ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
Supreme Court of Alaska (2023)
Hannah Berg
In Williams Alaska Petroleum Inc. v. State, 529 P.3d 1160 (Alaska 2023), the supreme court held that sulfolane is a hazardous substance pursuant to Alaska Statute (AS) 46.03.826(5)(A) of the Environmental Conservation Act. (Id. at 1177). Williams Alaska Petroleum, Inc. and The Williams Companies, Inc. operated a North Pole refinery since 1977 on State-leased land, introducing sulfolane as a refining solvent in 1985. (Id. at 1171). Sulfolane’s high solubility in water and low volatility led to its migration into groundwater at the refinery via several pathways. (Id.). Despite attempts to recycle sulfolane, the company’s inadequate maintenance, including documented tears and makeshift repairs in wastewater lagoon linings, resulted in the release of sulfolane into the soil and groundwater. (Id.). On appeal, Williams Alaska Petroleum argued that AS 46.03.826(5)(A) does not capture sulfolane. (Id. at 1177). The supreme court used the statute’s plain meaning supported by relevant case law to conclude that “imminent danger,” within the meaning of AS 46.03.826(5)(A), means “harm that is threatening to occur immediately.” (Id. at 1181–82). Notably, the supreme court emphasized that this meaning of “imminent danger” includes threatening harm that manifests at a later time or never manifests at all. (Id. at 1182). Expert testimony was key to the supreme court’s holding as they cited scientific studies revealing that sulfolane poses imminent danger when it enters the environment. (Id. at 1178, 1182–83). Affirming the decision below, the supreme court held that sulfolane satisfies the definition of a hazardous substance under AS 46.03.826(5)(A). (Id. at 1177).
