When it comes to analyzing the costs and benefits of its regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency has quite a bit of room for improvement, according to the Government Accountability Office. According to a story in The Hill, GAO concluded that information EPA uses in its Regulatory Impact Analyses is often outdated or inaccurate.
“Without improvements in its estimates, EPA’s RIAs may be limited in their usefulness for helping decision makers and the public understand these important effects,” the GAO concluded.
The American Farm Bureau Federation has pointed out that EPA’s conclusions about its proposed Waters of the U.S. Rule suffer from such general inaccurate analysis. EPA has erroneously alleged that just 1,300 acres would be affected by the proposed WOTUS rule, but AFBF has concluded that the proposed rule would limit property rights on more than 1 million acres of land.
“Farmers and ranchers, not to overlook the American public, should have confidence that EPA thoroughly analyzed a robust set of facts and quantifiable data to provide clear understanding of the real-world impacts of the proposed WOTUS rule,” said Dale Moore, executive director of public policy for AFBF. “What we have instead is a patchwork quilt of agenda-driven outcomes held together by thread-thin data sets that began unravelling as soon as the bright lights came on – while EPA missed the mark on transparency, their motive is transparent. This just gives us another clearly justified reason to ditch the rule.”