Methylene chloride, N-methylpyrrolidone, and trichloroethylene are toxic. There’s no question about that. The first two are directly related to deaths from inhalation related to their use in paint strippers. The third, commonly used in dry cleaning and in making refrigerants and previously used as an anesthetic, is tied to everything from liver and kidney damage, to a variety of birth defects.
All three chemicals were fast tracked to be banned by the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act. “Were” is the operative term.
The Environmental Protection Agency will indefinitely postpone bans on certain uses of three toxic chemicals found in consumer products, according to an update of the Trump administration’s regulatory plans.
Why will the EPA keep these chemicals on the market and in the environment, even those that were specifically singled out in the bipartisan bill because of their known toxicity?
The E.P.A. declined to comment. In a news release earlier this month, the agency wrote that its “commonsense, balanced approach carefully protects both public health and the environment while curbing unnecessary regulatory burdens that stifle economic growth for communities across the country.”
This follows immediately after an EPA lawyer announced that the task force that produced new rules for handling SuperFund sites generated no notes, created no documents, and used no reference material. Which suggests that Scott Pruitt is doing exactly what Scott Pruitt wants … the worst thing possible in every circumstance. As in, whatever will kill the most Americans.
But Pruitt is not alone in this. Because Trump’s nominee to head the EPA chemical safety board, is a lobbyist who supports the manufacture of one of these chemicals.
Michael Dourson, President Trump’s nominee to oversee the E.P.A.’s chemical safety branch, in 2010 represented the Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance before the E.P.A., which was considering restrictions on TCE.
That chemical again is?
“Carcinogenic to humans by all routes of exposure” and has reported that it causes developmental and reproductive damage.
And what else?
“Potential health concerns from exposure to trichloroethylene, based on limited epidemiological data and evidence from animal studies, include decreased fetal growth and birth defects, particularly cardiac birth defects,” agency officials noted in 2013.
So it makes perfect sense that someone who favors this cancer-causing baby mangler should be put in charge of the decision. And now that this critical decision has been made, there’s no reason to hang around.
Mr. Dourson, who withdrew his name from consideration last week, had been working as an E.P.A. adviser while awaiting confirmation. The agency did not respond to a query about whether Mr. Dourson had been involved in the evaluation of TCE.
Of course not. No response. No notes. No comment. No f#$ks to give about American health. That’s the new EPA.