MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION CENTER
MEIC Teams
up to Defeat
“Censored Science”
Rule
by Derf Johnson & Katy Spence
I
n the final days of former President Trump’s presidency, his administration pushed an egregious rule that would have required the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to disregard and ignore scientific research that utilized data from confidential medical information. Officially, it was known as the “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science” rule but, to opponents, it became known as the “Censored Science” rule. Immediately after the rule’s publication, which went into effect immediately, MEIC joined forces with the Environmental Defense Fund and Great Falls, Montana, -based Citizens for Clean Energy to sue the federal government and block the immediate implementation of the rule. And just a few weeks later, we won. The EPA has long relied on studies that contain confidential data to develop new regulations, including dose-response studies, which explore how much exposure to a substance increases risk. For example, studies on the effect of air pollutants on human health could be based on private medical information but inform important regulatory policies regarding air pollution. Studies such as these have helped improve regulations on water pollution, as well as exposure to toxins, workplace chemicals, and
4
cigarette smoke. Participants in human health studies often agree to provide their personal medical information with the condition that their private health information not be disclosed publicly. Federal law also contains protections for private medical information under HIPAA. The Censored Science rule would have required the EPA to disclose raw data from public health studies before it could enact regulations based on that research. Because the EPA cannot disclose private medical records, the rule change would have forced the agency to ignore or lessen the influence those studies would have had on new regulations. In other words, the EPA would have had to ignore the most important science when it came to public health regulations. It may come as no surprise that supporters of the Censored Science rule included lobbyists for the tobacco and fossil fuel industries. This absurd rule was a parting shot from an administration that undermined science at every turn. By refusing to let the EPA use the best available scientific studies, the agency would have become hobbled, no longer able to enact regulations that protect our air and water. Even the rule’s name was a misnomer. Proponents claimed it would have provided “transparency,” but in reality it was simply an
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973 .
