Posted by Matt Dempsey Matt_Dempsey@epw.senate.gov

In the News...

E&E News  

Senate Republicans call on EPA to put controversial chemical assessments on hold

(05/11/2011)

Jeremy P. Jacobs, E&E reporter

Link to Article

In light of a recent National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report that criticized how U.S. EPA evaluates chemical toxicity levels, two Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee have called on the agency to suspend its assessments of all chemicals "where serious concerns have been raised."

In a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson yesterday, Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and David Vitter (R-La.) said the NAS review of the agency's formaldehyde risk assessment raised significant questions about the agency's methodologies.

"You have repeatedly stated that 'sound science' is the basis for all agency action," the senators wrote. "This is clearly not the case as the NAS report has shown."

The senators said several high-profile chemicals that the agency's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) is currently reviewing -- including the water contaminant hexavalent chromium and several fuel additives -- should be "temporarily stopped."

"Our concerns extend to all chemicals that EPA is reviewing under its flawed methodology," the senators said.

Last month, NAS issued a report requested by Vitter in 2009 that sharply criticized EPA's formaldehyde assessment. While it agreed with EPA's conclusions that the chemical causes nose and upper throat cancers, it said the agency did not support its claims that formaldehyde causes respiratory cancers, leukemia and several other health problems like asthma.

In its most critical passages, NAS took EPA to task for its methodologies.

"Overall, the committee found that EPA's draft assessment was not prepared in a logically consistent fashion, lacks clear links to an underlying conceptual framework and does not sufficiently document methods and criteria used to identify evidence for selecting and evaluating studies," NAS wrote (Greenwire, April 8).

Vitter and Inhofe asked EPA to outline how it will implement all of the recommendations outlined in the NAS report.

The senators also said the report demonstrated that independent peer review is essential to ensuring scientific integrity. Consequently, Vitter and Inhofe called for a more rigorous peer review process beyond EPA's Science Advisory Board and other ad hoc models.

"This would ensure that the science is properly vetted and our government does not rush to conclusions that fail to take into account the quality of the data used and the weight of the evidence," they wrote.

Vitter and Inhofe asked the agency for a "preliminary list of all chemicals EPA does not have the scientific expertise to review but are in need of review."

"It might be prudent," they wrote, "to go directly to NAS to have the assessment work completed."

The Republicans letter echoes concerns from the chemical industry. Last month, the American Chemistry Council sent EPA a letter calling for significant changes to the IRIS process including submitting all risk assessments to NAS for review (E&ENews PM, April 19).

Chemical watchdogs note that submitting all IRIS assessments to NAS would cost the agency millions of dollars. They also say that putting controversial toxicity evaluations on hold would further delay an already lengthy process

###