According to a fantastic investigation by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA ) has kept data about potentially dangerous chemicals secret.. The newspaper said its analysis of more than 2,000 EPA dangerous chemical filings over the past three years found that the agency allowed the names of chemicals added to consumer products to remain undisclosed in more than half those cases. As well, in hundreds of the registered reports, both the company and its address remained confidential.

In its mission to protect human health and the environment, the EPA is supposed to act as a clearinghouse for information about hazardous chemicals. It is not a protectionist agency and it should not be invested in trade secret keeping or other patent and copyright protection activities. Therefor, there is no excuse for keeping these chemicals secret except to protect specific companies from public backlash. Their first duty is to the consumer, not the producer.

None the less, this brilliant investigation found that the agency is actually making it difficult for the public to find information about chemicals and is also allowing companies to keep compounds, including those shown to cause cancer and respiratory problems, secret. This is an outrage and should have the American public up in arms. In fact, I believe that if they were informed, there would be an outcry.

The EPA’s chemical monitoring program was established 30 years ago to help the public steer clear of dangerous chemicals. That was the entire purpose for the creation of this agency. Manufacturers are required to file information about the hazardous chemicals they make and to do so on a regular basis. They are only allowed to withhold information in limited circumstances, which may include trade secrets but, when it comes to health and safety information, nothing is supposed to be kept from the unsuspecting, vulnerable consumer.

Still, the EPA does not fight for us, as they are supposed to. They rarely dispute claims to secrecy from various manufacturers, even when there may be potential health or safety hazards. The general excuse given for this is a viable one. It has been said that the chemical surveillance program has been underfunded and discouraged by the Bush Administration, a claim I do not doubt. We have seen clearly very recently the results of the Bush allergy to oversight; is this just a naive belief in humanity? That companies will “do the right thing”? Or is it a callous disregard for common folk, people who don’t live off the wall street tit? You decide.

Overall, information, which should be flowing and accessible, is scarce and hard to locate. The EPA website maintains only about four years of filings online and their search engine is so unfriendly you could spend days there just trying to find the chemical name.

In it’s mission statement, the EPA says it intends to give as much information as possible so people can “understand potential human health and environmental risks associated with exposure to chemical substances.” So far, it has failed and this failure puts us all at risk. Not having information in the buying process has all of us consuming toxic and dangerous substances. In fact, some substances that have been found in consumer products during the past few years have been deadly.

Although they should not be confused with the FDA, which regulates foodstuffs and drugs and has also done an extremely poor job as of late, the information the EPA is commissioned to provide is just as necessary to our safety. The report by the Journal Sentinel made it clear that the secretive EPA entries appear to be in opposition to a federal law that requires the EPA to publicly report any new data regarding potentially dangerous chemicals. This means that what they are doing is outright illegal.

Under their own established regulations, the EPA can only agree to retain confidentiality for a company or product under rare circumstances. In an interview for the article, Wendy Wagner, a University of Texas-Austin law professor, said the newspaper’s findings appear to indicate the agency has violated the Toxic Substances Control Act rules. “The EPA has chosen to ignore that,” she told the Journal Sentinel.

Here are some things you can do to work towards change. Join and support the Project on Government Oversight (POGO ).

Read the EPA answers to questions submitted by the Journal during the investigation HERE by downloading the PDF.

Read the redacted EPA Report and learn about this issue.

Read the complete Journal investigation report HERE . They won environmental and journalism awards for this excellent work.

Read about Chemical Pollution and Cancer HERE .

And then write the EPA and tell them what you think of this and how you would like it to change. Your voice matters! Many voices matter even more. You can contact the EPA online HERE . Don’t be afraid to tell them what you think. The Government is supposed to encourage public involvement. You and your family could be at serious risk.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,


Digg!

submit to reddit