The tip of the iceberg: Three case studies of spill risk assessments used in environmental impact statements

Abstract

Environmental impact statements (EISs) are based on science produced about specific project proposals, which results in a large body of grey literature. Spill risk estimates are part of that body of work. This is a critique the spill risk models cited in EISs for proposed drilling on the Alaskan Coastal Plain, the Pebble Mine transportation corridor, and Arctic offshore drilling, which are scored against published standards of best practices for ecological risk assessments. After a detailed peer review of Arctic offshore drilling risks, the findings and results from internal and external review processes of those reports are described. The amount of grey literature cited in recent EISs and how the alphanumeric ratings of draft EISs changed in 2017 are shown. Suggestions of how agencies, scientists, and peer reviewed journals can contribute to meaningful review of grey literature in regulatory science are offered.