B O S C
Board of Scientific Counselors
Report of the U.S. Environmental Protection agency
Board of Scientific Counselors
Air and Energy (A-E) Subcommittee
Responses to Charge Questions
Air and Energy Subcommittee
Charlette Geffen, Ph.D. (Chair)
Bart Croes, P.E., M.S.
Louie Rivers III, Ph.D.
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Retired
North Carolina State University
Sandra Smith, M.S. (Vice Chair)
Jennifer Hains, Ph.D.
Annette Rohr, Sc.D.
AECOM
Minnesota Dept of Health
Electric Power Research Institute
Viney Aneja, Ph.D.
Cara Keslar, M.S.
Constance Senior, Ph.D.
North Carolina State University
Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality
Clean Energy
Jeffrey Arnold, Ph.D.
Michael Kleinman, Ph.D.
Art Werner, Ph.D.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
University of California, Irvine
Retired
Myron Mitchell, Ph.D.
State University of New York
EPA Contact
Tom Tracy, Designated Federal Officer
June 11, 2019
A Federal Advisory Committee for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and Development
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Disclaimer Text. This report was written by the Air and Energy (A-E) Subcommittee of the Board of Scientific Counselors, a
public advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that provides external advice,
information, and recommendations to the Office of Research and Development (ORD). This report has not been reviewed
for approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and therefore, the report's contents and
recommendations do not necessarily represent the views and policies of EPA, or other agencies of the federal government.
Further, the content of this report does not represent information approved or disseminated by EPA, and, consequently, it
is not subject to EPA's Data Quality Guidelines. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute a
recommendation for use. Reports of the Board of Scientific Counselors are posted on the Internet at
httpi//www.epa.gov/bosc.
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Contents
List of Acronyms 4
Introduction 5
Background 5
StRAP Research Objectives 6
Charge Questions and Context 8
Subcommittee Responses to Charge Questions 9
Charge Question la 10
Charge Question lb 12
Charge Question lc 14
Charge Question Id 18
Charge Question le 20
Summary List of Recommendations 23
Conclusions 25
Appendix A: Meeting Agenda 27
Appendix B: Materials 28
Material Provided in Advance of the Meeting 28
Additional Material Provided During the Meeting 28
iii
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
List of Acronyms
AAPCA
Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies
ACE
Air, Climate, and Energy
A-E
Air and Energy
AMD
Atmospheric Model Development
BenMAP
Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program
BOSC
Board of Scientific Counselors
CAA
Clean Air Act
CARB
California Air Resources Board
CENRAP
Central Regional Air Planning Association
CENSARA
Central States Air Resource Agencies
CMAQ
Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System
CSS
Chemical Safety for Sustainability
DOE
Department of Energy
ECOS
Environmental Council of the States
ERIS
Environmental Research Institute of the States
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
HAP
hazardous air pollutant
HHRA
Human Health Risk Assessment
HSRP
Homeland Security Research Program
ITRC
Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council
LADCO
Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium
MARAMA
Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association, Inc.
MJO
multi-jurisdictional organization
MBI
market-based research
NACAA
National Association of Clean Air Agencies
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NASA
National Air and Space Administration
NC
North Carolina
NERL
National Exposure Research Laboratory
NESCAUM
Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management
NGO
non-governmental organization
NTAA
National Tribal Air Association
ORD
Office of Research and Development
PFAS
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
PM
particulate matter
RTP
Research Triangle Park
SBIR
Small Business Innovation Research
SHC
Sustainable and Healthy Communities
SIP
State Implementation Plan
SSWR
Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
STAR
Science to Achieve Results
St RAP
Strategic Research Action Plan
WESTAR
Western States Air Resources Council
4
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Introduction
The mission of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development
(ORD) is to provide the best available science and technology to inform and support public health and
environmental decision-making at the Federal, state, tribal, and local levels, addressing critical
environmental challenges and anticipating future needs through leading-edge research. The ORD's Air
and Energy (A-E) research program focuses on the science and engineering needed to improve air quality,
reduce the number of nonattainment areas in the United States, and protect public health and the
environment. It is one of the Agency's six, highly integrated national research programs. The other five
are Chemical Safety for Sustainability (CSS), Homeland Security Research Program (HSRP), Human Health
Risk Assessment (HHRA), Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR), and Sustainable and Healthy
Communities (SHC).
ORD has developed Strategic Research Action Plans (StRAPs) to guide each research program. The draft
A-E Strategic Research Action Plan, 2019-2022 (A-E StRAP)1 articulates a four-year strategy for delivering
air- and energy-related research to address EPA's strategic objectives and mandates, as identified in the
FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan (EPA Strategic Plan)2. It is the third such strategic planning exercise in
this format (previous StRAPs covered 2012-2016 and 2016-2019). The current StRAP evolved through
close collaboration with EPA Program and Regional partners, input from the EPA laboratories and centers
working with A-E, and consultation with the states to identify their needs, particularly through the
Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), along with engagement with the tribes.
Currently, ORD is seeking input from the Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) on the draft 2019-2022
StRAP documents and proposed research strategies. The emphasis is on advancing ORD research that can
successfully address the needs identified by EPA programs and regions, and states and tribes. This review
by the BOSC A-E Subcommittee is focused on strategic directions and proposed research priorities
described in the draft A-E StRAP. Future BOSC reviews will address research activities and outcomes over
the course of the StRAP implementation.
Background
In November 2018, A-E provided the BOSC A-E Subcommittee with review materials relating to the draft
A-E StRAP and five charge questions to consider when reviewing the materials. Subsequently, the A-E
Subcommittee:
1. Reviewed the draft StRAP (October 24, 2018 version) and related materials (see Appendix B for list of
materials);
2. Met with the A-E Acting National Program Director and program staff on November 13-14, 2018 in
Research Triangle Park (RTP), North Carolina (NC). In addition to A-E presentations, the Subcommittee
had opportunities to discuss elements of the plan with program staff (see Appendix A for meeting
agenda);
3. Deliberated as a group on the charge questions; and
1 Air and Energy National Research Program, Strategic Research Action Plan, 2019 - 2022, External Review Draft,
October 24, 2018 version. Updated: March 11, 2019 version.
2 Working Together, FY 2018-2022 U.S. EPA Strategic Plan, available at
https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan
5
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
4. Divided into five workgroups to draft initial responses to each charge question.
The five Subcommittee workgroups drafted specific responses to each charge question after the
November 2018 meeting. The Chair and Vice Chair of the Subcommittee prepared an initial draft of the
Subcommittee report based on charge question responses provided by the five small groups, circulated
the initial draft report to all Subcommittee members, asked for review comments, and planned a
teleconference on March 22, 2019 to discuss the draft report.
Prior to the teleconference, EPA released a revised draft StRAP (Draft, March 11, 2019 version) that
reflected some of the feedback and discussion at the November 2018 meeting. As a result, several
recommendations or suggestions made in an earlier draft of the Subcommittee report were no longer
necessary and were removed from the report. These included recommendations to more
comprehensively identify state and tribal research needs in the StRAP and to provide a more detailed
description of the aims and expected products of critical extramural programs. For the same reason, a
suggestion to better articulate anticipated research outcomes was also deleted. Some recommendations
were moved from the list of recommendations to text discussion or included as suggestions.
The report was further revised based on Subcommittee member comments and discussions during the
teleconference on March 22, 2019. The recommendations of the A-E Subcommittee in the draft report
are based on material provided to us prior to and after the November 2018 meeting, presentations made
during the day and a half meeting, and deliberations during the meeting and after the teleconference.
