Policy Concentrates POLICY
EPA dismisses half of research advisory board Agency is expected to offer slots to industry members A membership shake-up in an EPA scientific advisory council could be a sign of more changes to come at the regulatory agency, policy experts say. In an unusual action, EPA did not grant nine of the 18 members on its Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) a second threeyear term. An additional four were already scheduled to rotate off the board this year due to term limits, BOSC Chair and environmental chemist Deborah L. Swackhamer tells C&EN. Composed of scientists from outside the agency, the board reviews technical and management issues related to EPA’s in-house research. The unexpected dismissals and statements from EPA officials leave Swackhamer and others concerned that the agency will open itself to potential conflicts of interest
by filling the vacant slots with members from regulated industries. EPA spokesperson J. P. Freire says the agency has received hundreds of nominations to serve on the board, and the agency intends to “carry out a competitive nomination process.” Gretchen Goldman, research director of the Center for Science & Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, is watching to see what the move portends for other scientific review groups at the agency. These include the Science Advisory Board, whose work is more closely tied to policy outcomes than BOSC’s, she says. The move is another way that the Trump Administration is trying to take science out of the regulatory process, Goldman asserts. “It builds on other actions that we’re seeing
In the Everglades, an EPA scientist collects fish to be analyzed for mercury contamination. this Administration take with respect to science and science advisers.” With their diminished numbers, BOSC’s remaining five members may find their capacity to review the agency’s scientific research program limited, several board members tell C&EN. Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), the top Democrat on the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, last week asked EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt for more information about the dismissals. Carper says he is concerned that through this and other actions, EPA is engaging in “a broad approach of denying the science that forms the basis of sound environmental regulation.”—JESSICA MORRISON
POLICY
State Department would collect more personal information for some applicants Some foreign scientists who want to travel to the U.S. may have to provide far more information in visa applications than they do now under a White House proposal. Earlier this month, the U.S. State Department released a plan to collect more information, such as social media handles and family connections, for some travelers seeking either visitor or immigrant visas. The move was in response to a March 6 executive order by President Donald J. Trump. The proposal would affect applicants who “warrant additional scrutiny in connection with terrorism or other national security-related visa ineligibilities,” according to the announcement. The State Department estimates 65,000 applicants would be affected. That represents a small fraction of the 10 million visas that were issued in 2016. The policy could impact chemists who want to come to the U.S., especially students and those attending ACS meetings,
20
C&EN | CEN.ACS.ORG | MAY 15, 2017
says Glenn Ruskin, director of the ACS Office of Public Affairs. The ACS national meeting earlier this year in San Francisco,
More personal information on visa applications The U.S. Department of State has proposed expanding the information it collects on some visa applications. New information ▸ Social media platform handles ▸ Names and birth dates of siblings ▸ Names and birth dates of childrena Expanded from 5 to 15 years ▸ Travel history, including source of funding and, in some cases, where within a country ▸ Address history ▸ Employment history a New for most applications. Source: U.S. State Department
for example, had 3,099 international participants, about one-sixth of the attendees. “People are coming from around the world,” Ruskin says. If there are visa changes, “what impact will that have on the discourse and exchange?” Brendan Delaney, an immigration lawyer who works with scientists through the National Postdoctoral Association, says it is unclear who would be asked for the additional information. “What is going to warrant this heightened scrutiny? It seems to be fairly subjective,” he says. Some scientists already get extra attention, Delaney explains, especially if their research is in an area that could be considered sensitive. He suggests the best thing researchers can do to avoid problems is apply for their visas early. ACS, which publishes C&EN, is especially worried about the new emphasis on collecting social media information, since some scientific information in posts could be misinterpreted if it is an unfamiliar subject. ACS plans to send in a comment on the proposal, Ruskin says.—ANDREA WIDENER
CREDIT: EPA/FLICKR
U.S. visa change could impact chemists
