In the three decades since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created, the agency's scientific and technical practices and credibility have been independently assessed many times in reports from the National Research Council (NRC), EPA Science Advisory Board, General Accounting Office, and many other organizations; in congressional oversight and judicial proceedings; and in countless criticisms and lawsuits from stakeholders with interests in particular EPA regulatory decisions. As a previous independent panel put it in the 1992 report Safeguarding the Future: Credible Science, Credible Decisions, EPA's policy and regulatory work receives a great deal of public attention, but the agency's scientific performance typically receives a similar degree of attention only when the scientific basis for a decision is questioned. Thus, strong scientific performance is important not only to enable EPA to make informed and effective decisions, but also to gain credibility and public support for the environmental protection efforts of EPA and the nation. This report is the fourth and final one in a series prepared by two independent expert committees convened by the NRC in response to a request from Congress and to subsequent, related requests from EPA. The Committee on Research Opportunities and Priorities for EPA-the companion committee in this study-was charged to provide an overview of significant emerging environmental issues, identify and prioritize research themes most relevant to understanding and resolving those issues, and consider the role of EPA's research program in the context of research being conducted or supported by other organizations. That committee published an interim report in 1996 and a final report, Building a Foundation for Sound Environmental Decisions, in 1997. The Committee on Research and Peer Review in EPA was charged to evaluate research management and scientific peer-review practices in the agency. The committee published an interim report in 1995 and this final report.

In the three decades since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created, the agency's scientific and technical practices and credibility have been independently assessed many times in reports from the National Research Council (NRC), EPA Science Advisory Board, General Accounting Office, and many other organizations; in congressional oversight and judicial proceedings; and in countless criticisms and lawsuits from stakeholders with interests in particular EPA regulatory decisions. As a previous independent panel put it in the 1992 report Safeguarding the Future: Credible Science, Credible Decisions, EPA's policy and regulatory work receives a great deal of public attention, but the agency's scientific performance typically receives a similar degree of attention only when the scientific basis for a decision is questioned. Thus, strong scientific performance is important not only to enable EPA to make informed and effective decisions, but also to gain credibility and public support for the environmental protection efforts of EPA and the nation. This report is the fourth and final one in a series prepared by two independent expert committees convened by the NRC in response to a request from Congress and to subsequent, related requests from EPA. The Committee on Research Opportunities and Priorities for EPA - the companion committee in this study - was charged to provide an overview of significant emerging environmental issues, identify and prioritize research themes most relevant to understanding and resolving those issues, and consider the role of EPA's research program in the context of research being conducted or supported by other organizations. That committee published an interim report in 1996 and a final report, Building a Foundation for Sound Environmental Decisions, in 1997. The Committee on Research and Peer Review in EPA was charged to evaluate research management and scientific peer-review practices in the agency. The committee published an interim report in 1995 and this final report.

Sustainability is based on a simple and long-recognized factual premise: Everything that humans require for their survival and well-being depends, directly or indirectly, on the natural environment. The environment provides the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. Recognizing the importance of sustainability to its work, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been working to create programs and applications in a variety of areas to better incorporate sustainability into decision-making at the agency. To further strengthen the scientific basis for sustainability as it applies to human health and environmental protection, the EPA asked the National Research Council (NRC) to provide a framework for incorporating sustainability into the EPA's principles and decision-making. This framework, Sustainability and the U.S. EPA, provides recommendations for a sustainability approach that both incorporates and goes beyond an approach based on assessing and managing the risks posed by pollutants that has largely shaped environmental policy since the 1980s. Although risk-based methods have led to many successes and remain important tools, the report concludes that they are not adequate to address many of the complex problems that put current and future generations at risk, such as depletion of natural resources, climate change, and loss of biodiversity. Moreover, sophisticated tools are increasingly available to address cross-cutting, complex, and challenging issues that go beyond risk management. The report recommends that EPA formally adopt as its sustainability paradigm the widely used "three pillars" approach, which means considering the environmental, social, and economic impacts of an action or decision. Health should be expressly included in the "social" pillar. EPA should also articulate its vision for sustainability and develop a set of sustainability principles that would underlie all agency policies and programs.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) applies scientific results that have been provided by various parts of its own organization and by external organizations. The agency requires substantial high-quality inhouse scientific expertise and laboratory capabilities so that it can answer questions related to regulation, enforcement, and environmental effects of specific chemicals, activities, and processes. It is also usually faced with situations in which research or analytic work is time-critical, so it maintains dedicated laboratory staff and facilities that can respond quickly to such needs. In recent years, EPA has made several changes to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its laboratories, such as the designation of national program directors to align the work of research laboratories with the needs of the agency's regulatory program offices. The agency is currently undertaking an integrated evaluation of it laboratories to enhance the management effectiveness and efficiency of its laboratory enterprise and to enhance its capabilities for research and other laboratory-based scientific and technical activities. The results of EPA's evaluation are expected to include options for colocation and consolidation of laboratory facilities. Rethinking the Components, Coordination, and Management of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Laboratories assesses EPA's highest-priority needs for mission-relevant laboratory science and technical support, develops principles for the efficient and effective management of EPA's laboratory enterprise to meet the agency's mission needs and strategic goals, and develops guidance for enhancing efficiency and effectiveness now and during the next 10 years. EPA's laboratories play a vital role in the agency's work. The findings and recommendations of this report will help EPA to develop an implementation plan for the laboratory enterprise.