Public Input

1. Environmental
INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions
Minnesota Chemical Regulation
and Policy Project
Public Input Meeting
October 12, 2011

2. Public Input Meeting
AGENDA
5:00 Welcome and Introductions
Project Background and Overview Draft Proposals
5:30 Roundtable Discussions/Input Sessions
Policy and Risk Management
Science and Risk Assessment
Green Chemistry
6:30 Reconvene and Report Back
7:00 Close

3. Who is Environmental
Initiative?
 20-year-old environmental nonprofit organization
 Mission: Build partnerships to develop collaborative
solutions to Minnesota’s environmental problems.
 Environmental solutions through three areas of work:
 Events
 Dialogue Environmental
 Action INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

4. Events
Networking, diverse perspectives, access to experts
 Business and Environment Series
 Environmental Initiative Awards
 Policy Forum Series

5. Action
 Project Green Fleet
 Over 2,000 cleaner engines
operating statewide
 Average of 2 tons of particulate
matter reduced per day
 Other Action Projects
 Autobody Refinishing Industry
Project
 Habitat for Humanity Green
Demonstration House

6. Dialogue
We facilitate conversations with private- and public-sector
leaders to achieve policy and other environmental solutions
for a cleaner, stronger Minnesota.

7. Minnesota Chemical Regulation
and Policy Project – Intro &
Background
Purpose:
 Recommend improvements to Minnesota’s
approach to chemical regulation and policy
 Identify opportunities to incentivize and promote
green chemistry principles and practices
Environmental
INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

8. Project Funders
 3M
 Ecolab
 Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy
 Minnesota Chamber of Commerce
 Minnesota Department of Health
 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

9. Phase 1: January – July 2010
Goals:
 Refine issues and opportunities
 Assess policy mechanisms to identify approaches that may be
applicable in Minnesota
 Recommendation regarding proceeding to Phase II
Opportunities:
 Collaborative approach
 MN unique/value-added
 Resource efficient/promote economic development
 Sound science
 Information, education, communications Environmental
INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

10. Charge for Phase II
 Identify and analyze the effectiveness of regulations and
policies currently in place at the state and federal levels and
determine if they do (or could) adequately address the
opportunities the group highlighted in Phase I
 Where needed, recommend improvements to
Minnesota’s system of regulating and managing
chemicals
 Evaluate opportunities to integrate promotion of and
incentives for product design that incorporates principles of
green chemistry and life-cycle analysis into a
recommended policy framework

11. Phase II Project Structure
 20 member Work Group
 Sub-groups tasked to develop
recommendation proposals
 9 meetings: June – December 2011
 6 meetings to date
 Two public input meetings (Fall 2011)
 Planning Team provides input and
advice to Environmental Initiative
between meetings

12. Science and Risk Assessment
 Risk assessment is the process of determining the probability that
exposure to chemical contaminants or other environmental stressors will
harm human or ecosystem health.
Risk = toxicity (hazard) + exposure
 New approaches to risk assessment have the potential to increase the
accuracy and efficiency of risk assessment by:
 pushing problem formulation to the forefront;
 accounting for cumulative risk and multiple exposures;
 using chemical mode of action information in determining risk.
 Work Group recognizes the need to identify and evaluate emerging
methodologies in order to facilitate the transition to advanced approaches
to risk assessment.

13. Science and Risk Assessment
Draft Recommendation Proposal
Project to Evaluate Emerging Risk Assessment Methodologies
 Recommendation: Implement a project to test alternative risk assessment
methodologies to improve risk assessment in Minnesota
 Need: Identify and analyze new or underutilized risk assessment
approaches to enable better risk management decision-making. Guiding
principles and priorities for adopting new approaches include:
 increased precision and accuracy;
 decreased uncertainty;
 utilizing chemical mode of action information;
 accounting for cumulative risk;
 cost effectiveness and efficiency; and
 high level of confidence in the data and risk assessment conclusions
by all stakeholders.

14. Science and Risk Assessment
Draft Recommendation Proposal
 Function: Two Phases
 Phase 1 – inventory existing methods, data requirements, and
relevant policy implications
 Phase 2 – test and analyze alternative methods (vs. standard
approaches) against the guiding principles
 Structure: Assessment and analysis performed by a designated
researcher with oversight and advisement from a cross-sector
Project Advisory Committee

15. Policy and Risk Management
 Federal reform of TSCA is needed and recommended
improvements to state policy in Minnesota should complement
and integrate with the current and anticipated future framework for
chemical regulation at the national scale.
 Status quo for state chemicals policy is not working.
 Decision-making in the face of scientific uncertainty will continue
to be a challenge.
 Improved chemicals policy must be based on sound science and
should enable increased understanding of chemical risk, benefits
and management by decision-makers and the public.

16. Policy and Risk Management
Draft Recommendation Proposal
Chemical Science Advisory Panel (CSAP)
 Recommendation: Create a Chemical Science Advisory Panel (CSAP) for
the state of Minnesota
 Need: Provide a forum for scientific discussion and debate outside the
policy realm
 Function: The CSAP will serve as an independent advisory body and will
respond to specific requests (“charge”) from either the legislative or
executive branch
 Structure: 6 highly qualified members from the scientific community
appointed to serve on the panel with the ability to call in other experts as
needed on an ad hoc basis

17. Pathway for inputs and outputs of the Chemical Science Advisory Panel (CSAP)
Executive MPCA/MDH
Branch Commissioner
CSAP Proposal Full Report
• Work plan • 2/3 majority
• Budget
• Timeframe
Legislative LAC via •
Committee Chair Ad hoc
Branch Legislative Auditor members
or Legislator
• Screen for
relevance/imp
ortance
Criteria
Relevant to MN environment or population
Disputed issue of science where independent review is helpful

18. Green Chemistry
 Green chemistry is the design of chemical products and
processes that reduce or eliminate the use or generation of
hazardous substances.
 Applies across the value chain – product
design, formulation, manufacture, use, disposal.
 Positive momentum for Green Chemistry as an economic
development opportunity:
 Emerging and established companies –
Segetis, BioAmber, Cargill NatureWorks, Ecolab, 3M, etc.
 Minnesota Green Chemistry Forum – business/NGO
networking group
 BioBusiness Alliance Bioindustrial Partnership

19. Green Chemistry
Draft Recommendation Proposal
Minnesota Green Chemistry Innovation Council
 Recommendation: Create a Minnesota Green Chemistry Innovation
Council by Governor’s Executive Order
 Need:
 Increase economic development through the promotion of new
Green Chemistry businesses in Minnesota;
 Improve the sustainability and access to markets of existing
Minnesota businesses through Green Chemistry process
improvements and product development.

20. Green Chemistry
Draft Recommendation Proposal
 Function: Develop and recommend strategies to:
 Promote collaboration and synergies between entities;
 Identify ways to align existing initiatives and interests;
 Raise public awareness of Minnesota Green Chemistry businesses
and products;
 Identify sources of funding and incentives.
 Structure: Cross-sector membership to demonstrate public and private
sector leadership and engagement.
 Potential mechanisms to support green chemistry development
include: business support, education, research, public outreach.

21. Input Stations / Roundtable
Discussions
 Questions? Anything that needs clarification?
 What do you like about the proposal? What works well?
 What concerns you? What would you change? Why?