Environmentalists file lawsuit challenging BP plan
By TOM COYNE
Associated Press Writer
6:47 PM CDT, July 9, 2008
SOUTH BEND, Ind.
An environmental group filed a lawsuit Wednesday asking a federal judge to halt BP's $3.8 billion expansion of its Whiting refinery, saying the company needs to obtain a more stringent air permit before it can continue.
The Natural Resources Defense Council contends BP obtained a "minor source" air permit from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management when it should have obtained a "major source" permit under the federal Clean Air Act, according to the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Hammond.
Ann Alexander, a senior attorney with NRDC, said BP failed to account for all the added pollution the expansion will cause, including an increase in sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds and particulate matter. The additional pollution will cause health problems such as such as asthma and bronchitis, and environmental problems such as ozone and acid rain, the lawsuit contends.
BP spokeswoman Sarah Howell said the company could not comment on the lawsuit because it had not fully reviewed it. But she said the refinery expansion is in line with calls for more U.S. refining capacity and the nation's energy security.
"This project has and will continue to undergo intense regulatory scrutiny and will comply with state and federal regulations governing protection of human health and the environment," she said.
BP has said the expanded refinery would be the nation's top processor of heavy high-sulfur Canadian crude oil, boosting its annual production of gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel by 15 percent to about 4.7 billion gallons annually.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last month approved the air permit issued to BP by IDEM. BP began work on the expansion on May 1, the same day it got final state approval.
The NRDC contends the expansion fails to account for three new flares, which would be used to burn off gases generated in the refining process. Alexander said BP contends it did not have to count pollution from the flares because it does not plan to use them. She called that an "absurd assumption."
"That's not the way it works," she said. "The Clean Air Act says you have to count everything."
The lawsuit contends BP failed to account for other sources of pollution, including sulfur emissions from leaks in valves, flanges and other places and venting from pressure-relief devices.
The air permit also faces challenges at the state level. Several environmental groups last month agreed to drop their attempts to halt the BP construction in exchange for expedited hearings on their appeals.
The NRDC is encouraged by an EPA appeals board's ruling last month in an Illinois case. That decision said the state failed to adequately address questions raised when it granted an air permit to ConocoPhillips for an expansion of a refinery in Roxana, Ill., outside St. Louis.
"The Conoco was a situation where the EPA put its foot down and said, 'No, you don't just get to gloss over flare emissions. They're very important. They're very significant,"' Alexander said. "That does give us confidence that a federal court is going to do the right thing as well."
The lawsuit filed Wednesday asks a judge to stop the expansion until BP meets the Clean Air Act requirements and fine BP up to $32,500 a day for each violation of the act.
chicagotribune.com |
