Latest news with #Superfund
Los Angeles Times
8 hours ago
- Health
- Los Angeles Times
The Trump administration is gutting EPA's research arm. Can California bridge the gap?
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.
Yahoo
18-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Arizona Democratic race for House seat highlights party's internal debate – and previews the midterms
A gen Z influencer, a former state lawmaker and the daughter of a former representative are facing off in a special Democratic primary in Arizona on Tuesday that showcases the party's internal debate in the run-up to the midterm elections. Longtime Arizona representative and progressive stalwart Raúl Grijalva died in office from complications of lung cancer treatment in March at age 77, leaving open a seat representing southern Arizona and its borderlands. His daughter, Adelita Grijalva, herself a longtime elected official in southern Arizona, is the frontrunner in the race and has a laundry list of endorsements. But Deja Foxx, a 25-year-old who's made her name in viral moments standing up to politicians and who would become the youngest member of Congress, is surging in recent polls. Daniel Hernandez, a former state lawmaker who was at the 2011 shooting of then representative Gabby Giffords, is also pulling in significant support. Related: Redrawing Texas: the Republican plan to stack the decks for the midterms 'It's a fascinating encapsulation of the different factions and factors that will define all Democratic primaries in 2026,' said Arizona progressive lobbyist Gaelle Esposito. 'Adelita represents the progressive wing, Deja's the blank-slate outsider, Daniel has that big donor lane locked down. Do people want a progressive leader, do they just want to shake up the system or do they want someone who knows how to navigate the DC backrooms?' The district is solidly blue, meaning that whoever wins the Democratic primary is the likely victor in the general election. National Democratic infighting has brought extra attention to the race, as the left wrangles over how to fight Donald Trump and win back voters while the Democratic party brand is flagging. It's also the first time this seat has been open in more than two decades. Questions over seniority and age in the party have loomed over the race – three Democrats died in office this year, and Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' passed by only one vote. Grijalva's opponents have attacked her 'legacy' last name. 'The thing that I need to push back on is this idea that the three members of Congress died because of age,' Grijalva, 54, said. 'They died because of cancer. My dad lived in a Superfund site and drank poison water for two decades.' After Zohran Mamdani's upset win in the Democratic primary for New York City mayor, Democrats are looking across the country at how candidates who buck the status quo, and who communicate well to voters and on social media, will fare. Leaders We Deserve, David Hogg's Pac, endorsed Foxx in the race, saying 'she has translated her story to represent a new vision of generational change that speaks truth to Trump's cruel policies'. His group is spending in Democratic primaries in safe blue districts to support younger progressive candidates and drive out Democrats who are 'asleep at the wheel'. The candidates say voters are concerned about immigration, deportations and detentions – the district contains three major ports of entry on the US-Mexico border. The economy looms large, especially with Trump's new bill that could devastate rural areas in particular, as does the dismantling of democracy. But the race hasn't dwelled much on the issues; instead it's zoomed in on an old-versus-new, established-versus-insurgent dynamic that's played out across the country and will mark the midterms. The candidates Foxx, a gen Z Filipino American from Tucson, got her start fighting for better sex education in Tucson schools. She has nearly 400,000 followers on TikTok and more than 240,000 on Instagram and has created viral political moments since she was a teenager. When she was 16, she pointedly confronted then US senator Jeff Flake at a town hall over defunding Planned Parenthood, calling him a 'middle-aged man' who '[came] from privilege'. In the decade since, she has worked on political advocacy, including on Kamala Harris's 2020 campaign. She attended the Democratic national convention in 2024 as a content creator. Her personal story plays heavily into her campaign: her family relied on food stamps, Medicaid and section 8 housing, all targets for Republican budget-cutting. She experienced homelessness as a teenager. She has worked a 'normal-person job' and cleaned toilets at a gas station for $10 an hour. 'People are ready to question a political system that prioritizes legacy last names or big-dollar donors, and they're looking for a candidate who reflects back their lived experiences,' Foxx said. When she filed paperwork to run in the special election in April, she was alone in her bedroom – and she said she did it wrong. She, like other young candidates jumping into primaries across the country, is showing her followers how you run for office in real time. 'I am the only break from the status quo, the only change candidate that represents a difference in the tactics it's going to take to stand up to this administration,' she said. 