11 NACEPT

^ % / Shaping tho N*f>on't Eftv*ronm«fiUI PoUcy

National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology

Teleconference

Call-in Number: 202-991-0744, Conference Code: 7667917#

Wednesday, February 28, 2018
12:00-4:00 p.m. EST

Meeting Summary

Welcome, Introductions and Overview of the Agenda

Eugene Green, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the National Advisor}' Council for Environmental
Policy and Technology (NACEPT or Council), Federal Advisor}! Committee Management Division
(FACMD), Office of Resources, Operations and Management (OROM), Office of Administration and
Resources Management (OARM), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): and William Ross, Jr.,
NACEPT Chair, Council Member, Gillings School of Global Public Health Advisory Council, University
of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-Chapel Hill)

Mr. Eugene Green (NACEPT DFO, EPA) welcomed the NACEPT members, thanked everyone involved
in drafting the report, and called the roll. A list of meeting participants is provided in Appendix A.

Mr. William Ross, Jr. (NACEPT Chair, UNC-Chapel Hill) also extended his welcome to the NACEPT
members and other participants. He added his appreciation for everyone's efforts in drafting the second
report on citizen science. He provided an overview of the agenda, which is included as Appendix B.

The official certification of the minutes by the Chair is included as Appendix C.

Public Comments

Eugene Green, NACEPT DFO, FACMD, OROM, OARM, EPA
Mr. Green called for public comments; none were offered.

Discussion on Uatest Integrated Draft of NACEPT's Report on EPA and Citizen Science: Building
Collaborations and Partnerships

William Ross, Jr., NACEPT Chair, Council Member, Gillings School of Global Public Health Advisory
Council, UNC-Chapel Hill: Council Members

Mr. Mark Joyce (FACMD, OROM, OARM, EPA) reminded the members that the purpose of the
teleconference is to discuss concerns with the current draft of the report so that they can be addressed and
then approve the report. The report will be edited based on the discussion during this call, and because of
time and other constraints, the edited report will not be sent to all of the members. The report language
must be finalized by the end of March so that it can be published by the end of April.

Mr. Dan Bator (ORD, EPA) reported that all comments have been incorporated into the current draft of
the report. Several EPA staff members were given the opportunity to provide input; this will be discussed
on this call. The report includes 10 recommendations, with the first section still focusing on investing in
partnerships to move citizen science from information to action.

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018

1


-------
Mr. Ross solicited comments about the draft from each NACEPT member present. Ms. Darlene Cavalier
(Arizona State University) thought that the report, although solid, takes a "safe" approach; she believed
that it would be more advantageous to take some risks, particularly in terms of the recommendations. She
would like the second report to identify and describe opportunities to take action on the recommendations
from the first report. Dr. Ramesh Chawla (Howard University) liked the report. Dr. Irasema Coronado
(The University of Texas at El Paso) indicated that the concerns that she had submitted previously had
been addressed, and she has only minor editorial comments.

Ms. Barbara Jean Horn (Colorado Parks and Wildlife) agreed with the previous comments and wondered
if NACEPT was as bold as it could be in its recommendations. EPA leadership will need to lead a cultural
shift at the Agency, and based on the EPA input that Mr. Jay Benforado (ORD, EPA) shared with the
Council, the report did not state this as boldly as necessary. Developing a timeline for implementation
could help leadership understand that integrating citizen science into EPA's culture is feasible even within
the current budget climate. The report's discussion of technology (Recommendation 10) should be framed
within the context of citizen science.

Mr. Robert Kerr (Pure Strategies, Inc.) agreed that the report could be bolder and more direct in
describing opportunities. He would like the report to be less cautious and make the point that citizen
science can help the Agency implement activities in times of budget constraints. Ms. Bridgett Luther
(Code Blue Innovations) thought that the report is comprehensive and agreed that it needs to be bolder.
She would like to see how the comments from EPA will be incorporated into the report. Mr. Jeffrey
Mears (Oneida Nation) thought that the report reads well, but he also would like to see it strengthened to
make the Council's points very clear. Dr. Graciela Ramirez-Toro (InterAmerican University of Puerto
Rico) thought that the report should emphasize that citizen science is not separate from the Agency's
current work; it can be incorporated relatively easy into current Agency activities.

Mr. Benforado thought that language could be added to the cover letter and the introduction to make the
report bolder and emphasize NACEPT's recommendations. Some of the EPA leadership comments
indicated that prioritization and a timeline were needed; however, as an external committee, NACEPT
may not be in the best position to comment on implementation issues. Agency leadership will need to
determine how citizen science is implemented within EPA. Specific examples will help to illuminate how
EPA can take advantage of citizen science to address its pressing problems and challenges
(e.g., abandoned mines, drinking water testing).

