EPA/600/N-93/001
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region II. New York, New York 10278
DATE: December 24, 1992
SUBJECT: Risk Assessmnt Review
FROM: William J. J
Deputy Regional Administrator
William Farland, Ph.D.
Director
Office of Health and Environmental Assessment
Attached is a copy of the Risk Assessment Review, a bimonthly
publication that is a cooperative effort between the Office
of Research and Development and the Regional Risk Assessment
Network.
The Review serves as a focal point for information exchange
among the EPA risk assessment community on both technical and
policy issues related to' risk assessment. It is currently in
its fourth year of publication and we are pleased at the
positive feedback we've received on the Review's usefulness
to staff across the Agency.
•
Thanks to all of you who continue to contribute articles and
are involved with production efforts. If you have an article
to contribute or any suggestions for further issues, contact
one of the Committee members listed on page 1 of the Review.
Attachment
-------
December 1992
Highlights
• U.S. Court of Appeals Decision on Drinking Water
Regulations for DBCP. EDB, PERC, and PCBs p. 1
• EPA's Use of Risk Assessment in
Central and Eastern Europe p. 1
• Risk Communication—Focus Group
Evaluation of Agency Lead Brochure p. 3
• Lead Coordinator in Region I p. 4
• New Name for the Centers for Disease Control p. 4
• Risk Training in Region DC p. 4
I-• .... •.:.,-: .....-..- ..:... v .,: •• •• v.-: ...... :•.,::::....:•,::-«<-»»•;:• -:•:-::-,-: ^.^:-^a""!
I. Special Features
Recent U.S. Court of Appeals Decision on
Drinking Water Regulations for 12 dibromo-3-
chloropropane (DBCP), Ethylene dibromide
(EDB), Perchloroethylene (PERC) and
Poly chlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
by Charles Ris (202) 260-7338
On August 21, 1992, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit passed a decision favorable to
EPA, in International Fabricare Institute (Petitioners) v.
US. Environmental Protection Agency (Respondent), Ha-
logenated Solvents Industry Alliance, Intervenor and con-
solidated cases 91-1150,91-1151, and 91-1154,1992 C/.S.
Risk Assessment Review Committee
Bill Farland - ORD, (202) 260-7317
Maureen McClelland - Region I, (617) 565-4885
Maria Pavlova - Region II, (212) 264-7364
Marian Olsen - Region II, (212) 264-5682
Suzanne Wuerthele - Region VIII, (303) 293-1714
Dana-Davoli - Region X, (206) 553-2135
App. Lexis 19337, upholding the National Primary Drink-
ing Water Regulations-Synthetic Organic Chemicals and
Inorganic Chemicals: Monitoring for Unregulated Con-
taminants; National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
Implementation; National Secondary Drinking Water Regu-
lations, 56 Fed. Reg. 3,526 (January 30,1991) (Final Rule).
These regulations establish the MCLGs and MCLs for a
number of drinking water contaminants.
The original action was commenced on March 28,1991, by
Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company, and Occi-
dental Chemical Corporation but was consolidated on May
14,1991, with similar actions commenced by the National
Electrical Manufacturers Association, Chemical Manufac-
turers Association, International Fabricare Institute, and
intervenor Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance. All the
petitioners challenged the regulations on the grounds that
EPA acted arbitrarily and capriciously in setting the MCLGs
and MCLs for DBCP, EDB, and PERC. The petitioners
challenged the measurement method for PCBs.
see Court p. 2
II. Headquarters
EPA's Use of Risk Assessment in Central and
Eastern Europe
by Jane Metcalfe (202) 260-7669
• Introduction
Across Central and Eastern Europe, governments are at-
tempting to put into place programs to deal with the envi-
ronmental legacy of the past 40 years of communism.
Pollution in many of these countries, particularly the indus-
trial areas of northern Czechoslovakia and Southern Poland,
has been blamed for a myriad of human health problems—
increased infant mortality rates, decreased life expectancy,
mounting respiratory problems, and climbing cancer rates.
Combating these ills is an expensive task—most estimate
the costs in the billions of dollars. In countries making the
historic transition to market economies, resources for in-
vesting in pollution control and energy efficiency are often
not available. How can these countries make the critical
choices necessary to reduce human health risks without
bankrupting their treasuries?
