No IRIS Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Feb 18, 2025
Bottom line
This bill would prevent the EPA from using its primary scientific program for assessing chemical risks in any regulatory or enforcement capacity, potentially impacting environmental and public health protections.
What it actually does
This bill prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from using any scientific assessments generated by its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program. This prohibition applies to developing new rules or regulations, carrying out regulatory, enforcement, or permitting actions, and informing air toxics assessments or other mapping and screening tools.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that IRIS assessments are often outdated, lack transparency, and rely on flawed science, leading to overly burdensome regulations that stifle industrial growth and economic activity. They assert that the program's methodologies are not robust enough for regulatory decisions and that this bill would prevent the EPA from relying on unreliable data.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that IRIS provides crucial scientific data for protecting public health and the environment from toxic chemicals. They argue that prohibiting its use would cripple the EPA's ability to regulate harmful substances, potentially increasing public exposure to risks and undermining evidence-based policymaking.
The bill text is extremely short and easy to read, but its implications are far-reaching and require significant background knowledge to fully grasp.
Section 2
Prohibition on Use of Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Assessments
This section explicitly forbids the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from using any scientific assessments produced by its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program. This prohibition applies to developing new rules or regulations, taking enforcement actions, issuing permits, or even using IRIS data to inform tools that map or screen for air toxics. Essentially, it removes IRIS as a basis for any EPA regulatory or enforcement activity.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the IRIS program has been criticized for its slow pace, lack of transparency, and use of outdated scientific methodologies, leading to unreliable assessments that impose unnecessary costs on industries. They contend that this prohibition would prevent the EPA from relying on flawed science for critical regulatory decisions, fostering a more efficient and less burdensome regulatory environment.
Critics contend
Opponents argue that IRIS is a foundational program for understanding the health risks of environmental contaminants and that its assessments are crucial for protecting public health. They assert that this bill would cripple the EPA's ability to make science-based decisions, leaving communities vulnerable to toxic chemicals and undermining the agency's core mission.
Tradeoffs
The bill creates a tension between reducing perceived regulatory burdens on industry and ensuring robust scientific backing for environmental and public health protections. It also highlights the ongoing debate about the reliability, transparency, and economic impact of federal scientific assessment programs versus their role in safeguarding public welfare.