54508 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 112

[FRL–5909–5]

Oil Pollution Prevention; NonTransportation Related Onshore

Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Denial of petition requesting

amendment of the Facility Response

Plan rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is denying the request

submitted by various trade associations

to amend the Facility Response Plan

(FRP) rule that the Agency promulgated

under section 311(j) of the Clean Water

Act (CWA), as amended by the Oil

Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990. These

organizations had requested that EPA

modify the FRP rule in a number of

ways to treat facilities that handle, store,

or transport animal fats and vegetable

oils in a manner differently from those

facilities that store petroleum-based oils.

EPA believes that the petition did not

substantiate the claimed differences

between animal fats and vegetable oils

and petroleum oils so as to support a

further differentiation between these

groups of oils under the FRP rule.

Instead, EPA continues to find that a

worst case discharge or substantial

threat of discharge of animal fats and/

or vegetable oils to navigable waters,

adjoining shorelines, or the exclusive

economic zone could reasonably be

expected to cause substantial harm to

the environment, including wildlife that

may be killed by the discharge of fats or

vegetable oils. Moreover, EPA believes

that in setting different response

strategies for petroleum and nonpetroleum oils, (with animal fat and

vegetable oils in the latter category), the

FRP rule already provides for adequate

differentiation in response planning

requirements for all covered facilities.

ADDRESSES: The official record for this

decision is located in the Superfund

Docket, at the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, [Docket Number

SPCC–3]. The docket is available for

inspection between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding

Federal holidays, at US EPA Crystal

Gateway 1 (CG1), 1235 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.

Appointments to review the docket can

be made by calling 703–603–8917. The

public may copy a maximum of 266

pages from any regulatory docket at no

cost. If the number of pages copied

exceeds 266, however, a charge of 15

cents will be incurred for each

additional page, plus a $25.00

administrative fee.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bobbie Lively-Diebold, Oil Pollution

Center, Office of Emergency and

Remedial Response (5203G), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 at

703–356–8774

(lively.barbara@epamail.epa.gov); or the

RCRA/Superfund Hotline at 800–424–

9346 (in the Washington, DC

metropolitan area, 703–412–9810). The

Telecommunications Device for the Deaf

(TDD) Hotline number is 800–553–7672

(in the Washington, DC metropolitan

area, 703–412–3323).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

contents of this Denial of Petition are

listed in the following outline:

I. Background

A. The Organizations’ Petition

B. Background on the Processing and Storage

of Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats

II. Technical Evaluation of Petitioners’

Claims

A. General

B. Petitioners’ Claim: Animal Fats and

Vegetable Oils Are Non-Toxic

1. How Animal Fats and Vegetable Oils

Produce Adverse Environmental Effects

2. Physical Properties

3. Chemical Composition

4. Environmental Effects

a. Physical Effects of Spilled Oil

b. Effects of Oil on Metabolic Requirements

c. Effects of Oil on Food and the Food Web,

Communities, and Ecosystems

d. Indirect Effects

5. Toxicity

a. Principles of Toxicology

b. Exposure From Oil Spills

c. Toxicity of Petroleum Oils

d. Toxicity of Vegetable Oils and Animal

Fats

Figure 1. Toxicity and Adverse Effects of

Components and Transformation

Products of Vegetable Oils and Animal

Fat

6. Epidemiological Studies

a. Human Health

b. Comparison of Effects From Oil Spills

With Human Consumption of Vegetable

Oils and Animal Fats

7. Other Adverse Effects from Oil Spills

a. Aesthetic Effects: Fouling and Rancidity

b. Fire Hazards

c. Effects on Water Treatment

8. FWS Comments

C. Petitioners’ Claim: Animal Fats and

Vegetable Oils Are Essential Components

of Human and Wildlife Diets

1. Nutritional Requirements for Dietary Fat

2. Essential Fatty Acids (EFA)

3. Adverse Effects of High Levels of EFAs

4. Adverse Effects of High Levels of Fats and

Oils

5. Relevance of EFA Principles to Spills

6. FWS Comments on Essential Fatty Acids

D. Petitioners’ Claim: Animal Fats and

Vegetable Oils Are Readily

Biodegradable and Do Not Persist in the

Environment

1. Chemical and Biological Processes

Affecting Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats

in the Environment

a. Chemical Processes

b. Biological Processes

c. Rancidity

2. Environmental Fate and Effects of Spilled

Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats: RealWorld Examples

3. FWS Comments on Degradation

E. Petitioners’ Claim: Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats Have a High BOD, Which

Could Result in Oxygen Deprivation

Where There Is a Large Spill in a

Confined Body of Water

F. Petitioners’ Claim: Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats Can Coat Aquatic Biota and

Foul Wildlife

III. Petitioners’ Suggested Language to

Amend the July 1, 1994, Facility Response

Plan Rule

A. Background

B. Regulatory Language Changes Proposed by

the Petitioners

IV. Conclusions

Acronym List

Bibliography

Appendix I: Supporting Tables

Table 1. Comparison of Physical Properties of

Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats with

Petroleum Oils

Table 2. Comparison of Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats with Petroleum Oils

Table 3. Comparison of Aqua Methods and

Standard Acute Aquatic Testing Methods

Table 4. Effects of Real-World Oil Spills

Appendix II: Edible Oil Regulatory Reform

Act Differentiation

I. Background

The OPA (Pub. L. 101–380, 104 Stat.

484) was enacted to expand prevention

and preparedness activities, improve

response capabilities, ensure that

shippers and oil companies pay the

costs of spills that do occur, provide an

additional economic incentive to

prevent spills through increased

penalties and enhanced enforcement,

establish an expanded research and

development program, and establish a

new Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund

administered by the U.S. Coast Guard.

Section 4202(a) of the OPA amends

CWA section 311(j) to require

regulations for owners or operators of

facilities to prepare and submit ‘‘a plan

for responding, to the maximum extent

practicable, to a worst case discharge,

and to a substantial threat of such a

discharge, of oil or a hazardous

substance.’’ This requirement applies to

all offshore facilities and any onshore

facility that, ‘‘because of its location,

could reasonably be expected to cause

substantial harm to the environment by

discharging into or on the navigable
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54509

waters, adjoining shorelines, or the

exclusive economic zone’’ (‘‘substantial

harm facilities’’).

On July 1, 1994, EPA published its

Final Rule amending the Oil Pollution

Prevention regulation (40 CFR part 112)

to incorporate new requirements to

implement amended section 311(j)(5) of

the CWA. (Oil Pollution Prevention;

Non-Transportation-Related Onshore

Facilities; Final Rule, 59 FR 34070, July

1, 1994). Under authority of section

311(j)(1)(C) of the CWA, the Final Rule

also requires planning for a small and

medium discharge of oil, as appropriate.

In the final rule, EPA determined that

for the purposes of section 311(j)

planning, the OPA includes nonpetroleum oils. The Agency noted that

the definition of ‘‘oil’’ in the Clean

Water Act includes oil of any kind, and

that EPA uses this broad definition in 40

CFR part 110, Discharge of Oil. Animal

fats and vegetable oils fall within the

CWA definition of ‘‘oil.’’

Only a small number, no more than

11⁄4 percent of the total SPCC

community regulated (approximately

5,400 of a total of 435,000 facilities)

under 40 CFR part 112.1–112.7 meet the

criteria for substantial harm under 40

CFR 112.20. Only a small number of the

5,400 substantial harm facilities (an

estimated 50 to 100) store or use

vegetable oil and animal fat and have

prepared and submitted FRPs.

A. The Organizations’ Petition

By a letter dated August 12, 1994,

EPA received a ‘‘Petition for

Reconsideration and Stay of Effective

Date’’ of the OPA-mandated FRP final

rule as that rule applies to facilities that

handle, store, or transport animal fats or

vegetable oils. The petition was

submitted on behalf of seven

agricultural organizations (‘‘the

Organizations’’ or ‘‘Petitioners’’): the

American Soybean Association, the

Corn Refiners Association, the National

Corn Growers Association, the Institute

of Shortening & Edible Oils, the

National Cotton Council, the National

Cottonseed Products Association, and

the National Oilseed Processors

Association.

To support the Petition, the

Organizations referenced an industrysponsored report titled ‘‘Environmental

Effects of Release of Animal Fats and

Vegetable Oils to Waterways’’ (prepared

by ENVIRON Corporation, June 28,

1993), and an associated study titled

‘‘Diesel Fuel, Beef Tallow, RBD Soybean

Oil and Crude Soybean Oil: Acute

Effects on the Fathead Minnow,

Pimephales Promelas’’ (prepared by

Aqua Survey, Inc., May 21, 1993). Both

the report and the study had been

submitted to EPA during the facility

response plan rulemaking as enclosures

to a comment filed over nine months

after the close of the comment period.

Based, in part, on these studies (the

ENVIRON report and Aqua Survey

study), the Petitioners asked EPA to

create a regulatory regime for response

planning for non-petroleum, ‘‘nontoxic’’ oils separate from the regime

established for petroleum oils and

‘‘toxic,’’ non-petroleum oils.

The report and the study provided

information on certain physical,

toxicological, and chemical properties

of animal fats and vegetable oils

compared with other types of oil. The

petitioners argued that according to the

ENVIRON report, the presence of animal

fats and vegetable oils in the

environment does not cause significant

harm. Six specific conclusions of the

ENVIRON report regarding vegetable

oils and animal fats were that these

substances are not toxic to the

environment; are essential components

to human and wildlife diets; readily

biodegrade; are not persistent in the

environment like petroleum oils; do

have a high Biochemical Oxygen

Demand (BOD), which could result in

oxygen deprivation where there is a

large spill in a confined body of water

that has low flow and dilution; and can

coat aquatic biota and foul wildlife.

The Petitioners also submitted an

Appendix to their Petition that included

specific suggested language to amend

the July 1, 1994, FRP rule. The

submitted language would have resulted

in the following changes regarding

facilities that handle, store, or transport

animal fats and vegetable oils: Further

clarified the definition of animal fats

and vegetable oil (set out in Appendix

E, 1.2 of the FRP); allowed mechanical

dispersal and ‘‘no action’’ options to be

considered in lieu of the oil

containment and recovery devices

otherwise specified for response for a

worst case discharge; required the use of

a containment boom only for the

protection of fish and wildlife and

sensitive environments; and increased

required on-scene arrival time for

response resources from 12 hours

(including travel time) to 24 hours plus

travel time for medium discharges and

worst case Tier 1 response resources.

The Federal natural resource trustee

agencies, including the Fish and

Wildlife Service (FWS), had reviewed

the ENVIRON study. In an April 11,

1994, letter to the Department of

Transportation’s (DOT) Research and

Special Projects Administration (RSPA),

the FWS stated that the Report did not

provide an accurate assessment of the

dangers that non-petroleum oils pose to

fish and wildlife and environmentally

sensitive areas. The letter stated that the

key facts were misrepresented,

incomplete, or omitted in the Report.

FWS also observed that the ENVIRON

report failed to give appropriate

significance to the fouling potential of

edible oils (USDOI/FWS, 1994).

The National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

also had evaluated the effects on the

environment of spilled non-petroleum

oils, including coconut, corn,

cottonseed, fish, and palm oils.

(Memorandum of Record, dated June 3,

1993, from the Department of Commerce

(DOC)/NOAA Hazardous Materials

Response and Assessment Division.)

The NOAA assessment, based on

literature research, addresses physical

and chemical properties and toxicity of

these and other oils, and indicates that

some edible oils, when spilled, may

have adverse environmental effects.

(The views of the FWS and NOAA on

the adverse effects of animal fats and

vegetables are discussed in detail in the

preamble to the U.S. Coast Guard’s final

rule setting forth response plan

requirements for marine transportationrelated facilities, [61 FR 7890, 7907–

7908, Feb. 29, 1996] and are included in

the docket that supports this decision.

These views also are discussed in EPA’s

Request for Data and Comment on

Response Strategies for Facilities That

Handle, Store, or Transport Certain

Non-Petroleum Oils, 59 FR 53742–

53743, October 26, 1994.)

On October 26, 1994, in view of the

differing scientific conclusions reached

by the Petitioners, the FWS, and other

groups and agencies, EPA requested

broader public comment on issues

raised by the Petitioners in a notice and

request for data (Request for Data and

Comment on Response Strategies for

Facilities That Handle, Store, or

Transport Certain Non-Petroleum Oils,

59 FR 53742, October 26, 1994). These

issues included whether to have

different specific response approaches

for releases of animal fats and vegetable

oils (rather than increased flexibility),

and the effects on the environment of

releases of these oils. EPA also asked

commenters to recommend specific data

that relate to the comparison of

petroleum and non-petroleum oils. EPA

received fourteen comments in response

to its October 26, 1994, notice and

request for data.

Of these fourteen commenters, most

agreed with the trade associations’

request that EPA should modify the FRP

rule. Most of the commenters asserted

that, based upon the ENVIRON report,

animal fats and vegetable oils are

readily biodegradable and not persistent
54510 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

in the environment. Certain commenters

also argued that vegetable oils and

animal fats are less toxic than other

types of oils. Other commenters argued

that edible oils pose less risk to the

environment because they are typically

stored in smaller tanks at food

processing facilities, whereas

petroleum-based oils are stored in larger

tanks at petroleum facilities. One

commenter, citing the unnecessary and

burdensome regulations and the

excellent spill record of the animal fat

and vegetable oil industry, stated that

EPA should differentiate animal fats and

vegetable oils from other types of oils.

One commenter questioned the

accuracy of the ENVIRON report and

stated that non-petroleum oils can

adversely affect fish and wildlife and

environmentally sensitive areas.

B. Background on the Processing and

Storage of Vegetable Oils and Animal

Fats

In 1992, approximately 20.8 billion

pounds of vegetable oils and animal fats

were consumed in the United States,

including over 14.8 billion pounds for

edible uses; and more than 5.9 billion

pounds for inedible uses, such as soap,

paint or varnish, feed, resins and

plastics, lubricants, fatty acids, and

other products (Hui, 1996a). The extent

of processing of vegetable oils and

animal fats depends on the ultimate use

of the product. Chemical composition,

which determines the toxicity and fate

of oils in the environment, changes at

each step in processing, as impurities or

specific components are removed or

chemicals formed; chemical

composition can also be changed by

storage, heating, or reactions in the

environment (Hui, 1996d; Brekke,

1980).

Processing steps in vegetable oil

facilities are generally independent

operations that are not connected by

continuous flow, and between each

processing step there may be one or

more storage tanks (Hui, 1996d). Many

crude vegetable oil storage tanks, which

are usually constructed of welded

carbon steel, have a capacity of 1

million pounds (approximately 140,000

gallons) (Hui, 1996d). They may be

located in the open or enclosed in a

structure. Storage tanks for finished fats

and oils are generally made of iron,

stainless steel, or aluminum and

typically hold between 75 and 200 tons

(about 21,000 to 56,000 gallons) of

product.

In a typical integrated vegetable oil

processing facility, steps may include

crude oil storage, preparation, extraction

and meal finishing, removal of gums

and lecithin processing, caustic refining,

bleaching and dry removal of gums and

waxes, hydrogenation,

interesterification, fractionation,

deodorizing, and shortening or

margarine production (Hui, 1996d;

Brekke, 1980). During these steps,

several classes of materials may be

removed, such as gums, phospholipids,

pigments, free fatty acids, color bodies,

pigments, metallic prooxidants, and

residual soaps. New compounds,

including oxidation products, polymers

and their decomposition products, may

be formed and contaminants introduced

during processing (Hui, 1996d).

Impurities are also removed and

chemical structure modified during

processing of animal fats (Hui, 1996d).

The major animal fats are lard and

tallow. Steps in the processing of animal

fats may include rendering, bleaching,

hydrogenation, deodorizing,

interesterification, and fractionation.

Rendering, the removal of fat from

animal tissues using heat or mechanical

means, is often a continuous process

that results in products that require no

further treatment. Further refining

removes materials, such as free fatty

acids or collagen or protein, or changes

the characteristics of the fat for

specialized use.

Spills of crude vegetable oils

containing gums, phospholipids, free

fatty acids, and a host of other chemical

components can differ greatly from

spills of processed oils in their

persistence in the environment, the

environmental compartments in which

they are distributed, the breakdown

products that they form, their rate of

degradation, and the exposure and

environmental effects that they produce.

Some minor components of oils can

affect their properties or cause adverse

health and environmental effects.

Spilled oils and fats can be transformed

by physical, chemical, or biological

processes to form products that are more

or less toxic than the original oil,

depending on the specific oil and the

products that are formed.

The EPA has considered the

Petitioners’ claims in detail. EPA’s

technical evaluation on the Petitioners’

claims is set forth in section II. EPA’s

responses to suggested changes in the

FRP regulation are provided in section

III. Detailed studies and information to

support this document are provided in

a Technical Document, which is located

in the Docket.

II. Technical Evaluation of Petitioners’

Claims

A. General

The Petitioners claim that unlike most

if not all other oils, animal fats and

vegetable oils are non-toxic, readily

biodegradable, not persistent in the

environment, and in fact are essential

components of human and wildlife

diets. Most of the Petitioners’ arguments

focus on toxicity, although toxicity is

only one of several mechanisms by

which oil spills cause environmental

damage.

In making its claims, the Petitioners

have disregarded fundamental scientific

principles and ignored a large body of

scientific evidence that was considered

by EPA in its promulgation of rules

implementing the requirements of the

CWA. The ENVIRON report submitted

by the Petitioners acknowledges that

animal fats and vegetable oils can cause

oxygen deprivation and coating of

animals, but the Petitioners incorrectly

minimize the importance of these

mechanisms in causing environmental

damage and rely instead on limited

studies in narrow areas of toxicity,

which are then improperly generalized

to support the Petitioners’ claims.

Petitioners’ submission emphasizes

that animal fats and vegetable oils are

used by all organisms for food. The

ingestion of small quantities of edible

oils by humans, however, is a

completely different situation from

spills of oil into the environment. These

situations differ markedly in the extent

and duration of exposure, the route of

exposure, the species exposed, the

composition of the chemicals involved,

the circumstances surrounding the

exposure, and the types of effects

produced—factors that determine the

toxicity and severity of the adverse

effects of chemicals. Thus, even if the

human consumption of small quantities

of oils in food were judged completely

safe, no inferences could be drawn

about the toxicity and other effects of

vegetable oils and animal fats on

environmental organisms exposed in the

very different circumstances of oil

spills.

The Petitioners’ arguments about

toxicity do not address the central issue:

Spills of animal fats and vegetable oils

kill or injure fish, birds, mammals, and

other species and produce a host of

other undesirable effects. Whether this

death and destruction results from

toxicity or from other processes, spills

of animal fats and vegetable oils should

be prevented and if spills occur, quickly

removed to reduce the environmental

harm and other adverse effects they

produce.

B. Petitioners’ Claim: Animal Fats and

Vegetable Oils Are Non-Toxic

The Petitioners claim that EPA’s

implementation of the response plan

provisions and other regulatory changes
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54511

under the CWA are inconsistent with

established regulatory principles and

with the available scientific data related

to animal fats and vegetable oils, which,

unlike other oils, are non-toxic.

EPA Response: For a number of

reasons that are detailed in this

document and the Technical Document,

EPA disagrees with the Petitioners’

contention that animal fats and

vegetable oils are non-toxic when

spilled into the environment. First,

while the Petitioners rely on laboratory

tests that measure only the acute lethal

effects of some vegetable oils and

animal fats in one species of fish, these

tests say nothing about other acute toxic

effects or long-term toxic effects, or

toxic effects on other species or

ecosystems, or toxic effects of oil spilled

in the environment under conditions

that differ from those in the laboratory.

Second, the tests submitted by the

Petitioners cannot demonstrate ‘‘nontoxicity’’ of vegetable oils and animal

fats; indeed the tests described in the

study only measure the lethality of the

oils tested under a given set of

experimental conditions. Third, other

information and data indicate that

animal fats and vegetable oils, their

components, and degradation products

are not as ‘‘non-toxic’’ as the Petitioners

assert. Fourth, while low levels of

certain animal fats and vegetable oils or

their components may be essential

constituents of the diet of humans and

wildlife, adverse effects occur from

exposure to high levels of these

chemicals. Numerous examples in the

scientific literature demonstrate that

essentiality does not confer safety and

essential elements can produce toxic

effects (Klaassen et al., 1986; NAS,

1977a; Rand and Petrocelli, 1985; Hui,

1996b).

Furthermore, EPA emphasizes that

toxicity is only one of several

mechanisms by which oil spills cause

environmental damage. As discussed

below, the physical effects of spilled

oil—such as coating animals and plants

with oil and suffocation of aquatic

organisms from oxygen depletion—and

the destruction of the food supply kill

birds and mammals, destroy fish and

other aquatic species, and damage their

habitats.

By contaminating food sources,

reducing breeding animals and plants

that provide future food, contaminating

nesting habitats, and reducing

reproductive success through

contamination and reduced hatchability

of eggs, even oils that remain in the

environment for relatively short periods

of time can cause long-term deleterious

effects years after the oil was spilled.

1. How Animal Fats and Vegetable Oils

Produce Adverse Environmental Effects

The deleterious environmental effects

of spills of petroleum oils and nonpetroleum oils, including animal fats

and vegetable oils, are produced

through physical contact and

destruction of food sources as well as

toxic contamination (USDOC/NOAA,

1996; NAS, 1985e; Crump-Wiesner and

Jennings, 1975; Frink, 1994; Frink and

Miller, 1995; Hartung, 1995; USDOI/

FWS, 1994). Nearly all of the most

immediate and devastating

environmental effects from oil spills—

such as smothering of fish or coating of

birds and mammals and their food with

oil—are physical effects related to the

physical properties of oils and their

physical interactions with living

systems (Hartung, 1995).

While these immediate physical

effects and effects on food sources may

not be considered the result of

‘‘toxicity’’ in the classic sense—i.e.,

effects that are produced when a

chemical reacts with a specific receptor

site of an organism at a high enough

concentration for a sufficient length of

time (Rand and Petrocelli, 1985)—

severe debilitation and death of fish and

wildlife are caused by spills of animal

fats and vegetable oils, other nonpetroleum oils, and petroleum oils and

their products. Adverse environmental

effects can occur long after the initial

exposure to animal fats and vegetable

oils because of toxicity, persistence of

products in the environment, or

destruction of food sources and habitat

and diminished reproduction resulting

from physical effects or toxicity.

2. Physical Properties

Petroleum oils and non-petroleum

oils, including vegetable oils and animal

fats, share common physical properties

and produce similar environmental

effects (Crump-Wiesner and Jennings,

1975; USDOI, 1994; Frink, 1994). When

spilled in the aquatic environment,

petroleum oils, animal fats and

vegetable oils and their fatty acid

constituents may float on the water’s

surface, become solubilized or

emulsified in the water column, or settle

on the bottom as a sludge, depending on

their physical and chemical properties

(Crump-Wiesner and Jennings, 1975;

DOC/NOAA, 1992, 1996). Vegetable oils

and animal fats that are solid at room

temperature still serve as potent

physical contaminants and are much

more difficult to remove from affected

animals than petroleum oil (Frink,

1994).

While the physical properties of

vegetable oils and animal fats are highly

variable, most fall within in a range that

is similar to the physical parameters for

petroleum oils. (See Appendix I, Table

1: Comparison of Physical Properties of

Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats With

Petroleum Oils and Table 2: Comparison

of Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats with

Petroleum Oils). Common properties—

such as solubility, specific gravity, and

viscosity—are responsible for the

similar environmental effects of

petroleum and vegetable oils and animal

fats. Petroleum and vegetable oils and

animal fats can enter all parts of an

aquatic system and adjacent shoreline,

and similar methods of containment,

removal and cleanup are used to reduce

the harm created by spills of petroleum

and vegetable oils and animal fats.

3. Chemical Composition

The chemical composition and

physical properties of petroleum and

non-petroleum oils, including vegetable

oils and animal fats, determine their fate

in the environment (where they go,

reactions, rate of disappearance) and the

exposure and adverse effects that they

produce. The chemical composition

changes at each step in processing, as

impurities or specific components are

removed or chemicals formed (Hui,

1996d; Brekke, 1980). Chemical

composition can also change with

storage, heating, or reactions in the

environment.

The main constituents of vegetable

oils and animal fats are esters of glycerol

and fatty acids (Hui, 1996b). The ester

linkages can be hydrolyzed to yield free

fatty acids and glycerol. While

triglycerides (triacylglycerols)

predominate, fats and oils also contain

mono- and diglycerides (mono-and

diacylglycerols) and other lipids, e.g.,

phosphatides and cholesterol, free fatty

acids, and small amounts of other

compounds. Fats and oils also contain

other minor components, such as

polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons

(PAHs). Like vegetable oils and animal

fats, petroleum crude oils are

hydrocarbon mixtures that can be

further processed to make specific

products; but the hydrocarbon

constituents of petroleum oils are

primarily alkanes (paraffins),

cycloalkanes, and aromatic

hydrocarbons (IARC, 1989).

Fatty acids largely determine the

chemical and physical properties of

triglycerides (Hui, 1996a) and influence

their fate and effects in the

environment. The structure of the fatty

acids can change as they are processed,

stored, heated, or transformed by

physical, chemical, and biological

processes in the environment. The fatty

acid composition of vegetable oils and
54512 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

animal fats varies with plant or animal

species, season, geographical location,

feed, and other factors.

The physical and chemical properties

of petroleum and non-petroleum oils

can change after they have spilled into

the environment. Spilled oil can be

transformed through a wide variety of

physical, chemical, and biological

processes (USDOC/NOAA, 1992a,

1996). These processes are affected by

many factors, among them temperature,

oxygen, light, ionizing radiation, and

the presence of metals (Kiritsakis, 1990;

Hui, 1996a, 1996d).

As the composition of the oil changes,

so does its fate in the environment and

its toxicity. The products that are

formed can be more or less toxic than

the original oil, depending on the

specific oil and the products that are

formed. Oxidation of vegetable oils and

animal fats, which may contribute

rancid off-flavors and odors, can create

products, such as cyclic monomers and

oxycholesterols that are toxic at

relatively low concentrations (Hui,

1996a). Polymers of soybean oil and

sunflower oil can form concrete-like

aggregates with soil or sand that cannot

be readily degraded by bacteria and

remain in the environment for many

years after they are spilled (Minnesota,

1963; Mudge, 1995, 1997a, 1997b).

Petroleum oils also undergo oxidation

and polymerization reactions and can

form tars that persist in the environment

for years (NAS, 1985d).

4. Environmental Effects

Spills of petroleum and vegetable oils

and animal fats can harm aquatic

organisms and wildlife in many ways

(Crump-Wiesner and Jennings, 1975):

• Oil can coat the feathers and fur of

birds and mammals and cause drowning

and hypothermia and increased

vulnerability to starvation and predators

from lack of mobility.

• Oils can act on the epithelial

surfaces of fish, accumulate on gills, and

prevent respiration. The oil coating of

surface waters can interfere with natural

processes of reaeration and

photosynthesis. Organisms and algae

coated with oil may settle to the bottom

with suspended solids along with other

oily substances that can destroy benthic

organisms and interfere with spawning

areas.

• Oils can increase BOD and deplete

water of oxygen sufficiently to kill fish.

• Oils can cause starvation of fish and

wildlife by coating food and removing

the food supply. Animals that ingest

large amounts of oil through

contaminated food or preening

themselves may die as the result of the

oil ingested. Animals can also starve

because of increased energy demands

needed to maintain body temperature

when they are coated with oil.

• Oils can exert a direct toxic action

on fish, wildlife, or their food supply.

• Oils can taint the flavor and cause

intestinal lesions from laxative

properties in fish.

• Oils can foul shorelines and

beaches. Oil spills can also create rancid

odors.

The environmental effects of

vegetable oils and animal fats and

petroleum oils, their chemical and

physical properties, and their

environmental fate are compared in

Appendix I, Table 2.

a. Physical Effects of Spilled Oil.

Physical effects produce nearly all of the

most immediate and devastating

environmental effects from oil spills.

Even oils that remain in the

environment for relatively short periods

of time can cause long-term deleterious

effects years after the oil was spilled.

