I have neither heard, read or seen any data withheld by EPA researchers that involved anything other than personal health data (including what you have mentioned here) blocked either by HIPAA or by pre-existing agreements with the data subjects. Neither you nor anyone else here has presented a single instance of withheld data that was NOT personal health data.
Pointing out that HIPAA has waivers and does not protect all data is interesting, but it neither supports your argument or refutes ours.
It is clear you don't even know what the bill was about back in 2015:
FoxNews
Published March 18, 2015
Excerpt:
"The House has passed two Republican-backed bills that would place new restrictions on the Environmental Protection Agency.
A bill approved Wednesday would require the EPA to disclose scientific data behind proposed regulations, while a measure passed Tuesday would prohibit the agency from appointing registered lobbyists to the EPA's Science Advisory Board.
Both were approved largely along party lines. The scientific data bill was approved 241-175, while the advisory board measure was approved 236-181.
Republicans said the bills would increase transparency at the EPA and make it more accountable to the public.
"Right now, the EPA is trying to impose harmful regulations based on scientific studies that no one can check -- not the public, not independent scientists, not even the United States Congress,' said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. "It's called `secret science' and it's wrong."
If the EPA or any other agency proposes a rule that adds costs to businesses or infringes on private property, "the people have every right to know why," McCarthy said.
The White House has threatened to veto the measures, saying they could delay or prevent environmental decisions and hurt the ability of the science board to advise the agency.
If adopted into law, the bill on scientific data could be used to prevent EPA from proposing or finalizing a regulation until legal challenges about the legitimate withholding of certain scientific and technical information are resolved, the White House said in a statement. Releasing data underlying some scientifically important studies could violate the privacy of test subjects or compromise confidential business information, the White House said.
Similarly, the White House said the measure restricting service on the EPA's Science Advisory Board could preclude the nomination of scientists with significant expertise in their fields."
bolding mine
LINK
Since the Senate never passed it using bogus reasons as stated in the above article. The EPA Administrator is doing it himself, to make it easier for the public to get the information that were used to support a regulatory decision. The stupid privacy excuses the democrats and YOU brayed on and on were easily addressed by existing HIPPA and other privacy laws already in place.
Research itself are NOT being regulated at all, just the availability of the published research data and methodology. The new EPA rule doesn't even try to tell science researchers how to do their research at all, which is something stupid liberals never seen to understand.
Here is the actual proposed rule,
Excerpt:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 30 [EPA–HQ–OA–2018–0259; FRL–9977–40– ORD] RIN 2080–AA14
EXCERPT:
"Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This document proposes a regulation intended to strengthen the transparency of EPA regulatory science. The proposed regulation provides that when EPA develops regulations, including regulations for which the public is likely to bear the cost of compliance, with regard to those scientific studies that are pivotal to the action being taken, EPA should ensure those underlying data are publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent validation. In this notice, EPA solicits comment on this proposal and how it can best be promulgated and implemented in light of existing law and prior Federal policies that already require increasing public access to data and influential scientific information used to inform federal regulation. DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 30, 2018."
