***Click here to download video. Click here for audio.***

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND), a Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee member, issued the following statement on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalizing its rule to strengthen the transparency of its significant regulatory actions and influential scientific information:

“The EPA’s rule embraces accountability and transparency, ensuring verifiable scientific data is prioritized in significant rulemakings. Cherry-picked ‘science’ should not be used by Washington to support politically driven regulations. I applaud Administrator Wheeler for placing a high priority on public rigor and scrutiny. The American people will be better served because of it.” 

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler recently announced the final rule.

“I fundamentally believe that the American public has a right to know about EPA’s regulations and their scientific underpinnings,” said Administrator Wheeler. “No one should be afraid of being transparent, especially if individual privacy is protected. Increased transparency has strengthened the Agency’s credibility with the public in the past, and I intend for this rule to do the same as we move forward.”

Specifically, this rule:

  • States the EPA shall give greater consideration to studies determined to be pivotal science where the underlying dose-response data are available in a manner sufficient for independent validation.
  • Applies to only future significant regulatory actions and influential scientific information. This rule has no retrospective effect on existing regulations or influential scientific information.
  • Applies to all dose-response data underlying studies used as pivotal science, regardless of when the study or the data was created.
  • Does not require the release of PII and CBI.
  • The rule also establishes requirements for the independent peer review of pivotal science. If the individual studies identified as pivotal science have already undergone journal peer review, EPA is not required to conduct a second review but can evaluate whether or not to initiate additional peer review, consistent with the OMB Bulletin for Peer Review.
  • In addition, when proposing a significant regulatory action, the Agency is required to clearly identify and make publicly available the science informing the rule. 
  • Under certain criteria outlined in the rule, the Administrator can grant case-by-case exemptions to the requirements of this rule.

Learn more here.