BILL REQ. #:  H-1601.1 

READ FIRST TIME 02/15/11.   

     AN ACT Relating to standards for the use of science to support public policy; adding new sections to chapter 34.05 RCW; and creating a new section.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 1   (1) The legislature finds that it is critically important that scientific information used to inform public policy be of the highest quality and integrity.
     (2) The legislature further finds that the scientific information used in support of or in justification for public policy actions in the state of Washington can be of varying quality and integrity.
     (3) The legislature further finds that a perceived lack of quality and integrity of scientific information is a key factor leading to litigation.
     (4) The legislature further finds that the generally accepted approach to ensuring the quality and integrity of scientific information is the conduct of independent peer review by qualified experts.
     (5) The legislature further finds that the state of Washington has not previously adopted a uniform standard for the use of independent peer review by qualified experts.
     (6) The legislature further finds that the only way to ensure that agencies use scientifically credible information is for all agencies to use the generally accepted practice of peer review.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 2   The definitions in this section apply throughout sections 3 through 5 of this act unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
     (1) "Natural resources agency" means the department of natural resources, the department of fish and wildlife, the department of ecology, and the department of agriculture.
     (2) "Peer reviewed science" means information developed using the scientific method for which the following factors are true:
     (a) The scientific information is provided by a qualified, scientific professional or professionals with issue-appropriate expertise based on the professional's credentials, certifications, earned advanced degrees, years of experience, recognized leadership in an appropriate scholarly area, formal training, and recognized ability to produce peer reviewed professional literature;
     (b) The scientific information has been subjected to independent peer review by at least three reviewers who are qualified and are independent with no conflict of interest. Independent peer review may be performed by reputable scientific journals, scholarly organizations such as the national academies, commissioned by the relevant agency, or commissioned by qualified entities whose interests will be affected by the action;
     (c) The methods used to obtain the information are clearly stated, standardized for the pertinent scientific discipline, and are able to be replicated;
     (d) The conclusions underlying the information are based on reasonable and logical assumptions supported by other studies and consistent with the data presented;
     (e) The data underlying the information have been analyzed using the appropriate statistical or quantitative methods;
     (f) The information has been placed in a proper context and is appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing body of pertinent scientific knowledge; and
     (g) The information is based on assumptions, analytical techniques, and conclusions that are clearly stated and well-referenced with citations to credible literature and other pertinent existing information.
     (3) "Significant agency action" means an act of a natural resources agency that meets one of the following:
     (a) Results in substantive requirements for a nonstate actor, the violation of which subjects the violator to penalty or sanction;
     (b) Establishes, alters, or revokes any qualification or standard for the issuance, suspension, or revocation of a license or permit; or
     (c) Results in significant amendments to an existing policy or program.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 3   (1) Except as provided in section 5 of this act, all natural resources agencies are required to demonstrate the use of peer reviewed science before or simultaneous with taking a significant agency action.
     (2) The use of peer reviewed science must be evidenced by the creation and maintenance of a public record that identifies:
     (a) The scientific literature or other sources relied upon by the natural resources agency; and
     (b) Any scientific information reviewed by the natural resources agency that does not meet the definition of peer reviewed science, which must be accompanied by a narrative explanation of why that information was or was not included.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 4   (1) Scientific studies may be brought forward for consideration in support of a significant natural resources agency action under section 3 of this act by a participating governmental entity, academic institution, qualified participating stakeholder group, or participating individual. These studies must be demonstrated to meet the requirements of peer reviewed science prior to being relied upon by a natural resources agency.
     (2) For scientific studies where the information has not been critically reviewed by other persons with qualified, relevant scientific expertise, the natural resources agency implementing the provisions of section 3 of this act shall obtain and document fully independent, rigorous peer review by other persons with qualified, relevant scientific expertise.
     (3) Reviews conducted in compliance with this section may not be performed by an employee of the natural resources agency responsible for the provisions or enforcement of the significant agency action informed by the science being reviewed or an employee of or an affiliate of the entity that performed or helped fund the science being reviewed.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 5   (1) A natural resources agency may proceed with interim significant agency actions without fulfilling the requirement for documenting the use of peer reviewed science under section 3 of this act if:
     (a) The natural resources agency is responding to an emergency critical need or event imminently affecting public health or safety or critical public infrastructure; and
     (b) There is a lack of peer reviewed science available or insufficient time to access the peer reviewed science without further exacerbating the emergency critical need.
     (2) Any agency action made using the provisions of subsection (1) of this section is interim in nature and is strictly limited in scope and effect to address the imminent emergency critical need until the necessary peer reviewed science is either collected and documented, or generated, so as to comply with the provisions of section 3 of this act.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 6   Sections 2 through 5 of this act are each added to chapter 34.05 RCW and codified with the subchapter heading of standards for the use of science to support public policy.