U.S. EPA has improved a beleaguered program for assessing environmental and health risks posed by chemicals, but the program is still far from achieving its mandates, the Government Accountability Office said today.

The federal watchdog commended EPA for changes made to its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), whose assessments of chemicals and other substances serve as the building blocks of EPA regulations aimed at protecting human health and the environment.

But GAO also cautioned that IRIS still faces "long-standing and new challenges."

GAO was tasked with examining changes EPA had made to IRIS since the watchdog's March 2008 report, which warned IRIS was in "serious risk of becoming obsolete." That audit said IRIS was failing to complete assessments in a timely manner, leading to a large backlog of chemicals needing assessments. Further, GAO also found IRIS lacked transparency, since most of the process was off-limits to the public and stakeholders.

In its report today, the watchdog said EPA took steps in the right direction in May 2009, when the Obama administration initiated reforms to the IRIS program. In particular, EPA has restored its complete control over IRIS, increased transparency by making comments publicly available and implemented a 23-month timeline for less challenging assessments.

But other progress has been "limited," GAO said. It noted that while IRIS made initial productivity gains, it has not maintained that pace. For example, IRIS completed 16 assessments within the first year and a half of the May 2009 update but only four in all of fiscal 2011.

Further, EPA "has not fully addressed" issues regarding the clarity of IRIS's risk assessments, GAO said.

IRIS's problems have long plagued EPA. After GAO's critical 2008 report, the watchdog added IRIS to its annual "high risk" list of troubled federal programs in 2009. It has remained on that list since (Greenwire, Feb. 16, 2011).

Further, the program is frequently lambasted by industry for its scientific methodologies. Those criticisms were bolstered last April when a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) review of IRIS's formaldehyde assessment found significant problems with how IRIS reached its conclusions, though it nevertheless did agree with some of the program's findings and did not recommend stalling IRIS (Greenwire, April 8, 2011).

GAO today recommended that EPA assess the feasibility of its established time frame for IRIS assessments and examine each step to see if changes are necessary. It also said EPA should submit a plan for how it will implement the NAS recommendations from April to an entity with scientific and technical credibility.

EPA agreed with the recommendations.

Reactions

Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.), who requested the GAO report, said the watchdog's findings showed the Obama EPA is moving in the right direction after the previous administration "actively sabotaged" IRIS.

"The Obama Administration has made progress by shining a light on what was an indefensibly secretive program, and they've made it less political and more scientific," Miller said in a statement. "But they've still got a lot of work to do."

Industry said the GAO report "affirms widespread recognition" that problems remain in the IRIS program.

"Despite a series of attempts to improve the [EPA's IRIS] process, the program still falls short of meeting the benchmarks of objectivity, scientific accuracy and transparency," said the American Chemistry Council. "The report shows that these longstanding problems have yet to be addressed and EPA has not developed a clear plan for fixing IRIS."

Environmentalists and public health advocates had a different take on the report. They pointed to the positive steps EPA has taken and added that the GAO report does not take into account recent actions. For example, EPA last July announced it would take steps to implement the NAS recommendations (E&ENews PM, July 12, 2011).

"It is a good summary, but doesn't address recent initiatives to address valid criticisms," said Jennifer Sass of the Natural Resources Defense Council, who added that delays, often caused by industry, lie at the root of IRIS's problems.

The Environmental Working Group's Jason Rano echoed that sentiment.

"Make no mistake," Rano said, "many in industry would not be satisfied with just delaying IRIS assessment. They won't be happy until the program is shut down completely."

Click here to read the GAO report.