Abby L. Harvey
GHG Monitor
3/13/2015
In the face of a veto threat from the Obama Administration, House lawmakers are gearing up to vote on two bills that would change the rules for who can sit on the Environmental Protection Agency’s Independent Science Advisory Board and that would require that all scientific data used to craft EPA regulations be made public. The House was set to vote on the bills last week but was delayed due to inclement weather. The bills were previously approved by the House last year, but did not move forward in the Senate.
Secret Science Reform Act Calls for Greater Transparency
The Secret Science Reform Act calls for greater public access to science and data used by the EPA to develop regulations. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Science Space and Technology Committee, noted in a Committee press release late last month, the EPA’s proposed carbon regulations for coal-fired power plants in defending the bill. The regulations would set emissions reduction targets for each state and require the states to develop action plans to reach those goals. The science used to develop the goals, however, is not available to the public, Smith said, so citizens cannot review the data for themselves “Costly regulations should not be created behind closed doors and out of public view. The data that underpins EPA regulations should be available to the public so that independent scientists have a fair chance to verify findings. Hardworking American families foot the bill for EPA’s billion dollar regulations and have a right to know that policy is based on sound science and thoughtful analysis. Our freedoms are best protected when citizens are informed. The Secret Science Reform Act would prohibit the EPA from using science they aren’t willing to make public. This bill works toward a more accountable government that the American people want and deserve,” Smith said.
In its threat to veto the bill, the White House said, “The Administration strongly supports regulatory transparency, but strongly opposes H.R. 1030. The bill would impose arbitrary, unnecessary, and expensive requirements that would seriously impede the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) ability to use science to protect public health and the environment, as required under an array of environmental laws, while increasing uncertainty for businesses and States.”
Bill Would Allow More Industry Representation on Scientific Advisory Board
The other bill being considered, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2015, would allow that “persons with substantial and relevant expertise are not excluded from the Board due to affiliation with or representation of entities that may have a potential interest in the Board’s advisory activities, so long as that interest is fully disclosed to the Administrator and the public,” according to the text of the bill.
Committee Vice-Chairman Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) said in a committee press release late last month that the bill would increase transparency and fairness within the advisory board. “The Science Advisory Board (SAB) informs the EPA on regulations that impact the lives of millions of Americans. Some members on this board have received grant money from the EPA, and several of the members have openly expressed policy preferences in the same areas they are asked to independently study. The heavy costs of EPA’s regulations warrant some degree of public oversight to ensure SAB’s findings are free from bias or conflicts of interest and not simply provided by a set of handpicked advisors. The EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act addresses these issues by ensuring the science guiding EPA’s regulatory policy is open to review by the public and requiring members who serve on this board to disclose their professional backgrounds,” Lucas said.
In a Statement of Administration Policy dated March 3, the White House wrote that “the Administration strongly opposes H.R. 1029, which would affect the ability of EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB) to form panels and perform its essential functions. The SAB, along with other functions, reviews the quality and adequacy of certain scientific and technical information used by EPA or proposed as the basis for EPA regulations. Therefore, it is imperative that the SAB be composed of the most knowledgeable scientific and technical experts available.”