SEJ Objects Over EPA Response to AP Story; plus, Suits & Rulings Involving Interior, EPA, NOAA

WatchDog: SEJ Objects Over EPA Response to AP Story; plus, Suits & Rulings Involving Interior, EPA, NOAA

By Joseph A. Davis, WatchDog TipSheet Editor

1. SEJ Objects to EPA Treatment of AP Journalist
2. Watchdog Group Sues over Zinke-Industry Meeting Documents
3. Judge Rules Against EPA on Withholding Pesticide Records
4. Enviros Sue EPA Over Info on Coal-Plant Water Toxics
5. Federal Judge Rules Some NOAA Scientists’ Emails Exempt from FOIA

 

1. SEJ Objects to EPA Treatment of AP Journalist

SEJ President Bobby Magill has written the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on behalf of the Society of Environmental Journalists, objecting to a Sept. 3 release from EPA's Office of Public Affairs that criticized an Associated Press story about Superfund sites during Hurricane Harvey floods. The EPA release was factually inaccurate and attempted to discredit an embarrassing story by falsely smearing a reporter by name. SEJ called on the EPA to "engage constructively with the press and stop attacking journalists for doing their jobs." Full text of SEJ letter here. Plus, read a full writeup in last month's WatchDog column.

Back To Top

 

2. Watchdog Group Sues over Zinke-Industry Meeting Documents

The nonpartisan, nonprofit watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, has sued the Interior Department for records relating to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s March 23, 2017, meeting with the American Petroleum Institute.

The group believes the records might shed light on Interior’s withdrawal of an Obama-era rule aimed at getting fair payment for oil and gas leases on federal lands. Interior made public its intention to deep-six the rule the day after the API meeting.

But Interior denied a May 23 request by CREW for the documents under the Freedom of Information Act. Zinke met with the API’s board of directors at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.

Back To Top

 

3. Judge Rules Against EPA on Withholding Pesticide Records

Weed control shown two weeks after application of the controversial pesticide Enlist Duo. Photo: Dow Agrosciences

A federal judge ruled Sept. 28 that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was wrong to withhold some 140 documents on potential harm to wildlife from the Dow AgroSciences pesticide Enlist Duo.

The Center for Biological Diversity, or CBD, had filed a request for the documents under the Freedom of Information Act on Jan. 5, 2017. It was seeking scientific studies and other factual documents on Enlist Duo’s possible effects on wildlife.

Duo is a combination of two previously registered herbicides, 2,4-D and glyphosate, developed because weeds had developed resistance to the herbicides used individually. CBD wanted information on possible synergistic effects of the two herbicides, among other things.

Back To Top

 

4. Enviros Sue EPA Over Info on Coal-Plant Water Toxics

A coalition of environmental groups has sued EPA over its refusal to disclose why it quashed an Obama-era rule limiting the amounts of toxic metals that coal-burning utilities could discharge into public waters.

EPA put a hold on the Obama rule April 25 and the groups had already filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents on what led to EPA’s decision. After four months, EPA remained almost entirely unresponsive to the request.

Earthjustice filed the suit Sept. 28 in the federal district court in Manhattan on behalf of the Waterkeeper Alliance, Sierra Club, Clean Water Action and the Environmental Integrity Project.

Back To Top

 

5. Federal Judge Rules Some NOAA Scientists’ Emails Exempt from FOIA

A federal district judge ruled Aug. 21 that some emails of scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration were exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Scientists’ emails have been a battleground in a number of environmental issue areas — as interest groups try to use them to discredit scientific findings they disagree with, often by discrediting the scientists themselves. The disputes have ranged from pesticides and GMOs to climate change.

Climate change was the issue in the most recent decision, rendered by Judge Christopher R. Cooper in the District Court for the District of Columbia. The ruckus started back in 2015, when a group of NOAA scientists who track global temperatures published an article in Science saying the data showed no “pause” in global warming.

This debunked a key talking point of conservatives and climate change deniers such as House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who promptly charged the scientists with chicanery. Nothing came of Smith’s probe, but the conservative group Judicial Watch took up the baton via a FOIA request and a 2015 lawsuit.

NOAA handed over some of the requested documents, but claimed others were exempt from FOIA because they were “deliberative” and “predecisional.” The judge, ultimately, agreed.

Scientists have complained that political groups use FOIAs of emails to harass them. Some journalists, however, say emails are an important tool in illuminating the public interest and violations thereof.

Back To Top

---

* From the weekly news magazine SEJournal Online, Vol. 2, No. 39. Content from each new issue of SEJournal Online is available to the public via the SEJournal Online main page. Subscribe to the e-newsletter here.  And see past issues of the SEJournal archived here.