Tobacco Documents Online

Human Event~~' THE NATIONAL CONSERVATIVE WEEKLY ~IIIfIIIIC' ~~. ~ APRIL 11. 1992 VOL LII No. 15 1992 by Human Ewnft_ Inc. - $1.25 EPA Readies Cold Shower for U.S. Agency officials-hoping to expand their regulatory power into the realm of Indoor air-are seriously looking at the 'exposure to contaminants' from taking a shower at home By BONNER R. COHEN 'IYy to envision an embattled Presi- dent Bush, eager to appease radical environmentalists (and undecided vot- ers), flying down to the Earth Summit in Rio this June. On his return to Wash- ington, he steps off Air Force One with a smiling EPA Administrator William Reilly at his side and declares: "Green peace in our time." This gloomy prospect was conjured up by Fred Smith of the Competitive Enterprise Institute at February's Con- servative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington. Address- ing a panel on "Eco-Hysteria," Smith wondered out loud whether the White House would end up surrendering American sovereignty over its environ- ment at the forthcoming Earth Summit in Brazil. The result, he warned, would be both an economic and ecological disaster. Though the Bush Administration has yet to commit the United States to par- ticipate in the Rio Earth Sutnmit, its rec- ord on caving in to political pressure at the last minute is well-documented enough to cause concern. Indeed, Smith's nightmare vision seems not at all far-fetched when one considers that Reilly's Environmental FRED SMITH Protection Agency is now seriously looking at a step that would mean yet another encroachment on individual liberties in the U.S. This time, the issue in question is the freedom to take a shower. In an effort to expand its regulatory power into the realm of indoor air, the EPA, among other things, is proposing to study the health effects of some 500 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) commonly found in buildings. One of those compounds is chloroform, a by- product of chlorine, which is used to purify water. Like all VOCs, chloro- form, when heated, is emitted as a gas which is then inhaled by the person tak- ing the shower. Thus, the EPA, which has jurisdic- tion over water, is attempting to seize Mr. Cohen n publientions dirertor at the Amerron Pollcy Center in Chantilly, Va. He also is edrtor oj EPA Watch, a tarce-rnonthly survey oJ EPA•rc/ated aJJalrs. control over indoor air by concentrat- ing its attention on gases created by heated water. If this sounds bizarre, consider the following: On February 25, the EPA's Science Advisory Board's (SAB) Indoor Air Quality and Total Human Exposure Committee (IAQTHEC) held an all- day meeting in Arlington, Va. One of that meeting's sessions was entitled "Review of Draft Documents: Projects Summary: Guidance on Estimating Ex- posure to VOCs During Showering: " This remarkable document notes that "Exposure to contaminants volatilized from tap water is a signifi- cant issue, and the scope of interest within EPA is broad: " The draft goes on to say that "we believe that the data on exposure from showering alone are of sufficient quality to support guid- ance. Such guidance would support an Agency-wide need-a basis for consis- tent risk management decisions to reduce showering exposure." "Although the Agency has well- established methods for assessing exposures from ingesting tap water," the document continues, "the Agency does not have well-established methods of estimating exposures from inhala- tion of contaminants volatilized during other household uses (e.g. showering, laundering, washing dishes, and toilet flushing); " Citing findings of a 1988 EPA Risk Assessment Forum on the same sub- ject, the draft points out that "the Forum's Exposure Oversight CGroup undertook a more detailed review of the literature and concluded that, although the studies were limited in number and consisted primarily of theoretical cal- culations and monitoring of unoccu- pied shower chambers, these studies demonstrated the significance of the showering pathway." Even though the draft admits that the EPA's studies are based largely on "theoretical calculations and monitor- ing of unoccupied shower chambers; " it nonetheless concludes that its data on the dangers of showering support the need for more "guidance: " Guidance Is the key word. For the "showering pathway" down which the EPA proposes to take the American taxpayers is designed to lead to a regulatory agenda under which EPA will have control over indoor air. Currently, indoor air is under the jurisdiction of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA), which, as its name implies, monitors health risks in the workplace. Should the EPA succeed in wresting regulatory control over indoor air from OSHA, some of the agency's 17,000 employees will soon be seeking out "indoor pollu- tants," including those lurking in the nation's kitchen sinks, shower chain- WILLIAM REILLY bers, and toilet bowls. The EPA's risk assessment on show- ers is not only one of the most stunning examples of involuntary humor ever produced by a federal agency, it also shows to what absurdities unrestricted government regulation can lead. The EPA already devours 36 per cent of the federal government's total regu- latory budget, not including the billions of dollars it forces state and local gov- ernments and private industry to spend in order to stay in compliance with EPA regulations. Yet the EPA's record on radon, di- oxin and asbestos, just to name a few, clearly shows that the agency has little understanding of the complex issues relating to Indoor air. In the case of asbestos, for example, the EPA succeeded in terrorizing hard- pressed school districts into spending millions of dollars to remove the sub- stance, only to discover that asbestos is relatively harmless when left alone. The asbestos fiasco was based on the same kind of risk assessment the EPA is now undertaking on showers. Indeed, so poor is the reputation of EPA science in the greater scientific community that Administrator Reilly found it necessary last year to appoint a special advisory panel of prominent scientists to evaluate the quality of the agency's science. The panel's findings, released on March 19, were not flatter- ing. For example, the report noted that some EPA studies "are frequently car- ried out without the benefit of peer review or quality assurance. They sometimes escalate into regulatory pro- posals with no further science input, leaving EPA initiatives on shaky scien- tific ground and affecting the credibil- ity of the agency." Pointing out that "EPA often does not scientifically evaluate the impact of ib ragulations;" the panel found that "the Interpreta- tion and use of science is uneven and haphazard across programs and Issues at EPA. ConfBcting science policies between EPA pro- grams create confusion and a lack of credibility for EPA decisions:' But those decisions, however bizarre, just keep coming. In fact, the EPA's sudden concern about the dangers of taking a shower is not the first time the agency has delved into the trivial. For some time, for example, the EPA has been trying to convince the world that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is a major health hazard. The agency's Science Advisory Board has even issued a draft report saying that ETS, or passive smoking, should be classified as a "Group A carcinogen." Yet the chairman of that board, Dr. Morton Lippman, told reporters last year that the possibility of getting cancer from second-hand smoke is a small added risk, "probably much less than you took to get here through Washington traffic." Once the EPA manages to get juris- diction over indoor air, the agency's JOE KENNEDY regulatory writ will extend into every bedroom in the United States. Home- owners could face the daunting pros- pect of having to get an EPA-approved "air-quality test" before they can sell their homes. Legislation now pending in Congress would make just such a nightmare pos- sible. The Indoor Air Quality Act of 1991 would make the EPA the lead agency on indoor air issues. The Senate has already passed Its version of the bill (S 455), sponsored by Majority Leader George Mitchell (D.-Maine), and the House is expected to vote on its com- panion measure (HR 1066), sponsored by Rep. Joseph Kennedy (D.-Mass.), later this year. Even though central planning and economic coercion have been thor- oughly discredited in the former Soviet Empire, this message seems to have been lost on the EPA and its friends in Congress. The Bush White House, which wants the American public to take seriously its recently announced 90-day mora- torium on regulations, had better wake up to what is going on at the EPA. If not, we're all in for more than just a cold shower. 0 14 / Human Events / APRIL 11, 1992 302