United States Science Advisory EPA-SAB-98-010
Environmental Board August 1998
Protection Agency
SCIENCE ADVISORY
BOARD 1997 STRATEGIC
PLAN
DEVELOPED DURING THE SAB's
NOVEMBER 1997 STRATEGIC
PLANNING RETREAT IN
WASHINGTON, DC
-------
NOTICE
This report has been written as a part of the activities of the Science Advisory Board, a public
advisory group providing extramural scientific information and advice to the Administrator and other
officials of the Environmental Protection Agency. The Board is structured to provide balanced expert
assessment of scientific matters related to problems faced by the Agency. This report has not been
reviewed for approval by the Agency; and hence, the contents of this report do not necessarily
represent the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency or other agencies in the
Federal government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute a
recommendation for use.
-------
EPA SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STRATEGIC PLAN, 1997
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The approaches to environmental protection at EPA are changing and to be most effective the
SAB needs to change with them. Specifically, the SAB needs to spend much more of its total energies on
providing strategic, forward looking advice, while maintaining and even improving the quality, utility, and
timeliness of its activities focussed on Agency-requested peer review of EPA products.
EPA and environmental decision making in general have undergone rapid change in recent years,
providing new opportunities for the SAB to enhance the quality of science in environmental decision
making, or, in some cases, requiring that the SAB also change in order to continue being successful. The
changes in EPA and environmental decision making which are particularly relevant to the SAB's mission
include new less centralized decision making approaches, emerging scientific issues, crosscutting
initiatives and programs, multiple avenues for peer review, an expanded EPA grants program and
international dimensions of emerging environmental problems.
The SAB intends to make changes along several lines simultaneously:
a) The SAB will improve general operations. This includes making several operational
changes to improve timeliness, such as expedited report writing, greater attention to
project selection, and a new "fast track" process for a few special cases. The
Executive Committee will also institute new ways to ensure that the SAB is accepting the
right projects for peer-review. In addition, the SAB will take concrete steps to improve
communication with customers, other organizations and with new SAB members and
Chairs.
b) The SAB will redirect, develop or modify some specific SAB elements. This includes
directing the Research Strategies Advisory committee to focus on the broad strategic
aspects of research and science in the Agency; integrating economics expertise into the
broader work of the Board; and a number of other specific activities.
c) And finally, the SAB will begin some new initiatives to meet the challenge of the
Agency's own changes in environmental decision making. The SAB will institute a
process for selecting a few strategic projects each year. These will focus on broad
issues such as the role of science in "next generation" approaches to environmental
protection. The SAB will also develop or contribute to the development of workshops to
address important, under-recognized scientific issues; explore a broader range of social
science involvement in SAB activities; experiment with short summaries of its reports for
non-technical audiences; and consider a focus on international environmental issues.