In the U.S., EPA uses risk assessment to make these critical
environmental decisions. Through its programs in Central
and Eastern Europe, funded through the State Department,
EPA is assisting the countries of the region, primarily
Czechoslovakia, to use a risk assessment/risk management
approach to work out environmental problems within a
logical framework. EPA believes that risk assessment and
comparative risk assessment can be used in Central and
Eastern Europe as an important tool for identifying priori-
ties; tailoring regulatory and non-regulatory action to key
human and ecological risks; establishing enforcement pri-
orities; informing decisions about resource allocations and
environmental investments; evaluating risk reduction op-
portunities; and providing an informed public debate about
environmental costs and economic investments.
see Risk p. 3
-------
Court (continued from p. 1)
The Court Petitioners and Contaminants of Concern were
as follows:
Dow Chemical Company DBCP
Shell Oil Company ";
Occidental Chemical Corporation
Dow Chemical Company EDB
International Fabricare Institute (IFF) PERC
Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance
National Electrical Manufacturers
Association (NEMA) PCBs
Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA)
The petitioners challenged EPA on the grounds of substan-
tive and procedural errors.
All the petitioners raised a general challenge to EPA's
method of establishing a zero MCLG for known or sus-
pected carcinogens. The petitioners believed there was new
scientific evidence that was likely to make EPA's position
untenable. The petitioners relied on a letter from Drs. Bruce
Ames and Lois Gold of the University of California at
Berkeley to the Editor of Science—"Pesticides, Risk and
Applesauce." (Science 240:757, May 19, 1989) and the
declaration of Dr. Gio Batta Gori on August 17,1989. In the
letter, Drs. Ames and Gold argued that low doses of car-
cinogens appear less hazardous than is widely believed,
while Dr. Gori pointed out the inherent difficulties in draw-
ing conclusions about the carcinogenic effect of chemicals
in humans based solely on animal studies. The Court, in
upholding the EPA zero MCLG approach, commented that
"the new scientific evidence boils down to the opinions of a
few scientists who, however qualified, are in their own
words at odds with what is generally thought about the
subject," while also noting that the documents being relied
on did not really present any new empirical studies or
laboratory experiments concerning the carcinogenicity of
the contaminant in question.
With respect to DBCP, the petitioners alleged that EPA not
only failed to adequately explain its actions in setting the
MCLGs and MCLs but also improperly rejected human
epidemiological data in the form of studies conducted on
humans exposed to DBCP in the work environment. In
rebuttal, EPA drew the Court's attention to its 1987 report
EPA Final Report: Review of the Epidemiologic Literature
on the Carcinogenic Effects of DBCP (March. 5,-1987) in
which it rejected the studies as definitive for ingestion
exposure, as they dealt with inhalation. In addition, the
petitioners asserted that the use of high dose animal experi-
ments to determine human hazard was inappropriate for
DBCP. In response, EPA adduced evidence showing that its
analyses of DBCP was an exhaustive study which involved
studies in rats and mice through oral, inhalation, and dermal
exposure. The Court, in finding for EPA, upheld EPA's
reliance on animal studies for determination of the carcino-
genicity of DBCP and found that EPA did comply with the
rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedure
ACL
For EDB, the Dow Chemical Company challenged the
established MCLG and MCL on the grounds that EPA
failed to address some public comments, especially the
epidemiology study by Professor M.G. Ott (1980), and in so
doing improperly rejected them. The Court found that "it is
simply untrue that the EPA failed to consider the available
human epidemiological data," and stated further that "not
only did it (EPA) respond to the Ott study that Dow claims
it ignored, it also analyzed other epidemiological data that
Dow itself now ignores." In addition, the Court noted that
Ott's studies involved inhalation exposure and that EPA
had cautioned against reliance on inhalation data in risk
assessment for oral exposure. It was also asserted that EPA
failed to address and improperly rejected alternative risk
assessments of EDB. The Court indicated that the alterna-
tive risk assessment depended on accepting the arguments
of a safe threshold and that EPA had adequately explained
its no-threshold position. There were also some cost feasi-
bility arguments raised which were not accepted by the
Court.
