Pruitt signs proposed rule to erase 'secret science' from EPA

Pruitt signs proposed rule to erase 'secret science' from EPA
© Getty Images

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott PruittEdward (Scott) Scott PruittOvernight Energy: Court rejects new effort to stop kids' climate lawsuit | Baltimore is latest city to sue over climate change | EPA staffers worried about toxic chemical in Pruitt's desk Pruitt staffers worried about toxic chemical in his desk Andrew Wheeler must reverse damage to American heartland MORE signed a rule proposal Tuesday aimed at increasing "transparency" in science all while limiting reporter, environmentalist and scientist access to the event.

The proposal, signed at EPA headquarters, aims to expose the methodology behind scientific findings and cut back on what Pruitt has deemed "secret science."

Speaking in front of a number of well-known climate change skeptics including the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Myron Ebell, Pruitt announced that the new rule would require science to "be transparent, reproducible and able to be analyzed by those in the marketplace." Reporters were not invited to attend the event, and details surrounding the announcement and rule proposal were kept secret until 30 minutes before the EPA's Twitter account announced it would be live-streamed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Pruitt said the new ruling shows "an agency taking responsibility for how we do our work, in respecting process … so that we can enhance confidence in our decision making." He also dubbed the current process which had, until now, allowed science to be peer reviewed rather than open to public scrutiny, "simply wrong headed."

The rule will replicate, through agency action, two bills previously introduced in the House and Senate meant to restrict the kind of science the EPA can use when writing regulations.

The House bill authored by Rep. Lamar SmithLamar Seeligson SmithElection Countdown: Senate, House Dems build cash advantage | 2020 Dems slam Trump over Putin presser | Trump has M in war chest | Republican blasts parents for donating to rival | Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders to campaign in Kansas Greens sue EPA over ‘super-polluting’ truck rule Lawmakers scold NASA for cost overruns MORE (R-Texas), now called the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act, would mandate all scientific data and findings be made publicly available before they are used to justify agency regulations. Versions of Smith’s bill passed the GOP-controlled House three times, but the Senate hasn’t taken it up.

Last week, internal documents released by a Freedom of Information Act request by the Union of Concerned Scientists found that EPA political staffers have been working for months in conjunction with Smith and his staff to mimic the bill.

Speaking at the event Tuesday, Smith thanked Pruitt for being a "courageous leader" of the agency and blamed the "liberal media and alarmist environmental groups," for finding negatives in his legislation.

"For too long, EPA has withheld data that has been hidden from the American people," Smith said.

Opponents of the new rule say it would limit the number of available scientific studies that could be used by the agency in its rulemaking, namely by excluding a number of public health studies.

Timed with Pruitt's announcement, seven Democratic Lawmakers sent a letter to Pruitt on Tuesday denouncing the new policy. The letter, led by Sen. Tom CarperThomas (Tom) Richard CarperOvernight Energy: Fewer than half of school districts test for lead | Dems slam proposed changes to Endangered Species Act | FEMA avoids climate change when discussing plan for future storms Dems slam proposed changes to Endangered Species Act Full interview: Democratic candidate Kerri Evelyn Harris discusses her Senate campaign in Delaware MORE (D-Del.), tells Pruitt, "Your proposed new policy likely violates several laws with which EPA must comply as the agency writes rules to protect our air, water and land from harmful pollution.”

The lawmakers said Pruitt's new policy likely would run afoul of a number of laws that mandate rulemaking be based on the "best available science … because it would require EPA to ignore some of the ‘best’ scientific studies."

"Courts have explained that ‘best available science’ means that agencies ‘should seek out and consider all existing scientific evidence relevant to the decision’ and ‘cannot ignore existing data,' " the letter read.

This story is being updated