Quick Summary:
• The EPA banned trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (Perc), widely used carcinogens in products like dry cleaning solvents and adhesives.
• TCE is linked to liver and kidney cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and nervous system damage, while Perc causes various cancers and organ damage.
• The ban eliminates all TCE uses and restricts Perc use to specific industries under strict safety measures.
• Decades of advocacy highlighted the chemicals’ devastating impact on communities, like TCE-contaminated water in Tucson, Arizona.
• Industry groups, including the American Chemistry Council, oppose the ban, citing economic and operational burdens.
• Political risks loom as the Congressional Review Act could allow the Republican-controlled Senate to overturn the ban.
• Environmental advocates call the ban a victory but emphasize the need for vigilance to protect it against political and industrial pushback.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) recent announcement of a permanent ban on two widely used carcinogens marks a significant step forward for public health and environmental safety. However, the decision, lauded by advocates as overdue, faces potential challenges from political and industrial resistance that could undermine its impact.
The EPA’s ban targets two toxic chemicals: trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (Perc). Both substances have long histories of widespread use and devastating health consequences. TCE, found in products like degreasers, spot removers, and adhesives, is linked to liver and kidney cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and nervous system damage. The agency banned all uses of TCE under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which was overhauled in 2016 to grant the EPA greater regulatory authority.
Perc, a solvent frequently used in dry cleaning and automotive repair, is less harmful than TCE but remains a significant health risk. It is associated with cancers of the liver, kidney, brain, and testes, as well as damage to the immune system and vital organs. The EPA’s ban eliminates all consumer uses of Perc but allows limited industrial applications under strict worker protection rules, particularly in the aviation and defense sectors.
The bans were proposed in 2023 and finalized late in President Joe Biden’s term, signaling the administration’s commitment to public health despite the political challenges of a transition year.
Communities across the U.S. have fought for decades to ban TCE and Perc. One of the most poignant stories is that of Linda Robles from Tucson, Arizona, whose daughter Tianna died in 2007 from a rare cancer and kidney failure that Robles believes stemmed from TCE exposure. Contaminated groundwater near Tucson International Airport and local military facilities—now designated Superfund sites—exposed residents to the chemical’s harmful effects.
“They’ve been telling me for decades that they’re going to ban TCE, so it’s such a big deal it’s finally happening,” said Robles. “Still, I’ll never get my daughter back.”
The dangers of TCE have been widely documented, including in the 1995 book A Civil Action, which later became a movie starring John Travolta. Advocacy groups such as Earthjustice and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) have consistently called for stronger regulations. Responding to the proposed bans last year, Scott Faber of the EWG said the EPA was “once again putting the health of workers and consumers first.”
While environmentalists celebrated the EPA’s decision, industry groups have expressed strong opposition. The American Chemistry Council warned that the bans could have “far-reaching impacts on various industries and the national economy.” Similarly, the Dry Cleaning and Laundry Institute and the National Cleaners Association described the regulations as an “oppressive burden” on thousands of businesses.
EPA officials have countered these claims, emphasizing the availability of safer alternatives. “There’s simply no reason to continue to use this stuff to make glue, or as a dry-cleaning aid, or to clean up grease,” said Michal Freedhoff, assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “The risk is just too great.”
The timing of the bans puts them at risk of reversal under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which allows a newly controlled Congress to overturn regulations finalized late in a presidential term. With Republicans taking control of the Senate, the bans on TCE and Perc could be rolled back, particularly under an administration that prioritizes deregulation.
President-elect Donald Trump’s environmental rhetoric on the campaign trail pledged “the cleanest air and the cleanest water,” but his first term saw efforts to weaken chemical safety regulations. Trump’s appointment of a former American Chemistry Council executive to the EPA’s chemical safety office raised concerns about corporate influence on regulatory decisions.
Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz, a senior attorney at Earthjustice, expressed confidence that efforts to overturn the bans would face public backlash. “If Trump and Senate Republicans try to roll back the ban, they’re going to encounter serious opposition from communities across the country that have been devastated by TCE, in both blue and red states.”
The bans on TCE and Perc reflect a growing recognition of pollution as a bipartisan concern that transcends political divides. Communities in both conservative and liberal states have suffered from the consequences of chemical contamination, uniting them in calls for stricter environmental protections.
However, the decision also underscores the fragility of such protections. Wendy Wagner, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, noted that regulating toxic chemicals requires rigorous scientific analysis, which is vulnerable to political interference. “During the first Trump administration, we saw some of the most notorious and flagrant interventions into the scientific record,” Wagner said.
“They’ve been telling me for decades that they’re going to ban TCE, so it’s such a big deal it’s finally happening,” Linda Robles said. “Still, I’ll never get my daughter back.”
COMMENTS