EPA questioned on reliance of IPCC

[JohnWho]

The "problems" with the IPCC report (and the SPM) may, and I believe should, have an impact on the US's EPA decisions:

Press Release - Barton, Walden ( U.S. Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Greg Walden, R-Ore., ranking member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee - JW) Ask EPA to Explain Reliance On Dubious Reports in Endangerment Finding

Quote:The lawmakers asked Jackson (Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson - JW) to respond to the following questions:

1. What did EPA do, and when, to evaluate the IPCC source requirements or peer-review procedures to determine if such requirements and procedures comply with OMB data quality guidelines or EPA’s own peer review guidelines?

2. Explain how EPA evaluated and determined that IPCC considered full information and all scientific viewpoints relating to climate change.

3. Explain how EPA verified that IPCC actually implemented and followed its published policies and procedures regarding review and comments on its published reports?

a. Did EPA evaluate the IPCC peer review record?
b. Did EPA evaluate the credibility or quality of IPCC author responses to comments?
c. Please provide all documents relating to any such verification of IPCC implementation of its policies.

4. Did EPA consider the technical support document for the endangerment finding as a candidate for peer review, as required by EPA’s Peer Review Handbook?

5. In recent years, the National Research Council has criticized EPA’s implementation of its peer review procedures, noting that EPA should more strictly separate the management of the work product from the peer review of that work product to ensure greater independence of peer review from the control of program managers. (See Strengthen Science at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NRC 2000.) Please identify who managed the peer review or review process for the technical support document for the endangerment finding and whether the individual(s) adhered to EPA peer review guidelines or the recommendations of the National Research Council.

6. Regarding the EPA’s Action Development Process for developing the endangerment finding, please provide any preliminary analytic blueprint and detailed analytic blueprint prepared for or relating to the endangerment finding or its technical support document.

7. Did EPA contractors participate in the analysis of or preparation for the responses to public comments on the endangerment finding or evaluation of the quality, rigor, or transparency of the science assessments EPA relied upon?

Copy of letter h e r e.

[Sunsettommy]

GOOD!

It will be interesting to what the reply will be.

Will the EPA back off from their intent of regulating a harmless trace gas,or will they continue to be dumbass morons and continue this farce?