EPA tells scientists to apply for new jobs within the agency
Political leaders at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have told scientists there to apply to new jobs, implying that those who do not may be fired, according to an official with a union representing the agency's employees.
'People in ORD [the Office of Research and Development] were told to apply for these positions,' said Joyce Howell, executive vice president of the union.
Howell recalled that the comment came from political officials during a meeting with EPA staffers. Someone asked during the meeting what would happen to those who did not apply to new positions and was told 'these are your opportunities,' she said, adding that the implication was that those who did not apply to or get a new position would be fired.
Howell said that employees were told 155 jobs were opening up in the agency's chemicals office, 300 were opening up in the administrator's office and 50 would open up in the air and radiation office, while an unspecified number would open up in the water office.
But reports have indicated that some 1,500 people work in ORD.
Howell warned that if the rest of these jobs are lost, the agency could be losing not only 'independent science' but also the 'expertise' of those staffers.
Chris Frey, who led ORD under the Biden administration, raised concerns about the future of the research office — and what it may mean for the American people.
'Without the evolution of the science, …we would see a difference that EPA will do less to protect public health and the environment,' Frey said.
'We've seen announcements from the administrator of EPA to roll back basically all of the major standards that were set during the Biden administration for air pollution and water quality, contaminants in land and chemicals in commerce, and all of those decisions are made based on an assessment of what is the harm to public health and the environment,' he added.
Asked about whether employees in the agency's science arm were instructed to apply for the new job openings, an EPA spokesperson said via email that 'All EPA employees were provided this opportunity via an internal hiring authority.'
'The May 2 announcement was the next phase of organizational improvements and part of a larger, comprehensive effort to restructure the entire agency,' the spokesperson said.
'The Office of Research and Development was not part of this announcement. EPA's Talent Hub went live Friday night (May 2) with new and open positions in offices impacted by this phase of reorganization … All EPA employees are eligible to apply,' continued the email.
The Hill also obtained an internal email, first reported by E&E News, that appears to detail changes to the agency's Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, which conducts studies to examine the impact of exposures to chemicals on people and ecosystems.
An email signed by the director and deputy director of the center says, 'Lab research will wind down over the next few weeks as we will no longer have the capability to acquire supplies and materials.'
'We requested for an exemption for journal articles but have not heard if that is approved,' the internal email states. 'ORD is shutting down their laboratory activities. We are unsure if these laboratory activities will continue post-reorganization.'
The EPA, however, described this email as 'factually inaccurate.'
'No ORD funding requests to [the Office of Mission Support] have been denied. In fact, we have approved numerous contracts for ongoing ORD research dating back to January,' an agency spokesperson said.
'At ORD and throughout the agency, EPA is continuing research and labs to advance the mission of protecting human health and the environment,' the spokesperson continued.
The alleged changes are coming in the wake of a broad reorganization announced by the agency earlier this month, part of sweeping changes enacted by the Trump administration.
EPA said that it would be 'shifting its scientific expertise and research efforts' to its program offices, including those that make decisions about whether to protect air and water and how to regulate chemicals.
The agency said at the time that this phase in its reorganization does not include layoffs, but that it hoped to eventually get staffing levels down to where they were in the Reagan era — meaning that around 1,000 to 3,000 of the agency's 15,000 positions could ultimately go.
Democratic staff of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee reviewed a plan earlier this year indicating that the EPA has considered eliminating ORD entirely.
The Trump administration has indicated that it wants to cut jobs at agencies across the board — and that it intends to carry out mass firings across the federal government. On Friday, a federal judge ordered a temporary pause in the administration's plans.
