which are common species in Gulf of Mexico estuarine habitats. The
invertebrate and fish species tested are considered to be representative of
the sensitivity of many species in the Gulf of Mexico, based on years of
toxicity testing with other substances. Initial peer reviewed results from
the first round of EPA’s toxicity testing indicated that none of the
eight dispersants tested, including the product currently in use in the
Gulf, COREXIT 9500 A, displayed biologically significant endocrine
disrupting activity. The results are posted on our website.
While we await the final round of scientific
testing, it appears that all the products that are currently registered
have roughly the same impact on aquatic life. While this is important
information to have, additional testing is needed to further inform the use
of dispersants. The next phase of EPA’s testing will assess the acute
toxicity of multiple concentrations of Louisiana Sweet Crude Oil alone and
combinations of Louisiana Sweet Crude Oil with each of the eight
dispersants for two test species.
Research and Development
Numerous questions have been raised on the effectiveness of
dispersants, their inherent toxicity, the toxicity of dispersed oil, and
how to deal with the shoreline and wetlands that are now being impacted as
the spill moves to shore. Historically, EPA has had a modest oil spill
research and development program. Events of the past several weeks
associated with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill have made it evident that
this modest investment must increase to address the uncertainties that have
arisen. The Administration has requested supplemental funds for dispersant
research associated with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. If the funds are
appropriated, EPA plans to engage institutions and other federal agencies,
such as NOAA and DOI, who have the knowledge and expertise to assist the
Agency. The $2.0 million requested by the President will support research
that will begin to provide a greater understanding of the short and long
term implications to the environment and public health associated with the
spill and the application, surface and undersea, of dispersants. We will
also further our research efforts to include innovative and expansive
approaches to spill remediation.
The
President’s request represents an important step forward to improve
our understanding of the impacts and implications of the use of dispersants
and exposure to the dispersed oil and the potential impact on the
environment and human health. EPA intends to continue to pursue an
aggressive research agenda over time which will address the mechanisms of
environmental fate, effects, and transport of the application of
dispersants on released crude oil. This will be conducted by both assessing
the risks to human health from exposure to chemical dispersants and
chemically-dispersed oil mixtures through direct and indirect exposure and
increasing our understanding of chemical dispersants and dispersed oil,
including its toxicity over a broad range of aquatic and terrestrial
ecosystems and species. EPA will also collaborate with NOAA and other
federal agencies to study the environmental and human health impacts of
dispersants and chemically-dispersed oil.
Summary and Conclusions
EPA will continue to provide full support to the USCG and the
UC, and will continue to take a proactive and robust role in dispersant use
as well as monitoring, identifying, and responding to potential public
health and environmental concerns, including waste management and beach
cleanup. EPA, in coordination with our federal, state, and local partners,
is committed to protecting Gulf Coast communities from the adverse
environmental effects of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. As local Gulf
Coast communities assess the impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on
their economies, EPA, in partnership with other federal, state, and local
agencies, as well as other community stakeholders, will devote its efforts
necessary to assist in the oil spill response. At this time I welcome any
questions you may have.
For more information on EPA’s efforts in
the gulf and for the latest air, water, sediment and underwater dispersant
monitoring data: http://www.epa.gov/bpspill