Coating with Oil. Among the

immediate effects of oil spills is the

coating of the feathers of birds and fur

of mammals (Hartung, 1995). Coating of

animals and their food supply is

produced by spills of petroleum and

non-petroleum oils alike. Birds and

some mammals, such as sea otters and

river otters that depend upon entrained

air for buoyancy and insulation, are

particularly vulnerable to harm from

spills of non-petroleum and petroleum

oils (NAS, 1985e; Hartung, 1967, 1995).

In freshwater or tidal brackish waters,

oiled birds are usually waterfowl and

wading birds, such as herons

(Alexander, 1983).

Birds and mammals become coated

with oil when they land in an oil slick

or surface from underneath (Hartung,

1995). Oil alters the structure and

function of the feathers and fur by

disrupting their orderly arrangement,

thereby reducing entrainment of air and

causing loss of buoyancy and thermal

insulation (Rozemeijer, 1992; Leighton,

1995; Frink and Miller, 1995; NAS,

1985e; Alexander, 1983; Hartung, 1967,

1995; Crump-Wiesner and Jennings,

1975). As the plumage absorbs water,

the weight and body mass of the birds

increases, and the birds sink and may

drown. Birds and mammals, with

feathers or fur matted down by

petroleum or non-petroleum oils, can

also die from hypothermia and/or

dehydration and diarrhea or fall victim

to predators.

Birds that are able to endure excess

chilling while avoiding their predators

may reach shore and sit or stand in a

state of shock (NAS, 1985e; Alexander,

1983). To maintain body temperature,

such birds would have to eat twice the

normal amount of food; yet they are

often isolated from their food supply

(Hartung, 1967, 1995; Alexander, 1983).

Fat and muscular energy reserves of

these birds are rapidly exhausted and

their body temperature drops (Hartung,

1967; Croxall, 1977; Alexander, 1983;

Rozemeijer et al., 1992). As their

appetite declines, death from starvation

ensues. Similarly, sea otters with fur

coated with oil require increased

metabolism to compensate for major

changes in conductance and heat flow

across the body surface (Hartung, 1967,

1995; Kooyman, 1977; Williams et al.,

1990; NAS, 1985e).

Oiled birds tend to preen their

feathers and may ingest large amounts

of oil from attempting to clean

themselves and from consuming oilcontaminated food and oil particles

(Frink, 1994; Frink and Miller, 1995;

Alexander, 1983; NAS, 1985e; Hartung,

1965, 1967, 1995). Bird rescuers have

described dead birds with organs filled

with oil from eating oiled food (Lyall,

1996; Frink and Miller, 1995). Oil can

also be transferred to birds through

consumption of fouled prey or direct

contact with the oiled shoreline or

surface water (Frink and Miller, 1995;

Smith and Herunter, 1989). The coated

birds that are observed after oil spills

are probably a small proportion of the

total affected, as weakened birds are

likely victims of predators (Hartung,

1995; Alexander, 1983; NAS, 1985e;

Lyall, 1996; Frink and Miller, 1995;

McKelvey et al., 1980; Smith and

Herunter, 1989; Minnesota, 1963).

Small spills of vegetable oil, animal

fat and petroleum oils can cause great

ecological damage, depending upon the

location of the spill and other factors.

Even a small spill of vegetable oil can

be far more damaging to aquatic birds

than certain petroleum oils (McKelvey

et al., 1980; Smith and Herunter, 1989).

Suffocation. Suffocation and death of

fish and other biota are often the

consequence of oxygen depletion of the

water. Oxygen depletion can result from

reduced oxygen exchange across the airwater surface below the spilled oil or

from the high BOD produced by microor

ganisms degrading oil (Crump-Wiesner

and Jennings, 1975; Mudge, 1995).

While a higher BOD is associated with

greater biodegradability, it also reflects

the increased likelihood of oxygen

depletion and potential suffocation of

aquatic organisms under certain

environmental conditions (CrumpWiesner and Jennings, 1975). Oxygen

depletion and suffocation are produced

by petroleum and non-petroleum oils,

including animal fats and vegetable oils.

Under certain conditions, however,

some vegetable oils and animal fats
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54513

present a far greater risk to aquatic

organisms than other oils spilled in the

environment, as indicated by their

greater BOD.

According to studies designed to

measure the degradation of fats in

wastewater, some food oils exhibit

nearly twice the BOD of fuel oil and

several times the BOD of other

petroleum-based oils (Groenewold,

1982; Institute, 1985; Crump-Wiesner

and Jennings, 1975). While the higher

BOD of food oils is associated with

greater biodegradability by

microorganisms using oxygen, it also

reflects the increased likelihood of

oxygen depletion and suffocation of

aquatic organisms under certain

environmental conditions (Groenewold,

1982; Institute, 1985; Crump-Wiesner

and Jennings, 1975). Oil creates the

greatest demand on the dissolved

oxygen concentration in smaller water

bodies, depending on the extent of

mixing (Crump-Wiesner and Jennings,

1975).

Contamination of Eggs. After spills of

non-petroleum and petroleum oils, oil

can be transferred from birds’ plumage

to the eggs they are hatching. Petroleum

and non-petroleum oils, including

vegetable oils and animal fats, can

smother an avian embryo by disrupting

the egg/air interface, sealing pores, and

preventing gas exchange (Albers, 1977;

Szaro and Albers, 1977; Leighton, 1995;

USDOI, 1994).

In addition to the severe physical

effects produced by non-petroleum and

petroleum oils, some petroleum oils can

also damage embryos apparently

through mechanisms of toxicity (Albers,

1977; Szaro and Albers, 1977; Leighton,

1995; Szaro, 1977; NAS, 1985e). Very

small quantities of petroleum or crude

oil cause mortality and developmental

effects in avian embryos from a wide

variety of species (Leighton, 1995; NAS,

1985c). Whether vegetable oils and

animal fats can harm embryos through

toxicity as well as physical effects is

unknown, for no studies of the toxicity

of vegetable oils and animal fats to avian

embryos and developing birds were

located.

b. Effects of Oil on Metabolic

Requirements. To survive spills of

petroleum and non-petroleum oils,

animals require increased energy (NAS,

1985e; Hartung, 1967, 1995). Birds

coated with oil must eat twice their food

ration to maintain body temperature

(Hartung 1967, 1995). Yet birds are often

isolated from their food sources

following an oil spill or find their food

coated with oil (Hartung 1967, 1995).

Sublethal effects can increase

vulnerability to disease or decrease

growth and reproductive success,

although the individual may continue to

live for some time (NAS, 1985e; Frink

and Miller, 1995; Smith and Herunter,

1989).

Studies of polluted animals show that

physiological stress is manifested in

higher energy demand (Sanders et. al.,

1980). When increasing environmental

stress greatly elevates metabolism and

reduces assimilation, little energy

remains for growth and reproduction, so

that most species disappear and only a

few tolerant species survive in

chronically polluted environments. Oil

pollution also forces animals to turn

from the most economical biochemical

pathways to other more costly

physiological pathways.

c. Effects of Oil on Food and the Food

Web, Communities, and Ecosystems.

The effects of oil on the food web and

community structures depend on the

type and amount of oil spilled, the

physical nature of the area, nutritional

status, oxygen concentration, and

previous exposure of the impacted area

(NAS, 1985e). Geographic location

appears far more important in

determining the impacts of oil spills

than spill size (Frink and Miller, 1995;

McKelvey et al., 1980). The community

structure and activities of microbes that

degrade petroleum oil are affected by

both catastrophic and chronic spills.

The risks from oil spills can be shifted

from those associated with toxicity to

those associated with habitat, e.g.,

predator-prey interaction (NAS, 1985e).

The vulnerability of species and

individuals to oil spills varies greatly

(NAS, 1985e), and the extent and rate of

recovery depends on many factors. In

enclosed waters where recruitment of

organisms from outside becomes less

important, intrinsic factors may limit

the recovery of the zooplankton

community. Plant communities too can

be affected long after an oil spill, with

imbalances persisting for a decade or

more, even after the floral community is

reestablished (Sanders et al., 1980).

When diversity and density have

increased and stabilized many years

after a spill, behavioral responses may

continue to be distorted or biochemical

pathways may be shifted from efficient

to more costly pathways.

d. Indirect Effects. While not

generally regarded as classic ‘‘toxicity,’’

high levels of fatty acids and

triglycerides from vegetable oils and

animal fats can upset the fermentation

and digestion of ruminants, such as

cattle, goats, deer, antelope, sheep,

moose, buffalos, and bighorn sheep (Van

Soest, 1994). Although intake of normal

levels of lipids does not affect

fermentation in ruminants, excess

unsaturated fatty acids and triglycerides

can profoundly suppress essential

fermentation bacteria and alter

fermentation balance, lipid metabolism,

and milk fat production. Methane

suppression is likely with a single large

dose of unsaturated oil that exceeds the

threshold of tolerance by fermentation

bacteria. A practical limit for fat of

about 8–10% of dietary dry matter is

expected (personal communication, D.

Ullrey, 1996).

Indirect effects also occur when

petroleum oil is spilled in the

environment (NAS, 1985e). After a spill

of number 5 fuel oil, the herring

population was reduced because of

increased fungal damage to fish eggs,

which in turn resulted from a decreased

population of amphipods which graze

fungi growing on fish eggs.

5. Toxicity

Adverse effects occur through both

non-toxic and toxic mechanisms.

Whether an adverse effect occurs

through toxicity or other mechanisms is

often unknown (Yannai, 1980). For

example, birds exposed to spilled oil

may die from non-toxic mechanisms

—starvation, hypothermia, drowning,

shock, susceptibility to predators

because of a food supply that is

inadequate to support increased energy

requirements, and consumption of oiled

food or oil from preening that clogs their

organs— or from the toxicity of

chemicals or biotransformation products

in the oil. The deaths of the birds occur,

regardless of the mechanisms involved

or knowledge about these mechanisms.

Toxicology is the study of the adverse

effects of chemicals on living organisms,

including lethality; reproductive effects;

effects on development; cancer; effects

on the nervous system, kidney, liver,

immune system, or other organs; and

biochemical effects, such as enzyme

inhibition (Klaassen et. al., 1986; Rand

and Petrocelli, 1985). To examine the

nature of toxic effects and evaluate the

probability of their occurrence, factors

that affect toxicity must be known. A

brief discussion of toxicity is presented

below. The supporting Technical

Document discusses toxicology in

greater depth.

a. Principles of Toxicology. The

toxicity of chemicals depends on factors

that are related to the organism itself,

chemical composition, external

environmental factors, and the exposure

situation. The necessity of considering

many factors in the evaluation of

toxicity is underscored in basic

textbooks about toxicology, such as

Casarett and Doull’s Toxicology that

state:

‘‘* * * Whether or not a toxic response

occurs is dependent * * * on the chemical
54514 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

and physical properties of the agent, the

exposure situation, and the susceptibility of

the biologic system or subject. Thus to

characterize fully the potential hazard of a

specific chemical agent, we need to know not

only what type of effect it produces and the

dose required to produce the effect but also

information about the agent, the exposure,

and the subject * * *’’ (Amdur et al., 1991).

The hazards and risks from

environmental exposures to chemicals

are assessed with toxicological studies

in the laboratory and with

epidemiological studies, while field

studies may be used to assess the

ecological effects of chemicals on

multiple species or ecosystems (NAS,

1985c; NAS, 1977a; OSTP, 1985; Rand

and Petrocelli, 1985). Toxic chemicals

enter the body primarily by ingestion,

inhalation, and skin contact (Klaassen et

al., 1986). The toxic effects from acute

exposure to a chemical (e.g., a single

dose during a short period of time such

as 24 hours) may differ greatly from

those produced by long-term (chronic)

exposures. Toxic effects can be

immediate or they can be delayed.

A substance that is harmless at low

concentrations in food may be

hazardous if it comprises a large portion

of the diet. Because there is little margin

of safety for many of the elements to

which people are exposed daily, the

daily intake of many elements in the

diet, such as iron, could not be

increased 5 or 10 times without adverse

effects (Klaassen et al., 1986).

b. Exposure From Oil Spills. Spills of

petroleum and vegetable oils and animal

fats during processing, storage, and

transportation can result in acute or

chronic exposures to fish and wildlife.

Not only massive spills but small

quantities that are spilled repeatedly

may result in environmental harm

(Alexander, 1983; McKelvey et al., 1980;

Smith and Herunter, 1989). Small

volume spills can produce severe

environmental damage because of the

behavior of oils in the environment,

their physical effects, and the toxicity of

some oil constituents and

transformation products. Many of the

immediate, devastating effects of spilled

petroleum and vegetable oils and animal

fats, such as coating, suffocation, and

other physical effects, occur during

acute exposures. Long-term effects have

also been reported from spills of

petroleum oil, vegetable oils and animal

fat.

During an oil spill, the potential for

significant exposures is very high

(Hartung, 1995). Unlike laboratory

experiments using controlled amounts

of oil, large amounts of oil may be

released during spills. While the initial

mortalities of birds and mammals

exposed to spilled oil are usually from

drowning or hypothermia resulting from

coating, the ingestion of oil begins to

contribute to effects later as birds

consume large amounts of oil through

preening or ingestion of oilcontaminated food and oil particles

(Hartung, 1967, 1995). Fish and other

aquatic organisms may die from

suffocation soon after an oil spill or

exhibit toxic effects, including cancer

and adverse effects on growth and

reproduction, following acute or chronic

exposures to spilled oils and fats or

their breakdown products.

Spilled oil can be transformed

through a wide variety of physical,

chemical, and biological weathering

processes that change oil composition,

behavior, exposure routes, and toxicity

(USDOC/NOAA 1992, 1996). Whether

the environmental fate and toxicity of

the transformation products differs from

that of the parent depends upon the

specific oil and products that are

formed.

c. Toxicity of Petroleum Oils. The

toxic effects of petroleum oils are

summarized in Appendix I, Table 2. The

effects of petroleum oils have been

investigated extensively in many

species (NAS, 1985e; IARC, 1984;

Albers, 1995). Commonly reported

individual effects of petroleum oils

include impaired reproduction and

reduced growth as well as death in

plants, fish, birds, invertebrates, reptiles

and amphibians; blood, liver, and

kidney disorders in fish, birds, and

mammals; malformations in fish and

birds; altered respiration or heart rate in

invertebrates, fish, reptiles, and

amphibians; altered endocrine function

in fish and birds; altered behavior in

many animal species; hypothermia in

birds and mammals; impaired salt gland

function in birds, reptiles, and

amphibians; altered photosynthesis in

plants; and increased cells in gills and

fin erosion in fish. Among the group

effects of petroleum are changes in local

population and community structure in

plants, invertebrates and birds and

changes in biomass of plants and

invertebrates.

Petroleum oils affect nearly all aspects

of physiology and metabolism and

produce impacts on numerous organ

systems of plants and animals as well as

altering local populations, community

structure, and biomass (Albers, 1995;

NAS, 1985e). Impaired reproduction,

reduced growth and development,

malformations, behavioral effects, blood

and liver and kidney disorders, altered

endocrine function, and a host of other

effects of petroleum oils on organisms

have been reported.

Certain petroleum products and crude

oil fractions are associated with

increased cancer in refinery workers

and laboratory animals (IARC, 1989).

Many of these petroleum oils contain

benzene and polynuclear aromatic

hydrocarbons (PAHs), toxic constituents

that are carcinogenic in humans and

animals. Untreated and mildly treated

mineral oils are carcinogenic to humans.

In experimental animals, some

distillates and cracked residues derived

from the refining of crude oil and

residual (heavy) fuel oils are

carcinogenic. There is limited evidence

in experimental animals for the

carcinogenicity of unleaded automotive

gasoline, fuel oil number 2, crude oil,

and naphtha and kerosene produced by

certain processes.

d. Toxicity of Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats. The toxicity of vegetable

oils and animal fats and the toxic effects

on many systems and organs in the body

are summarized in Appendix I, Table 2

and described briefly below. A detailed

discussion of these effects is included in

the supporting Technical Document.

The acute and chronic toxicity of

vegetable oils and animal fats, types of

fats, and their components and

degradation products have been

evaluated in toxicology and

epidemiological studies. Chemical and

physical properties of the particular

animal fat or vegetable oil, the exposure

situation, the biologic systems exposed,

and the environmental conditions that

are present are factors that influence the

toxicity of a chemical.

Acute lethality tests are among several

measures used to evaluate acute

toxicity. They can be employed to rank

chemicals or to screen doses that may be

selected for longer term toxicity testing,

or they can be an early step in tiered

hazard assessment approaches. The use

of different protocols and test species in

acute lethality tests makes comparisons

between tests difficult. For example,

although the Petitioners claim that the

tests conducted by Aqua indicate that

smaller amounts of petroleum oils than

certain vegetable oils and animal fats

kill half the population of some aquatic

species; other acute lethality studies

suggest that by one measure, vegetable

oils are more toxic than petroleumderived mineral oil. In studies

comparing the acute lethality of corn

oil, cottonseed oil, and petroleumderived mineral oil in albino rats, no

rats receiving mineral oil died, while

smaller doses of the vegetable oils

administered for a shorter time period

killed rats (Boyd, 1973).

Vegetable oils and animal fats

produce other types of acute toxicity as

well. Like petroleum oils, vegetable oils
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54515

and animal fats are laxatives that can

produce diarrhea or cause lipid

pneumonia in animals. These effects

can compromise the ability of animals

in the wild to escape their predators

(USDOI, 1994; Frink, 1994). Clinical

signs of toxicity in rats fed large

amounts of corn oil or cottonseed oil for

4 or 5 days include decreased appetite,

loss of body weight, abnormal lack of

thirst, diarrhea, fur soiling, listlessness,

pale skin, incoordination, cyanosis

(dark blue skin color from deficient

oxygenation of the blood), and

prostration, followed by respiratory

failure and central nervous system

depression, hypothermic coma, and

death. Autopsies of the rats showed

violent local irritation of the

gastrointestinal tract, which allowed the

absorption of oil droplets into the

bloodstream and deposition of oil in

tissues, resulting in inflammation,

congestion in the blood vessels,

dehydration, degenerative changes in

the kidney, loss of organ weights, and

stress reaction (Boyd, 1973).

Animals exposed to vegetable oils and

animal fats can manifest a range of

chronic toxic effects. High levels of

some types of fats increase growth and

obesity but cause early death in several

species of animals and may decrease

their reproductive ability or the survival

of offspring (NAS/NRC, 1995). On the

other hand, the growth of some fish

decreases with elevated levels of

vegetable oils (Salgado, 1995; Mudge

1995, 1997a). Mortality of mussels

exposed to one of four vegetable oils

began after 2 or 3 weeks of exposure.

Growth inhibition, effects on shells and

shell lining, and decreases in foot

extension activity that are essential to

survival were observed in mussels

exposed to low levels of sunflower oil.

Dietary fat consumption has been

associated with the incidence of some

types of cancer, including mammary

and colon cancer, in laboratory animals

and humans (Hui, 1996a; USDHHS,

1990; FAO/WHO, 1994). The intake of

dietary fat or certain types of fat has also

been correlated with the incidence of

coronary artery disease, diabetes, and

obesity in epidemiological studies (Hui,

1996a; FAO/WHO, 1994; Nelson, 1990;

Katin at al, 1995). High dietary fat intake

has also been linked to reduced

longevity and altered reproduction in

laboratory animals and altered

immunity, altered steroid excretion, and

effects on bone modeling and

remodeling in humans.

Some vegetable oils and animal fats

contain toxic constituents, including

specific fatty acids and oxidation

products formed by processing, heating,

storage, or reactions in the environment

(Hui, 1996a; Berardi and Goldblatt,

1980; Yannai, 1980; Mattson, 1973).

Toxic effects on the heart, red blood

cells, and immune system; effects on

metabolism; and impairment of

reproduction and growth can be caused

by constituents or transformation

products of vegetable oils and animal

fats. In addition, some constituents of

vegetable oils and animal fats cause

cancer in rainbow trout, while lipid

oxidation products may play a role in

the development of cancer and

atherosclerosis (Hendricks at al 1980a

and 1980b).

Acute Toxicity: Acute Lethality Test

(LC50 Test) Submitted by Petitioners.

The tests by Aqua that were submitted

by the Petitioners are acute lethality

tests that measure only the death of

organisms. These tests provide no data

on nonlethal acute toxicity, including

irreversible damage, or long-term effects

experienced by organisms and

ecosystems. The LC50 (lethal

concentration 50) value or LD50 (lethal

dose 50) value does not describe a

‘‘safe’’ level but rather a level at which

50% of test organisms are killed under

the experimental conditions of the test

(Rand and Petrocelli, 1985; Klaassen et

al., 1986). (A high LC50 value indicates

low acute lethal toxicity, for a large

concentration of chemical is needed to

cause 50% mortality.) If the Aqua test

results were accurate, they would

indicate that diesel fuel kills half the

population of fathead minnows at lower

concentrations than aerated crude

soybean oil, RBD soybean oil, and beef

tallow. Spills of petroleum oils,

vegetable oils and animal fats that result

in LC50 concentrations in the

environment could kill half the

organisms with sensitivity similar to

fathead minnows when conditions are

identical to those in the Aqua tests.

Although the manner in which the

Aqua tests were conducted precludes

accurate determination of the LC50

values, the tests nevertheless

demonstrate that petroleum oils and

vegetable oils and animal fats can injure

and kill fish by toxicity or oxygen

depletion and suffocation. In the first set

of the Aqua tests, all of the minnows

exposed to diesel fuel and unaerated

crude soybean oil died. The fish

surfaced and gulped for air or swam

spasmodically before dying, just as they

do in the environment when suffocating

from oxygen depletion following spills

of petroleum and non-petroleum oils,

including vegetable oils and animal fats.

Results Questionable. However, the

test procedures used by Aqua render

questionable the results suggesting that

diesel fuel is more deadly at lower

concentrations than soybean oil. The

procedures deviate in important ways

from standardized methodology,

although the Aqua report states that test

procedures are based on accepted

methodologies. Appendix I, Table 3:

Comparison of Aqua Methods and

Standard Acute Aquatic Testing

Methods lists key differences between

the methods used by Aqua and the

standard methods referenced in the

Aqua report as well as more recent

methods published by these same

organizations that were omitted from

the Aqua report. The accuracy of the

LC50 estimates provided by Aqua is

highly doubtful because of the following

deficiencies:

• Oxygen depletion. In the first set of

Aqua tests, dissolved oxygen was below

acceptable levels in the vessels with

crude soybean oil. It is impossible to

determine whether oxygen depletion or

toxicity killed fish.

• Short exposure period. The Aqua

tests were conducted for only 48 hours,

instead of the 96 hours used in most

methods. Fish that are alive at 48 hours

may not survive for 96 hours.

• Unknown concentrations of test

material encountered by fish during the

test: (1) Oil sheens floated on test

solutions and cloudiness was so severe

that fish could not be observed for 24

hours; (2) the Aqua report contained no

data on actual chemical concentrations

of parent chemical or breakdown

product, a critical determination in

static tests where concentrations change

over time (Rand and Petrocelli, 1985;

NAS, 1985c). Aqua relied instead on the

original nominally designated

concentrations that are highly dubious,

especially given the turbidity of the test

solutions that cleared up over the course

of the test, the likely degradation of test

material in the aerated test system, and

the use of vessels that were not stainless

steel or glass and may have adsorbed

test material; (3) the Aqua test did not

aerate all test solutions and controls, did

not maintain dissolved oxygen

concentration at 80% or more of the

nominal concentration, and did not test

non-aerated and aerated oils together—

requirements of standardized methods

that allow gentle aeration. If vegetable

oils degrade rapidly, as Petitioners

claim elsewhere, aeration will increase

the degradation of the oils in the test

system; (4) the Aqua report provided no

data on oil particle size, even when

visual inspection showed that solutions

of test material were cloudy and the

NAS study referenced in the report

cautioned against relying on visual

inspections of clarity (NAS, 1985c); and

(5) improper data reporting and

evaluation. Results from two dissimilar

tests were combined, although the tests
54516 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

lacked a common test substance, used

different test conditions, failed to

measure actual concentrations, and

included no estimates of variability

between the two sets of tests. Aqua also

failed to provide data on confidence

intervals and slopes, as required by all

of the standardized methods referenced

by Aqua and by the Aqua protocol.

Relevance of Acute Lethality Tests to

Spills in the Environment Challenged.

Serious questions remain about the

relevance of the LC50 laboratory results

to spills in the environment (NAS,

1985c, 1985e). The many test variables

that influence estimates of LC50—

including the nature of the chemicals or

mixtures tested, test parameters (e.g.,

route and method of administration,

frequency and duration of exposure,

mixing energy, temperature, salinity,

static vs. flow-through systems, duration

of observations) and biological factors

(e.g., species selected for testing, sex,

age or life-stage, weight, contamination

history of the organism)—rarely reflect

the conditions that occur following a

spill (Rand and Petrocelli, 1985; NAS,

1985c; Wolfe, 1986; Abel, 1996). The

water-soluble fraction used in static

tests does not simulate the dynamic

process of the change in stages between

aqueous and oil phases that depends on

parameters unique to each spill (NAS,

1985c). Once oil is spilled in the

environment, the composition,

concentration, and toxicity of oil and its

components can be profoundly altered

by chemical and biological processes,

such as evaporation and biological

oxidation.

Further, acute lethality tests by their

very nature usually provide no data on

toxic effects other than death (NAS,

1985c; Rand and Petrocelli, 1985;

Klaassen et al., 1986). Indeed, a widelyused toxicology text warns that

‘‘defining acute toxicity based only on

the numeric value of an LD50 is

dangerous’’ (Hayes, 1982). Animals that

survive a toxic response nevertheless

may suffer irreversible damage (NAS,

1985e). These nonlethal, adverse effects

must be considered in assessing the

risks of chemical exposure. Nor do acute

lethality tests measure long-term effects

or effects on ecological communities or

changes in predator-prey relationships

which occur, for example, when

animals coated with spilled oil are

weakened and become more susceptible

to predators.

Acute Toxicity: Other Acute Lethality

Tests (Aquatic Tests). (See Appendix I,

Table 2, for other aquatic lethality

information.) Free fatty acids are among

the products formed from vegetable oils

and animal fats by processing, storage,

heating, or reactions in the

environment. Static tests with juvenile

fathead minnows indicate that oleic

acid, which is found in Canola,

safflower, and sunflower oils, is more

acutely lethal at 96 hours than at 24

hours and is intermediate in lethality in

tests of a series of 26 organic

compounds (USEPA, 1976; Hui, 1996a).

Acute Toxicity: Other Acute Lethality

Tests (Tests with Laboratory Animals).

(See Appendix I, Table 2.) Studies

comparing the acute lethality of corn

oil, cottonseed oil, and mineral oil in

albino rats show that by one measure

cottonseed oil and corn oil are more

toxic than petroleum-derived mineral

oil, although interpretation of the

studies is complicated by differences in

the experimental protocol (Boyd, 1973).

No albino rats receiving mineral oil by

gavage (tube into stomach) for 15 days

died, while smaller doses of cottonseed

oil and corn oil administered for a

shorter time period killed rats.

The toxic effects differed significantly

in rats receiving corn oil or cottonseed

oil and those administered mineral oil

(Boyd, 1973). Clinical signs of toxicity

in rats receiving corn oil or cottonseed

oil included anorexia (decreased

appetite), loss of body weight, abnormal

lack of thirst, decreased urination,

diarrhea, fur soiling, listlessness, pallor

(pale skin), incoordination, cyanosis

(dark blue skin color from deficient

oxygenation of the blood), and

prostration (Boyd, 1973). Rats

administered corn oil died after

respiratory failure and hypothermic

coma, while death followed central

nervous system depression and coma in

rats ingesting cottonseed oil. Autopsies

showed violent local irritation of the

gastrointestinal tract that allowed the

absorption of oil droplets into the

bloodstream. Oil droplets were

deposited in many body organs with

resultant inflammation, vascular

congestion, degenerative changes in the

kidney, and other effects. In contrast, no

deaths occurred among rats

administered mineral oil for 15 days

and clinical signs differed in many

respects from those observed in rats

treated with corn or cottonseed oil.

Chronic Toxicity. Appendix I, Table 2

summarizes the chronic toxicity of

vegetable oils and animal fats and

petroleum oils. Cancer and adverse

effects on growth, reproduction,

development, and longevity as well as

other toxic effects have been observed in

several species following chronic or

subchronic exposures to vegetable oils

and animal fats or their constituents.

(Subchronic exposures are longer than

acute exposures, generally 1–3 months

for rodents and longer than 4 days for

aquatic species.)

