EWG

Sign up to receive email updates, action alerts, health tips, promotions to support our work and more from EWG. You can opt-out at any time. [Privacy]

 

EPA’s New Chemical Data Reporting Rule Falls Short

For Immediate Release: 
Tuesday, August 2, 2011

 

Washington, D.C. – Environmental Working Group senior scientist David Andrews issued the following statement in response to today’s announcement by the Environmental Protection Agency of its revised Chemical Data Reporting rule (CDR).

Read our latest research: Chemical Industry Has Timely Information for Investors, but not the Public

“The fact that EPA does not annually track what chemicals are produced or imported in the United States is a serious failure of modern chemical policy,” said David Andrews, Ph.D, a senior scientist with Environmental Working Group. “Basic chemical production and use information is necessary to assess risk to human health and the environment, and EPA has taken some steps in collecting more information. However, the high reporting threshold and infrequent data collection leave EPA and the public with inadequate information to safeguard our children and the environment. Chemical companies provide quarterly reports on production and sales figures to shareholders. Why shouldn't the public and EPA receive similar reports every year about commonly used chemicals, some of which could pose a serious health risk?”

EWG provided the following comments to EPA last year on the proposed rule change:http://www.ewg.org/Comments-on-TSCA-Inventory-Update-Reporting