EPA’s ‘secret science’ proposal being used by Big Oil to undermine clean water rules

Internal emails reveal two major fossil fuel trade groups are lobbying to stop the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from updating a decades-old list of toxic chemicals found in petroleum wastewater — and they’re using the Trump administration’s controversial “secret science” proposal to make their case. 

An Exxon gas refinery in Baytown, Texas.

The EPA currently monitors for 16 types of chemicals in wastewater, or effluent, released by petroleum refineries under the Clean Water Act. However, in the more than 40 years since the list was developed, scientific understanding around the number of chemicals and their toxicity levels has grown. As a result, the EPA is in the early stages of determining whether the priority list of chemicals needs to be updated.

But according to emails released to the Sierra Club and reviewed by ThinkProgress, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) are lobbying to limit the scope of the EPA’s study.

Read the story from ThinkProgress by Kyla Mandel - “EPA’s ‘secret science’ proposal being used by Big Oil to undermine clean water rules.”

CSIRO worried Great Barrier Reef Foundation could spend millions of dollars on overheads, emails reveal

The head of the CSIRO warned in internal emails that the Great Barrier Reef Foundation (GBRF) was in danger of spending "millions in overheads" after it received a controversial $444 million grant from the Federal Government.

Larry Marshall said the CSIRO could help the foundation's
 chief executive with money management.

The email was one of many revealed in documents tabled in Parliament this week, after Labor initiated an order for the production of documents.

The emails also reveal a string of other concerns by people within the CSIRO, including that the GBRF could have trouble showing it was spending the money well.

Read the ABC News story by Michael Slezak - “CSIRO worried Great Barrier Reef Foundation could spend millions of dollars on overheads, emails reveal.”