Dietary fat and some classes of fats

that are found in vegetable oils and

animal fats have been associated with

the increased incidence of some types of

cancer, including mammary and colon

cancer, in laboratory animals and

humans (Hui, 1996a; USDHHS, 1990;

FAO/WHO, 1994). The intake of dietary

fat or of certain types of fat has also

been correlated with the incidence of

coronary artery disease, diabetes, and

obesity in epidemiological studies. High

dietary fat intake has also been linked

to reduced longevity and altered

reproduction in laboratory animals and

altered immunity, altered steroid

excretion, and effects on bone modeling

and remodeling in humans.

In addition, some vegetable oils and

animal fats contain toxic constituents or

form toxic degradation products,

including specific fatty acids and

oxidation products, when they undergo

processing, heating, storage, or reactions

in the environment. The toxic effects of

these chemicals are summarized briefly

in Appendix I, Table 2 and described

further in section II.5.d Toxicity of

Specific Fatty Acids and Other

Constituents of Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats. Among the toxic effects

observed after exposure to these

chemicals are cardiac toxicity, rupture

of red blood cells, growth suppression,

anemia, impaired reproduction, and

adverse effects on the immune system

and metabolism. In addition, the

cyclopropene fatty acid constituents of

cottonseed oil and some other vegetable

oils cause liver cancer in rainbow trout

and increase carcinogenesis of other

chemicals, and some oxidation products

may play a role in the development of

colon cancer and atherosclerosis.

Cancer. Unlike petroleum oils that

contain a large proportion of PAHs,

including some PAHs that are animal

and/or human carcinogens, vegetable

oils and animal fats contain only small

amounts of PAHs (Kiritsakis, 1991;

IARC, 1984). Dietary fat intake and

consumption of some classes of fats that

are found in vegetable oils and animal

fats have been implicated in the

development of certain types of

cancer—including cancer of the breast

and colon and probably cancer of the

prostate and pancreas—in studies of

laboratory animals and in

epidemiological studies (NAS/NRC,

1985c; Hui, 1996a; USDHHS, 1990;

FAO/WHO, 1994). An expert panel

organized by two United Nations

organizations concluded that abundant

data show that animals fed high-fat diets

develop tumors of the mammary gland,

intestine, skin, and pancreas more

readily than animals fed low-fat diets,

although caloric restriction can override
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54517

the effect (WHO/FAO, 1994). Animal

studies also indicate correlations

between total fat intake and liver cancer

and between high-fat diets and certain

types of chemically-induced or lightinduced skin tumors. Studies describing

the relationships between fat

consumption and cancer in animals and

humans have been summarized recently

(Hui, 1996a).

Development of some types of cancer

is influenced by the type of fat

consumed. Breast cancer increased

(shortened latency period for tumor

appearance, promotion of growth, and

increased mammary tumor incidence) in

rodents receiving diets rich in the

essential fatty acid linoleic acid

(polyunsaturated fatty acid or PUFA of

the n-6 family) compared to rodents

consuming diets high in saturated fatty

acids (Hui, 1996a). In contrast, fish oil

containing different fatty acids (n-3

PUFA) inhibited mammary tumor

development, probably by inhibiting the

effects of linoleic acid. The incidence of

colon cancer is strongly associated with

diet, especially diets high in total fat

and low in fiber content in laboratory

animals and epidemiological studies

(Hui 1996a; USDHHS, 1990). Some

types of fat, such as dietary cholesterol

and certain long-chain fatty acids, have

been proposed as colon cancer

promoters, while other types of fat (n3 PUFA) may inhibit development of

colon cancer (Hui, 1996a).

Non-Carcinogenic Toxic Effects. The

non-carcinogenic toxic effects of

vegetable oils and animal fats on aquatic

organisms and laboratory animals are

summarized in Appendix I, Table 2,

briefly described below and are

discussed in greater detail in the

Technical Document.

Non-Carcinogenic Toxic Effects on

Mussels. The detrimental environmental

effects of sunflower oil have been

investigated extensively in laboratory

studies and in the field at the site of the

1991 wreck of the cargo tanker M.V.

Kimya, where much of its 1500-tonne

cargo of crude sunflower oil was spilled

over a 6–9 month period (Mudge et al.,

1993, 1994, 1995; Mudge, 1995, 1997b;

Salgado, 1992, 1995). Mussels died in

the intertidal shores at sites near the

wreck; in other areas where mussels

survived, their lipid profiles revealed an

altered fatty acid composition reflecting

the fatty acids in sunflower oil (Mudge

et al., 1995; Mudge, 1995, 1997a, 1997b;

Salgado, 1992, 1995). Mobile species

that left the spill area were replaced

with other species, affecting diversity.

Sunflower oil, olive oil, rapeseed oil,

and linseed oil produced several types

of adverse effects in mussels at low

exposure rates in the laboratory

(Salgado, 1995; Mudge, 1995; Mudge,

1997a). These four vegetable oils killed

mussels or reduced their growth rate as

much as fivefold within 4 weeks, even

at low exposure rates (1 part of oil in

1000 in a flow-through sea water

system). Mussels exposed to sunflower

oil were more likely to die. Exposure to

sunflower oil created behavioral

differences in the mussels, such as

decreased foot extension activity and

altered gaping patterns. Interference

with foot extension activity that allows

the mussels to form threads for

attachment to the substratum can

dislodge mussels and endanger their

survival; removal of the oil reversed the

effect (Salgado, 1995).

All four oils killed mussels in

mortality studies in the laboratory; 10%

mortality was observed in mussels

exposed to sunflower oil, rapeseed oil,

or olive oil for up to 4 weeks, while

70% or 80% mortality was reported

when mussels were exposed to linseed

oil (Salgado, 1995; Mudge, 1997b). No

control mussels died. Mussels began

dying the second week after exposure to

linseed or sunflower oil, and later when

exposed to rapeseed or olive oil. Death

may have been caused by suffocation in

mussels that refused to gape in the

presence of the oil or by formation of a

toxic metabolite. The death of mussels

in aerated growth tanks where anoxia

(lack of oxygen) was not the cause of

death suggests that vegetable oils kill

mussels through mechanisms of

toxicity.

The shells of mussels exposed to the

vegetable oils in the laboratory lacked

the typical nacre lining, perhaps

because of altered behavior in the

presence of oil stressors (Salgado, 1995;

Mudge, 1997a). The internal shell

surfaces of mussels treated with

vegetable oils were chalky in contrast to

controls that exhibited an iridescent

luster. Prolonged closure of the mussels

in response to oil can cause anoxia and

increase the acidity of the internal water

with dissolution of the inner shell.

Sunflower oil from the wreck of the

M.V. Kimya polymerized in water and

on sediments and formed hard

‘‘chewing gum balls’’ that washed

ashore over a wide area or sank,

contaminating the sediments inhabited

by benthic and intertidal communities

near the spill (Mudge, 1995). Concretelike aggregates of sand bound together

with sunflower oil remain on the shore

near the site of the M.V. Kimya spill

almost six years later (Mudge, 1995,

1997a, 1997b; Mudge et al., 1995). In

laboratory experiments with saltmarsh

sediments simulating a spill over a 35-

day period, linseed oil percolated

rapidly through the sediments but

sunflower oil polymerized and formed

an impermeable cap, reducing oxygen

and water permeability (Mudge et al.,

1995; Mudge, 1997a). In the

environment, oxygen reduction would

eventually produce anoxia in sediments

with the death and removal of benthic

organisms, changes in species from a

community that is aerobic to an

anaerobic community, and erosion of

the saltmarsh sediments (Mudge et al.,

1994, 1995).

Non-Carcinogenic Toxic Effects on

Fish. Other studies have also shown that

exposure to an excess of fat or fatty

acids can be detrimental to fish, even

though fish and other aquatic organisms

require certain essential fatty acids for

growth and survival. Poor growth and

low feed efficiency were observed in

rainbow trout fed 4% or more of certain

polyunsaturated acids (Takeuchi and

Watanabe, 1979). High levels of dietary

fatty acids reduced growth in channel

catfish; while saturated,

monounsaturated, or PUFA from fish oil

enhanced channel catfish growth

(Stickney and Andrews, 1971, 1972).

Some dietary fatty acids inhibited the

growth of common carp, but saturated

and monounsaturated acids and other

classes of polyunsaturated fatty acids

from fish oil enhanced carp growth

(Murray et al., 1977). More recent

papers show the relatively efficient use

of high levels of dietary lipid by

warmwater and coldwater fishes,

provided essential fatty acid

requirements are met (NAS/NRC, 1981a,

1983). Increased lipid intake, however,

has been associated with increased

deposition of body fat.

Non-Carcinogenic Toxic Effects on

Laboratory Animals. The chronic toxic

effects of petroleum oils and vegetable

oils and animal fats on laboratory

animals are summarized in Appendix I,

Table 2 and detailed in the

accompanying Technical Document.

High levels of dietary fat have been

associated with shortened lifespan and

altered reproduction in laboratory

animals (NAS/NRC, 1995). While 5%

dietary fat is recommended for most

laboratory animals, growth usually

increases significantly when animals are

fed higher levels of fat. Apparently, this

increased growth comes at a high cost,

however, for longevity is often reduced

and reproduction may be affected

adversely in animals consuming high

levels of fat.

The relationship between dietary fat

intake and kidney diseases has been

demonstrated in laboratory animals

(Hui, 1996a). Rats, rabbits, and guinea

pigs fed high cholesterol diets

developed kidney damage. Diets

containing 2% cholesterol increased the
54518 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

incidence or severity of coronary

atherosclerosis in rats exposed

chronically to the cold (Sellers and

Baker, 1960). Histological aberrations in

the small intestine and nearby lymph

nodes have also been reported in rats

consuming high doses of fish oil

concentrate in a subchronic toxicology

study (Rabbani et al., 1997).

Increasing the consumption of some

dietary lipid components, such as oleic

acid and cholesterol, also increases the

need for other fatty acids in rats (NAS/

NRC, 1995). The ratios of PUFA and

polyunsaturated to saturated fatty acids

greatly influence tissue lipids and the

formation of important compounds,

such as prostaglandins. The type of fat

can influence bone formation rates and

fatty acid composition of cartilage in

chicks (Hui, 1996a).

Toxicity of Specific Fatty Acids and

Other Constituents of Vegetable Oils

and Animal Fats. In addition to the

adverse effects produced in humans and

other animals by high fat diets or by

consumption of certain classes of fats

and oils, toxic effects can be produced

by constituents of some animal fats and

vegetable oils, including specific fatty

acids and gossypol, and their

transformation products (Hui, 1996a;

Berardi, 1980; Yannai, 1980; Mattson,

1973). While plant breeding and

processing can reduce the levels of some

constituents in the final product, the

constituents are present during the early

stages of processing and storage of some

vegetable oils and may enter the

environment. Although the

development of varieties of glandless,

gossypol-free cottonseed and new

varieties of rape seed with little erucic

acid have reduced these two

constituents in some oils, gossypol is

found in crude oils and in oils derived

from older cottonseed varieties with

greater resistance to disease and insects

and high amounts of erucic acid are

contained in rapeseed oil used for the

manufacture of lubricants and fatty acid

derivatives (Hui, 1996a, 1996b). Toxic

materials can be formed during normal

processing procedures, heating, and

storage or by reactions that occur when

such materials are released in the

environment. Spills of crude vegetable

oils may differ greatly in their toxicity

and other effects from spills of

processed vegetable oils and animal fats.

Figure 1: Toxicity and Adverse Effects

of Components and Transformation

Products of Vegetable Oils and Animal

Fats illustrates the variety of toxic

effects that may be caused by

constituents and breakdown products of

vegetable oils and animal fats. For

example, small amounts of gossypol are

lethal when they are ingested for

prolonged periods despite the relatively

high LD50 values obtained in acute

toxicity tests; fat accumulated in heart

muscle of weanling rats after a single

day of consuming diets containing

erucic acid; and cyclopropene acids,

such as sterculic acid, are liver

carcinogens in rainbow trout (Berardi,

1980; Mattson, 1973; Hendricks et al.,

1984). Phytoestrogens, which occur

naturally in some legumes and oils,

including soybean, fennel, coffee, and

anise oils, exhibit estrogen-like activity

in reproductive organs of laboratory

animals (Hui, 1996a; Sheehan, 1995;

Levy et al., 1995).

When vegetable oils are spilled, air,

moisture and heat in the environment

can cause these oils to form various

harmful oxidation products, which may

be more toxic than the original product.

Releases of used oil from restaurants or

releases of oil during refining may

already contain toxic oxidation products

that may be further oxidized in the

environment. Cholesterol oxidation

products or COPs that are formed by

autooxidation of cholesterol when it is

exposed to air, heat, photooxidation,

and oxidative agents have numerous

biological activities and may play a role

in the development of atherosclerosis

(Hui, 1996a). Lipid oxidation products

(LOPs) that can be formed when

unsaturated fatty acids are oxidized

upon exposure to oxygen, light, and

inorganic and organic catalysts have

been associated with colon cancer (Hui,

1996a; Hoffmann, 1989; Lawson, 1995).

FIGURE 1. TOXICITY AND ADVERSE EFFECTS OF COMPONENTS AND TRANSFORMATION PRODUCTS OF VEGETABLE OILS

AND ANIMAL FATS

Component or transformation

products Type of oil Effects

Gossypol 1,2,3 ........................ Cottonseed oil .................... Cardiac irregularity in several species of animals, death from circulatory failure or

rupture of red blood cells and decreased oxygen-carrying capacity in blood.

Discolors egg yolks in laying hens by interacting with yolk iron; effect decreased by

ferrous sulfate, increased by cyclopropene fatty acids in cottonseed oil.

Crosslinks proteins in several species; reduces protein quality, uncouples respiratory-linked energy processes, reduces activity of respiratory enzymes and

protein kinases and proteins involved in sterol, steroid, and fatty acid metabolism.

High LD50 in acute tests for mice and swine, but small amounts are lethal when ingested for prolonged period.

Death from pulmonary edema in subacute poisoning; wasting and lack of assimilation of food with chronic poisoning.

Depressed appetite, loss of body weight, diarrhea, effects on red blood cells, heart

and lung congestion, degenerative changes in liver and spleen, various pathological effects depending on species.

Body weight depression, reduced sperm production and motility in male rats; loss

of appetite, diarrhea, hair loss, anemia, hemorrhages in stomach and intestines,

congestion in stomach, intestines, lungs, and kidneys of rats.

Spastic paralysis of hind legs, degeneration of sciatic nerve, rapid pulse, cardiac

effects in cats.

Posterior incoordination, stupor, lethargy, weight loss, diarrhea, vomiting, loss of

appetite, lung and heart congestion, hemorrhaging of liver, fibrosis of spleen and

gallbladder in dogs.

Stupor, lethargy, loss of appetite, spastic paralysis, decreased litter weights, congestion of large intestine, hemorrhaging in small intestines, lungs, brain, and legs

in rabbits.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54519

FIGURE 1. TOXICITY AND ADVERSE EFFECTS OF COMPONENTS AND TRANSFORMATION PRODUCTS OF VEGETABLE OILS

AND ANIMAL FATS—Continued

Component or transformation

products Type of oil Effects

Weight loss, decreased appetite, leg weakness, reduced red blood cells, congestion, vacuoles in liver, enlarged gallbladder and pancreas, decreased egg size,

decreased egg hatchability, discolored yolk in poultry.

Thumps or labored breathing, weakness, emaciation, diarrhea, enzyme effects, hair

discoloration, dilated heart, reduced hemoglobin, lipid in kidneys, widespread

congestion of organs in swine.

Erratic appetite, breathing difficulties, fatty degeneration of liver, decreased blood

clotting, and death in young calves but no toxicity in older ruminants.

No human toxicity in China, where gossypol used as male contraceptive, antifertility

reversible.

Erucic Acid 2,4,5 ..................... Rapeseed oil, mustardseed

oil.

Adverse effects on heart in laboratory animals; inflammation of heart in rat , fat

deposition until fat content of heart 3 to 4 times normal, fat droplets visible in

heart followed by mononuclear cell infiltration and replacement of fat and droplets with fibrous tissue in muscle; weanling rats accumulated fat in heart muscle

after only one day; fatty infiltration of heart absent with fully hydrogenated

rapeseed oil, indicating effects from erucic acid; erucic acid in heart muscle in

rats exposed long-term; changes in skeletal muscle in rats.

Lipid accumulation in hearts of rats, hamsters, minipigs, squirrel monkeys and

ducklings; fluid accumulation around heart and liver cirrhosis in ducklings.

Enlarged spleen, increased cell permeability and destruction of red blood cells in

guinea pigs (erucic and nervonic acids in rapeseed oil).

Growth suppression in rats, pigs, chickens, turkeys, guinea pigs, hamsters, and

ducklings fed rapeseed oil; suppressed body weight gain in rats fed fats plus erucic acid.

Degenerative changes in liver and kidney, fewer and smaller offspring in rats fed

high levels of rapeseed oil.

Cyclopropene Fatty

Acids 2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10.

Cottonseed oil, kapok seed

oil, cocoa butter.

Discolors egg whites, can be removed by hydrogenation; growth suppression in

rats; reduced comb development in roosters.

Impaired female reproduction in laboratory animals and hens; depressed egg production, reversible in hens; embryomortality in hens and rats; developmental abnormalities in rats, increased mortality in rat pups.

Liver carcinogen in rainbow trout; increases carcinogenic effects of other chemicals; adverse effects on cholesterol and fatty acid metabolism in several species;

aortic atherosclerosis in rabbits; liver damage in rabbits and rainbow trout.

Oxidation Products 2,4,11,12,13,14,15.Many vegetable oils and

animal fats.

Cholesterol Oxidation Products (COPs): Numerous biological activities include adverse effects on blood vessels, destruction of cells, mutagenicity, suppression of

immune response, inhibition of certain metabolic mechanisms; may contribute to

development of atherosclerosis.

Lipid Oxidation Products (LOPs): Associated with colon cancer; lipid peroxides act

as cancer promoters or cocarcinogens and form crosslinks between DNA and

proteins; lipid peroxidation correlated with severity of atherosclerosis.

Oxidative fatty acid fraction of products of thermal and oxidative changes from prolonged heating of fats and oils in laboratory studies (may not simulate commercial heat treatment); severe heart lesions, distended stomach, kidney damage,

hemorrhage of liver and other tissues, reduced liver enzyme activity in laboratory

animals; reduced body weight gain and feed consumption, enlarged liver and kidney, damage to thymus and sperm reservoir, diarrhea, skin inflammation, and fur

loss in weanling rats fed heated corn and peanut oil; reduced antioxidant tocopherol in gastrointestinal tract of chicks fed thermally oxidized PUFA; reports of formation of cocarcinogens during heating of corn oil and promotion of chemicallyinduced mammary tumors.

Branched Chain Fatty

Acids3,4,16.

Ruminant fats, dairy products.Individuals with genetic disorder Refsum’s syndrome: neurological abnormalities resulting from inability to metabolize branched chain fatty acids.

1Berardi and Goldblatt, 1980

2 Hui, 1996a

3 Hayes, 1982

4 Mattson, 1973

5 Roine et al., 1960

6Phelps et al., 1965

7 Lee et al., 1968

8 Miller et al., 1969

9 Hendricks et al., 1980a

10 Hendricks et al., 1980b 11Yannai, 1980 12Boyd, 1973 13Frankel, 1984 14Artman, 1969 15Andrews et al, 1960 16Steinberg et al., 1971
54520 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

6. Epidemiological Studies

Although the focus of this document

is the environmental effects of spilled

vegetable oils and animal fats, a brief

discussion of the effects of these oils on

human health is included for several

reasons. First, the ENVIRON report

submitted by the Petitioners incorrectly

states that there are no accumulating or

otherwise harmful components in

animal fats and vegetable oils that are

irritating, toxic, or carcinogenic; and

that animal fats and vegetable oils are

consumed safely by wildlife and

humans. The large number of human

health studies, many with a substantial

population size, provide a significant

data base for examining the effects of

long-term oral exposure to fats and

certain classes of fats or their

components or degradation products.

Second, humans may be exposed to

spilled non-petroleum and petroleum

oils through several routes. Inhalation of

harmful vapors and dusts or mists and

aerosols is often a significant route of

human exposure to spilled petroleum

oils, though it is rarely an important

exposure route of less volatile vegetable

oils and animal fats.

Third, humans and many animals

often handle chemicals by similar

mechanisms in the body and exhibit

similar toxic effects, a tenet underlying

the frequent use of animal tests in

evaluations of human health risk. For

example, certain PAHs that are human

carcinogens also cause cancer in

laboratory animals and in fish and other

aquatic organisms in the environment.

Thus, the findings of epidemiology

studies are relevant to the evaluation of

mechanisms of toxicity in animals,

particularly when the epidemiology

studies are large enough to overcome

statistical limitations that are found

with smaller data sets.

a. Human Health. Although fat is a

major component of the human diet, the

consumption of high amounts of fat or

certain types of dietary fats and oils has

been associated with several chronic

diseases (Hui, 1996a; FAO/WHO, 1994;

Nelson, 1990; Katan et al., 1995). In a

number of epidemiology studies, the

intake of dietary fat and some fat types

(e.g., saturated fats, unsaturated fats,

polyunsaturated fatty acids, trans-fatty

acids, cholesterol) has been correlated

with the incidence of coronary artery

disease. Dietary fat consumption has

been associated with the incidence of

certain types of cancer, including

mammary and colon cancer, presumably

because dietary fat is acting as a cancer

promoter. Dietary fat intake has also

been linked to hypertension, diabetes,

and obesity (Hui, 1996a). Other studies

report that high dietary fat intake is

related to altered immunity and altered

steroid excretion and may affect bone

modeling and remodeling.

In many animal and human studies,

dietary fat intake has been linked to

cardiovascular disease and

atherosclerosis through its effects on the

levels of cholesterol and triglycerides in

plasma and the lipid composition of

lipoproteins (Hui, 1996a). A 2% rise in

risk of coronary heart disease has been

predicted for every 1% increase in

serum cholesterol. The American Heart

Association, American Cancer Society,

and National Cancer Institute have

recommended lowering fat intake to

30% of total consumed calories in

adults; the American Heart Association

also recommends limiting the intake of

polyunsaturated fatty acids to less than

10% of calories and replacing saturated

acids with monounsaturated acids

(USDHHS, 1990; FAO/WHO, 1994; Hui

1996a).

b. Comparison of Effects From Oil

Spills With Human Consumption of

Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats. The

ENVIRON report, which was submitted

by the Petitioners, draws incorrect

comparisons between the human

consumption of vegetable oils and

animal fats and the environmental

effects of oil spills. The effects on

humans who consume small quantities

of vegetable oils and animal fats in their

foods cannot be easily translated to

environmental effects produced by oil

spills. These situations differ in many

respects. A few of the differences are

highlighted below:

• Differences in factors relating to the

host organism: Sensitivity; humans may

not be the most sensitive species.

Species differences; while similarities in

metabolism and biokinetic parameters

exist between some species, it is often

unclear how effects on humans can be

translated to effects on fish. Differences

in susceptibility; there are no controls

for differences in genetics, age, lifestage, strain, gender, health, nutritional

status, presence of other chemicals, or

other factors inherent to the exposed

organisms.

• Differences in dose-response

relationships. It is unclear how doseresponse relationship can be

extrapolated from humans to other

species, even if such information had

been provided.

• Exposure. Exposure differs in route,

frequency, and duration. Animals are

exposed to large quantities of oil during

an oil spill, and the exposure may be

short-term or long-term. The animals

may ingest the oil, or they may be

exposed through their gills or skin.

Humans consuming foods, however, are

exposed to small quantities of oils for

intermittent periods of time, and their

exposure is via ingestion only.

• Differences in chemical

composition. The composition of oils

used in small quantities in processed

foods may differ from the composition

of the oils spilled in the environment,

particularly when the oils are acted

upon by chemical and biological

processes in the environment.

• Environmental factors. The effects

of oil in the environment depend on a

wide variety of factors, including pH

and temperature. These factors are

different from those that affect humans

consuming food oils.

• Effects. Effects, such as reduced egg

hatchability or effects on molting,

cannot be measured in humans.

• Ecosystems. Ecosystems, food webs,

and predator-prey relationships can be

affected by oil spills; these are not

factors in determining human health

effects.

• Statistical power of studies. Those

epidemiologic studies with large

numbers of people have demonstrated

possible adverse effects from

consumption of high levels of dietary fat

or types of fat. Negative studies may

indicate that too few subjects were

included in the study or that

confounding factors obscured the effect

because of statistical limitations of the

methodology.

7. Other Adverse Effects of Oil Spills

a. Aesthetic Effects: Fouling and

Rancidity. Fouling of beaches and

shoreline and rancid odors have been

reported after spills of vegetable oils and

animal fats; some real-world examples

are provided in section II.D.2. Rancidity

is the deterioration of fats and oils in the

presence of oxygen (oxidative rancidity)

or water (hydrolytic rancidity) with

formation of off-flavors and odors (Hui,

1996b, 1996d; Kiritsakis, 1990). The

hydrolysis and oxidation of spilled

vegetable oils and animal fats and

decomposition of hydroperoxides leads

to formation of aldehydes, ketones, fatty

acids, hydroperoxides, and other

compounds that produce off-flavors and

rancid odors. Rancidity occurs

especially with oils that contain PUFA,

such as linoleic acid (Hui, 1996a). Fish

oils, which contain high levels of PUFA,

are especially susceptible to oxidative

rancidity and production of toxic

byproducts and are often supplemented

with antioxidants to reduce their

oxidation.

Unlike vegetable oils and animal fats,

rancid odors have not been reported

following petroleum oil spills, although

off-flavors and tainting of fish have

occurred (Crump-Wiesner, 1975;
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54521

Hartung, 1995). Fish collected near

petroleum refineries or in petroleumpolluted areas can be tainted (Lee,

1977), and commercial species have

been contaminated with petroleum oils

(Michael, 1977). Thousands of

observations of floating tar balls and

beach tar have been tabulated over a 4-

year period in a petroleum monitoring

project for marine pollution (NAS,

1985d).

b. Fire Hazards. While some

petroleum oils and products present fire

and explosion hazards, most vegetable

oils and animal fats do not, unless

flammable chemicals, such as hexane

used during processing, are present or

temperatures are elevated. A few

vegetable oils, such as coconut oil

(copra oil) are spontaneously

combustible (Lewis, 1996). Because of

their low vapor pressures, some

petroleum products are highly volatile

and flammable. In addition, most

vegetable oils and animal fats have a

high flash point (temperature at which

decomposition products can be ignited),

while the flash point for many

petroleum products is below or near

room temperature.

Although most vegetable oils and

animal fats do not easily catch fire by

themselves, once fires begin they are

difficult to extinguish and may cause

considerable environmental damage.

For example, a butter and lard fire in

Wisconsin that was apparently started

by an electric forklift resulted in the

release of some 15 million pounds of

melted butter that threatened nearby

aquatic resources (Wisconsin, 1991a,

1991b, 1991c; Wisconsin State Journal,

1991a, 1991b, 1991c, 1991d, 1991e).

c. Effects on Water Treatment. Oils

and greases of animal and vegetable

origin and those associated with

petroleum sources have long been a

concern in wastewater control (USEPA,

1979; Metcalf and Eddy, 1972). Too

much oil, i.e., spills or discharges of oil

and grease to a municipal wastewater

treatment system in quantities that

exceed the levels the treatment plant

was designed to handle, can overwhelm

the water treatment plant that maintains

sanitary conditions and removes water

pollutants that are harmful to aquatic

organisms or interfere with the

recreational value of waters (Institute,

1985; Metcalf and Eddy, 1972). Certain

fatty acid products, such as quaternary

amines, may inhibit biological treatment

and affect in-plant facilities and

downstream municipal sanitary sewage

treatment facilities (Hui, 1996d).

Under normal operations, floating oil

can be removed before wastewater is

discharged to water treatment plants,

and highly variable discharges of flow

and organics can be minimized

(Institute, 1985). With large quantities of

spilled oil and high organic loads,

however, these conditions may not be

controlled adequately and water

treatment systems can be damaged. To

prevent potential damage to water

treatment plants from oil spills, officials

may halt water treatment and interrupt

water supplies, as occurred when 15

municipal drinking water intakes were

shut down following a spill of one

million gallons of diesel fuel from a

collapsed storage tank at the Ashland

Oil facility in Floreffe, Pennsylvania in

1988 (USEPA, 1988).

