FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, September 24, 2025
Contact:
Kyla Bennett (508) 230-9933 [email protected]; Jeff Ruch (510) 213-7028 [email protected]
EPA Perpetuates Scientific Fraud in Pesticide Cancer Risks
More Than 3 Years after IG Report, EPA Has Not Made Needed Corrections
Washington, DC — More than three years after its own Inspector General (IG) took it to task, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to allow workers and the public to be exposed to one of the nation’s most popular fumigants without adequate cancer warnings, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) who filed the original complaint about EPA fraudulently watering down the fumigant’s risk assessment. The egregious nature of EPA’s scientific misconduct in this case underlines the depth of ongoing problems plaguing its safety reviews for new chemicals and pesticides.
In 2020, EPA revised its human health risk assessment of 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D), a Dow Chemical soil fumigant and nematicide; the most common formulation goes by the brand name “Telone.” 1,3-D is used on a wide variety of fruits and vegetables, fruit and nut trees, and field crops. EPA downgraded its prior cancer classification of 1,3-D from “likely to be carcinogenic to humans” to “suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential.” This downgrade allowed higher levels of human exposure to Telone without being considered a human health risk.
PEER charged, and the IG confirmed in a July 2022 report, that EPA –
- Downgraded its cancer risk assessment based upon a bogus literature search which excluded relevant studies;
- Used an inappropriate new risk analysis method without knowing how to use it; and
- Violated its own procedures for ensuring scientific integrity, transparency, and peer review, thus blocking outside reviewers to flag deficiencies.
“These were not minor discrepancies; these were appallingly blatant departures from accepted procedures,” stated PEER Science Policy Director Kyla Bennett, a scientist and attorney formerly with EPA, pointing out that senior officials overrode EPA scientists’ original assessment after multiple meetings with manufacturer representatives without entering those meetings into the official review docket. “Significantly, not a single EPA manager has been disciplined for this malfeasance.”
Notably, EPA has offered no explanation for or defense of its actions. After the IG report came out, EPA balked at adopting key IG recommendations, even attempting to use industry scientists, including two reviewers from Dow AgroSciences, as its peer reviewers.
In a new report issued this month, the IG says EPA has yet to issue “specific criteria requiring external peer review” to prevent undue “precedent-setting influence on future risk assessments.”
“This case illustrates how thoroughly industry has corrupted EPA’s pesticide risk assessment process starting in Trump’s first term, extending through Biden, and continuing unabated today,” Bennett added. “EPA’s chemical safety net has clearly not worked as envisioned.”
###
Read summary of new IG report tagging EPA’s failure to follow-through
Look at the 2022 IG report on Telone
See how badly EPA chemical review process is broken
Examine ingrained corruption in EPA chemical review program
PEER protects public employees who protect our environment. We are a service organization for environmental and public health professionals, land managers, scientists, enforcement officers and other civil servants dedicated to upholding environmental laws and values. We work with current and former federal, state, local and tribal employees.