[Anticipated in future]
The draft report was submitted to the full BOSC Executive Committee, which met in June 2019 in RTP, NC
to review and discuss draft reports from each of the ORD BOSC subcommittees. The Chair, Vice Chair, and
Dr. Aneja of the A-E Subcommittee are members of the Executive Committee; Dr. Geffen and Dr. Aneja
participated in the meeting. The A-E Acting National Program Director, Dr. Alan Vette, was present. They
and the members of the BOSC Executive Committee discussed the A-E Subcommittee draft report during
the meeting, asked clarifying questions, provided perspective, and offered comments to the A-E
Subcommittee Chair and Vice Chair.
Subsequently, the A-E Subcommittee Chair and Vice Chair revised the charge question report in response
to questions and comments raised during the BOSC Executive Committee meeting, as well as the
additional information provided during the meeting, and submitted this revised report back to the
Executive Committee for their final review.
StRAP Research Objectives
The draft A-E StRAP outlines research to address EPA's strategic objectives and mandates to improve air
quality, reduce the number of areas currently in nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS), and protect public health and the environment. As described in the draft StRAP, the
A-E research objectives are for FY 2019-2022 are:
Assess Impacts — Improve understanding of the processes regulating human and ecosystem
exposures and of the effects associated with air pollutants at individual, community, regional,
national, and global scales.
6
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Expand Approaches to Prevent and Reduce Emissions — Develop and evaluate new approaches to
prevent and reduce air pollution now and in the future, particularly sustainable, cost-effective, and
innovative multi-pollutant and sector-based approaches.
Advance Measurement and Modeling — Improve the human exposure and environmental modeling,
monitoring, metrics, and information that are needed to address emerging and future risks and inform
air quality decision making at the national, state, tribal, and local levels.
Inform Decisions — Deliver state-of-the-art science and tools to inform implementation of the NAAQS
and other air quality regulations and policies at the national, state, tribal, and local levels.
To achieve these objectives and more clearly align with the EPA Strategic Plan, the A-E research program
is updating its structure to organize research activities under three interrelated topics: (1) Science for Air
Quality Decisions; (2) Extreme Events and Emerging Risks; and (3) Next Generation Methods to Improve
Public Health and the Environment. Although many scientific issues cut across all three research topics,
one in particular - wildland fires - highlights the importance of an integrated science focus and has been
identified separately, as it will draw from activities in all three topic areas. The integration of research on
wildland fires across the three main topics provides a guide to integrated research for other scientific
issues that cut across more than one topic. The following figure is a conceptual diagram from the draft
StRAP that illustrates the updated organizational structure of the A-E program.
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Table 1. Overview of the A-E Research Program Structure
Topic
Research Areas
#1: Approaches to support air quality management programs for
multiple pollutants at multiple scales
Science for
Air Quality
Decisions
#2: Approaches for characterizing source emissions, air quality,
exposure, and mitigation strategies
#3 Public health and environmental responses to air pollution
Extreme
#4: Public health and ecosystem exposures and responses to emerging
air pollutants and sources
#9:
Wildland
Events and
Emerging
Risks
#5: Methods to evaluate environmental benefits and consequences of
changing energy systems
Fires
(Integrated
#6: Methods to enable resilience to future environmental stressors
Science
Focus)
Next
Generation
#7: Emerging approaches to improve air quality and exposure
characterization
Methods to
Improve
Public
Health and
the
Environment
#8: Novel approaches to assess human health and ecosystem impacts
and risks
Appendix 1 of the draft StRAP lists 29 proposed, high-level research outputs, including proposed delivery
timeframes, organized by topic and research area. Outputs are defined as deliverables with the research
results synthesized and/or translated into the format needed by the end user(s). The A-E program plans
to maintain engagement with partners throughout the research process to optimize the utility of the
research products to meet their needs.
Charge Questions and Context
The A-E Subcommittee was charged with five questions as follows:
Q.la: Does the research outlined for the 2019-2022 timeframe support the relevant Agency
priorities as described in the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans?
Q.lb: Each ORD research program undertook a rigorous engagement process to provide
additional detail on specific EPA program and region, state, and tribal needs, the results of which
are summarized in the StRAP objectives and explanations of research topics and areas. How well
does the proposed research program respond to these partner-identified needs?
Q.lc: Does the StRAP, including the topics, research areas, and proposed outputs, clearly describe
the strategic vision of the program? Given the environmental problems and research objectives
8
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
articulated, please comment on the extent to which the StRAP provides a coherent structure
toward making progress on these objectives in the 2019-2022 time frame.
Q.ld: Recognizing ORD's focus on addressing identified partner research needs, in the presence
of reduced scientific staff and resources, are there any other critical emerging environmental
needs or fields of expertise and/or new research methods where this program should consider
investing resources?
Q.le: What are some specific ideas for innovation (including prizes/challenges) and market-based
approaches that the program could use to advance solutions to existing and emerging
environmental problems?
These same five charge questions were posed to each of the BOSC subcommittees to guide their review
of the ORD draft StRAPs. The responses of the A-E subcommittee to the charge questions are contained
in the following section.
Subcommittee Responses to Charge Questions
The Subcommittee appreciates the efforts of the A-E program leadership and staff to develop and deliver
a StRAP that builds on the history of important scientific contributions in the program and positions the
A-E research enterprise for effective scientific advances in the context of evolving Agency priorities. The
research topics identified are based on important science challenges and are well suited to the program's
strengths. The plan also allows for opportunities to address complex and/or emerging scientific issues
with a systems approach, as demonstrated by the cross-cutting design of the wildland fires research area.
Continued attention to development of the workforce of the future is suggested to position the program
for future success. The A-E program has made changes to the engagement process for identifying partner
and stakeholder needs and is encouraged to update the StRAP to more clearly represent the attention to
outreach and dialogue that is continuing to be an important part of the program. The A-E program vision,
while well-articulated in this StRAP, should be carefully implemented with review to ensure that research
work for immediate and short-term responses do not become the sole focus or goal of A-E research
activities. To continue its record of success, A-E work must be a balance of the interests of EPA partners
inside and outside the laboratories with those of the wider A-E science research communities. Striking the
proper balance of work for immediate Agency responses and a commitment to longer-term research on
topics relevant to A-E missions and goals will help ensure that A-E and ORD as a whole can continue leading
advancements in environmental science. Clearer articulation of the applied science questions that could
drive new A-E research, and how those research areas are aligned with A-E scientific strategy and research
priorities, would help ensure a balanced approach in A-E's research plan and agenda.
The StRAP should provide a more detailed description of the aims and expected products of the
extramural research programs which are an integral part of the A-E research agenda. This description will
help ensure a more comprehensive view of the research program. The Subcommittee also encourages
A-E to include potential issues related to energy - currently the "E" in A-E is underrepresented. These
issues certainly represent critical emerging needs in environmental science. Examples are provided in the
report on where proactive research could inform important scientific questions. The A-E StRAP should
also explicitly include environmental justice and citizen science topics that are important to regional, state,
local and tribal agencies, and the public at large, and potentially include energy and environmental justice
as cross-cutting research issues in Appendix 3 of the StRAP. Given the challenging funding environment,
9
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
the use of a variety of approaches to advance solutions is recommended. The Subcommittee suggests
focused utilization of the EPA/Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program (perhaps around
specific challenges to develop Next-Gen answers to emerging environmental problems) as one approach,
as well as a focused call using the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program, which could be utilized for
attacking an emerging environmental challenge. Finally, broader use of interagency partnerships and
collaborations is recommended to maximize efficiencies and makethe best use of intellectual and physical
capital.
Specific responses to each of the five charge questions follow below. The responses highlight strengths of
the plan as identified by the Subcommittee, as well as suggestions for additions or clarifications to the
plan that might reinforce plan priorities and/or enhance understanding of ongoing activities and
initiatives. The responses also include one or more specific recommendations for action by the
A-E program leadership and staff for each charge question.
