Displaying items by tag: propublica
Industry-backed legislation would bar the science behind hundreds of environmental protections
Trichloroethylene is among the chemicals deemed a serious public health risk by way of the Environmental Protection Agency’s IRIS database. Legislation in Congress could bar the use of IRIS and its associated scientific methods from being used to calculate the environmental and human health risks of chemicals such as TCE, a proven carcinogen. ChemLibrarian/Wikipedia Commons
Two bills in Congress would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from using hundreds of chemical assessments completed by its IRIS program in environmental regulations or enforcement.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — For decades, Republican lawmakers and industry lobbyists have tried to chip away at the small program in the Environmental Protection Agency that measures the threat of toxic chemicals.
Most people don’t know IRIS, as the program is called, but it is the scientific engine of the agency that protects human health and the environment. Its scientists assess the toxicity of chemicals, estimating the amount of each that triggers cancer and other health effects. And these values serve as the independent, nonpartisan basis for the rules, regulations and permits that limit our exposure to toxic chemicals.
Now IRIS faces the gravest threat to its existence since it was created under President Ronald Reagan four decades ago.
Legislation introduced in Congress would prohibit the EPA from using any of IRIS’ hundreds of chemical assessments in environmental rules, regulations, enforcement actions and permits that limit the amount of pollution allowed into air and water. The EPA would also be forbidden from using them to map the health risks from toxic chemicals. The bills, filed in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives earlier this year, are championed by companies that make and use chemicals, along with industry groups that have long opposed environmental rules. If it becomes law, the “No IRIS Act,” as it’s called, would essentially bar the agency from carrying out its mission, experts told ProPublica.
“They’re trying to undermine the foundations for doing any kind of regulation,” said William Boyd, a professor at UCLA School of Law who specializes in environmental law. Boyd noted that IRIS reports on chemicals’ toxicity are the first step in the long process of creating legal protections from toxic pollutants in air and water.
“If you get rid of step one, you’re totally in the dark,” he said.
If the act passes, companies could even use the law to fight the enforcement of environmental rules that have long been on the books or permits that limit their toxic emissions, environmental lawyers said.
- iris
- propublica
- chemical regulation
- chemical pollution epa
- chemical database
- no iris act
- sharon lerner
- tce
- epa chemical regulations
- trump and environment
- environmental regulations
- carcinogens
- public health protection
- worst chemicals
- forever chemicals
- propublic environment
- propublica environment reporting
- best environmental reporting
- integrated risk information system
- toxic pollution
- environmental protection agency
The coal plant next door: The sad and long legacy of coal ash in Georgia
This story from ProPublica is shared via Hellbender Press under a Creative Commons license. Click here for the entire ProPublica story, including illustrations and photos.
By Max Blau for Georgia Health News
ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
Mark Berry raised his right hand, pledging to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The bespectacled mechanical engineer took his seat inside the cherry-wood witness stand. He pulled his microphone close to his yellow bow tie and glanced left toward five of Georgia’s most influential elected officials. As one of Georgia Power’s top environmental lobbyists, Berry had a clear mission on that rainy day in April 2019: Convince those five energy regulators that the company’s customers should foot the bill for one of the most expensive toxic waste cleanup efforts in state history.
- coal ash
- cleanup
- georgia power
- kingston coal ash spill
- toxic waste
- mark berry
- energy regulator
- public service commission
- coal ash pond
- disinformation
- eminent domain
- radioactive coal ash
- electric utility
- trace metal
- cancer risk
- drinking water contamination
- human health hazard
- leaching
- groundwater
- water well
- erin brockovich
- chronic illness
- heavy metal
- plant scherer
- propublica
- lobbyist
- hexavalent chromium
- cancer cluster