Ms. Horn agreed that NACEPT must tell EPA what needs to be done but not how to do it. A consistent
approach should be implemented across regions and programs that is adaptable within each region and
program. A sentence or two describing what is meant by a paradigm or cultural shift also should be added
to the beginning of the report. Many people do not understand that it means changing how institutions do
business.

The NACEPT members agreed to include a paragraph in the report introduction describing the urgency of
enacting a cultural shift and examples of implementation (i.e., how citizen science can be applied to
priority Agency issues such as lead, abandoned mines, drinking water testing and so forth). Dr. Alison
Parker (ORD, EPA) asked the NACEPT members to provide specific examples that could be included.
Ms. Cavalier gave the example of Dr. Caren Cooper (North Carolina State University) and Dr. Mark
Edwards (Virginia Tech) receiving support for a national citizen science project to test water pipes for
lead. Ms. Horn, Dr. Coronado and Mr. Benforado volunteered to work on this paragraph.

Ms. Horn noted that NACEPT is not designed to create continued accountability in reporting. Perhaps the
recommendation to form an advisory board should be highlighted. This advisory board should be
equivalent to the advisory boards that the Agency consults with regarding accountability in mining,
extraction, utility and other industries. EPA should create a sounding board for accountability that will
help the Agency to consistently implement citizen science within its activities. Dr. Ramirez-Toro noted

2

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018


-------
that the interviews with EPA staff could be a resource to determine the best examples to show how citizen
science can be implemented at the Agency.

Dr. Parker asked for input regarding the diagram on page 14 and whether the right groups are included.
Some concern has been expressed about the inclusion of industry. The NACEPT members agreed that
industry needs to be included, and the term will be changed to "private sector." Ms. Horn described the
content of Figure 3, which highlights EPA's various, diverse relationships with those who can help the
Agency implement citizen science activities. Mr. Benforado wondered whether the figure could be
simplified to emphasize its main point, which is the diversity of EPA's relationships. The figure legend
also could describe the figure better. Ms. Horn said that the figure could be simplified by removing the
boxes on the right side. Ms. Luther thought that the figure effectively highlights the points of connection.
Mr. Benforado noted that the final graphic should not imply federalism; Ms. Horn attempted to avoid this
by drawing the figure horizontally rather than placing EPA at the top. An alternate idea is to place EPA in
the center with spokes out to its various connections. A contractor will be developing the graphic for the
final report; the Editing Team will seek input about the graphic from Dr. Horn, Dr. Coronado, Mr. Kerr
and Ms. Luther. Mr. Kerr suggested including a reference to the examples to help the reader make the
connections among the examples. Dr. Ramirez-Toro added that the specific acts (e.g., Clean Water Act)
that relate to the examples can be included to show where EPA draws its authority.

Dr. Parker explained that some concerns have been expressed about the imbalance in media highlighted in
the report, as water is the main focus of many of the examples. She asked the Council members for
suggestions on how to correct the imbalance, either by adding additional air, waste or toxics examples as
available or removing some of the water examples. Mr. Ross had not noticed the imbalance. Dr. Ramirez-
Toro noted that adding examples related to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Clean Air Act,
and so forth would help to address any perceived imbalance. Mr. Benforado suggested including a table
listing the various media (i.e., air, water, land, waste) and an example or two for each to show that citizen
science can help all of EPA's program areas. A visual object placed at the beginning of the report will
help the reader to understand that the citizen science approach can be used throughout EPA in all of the
media program areas.

Dr. Parker explained that the contractor had suggested including a case study in the section on technology
to highlight how federal agency/industry partnerships can foster citizen science; she asked for input about
this idea and whether any of the members knew of any specific examples that could be highlighted.
Ms. Cavalier thought that such examples exist in the area of sensors, and this could be a place to be bolder
and also be transparent about the challenges involved in federal-industry partnerships. Mr. Benforado
agreed that sensors would be an appropriate area to explore for such a case study. Ms. Horn commented
that Mr. Dwane Young (EPA) has worked effectively within the area of data visibility and developing
tools to help groups submit data to the Water Quality Portal. EPA currently is piloting its "How's My
Waterway?" website and worked with open source software companies in this effort. Ms. Cavalier and
Mr. Benforado will develop a case study that includes sensor and Water Quality Portal examples.

