FACT CHECK: Wrong Again, New York Times! EPA Debunks False Claims, Affirms Science at Agency Remains Top Priority
These errors follow 17 corrections The New York Times issued to admit its false claims about Trump EPA
May 1, 2026
Contact Information
EPA Press Office (press@epa.gov)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today issued a comprehensive fact-check addressing an unsubstantiated report circulating about scientific research at the agency, work that remains a top priority. When The New York Times contacted EPA with questions about the agency’s new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Studies (OASES), we proudly shared seven full paragraphs of information about the office and its cutting-edge work. Sadly, the reporter omitted any reference to OASES in the final article, effectively ignoring the office and its contributions altogether.
The Trump EPA is no stranger to this pattern. The New York Times has issued at least 17 corrections to false claims about the agency under President Trump — a number that likely understates the full scope of errors.
Moreover, the article relied on unverified claims and failed to adequately fact-check sources. EPA has thoroughly reviewed and debunked these assertions, as outlined below.
LIE #1: EPA no longer has “an independent unit designed to be free from political interference.”
FACT CHECK: EPA just set up the OASES with the explicit goal of putting more gold-standard science directly at the service of the agency’s core mission, protecting human health and the environment.
Don’t forget, during the Biden Administration, EPA’s Office of Research and Development was led by a political appointee, with other political appointees serving as part of the ORD leadership structure. And let’s not forget that the previous administration forced their radical agenda of wasteful DEI programs and ‘environmental justice’ instead of advancing EPA’s core mission of protecting human health and the environment.
LIE #2: “Scientists at the E.P.A. had created a way to search for fluorinated chemicals in water supplies, allowing them to detect a toxic man-made substance known as GenX in North Carolina’s Cape Fear River Basin. Many of those researchers have been reassigned.”
FACT CHECK: Great news! EPA’s thorough research on GenX was completed and published in 2015, over a decade ago, and you can read it here: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.5b01215. Even better news: today, EPA still maintains the expertise and capability to conduct and advance this research in OASES as well as EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pesticide Pollution (OCSPP) and EPA’s Office of Water (OW).
The New York Times wanted its readers to believe EPA stopped research supporting clean water, but the truth is the agency is doing more work than ever before, with researchers reassigned to the Office of Water, where their expertise is keeping every glass of American water crystal-clear.
LIE #3: “While the Trump administration has rolled back science work across the government, the E.P.A.’s research was a particular target because its findings have often led to tighter air and water regulations, costing industries billions of dollars.”
FACT CHECK: EPA’s reorganization was about making our research more effective and better integrating gold standard science into every program office, and that’s exactly what happened. It had nothing to do with industry — so much for this wishful thinking from The New York Times.
LIE #4: “Within months of Mr. Trump’s return to the White House, funding for [Great Lakes] and other research stalled. Meeting with scientists outside of E.P.A. buildings required special approval. New rules made it harder to publish research.”
FACT CHECK: Great Lakes funding never “stalled.” EPA’s efforts to protect the Great Lakes and ensure improvements in water quality have never stopped. This work is led by EPA’s Great Lakes Coastal Science Branch and laboratory within the OASES Coastal Science Solutions Division. In partnership with the Great Lakes National Program Office, EPA will continue to advance research and efforts to protect the watershed and share advancement with EPA offices across the nation.
LIE #5: “Scientists said the E.P.A. was now less likely to have information that might provide the basis to strengthen regulations of air and water pollution or toxic chemicals.”
FACT CHECK: This speculation had no factual basis whatsoever. Science and research continue throughout the agency. In fact, with approximately 500 staff members, OASES prioritizes practical, solution-oriented projects that are closely coordinated with EPA program and regional offices, directly advance the Agency’s statutory requirements, and support cooperative federalism through collaboration with states and Tribes. This means more gold-standard scientific information is available than ever before to inform policy decisions and everything the agency does.
LIE #6: “ORD scientists have been laid off, reassigned or pressured to retire.”
FACT CHECK: This is flatly incorrect. Not one member of ORD has been laid off as part of EPA’s reorganization efforts.
LIE #7: 124 researchers remain and must decide whether to remain employed or “move to different parts of the agency, or the country.”
FACT CHECK: This is not true. As we told The New York Times, a majority of the 124 will not be moving location. Only 34 have been identified for a location reassignment to fill priority vacancies in various parts of the Agency.
LIE #8: “The science office operated the world’s only laboratory specializing in controlled human-exposure studies to determine the health effects of vehicle exhaust, wildfire smoke, ozone and other pollutants. That laboratory has been closed.”
FACT CHECK: We explicitly told The New York Times that while the UNC facility is no longer being utilized by EPA, all the laboratory functions and staff have transferred to our Research Triangle Park laboratory facility to ensure continuity of any operations. This move was due to a lease expiration.
LIE #9: “Some colleagues were working with the oil and gas industry on ways to reduce leaks of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Others were studying how to protect drinking water when climate-fueled wildfires burned plastic pipes that leach chemicals like benzene, a carcinogen. When Mr. Trump took office, ‘It just stopped,’ Dr. Hubbell said.”
FACT CHECK: Wrong again, New York Times! This is false. Work on this now takes place directly in EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR). Staff are now able to directly support and work on the regulations impacting these industries.
LIE #10: EPA “stopped quantifying the benefit of saving a human life when setting emissions limits.”
FACT CHECK: The New York Times has done some historically poor reporting on this topic to date. As we have told this so-called newspaper ad nauseam, EPA, like the agency always has, is still considering the impacts that PM2.5 and ozone emissions have on human health, but the agency will not be monetizing the impacts at this time.
In fact, Biden administration also didn’t monetize many air pollutants in their rules. No one questioned if they were following the agency’s core mission of protecting human health and the environment. Not monetizing DOES NOT equal not considering or not valuing the human health impact. In every action, EPA applies the highest gold standard of science and analysis. The agency’s ongoing work to refine its economic methodologies demonstrates, not diminishes, its commitment to protecting human health and the environment through science-based decision-making.
EPA continues to recognize the clear and well-documented benefits of reducing fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone. The United States has made substantial progress, achieving reductions in PM2.5 and ozone concentrations of 37% and 12%, respectively, since 2000. After careful review, EPA is working to enhance the methods for monetization of the economic impacts associated with additional PM2.5 and ozone emission reductions in regulatory actions as applicable. As national concentrations of these pollutants have declined, the incremental impacts of further reductions have become smaller and more complex to model with precision.
Given this increased analytical complexity, the agency is working towards refining its methods to ensure that future monetized estimates reflect the most accurate and transparent understanding of public health and environmental outcomes. EPA remains committed to accurately quantifying emissions changes and will resume monetizing these impacts as soon as updated models meet the agency’s rigorous analytical standards.
|
