Congress mandated a review of how dangerous chemicals are manufactured and stored. Donald Trump and EPA administrator Scott Pruitt don’t want to do anything that might actually result in regulation of dangerous chemicals. How to make these two things work together? The Associated Press details how they intend to intentionally ignore most of the problem.
Instead of following President Barack Obama’s proposal to look at chemicals already in widespread use that result in some of the most common exposures, the new administration wants to limit the review to products still being manufactured and entering the marketplace.
Which means that chemicals that are already present across America—made in American plants, stored in American towns, shipped to American homes—get a free pass. That includes thousands of existing products that are known toxins. It even includes millions of tons of cancer-causing asbestos.
“Hundreds of thousands of firefighters are going to be affected by this. It is by far the biggest hazard we have out there,” said Patrick Morrison, assistant general president for health and safety at the International Association of Fire Fighters. “My God, these are not just firefighters at risk. There are people that live in these structures and don’t know the danger of asbestos.”
Asbestos exposure costs the lives of thousands of firefighters each year, and it’s just one of the many chemicals that the Trump “review” won’t review. Which seems ridiculous … because it is.
Lawmakers say the review was intended to be the first step toward enacting new regulations needed to protect the public. But critics - including health workers, consumer advocates, members of Congress and environmental groups - contend ignoring products already in use undermines that goal.
But someone certainly likes Trump’s approach—that someone being the lobbying group American Chemistry Council.
President Obama issued his proposal for a general review not because he hated the chemical industry, but because of the massive explosion that took 14 lives in West, Texas. That event made it obvious that dangerous chemicals were not just entering the environment, but that local officials were failing to properly regulate their storage and use.
But from that moment to the end of President Obama’s term, lobbyists for the chemical industry worked to hold off any review, arguing that the industry didn’t need a regulation.
It extols its self-policing programs, raises terrorism fears to block the public's right to know and pours about $200 million into lobbying every year. The prevention of chemical disasters remains governed by a tattered patchwork of regulations administered by agencies that have neither the staff nor political support to enforce or improve upon them. And the public has been left largely in the dark about what goes on at facilities that might endanger their lives.
The secrecy and duplicity of the chemical industry were most recently on display outside of Houston, where the Arkema Chemical Plant faced explosions and fires after the passage of Hurricane Harvey, and where firefighters had to step in to address the danger, without even being told what chemicals they were facing. FEMA called the smoke from these fires “incredibly dangerous,” but the Pruitt-led EPA stepped in to say there was no reason for concern.
Since the explosion at West, the chemical industry has been able to count on Republicans to sell a lie about how they’re regulated.
Rep. Bill Flores, R-Waco, said the problem stemmed from West Fertilizer's "failure to comply with existing regulations and the lack of oversight and enforcement. It didn't occur from a lack of regulations."
In fact, there were no regulations to prevent the explosion. The material that blew up wasn't part of the Environmental Protection Agency's Risk Management Program. It wasn't among the chemicals that trigger aggressive preventative measures under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
In other words—the explosion expressly happened from a lack of regulations. A lack of regulations that will now continue. That the American Chemistry Council is getting what they want, should not be a surprise.
Democrats and public health advocates have criticized EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt for installing people with longstanding ties to the chemical industry into senior positions at the agency. On Wednesday, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee advanced the nomination of Michael Dourson, a toxicologist whose work has been paid for by the industry, to oversee the EPA’s chemical safety program.
Two prior appointments worked for the American Chemistry Council, the industry’s lobbying arm: Nancy Beck, deputy assistant administrator for chemical safety Nancy Beck and Liz Bowman, the associate administrator for public affairs.