By Kathy Pursley, Editor, Industrial WaterWorld
May 8, 2002 -- Christine Todd Whitman, administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) addressed the EPA Science Forum held in Washington, D.C., on May 1, 2002, saying, "...we are embarking on a new era at EPA, one where our commitment to the quality and relevance of science is greater than ever before."
Last year, Whitman asked a group of senior EPA mangers to examine the process by which it develops regulations and to recommend ways to improve it. After an extensive evaluation process, the group found that the existing system for writing regulations is basically sound.
Recommendations made by the group for making improvements included steps to revitalize procedures, developing an inventory of regulatory actions, and making changes in several organizations including the Office of Research and Development and the Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation.
Whitman said she believes these actions will reinvigorate EPA's regulatory process, enhance the quality of its decisions, and lead to more effective and sustainable environmental protection.
Whitman expects changes at EPA will encourage more cutting-edge scientific innovations, citing such changes as computational toxicology, rigorous peer review process, the new Post-Doctoral program, and support of academic research, particularly through the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program.
"It is absolutely essential that EPA managers have the best possible scientific and economic information to consider when making decisions. Only a strong commitment to science can define the environmental challenges of the future and determine the best methods to address these challenges," said Whitman.
Whitman explained to the forum that EPA relies upon science and technology to help determine which environmental problems pose important risks to the natural environment, human health, and quality of life.
"I firmly believe the credibility of our decisions depends on the science underlying them. The quality of the science behind those decisions largely determines how well environmental programs actually work -- whether they achieve our health and environmental goals," said Whitman.
