Changes

On May 1920, 2010, the [[U.S. EPA]] called on BP to use less toxic dispersants instead of Corexit 9500in its "May 19th Directive". HoweverThey gave BP "24 hours to find one or more products that are available in sufficient quantities, and are as effective and less toxic." Then, they gave BP 72 hours after submitting their list of products to EPA and receiving approval to begin using the new dispersants and to stop using Corexit.<ref>[http://www.scribd.com/doc/33776856/A-Toxic-Debate-BP-Rejects-EPA-Directive-to-Stop-Using-COREXIT "A Toxic Debate: BP Rejects EPA Directive to Stop Using Corexit"], Food and Water Watch, June 2010, Accessed August 7, 2010.</ref> BP responded that Corexit was their best option and refused to do sostop using it.<ref>Douglas J. Sutiles, [http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants/5-21bp-response.pdf "BPs May 20 Response to Dispersant Directive"], BP, May 20, 2010. </ref> In an August 4 hearing, Sen. [[Barbara Boxer]] (D-CA), Sen. [[Sheldon Whitehouse]] (D-RI), and the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works questioned the effectiveness and toxicity of the dispersants used in the Deepwater Horizon spill.<ref>Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, [http://www.c-spanvideo.org/videoLibrary/event.php?id=185753 Use of Dispersants in Gulf Oil Spill, Government Panel], C-Span, August 4, 2010</ref> Some Senators characterized the dispersants as a perhaps toxic (but government approved) method of saving the shoreline, whereas others expressed sentiments that the dispersants made an already toxic situation even worse. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) spoke of his bill, the Safe Dispersants Act, which would "require long-term testing and disclosure of all ingredients in a dispersant before it can be used in response to a spill."<ref>Andrew Restuccia, [http://washingtonindependent.com/92770/lautenberg-bill-will-require-chemical-dispersant-testing "Lautenberg Bill Will Require Chemical Dispersant Testing"], ''The Washington Independent'', July 27, 2010, Accessed August 7, 2010</ref>