8. FWS Comments

The FWS submitted a memorandum

with the following position to the EPA

in 1994. The potential for harm from

petroleum and non-petroleum oils is

equivalent; the path to injury is

different. Edible non-petroleum oils

cause chronic effects with the potential

of mortality. Both petroleum and nonpetroleum oil impact natural resources

through the fouling of coats and

plumage of wildlife. Secondary effects

from fouling include drowning,

mortality by predation, starvation, and

suffocation. The removal of edible oil is

more difficult and strenuous for wildlife

due to the low viscosity of vegetable oil,

which allows deeper penetration into

body plumage or fur and thorough

contamination of the wildlife.

Edible oils ingested in large quantities

can cause lipid pneumonia. Edible oil

consumed by wildlife during preening

or cleaning of their coats also acts as a

laxative resulting in diarrhea and

dehydration. Small amounts of edible

oil on plumage can cause thermal

circulation troubles and embryo death

in eggs exposed to oil through

disruption of egg/air interface (USDOI/

FWS, 1994).

C. Petitioners’ Claim: Animal Fats and

Vegetable Oils Are Essential

Components of Human and Wildlife

Diets

Petitioners claim that animal fats and

vegetable oils are essential components

of human and wildlife diets.

EPA Response: While EPA agrees that

some components of animal fats and

vegetable oils are essential components

of human and wildlife diets, EPA

disagrees with the Petitioners that all

animal fats and vegetable oils are

essential components of human and

wildlife diets. Most species require only

one or two essential fatty acids. Most

animals need some level of fat to supply

energy and fat-soluble vitamins. Intake

of high levels of dietary fat, some types

of fat, and essential fatty acids, however,

can cause adverse effects.

While low levels of certain chemicals

are essential for health, exposure to high

levels of these chemicals produces

toxicity. Numerous examples in the

scientific literature demonstrate that

essentiality does not confer safety and

essential elements can produce toxic

effects. Among these chemicals are

vitamin A; the fatty acid a-linolenic

acid, an essential fatty acid in humans

and coldwater fish; and trace metals

such as iron, manganese, selenium, and

copper (Klaassen et al., 1986; NAS,

1977a; USEPA, 1980; Rand and

Petrocelli, 1985; Abernathy, 1992; Hui,

1996a; NAS/NRC 1981a).

Further, high levels of fats and oils

alter the requirements for essential fatty

acids and change the balance between

certain types of lipids and fatty acids.

For many species of fish and laboratory

animals, levels of essential fatty acids

must be increased for the animals to

tolerate high lipid levels (NAS/NRC,

1983, 1995). High levels of some fatty

acids (n-6 PUFA, including the essential

fatty acid linoleic acid) deplete other

fatty acids (n-3 PUFA, including the

essential fatty acid a-linolenic acid),

thereby creating nutritional deficiency.

In addition, constituents of vegetable

oils and animal fats also affect

requirements for essential fatty acids.

Erucic acid, a constituent of rapeseed

oil, adversely affects reproduction in

rats by interfering with the metabolism

of essential fatty acids (Roine et al.,

1960).

Animals often die from starvation

after oil spills destroy their food supply

by oiling food or making it unavailable.

In addition to a reduction in food

supply and a need to consume twice

their normal amount of food to maintain

body temperature (Hartung, 1965; 1995),

oiled birds that are unable to float or fly

cannot retrieve food from the water that

usually provides their food. Bird

rescuers have described dead birds with

organs were filled with oil after eating

oiled food or consuming oil while

preening their feathers to remove oil

(Croxall, 1975; Lyall, 1991; Frink and

Miller, 1995). Thus, EPA finds that

Petitioners’ arguments are nonpersuasive and have little relevance to

the large quantities of oil released into

the environment from oil spills.

1. Nutritional Requirements for Dietary

Fat

In addition to their roles in cellular

structure, membrane integrity, and

microsomal enzyme function, fats play

an important nutritional role by

supplying energy and essential nutrients

(Rechigl, 1981; Hui, 1996b; Van Soest,
54522 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

1982). The caloric value of fats is more

than twice that of carbohydrates or

proteins (Hui, 1996a). Fats are a source

of the fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, and

K and are rich in antioxidants,

including tocopherols, such as vitamin

E, and carotenes such as provitamin A.

They also facilitate the digestion and

absorption of vitamins.

The nutritional requirements for

dietary fat vary greatly among species. A

diet containing about 5% dietary fat is

recommended for most laboratory

animals (NAS/NRC, 1995). Growth

usually increases greatly in animals fed

a diet containing higher levels of fat, but

lifespans are shortened and lactation

performance and reproduction

adversely affected in rats fed diets with

30% lipid (French et al., 1953). In

minks, diets with 35–40% fat have been

satisfactory for meeting energy

requirements, but higher levels (44–

53%) are recommended for fur

development, pregnancy and lactation

(NAS/NRC, 1992.) Up to 44% fresh fat

was used in fox diets without

detrimental effects (NAS/NRC, 1992).

For coldwater fish, 10% to 20% lipid is

needed in diets, and higher levels of

lipid alter carcass composition by

deposition of excess lipid and reduction

of the percentage of body protein (NAS/

NRC, 1981a).

Nutritional requirements for fats are

affected by environmental influences

and the health status of the organisms.

Birds must consume twice as much food

after a spill for thermal regulation

(Hartung, 1967). In laboratory animals,

the requirement for certain fatty acids

(n-6 PUFA) is increased during lactation

(NAS/NRC, 1995).

For many animals (cattle, goats, and

sheep), vitamin and energy

requirements rather than specific

dietary requirements for fat are

enumerated (NAS/NRC 1981b; NAS/

NRC, 1985; NAS/NRC, 1984). Certain

types of fat are necessary for other

animals. For example, sterols and

perhaps lecithin are necessary for

crustaceans (NAS/NRC, 1983).

Dietary Requirements of Wild

Animals. Unlike domestic animals that

are fed under regimens to maximize

their productivity, wild animals and

free-ranging domestic animals may have

different nutritional requirements for

their survival, growth, and reproduction

(Van Soest, 1982). Diets that promote

growth and obesity may also shorten life

and are undesirable for wild animals.

2. Essential Fatty Acids (EFA)

Certain unsaturated fatty acids that

must be supplied in the diet are called

essential, because humans or other

animals lack the enzymes to synthesize

them (Hui, 1996a; Rechigl, 1983). Two

fatty acids are considered essential in

humans—linoleic acid and a-linolenic

acid (Hui 1996a). These essential fatty

acids are required for fetal development

and growth. Long-chain n-3

polyunsaturated fatty acids, such as alinolenic acid, are needed by the brain

and retina; learning disabilities and loss

of visual acuity have been observed in

animals with low levels of these fatty

acids. A balance of PUFA from both the

n-6 and n-3 families is needed to

maintain health (Hui, 1996a).

EFA requirements differ according to

species. In chickens, 1% of the EFA

linoleic acid is required; the essentiality

of a-linolenic acid has not yet been

proven for poultry (NAS/NRC, 1994).

Linoleic acid is an EFA for pigs;

arachidonic, which is generally added

to swine diets, can be synthesized from

linoleic acid (NAS/NRC, 1988). Minks

require linoleic acid, and rabbits can

develop EFA deficiency (NAS/NRC,

1992, 1977b). Silver foxes need 2 to 3

grams of EFA linoleic and linolenic

acids daily to prevent skin problems

and dandruff (NAS/NRC, 1992). The

dietary EFA requirements of ruminants

are about an order of magnitude lower

than those of non-ruminants (Van Soest,

1982).

Studies of fish and crustaceans

demonstrate that EFA requirements of

aquatic animals vary with species and

are apparently related to the ability of

the animals to convert linolenic acid

(18:3w3) to highly unsaturated fatty

acids (Kanazawa et al., 1979). While

some animals can synthesize necessary

fatty acids, others require them in their

diets. The n-3 fatty acids are essential

for good health and growth in rainbow

trout, red sea bream, and turbot (NAS/

NRC, 1981a). For chum salmon, the

requirement for linoleic and linolenic

acids is 1%, or 0.5–1% for n-3 PUFA in

the diet. For coho salmon, the optimal

level of n-3 fatty acids is 1–2.5%, and

the optimal level of n-3 plus n-6 fatty

acids appears to be approximately 2.5%.

EFA requirements can be affected by

many factors, including fat content of

the diet and temperature. In fish, EFA

requirements change with temperature

and culture conditions (NAS/NRC,

1983, 1981a.)

3. Adverse Effects of High Levels of

EFAs

While certain levels of fat and

essential fatty acids are necessary,

higher levels can produce adverse

effects. Although requirements for

linolenic acid, a n-3 polyunsaturated

fatty acid, are as high as 0.5% of total

caloric intake in humans, consumption

of a diet high in the same family of fatty

acids (n-3 PUFA) may cause oxidative

stress to cell membranes through lipid

oxidation reactions, thereby increasing

requirements for antioxidants (Hui,

1996a).

A balance of types of lipid and

various fatty acids is needed. For

example, many species of fish and

laboratory animals tolerate high levels

of lipid if the essential fatty acid levels

are increased. (NAS/NRC, 1983, 1995).

Similarly, a high level of other dietary

components can increase the need for

certain PUFAs (n–6 PUFA) in rats, and

alter the fatty acid balance (between n–

6 PUFA and n–3 PUFA) (NAS/NRC,

1995). High levels of some fatty acids

(n–6 PUFA) deplete other fatty acids (n–

3 PUFA), thereby creating adverse

effects associated with nutritional

deficiency.

Compared to rodents consuming diets

high in saturated fatty acids, rodents

receiving diets rich in linoleic acid—

one of the two essential fatty acids for

humans—exhibited increased

development of breast tumors, including

a shortened latency period for tumor

appearance, promotion of tumor growth,

and increased incidence of mammary

tumors (Hui, 1996a). Once the dietary

linoleic acid exceeded 4–5% of total

calories, saturated or unsaturated fats

linearly increased tumor incidence.

Dietary linoleic acid enhanced the

spread of mammary tumors to lungs in

rats, apparently by acting as a cancer

promoter. Fish oil, which contains n–3

PUFAs, inhibited mammary tumor

development, apparently inhibiting the

effects of linoleic acid.

The importance of balance in

essential fatty acids is clearly seen in

studies of coldwater fish. An optimum

level of unsaturated fatty acids is

required for maximum growth of

coldwater fish, and the requirement for

n–3 fatty acids may be species-specific

(NAS/NRC, 1981a). EFA deficiency is

characterized by poor growth as well as

numerous other symptoms, and the

deficiency of most symptoms can be

reversed with certain fatty acids (n–3

PUFA); the addition of other fatty acids

(n–6 PUFA) to the diet reverses some

symptoms, while others are aggravated.

In coho salmon, extremely low and

high levels of n–3 fatty acids inhibit

growth; concentrations of n–6 fatty

acids above 1% also depressed growth

(NAS/NRC, 1981a). In studies of

rainbow trout fed different levels of

triglycerides containing n–3 and n–6

fatty acids in diets containing 10%

lipid, growth was reduced when diets

were deficient in n–3 fatty acids, high

in n–6 and low in n–3 fatty acids, or

high in both n–3 and n–6 fatty acids.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54523

4. Adverse Effects of High Levels of Fats

and Oils

Although fat intake is necessary to

provide energy, vitamins, and EFA,

ingestion of high levels of dietary fat can

cause adverse effects in fish and aquatic

species, other animals, and humans.

The adverse effects of consumption of

high levels of dietary fat and certain

classes of fat by humans and animals

have been discussed extensively in

section II.C.3.

5. Relevance of EFA Principles to Spills

For most animals, only one or two

fatty acids are essential, and these are

not necessarily the fatty acids present in

an oil spill. Animals require only small

quantities of these EFAs that are

provided in a normal diet, and these

quantities must be in balance. While

low levels of one or two fatty acids are

needed by some species, in several

species tested, high levels of these fatty

acids produce adverse effects by toxicity

or by creating nutrient imbalances that

deplete other essential nutrients.

After a spill, high levels of animal fats

and vegetable oils other than the EFA

are present in the environment. High

levels of total dietary fat, certain classes

of fats, imbalances of types of fat, and

some components and breakdown

products produce adverse effects in

laboratory animals and in some animals

that have been examined in the field

and are associated with adverse effects

in humans. Further, some constituents

of vegetable oils, such as erucic acid in

cottonseed oil, actually interfere with

EFA metabolism, thereby causing

adverse effects (Roine et al., 1960).

When food is coated with oil from a

spill of vegetable oils or animal fats,

animals are unable to forage or consume

the food or suffer the consequences of

ingesting large quantities of oil as they

consume food. Oil-coated birds die of

hypothermia or starvation when they

are unable to obtain or consume twice

their normal amount of food to provide

the increased metabolic requirements

needed to survive oil spills.

Some oils, their constituents, or

transformation products remain in the

environment for years. By

contaminating the food source biomass,

reducing breeding animals and plants

that provide future food sources,

contaminating nesting habitats, and

reducing reproductive success through

contamination and reduced hatchability

of eggs, oil spills can cause long-term

effects for years even if the oil remains

in the environment for relatively short

periods of time.

6. FWS Comments on Essential Fatty

Acids

The FWS commented that although

fats and oils are used by cells of living

organisms in small amounts, too much

will cause harm to organisms through

means other than toxicity. Ingestion of

concentrated vegetable oil or animal fat

could cause indigestion, nausea, and

diarrhea. This could incapacitate a bird

or mammal (USDOI/FWS, 1994).

D. Petitioners’ Claim: Animal Fats and

Vegetable Oils Are Readily

Biodegradable and Do Not Persist in the

Environment

EPA disagrees with Petitioners’ claim

that all animal fats and vegetable oils

are readily biodegradable and notes that

when biodegradation does occur in the

environment, it can lead to oxygen

depletion and death of fish and other

aquatic organisms. Some products

formed by biodegradation and other

transformation processes are more toxic

than the original oils and fats. While

some animal fats and vegetable oils are

degraded rapidly under certain

conditions, others persist in the

environment years after the oil was

spilled (Mudge et al., 1995; Mudge,

1995, 1997a, 1997b). Further, spilled

animal fats and vegetable oils can cause

long-term deleterious environmental

effects even if they remain in the

environment for relatively short periods

of time, because they destroy existing

and future food sources, reduce

breeding animals and plants, and

contaminate eggs and nesting habitats.

Every spill is different. How long the

vegetable oil or animal fat remains in

the environment after it is spilled, what

proportion of the oil is degraded and at

what rate, what products are formed,

and where the oil and its products are

transported and distributed are

determined by the properties of the oil

itself and those of the environment

where the oils is spilled. Factors such as

pH (acidity), temperature, oxygen

concentration, dispersal of oil, the

presence of other chemicals, soil

characteristics, nutrient quantities, and

populations of various microorganisms

at the location of the spill profoundly

influence the degradation of oil.

Like petroleum oils, vegetable oils

and animal fats can float on water, settle

on sediments or shorelines, and form

emulsions when there is agitation or

prolonged exposure to heat or light

(Crump-Wiesner and Jennings, 1975;

DOC/NOAA, 1992, 1996).

Environmental processes can alter the

chemical composition and

environmental behavior of the spilled

oils and influence their proximity to

environmentally sensitive areas and the

environmental damage they cause.

The detrimental environmental effects

of several spills of vegetable oils and

animal fats are described below and in

Appendix I, Table 4: Effects of RealWorld Oil Spills. These reports provide

examples of the effects of some specific

spills where death, injuries, and damage

were observed. No structured survey on

the effects and numbers of victims of

spills of vegetable oils and animal fats

has been conducted (Rozemeijer et al.,

1992). Because birds and other animals

show only a ‘‘wet look’’ when they are

coated with vegetable oils and animal

fats, they are difficult to identify and

may never be found if they sink when

they die or are consumed by predators

(NAS, 1985e).

1. Chemical and Biological Processes

Affecting Vegetable Oils and Animal

Fats in the Environment

Vegetable oils and animal fats that are

spilled in the environment can be

transported and transformed by a wide

variety of physical, chemical, and

biological processes that alter the

composition of the oil, its fate in the

environment, and its toxicity. Oil that is

spilled in inland waters, such as small

rivers and streams, may be especially

harmful if there are limited oxygen

resources in the water body and little

dispersal of the oil (NOAA/FWS, 1996).

Whether the toxicity of these

transformation products formed by

chemical and biological processes

increases compared to that of the

original oil depends on the specific oil

and the products that are formed. For

example, lipid oxidation products that

are formed following exposure of fats to

oxygen, light, and inorganic and organic

catalysts have been associated with

colon cancer; and cholesterol oxidation

products that are formed by

autoxidation of cholesterol exposed to

air, heat, photooxidation, and oxidation

agents have numerous biological

activities (Hui, 1996a). (See section

II.B.5.d for a discussion of the toxicity

of transformation products.)

a. Chemical Processes. The fate of

petroleum and non-petroleum oils can

be altered by environmental processes.

Primary weathering processes include

spreading, evaporation, dissolution,

dispersion, emulsification, and

sedimentation (DOC/NOAA, 1992a,

1994, 1996). The rate and relative

importance of each of these processes

depends on the specific oil that is

spilled and environmental conditions

that are present and that may change

over time. Wind transport,

photochemical degradation, and

microbial degradation may also play
54524 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

important roles in the transformation of

petroleum oils, vegetable oils and

animal fats.

Different parts of the ecosystem are

affected as the composition of the

spilled oil changes. For example,

weathered petroleum oils penetrate into

marsh vegetation less than fresh oil, for

weathered oil is composed of relatively

insoluble compounds and often forms

mats or tarballs (DOC/NOAA, 1994;

Hartung, 1995; NAS, 1985e). Thus,

weathering decreases the potential

exposure to fish through the water

column while increasing the potential

exposure of species that ingest tarballs.

As the lighter fractions dissolve or

evaporate, oil sinks, thereby

contaminating sediments and

contributing to water column toxicity.

Spilled sunflower oil is hydrolyzed and

polymerized to chewing gum balls that

can be washed ashore or can sink and

cover sediments, thereby exposing

benthic and intertidal marine

communities (Mudge, 1993).

Vegetable oils and animal fats can

undergo several types of chemical

reactions. They can be hydrolyzed to

yield free fatty acids and diglycerides,

monoglycerides, or glycerol; this

hydrolysis can be catalyzed by acids,

bases, enzymes, and other substances

(Hui, 1996a; Lawson, 1995; Kiritsakis,

1990; Hoffmann, 1989). Vegetable oils

and animal fats can be oxidized to form

hydroperoxides and free radicals which

perpetuate the oxidation reaction until

they are destroyed by reacting with

other chemicals, such as natural or

added antioxidants. The free radicals

that initiate an autoxidation reaction are

formed by decomposition of

hydroperoxides, exposure to heat or

light, or other means. COPs are formed

by autoxidation of cholesterol that is

exposed to air, heat, photooxidation,

and oxidative agents derived from

dietary sources and metabolism (Hui,

1996a).

Several types of reactions can occur

during processing, cooking, or storage of

fats and oils, including hydrogenation of

unsaturated fatty acids in oils

(hardening); esterification;

interesterification, including

transesterification; and halogenation

(Lawson, 1995; Hui, 1996a; Hoffmann,

1989; Yannai, 1980). Thermal oxidation

and polymerization during cooking,

frying, or processing operations at high

temperatures, generally between 180°C

to 250°C, can lead to conjugation (act of

being joined) of polyunsaturated fatty

acids and cylization and the formation

of volatile decomposition products.

b. Biological Processes. Petroleum oils

and vegetable oils and animal fats that

are spilled in the environment can be

transformed by bacteria, yeast, fungi,

and other microorganisms. Although

microbial degradation rarely occurs

when there are controlled conditions

during normal storage of animal fats and

vegetable oils, microorganisms can grow

on vegetable oils and animal fats and

degrade them when environmental

conditions are favorable (Ratledge,

1994).

Investigations of biological

approaches to remediating sites

contaminated with petroleum oils have

shown that numerous environmental

factors must be carefully controlled for

biodegradation to be effective in

reducing contamination from oily

materials in soil (Venosa et al., 1996;

Salanitro et al., 1997). While

bioremediation has been used for soil

cleanup at some petroleumcontaminated sites (e.g., in tests at

refineries, in treatment of oily sludges in

oil and gas operations, and at pipeline

sites for spills of crude oil), successful

cleanup requires management of

appropriate levels of applied waste to

soil, aeration and mixing, nutrient

fertilizer addition according to the ratios

of carbon: nitrogen: phosphorus present,

pH amendment, and moisture control to

optimize degradation by soil

micoorganisms (Salanitro et al., 1997).

The extent of biodegradation apparently

depends upon the type of soil and crude

oil involved.

The promise and the limitations of

microbial degradation have been

highlighted in numerous studies of

factors influencing the microbial

utilization of animal fats and vegetable

oils (Ratledge, 1994). These studies were

conducted in experimental cultures and

cannot be applied readily to cleanups of

oil spills, where control of pH, oil

dispersal, and nutrient supplementation

are difficult to achieve. They are

described briefly, primarily to illustrate

the complexity of biotransformation

processes, the many factors that can

affect biodegradation, and the difficulty

in accurately reflecting conditions and

determining rates of biodegradation or

other transformation processes at

specific spill locations. A more detailed

discussion of the microbial degradation

of vegetable oils and animal fats is

provided in the accompanying

Technical Document. (See Technical

Document, Claims V and VI, Biological

Processes, Section A.)

Factors that affect the biodegradation

of oils include pH, dispersal of oil,

dissolved oxygen, presence of nutrients

in the proper proportions, soil type,

type of oil, and the concentration of

undissociated fatty acids in water. In

addition to microorganisms, other biota

can also alter the chemical composition

of vegetable oils and animal fats. The

reactions may depend on the species,

for organisms such as invertebrates, lack

enzymes that participate in certain

metabolic pathways found in other

organisms.

c. Rancidity. Biological and chemical

processes can lead to the formation of

rancid products that cause off-flavors

and unpleasant odors. Rancidity results

from the oxidation of unsaturated fatty

acids that are acted upon by peroxide

radicals or enzymes to form a variety of

products, some of which are toxic (Hui,

1996a; Yannai, 1980). Rancidity can also

be produced by hydrolysis of

triglycerides and lipolysis by

microorganisms or natural enzymes

(Kiritsakis, 1990). The hydrolysis and

oxidation of spilled vegetable oils and

animal fats leads to formation of

aldehydes, ketones, fatty acids, and

other compounds responsible for offflavors and rancid odors. The rate of

rancidity increases with thermal

decomposition of fats (Hui, 1996a),

although enzymatic peroxidation and

oxidation of unsaturated fatty acids by

lipoxygenases can also occur in plant

food stuffs even during storage at low

temperature and in the dark (Yannai,

1980).

2. Environmental Fate and Effects of

Spilled Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats:

Real-World Examples

The reports in this section describe

the spread of vegetable oils and animal

fats after spills into the environment

and detail the deleterious effects

produced by these spills. While some

aspects of specific spills have been

discussed earlier, the examples

presented below demonstrate that

factors such as the nature of the oil, its

environmental fate, and proximity of the

spill to environmentally sensitive areas

determine the adverse effects of spills of

vegetable oils and animal fats in the

environment. Many spills are never

reported. Animals injured or killed by

oils may never be found, for they are

highly vulnerable to predators or may

drown and sink (USDOI, 1994; Frink,

1994; NAS, 1985e). Thus, the reports

that are summarized in Appendix I,

Table 4 and below are not a

comprehensive study of the adverse

environmental effects of spills of

vegetable oils and animal fats, but rather

a snapshot revealing some of the

deleterious effects caused by spills of oil

into the environment.

Minnesota Soybean Oil and

Petroleum Oil Spills. Oil from two spills

in Minnesota killed thousands of ducks

and other waterfowl and wildlife or

injured them through coating with oil.

The peak of waterfowl damage occurred
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54525

within two days of the breakup of ice on

the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers in

the spring of 1963 (Minnesota, 1963;

USDHHS, 1963). There were two

sources of oil—an estimated 1 million to

1.5 million gallons of soybean oil that

entered the Minnesota River via the

Blue Earth River when storage facilities

failed at a plant in Mankato, Minnesota;

and an estimated 1 million gallons of

low viscosity cutting oil that escaped to

the Minnesota River near Savage,

Minnesota, from a marsh that was

flooded with oil when storage facilities

failed. Oil spilled during the winter

months from mechanical failure of

storage tanks or pipelines, moved little

until the breakup of ice in the spring.

The varnish-like covering of willows on

the river banks showed that the soybean

oil had escaped into the river during the

spring run-off.

While the petroleum oil and soybean

oil slicks could not be distinguished by

field observation, laboratory analysis of

samples of oil and oil scraped from

ducks revealed that soybean oil caused

much of the waterfowl loss (Minnesota,

1963). Approximately 5,300 birds were

affected or killed by oil, including 1369

live oil-soaked ducks rescued and 1842

dead birds collected. They included

lesser scaup ducks, ringnecked ducks,

coots and grebes, several other types of

ducks, gulls, and mergansers, and a

cormorant. While some birds may have

been counted more than once, the

numbers probably underestimate the

impact of the oil spills, because ducks

covered with oil crawl into dense cover

and are hard to find.

Mammals and other dead animals

were reported, including about 26

beaver, 177 muskrats, and 50 others,

among them turtles, herons, kingfisher,

songbirds, other birds, skunk, squirrel,

dog, and cows (Minnesota, 1963). The

death of 7,000 fish was attributed to

causes other than oil pollution, because

winterkill is common in shallow

backwater areas of the river and a BOD

study indicated that the sample

analyzed would not have sufficient

oxygen demand to significantly affect

oxygen resources in the river. Bottom

fauna used as fish food may have been

affected temporarily in localized areas.

The character of the soybean oil on

and in the water changed with time, as

thick orange-colored slicks that were

first observed changed to pliable greyish

and somewhat rubbery floating masses

that were stringy or somewhat rounded

and were sometimes surrounded by a

light oil slick (Minnesota, 1963).

Limited areas of the bottom were

covered.

Oil that normally floated on the

surface of the river tended to sink to the

lake bottom or settled into low areas of

the river bottom near the shoreline,

apparently because of entrapment of

heavy materials in the oily mass. A

sample of soybean oil collected from the

bottom of the lake contained sand, dirt,

twigs, and leaves when it was analyzed

in the laboratory.

Soybean oil also mixed with sand on

the beach, creating a hard crust 3 feet

above water level. White balls,

apparently from soybean oil that was

once near the surface of a lake, moved

toward shore and broke up into long,

white stringy material that collected on

shore. Pools of tough, milky material

covered with brown scum were found in

low areas of the beach along with a hard

varnish-like crust on the beach.

Spill of Coconut Oil, Palm Oil, and

Edible Materials. In 1975, a cargo ship

that was carrying primarily vegetable

oils and edible raw materials (copra or

dried coconut meat, palm oil, coconut

oil, and cocoa beans) went aground on

Fanning Atoll, Line Island and dumped

its cargo onto a pristine coral reef

(Russell and Carlson, 1978). The effects

of the oily substances were similar to

those following a petroleum oil spill.

Fish, crustaceans, and mollusks were

killed. Shifts in the algal community

were observed, with excessive growth of

some types of green algae and the

elimination of other algal competitors.

The effects on the algal community

continued for about 11 months.

Sunflower Oil Spill in North Wales.

When a cargo of unrefined sunflower oil

was spilled into the environment off the

coast of Anglesey, North Wales in

January 1991, surface slicks of the oil

were formed for many miles around the

ship (Mudge et al., 1993; Salgado, 1992,

1995). Some oil was hydrolyzed and

polymerized to form ‘‘chewing gum

balls’’ that were washed ashore over a

wide area. The denser balls sank,

allowing the sunflower oil to contact a

wide range of benthic and intertidal

communities near the spill. Sunflower

oil polymerized in seawater and formed

lumps that could not be degraded by

bacteria.

Mussels that were near the spill died.

Polymerized sunflower oil formed a cap

that reduced the permeability of

sediments to water and oxygen and

killed organisms living on the sediments

(Mudge et al., 1993, 1995, Mudge, 1995).

Polymerization of sunflower oil that

washed ashore produced concrete-like

aggregates that still persist nearly 6

years after the spill (Mudge, 1997a,

1997b).

