60–010 

Calendar No. 1077 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 110–499 

RESTORING THE VALUE OF EVERY AMERICAN IN 

ENVIRONMENTAL DECISIONS ACT 

SEPTEMBER 24 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 17), 2008.—Ordered to be printed 

Mrs. BOXER, from the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3564] 

together with 

MINORITY VIEWS 

[Including an estimate from the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Environment and Public Works, having considered an original bill (S. 3564) to restore the value of every American in environmental decisions, and for other purposes, having 

considered the same, reports favorably there on and recommends 

that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY OF THE LEGISLATION

The purpose of The Restoring the Value of Every American in 

Environmental Decisions Act is to ensure that the Environmental 

Protection Agency restores the value of every American in its decision making, and to provide transparency when the Agency evaluates its actions in the future. 

This legislation would require that, to the extent the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency uses any value of a 

statistical life in decision making, that such value is not reduced 

from the highest previous value used by the agency, and that in 

the future it is not reduced or devalued based on age, income, race, 

illness, disability, date of death, or any other persona attribute or 

relativistic analysis. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
2 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishes standards based on a variety of legal tests, including feasibility, technology-based, right-to-know, and health-based criteria. However, 

the Agency sometimes uses the value of a statistical life to inform 

its decision making process when creating some rules that implement these legal standards. In particular, the Agency sometimes 

uses this information when conducting cost-benefit analysis on its 

rules. 

The Committee is concerned that fundamental moral and ethical 

issues are raised by placing a dollar value on a human life, and is 

aware that assigning a monetary value to life in order to decide 

whether to save it is highly controversial. The legislation makes 

clear that Congress shall not be construed to be endorsing the 

monetization of the value of human life or use of such cost-benefit 

analyses. 

Problems arise with valuing voluntary versus involuntary risks, 

and with assigning values to risks experienced by other people, including infants and children who do not have the ability to decide 

on the appropriate value of avoiding death. 

The Committee is extremely concerned about recent reports that EPA has devalued a statistical life, from roughly $7.8 million per 

person to about $6.9 million per person. 

SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

The Restoring the Value of Every American in Environmental 

Decisions Act will ensure that the EPA does not reduce the estimated ‘‘value of statistical life’’ in its decision making, and requires 

the agency to provide transparency and public participation when 

the Agency assigns a value in the future. 

This legislation would require that, to the extent the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency uses any value of a 

statistical life in decision making that such value is not reduced or 

otherwise modified based on age, income, race, illness, disability, 

date of death, or any other persona attribute or relativistic analysis. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

This section designates the title of the bill as the ‘‘the Restoring 

the Value of Every American in Environmental Decisions’’. 

Section 2. Valuation of statistical life in Environmental Protection 

Agency decision making 

Section (a) contains findings. 

Section (b)(1) ensures that, to the extent that the Administrator 

uses in decision making any value of statistical life, including the 

life of pregnant women, infants, children, and the elderly, the Administrator shall not reduce the value below the highest value of 

statistical life used in a decision making of the Administrator’s before the date of enactment of the Act. This section also requires the 

Administrator to regularly update this value using certain criteria. 

Subsection (b)(2) creates a prohibition on the devaluation or relativistic adjustment of the value of a statistical life. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
3 

Subsection (b)(3) requires the Administrator to use a transparent 

process when establishing and revising the value of a statistical 

life. 

Section (c) makes clear that Congress does not endorse the use 

of a value of a statistical life as a decision making criterion, costbenefit analysis, regulatory decision making threshold, or single 

process of agency decision making. It also makes clear that this Act 

does not create a duty to revise standards under applicable law or 

in any other way affect any substantive standard. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND VOTES

On September 17, 2008, the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works held a business meeting to consider the Restoring the 

Value of Every American in Environmental Decisions Act, among 

other pieces of legislation. The Committee on Environment and 

Public Works considered and approved by voice vote a second degree amendment offered by Senator Boxer, which amended an 

amendment offered by Senator Inhofe. The Inhofe Amendment, as 

amended by the Boxer second degree, passed by a rollcall vote of 

10–7. The Committee favorably adopted the amended bill by a 

voice vote. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the committee finds that this legislation does 

not impose significant regulatory impacts. 