The Strategic plan will be used as a guide for SAB operations over the next several years. If
successful, the plan will result in more timely, balanced, relevant and useful SAB products and, most
importantly, enable the SAB to have a greater positive impact on how EPA does science and uses
science in protecting the environment.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ii
I. INTRODUCTION: (Why Strategic Planning?) 1
II. STRATEGIC ISSUES (Where are we going?) 1
A. Mission, Customers and Overarching Goal 1
B. New Directions for the SAB 2
C. Changes in EPA that Provide Opportunities for the SAB 2
1. New decision-making approaches in the Agency call for new SAB
approaches as well. 3
2. Emerging science and issues call for SAB facilitated interaction
between the Agency and the scientific community. 3
3. New Crosscutting Initiatives and Programs call for more up-front,
strategic advice. 4
4. Multiple avenues for peer review and science advice permit more
strategic activity by the SAB. 4
5. Expanded Grants Program calls for technical evaluation by the SAB 4
6. International aspects of environmental problems suggest a need for
greater interaction between technical advisory groups. 4
III. CHANGING DIRECTION (How do we getthere?) 4
IV. DEFINING SUCCESS (How do we know when we get there?) 5
V. HOW THIS STRATEGY WILL BE USED 5
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX A - PLANS FOR CHANGING DIRECTION A - 1
I. IMPROVING SAB-WIDE OPERATIONS A - 2
1. Timeliness A - 2
2. Project Selection A-3
3. Communications A - 4
4. Agency Feed-back A-4
5. Orientation of new members and new chairs A-4
6. Interactions with other FACAs and other agencies A - 5
111
-------
II. IMPROVING SPECIFIC SAB ELEMENTS A - 5
1. Redirect the Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) A - 5
2. Develop approach to scientific peer review of cost/benefit and other
economic analyses A - 5
3. Explore a new approach to environmental futures A - 5
4. Encourage integration of economics expertise into broader work
of the Board A-6
IE. BEGINNING NEW INITIATIVES A-6
1. Take on a limited number of strategic projects A-6
2. Take on a catalytic role in conducting workshops on important scientific
issues A - 7
3. Explore a broader range of social science involvement in SAB activities .... A - 7
4. Experiment with short summaries intended for a non-technical audience A - 7
5. Consider a focus on international issues A - 7
APPENDIXB - THE SAB STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT B - 1
AGENDA B - 2
PARTICIPANTS B - 4
IV
-------
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STRATEGIC PLAN, 1997
I. INTRODUCTION: (Why Strategic Planning?)
In 1977, Congress established the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) and charged it to
provide independent technical advice on environmental issues to the EPA Administrator and others
(e.g., Congressional Committees) to help inform their decisions.
. .„,.,. , . . . , NEW DIRECTIONS IN EPA
Since its rounding, the Science Advisory Board s original DFMA NP> NFW
DIRECTIONS FOR THE
SAB
structure and function have served it well: the Board is widely
recognized for its success in advising the Environmental Protection
Agency on science issues. However, environmental science and
decision-making have changed profoundly in recent years and will
change even more rapidly in the next few years. (See discussion of some of these changes in section
EC below.) The Board is developing a strategy to accomplish its mission in this new decision-making
context.
II. STRATEGIC ISSUES (Where are we going?)
A. Mission, Customers and Overarching Goal
The Science Advisory Board's mission is to provide independent, relevant advice on the
scientific and technical dimensions of the Agency's actions to carry out its own mission of protecting
human health and safeguarding the natural environment on which life depends.
The EPA Administrator is SAB's primary customer and is identified as such in its enabling
legislation. The SAB also has a responsibility to respond to certain Congressional requests. Other
customers include the EPA as a whole, the public, the scientific community, and the press.
TO BE SUCCESSFUL, THE SAB
MUST NOT ONLY GIVE SOUND
TECHNICAL ADVICE BUT ALSO
MAKE A POSITIVE DIFFERENCE
IN THE WAY SCIENCE IS
DEVELOPED AND USED
In the minds of the members of the Executive
Committee, the overarching goal of the Board is to make a
positive difference in the way the science underlying
environmental decisions is commissioned, developed, and
used in environmental decision-making. When the
processes in environmental decision-making change, as
they have in recent years, the SAB must also change in
order to be able to continue to make that difference in the
EPA's use of science.
-------
B. New Directions for the SAB
To meet the changing needs of its customers and maintain a high level of success, the SAB
needs to be significantly more strategic in its approach to providing scientific advice on
Better coordination to assure that the
Integration of existing activities SAB reviews the things that are most
(e.g., children's health efforts) appropriate
Strategic ^^^^^^^_^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^_ Review
Studies designed to address Respond to peer
important "strategic" topics and review requests
problems
environmental issues. That is, the Board needs to provide more up-front planning and scoping (e.g.,
strategic) advice, as opposed to the "end of pipe" peer review. At the same time, it must maintain and
improve the quality of advice and peer review on specific issues.