For PERC, IFI petitioned for the judicial review of the EPA
standard alleging that EPA, for purposes of establishing the
MCLG, placed PERC, a Group C contaminant, in Category
I and assigned it a zero MCLG, despite its policy of placing
Group A and B contaminants in Category I and Group C
contaminants in Category II. IFI argued that EPA was
bound to follow its set policy and treat PERC as a Category
II contaminant in spite of EPA's efforts to reclassify it as a
Group B2 contaminant EPA rebutted the allegation by
showing specific deviations (e.g., asbestos, cadmium, and
chromium) from the usual relationship of cancer Weight-
of-Evidence and drinking water regulatory categorization.
The Court, in rejecting the argument, held that DPI had
failed to show evidence prohibiting EPA from "assigning a
Safe Drinking Water Act category when the cancer classifi-
cation for a contaminant is unresolved." It further reasoned
that the question for them turned on whether EPA had
reasonably interpreted its regulatory categorization proce-
dures as allowing the categorization of an unclassified
contaminant based on its review of scientific evidence. The
Court, in this instance, found EPA's interpretation of its
categorization procedure permissible and fully consonant
with the dictates of notice-and-comment rulemaking since
EPA furnished a full opportunity for comment on PERC's
carcinogenicity at the time it proposed the MCLG for
PERC. IFI also claimed that the animal carcinogenicity
studies relied on by EPA did not support a finding of
PERC's carcinogenicity. In response, the Court noted the
similar dispute over the 1985 categorization of trichloroeth-
ylene which it upheld while noting that "happily it is not for
the judicial branch to undertake comparative evaluations of
conflicting evidence. Our review aims only to discern
whether the Agency's evaluation was rational." The Court,
in applying the same standard to PERC, concluded that
EPA acted rationally in considering animal studies in its
-------
determination of PERC's carcinogenicity. The Court noted
that EPA's actions were consistent with its policy of Accept-
ing findings on the carcinogenicity of a contaminant in the
absence of contrary evidence.
For PCBs, the petitioners (NEMA and CMA) alleged that
EPA's choice of Method S08A as the measurement method
for PCBs in water samples was adopted without proper
notice and comment as provided under the Administrative
Procedure Act. The petitions contended that not only did
EPA adopt a different measurement method, in the final
rule, from the method discussed in the earlier notices but
that there were concerns in industry about the reliability of
the method which had not undergone proper public com-
ment because of the last minute switch by EPA. The Court,
in rejecting both arguments, found that EPA's actions were
neither arbitrary nor capricious and that EPA had complied
with the notice-and-comment requirements by adequately
explaining its actions. (We appreciate the assistance of
Winifred Okoye of Region IPs Office of Regional Counsel
in developing this article.)
Risk (continued from p. 1)
• Technical Assistance Programs
Two of the largest EPA projects in .Central and Eastern
Europe use risk assessment as their central tenet The projects
are as follows:
• Project Silesia, a comparative risk project in the Ostrava
region of Czechoslovakia and the adjoining Katowice
region of Poland, designed to evaluate the risks of
environmental problems and to help set priorities for
mitigation activities and environmental investments.
This is a project conducted jointly by the Office of
Research and Development (ORD), the Office of Policy,
Planning, and Evaluation (OPPE), and the Office of
International Activities (OIA). Region VIII £as also
been involved in this project.
Northern Bohemia Air Quality Project, a risk-based
air pollution monitoring and control project in the
Northern Bohemia region of Czechoslovakia, designed
to understand the health problems caused by air pollu-
tion in the region and to identify measures to reduce
these problems. This project is being managed by
ORD.
• Risk Assessment Training
ORD has developed a core risk assessment training pro-
gram for Eastern Europe. The training is a 4-1/2 day course
and presents the principles of environmental risk assess-
ment, cancer and non-cancer health effects, exposure is-
sues, and comparative risk assessment. EPA's risk
assessment database—IRIS—is demonstrated, along with a
risk assessment software package, RISK* ASSISTANT. The
purpose of this risk assessment training is to help scientists
and decision makers understand the basis of risk assess-
ment, develop a common base of knowledge and terminol-
ogy, and use the concept in a case study. The training will
cover risk management and comparative risk concepts.