Charge Question la
Q.la: Does the research outlined for the 2019-2022 timeframe support the relevant Agency
priorities as described in the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans?
Narrative
The EPA Strategic Plan is largely mission-oriented. As stated directly in the plan, it emphasizes a "back-to-
basics" agenda with three overarching goals: 1) refocus the Agency on its core mission (deliver real results
to provide Americans with clean air, land, and water, and ensure chemical safety); 2) restore power to the
states through cooperative federalism (rebalance the power between Washington and the states to create
tangible environmental results for the American people); and 3) lead the Agency through improved
processes and adhere to the rule of law (administer the law as Congress intended, to ensure the Agency is
focused on its statutory obligations under the law).
The ORD Strategic Plan3 focuses on how to operate within ORD to achieve the overall EPA mission. It
outlines how ORD plans to ensure that its science is well formulated, focused on priority issues, conducted
in a manner consistent with scientific protocols and guidelines, and accessible to the public in a way that
is both transparent and understandable.
The Subcommittee has identified the following strengths concerning the alignment of the research
outlined in the draft StRAP with relevant Agency priorities as described in the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans
and provides additional suggestions and recommendations for A-E program leadership consideration.
Strengths
• There is a clear relationship between the outlined research and the EPA Strategic Plan Goal 1: Core
Mission, Objective 1.1, "Improve Air Quality". This approach has historically been a major priority for
the A-E program research agenda, with important outcomes, and will continue to be a key element of
the program moving forward.
• The draft StRAP does a good job tying research priorities to the appropriate regulatory drivers and
policy context, providing links to the relevant regulations and strong justification for the research
agenda described in the plan.
3 EPA, Office of Research and Development, Strategic Plan 2018-2022, available at
https://www.epa.gov/research/epa-office-research-and-development-strategic-plan-2018-2022
10
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
• With respect to alignment with Goal 2: Cooperative Federalism, the StRAP highlights significant efforts
that the A-E staff has engaged in to meet this goal. In each research area, external needs are identified
as context and drivers for the outlined research program.
• The broad portfolio of the program includes both intramural and extramural research activities. One
example of extramural research discussed at the BOSC meeting focused on research centers looking
at the issue of exposure to multiple pollutants. This is a good example of extramural research
contribution to the A-E portfolio that aligns well with the EPA core mission as well as regulatory
compliance work.
• Specific outputs for each research area were provided in the plan, which is aligned with the EPA
approach of using more measurements and metrics to highlight the value of its research and the
accomplishments of its research programs. Appendix 1 of the draft plan summarizes specific outputs
for each research area.
• Overarching wildland fire/biomass burning research intersects with all three research topics and most
of the research areas. It is a good example of a systems approach to important and/or emerging
questions or issues that don't fit neatly into just one of the research topics. The increasing complexity
of environmental issues will continue to demand this integration.
Suggestions
The following suggestions for modification of the StRAP are provided to better highlight alignment of the
research outlined in the draft StRAP with relevant Agency priorities.
• Material in the StRAP itself should be expanded to more clearly show the breadth of the engagement
with partners and stakeholders. Program leadership and staff have emphasized the need to continue
to engage in communications and dialogue throughout the development and implementation of the
StRAP. See response to Charge Question lb for discussion concerning how well the proposed research
program responds to partners' needs.
• The Subcommittee believes that the draft StRAP misses an opportunity to highlight alignment with
EPA Strategic Plan Goal 3: Rule of Law and Process, Objective 3.5, "Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness". Delivering "on-demand" data to the right people at the right time, the grants
processes, and information management are specifically described in the EPA Strategic Plan as central
to meeting this objective. The A-E program clearly have processes in place that can contribute to this
goal. The Subcommittee suggests the StRAP could better highlight how the program will "acquire,
generate, manage, use, and share information" to more clearly demonstrate alignment with this EPA
goal.
• The Subcommittee encourages A-E to include more discussion in their StRAP about the workforce
requirements and workplace enhancements to implement the action plan. This will provide stronger
alignment with ORD Goal 3: Enhancing the Workforce and Workplace. Recognizing that there has
been significant attrition in A-E staff, some priority on building and supporting the workforce and work
environment would be helpful. The Subcommittee appreciates that this is a challenge given ongoing
budget constraints, but also believes this is an important priority for the future. Creative approaches
to engaging in partnerships with other ORD programs and/or extramural research institutions might
be considered.
• While the Subcommittee believes that there is good alignment between the research outlined in the
draft StRAP with relevant Agency priorities as described in the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans, the
structure of the draft StRAP does not make the alignment clear. See response to Charge Question lc
for discussion of this issue.
11
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
• The Subcommittee recognizes that the contents of Appendix 1 are not intended to be exhaustive or
final. As A-E finalizes the outputs, we encourage the program to continue its focus on alignment with
ORD's translational science goals.
• We encourage the A-E program to ensure that scope is maintained for exploratory research in their
StRAP to enable the Agency to respond to emerging issues. The pace of scientific discovery continues
to accelerate, and the problems of tomorrow are likely to be more complex and challenging than
those currently known. It is critical that the StRAP has some level of flexibility built in to evaluate,
identify, and pursue emerging scientific challenges that are aligned with EPA's primary mission and
vision.
Recommendations
The Subcommittee offers two recommendations to capitalize on opportunities to demonstrate how the
research outlined for the 2019-2022 timeframe supports the relevant Agency priorities as described in
the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans.
Recommendation la.l: Identify and describe in the StRAP the process by which A-E will balance
immediate needs within EPA and longer-term, exploratory research objectives so that A-E and ORD can
be prepared for future science needs. The action plan should include a process for review and evaluation
of this balanced approach.
Recommendation la.2: Add discussion in the StRAP to reflect activities by A-E (current and planned)
concerning EPA Strategic Plan Objective 3.5, "Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness", and ORD Goal 3:
Enhancing the Workforce and Workplace.
Charge Question lb
Q.lb: Each ORD research program undertook a rigorous engagement process to provide
additional detail on specific EPA program and region, state, and tribal needs, the results of which
are summarized in the StRAP objectives and explanations of research topics and areas. How well
does the proposed research program respond to these partner-identified needs?
Narrative
EPA ORD, and in particular the A-E national program, has made changes to the engagement process used
to incorporate the needs of stakeholders and partners into the strategic planning process. ORD has long
had relationships with the Agency's program and regional offices but has not engaged as much with other
groups (e.g., states and tribes). There is clear intent to interact more broadly with a wide variety of
stakeholders in developing and implementing the StRAP over the next few years, rather than focusing
only on the partner organizations within EPA. Within ORD, A-E has made a good initial start by looking at
ECOS and the National Tribal Air Association (NTAA) air quality priorities. The StRAP reflects the needs
identified [to date] by programs, regions, states and/or tribes within each research area. The
Subcommittee encourages A-E to continue to engage with these groups and others, and specifically
continue conversations with the states, as it refines the StRAP and implements the action plan. This is a
long-term project of building relationships, and it is helpful to have a strategy for further developing
processes and to have metrics to assess progress in this endeavor.
12
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
In response to the charge question, the Subcommittee considered how the engagement process is
explained in the draft A-E StRAP, whether A-E is responding to the needs identified, and whether there
are partners or stakeholders that require additional outreach.
The Subcommittee has identified the following strengths concerning the engagement process and the
alignment of the research outlined in the draft StRAP with partner-identified needs, and provides
additional suggestions and recommendations for A-E program leadership consideration.
