EPA sees pushback in reevaluation of chemical risk assessment rules

August 25th, 2017 by Dakota Software Staff

In 2016, Congress reworked the Toxic Substances Control Act, reevaluating the danger of many of the tens of thousands of chemicals covered in the legislation. The move was met with bipartisan praise from both government officials and those in affected industries. Currently, the EPA is working to supersede the efforts of the previous administration in the proposal and various environmental groups hope to take the EPA to court, according to Scientific American.

Under the terms of the TSCA, the EPA is in charge of implementing the regulations set by Congress in what are known as frameworks. These frameworks dictate how hazardous chemicals like asbestos, lead-based paint and formaldehyde are to the health and safety of workers and consumers, and what potential risks exist when encountering these toxic substances in specific instances.

"These are major rules that will set the conditions for how TSCA is implemented - potentially for the next few decades," said Noah Sachs, director of the University of Richmond Law School's Center for Environmental Studies, to Scientific American.

Court battles possible over EPA's decision to revise TSCA rulings

According to Bloomberg BNA, 11 labor, environmental and health groups, represented by Earthjustice attorney Eve Gartner, asked a California federal appeals court to review EPA regulations dictating how it would assess chemical risks, and also how it will choose what chemicals are prioritized for risk evaluation.

The coalition accused the EPA of being highly selective in which uses of certain chemicals they wish to investigate, which is not allowed under the TSCA. Under the previous ruling issued in January, the totality of a chemical's usage was examined rather than specific cases, according to Gartner.

"A shift has been made under the present administration," said Nicholas Ashford, director of the Technology and Law Program at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, to Scientific American. "They have decided not to go very far in looking at all the uses a chemical might have. They're basically subverting the purpose of the act, which is protection."

Opponents of the EPA's action also raised concerns over the agency's current deputy assistant administrator in the office that initially drafted the TSCA rules, Nancy Beck, and her ties to the chemical industry. Beck is a former toxicologist for the American Chemistry Council and many fear conflict of interests could arise that could sway her rulings in favor of the businesses in her previous line of work.

"She gets installed," Gartner told Bloomberg BNA. "The rules get changes, and now they reflect precisely what the chemical industry wanted. That's deeply concerning."

According to an EPA email sent to Scientific American, the agency stated the revised frameworks will streamline risk assessment by efficiently diverting the agency's attentions to risks that pose the greatest threat to the environment and citizens.

The advocacy alliance has until October 30 to submit their opening briefs, as dictated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.