Regions II and V are assisting ORD in developing and
teaching this course. This training is one of a series of
training modules (environmental policy, environmental eco-
nomics, and environmental impact assessment) that EPA is
developing for delivery in Central and Eastern Europe.
• Conclusion
Risk assessment and risk management provide a framework
for setting regulatory priorities and for making decisions
that cut across different environmental program areas. This
kind of framework has become increasingly important to
EPA in recent years. EPA's work in Central and Eastern
Europe seeks to build such a framework so that logical
decisions can be made about cost-effective solutions to the
region's overwhelming environmental problems.
Risk Communication—Focus Group
Evaluation of Agency Lead (Pb) Brochure
by Brenda Kover (202) 260-9171
The Risk Communication Project (RCP), located in OPPE
at Headquarters, recently managed focus group testing of
two Agency brochures on lead, one developed by the Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics and the other by the
Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water. The goal of the
initial groups was to determine what format and content
should be incorporated for a single brochure that would be
easily understood by parents with a low to moderate range
of education throughout the United States. The goal of the
remaining focus group was to refine the content and clarify
issues that remained difficult to communicate. Thirteen
focus groups were conducted over a period of three months
in five geographic locations known to have lead problems.
The focus groups also study media materials developed by
the President's Commission on Environmental Quality
(PCEQ) designed to promote the brochure as part of their
lead education campaign. This cooperative effort between
EPA and PCEQ enabled EPA to cost effectively test both
the brochure and the advertising campaign in a joint effort
This focus group experience taught us much about target
audience reaction to brochure appearance, choice of words,
and that some of the recommendations were not only unre-
alistic, impractical, and unclear, but also insulting. A sum-
mary of the focus group structure and process, along with
examples of how they helped EPA produce better wording,
design, graphics, and results is available upon request. •
The goal of RCP is to build risk communication skills
within the Agency via training, technical support, and some
research and development. RCP has a contract vehicle
available for pretesting Agency materials.
-------
>• For additional information, contact Lynn Luderer, Di-
rector of the Risk Communication Project at (202) 260-
6995.
. Regions
Region I
Appointment of Lead Coordinator
On October 27, 1992, Region I announced the appointment
of Ann Carroll as lead coordinator in the regional office to
bring together state and federal programs designed to re-
duce the risk of lead poisoning.
A large number of children" in urban areas in New England
have levels of lead in their blood above those recommended
as safe by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC). The recommended maximtm safe level is 10 mi-
crograms of lead per deciliter of blood.
The regional lead coordinator will help advance the Agency's
understanding of the multi-cultural needs of the region's
urban at-risk populations and increase EPA's ability to
better educate families about lead issues.
Components of the regional lead strategy include the devel-
opment of an inter-agency task force on lead, a federal/state
coordinating task force, a broad-based education and out-
reach campaign, a lead database from existing and new data
for improved monitoring, a scientific assessment in identi-
fying hotspots and evaluating abatement programs, and
policies and guidelines for improved lead, abatement strate-
gies.
For more information on Region I's lead initiatives, call
Ann Carroll, Regional Lead Coordinator, (617) 565-3411.
>• Contact Maureen McClelland (617) 565-3470
Region II
CDC's New Name
The November 6, 1992, issue of Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report (November 6, 1992, VoL 41, No. 44) re-
cently reported on the change in CDC's name. The follow-
ing highlights are excerpted from that edition:
On October 27, 1992, the Centers for Disease Control's
name was changed to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. This change was enacted by Congress, as part
of the Preventive Health Amendments of 1992, to recognize
CDC's leadership role in the prevention of disease, injury,
and disability. In enacting this change, Congress specified
that the Agency continue to use the acronym "CDC* be-
cause of its recognition within the public health community
and among the public.
Availability of Chronic Disease Data Handbook
CDC's National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and
Health Promotion, Office of Surveillance and Analysis, has
released "Using Chronic Disease Data—A Handbook for
Public Health Practitioners." This handbook, which dis-
cusses the use of mortality, hospitalization, and behavioral
risk factor data, is designed to help state and local health
agencies locate and analyze data about chronic diseases.
