Fri. Nov 18th, 2022

WASHINGTONThe Environmental Protection Agency is issuing new rules that will give preference in future decisions about public health to scientific studies that disclose their underlying data.Administrator
Andrew Wheeler
said the changes are aimed at increasing transparency so that the public has a chance to scrutinize findings that underlie major regulations.By shining light on the science we use in decisions, we are helping to restore trust in government, Mr. Wheeler wrote in a commentary published by The Wall Street Journal late Monday. We want the EPA to be able to say, you can check our work.
The policy change, in the works since the start of the Trump administration, has been opposed by public-health experts, scientists and former staff who say it could undermine the agencys effectiveness.
Many public-health studies rely on information about individual patient health that is required to be kept confidential, which may now exclude groundbreaking health findings from EPA consideration, these critics say.
The rules apply to the EPAs consideration of dose-response studies, used to figure out how much exposure to a chemical or pollutant increases the risk to a persons health. Those determinations are fundamental to many core EPA rules on public health.
In future decisions the agency must now give greater consideration to studies in this area in which underlying dose-response data is available for independent validation. And when it proposes new regulations it must make available to the public that science that informs the rule.
The rule wont categorically exclude any data, Mr. Wheeler wrote, adding that the new practices can be done without releasing personal information or violating confidentiality.
The rule will prevent agency leaders from trying to cherry pick research to derive politically helpful results, he wrote. It outlines specific criteria for when the administrator can make case-by-case exemptions to these requirements.
Several scientists and health experts have questioned Mr. Wheelers claims and say it is in many cases impossible to require these types of disclosures without violating patient confidentiality. In the end that is more likely just to narrow what research will be considered, they said.
If left unchallenged, this rule would essentially bar the agency from using the most relevant medical studies when creating rules about air pollution, toxic chemicals, water contaminants, Chris Zarba, a former director of the EPAs Science Advisory Board, said in a statement. The ruledoesnt ensure transparency in science, but rather is detrimental to high-quality impartial decision-making.
Mr. Zarba was joined in the statement by other former EPA employees, who say the change will benefit industrial interests by excluding certain types of studies.
They noted the EPA has long had a public review process for the science it uses, one that includes several review boards and committees of outside experts from academia and industry to ensure transparency and scientific quality.
Write to Timothy Puko at tim.puko@wsj.com
Copyright ©2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8