Lawmakers Provide Additional Funding for Science Agencies in CARES Act, Funding Agencies Release New Guidance<\/strong><\/a> EPA Reduces Enforcement Activities, Extends Comment Period for \u201cTransparency in Science\u201d Rule by 30 Days<\/strong><\/a> Executive Branch<\/strong><\/a> Courts<\/strong><\/a> International<\/strong><\/a> Scientific Community<\/strong><\/a> ESA In the News<\/strong><\/a> Opportunities to Get Involved<\/strong><\/a> <\/a> Lawmakers included pockets of additional funding for science agencies in the CARES Act, also known as the third coronavirus response bill. The total spending in the CARES act is around $2 trillion.<\/p>\n Funding Agencies Response<\/u><\/p>\n The National Science Foundation\u2019s Biological Science Directorate issued a\u00a0letter<\/a>\u00a0providing guidance to grantees and the biological science community. Universities and other awardee organizations can issue a one-year no-cost extension without NSF approval. The awardee organization\u2019s grants office must inform NSF of their intention to use a no-cost extension two weeks before the end of the award. Grant officers can also request additional no-cost extensions from NSF. BIO program officers will accommodate such requests for a second-year no-cost extension associated with delays due to COVID-19.<\/p>\n NSF has also posted an updated list of current NSF grant deadlines\u00a0online<\/a>. For more information, see the\u00a0NSF coronavirus page<\/a>.<\/p>\n A \u00a0Frequently Asked Questions document<\/a>\u00a0from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (USDA NIFA) details the agency\u2019s guidance for grantees and potential grant applicants. The agency extended deadlines for several grant programs in response to COVID-19. NIFA grantees are authorized to continue charging salaries, stipends, and benefits to active USDA NIFA awards consistent with institutional policies. Grantees are also authorized to charge other costs to USDA NIFA awards that are necessary to resume activities supported by the grant. However, NIFA advises that recipients must not assume that supplemental funding will be available if charging of such costs results in a shortage of funds to eventually carry out the project.<\/p>\n Several NIFA programs will allow submission of COVID-19 relevant projects outside of their normal deadlines. The deadline for these submissions is May 21, 2020. For more information, see the NIFA coronavirus page<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science issued a\u00a0Dear Colleague letter<\/a>\u00a0in mid-March asking the scientific community for ideas about how the DOE and the National Laboratories might contribute resources to help address COVID-19 through science and technology efforts and collaborations.<\/p>\n <\/a> Meanwhile, the EPA continues its work to finalize regulations before the end of President Trump\u2019s current term in office. The agency extended the public comment period for its supplement to the proposed \u201cTransparency in Regulatory Science<\/a>\u201d rule by 30 days. This rule, initially released in April 2018, prohibits the EPA from using scientific studies where the underlying data are not publicly available. The supplement expands the original rule so that it covers \u201cinfluential scientific information,\u201d in addition to significant regulatory actions. The agency defines influential scientific information as \u201cinformation the agency reasonably can determine will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or private sector decisions.\u201d With the extension, the supplement to the rule will be open for public comment for a total of 60 days. In contrast, the comment period for the original 2018 rule was 120 days. The public comment period will now end May 18.<\/p>\n The scientific community, including ESA, have long pushed back against the transparency in science rule and its legislative predecessors, the HONEST Act and the Secret Science Reform Act, stating that the rule would prevent the EPA from using the best available science in decision-making. Environmental and public health groups also widely oppose the policy, citing concerns that the rule will be used to weaken clean air and water regulations. The EPA\u2019s own Science Advisory Board has also\u00a0criticized<\/a>\u00a0the proposal, writing that the EPA \u201chas not fully identified the problem to be addressed by the proposed rule.\u201d<\/p>\n Congressional Democrats have pushed back against the EPA decisions to reduce enforcement and to finalize the \u201cTransparency in Science\u201d rule. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member Tom Carper (D-DE)\u00a0commented<\/a>\u00a0that the \u201cTransparency in Science\u201d rule may slow or hurt the agency\u2019s ability to respond to COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. The chairs of 14 House committees\u00a0asked<\/a>\u00a0the White House Office of Management to \u201cimmediately reschedule all public hearings and meetings and extend public comment periods\u201d using the comment period for the EPA transparency rule as an example.<\/p>\n The co-chairs of the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition, a group of House Democrats, also\u00a0called<\/a>\u00a0on the EPA to reverse its decision to suspend enforcement, arguing that the EPA actions will \u201clikely add patients to health care providers\u2019 already overwhelming caseloads.\u201d<\/p>\n A coalition of environmental groups filed an emergency petition for rulemaking requesting that the EPA require companies to provide public, written notice of any noncompliance with environmental regulations, as allowed by the EPA memo.<\/p>\n <\/a> NSF:<\/strong>\u00a0Director France Cordova\u2019s six-year term leading NSF as its 14th<\/sup> director ended March 31. In December 2019, the Trump administration nominated Sethuraman \u201cPanch\u201d Panchanathan, a member of the National Science Board and an Arizona State University computer scientist, to replace Cordova. The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee has not yet held a confirmation hearing for Panchanthan. Current White House Office of Science and Technology Director Kelvin Droegemeier will serve as acting NSF director until Panchanthan is confirmed.<\/p>\n Department of Energy:<\/strong>\u00a0The Office of Science and the Office of Fossil Energy\u00a0announced<\/a>\u00a0that they are collectively offering $22 million for research potentially leading to breakthroughs in the effort to capture carbon dioxide directly from ambient air.<\/p>\n EPA:<\/strong>\u00a0The Science Advisory Board (SAB) is\u00a0seeking<\/a>\u00a0nominations for new members of the board and four of its standing committees \u2014 the Agricultural Science Committee, the Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee, the Drinking Water Committee and the Radiation Advisory Committee. The SAB is particularly interested in scientists with expertise in air and water quality, agricultural sciences, complex systems, ecosystem services and sustainability. Nominations should be submitted in time to arrive no later than May 1, 2020. The EPA anticipates announcing new SAB members by October 2020.<\/p>\n USAID:\u00a0<\/strong>The PREDICT project\u00a0received<\/a>\u00a0a six-month emergency extension, allowing the project to stay operational through October 2020. Previously, the program was slated to end in March 2020. The U.S. Agency for International Development declined to renew PREDICT for another five-year cycle in October 2019. PREDICT was designed to strengthen global capacity for detection and discovery of zoonotic viruses with pandemic potential.<\/p>\n PREDICT plans to use the additional funding to continue provide technical expertise to support the detection of SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) cases in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. The project will also investigate the animal source or sources of SARS CoV-2 using data and samples collected over the past ten years in Asia and Southeast Asia.<\/p>\n USFWS:\u00a0<\/strong>The agency\u00a0declined<\/a>\u00a0to provide Endangered Species Act protections for the bi-state distinct population segment of greater-sage grouse. USFWS originally proposed listing this population, which is found along the California-Nevada border, as a threatened species in 2013 and withdrew this proposed rule in 2015. In May 2018, a federal judge determined that USFWS acted in an \u201carbitrary and capricious\u201d manner when it decided not to list the bi-state sage grouse and required USFWS to re-initiate a review of the species\u2019 status. USFWS credited voluntary conservation efforts for reducing threats to the bird, avoiding the need for endangered species protections.<\/p>\n <\/a> <\/a> The U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity has also\u00a0postponed<\/a>\u00a0several of its meetings and moved to virtual meetings for time-sensitive discussions. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has also\u00a0moved<\/a>\u00a0several upcoming meetings to virtual meetings, with plans for future in-person meetings.<\/p>\n Brazil:<\/strong>\u00a0The head of Brazil\u2019s environmental enforcement agency, Ibama,\u00a0announced<\/a>\u00a0that the agency is reducing its efforts to combat environmental crimes, including deforestation in the Amazon rainforest. Ibama said that the reduction was necessary because around a third of the agency\u2019s officers are high-risk for coronavirus. Many officers are around 60 years old, in part because the agency has not hired new officers in years due to government hiring freezes.<\/p>\n <\/a> A new\u00a0survey<\/a>\u00a0is soliciting feedback from the scientific community about how NSF communicates with the community.<\/p>\n <\/a> View more letters and testimony from ESA\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/a> Opportunities for Public Comment and Nominations:<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nNSF receives $76 million for coronavirus grants.<\/p>\n
