E.P.A. and Toxic Chemical Rules

A Chemical Industry Executive Joins the EPA

p. 7

This letter from Nancy B. Beck to Wendy Cleland-Hamnett, her boss at the time, explains that because of the way Dr. Beck was hired, she was not required to sign the ethics pledge issued by President Trump in January for political appointees. As a result, Dr. Beck says, she can now start to attend meetings that involve the American Chemistry Council, her former employer, as they discuss the regulations that the council is trying to influence.

p. 9

Beck's Résumé (p. 9)

Note by News Documents

p. 11

Here is one of three memos obtained by The New York Times detailing concerns that E.P.A. staff had with changes made in the toxic chemical rules. The changes that the staff objected to were made at the request of Dr. Beck, after she arrived at the agency, several E.P.A. employees confirmed to The Times.

p. 13

Here the Office of General Counsel, in a confidential memo obtained by The Times, raises concern that the agency's toxic chemical rules may be subject to legal challenge based on the changes that were made—changes requested by Dr. Beck, that reflecting those she pushed for while at the American Chemistry Council.

p. 15

Here the E.P.A. Waste and Chemical Office raises objections to some of the same changes. This document is being made public for the first time by The Times. But Politico had previously written a story after seeing a copy of this document. In each case, the agency divisions are writing "concur" memos that say they support the overall regulation as drafted. But staff members told The Times that political appointees told the agency employees to not do a "non concurrence" memo, but instead to raise specific objections.

Tensions Emerged During Bush Administration

p. 20

Dr. Beck, while serving in the White House under President George W. Bush, helped draft this 2006 report that called for significant changes in the way the way the federal government assesses risk. The goal was to "improve the technical quality and objectivity" of the risk evaluation process, the document says. But it provoked an intense backlash by environmentalists and scientists, who claimed that the White House was trying to improperly dictate scientific standards.

p. 46

The National Academy of Sciences prepared a report in 2006 examining the proposed new risk assessment standard, and was severely critical of the recommendations from Dr. Beck. Here are excerpts from the report, which called on the White House to abandon the effort and withdraw the recommendation, which it ultimately did.

p. 65

It would still be several years before Dr. Beck went to work for the American Chemistry Council, the leading chemical industry trade group. But here in 2006, the council defends her proposal for how to redefine risk assessment work within the federal government.

p. 67

Many environmental groups, like the Natural Resources Defense Council, criticized the proposal by Dr. Beck. Here is one letter from 2006.

p. 83

Dr. Beck and Ms. Hamnett first clashed during the Bush administration, when Dr. Beck questioned aspects of a study that Ms. Hamnett's team at the E.P.A. had prepared, estimating the cost and benefits associated with a rule intended to prevent lead poisoning during home renovations. Here is a record of a meeting that took place at the White House in 2008, where the National Association of Home Builders came to object to what it considered the high cost of this new rule. Dr. Beck, in her role as a White House adviser on major regulations, participated in the meeting, the records show.

p. 84

Here is an excerpt from a 2006 report that Ms. Hamnett's team worked on, which concluded that lead paint is probably a contributing factor to cardiovascular disease in adults, and that as a result, the benefits associated with limiting lead paint exposure during home renovations should be included in the cost benefit analysts of the proposed new rule. Dr. Beck, according to Ms. Hamnett, and a second E.P.A. official, objected to this conclusion.

p. 94

This 2009 report focused in large part on the repeated interventions by Dr. Beck from her White House post during the Bush administration into scientific determinations that E.P.A. was trying to make, with the House investigators concluding that Dr. Beck was inappropriately intervening in agency science. Dr. Beck did not respond to requests to comment.

