Trump officials accused of stacking top chemical safety board with industry ‘mouthpieces’

The Lyondell chemical plant in Channelview, Texas. Photograph: David J Phillip/AP View image in fullscreen The Lyondell chemical plant in Channelview, Texas. Photograph: David J Phillip/AP Trump officials accused of stacking top chemical safety board with industry ‘mouthpieces’ Public health advocates warn of conflicts of interests and say panel likely to provide justification for key rollbacks The Trump administration has stacked a top chemical safety board with industry-aligned scientists who have a range of financial conflicts of interest and stand to profit from deregulation, public health advocates say. The Environmental Protection Agency’s science advisory committee on chemicals (SACC) is slated to review research for dozens of toxic chemicals during the new members’ terms. At least 13 proposed Trump appointees are probably conflicted on the chemicals that will be reviewed, comments filed with the EPA by a coalition of public health advocacy groups alleges. Their appointment, critics warn, is designed to provide scientific justification for the EPA’s broader campaign to dismantle the nation’s protections against toxic chemicals. Among the appointees are Wade Barranco, employed by Lyondell Chemical Company, which in 2024 released nearly 1m pounds of chemicals likely to be reviewed by the SACC during his term, including acetaldehyde, benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene and styrene. The public health groups say the appointees’ participation on reviews in which there is a conflict could be illegal. They pointed to federal law and the EPA’s internal guidelines that state that the SACC must be “both balanced and free of members who have actual or perceived conflicts of interest or an appearance of a loss of impartiality”. Erik D Olson, senior strategic director for health for the Natural Resources Defense Council non-profit, which is among those leading the investigation into the appointees, said it was “clear why they were put on the committee”. “They are mouthpieces for the chemical industry, or consulting firms bought and paid for by the chemical companies,” Olson said. The SACC comprises 20-23 experts appointed every three years by the EPA administrator. It peer-reviews EPA science and scrutinizes the chemical risk analyses that underpin the agency’s decisions to regulate substances, with the aim of ensuring that the best available science is used. The SACC typically includes experts from across the scientific community, including those affiliated with chemical makers, but the new board will be heavily tilted toward industry. The industry-aligned SACC will probably ensure that scientific research that supports industry positions are used, and the board “will just rubber-stamp everything”, said Kyla Bennett, a former EPA scientist now with the Public Employees for Responsibility non-profit. “It will give them cover for bad science,” Bennett added. For its report, the public health coalition reviewed the EPA chemical data reporting database and