EPA Awards $1.65 Million in Research Fellowships to Undergraduates

EPA’s GRO Fellowships have supported students for more than 30 years

Washington, DC – Today the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced more than $1.65 million in research fellowships to 33 students pursuing degrees in environmental science and related fields through its Greater Research Opportunities (GRO) Fellowship program. This year marks the 30^th anniversary of EPA’s undergraduate grant program.

“For 30 years, EPA’s GRO program has nurtured and supported new generations of America’s workforce as they prepare to enter the environmental science and public health fields,” Lek Kadeli, acting assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Research and Development. “This year’s GRO recipients truly reflect EPA’s commitment to research that promotes a sustainable and healthy nation.” 

The 2013 GRO recipients are eligible to receive a fellowship of up to $50,000 for their studies in natural and life sciences, environmental sciences and interdisciplinary programs, engineering, social sciences, physical and earth sciences, and mathematics and computer sciences. EPA’s GRO program also supplements the students’ education with an EPA internship.  

Past GRO winners continue to make a significant impact in their field of study and local communities. A past GRO fellow, Dr. Sacoby Wilson, Director, Community Engagement, Environmental Justice, and Health at the University of Maryland is working to address environmental injustice and environmental health disparities in the Washington, DC region. Dr. Wilson’s work is a great illustration of how science, community organizing, and civic engagement can be used to address environmental health issues at the local level. The GRO Fellowship, created in 1982, has funded more than 395 undergraduates’ education over the past 30 years as they pursue degrees related to the environmental science and public health fields.

 The 2013 GRO has awarded fellowships to students at: 

Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, Ala.

University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Ark

Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, Calif.

University of the Pacific, Stockton, Calif. 

Humboldt State University, Arcata, Calif.

University of New Haven, West Haven, Conn.

Howard University, Washington, DC

American University, Washington, DC

University of Hawaii, Hilo, Hawaii

Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, Ky

Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, Ky

Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass.

Smith College, Northhampton, Mass.

St. Mary’s College of Maryland, St. Mary’s City, Md.

University of Maine, Orono, Maine

Lake Superior State University, Marie, Mich.

Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wis.

Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, Mich.

Michigan Technological University, Houghton, Mich.

St. Olaf College, Northfield, Minn.

Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, Mo.

Salish Kootenai College, Pablo, Mont.

University of Nevada, Reno, Nev.

Dickinson College, Carlisle, Pa.

LaFayette College, Easton, Pa.

Universidad Metropolitana, San Juan, Puerto Rico

Virginia Wesleyan College, Norfolk, Va.

Western Washington University, Bellingham, Wash.

University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas

Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas

For more information on the 2013 GRO awardees: http://www.epa.gov/ncer/gro13 

For information about the GRO Program: http://epa.gov/ncer/fellow/

The 9th Annual Columbia University Energy Symposium The Future Now: Energy Progress in the 21st Century

 The Center on Global Energy Policy is proud to support the 9th Annual Columbia University Energy Symposium. Jointly organized by students representing the Columbia Business School Energy Club and the Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs Energy Association (SEA), the Symposium will take place on Friday, November 22nd, in Lerner Hall. Please see below for full event details.

http://www.cuenergysymposium.com/

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy Testimony Before House Committee on Science, Space and Technology

WASHINGTON – As prepared for delivery.

Good morning Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, and other distinguished members of the Committee. I am pleased to be here to talk about the central role science plays at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Let me begin by stating that science is and has always been the backbone of the EPA's decision-making. The Agency’s ability to pursue its mission to protect human health and the environment depends upon the integrity of the science upon which it relies. I firmly believe that environmental policies, decisions, guidance, and regulations that impact the lives of all Americans must be grounded, at a most fundamental level, in sound, high quality, transparent, science.

Because we rely so heavily on science to meet our mission on behalf of the American people, it must be conducted in ways that are transparent, free from bias and conflicts of interest, and of the highest quality, integrity, and credibility. These qualities are important not just within our own organization and the federal government, but across the scientific community, with its long established and highly honorable commitment to maintaining strict adherence to ethical investigation and research. That’s why the agency has established—and embraced—a Scientific Integrity Policy that builds upon existing Agency and government-wide policies and guidance documents, explicitly outlining the EPA’s commitment to the highest standards of scientific integrity. And that commitment extends to any scientist or organization who wishes to contribute to our efforts. All EPA-funded research projects, whether conducted by EPA scientists or outside grantees and collaborators, must comply with the agency’s rigorous quality assurance requirements.

