Environmental Protection Agency accused of retaliating against scientists who voiced concerns about toxic chemicals When they failed to delete evidence of the serious dangers associated with the chemicals, their managers did it themselves.
The scientists claim that after pushing back, they were hit with negative performance reviews, while some lost their positions in the new chemical division and were reassigned to other parts in the agency.
“The events covered by these reports began during the previous administration when the political leadership placed intense pressure on both career managers and scientists in EPA’s new chemicals program to more quickly review and approve new chemicals,” the agency claimed.
The three whistleblowers in question – Sarah Gallagher, William Irwin and Martin Phillips – maintained that the chemicals they were vetting for the agency could cause damages ranging from neurological problems and miscarriages to cancer.
The report instructed the EPA to take “appropriate corrective action” as a result, including a potential three-day minimum suspension for supervisors who violated the Whistleblower Protection Act.
Last week, the Inspector General of the EPA announced their finding that three of the scientists’ treatment can be considered retaliation, confirming that their negative reviews and reassignments were retaliatory.
Whistleblowers describe retaliatory action after they refused to cover up dangers One of the whistleblowers, William Irwin, who possesses doctorates in molecular biology and biochemistry as well as board certifications in toxicology, says that he was transferred out of the new chemicals division after he refused to change reports, including one that cautioned about a chemical potentially causing immune, neurological and reproductive problems.
No comments:
Post a Comment