May 2
If the EPA continues its sloth-like pace on defining the health dangers of toxic chemicals such as formaldehyde, Congress will ramp up its intervention by legislating bans.
Thatīs the directive from Sen. Barbara Boxer, chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. The California Democrat responded to a recently released report from Congressīs investigative arm confirming her suspicions about the Environmental Protection Agencyīs opaque, closed-loop risk assessment process under the Bush administration.
"Because the agenciesī comments and the changes EPA makes in response are treated as internal executive branch documents not subject to release outside the executive branch, the White House Office of Management and Budget/interagency reviews occur in what amounts to a black box," the Government Accountability Office concluded in its 84-page report on whatīs known as EPAīs Integrated Risk Information System.
IRIS was created in 1985 as an accessible source of data on the health effects of exposure to chemicals. Federal and state officials use these scientifically vetted thresholds to guide programs covering waste cleanup and air and water pollution. Today, the database covers assessments of 540-plus chemicals. Every year about 700 new chemicals enter the marketplace.
Boxer accused the Bush administration of corrupting the risk-assessment process by shunting aside scientistsī input and elevating directions from OMB, the Department of Defense and other agencies that could benefit directly from outcomes. For instance, cleanup costs could rise and other legal liabilities could increase if EPA regulates certain chemicals.
"Itīs already a nightmare," Boxer said during an April 29 oversight hearing, adding that the changes proposed by the Bush administration will "institutionalize this nightmare."
Boxer also wanted to know why the EPA has completed five risk assessments per year when the number of employees more than quadrupled between 2000 and 2007. Only four risk assessments were completed in 2006 and 2007 even though the EPA submitted 32 draft assessments during that time.
The database is at serious risk of becoming obsolete because the agency isnīt able to complete timely assessments or reduce a backlog of 70 reviews, testified John Stephenson, GAOīs environment director.
"If we donīt see action out of the EPA ā Congress is going to do it," Boxer said. "The weaker (the process) gets, the stronger we get."
Armed with colorful charts, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said the revised IRIS process laid out April 10 appears to be more complicated and cumbersome. He asked EPA witness Jim Gulliford about changes that appear to allow for secrecy.
Gulliford, assistant administrator for the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, agreed with the need for transparency and said thereīs no proof such a loophole is being used. He defended the changes, saying the EPA counts on the best science available. Contributions by OMB scientists and an independent third-party review are built in to offer extra guidance, he added.
The new review process limits the credibility of assessments because it lacks transparency, Stephenson said. He added that OMB is muddling the cornerstone of the process by compromising the independence of EPA scientists.
GAO recommended that the EPA suspend recent changes to the assessment process and create a streamlined system that assures assessments are based on science and not biased by policy considerations. Afterward, other agencies can be invited to the table during rule-making procedures.
"Weīre going to see a formalization of a process that puts politics in the center of regulating chemicals ā instead of pure science," Boxer said. "This is a travesty and itīs happening under our noses."
Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, the committeeīs ranking Republican, praised the new risk-assessment procedures for involving the public earlier and inviting more rigorous peer review.
"I donīt understand how someone can stand up and say they support public right-to-know, scientific community participation and transparency when the agency makes regulatory decisions, but not support those very same principles when it comes to risk assessment," he said. "More science means better decisions."
Formaldehyde, naphthalene and trichloroethylene are three harmful chemicals long under review for IRIS conclusion.
Environmental health professor Dr. Lynn Goldman, one of seven witnesses testifying, said formaldehyde is just one of the chemicals being held hostage by the process.
"Itīs completely unacceptable for (federal agencies) to have even an appearance of a veto over EPAīs scientific conclusions," said Goldman, an assistant administrator for EPAīs Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances from 1993-98. "Their involvement gives appearance of providing a back door through which industry groups can exert pressure to modify EPAīs conclusions or to subject the process to endless delays."
E-mail Waste News correspondent Elizabeth McGowan at elizabethherron@hotmail.com
To subscribe or visit go to: http://www.wastenews.com