To ensure that we have the best possible science, we are committed to rigorous, independent peer review of the scientific data, models and analyses that support our decisions.  Peer review can take a number of forms, ranging from external reviews by the National Academy of Sciences or the EPA’s federal advisory committees to contractor-coordinated reviews. Consistent with OMB guidance, we require peer review for all EPA research products and for all influential scientific information and highly influential scientific assessments. 

Among the external advisory committees is the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB). SAB reviews are conducted by groups of independent non-EPA scientists with the range of expertise required for the particular advisory topic. We invite the public to nominate experts for SAB panels and to comment on candidates being considered by the EPA for SAB panels. The EPA evaluates public comments and information submitted about SAB nominees. The EPA reviews experts’ confidential financial information to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest.

SAB peer reviews are conducted in public sessions in compliance with the open-government requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The public is invited to attend and to provide oral and written comments for consideration by the SAB. Public comments help to ensure that all relevant scientific and technical issues are available to the SAB as it reviews the science that will support our environmental decisions.

Another example is the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) which provides inddependent advice to the EPA Administrator on the science that supports the EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The CASAC reviews the EPA’s Integrated Science Assessments which deliver science in support of the Clean Air Act.

Thanks to the science behind the implementation of the Clean Air Act, we have made significant and far-reaching improvements in the health and well-being of the American public. In 2010 alone, EPA estimates that programs implemented pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 avoided 160,000 premature deaths millions of cases of respiratory problems such as acute bronchitis and asthma attacks; 45,000 cardiovascular hospitalizations; and 41,000 hospital admissions. These improvements have all occurred during a period of economic growth; between1970 and 2012 the Gross Domestic Product increased by 219 percent.

Through a transparent and open process, we have also committed to enhancing the Agency’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessment program. A strong, scientifically rigorous IRIS Program is of critical importance, and the EPA is in the process of: 1) enhancing the scientific integrity of assessments; 2) enhancing the productivity of the Program; and 3) increasing transparency so that issues are identified and debated early in the process. In 2009, the EPA made significant enhancements to IRIS by announcing a new 7-step assessment development process. Since that time, the National Research Council (NRC) has made recommendations related to enhancing the development of IRIS assessments. The EPA is making changes to the IRIS Program to implement the NRC recommendations. These changes will help the EPA produce more high quality IRIS assessments each year in a timely and transparent manner to meet the needs of the Agency and the public. A newly released NRC report is largely supportive of the enhanced approach the EPA is taking to develop the IRIS assessment for inorganic arsenic.

As I mentioned in my opening statement, science is the backbone of our decision-making and our work is based on the principles of scientific integrity and transparency that are both expected and deserved by the American people. I am proud of the EPA’s research efforts and the sound use of science and technology to fulfill the EPA’s mission to protect human health and safeguard the natural environment.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today.  I am happy to answer any questions you may have at this time.

A Long Time Coming, De Blasio Wins the Race for Mayor After Promising Ban on Horse Carriages

New York City-Three years after a story I published here titled “Please Support the Coalition of Ban Horse-Drawn Carriages" De Blasio wins the race for mayor of New York City. He has promised to ban horse drawn carriages seen in Central Park carrying tourists and spreading a not so pleasant aroma around the park and adjacent streets. The coalition was an important supporter of De Blasio’s campaign via fund raising, monetary contributions, and a strong Facebook presence. 

During one of the debates, the moderator asked both candidates if they would ban horse drawn carriages and they both supported the cause.  But I perceived a stronger support from De Blasio, he often posed for photos with the coalition and did not hide his support. I have to admit I knew very little about De Blasio before the postings on Facebook letting supporters know he was the major who was going to ban horse drawn carriages. It was refreshing given that politicians usually stay away from sensitive or controversial topics and animal rights can be a polarizing one. Taking the risk worked for De Blasio.  I wish him the very best luck with his term (s) as the new New York City Major.

