Cal/EPA Barred From Shredding Documents

The Wilson administration Tuesday suspended a new policy to destroy records of dissenting opinions by state scientists, hours after environmental law groups sued to block what they dubbed the “scientific shredder policy.”

The California Environmental Protection Agency insisted that its policy--which it calls the “records retention policy”--had been aimed at encouraging scientists to freely voice their opinions without fear of being embarrassed by public disclosure of those views.

On Tuesday afternoon, after the lawsuit was delivered to Gov. Pete Wilson’s office, the administration moved to suspend the policy. Officials said no documents have been destroyed.

“We first learned of this today,” said Wilson spokesman Sean Walsh. “We instructed the department to maintain all records, and to clarify any confusion that may exist over policy at the department for the retention of documents.”

While the governor promised that no embarrassing or dissenting documents would be destroyed, officials said that the material in question will be retained in confidential files.

Cal/EPA spokesman Daniel Pellissier said state lawyers believe that some research material and correspondence can be kept secret in order to protect scientists’ “frank and open” discussions that are important to the decision-making process.

Late in the day, lawyers for the environmental groups said Cal/EPA’s new plan to keep the documents confidential fails to satisfy the public’s right to know about the workings of government.

“If that’s what they’re proposing, the lawsuit is alive and well,” said Al Meyerhoff, attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, which along with the Environmental Law Center and Society of Professional Journalists filed the lawsuit in San Francisco. “They’re just fundamentally misreading the law. . . . There is no court case that would allow that.”

“This doesn’t resolve [the complaint] at all,” said Elizabeth Pritzker, an attorney for the Society of Professional Journalists. “There is no need for secrecy to protect the scientific analyses that are going on at Cal/EPA.

“What the agency really wants to secret away are its political decisions, and there’s no basis for that,” she said.

Proposed in April, Cal/EPA’s records retention policy is aimed at scientists in the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, which is the main state scientific division that analyzes public health risks. The office is involved in analyzing several politically explosive issues, including the public health hazards associated with diesel exhaust, lead emissions and secondhand tobacco smoke.

Outside scientists have criticized Cal/EPA and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment for failing to produce the reports fast enough. The lead report has been in the works for five years. The tobacco report has been in the works for more than two years.

In its April policy, Cal/EPA told its scientists to “please dispose of all documents . . . and other communications prepared during the course of policy formulation which contain other policy proposals not adopted or reflected in the final decision.”

Scientists resisted the new policy,