Federal Agencies Clash Over SPH Data

A study from the Harvard School of Public Health (SPH) has recently become part of the debate over the 1977 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the release of research data.

A SPH study that formed the basis for the EPA's tightening of gasoline and clean air regulations is the center of this debate. In an effort to get the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to release data from this study, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed three FOIA requests last week to the EPA.

William Kovacs, vice president of environment and regulatory affairs for the Chamber of Commerce, said the reforms involve changing regulations that would cost taxpayers anywhere from $50 to $150 billion. Given this impact, Kovacs said it is only reasonable to expect the EPA to disclose the study on which they are basing their actions.

"What they have disclosed are the results that they want to talk about," Kovacs said. "We want our researchers to analyze the data for themselves. The EPA can believe what they want to believe."

But officials at the SPH have said that confidentiality agreements with the subjects of the studies prevent them from releasing the data in any form, even if names are not used.

"Basically the issue here is that the research data was collected under pledges of confidentiality to the research subject. There was a commitment made to these people that it would not be released," said James H. Ware, dean for public affairs at the SPH. "The data was provided on the condition that it wouldn't get out."

Officials at the Chamber of Commerce say that if the EPA is going to implement such drastic measures to improve what they deem the poor health of the country, they need to justify their actions.

"The standards are being set based on this study. If there are actual health effects, then it is fine," Kovacs said. "If you say you are going to limit highway construction and put serious limitations on and virtually halt industrial productions, you have to have some basis of fact."

The Chamber of Commerce has taken the position that taxpayers have a right to know where their money is going.

The study, called the Pope study after its chief researcher, was conducted approximately six years ago to determine whether or not new health standards would have a beneficial effect on public health, according to Kovacs.

After concluding that this was in fact the case, Kovacs said that an independent research group analyzed the results and estimated that the government could save 40,000 lives every year with an expenditure of $50 billion.

Frank Coleman, the spokesperson for the Chamber, said that this figure is controversial and said he thinks that the EPA does not have an accurate conception of what reforms actually need to be implemented, in part because of the ambiguity of the data.

Based on the finding that thousands of people die each year as a result of inhalation of particles in the air, the EPA called for reforms that include stricter air quality standards.

"The EPA is all too ready to stand up and say that it will save thousands of lives," Coleman said. "But [that conclusion] is both arbitrary and capricious."

Kovacs said that many different people have been trying to get a copy of the study to see if the effects are in fact verifiable, but attempts have been unsuccessful.

The chamber filed the FOIAs with the expectation that the EPA will reject them. The chamber will then likely sue for the release of the data.