Decades-Old Environmental Studies At Heart Of Public Health Regulations Could Be Inadmissible Under New EPA Rule
The new rule dictates that scientists disclose all of their raw data, including confidential medical records, before the EPA can issue guidance. But many of those old studies that form the basis for air-quality and other public safety regulations rely were conducted under confidentiality agreements. Something like research proving lead in paint dust is tied to behavioral disorders in children would be inadmissible, then, when the Trump administration drafts rules.
The New York Times:
E.P.A. To Limit Science Used To Write Public Health Rules
The Trump administration is preparing to significantly limit the scientific and medical research that the government can use to determine public health regulations, overriding protests from scientists and physicians who say the new rule would undermine the scientific underpinnings of government policymaking. A new draft of the Environmental Protection Agency proposal, titled Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science, would require that scientists disclose all of their raw data, including confidential medical records, before the agency could consider an academic study’s conclusions. (Friedman, 11/11)
The Hill:
EPA Rule Proposes To Expand Limitations On Scientific Studies
The move is an expansion from previous drafts of the formally titled Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science rule, also dubbed the “secret science” rule, which was first pitched in 2017 by former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler told a congressional committee in September that the agency was moving forward with the rule to "ensure that the science supporting agency decisions is transparent and available for evaluation by the public and stakeholders.”
The new rule is now headed for the White House, according to the Times. (Green, 11/11)
