Senate Bill 178 bars the state from enacting regulations more stringent than those adopted at the federal level. It also mandates that any environmental rule to be based on what it describes as the "best available science."
That phrase sparked debate in a Wednesday hearing — with bill sponsor Sen. Greg Elkins maintaining that the language contained in the measure creates an "objective, unbiased" standard, including science showing a direct link between the potentially unsafe chemicals and real-world health impacts.
"There is an inherent risk that fast-developing media coverage of emergent chemicals or other substances of potential concern could pressure some state agencies to hastily adopt costly regulations driven by unfounded fears or flimsy science rather than rigorous scientific studies and literature," the Winchester Republican said.
Yet critics representing a variety of environmental specialties said the kinds of evidence demanded in the bill are unrealistic, and prevent agencies from taking timely action when people are being affected by environmental threats.
"Most critically, when a regulation is intended to protect human health, safety, or welfare, this bill requires additional elements. It requires proof of a direct causal link between exposure and manifest bodily harm in humans, meaning that agencies can no longer act when there is credible risk," said Audrey Ernstberger with the Kentucky Resources Council.
The bill took its first step out of committee Wednesday and now moves to the Senate for consideration.