Investigators close complaint about EPA communications project

Investigators have dismissed a watchdog group's allegations that an Environmental Protection Agency communications effort was a waste of money and violated laws prohibiting the use of congressionally appropriated funds for propaganda.

The EPA inspector general's office in late January closed a complaint lodged last summer against the agency's Office of Research and Development by Washington-based Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, concluding that all four allegations made by the group were unfounded.

PEER had claimed that a science communications effort undertaken by the EPA's research office violated laws barring the use of congressional appropriations "for publicity or propaganda purposes" and went against the agency's own communications policies by promoting a separate identity for the office. The group also alleged that the effort wasted public funds better spent on research, and that two ORD employees had conflicts of interest regarding the contractors selected to carry out the work.

But in a January letter signed by Paul McKechnie, EPA's director of public liaison, the inspector general's office informed PEER it had completed its review, found the allegations to be unfounded and was closing the process "with no further action."

Regarding the allegations of contracting impropriety, McKechnie noted that the communications program was contracted through an interagency agreement with the Treasury Department, which was solely responsible for soliciting and awarding the work with no participation from ORD.

In news releases, PEER has referred to the program under review as "spin" that aims "to improve the agency's scientific reputation."

The main focus of PEER's complaint was a "sources sought" solicitation for a $6 million contract to provide communications and graphic research support. ORD Public Affairs Director Donna Vincent Roa said the work described was for "industry standard communications services" including outreach to science writers, logo development, creation of presentations and design of brochures and banners.

"Attempts to label science communication as propaganda and spin are clearly anti-science and anti-government," Roa wrote in a letter announcing inspectors' findings. "This kind of inappropriate labeling keeps agencies off-balance and keeps dedicated government civil servants fighting the wrong fight."

PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch said the group will file a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain more information about the rationale behind the investigators' conclusions. An internal memorandum that EPA's McKechnie supplied to the group goes into greater detail on the review's findings, and Ruch said it may suggest that the program initially exceeded its bounds, but has since been scaled back.

In early January, PEER publicized a survey of news editors, commissioned by Roa's office, that queried perceptions of the scientific credibility of EPA research. Roa said that effort provided useful data that will help her "get the word out" on the valuable research under way at the agency.