Southampton - Timothy Bishop (D-NY) and Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), both senior Members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, introduced a bill calling for a ban on the use of chemical dispersants in oil cleanup efforts. The Ban Toxic Dispersants Act of 2011 would establish new procedures for the use of dispersants and ensure the safety of public health, water quality and the environment. Dispersants' toll on the Gulf of Mexico one year after the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill remains high and has been insufficiently studied or addressed.

"We need rigorous scientific testing of the long-term effects of chemical dispersants on public health and the environment before the government endorses their continued use," said Bishop. "It's time to take a step back and ensure dispersants are effective on oil spills in our waters and won't harm water quality and marine habitats."

"We cannot use the Gulf of Mexico or anywhere else that suffers an oil spill as testing grounds for little-known toxic chemicals," said Nadler. "It is time that we establish a comprehensive approach for the use of dispersants if we are to protect the health of people, fisheries, marine mammals and their habitats."

Last year, in response to BP's Deepwater Horizon oil spill, at least 1.8 million gallons of dispersants were used in the Gulf. BP notoriously chose the petroleum-based dispersant, Corexit, one of the most toxic and least effective on Gulf crude oil, according to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) pre-approved list. There are numerous reports of illness, and lawsuits have been filed by Gulf Coast residents, workers and companies claiming to have suffered adverse health effects or loss of business due to exposure from dispersants.

Alarmingly, the full impact on human health and the environment are not yet fully known. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has stated repeatedly that the long-term effects of dispersants on aquatic life and the environment are unclear, and that the amount applied in the Gulf was unprecedented. Further, there is no scientific evidence that dispersants can be effective in an oil spill of that magnitude, and no one can guarantee that they are safe.

In 2005, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued a report, "Oil Spill Dispersants: Efficacy and Effects," analyzing the use of dispersants in response to an oil spill. The report outlined numerous aspects of oil dispersants that are not adequately understood, including how chemically dispersed oil interacts with the environment, how it enters and affects the food chain, and, most notably, "the mechanisms of both acute and sublethal toxicity from exposure to dispersed oil." The NAS report cautioned that, "the current understanding of key processes and mechanisms is inadequate to confidently support a decision to apply dispersants."

The Ban Toxic Dispersants Act of 2011 requires the EPA to carry out a new rulemaking procedure to establish baseline levels of toxicity and effectiveness, taking into account a study of the acute and chronic risks posed by the use of dispersants. In other words, the EPA must determine whether or not it's safe to use these dispersants before granting any approvals.

The bill also includes a temporary moratorium on the use of dispersants until the rulemaking and study ensuring their safety is complete, although the EPA can grant conditional approvals if it determines that there will be no negative impact on human health or the environment. The bill also makes the ingredients and the location of applied dispersants available to the public on the internet. This legislation is similar to a provision that passed the House last year as part of H.R. 3534, the Consolidated Land, Energy and Aquatic Resources (CLEAR) Act.