Strengths
• The presentations and discussion at the BOSC meeting demonstrated that A-E has accomplished
significant outreach and engagement with a variety of stakeholders, although not all of these efforts
are clearly reflected in the draft StRAP. Reaching out to external partners is an important element of
EPA's outreach, and we encourage the A-E program leadership and staff to identify approaches that
will enable them to continue dialogue with these groups.
• Appendix 2 in the StRAP provides a high-level summary of the needs of states and tribes. Additional
information on needs of states and tribes was also identified in the draft StRAP within each research
area. The StRAP report responds to the needs that were identified.
• The plan identifies key issues and outputs that build on the technical expertise and foresight of A-E,
and at the same time, provide great benefit to external partners (e.g., states and tribes) who do not
have the resources or technical staff to fully articulate and respond to emerging issues (e.g., per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS). When problems come up, these stakeholders need EPA to help
mobilize resources and talent to rapidly provide assistance.
Suggestions
• We encourage A-E to continue discussion with tribes and states, using the process outlined in Dr. Alan
Vette's presentation to the Subcommittee. It can be helpful to have separate discussion with tribal
organizations to ensure that their voices are heard. In addition, A-E should commit to ongoing
communication and updates with the states, tribes, and other external partners as the research topics
and projects are refined.
• The draft StRAP made a good start at identifying partner and stakeholder needs, but it would be
helpful to expand on how those needs will be addressed and how A-E will continue to refine its
understanding of the needs. A process for prioritizing needs as well as checking back with partners to
see if new needs are identified would be useful to summarize in the StRAP.
• The draft StRAP misses an opportunity to highlight the extensive A-E outreach efforts to date and the
connection between outreach and program design. The Subcommittee suggests adding detail on the
process of engagement and commitment to continuing dialogue as discussed in the
recommendations. Slide 38 in Alan Vette's presentation to the Subcommittee ("Input from outside
stakeholders") should be included in the StRAP as a means to summarize how A-E connected with the
outside stakeholders.
• Reaching out to ECOS is a good first start, but this group represents a high-level view from state
agencies. The Subcommittee suggests that A-E consider reaching out to the National Association of
Clean Air Agencies (NACAA), the Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies (AAPCA), and multi-
jurisdictional organizations (MJOs) to allow for more granularity of the issues. The MJOs have good
relationships among states and provide more regional perspective from states because they don't
13
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
require consensus from the larger group (NACAA/AAPCA). Some examples of MJOs are MARAMA,
WESTAR, NESCAUM, LADCO, CENSARA, CENRAP, CARB, NTAA.4
• The program could leverage the existing relationship with ECOS to include more specific questions
(items) about emerging needs from the states on the ERIS States' Research Needs Survey. ORD and
A-E can also make use of the regional offices' connections to the states and local organizations to
identify emerging needs.
• As A-E formulates its research priorities and plans, engaging more intentionally with MJOs as research
partners could be valuable. Formalized procedures for engaging in conversation with MJOs are
recommended; for example, make technical presentations to MJOs on A-E research programs and
facilities and connect A-E principal investigators with specific organizations/individuals on projects.
• A-E creates the A-E research news quarterly web newsletter and science matters newsletter and these
are great resources. These resources should be highlighted in the StRAP as part of the overall A-E
strategic outreach and engagement plan, and could also be advertised more to states, MJOs, non-
governmental organizations (NGOS), academia, and trade groups.
Recommendations
The Subcommittee offers three recommendations concerning the engagement process and the
alignment of the research outlined in the draft StRAP with partner-identified needs.
Recommendation lb.l: There is a need to have more engagement with states and tribes, in particular,
educational outreach on A-E capabilities. It would also be helpful to educate partners on the kinds of
questions EPA can answer. For example, EPA staff might attend MJO meetings (in person or via webinar)
to present ORD capabilities and then ask questions of states' needs. This can be a good mechanism for
identifying emerging issues.
Recommendation lb.2: Academia, science associations, etc. are mentioned in the draft StRAP, but it
would be helpful to discuss in more detail how these outreach efforts occur and are utilized by EPA.
NGOs are not discussed and should be included (unless they are considered community action groups).
Recommendation lb.3: We encourage continued collaboration and communication through sensor
workshops/wildfire workshops and including communities involved in these issues to be a part of the
workshops.
Charge Question lc
Q.lc: Does the StRAP, including the topics, research areas, and proposed outputs, clearly describe
the strategic vision of the program? Given the environmental problems and research objectives
articulated, please comment on the extent to which the StRAP provides a coherent structure
toward making progress on these objectives in the 2019-2022 time frame.
Narrative
The draft A-E StRAP provides a summary of topics, research needs, and outputs related to energy and the
atmosphere, including the role of EPA in helping improve air quality, that clearly describe the strategic
4The full list of acronyms can be found on page 4.
14
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
vision of the program. The A E strategic vision directly addresses a subset of the vision of the entire EPA
program, as indicated by yellow ovals in the figure below:
The engagement of A-E partners in the development of the St RAP will facilitate the distribution of
information related to air pollution and the other goals and objectives in the EPA 2018-2022 Strategic
Plan. This broader participation should also encourage individuals to provide feedback on a variety of
topics related to air pollution, including emerging measurement techniques, newly identified pollutants,
methodology for pollution reduction, etc.
The Subcommittee understands that this plan is strategic, and not an implementation or action plan. The
Subcommittee commends A-E for setting forth ambitious goals in the draft StRAP, some of which (e.g.,
the role of forest and wildland fires in air pollution) will likely extend beyond 2022. The StRAP provides a
good start in addressing science questions under the broad themes of A-E research. The work on forest
and wildland fire is especially highly relevant and well-developed. The A-E Program is supporting work at
EPA ORD National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) Atmospheric Model Development (AMD) Branch,
for example, that could help advance air pollution modeling related to the research area of wildland fire,
especially if additional resources are available. The plans for forest and wildland fire work described in the
draft StRAP should also provide an opening for continued testing of new and improved sampling methods,
including satellite remote sensing of forest fire characteristics such as burn area, etc., under a broad range
of conditions relevant to many areas of importance to regional and local policies. We applaud the effort
of A-E in bringing together this draft StRAP that clearly demonstrates EPA's continued support of scientific
research and overall environmental efforts related to atmospheric pollution and energy utilization in the
United States.
Communication mechanisms associated with the StRAP must be carefully designed, and implemented to
be supportive of the science conducted in the A-E program. The first stages of communication
developments are described in the draft StRAP for making desired information available. However, the
tasking for information sharing should not distract from the core scientific mission of EPA ORD A-E. The
A-E Subcommittee recognizes that EPA is working under conditions of limited resources and that priorities
need to be clearly delineated to maximize the effectiveness of chosen communication mechanisms.
The draft StRAP also shows a substantial commitment to both enhanced shared accountability and
increases in transparency and participation by a range of partners. Ongoing engagement with various
A
Provide for Clean & Safe Water
Revitalize Land & Prevent Contamination
Ensure Safety of Chemicals in Marketplace
Enhance Shared Accountability
Increase Transparencv & Public Participate
Cooperative
Federalism
Compliance with the Law
Create Consistency & Certainty
Prioritize Robust Science^^
Improve Efficiency & Effectiveness
Rule of Law & Process
Figure 2. EPA Strategic Plan (FY 2018-2022)
15
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
partners will encourage understanding and support for the scientific approaches used in regulatory and
specialized monitoring air quality and the reduction of air pollution to meet EPA and ORD Strategic Plan
objectives. Feedback from the partners identified in the StRAP will encourage and strengthen
relationships at A-E that will be helpful in meeting EPA objectives for monitoring and decreasing air
pollution, and help shape current and future activities.