Dr. Parker stated that NACEPT must select an appropriate title for the report, which had been discussed
during the November 2017 NACEPT teleconference. Currently, the working title is: Information to
Action: Strengthening Citizen Science Partnerships for Environmental Protection. Alternate titles are as
follow:

1.	Environmental Protection Belongs to the Public: Moving From Information to Action Through
Partnerships in Citizen Science

2.	Environmental Protection Belongs to the Public: Harnessing Information and Action Through
Partnerships in Citizen Science

3.	Partnering With the Public: Moving Information to Action Through Citizen Science

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018

3


-------
4. Citizen Science at EPA: Moving Information to Action

Mr. Ross and Mr. Kerr prefer alternate title # 1. Ms. Luther and Dr. Chawla prefer the current working
title. Dr. Ramirez-Toro likes the selected title but would like EPA to be included. The NACEPT members
decided that the final title of the report would be Information to Action: Strengthening EPA Citizen
Science Partnerships for Environmental Protection.

The Council members discussed the report by section.

Executive Summary. The NACEPT members did not have comments about this section.

Chapter 1: Mr. Benforado noted the description of the methodology to develop the report, including
interviews, on page 8 and asked whether a list of interviewees should be included in the report. The
NACEPT members decided not to include a list of interviewees. The Council members concurred that the
chapter is well written.

Chapter 2: Links to pertinent online material will be included, and the contractors will ensure that the
figure callouts are located near the figures. Figures 1 and 2 should be placed closer together and near
Recommendation 1. Mr. Benforado thought that the last column in Figure 2 mixes two categories that
could be placed in separate columns. Ms. Horn and Mr. Ross liked combining outcomes and results,
which should be the emphasis of the figure, in one column. Appropriate state abbreviations will be added
to Table 1. Figure 4 will be redesigned so that its aesthetic matches the rest of the report.

Ms. Horn thought that a cultural shift will be needed for EPA to adopt the recommendation that the
Agency develop a mechanism to approve Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs). A QAPP describes a
data objective and the quality of data that will be generated to achieve that objective. A continuum of
approval exists for QAPPs, and EPA must improve how it operates on that continuum. Mr. Benforado
explained that two concerns exist around EPA providing QAPP approvals: resource limitations and
determining the dynamic of citizen science data. Dr. Parker commented that EPA already approves
QAPPs for organizations conducting EPA-funded research; the NACEPT recommendation is to apply this
approval process to any external organization seeking such approval. Mr. Benforado suggested providing
more explanation to make this clear. Dr. Ramirez-Toro noted that the level of expertise in evaluating
QAPPs varies within the Agency. EPA's role may be to facilitate or provide guidance rather than to
approve so that partnerships remained balanced. A NACEPT member commented that community groups
want to be validated; perhaps "validate" is a better term than "approve."

Mr. Benforado thought that this chapter should reference Mr. Omega Wilson's (West End Revitalization
Association) work on equity and equality.

Chapter 3: Mr. Benforado suggested adding an opening paragraph under Recommendation 5 describing
the role of local government, the nuanced relationship that EPA has with local governments, and why this
is an important issue. It should stress that NACEPT envisions an increased role for local governments in
local citizen science projects, and EPA must help to foster this.

Chapter 4\ A NACEPT member recommended including a non-water-related example within
Recommendation 7 to highlight the fact that citizen science can be applied to media other than water. This
might be a good place to include an example about toxics. Mr. Benforado thought that the first text box
underneath Recommendation 7 should be moved to Recommendation 5 regarding local governments.
Dr. Ramirez-Toro agreed that this text box could be moved and provided her perspective of local
government interactions with neighborhoods and communities. Most local governments do not have
primacy. A NACEPT member commented that individual quotes could be pulled from Dr. Cooper's bird
projects.

4

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018


-------
Chapter 5: In response to a question from a NACEPT member about licensing, Mr. Benforado explained
that many citizen science projects require apps or tools. Some of these cannot be used without paying for
a license. Open licensing creates an infrastructure that allows free use of apps and tools and eliminates a
potential barrier to communities and groups performing citizen science. The report will be revised to
include a definition of open licensing or use more accessible terminology (e.g., open source).

A NACEPT member would like Recommendation 9 expanded to include communities in addition to the
private sector. Another NACEPT member agreed that everyone, from citizens through the EPA
Administrator, will need to understand data use. The term "private sector and other stakeholders" will be
used in the recommendation and the text. The phrase "EPA can develop standards" in the second
paragraph of Recommendation 9 will be revised to "EPA can develop practices" because the term
"standards" is regulatory language within the Agency.