It is important for the SAB to maintain a mix of activities along the strategic-review continuum,
ranging from responding to questions from the Agency as they appear; through co-ordination to assure
that the SAB reviews the most appropriate documents and integration of existing activities on certain
themes (e.g., children's health); to studies designed to address important strategic topics and problems.
While the peer review of Agency products is a critically important activity, the SAB, and in particular
the Executive Committee, should not be constrained to this single focus.
The SAB needs to devote about 20 to 30 percent of its efforts across the entire Board to the
more strategic activities. The Executive Committee should be spending roughly half of its energies on
strategic issues. The opportunities described in the next section provide important areas for strategic
advice.
C. Changes in EPA that Provide Opportunities for the SAB
EPA and environmental decision-making in general have undergone rapid change in recent
years. The examples listed below are some of the changes that are particularly relevant to the SAB's
operations and success. Most of these changes provide new opportunities for the SAB to enhance the
quality of science in environmental decision-making or, in some cases, require that the SAB make some
changes in order to continue being successful.
-------
1. New decision-making approaches in the Agency call for new SAB
approaches as well.
THE SAB WILL PROVIDE
NEW APPROACHES FOR
TECHNICAL ADVICE TO
RESPOND TO EPA 'SNEW
DECISION APPROACHES.
SEE APPENDIX A,
SECTION m.
EPA has recently begun to develop and follow some
new processes for decision making beyond the traditional
"command and control" approach it used in the past. This
includes Community Based Environmental Protection,
Regulatory Negotiation, The Common Sense Initiative, Project
XL, and others.
THE SAB NEEDS TO SPEND
MUCH MORE OF ITS TOTAL
ENERGIES ON PROVIDING
STRA TEGIC FORWARD-
LOOKING ADVICE. THE
BOARD PLANS TO MAKE A
SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN
THIS DIRECTION WHILE
MAINTAINING AND EVEN
IMPROVING THE QUALITY,
UTILITY, AND TIMELINESS
OF ITS ACTIVITIES
FOCUSSED ON PEER
REVIEW OF EPA PRODUCTS.
These new
approaches often involve
intensive participation by multiple stakeholders; in some of them
EPA plays only a support role to stakeholders who hold
decision-making authority. In such cases, the process for
incorporating science may differ greatly from the traditional
approach, raising some question as to just when or how science
advice and review should be incorporated into the activity.
Sometimes the science review comes only at the end; it therefore
fails to allow for review of the way in which the science issues
are formulated and may be too late for changes to be effectively
incorporated.
The SAB has an opportunity to contribute to the quality
of these decisions by exploring new avenues to improve the use
of science in making them. For example, the SAB could
contribute to the quality of such projects by providing much
earlier generic advice on the scientific aspects of issues that are
important to decision-making in these new contexts.
2. Emerging science and issues call for SAB facilitated interaction
between the Agency and the scientific community.
At times, certain areas of scientific knowledge grow so rapidly that it is hard for the heavily
burdened EPA staff to keep up with them. Similarly, environmental issues may appear in the scientific
literature long before the Agency has developed a program to monitor the situation. The SAB can help
the Agency deal with these areas by acting as a catalyst to bring the Agency together with the experts in
the emerging field. Some examples of such emerging areas are the use of burgeoning genomic
information in risk assessment, and the roles that the physical and social sciences can play in
environmental decision-making and environmental security.
-------
3. New Crosscutting Initiatives and Programs call for more up-front,
strategic advice.
EPA has begun several new cross program or cross Agency initiatives such as Children's
Health and Environmental Measures (or Report Cards). In addition, there are new program offices
(such as OPAA) with major responsibilities for planning, scoping, and coordinating Agency activities
that might benefit from SAB advice. As these crosscutting initiatives begin, the SAB can provide
valuable up-front strategic advice now, rather than wait for the end-of-pipe peer review of Agency
public review drafts which have typified the Board's interaction with the Agency in the past.
4. Multiple avenues for peer review and science advice permit more
strategic activity by the SAB.
The EPA peer review policy requires review of many more documents than the SAB could or
should review. This has led EPA programs to find or establish new avenues for peer review.
Documents that would have come to the SAB in the past may now be reviewed by one of these other
means. The existence of these new avenues makes it possible for the SAB to shift some of its attention
from review to more strategic advice.
5. Expanded Grants Program calls for technical evaluation by the SAB.
EPA has greatly expanded its grants program in the last few years. This has necessitated a
major shift in the use of resources. Questions have been raised about the extent to which this shift has
improved the production of science at EPA. An objective assessment of the success of the grants
program in meeting the objectives of the Agency may be usefu.
6. International aspects of environmental problems suggest a need for
greater interaction between technical advisory groups.
International activity in environmental issues is growing. The SAB will explore avenues for
increasing its involvement as described in Section m-5 of Appendix A.
III. CHANGING DIRECTION (How do we get there?)
To provide more generic, early advice on planning and scoping issues, while maintaining the
ability to deliver high-quality peer review on specific Agency work products, the SAB needs to:
a) improve SAB-wide operations,
b) add or change specific SAB elements, and
c) undertake new initiatives.
-------
Specific plans in each of these categories are described in Appendix A.
IV. DEFINING SUCCESS (How do we know when we get there?)
a) In the minds of the Executive Committee members, the most important aspect of
success for the SAB is to make a difference in how EPA does science and how EPA
uses science in protecting the environment. This includes providing advice on key and
emerging research issues, using science appropriately in making decisions, and
documenting the scientific basis for decisions accurately and clearly.
b) An important interim measure of success is the extent to which SAB reports that clearly
articulate sound scientific advice. In these reports, balanced committees accurately
reflect their areas of consensus and the range of expert scientific thought, identifying
uncertainties and the limitations of current knowledge.
c) Timeliness is an important prerequisite for making a difference in the Agency. Without
improved timeliness on the Board's part, the Agency will be reluctant to refer important
time-sensitive issues to the Board.
d) When successful, the SAB provides a forum in which all sides of a scientific issue can
be heard and fosters intra and inter agency communication.
e) Finally, an important measure of SAB success
is the demand for its advice.
V. HOW THIS STRATEGY WILL BE USED
SAB SUCCESS DEPENDS ON
TIMELINESS. SEE APPENDIX A,
SECTION I
This strategy is intended as a guide to the SAB for the
next several years. The primary audience for the document is the SAB itself, although we believe that
some of the Board's customers will also be interested in its content and underlying philosophy. The
overall thrust of this Strategic Plan is captured in Figure 1 below.
The strategy will be used to guide the Executive Committee, the standing committees and the
staff in their day to day work, especially during the planning of new projects, and as a basis for self-
evaluation in the short term. It will also be used in the orientation for new members and staff.
Although the document is intended to be a guide for the next few years, some elements in it
should be relevant for much longer than that, while others will probably become obsolete much sooner.
In particular, the various hierarchial levels shown in the figure vary in the length of time they are
expected to impact the Board. The overarching goal of making a positive difference should last
indefinitely. The principal objective should last for several years until the targeted changes in direction
have become a part of normal operations. Finally, the implementation activities described in the
-------
Appendix will be useful for various lengths of time until they are accomplished or replaced by new
activities.
While the SAB intends this strategy as guidance to its own operations for the next several
years, the Board does not intend to follow it rigidly. Rather, the SAB will implement these plans in a
flexible way that will improve the extent to which the Board meets its overarching goal of making a
positive difference in the way that science is developed and used, given the Agency environment of
rapid change.
-------
Fipre 1. SAB Strategic Plan
1,1111
l>H inn' •
&
Maintain and
Improve Qnalitj of
Improve SAB-
wide Operations
Comnmnication
Interactions
Provide more
Strategic
Advice
Improve Specific
Elements
Integrate Economics peerreiiew
Economics
Explore Science
Activities in lew EPA
Start lew
Initiatives
Workshops
International
Social Science
-------
APPENDIX A - PLANS FOR CHANGING DIRECTION
The SAB's Strategic Plan addresses activities in three areas:
I. Improving SAB-wide operations,
n. Improving specific SAB elements, and
HI. Beginning new initiatives.