Nancy Beck Joins Chemical Industry

p. 150

After joining the American Chemistry Council in January 2012, Dr. Beck continued to regularly intervene with the E.P.A., but she did so now as a chemical industry executive, repeatedly questioning scientific standards the agency used as it assessed risk on a range of chemicals. Here, in a January 2013 letter, she raises questions about arsenic.

p. 154

The Times found more than a dozen examples of Dr. Beck pushing the E.P.A., during her tenure at the American Chemistry Council, to revise the way it was examining toxic chemicals, including methylene chloride, which has been blamed in dozens of deaths. Here are the oral comments. Much more comprehensive, detailed comments were submitted for the record.

p. 156

Here is a page from the American Chemistry Council with pieces that Dr. Beck wrote, repeatedly raising questions about the scientific process at the E.P.A. and outside scientists on whom the agency relies for risk assessments. Ms. Hamnett sees this as part of a long-running industry strategy, as the questions slow the regulatory process, or even stop it, while undermining confidence in conclusions that certain chemicals present a health threat. Also included is a chart prepared by the council challenging risk assessment at the E.P.A.

Wendy Cleland-Hamnett and the Struggle to Chemicals

p. 163

Ms. Hamnett joined the E.P.A. in 1979, shortly after graduating from George Washington University law school. She never had another job. Here is her official biography, which was taken down after she left the agency in September.

p. 164

A Focus on Health Groups (p. 164)

Note by News Documents

Ms. Hamnett, email records obtained by The Times show, spent a fair amount of time meeting with public health groups, as well as chemical industry representatives, to discuss concerns related to toxic chemicals. This is a standard role for an E.P.A. official. Here are examples of her meeting with health groups.

p. 167

A Note to Ms. Hamnett (p. 167)

Note by News Documents

Here is a note Ms. Hamnett received in March 2017, unsolicited, from someone thanking her for her work. The Times redacted the writer's name and address. Another letter below is one Ms. Hamnett received from Senator Tom Udall, Democrat of New Mexico, on Ms. Hamnett's role in helping draft the revised toxic chemical law that Congress ultimately passed in 2016, and then a short summary of the law.

The Clash Over Toxic Chemical Rules

p. 170

With the adoption of the new toxic chemical law, the American Chemistry Council tried to influence how the rules enacting the new law would be drafted. Here Dr. Beck writes to Ms. Hamnett, in August 2016, beginning this conversation, just a few months after President Barack Obama signed the new law.

p. 179

Dr. Beck's critique of the E.P.A.'s scientific standards is particularly sharp here.

p. 188

Dr. Beck and the American Chemistry Council obviously are not the only industry players challenging E.P.A. chemical safety rules. Here W.M. Barr, a Tennessee-based company that makes several methylene chloride brands sold as paint strippers at home improvement stores, meets in late 2016 with the Obama White House to try to prevent the agency from banning its products. Here is the entire presentation provided to the White House, with the company effectively arguing that better labels may be enough to solve the problem.

p. 227

In this testimony, Dr. Beck makes several arguments, on behalf of the chemical industry, that she will eventually take up at the E.P.A.

p. 245

In March 2017, the American Chemistry Council submitted formal comments addressing two drafts of regulations to implement the new toxic chemical law, as it called for changes compared to the proposal that the Obama-era E.P.A. had released in January. Dr. Beck still then worked at the Chemistry Council. But her name is not on these documents. She would start at the agency on May 1. In this comment letter, the industry asks the E.P.A. to add new definitions to the rule like "Best Available Science," definitions that the E.P.A. objected to.

p. 287

Here is the March 2017 comment letter from the American Chemistry Council on the second rule, related to risk evaluation. In these comments, the council, among many changes, calls again for specific definitions like "Best Available Science" and "Weight of the Evidence." It also asks that the E.P.A. change the rule so that "all" uses of a chemical are not considered during a risk evaluation, only certain ones. This change drew strong opposition from staff at the E.P.A., as detailed in the memos at the top of this collection of documents.

p. 333

With Dr. Beck now at the E.P.A, she immediately begins to meet with chemical industry officials to discuss the toxic chemical regulations, even though, weeks earlier, she was a chemical industry executive helping push for some of the same changes to rules that she now has power to decide on.

p. 334

Hamnett's Notebook (p. 334)

Note by News Documents

Ms. Hamnett allowed The Times to examine pages from notebooks she filled detailing meetings she had with Dr. Beck and Trump administration officials, as well as environmental groups.

