Selected category: Industry Influence

Modus operandi: How EPA toxics nominee Dourson carries out his work for the chemical industry

Richard Denison, Ph.D.is a Lead Senior Scientist.

[Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.]

I’ve now examined dozens of papers and reports that EPA toxics nominee Michael Dourson and his firm, Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA), have published on chemicals over the past 15-20 years.  A remarkably consistent pattern of how Dourson conducts his paid work for the chemical and pesticide industries emerges from this examination.  I’ll use one example below to illustrate, but most or all of the steps I’ll describe have been followed over and over again.   Read More »

Also posted in EPA, Health Policy, Health Science, TSCA Reform| Tagged | Leave a comment

This speaks volumes: Industry rushes in to defend EPA’s new TSCA regulations

Richard Denison, Ph.D.is a Lead Senior Scientist.

Environmental Defense Fund has made no secret of our view that many elements of the final framework rules issued by the Trump EPA in July to implement recent reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) are contrary to law and fail to reflect the best available science.  The rules EPA had proposed in January were heavily rewritten by a Trump political appointee, Dr. Nancy Beck, who until her arrival at the agency at the end of April was a senior official at the chemical industry’s main trade association, the American Chemistry Council (ACC).

In our view, the final rules largely destroyed the careful balance that characterized the efforts to reform TSCA and the final product of that effort, the Lautenberg Act.  In many respects, the final rules governing how EPA will identify and prioritize chemicals and evaluate their risks now mirror the demands of the chemical industry, reflected in comments they had submitted earlier – some of which Beck herself had co-authored.

These are among the reasons EDF as well as other NGOs and health and labor groups have had no choice but to file legal challenges to these rules.

Lest you have any doubt that the final rules are heavily skewed in industry’s direction, a development in these legal cases just yesterday should dispel it.  Read More »

Also posted in EPA, Health Policy, TSCA Reform| Tagged | 1 Response

Report: Widespread exposure to a risky chemical “blessed” by the Trump Administration’s nominee to head EPA’s toxics office

Richard Denison, Ph.D.is a Lead Senior Scientist.  Jack Pratt is Chemicals Campaign Director.

[Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.]

A report issued today by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) documents that the industrial chemical 1,4-dioxane, a likely human carcinogen, is present in tap water used by nearly 90 million Americans living in 45 states.  For more than 7 million of those people (living in 27 states), the average level of the chemical exceeds the level set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as presenting an increased risk of cancer, which is one among a number of health effects tied to the chemical.

The solvent 1,4-dioxane is manufactured in large amounts in the U.S., with EPA reporting a total volume in 2015 between 1 and 10 million pounds. It is intentionally used or present in products like paints and coatings, greases, waxes, varnishes and dyes. It is also found as an impurity in many household cleaning and personal care products.

Among the other reasons this chemical is currently notable:

  • It is one of the first 10 chemicals being evaluated by EPA under the recently reformed Toxic Substances Control Act to determine whether it presents an unreasonable risk and warrants regulation. Currently there is no legal enforceable limit on the amount of the chemical allowed in drinking water.
  • It is one of a number of chemicals that Michael Dourson, the Trump Administration’s nominee to lead the EPA toxics office, was paid to work on by the chemical industry. EDF has blogged extensively about Dourson’s close ties to the chemical industry as well as earlier work he did for the tobacco industry.  In the case of 1,4-dioxane, Dourson was hired by PPG Industries, a paints and coatings manufacturer that has released the chemical into the environment, leading to contamination of a public water supply in Ohio.

Read More »

Also posted in EPA, Health Policy, Health Science, TSCA Reform| Tagged | Comments are closed

Toxicologists endorsing Dourson’s nomination are birds of a feather

Richard Denison, Ph.D.is a Lead Senior Scientist.

[My colleagues Dr. Jennifer McPartland, Lindsay McCormick, Ryan O’Connell, and Dr. Maricel Maffini assisted in the research described in this post.]

[Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.]

When the Trump Administration announced its intention to nominate Michael Dourson to head the office at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) charged with implementing the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA issued a news release titled “Widespread Praise for Dr. Michael Dourson.”  The release cited four toxicologists:  Samuel M. Cohen, Jay I. Goodman, Gio Batta Gori and Kendall B. Wallace.

Far from representing a “widespread” set of endorsers, it turns out these four and Dourson constitute an exceedingly close-knit group.   Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy, Health Science, TSCA Reform| Tagged | Read 1 Response

Dourson’s go-to journal for publishing his industry-funded papers is, well, also industry-funded

Richard Denison, Ph.D.is a Lead Senior Scientist.

[My colleague Ryan O’Connell assisted in the research described in this post.]

[Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.]

In a recent post I noted our initial findings from a review of published papers of Michael Dourson, the Trump Administration’s nominee to head the office at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) charged with implementing the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  That review has shown that Dourson has been paid by dozens of companies and trade associations for work on dozens of their chemicals – including many of the same chemicals he will be charged with reviewing and regulating should he be confirmed.

Our review is uncovering additional curious features of Dourson’s published papers.  Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy, Health Science, TSCA Reform| Tagged | Comments are closed

EPA’s announced changes to new chemicals review process put industry demands for ready market access above public health protection

Richard Denison, Ph.D.is a Lead Senior Scientist.

Last year’s Lautenberg Act, which overhauled the badly broken Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), made fundamental changes intended to improve EPA’s review of new chemicals prior to their commercialization, by requiring more scrutiny of those chemicals to better ensure they are safe.  Until recently, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was on track in implementing the new requirements in a health-protective manner.  With the addition of more staff, EPA was also steadily reducing the temporary backlog in new chemical reviews that had developed – a result of the fact that the law’s new requirements took effect immediately upon passage.

In recent months, however, agency staff have faced relentless pressure from the chemical industry – and internally from new industry-friendly senior management – not only to speed up reviews, but to return the program to its pre-Lautenberg practices.  There were growing signs that EPA was considering changes that would circumvent the law’s requirements in the name of increasing program “throughput.”   The agency’s press release today makes clear that this is now happening.   Read More »

Also posted in Health Policy, TSCA Reform| Tagged | Comments are closed
  • About this blog

    Science, health, and business experts at Environmental Defense Fund comment on chemical and nanotechnology issues of the day.
    Our work: Chemicals

  • Get new posts by email

    We'll deliver new blog posts to your inbox.

    Subscribe via RSS

  • Filter posts by tags

    • aggregate exposure (10)
    • American Chemistry Council (ACC) (57)
    • bisphenol A (23)
    • carcinogen (22)
    • Carcinogenic Mutagenic or Toxic for Reproduction (CMR) (12)
    • chemical identity (32)
    • Chicago Tribune (6)
    • children's safety (24)
    • Confidential Business Information (CBI) (61)
    • conflict of interest (9)
    • consumer products (52)
    • data requirements (47)
    • Dourson (10)
    • endocrine disruption (31)
    • exposure and hazard (49)
    • FDA (19)
    • flame retardants (25)
    • formaldehyde (15)
    • front group (13)
    • general interest (22)
    • High Production Volume (HPV) (23)
    • industry tactics (45)
    • IUR/CDR (27)
    • Lautenberg Act (71)
    • National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (20)
    • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) (5)
    • New chemicals (10)
    • Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (16)
    • Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) (3)
    • Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) (22)
    • prioritization (38)
    • Regulatory Reform (1)
    • risk assessment (73)
    • Safe Chemicals Act (24)
    • Safer Chemicals Healthy Families (33)
    • styrene (7)
    • test rule (18)
    • toxic substances control act (1)
    • TSCA Reform (1)
    • U.S. states (17)
    • worker safety (23)
    • WV chemical spill (12)