The Subcommittee has identified the following strengths concerning the strategic vision of the program,
and the extent to which the StRAP provides a structure for making progress toward outcomes in the 2019-
2022 timeframe, and provides additional suggestions and recommendations for A-E program leadership
consideration.
Strengths
• The draft StRAP provides an excellent general summary of topics and research areas for the A-E
national program and the A-E program vision. It sketches a coherent general structure for progress
against those topics and the larger general ORD and EPA objectives and goals. The document shows
the importance of addressing issues related to energy utilization and air quality and sketches the
general picture of how these research areas are related and are mutually reinforcing. The A-E research
vision is appropriately ambitious and thoughtfully built on well-known historical successes in Air,
Climate, and Energy (ACE) and EPA ORD; this is an excellent template for the A-E programs.
• The additional emphasis in this draft StRAP on planning for greater participation of partners from
diverse groups (other governmental agencies, industry, scientific groups, NGOs, states, and tribes),
and on related translation of A-E science products for informing decisions, are very positive aspects
of this plan.
• The draft StRAP shows that effective and efficient environmental policy must be built from well-
established science with the flexibility to respond to any future policy-relevant questions. This policy
needs to address known environmental and energy components, recognizing the relative importance
of these components in the United States will change. The protection of human and ecosystem health
depends on the ability of A-E to marshal science to account for effects of those changes, many of
which are currently unknown.
• The draft StRAP thoughtfully shows points of possible integration of intra- and extramural research
on A-E topics.
Suggestions
• The present draft StRAP document could benefit from the development of a listing (possibly a table)
that would show priorities and how they fit into the overall vision of EPA and the StRAP.
• Mechanisms could be developed through internal collaboration with EPA offices which receive
science products from A-E to facilitate access of those A-E partners to the data sets, reports, papers,
etc., as well as in the translation of those science products to help make decisions informed by the
best A-E science outputs. Providing general and flexible time lines for the major components of the
plan would be helpful for demonstrating the connections from A-E science to the partners identified
in the StRAP. The inclusion of further consideration of the use of a system's approach to help integrate
the various components, including the social aspects, would be helpful.
• Particular research lines could be described in slightly more detail as a means to illustrate where, for
example, the air pollution and energy resource components of A-E could be brought together to show
how this work advances the science of each component relevant to EPA and its partners.
• The plan needs clearer articulation of the applied science questions that will drive new research for
A-E to meet its obligation to remain at the forefront of environmental science research relevant to
16
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
EPA's missions. An explicit systems integrative approach as suggested above will help illustrate and
delineate separate lines of research and where and how those lines cross to enhance the usefulness
of work on each applied science question to A-E and ORD.
• More specific descriptions of formalized procedures for producing and iterating science research
questions need to be provided along with identification of the impacted scientific communities. These
questions should be dedicated to protecting the A-E aspects of human health and the environment.
Better articulation of these questions would more strongly tie them to the general EPA Strategic Plan
objectives.
• The Subcommittee has some concern that the draft StRAP sourcing of research ideas is too far in the
direction of A-E's partners and product end-users, leaving insufficient attention to the environmental
science research communities relevant to work under the specific A-E components of ORD. The
continued close integration of A-E with the wider atmospheric and energy research communities
outside EPA is vital to ensuring that EPA ORD can maintain its position of advancing environmental
science. An element of a more inclusive approach could be articulation of a process for identifying
and prioritizing work preparing for future 'unknown unknowns'.
• A clearer description of specific motivating science questions and why the A-E program is best suited
to answer those questions would strengthen the connection of A-E work to the ORD goal of remaining
at the forefront of environmental science research. The science challenges outlined early in the plan
may be a part of this motivation, but they are organizationally removed from the specific research
topics and areas in the StRAP. This added description would improve the utility of the StRAP as a
framework for planning implementation by suggesting where A-E can best allocate resources within
its program and where partnering with other EPA ORD components and other partners outside EPA
ORD can support the work at A-E. Finer articulation of those science questions would also help
facilitate the re-orientation and selection of science partners for A-E and help shape the various
science products needed to meet ORD and A-E objectives and further deliver science to support EPA's
missions.
• A-E could improve the StRAP with better developed approaches for distinguishing forest and wildland
fire effects from industrial air pollutants and pollutants from other sources. These approaches should
support determinations under current EPA regulatory policy related to allowable exceedances under
wildfire smoke conditions. Such information would also provide an opening for advancement of
source apportionment modeling and the enhanced representation of chemical plume modeling inside
large-domain air quality models.
17
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Recommendations
The Subcommittee offers three recommendations regarding the strategic vision of the program, and the
extent to which the StRAP provides a structure for making progress toward outcomes in the 2019-2022
timeframe.
Recommendation lc.l: The StRAP should include a description of the process or mechanisms and
general timelines that will be used to facilitate access of the A-E partners to data sets, reports, papers,
etc., as well as how A-E or ORD will work to translate those science products for broader use in informing
decision-making.
Recommendation lc.2: The A-E program vision must balance the interests of partners with those of the
environmental science research communities to ensure they remain in a leadership role in advancing
environmental science. Clearer articulation of the applied science questions that will drive new research
for A-E would help refine the research plan and agenda. The present draft StRAP document should
include a listing (possibly a table) of research priorities and how they fit into the overall vision of EPA and
the StRAP.
Recommendation lc.3: A clearer description of specific motivating science questions and why the A-E
program is best suited to answer those questions would strengthen the connection of A-E work to the
ORD goal of remaining at the forefront of environmental science research. The science challenges
outlined early in the plan may be a part of this motivation, but they are organizationally removed from
the specific research topics and areas in the StRAP.
Charge Question Id
Q.ld: Recognizing ORD's focus on addressing identified partner research needs, in the presence
of reduced scientific staff and resources, are there any other critical emerging environmental
needs or fields of expertise and/or new research methods where this program should consider
investing resources?
Narrative
The Subcommittee recognizes A-E for its proposed work on emerging environmental needs and
investments in new research methods as described in the draft StRAP. Air and energy issues range across
wide scales in space (e.g., indoor to regional to global air pollution) and time (e.g., acute to chronic health
effects), which demand innovative tools and multidisciplinary approaches. The A-E program has proposed
a relatively modest (in comparison to past years) but balanced research portfolio with investments in new
tools (e.g., low-cost sensors and satellite products) and scientific investigations on criteria pollutants,
hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), and emerging issues (e.g., wildland fire impacts).
The Subcommittee identified the following strengths of ORD's A-E program to address critical emerging
environmental needs, and its investments in staff expertise and research methods, and provides
additional suggestions and recommendations for A-E program leadership consideration.
18
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Strengths
• The draft A-E StRAP recognizes resource constraints on both intramural and extramural resources
from prior years due to staff cuts, loss of critical expertise, and extramural funding reductions, and
focuses on what is expected to be doable with anticipated resources.
• The A-E research program successfully balances EPA's responsibilities regarding some legacy areas of
scientific investigation (e.g., particulate matter, or PM, health effects, air quality models, cookstove
emissions) and critical emerging areas, such as the proposed research on ecosystem and human
vulnerability to wildland fires, and wildland fire risk mitigation and communication.
• The bibliography of 878 peer-reviewed publications and other documents published from 2015 to
2018 demonstrates ORD's current success in identifying research priorities and providing important
and scientifically relevant outcomes.
• The research program on PFAS demonstrates ORD's multi-disciplinary thinking on emerging
environmental topics.
• The draft A-E StRAP material describing the Proposed Outputs (FY2019-2022) for research on both
legacy and emerging areas of investigation was well described and aligned with the identified
program, regional, state, and/or tribal needs.
