Republican lawmakers at a hearing addressing the way that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) performs its assessment and evaluation of chemicals to determine their safety, leveled criticism at the agency for their methods of evaluation, the lack of clarity and the length of time it takes to get regulations passed.

The EPA relies on the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), a database containing assessments by EPA scientists of over 540 chemicals, when determining what regulation is required for chemicals and their effect on the quality of drinking water, air quality or other environmental standards. The problem is that these assessments are sometimes quite controversial politically as with the assessment of formaldehyde, a preservative widely used by the chemical industry, and this can cause significant delays in passing regulations.

In a July 12, 2011 press release issued on the EPA website, EPA science adviser Paul Anastas outlined changes that were recommended to streamline the assessment process by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and received by the EPA on April 8, 2011. In response to the NAS recommendations, the EPA, working with their Science Advisory Board, will focus on “quality, transparency and scientific rigor” in IRIS assessments and that a peer consultation will be implemented to lend additional scientific input during the early stages of the process. It will also create an IRIS scientific advisory committee.

Although the improvements met with broad approval, there are still questions about how much additional peer review is necessary to properly prepare IRIS assessments for use as guidelines in establishing regulations.

In 2009, some progress was made to streamline the process after a U.S. Government Accountability Office call for broad transformation of IRIS. Prior to 2009, it was not unusual for assessments to take 5 years or longer. As a result of the changes implemented at that time most assessments are now completed in 23 months or less.