U.S. EPA Names Scientific Ombudsman to Fight Secrecy Claims

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) named a scientific ombudsman on Monday to fight back against accusations by Republican lawmakers of being opaque in its scientific findings and not allowing outside parties to review them.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) named a scientific ombudsman on Monday to fight back against accusations by Republican lawmakers of being opaque in its scientific findings and not allowing outside parties to review them.

The agency tapped Francesca Grifo to be its first "scientific integrity official."

Grifo is formerly the director of the scientific integrity program at the Union of Concerned Scientists and a director of the Center for Environmental Research at Columbia University.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

She will be given the task of coordinating the agency's policies on scientific integrity and chairing a committee devoted to the subject.

"Science is, and continues to be, the backbone of this agency and the integrity of our science is central to the identity and credibility of our work," EPA administrator Gina McCarthy said in a statement.

The agency has for years been criticized by Republican lawmakers who accused the EPA of using "secret science" to justify what the lawmakers see as over regulation that crimps economic growth and costs jobs.

The House of Representatives Science and Technology committee earlier this month brought McCarthy in to testify about the agency's use of scientific information.

David Vitter of Louisiana, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, was unimpressed by Grifo's appointment.

"'Scientific integrity' is a moot point when the science remains secret, no matter who's in this role. There's currently no method to independently analyze or verify their (EPA's) science, or its integrity," said Vitter.

(For the EPA's "Scientific Integrity Policy, see: http://www.epa.gov/osa/pdfs/epa_scientific_integrity_policy_20120115.pdf)

(Reporting by Valerie Volcovici. Editing by Ros Krasny and Andre Grenon)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American