Suggestions
• The extramural research program (existing STAR and ACE Center grants, Health Effects Institute
support) addresses important environmental topics (e.g., health effects from low concentration
exposures, cumulative impacts of multiple-pollutants, and organic carbon). While a high-level
description is provided in the StRAP, an explicit description of how the extramural efforts are
complementary with A-E intramural efforts in selected research topics and areas would give a more
complete picture of the full research program.
• The A-E StRAP should outline potential issues related to energy in more detail - currently the "E" in
A-E is underrepresented. Examples of where proactive research could inform important scientific
questions include air quality impacts of distributed generation, impacts of fires and emergency
situations at energy storage facilities, potential emissions of chemicals used in carbon capture
systems, and end of life issues (e.g., solar panel disposal and potential impacts).
• The A-E StRAP should explicitly include environmental justice topics that are important to regional,
state, local, and tribal agencies, and the public at large. These can fit into existing efforts on use of
low-cost sensors, satellite data, wildland fire impacts, etc.
• There could be more attention to HAPs, especially toxics emitted from brake and tire wear (where
ORD can link with European and California efforts), and small stationary facilities (e.g., hexavalent
chromium) that have become relatively more important as PM2.5- and ozone-related health effects
are reduced.
• ORD's indoor air quality program has a long history of advancing knowledge on time-activity patterns
and microenvironmental exposures to all age groups, indoor pollutant sources and emissions, radon
exposure, exposure reduction strategies, etc. The A-E StRAP has a proper focus on wrapping up
ongoing work on cook stoves and new work on indoor penetration of wildland fire smoke, but there
could be a stronger effort to rebuild broad staff expertise, seek partnerships with international and
other agencies, and link with work on energy systems and environmental justice. For example,
building energy efficiency measures have implications for indoor pollutant exposures.
• There could be more attention to simplified tools to assist Programs, regional, state, local, and tribal
agencies with limited resources in addressing their statutory responsibilities. Examples include
reduced-form air quality models for State Implementation Plans, simpler tools for source control
19
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
prioritization (e.g., intake fraction approach, ozone and PM formation scales), identification of long-
range transport and global climate impacts on air quality, and identification of super-emitting sources
for enforcement purposes.
• The readability of A-E StRAP could be improved with a better mapping of the report's objectives,
topics, etc. with a matrix or other type of table or chart. As currently written, the plan identifies four
research program objectives, each of which is supported by a number of science challenges. The link
between those and the research topics and areas, which appear to be the core of the A-E strategic
research plan, needs to be clarified.
Recommendations
The A-E Subcommittee recognizes that ORD is in the midst of what could be a large downsizing in staff
and extramural funding, and that its research portfolio over the next three fiscal years should reflect this
reduced baseline but still be comprehensive and nimble enough to address the priority research needs
of the Nation. Until there is more clarity on the resources available through the budget process and
implementation of the Administrator's priorities, the Subcommittee offers the following
recommendations on ORD's A-E program to address critical emerging environmental needs, and its
investments in staff expertise and research methods
Recommendation ld.l: Add energy and environmental justice as Cross-cutting Research Issues in
Appendix 3.
Recommendation Id.2: Consider adding work on HAPs (brake and tire wear, small stationary sources)
and simplified tools for State Implementation Plan (SIP) modeling, source control prioritization, and
enforcement, as resources allow.
Recommendation Id.3: Consider rebuilding staff expertise on building ventilation and other indoor air
quality topics.
Charge Question le
Q.le: What are some specific ideas for innovation (including prizes/challenges) and market-based
approaches that the program could use to advance solutions to existing and emerging
environmental problems?
Narrative
As stated in the draft StRAP, "the [Clean Air Act] CAA states that EPA shall conduct research "related to
the causes, effects (including health and welfare effects), extent, prevention, and control of air pollution."
The CAA further requires that this includes "research, testing, and development of methods for sampling,
measurement, monitoring, analysis, and modeling of air pollutants" and research on "the short-term and
long-term effects of air pollutants ... on human health." Further research listed under the CAA includes
efforts to "improve understanding of the short-term and long-term causes, effects, and trends of
ecosystems damage from air pollutants on ecosystems."
The Subcommittee applauds the Agency's long history of promoting innovative approaches to solving
environmental problems. Historically the Agency used STAR grants to develop mission-oriented scientific
projects and issued SBIR awards to encourage scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to develop new
and potentially marketable environmentally relevant devices and techniques. These programs have been
20
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
a successful element of EPA's portfolio. While the Subcommittee recognizes that A-E does not control the
SBIR and the STAR programs, we recommend that A-E grasp any opportunity to use these programs to
the extent allowed by available budget. These programs have historically enabled EPA, through its
extramural research operation, to work broadly with academia, trade associations and industry to
augment its intramural research program. For example, A-E played an integral role in developing the
highly successful market-based Acid Rain program.
In addition to capitalizing to the greatest possible extent on the STAR and SBIR programs, we encourage
A-E to continue to promote innovations to deal with next generation environmental problems, despite
the reduction in staff and financial resources imposed by the "lean" agency profile. EPA can incentivize
innovation with efficiency and fiscal responsibility through recognition of exceptionally high-quality
research that advances the A-E mission. Criteria for recognition can include individual or team initiative,
relevance to the Agency's core mission, responsiveness to state, local, and tribal partner needs, impact
on the state-of-the-science/technology, and innovation that leads to cost savings. Awards could involve
national recognition for excellence, potentially coupled with monetary awards for exceptional efforts.
The Subcommittee suggests that A-E focus available EPA/SBIR resources on specific challenges to develop
Next-Gen answers to emerging environmental problems. The Agency should encourage cost sharing.
Potential topics might include:
• Air quality impacts on downwind communities and effects on health, which requires research on
particle chemistry, exposure scenarios, uptake and distribution in respiratory tracts, and translocation
to other organs.
• Economic impacts of the effects of pollutants at a range of temporal and spatial scales.
• Fallout of toxic products on soil with subsequent contamination of groundwater; impact on aquatic
species (e.g., GenX in Eastern NC).
• Contamination of agricultural products by toxic fire-related compounds such as polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons and toxic metals.
• Planning for the future using appropriate climate models to predict number and intensity of wildfires.
• Pesticide use where the product is sprayed as an important exposure route for residents in nearby
communities. The crossover is damage to forests by pests leading to increased risk of fires and the
risk of bystander exposure. Other air contamination aspects of pesticide usage could be a
collaborative effort across EPA divisions and A-E can provide significant expertise related to exposure
modeling, exposure assessment, risk assessment, and risk management.
The Subcommittee also suggests that A-E Environmental Excellence Awards could be established and
presented to industry partners and state agencies that demonstrate innovative solutions that reduce
emissions, health effects, or environmental impacts. Firms could benefit by advertising that they received
an EPA award for environmental excellence. This type of incentive worked well with the "ENERGY STAR"
designation program. EPA could also provide testing, certification, or validation for innovative
measurement instruments or approaches and control technologies. Such an award program could be
linked with an SBIR program, which would allow new techniques that solve environmental challenges to
be more fully developed and eventually come to market.
A-E could sponsor environmental challenges at relevant national meetings of scientific and trade
associations that involve local high school and college teams to compete to solve a local problem selected
by the conference organizers with the collaboration of the EPA regional staff. The American Chemical
Society and the Air and Waste Management Association both host such annual challenges, which might
21
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
provide good opportunities for collaboration. The environmental challenges could be cross-cutting across
ORD research programs.
