The Biobased and Renewable Products Advocacy Group (BRAG) helps members develop and bring to market their innovative biobased and renewable chemical products through insightful policy and regulatory advocacy. BRAG is managed by B&C® Consortia Management, L.L.C., an affiliate of Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.

By Lynn L. Bergeson

Effective March 29, 2020, Yvette T. Collazo will be the new Director of EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). Ms. Collazo previously worked for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), where she led activities related to federal contracts and agreements of more than $250 million for the cleanup of radiological, industrial, and groundwater hazards resulting from decades of nuclear material production at DOE’s Savannah River facility. Ms. Collazo also served as Senior Advisor and Director for the Office of Technology Innovation and Development at DOE’s Office of Environmental Management. In this capacity, she led the identification and advancement of technologies, processes, and technical practices that improved the performance of waste processing, groundwater and soil, facility decontamination and decommissioning, and nuclear materials projects over their life cycles, from planning to disposal. Starting in 2013, Ms. Collazo served as District Director of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands District Office. As District Director, she was responsible for the delivery of the SBA’s financial assistance, business counseling, entrepreneurial training, and federal contracting programs throughout the District. Ms. Collazo has a Master of Science in Environmental Management from the Illinois Institute of Technology and a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez Campus.

Tags: EPA, OPPT

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

On March 18, 2020, EPA published its supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) titled “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science” in the Federal Register. Per last week’s Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®) blog post, the supplemental notice proposes the following changes to the 2018 proposed rulemaking:

  • A scope that applies to influential scientific information and significant regulatory decisions;
     
  • A modified approach to the availability provisions for data and models that would underlie influential scientific information and significant regulatory decisions as well as an alternate approach;
     
  • Clarification on the ability of the EPA Administrator to grant exemptions; and
     
  • Definitions and clarifications that the proposed rule applies to data and models underlying both pivotal science and pivotal regulatory science.

EPA is seeking comment on each of the proposed changes by April 17, 2020. In particular, EPA is asking for feedback on whether this approach may improve consistency between this proposed rulemaking and certain provisions of those statutes that refer to standards for data availability. Interested parties may also wish to review B&C’s March 9, 2020, memorandum on the SNPRM.


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

On March 5, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it is seeking grant applications through the Source Reduction Assistance Grant Program from states, federally recognized tribes, universities, local governments, and other groups to support innovative solutions for source reduction or pollution prevention (P2) through research, education, training, or certain other methods. EPA notes that as it highlights chemical safety during the month of March, “these grants support that goal by providing information, training, and tools to improve public health and the surrounding environment, reduce pollutants, and decrease resource use (e.g., water and energy).” EPA anticipates awarding individual grants in the range of $20,000 - $200,000 for a two-year funding period (or between $10,000 and $100,000 per year), though award amounts may vary based on EPA region. EPA anticipates awarding 20 grants in total. EPA states that grant applications should focus on at least one of the following P2 priority areas, also referred to as National Emphasis Areas (NEA) that support several of the EPA’s Smart Sectors. Through these grants, technical assistance and projects should encourage businesses to identify, develop, and adopt P2 practices and reduce waste in the following sectors:

  • Food and Beverage Manufacturing and Processing (NEA #1);
  • Chemical Manufacturing, Processing, and Formulation (NEA #2);
  • Automotive Manufacturing and Maintenance (NEA #3);
  • Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing and Maintenance (NEA #4); and
  • Metal Manufacturing and Fabrication (NEA #5).

Proposals are due by April 30, 2020. Additional information is available on www.grants.gov, under Funding Opportunity Announcement EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-002.

Tags: EPA, Grant, P2

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

On March 3, 2020, EPA announced that a supplemental notice of the proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) titled “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science” will be published in the Federal Register in the near future. While the notice would only modify EPA internal procedures, industry stakeholders are asked to comment on the proposed rule during a 30-day period after the date of publication in the Federal Register. The supplemental notice proposes the following changes to the 2018 proposed rulemaking:

  • A scope that applies to influential scientific information and significant regulatory decisions;
  • A modified approach to the availability provisions for data and models that would underlie influential scientific information and significant regulatory decisions as well as an alternate approach;
  • Clarification on the ability of the EPA Administrator to grant exemptions; and
  • Definitions and clarifications that the proposed rule applies to data and models underlying both pivotal science and pivotal regulatory science.