Ms. Horn commented that Recommendation 10's action item is missing the message that EPA should
serve as a conduit to bring technologies to the citizen science movement. The Agency could facilitate
access to technologies through partnerships and must be a leader in this area. EPA could develop best
practices for citizen scientists who need to understand the technologies and appropriate use of tools under
the context in which they will be collecting and using data. Making the information about apps and tools
discoverable is another important role for the Agency.

Mr. Kerr moved that NACEPT approve the revised report, which will include the revisions discussed
during the teleconference. Dr. Coronado seconded the motion, which the NACEPT members approved
unanimously.

Action Items and Next Steps

William Ross, Jr., NACEPT Chair, Council Member, Gillings School of Global Public Health Advisory
Council, UNC-Chapel Hill; Council Members

Mr. Green requested that NACEPT members provide all additional materials for the report to the Editing
Team no later than Friday, March 9; this includes all information for any outstanding references,
particularly the dates of interviews. Photographs are needed for the report as well. NACEPT members
will find and submit photographs (with appropriate permissions) no later than Friday, March 9.

Mr. Joyce announced that this is his final NACEPT meeting and report, as he is retiring on March 30. He
has enjoyed working with NACEPT and thanked the members for their dedication and support. Mr. Ross
and the NACEPT members thanked Mr. Joyce for his leadership and wished him well.

Adjournment

Mr. Green thanked Dr. Coronado for her efforts on the Spanish translation of NACEPT's first report on
citizen science. The Spanish version will be published soon. Mr. Benforado thanked the NACEPT
members and EPA staff for their work on the report. Mr. Ross thanked the NACEPT members for their
participation and adjourned the meeting at 2:44 p.m. EST.

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018

5


-------
Action Items

• The NACEPT members agreed to take the following actions and implement the following changes to
the current draft of the report:

o Develop a paragraph in the introductory material describing a cultural shift and implementation,
including examples of how citizen science can be applied to priority Agency issues (e.g., lead,
abandoned mines, drinking water testing); include a sentence or two in the cover letter and
executive summary. Responsible parties: Editing Team, Ms. Horn, Dr. Coronado and
Mr. Benforado.

o Change "industry" to "private sector" in the diagram on page 14. Responsible party: Editing
Team.

o Develop Figure 3 with the contractor. Responsible parties: Editing Team, Ms. Horn,
Dr. Coronado, Ms. Luther and Mr. Kerr.

o Create a table with one or two citizen science examples for each media program area to visually
show how the citizen science approach can be used throughout EPA in all of the media program
areas (i.e., not just water). Responsible parties: Mr. Ross, Mr. Kerr, Dr. Coronado and
Mr. Benforado.

o Develop a case study highlighting air sensor work and Mr. Young's data visibility efforts to
highlight the successes and challenges of federal-private partnerships and the algorithms used to
make decisions. Responsible parties: Ms. Cavalier and Mr. Benforado.

o Place Figures 1 and 2 closer together and near Recommendation 1. Responsible parties: Editing
and Contracting Teams.

o Locate figure callouts near the appropriate figures. Responsible party: Contracting Team.

o Add appropriate state abbreviations to Table 1. Responsible party: Editing Team.

o Redesign Figure 4 so that its aesthetic matches the rest of the report. Responsible parties: Editing
and Contracting Teams.

o Revise the language about QAPP approval to be more encompassing. Responsible parties:
Editing Team and Ms. Horn.

o Reference Mr. Wilson's work on equity and equality in Chapter 2. Responsible party: Editing
Team.

o Add an opening paragraph under Recommendation 5 describing the role of local government, the
nuanced relationship that EPA has with local governments, and why this is an important issue.

Responsible parties: Mr. Ross, Mr. Benforado and Ms. Laureen Boles.

o Include a toxics example under Recommendation 7. Responsible party: Editing Team.

o Move the first text box under Recommendation 7 to Recommendation 5. Responsible party:
Editing Team.

o Determine whether Dr. Cooper can provide a quote for Recommendation 7. Responsible party:
Editing Team.

o Include a definition of open licensing or use more accessible terminology in Recommendation 8.

Responsible party: Editing Team.

o Expand Recommendation 9 to include "other stakeholders" in addition to the private sector.

Responsible party: Ms. Shannon Dosemagen and Editing Team.

6

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018


-------
o Change the phrase "EPA can develop standards" in the second paragraph of Recommendation 9
to "EPA can develop practices." Responsible party: Editing Team.

o Add the message that EPA should serve as a conduit to bring new technologies to the citizen
science movement to the action item under Recommendation 10. Responsible parties:
Ms. Cavalier, Ms. Luther and Editing Team.