Related story published here on February 28, 2010

EPA Seeks Public Input on Newly Designed Graphic for Bug Repellent Labels

New graphic will help consumers make informed choices to protect their health

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released a Federal Register Notice seeking public input on a new insect repellent graphic for skin-applied insect repellent product labels. The graphic, which may be applied voluntarily by manufacturers, will provide consumers with important health information including the estimated number of hours a product will repel potentially harmful insects, like mosquitoes and ticks, when used as directed.

“EPA is working to create a system that does for bug repellents what SPF labeling did for sunscreens,” said Jim Jones, assistant administrator of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “By providing vital health information to consumers, this new graphic will help parents, hikers and the general public better protect themselves from serious health problems caused by mosquito and tick bites.”

Current labeling of skin-applied insect repellent products does not allow consumers to easily identify the insects repelled by a product and the amount of time the product remains effective.  Over the past four years, EPA has held focus groups and worked with manufacturers and others to create the new graphic, which will display consumer information in a more prominent and standardized format. The graphic will only be placed on insect repellent products that are applied directly to the skin.

Effective insect repellents can protect against serious mosquito and tick-borne diseases. In the United States, mosquitoes can transmit diseases like St. Louis encephalitis and West Nile virus. Ticks can transmit serious diseases like Lyme disease, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, and Ehrlichiosis. Using the right insect repellent and taking other preventive actions can discourage bites from ticks, mosquitoes, and other biting insects.

Companies will be able to request approval to use this graphic through the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) registration process.

View the FR Notice, graphic and additional information: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/insect/repellency-awareness.html

---

EPA Releases Agency Plans for Adapting to a Changing Climate

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today released its draft Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plans for public review and comment. In support of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan and Executive Order on Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change announced today, the Implementation Plans provide detailed information about the actions EPA plans to take across the country to help communities adapt to a changing climate.

“To meet our mission of protecting public health and the environment, EPA must help communities adapt to a changing climate,” said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. “These Implementation Plans offer a roadmap for agency work to meet that responsibility, while carrying out President Obama’s goal of preparing the country for climate-related challenges.”

The impacts of a changing climate – including increased extreme weather, floods, and droughts – affect EPA’s work to protect clean air and water. The draft Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plans recognize that EPA must integrate climate adaptation planning into its programs, policies, rules, and operations to ensure that the agency’s work continues to be effective even as the climate changes.

EPA released its draft agency Climate Change Adaptation Plan on February 9, 2013 for public review and comment, and expects to issue the final version this Fall. In 2009, all federal agencies were required to develop Climate Change Adaptation Plans by the federal Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. Under Executive Order 13514, the Task Force was charged with developing recommendations for the President on how to increase the nation’s resilience to climate change. The new Implementation Plans provide information about how EPA will meet the agency-wide priorities identified in the draft Climate Adaptation Plan released earlier this year.


More information on EPA’s Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plans: http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs/EPA-impl-plans.html

More information on EPA’s draft Climate Change Adaptation Plan: http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs.html

More information about EPA’s climate adaptation activities: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/adaptation.html

Women in Science, A Little Bit of My Story

Me (left) and former classmate (2000)

As many other professional women, I am thrilled to see many discussions and articles actively being published about women in science and the professional world. Recently, the Harvard Business Review published an article titled “Emotional, Bossy, Too Nice− the biases that still hold female leaders back and how to overcome them” about obstacles many of us may think do not exist for women in the workplace but are very much alive. New York Times recently took a realistic look at women in science with their article titled “Why Are There Still So Few Women in Science?” in which the author, a former physics student at Yale University discusses her experience and challenges as a student in an environment in which women were not encouraged to pursue a career in physics, a field typically dominated by males. As I was reading the article, many of her experiences awoke my own memories.  As I was reading the article I found myself saying ‘that definitely happened to me’ as a science major during my undergraduate years. Like the author and other women interviewed for the article, often times I felt discouraged, sad, and ready to drop out of my department. The key difference is that I was not discouraged by my parents like the author was, but by my female science professors. Some felt that I didn't have the right preparation and therefore instead of offering support, thought the easiest thing for me to do was to change my dreams completely and major in something else.

