{"id":4900,"date":"2021-09-01T09:43:21","date_gmt":"2021-09-01T15:43:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/?p=4900"},"modified":"2021-09-01T09:43:23","modified_gmt":"2021-09-01T15:43:23","slug":"epa-exposed-for-hiding-chemical-risks-favoring-corporate-interests","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/?p=4900","title":{"rendered":"EPA exposed for hiding chemical risks, favoring corporate interests."},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

August 31, 2021 – by Carey Gillam, \u00a0US Right to Know<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a long and well-documented history of questionable conduct when it comes to regulation of chemicals important to the profit centers for many large and powerful corporations.\u00a0 Numerous examples show a pattern of agency actions that allow for the use of dangerous chemicals by consumers, farmers, groundskeepers and others despite evidence of harm.<\/p>\n

Documents and other evidence, including information provided in public disclosures by multiple EPA scientists, reveals actions in which EPA managers have intentionally covered up risks associated with certain chemicals. According to the evidence from these EPA insiders, pressure from chemical manufacturers, chemical industry lobbyists and from certain U.S. lawmakers drives internal agency manipulations that protect corporate interests but endanger public health.<\/p>\n

Evidence indicates the misconduct dates back decades and has occurred in administrations led by Democrats and Republican alike.<\/p>\n

A research project<\/a> sponsored by Harvard University\u2019s Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics said while the EPA has \u201cmany dedicated employees who truly believe in its mission,\u201d the agency has been \u201ccorrupted by numerous routine practices,\u201d including a \u201crevolving door\u201d between EPA and industry in which corporate lawyers and lobbyists gain positions of agency power; constant \u00a0industry lobbying against environmental regulations; pressure from\u00a0 lawmakers who are beholden to donors; and meddling by the White House.<\/a><\/p>\n

Blowing the whistle<\/strong><\/h2>\n

The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21 Century Act, signed into law on June 22, 2016, was the first substantive reform to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The law requires EPA to make an affirmative determination on whether a new chemical substance presents an \u201cunreasonable risk\u201d to human health or the environment under \u201cknown, intended or reasonably foreseen conditions of use.\u201d See information here<\/a> for more information.<\/p>\n

Despite the law, the EPA has make valid determinations about the risk presented by numerous chemicals.<\/p>\n

In June 2021, four EPA scientists, each working within the agency\u2019s Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention (OCSPP), publicly accused the the EPA of deliberate tampering with chemical risk assessments. The four whistleblowers made their complaints public through a group called Public\u00a0 Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).<\/p>\n

In a June 28 letter<\/a> to the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform, PEER said the four EPA scientists were providing \u201cdisturbing evidence of fraud and corruption,\u201d involving \u201cdeliberate tampering with chemical risk assessments conducted under the Toxics Substances Control Act (TSCA), including PFAS (a.k.a. \u201cforever chemicals\u201d), and the deletion of potential health effects without the knowledge or consent of the human health assessors.\u201d<\/p>\n

The letter further states:<\/p>\n

\u201cAll four clients have experienced numerous instances where their risk assessments were changed<\/em>
by their managers or by colleagues in response to direction by management. These changes<\/em>
include \u2013<\/em>
\u25cf Deleting language identifying potential adverse effects, including developmental toxicity,<\/em>
neurotoxicity, mutagenicity, and\/or carcinogenicity;<\/em>
\u25cf Major revisions that alter the report conclusions to indicate that there are no toxicity<\/em>
concerns despite data to the contrary; and<\/em>
\u25cf Risk assessments being reassigned to inexperienced employees in order to secure their<\/em>
agreement to remove issues whose inclusion would be protective of human health.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

As a result of the manipulations, people who work with these chemicals are not receiving information they need to protect themselves, such as \u201cproper handling procedures, personal protection needed, accidental release measures, and first aid and firefighting measures,\u201d according to PEER.
This is a particular concern for pregnant women, according to the PEER complaint.<\/p>\n

Erasing important information<\/strong><\/h2>\n

On August 26, 2021, PEER filed a separate complaint alleging<\/a> that the EPA has been breaking the law by erasing original versions of internal communications and draft documents and retaining only the final version of key documents. The practice violates the Federal Records Act by eliminating details of the decision-making process from outside review, according to PEER.<\/p>\n

PEER states<\/a> that that discarding of documents trails is not only contrary to law but also violates the EPA\u2019s own records retention policy. According to PEER, its complaint focuses on two classes of documents:<\/p>\n