Rapeseed Oil Spills in Vancouver

Harbor. Three small spills of rapeseed

oil caused greater losses of birds than

176 spills of petroleum oils over a 5-

year period in Vancouver harbor from

1974 to 1978 (McKelvey et al., 1980). An

estimated 35 barrels of rapeseed oil

killed an estimated 500 birds, while all

of the petroleum oil spills combined

oiled less than 50 birds, perhaps

because the vegetable oils lacked the

strong, irritating odor of petroleum or its

eye-catching iridescence. Both

petroleum and non-petroleum oils coat

the feathers of birds, destroying their

waterproofing qualities and allowing

water to penetrate to the skin with loss

of insulation and buoyancy, which

results in exposure, and death (Mudge,

1995; Hartung, 1967; NAS, 1985e; Smith

and Herunter, 1989; Rozemeijer, 1992).

Another spill of rapeseed oil (Canola)

occurred in Vancouver Harbor on

February 26, 1989 (Smith and Herunter,

1989). During product transfer, an

estimated 400 gallons of rapeseed oil

spilled into the harbor. A thin film

covered large portions of the harbor, and

a patchy slick of yellow oil from the

spill site to the center of the harbor was

visible from above. It was estimated that

at least 700 birds were in the harbor at

the time of the spill, including 500

diving ducks, 100 gulls, and 100 other

divers.

Initially, booms were not used to

contain the spill, and an attempt to

disperse the oil with multiple passes of

a small tug through the thick oil were

ineffective (Smith and Herunter, 1989).

EPA notes that the trade association

requested that this ineffective

mechanical dispersal be allowed as a

response to spills of vegetable oil and

animal fat under the FRP rule. After

several hours, booms were set up to

contain the oil and skimmer boats

recovered the oil.

Cleanup was concluded 15 hours after

the spill was discovered (Smith and

Herunter, 1989). Nevertheless, 88 oiled

birds of 14 species were recovered after

the spill, and half of them were dead.

Oiled birds usually are not recovered for

3 days after a spill, when they become

weakened enough to be captured. Of the

survivors, half died during treatment.

The authors caution that because

vegetable oils are edible, they may not

be considered as threatening to aquatic

birds as petroleum oils. However, the

end result is the same. Birds die (Smith

and Herunter, 1989). The number of

casualties from the rapeseed oil spills

was probably higher than the number of

birds recovered, because heavily oiled

birds sink and dying or dead birds are

captured quickly by raptors and

scavengers.

Smith and Herunter emphasize that

containing and recovering the spilled oil

as soon as possible is critical to

minimizing environmental damage
54526 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(1989). Using booms, testing transfer

lines, having spill detection equipment

in place, training on-site personnel, and

reporting spills immediately are

essential to reducing environmental

harm.

Fat and Oil Pollution in New York

State Waters. Pollution of surface waters

by oils and fats from a wide variety of

sources killed waterfowl, coated boats

and beaches, tainted fish, and created

taste and odor problems in water

treatment plants in New York State

(Crump-Wiesner and Jennings, 1975).

Sources of the fats and oils included

spills, food and soap manufacturing,

refinery wastes, construction activities,

industrial waste discharges, and

sanitary sewage. Grease-like substances

were seen along the shore or floating in

Lake Ontario. Grease-balls that

contaminated the shoreline near

Rochester and smelled like fat or lard

were analyzed and characterized as

mixtures of animal and vegetable fats

with similar fatty acid contents.

Spills of Fish Oil Mixtures in South

Africa. Oil that was discharged from a

fish factory effluent pipe near Bird

Island, Lamberts Bay, South Africa, the

breeding ground for 5,000 pairs of Cape

Gannets and home to tens of thousands

of Cape Cormorants and 500 Jackass

Penguins, killed at least 709 Cape

Gannets, 5,000 Cape Cormorants, and

108 Jackass Penguins (Percy Fitzpatrick

Institute, 1974). A few days after the

oiling incident, researchers found

penguins covered with a sticky, white,

foul-smelling coat of oil. They were

shivering on the shore and gannet

chicks, who were observed walking

straight into the oil, were dead or dying.

They observed a milky white sea on one

side of the island and a frothy mixture

and clots of oil thrown up on the island.

The oil smelled strongly of fish.

Damage from fish-oil pollution was

detailed at two other fish factories in

South Africa (Newman and Pollock,

1973). In the rock lobster sanctuary at

St. Helena Bay, 10,000 rock lobsters and

thousands of sea urchins were killed,

probably from oxygen depletion caused

by the release of organic material from

the fish factory. At least 100,000 clams

died near a fish factory at Saldanha Bay

along with large numbers of black

mussels and prawns and some

polychetes and anemones. Other effects

were also described by the authors: the

sea was discolored and smelled, water

quality was poor, and the aesthetic

appeal of the beaches located near a

town and popular camping site was

adversely affected.

Spill of Nonylphenol and Vegetable

Oils in the Netherlands. Thousands of

seabirds, mostly Guillemots and

Razorbills, washed ashore in the

Netherlands during a four-month period

from December 1988 to March 1989

(Zoun, 1991). They were covered with

an oil-like substance. Nearly all of the

1,500 sick birds that were taken to bird

hospitals died; many exhibited

emaciation, aggressive behavior, bloody

stools, and leaky plumage. Autopsies

and pathological examination of 30

birds revealed hepatic degeneration and

necrosis as well as aspergilliosis in the

air sacs and lungs. Chemical analysis of

the feathers and organs showed the

presence of high levels of nonylphenol

and vegetable oils, such as palm oil. No

source of the contaminants was

established, but they may have been

discharged from a ship.

Soybean Oil Spills in Georgia From a

Tanker Truck and a Vegetable Oil

Refinery. Aesthetic effects were a major

concern to property owners on an oiled

cove at Lake Lanier, Georgia (Rigger,

1997). The strong, unpleasant odor of

soybean oil spilled from a tanker truck

became more rancid as the oil

weathered. Rapid response action

minimized the damage and costs,

although the oil adhered to boat dock

floats and boats and produced several

thousand dollars in claims for cleaning

boats and docks and replacing dock

floats.

In a vegetable oil refinery in Macon,

Georgia, soybean oil was released from

an aboveground storage tank that was

accidentally overfilled (Rigger, 1997).

Rapid response prevented significant

damage from the spilled oil, which had

flowed through a storm water system

and entered a stream. Investigation of

the spill incident revealed that previous

spills from the facility had entered the

sanitary sewer system and damaged the

sewage treatment plant.

Wisconsin Butter Fire and Spill. In

1991, a major butter and grease fire

apparently triggered by an electric

forklift destroyed two large refrigerated

warehouses at Central Storage facility in

Madison, Wisconsin and resulted in the

release of large volumes of butter, lard,

cheese, meat, and other food products

(Wisconsin, 1991a, 1991b, 1991c;

Wisconsin State Journal, 1991a, 1991b,

1991c, 1991d, 1991e). The warehouses

contained 15 million pounds of butter—

much of it part of the USDA surplus

program. Thick, black smoke filled the

air, and melted butter and lard streamed

from the burning building and

threatened to pollute a nearby creek and

lake.

The quick action of firefighters, city

engineers, and other responders was

credited by the company and state

environmental officials with saving a

nearby creek and lake from

environmental disaster and limiting the

losses and injuries from the fire

(Wisconsin, 1991; Wisconsin State

Journal, 1991a, 1991b, 1991c, 1991d,

1991e). If the buttery material had

flowed through storm sewers into the

creek and lake, it could have depleted

the available oxygen required by

walleyed pike, bass, and other aquatic

organisms living in the creek and

connecting lake and ruined a recent one

million dollar cleanup effort in the

watershed.

After the cleanup was largely

completed, the Wisconsin Department

of Natural Resources declared as

hazardous substances the thousands of

gallons of melted butter that ran offsite

and the mountain of damaged and

charred meat products spoiling in the

hot sun and creating objectionable

odors. The Wisconsin DNR stated that

these products posed an imminent

threat to human health and the

environment.

3. FWS Comments on Degradation

Vegetable oils and animal fats may

biodegrade quicker than petroleum;

however, in the short term, this

advantage is neutralized by the ability of

many petroleum compounds to

evaporate quickly. In addition, the

higher BOD of vegetable oils and animal

fats pose an increased risk of oxygen

depletion in shallow waters and

wetlands. Both kinds of oil will degrade

more slowly in low-energy waters and

can become submerged in an anoxic

aquatic habitat, settle to the bottom and

into sediments, or form thick layers

because the vegetable oil is no longer

being exposed to oxygenated waters or

surroundings. In such instances, the

edible oil or fat will remain in the

environment for a long period of time

and continue to create a risk to the

natural environment. The variability of

circumstances surrounding each spill

(location, spill volume, weather, tides,

water currents, effectiveness of spill

response) will have a greater influence

in the short term on environmental

effects than will biodegradability.

(USDOI/FWS, 1994)

E. Petitioners’ Claim: Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats Have a High BOD, Which

Could Result in Oxygen Deprivation

Where There Is a Large Spill in a

Confined Body of Water

Petitioners claim that vegetable oils

and animal fats have a high BOD, which

could result in oxygen deprivation

where there is a large spill in a confined

body of water with low flow and

dilution.

EPA Response: EPA agrees with the

Petitioners’ claim that vegetable oils and
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54527

animal fats have a high BOD, which

could lead to oxygen depletion and

severe environmental consequences.

(For a detailed discussion of this topic,

see section II.B.4.a.Suffocation.) EPA

disagrees, however, that oxygen

depletion would occur only with large

oil spills. Small spills are sufficient to

cause oxygen depletion and suffocation

and death of fish and other biota,

depending on the conditions that apply

at the location of the spill. Oxygen

depletion can result from reduced

oxygen exchange across the air-water

surface below the spilled oil or from the

high BOD by microorganisms degrading

oil (Crump-Wiesner and Jennings, 1975;

Mudge, 1995). Examples of

environmental damage produced by

small spills of vegetable oils and animal

fats are provided above.

While a higher BOD is associated with

greater biodegradability, it also reflects

the increased likelihood of oxygen

depletion and potential suffocation of

aquatic organisms under certain

environmental conditions (CrumpWiesner and Jennings, 1975). Oxygen

depletion and suffocation are produced

by petroleum and vegetable oils and

animal fats. Under certain conditions,

however, some vegetable oils and

animal fats present a far greater risk to

aquatic organisms than other oils spilled

in the environment, as indicated by

their greater BOD.

According to studies designed to

measure the degradation of fats in

wastewater, some food oils exhibit

nearly twice the BOD of fuel oil and

several times the BOD of other

petroleum-based oils (Groenewold,

1982; Institute, 1985; Crump-Wiesner

and Jennings, 1975). While the higher

BOD of food oils is associated with

greater biodegradability by

microorganisms using oxygen, it also

reflects the increased likelihood of

oxygen depletion and suffocation of

aquatic organisms under certain

environmental conditions (Groenewold,

1982; Institute, 1985; Crump-Wiesner,

1975). Oil creates the greatest demand

on the dissolved oxygen concentration

in smaller water bodies, depending on

the extent of mixing (Crump-Wiesner

and Jennings, 1975).

FWS Comments on BOD.

Decomposition of vegetable oils and

animal fats causes oxygen depletion

problems for aquatic species (USDOI/

FWS, 1994).

F. Petitioners’ Claim: Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats Can Coat Aquatic Biota

and Foul Wildlife

EPA Response: EPA agrees with the

Petitioners’ claim that vegetable oils and

animal fats can coat aquatic biota and

foul wildlife but disagrees with the lack

of significance accorded this potentially

devastating effect in Petitioners’

ENVIRON report. Many animals and

plants die when they are coated with

spilled petroleum oils or vegetable oils

and animal fats. (See section II.B.4.a.

Coating with Oil for a discussion of

these effects.) Coating with oil can

contaminate existing and future food

sources, destroy habitat, and damage

eggs and nesting areas, thereby inflicting

environmental damage years after an oil

spill occurs (Frink and Miller, 1995).

Trustees Comments on Fouling. The

biggest oversight of the ENVIRON

report, which was never subject to peer

review as are journal publications, is the

insignificance given to the fouling

potential of vegetable oils and animal

fats (USDOI/FWS, 1994). Wildlife

rehabilitators consider edible oils and

fats to be some of the most difficult of

substances to remove from wildlife

because of their low viscosity. These

less viscous oils are good wetting

agents, allowing deeper penetration into

plumage or fur and creating a

thoroughly contaminated animal, as

opposed to surface and intermediate

penetration. In many instances,

complete removal can only be

accomplished with extremely hot water,

which is detrimental because of

scalding, and excessive washing.

The FWS takes issue with statements

in the ENVIRON report that observed

birds clean themselves and return to

feeding areas (USDOI/FWS, 1994). Such

observations are difficult to confirm

without banding or radio tagging the

birds and closely observing them. It is

highly doubtful that the birds were able

to clean themselves, for only minuscule

amounts of oil can be completely

preened from plumage. Even birds

fouled with petroleum oils will preen

and fly back to their nests. Small

amounts of oil on the birds’ plumage

can cause thermal circulation trouble

and smother embryos in eggs exposed to

the oil. Birds may appear to act

normally, but it is not the immediate

effects of the oils but those that appear

later that cause problems. Secondary

effects from fouling include drowning,

mortality by predation, starvation, and

suffocation.

Both petroleum and non-petroleum

oils foul the coats and plumage of

wildlife (USDOI/FWS, 1994). The risks

from vegetable oils and animal fats are

magnified by their lack of repugnant

smell or iridescence to frighten wildlife

away, making it more likely that

wildlife will come in contact with these

oils.

III. Petitioners’ Suggested Language To

Amend the July 1, 1994, Facility

Response Plan Rule

This section begins with a short

discussion about EPA’s inland area of

jurisdiction and also provides some

characterization of the amounts of

vegetable oil and animal fats produced

or consumed, and reported spills. These

discussions are followed by EPA’s

response to the Petitioners’ specific

regulatory language to amend the July 1,

1994, facility response plan rule.

A. Background

Examples of water systems that occur

in the inland area within EPA’s zone of

authority are major freshwater rivers,

smaller streams, creeks, lakes and

wetlands or mixed freshwater—

saltwater estuary and wetlands areas

subject to tides. (See a Memorandum of

Understanding [MOU] between the

Secretary of Transportation and the EPA

Administrator dated November 24, 1971

[36 FR 24080].) Many of these areas,

including wetlands and estuary areas,

are often very sensitive, highly

productive areas where a large number

of organisms such as shrimp, crabs, fish,

and water fowl nest, breed and feed.

Lakes and larger rivers may be used as

water supplies and have drinking water

and industrial intakes that must be

protected. Inland spills have a much

higher potential to contaminate both

ground and surface water supplies.

Some lakes, estuaries and bays are often

highly developed with industry,

recreational beaches, marinas and other

highly visible areas that need protection

from oil spills.

Vegetable oil and animal fat were

among the most frequently spilled

organic materials, ranking sixth and

seventh respectively, and were

responsible for over 6% of all spills (384

of 6076 spills) of organic materials

reported along the coasts and major

waterways in the United States in 1973–

1979 (Wolfe, 1986). Other authors

estimate that at least 5% of all spill

notifications are for vegetable oils and

animal fats (Crump-Wiesner, 1975). Of

the 18,000 to 24,000 spills in the United

States reported annually to the National

Response Center and EPA Regions, 2–

12% are from non-petroleum oils,

including vegetable oils and animal fats

(USEPA/ERNS, 1995, 1996). These

figures represent the minimum number

of spills; it is likely that they greatly

underestimate the actual number of

spills because of significant

underreporting. A comparison was

made of reports of spills in Ohio of

vegetable oil and soybean oil from

January, 1984 to June, 1993 to the State
54528 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

of Ohio Environmental Protection

Agency (Ohio EPA) and to the National

Response Center (NRC). Only 7 of 27

reports (26%) to the Ohio EPA were also

reported to the NRC (USEPA, 1994a).

There were a number of reports of

vegetable and soybean oil spills to the

NRC that were not on the State list

(USEPA, 1994a).

B. Regulatory Language Changes

Proposed by the Petitioners

Language to further clarify the

definition of vegetable oil and animal

fats. EPA Response: EPA has decided

not to incorporate Petitioners’ proposed

definitions of ‘‘animal fat and vegetable

oils’’ in the regulatory provisions of

section 112.2. In issuing the final FRP

rule, EPA included a definition of ‘‘nonpetroleum oil’’ in an Appendix to the

rule. (See 40 CFR part 112, Appendix E,

section 1.2.3.) ‘‘Non-petroleum oil’’ is

defined to mean ‘‘oil of any kind that is

not petroleum-based. It includes, but is

not limited to, animal and vegetable

oils.’’ Id.

EPA included this definition of ‘‘nonpetroleum oil’’ in the rule because the

Agency established different and more

flexible response planning requirements

for facilities that handle, store, or

transport non-petroleum oil, including

animal fats and vegetable oils. For

example, in calculating required

response resources for non-petroleum

facilities, the owner/operator of such a

facility, including those facilities which

handle, store, or transport animal fats or

vegetable oils, is not required to use

emulsification or evaporation factors in

Appendix E of the rule. Rather, these

facilities need only: (1) Show

procedures and strategies for responding

to the maximum extent practicable to a

worst case discharge; (2) show sources

of equipment and supplies necessary to

locate, recover, and mitigate discharges;

(3) demonstrate that the equipment

identified will work in the conditions

expected in the relevant geographic

area, and respond within the required

times; and (4) ensure the availability of

required resources by contract or other

approved means. 40 CFR Part 112,

Appendix E, section 7.7. Importantly,

EPA does not prescribe the type or

amount of equipment that preparers of

response plans for non-petroleum oil

discharges must identify. Id.

Moreover, at the time of issuing the

final rule, EPA also set forth definitions

for both ‘‘animal fat’’ and ‘‘vegetable

oil’’ in the preamble to the FRP rule (59

FR 34070, 34088 (July 1, 1994)). To

assist owners and operators in

distinguishing between oil types, EPA

defined ‘‘animal fat’’ to mean ‘‘a nonpetroleum oil, fat, or grease derived

from animal oils not specifically

identified elsewhere.’’ Id. The Agency

defined ‘‘vegetable oil’’ to mean ‘‘a nonpetroleum oil or fat derived from plant

seed, nuts, kernels or fruits not

specifically identified elsewhere.’’ Id.

The Agency stands behind these

definitions, and because EPA is not

modifying the FRP rule as requested by

Petitioners (see below), the Agency sees

no need to include these definitions in

the rule provisions.

Petitioners express a concern that

animal fats and vegetable oils have been

included with other types of ‘‘nonpetroleum oils,’’ although the planning

requirements for owners and operators

of all facilities storing ‘‘non-petroleum’’

oils are more flexible than those

requirements for facilities storing,

handling, or transporting petroleum oil.

Petitioners’ main concern appears to be

premised upon the claim that vegetable

oils and animal fats are ‘‘non-toxic’’

compared to other non-petroleum oils.

EPA believes that Petitioners have failed

to make a demonstration that animal

fats and vegetable oils should be subject

to less stringent planning requirements

than other types of non-petroleum oils.

This is so for all of the reasons set forth

elsewhere in this notice.

Allow mechanical dispersal and ‘‘no

action’’ options to be considered in lieu

of oil containment and recovery devices

specified for response to a worst case

discharge of vegetable oil and animal

fats. EPA Response: The Agency

declines this proposed language.

Although the ‘‘no action’’ and

mechanical dispersal options proposed

by the Petitioners may be considered in

response to an actual spill under certain

conditions, i.e., river currents too high

for the effective use of a boom, neither

option would meet the intent of OPA for

planning purposes. The intent of OPA

was for industry to plan for and secure

the equipment and resources needed to

respond to a worst case discharge,

which may be a discharge of 1 million

gallons or greater for a large vegetable

oil facility.

A ‘‘no action’’ plan would allow a

large amount of oil to remain in the

environment, which would in turn

cause immediate physical effects to

resources that could extend for

considerable distances as the oil

spreads. This oil would have the

potential to remain in the environment

for long periods of time.

One issue raised by the Petitioners is

that the response to a spill of vegetable

oil or animal fat may do more harm to

the environment than a ‘‘no action’’

alternative. A consideration in the

response to any type of oil, including

petroleum or vegetable oil or animal fat,

is whether the measures used in

response to the spill will cause

unacceptable damage to a specific type

of environment. This determination is

based on the conditions existing at the

time of the spill. Specific spill

conditions will often dictate the need

for different techniques for the same

water environment or shoreline habitat.

A study, which evaluated the relative

impact of various generic characteristics

of response techniques in the absence of

oil, rated booming and skimming as

having a ‘‘Low’’ impact in open water,

small lakes/ponds, large rivers and

small rivers and streams (DOC/NOAA,

1992) and therefore, causing little

environmental harm.

Mechanical dispersal of the vegetable

oil or animal fat into the water column

could shut down or negatively impact

drinking intakes due to flavor changes

and odors, reduce cooling efficiency in

cooling waters of power plants,

contaminate food from receiving waters,

increase BOD levels, violate water

quality standards, cause sludges, and

adversely impact benthic organisms and

the resulting food chain in inland areas.

Oil dispersed by mechanical means may

resurface and cause further

environmental damage in the same area

or a different area depending on the

characteristics of the water body. (See

section II.D.2, Rapeseed Oil Spills in

Vancouver Harbor on the ineffective use

of mechanical dispersal.) This Notice

references studies that document spills

of vegetable oils that have remained in

the water environment for several years

and that continued to kill shellfish and

other organisms.

Limit the use of containment boom to

the protection of fish and wildlife and

sensitive environments: EPA’s

Response. Based on tests and studies

summarized in the data in this Decision

Document and the Technical Document,

vegetable oils and animal fats clearly

have adverse impacts on the aquatic and

terrestrial environment and its

inhabitants. EPA declines to modify the

FRP rule as suggested by the Petitioners.

EPA continues to believe that an OPA

required FRP must limit the impacts of

the oil through response techniques that

include containment and removal in

addition to protection of priority fish

and wildlife and environmentally

sensitive areas.

The Area Contingency Plan (ACP)

identifies and prioritizes the fish and

wildlife and environmentally sensitive

areas to be protected and also

determines the type of protection to be

used when a spill occurs. CWA section

311(j)(5)(C)(I) requires that a FRP must

be consistent with the applicable ACP,

which usually requires that a
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54529

containment boom be positioned to

protect drinking water intakes and

environmentally sensitive areas.

In addition, facility response planning

must also include the use of measures

appropriate to the body of water to

contain and limit and concentrate the

spread of oil for removal. The spreading

rate of oil is a function of its viscosity.

Low viscosity materials spread easily

over the surface of water. At lower

temperature, the oil spreads less

rapidly. Generally, vegetable oils and

petroleum oils are of low viscosity. The

spread of spilled oil over a large area

will hamper recovery of the oil. The

thicker the concentration of animal fat

or vegetable and petroleum oil in an

area, the greater the efficiency for oil

removal. As the oil spreads over time

into thinner slicks, its removal becomes

less efficient and more costly. In tidally

influenced areas, oil may move back

and forth with each tide and be

redeposited on the shore line, tidal flats,

and marshes and cause adverse effects.

Since vegetable oils and animal fats

usually have few volatile fractions and

therefore usually do not decrease in

volume through evaporation as do many

of the lighter factions of petroleum oils,

most of the quantity of vegetable oil and

animal fats spilled into water remain in

the environment. When this happens,

there is the potential for adverse

impacts to environmentally sensitive

areas and water intakes. Although most

vegetable oils and animal fats break

down more quickly than some

petroleum oils, under certain conditions

and times of the year, these oils may

remain in the aquatic environment for

long periods of time, polarize and form

toxic degradation products and kill

shellfish and other organisms.

If a facility storing animal fat and/or

vegetable oil does not provide for the

use of containment booms in its plan to

respond to a worst case discharge, it

will not have the equipment and trained

personnel available for an actual spill

and many miles of shoreline and aquatic

resources over a large area of water may

be impacted. Rapid and immediate

response and removal, including the use

of containment booms, offer the most

effective means of minimizing the

immediate and long term effects of

spills of petroleum and non-petroleum

oils, including vegetable oils and animal

fats. EPA does not believe that the

Petitioners have shown why the use of

containment booms should be limited to

only protecting fish and wildlife and

environmental sensitive areas. Without

the use of containment booms, a worst

case discharge of vegetable oil or animal

fats could cause harm not only to fish

and wildlife and environmentally

sensitive areas, but also damage the

aquatic and terrestrial environment.

Such a discharge could also present

risks to humans if the vegetable oil and

animal fats adversely affect drinking

water intakes.

Increase the time for the arrival of onscene response resources for medium

discharges and worst case Tier 1

response resources to 24 hours plus

travel time from the currently required

12 hours including travel arrival time:

EPA’s Response. A rapid response to an

oil spill is important in the recovery of

as much oil product as possible. Any oil

that remains in the environment will

continue to adversely impact the aquatic

and shoreline environment and cause

lasting damage. (This document

contains discussions of environmental,

physical and other impacts that occur

when vegetable oil and animal fats are

spilled.) A 24 hour plus travel time

delay in the arrival of response

resources would result in an

unacceptable increase in impacts to

drinking water intakes, fish and wildlife

and sensitive environments, greater

response costs, less product recovered,

and increased water and other types of

pollution.

A delay in the arrival of response

resources will increase the difficulty of

the removal of the spilled oil and will

also result in an increase in the cost to

recover this oil. If effective containment

and cleanup procedures are initiated

within an hour of a spill occurrence,

estimated removal costs are $250 per

barrel (42 gallons). If two or more hours

elapse before the oil is removed, the cost

can be four or more times that amount

and continue to increase with the time

to respond to the release (USEPA, 1995).

The ‘‘window of opportunity’’ for the

most effective and efficient response to

oil spills occurs within the early hours

after the spill.

Immediate action is required when oil

spills occur on water to prevent the oil

from becoming so widely spread that

containment and cleanup become

extremely expensive and a larger area of

fish and wildlife and environmentally

sensitive areas are adversely affected.

There are immediate physical effects to

the environment from releases of

vegetable oil and animal fat. There is the

potential for additional sensitive areas

to be contaminated within the 24 hours

plus travel time proposed by the

Petitioners for the arrival of response

resources. This is 12 hours plus travel

time longer than the FRP requirement

for rivers, canals, inland, and near shore

areas. Sensitive areas within many

additional miles would be affected with

the delay in the arrival of response

resources proposed by the Petitioners

since booms would not be made

available for their protection until much

later. Rapid response is imperative to

limit adverse effects, protect resources,

and contain oil for removal.

Extending the time for arrival of

response resources would increase the

FRP distance calculation for a facility

and could result in additional vegetable

oil and animal fat facilities meeting the

criteria for substantial harm and having

to prepare and submit a facility

response plan to EPA. The requirements

for determination of substantial harm in

the FRP rule for facilities with 1 million

gallons or above capacity includes a

calculation in Appendix C–III of 40 CFR

Part 112 of the distance an oil discharge

from the facility would travel within the

time it would take for the appropriate

tier of response resources to arrive.

Once the distance is calculated, the

facility must determine whether fish

and wildlife and environmentally

sensitive areas or drinking water intakes

are located within this distance. If so,

the facility is considered a substantial

harm facility and must prepare and

submit a response plan. An additional

twelve hours plus travel response time

would more than double the distance a

spill could travel on water before the

arrival of response resources and

therefore potentially increase impacts to

drinking water intakes and

environmentally sensitive areas and

increase the number of vegetable oil and

animal fat facilities that have to prepare

and submit FRPs. For the above reasons,

EPA declines to modify the FRP rule in

this manner.

IV. Conclusions

The environmental effects of

petroleum and non-petroleum oils,

including vegetable oils and animal fats,

are similar because of physical and

chemical properties common to both.

Many of the most devastating effects of

spills of petroleum oils and vegetable

oils and animal fats are physical effects,

such as coating of animals, suffocation,

or starvation. Some tests measuring

BOD suggest that certain vegetable oils

and animal fats may present a greater

environmental risk of suffocation to

organisms than spilled petroleum oils

under certain conditions. Petroleum oils

and vegetable oils and animal fats can

be transferred to the eggs of nesting

birds from the parents’ feathers and

smother the embryos inside. Embryos in

eggs are also killed by petroleum oils

through mechanisms of toxicity;

whether non-petroleum oils also cause

direct embryotoxicity has not been

evaluated in tests.