The Subcommittee suggests that A-E consider developing an EPA Mission Oriented Collaborative Research
Program to invite scientists, engineers, stakeholders, tribal, and other partners to propose an approach
to solve a current or emerging environmental problem. Groups with winning proposals might then work
with an A-E team, bringing to bear EPA resources or expertise if specific equipment or methodology were
found to be helpful. EPA could also reach out to foundations and form public/private partnerships that
could leverage ongoing and new innovative efforts.
EPA could also sponsor partner activities at EPA facilities by expanding a guest researcher and/or intern
program, as well as potentially broadening its engagement with other agencies. Ideas include:
• Inviting candidates who propose an innovative solution to a current or emerging environmental
problem to work with A-E scientists to test a new approach or device where access to EPA resources
and facilities could accelerate progress.
• Facilitating the testing of developed instruments, procedures, and technologies at EPA or in the field
at partner's facilities.
• Augmenting resources by reaching out to foundations and making use of expertise at other agencies
(e.g. National Air and Space Administration [NASA] and the U.S Department of Energy [DOE]) that
have environmental mandates to expand specific programs.
• Partnering with other agencies on key research agendas and topics, maximizing efficiencies, and
making the best use of intellectual and physical capital. As just one example, the U.S. National Climate
Assessment, a multi-agency report released late in 2018, recommends five foundational cross-cutting
research areas, the first two of which (integrated natural and social science, engineering, and other
approaches; and observations, monitoring, and infrastructure for critical data collection and analysis)
are well suited for A-E to address in partnership with others.
The Subcommittee would like to emphasize the importance of improving and applying EPA's AERMOD,
Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ), and Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program
(BenMAP) software for the purpose of accurately monetizing the cost of airborne pollutant emissions, as
a first step in developing market-based incentives for mitigating current or emerging environmental
issues. Reasons include:
• Market-based incentives (MBIs) could be useful and cost-effective alternatives to imposing new
regulations for pollution control.
• Environmental taxes, deposit refund systems, and tradeable pollution permits could be suitable
instruments for inducing pollution abatement behavior.
• A key barrier to employing MBIs to promote pollution abatement is developing a realistic dollar value
to be applied to the value of a tax or credit, which could be addressed and verified by the application
of appropriate EPA computational models.
• Updates and modifications of EPA's computational arsenal could support the development by EPA,
state and tribal partners of pollutant trading or subsidy strategies or approaches as alternatives to
new regulatory actions.
22
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Recommendations
The Subcommittee offers three recommendations regarding ideas for innovation (including
prizes/challenges) and market-based approaches that the program could use to advance solutions to
existing and emerging environmental problems.
Recommendation le.l: While the Subcommittee recognizes that A-E does not control the EPA/SBIR
program, A-E should grasp any opportunity to use the SBIR program to develop Next-Gen answers to
emerging environmental problems. Potential topics are listed in the text.
Recommendation le.2: While the Subcommittee recognizes that A-E does not control the STAR
program, A-E should take advantage of any access to the STAR program to provide specific challenges to
scientists and engineers to identify an emerging environmental problem and submit a concept proposal
for addressing that concern. The A-E program could encourage cost sharing and provide funding and/or
other resources to one or more concepts that would advance the strategic priorities of the program.
Recommendation le.3: Establish an Interagency Task Force to focus on future needs and to make
available or share resources. In the lean agency framework, the utilization of existing equipment and
facilities that are underused could be maximized through intra-agency, interagency, and collaborative
research initiatives. An active program of collaboration and cooperation should be fostered to maximize
efficiency and make the best use of intellectual and physical capital.
Summary List of Recommendations
This section provides a listing in a single location of the recommendations provided earlier in the report
in response to each charge question.
Charge Question la. Does the research outlined for the 2019-2022 timeframe support the
relevant Agency priorities as described in the EPA and ORD Strategic Plans?
Recommendation la.l: Identify and describe in the StRAP the process by which A-E will balance
immediate needs within EPA and longer-term, exploratory research objectives so that A-E and ORD can
be prepared for future science needs. The action plan should include a process for review and evaluation
of this balanced approach.
Recommendation la.2: Add discussion in the StRAP to reflect activities by A-E (current and planned)
concerning EPA Strategic Plan Objective 3.5, "Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness", and ORD Goal 3:
Enhancing the Workforce and Workplace.
Charge Question lb. Each ORD research program undertook a rigorous engagement process to
provide additional detail on specific EPA program and region, state, and tribal needs, the results of
which are summarized in the StRAP objectives and explanations of research topics and areas. How
well does the proposed research program respond to these partner-identified needs?
Recommendation lb.l: There is a need to have more engagement with states and tribes, in particular,
educational outreach on A-Ecapabilities A-E. It would also be helpful to educate partners on the kinds of
questions EPA can answer. For example, EPA staff might attend MJO meetings (in person or via webinar)
to present ORD capabilities and then ask questions of states' needs. This can be a good mechanism for
identifying emerging issues.
23
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Recommendation lb.2: Academia, science associations, etc. are mentioned in the draft StRAP, but it
would be helpful to discuss in more detail how these outreach efforts occur and are utilized by EPA. NGOs
are not discussed and should be included (unless they are considered community action groups).
Recommendation lb.3: We encourage continued collaboration and communication through sensor
workshops/wildfire workshops and including communities involved in these issues to be a part of the
workshops.
Charge Question lc. Does the StRAP, including the topics, research areas, and proposed outputs,
clearly describe the strategic vision of the program? Given the environmental problems and
research objectives articulated, please comment on the extent to which the StRAP provides a
coherent structure toward making progress on these objectives in the 2019-2022 time frame.
Recommendation lc.l: The StRAP should include a description of the process or mechanisms and general
timelines that will be used to facilitate access of the A-E partners to data sets, reports, papers, etc., as well
as how A-E or ORD will work to translate those science products for broader use in informing decision-
making.
Recommendation lc.2: The A-E program vision must balance the interests of partners with those of the
environmental science research communities to ensure they remain in a leadership role in advancing
environmental science. Clearer articulation of the applied science questions that will drive new research
for A-E would help refine the research plan and agenda. The present draft StRAP document should include
a listing (possibly a table) of research priorities and how they fit into the overall vision of EPA and the
StRAP.
Recommendation lc.3: A clearer description of specific motivating science questions and why the A-E
program is best suited to answer those questions would strengthen the connection of A-E work to the
ORD goal of remaining at the forefront of environmental science research. The science challenges outlined
early in the plan may be a part of this motivation, but they are organizationally removed from the specific
research topics and areas in the StRAP.
Charge Question Id. Recognizing ORD's focus on addressing identified partner
research needs, in the presence of reduced scientific staff and resources, are there
any other critical emerging environmental needs or fields of expertise and/or new
research methods where this program should consider investing resources?
Recommendation ld.l: Add energy and environmental justice as Cross-cutting Research Issues in
Appendix 3.
Recommendation Id.2: Consider adding work on HAPs (brake and tire wear, small stationary sources)
and simplified tools for State Implementation Plan (SIP) modeling, source control prioritization, and
enforcement, as resources allow.
Recommendation Id.3: Consider rebuilding staff expertise on building ventilation and other indoor air
quality topics.
24
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Charge Question le. What are some specific ideas for innovation (including
prizes/challenges) and market-based approaches that the program could use to
advance solutions to existing and emerging environmental problems?
Recommendation le.l: While the Subcommittee recognizes that A-E does not control the EPA/SBIR
program, A-E should grasp any opportunity to use the SBIR program to develop Next-Gen answers to
emerging environmental problems. Potential topics are listed in the text.
Recommendation le.2: While the Subcommittee recognizes that A-E does not control the STAR program,
A-E should take advantage of any access to the STAR program to provide specific challenges to scientists
and engineers to identify an emerging environmental problem and submit a concept proposal for
addressing that concern. The A-E program could encourage cost sharing and provide funding and/or other
resources to one or more concepts that would advance the strategic priorities of the program.
