Ensuring Sound Science

What Needs to Be Done | Key Reports

In recent years, concerns have been raised regarding the perceived politicization of science in agency decisions.
The usefulness and credibility of EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database — which contains the agency's scientific position on the potential human health effects of more than 540 chemicals — are being limited, in part, by the way the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)/interagency reviews of EPA's chemical assessments are being conducted.
OMB's and other agencies' input into EPA's chemical risk assessments is expressly defined as deliberative and therefore not subject to public disclosure. The OMB/interagency reviews occur in what amounts to a black box.
EPA's draft chemical risk assessments — those provided to independent peer review committees — incorporate undisclosed changes from federal agencies, such as the Departments of Defense and Energy, that may be affected by assessments that lead to regulatory actions.
EPA and other agencies rely on advice from federal advisory committees on scientific and technical issues. In 2008, GAO testified about continuing problems with the independence of advisory committee members — that is, their freedom from conflicts of interest — and the balance of the committees overall in terms of points of view and functions to be performed.
Many advisory committee members are not appropriately screened for potential conflicts of interest or points of view.
GAO's work on the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee suggests that EPA has not proactively used the committee to ensure that the agency's regulations, guidance, and policies address the disproportionate risks to children that result from environmental contamination.
EPA has often disregarded key recommendations from its advisory committee on proposed revisions to important environmental issues, such as the national air quality standards.

Figure 1: The Science of Environmental Protection
Environmental Cycle

^ Back to topWhat Needs to Be Done

EPA should streamline its lengthy scientific assessment process for toxic chemicals and adopt transparent practices providing assurance that these assessments are appropriately based on the best available science and are not inappropriately biased by policy considerations of OMB or other federal agencies that have a vested interest in the results of EPA scientific assessments.
Highlights of GAO-08-810T (PDF)
Congress may want to consider amendments to the Federal Advisory Committee Act to provide greater assurance that committees are, and are perceived as being, independent and balanced.
Highlights of GAO-08-611T (PDF), Highlights of GAO-04-328 (PDF)

^ Back to topKey Reports

Environmental Health: EPA Efforts to Address Children's Health Issues Need Greater Focus, Direction, and Top-Level Commitment: GAO-08-1155T, September 16, 2008; Summary (HTML) Highlights Page (PDF) Full Report (PDF, 24 pages) Accessible Text Recommendations (HTML)

Chemical Assessments: EPA's New Assessment Process Will Further Limit the Productivity and Credibility of Its Integrated Risk Information System: GAO-08-810T, May 21, 2008; Summary (HTML) Highlights Page (PDF) Full Report (PDF, 33 pages) Accessible Text

Federal Advisory Committee Act: Issues Related to the Independence and Balance of Advisory Committees: GAO-08-611T, April 2, 2008; Summary (HTML) Highlights Page (PDF) Full Report (PDF, 18 pages) Accessible Text

Chemical Assessments: Low Productivity and New Interagency Review Process Limit the Usefulness and Credibility of EPA's Integrated Risk Information System: GAO-08-440, March 7, 2008; Summary (HTML) Highlights Page (PDF) Full Report (PDF, 89 pages) Accessible Text Recommendations (HTML)

Legal Principles Applicable to Selection of Federal Advisory Committee Members: B-303767, October 18, 2004; Summary (HTML) Full Decision (PDF, 9 pages) Full Decision (HTML)

Federal Advisory Committees: Additional Guidance Could Help Agencies Better Ensure Independence and Balance: GAO-04-328, April 16, 2004; Summary (HTML) Highlights Page (PDF) Full Report (PDF, 149 pages) Accessible Text Recommendations (HTML)