"It's worse than nothing because it suggests they're holding themselves to a high standard of scientific integrity when they're not."
Carey Gillam for the Environmental Health News
 |
| PEER requested details about the complaints and their handling but EPA provided only very limited information illustrated in pie charts like these. |
Since 2017 there have been 68 allegations of scientific integrity violations inside the EPA, including 35 allegations filed between 2019 and mid-year 2021, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
Seven
complaints were filed between January and July of this year, according to EPA
data obtained by PEER, which released the new report.
PEER
is currently representing four EPA scientists who have come forward as
whistleblowers, offering internal agency emails and other documents as evidence
of what they allege is widespread corruption driven by powerful political and
corporate influences.
Among
other things, those whistleblowers have claimed specifically
that chemical risk assessments have been altered, or otherwise tampered with,
in order to make chemicals entering the marketplace appear safer than they
actually are. The result leaves the public exposed to chemicals that may cause
cancer, developmental problems, or other hidden health risks.
Importantly,
the whistleblowers have said that agency misconduct has continued through the
first several months of the Biden administration.
The
information obtained by PEER shows
that of the 35 allegations filed from 2019 through June 2021, 12 were closed,
22 remained unresolved, and only one was deemed "substantiated," but
even that one has not led to any punishment.
"It's
a complete sham," Jeff Ruch, a PEER regional director and former executive
director, said of the EPA's scientific integrity program. "They give the
illusion that they have a program, but it's worse than nothing because it
suggests they're holding themselves to a high standard of scientific integrity
when they're not."
EDITORIAL DISCLOSURE: I worked very closely with PEER and especially then director Jeff Ruch during my time in Washington. Our work was most intense when we worked with whistleblowers from the Office of Surface Mining (OSM), most of them mine inspectors. They provided detail and documents on problems at coal mines as well as testimony that they were being kept from busting environmental criminals. PEER was a key player in protecting those mine inspectors from retaliation. Even though I don't work on coal mining issues anymore, I still send my annual dues to PEER. -Will Collette.
Interference in science
The EPA has publicly reported scientific integrity complaint information through 2018, but has not filed public reports for complaint information since. The data for 2019 through June of 2021 was procured by PEER through a Freedom of Information Act request. The nonprofit requested details about the complaints and their handling but EPA provided only very limited information illustrated in pie charts above.
The
information in the pie charts shows that "interference" in scientific
work ranked as the most often-cited type of complaint. Five of the seven
complaints recorded for the first half of 2021 were for interference, for
instance.
Shortly
after taking office, President Biden launched a review of
federal scientific integrity policies, saying "scientific findings should
never be distorted or influenced by political considerations."
The
directive said "Improper political interference in the work of federal
scientists... undermines the welfare of the nation, contributes to systemic
inequities and injustices, and violates the trust that the public places in
government to best serve its collective interests."
In
one example of such interference, PEER filed a complaint last year with the
EPA's Office of Inspector General charging that then EPA Administrator Andrew
Wheeler, along with other high-ranking EPA officials, excluded key scientific
information and the analysis of experts in changing the definition of
"water of the United States" under the Clean Water Act, a move PEER and others said threatened clean
drinking water around the country.
PEER
describes what it calls "major" hindrances within the EPA's
Scientific Integrity program, including a "lack of investigative
staff," an "inability to draw upon expertise needed to assess
technical issues," and the "absence of any protocol for reviewing or
investigating complaints."
And
notably, violations of the agency's scientific integrity policy carry no
penalties, PEER said. The group's experience representing whistleblowers indicates
violations are largely addressed by trying to "persuade non-compliant
managers to address their own violations," PEER said.
The group said with respect to the current whistleblower complaints PEER is involved in, the EPA scientists notified the agency's office of scientific integrity last November about their concerns about a memorandum that made policy changes they scientists said weakened human health assessments in a way that made them less likely to find risks with a new chemical substance.
Their concerns
were ignored for months, according to PEER. The memorandum was eventually
revoked, but the altered chemical assessments were not corrected and the
scientists fear the policy memo will be reinstituted, according to PEER.
In
the EPA's 2018 report, the agency said that "Scientific integrity remains
an ongoing priority for EPA," and said the agency works with special
advisors and committees and engages the Office of Inspector General (OIG) when
needed to protect and advance the integrity of the agency's scientific work.
"Scientific
integrity is the compass that guides EPA in its mission to protect human health
and the environment," the agency states in the report.
