Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, on April 26 in Washington. (Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post)

Robert Hahn may have read Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt’s plan to censor the science the EPA uses, but he clearly doesn’t understand it [“Please, hear Pruitt out on this,” Friday Opinion, May 11]. Under that plan, the EPA would restrict the independent, peer-reviewed science the agency uses when trying to decide whether toxic air pollution or agricultural pesticides are dangerous to our health. After all, researchers cannot (and should not) disclose the confidential personal information of those participating in studies. But industry could get a pass and keep much of its “confidential” business information secret.

If you want the EPA deciding what chemicals are safe based on what the makers of those chemicals say, then you might want to join Mr. Hahn in cheering this plan. But if you think the best scientific data is important for setting health safeguards, write the EPA and tell Mr. Pruitt to drop this insidious idea.

John Walke, Washington

The writer is director for clean air at the Natural Resources Defense Council.