These proposed modifications are in response to some of the public comments received by EPA on the 2018 proposed rulemaking. Under the alternate approach to the use of data and models, EPA will also use restricted studies that are not available to the public. The proposal would apply to reviews of data, models, and studies regardless of when the data and models were generated. EPA plans to identify studies that are given greater consideration and provide a short explanation of why greater consideration was given.

EPA is seeking comment on each of the proposed changes. In particular, EPA is asking for feedback on whether this approach may improve consistency between this proposed rulemaking and certain provisions of those statutes that refer to standards for data availability.

EPA’s announcement includes a pre-publication version of the proposed supplemental rulemaking, which can be accessed here. Interested parties may wish to review Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.’s (B&C®) March 9, 2020, memorandum on the SNPRM.


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

Effective March 15, 2020, Madison Le will join the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) as Director of the Chemical Control Division (CCD). Ms. Le will replace Acting Director Lynn Vendinello. Ms. Le is currently Director of the Fuels Compliance Policy Center within the Office of Air and Radiation. In that capacity, Ms. Le manages the implementation of EPA’s national fuels programs, including the Renewable Fuel Standard Program, Tier 3 Gasoline, Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel, and Fuels and Fuel Additives Registration. Prior to working for EPA, Ms. Le worked for California’s Los Angeles County on engineering design projects for municipal solid waste landfills and wastewater treatment plants, including air quality modeling and permitting for stationary and mobile sources. Ms. Le holds an M.S. and B.S. in Environmental Engineering from the University of Southern California.

Tags: EPA, OPPT

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

The EPA Pollution Prevention (P2) Grant Program has announced the availability of funds to provide technical assistance (e.g., information, training, tools) to businesses to encourage the development and implementation of source reduction practices. EPA states that source reduction practices can help businesses save money by reducing resource use, expenditures, waste, and liability costs, while at the same time reducing their environmental footprint and helping to protect human health and the environment. Applications for fiscal years (FY) 2020 and 2021 are due March 31, 2020.

EPA states that it anticipates awarding approximately $9.38 million in total federal pollution prevention grant funding over a two-year funding cycle ($4.69 million in FY 2020 funds and approximately $4.69 million in FY 2021 funds). According to EPA, P2 grants are expected to be awarded in each EPA region and will be funded in the form of grants or cooperative agreements. EPA provides the following “quick facts” for P2 grants:

  • Eligibility: State governments, colleges, and universities (recognized as instrumentalities of the state), federally recognized tribes, and intertribal consortia;
  • Match requirement: 50 percent match; for tribal governments that place P2 grant activities into a performance partnership grant (PPG) agreement, the match for the tribe is reduced to five percent;
  • Review of applications: Along with other requirements that are noted in the Request for Applications (RFA), applications must address one of the following statutory/regulatory criteria to merit further review:
     
    • Provide technical assistance and/or training to businesses and/or facilities about source reduction techniques to help them adopt and implement source reduction approaches and to increase the development, adoption, and market penetration of greener products and sustainable manufacturing practices; and
       
    • Identify, develop, document, and share P2 best management practices and innovations so this information may inform future technical assistance and these P2 approaches and outcomes may be replicated by others;
       
  • Range of awards: Individual grant awards may potentially be in the range of $40,000 - $500,000 for the two-year funding period (between $20,000 and $250,000 incrementally funded per year). Some EPA regions may have lower award caps, however; and
  • Average number of grants issued: 40.
Tags: EPA, P2, Grant

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pollution Prevention (P2) Grant Program has announced the availability of funds to provide technical assistance (e.g., information, training, tools) to businesses to encourage the development and implementation of source reduction practices. EPA states that source reduction practices can help businesses save money by reducing resource use, expenditures, waste, and liability costs, while at the same time reducing their environmental footprint and helping to protect human health and the environment. Applications for fiscal years (FY) 2020 and 2021 are due March 31, 2020.