Recommendation le.3: Establish an Interagency Task Force to focus on future needs and to make
available or share resources. In the lean agency framework, the utilization of existing equipment and
facilities that are underused could be maximized through intra-agency, interagency, and collaborative
research initiatives. An active program of collaboration and cooperation should be fostered to maximize
efficiency and make the best use of intellectual and physical capital.
Conclusions
Overall, the A-E Subcommittee found that the draft A-E StRAP clearly describes a strategic vision and
action plan that supports the Agency priorities and strategic plans. The A-E research program focuses on
the science and engineering approaches needed to improve air quality, reduce the number of
nonattainment areas in the United States, and protect public health and the environment. The draft StRAP
effectively links A-E research priorities with the appropriate regulatory drivers and policy context for the
Agency, and lays out a research agenda that balances the needs of stakeholders and partners with
important and emerging topics in environmental science. The plan could do more to highlight the overall
integrated research portfolio with some description of extramural research efforts, particularly as
complementary with A-E intramural efforts around key strategic topics; this would give a more
comprehensive view of the full research program. The Subcommittee also encourages A-E to place a
priority on ensuring the portfolio effectively balances near-term needs within the Agency with longer-
term, exploratory research objectives. Striking the proper balance of work for immediate Agency
responses and a commitment to longer-term research on topics relevant to A-E missions and goals will
help ensure that A-E and ORD as a whole can continue leading advancements in environmental science.
The new structure for the A-E research program, around three science topics and one integrated topic,
provides a useful construct for the future directions of the program. Each of the three topics and related
research areas are well suited to the program's strengths, while also supporting opportunities to address
complex and/or emerging scientific issues with a systems approach. The plan successfully balances EPA's
responsibilities regarding historical areas of scientific investigation (i.e., air quality models) with critical
emerging areas. The selection of wildfires research as a cross-cutting topic, as an example, addresses an
important science gap, leveraging the strengths of the A-E team. Providing opportunities in the plan for
emerging, cross-cutting areas is important, as the increasing complexity of environmental issues will
continue to require integration across more traditional research topics. The plan would benefit from a
clearer articulation of the applied science questions that will drive the research agenda, aligning these
25
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
questions more clearly with the specific research topics and areas in the StRAP. The links between the
program objectives, science challenges, research topics, and research areas are not as clear as they could
be. The Subcommittee also suggests that the plan should outline potential issues related to energy in
more detail - the "E" in A-E is currently underrepresented. The StRAP could also be improved with a
greater articulation of expected outcomes related to the research in support of EPA/ORD strategic
priorities and objectives.
The presentations and discussion at the review meeting demonstrated the extent of the outreach and
engagement by the A-E team with partners and stakeholders, though not all of these efforts are reflected
in the draft StRAP. The document could do more to clearly convey the breadth of engagement as well as
the commitment to continued dialogue and interaction. There are a number of specific recommendations
in the report that discuss areas where additional clarity would be useful. The Subcommittee also notes
that it is important for the program to retain a balance between partner-driven research priorities and
those required to ensure that the A-E team maintains its leadership role in the science community and
continues to fulfill its mission. To that end, we encourage the A-E program to ensure that scope is
maintained for exploratory research that allows the Agency to respond to emerging issues.
The Subcommittee encourages A-E to continue to pursue innovative approaches to conducting their
research and to rewarding/encouraging their scientists. This is particularly important given the recent
reductions in staff and financial resources. A number of ideas are provided for consideration by the A-E
program, including awards and recognition of excellence both for program scientists who have achieved
exceptionally noteworthy research or technology outcomes and for industry partners and/or state
agencies that demonstrate innovation solutions. The Subcommittee reinforced the value of the EPA SBIR
and STAR programs, and encourages the Agency to reinvigorate those programs, perhaps with a specific
focus on emerging environmental challenges or focused topical areas of research.
In conclusion, the Subcommittee believes that the A-E StRAP articulates and organizes an ambitious and
achievable research program that is well-aligned with EPA's objectives and mandates to improve air
quality, reduce the number of nonattainment areas in the United States, and protect public health and
the environment. The A-E StRAP will promote high priority research needed by EPA's partners with the
resources available. The Subcommittee looks forward to reviewing the implementation of the research
outlined in this StRAP in future meetings, and continuing to serve as a resource to the A-E program on
scientific and strategic topics related to its research programs.
26
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Appendix A: Meeting Agenda
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC)
Air and Energy (A-E) Subcommittee
Meeting Agenda
November 13-14, 2018
U.S. EPA Room C-112
109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Durham, NC 27709
TIME
TOPIC
PRESENTER
Tuesday, November 13, 2018
8:00-8:30
Registration
8:30-8:40
Welcome, and Opening Remarks Introduction
Charlette Geffen, Chair
8:40-9:00
Subcommittee Introductions
Subcommittee
9:00-9:10
DFO Welcome
Tim Benner
9:10-9:30
ORD Welcome
Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta
9:30-11:30
StRAP Development Presentation
• General approach
• Expanded engagement with stakeholders
• Proposed A-E program structure moving forward
• Time allowed for SC questions
Alan Vette
11:30-11:45
Review of Charge Questions
Charlette Geffen, Chair
11:45-1:00
Lunch
1:00-1:30
Public comments (if any)
1:30-3:30
Discussion of Charge Questions
• EPA Overview
• SC Discussion
Alan Vette
Subcommittee
3:30-4:30
Subcommittee Discussion and EPA response to questions
Subcommittee
Alan Vette
4:30-4:45
Wrap-up and Adjourn
Wednesday November 14, 2018
8:30-9:30
Subcommittee discussion
EPA response to Subcommittee questions
Subcommittee
Alan Vette
9:30-12:00
Subcommittee discussion and writing
Subcommittee
12:00-12:45
Lunch
12:45-2:15
Subcommittee discussion and writing
Subcommittee
2:15-2:30
Wrap-up and Adjourn
Note: The agenda does not include specific breaks. Breaks were held at the discretion of the Subcommittee Chair.
27
-------
BOSCA-E Subcommittee Report | June 7, 2019, 2019
Appendix B: Materials
Material Provided in Advance of the Meeting
Materials to Support the Charge Questions
• Agenda
• Charge questions
• Draft A-E StRAP (External Review Draft, October 24, 2018 version)
• EPA Strategic plan https://www.epa.eov/plaiianclbycleet/strateeicpian
• ORD Strategic Plan
• A-E Program Summary
• Partner Engagement Summary
Informational Materials
• Product and output summaries (7 examples provided)
• Bibliography (2015-2018)
• A-E Resources sheet with links to:
o ACE/A-E External Newsletter
o FACT Sheets
o Science matters
o Grants information
o Tools and toolboxes
Additional Material Provided During the Meeting
• BOSC A-E Subcommittee roster
• National Tribal Association's Status of Tribal Air Report, May 2018, presented at the National
Tribal Forum on Air Quality Hosted by the Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa.
• Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC), 2018 Priorities with Focused Constraints -
States Point to Shifting Product Needs (summary of state priorities from 2018 survey of states to
understand the environmental issues and the technical constraints preventing solution).
• Environmental Research Institute of the States (ERIS), 2016 ERIS States' Research Needs Survey,
A Summary of State Environmental Priorities.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Research and Development (ORD),
PowerPoint presentation by Alan Vette, Acting Program Director of the Air and Energy Research
Program: Air and Energy National Research Program, Discussion with A-E BOSC Subcommittee
on the Draft A-E Strategic Research Action Plan (StRAP).
28
------- |