Petroleum oils and vegetable oils and

animal fats, can enter all parts of the
54530 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

aquatic environment and adjacent

shoreline. They can form a layer on

water, settle on the bottom in sediments,

foul shorelines, and be transported and

distributed to other areas.

Some vegetable oils and animal fats,

their components, or breakdown

products remain in the environment for

years. Whether or not the oil persists in

the environment, spilled oil can have

long-lasting deleterious environmental

effects. By contaminating food sources,

reducing breeding animals and plants

that provide future food, contaminating

nesting habitats, and reducing

reproductive success through

contamination and reduced hatchability

of eggs, oil spills can cause long-term

effects years later even if the oil remains

in the environment for relatively short

periods of time.

In addition to physical effects and the

destruction of food and habitat,

petroleum oils and vegetable oils and

animal fats, their constituents, or

degradation products can cause shortterm and long-term toxic effects in some

animals. Petroleum oils contain PAHs

and benzene which are animal and

human carcinogens. While vegetable

oils and animal fats contain only small

quantities of PAHs, high dietary intake

of fats and certain types of fats have

been associated with increased cancer

incidence in laboratory animals and

humans as well as coronary artery

disease, diabetes, obesity, and altered

immunity and other effects. Lethality,

impaired growth, reproductive effects,

and behavioral effects are among the

subchronic and chronic toxic effects

observed in other studies of vegetable

oils and animal fats.

Spills of petroleum and vegetable oils

and animal fats can affect drinking

water supplies, and they have forced the

closing of water treatment systems.

Rancid smells, fouling of beaches, and

destruction of recreational areas have

been reported after spills of vegetable

oils and animal fats.

Small spills of petroleum and

vegetable oils and animal fats can cause

significant environmental damage. Realworld examples of oil spills

demonstrate that spills of petroleum oils

and vegetable oils and animal fats do

occur and produce deleterious

environmental effects. In some cases,

small spills of vegetable oils can

produce more environmental harm than

numerous larger spills of petroleum oils.

Because petroleum oils and vegetable

oils and animal fats exhibit similar

behavior in the environment, similar

methods are used to contain them and

attempt to clean them up after a spill.

Because every spill is different,

decisions on what cleanup methods are

most effective and least harmful to the

environment must be made case-bycase, considering the nature of the oil,

the characteristics of the contaminated

area, and the proximity of the spill to

environmentally sensitive areas.

Once oil is spilled in the

environment, however, the

opportunities for reducing

environmental damage and other

adverse effects are limited. Although

methods for rescuing and cleaning oilcontaminated birds, otters, and other

wildlife have improved, only a small

proportion of affected animals are

recovered, and even fewer of the

rescued animals survive. Further, by

affecting current and future food

sources, nesting habitats, and

reproduction, oil spills can damage the

environment long after the spilled oil

has been removed from the

environment. Prevention measures and

rapid response offer the only effective

means of minimizing the immediate,

devastating effects and long-term

environmental effects of spills of

petroleum and non-petroleum oils,

including vegetable oils and animal fats.

In summary, EPA finds that

Petitioners’ arguments about the manner

in which environmental species die or

become injured following spills of

vegetable oils and animal fats, their

claims about degradation of oil in the

environment, and their assertion that

fats are essential to humans and wildlife

in no way obviate the need to prevent

spills of vegetable oils and animal fats

that can cause lasting environmental

damage. Nor do the Petitioners’ claims

obviate the need to reduce

environmental damage from these spills

by planning in advance for effective

response resources and actions. EPA

hereby declines to modify the July 1,

1994, Final Rule.

Dated: October 1, 1997.

Timothy Fields, Jr.,

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of

Solid Waste and Emergency Response.

Acronym List

ACP—Area Contingency Plan

BOD—Biological Oxygen Demand

CFR—Code of Federal Regulations

COPs—Cholesterol Oxidation Products

CWA—Clean Water Act

DNA—Deoxyribonucleic Acid

DNR—Department of Natural Resources

DOT—Department of Transportation

EFA—Essential Fatty Acids

EPA—Environmental Protection Agency

ERNS—Emergency Response Notification

System

FAO/WHO—Food and Agriculture

Organization/World Health Organization

FR—Federal Register

FRP—Federal Response Plan

FWS—Fish and Wildlife Service

IARC—International Agency for Research on

Cancer

Institute—Institute of Shortening and Edible

Oils, Inc.

LC50—Lethal Concentration 50

LD50—Lethal Dose 50

LOPs—Lipid Oxidation Products

MOU—Memorandum of Understanding

NAS—National Academy of Sciences

NOAA—National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

NRC—Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NRC—National Response Center

OPA—Oil Pollution Act

PAHs—Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons

PCBs—Polychlorinated Biphenyls

PUFA—Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid (n-6

PUFA, including essential fatty acid

linoleic acid; n-3 PUFA, including the

essential fatty acid, a-linolenic acid)

RCRA—Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act

RSPA—Research and Special Projects

Administration

SPCC—Spill Prevention Countermeasure and

Control

USDA—United States Department of

Agriculture

USDHHS—United States Department of

Health and Human Services

USDOC—United States Department of

Commerce

USDOI—United States Department of Interior

USEPA—United States Environmental

Protection Agency

Bibliography

Abel, P.D. (1996). Water Pollution Biology.

Taylor and Francis, London, United

Kingdom, 113–163.

Abernathy, Charles O., Robert Cantilli,

Julie T. Du, and Orville A. Levander. (1992).

Essentiality Versus Toxicity: Some

Considerations in the Risk Assessment of

Essential Trace Elements. In: J. Saxena,

editor, Hazard Assessment of Chemicals.

Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York,

NY, Volume 8.

Albers, P.H. (1977). Effects of External

Applications of Fuel Oil on Hatchability of

Mallard Eggs In: D.A. Wolfe, editor, Fate and

Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Marine

Organisms and Ecosystems. Pergamon Press,

Oxford, pp. 158–163.

Albers, P.H. (1995). Oil, Biological

Communities and Contingency Planning In:

L. Frink, K. Ball-Weir, and C. Smith, Editors.

Wildlife and Oil Planning. Response,

Research, and Contingency Planning. TriState Bird Rescue and Research, Newark,

Delaware, pp. 1–9.

Alexander, Maurice M. (1983). Oil, Fish

and Wildlife and Wetlands: A Review.

Northeastern Environmental Science 2 (1):

13–24.

Allen, A. and W.G. Nelson. (1983). Canola

Oil As a Substitute for Crude Oil in Cold

Water Tests. Spill Technology Newsletter,

January-February, pp. 4–10.

Amdur, Mary O., John Doull and Curtis D.

Klaassen. (1991). Casarett And Doull’s

Toxicology. Pergamon Press, New York, NY,

Fourth Edition, pp. 12–126, 565–680.

Andrews, J.S., W.H. Griffith, J.F. Mead, and

R.A. Stein. (1960). Toxicity of Air-Oxidized

Soybean Oil. J. Nutrition 70:199–210.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54531

Aqua Survey, Inc. (1993). Diesel Fuel, Beef

Tallow, RBD Soybean Oil and Crude Soybean

Oil: Acute Effects on the Fathead Minnow,

Pimephales Promelas. Study # 93–136, May

21, 1993.

Artman, N.R. (1969). The Chemical and

Biological Properties of Heated and Oxidized

Fats. In: R. Poaletti and D. Krichevsky,

Editors, Advances in Lipid Research, pp.

245–330.

Berardi, L.C. and L.A. Goldblatt. (1980).

Gossypol In: I.E. Liener, Editor, Toxic

Constituents of Plant Foodstuffs. Second

Edition, Academic Press, New York, pp. 183–

237.

Boyd, E.M. (1973). Toxicity of Pure Foods.

CRC Press, Cleveland, OH, pp. 71–111.

Brekke, O.L. (1980). Edible Oil

Processing—Introduction In: American

Soybean Association and American Oil

Chemists’ Society. Handbook of Soy Oil

Processing and Utilization. St. Louis, MO and

Champaign, IL, pp. 67–69.

Carroll, K.K. (1991) Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 53

(Suppl 4):1064S. Cited in Hui, Y.H. (1996a).

Bailey’s Industrial Oil and Fat Products,

Edible Oil and Fat Products: General

Application. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New

York, NY, Volume 1, Fifth Edition, pp. 194–

196.

Chemical Hazards Response Information

System (CHRIS). Department of

Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard. January,

1991.

Chemical Hazards Response Information

System (CHRIS). Department of

Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard. 1995.

Clark, R.B. (1993). Marine Pollution.

Clarendon Press, Oxford, 3rd Edition,

Chapter 3, pp. 28–52.

Croxall, J.P. (1975). The Effect of Oil on

Nature Conservation, Especially Birds. In:

Petroleum and the Continental Shelf of

Northwest Europe. v. 2: 93–101,

Environmental Protection. Inst. Petrol.,

London. As cited in Alexander, 1983.

Croxall, J.P. (1977). The Effects of Oil on

Seabirds. Rapp. P-v. Reun. Cons. Int. Explor.

Mer 171:191–195, 1977 In: National Academy

of Sciences. Oil in the Sea. Effects, pp. 430–

436.

Crump-Wiesner, Hans J. and Allen L.

Jennings. Properties and Effects of

Nonpetroleum Oils. (1975). Pro. of 1975

Conference on Prevention and Control of

Pollution. American Petroleum Institute,

Washington, D.C., pp. 29–32.

Dubovkin, N.P., M.E. Tararyshkin, and L.D.

Abashina. (1981). Crude Oil and Product

Research: Vapor Pressure and Critical

Parameters of Jet Fuel In: Chemistry and

Technology of Fuels and Oils. Plenum

Publishing Corporation, pp. 207–210.

Translated from Russian; translated from

Khimiya I Takhnologiya Topliv I Masel 17

(4):34–37, April, 1981, Consultants Bureau,

New York.

Entrix, Inc. (1992). A Critical Review of

Toxicity Values and an Evaluation of the

Persistence of Petroleum Products for Use in

Natural Resource Damage Assessments, Draft.

Wilmington, DE. Prepared for American

Petroleum Institute. December 18, 1992, pp.

108–120.

ENVIRON Corporation. (1993).

Environmental Effects of Releases of Animal

Fats and Vegetable Oils to Waterways.

Arlington, VA June 3, 1993. Submitted by

Petitioner.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the

United Nations, World Health Organization

(FAO/WHO). (1994). Fats and Oils in Human

Nutrition. Expert Consultation, October 19–

26, 1993, Rome. Published by Food and

Agriculture Organization, Rome, pp. 1–102,

113–147.

Frankel, E.N. (1984). Lipid Oxidation:

Mechanisms, Products and Biological

Significance. Journal of the American Oil

Chemist Society 61(12):1908–1917, December

1984.

Freedman. L.S., C. Clifford, and M.

Messina. (1990). Cancer Res. 50:5710. In:

Hui, Y.H. (1996a). Bailey’s Industrial Oil and

Fat Products, Edible Oil and Fat Products:

General Application. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,

New York, NY, Volume 1, Fifth Edition, pp.

194–196.

French, C.E., R.H. Ingram, J.A. Uram, G.P.

Barron, and R.W. Swift. (1953). The Influence

of Dietary Fat and Carbohydrate on Growth

and Longevity in rats. J. Nutr. 51:329–339.

Cited in: National Research Council, Nutrient

Requirement of Laboratory Animals., 4th

Edition. National Academy Press,

Washington, D.C., p. 20, 1995.

Frink, L. (1994). Statement on Regulatory

Standards for the Transportation of Edible

Oil. Tri-State Bird Rescue & Research, Inc.,

January 30, 1994.

Frink, L. and E.A. Miller. (1995). Principles

of Oiled Bird Rehabilitation. Wildlife and Oil

Spills. Tri-State Bird Rescue & Research, Inc.,

Newark, DE, pp. 61–68.

Gilman, A.G., L.S. Goodman, T.W. Rall,

and F. Murad. (1985). Goodman and

Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of

Therapeutics. Macmillan Publishing

Company, Seventh Edition, pp. 1001–1003.

Goodrich, W.H. (1980). Environmental

Concerns In: D.R. Erickson, E.H. Pryde, O.L.

Brekke, T.L. Mounts, and R.A. Falb, Editors,

Handbook of Soy Oil Processing and

Utilization. American Soybean Association,

St. Louis, MS and American Oil Chemists’

Society, Champaign, IL, pp. 521–527.

Groenewold, J.C., R.F. Pico, K.S. Watson.

(1982). Comparison of BOD Relationships for

Typical Edible and Petroleum Oils. Journal of

the Water Pollution Control Federation

54(4):398–405, April, 1982.

Hartung, R. (1965). Some Effects of Oiling

on Reproduction of Ducks. Journal of Wildlife

Management 29(4):872–874.

Hartung, R. (1967). Energy Metabolism in

Oil-Covered Ducks. Journal of Wildlife

Management 31:798–804.

Hartung, R. (1995). Assessment of the

Potential for Long-Term Toxicological Effects

of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill on Birds and

Mammals In: P.G. Wells, J.N. Butler, and J.S.

Hughes, Editors, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Fate

and Effects in Alaskan Waters. American

Society for Testing and Materials,

Philadelphia, PA, pp. 693–725.

Hayes, A. Wallace. (1982). Principles and

Methods Of Toxicology. Raven Press, New

York, NY, pp. 1–55.

Hayes, A. Wallace. (1989). Principles and

Methods of Toxicology. Raven Press, New

York, NY, Second Edition, pp. 75–76, 105–

110, 169–220.

Hazardous Substances Data Base (HSDB),

National Library of Medicine, 1997.

Hendricks, J.D., R.O. Sinnhuber, P.M.

Loveland, N.E. Pawlowski, and J.E. Nixon.

(1980a). Hepatocarcinogenicity of Glandless

Cottonseeds and Refined Cottonseed Oil to

Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri). Science

208:309–310.

Hendricks, J.D., R.O. Sinnhuber, J.E. Nixon,

J.H. Wales, M.S. Masri, and D.P.H. Hsieh.

(1980b). Carcinogenic Response of Rainbow

Trout (Salmo gairdneri) to Aflatoxin Q1 and

Synergistic Effect of Cyclopropenoid Fatty

Acids. JNCI 64:523–528.

Hendricks, J.D., T.R. Meyers, and D.W.

Shelton. (1984). Histological Progression of

Hepatic Neoplasia in Rainbow Trout (Salmo

gairdneri). In: K.L. Hoover, Editor, Use of

Small Fish Species in Carcinogenicity

Testing. National Cancer Institute Monograph

65, NIH Publication Number 84–2653,

National Institutes of Health, Bethesda,

Maryland, pp. 321–336, May, 1984.

Hoffmann, G. (1989). The Chemistry and

Technology of Edible Oils and Fats and their

High Fat Products. Academic Press, London,

pp. 1–28, 343–363.

Hui, Y.H. (1996a). Bailey’s Industrial Oil

and Fat Products, Edible Oil and Fat

Products: General Application. John Wiley &

Sons, Inc., New York, NY, Volume 1, Fifth

Edition, pp. 1–280, 397–439.

Hui, Y.H. (1996b). Bailey’s Industrial Oil

and Fat Products, Edible Oil and Fat

Products: Oils and Oilseeds. John Wiley &

Sons, Inc., New York, NY, Volume 2, Fifth

Edition, pp. 1–689.

Hui, Y.H. (1996d). Bailey’s Industrial Oil

and Fat Products, Edible Oil and Fat

Products: Products and Application

Technology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New

York, NY, Volume 4, Fifth Edition, pp. 1–

655.

Institute of Shortening and Edible Oils, Inc.

(1985). Treatment of Wastewaters From Food

Oil Processing Plants in Municipal Facilities.

October, 1985, pp. 1–18.

International Agency for Research on

Cancer (IARC). (1984). Evaluation of the

Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans:

Polynuclear Aromatic Compounds, Part 2,

Carbon Blacks, Mineral Oils and Some

Nitroarenes. IARC, France, Volume 33, pp.

29–31 and 87–168.

International Agency for Research on

Cancer (IARC). (1989). Evaluation of the

Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans:

Occupational Exposures in Petroleum

Refining: Crude Oil and Major Petroleum

Fuels. IARC, Lyon, France, Volume 45, pp.

13–272.

Kanazawa, A., S. Teshima, and K. Ono.

(1979). Relationship Between Essential Fatty

Acid Requirements of Aquatic Animals and

the Capacity for Bioconversion of Linolenic

Acid to Highly Unsaturated Fatty Acids.

Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 63B:295–298.

Katan, M. B., P. L. Zock, and R.P. Mensink.

(1995). Trans Fatty Acids and Their Effects

on Lipoproteins in Humans. Annual Review

of Nutrition 15:473–493.

Kiritsakis, A.K. (1991). Olive Oil. American

Oil Chemists’ Society, Champaign, Illinois,

pp. 25–33, 104–127, and 157–161.

Klaassen, Curtis D., Mary O. Amdur and

John Doull. (1986). Casarett And Doull’s
54532 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Toxicology. Macmillan Publishing Company,

New York, NY, Third Edition, pp. 11–98 and

519–635.

Kooyman, G.L., R.W. Davis, and M.A.

Castellini. (1977) Thermal Conductance of

Ememrsed Prinniped and Sea Otter Pelts

Before and After Oiling with Prudhoe Bay

Crude In: D.A. Wolfe, editor, Fate and Effects

of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Marine

Organisms and Ecosystems, Pergamon Press,

Oxford, pp. 143–150.

Lawson, H. (1995). Food Oils and Fats.

Technology, Utilization, and Nutrition.

Chapman & Hall, New York, NY, pp. 3–27.

Lee, R.F. (1977). Accumulation and

Turnover of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in

Marine Organisms In: D.A. Wolfe, Editor,

Fate and Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons

in Marine Ecosystems and Organisms,

Pergamon Press, Oxford, pages 60–70.

Lee, D.J., J.H. Wales, J.L. Ayres, and R.O.

Sinnhuber. (1968). Synergism between

Cyclopropenoid Fatty Acids and Chemical

Carcinogens in Rainbow Trout (Salmo

gairdneri). Cancer Research 28:2312–2318,

November, 1968.

Leighton, F.A. (1995). The Toxicity of

Petroleum Oils to Birds: An Overview. In: L.

Frink, K. Ball-Weir, And C. Smith, Editors,

Wildlife and Oil Spills: Response, Research,

and Contingency Planning, Tri-State Bird

Rescue & Research, Newark, Delaware, pp.

10–22.

Levy, J.R., K.A. Faber, L. Ayyash, and C.L.

Hughes. (1995). The Effect of Prenatal

Exposure to the Phytoestrogen Genistein on

Sexual Differentiation in Rats. Second

International Conference on Phytoestrogens.

October 17–20, 1993. Little Rock, Arkansas.

Proceedings of the Society for Experimental

Biology and Medicine 208 (1):60–66, January,

1995.

Lewis, A., P. S. Daling, T. StromKristiansen and P. J. Brandvik. (1995). The

Properties and Behavior of Crude Oil Spilled

at Sea. Pro. Second International Oil Spill

Research and Development Forum.

International Maritime Organization,

London, United Kingdom, Volume 1, May

1995, pp. 408–420.

Lewis, R.J. (1996). Sax’s Dangerous

Properties of Industrial Materials. Ninth

Edition, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,

Volume 1: pp. xiii-xxvii, Volume 2: pp. 922,

924, 1143–1144, Volume 3: pp. 2054, 2372–

2373, 2514, 2561, 2573–2574, 2894, 3340,

3367.

List, G. R. and D. R. Erickson. (1980).

Storage, Stabilization and Handling In: D.R.

Erickson, E.H. Pryde, O.L. Brekke, T.L.

Mounts, and R.A. Falb, Editors, Handbook of

Soy Oil Processing and Utilization. American

Soybean Association, St. Louis, MS and

American Oil Chemists’ Society, Champaign,

IL, pp. 272–98 and 300–301.

Lyall, S. ‘‘And Still the Birds Die, Out in

the Poisoned Sea.’’ New York Times

International, April 26, 1996.

Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). (1997).

Corn Oil. Fisher Scientific, Fairlawn, NJ.

Mattson, F. H. (1973). Potential Toxicity of

Food Lipids. In: National Academy of

Sciences, Toxicants Occurring Naturally in

Foods. National Academy of Sciences Press,

Washington, D.C., pp. 189–209.

McKelvey, R.W., I. Robertson and P.E.

Whitehead. (1980). Effect of Non-Petroleum

Oil Spills on Wintering Birds Near

Vancouver. Marine Pollution Bulletin

11:169–171.

Mecklenburg, T.A., S.D. Rice, and J.F.

Karinen. (1977). Molting and Survival of

King Crab (Paralithodes ‘‘Camtschatica’’) and

Coonstripe Shrimp (Pandalus Hypsinothus)

Larvae Exposed to Cook Inlet Crude Oil

Water-Soluble Fraction In: D.A. Wolfe,

Editor, Fate and Effects of Petroleum

Hydrocarbons in Marine Organisms and

Ecosystem, Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 221–

228.

Merck Index. (1989). 11th Edition. Merck

and Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ. Pp. 2528, 2550,

5173, 5245, 6951, 8127–8128.

Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. (1972). Wastewater

Engineering: Collection, Treatment, Disposal,

Consulting Editors, V.T. Chow, R. Eliassen,

and R.K. Linsley, McGraw Hill, Inc., New

York, pp. 239–240.

Michael, A.D. (1977). The Effects of

Petroleum Hydrocarbons on Marine

Populations and Communities. In: D.A.

Wolfe, Editor, Fate and Effects of Petroleum

Hydrocarbons in Marine Ecosystems and

Organisms, Pergamon Press, Oxford, pages

129–137.

Miller, A.M., E.T. Sheehan, and M.G.

Vavich. (1969). Prenatal and Postnatal

Mortality of Offspring of Cyclopropenoid

Fatty Acid-Fed Rats. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol.

Med. 131:61–66, 1969.

Minnesota Department of Conservation,

Division of Game and Fish. Waterfowl

Mortality Caused by Oil Pollution of the

Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers in 1963.

(1963). In Proceedings of the 20th Annual

Meeting of the Upper Mississippi River

Conservation Committee, pp. 149–177.

Mudge, S. M., M. A. Salgado and J. East.

(1993). Preliminary Investigations into

Sunflower Oil Contamination Following the

Wreck of the M. V. Kimya. Marine Pollution

Bulletin 26 (1): 40–43.

Mudge, S.M., H. Saunders and J. Latchford.

(1994). Degradation of Vegetable Oils in the

Marine Environment. Countryside

Commission for Wales Report, CCW, Bangor,

pp. 1–41.

Mudge, Stephen M. (1995). Deleterious

Effects from Accidental Spillages of

Vegetable Oils. Spill Science and Technology

Bulletin 2 (2/3): 187–191.

Mudge, Stephen M., Ian D. Goodchild and

Matthew Wheeler. (1995). Vegetable Oil

Spills on Salt Marshes. Chemistry and

Ecology 10: 127–135.

Mudge, Stephen M. (1997a) Presentation,

Third International Ocean Pollution

Symposium, April 6–11, 1997, Harbor Branch

Oceanographic Institution, Ft. Pierce,

Florida.

Mudge, Stephen. (1997b) Can Vegetable

Oils Outlast Mineral Oils in the Marine

Environment? Marine Pollution Bulletin, in

press.

Murata, S., F. Tanaka, and J. Tokunaga.

(1993). Measurement of Vapor Pressure of a

Series of Edible Oils. J. Fac. Agr., Kyushu

Univ. 38(1–2): 9–18.

Murray, M.W., J.W. Andrews, and H.L.

DeLoach. (1977). Effects of Dietary Lipids,

Dietary Protein and Environmental

Temperatures on Growth, Feed Conversion

and Body Composition of Channel Catfish. J.

Nutr. 107: 272–280. Cited in: National

Research Council, Nutrient Requirements of

Warmwater Fishes and Shellfishes. National

Academy Press, pp. 9–11, 1983.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1977a).

Drinking Water and Health. NAS,

Washington, D.C., Volume 1, pp. 19–62, 252–

253, and 265–270.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1977b).

Nutrient Requirements of Rabbits. National

Academy Press, Washington, D.C., Second

Revised Edition, pp. 2–28.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1981a).

Nutrient Requirements of Coldwater Fishes.

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.,

Number 16, pp. 6–53.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1981b).

Nutrient Requirements of Goats: Angora,

Dairy, and Meat Goats in Temperate and

Tropical Countries. National Academy Press,

Washington, D.C., Number 15, pp. 2–5 and

74–76.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1983).

Nutrient Requirements of Warmwater Fishes

and Shellfishes. National Academy Press,

Washington, D.C., Revised Edition, pp. 2–58.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1984).

Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle.

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.,

6th revised edition, pp. 2–6 and 35–36.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

(1985c). Oil in the Sea—Inputs, Fates and

Effects. Chemical and Biological Methods.

National Academy Press, Washington D.C.

pp. 89–269.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

(1985d). Oil in the Sea—Inputs, Fates and

Effects. Fates. National Academy Press,

Washington D.C., pp. 270–368.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

(1985e). Oil in the Sea—Inputs, Fates and

Effects. Effects. National Academy Press,

Washington, D.C., pp. 369–547.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1985).

Nutrient Requirements of Sheep. National

Academy Press, Washington, D.C., Sixth

Revised Edition, pp. 2–8 and 28.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1988).

Nutrient Requirements of Swine. National

Academy Press, Washington, D.C., Ninth

Revised Edition, pp. 2–8 and 63–66.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1992).

Nutrient Requirements of Mink and Foxes.

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.,

Number 7, Second Revised Edition, pp. 9 and

19.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1994).

Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. National

Academy Press, Washington, D.C., Ninth

Revised Edition, pp. 11–1320–23, 27, 36–37,

40–42, 45, 69, and 75–77.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS),

National Research Council (NRC). (1995).

Nutrient Requirements of Laboratory
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54533

Animals. National Academy Press,

Washington, D.C., Fourth Revised Edition,

pp. 17–21, 60–71, 84–85, 97–100, 106–107,

126–129, and 141.

Nelson, G.J. (1990). Health Effects of

Dietary Fatty Acids. American Oil Chemists’

Society, Champaign, Illinois, pp. 1–263.

Newman, G.G. and D.E. Pollock. (1973).

Organic Pollution of the Marine Environment

by Pelagic Fish Factories in the Western

Cape. South African Journal of Science

69:27–29.

Oil Pollution Act (OPA) Public Law 101–

380, 104 Stat. 484.

Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African

Ornithology. (1974). Fish Oil Kills Sea Birds.

African Wildlife 28(4):24–25.

Phelps, R.A., F.S. Shenstone, A.R.

Kemmerer, and R.J. Evans. (1965). A Review

of Cyclopropenoid Compounds: Biological

Effects of Some Derivatives. Poultry Science

44:358–394.

Rabbani, P.I., H.Z. Alam, S.J. Chirtel, R.

Duvall, R.C. Jackson, and G. Ruffin. (1997).

Subchronic Toxicity of Menhaden Oil (MO)

and MaxEPA in Male and Female Rats.

(Abstract). Fundamental and Applied

Toxicology, Supplement 36(1), Part 2:42–43,

March, 1997. Presented at 36th Annual

Meeting of Society of Toxicology, Cincinnati,

Ohio, March 9–13, 1997.

Rand, G.M. and S.R. Petrocelli. (1985).

Fundamentals of Aquatic Toxicology:

Methods and Applications. Hemisphere

Publishing Corporation, New York, NY,

pp.1–109 and 124–163.

Ratledge, C. (1994). Biodegradation of Oils,

Fats, and Fatty Acids. In: C. Ratledge, Editor,

Biochemistry of Microbial Degradation.

Kluwer Academic Publishers, The

Netherlands, pp. 89–141.

Rechcigl, Jr., M. (1981). CRC Handbook of

Nutritional Requirements in a Functional

Context: Hematopoiesis, Metabolic Function,

and Resistance to Physical Stress. CRC Press,

Inc., Boca Raton, FL, Volume II, pp. 80–81,

148–51, 302–330, 342–43, 349, 357, 364–66,

381–82, 388, 390, 392, and 394–95.

Rechcigl, Jr., M. (1983). CRC Handbook of

Naturally Occurring Food Toxicants. CRC

Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, pp. 15–17, 21–

30, 101–104, 226.

