EPA Overhaul Sparks Controversy Over Science and Politics

On May 2, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a dramatic restructuring plan that includes cutting its budget by $300 million in the 2026 fiscal year, downsizing its workforce to 1980s levels, and dissolving its Office of Research and Development. The overhaul aims to streamline the agency in alignment with President Donald Trump’s push for deregulation and energy expansion.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin defended the changes, stating they would enhance efficiency and reaffirm the agency’s mission of protecting public health and the environment. He emphasized that the restructuring would also support Trump’s broader economic agenda, which includes boosting domestic energy production, revitalizing manufacturing, reducing consumer costs, and reforming the permitting process.

However, critics, including the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), argue that the cuts and organizational changes could undermine scientific integrity. They claim the restructuring will shift EPA’s focus away from evidence-based policy and instead force staff to align with political priorities. UCS warns that the move risks turning the EPA into a politically driven agency rather than one guided by independent scientific research.

The agency’s staffing levels will be reduced to figures not seen since the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan was in office. In 1984, the EPA had approximately 11,400 employees, significantly fewer than the 15,100 staff members recorded in 2024. The agency has also recently canceled billions of dollars in grants, fueling speculation that deep budget cuts were imminent.

One of the most significant structural changes involves relocating scientific research responsibilities from the Office of Research and Development to various program offices, including a newly created Office of Applied Science. Additionally, the Office of Science and Technology, which previously helped shape water policy, will be eliminated. Researchers caution that dissolving these scientific divisions could weaken the independence of environmental research within the agency.

As part of the reorganization, around 1,500 research staff members must reapply for approximately 400 newly created positions in other offices. Employees were informed during an all-hands meeting that those who do not secure new roles may be forced to resign, with a deadline extension until May 5 for voluntary departures. Meanwhile, the agency plans to expand the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention by adding 130 new positions to address a backlog of chemical and pesticide reviews.

Despite assurances from Zeldin that these changes will improve the EPA’s functionality, skepticism remains. UCS Managing Director Chitra Kumar warned that dismantling independent research and reclassifying scientists as political appointees could permanently alter the agency’s role, turning it from a respected scientific institution into a tool of political influence.