BP Hiding Critical Dispersant Data

Ticker

Monika Bauerlein,
CEO

Dear Reader,

The next few months are make-or-break for Mother Jones’ fundraising, and we need more online readers to pitch in than have been of late. In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we take a level-headed look at the brutal economics of journalism, why investigative reporting like you get from us matters, and why we're optimistic we can grow our base of support in a big way—starting with hitting a huge $300,000 goal in just three weeks. Please learn more and donate if you can right now.

The next few months are make-or-break for Mother Jones’ fundraising. We need to raise $300,000 quickly, and we need more online readers to pitch in than have been. Please learn more in "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," where we go into the brutal economics of journalism, and what makes Mother Jones unique and worth supporting if you can right now.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

BP continues to defy a directive from the Environmental Protection Agency to find a less toxic alternative for the chemicals the company is using to disperse oil in the Gulf. And despite a separate order from EPA and the Department of Homeland Security to make its operations more transparent, BP is still keeping crucial information about its activities in the Gulf under wraps.

BP sent a letter to the EPA Thursday saying that it was unable to find a replacement dispersant. The company redacts a number of critical pieces of data, which it claims are “confidential business information.” An excerpt:

The EPA released a statement on Saturday saying that the agency it is working to get more information released:

BP and several of the dispersant manufacturers have claimed some sections of BP’s response contain confidential business information (CBI). By law, CBI cannot be immediately made public except with the company’s permission. EPA challenged these companies to make more information public and, as a result, several portions of the letter can now be made public. EPA is currently evaluating all legal options to ensure that the remaining redacted information is released to the public. EPA continues to strongly urge these companies to voluntarily make this information public so Americans can get a full picture of the potential environmental impact of these alternative dispersants.

I’ve asked EPA just how much the agency can do to force BP’s hand on disclosure and moving to a less toxic dispersant option. I’ll update as more information is available.