EPA’s Chemical Review Program under scrutiny as whistleblowers allege data manipulation

House Energy and Commerce Committee members demanded answers from Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan this week in response to whistleblower allegations the agency has been pressuring and manipulating results in its chemical review program.

The accusations span years and allege that the agency downplayed the dangers of new chemicals during reviews required by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). In all, four whistleblowers — each current or former staffers from the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) — noted that the agency has not only undersold dangers but actively and inappropriately interfered with risk assessments, manipulating cases for dozens of chemicals so they would appear safer on paper.

Adverse effects ranging from cancer to birth defects to neurological effects were all swept under the rug. Those scientists who attempted to speak up were supposedly subject to retaliation.

Amid the uproar this has caused, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chair Diana DeGette (D-CO), and Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee Chairman Paul Tonko (D-NY) wrote to Regan for answers.

The legislators asked what the EPA has done to look into allegations of malpractice and interference; whether the organization has considered reevaluation of any chemical due to potentially flawed review processes; and what efforts are being taken to strengthen whistleblower protections at the EPA. They are requesting a response by the end of the month.

“The Committee has a longstanding interest in ensuring EPA’s implementation of TSCA is based on sound science,” Pallone, DeGette, and Tonko wrote. “We also firmly believe EPA’s scientific staff must be able to perform their work of protecting human health and the environment free from inappropriate interference and retaliation. The allegations made by the four whistleblowers are troubling and, if true, raise serious concerns about EPA’s implementation of TSCA and about protections for EPA employees.”