In the wake of the Trump administration’s decision to dismantle the research arm of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a robust if little-known California agency known as the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment is poised to take on an even bigger role to bridge the gap.
The EPA this month announced that it was eliminating nearly 4,000 employees as part of a cost-saving “reduction in force,” the majority of which are staffers from its Office of Research and Development — whose research into environmental risks and hazards underpins nearly all EPA rules and regulations. The reduction will save the agency $748.8 million, officials said.
“Under President Trump’s leadership, EPA has taken a close look at our operations to ensure the agency is better equipped than ever to deliver on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment while Powering the Great American Comeback,” read a statement from EPA administrator Lee Zeldin. “This reduction in force will ensure we can better fulfill that mission while being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars.”
The ORD had been in operation since the EPA was established by President Richard Nixon in 1970 and was focused on conducting scientific research to help advance the EPA’s goals of protecting human health and the environment.
Experts said the decision to break up the research office sends a chilling signal for science and will leave more communities exposed to environmental hazards such as industrial chemicals, wildfire smoke and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — or PFAs — in drinking water, all of which are subject to the department’s analysis.
“The people of this country are not well served by these actions,” read a statement from Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, former EPA Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science. “They are left more vulnerable.”
It also shifts the onus onto California and other states to fill the void left by the federal government. ORD’s research supported work around Superfund site cleanups and environmental disasters such as the Los Angeles wildfires or the East Palestine, Ohio, train derailment.
“There will be another East Palestine, another Exxon Valdez [oil spill] — some disaster will happen … and those communities will be hurt when they don’t have to be,” said Tracey Woodruff, a professor at UC San Francisco and a former senior scientist and policy advisor with EPA’s Office of Policy.
The Golden State appears better positioned than many others carry on the work — particularly through the small but mighty department Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, or OEHHA, located within the California Environmental Protection Agency.
“California has for some time developed a pretty robust infrastructure of assessing the health harms of toxic chemicals and pollutants,” Woodruff said. “So in that way, we’re better off than almost any other state because we have such a stellar group of scientists.”
Indeed, California is known for some of its more rigorous health-based standards and regulations, such as the Proposition 65 warnings posted by businesses across the state to advise people of the presence of cancer-causing chemicals, which are overseen by OEHAA.
By dismantling ORD, the EPA is further politicizing the independent science and research that underpins so many of the nation’s regulations, said Yana Garcia, California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection. While California remains dedicated to such science, she said other states may not be so lucky.
“We will continue to keep the work of OEHHA strong and remain committed to it, but we’re still getting a handle on what this loss really means,” Garcia said. “It is a huge loss to California. It is an even bigger loss to so many other states that don’t have an Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessments like we do.”
Kris Thayer, OEHHA’s director, came to agency from ORD, where she directed its IRIS program for identifying and characterizing the human health hazards of chemicals. She said the state is “absolutely going to be looking at every way that we can fill the void given our resources, but we are going to feel the pinch of this.”
“It’s not only that the quantity of assessments will be reduced, but the credibility of the assessments will be reduced, because they will be developed by programs where there’s a lot more opportunity for political interference in terms of the science that gets shaped,” she said.
Chemical industry and other anti-regulatory groups have lobbied for the EPA to limit ORD’s influence. A January letter addressed to Zeldin spearheaded by the American Chemistry Council and 80 other organizations said risk assessments developed by ORD were “being used to develop overly burdensome regulations on critical chemistries essential for products we use every day.”
In particular, they cited the government’s evaluation of chemicals including formaldehyde, inorganic arsenic and hexavalent chromium, which can be used or created by industrial processes. The groups charged the agency with a lack of impartiality and transparency, a slow process and limited peer review.
Thayer noted that a lot of assessment work conducted by ORD is used in California. On the other hand, a number of states and EPA programs also look to California’s assessments.
“We’re going to be monitoring how this unfolds, but we’re certainly going to be looking to do everything we can to meet capacity — we’re not going to be able to fully meet it — and recognizing that our work will not only impact California, but can be used by other states,” she said.
Garcia said California has hired a number of people from the federal government over the past year and is open to absorbing more EPA employees who were recently laid off. OEHHA has a number of open positions.
“California remains open for [a] rigorous, science-based approach to health and environmental protections,” Garcia said.
Woodruff, of UCSF, said she hopes to see California and other states invest more in OEHAA and other scientific agencies by offering better salaries and bolstering staff numbers. But ultimately, she said the Golden State can use this moment to become an example for others to follow.
“California could be a real leader for all the other states who also want to keep doing right by their by their constituents and continuing to address toxic chemical exposure,” she said.
The post The Trump administration is gutting EPA’s research arm. Can California bridge the gap? appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
