Partner and Task Force members met four times during Phase II of the CLI. These meetings were used to provide updates on the progress of
the project, as well as to obtain consensus on decisions that needed to
be made during Phase II of CLI. During these meetings, sub-groups presented their findings to the
CLI Partner and Task Force members and other interested Stakeholders. Future CLI activities were also discussed and planned.
20, 1997 CLI Phase II "Kick-off" Meeting
March 1997, CLI Partner and Task Force members met to begin work on the
second phase of the CLI. The
meeting began with a review of the key points coming out of Phase I of
the CLI as a setting for the initiation of Phase II.
this meeting, EPA announced that budgetary and Paperwork Reduction Act
constraints would make it impossible for the Agency to fund quantitative
research of the type and magnitude that had been recommended by Phase
I of the CLI. The Agency
indicated that it would neither require nor request that such research
be done, although it conceded that quantitative research would be extremely
valuable. Several of the
CLI industry and trade association partners decided that the research
was too important to be eliminated from the program, and volunteered to
fund and direct it, with input from all of the CLI participants. The EPA's role in connection with the quantitative research has
thus been one of a facilitator, consultant, and recipient.
of these industry partners presented a research plan for the Phase II
quantitative research at this meeting. The Bayer Corporation, Procter and Gamble, and S.C. Johnson and
Son, Inc. gave this presentation. Discussion on the research plan included, but was not limited to:
making sure that the questions be clear in asking consumers what they
understand about labels and not what they preferred; providing a 'mock-label'
to consumers; collecting data on consumer attitudes toward products; collecting
information on standardized environmental information.
EPA also announced that there would be a meeting between the EPA and environmental
and public interest groups in April 1997, and invited CLI Partner and
Task Force members to attend. The
purpose of the April meeting was to update these groups on the progress
of the CLI, and to obtain their input and participation for its development.
meeting was also a forum to re-cap the immediate and longer term label
changes that could be made as a result of Phase I of CLI. Immediate label changes included: 1) inclusion of a toll-free
number on product labels, so that consumers have someone to call in case
of emergencies; 2) using the common names of ingredients instead of their
chemical names; 3) using the word "other ingredients" instead of
"inert ingredients; and 4) using a clear heading for the first aid
section of the label, which is to read "First Aid," instead of "Statement
of Practical Treatment."
changes would be addressed by Subgroups and included: 1) further investigation
of First Aid statements; 2) further investigation of the ingredients issues
(i.e., right-to-know issues regarding full disclosure of ingredients);
and 3) further investigation of the storage and disposal issues, and how
to address the conflict between label language and state and local policies,
regulations, and practices.
this meeting, the EPA announced that they are interested in investigating
the idea of a standardized "eco-facts box" on product labels (like
the nutrition box). The EPA
suggested investigating this through the quantitative research.
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency presented details of its Consumer
Label Education Program as a stepping stone for the CLI consumer education
effort. It was decided that
any consumer education campaign for CLI should focus on "reading
the label," rather than on infrequent but real risks of the products themselves.
details on the discussion that took place during this meeting, refer to
second meeting took place February 17-18, 1998, in Alexandria, VA. The meeting was announced one to two months prior to the meeting. All Partner and Task Force members and other interested parties
were invited to attend. Forty
CLI Partner and Task Force members were in attendance. (For a list of meeting participants, please refer to Appendix 7‑1.) The meeting served as a forum for subgroups to update Partner
and Task Force members on their activities.
the first day of the meeting, members of the Quantitative Research subgroup
updated meeting attendees on the progress of the quantitative research
and the subgroup's plans for implementing the quantitative survey. The group affirmed that the survey would address the learning objectives
defined in Phase I, and outlined a schedule for completing the research.
concept of standardizing environmental information on product labels was
introduced and an outline for discussion was proposed. To engage Stakeholders in framing the debate, Andrew Stoeckle of
Abt Associates presented a paper written with Julie Winters of the EPA,
that explored issues relating to standardizing environmental information
on product labels. Julie
Spagnoli of Bayer Corporation also did a presentation on the topic. A core subgroup of CLI members was identified to work on the
from the subgroups on Ingredient Identification and First Aid gave presentations
on the status of their work. In
addition, sessions were held to discuss other issues not covered by a
specific sub-group. These
issues included multi-lingual consumers and literacy level of consumers,
the use of icons or signal words on product labels, label format, and
environmental claims of a product.