Each of these areas is elaborated upon below.
I. IMPROVING SAB-WIDE OPERATIONS
In order to provide more effective advice to the SAB customers and to allow for more strategic
advice on important issues, the SAB needs to make changes in the way it does business. Some
activities whose need and feasibility are apparent at this time are listed below. Others may be added in
the future.
1. Timeliness
Timeliness is one of the most important aspects of quality to SAB customers. It is also an
essential aspect of making a difference in environmental decision-making. Customers have demanded
and the Board has recognized the necessity of improvement over past performance.
In the past, the SAB has set timeliness goals and introduced some changes (e.g. conference
calls) to reduce the time it takes to complete a report. These changes have resulted in considerable
improvement, but more improvement is needed. Therefore, the SAB will introduce some specific
process changes to achieve the goal of producing most reports in two to four months after the last
public standing committee meeting on the issue and within one month for a few special cases.
These changes cannot apply to extremely controversial or complex cases or to any case in
which the Agency is unable to deliver the final review version of the product well (i.e., at least four
weeks) in advance of the standing committee meeting. However the Board will be clear about what is
possible in any specific case.
a) SAB committees will change the process for report writing by:
1) Working with the Agency to agree on a more explicit charge.
2) Working with the Agency to get materials to SAB members at least four weeks
before the meeting. (This Agency action is a sine qua non of SAB timeliness.)
A-8
-------
3) Having SAB members write more materials, positions, responses to charge
questions etc. before the meeting.
4) Having the SAB Committee complete a working draft before leaving the
meeting.
5) While continuing to strive for consensus, the SAB will avoid insisting on
unanimity when further deliberation appears unlikely to improve the result.
b) The SAB will develop a "fast track" process for special cases. In certain cases,
committees may produce a report within one month of the last public meeting on an
issue. Such accelerated action will only be possible in a minority of cases that pose
clear-cut issues and will require some help from the Agency program requesting the
review, such as final document delivery at least six weeks before the meeting. This will
be a resource intensive effort, but is worthwhile to the extent that it improves timeliness
in a way that is important to the Agency's needs.
c) The SAB can also streamline the review by the Executive Committee in many cases. In
the past, the use of Executive Committee conference calls in between face-to-face
meetings has been helpful. In the future, the Executive Committee will also explore
authorizing specific Executive Committee members to vet some more routine, low-
controversy committee reports on behalf of the full Executive Committee.
2. Project Selection
EPA produces many more scientific documents than the SAB can possibly review.
Furthermore, the Agency has developed other mechanisms for peer review that do not involve the
SAB. Therefore, while the SAB should review only a minority of the documents that require some kind
of peer review, it is important that the SAB review the right documents in order to maximize the impact
on EPA's development and use of science. Various methods have been used in the past to allow
selection of the most appropriate documents, but the success of these has been difficult to evaluate.
Some new steps will be taken:
a) SAB staff will prepare an analysis to compare the documents coming to SAB for
review to the general universe of documents that might be peer reviewed.
b) Using this analysis and the criteria for SAB review developed in 1989, the Executive
Committee will update the criteria for SAB review and develop a process to select
projects.
c) On approximately a yearly basis Committee chairs will meet with relevant AA's and
associated staff to discuss criteria they are using to choose review tasks for the SAB
A-9
-------
and what reviews they expect to be requesting from the SAB over the coming 18
months.
d) The SAB Chair also will meet at least annually with the Deputy Administrator to discuss
the Board's plans for the coming year.
