Fossil fuel lobby groups oppose EPA's move to update a 1976 list of toxic pollutants found in petrochemical wastewater according to internal emails released to the Sierra Club. Currently the agency monitors 16 types of chemicals in effluent pursuant to the Clean Water Act. Scientific developments have made the list incomplete. Specifically, the two lobby groups, American Petroleum Institute and American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufactures want two chemical groups known to be poisonous to aquatic life and potentially dangerous to humans to be excepted from EPA's study. The 1976 list of toxic chemicals was created based on what was commercially available at
the time, but many more variations of toxic chemicals exist now.
Also, toxicology has improved understanding of the adverse health
impacts of a wide range of chemicals found in effluents, including new compounds known to be carcinogenic.
Aalkylated polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (alkylated-PAHs) and Naphthenic acids (NAs) are mainly waste compounds from burning coal and oil. Alkylated PAHs make up about 97 of PAH compounds found in crude oil, making their exclusion significant. NAs are found primarily in the byproducts of tar sands oil and are non-biodegradable; they are stored in toxic tailing ponds at the site of refining. At high exposure levels, both of these types of compounds cause tumors in aquatic birds and fish, and impair life-cycle functions. NAs also cause liver and heart damage in mice. Human affects are still being studied, but the PAH compounds are known to cause eye and skin irritation, nausea, and diarrhea, as well as longer-term
impacts such as kidney or liver damage and asthma-like symptoms.
The industry lobbyists in opposing study of NAs are invoking a rule proposed by the EPA director who resigned because of ethical violations, Scott Pruitt. The rule, known as "secret science" to critics would allow the EPA to rely only on data publicly released when developing new regulations. Critics say such a restriction on the type of data used by the agency would place a number of unnecessary burdens on the agency. The industry has warned the agency that using the industry’s own proprietary method of analyzing
naphthenic acids would be a “clear contradiction” of the EPA’s proposed
secret science rule. The secret science rule has not advanced under the new administrator, Andrew Wheeler. Using a proposed rule not yet in force to justify industry opposition to a study is "pretty outrageous", says the former director of EPA's Office of Water Technology and Science.