'I would ask people to just imagine what we could do from the House floor. It's going to take messengers like me who know how to reach the people we are losing.' Hernandez, who served three terms in the state legislature, has touted his ability to work with Republicans to pass legislation. He ran in a nearby congressional district in 2022, losing in the Democratic primary. He said voters have told him they've been without a voice in Congress since early 2024, when Raúl Grijalva got sick. They're worried about losing access to Medicare, Medicaid and social security, and they want representation. 'I'm the only one that actually has experience delivering results in a Republican environment,' he said. 'That's something that is really important right now, given the very broken and very divided Congress that we're in.' Adelita Grijalva boasts a stack of endorsements from across the Democratic spectrum, including Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Arizona's two US senators, Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly. She has a long résumé in local politics, serving on the Tucson unified school district governing board for 20 years and the Pima county board of supervisors since 2020. She hasn't shied away from her father's legacy. Her first campaign video leans into it. 'When you grow up Grijalva, you learn how to fight and who you're fighting for,' she says. 'I know how to fight and win because I learned from the best.' She said she learned from her dad the importance of doing your homework and to not take politics personally – a lesson she admittedly has struggled with, especially in this race. 'I anticipated low blows. I didn't anticipate, like, six feet under,' she said. Foxx has called out Grijalva for having a 'legacy last name' and inheriting her father's donor and mailing lists. But, Grijalva notes, her dad was 'not a prolific fundraiser'. He raised enough to hire staff and buy food, but wasn't sending money back to the party. She said 94% of the people who donated to her primary campaign haven't given to a Grijalva before. 'I'm not using my dad's last name,' she said. 'It's mine, too. I've worked in this community for a very long time – 26 years at a non-profit, 20 years on the school board, four years and four months on the board of supervisors. I've earned my last name, too.' While she's been attacked as an establishment candidate, her record – and her father's – are strongly progressive. If elected, she wants to push for Medicaid for all and the Green New Deal. But the race has focused mostly on identity, with attempts to discredit her contributions to the community. 'Establishment' and 'Grijalva' have previously not really been used in the same sentences, she said, until the last month. 'I wonder if my dad were an older white man and I were a junior, if I would be getting the same kind of criticism that I'm getting now,' she said. 'And I don't think I would.'
Politico
17-07-2025
- Business
- Politico
EPA moves ahead with reorganization, new buyouts
'These structural changes reinforce EPA's unwavering commitment to fulfill its statutory obligations and uphold fiscal responsibility,' Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement. In tandem with the announcement Thursday, the agency offered yet another round of buyouts and early retirements to employees, targeted at people in the offices being reorganized. That includes those in the Office of Research and Development, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, the Office of Mission Support and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, as well as regional employees who were excluded from an earlier round of deferred resignations, according to an email obtained by POLITICO. Details: EPA has created a new Office of Finance and Administration, combining what was formerly the Office of the Chief Financial Officer and the Office of Mission Support. Those divisions tended to draw less attention than the program offices charged with issuing and enforcing regulations and overseeing environmental cleanups. EPA touted the new office as a 'streamlined, one-stop-shop for all financial and administrative operations' that will improve coordination within EPA and help communicate better with Congress and other agencies. 'By partnering our operations and mission support services, we can deliver results for American communities while remaining good stewards of taxpayer dollars,' Zeldin said. The agency announced other restructurings in two other offices. In the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, EPA said unspecified changes to its operations 'will better address pollution problems that impact American communities by re-aligning enforcement with the law to deliver economic prosperity and ensure compliance with agency regulations.' The agency did not share further details about the reorganization. EPA earlier this year told staff to reduce enforcement and compliance actions against energy facilities, reducing oversight to prioritize 'violations that threaten human health and safety or risk releases or accidents that would disrupt energy production or power generation.' The agency on Thursday also announced additional unspecified changes to the Office of Land and Emergency Management, which oversees the sprawling Superfund program as well as EPA's response to disasters. The changes 'will better equip the agency to swiftly and efficiently fulfill statutory obligations like preventing contamination, cleaning up and returning land to productive use, and responding to emergencies.'
