The United States, long considered a leader in scientific achievements, is now actively tossing aside this distinction. Every day, science is being undermined. The latest blow to independent research is the dismantling of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and Development (ORD). Since March, the administration has been denying ORD was on the chopping block. But by mid-July, after the Supreme Court decided the Trump administration could drastically reduce the federal workforce and dismantle agencies, ORD was slated to be gutted.
“I am pretty displeased with the federal government and political leadership at EPA,” says Chris Frey, who served at EPA under President Biden, including as head of ORD. He left in September 2024, to return to North Carolina State University, where he’s currently the Associate Dean for Research and Infrastructure of the College of Engineering.
Tell Congress: Defend EPA’s Ability to Protect Human Health and the Environment
What’s ORD?
ORD, by unique design, is a science organization within EPA—an independent agency producing research that’s used to inform decisions, including policies and regulations. ORD scientists support the needs of EPA stakeholders but remain separate from the political fray. This creates an important “firewall,” says Dr. Frey, between scientists and political leadership and administrators. ORD connects with policy officers at four offices—informally known as Air, Water, Land, and Chemicals—on what science is needed, but critically, scientists are not told what outcomes need to be.
“EPA staff really care about the mission of the agency and also care about getting policy done. Sometimes the mindset of doing policy doesn’t align with the mindset of doing science,” he notes. The structure of ORD being distinct from the rest of EPA “enables scientists to do world-class peer-reviewed science independent of those pressures, responsive to the information needs of decision makers, and that stand ups to scrutiny.”
ORD’s research portfolio is wide ranging and covers everything from risks of hazardous chemicals, impacts of wildfire smoke on the environment and public health, contamination of drinking water by chemicals from fracking to PFAS, soot pollution, responses to environmental emergencies and exposure to chemicals, and much more. Dr. Frey’s own research includes measurement and modeling of human exposure to air pollution and vehicle emissions. The head of the union that represents EPA workers has described ORD as “the heart and brain of the EPA.”
ORD also conducts “anticipatory research,” collaborating on and figuring out future scientific needs unrelated to current policy making. “One example is that ORD has long invested in computational toxicology and developing new approach methods aimed at trying to move away from very expensive and time-consuming tests,” says Dr. Frey, adding, “What’s being torn apart is designed to support the best and relevant science done in a credible way. That’s pretty much out the window at this point.”
What dismantling ORD looks like
When Dr. Frey was in charge, ORD had an annual budget of over $500 million, more than 1,500 federal full-time employees, and 12 locations across the U.S. This isn’t all gone—yet. The situation is in flux. According to Dr. Frey’s former colleagues on the inside, some people have taken early retirement or been placed on leave, others have been told to apply for ill-defined internal job openings—not research positions—for scientists in one of EPA’s policy program offices, and still others have been summarily reassigned to new jobs with no option to decline and still remain employed.
“I have talked to a few people that got notice that they’ve been moved into one of the program offices. They don’t know what they’re going to do, and the management in those offices don’t know what they’re going to do with those people. We don’t really know if it’s getting totally shut down. It’s a big mess. The political leadership is not forthcoming,” says Dr. Frey, who writes a blog meant to be a one-stop shop related to the proposed elimination of EPA’s ORD.
There were also a thousand other folks, not federal employees, working with Dr. Frey at ORD—“essentially contractors”—supporting the work of different labs across the country. Most of these were young scientists, “ORISE” fellows through Oak Ridge Institute. “These are bachelor, master, PhDs, and post-doc research associates on the leading edge of science. They bring in new ideas, excitement, and energy,” he says. That EPA has not renewed their contracts is “a huge loss.”
Quantifying what’s being lost
The public health of every person in the U.S. as well as the environment is touched by ORD’s work. “Decisions informed by ORD scientists have avoided hundreds of thousands of premature deaths, millions of incidents of illnesses, and protection of air, water, and soil quality, plus a better understanding of the toxicity of chemicals in commerce that leads to evidence-based rule making,” explains Dr. Frey. Without ORD to measure what’s in the environment, we’ll be in the dark about what’s there and how to prevent or control releases plus how to mitigate or clean up. The loss is staggering.
Why dismantle ORD?
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, a well-established friend to industry, just bucked all scientific consensus when this week he announced a proposal to revoke the Endangerment Finding, the legal foundation of EPA’s ability to protect us from the health effects of climate change. ORD’s research has, in the past, often been the basis for stricter environmental rules. Industry, including the American Chemistry Council, in particular has wanted to see ORD’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), a program for evaluating toxic chemicals, dismantled. But eliminating the entire office goes beyond what was even recommended in Project 2025, the conservative policy blueprint that has inspired many of this administration’s efforts, notes Dr. Frey. “What they’re doing is puzzling. It’s the worst combination of an administration that seems very hostile to science and appointees that don’t understand the role of science. It’s like a perfect storm.”
Can ORD be put back together in the future?
Dr. Frey believes ORD will live again with commitment plus the right resources and leadership, though he allows it would take considerable time to recover from this “huge insult and injury.” He sees a glimmer of hope in the fact that the Senate Appropriations Committee recently approved a budget bill that would require EPA to maintain ORD in a clear 26 to 2 vote.
“The bill includes language about restoring ORD to 2021 structure and levels. This is the first signal that I’ve noticed coming out of either body of Congress of a genuine level of awareness and support. We’re going to get through this, and something will come back,” he says.
In the meantime, Dr. Frey is sure this callous interruption of such an invaluable science enterprise will show us all just how important it is.
Tell Congress: Defend EPA’s Ability to Protect Human Health and the Environment