Press Releases

Recently, Rep. Jack Bergman sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan, pressing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use sound science in the rule-making process concerning Formaldehyde use. Members of both parties have raised concerns about the absence of meaningful interagency review, or robust, independent peer review by the EPA for formaldehyde.

Rep. Bergman recently visited Bakelite Synthetics and the Arauco Plant in Grayling to tour their operations, meet with workers, and learn more about the needs and uses of formaldehyde products in manufacturing across the First District and Nation. 

JP Aucoin, President and CEO of Bakelite Synthetics, noted, “While we commend health science organizations that continue to monitor potential risk exposure, it is important that these organizations follow governmental requirements to ensure that there is an objective, transparent, and science-based evaluation process. Restrictive regulation of formaldehyde will harm stakeholders up and down the supply chain, including consumers, producers, and workers.  As a leader in the chemical manufacturing industry, we play an important role in advocating for these stakeholders, our customers, and the community as a whole."

Aucoin Continued, "We applaud Congressman Bergman’s visit to our facility in Grayling and our neighboring customer’s operation, which demonstrates the importance to the local economy and the significance of the issue around formaldehyde-based regulations." 

You can read the full letter below:

Dear Secretary Austin and Administrator Regan,

As the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues risk evaluation activities for formaldehyde, I am concerned that decisions not based on sound science will result in bans or unachievable standards. This would not only have enormous economic impacts across dozens of industries and impact the competitiveness of American manufacturers, but also threaten national security. Despite these concerns, EPA is rushing forward with these overreaching regulations without going through an interagency process to incorporate feedback from defense agencies.

Formaldehyde is a critical building block for hundreds of defense applications critical to national security. For example, formaldehyde is a critical element of numerous aerospace components, including electrical systems, landing gear components, safety systems, brake pads, wings, flooring, vulcanized rubber, lubricants and seatbelts.

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires EPA to engage other federal agencies and allows for the Agency to issue exemptions for “critical or essential uses.” Yet, EPA did not exclude any defense applications for formaldehyde from its final “scoping plan” for its forthcoming risk evaluation and risk management process under TSCA. 

In addition, EPA is focusing its risk evaluation and risk management rules on a variety of “conditions of use” on formaldehyde applications critical to DOD priorities, including semiconductors, adhesives, plastics, rubber, oil and gas, explosive materials, electrical systems, construction materials, lubricants, and water treatment.

EPA’s actions, including the release of an April 2022 draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment of formaldehyde and forthcoming risk evaluation and risk management rules under TSCA for formaldehyde, could threaten the availability of formaldehyde through bans, unachievable standards, litigation, and enforcement actions. Members of both parties have already raised concerns about the absence of meaningful interagency review, or robust, independent peer review of these EPA chemical activities for formaldehyde, further demonstrating the need for early, formal consultation between EPA and DOD.

EPA’s unscientific approach to establishing toxicity values under the IRIS and TSCA programs for formaldehyde sets a terrible precedent for other chemistries on the list to be reviewed in the coming years. These include critical minerals that are “essential to U.S. national security,” including vanadium and uranium.

Given these concerns about the national security impact of EPA’s actions on formaldehyde I request:

·    Consistent with TSCA and past practice, EPA should go through a full interagency review process for any draft or final risk evaluation for formaldehyde. This should be overseen by the White House Office of Management and Budget, include a process consistent with Executive Order 12866, last at least 60 days, and seek input from all relevant defense agencies and sub-agencies.

·    Any peer review of EPA’s risk evaluation or risk management rules should be balanced and include perspectives from the national security community familiar with the potential defense implications.

·    EPA and DOD should provide a briefing to my staff and House Armed Services Committee staff on the national security consequences security implications of EPA IRIS and TSCA activities for formaldehyde and other critical minerals no later than October 1, 2023.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to a prompt response.

Sincerely,

Jack Bergman

Member of Congress