National Post
15-07-2025
- Business
- National Post
Tetra Tech Awarded $94 Million Emergency Preparedness and Response Services Contract
Article content PASADENA, Calif. — Tetra Tech, Inc. (NASDAQ: TTEK), a leading provider of high-end consulting and engineering services in water, environment, and sustainable infrastructure, announced today that the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has awarded the Company a $94 million, single-award contract to provide technical services in EPA Region 7 to support the Superfund Technical Assessment & Response Team (START). Article content Under this seven-year contract, Tetra Tech scientists, engineers, and technical specialists will support preparedness and response activities for a wide range of emergencies, including chemical and hazardous materials releases, oil spills, industrial accidents, and natural disasters. Our teams will oversee time-critical cleanup actions, perform contaminated site assessments, and conduct training and community outreach. Tetra Tech technical specialists will integrate new technologies for collecting, sharing, visualizing, and streaming real-time field data to support decision-making during emergencies. Article content 'Tetra Tech has supported EPA's START program for 30 years, providing technical services in 36 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia,' said Dan Batrack, Tetra Tech Chairman and CEO. 'We are pleased to continue using our Leading with Science ® approach to support EPA in preparing for and responding to emergencies, protecting human health and the environment, and keeping communities safe and secure.' Article content About Tetra Tech Article content Tetra Tech Article content Leading with Science ® Article content to address the entire water cycle, protect and restore the environment, and design sustainable and resilient infrastructure. For more information about Tetra Tech, please visit Article content Article content LinkedIn Article content and Article content Facebook Article content . Article content Any statements made in this release that are not based on historical fact are forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statements made in this release represent management's best judgment as to what may occur in the future. However, Tetra Tech's actual outcome and results are not guaranteed and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions ('Future Factors'), and may differ materially from what is expressed. For a description of Future Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements, see the discussion under the section 'Risk Factors' included in the Company's Form 10-K and Form 10-Q filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Article content Article content Article content Article content Article content Article content
Boston Globe
06-07-2025
- Health
- Boston Globe
Trump's EPA has terminated over $15 million in funding for 'forever chemicals' research
In the onslaught of legal action and activism that followed, the EPA during President Donald Trump's first term took an assertive stance, vowing to combat the spread of PFAS nationwide. Advertisement In its big-picture By the time Trump was sworn in for his second term, many of the plan's suggestions had been put in place. After his first administration said Advertisement But now, the second Trump administration is pulling back. The EPA said in May that it will These EPA decisions under Trump are part of a slew of delays and course changes to PFAS policies that had been supported in his first term. Even though his earlier EPA pursued a measure that would help hold polluters accountable for cleaning up PFAS, the EPA of his second term has not yet committed to it. The agency also slowed down a process for finding out how industries have used the chemicals, a step prompted by a law signed by Trump in 2019. At the same time, the EPA is hampering its ability to research pollutants — the kind of research that made it possible for its own scientists to investigate GenX. As the Trump administration seeks severe reductions in the EPA's budget, the agency has terminated grants for PFAS studies and paralyzed its scientists with spending restrictions. Pointing to 'If anything,' the agency added, 'the Trump administration's historic PFAS plan in 2019 laid the groundwork for the first steps to comprehensively address this contamination across media and we will continue to do so this term.' Advertisement In public appearances, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has pushed back on the suggestion that his agency weakened the drinking water limits on GenX and similar compounds. Future regulations imposed by his agency, he said, could be more or less stringent. 'What we want to do is follow the science, period,' he has said. That sentiment perplexes scientists and environmental advocates, who say there is already persuasive evidence on the dangers of these chemicals that linger in the environment. Scientists and advocates also said it's unclear what it means for the EPA to follow the science while diminishing its own ability to conduct research. 'I don't understand why we would want to hamstring the agency that is designed to make sure we have clean air and clean water,' said Jamie DeWitt, a toxicologist in Oregon who worked with other scientists on Cape Fear River research. 'I don't understand it.' Delays, Confusion Over PFAS Favored for their nonstick and liquid-resistant qualities, synthetic PFAS chemicals are widely used in products like raincoats, cookware and fast food wrappers. Advertisement The chemicals persist in soil and water too, making them complicated and costly to clean up, leading to a yearslong push to get such sites covered by the EPA's Superfund program, which is designed to handle toxic swaths of land. During the first Trump administration, the EPA said it was taking steps toward designating the two legacy compounds, PFOA and PFOS, as 'hazardous substances' under the Superfund program. Its liability provisions would help hold polluters responsible for the cost of cleaning up. Moving forward with this designation process was a priority, according to the PFAS plan from Trump's first term. Zeldin's EPA The designation became official under Biden. But business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and organizations representing the construction, recycling and chemical industries, sued. Project 2025, The Heritage Foundation's playbook for the new administration, also questioned it. Zeldin has said repeatedly that he wants to hold polluters accountable for PFAS, but his EPA requested three delays in the court case challenging the Superfund designation that helps make it possible. The agency said in a recent motion it needed the latest pause because new leadership is still reviewing the issues and evaluating