PPDC Performance Measures Workgroup Meeting Notes - June 14, 2006
- Informational Presentation
- Discussion with Jim Jones
- Discussion of Draft Work Group Report
- Preparation for Presentation to PPDC
John Schell, BBL Sciences
James Roberts, Medical University of South Carolina
Eric Maurer, Valent USA
Steve Balling, Del Monte Foods
Tom Beidler, Syngenta
Larry Elworth, Center for Agricultural Partnerships
Isi Siddiqui, CropLife America
Michael Fry, American Bird Conservancy
Lois Rossi, EPA/OPP/Registration Division
Michael Nieves, EPA/OPP/Registration Division
Maryann Petrole, EPA/OPP/IT and Resource Management Division
Sarah Khasawinah, EPA/Office of Pesticide Programs
Tim Kiely, EPA/OPP/Biological and Economic Analysis Division
Jennifer Vernon, EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Sherry Sterling, EPA/Office of Pesticide Programs
Sherry Sterling gave a presentation to the group on the EPA performance measures framework which shows how the strategic plan, budget, and PART are linked together. It was agreed by the group that this framework should be presented in simplified form to the full PPDC on June 15.
Jim Jones stopped by to express his appreciation for the work of this Group, and to answer any questions. A key discussion point was that this work group had already had a major positive effect on the performance measures work. For example, the work group’s affirmation of the importance of the “other benefits” category was important in keeping this mission area in the most recent draft of the EPA Strategic Plan.
“Other Benefits” Mission Area:
- The Group agreed that a more powerful name than “Other Benefits” is desirable for this important mission area. Some suggestions made include: “direct benefits,” “societal benefits,” “value of pesticide availability,” and “enhancing agriculture.”
- In discussing how to create other measures for this mission area, a number of suggestions were made:
- CropLife America and Leonard Giannesi have made a proposal.
- Ask at the PPDC if anyone has data to support this mission area. Perhaps companies have data that were generated for marketing purposes that could somehow be used.
- Need to be able to extrapolate from existing data.
- Need to link up with USDA; they collect data that could potentially be useful to OPP.
- Measures in the area of stewardship need further development. OPP has a good story to tell here and it is “missing the boat” by not having strong measures.
- The “International Measure” highlights some of the most important work done by OPP. It is placed in the “Benefits” mission area in recognition of the far-reaching societal benefits. In fact, this international measure could accrue benefits in all 3 mission areas.
- OPP’s needs stronger measures to demonstrate the important work of the Antimicrobials Division.
Human Health Mission Area:
- Notwithstanding the many issues with biomonitoring, it would be helpful to have a better human health tracking system.
- As measures are developed, it is important to remember that trends are important and tell more than yearly numbers.
- With the new pesticide chemistries that have shorter half-lives, exposure to these new pesticides may not be easily picked up in the NHANES biomonitoring.
- Water exposure is an important element to consider in human health. All of the work done in support of protecting water as a resource is also helpful to protecting human health.
- A key thing to remember when looking at the data for this and any measure is that a lack of evidence does not mean there’s no effect.
Protect the Environment:
- The Breeding Bird Survey data from USGS may be helpful to OPP; it has many confounding factors, but so do the databases used in support of the other mission areas.
- The fact that there is not much in the way of terrestrial risk assessment is still problematic. One suggestion is to look at what the Superfund program is doing in this area.
- A suggestion was made that OPP follow up with the Natural Resource Inventory at USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service. That inventory may provide information that OPP may find useful.
- Messages the Work Group wants to be sure to convey:
- Data have significant cost; don’t sacrifice dollars to the program on data collection for performance measures.
- Use existing databases. Need to be able to extrapolate. Encourage thoughtful use of data to establish trends.
- Coordination with other agencies on data is essential for present and future. OPP needs to continue to work with other agencies to make certain they continue to capture pesticides
- NHANES – both overestimates and underestimates are possible.
- Need to include schools and IPM in the “Other Benefits” mission area.
- Questions for PPDC:
- How does PPDC want to work on these issues in the future?
- Should this Work Group continue? The work Group thinks that it should continue but more on an “as needed basis” – for consultation on any new measures, to see progress on data collection for measures, etc.