In February 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) published a report titled Assessment of the Department of Veterans Affairs Airborne Hazards and Open Burn Pit Registry. The report was required by Public Law 112-260 (Section 201). This law also required an additional report not later than five years after completion of the initial effort. The requirements of the Public Law include:
(i) An update to the initial report described in subparagraph (A) of the Public Law.
(ii) An assessment of whether and to what degree the content of the registry established under subsection (a) of the Public Law is current and scientifically up-to-date.

To accomplish this task,VA requests that the NASEM complete a report that:

1) conducts an independent scientific assessment of the effectiveness of actions taken by the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense to collect and maintain information in the Airborne Hazards and Open Burn Pit (AH&OBP) Registry on the health effects of exposure to toxic airborne chemicals and fumes caused by open burn pits,

2) provides recommendations to improve the collection and maintenance of such information, and

3) using established and previously published epidemiologic studies, provides recommendations regarding the most effective and prudent means of using the AH&OBP Registry or another system of records to provide information that translates into learning more about the conditions that are likely to result from exposure to open burn pits. The assessment should also look at other means or methods to obtain similar or better information by VA and to achieve the goals of burn pit exposures research. Such means might include the Individual Longitudinal Exposure Record (ILER) and the Millennium Cohort Study.

The report should additionally address how VA has done in implementing the recommendations offered in the 2017 NASEM report and present recommendations on how to address gaps identified in the initial report and on burn pit and airborne hazards research, diagnosis, and treatment in general. It should review the scientific literature on other registries and self-reported databases for potential improvements and techniques that could be used by the AH&OBP Registry. The report shall include, to the extent permitted by the available data, a description of the data contained in the AH&OBP Registry, updating and augmenting the analyses presented in the 2017 initial report.

The report should make a recommendation on the best way to utilize resources for airborne hazards research. Does, for example, a more cost-effective way than the AH&OBP Registry exist to discover associations between airborne hazards and burn pit exposures and disease?

Lastly, the report should look at a potential end state to the AH&OBP Registry. At what point would it or any registry that is based on self-reported information complete its intended purpose? What alternative form of surveillance and identification of research candidates would need to be identified if the AH&OBP Registry was closed?