Science Advisers Fired at the EPA

Our quick take at this moment

The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect human health and the environment. It works to ensure that the public has clean air, land, and water; that chemicals in the marketplace are safe; that contaminated communities are cleaned up; and that the public has accurate information about health and environmental risks. Thus, science is an essential component of the agency’s ability to deliver on its mission, and ensure that its policies, standards, and regulations are science-based.

In doing this work, the EPA seeks scientific advice and counsel from its independent science advisory committees, composed of experts in various scientific fields, e.g., environmental science, toxicology, public health, epidemiology, engineering, atmospheric science, and economics. These committees help ensure that EPA policies and regulations are based on the best available science.

This week, Acting EPA Administrator James Payne ousted all members of two of the agency’s most influential science advisory panels – the Science Advisory Board and the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. In doing so, Mr. Payne said the action was a “reset…to ensure that the agency receives scientific advice consistent with its legal obligations to advance our core mission.”

This action is not unusual or unexpected. It’s happened before; under President Biden, EPA Administrator Michael Regan did the same thing. In all honesty, it all makes some sense. People elect new leaders, and new leaders get to appoint cabinet members and agency heads that will align with their policies. And agency heads get to review and appoint new members to their advisory boards and committees.

I will go out on a limb here and say that the EPA will solicit and likely appoint members who have the requisite scientific credentials. I suspect they will have had to demonstrate support for President Trump and his administration policies. And that’s a worry, as President Trump is not a vocal champion of science – let alone clean air, public health, or environmental protection. And with his closest billionaire buddies, advisors, and cheerleaders from corporate America – regulatory action is not something they welcome.

But I withhold judgment. Let’s wait and see and hope that science actually prevails when new committee members are appointed, meet, and provide scientific (nonpolitical) advice. SciLight will be watching this reappointment process and will hold it to account if it is politicized.

That’s it for today - Thank you so much for reading SciLight!

If you enjoyed today’s post, please like it or share it with others. You can also support the work

If you want to share today’s post as a web page with your network, click this button:

If you have suggestions, questions, comments, or want to drop us a line - send it all to scilightsubstack@gmail.com