EPA states that it anticipates awarding approximately $9.38 million in total federal pollution prevention grant funding over a two-year funding cycle ($4.69 million in FY 2020 funds and approximately $4.69 million in FY 2021 funds). According to EPA, P2 grants are expected to be awarded in each EPA region and will be funded in the form of grants or cooperative agreements. EPA provides the following “quick facts” for P2 grants:
 

  • Eligibility: State governments, colleges, and universities (recognized as instrumentalities of the state), federally recognized tribes, and intertribal consortia;
     
  • Match requirement: 50 percent match; for tribal governments that place P2 grant activities into a performance partnership grant (PPG) agreement, the match for the tribe is reduced to five percent;
     
  • Review of applications: Along with other requirements that are noted in the Request for Applications (RFA), applications must address one of the following statutory/regulatory criteria to merit further review:
     
    • Provide technical assistance and/or training to businesses/facilities about source reduction techniques to help them adopt and implement source reduction approaches and to increase the development, adoption, and market penetration of greener products and sustainable manufacturing practices; and
       
    • Identify, develop, document, and share P2 best management practices and innovations so that this information may inform future technical assistance and these P2 approaches and outcomes may be replicated by others;
       
  • Range of awards: Individual grant awards may potentially be in the range of $40,000 - $500,000 for the two-year funding period (between $20,000 and $250,000 incrementally funded per year). Some EPA regions may have lower award caps, however; and
     
  • Average number of grants issued: 40.
     

EPA will hold an informational webinar on February 19, 2020, from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. (EST).

Tags: EPA, P2

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

On November 20, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) announced a public meeting to engage with stakeholders interested on the implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) New Chemicals Program. The meeting will be held on December 10, 2019, from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. (EST), and will include:

  • An overview of EPA’s updated “Working Approach” document that builds on EPA’s “New Chemicals Decision Making Framework: Working Approach to Making Determinations under Section 5 of TSCA”;
     
  • A demonstration of how EPA uses key concepts in the Working Approach to reach certain conclusions and/or make determinations under TSCA Section 5(a)(3) using case examples;
     
  • An update on confidential business information (CBI) process improvements and clarifications; and
     
  • A discussion of EPA’s ongoing efforts and progress to increase transparency.

During the meeting, EPA will provide an opportunity for stakeholders to provide input on the topics mentioned above. Feedback can also be submitted via the docket on or prior to January 24, 2020.

By the end of 2019, EPA expects to make the “Working Approach” document available for written public comments


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

On November 13, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. (EST), the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will hold a hearing on “Strengthening Transparency or Silencing Science? The Future of Science in EPA Rulemaking.” The Committee will hear from the following witnesses:

Panel 1

  • Dr. Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD); EPA Science Advisor.
     

Panel 2

  • Dr. Linda S. Birnbaum, Scientist Emeritus, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS); Director of NIEHS, 2009-2019;
     
  • Dr. Mary B. Rice, Assistant Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School; Pulmonary and Critical Care Physician, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center;
     
  • Dr. David Allison, Dean, School of Public Health, Indiana University-Bloomington; Member, “Reproducibility and Replicability in Science” Committee, The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and
     
  • Dr. Todd Sherer, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research.
     

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson

On September 23, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) announced that it plans to begin fieldwork on EPA’s Safer Choice program. According to OIG, its objectives are to identify and assess the controls that EPA has in place to verify that the Safer Choice program meets its goals and achieves quality standards through its product qualification, renewal, and required audit process. OIG states that Safer Choice “is a voluntary labeling program that helps consumers and commercial buyers find chemical-based products that are safer for human health and the environment.” OIG plans to conduct work at headquarters and at various third-party assessor and auditor locations. It will use applicable generally accepted government auditing standards in conducting its audit. The anticipated benefits of the audit “are reducing the use of chemicals of concern and empowering consumers to protect their health.”


 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›