3. Communications
In recent years the SAB has done quite a bit to improve communications, especially by
electronic means. However, there is room for more improvement in specific areas.
a) The Executive Committee will appoint members as liaisons to each of the program
offices of EPA, including non-media offices such as OPPE and OPAA.
b) The SAB will institute oral briefings of the appropriate Agency official(s) after a report
is completed, within the constraints of F AC A.
c) The Executive Committee will re-institute the kind of informal meetings that the Futures
Subcommittee once held with officials from other agencies on topics of mutual interest.
d) The SAB will develop short summaries for at least some of its reports, as described in
Section C, below.
4. Agency Feed-back
In order to remain effective, the SAB needs information on how and why its advice is or is not
used in Agency decision-making. There is currently inadequate response from the Agency to reviews
completed by the SAB. While written response is requested on all reviews, the Board received
responses on only about 25% of its FY 97 reports as of November, 1997. The SAB will continue to
request written responses, but it will also institute a new face-to-face process. Once a review has been
approved by the Executive Committee, the standing committee that prepared the review will meet with
relevant Agency officials to obtain oral feedback on the report and discuss how the advice was or is
being incorporated into the reviewed documents. These discussions could occur at small meetings with
the Chair, or in public meetings with the full committee. The Executive Committee will discuss the
results of these encounters at its public meetings to determine if there are any systematic issues that
need to be addressed.
5. Orientation of new members and new chairs.
The SAB can improve its efficiency and effectiveness by providing more focused orientation of
new members and chairs. As a first step, outgoing Committee Chairs will serve as mentors/advisors to
the new Chairs who replace them. Further, the Executive Committee will supplement its recently
A- 10
-------
adopted "Expectations" document by developing additional written guidance for orientation of new
members.
6. Interactions with other FACAs and other agencies.
There are many other advisory groups at EPA, some of whom have a technical focus. SAB
interaction with these groups might be beneficial to both the SAB and the other advisory groups and
ultimately allow more efficient and effective provision of technical advice to the Agency.
Interactions with officials or advisory groups from inside or outside the Agency, such as those
that occurred during the development of "Beyond the Horizon" could be similarly useful. This would
include interaction with the National Research Council.
The Executive Committee will include opportunities for such interactions in its regular meetings.
II. IMPROVING SPECIFIC SAB ELEMENTS
1. Redirect the Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC)
A number of questions have arisen in recent years about the proper function and purpose of
RSAC. In particular, the RSAC role will need to be adapted somewhat to provide complimentary and
not redundant activities to the recently established ORD Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC).
BOSC has responsibilities directly to the AA of ORD while RSAC has broad responsibilities for
research strategies across the Agency. On some activities it may be appropriate for RSAC to work
together with BOSC as necessary to accomplish RSAC's broad mandate.
RSAC should stress broad strategic review of research and how its results are used across the
Agency. RSAC is well-positioned to look at cross-Agency science issues such as the implementation
of the Administrators Peer Review Policy, effectiveness of the Grants program, the overall science
research planning and budget of the Agency, and the integration of environmental science and
technology ongoing inside and outside the Agency.
2. Develop approach to scientific peer review of cost/benefit and other
economic analyses.
The SAB can provide a useful service to EPA by facilitating the development of an approach to
scientific peer review of cost-benefit analysis. The Executive Committee will begin this task by
sponsoring a meeting with some of the scientists who have experience in this area.
3. Explore a new approach to environmental futures.
A- 11
-------
The SAB has an opportunity to make a valuable contribution to the Agency in the area of
Environmental Futures. Work should continue in this area both with the Agency and through SAB
workshops. This recommendation holds for both "beyond the horizon" issues and the kind of 5-15
year planning needed for a research program. Since most of the people involved in "Beyond the
Horizon" have now left the Board, some mechanism needs to be introduced to maintain SAB
experience with futures thinking. A subcommittee of the Executive Committee will propose a new
approach.
