No. It’s a bad idea. I’ve seen this just about everywhere lately with a terrible success rate. Secondary pumps have the dual job of trying to keep boilers (or chillers) happy with flow rates while doing the simultaneous job of maintaining DP at a remote secondary location. One fights the other and neither is happy about the situation.
An energy “upgrade” lately removed 40 HP primary chiller pumps at a stadium, replaced the pumps with valves, so the secondary 150 HP pumps could serve the dual purpose of primary pump plus remote DP gratifier. The larger pumps work at a much higher rate for the same duty, negating the primary pump removal savings. Ludicrous. Some compressors on the chillers fried because of imperfect controls (is that a reach?); no sympathy from the manufacturer, who said that if you remove the primary pumps you’re on your own.
Whoever is selling the “secondary pump can do it all” philosophy, is selling it very well, but they need to just go away.
The primary-secondary decoupled loop is a good invention and should be stuck with until something better comes along. Removing primary pumping to replace with control valves is not that solution.