The EPA's new ruling - something stinks

and it isn't a dead fish. I had written yesterday about the new ruling for soot. Now it seems that the data supporting this ruling is being kept from view. From The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology:

Committee Leaders Call on Administration to Release Secret Data Behind Looming Air Rule
Republican leaders on the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee today sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson, Acting White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Administrator Boris Bershteyn, and the President�s Science Advisor Dr. John Holdren questioning the rulemaking process and quality of science supporting a costly new fine particulate matter rule to be released in the coming days. The letter was sent by Committee Chairman Ralph Hall (R-TX), incoming Chairman for the 113th Congress, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), and Energy and Environment Subcommittee Chairman Andy Harris (R-MD).

As the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and EPA aim to respond to a court-imposed December 14th deadline for release of the final National Ambient Air Quality Standards for fine particulate matter (PM2.5), the lawmakers reiterated concerns that the rulemaking has been rushed, and relies heavily on secret science and nontransparent data.

And why is this data so important?

The data sets in question serve as the sole basis for $1.7 trillion, or 85 percent, of the $2.0 trillion in total benefits that EPA claims will result from the Clean Air Act between 1990 to 2020. These secret data are also the origin of EPA�s frequent claim that the benefits of its Clean Air Act regulations exceed the costs by a 30-to-1 ratio.

Good -- hold their feet to the fire. If this is such a pressing issue, the EPA should have zero problems releasing the data for general viewing. The data would only reinforce their claims.