Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Ian A. Bowles, Secretary

1. Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental AffairsIan A. Bowles, Secretary Review of the Boston University BioLab under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act NIH Blue Ribbon Panel and Working Group March 13, 2008

2. Purpose • MEPA provides meaningful opportunities for public review of potential environmental impacts • Requires that state agencies study the environmental consequences of their actions (including permitting and financial decisions)

3. Purpose • Requires that state agencies take all feasible measures to avoid or minimize and mitigate damage to the environment by: • studying alternatives to the proposed project • evaluating respective impacts • developing enforceable mitigation commitments which will become permit conditions for the project if and when it is permitted

4. Process • Proponent responsible for developing Environmental Impact Report subject to Scope issued by Secretary • Proponent files Draft and Final EIRs for review • Secretary considers comments from the public, agencies, and relevant information from any other source • Secretary makes ‘adequate’/’inadequate’ finding – MEPA does not approve or deny • Agencies act only after MEPA completed

5. Review of BU BioLab • Boston University addressed the potential environmental impacts of the BioLab in a Final EIR • The Final EIR assessed potential impact to human health and safety using a worst case scenario risk assessment based on the accidental release of anthrax • Secretary determined that the FEIR was adequate • The determination of adequacy was overturned in state superior court

6. Review of BU BioLab • The court remanded the review to the Secretary, finding that: • The worst case scenario should be characterized as an accidental or malevolent release of a contagious pathogen • Environmental review should include an assessment of the comparative risk of siting the BSL-4 in alternative (less densely populated) locations • The Secretary issued a scope for a Supplemental FEIR that incorporated the superior court’s direction

7. Review of BU BioLab • EEA contracted with the NRC to review the NIH supplementary risk assessment study regarding whether those studies: • identified representative worst case scenarios • determined, based on the comparison of risk associated with alternative locations, whether there is a greater risk to public health and safety from the location of the facility in one or another proposed location • NRC determined that the studies did not substantiate NIH conclusions

8. Review of BU BioLab • No statutory or working MEPA definition of “worst case scenario” • NRC asked, do the risk scenarios adequately: • Evaluate comparative risks among urban, suburban and rural alternatives • Represent those needed to appropriately characterize the risks of the BioLab

9. NIH Risk Assessment • Secretary Bowles’s expectation is that NIH will provide an expert, robust, and disinterested assessment of the potential risk associated with the proposed facility through the work of the Panel and Working Group • MEPA will formally review NIH materials as part of the Supplemental FEIR to be submitted by Boston University