Title 42 of the U.S. Code gives federal agencies the authority to appoint highly qualified scientists and engineers outside of standard civil service positions. This hiring authority helps federal agencies to attract and retain top talent to advance national scientific priorities.

In a report released earlier this month, the National Academies reviewed the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) use of their Title 42 hiring authority and offered recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the program.

DELS Program News sat down with Dr. Thomas Burke, Professor Emeritus at Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health and former EPA Science Advisor, to discuss key insights from the report and how Title 42 can enhance the mission of the EPA. Burke served on the National Academies committee who authored the Title 42 report.

Q: Why is Title 42 hiring authority important for a regulatory body such as EPA??

Burke:  EPA science does much more than support the regulatory activities. EPA research has shaped our progress in protecting health and our environment, and communities throughout the country have benefited from EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) science. From cleaner air to safe drinking water, EPA scientists conduct the environmental health assessments that guide our policies, investigate emerging threats, and respond to emergencies, from chemical emergencies to extreme climate related events. EPA also supports academic research and the training of future science leaders and is always there as a technical resource to states and communities faced with environmental challenges. 

Q: How does Title 42 authority help EPA address critical, emerging research areas?

Burke: Title 42 enables the EPA to recruit established and emerging science leaders to respond to the ever-changing environmental threats facing our nation. Since the establishment of Title 42 at EPA in 2006, appointees have provided scientific leadership in areas that are critical to the Agency’s mission. The program has brought senior leaders to establish and build new programs such as computational toxicology. Title 42 appointees have led the evaluation of emerging hazards such as PFAS or “forever chemicals” in drinking water and guided the EPA response to emergencies from Flint Michigan to COVID. Examples of the expertise represented by the appointees include data science, disaster response, ecosystem modeling, social and behavioral sciences, and environmental justice.

Q: What are the key findings and recommendations of the report?

Burke: The first and most important finding is that EPA ORD has done a very good job implementing Title 42 authority. The program is well managed and has brought cutting edge expertise to high priority areas. Appointees are conducting research, developing new tools, and providing technical expertise the Agency, states, and communities. Therefore, our key recommendation is that Congress should grant EPA permanent Title 42 authority as it has for other federal agencies. The Committee also recommended that the program be expanded beyond its current small numbers (2.6%) of the ORD workforce, and that consideration be given to expanding to all EPA program offices and regions.

Other recommendations focused on encouraging a transparent and competitive recruitment process, a strategic planning process to identify priority areas, and raising the maximum salary cap to assure EPA can be competitive in recruiting and retaining the best and brightest scientists. 

Finally, the committee recommended regular evaluation of the Title 42 program by an independent outside body such as the EPA Board of Scientific Counsellors or the National Academies. Evaluation will track progress and impact, assure integrity and transparency, and help to build in continuous improvement. 

Q: How did the committee envision the potential impacts of granting permanent Title 42 authority to the EPA?

Burke: The National Institute of Health has permanent authority for Title 42 and about 4000 scientists holding scientific research and clinical studies positions. In contrast, EPA is now authorized only 75 positions in ORD and 25 in the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Since its inception, EPA Title 42 authority has been subject to continual uncertainty about the Congressional renewal every 5 years and the number of positions authorized.  This has undoubtedly had a negative impact on recruitment of exceptional candidates. To be fully effective and assure the career stability and growth of appointees EPA should have permanent authority. Although the traditional civil service science track positions will continue to serve as the core of EPA’s technical workforce, the Committee envisions that Title 42 appointees will be a cornerstone of EPA science: assuring excellence, interdisciplinary breadth, and leadership for the future.

Q: How does the committee foresee its recommendations contributing to the overall enhancement of EPA's research and development enterprise, particularly in alignment with the agency's mission and current initiatives?

Burke: The Title 42 report is a follow up to the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology’s consensus study report Transforming EPA Science to Meet Today’s and Tomorrow’s Challenges. This report highlighted the changing nature of today’s environmental challenges and called for a new systems approach, a One Environment – One Health approach. EPA science is at a crossroads, requiring a new lens to investigate and address environmental threats and recognize the inextricable link between ecological health and human health.  Challenges like climate change, environmental justice, and the cumulative health impacts of chemical pollutants require inclusion of multiple evolving disciplines. The Committee sees Title 42 as an essential tool for building the scientific workforce, enhancing Agency science capability, and assuring the scientific excellence of EPA to address their mission – to protect human health and the environment.