• NACEPT members will:

o Provide all additional information, including information related to references, to the Editing
Team no later than Friday, March 9.

o Provide photographs (with appropriate permission) for the report no later than Friday,

March 9.

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018

7


-------
Appendix A

National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT)

Meeting Participants

NACEPT Members

Ms. Darlene Cavalier

Professor of Practice

Consortium for Science, Policy, and Outcomes
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ

Dr. Ramesh C. Chawla

Professor/Chair of Chemical Engineering
Department of Chemical Engineering
College of Engineering, Architecture

and Computer Sciences
Howard University
Washington, D.C.

Dr. Irasema Coronado

Professor

Department of Political Science
University of Texas at El Paso
El Paso, TX

Dr. Dale G. Medearis

Senior Environmental Planner
Environmental and Planning Services
Northern Virginia Regional Commission
Fairfax, VA

Dr. Graciela I. Ramirez-Toro

Institutional Director

Center for Environmental Education,

Conservation and Research
InterAmerican University of Puerto Rico
San German, PR

Mr. William G. Ross (NACEPT Chair)
Council Member

Gillings School of Global Public Health

Advisory Council
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill, NC

NACEPT Designated Federal Officer

Ms. Barbara Jean Horn

Water Quality Resource Specialist
Water Unit

Department of Natural Resources
Colorado Parks and Wildlife
Durango, CO

Mr. Robert Kerr

Co-Founder and Principal
Pure Strategies, Inc.

Reston, VA

Ms. Bridgett Luther

Senior Vice President of Sustainability
Code Blue Innovations
San Francisco, CA

Mr. Jeffrey M. Mears

Environmental Area Manager
Environmental Health and Safety Division
Oneida Nation
Oneida, WI

Mr. Eugene Green

Federal Advisory Committee Management
Division

Office of Resources, Operations and

Management
Office of Administration and Resources

Management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
William Jefferson Clinton Building (1601M)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone: (202) 564-2432
Email: green.eugene@epa.gov

EPA Participants

Mr. Dan Bator

ASPPH Research Fellow
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
William Jefferson Clinton Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone: (202) 564-7362
Email: bator.daniel@epa.gov

8

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018


-------
Mr. Jay Benforado

Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
William Jefferson Clinton Building (8101R)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone: (202) 564-3262
Email: benforado.jay@epa.gov

Dr. Alison Parker

ORISE Research Fellow

Office of Research and Development

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

William Jefferson Clinton Building

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20460

Email: parker.alison@epa.gov

Other Participants

John Kinsman

Edison Electric Institute
Washington, D.C.

Kristen LeBaron

The Scientific Consulting Group, Inc.
Gaithersburg, MD

Division

Office of Resources, Operations and

Management
Office of Administration and Resources

Management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
William Jefferson Clinton Building (1601M)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone: (202) 564-2130
Email: joyce.mark@epa.gov

Ms. Emily Hall

Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
William Jefferson Clinton Building (8101R)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Email: hall.emily@epa.gov

Mr. Mark Joyce

Federal Advisory Committee Management

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018

9


-------
Appendix B

Agenda for the February 28, 2018 NACEPT Meeting

NACEPT

Shaping the Nation's Environmental Policy

National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT) Agenda

Wednesday, February 28, 2018
12:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. EST

U.S. EPA William Jefferson Clinton East Building, Room 1132
1201 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Call-in Number: 202-991-0744, Conference Code: 7667917#

12:00 p.m. Welcome, Introductions, and Overview of Agenda

Eugene Green

NACEPT Designated Federal Officer

Bill Ross
NACEPT Chair

12:15 p.m. Public Comments

12:30 p.m. Discussion on Latest Integrated Draft of NACEPT's Report on EPA and Citizen
Science: Building Collaborations and Partnerships

Bill Ross
NACEPT Chair

Council Members

3:30 p.m. Action Items and Next Steps

Bill Ross
NACEPT Chair

Council Members

4:00 p.m. Adjournment

10

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018


-------
Appendix C

Chair Certification of Minutes

I, William G. Ross, Jr., Chair of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology
(NACEPT), certify that this is the final version of the complete minutes for the teleconference held on
February 28, 2018, and that the minutes accurately reflect the discussions and decisions of the meeting.

April 10,2018

William G. Ross, Jr., NACEPT Chair	Date

NACEPT Meeting Summary, February 28, 2018

11


-------