4. Encourage integration of economics expertise into broader work of the Board.
Past experience (on the Clean Air Council, for example) has shown the value of incorporating
the expertise of non-economists into projects with an economic focus. Specifically, natural scientists
involved with the Council's review of the costs and benefits of the Clean Air Act have been quite
helpful in identifying the appropriate scientific studies and interpreting their results for appropriate use
by economists in cost-benefit analysis. The SAB will implement approaches to achieving this.
a) The Executive Committee will encourage the Board's various panels to include
members of the Environmental Economics Advisory Committee on an ad hoc basis.
b) The Environmental Economics Advisory Committee will have members as liaisons to
other standing committees, who will use their expertise appropriately to improve the
value of the advice rendered by these committees.
m. BEGINNING NEW INITIATIVES
In order to change to a more strategic approach, the SAB needs to take on some new
initiatives.
1. Take on a limited number of strategic projects.
The SAB will institute a process for selecting strategic projects such as the role of science in
"next generation" environmental regulation and risk management; long term environmental impacts on
development and reproduction; and quality of the global commons. A few of these projects will be
SAB-wide efforts, while others will be taken on by individual standing committees.
The EC will develop guidance for the standing committees to help them nominate topics for
SAB-wide strategic activities. The Executive Committee will collect the suggestions from the standing
committees and pick one or two for immediate action and identify others as leading candidates for
future action. The Executive Committee will also review and provide advice on strategic studies by
individual standing committees.
A- 12
-------
A- 13
-------
2. Take on a catalytic role in conducting workshops on important scientific issues.
In addition to generating advisories, commentaries, consultations, and reviews, the SAB will
work with the Agency, professional societies, or others to insure that open workshops are conducted
to address important scientific issues. Such workshops may involve outside experts in a rapidly
developing field (e.g., impacts of genomic research on risk assessment), or bring together various
groups inside and outside of EPA around a common issue (such as uncertainty in fate and transport
modeling). An example of such a workshop is the recent ORD workshop (Models 2000) which was
stimulated, in part, by SAB reports and commentaries on this field and the Board's call for action.
Although the SAB has occasionally held such workshops in the past (e.g., the Environmental
Engineering Committee Leachability workshop in 1990 and the Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee workshop on expert judgment in the early 1980's), the Board intends to make greater use
of them in the future.
3. Explore a broader range of social science involvement in SAB activities
Social sciences other than economics are playing an increasing role in environmental protection.
Other scientific advisory groups, such as the National Science Foundation (NSF) have included social
scientists in their activities on a regular basis. The Executive Committee will invite the NSF and other
experts to discuss their experiences in this area. In addition, the EC will consider taking on projects
that have important social science components and facilitate the use of social scientists in the work of
standing committees.
4. Experiment with short summaries intended for a non-technical audience.
In order to make the results of SAB reports more understandable to the multiple audiences that
may need to understand them, the SAB will experiment with developing one or two page summaries for
some of its reports, outlining the major points in clear, lay language.
5. Consider a focus on international issues.
The Executive Committee will consider the usefulness of a committee focused on international
issues. The Executive Committee will appoint an ad hoc Committee to meet with the Office of
International Activities and others and make a recommendation on the means for providing this focus.
A- 14
-------
APPENDIX B - THE SAB STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT
In November 1997, the new SAB Executive Committee (EC) held a three-day Strategic Planning
Retreat to develop the Strategic Plan presented in this document. This Appendix contains the Agenda
and Participants of that Retreat.
B- 1
-------
SAB STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT
College of Preachers
3510 Woodley Road
Washington, D.C.