\nThe comment period for the proposed rule closes May 18.<\/p>\n
\nNSF Director France Cordova completes her six-year term, Office of Science and Technology Director Kelvin Droegemeier to serve as acting NSF Director.<\/p>\n
\nFederal judge orders the Army Corps of Engineers to complete an Environmental Impact Statement for the Dakota Access Pipeline.<\/p>\n
\nU.N. postpones climate talks to 2021.<\/p>\n
\nNSF Biological Sciences Directorate Advisory Committee schedules teleconference for April 30 and an LTER review is on the agenda. NSF seeks input about how to best communicate with the community.<\/p>\n
\nView an up-to-date list of ESA\u2019s media coverage.<\/p>\n
\nFederal Register opportunities.<\/p>\nLawmakers Provide Additional Funding for Science Agencies in CARES Act, Funding Agencies Release New Guidance<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nScience Funding in the CARES Act<\/u><\/p>\n\n
EPA Reduces Enforcement Activities, Extends Comment Period for \u201cTransparency in Science\u201d Rule<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nCiting the coronavirus pandemic, the Environmental Protection Agency\u00a0moved<\/a>\u00a0to reduce its enforcement of environmental laws. An order from Susan Bodine, the head of the EPA\u2019s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, allows industries to self-determine if they can comply with protections and waives certain enforcement fines.<\/p>\nExecutive Branch<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nWhite House:\u00a0<\/strong>The Office of Science and Technology Policy extended the comment period for its\u00a0request for information<\/a>\u00a0asking for \u201crecommendations on approaches for ensuring broad public access to the peer-reviewed scholarly publications, data, and code that result from federally funded scientific research\u201d until May 6, 2020.<\/p>\nCourts<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nPipelines:\u00a0<\/strong>A federal judge\u00a0ordered<\/a>\u00a0the Army Corps of Engineers to complete an environmental impact statement for the Dakota Access pipeline. The ruling determined that the Corps did not adequately address issues raised in comments submitted by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and other public comments from technical experts. In February 2017, the Corps concluded that granting an easement for the crossing of the pipeline would yield no significant environmental impact, exempting the agency from having to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement under the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.<\/p>\nInternational<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nU.N.:\u00a0<\/strong>International climates talks scheduled for November 2020 in Glasglow, Scotland have been\u00a0postponed<\/a>\u00a0until 2021, in light of the coronavirus pandemic. The conference site, the SEC Centre, is being converted into a temporary hospital to treat COVID-19 patients.<\/p>\nScientific Community<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nNSF:<\/strong>\u00a0The Biological Science Directorate Advisory Committee will hold a\u00a0teleconference<\/a>\u00a0April 30. Agenda items include a review of the charge for the Long-Term Ecological Research 40-year review and discussion of the research communities\u2019 adaptation to COVID-19 restrictions.<\/p>\nWhat We\u2019re Reading<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n
ESA In the News<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nESA regularly issues press releases to the media about journal articles and other Society news. Press coverage is kept up-to-date on our \u201cIn the News\u201d page.\u00a0Check out news stories here<\/a>.<\/p>\nESA Correspondence to Policymakers<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n
Opportunities to get involved\u00a0<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nVirtual public meetings and conference calls:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n