Casten Questions EPA Official on Proposed Rule to Censor Science
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Representative Sean Casten (IL-06), today at a House Science, Space, and Technology Committee hearing questioned Dr. Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisor and Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science for the Office of Research and Development, about the Trump Administration's proposed rule that would significantly limit the amount of science and medical research used in policymaking by requiring scientists to disclose their raw data. Casten points out that the rule, "Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science," would retroactively impact several types of existing EPA regulations by improperly limiting scientific research, including those setting air pollution limits, which are legally mandated to be updated regularly.
To see Casten's questions to Dr. Orme- Zavaleta, click the image above or click here.
Casten: "In the New York Times report, it said that the supplemental proposed rule is considering applying the policy retroactively, so all past scientific research could be excluded by EPA unless the underlying data is made publicly available. The EPA's response to this, which you've been talking about, largely dodges the important points…EPA said in the release that ‘the proposal in supplemental will not apply to any regulations already in place.' Yes or no, is it within EPA's authority to update an existing regulation at its own discretion"?
Orme-Zavaleta: "I believe they follow the statutory schedule."
Casten: "So that's a yes."
Orme-Zavaleta: "It's a maybe."
Casten: "You have that discretion. Aren't there mandated timelines to update certain existing regulations, like, those issued under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards"?
Orme-Zavaleta: "I believe the statutes do require a regular schedule for updating."
Casten: "So, given that EPA, can reconsider any regulations that it deems necessary and with the mandatory reconsiderations, is it safe to say that any existing regulation can be ultimately rewritten within the bounds of this proposed rule, should it be finalized"?
Orme-Zavaleta: "Should this rule be finalized, then it will apply prospectively to new rules and regulations."
Casten: "But those old rules are going to come up for renewal under what we just talked about. So, it's fundamentally disingenuous to assert as the EPA has that the rule will not be applied retroactively to existing regulations."
Orme-Zavaleta: "It still applies prospectively."
Casten: "But all those rules are coming up for renewal."
Orme-Zavaleta: "The agency may decide to update. A lot of it is driven by what new information is, becomes available."
Casten: "And we're asked to trust that people led by science deniers are going to make that decision, right? Look, this is painful. And, we're sitting at a moment where none of this assault on science happens if people in your shoes stand up. If, and when you stand up, we've got your back, but please stand up."
###