N※N

EPA tells scientists to stop publishing studies, employees say

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. ts-to-stop-publishing-studies-employees-say.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Saturday, September 20th 2025 at 16:34 GMT by Seattle Times
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

EPA Tells Scientists to Stop Publishing Studies, Employees Say

Seattle Times, 24 March 2023

In a move that has rattled the scientific community inside and outside the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an internal memo now widely circulated among agency staff has ordered scientists to keep their research “internal only.” According to EPA employees, the directive – issued by senior officials in the agency’s Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) – prohibits staff from publishing independent studies or submitting data to peer‑reviewed journals without explicit approval.

The memo, dated January 10, 2023, was drafted by Dr. Susan R. Lee, deputy director of the OSI, and circulated to all research divisions. In a brief preamble, Lee warned that “the agency’s credibility depends on the integrity of its science,” and that “unapproved external publication could undermine the EPA’s policy positions.” She also cited a 2019 policy from the Office of Research and Development (ORD) that had limited publication of “confidential or proprietary data.” The 2023 memo, however, expands the restriction to all peer‑reviewed work, not merely data with commercial sensitivity.

“Basically, if you write a paper that could be used to hold polluters accountable, you’re not allowed to publish it,” says Dr. Maya Patel, a senior environmental chemist in ORD. Patel worked on a study that traced fine‑particle emissions from diesel trucks across the Puget Sound region. The study was poised for publication in Environmental Science & Technology when Patel received a message from her supervisor, asking her to “refrain from submitting until we receive clearance.” “We’re not being told to hide the data. We’re told to not let it get into the public domain,” she says.

The directive has sparked a sharp debate about scientific freedom and the EPA’s role as a steward of public health. The agency’s mission, according to its charter, is to “protect human health and the environment by developing and enforcing environmental laws.” Critics argue that restricting scientists’ ability to publish impedes transparency and may allow the agency to influence policy outcomes without public scrutiny.

The EPA’s internal hierarchy is clear: while the Office of the Administrator and the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) set policy directions, the OSI is charged with ensuring that research adheres to “the highest standards of scientific integrity.” Yet the 2023 memo’s tone suggests a shift toward a more controlled narrative. “The agency has always had a role in drafting policy. The new policy feels more like a tool for protecting the agency’s image,” notes Dr. Jonathan Kim, a former OSI analyst who left the agency in 2021. Kim’s experience mirrors that of other former staffers who have described a growing pressure to align research findings with policy goals.

The memo does not, however, outlaw all external communication. Staff are still permitted to present findings at conferences and to share data with internal stakeholders. But the fine line between “internal presentation” and “external publication” has become a source of confusion. “We’re told we can present at a meeting, but if the paper gets cited in a policy brief, that could be considered external publication,” explains Dr. Patel. “So it’s a gray area.”

The EPA’s own website provides a page on “Scientific Integrity” (https://www.epa.gov/science/science-policy) which details the agency’s commitment to “transparent, reproducible, and responsible science.” The page references the 2019 ORD policy that limited publication of “confidential or proprietary data,” but it does not mention the 2023 memo. An archived PDF of the 2019 memo is available on the EPA’s site (https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-06/ords-publishing-policy.pdf), which the Seattle Times linked for context. That document, written by then-ORD director Dr. Michael J. O’Connor, stated that “research must be approved by the agency before publication if it contains proprietary or confidential data.” The 2023 memo expands that concept to all research, even when the data are publicly available.

The policy shift has drawn criticism from outside the agency. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) issued a statement on March 18, urging the EPA to “respect the open‑science tradition” that has historically underpinned environmental regulation. “Scientific publishing is not a luxury; it is a fundamental public good,” the AAAS said. In the same breath, the Environmental Law and Policy Center released a brief warning that “the agency’s policy could undermine the legal foundation of environmental law, which relies on robust, independently published data.”

The EPA has not yet issued a public comment or responded to the Seattle Times’ inquiry. In a brief statement, the agency’s press office said that “the organization is committed to ensuring that all scientific work conducted by its staff meets the highest standards of quality and integrity.” The statement did not clarify whether the policy had been revised or would be subject to oversight by the Office of Management & Budget or the EPA’s Science Advisory Board.

For many employees, the memo feels like a last‑minute attempt to pre‑empt criticism. “We’ve always had to get approvals for our research. But this feels more… strategic,” says Dr. Patel. “The agency is telling us to silence independent voices that could potentially challenge policy decisions.” The situation has sparked a broader conversation about the relationship between science and policy within federal agencies—a conversation that, as the Seattle Times has shown, is not limited to the walls of Washington but reverberates through the air we breathe and the water we drink.

Additional Links and Resources

1. EPA’s Scientific Integrity page – outlines the agency’s commitment to transparent science: https://www.epa.gov/science/science-policy
2. 2019 ORD Publishing Policy PDF – the predecessor to the 2023 memo: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-06/ords-publishing-policy.pdf
3. AAAS Statement on EPA Publishing Policy – commentary on the implications of restricting scientific output: https://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-statement-epa-publishing-policy
4. Environmental Law and Policy Center Brief – analysis of the policy’s potential legal ramifications: https://elpc.org/brief-epa-publishing-policy
5. Seattle Times Article (Original) – the source of the above discussion: https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/epa-tells-scientists-to-stop-publishing-studies-employees-say/

These links provide context for the policy’s origins, its broader implications for scientific transparency, and the reaction of professional and advocacy groups.