Strengthening Scientific Integrity at the Environmental Protection Agency

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) argues that the EPA has systematically undermined scientific integrity since January 2017 through political censorship, the sidelining of expert advisory committees, and the suppression of research. The report details specific instances of scientific failure—such as the reversal of a chlorpyrifos ban and the delay of a formaldehyde assessment—and proposes a comprehensive roadmap for reform. Key recommendations include lifting hiring freezes on scientific positions, rescinding rules that restrict the use of confidential data in regulatory science, and establishing a formal process for resolving differing scientific opinions. The document also emphasizes the need to eliminate industry conflicts of interest among political appointees and to protect the rights of scientists to communicate their findings to the public without political interference.

• Since January 2017, the EPA has suppressed scientists and their work for political reasons, including altering grant programs to favor political ideology over intellectual merit and blocking independent experts from serving on advisory committees.
• A 2018 survey of federal scientists by the UCS and Iowa State University found that EPA scientists reported high levels of political interference and the worst levels of scientific censorship among 16 surveyed federal agencies.
• The EPA has sidelined scientific evidence in several key regulatory decisions, including the reversal of a ban on the insecticide chlorpyrifos, which is linked to neurological damage in children, and the failure to propose particulate matter pollution standards.
• Political interference has delayed the release of critical health assessments, such as the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program's formaldehyde assessment, which has been under review for over three years despite a typical 60 to 90 day process.
• The EPA has restricted the role of external scientific expertise by disbanding advisory panels, such as a particulate matter air pollution panel in 2018, and implementing a policy that barred scientists with EPA grants from serving on advisory committees.
• There is a significant conflict of interest within EPA leadership, with nearly half of President Trump's appointees having strong ties to regulated industries and about one-third having previously worked as lobbyists or lawyers for those industries.

APA

Union of Concerned Scientists (2020). Strengthening Scientific Integrity at the Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2020-08/epa-fact-sheet-roadmap-for-science_1.pdf

Chicago

Union of Concerned Scientists. Strengthening Scientific Integrity at the Environmental Protection Agency. 2020. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2020-08/epa-fact-sheet-roadmap-for-science_1.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Union of Concerned Scientists |title=Strengthening Scientific Integrity at the Environmental Protection Agency |date=August 2020 |url=https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2020-08/epa-fact-sheet-roadmap-for-science_1.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{unionofconcernedscientists2020strengthening, author = {{Union of Concerned Scientists}}, title = {{Strengthening Scientific Integrity at the Environmental Protection Agency}}, institution = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, year = {2020}, month = aug, url = {https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2020-08/epa-fact-sheet-roadmap-for-science_1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }