Reverse EPA proposal based on trumped-up ‘secret science’ claim | TheHill

peter.suber's bookmarks 2018-09-06


"Scott Pruit has been ousted as head of the Environmental Protection Agency, but what may be the most damaging aspect of his legacy still looms. EPA is still considering Pruitt’s proposed rule to limit what science the agency can take into account when deciding whether and how to protect the public from pollution. Along with Pruitt’s policy — still in effect — to disqualify some experts from service on scientific committees, the proposal would distort and limit EPA’s ability to take action against toxic chemicals, air and water pollutants, and just about any other danger to health under its purview....


The language EPA has been using to promote its proposal is Orwellian. The agency frames its effort as advancing such core scientific values as transparency and peer review, while the rule would actually prevent the use of reputable scientific studies in determining environmental policy. It would also allow the EPA administrator to substitute his judgment for that of scientists by giving the agency head broad and arbitrary authority to permit the use of some studies while rejecting others.

The proposal has its origins in a trumped-up claim about the use of “secret science,” but the facts instead show why the EPA proposal itself is so dangerous...."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags: oa.trump oa.epa oa.environment oa.climate oa.usa oa.recommendations oa.openwashing

Date tagged:

09/06/2018, 16:18

Date published:

09/06/2018, 12:18