A short stretch up the Mystic River from Boston Harbor, an oil transfer and storage station operated by ExxonMobil sits at the verge of a high-tide mark that is plainly visible along the blackened shoreline.
That terminal in Everett, Mass., according to the Conservation Law Foundation, routinely violates the legal limits of the company’s federal operating permits, usually because of stormy weather. What’s more, the New England advocacy group says, the company is knowingly putting local people at risk in the face of imminent climate risks that could someday wash the Everett terminal away—storage tanks, impoundments, oil stockpiles, rickety docks, contaminated soils and all.
The CLF and a coalition of local green groups contend that the company has understood for years the global risks posed to its business and to the public by climate change. Even so, it has failed to fortify this soft local underbelly of a sprawling oil distribution network against increasingly likely inundation from rising tides and intensifying rains.
On Tuesday, the CLF took the first legal step toward lodging a civil complaint against Exxon in federal court, a move that introduces a new twist into the company’s escalating legal battles over climate change.
The complaint, to be filed under clean water and hazardous waste statutes, will say that if Exxon knew about rising climate risks to installations like Everett, it was legally bound to take protective steps—but has not done so.
“ExxonMobil knowingly and unlawfully misled regulators about whether its Everett facility can withstand rising seas, more intense precipitation, and other climate impacts without spewing oil and other toxic pollutants into adjoining neighborhoods, the Mystic River, and the Boston Harbor,” said Brad Campbell, president of CLF. “Today’s lawsuit—the first of its kind—aims to hold ExxonMobil accountable for decades of dishonesty and require that the Everett facility meet the legal standards for climate-readiness.”
Exxon did not respond to a request for comment. It has repeatedly said that it considers legal actions based on its early understanding of the emerging science of climate change, a history described in a series of articles by InsideClimate News last year, to be the product of a conspiracy driven by advocacy organizations.
The CLF’s approach, which it said was sparked by ICN’s reports, is unlike investigations by the attorneys general of Massachusetts, New York and the Virgin Islands, among others, which are probing whether Exxon misled investors or the public about climate risks. Those have produced subpoenas, but have not leveled any specific charges.
This lawsuit, brought by outside parties including citizens who say they are being put at risk by the company’s negligence, will ask the federal court in Boston to find that Exxon has not lived up to its legal obligations to protect a local community against a very specific and perhaps even imminent danger.
The CLF is bringing suit on behalf of the Mystic River Watershed Association and a coalition of local advocacy groups from communities that are among the Boston area’s least prosperous and most heavily impacted by industrial pollution.
They claim that even in routine rainstorms the wastewater impoundments at the site have allowed pollution to spill into the Mystic and its tributaries, and that under the effects of climate change the situation is bound to worsen and invites calamity. Already, they say, there have been narrow escapes when the timing of powerful storms and high tides just missed a worst-case outcome.
“The first significant storm surge that makes landfall at the Everett Terminal at or near high tide is going to further flush your hazardous and solid waste into the Island End and Mystic Rivers and through those communities, and a significant rise in sea level will put the majority of the Everett Terminal, including soils, groundwater, and treatment works, under water,” contended a letter delivered to Exxon by the plaintiffs on Tuesday, a legally required shot across the bow required a few months before a lawsuit may be filed. “You know all this, and yet have not taken appropriate steps to protect the public and the environment from this certain risk.”
That is the novelty of this litigation: It connects the big picture of Exxon’s record on the science of climate change to the local damages that the plaintiffs say they will incur.
“Your obfuscation and denial is not and has not been limited to the imminent and substantial endangerment to health or the environment you have created at theEverett Terminal,” the letter from CLF to Exxon states. “You have also engaged in a decades-long scheme to conceal and sow doubt regarding the effects of climate change and your role, as the largest oil refiner on the planet, causing the anthropogenic climate change that is resulting in a greater frequency of storm surges and extreme weather events and rising sea levels.”
About This Story
Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.
Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?
Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.
Thank you,
John H. Cushman Jr.
Managing Editor
Jack Cushman grew up in an Army family, living in many places in the United States and abroad. He studied political literature at Dartmouth College, where he graduated in 1976. Before joining the InsideClimate News staff, he worked for 35 years as a writer and editor in Washington, D.C., principally with the Washington bureau of The New York Times. Cushman has written extensively about energy, the environment, industry and military affairs, also covering financial and transportation beats, and editing articles across the full spectrum of national and international policy.
Among his many beat assignments at The Times, he covered climate and the environment during the Clinton administration. He served on the board of governors of the National Press Club and was its president in the year 2000. He has taught brief courses in media and environmental law at the Vermont Law School.
He is the author of Keystone and Beyond: Tar Sands and the National Interest in the Era of Climate Change.