Rescorla, A.R. and F.L. Carnahan. (1936).

Ind. Eng. Chem. 28:1212–1213. In A.E.

Bailey, Bailey’s Industrial Oil and Fat

Products, p. 55, 1945.

Rigger, D. (1997). Edible Oils: Are They

Really That Different? Proceedings of the

1997 International Oil Spill Conference.

Sponsored by U.S. Coast Guard, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, American

Petroleum Institute, International Petroleum

Industry Environmental Conservation

Association, and International Maritime

Organization. Fort Lauderdale, Florida. April

7–10, 1997, pp. 59–61.

Roine, P., E. Uksila, H. Teir, and J. Rapola.

(1960). Histopathological Changes in Rats

and Pigs Fed Rapeseed Oil. Zeitschrift feur

Erneahrungswissenschaft 1:118–124.

Rozemeijer, M.J.C., K. Booij, C. Swennen

and J.P. Boon. (1992). Harmful Effects of

Floating Lipophilic Substances Discharged

from Ships on the Plumage of Birds.

Netherlands Institute for Sea Research

(NIOZ), Den Burg, Netherlands, pp. 1–17,

April, 1992. Attachment to Amendments and

Interpretation of the BCH Code and the IBC

Code, International Maritime Association,

July 17, 1992 and Annex 3, Draft Marine

Environment Protection Committee Circular

on Harmful Effects on Birds from Contact

with Animal and Fish Oils and Fats and

Vegetable Oils (Floating Lipophylic

Substances).

Russell, D.J. and B.A. Carlson. (1978).

Edible-Oil Pollution on Fanning Island,

Pacific Science 32(1):1–15, University Press

of Hawaii.

Salanitro, J.P., P. Dorn, M. Huesemann,

K.O. Moore, I.A. Rhodes, L.M.R. Jackson, T.E.

Vipond, M.M. Western, and H.L. Wisniewski.

(1997). Crude Oil Hydrocarbon

Bioremediation and Soil Ecotoxicity

Assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 31: 1769–

1776.

Salgado, M. (1992). Contamination of the

Anglesey Coastline by Sunflower Oil from the

Wreck of the M.V. Kimya. Master of Science

Thesis, School of Ocean Sciences, University

College of North Wales, Menai Bridge, United

Kingdom. April, 1992, pp. 1–107.

Salgado, M. (1995). The Effects of

Vegetable Oil Contamination on Mussels.

PhD Thesis, School of Ocean Sciences,

University of Wales, Menai Bridge,

Gwynedd, United Kingdom. October, 1995,

pp. 1–219.

Sanders, H.L., J.F. Grassle, G.R. Hampson,

L.S. Morse, S. Garner-Price and C.C. Jones.

(1980). Anatomy of an Oil Spill: Long-term

Effects from the Grounding of the Barge

Florida Off West Falmouth, Massachusetts.

Journal of Marine Research 38(2): 265–380.

Sellers, E.A. and D.G. Baker. (1960).

Coronary Atherosclerosis in Rats Exposed to

Cold. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 83:6–13 In: M.

Rechcigl, Editor, CRC Handbook of

Nutritional Requirements in a Functional

Context, vol. II, Hematopoiesis, Metabolic

Function, and Resistance to Physical Stress,

CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, 1981,

pp. 527–528, 540.

Shaw, D.G. (1977). Hydrocarbons in the

Water Column. In: D.A. Wolfe, Editor, Fate

and Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in

Marine Ecosystems and Organisms,

Pergamon Press, Oxford, pages 8–18.

Sheehan, D.M. (1995). Introduction: The

Case for Expanded Phytoestrogen Research.

Second International Conference on

Phytoestrogens. October 17–20, 1993. Little

Rock, Arkansas. Proceedings of the Society

for Experimental Biology and Medicine

208(1):3–5, January, 1994.

Smith, D.W. and S.M. Herunter. (1989).

Birds Affected by a Canola Oil Spill in

Vancouver Harbour, February, 1989. Spill

Technology Newsletter, pp. 3–5 October–

December 1989.

Steinberg, D. (1971). Phytanic Acid Storage

Disease (Refsum’s Disease). In: J.B. Stanbury,

J.B. Wyngaarden, and D.S. Fredrickson,

Editors, Metabolic Basis of Inherited Disease.

3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York. Cited

in Mattson, F.H. Potential Toxicity of Food

Lipids, National Academy of Sciences,

Toxicants Occurring Naturally in Foods.

National Academy of Sciences Press,

Washington, D.C., pp. 189–209, 1973.

Stickney, R.R. and J.W. Andrews. (1971).

Combined Effects of Dietary Lipids and

Environmental Temperature on Growth,

Metabolism and Body Composition of

Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus). J. Nutr.

101:1703–1710. Cited in: National Research

Council, Nutrient Requirements of

Warmwater Fishes and Shellfishes. National

Academy Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 9–11.

Stickney, R.R. and J.W. Andrews. (1972).

Effects of Dietary Lipids on Growth, Food

Conversion, Lipid and Fatty Acid

Composition of Channel Catfish. J. Nutr.

102:249–258. Cited in: National Research

Council, Nutrient Requirements of

Warmwater Fishes and Shellfishes. National

Academy Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 9–11.

Straughan, D. (1977). Biological Survey of

Intertidal Areas in the Straits of Magellen in

January, 1975, Five Months After the Metula

Oil Spill In: D.A. Wolfe, Editor, Fate and

Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Marine

Organisms and Ecosystems, Pergamon Press,

Oxford, pp. 247–260.

Szaro, R.C. and P.H. Albers. (1977). Effects

of External Applications of No. 2 Fuel Oil on

Common Eider Eggs In: D.A. Wolfe, Editor,

Fate and Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons

in Marine Organisms and Ecosystems.

Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 164–167, 1977.

Takeuchi, T. and T. Watanabe. (1979).

Studies on Nutritive Value of Dietary Lipids

in Fish. XIX. Effect of Excessive Amounts of

Essential Fatty Acids on Growth of Rainbow

Trout. Bull. Jpn. Soc. Sci. Fish. 45:1517–

1519. Cited in: National Research Council,

Nutrient Requirements of Warmwater Fishes

and Shellfishes. National Academy Press,

Washington, D.C., pp. 9–11.

Tannenbaum, A. (1942). Cancer Res. 2:468.

Cited in: Hui, Y.H. (1996a). Bailey’s

Industrial Oil and Fat Products, Edible Oil

and Fat Products: General Application. John

Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, Volume

1, Fifth Edition, pp. 194–196.

Teal, J.M. (1977). Food Chain Transfer of

Hydrocarbons, pp. 71–77 In: Wolfe, D.A. Fate

and Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in

Marine Ecosystems and Organisms.

Pergamon Press, New York, NY, Chapters 8,

15, 16 and 23.

Ullrey, D.E. (1996). Personal

Communication to Barbara Davis on

Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. June 18,

1996.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC),

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). (1992a). An

Introduction to Oil Spill Physical and

Chemical Processes and Information

Management. April, 1992, Chapters 2 and 3,

pp. 2–1 to 2–56 and 3–1 to 3–97.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC),

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). (1992b). Shoreline

Countermeasures Manual. Temperate

Coastal Environments. pp. 9–23 and 37–62,

December, 1992.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC),

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). Memorandum of

Record, June 3, 1993, from NOAA Hazardous

Materials Response and Assessment Division,

June 3, 1993.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC),

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). (1994). Options for

Minimizing Environmental Impacts of
54534 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Freshwater Spill Response. NOAA and

American Petroleum Institute, September

1994, pp. 2–11, 122–124.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC),

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). (1996). Damage

Assessment and Restoration Program. Injury

Assessment: Guidance Document for Natural

Resource Damage Assessment Under the Oil

Pollution Act of 1990. Silver Spring,

Maryland, Appendix C, Oil Behavior,

Pathways, and Exposure, pps. C–1–24 and

Appendix D, Adverse Effects From Oil, pps.

D–1–69, August, 1996.

U.S. Department of Health & Human

Services (USDHHS), Public Health Service

(PHS), 1963. Report on Oil Spills Affecting

the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers, Winter

of 1962–1963. Cincinnati, Ohio, pp. 1–40.

U.S. Department of Health & Human

Services (USDHHS). (1990). Healthy People

2000. Conference Edition, pp. 119–137 and

390–436.

U.S. Department of Health & Human

Services (USDHHS). Agency for Toxic

Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).

(1995a). Toxicological Profile for Gasoline,

pp. 9–111, June, 1995.

U.S. Department of Health & Human

Services (USDHHS). Agency for Toxic

Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).

(1995b). Toxicological Profile for Fuel Oils.

pp. 9–109, June 1995.

U.S. Department of Health & Human

Services (USDHHS). Agency for Toxic

Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).

(1995c). Toxicological Profile for Jet Fuels

(JP4 and JP7). pp. 7–74, June 1995.

U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI),

Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS). (1994).

Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 1994. FWS Memorandum from Peter

H. Albers, Leader, Contaminant Ecology

Group to Oil Spill Response Coordinator,

December 29, 1993. U.S. Department of the

Interior (USDOI), Fish & Wildlife Service

(FWS). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Letter

from Michael J. Spear, Assistant Director,

Ecological Services, to Ms. Ana Sol Gutierrez,

Research and Special Projects

Administration, U.S. Department of

Transportation, April 11, 1994.

U.S. Department of Transportation

(USDOT), Coast Guard (CG). (1996).

Response Plans for Marine TransportationRelated Facilities: Final Rule. 61 FR 7890,

7907–7908, Feb. 29, 1996.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA), Memorandum of Understanding

between the Secretary of Transportation and

the EPA Administrator, dated November 24,

1971 (36 FR 24080).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA), Office of Research and

Development (ORD). (1976). Acute Toxicity

of Selected Organic Compounds to Fathead

Minnows. EPA–600/3–76–097,

Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of

Research and Development, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Duluth,

Minnesota, October, 1976, pp 1–13.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA). (1978). Identification of

Conventional Pollutants. 43 FR 32857–32859,

July 28, 1978.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA). (1979). Identification of

Conventional Pollutants, Final Rule. 44 FR

44501–44503, July 30, 1979.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA). (1980). Water Quality Criteria

Documents; Availability. 45 FR 79318–79379,

November 28, 1980.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA), Office of Solid Waste and

Emergency Response, Office of Emergency

and Remedial Response (OSWER). (1988).

The Oil Spill Prevention, Control, and

Countermeasures Program Task Force

Report. May 13, 1988.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

(1994a). Memorandum from Kathleen Bogan,

ABB to Dana Stalcup, Oil Program Branch,

USEPA, June 22, 1994.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA, 1994b). Oil Pollution Prevention;

Non-Transportation-Related Onshore

Facilities; Final Rule. 59 FR 34070, 3408,

Appendix E, July 1, 1994.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA, 1994c). Request for Data and

Comment on Response Strategies for

Facilities that Handle, Store, or Transport

Certain Non-Petroleum Oils. 59 FR 53742,

53743, October 26, 1994, p. 5.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA), Office of Solid Waste and

Emergency Response (OSWER),

Environmental Response Team. (1995).

Hazardous Material Incident Response

Training Program, Edison, NJ, 1995 Review,

Section 4, pp. 1–27.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA), Office of Solid Waste and

Emergency Response (OSWER). Emergency

Response Notification System (ERNS)

database, 1996 and ‘‘An Overview of ERNS,’’

March, 1995.

Van Soest, P.J., Nutritional Ecology of the

Ruminant. (1994). Comstock Publishing

Associates, Ithaca, pp. 1–3, 7–11, 325–336.

Venosa, A.D., M.T. Suidan, B.A. Wrenn,

K.L. Strohmeier, J.R. Haines, B.L. Eberhart, D.

King, and E. Holder. (1996). Bioremediation

of an Experimental Oil Spill on the Shoreline

of Delaware Bay. Environ. Sci. Technol.

30:1764–1775.

Weiss, T.J. (1983). Food Oils and Their

Use. Second Edition, Avi Publishing Co.,

Inc., Westport, CT, pp. 10–13.

Whiticar, S., M. Bobra, M. Fingas, P.

Jokuty, P. Liuzzo, S. Callaghan, F. Ackerman

and J. Cao. (1993). A Catalogue of Crude Oil

and Oil Product Properties. Environment

Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, 1992 Edition,

February 1993, pp. 111–119, 154–156, 160–

165, 215–266.

Williams, T.M., J. McBain, R.K. Wilson,

and R.W. Davis. (1990). Clinical Evaluation

and Cleaning of Sea Otters Affected by the T/

V Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Sea Otter

Symposium, U.S. Department of the Interior,

Biological Report 90 (12), December, 1990,

Washington, D.C., pp. 236–257.

Wisconsin, Department of Natural

Resources. (1991a). Spill Cleanup from the

Central Storage and Warehouse Fire on

Cottage Grove Road in Madison. Memo of

J.W. Brusca to K.R. Williams, May 14, 1991;

Central Storage Warehouse Fire/Spill

Cleanup.

Wisconsin, Department of Natural

Resources. (1991b). Memo from T.J. Amman

to Floyd Stutz, about May 31, 1991; Update

on Clean Up Actions following the Fire in

Early May, 1991.

Wisconsin, Department of Natural

Resources. (1991c). Letter from T.J. Amman

to T. Fitzgerald, Central Storage and

Warehouse Co., Inc., August 1, 1991.

Wisconsin State Journal (1991a). Walking

in Wet Concrete. May 5, 1991.

Wisconsin State Journal (1991b). Mike

Flaherty. Grease Fire Burning On. May 6,

1991.

Wisconsin State Journal (1991c). Mike

Flaherty. Blaze Also Poses Environmental

Threat. May 6, 1991.

Wisconsin State Journal (1991d). Jonnel

LiCari. Rain Adds to Cleanup Woes. May 6,

1991.

Wisconsin State Journal (1991e). Mike

Flaherty. Fire Assessment Begins. May 9,

1991.

Wolfe, D.A. (1986). Source of Organic

Contaminants in the Marine Environment:

Ocean Disposal and Accidental Spills In: C.S.

Giam and H.J.M. Dou, Editors, Strategies and

Advanced Techniques for Marine Pollution

Studies: Mediterranean Sea. Springer-Verlag,

Berlin, pp. 237-288.

Yannai, S. (1980). Toxic Factors Induced

by Processing In I.E. Liener, Editor, Toxic

Constituents of Plant Foodstuffs, Academic

Press, New York, Second Edition, pp. 371–

427.

Zoun, P.E.F., A.J. Baars and R.S.

Boshuizen. (1991). A Case of Seabird

Mortality in the Netherlands Caused by

Spillage of Nonylphenol and Vegetable Oils,

Winter 1988/1989. Sula 5 (3): 101–103.

Summary of a report, published in Dutch.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54535

Appendix I—Supporting Tables

Table 1. Comparison of Physical Properties

of Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats with

Petroleum Oils

Table 2. Comparison of Vegetable Oils and

Animal Fats with Petroleum Oil

Table 3. Comparison of Aqua Methods and

Standard Acute Aquatic Testing Methods

Table 4. Effects of Real-World Oil Spills

TABLE 1.—COMPARISON OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF VEGETABLE OILS AND ANIMAL FATS WITH PETROLEUM OILS

Oil type Solidification point Solubility

Specific Gravity at 25°C

unless otherwise

specified

Vapor pressure (mmHg)

Edible Oils

Tallow ................................ 40 to 46°C 1 ....................... Insoluble in water 1 ............ 0.87 at 80°C 3 ....................

Corn oil .............................. 14 to 20°C 4 ....................... Insoluble in water; soluble

in acetone.1,2.

0.916–0.921 4, 0.91875.5 .. Negligible.6

Coconut oil ........................ Solid to liquid at 15°C, 1

atm.7.

Insoluble in water; very

soluble in ether.1.

0.922 7 ...............................

Rapeseed/Canola oil ......... ¥2 to ¥10°C; liquid at

15°C.4.

Insoluble in water; soluble

in chloroform and ether.4.

0.913–0.917 8 .................... 250°C, 0.535mmHg.9

Fish oil ............................... ¥2 to 4°C; liquid at 15°C.4 Insoluble in water 1 ............ 0.93 at 20°C.7 ...................

Soybean oil ....................... ¥10 to ¥16°C; liquid at

15°C.5.

Insoluble in water and acetone.1.0.916–0.922 4, 0.9175 5 ..... 250°C, 0.351mmHg.9

Cottonseed oil ................... 0 to ¥5°C; liquid at 15°C.4 Insoluble in water; slightly

soluble in alcohol.1.

0.915–0.921 4, 0.917 5 ....... 250°C, 0.317mmHg.9

Palm oil ............................. Solid to liquid at 15°C, 1

atm.7.

Insoluble in water.1 ........... 0.920–0.927 (fruit), 0.952

(seed).4.

Lard ................................... ¥2 to 4°C 1 ....................... Insoluble in water or cold

alcohol; soluble in ether

and benzene.1.

0.917 4 <1 1 ........................

Petroleum Oils

Diesel ................................ Liquid at 15°C, 1 atm 7 ...... Insoluble in water 7 ............ 0.841 at 16°C 7 .................. 38°C, 0.201mmHg.9

Fuel Oil #1 (kerosene) ...... Liquid at 15°C, 1 atm 7 ...... Insoluble in water; miscible

with other petroleum solvents.1.

0.80 4 ................................. 21°C, 2.12–26.4mmHg.11

Fuel Oil 2–D ...................... Liquid at 15°C, 1 atm 7 ...... Insoluble in water 7 ............ 0.87–0.9 at 20°C 7 ............. 21°C, 2.12–26.4mmHg.11

Crude ................................. Liquid at 15°C, 1 atm 7 ...... Insoluble in water 7 ............ 0.89 8 ................................. 37.8°C, 3.27mmHg.10

Fuel Oil #6 Residual .......... Liquid at 15°C, 1 atm 7 ...... Insoluble in water 7 ............ 0.95 approx. at 20°C 7 ...... 37.8°C, 0.092mmHg.10

Jet Fuel JP #7 ................... ........................................... ........................................... ........................................... 260°C, 2,480 mmHg.12

T 1 ..................................... ........................................... ........................................... ........................................... 180–380°C,

6,907mmHg.13

T 6 ..................................... ........................................... ........................................... ........................................... 170–450°C,

7,120mmHg.13

Oil type Viscosity dynamic (centipoises) Viscosity kinematic (centistokes)

Edible Oils

Tallow ................................................................ 16.5 at 100°C 3

Corn oil .............................................................. 30.8 at 40°C 5

Coconut oil ........................................................ 32.6 at 32°C 7 ................................................... 29.79 at 37.8°C.14

Rapeseed/Canola oil ......................................... ........................................................................... 50.64 at 37.8°C 14, 62.6 at 25°C, 36.7 at 40°C

for RBD Soybean Oil.5

Fish oil ............................................................... ........................................................................... 32.7 at 37.8°C (cod liver 12).14

Soybean oil ....................................................... 28 at 40°C 15 ..................................................... 28.49 at 37.8°C 14, 50.1 at 25°C, 28.9 at

40°C.5

Cottonseed oil ................................................... 34 at 40°C 15 ..................................................... 38.88 at 37.8°C.14

Palm oil .............................................................

Lard ................................................................... 45 at 40°C 15 ..................................................... 44.41 at 37.8°C.14

Petroleum Oils

Diesel ................................................................ 11.9 at 37.8°C 7 ................................................ 6.8 at 20°C.10

Fuel Oil #1 (kerosene) ...................................... 1.15 at 21°C 7 ................................................... 1.7 at 15°C.10

Fuel Oil 2–D ...................................................... 1.97 at 21°C 7 ................................................... 2.0 to 3.6 at 38°C.10

Crude ................................................................ 5.5 at 21°C 7 ..................................................... 5.96 at 20°C.10

Fuel Oil 6 Residual ........................................... 123 to 233 at 20°C 10 ....................................... >130 at 40°C.10

1 HSDB: Hazardous Substances Data Base. National Library of Medicine, 1997.

2 USDOC/NOAA, 1994.

3 Chemical Hazards Response Information System (CHRIS), DOT, USCG, January, 1991.

4 Merck Index, 1989.

5 Hui, 1996a, 1996b.

6 Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), 1997, Corn Oil, Fisher Scientific.

7 Chemical Hazards Response Information System (CHRIS), Department of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard, 1995.
54536 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

8Allen and Nelson, 1983.

9 Murata et al., 1993.

10Whiticar et al., 1993. 11 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1995b. 12 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1995c. 13 Dubovkin et al.,1981. Translated. 14 Rescorla and Carnahan, 1945. 15Weiss, 1983.

TABLE 2.—COMPARISON OF VEGETABLE OILS AND ANIMAL FATS WITH PETROLEUM OILS

Vegetable oil/animal fats Petroleum oils

Chemical Properties:

Chemical Structure .................................... Triglycerides (triacylglycerols), cholesterol,

phospho lipids, fatty acids, other components in crude oils.1,2,3.

Alkanes, cycloalkanes, aromatic hydrocarbons,

polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),

other components in crude oils.4

Chemical Form .......................................... Some liquids, some solids.1,5,6,7,8,9 ................... Some liquids, some solids.10,11,12,13

Physical Properties:

Density ....................................................... Most 0.908–0.927 at 20 ° C; most float on

water, some sink.1,5,6,7,9,14.

Most 0.80–0.95 at 20° C; most float on water,

some sink.8,9,14

Solubility ..................................................... Most insoluble in water, soluble in organic solvents.6,8,9.Most insoluble in water, soluble in organic solvents.6,8, 12

Viscosity ..................................................... Wide range, depends on temperature.1,5,7,8,15,16.

Wide range, depends on temperature.8,10

Volatility ...................................................... Generally small proportion volatile, most not

volatile.1,5,13,17.

Some fractions (e.g., gasoline) volatile, some

not volatile; 11–90% volatile, depending on

type of oil.10,11,12,18

Environmental Fate:

Environmental Distribution ......................... Oil found in water, soil/sediment, biota; usually

little in air.1,5,19,20,21,22,23.

Oil found in water, air, soil/sediment,

biota.4,12,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33

Persistence ................................................ May persist in environment for many years or

degrade rapidly; depends on oil, media, environmental conditions where

spilled.22,34,35,36,37.

May persist in environment for many years;

depends on oil, media, environmental conditions where spilled.6, 30,38,39

Chemical, Physical, and Biological Reactions.Oxidation, hydrolysis, polymerization, photolysis, other chemical reactions; degraded by

microorganisms, metabolized by plants and

animals.1,2,3,40,41.

Oxidation, photolysis, weathering processes;

degraded by microorganisms; petroleum

components taken up by plants and animals, metabolized by macroinvertebrates

and some other animals.4,30,33

Toxic Components, Degradation Products Some oils contain toxic components or may

be degraded to form toxic products.1,2,43,44,45.

Many contain benzene, PAHs, and other toxic

components; may be degraded to form toxic

products.46,47,48

Physical Effects:

Smothering ................................................. Yes; suffocation when oil blocks aeration at

water surface or depletes oxygen through

biodegradation.20,22,49,50,51,52,53.

Yes; suffocation from oxygen depletion.30,47

Coating ....................................................... Yes, can cause hypothermia, increased need

for food, loss of buoyancy, decreased ability

to escape predators.22,29,36,37,54,55,56,57,58,59.

Yes, can cause hypothermia, increased need

for food, loss of buoyancy, decreased ability

to escape predators.28,29,47,54,55,56,57,58

Egg Contamination .................................... Yes; can be transferred from coated parents

and kill embryos by blocking air exchange at

egg surface.22,29,54,55,56,57,58.

Yes; can be transferred from coated parents

and kill embryos by blocking air exchange at

egg surface and by

toxicitytion.28,29,47,56,57,60,61,62,63

Food and Habitat Destruction .................... Yes; can cause starvation or ingestion of oiled

food, destruction of future food sources, destruction of habitat, community effects.22,29,55,56,57.

Yes, can cause starvation or ingestion of oiled

food that clogs organs, destruction of future

food sources, destruction of habitat, community effects.28,29,47,54,55,56,57,58,61,64,65

Lethality (LD50, LC50) ................................. Results vary by test, organism, conditionsG546,47,66,67 Tests submitted by Petitioners Other tests: Corn oil and cottonseed

more lethal than mineral oil in albino rats—

55 g/kg was LD50 for 5 days for corn oil

and for 4 days for cottonseed oil; no fatalities at 130 g/kg with mineral oil for 15

days.69 Other tests: Several free fatty acids

intermediate in lethality in series of chemicals in fathead minnows.70 Other tests: Mussels died after two weeks or more of exposure to low levels of oils (0.3 ml/min flowrate

for oils, 300 ml/min flowrate seawater).19,21.

Results vary by test, organism, conditions.46,47,66,67,68 Tests submitted by petitioner Other tests: 0.5–28 ppm 96-hour

LC50 static tests for some aromatic hydrocarbons for selected marine

macroinvertebrates and fish.46,47,68

Acute Toxicity ............................................ Laxative, diarrhea, lipid pneumonia, decreased

ability to escape predators; some vegetable

oils, such as safflower oil, are irritating to

human skin and eyes.55,56,57,71,72

Laxative, decreased ability to escape predators, pneumonia; affects lung, liver, kidney,

blood, gastrointestinal and nervous systems.28,29,47,57

Chronic Toxicity:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54537

TABLE 2.—COMPARISON OF VEGETABLE OILS AND ANIMAL FATS WITH PETROLEUM OILS—Continued

Vegetable oil/animal fats Petroleum oils

Cancer ....................................................... High-fat diets and diets containing certain

types of fats increase cancer incidence in

studies of laboratory animals and epidemiological studies.1,73,74,75,76,77,78.

Benzene and some PAHs are human carcinogens; certain crude oil fractions and petroleum products sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in laboratory animals and associated with increased cancer in refinery workers.47,48,79

Effects on Growth ...................................... High levels of some types of fats increase

growth and obesity but early death and decreased reproductive ability in several species of animals; elevated levels of some oils

or components decrease growth in some

fish; growth inhibition in mussels exposed to

low levels of sunflower

oil.1,21,35,74,78,80,81,82,83,84,85,86.

Petroleum hydrocarbons affect nearly all aspects of physiology and metabolism; reduced feeding rates in most animal species

studied at concentrations similar to those in

spills; benthic organisms especially sensitive; varying responses in marine

plants.28,29,38,47

Reproductive and Developmental Effects Decreased reproduction or growth and survival

of offspring in some animals ingesting high

levels of oils; kills embryos in eggs by physical effects, unknown whether toxicity also

occurs.22,55,56,57,74.

Affect broad range of reproductive and developmental processes; sensitivities to hydrocarbons vary widely between species and

life stages; significant reproductive impairment rarely seen in field although coral,

mussels, fiddler crabs,fish, birds, crustaceans, teleosts can be affected, some for

years; decreased reproductive capacity and

malformations in fish, birds; reduced egg

production and toxicity in several bird species.28,29,30,38,47,59,60,61,62

Other Toxic Effects .................................... Effects on shells of mussels exposed to low

levels of oils, decreased foot extension activity; human and some animal studies show

correlation of high levels of dietary fats with

coronary artery disease, some types of cancer, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, altered

immunity, altered steroid excretion, effects

on bone modeling; increased atherosclerosis in rats fed high cholesterol levels; decreased lifespan in some animals consuming high levels of certain types of oils that

increased growth and obesity.1,21,35,73,74,78,86,87.

Affect broad range of organ systems and functions; increased vulnerability to disease and

decreased growth and reproductive success; adverse skin effects in workers; components affect immune and hematopoeitic

systems.28,29,30,38,39,47,48

Toxicity of Components or Degradation

Products.

Most common chronic toxic effects of

gossypol, a cottonseed oil component, in

animals are cardiac irregularity, circulatory

failure or rupture of red blood cells, and

death; erucic acid in rapeseed oil and

mustardseed oil causes cardiac effects, fat

deposition in hearts of animals, growth suppression, anemia, and other effects, affects

essential fatty acids; cyclopropene fatty

acids in cottonseed and other oils suppress

growth and impair female reproduction in

laboratory animals, produce embryomortality

in hens and rats, increase liver toxicity of

other chemicals, and cause liver cancer in

rainbow trout; oxidation products of animal

fats and vegetable oils—cholesterol oxidation products can adversely affect the heart,

immune system, and metabolism, and some

lipid oxidation products may act in cancer

development and affect atherosclerosis.1,42,43,44,88,89,90,91,92,93.

