What to Know
- Over a dozen states and Washington, D.C. are calling on the EPA to a proposal to limit the use of scientific evidence when making decisions
- The proposed rule, if adopted, would bar the agency from considering relevant scientific studies if the underlying information is not public
- The letter explains that the rule would prohibit groundbreaking studies because they contain confidential personal and medical histories
New York, New Jersey and Connecticut join over a dozen other states and Washington, D.C. in calling on the federal Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw a proposal to limit the use of scientific evidence and information when making decisions.
The EPA issued a proposed rule earlier in the year which, if adopted, would bar the agency from considering relevant scientific studies – even when they have been validated by peer review – if the underlying information is not publicly available.
In the multi-state letter to Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler, Attorney General Grewal describes the proposed rule as “ill-conceived” and “rushed” — noting that the agency failed to consult its own Science Advisory Board.
NBC 4 New York could not immediately reach Wheeler for comment.
The Friday letter reads in part that EPA’s proposed rule “would violate the very federal laws EPA is required to uphold.”
The letter further cites a number of key environmental laws, such as the federal Toxic Substances Control Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and Clean Air Act, as examples of laws requiring EPA to rely on the “best available science,” “sound and objective scientific practices” as well as the “latest scientific knowledge.”
Local
Additionally, the letter further states that, EPA’s refusal to do so simply because the underlying information is not publicly available violates those laws.
The proposed rule blocks EPA from relying on long-standing, peer-reviewed, and important research on environmental and public health priorities, the letter explains, adding that the proposed rule would block the EPA from considering the results of groundbreaking studies, because such research involves confidential personal and medical histories or propriety information.
“The scientific community has made clear that such a limitation is not in accordance with best practices,” the letter reads. “This anti-science approach has stalled in Congress and been rejected by the courts; it has no place at EPA.”
The EPA did not immiately respond to request for comment.
