Democrats Seek Further Inquiry into EPA Advisory Boards
FEBRUARY 15, 2018
Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee Ranking Member Tom Carper (D-DE) and committee member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) sent a letter to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), requesting a further inquiry into EPA’s federal advisory boards.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt issued a directive in October 2017, intending to remove potential conflict of interests from its advisory committees by precluding individuals from participating if they receive grants from the Agency, and seeking to strengthen member independence and promote fresh perspectives.
In their letter, the Senators state, “EPA Science Advisory Board staff ensures that the Board’s panelists are independent and that panels as a whole are balanced in their viewpoints and expertise. That includes ensuring compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act and the Ethics in Government Act. Normally, when candidates are nominated to serve on advisory committees, EPA’s career scientists and lawyers provide input to the Administrator regarding which nominees have the right scientific expertise and which have conflicts of interest. And normally, the Administrator follows the advice from career staff.”
The Senators cite two instances that they perceive EPA political appointees have circumvented that procedure, potentially in violation of internal policies and federal laws.
Due to their concern, the Senators asked GAO to answer four questions:
- Has it been the practice of the EPA Administrator and/or political staff to reject the advice of career staff on appointments to science advisory boards?
- Does the Science Advisory Board staff office currently have in place adequate policies and procedures to vet nominees for compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Ethics in Government Act, and other applicable rules?
- When career staff advice is rejected, is there an increased risk that EPA will appoint representatives to its boards in violation of applicable laws and regulations?
- Is the process and its outcomes (appointments) consistent with the Directive and the Federal Advisory Committee Act?
The Union of Concerned Scientists also filed a lawsuit last month, challenging Administrator Pruitt’s advisory committee directive.