the second day of the meeting, Susan Wayland, Deputy Assistant Administrator
for the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, spoke to
CLI Partner and Task Force members. She encouraged the group to find out what environmental information
consumers wanted to know, and how they wanted that information presented.
subgroups on Consumer Education, and Storage and Disposal, presented updates
of their activities to meeting attendees. A session was also held to update Partner and Task Force members
and CLI Stakeholders on EPA efforts to involve Stakeholders in the CLI.
the end of the meeting, items for future action were compiled from the
two days of presentations and discussion. CLI project management and time lines were also discussed. For more detailed information on the discussion that took place
during this meeting, refer to Appendix 7-2.
Partner and Task Force members met again on September 23 and 24 in Alexandria,
VA. Efforts were made beforehand
to encourage the involvement of as many participants as possible. A CLI Update, published in August 1998, invited interested parties
to attend the meeting. The update was sent to all Partner and Task Force members and
CLI Stakeholders, and was posted on the World Wide Web. Some project Stakeholders, such as environmental organizations,
were telephoned and personally invited to the meeting by EPA staff members. Forty-seven people were in attendance. Julie Winters of the U.S. EPA's OPPTS served as the moderator. (For a complete list of attendees, refer to Appendix 7-2.)
goals of the meeting were:
present the data and the findings of Phase II quantitative and qualitative
research, in order to ensure the understanding of participants;
develop possible recommendations and action steps arising out of Phase
make policy recommendations when possible and appropriate;
recommend label changes and identify tradeoffs in going forward; and
recommend further research where necessary.
During the first day, findings, implications and conclusions
from both the quantitative and qualitative Phase II CLI research were
presented. Members of the
subgroups on Storage and Disposal and Consumer Education also gave reports
on their activities.
On the second day of the meeting, participants were asked to
make recommendations to the EPA on policy changes, immediate label changes,
and areas for further research, based on the information presented the
day before. For a full list
of the recommendations, please refer to Chapter 9. Discussion included topics addressed on the first day, as well
as ingredient information, signal words, hazard hierarchy, and label format/language. CLI recommendations on which participants could agree were adopted
to be presented to the EPA, for consideration by the Agency for possible
adoption. For details on the discussion that took place during this meeting,
refer to Appendix 7-3.
The fourth CLI Partner and Task Force Meeting was held on April
7 and 8, 1999, in Alexandria, VA, to update Stakeholders on CLI events
that had happened since the September 1998 meeting. Thirty Partner and Task Force members attended the meeting. Topics of discussion included plans for an upcoming media event,
implementation of CLI proposed label changes by the Office of Pesticide
Programs (OPP), issues related to storage and disposal, and the consumer
education campaign. (To view
the meeting summary and notes, refer to Appendix 7-4.)
The EPA informed CLI Stakeholders about plans for an upcoming
media event, to be held in Spring 2000, to announce some of the labeling
recommendations that EPA will be making as a result of the CLI. The Partners and Task Force discussed potential messages, goals,
and details of the event.
Jean Frane from the OPP informed project Stakeholders how the
CLI recommendations made in September 1998 were being implemented. The OPP revised the First Aid Statements, using CLI recommendations,
and expects to release a Pesticide Registration (PR) notice citing
these new recommendations in Fall/Winter 1999. Certain label changes, recommended at the September Partner and
Task Force meeting, were adopted by the EPA as changes that can be currently
submitted to the OPP. These
label changes, changes that will be considered on a case-by-case basis,
and changes that will not be considered at present until formal implementing
documents are published, were presented to CLI Stakeholders and are listed
at the end of Chapter 9.
Storage and disposal issues were also discussed by Jean Frane
of the OPP. At the meeting,
it was pointed out that some states are reluctant to take part the "Read
the Label FIRST!" campaign while there are still unresolved issues
concerning the storage and disposal section of the label.
The Consumer Education sub-group updated Stakeholders on events
pertaining to Consumer Education. The Subgroup presented drafted text for outreach brochures targeting
gardeners, children's health, pet protection, and household products. Message placement plans and the process of designing a consumer
education campaign logo were also discussed.