RE: Welcome to Fourth Day of Dialogue

[Nina Powers <npowers@home.com>]

EPA's Bruce Engelbert asks;
"We also have a couple of questions, not directly related to providing assistance, that we would appreciate comments on:

   6. In what circumstances is EPA usually responsive? Are there certain types of issues, areas, or processes where EPA is not responsive?

   7. Do you believe EPA is open in sharing information? If no, please give an example, and say what could be improved."

 My comments per your request;
  6. My experience has been with pesticides, and requests across several inter-agency EPA offices. I find that when EPA has made a decision that is not protective of human health and the environment, and they wish to avoid that the public interest has been usurped by the chemical interest, EPA is not responsive.

  7. The latest example of EPA not being open in sharing information was their recent flip flop on the potential of the genotoxic,neurotoxin malathion to cause cancer in humans. EPA was preparing to classify malathion as a "likely human carcinogen",  then changed their mind and decided to classify malathion as "suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity but not sufficient to assess human carcinogenic potential."  EPA documents that were posted on the malathion risk assessment web page after the sudden reversal show that EPA changed its view after objections from malathion's manufacturer. EPA then had their Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) review the process by which the carcinogenic potential of malathion was determined. One of the SAP members, Dr. Herbert Needleman, a highly respected pediatric M.D. and educator, renowned for his research work on lead exposure and children, was so concerned after the SAP meeting, he wrote a letter and requested it be entered as part of the public record with his view on the flawed process used by EPA to downgrade the potential of malathion to cause cancer. EPA did not include Dr. Needleman's comments in either the malathion documents or the SAP final report posted on EPA's web site. His comments were entombed in the "OPP public docket", accessible only if the public knows to ask for it. The only way I knew of this "public information document" was by personal conversation with Dr. Needleman.I requested the SAP office to include Dr. Needleman's comments on the EPA web site, and then the Office of the Administrator. EPA obviously doesn't want this information to be distributed and has not posted SAP panelist Dr. Needleman's comments online.

  My 1/11/01 inquiry to OPP Communication Services remains unanswered. The EPA Administrator's Office sent me a form letter reply to my 10/13/00 request that they were too busy to respond, but my message would be "shared". It was a simple request that required action, not sharing. You requested an example? I'll respond with the trail of my requests from 10/08/00 -01/11/01. If anyone is interested in Dr. Needleman's public comment,please feel free to contact me.

---------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Thank you for your inquiry
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:41:18 -0500
From: Nina Powers

Organization: @Home Network
To: Franklin.Charles@epamail.epa.gov
CC: Bill Hirzy , "Dr. Brian Dementi" , "Dr. Routt Reigart" , Dwight Welch , Herbert Needleman , Senator Bob Graham , Lewis.Paul@epa.gov, Bonner.Patricia@epa.gov

References: 1

Dear Mr. Franklin,

Thank you for replying to my October 2000 request. I am copying you with that again, as burying SAP Panel Member Dr. Herbert Needleman's comments on the August 17-18, 2000 Malathion SAP meeting in the OPP Docket doesn't allow public access to this information. Your Agency can easily include Dr. Needleman's comments as received as part of the final report on the SAP web site. Since these comments are not supportive of EPA's flawed "risk assessment", your Agency has decided this public document should be difficult to access. Selective incorporation of parts of Dr. Needleman's comments isn't sufficient. I am requesting, once again, that EPA post Dr. Needleman's comments dated 09/20/2000 in their entirety online as part of the public record.

---------------------------------------------------------

Franklin.Charles@epamail.epa.gov wrote:
>
> Dear Ms. Powers:
>
> Thank you for your E-mail letter to Administrator Carol Browner regarding
> the availability of information on the Environmental Protection Agency
> (EPA) web site. Specifically, you request that we post on our web site the
> comments made by FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) permanent panel
> member, Herbert Needleman, M.D. following the August 17-18, 2000
> Assessment of Human Carcinogenic Potential of Malathion SAP meeting.
>
> EPA strives to provide the public with the information necessary to comment
> on its regulatory procedures and decisions. We have found that
> establishing a docket is an effective way to develop administrative records
> and to provide public access, and consider the docket to be essential for
> the success of our mission. The Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Public
> Regulatory Docket consists of the Federal Register, Special Review, and
> Special Programs dockets which store regulatory notices, background
> documents and public comments on OPP activities. Our dockets represent an
> important information repository, the integrity of which must be protected
> and maintained to ensure broad public access to docket materials.
>
> Unfortunately, due to the large number of comments we receive and the
> substantial resources and technology required to convert all materials for
> electronic posting on the web, the Agency is unable to do so at this time.
> As you noted, EPA did provide a copy of Dr. Needleman's comment to the OPP
> docket (docket control number OPP_00670). In addition, Dr. Needleman's
> comments were also incorporated into the SAP's final report for this
> meeting. The meeting report is available in the OPP docket (docket control
> number OPP_00670) and on the SAP web site. The URL address is
> http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/index.htm.
>
> At the meeting on August 17-18, 2000, the SAP considered a range of
> arguments presented by the Agency and others, and supported the Agency's
> consensus conclusion that the human carcinogenic potential of malathion is
> low. When malathion is used according to label directions, the Agency's
> assessments show very low potential for human exposure, and a low potential
> for cancer risk. EPA is presently analyzing all scientific data regarding
> malathion to ensure that its scientific decisions are sound and are fully
> protective of public health and the environment.
>
> EPA continues to explore new ways to improve the public's ability to
> provide comment and to receive information about ongoing Agency action. We
> will take your request for increased on-line access to public comments into
> consideration as we continue this process.
>
> Thank you for your interest in this important matter. If we may be of
> further assistance, please contact us at 703-305-5017.
>
> Charles Franklin, Chief
> Communication Services Branch
> Office of Pesticide Programs
>
> X0006872