Examples in the handbook show how data drawn from
multiple sources have been used to support public health
action. Special aids include guidelines for the visual presen-
tation of data, an age-adjustment spreadsheet on disk, a
directory of contacts for different types on data, and samples
of selected legislation. Copies are available free by calling
(404) 488-5269.
National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish
EPA's Office of Science and Technology, Standards and
Applied-Science Division recently published "National Study
of Chemical Residues in Fish" (EPA 823-R-92-008a&b).
The report summarizes information from a nationwide sur-
vey of fish samples from 388 sites throughout the county.
The sampling covers the period from 1986 through 1989.
The fish were examined for 60 pollutants.
For additional information, contact the Office of Science
Technology, Standards and Applied Science Division, U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation Report
The New York State Department of Environmental Conser-
vation recently issued a report tided "Remedial Action
Report—Fiscal Year 1991-1992." The report outlines re-
medial work at 185 sites within New York State. Copies of
the report are available by calling (518) 457-1684.
>• Contact Marian Olsen (212) 264-5682
Region IX
Training
Region DC presented lectures on risk communication and
public involvement to
• Legionella; Biology, Evaluation and Control Confer-
ence, sponsored by the University of California, Berke-
ley Extension. Over 50 building managers, engineers,
and medical professionals attended.
• University of California, Berkeley Extension Hazard-
ous Waste Management Certification Program. About
50 professionals with a variety of backgrounds at-
tended.
>• Contact Alvin Chun (415) 744-1019
-------
Risk and Decision Making Manual and Slides
The Risk and Decision Making Manual is being updated
and improved. Copies of the lecture slides and manual
should be available in December or January.
> Contact: Gerry Hiatt (415) 744-1022
Krishna Nand, ESI; Risk Estimates and Risk Manage-
ment—Mardy Kazarians, ADL; and Risk Communica-
tion—Ann Cardinal, Dynamac Corporation.
>• For additional information on the meeting, contact the
Society for Risk Analysis, Suite 130, 8000 Westpark
Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102 or (703) 790-1745.
IV. Meetings
Society for Risk Analysis Meeting in San
Diego—December 6-9,1992
The Society for Risk Analysis held its annual meeting at the
Hotel del Coronado in San Diego, December 6-9,1992. The
meeting focused on (1) environmental/global risk, (2) risk
communication, (3) engineering and space applications, (4)
exposure assessment, (5) regulatory policy, decision mak-
ing, and other topics, and (6) dose response methodology.
Within these tracks, approximately 250 papers*were in-
cluded in the platform sessions and about 110 were pre-
sented as posters. A total of 360 pape'rs; the largest number
ever scheduled for a Society of Risk Analysis meeting,
were presented.
The meeting included the following five workshops:
• Understanding and Performing Desktop Chemical Risk
Assessments (Instructors: Philip Wexler, National Li-
brary of Medicine; James Kawecki and Susan Santas,
Center for Risk Communication, Columbia University)
• California's Proposition 65: Risk Assessment and Di-
etary Exposure Assessment Methodologies (Instruc-
tors: Officials of the California Environmental
Protection Agency; Moderator Barbara Petersen, Tech-
nical Assessment Systems).
• Reference House: Assessment of Residential Expo-
sures (Organizers: Bert Hakkinen, Procter and Gamble
Co., Jeffrey Driver and Gary Whitmyre, Technology
Sciences Group, Inc.; with assistance from Paul Price,
ChemRisk, McLaren/Hart).
• Fundamentals of Risk Analysis: Introduction and Types
of Risk Analysis—Vlasta Molak, Gaia Unlimited, Inc.;
Cancer Models and Risk Assessment—Roy Albert,
University of Cincinnati; Ecological Risk Assessment—
Larry Bamthouse, Oak Ridge National Laboratory;
Epidemiology and Risk Analysis—Leslie -Stayner,
NIOSH; Probabilistic Risk Analysis—Stan Kaplan,
PLG, Inc.; Risk Assessment at Hazardous Waste Sites—
Smita Siddhanti, Cadmus Group; Other Applications
of Risk Assessment—Vlasta Molak; and Risk Percep-
tion and Risk Communication—Paul Slovic, Decision
Research.