An EPA spokesperson declined to say whether its reorganization efforts will be impacted by that order, saying the agency doesn't comment on pending litigation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
44 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
What to know about the conflict between Israel and Iran, and the US intervention
Advertisement Iran insists its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes. But Israel views Iran's nuclear program as an existential threat, and has said its military campaign is necessary to prevent Iran from building an atomic weapon. Although U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Tehran is not actively pursuing a bomb, Trump and Israeli leaders have argued it could quickly assemble a nuclear weapon, making it an imminent threat. The region has been on edge for the past two years as Israel seeks to annihilate the Hamas militant group, an Iranian ally, in the Gaza Strip, where war still rages after Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack on southern Israel. Here's what to know about the conflict between Israel and Iran, and the United States' intervention: Advertisement U.S. bombs Iran President Donald Trump announced the overnight 'massive precision strikes' on Iran's Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites in a televised address to the nation from the White House. Describing them as 'a spectacular military success,' he said they had 'completely and fully obliterated' the nuclear sites. Iran, he said, would now have to make peace. Iran's Atomic Energy Organization confirmed the attacks, but insisted its nuclear program will not be stopped. Iran and the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said there were no immediate signs of radioactive contamination at the three locations following the strikes. The nuclear fuel enrichment site at Fordo is buried deep beneath a mountain, and the attack against it used bunker-buster bombs designed to penetrate the ground before exploding, a U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss military operations. Only the United States has the 30,000-pound (13,600-kilogram) munition and the stealth bombers used to deliver them. U.S. submarines also launched about 30 Tomahawk missiles during the attack, according to another U.S. official who also spoke on condition of anonymity. Trump warned there would be additional strikes if Tehran retaliated against U.S. forces. 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,' he said. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump's decision to attack. 'Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities, with the awesome and righteous might of the United States, will change history,' he said in a video message directed at the American president. The U.S., he said, 'has done what no other country on earth could do.' Iran's response Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned in a post on X Sunday that the U.S. attacks 'will have everlasting consequences' and that Tehran 'reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest and people.' Advertisement In a separate post, he said the overnight strikes had scuttled any chance of diplomacy with the U.S. or the European Union. 'Last week, we were in negotiations with the US when Israel decided to blow up that diplomacy. This week, we held talks with the E3/EU when the US decided to blow up that diplomacy,' Araghchi wrote on X. 'What conclusion would you draw?' In a lengthy statement posted Sunday morning, the Iranian Foreign Ministry said that the 'U.S. has itself launched a dangerous war against Iran.' It said Iran 'reserves its right to resist with full force against U.S. military aggression and the crimes committed by this rogue regime, and to defend Iran's security and national interests.' 'A dangerous escalation' U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the United States' use of force, and called the strikes a 'dangerous escalation.' World leaders issued calls for diplomacy. 'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control — with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region and the world,' Guterres said in a statement on the social media platform X. 'I call on Member States to de-escalate.' 'There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy.' The European Union's foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, said Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, but urged those involved in the conflict to show restraint. 'I urge all sides to step back, return to the negotiating table and prevent further escalation,' she said in a social media post. Kallas will chair a meeting of the 27-nation bloc's foreign ministers in Brussels on Monday, with the Israel-Iran war high on the agenda. Advertisement Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, who had threatened to resume attacks on U.S. vessels in the Red Sea if the Trump administration joined Israel's military campaign, called on other Muslim nations to form 'one front against the Zionist-American arrogance.' Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had warned the U.S. on Wednesday that strikes against Iran would 'result in irreparable damage for them.' The Israeli military said Saturday it was preparing for the possibility of a lengthy war, while Iran's foreign minister warned before the U.S. attack that American military involvement 'would be very, very dangerous for everyone.'
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
AOC howls about impeaching Trump. But president had the authority to bomb Iran.
If the president is not able to respond to a hostile regime building weapons that could destroy entire American cities, then I'm not sure what else would allow him to act. Shortly before 8 p.m. ET on June 21, President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that the United States had bombed three Iranian nuclear program sites, including the difficult to penetrate Fordow enrichment facility. After days of deliberation, Trump decided that the only way to ensure Iran could not obtain nuclear weapons was through U.S. military action. Bombing Iran's nuclear facilities was strategically the right move and a just action. Iran could not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon, and this attack appears to have prevented that in the near term. However, there is another important question: Was the U.S. attack constitutional? Opinion: Trump's rebuke of MAGA isolationists is smart foreign policy. We must stop Iran. Did Congress approve Iran bombing? Can Trump legally strike without it? There has been much debate surrounding the question of whether the president can act militarily without Congress' approval. House members on both sides of the aisle have indicated they think the president needs congressional approval. 