p. 335

These notes from a meeting on May 12 — nearly two weeks after Dr. Beck first arrived — show how Dr. Beck continued to demand the changes, and how staff at the agency started to raise questions about potential legal problems. In these notes, there is discussion of a "logical outgrowth" problem, because revisions requested by Dr. Beck no longer reflected the rules as drafted, meaning they might be vulnerable to legal challenge, the Office of General Counsel says. Ms. Hamnett said she was quoting quoting Dr. Beck with the phrase "but not 1000s" of uses," as Dr. Beck had insisted that the agency not consider "all uses" in evaluating a potential threat from a chemical.

p. 336

Here are notes that Ms. Hamnett took of a meeting that she and Dr. Beck held with representatives from the Environmental Working Group, which was pushing Dr. Beck not to include definitions like "best available science" and not to limit the uses of a chemical considered in a risk evaluation. The E.P.A., these environmentalists argued, must consider "all uses, entire life cycle," of a chemical and also perhaps unexpected used. Accidents and spills should also be considered in evaluating safety. Dr. Beck listened, but did not agree to these requests, participants in the meeting said.

p. 337

Here is a list of last-minute changes made in the rules, compared with what the Obama administration proposed. The changes repeatedly reflect those requested by the American Chemistry Council. This summary was prepared by the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit. The Times examined the language in the Obama-era draft from Jan. 19, 2017, as well as the American Chemistry Council comments on these rules (included above) and the text of the final rule from June, and confirmed that the changes that Dr. Beck and the American Chemistry Council sought were written into the new rule before it was sent to the White House for approval.

p. 338

Here is a news release issued in June, when Scott Pruitt, the E.P.A administrator, announced the completion of the new rules. Both Dr. Beck and Ms. Hamnett were present for a ceremony that Mr. Pruitt hosted. Dr. Beck is on the left in the photo, and Ms. Hamnett is standing behind Mr. Pruitt. With the cameras rolling, everyone smiled for the photos and a video. But there was great tension among members of this group, and anger over how the process had played out, interviews with The Times confirmed.

Wendy Cleland-Hamnett Leaves EPA and Industry Pushes to Defend its Gains

p. 341

Here is an email, first obtained by E&E News, that Ms. Hamnett sent out to announce her retirement shortly after the new toxic chemical rules were adopted. She ultimately ended up working until the beginning of September.

p. 342

Environmentalist and public health groups sued the E.P.A. to challenge the changes made in the toxic chemical rules. Here in September 2017, the American Chemistry Council and other industry groups move to enter the lawsuit to defend the E.P.A.'s actions. The industry notes that if the rule changes are reversed, the chemical industry and its customers could lose millions of dollars, as a result of restrictions on uses of chemicals they make, use or sell.

Questions and Answers to The New York Times

p. 365

The Times asked Dr. Beck and the E.P.A. repeatedly to address questions related to this story. Both declined to answer any questions. But the agency did provide a list of individuals it urged The Times to contact about Dr. Beck. The Times called almost all of them, including John D. Graham, who was her boss during the Bush administration. Here is what he wrote. Mr. Graham notes that Dr. Beck was from New Jersey. She in fact grew up in New York.

p. 368

Over a matter of several months, The Times asked the E.P.A. and Dr. Beck to agree to an interview. Finally, The Times submitted this list of detailed questions. Here are the questions and the entire response The Times received. Liz Bowman, who is an E.P.A. spokeswoman, also used to work at the American Chemistry Council.

p. 372

Here the E.P.A. turned confrontational with a reporter when presented with a simple fact-checking question. The E.P.A. public affairs staff ultimately sent out a newspaper reporter's email to other news organizations.

p. 378

So what she is recording here is a series of meetings, with Nancy Beck and other E.P.A. staff members that started after Dr. Beck joined the E.P.A. on May 1 and Dr. Beck pushed the other E.P.A. staff members to revised rules they had agreed were needed to ensure toxic chemical safety in the United States. Here Ms. Hamnett writes down that she has been instructed to remove "legacy" chemicals from the uses they will evaluate when considering toxicity. She also notes that Dr. Beck wants specific definitions included for terms like "best available science" which the E.P.A. staff had previously agreed not to include, but Dr. Beck had pushed for while she worked at the American Chemistry Council. Now Dr. Beck was calling the shots.

Sections
Page of 380