Washington - All Republican members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Investigations Subcommittee, including the full committee's ranking member, U.S. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, and the subcommittee's ranking Republican, U.S. Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon, joined Thursday in pressing EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to explain why and how a career EPA official's views were suppressed when he questioned Democrats' policy on global warming.

Their letter marks the second attempt to get information from EPA since a series of bizarre e-mails became public and demonstrated that a long-term EPA official was ordered not only to stop dissenting, but to stop working on global warming issues altogether.

"Questions about the process and treatment of critical opinion and debate within EPA have only increased since we wrote three weeks ago," the lawmakers wrote. "Since that time, you or EPA spokesmen have issued statements at once minimizing the critical comments by a senior career employee, Dr. Alan Carlin, on the quality of the agency's basis for the proposed endangerment finding, and ignoring the substantive questions about the integrity of the EPA process raised by the alleged suppression of Dr. Carlin's report.

"Your July 10 letter response and subsequent telephone conversation with Ranking Member Barton about that response did not mitigate our concerns about agency process and atmosphere," they added. "At this point, we cannot accept as plausible your contention that neither you nor your staff nor direct reports supplied or authorized timelines or other directives for collecting internal comments and for preparing the proposed endangerment finding, which was apparently sought by the administration."

Because Jackson's letter was not responsive to Barton's initial letter, the Republicans posed a series of questions designed to learn the facts behind EPA's decision to hush Dr. Carlin's dissent. Specific questions included the following:

- Why was Dr. Alan Carlin directed to cease working on climate change?

- According to a June 29, 2009, press interview, Dr. Carlin says his immediate supervisor, Dr. Al McGartland, was pressured to take Dr. Carlin off of climate research when he attempted to submit his Technical Support Document analysis. Please identify the person(s) who instructed Dr. McGartland to remove Dr. Carlin from climate research, and the basis for their instruction. If EPA does not have this information, please explain why and how Dr. McGartland could be counseled without all pertinent facts.

- Was Dr. Carlin's commentary on the Technical Support Document which led to EPA's carbon dioxide endangerment finding prepared as part of his official EPA duties?

- Was the set of comments prepared during March 2009 by Dr. Carlin concerning the March 2009 draft of the Technical Support Document forwarded to EPA staff outside the National Center of Environmental Economics?

- In your July 10, 2009, telephone conversation with Ranking Member Barton, you stated that Dr. McGartland was "counseled" about his actions or emails regarding Dr. Carlin. Please explain how and when he was counseled, who counseled him, what specifically he was counseled about, and who ultimately directed that he be counseled. What was the basis for the counseling? Did EPA conduct an internal investigation of Dr. McGarland's conduct? If so, what was the allegation, and what did EPA find?

- Please explain the specific role and contributions of Stratus Consulting, the reported contractor that assisted EPA staff with preparation of the TSD.

- Please explain (1) the process for choosing, (2) the specific role, and (3) contributions and date of contributions of the Federal expert reviewers listed in the April 17, 2009 TSD.

A copy of the letter can be found here.