the designation in context of its 'comprehensive strategy to address PFOA and PFOS.' The EPA also Advertisement Businesses were supposed to start reporting this month. But in a May 2 letter, a coalition of chemical companies When the EPA delayed the rule less than two weeks later, it said it needed time to prepare for data collection and to consider changes to aspects of the rule. In an email to ProPublica, the agency said it will address PFAS in many ways. Its approach, the agency said, is to give more time for compliance and to work with water systems to reduce PFAS exposure as quickly as feasible, 'rather than issue violations and collect fees that don't benefit public health.' The court expects an update from the EPA in the Superfund designation case by Wednesday, and in the legal challenges to the drinking water standards by July 21. The EPA could continue defending the rules. It could ask the court for permission to reverse its position or to send the rules back to the agency for reconsideration. Or it could also ask for further pauses. 'It's just a big unanswered question whether this administration and this EPA is going to be serious about enforcing anything,' said Robert Sussman, a former EPA official from the administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. As a lawyer, he now represents environmental groups that filed an amicus brief in PFAS cases. Advertisement Back in North Carolina, problems caused by the chemicals continue to play out. A consent order between the state and Chemours required the manufacturer to drastically reduce the release of GenX and other PFAS into the environment. (The chemicals commonly called GenX refer to HFPO-DA and its ammonium salt, which are involved in the GenX processing aid technology owned by Chemours.) Chemours told ProPublica that it invested more than $400 million to remediate and reduce PFAS emissions. It also noted that there are hundreds of PFAS users in North Carolina, 'as evidenced by PFAS seen upstream and hundreds of miles away' from its Fayetteville plant 'that cannot be traced back to the site.' PFAS-riddled sea foam continues to wash up on the coastal beaches. Chemours and water utilities, meanwhile, are battling in court about who should cover the cost of upgrades to remove the chemicals from drinking water. Community forums about PFAS draw triple-digit crowds, even when they're held on a weeknight, said Emily Donovan, co-founder of the volunteer group Clean Cape Fear, which has intervened in federal litigation. In the fast-growing region, new residents are just learning about the chemicals, she said, and they're angry. 'I feel like we're walking backwards,' Donovan said. Pulling back from the drinking water standards, in particular, is 'disrespectful to this community.' 'It's one thing to say you're going to focus on PFAS,' she added. 'It's another thing to never let it cross the finish line and become any meaningful regulation.' Research Under Fire The EPA of Trump's first term didn't just call for more regulation of PFAS, it also stressed the importance of better understanding the forever chemicals through research and testing. In a Zeldin, too, has boasted about advancing PFAS research in an At about the same time, though, the agency terminated a host of congressionally appropriated grants for PFAS research, including over $15 million for Scientists at Michigan State University, for example, were investigating how PFAS interacts with water, soil, crops, livestock and biosolids, which are used for fertilizer. They timed their latest study to this year's growing season, hired staff and partnered with a farm. Then the EPA canceled two grants. In virtually identical letters, the agency said that each grant 'no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities. The objectives of the award are no longer consistent with EPA funding priorities.' The contrast between the agency's words and actions raises questions about the process behind its decisions, said Cheryl Murphy, head of Michigan State's Center for PFAS Research and co-lead of one of the projects. 'If you halt it right now,' she said, 'what we're doing is we're undermining our ability to translate the science that we're developing into some policy and guidance to help people minimize their exposure to PFAS.' At least some of the researchers are appealing the terminations. About a month after PFAS grants to research teams in Maine and Virginia were terminated for not being aligned with agency priorities, the agency reinstated them. The EPA told ProPublica that 'there will be more updates on research-related grants in the future.' Even if the Michigan State grants are reinstated, there could be lasting consequences, said Hui Li, the soil scientist who led both projects. 'We will miss the season for this year,' he said in an email, 'and could lose the livestock on the farm for the research.' Federal researchers are also in limbo. Uncertainty, lost capacity and spending restrictions have stunted the work at an EPA lab in Duluth, Minnesota, that investigates PFAS and other potential hazards, according to several sources connected to it. As one source who works at the lab put it, 'We don't know how much longer we will be operating as is.' The EPA told ProPublica that it's 'continuing to invest in research and labs, including Duluth, to advance the mission of protecting human health and the environment.' Meanwhile, the agency is asking Congress to eliminate more than half of its own budget. That includes massive staffing cuts, and it would slash nearly all the money for two major programs that help states fund water and wastewater infrastructure. One dates back to President Ronald Reagan's administration. The other was The EPA lost 727 employees in voluntary separations between Jan. 1 and late June, according to numbers the agency provided to ProPublica. It said it received more than 2,600 applications for the second round of deferred resignations and voluntary early retirements. 'These are really technical, difficult jobs,' said Melanie Benesh, vice president for government affairs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group. 'And the EPA, by encouraging so many employees to leave, is also losing a lot of institutional knowledge and a lot of technical expertise.' The shake-up also worries DeWitt, who was one of the scientists who helped investigate the Cape Fear River contamination and who has served on an EPA science advisory board. Her voice shook as she reflected on the EPA's workforce, 'some of the finest scientists I know,' and what their loss means for public well-being. 'Taking away this talent from our federal sector,' she said, will have 'profound effects on the agency's ability to protect people in the United States from hazardous chemicals in air, in water, in soil and potentially in food.'