---------------------------------------------------------

My previous e-mail request;

Subject: [Fwd: Dr. Needleman's comments]
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 02:38:19 -0400
From: Nina Powers
Organization: @Home Network
To: Browner.Carol@epa.gov
CC: Lewis.Paul@epa.gov, Bonner.Patricia@epa.gov, Welch.Dwight@epa.gov, Bill Hirzy , "Dr. Brian Dementi" , Herbert Needleman , reigartj@musc.edu, bob_graham@graham.senate.gov

Dear Ms. Browner,

I'm hopeful that you can help with a simple request to your Agency regarding the availability of information on the EPA web site.

I recently participated in EPA's Online Dialogue on Capacity Building via the Internet, Sept. 18-29,2000. During this excellent EPA e-forum, participants were asked to identify problems that exist in their attempts to access environmental information, and offer suggestions for the improvement of resources on the EPA Web site. One of the recurrent issues was trust and the EPA, does EPA manipulate information and access to it?

I have been following EPA's actions on malathion ever since the Section 18 Exemptions that allowed crop dusting urban populations for Medfly "eradication" here in Florida and adversely impacted the health of so many people. I read your recent malathion preliminary risk assessment with great interest, as it certainly qualifies as manipulation of information.

In a telephone conversation with OSCP SAP yesterday, I was informed that FIFRA SAP Panel member, Dr. Herbert Needleman's comments dated 09/20/00 as a follow-up to the August 17-18th, 2000 Malathion Meeting, would only be available in the Docket. I had requested Dr. Needleman's response be posted online in several avenues of availability, but was told that would not be possible. This certainly qualifies as manipulating access to information. At the very least, the comments should be part of the public record posted online with the final FIFRA SAP malathion meeting report, and also be added as an attachment under the preliminary risk assessment malathion documents. Your HED toxicologist dedicated to the protection of public health, Dr. Brian Dementi, has his excellent assessments posted in both locations. Dr. Needleman's comments aren't confidential. He also requested they be part of the public information. Banishing them to the Docket, where no one will see them unless they know to request them, is unacceptable. Please do what you can to rectify this decision, and let me know where and when Dr. Needleman's Sept.20th Critique will be posted online. Thank you.

Our Senator Bob Graham was very helpful in convincing your Agency to deny any further Section 18's for malathion in the State of Florida, and the USDA to fund an ongoing Sterile Insect Release program for medfly control. That has resulted in the protection of both agriculture and public health. I will contact Senator Graham concerning EPA's recent actions regarding malathion. Just like chlorpyrifos and diazinon, the public exposure to this over-used neurotoxic, genotoxic, probable human carcinogen must be mitigated. Your Agency is not taking action to insure that outcome.


---------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Dr. Needleman's comments
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 21:03:13 -0400
From: Nina Powers
Organization: @Home Network
To: lewis.paul@epa.gov
CC: bonner.patricia@epa.gov, kapuscinski.Jacques@epa.gov

Hi Mr. Lewis,

Following up on your advice, I contacted the OPP Docket. Dr. Herbert Needleman's comments to SAP on malathion after the August 17-18, 2000 FIFRA SAP meeting on malathion's carcinogenic potential were faxed to me.

When and where will FIFRA SAP member Dr. Needleman's comments be posted online as part of the public record?

Since there is a tendency for information such as this to be lost to the public searching EPA's web site, please consider posting a link to Dr. Needleman's Critique of the EPA Malathion Risk Assessment, dated September 20,2000 in the section on the EPA home page titled, "What's New on the EPA Web."

Dr. Needleman's 09/20/2000 comments should also be made a part of the Documents for Malathion and noted in the "What's New" section on the OPP home page and be part of the information under the August 17-18 SAP meeting on the OSCP SAP web page.

Thank you for your assistance.