'This is not Constitutional,' Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, posted on X immediately after Trump announced the strike. 'It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment,' Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, stated on X. It is true that the power to declare war belongs to Congress, but that fact is muddied by legislation governing the president's authority. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 requires that the president notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying American troops if a formal declaration of war has not already been declared. The resolution also requires that the president withdraw any forces deployed in a conflict within 60 days if Congress has not formally declared war. The law was intended as a constriction of presidents' authority to start a war. Yet, in practice it has done the opposite. Rather than using military action simply to respond to an imminent attack, presidents have read the statute as a license to act for 60 days without congressional approval. Another view: Trump just bombed Iran. We deserve to know why, but don't count on the truth. | Opinion There is a cautious balance in the war powers between the president and Congress. The president is the commander in chief, and the job requires him to deal with immediate threats. Congress is a slow moving body, and cannot possibly react to imminent national defense threats. Yet, war authority lies with Congress, and the president would need congressional approval to launch a massive ground war in a foreign nation, both practically and constitutionally. The last time Congress formally declared war was in 1942, but it has passed resolutions authorizing force during more recent conflicts. Trump likely had authority to strike Iran Trump probably has the facts on his side in this instance. Iran has previously threatened to attack the United States, and it was rapidly approaching the capacity to build a nuclear bomb, according to Israeli intelligence. If the president is not able to respond to a hostile regime building weapons that could destroy entire American cities, then I'm not sure what else, short of an actual invasion of the homeland, would allow for him to act. Iran has been attacking American ships through their proxies in Yemen, the Houthis. America has responded with air strikes against them. Striking against Iran directly is no different. History also is on Trump's side. President Barack Obama, to cite just one example, acted in the same way by ordering American military action in Libya. Other experts have pointed out that Iran's harboring of fugitives involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks opens up a different path for congressional approval. The president has the authority to act against nations harboring terrorists who were involved in the largest terror attacks ever launched on American soil. Trump's bombing of Iran is not out of line with the actions of past presidents, and it fits within the president's authority to act against imminent threats. While Trump would need congressional approval to launch a prolonged armed conflict against Iran, he has history and the facts on his side in this case. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Today in History: Voting age lowered to 18
Today is Sunday, June 22, the 173rd day of 2025. There are 192 days left in the year. Today in history: On June 22, 1970, President Richard Nixon signed an extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that lowered the minimum voting age to 18. Also on this date: In 1815, Napoleon Bonaparte abdicated for a second time as Emperor of the French. In 1938, in a rematch that bore the weight of both geopolitical symbolism and African American representation, American Joe Louis knocked out German Max Schmeling in just two minutes and four seconds to retain his heavyweight boxing title in front of 70,000 spectators at New York's Yankee Stadium. 1941, Nazi Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, a massive and ultimately ill-fated invasion of the Soviet Union that would prove pivotal to the Allied victory over the Axis Powers. In 1944, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, more popularly known as the 'GI Bill of Rights,' which provided tuition coverage, unemployment support and low-interest home and business loans to returning veterans. In 1945, the World War II Battle of Okinawa ended with an Allied victory. In 1977, John N. Mitchell became the first former U.S. Attorney General to go to prison as he began serving a sentence for his role in the Watergate cover-up. In 1981, Mark David Chapman pleaded guilty to killing rock star and former Beatle John Lennon. In 1986, Argentine soccer player Diego Maradona scored the infamous 'Hand of God' goal in the quarterfinals of the FIFA World Cup against England, giving Argentina a 1-0 lead. (Maradona would follow minutes later with a remarkable individual effort that become known as the 'Goal of the Century,' and Argentina won 2-1.) In 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court, in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, unanimously ruled that 'hate crime' laws that banned cross burning and similar expressions of racial bias violated free-speech rights. In 2011, after evading arrest for 16 years, mob boss James 'Whitey' Bulger was captured in Santa Monica, California. In 2012, former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky was convicted by a jury in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, on 45 counts of sexually assaulting 10 boys over 15 years. (Sandusky would later be sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison.) Today's Birthdays: Actor Prunella Scales is 93. Actor Klaus Maria Brandauer is 82. Fox News analyst Brit Hume is 82. Musician-producer Peter Asher (Peter and Gordon) is 81. Musician-producer Todd Rundgren is 77. Actor Meryl Streep is 76. Actor Lindsay Wagner is 76. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is 76. Actor Graham Greene is 73. Singer-songwriter Cyndi Lauper is 72. Actor Bruce Campbell is 67. Environmental activist Erin Brockovich is 65. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is 65. Basketball Hall of Famer Clyde Drexler is 63. Actor Amy Brenneman is 61. Author Dan Brown is 61. Actor Mary Lynn Rajskub is 54. Football Hall of Famer Kurt Warner is 54. TV personality Carson Daly is 52. Actor Donald Faison is 51. Football Hall of Famer Champ Bailey is 47. Golfer Dustin Johnson is 41.