• Process Safety Management and Risk Management
Plans: Regulatory Requirements—Bruno Loran, ESI;
Hazard Evaluation—Robert Mulvihill, PRC, Inc.; Hu-
man Factors and Process Safety—Najm Meshkati, Uni-
versity of Southern California; Consequence Analysis-
National Symposium on Measuring and
Interpreting VOCs in Soils: State of the Art and
Research Needs—January 12-14,1993
The National Symposium on Measuring and Interpreting
Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs) in Soils: State of the
Art and Research Needs will be held January 12-14,1993,
in Las Vegas, Nevada. The course is sponsored by EPA and
organized by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Univer-
sity of Wisconsin-Madison/Extension, U.S. Department of
Energy, U.S. Army Toxics and Hazardous Materials Agency,
and the American Petroleum Institute.
Symposium sessions will focus on
• Soil VOC measurement and assessment process funda-
mentals;
• Soil VOC behavior and measurement strategies and
designs;
• Soil sample collection and measurement for VOCs;
• In Situ VOC measurement techniques;
• Data analysis and interpretation; and
• State of the an and research needs.
>• For additional information, contact Engineering Regis-
tration, The Wisconsin Center, 702 Langdon Street,
Madison, Wisconsin 53706. The telephone number is
(608) 262-1299, and the FAX number is (608) 263-
3160.
1993 Society for Toxicology Annual Meeting—
March 14-18,1993
The Society for Toxicology will hold its annual meeting
March 14-18,1993, at the New Orleans Convention Center
in New Orleans, Louisiana.
> For additional information, contact the Society for
Toxicology, Suite 1100,110114th Street, N.W., Wash-
ington, D.C. 20005-5601. The telephone number is
(202) 371-1393, and the FAX number is (202) 371-
1090.
1993 Interagency Conference on Risk
Assessment—April 5-8,1993.
An interagency conference, titled "The Risk Assessment
Paradigm After 10 Years: Policy and Practice Then, Now,
-------
and in the Future," will be held April 5-8,1993, in Dayton,
Ohio, at the Hope Hotel and Conference Center located on
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.
The conference will (1) acquaint individuals with the basics
of the risk assessment process as originally developed 10
years ago by the National Academy of Sciences, (2) high-
light current issues in risk assessment, emphasizing the
strengths and weaknesses of the current paradigm and areas
needing change, and (3) present and discuss current re-
search related to improving the risk assessment process.
The conference will feature invited presentations by noted
individuals in the risk assessment field and a poster session
for studies relevant to the conference. Individuals interested
in presenting a poster should contact the conference coordi-
nator. Abstracts must be received by February 2,1993.
>• To obtain further information, write to Lois Doncaster,
Conference Coordinator, ManTech Environmental
Technology, Inc., P.O. Box 31009, Dayton, Ohio 45437-
0009. The telephone number is (513) 256-3600, ext
211
Twenty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the National
Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements—April 7-8,1993
The Twenty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the National Council
on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) will be
held April 7-8, 1993, at the Crystal City Marriott, Arling-
ton, Virginia.
>• For additional information, contact the National Coun-
cil on Radiation Protection, Suite 800,7910 Woodmont
Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland 20814. The telephone
number is (301) 657-2652, and the FAX number is
(301) 907-8768.
Second International Symposium on
Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis
(ISUMA '93)—April 25-28,1993
The Second International Symposium on Uncertainty Mod-
eling and Analysis will be held April 25-28,1993, at the
Center of Adult Education, University of Maryland, Col-
lege Park, Maryland. The objective of the symposium is to
bring together researchers from academic, governmental,
and industrial institutions to discuss new developments and
results in the field of uncertainty modeling and analysis
including probabilistic methods, Bayesian approaches, fuzzy
reasoning, and risk management
>• For more information, contact Professor Bilal M. Ayyub,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mary-
land, College Park, Maryland 20742. The telephone
number is (301) 405-1956, and the FAX number is
(301) 314-9320.
International Congress on the Health Effects of
Hazardous Waste—May 3-6,1993
The International Congress on the Health Effects of Haz-
ardous Waste will be held May 3-6, 1993, at the Marriott
Marquis Hotel in Atlanta, Georgia. The conference is spon-
sored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Ser-
vices, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry.