Single exposures to benzene, a component of

petroleum oils, at very high concentrations

fatal in man; can cause central nervous system stimulation followed by depression and

respiratory failure; can produce nausea, giddiness, headache, unconsciousness, convulsions, and paralysis; chronic exposure of

humans to benzene can produce anemia

and other blood effects and decrease immune defense mechanisms; some PAHs,

components of petroleum oils, have reproductive effects and cause birth defects in

animals and can affect skin, body fluids, and

the immune system after short and longterm exposures in animals, and cause some

respiratory effects in workers; some breakdown products are mutagenic or linked to

carcinogenicity.12,28,29,38,47,48,66,79,94

Indirect Effects .................................................. High levels of oils upset fermentation and digestion in ruminants.95.Fuel oil no. 5 reduced herring population by

decreasing amphipod grazers that control

fungal damage to fish eggs.47

Aesthetics (Fouling, Rancidity) ......................... Rancid odors of breakdown products; fouling

of beaches, polymers formed in water and

on sediments and concrete-like aggregates

of oil and sand foul beaches.

1,2,3,5,19,21,22,34,35,96.

Fouling of beaches with tar balls and weathered oil.31,32,33,47

Fire/Explosion Hazard ....................................... Usually not a hazard, unless hexane or other

chemicals present.1,2,15,17.

Many petroleum products contain volatile

chemicals that are flammable or explosive

under certain conditions.11,12,18,31,39
54538 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 2.—COMPARISON OF VEGETABLE OILS AND ANIMAL FATS WITH PETROLEUM OILS—Continued

Vegetable oil/animal fats Petroleum oils

Interference With Water Treatment .................. Large amounts can overwhelm microorganisms used in water treatment plants; treatment plants must be shut down and alternative water supply provided to prevent disruption from spills.96,97,98,99,100.Spills can interfere with water treatment processes, requiring shutdown of plants and provision of alternate water supply; can contaminate groundwater.30,52,97,98,99

1 Hui, 1996a

2 Hoffmann, 1989

3 Lawson, 1995a

4 NAS, 1985a

5 Hui, 1996b

6 Hazardous Substances Data Base, National Library of Medicine, 1997

7 CHRIS (Chemical Hazards Response Information System), DOT, 1991

8 CHRIS (Chemical Hazards Response Information System), DOT, 1995

9 Merck Index, 1989

10Whiticar et al., 1993 11 Dubovkin et al., 1995 12 USDHHS/ATSDR, 1995b 13 Material Safety Data Sheet on Corn Oil, 1997 14Allen and Nelson, 1983 15 Rescorla and Carnahan, 1936 16Weiss, 1983 17 Murata et al., 1993 18 USDHHS/ATSDR,1995a 19Salgado, 1992 20 Mudge et al., 1993 21 Mudge, 1995 22 Crump-Wiesner and Jennings, 1975 23 Russell and Carlson, 1978 24Sanders et al., 1980 25Shaw, 1977 26 Lee, 1977 27Teal, 1977 28Alexander, 1983 29 Hartung, 1995 30 USDOC/NOAA, 1996 31 USDOC/NOAA, 1992b 32 Clark, 1993 33 NAS, 1985d 34 Mudge, 1997a 35 Mudge, 1997b 36 Minnesota, 1963 37 USDHHS, 1963 38Entrix, 1992 39 USDOC/NOAA, 1992a 40 Hui, 1996d 41 Ratledge, 1994 42 Hayes, 1982 43 Mattson, 1973 44Berardi and Goldblatt, 1980 45 Rechcigl, 1983 46 NAS, 1985c 47 NAS, 1985e 48 IARC, 1989 49 Mudge et al., 1995 50 Mudge et al., 1997b 51Straughan , 1977 52Groenewold et al., 1982 53 Institute, 1985 54 Michael, 1977 55 USDOI/FWS, 1994 56Frink, 1994 57Frink and Miller, 1995 58 Rozemeijer et al., 1992 59Smith and Herunter, 1989 60Albers, 1995 61 Leighton, 1995 62Albers, 1977 63Szaro and Albers, 1977 64 Croxall, 1975 65 Lyall, 1996 66Klaassen et al., 1986 67 Rand, 1985 68 Mecklenburg et al., 1977 69Boyd, 1973 70 USEPA, 1976 71Gilman et al., 1985 72 Lewis, 1996 73 USDHHS, 1990 74 NAS/NRC, 1995
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54539

75Tannenbaum, 1942 76 Carroll, 1990 77Freedman, 1990 78FAO/WHO, 1994 79 IARC, 1984 80 NAS/NRC, 1983 81 NAS/NRC, 1981a 82Takeuchi and Watanabe, 1979 83Stickney and Andrews, 1971 84Stickney and Andrews, 1972 85 Murray et al., 1977 86Salgado, 1995 87Sellers and Baker, 1960 88Frankel, 1984 89 Hendricks et al., 1980a 90Phelps et al., 1965 91 Miller et al., 1969 92 Roine et al., 1960 93Yannai, 1980 94 USDHHS/ATSDR, 1995d 95Van Soest, 1994 96 Rigger, 1997 97 USEPA, 1978; Identification of Conventional Pollutants, 43 FR 32857–32859, July 28, 1978 98 USEPA, 1979; Final Rule, Identification of Conventional Pollutants, 44 FR 44501–44503, July 30, 1979 99 Metcalf and Eddy, 1972 100Goodrich, 1980

TABLE 3. COMPARISON OF AQUA METHODS AND STANDARD ACUTE AQUATIC TESTING METHODS

Method Number of species Fish size Acclimation

AQUA Report 1993 ...... 1—Fathead minnow ... 0.066±0.041 g, 20.4±3.7 mm, approximately

4 weeks old.

5 days.

USEPA/OPP 1982 (update 1985) 1.2—1 warmwater, 1

coldwater (2—1

warmwater, 1

coldwater).

0.5-5 g, very young not used, longest no

more than twice shortest (0.5-5g).

(At least 2 weeks).

ASTM 1986 .................. List of recommended

species.

0.5-5 usually, not very young, similar size

and age, length of longest no more than

twice shortest.

2 days or more with 100% dilution water and

maximum temperature, change no more

than 3 °C over 72 hours.

USEPA/OTS 1985 (update 1987).Fathead minnow or

other listed species.

2±1 cm recommended length ......................... Held 12 to 15 days before testing; maintained

in water of quality to be used in test at

least 7 days.

USEPA/ORD 1985 (update 1991) {update

1993b}2.

Species depends on

regulatory requirements.

Age: 1–90 days {Age: 1–14 days} ................. At least 24 hours in 100% dilution water at

temperature range of test.

APHA 1989 .................. List; sensitive to effluent, material, envi.

conditions.

Most sensitive life stage, depending on test

purpose; longest no more than 1.5 times

length of shortest.

Acclimate fish to lab conditions at least 14

days; 100% dilution water for at least 2

days.

OECD 1984 .................. 1 or more ................... Recommended total length for several species; 2±1 cm for fathead minnow; rationale

if others.

12 days or more; fish exposed to water of

test quality and temperature at least 7

days.

EEC 1984 ..................... 1 or more ................... Recommended length 5±2 cm for fathead

minnow.

12 days or more; fish exposed to water of

test quality and temperature at least 7

days.

Method Static test duration Aeration

AQUA Report 1993 .............................. 48 hours .................................................................. No—Set 1.

Yes—Crude soybean oil and diesel fuel, set 2 aerated for 48 hours; others not aerated.

USEPA/OPP 1982 (update 1985) ........ 96 hours (96 hours) ................................................ (No, except aerate reconstituted water prior to

use).

ASTM 1986 .......................................... 96 hours, except 48 hours for daphnids and midge

larvae; record mortality at 24, 48, 96 hours for

LC.50.

May gently aerate all chambers and controls; use

simultaneous test without aeration; toxicant concentration in aerated chamber not more than

20% lower than unaerated.

USEPA/OTS 1985 (update 1987) ........ 96 hours preferred, mortality at 24, 48, 72, 96

hours, LC50, 95% confidence limits (96 hours).

Dilution water aerated until oxygen saturation,

stored 2 days without further aeration.

USEPA/ORD 1985 (update 1991)

{update 1993b}.

24–48 hours; 96 hours, some states (24–96

hours, depends on requirements).

May alter results, only as last resort; none, unless

dissolved oxygen <4mg/l, at which time gentle

single-bubble aeration (Aeration rate not over

100 bubbles/min in all test solutions).

APHA 1989 ........................................... 96 hours for LC50; 24 hours, range-finding ............ Avoid aerating, because aeration may alter results.

OECD 1984 .......................................... 96 hours preferred; mortality recorded at 24, 48,

72, and 96 hours and LC.50.

May be used if no significant loss of test substance; must show test substance concentration

at least 80% nominal concentration over test

period.
54540 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Method Static test duration Aeration

EEC 1984 ............................................. 96 hours preferred, 48 hours minimum; morality

recorded each 24 hours and LC.50.

Method Test Vessels Dissolved oxygen

AQUA Report 1993 .............................. Polyethylene buckets .............................................. Protocol says not below 4.5 mg/l (but was below

4.5 in 100% beef tallow and all concentrations

of crude soybean oil, Set 1).

USEPA/OPP 1982 (update 1985) ........ (Glass or welded stainless steel; polyethylene absorbs test materials; for other materials, analyze

toxicant concentration).

Measure concentration at start and every 48 hours

to end; first 48 hrs., 60–100% saturation, then

40–100% (Measure in control, high, medium,

low concentration).

ASTM 1986 .......................................... Welded stainless steel or glass; size and shape of

chamber may affect results if toxicant volatilizes

or sorbs onto chamber.

60–100% saturation for first 48 hours, 40–100%

saturation after 48 hours.

USEPA/OTS 1985 (update 1987) ........ Not contain substances that leached or dissolved

into aqueous solutions or chemical sorption;

glass, stainless steel, perfluorocarbon plastic.

Maintain above 4.5 mg/l or at least 60% air saturation value.

USEPA/ORD 1985 (update 1991)

{update 1993b}.

Usually soft glass {Borosilicate glass or non-toxic

disposable plastic, covered}.

4 mg/l minimum warmwater species, 6 mg/l minimum coldwater species.

APHA 1989 ........................................... No material with leachable substances or adsorbs

substances from water; stainless steel probably

best, glass adsorbs organics; do not use rubber

or plastics with fillers, additives, stabilizers..

At or near saturation, never below 4 mg/l or 60%

saturation.

OECD 1984 .......................................... Chemically inert materials, suitable capacity .......... At least 60% of air saturation value throughout.

EEC 1984 ............................................. ................................................................................. At least 60% of air saturation value at selected

temperature throughout.

Method Dilution Water Chemical Analysis of Concentration

AQUA Report 1993 .............................. 72 mg/l CaCO3 (moderately hard, lab fresh water

deionized).

None reported; nominal concentrations listed in report.

USEPA/OPP 1982 (update 1985) ........ Describe source, characteristics, pretreatment

(Reconstituted water, soft, aged 1–2 weeks,

aerated before use or natural water, hardness

40–48 mg/l as CaCO3; animals not stressed).

Describe methods, concentration, validation and

blanks if done (Chemical analysis of test solutions preferred, especially if aerated, material insoluble, containers not stainless steel or glass,

or chemical adsorbs to container).

ASTM 1986 .......................................... Test organisms survive without stress or grow and

reproduce; reconstituted, surface, or natural

water, requirements described.

Measure concentration at beginning and end in all

chambers if possible; desirable to measure degradation products and report methods of analysis, standard deviation and validation studies.

USEPA/OTS 1985 (update 1987) ........ Drinking, natural, or reconstituted water, 50–250

mg/l as CaCO3, pH6–8.5 preferred.

Measure concentration in each at beginning and

end; validate analytical methods, degradation

products not interfere; replicates within 20%

(Concentration in each chamber not vary >30%

from measured at start).

USEPA/ORD 1985 (update 1991)

{update 1993b}.

Receiving water, other surface water, ground

water, soft synthetic water {Same water, culturing and dilution}.

Use methods in CWA Sec 304(h) for analysis

{Measure in each test concentration at start,

daily, and end}.

APHA 1989 ........................................... Reconstituted or natural water; standard water

conditions for comparative toxicity, sensitivity

tests.

Measure concentration in each container at start

and once during test; measured concentration

within 15% of calculated.

OECD 1984 .......................................... Drinking, natural or reconstituted water; prefer

hardness 50–250 mg CaCO3 per liter, pH 6–8.5.

Must show concentration maintained and measured concentration at least 80% of nominal.

EEC 1984 ............................................. Drinking water, natural water, reconstituted water;

prefer 50–250 mg/l as CaCO3, pH 6–8.5.

Evidence from analysis, chemical properties, or

test system used that concentration maintained

and within 80% of initial concentration.

Method Results reported

AQUA Report 1993 ......................... 48-hour LC50; no confidence limits reported, but protocol says intervals computed.

USEPA/OPP 1982 (update 1985) ... Effect criteria, percent with effects; 96-hour LC50, 95% confidence limits, slope or show LC50>100 mg/l (at

least 30 organisms exposed) or >100,000 times maximum expected environmental concentration or estimated environmental concentration (Methods, materials, organisms, LC50, 95% confidence limits, slope,

calculations, chemical analysis).

ASTM 1986 ..................................... 24, 48, and 96-hour LC50, 95% confidence limits, percentage died at each concentration and controls, calculation methods, and detailed information on test and organisms and findings, validation studies for analytical methods and accuracy.

USEPA/OTS 1985 (update 1987) ... Test procedures and conditions, preparation of test solutions, maximum concentration with 0% mortality,

minimum concentration with 100% mortality, cumulative mortality each concentration and time, LC50

based on nominal concentration at each time, 95% confidence limits, concentration-mortality curve at

end, procedures for determining LC50, mortality of controls, test according to guidelines.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54541

Method Results reported

USEPA/ORD 1985 (update 1991)

{update 1993b}.

Chemical analysis, organisms died or effect in each chamber, observations, LC50, 95% confidence intervals and methods to calculate, deviation from methods {Raw toxicity data, relationship between LC50

and NOAEL if NOAEL, pass/fail}.

APHA 1989 ..................................... LC50’s for exposure times, 95% confidence limits; mortality in controls, describe test conditions and methods, observations, test material, response criteria.

OECD 1984 ..................................... Cumulative percent mortality vs. concentration; LC50; confidence limits, p=0.95; where data inadequate,

geometric mean of highest concentration with 0% mortality and lowest concentration with 100%.

EEC 1984 ........................................ Methodology, highest concentration with 0% mortality, lowest concentration with 100% mortality, cumulative mortality, control, LC50, 95% confidence limits, LC50 calculations, dose-response at end, slope, dissolved oxygen and pH and temperature every 24 hours.

Method Special considerations

AQUA Report 1993 .........................

USEPA/OPP 1982 ..........................

(update 1985) ..................................

Required to register end-use pesticide product introduced directly into aquatic environment, LC50 below or

equal to maximum expected environmental concentration, or ingredient enhances toxicity

(Required if insoluble; flow-through if high BOD; 17–22 °C, at least 10 organisms/concentration, loading

limits; reviews statistical analysis; invalid if aerated or not glass or solubility problems).

ASTM 1986 ..................................... Use flow-through if chemical has high BOD; loading limits specified so dissolved oxygen acceptable, metabolic products not above acceptable level, and no crowding; temperature not vary > 1°C; 10 organisms

per concentration group.

USEPA/OTS, 1985 ..........................

(update, 1987) .................................

Guidelines for development of test rules standards, test data under Toxic Substances Control Act; loading

limits; 23° ± 2°C.

USEPA/ORD 1985 ..........................

(update 1991) ..................................

{update 1993b} ...............................

For National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System effluents; definitive vs. screening tests; loading, limits;

20° C; 2 replicates, 10 organisms/concentration.

{If pH outside 6–9, two parallel tests, one adjusted; or static renewal or flow-through}.

APHA 1989 ..................................... 5 concentrations and control; 10 fish/tank, 20 fish/concentration; species in receiving water or similar,

available for tests, healthy in lab, important trophic link or economic resource.

OECD 1984 ..................................... 21–25° C; carry out without pH adjustment, adjust pH of stock solution if necessary so concentration not

changed and no reaction or precipitation.

EEC 1984 ........................................ 20–24 ° C ± 1°C; carry out without pH adjustment, adjust if necessary; interpret results with care if stability

or homogeneity of test substance not maintained.

1 In some instances, other test conditions were allowed (USEPA, 1996). Draft Amendment to Standard Evaluation Procedures, 1996 states:

Individual fish should weigh 0.1–5 g. Hardness of natural dilution water of less than 200 mg/l as CaCO3 can be used in lieu of reconstituted

water for organic chemicals. Chemicals that are poorly soluble or with a water solubility less than 100 ppm (<100 mg/l) should be tested up to

the maximum water solubility if certain conditions apply. 2Final Report of Fourth Edition, August, 1993.

TABLE 4.—EFFECTS OF REAL-WORLD OIL SPILLS

Name and location of spill Oil spilled Effects

Minnesota Soybean Oil and Petroleum Oil Spills (1962–1963).1,21 to 1.5 million gallons soybean oil

from storage facilities, 1 million

gallons low viscosity cutting oil.

Killed thousands of ducks and other waterfowl and wildlife or injured

them through coating; 5,300 birds injured or died, 26 beavers, 177

muskrats.

Formed stringy, rubbery masses with slicks; sank to bottom; milky

material and hard crusts of soybean oil with sand on beaches.

Soybean oil caused much of waterfowl loss, as shown by lab analysis

of oil scraped from ducks.

Fanning Atoll Spill (1975).3 Cargo ship with coconut oil, palm

oil, and edible materials; ran

aground, dumped cargo onto

coral reef.

Effects similar to petroleum oil spill.

Killed fish, crustaceans, mollusks; shifts in algal community continued

for 11 months.

Kimya Spill, North Wales

(1991).4,5,6,7,8

Cargo of unrefined sunflower oil ... Killed mussels, shifts in ecological communities around spill.

Polymerized, covered bottom, killed benthic organisms; formed impermeable cap, shut out oxygen, bacteria cannot break down; polymers remain nearly 6 years later.

Concrete-like aggregates of oil and sand on beach.

Lab studies of mussels show small amounts of sunflower and other

vegetable oils kill mussels after 2 weeks; affect mussel lining.

Rapeseed Oil Spills (1974–1978).9 3 small spills, total about 35 barrels rapeseed oil.Greater losses of birds from 3 small spills of rapeseed oil than 176

spills of petroleum oils over 5 years in Vancouver Harbor.

Killed 500 birds; petroleum spills killed less than 50 birds.

Perhaps vegetable oils lack strong, irritating odor of petroleum oils, so

birds do not avoid.

(1989).10 About 10 barrels (400 gallons) of

rapeseed oil.

88 oiled birds of 14 species, half of them dead; half of rescued birds

died; casualties probably higher.

About 300 oiled Barrow’s Goldeneyes spotted 2 days after spill

crowded onto islands where they remained for 2 days—fate unknown, but weakened birds often die.
54542 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 4.—EFFECTS OF REAL-WORLD OIL SPILLS—Continued

Name and location of spill Oil spilled Effects

Fat and Oil Pollution in New York

State Waters (1967).11

Wide variety of sources. ................ Killed waterfowl, coated boats and beaches, tainted fish, created taste

and odor problems in water treatment plants.

Grease like substances on shore or floating on Lake Ontario; shoreline grease balls smelled like lard, analyzed as mixtures of animal

and vegetable fats.

Spills of Fish Oil Mixtures near

Bird Island, Lamberts Bay, South

Africa (1974).12

Fish factory effluent pipe near

breeding ground for Cape Gannets.

Killed at least 709 Cape Gannets, 5,000 Cape Cormorants, and 108

Jackass Penguins.

Penguins with sticky, white, foul-smelling coat of oil shivering; gannet

chicks dead.

Milky white sea and clots of oil on island smelling of fish.

Releases at two other fish factories

at St. Helena Bay and Saldanha

Bay, South Africa (1973).13

Two other fish factories; storage

pits and processing effluents

and off loading water from vessels.

Two other fish factories; at one, killed 10,000 rock lobsters and thousands of sea urchins probably from oxygen depletion; at second,

killed 100,000 clams and black mussels, prawns, polychetes, and

anemones, and smelled bad and adversely affected aesthetics of

beaches and camping site.

Soybean Oil Spills in Georgia

(1996).14

Soybean oil from tanker truck and

soybean vegetable oil refinery

with overfilled aboveground storage tank.

Aesthetic effects at Lake Lanier; rancid oil as weathered; adhered to

boats and docks.

At Macon, rapid response prevented significant damage from oil,

which flowed through storm water system and entered stream; previous spills from facility had entered sanitary sewer system and

damaged sewage treatment plant.

Spill of Nonylphenol and Vegetable

Oils in Netherlands (December,1988 to March, 1989).15

Unknown source ............................ Thousands of seabirds, mostly Guillemots and Razorbills, washed

ashore.

1,500 sick birds died; covered with oil, emaciation, aggressive behavior, bloody stools, leaky plumage; liver damage, lung infections.

High levels of nonylphenol and vegetable oils, such as palm oil.

Wisconsin Butter Fire and Spill

(1991).16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23

Butter, lard, cheese as well as

meat and other food products.

Released 15 million pounds of butter and 125,000 pounds of cheese

into the environment and damaged at least 4.5 million pounds of

meat; thousands of pounds of butter ran offsite; rapid response prevented flow of buttery material through storm sewers to nearby

creek and lake, where fish and other aquatic organisms could have

suffocated from oxygen depletion.

Destroyed two large refrigerated warehouses with $10 million to $15

million in property damage.

Cost tax payers $13 million for butter and cheese stored under USDA

surplus program.

Damage to fire equipment from grease, loss of business, overtime

pay for 300 firefighters and responders, costs for cleaning equipment and drains, rodent control.

Environmental cleanup costs; thousands of gallons of melted butter;

butter and spoiled meat declared hazardous waste.

1 Minnesota, 1963.

2 USDHHS, 1963.

3 Russell and Carlson, 1978.

4Salgado, 1992.

5 Mudge et al., 1993.

6 Mudge et al., 1995.

7 Mudge, 1997a.

8 Mudge, 1997b.

9 McKelvey et al., 1980.

10Smith and Herunter, 1989. 11 Crump-Wiesner and Jennings, 1975. 12Percy-Fitzpatrick Institute, 1974. 13 Newman and Pollock, 1973. 14 Rigger, 1997. 15Zoun et al., 1991. 16Wisconsin, 1991a. 17Wisconsin, 1991b. 18Wisconsin, 1991c. 19Wisconsin State Journal, 1991a. 20Wisconsin State Journal, 1991b. 21Wisconsin State Journal, 1991c. 22Wisconsin State Journal, 1991d. 23Wisconsin State Journal, 1991.

Appendix II—Edible Oil Regulatory

Reform Act Differentiation

Edible Oil Regulatory Reform Act

Congress enacted the Edible Oil

Regulatory Reform Act on November 20,

1995. The Act requires all Federal

agencies (with the exception of the Food

and Drug Administration) to (1)

differentiate between and establish

separate classes for animal fats and oils

and greases, fish and marine mammal

oils, oils of vegetable origin, including

oils from certain seeds, nuts, and

kernels, from other oils and greases,

including petroleum; and (2) apply

standards to different classes of fats and

oils based on certain considerations. In
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 202 / Monday, October 20, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 54543

differentiating between the classes of

fats, oils, and greases, each Federal

agency shall consider differences in the

physical, chemical, biological, and other

properties, and in the environmental

effects, of the classes. These

requirements apply when Federal

agencies are issuing or enforcing any

regulation or establishing any

interpretation or guideline relating to

the transportation, storage, discharge,

release, emission, or disposal of a fat,

oil, or grease under any Federal law.

EPA’s Final Rule amending the Oil

Pollution Prevention regulation (Oil

Pollution Prevention; NonTransportation-Related Onshore

Facilities; Final Rule, 59 FR 34070, July

1, 1994) was promulgated before the

Edible Oil Regulatory Reform Act was

enacted; Congress did not make the

requirements of the Act retroactive. EPA

is, therefore, not obligated to evaluate

the statutory criteria to determine if a

further differentiation between edible

oils and other oils should be made in its

Final Rule. EPA does, however, present

the following information in support of

its conclusion that spills of vegetable

oils and animal fats can indeed pose a

serious risk to fish, wildlife, and

sensitive environments.

A summary of the properties and

effects of vegetable oil and animal fats

are presented in Appendix I, Tables 1

and 2. Additional detailed discussion

and studies of these properties and

effects are contained in the Technical

Document in support of this document.

Physical Properties. Vegetable oils

and animal fats are generally solids in

water at ambient temperatures. They

both have limited water solubility but

high solubility in organic solvents. They

generally are of low viscosity, have a

low evaporation potential, and their

specific gravity can range from 0.87 to

0.92. Petroleum oils also have limited

water solubility and high solubility in

organic solvents. They form an

emulsion in turbulent water, and they

evaporate faster than edible oils. Their

specific gravity can range from 0.78 to

0.97. Data regarding petroleum oil’s

solidity and viscosity vary. (See

Appendix I, Table 1. Comparison of

Physical Properties of Vegetable Oils

and Animal Fats with Petroleum Oils

and Table 2. Comparison of Vegetable

Oils and Animal Fats with Petroleum

Oils.

Vegetable oils and animal fats and

petroleum oils all have similar physical

properties. One difference is the low

volatility of most vegetable oils and

animal fats, which results in less

product removed from a spill by

evaporation and reduces the combustion

and explosive potential of these oils.

Chemical Properties. Animal fats and

vegetable oils are water-insoluble

substances that consist predominantly

of glyceryl esters of fatty acids or

triglycerides. Petroleum oils are

extremely complex mixtures of

chemical compounds. Many classes of

compounds are present in petroleum,

and each class is represented by many

components. For example,

hydrocarbons are a major class of

constituents of petroleum. Similar

behavior of fatty acids and petroleum oil

in the aquatic environment is largely a

result of their predominantly

hydrocarbon character.

Biological Properties. Some vegetable

oils and animal fats do biodegrade more

readily than petroleum oils; however,

because their evaporation potential is

low, vegetable oils and animal fats may

tend to stay in the water in larger

quantities and for longer periods of time

than petroleum oils. Under certain

circumstances, vegetable oils and

animal fats can remain in the

environment for periods of time greatly

exceeding their potential degradation

time. Environmental circumstances play

an important part with regard to the

comparative degradation rates of

petroleum and non-petroleum oils

including vegetable oil and animal fats.

Both kinds of oil degrade more slowly

in low-energy and poorly oxygenated

waters, and both tend to disappear

quickly in high-energy, well

oxygenated, open water areas. Both

petroleum and non-petroleum oils can

remain in the environment for extended

periods of time if buried under sediment

or spilled in large enough quantities to

form thick layers. The high BOD of

vegetable oils and animal fats increases

the rate of biodegradation but also

quickly depletes the available oxygen of

the surrounding environment. This

could result in significant harm to

shallow near-shore areas or wetlands.

Oxygen depletion could be as serious as

toxicity with regard to its impact on

aquatic wildlife.

Environmental Effects. Certain effects

of non-petroleum oils are similar to the

effects of petroleum oils because of the

physical properties common to both.

Significant environmental harm from

petroleum oils, animal fats and

vegetable oils, and other non-petroleum

oils can occur as a result of the

following: physical effects such as

coating with oil, suffocation,

contamination of eggs and destruction

of food and habitat, short and long term

toxic effects, pollution and shut down of

drinking water supplies, rancid smells,

fouling of beaches and recreational

areas.

Summary of Analysis after Reviewing

the Act’s Criteria. Based on the

significant degree of similarity between

animal fats and vegetable oils and other

petroleum and non-petroleum oils,

especially with respect to negative

environmental effects associated with

the common physical properties of all

oils, EPA stands by its decision not to

make further changes to its July 1, 1994,

Final Rule. The Final Rule already

provides a greater degree of flexibility

for owners or operators of facilities

storing only non-petroleum oils,

including vegetable oils and animal fats,

to devise different and more appropriate

response strategies than owners or

operators of petroleum oil facilities.

[FR Doc. 97–27261 Filed 10–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P