Ethylene Oxide Emissions Class Actions: Challenging or Defending Risk Assessment Testing Methodologies

Description

First discovered in the mid-1800s, EtO is a colorless, odorless compound used (1) to make ethylene glycol and a host of consumer products and (2) to sterilize and/or fumigate sensitive products: e.g., certain medical equipment, plastics, and dried herbs and spices. The U.S. EPA recently lowered its acceptable ambient EtO exposure levels. This change was implemented based on risk assessment and other methodologies, which have faced significant criticism from industry experts, the scientific community, and state agencies.

The EPA's recent changes have spawned numerous class action and personal injury lawsuits by individuals living in proximity to facilities that use EtO. This often demands medical monitoring as a remedy. The strength of any particular claim depends on the quality of the scientific evidence attempting to link EtO emissions in the community to reported health issues, so counsel on both sides must thoroughly understand and be able to challenge the weaknesses or defend the strengths of different testing methodologies and the resulting data.

The scientific problem is complex. A few attempts have been made to assess the risk of ambient EtO exposure. Scientific disagreements exist over which of the many methodologies most accurately measure EtO risk. No consensus exists as to whether EtO can cause damage, nor as to the weight of evidence that would be needed to demonstrate at what levels of exposure damage might occur. Defendants have argued that the risk assessment methodology used to measure EtO risk lacks precision and have urged that the EPA adopt the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's risk value for EtO as an alternative.

Listen as this panel of attorneys and experts reviews and offers guidance on how to evaluate risk assessment testing and methodologies in EtO class actions seeking medical monitoring.