Below is the timeline of the events leading up to yesterdays ruling by the Federal Court judge that denied EPA’s request to dismiss the Petition to ban fluoride chemicals into the public drinking water. This Petition was submitted under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). This ruling allows the law suit against EPA to proceed in Federal Court.

The Timeline

November 23, 2016: Fluoride Action Network (FAN), together with a coalition of environmental, medical and health groups, collectively known as the “Petitioners” see * below, served the EPA with a Petition calling on the Agency to ban the addition of fluoridation chemicals to public water supplies due to the risks these chemicals pose to the brain. The Petition was submitted under Section 21 of TSCA because it authorizes EPA to prohibit the “particular use” of a chemical that presents an unreasonable risk to the general public or susceptible subpopulations. TSCA also gives EPA the authority to prohibit drinking water additives.

February 27, 2017: EPA denied the TSCA Section 21 Petition. Read their reasons here. In their decision the EPA claimed, “The petition has not set forth a scientifically defensible basis to conclude that any persons have suffered neurotoxic harm as a result of exposure to fluoride in the U.S. through the purposeful addition of fluoridation chemicals to drinking water or otherwise from fluoride exposure in the U.S.”

April 18, 2017: FAN et al.’s response to EPA’s rejection of Petition.

September 25, 2017: Motion to Dismiss FAN et al. Petition by the Department of Justice, on behalf of the EPA.

October 25, 2017: FAN et al. response to EPA’s rejection of Petition.

October 25, 2017: Amicus Curiae Brief of the Natural Resources Defense Council and Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families in Support of Neither Party. Their brief against EPA’s basis to dismiss our section 21 Petition that FAN et al. “must evaluate all of a chemical’s conditions of use”

November 30, 2017: Hearing with arguments from both parties. Michael Connett, JD, put forward the arguments of why EPA’s Motion to Dismiss should be denied.

December 21, 2017: Court rules in our favor and denies EPA’s Motion to Dismiss.

* The Petitioners:
Fluoride Action Network,
American Academy of Environmental Medicine,
Food & Water Watch,
International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology,
Moms Against Fluoridation,
Organic Consumers Association,
and various individuals.

Note: The news articles on this lawsuit can be accessed here http://fluoridealert.org/news/?country=united-states&sub=tsca-lawsuit

Print PDF