It may sound hard to believe other female professors and advisers; the same ones who likely faced discrimination and lack of support themselves when they were completing their studies would be themselves unsupportive. But my situation was a bit unique. I was not a typical student. By the time I started college I had major obstacles I was to overcome if I was to become a scientist or admitted into veterinary school. By the time I started college, I had done 4 years of bilingual High School having immigrated to the US at 14 years of age. Like most students in the South Bronx High School, I was grossly under prepared for any science studies. Even so, I was determined to major in biology as I pursued my dreams of become a veterinarian or some kind of scientist. I struggled as the courses levels increased but through many hours of tutoring and hard studying I was able to pull nearly perfect GPA during my first semester. Having conversations with fellow students and professors was a different issue nevertheless. I was extremely shy and self-aware, and often felt inadequate.

Throughout my years as an undergraduate, I joined student organizations, became president of a student organization, gave free Latin dance lessons,   and joined the physics students group as I also developed great interest in learning about the subject. I had read physics books about quantum mechanics during my summer breaks, and became fascinated by a world difficult to understand. Of course, I never discussed the possibility of pursuing a degree in physics with anyone and I’m glad I didn't.  After two years at a state school, I was popular for being ‘smart’ and my confidence was better. It was time to do what most students with good grades do who attend Morrisville: apply to Cornell University. I was ready to continue my bachelors for two more years in biology, and my adviser knew I would eventually apply to veterinary school. When she learned of my plans, she discouraged me based on the fact that she didn't want me to go through the “back door”; she wanted me to enter through the “front door” which meant applying to their premed school program first. I knew that would be a difficult task for me, as I needed more preparation.  I deduced I was not going to kid myself and never applied. The same adviser discouraged me to applying to other schools I was interested in. Still, I needed to transfer so I settled into applying into three state schools. My application was accepted for all the schools I applied to. I sent an angry E-mail to my adviser, and always wondered what if…

Those experiences had a tremendous amount of influence on the type of decisions I made about my future after graduation, like working instead of applying to graduate school.  My ability to trust people who were supposed to encourage me to ‘aim high’ was definitely affected. Yet, I am sure what happened to me happens to other students- especially ones of minority backgrounds- all the time.  As Eileen Pollack reminds us in her article …“The numbers of black and Hispanic scientists are even lower; in a typical year, 13 African-Americans and 20 Latinos of either sex receive Ph.D.’s in physics. The reasons for those shortages are hardly mysterious — many minority students attend secondary schools that leave them too far behind to catch up in science, and the effects of prejudice at every stage of their education are well documented. But what could still be keeping women out of the STEM fields”.  These issues are not unique to the field of physics. As a student in the biological sciences I experienced the same lack of preparation and challenges she describes.

Today, I work not as a scientist but as a research safety specialist for Columbia University. In my daily activities, I encounter scientists at the top of their field, with grants in the millions of dollars. Their research is featured in the news, newspapers, journals, and scientific articles on a regular basis.  The job also offers me with a good opportunity for me to learn about different types of bio-medical research.Most principal investigators are men, while most laboratory managers are females. Why aren't more women principal investigators?  Surely, Columbia University puts a great amount of effort to recruit women and other minorities. But there are still obstacles women and minorities of underprivileged backgrounds face. And they must compete with brilliant colleagues with impeccable preparation and qualifications that happen to be male.

 Male cliques, favoritism, “and boys club” mentality in any professional or scientific setting is harmful for women. Managers, presidents, chairs,  and other persons with position of power must commit to change those types of behaviors in the work place.  I can hardly blame women who sabotage each other in the workplace as they’re trying to be taken seriously, and compete for the same benefits male colleagues do.

I’m glad things are changing.  Businesses and schools are working harder than ever to recruit women. Whether women will give up, or continue their career in any field will depend on how much support they get. Like me, many will not give up based on self-motivation and persistence. A little discouragement can go a long way though, and we ought to remember this when our little girls are young ready to explore the world.

Information about the articles:

Harvard Business Review. Sep2013, Vol. 91 Issue 9, p12-1. 1p.

New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/why-are-there-still-so-few-women-in-science.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1