MANDATES ASSESSMENT

In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Public Law 104–4), the Committee finds that this legislation contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose 

no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. The CBO confirms 

that in their view, ‘‘The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act and would have no direct impact on the budgets of state, local, 

or tribal governments.’’ 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008. 

Hon. BARBARA BOXER, Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MADAM CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has 

prepared the enclosed cost estimate for the Restoring the Value of 

Every American in Environment Decisions Act. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Susanne S. Mehlman. 

Sincerely, 

PETER R. ORSZAG. 

Enclosure. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
4 

S. 3564—Restoring the Value of Every American in Environmental 

Decisions Act 

Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered its 

official estimate of the monetary value of a statistical life. EPA 

uses that figure in various cost-benefit analyses and other types of 

decisionmaking. This legislation would restore the dollar-value estimate of human life used by EPA prior to the recent change. In addition, the bill would require EPA to regularly update that value 

through a process that is open to the public. Based on information 

from EPA, CBO estimates that implementing this legislation would 

not result in any significant cost to the agency. Enacting the bill 

would not affect direct spending or receipts. 

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

have no direct impact on the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Susanne S. Mehlman. 

This estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
(5) 

1 Report of the EPA Work Group on VSL META-Analyses, July 25, 2006—available at http:// 

yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eermfile.nsf/vwAN/EE–0494–01.pdf/$File/EE–0494–01.pdf 

MINORITY VIEWS OF SENATOR JAMES INHOFE 

The Environmental Protection Agency uses a value of statistical 

life estimate to express the benefits of mortality risk reductions in 

monetary terms for use in benefit-cost analyses of its rules and regulations. EPA has used the same central default value—adjusted 

for inflation—in most of its primary analyses since 1999 when the 

Agency updated its Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses 

(USEPA, 2000).1

For the economic purposes of cost-benefit analysis and resource 

allocation, EPA calculates the statistical value of life primarily 

based on society’s value of itself—i.e., measuring what people are 

willing to pay to avoid certain risks, including factors such as additional amounts employers pay their workers to take on more risk. 

A significant amount of the data used by EPA is drawn from payroll statistics; other data comes from opinion surveys and validated 

scientific models. From EPA’s perspective, the value of a statistical 

life should not be thought of as the ‘‘price tag’’ of a particular life, 

but rather as an economic statistical value. 

There is no evidence to suggest that EPA has acted improperly, 

used invalid data or methodologies, or is politically motivated to devalue life. The record instead reflects that the Agency has sought 

to regularly reevaluate the available data, models and methodology 

in order to properly and consistently calculate this economic measurement. 

Of course, the Committee could have properly debated the validity of EPA’s process had we actually held a hearing on the subject 

prior to voting on this legislation. Unfortunately, this Committee 

chose to pass judgment about an issue on which we did not conduct 

proper oversight. Adding insult to injury, this bill was not even introduced for Senate consideration until after the business meeting 

was publically noticed. I believe that this disregard for established 

process alone invalidates the Committee’s action on this legislation. 

By passing this legislation, the Committee has improperly inserted its own subjective social and moral preferences into an otherwise economic exercise. Further, if this Committee insists on 

heading down the road of legislating social concerns and moral 

preferences, I am disappointed that the Committee did not support 

my efforts to instruct EPA to consider the value of life—born and 

unborn. 

Since the Committee did not follow proper oversight procedures, 

I oppose passage of the Restoring the Value of Every American in 

Environmental Decisions Act because there is no evidence to sugVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:51 Sep 29, 2008 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\SR499.XXX SR499

rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
6 

gest that the existing EPA process improperly values the economic 

measure of the statistical value of life. 

JAMES M. INHOFE. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

Section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate requires the committee to publish changes in existing law made by 

the bill as reported. Passage of this bill will make no changes to 

existing law. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with HEARING