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 18
7:30 am Breakfast
8:15 am Opening Remarks by Joan Daisey, SAB Chair
8:30 am Panel Discussion: Role of Science Advisors in a Regulatory Agency
Bruce Smith
Terry Yosie
John Graham
9:30 am Coffee
10:00 am Remarks by Peter Robinson Chief of Staff to the Administrator
10:30 am Panel Discussion: SAB and its Customers
Peter Blair
EPA Officials: Robert Perciasepe, Henry Longest
11:30 . Studies of Science at EPA
Raymond Loehr (ROPE report)
Costel Denson (BOSC)
Mark Powell (RFF)
12:15 am Highlights from results of members questionnaire - Donald Barnes SAB Director
12:30 pm Lunch
1:30 pm Plenary Discussions: SAB role and customers — Issues
3:30 pm Simultaneous Activities
A. Drafting Group - Options and recommendations for Issues
B. Free time (possible Cathedral tour)
6:00 Dinner
B-2
-------
NOVEMBER 19
8:00 am Breakfast
8:30 AM Plenary — Closure on options for SAB role and customers
11:00 am Simultaneous Activities - Small Group Discussions
A. Structure and interactions with other Advisors
B. Proactive vs. Reactive advice
C. Mechanisms (and critieria) for handling requests
D. Customer Needs and Alignment (with EPA and Congressional staff)
12:30 pm Lunch
4:00 pm Plenary check-in for small group discussions
6:00 pm Dinner
7:00pm Draft report reflecting AM decisions (drafting group)
NOVEMBER 20
8:00 am Breakfast
8:30 am Small groups - conclusions/next steps
10:00 am Coffee Break
10:15 Plenary discussion: small group reports and conclusions
12:00 noon Lunch
1:00 pm Plenary — conclusions and next steps, content of report
3:00pm Adjourn.
B-3
-------
PARTICIPANTS
SAB STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT
NOVEMBER 18-20, 1997
COLLEGE OF PREACHERS, WASHINGTON B.C.
SAB MEMBERS. PAST MEMBERS. AND LIASIONS
Dr. Joan M. Daisey (Chair)
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Dr. Stephen Brown
Risks of Radiation and Chemical Compounds
Dr. Richard J. Bull
Battelle Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Dr. Costel Denson
University of Delaware
Dr. William daze
University of North Carolina
Dr. Hilary Inyang
University of Massachusetts
Dr. Morton Lippmann
New York University Medical Center
Dr. Raymond Loehr
University of Texas
Dr. Genevieve Matanoski
The Johns Hopkins University
Dr. Granger Morgan
Carnegie Mellon University
Dr. Ishwar Murarka
Electric Power Research Institute
Dr. Emil Pfitzer
Research Institute for Fragrance Materials
B-4
-------
Dr. Randall Seeker
Energy and Environmental Research Corp.
Dr. James E. Watson, Jr.
University of North Carolina
GUEST PARTICIPANTS IN BREAKOUT GROUPS
Dr. Carl Mazza
Office of Air and Radiation, EPA
Dr. Peter Preuss
Office of Research and Development, EPA
Dr. Peter Grevatt
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, EPA
Mr. Steve Eule
Committee on Science, US House of Representatives
Mr. Michael Rodemyer
Committee on Science, US House of Representatives
Mr. Larry Dorsey
Scientific Advisory Panel, Office of Pesticide Programs, EPA
SAB STAFF
Dr. Donald Barnes, Director
Ms. Anne Barton
Mrs. Kathleen Conway
Ms. Roslyn Edson
Mr. Robert Flaak
Dr. John ("Jack") Fowle
Mr. Thomas Miller
Mrs. Priscilla Tillery-Gadson, Staff Secretary
B-5
-------
Mrs. Betty Fortune, AARP Assistant
OBSERVERS
Mr. Clarence Hardy
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology, EPA
Mr. James T. Melillo
Environmental Management Advisory Board, DOE
Ms. Sandra Siliezar
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology, EPA
INVITED SPEAKERS
Mr. Peter Robertson
Chief of Staff to the Administrator, EPA
Dr. Bruce Smith
The Brookings Institution
Dr. John Graham
Harvard School of Public Health
Dr. Terry Yosie
E. Bruce Harrison Company
Dr. Mark Powell
Resources for the Future
Dr. Peter Blair
Sigma Xi
Mr. Robert Perciasepe
Office of Water, EPA
Dr. Henry Longest
Office of Research and Development, EPA
-------
B-6
------- |