The purpose of this congress is to promote the exchange of
findings, ideas, and recommendations related to the human
health effects of hazardous waste. The intended audience
includes environmental epidemiologists, lexicologists, and
health scientists from both government and academic set-
tings; clinical and public health physicians working in
environmental and occupational health; health educators;
public health administrators and policy makers; health,
safety, and management representatives from industry; pro-
fessional environmentalists; and the interested public.
Registration is required of all participants, and the deadline
for early registration is April 5,1993. The registration fee is
$100.00. Checks should be sent to the Emory University
School of Public Health (see address below).
Reservations should be made at the Marriott Marquis Hotel,
265 Peachtree Center Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The
hotel telephone number is (404) 521-0000. Attendees should
identify themselves as participants in the "Hazardous Waste
Conference."
>• For additional information on the course, contact Dr.
Howard Frumltin, Emory University School of Public
Health, Division of Environmental and Occupational
Health, International Congress on the Health Effects of
Hazardous Waste, 1599 Clifton Road, N.W., Atlanta,
Georgia 30329. The telephone number is (404) 727-
3697, and the FAX number is (404) 727-8744.
12th Annual Incineration Conference—
May 3-7,1993
The 12th Annual Incineration Conference will be held May
3-7,1993, in Knoxville, Tennessee. The meeting will cover
thermal treatment of chemical, hazardous, radioactive,
mixed, and medical wastes; innovative technologies for
mixed-waste treatment; emerging hazardous waste thermal
technologies; and waste analysis and handling before incin-
eration.
>• For additional information concerning the meeting,
contact Charlotte Baker of the University of California
at Irvine at (714) 856-7066 or Ronald Kagel of Dow
Chemical at (517) 636-2317.
Fourth Annual Conference of Society for Risk
Analysis, Europe—October 18-20,1993
The Fourth Annual Conference of the Society for Risk
Analysis, Europe, will be held October 18-20, 1993, in
Rome, Italy. The conference theme is "European Technol-
-------
ogy and Experience in Safety Analysis and Risk Manage-
ment 10 Years After the Seveso Directive." Session topics
include emerging trends in European safety analysis and
risk management, risk analysis aiding decision making in
industry, risk analysis aiding decision making in govern-
ments, risk communication principles and experiences, qual-
ity management, safety management, and insurance. Full
papers will be published in conference proceedings distrib-
uted at the meeting.
> For additional information, contact Dr. Paolo Vestrucci,
N.I.E.R., Via S. Stefano 16,40125 Bologna, Italy. The
telephone number is 39.51.239728, and the FAX num-
ber is 39.51.227824.
Risk and Decision-Making Course Schedule
The following is the schedule for the Risk and Decision-
Making Courses through March:
Contacts:
December 1-3
December 14-15
January 25-27
March 9-11
March 22-26
Sacramento, California
Chicago, Illinois
New York City
Carson City, Nevada
Sydney, Australia (Region IX)
The following is the schedule for the Risk
Communication Workshops through March:
February 8-10 Visalia, California
Jim Cole (202) 260-2747
Marian Olsen (212) 264-5682
Alvin Chun (415) 744-1022
Contacts:
Jerome Puskin
Linda Tuxen
Dorothy Fatten
Dick Hill
Don Barnes
Dean Hill
Maureen McClelland
Marian Olsen
Jeffrey Burke
Elmer Akin
Milt Clark
Jon Rauscher
Mary Williams
Suzanne Wuerthele
Arnold Den
Dana Davoli
OAR-RAD
ORD-OHEA
ORD-RAF
OPTS
SAB
NEIC
Region I
Region II
Region III
Region IV
Region V
.Region VI
Region VII
Region vm
Region DC
Region X
(202) 260-9640
(202) 260-5949
(202) 260-6743
(202) 260-2897
(202) 260^126
(202) 776-8138
(617) 565-4885
(212) 264-5682
(215)597-1177
(404) 347-1586
(312)886-3388
(214) 655-8513
(913) 551-7415
(303) 293-0961
(415) 744-1018
(206) 442-2135
If you would like to receive additional copies of this and
subsequent Reviews or to be added to the mailing list
contact:
CERI Distribution
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
------- |