The change, aimed at saving $748.8 million, includes transferring scientific functions to a newly created Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions (OASES). EPA leadership says this will prioritize science in rulemaking, but researchers, unions, and lawmakers say it risks sacrificing long-term innovation and scientific independence.
ORD has long served as the EPA’s hub for independent, peer-reviewed research on air pollution, toxic chemicals, and climate change. Under the reorganization, up to 1,000 scientists may be displaced, with only 300 transitioning to OASES, according to Chemical & Engineering News.
“This could very well turn a premier science agency into a political arm of the president,” warned the Union of Concerned Scientists, echoing widespread fears of science becoming subservient to policy agendas.
Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, former EPA deputy science administrator, criticized the move as “misleading and dangerous,” noting that ORD’s work has been instrumental in addressing PFAS contamination and childhood asthma, among other health threats.
Critics say the restructuring signals a shift from research-driven policy to compliance-focused operations. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents EPA workers, described the decision as a threat to “the heart and brain” of the agency’s scientific mission.
Justin Chen, president of the EPA employees union, warned that "eliminating ORD risks devastating U.S. public health,” citing the agency’s diminished capacity for cutting-edge climate modeling and chemical safety analysis.
Meanwhile, the American Chemistry Council has expressed support for the restructuring, viewing it as a way to accelerate regulatory review processes and redirect resources toward applied science and pesticide oversight.
The EPA is also terminating its Environmental Justice (EJ) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs—an abrupt reversal from previous commitments to community-focused science. These programs played key roles in initiatives like hyperlocal air quality monitoring and community-based resilience planning.
Nearly 300 current and former EPA employees have signed a letter condemning the restructuring, calling it a “strategic rollback of science-based protections” and a “politicization of environmental science.”
While the new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions is intended to centralize science in policymaking, its structure, governance, and staffing remain unclear. No new budget allocation has been announced, raising concerns that the office will be understaffed and overly policy-aligned.
Experts fear that without safeguards for scientific integrity, OASES may prioritize research aligned with political objectives over foundational science.
The EPA’s restructuring may streamline operations and regulatory reviews, but it comes at the potential cost of scientific rigor, equity, and innovation. As the U.S. faces rising climate, pollution, and health challenges, the dismantling of ORD and elimination of EJ and DEI programs signals a retreat from the agency’s research-driven foundation.
Unless more transparent safeguards and investments follow, the reorganization risks weakening the EPA’s ability to lead in environmental protection at a time when independent, long-term science is more critical than ever.
