Senators request probe of charges that EPA withheld info on mercury rule

March 28 -- Three Democrats and the only independent in the Senate have asked for the EPA´s independent Inspector General´s Office to investigate allegations that the EPA withheld information during the mercury rulemaking process that disagreed with some administration assumptions.

However, the Environmental Protection Agency said the information was omitted in part because it appears flawed.

Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., James Jeffords, I-Vt., John Kerry, D-Mass., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., requested the investigation in a March 24 letter to Stephen L. Johnson, the acting EPA administrator.

The senators also asked Johnson to stay the implementation of the mercury rule until the information from the omitted study can be considered.

"If you are to be confirmed as the next administrator, the Senate needs to know that the scientific and procedural integrity of the rulemaking process at EPA will be restored under your tenure," the senators wrote in their letter.

President Bush has nominated Johnson to replace former EPA administrator Michael Leavitt.

The senators were reacting to recently revealed information that a Harvard University-conducted study estimated much larger public health benefits from cutting mercury emissions from coal burning power plants than did the EPA. The report by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis estimated public health benefits of $5 billion per year in 15 years if mercury pollution were cut in half. The EPA estimated the benefits at only $50 million per year.

"It appears that EPA excluded consideration of the Harvard study because these findings estimated far greater health benefits, including cardiovascular benefits, from regulating mercury emissions from power plants than the administration asserted in one of the final rules," the senators wrote to Johnson.

However, an EPA spokeswoman said the complete Harvard study was submitted after a previously announced agency deadline and that elements of the analysis were flawed. Only a summary was submitted prior to the deadline.

"Based on our initial review of the [Harvard] study, we have serious concerns with some of the assumptions made and how they treated the uncertainties in the science," EPA spokeswoman Cynthia Bergman said.

The EPA said more research is needed into possible cardiovascular risks associated with exposure to methylmercury that were discussed in the report. Because of the uncertainty, the health benefits predicted in the report should be viewed with caution, according to the agency.

EPA experts and scientists will conduct a full review of the study, Bergman said.